|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] | ||||||||||
yachanin Inner circle Cleveland, OH 2109 Posts 
|
Hi erlandish,
I agree it would not make sense and would disrupt the show if you stopped in the middle and said, "By the way, it's not real and anybody can do this." I don't believe Entity is suggesting that anyone do that in the middle of the show or during a routine. There are many ways and appropriate times during which "disclaimers" can be given. Sorry. Entity posted before I could and said the same thing. Regards, Steve
"Impossible? Your audience will think so..." TM
Thought Association Card Triangulation Word Search Detective Christmas Eve Sights - Start A Family Tradition |
|||||||||
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-05 07:53, Jim-Callahan wrote: I would absolutely agree. Even bad art can have its affect. I suppose one of the questions at hand is, "What responsibility does the artist have to the audience for the affect his "performance" creates in their lives? In Toronto recently an art student made a replica of a bomb and, as an "art project" had masked assistants leave the "bomb" in full view in the foyer of a museum on the night of a scheduled AIDS fundraising benefit dinner and concert. The benefit was called off, city streets were shut down for blocks, police were taken away from doing their jobs in other parts of the city in order to deal with this suspected 'terrorist activity'. This "artist's" performance certainly had an effect outside of its venue. Does the artist have any responsibility for the affects that resulted from his art? To him, it was just "a performance". - entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
gaddy Inner circle Agent of Chaos 3567 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-06 00:48, yachanin wrote: don't bother with your regards
*due to the editorial policies here, words on this site attributed to me cannot necessarily be held to be my own.*
|
|||||||||
erlandish Inner circle Vancouver, Canada 1254 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-06 02:23, yachanin wrote: Steve, I honestly see no graceful way of putting that information in there. Frankly, I think it does nothing to deter those who are desperate to believe, and insults the intelligence of everybody else. |
|||||||||
|
gaddy Inner circle Agent of Chaos 3567 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-06 03:07, erlandish wrote: You best put a disclaimer that your show might be so exciting that someone might have a heart attack because of it, because that could happen, you know... I think it did happen, somewhere. Maybe a disclaimer that it could cause cancer too, just to be on the safe side.
*due to the editorial policies here, words on this site attributed to me cannot necessarily be held to be my own.*
|
|||||||||
|
erlandish Inner circle Vancouver, Canada 1254 Posts
|
You know, there is one exception to the rule that I'll make on disclaimers... Any show that incorporates an effect wherein if somebody tries to replicate it step by step, they or somebody else is in serious danger -- ie: razor-blade eating, burying oneself alive, etc.
But that doesn't extend to traditional magic or mentalism. The most that's going to happen if they try to replicate a Q&A act is severe embarrassment. As for the "idiot" question... If somebody sees something that they think is so real and convincing that they suddenly believe magic is real, then they are ignorant. Not necessarily stupid, but ignorant in the classical sense, as in lacking information. Someone who is in that situation can choose to either (a) try to educate themselves about what happened, or (b) willfully remain ignorant. People in the first group will find all sorts of information to assure them that magic or mental powers do not exist, from exposure shows, from guys like James Randi, even from bona fide magic books. People in the second group are, in my opinion, idiots, and I feel no responsibility with regards to them. Somebody dropped the ball in that person's growth and development in their lifetime, and I've got no desire to change my show for their benefit. |
|||||||||
|
gaddy Inner circle Agent of Chaos 3567 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-06 03:33, erlandish wrote: Devil's advocate here, but those same people might just find as much compelling information telling them that magickal powers really DO EXIST... The Boogey man too! Also the Loch Ness Monster. But they won't have to worry too much about Ole' Nessie as 'Doc' Shiels has her well under control. Ultimately they will end up in a cult and it'll be all your fault.
*due to the editorial policies here, words on this site attributed to me cannot necessarily be held to be my own.*
|
|||||||||
|
erlandish Inner circle Vancouver, Canada 1254 Posts
|
I can live with that. So long as it's MY cult...
|
|||||||||
andyfisher Veteran user Norwich, UK 319 Posts
|
Ah but apparently erlandish, MY cult will be touting for business on the other side of the street! Perhaps we can get together and agree how we can carve up the minds and souls of the unwary!
|
|||||||||
|
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-05 13:42, erlandish wrote: and then... Quote:
On 2008-05-06 03:33, erlandish wrote: These two statements would seem to be at odds with each other. Are we trying to give them the "gift" of believing that there is no other explanation than magic, or are they idiots when we convince them that there is no other explanation than magic? - entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
|
erlandish Inner circle Vancouver, Canada 1254 Posts
|
Like I said, entity, I don't think you're quite understanding my point. The gift is the paradox. We cannot give them that if we undermine the side of the equation that is related to us.
The audience schemata, what they bring to the show, is that magic is impossible. We don't intrude upon their belief system as it functions in the real world before the show. All we do is, for the duration of that show, challenge its very foundation. What they do after the show is up to them -- the ball's in their court. I described the two types of people who feel compelled to actually believe in magic as a result of a good show -- those two types aren't even the majority. I think it behooves us to play to that majority, the ones who came to be entertained and/or bamboozled. The gift that a movie gives to its audience is an experience that feels real. The gift that a song gives to its audience is the warping of reality to a rhythm and a melody. Our gift is the paradox. It's an experience that we can give them that no other art form can. Why take that away from the audience? There are so many people out there already willing to do that for you... the hecklers, the exposers, the jealous magicians, people who think magic is a challenge to religion, the James Randi boys... Honestly, they don't NEED your help. |
|||||||||
|
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts
|
Again, who here has suggested taking anything away from the audience?
It's a fundamental (and very elementary) given, the paradox you speak of in magic, and in mentalism. That is the intrigue of magic -- it shouldn't be possible, but it appears to be happening -- That is not the point I'm addressing in your posts. You devote yourself (I presume), throughout your entire show, to creating a convincing illusion -- one that you personally seem to want to live on after the performance has ended. (Again, a presumption on my part, but you seem to imply that by your posts, your comments about exposures, etc.) But you then state that those in your audience who believe you, are (to use your own word) idiots? That's the point I would like you to clarify. We all know that magic/mentalism is a paradox between illusion and reality. But what I'm trying to figure out is how your approach is in any way respectful of the audience. You don't want to destroy the illusion (which, again, no one here has suggested you should), but you think that those that believe the illusion are idiots. It seems that if the above were true, then your show sets out to create idiots out of your audience. I'm sure that's not true, but your statements lead to that conclusion. And could you explain what you meant by "Randi's Boys"? Do you mean Banachek, Andrew Mayne, folks like that? You seem to use the term in a pejorative sense. - entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
|
gaddy Inner circle Agent of Chaos 3567 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-06 14:03, erlandish wrote: I think he understands your point, he just refuses to concede it one iota. I had a similar conversation with him a few months ago -though my position was even more tenuous than yours... And yet I still don't have a problem with it.
*due to the editorial policies here, words on this site attributed to me cannot necessarily be held to be my own.*
|
|||||||||
|
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts
|
As I said in my post above, I understand the point about the paradoxical appeal of magic -- that's pretty fundamental to everyone who performs magic or mentalism.
The OTHER point being made by elandish was the one I doggedly tried to get him to directly address, and he just as doggedly avoided addressing, directly. - entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
|
gaddy Inner circle Agent of Chaos 3567 Posts
|
Well, despite my rather polarized views on this subject, I do find it an interesting debate... No hard feelings, Entity.
*due to the editorial policies here, words on this site attributed to me cannot necessarily be held to be my own.*
|
|||||||||
|
erlandish Inner circle Vancouver, Canada 1254 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-06 16:50, entity wrote: Entity, for the love of... Never mind. I give up. If somebody else wants to try to explain it, or if I'm the only one on my side of the argument, whatever... I give up. |
|||||||||
IAIN Eternal Order england 18802 Posts
|
Back to the original post, I think we should find your friend and string him up...if he's using psuedo psychological approaches and people go and spend thousands of pounds on learning NLP, speed reading techniques and so on, and yet, finds he cant do the same feats as your friend...well..its his fault...
I still don't use a "disclaimer", though I think it might be useful to say "i am not truly what I say I am..."..i too find this an interesting debate though... very recently, I did a couple of simple ESP tests in a small bar with a woman friend - and then did a simple truth/lie playing card effect, during that, I dressed it as "ah, I noticed your pupils dilated when you touched that card, and the tambre of your voice changed just a little as you said lie...so that was your card wasnt it..." it was...then she got wierd with me, and started paying attention more to how she spoke and kept asking me "are you keeping note of how my voice changes as we talk iain?" and she got a bit strange with me for a good ten minutes after that simple effect...so I do entertain the thought of a disclaimer...but how to put one together without sounding like a tool is a condundrum to me at the moment.. I'm slowly changing what I do, to a more modern day victorian kinda approach...hard to explain fully cos its not all ironed out...but it seems fun so far... to draw someone in, have them interested, I think really, people don't actually pay much attention to a disclaimer - just listen to the amount of youngsters trying to learn NLP cos they think that's how derren does it all (when its really all done by herons and geese obviously) - he states his disclaimer very forcefully...and yet a lot of people CHOOSE to ignore it... I find it odd... I've yet to hear anyone leave his show and say "ooh yeah, well, it was ok - it was all a big trick wasnt it...he says in his disclaimer, magic...magic is just a bunch of tricks..." so my question is, even with a disclaimer, WHY do people choose to ignore it?
I've asked to be banned
|
|||||||||
|
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts
|
Erlandish... No. Don't "give up". It's not about winning or losing or all of that. I don't even see it as an argument, since I haven't done anything but ask for clarification of your statements. I truly want to understand your seemingly contradictory remarks.
Did you make a mistake with your choice of words when you used the term "idiot" to describe those who believe what you present without further investigation? Please, perhaps in discussing (not arguing) this reasonably we can both learn something, or refine our perspectives. Abraxus: I don't think that most people truly do ignore Derren's disclaimer. They simply want to pretend that they believe he has "special abilities". They've heard his disclaimer, and underneath it all they understand he's a showman and it's all theater, but it's fun for them to pretend to believe otherwise. People like to have a delightful story to tell others. For some people, it's more fun to tell others that they saw this person who could do all of these wonderful things through psychological manipulation than by magic tricks. Good business for Derren,because those new folks hear the legend, and go to see the show, even though people do understand at heart that he's a performer in a theatrical presentation. It's a complex psychological mix of forces at work, which is very adroitly planned and achieved by Derren. It allows the mystery (indeed, it helps to create a legend) but at the same time it ensures that, for the most part, those who hear him know, at heart, that it's theater and showmanship, and Magic (although not just a bunch of tricks -- Magic is decidedly more than that). - entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
|
erlandish Inner circle Vancouver, Canada 1254 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-06 17:31, entity wrote: Oh, I doubt it, entity. When somebody asks me a question, and I do my best to answer it, and they claim afterwards that I dodged it... that is somebody who I am not interested in having a discussion with. It's dishonest and a waste of my time. If others want to play with you on that level, that's their business, but I'm finished. |
|||||||||
|
andyfisher Veteran user Norwich, UK 319 Posts
|
Entity - let me get this straight...am I right in thinking that in your opinion, those who seem to believe that Derren really does have access to unusual abilities or paranormal powers (and state so explicitly in conversation) are actually engaged in some kind of 'self reflexive denial' whereby they know that he's just a showman but elect to deny that reality in order to deceive their wider peer group - presumably enhancing their own kudos or at least allowing them to spin a tall tale for the fun of it?
On what grounds have you come to that assessment? I know plenty of people who are certain that Derren is the real deal - when I have asked them to recall his disclaimer, they are oblivious - when I have shown them footage in which he reiterates the nature of his performance, those same people dismiss it as 'a necessary step to avoid liability' or the clever use of language to retain a degree of ambiguity within the disclaimer renders it essentially mute for them! Most viewers do not scrutinise the disclaimer - it washes over them and is masked by the wider message of the effect and Derren's charisma. I must say that I find it hard to believe that they are anything but sincere in their convictions that Derren is far more than a 'magician' or 'entertainer' using mundane methods to achieve his ends. By the way - whilst talking of 'avoiding addressing direct questions' - YOU are yet to respond to my earlier questions: here they are again - do YOU perform? If so, what do you say? Do you offer a disclaimer? What is it? I look forward to your reply for I too would like to 'refine my perspective' by gaining an insight, not only driven by your challenges to others but by your own statements about YOUR approach to our art. |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » A question of ethics... (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: May 6, 2008 06:23 am 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2026 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
|
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < 
|