|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
jfquackenbush Special user Out here on the desert 607 Posts |
Was just watching the first DVD in the Vernon Revelations series and noted that a number of Vernon's comments were directed against presentations that were just the performer showing how "clever" he is. It got me thinking that this is maybe the thing that I've found kind of annoying about the Buck Twins style flourishing. Watching Dan and Dave and not taking away from their incredible skill with cards, it occurred to me that this has something to do with why I find them so boring. I've never seen them in person, but in the video clips I've seen they just seem to stand there looking bored and detached doing things with cards.
The point Vernon makes is that if the point of a trick is to show how clever you are, then you're annoying to your audience. I think it's a valuable lesson that certainly hit home for me seeing it again.
Mr. Quackenbush believes that there is no such thing as a good magic trick.
|
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
That's probably not the lesson most folks wanted to learn from the Professor.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
jfquackenbush Special user Out here on the desert 607 Posts |
Ha! yeah, probably not. Still, particularly nowadays with so much marketing going on that seems to be more bent on impressing magicians than on the value of effects, I think it may be more relevant now than ever. XCM sure looks cool, but wouldn't it be cooler if it could be something more than a display of physical dexterity?
Mr. Quackenbush believes that there is no such thing as a good magic trick.
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
If the point of a trick is to show how stupid you are, then you're pleasing to your audience. That's probably not the lesson most folks wanted to learn from the Professor but I was always pleased to see Tommy Cooper.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
clarissa35f Veteran user 363 Posts |
I do not believe that there need be a dichotomy of Clever vs Stupid. What I believe Vernon meant was, that There are ways to perform an effect that result in a magical effect, and there are alternate handlings of the same effect that may be more complex, or more impressive to those that know what you are doing, but those handlings may either weaken the effect for the lay person...or not significantly improve the effect.
Under those particular circumstances the temptation is large to keep to the " more clever" handlings because it provides the magician with an ego boost. They abhor the simple, because it does not boost their ego as much as the complex. I have also read that some magicians feel guilty if the method for a hard hitting effect is TOO simple, as though they have not earned the applause. So they try to make it more complex, that way they feel they have EARNED the applause. My impressions are that what Vernon meant was... if you can get a hard hitting effect and the effect is otherwise the same regardless of all the alternate handlings you might use.... stick to what is simplest... Not The Dichotomy of Clever vs Stupid, as you propose which makes little sense.... But Clever vs Simple... aim for simplicity. Unless Complexity directly leads to a more powerful effect on your audience. IMHO.
“Amateurs practice until they get it right.
Professionals practice until they can’t get it wrong.” <Anonymous> "There is no such thing as magic, there is no other way that could have been done" <Whit Haydn> |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
The much-loved thing about Tommy Cooper was the dichotomy that he embodied.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
john scot Special user brighton, uk 585 Posts |
There's an old Chinese proverb that goes something like, 'An artist is one who can do more, but refrains.'
If we bear this in mind, excessive displays of ‘cleverness’ are in fact, not very clever at all.. Ta, John |
|||||||||
stoneunhinged Inner circle 3067 Posts |
It's a hard-learned fact of my life (one which I still don't always grasp in practice) that it's better to not be clever. Cleverness is usually associated with arrogance.
Maybe that should be our food for thought. Being clever is not bad. Being arrogant is. Could that be what the Professor meant? |
|||||||||
Bill Hallahan Inner circle New Hampshire 3222 Posts |
As a magician, I'd much rather hear someone blurt out, "No way!" than hear them say, "He has fast hands."
However, one of the most entertaining acts that I've ever seen of any kind, was a juggling act. It was performed by young girl named Gena Shvartsman. She's married now, and named Gena Shvartsman Cristiani. When I first saw her perform, she was 13 years old. She did things that can only be described as astonishing. She juggled clubs while doing forward handsprings. She juggled 8 balls, ending with a forward handspring without dropping a ball. She juggled clubs using both her hands, and her feet, and she used her feet in different ways to juggle. She did other amazing things. And, while one would imagine machine-like precision to accomplish such feats, and she must have had such precision, when she did all that, her movements were fluid, and it appeared to be simple for her. I later saw her entire family perform together several times, and they were great, but she was definitely the star attraction. I noticed she was clearly having fun. It wasn't as if she was lauding her ability in front of everyone, as if to say, "I can do this, and you can't," rather, it was more like, "I'm having a blast doing this, and this is so cool!" And it was. Of course, it was not "magic."
Humans make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to create boredom. Quite astonishing.
- The character of ‘Death’ in the movie "Hogswatch" |
|||||||||
clarissa35f Veteran user 363 Posts |
I can see what you mean Bill... I think that is exactly what Dai Vernon was referring to... that we should not show off, because then among other things we alienate the audience...
it should be about how amazing the magic is, that just happens to be happening at our finger tips... never... "look what I can do that you cannot." Thanks for sharing that story. I would have Loved to have seen that girl perform...I am sure her face said it all.." WoW isn't this amazing???" Not.." WoW Look at me!!!" As an after thought... it may not have been "magic" but it was very magical.
“Amateurs practice until they get it right.
Professionals practice until they can’t get it wrong.” <Anonymous> "There is no such thing as magic, there is no other way that could have been done" <Whit Haydn> |
|||||||||
airship Inner circle In my day, I have driven 1594 Posts |
I always think of W.C. Fields, who started in showbiz with a Vaudeville act that consisted of the most impressive pool trick-shots you've ever seen. They mounted a huge mirror at an angle over the table so the audience could see. But he didn't present them seriously. Most of the time, he made it seem like he'd made the shot through some sort of drunken fumbling. Now that's showmanship!
'The central secret of conjuring is a manipulation of interest.' - Henry Hay
|
|||||||||
clarissa35f Veteran user 363 Posts |
So it would be safe to say that an example of true showmanship, is when you can make the very difficult look effortless? " man he makes it look soooo easy."
And wouldn't that be an example of a meta-illusion ?
“Amateurs practice until they get it right.
Professionals practice until they can’t get it wrong.” <Anonymous> "There is no such thing as magic, there is no other way that could have been done" <Whit Haydn> |
|||||||||
Whit Haydn V.I.P. 5449 Posts |
The performer must know what he is on the stage for, and what he plans to give the audience, or the audience will "assume" a reason.
They most often assume that the performer is looking for approval--that he is there to "show off." This is the weakest possible performance situation. It puts the audience in the role of judges--they have the score cards. If they like the performer, they applaud because "they have to admit he is good." This kind of applause is always going to be of a different quality, almost grudging, because there is no feeling of gratitude in it--nothing was given to the audience--it is all about the performer. But if the performer does not "seek approval," but instead clearly has some other goal in mind, the audience can have their role framed differently. For example, the performer might come out with the clear intention to "give 'em a good scare." If he does scare the crowd, then everyone applauds with enthusiasm--"That was really scary!" A performer might come out with the intention of "playing" with the audience and pulling their legs. That audience responds with fun and play, and applause. The performer can have all sorts of artistic motives for being on stage, and all sorts of artistic motivations. But to "show off" is the weakest and most self-defeating. Such performers are not interested in giving anything to the audience, but in taking from them. Whenever the performer seems to present this sort of motivation, the audience will automatically be placed in a superior position--they get to decide whether to give or withold approval. It is a weak position to put yourself in. Look how a great like Lennart Green handles a fancy multi-packet cut. Instead of showing the cut and then looking up expectantly for applause ("Aren't I clever?"), he makes the cut and when every nook and finger is agog with card packets a look of uncertainty comes over his face. He has forgotten the order! Now he slowly starts trying to put the packets back together, mumbling under his breath, "six, no five, let's see..." He gets a huge laugh, and still gets credit for the skill. It is always stronger, when possible, to display skill in an underhanded way, without "asking for approval." Fan the pack for a card to be selected, do a shower "to show there aren't any breaks." You can do a one-handed shuffle as you tell the spectator, "I'll shuffle the cards so everything seems fair..." There are many humorous and procedural ways to display skill without inviting approval. When the audience breaks into "spontaneous" applause for such things, the performer can act surprised. The display of cleverness and skill can be an asset, but it is best when handled in a way that does not frame the audience as a panel of judges and the performer as someone seeking approval. Basically, the difference can be simply one of "Isn't it wonderful?" instead of "Aren't I wonderful?" If you do something "really clever," then the audience is applauding you for your cleverness. It is all about you. But if you are sharing with the audience your love of great magic, then it is about the magic. "Isn't it wonderful?" |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Quote:
The point Vernon makes is that if the point of a trick is to show how clever you are, then you're annoying to your audience. I think it's a valuable lesson that certainly hit home for me seeing it again. I would agree with that if it had said: If the point of “doing” a trick……. The trick or flourish itself does not have a point of cleverness, it seems to me. Its rather the magicians attitude regardless of what tricks he does. Legendary dove and card manipulation acts by Channing Pollock were full flourishes and also Cardini’s act likewise, yet they never came over with any self conceit. Vernon himself liked a flourish.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Bill Hallahan Inner circle New Hampshire 3222 Posts |
Whit Haydn wrote:
Quote:
The performer must know what he is on the stage for, and what he plans to give the audience, or the audience will "assume" a reason. Thank you Whit. As usual, and not surprisingly, your understanding surpasses what I had thought about this issue. I particularly like the suggestion to act surprised when people applaud. I think without forethought, the natural default attitude is to 'invite approval.'
Humans make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to create boredom. Quite astonishing.
- The character of ‘Death’ in the movie "Hogswatch" |
|||||||||
jfquackenbush Special user Out here on the desert 607 Posts |
Good responses all. I think a lot of this for me has come with a general sort of being annoyed by the buck twins. For a long time I thought it was just that I didn't like XCM, or that I thought XCM wasn't magic, but that isn't the case. I do like to watch a good card juggler and I do think there's a place for display of skill with cards. The Vernon anti-cleverness edict has dovetailed with this trying to figure out why watching Dan and Dave annoys me, and having thought about it a bit more, I think it's all about presentation. When he first gives the advice on the DVD, he and Michael Ammar are talking about the sleights used in Spellbound, at which point the professor starts pointing out different ways of doing the same coin sleight, and his point was more about giving a reason for a move, as in, don't just vanish a coin to show that you can vanish a coin. don't just do a color change or a transposition to show that you can do it. Give it a reason, make it a part of a story, engage the audience and entertain them. That to me is the crucial distinction. And I think having thought about all of this, what really annoys me about the buck twins is that they just stand there sullenly doing flourishes and staring at their feet expecting me to want to watch them. They aren't doing anything to engage me, and so their performance is standoffish. Which to me reinforces some of the worst stereotypes about magicians as antisocial sullen dorks who sit in their bedrooms and practice card sleights because they can't get a date to the homecoming dance.
or to put it another way, what makes something magical is the charisma of the magician inviting you to play the astonishment game with him. If you don't want to have that exchange with the person first, it doesn't matter how fancy the magician can do his butterfly cut.
Mr. Quackenbush believes that there is no such thing as a good magic trick.
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Do you think the professor was clever?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
jfquackenbush Special user Out here on the desert 607 Posts |
Of course, the man was amazing. but there's a difference between being clever and doing things the goal of which is to demonstrate how clever you are.
Mr. Quackenbush believes that there is no such thing as a good magic trick.
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
There's a difference?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
jfquackenbush Special user Out here on the desert 607 Posts |
Being vs doing, acting vs having. or however you want to slice it. the fact of the matter is that the same word is being used with different meanings in the two circumstances you're talking about. conflating the two is bad logic.
Mr. Quackenbush believes that there is no such thing as a good magic trick.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » Vernon on Cleverness (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 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 < |