|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts 
|
Quote:
On 2008-07-16 13:45, jstone wrote: Ha... I've had the same problem, actually, trying to contact somebody who I'm positive will know the pedigree of a technique, only to never hear from them. I guess these things happen. I guess the best one can do is document the research as best they can and to make sure people know you tried your hardest, and to take some comfort in the fact that even the icons in our industry made crediting errors. For what it's worth, Denis Behr's archive is a great starting point for researching these sorts of things.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
MagicSanta Inner circle Northern Nevada 5841 Posts
|
You can only do what you can do as far as research.
I will say I'm surprised you didn't hear from Maven unless he felt you needed to do more than contact him for info, you know, the journey and all that. Max is, in my experience, a delightful and generous man. |
|||||||||
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts
|
MagicSanta,
I'm by no means attacking Max. I love him and his work. In fact I just reread the article about him in November 07's genii... I was just bringing it up because it proves the point that he (and others) are busy people with lives of their own. They can't stop what they're doing and respond to me. I'm by no means a celebrity in magic, but even my email box is loaded with people asking me questions, advice, etc... I don't have time to answer all of those, so imagine guys like Max who have a lot more on their plate than I do... they've just got bigger fish to fry. By the way, for clarity, I'm thinking back on what it was that I emailed Maven. It was to find out if I could use a modification to one of his routines in my lecture. I never heard back, so I never used it. As to Robert's comment about maybe I'm "asking the wrong people." This is the very thing that I find frustrating about this whole subject. I've seriously spent tons of time researching and looking for proper credits, etc, but when I can't find what I'm looking for, or I find no evidence of prior credit or when I'm told the wrong information, it's not good enough. Instead, the problem is still that I am asking the wrong people. So who is the authority on who the "right people" are? What books do I have to have read before I can say that I couldn't find this published anywhere else? Again, not fighting, just frustrated and seeking some more definitive guidelines. As I mentioned before, I've been pretty heavily attacked and felt like I was in third grade again because of a couple of mistakes I made on crediting. How far do you take it? Who invented the double lift, the second deal, the side steal, the palm, the false put, false transfer, etc? Should we credit those moves? If not, what makes them any different from other moves that we should credit? Believe me, this is something that I've spent a ton of time thinking about, and I almost decided against ever publishing any of "my" material because this is such a moral dilemma with me. I hope I'm not ranting or raving... thanks again for an exciting discussion... keep it coming. |
|||||||||
|
MagicSanta Inner circle Northern Nevada 5841 Posts
|
I've seen your material and crediting and you are fine.
|
|||||||||
|
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-07-17 19:03, MagicSanta wrote: That depends on who you ask, which, of course, is my whole point. Thanks for the support, though.  |
|||||||||
|
Andi Peters Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
Do most magicians really care about where a move originated from? Surely it's more of an ego thing to satisfy the inventor or to make the magic pedants feel self-important.
After all, do we go round in our ordinary lives worrying about who came up with the idea for the table, television, car and other such things?!? |
|||||||||
|
Review King Eternal Order 14446 Posts
|
Magic is a secret, sacred, art. We pay homage to those that followed before us by crediting them. We also pay respect to those that are still here contributing by giving them credit if we use their work in creating our own effects, or versions.
Plus, it's intersting and fun to learn who came up with what. I love showing someone something and saying "here's where I do the Wes James move", etc.
"Of all words of tongue and pen,
the saddest are, "It might have been" ..........John Greenleaf Whittier |
|||||||||
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5930 Posts
|
Quote:
After all, do we go round in our ordinary lives worrying about who came up with the idea for the table, television, car and other such things?!? I guess that depends on if we study and work on tables, television, and cars... or just use them. |
|||||||||
|
MagicSanta Inner circle Northern Nevada 5841 Posts
|
Tom has brought up a key point. I've a question for some to ponder. If a fellow is a great mechanic, can do anything to a Ford to get it running great. If you ask him he knows that the cars are Fords and he even knows the years they were made, but he has absolutely no idea who designed the model in question. Is he less of a mechanic for not having that knowledge? If he wrote a book and said "it is a 1967 Ford" would there be those complaining "he should have mentioned Shelby!"? You bet there would be. I think if he acknowledged it was a 67 Ford is enough unless he happens to know the designer because he didn't leave it out for any evil reason and wasn't claiming to have designed it himself.
Note: I have heard the name Shelby and don't know if he designed anything in 67 so all of you Shelby heads keep mum! |
|||||||||
|
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-07-19 12:38, MagicSanta wrote: Very good question. This links back to my question that nobody has answered yet: Should be find out who invented the double lift and give them credit? What about palming cards? The overhand shuffle? The Riffle Shuffle? The "gambler's spread"? False transfer? My guess is that most people would agree that there is no need to credit those moves, so what's the difference between a double lift and say the "Sunrise" by Ed Marlo when it comes to crediting? I'm happy to give credit if I know who credit belongs to. However, I've hear Aldo Colombini on several occasions say something to this effect: I do this move all the time, I've never seen it in print, but I can't believe that someone else hasn't come up with this first. To me that's fine, and I see no need for Aldo to spend his live searching through thousands and thousands of books and DVDs trying to find something that sort of looks like what he's doing. From what I can tell Aldo doesn't seem to get harassed by anyone for making such a statement, yet others have. I've heard some people say that a simple google search would lead you in the right direction. To me that's ridiculous. I've developed a move that I use all the time that would take 2 paragraphs to explain. It's very easy to show someone, but it's very difficult to explain. What words would I type into the google search box to even begin finding something like that? I'm with Mr. Santa here on the fact that you have to look at a person's intent. On my DVD, I use a move that I read in Paul LePaul's book, "The card magic of Paul LePaul." The move is described on page 204 in the trick Aces Up. In Paul's book, he uses the phrase, "The Maneuver, which is fairly well known among card men..." He does not credit it, so I made a joke on my DVD that the move was likely Ed Marlo's. Turn's out it was a Braue move. I don't hear too many people criticizing LePaul. Well A few decades after LePaul's book, unbeknownst to me, JK Hartman came up with an ever so slight difference to the Braue move. In the Braue move cards are pivoted around a pack and placed on the deck then the remainder of the packet is placed on the deck. In the Hartman variation, the cards are pivoted around the packet and placed on the back of the packet, then the packet is placed on the deck. The result is identical, and the difference is so minor that it took me several times reading it to finally catch on. In my DVD, I performed the move the Hartman did. I felt and thought I was performing the move out of the LePaul book which was an uncredited move, so I felt totally justified in saying that it was probably a Marlo move. However, I got totally ripped apart for not knowing Hartman's move, and for making light of crediting. To me that's just taking it tooooooooooooo far. Before publishing that effect, I went through Racherbaumer's "Counthesaurus" looking for anything that looked similar to this move, and I couldn't find it. But I was totally villain-ized for this completely honest mistake. I'm not here to whine about the attack on my character, but rather to point on that this stuff, to me, is a bit out of hand. Your thoughts? Anyone? Chris, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this. You and I are usually pretty much on the same page on most things, but I think we may differ here. The cool thing is that I know you well enough, and you know me well enough that we can have an intelligent conversation without it impacting our friendship. |
|||||||||
|
MagicSanta Inner circle Northern Nevada 5841 Posts
|
What have the guys who were attacking you ever created?
Like I said, do your best and realize that not everyone knows everything. A great DVD, I said this before, had the creator saying "I don't know the history of the effects but I'm not a historian but I appreciate their work..." something like that and I doubt anyone screamed. |
|||||||||
|
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-07-19 13:46, MagicSanta wrote: Right, wrong or indifferent, I learned from my mistake. I learned how sensitive of a subject this really is. In my upcoming project, Gemstones, I made several mistakes in crediting during the filming of the DVD, but I've since been corrected and, hopefully, have the correct crediting. It will be added to the DVD either as pop up text, or as credits at the end of the DVD. Plus I'll be creating a page on my site that's dedicated to this DVD. It will continue to be updated as more people correct my crediting. Hopefully the critics will see that I'm on the side of magic and the giants whose shoulders we all stand upon. |
|||||||||
|
RLFrame Elite user 447 Posts
|
Jeff,
I agree with Magic Santa "... do your best and realize that not everyone knows everything." A) Between magazines from various countries (some a hundred years old), books (even limited editions and exclusives such the PEA), lectures, lecture notes, video, DVD, e-books, etc. there is a mountain of material and no one has access to it all, and no one is even familiar with a large percentage of the literature. B) Much of the business end of it for magicians is in selling secrets. There is even some prevailing sentiment that even borrowing books or DVDs is unethical as that means one has accessed things that another is selling and not paying for them. This dynamic obstructs research. There are a lot of knowledgeable people on The Café, but no one is going to say, "Hey, before I relase this in my new e-book, I need the vast, collective knowledge of all of you to tell me if the following technique has ever been published before, it works exactly like this..." [the technique is fully explained. ] Worst case response, "Yes it was invented and published a few years back, and he will not be too happy that you just explained to 10, 000 magicians..." Best case response: "Hey that is wonderful and unique, but no use relaesing it... you already showed it to us. Thanks." I wrote much the same another recent thread on the "Penny" forum and met with some who disagreed with me when said that "comprehensive research is not possible." When asked HOW comprehensive could be done, no good answer was forthcoming. Of course, it is desireable to credit what has happened before. But eveyone needs to recognize the truth that it not really possible to research 'secrets' given the amount of material and the limited access that comes with secret guarding. The paradox is that several threads have brought forth people who are now hesitant to release something because they do not want to be called on to the carpet 'like a third grader' for not crediting. To reward creativity of the past by stifling it today seems to me to be in no one's interest. I suggest we take an honest look to the past and the future. IN the past we saw a lot of blatant secret stealing, even among 'giants.' Steinmeyer had a great chapter on it in "Hiding The Elephant." In the future we see that mountain of material growing and growing and so tougher to have anyone truly informed about it. Is anyone even familiar with EVERYTHING new came out even in 2007 even in one's own specialty? Of course, I think it is noble to credit creators, and we should do some basic research before releasing something. But I think if Hyrum T Peabody invented the 'dichotomous bifurcated angle spin' and published it in a magazine in 1946 and Fergus Munsterlander independently creates the same move in 2008: 1) It is NOT likely to be found out by basic research. 2) The most likely way to get old Hyrum due credit is to have the move gain some widespread appeal in 2008 and hope that someone is reading through that old magazine and notifies Fergus, for the record, that the move was in print in 1946 so that proper credit can then be given in future editions. 3) If it is a good technique, worthy of considertion, Hyrum and the rest of us should be grateful that it has once again been brought to light. |
|||||||||
|
MagicSanta Inner circle Northern Nevada 5841 Posts
|
Scooooore!
|
|||||||||
|
Review King Eternal Order 14446 Posts
|
If you are going to have any credit to any release, then do it ad nauseum.
Or... Don't have any credit. Even state it on the package "These are my effects and techniques I use. I have no idea who to credit as that is something folks can do that have an interest in that. I don't excpect anyone to credit me, so I don't bother to research anything. If it bothers you, don't buy this product". You're safer not doing any credit because no matter how much research you do, someone will find something you missed. If you take the "I don't care" stand and the product is excellent, the only people that won't buy it are those that have a stand on crediting. And make sure the people are dead that inspired you before relasing anything. If it's anyone alive, the'll say you took their idea and didn't have permission. Just credit Marlo and Vernon as your influences. And..NEVER show magicians anything. Jam sessions should be called "no protection for your ideas sessions". 30 years later, someone will say they showed you something at some convention at 3 a.m. etc.
"Of all words of tongue and pen,
the saddest are, "It might have been" ..........John Greenleaf Whittier |
|||||||||
|
RLFrame Elite user 447 Posts
|
Annemann had a great line in Jinx though he was using it in a slightly different context, but I think relevant:
"Reviewers... who steep themselves in the lore of the ages, to which present day fans have little access..." go "overboard in their condemnation, generally to the extent that they forget to review the trick's possibilities regardless of age. If any of the commentators ever started doing a trick after some professional dug it out of near oblivion, some trick they undoubtedly would have called 'old' and in their calling must have known it but passed it by, they'll perhaps know what I am trying to say." Perhaps, if some of those who 'steep themselves in the lore of the ages' had not 'in their knowing passed it by' and instead recognized the cleverness of the old technique, promoted it all along, and shouted its uselfulness from the mountaintops - as it is being praised now - the technique would be more widely known and would not have had to have been reinvented, or mis-credited. |
|||||||||
|
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-07-21 17:51, Christopher Kavanagh wrote: Chris, Even doing ad nauseum will not be enough for some. I liked the interview with Sankey in RMQ where he told the story of how he was approached by Bobby Bernard at a convention one time, and Mr. Bernard showed Jay a copy of an old publication and implied that Jay got the idea for one of his (jay's) tricks from that article. In reality Jay had never seen that article. I think that there has to be a happy medium between ad nauseum and "I don't care." If I get a credit wrong and someone wants to correct me, I'll be happy to correct the mistake. In fact, Wesley James just gave me several mistakes in my e-book. I've already made the changes. I think that it's wise to ask a few magicians in the know (assuming you can trust that they won't steal your idea), and make sure you check some of the major sources. Otherwise I think giving the credit that you know, and stating that after doing some research you could not find the remaining necessary credits is a fair approach. Again, I have no problem with someone informing me that I've made a mistake on my credits. What I have a problem with is childish and unprofessional responses and behavior because of an honest mistake. |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Some General Comments About Magic DVD's (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
Posted: Jul 16, 2008 11:44 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.08 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 < 
|