|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next] | ||||||||||
Laurent van Trigt Regular user 160 Posts 
|
What I'm struggling at right now is that the more I define a character and give unity to my performances, the more I have to 'filter out' effects, some of which play very strong. From the audience's perspective, wouldn't it make more sense to see that strong trick you sacrificed cause you wanted to stick to that little character of yours??
|
|||||||||
|
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16543 Posts
|
Do American magicians have their powers limited by the US Constitution or can they do what that wish like.....CIA agents?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Steve_Mollett Inner circle Eh, so I've made 3006 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2010-01-14 19:07, Laurent van Trigt wrote: Good question; one you have to answer for yourself. As I see it, a well-defined character can grasp opportunities to incorporate new 'strong' effects (even if sacrificing other, older ones) while avoiding the chaos of being 'out of character.' I see it as an open door to uniqueness and creativity, rather than a closed door to flexibility.
Author of: GARROTE ESCAPES
The absurd is the essential concept and the first truth. - Albert Camus |
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts
|
Laurent,
That's the main challenge -- either dropping the routine because it doesn't fit your character, or else finding a way to motivate doing the routine that somehow manages to make it fit. Some magicians, for instance, have done a great trick, all the while explaining why they hate doing it. That very paradox can itself be entertaining, if done the right way, and if used to convey something genuine about your character.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
|
Donal Chayce Inner circle 1770 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2010-01-14 19:07, Laurent van Trigt wrote: I'm presently having a similar struggle myself, and not just with routines that play strongly, but with routines that I've greatly enjoyed performing as well. Nevertheless, I've come to see that a strong performance of magic necessitates this restriction of one's powers (to bring things full circle vis-a-vis Jon's superhero theory). And so I've been regretfully and gratefully turning away from some old and trusted friends as I've eagerly but cautiously explored new relationships. :smiletear: |
|||||||||
|
Lawrence O Inner circle French Riviera 6811 Posts
|
Donal and Laurent,
you don't have to filter your beloved tricks out. You must however rewrite the script to make it consistent with the act and the personality chosen for the character In my Jedi card act is a version of Chicago Opener but concerning the relationship between Fate and free will explaining that only a Jedi could possibly blend the both together. The second trick is a cutting to the aces followed by a Jazz aces where I show a spectator how he can "use the force" and let him do the last ace but making him feel the force in his arm. The following one concerns the temptations of the dark side and it's a classic Ten card poker deal Then I end with Out of this world with the spectators shuffling alll along and the performer "not touching the cards"
Magic is the art of emotionally sharing live impossible situations
|
|||||||||
|
Laurent van Trigt Regular user 160 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2010-01-14 20:11, Steve_Mollett wrote: I think you are right. Although one would think that sticking to a character 'narrows' you, it also seems to stimulate ideas and creativity. |
|||||||||
|
Lawrence O Inner circle French Riviera 6811 Posts
|
Spot on Laurent
Magic is the art of emotionally sharing live impossible situations
|
|||||||||
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts
|
Sticking to a character allows you to build a relationship with between the audience and that character by way of presentation, both items presented and how they are presented.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
|
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16543 Posts
|
Being a con man is good training for character acting. I know this from my days of being a supervillain.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9987 Posts
|
From actual experience -- if you put on a show and no one comes, does it mean they don't like your character, or don't like you magic?
or that the printer put the wrong date on the flyers ...
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
|
Michael Kamen Inner circle Oakland, CA 1315 Posts
|
If you fart in the forest, does a tree fall?
Michael Kamen
|
|||||||||
|
Lawrence O Inner circle French Riviera 6811 Posts
|
Well basically we could classify the character offered in an effect by a performer into three categories.
The protagonist: this type causes the effect, he has everything under control and is responsible for producing the magic. Naturally his approach is very energetic and he has to work hard to reach the audience because he is only "demonstrating" his powers. I takes masters like Juan Tamariz, Whit Haydn, John Carney or Gregory Wilson to pull out such characters keeping the performance "magic" and it is the one that every newbie with a sick ego attempts to imitate. Such masters are serving the art well. They are however somewhat of a danger to the magicians' community who's less experienced member use their performance as justification for challenges, puzzles and skill demonstrations which kill the "magic". The submissive is taken by surprise by the magic effect. He deals with magic by setting the causes but seem not to control anything around the effect. He seems powerless (keeping the rhythm but not showing that he generates it) and therefore needs a better script and requires for the performer to be a better actor since the magic happens outside of him. His attitude immediately places the audience on his side. René Lavand is a master in that art and, in a more casual way, David Williamson also shines in that art but in a more casual way. Fred Kaps and Tommy Wonder used to be extremely efficient in this approach as well. The third type is the neutral witness. He is neither ahead nor behind the effect but only next to it. Like the protagonist, he does "magic" but controls only himself. He is neither energetic nor powerless but calm, precise and detached. The audience wishes to be on the side of the trick but it has to go through him to witness it. There is a risk for the rhythm to be too slow but the emotional involvement of the audience in the magic is guaranteed if the performer is a good actor. Lance Burton and Kevin James are masters in that art. Instead of trying to classify yourself or your character solidly in one or the other category (possibly for unconscious ego reasons), what about considering the possibility that an act could introduce the magic with the magician as a simple witness, then to present the magician as becoming submissive before he reacts and becomes superhero only in the last trick. Another combination could promote magic more than the successful dominant character (and its performer). The first effect could put the protagonist forward, for the following effects the performer allows the character to slide into the witness approach, finally magic takes over controlling everything. Naturally there are other possible combinations. I'm well aware that most magicians are naturally drawn into playing the superhero, but in building an act, as it is wise to vary the effects (check Fitzkee's list if need be) it is wise to let the positioning of the character towards magic to evolve. Boredom arose one day from uniformity.
Magic is the art of emotionally sharing live impossible situations
|
|||||||||
|
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts
|
I don't understand this knee-jerk reaction towards assuming the superhero theory is about ego. The issue for considering the superhero theory isn't to model the story arcs that superheros are frequently in (comic books, films, etc.), or to cast spectators/participants/partners/whatever into arbitrary roles. The idea is simply to re-evaluate the relationship that the performer has with the magic cause that makes everything happen. Where the story goes from there is a different consideration altogether.
Look at it another way. Whit Haydn's Teleportation Device routine can be seen as following the model. We've got the funny scientist-type who is proud to demonstrate the marvels of modern technology. The whole routine can be seen as an elaborate experiment to prove that the technology works. His delight at this knowledge, contrasted with the fact that the character probably knows less than anybody else in the room about technology, foreshadow the unexpected results. The technology itself also has predefined limits -- it requires small objects and the teleportation doesn't always work -- and this saves the performer from having to answer for the cause on a serious level. He's safe from people wanting to assert too much of their own imagination upon what it is he should be capable of doing with that technology. We could almost see this character within the confines of a comic book, knowing what he brings to the table in terms of abilities, knowing the boundaries of those abilities, and even getting a sense of his style. Again, look at what we've got... We've got a claim about a causative agent (the mysterious technology), we've got demonstrations that the causative agent works but with limitations, we've got excellent proof via cancelling methods that the causative agent is behind the phenomena and not some other factor that would undermine the claim, and we've got a clear idea of the relationship between the character and that causative agent. I have no clue if any of that factored into Whit's design and development of the routine. Regardless, it represents a significant model that somebody interested in studying the superhero theory could examine, to their benefit -- especially because of the fact that it's an example in the realm of magic performance rather than in mentalism, where this sort of theory is more prevalent.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
Whit Haydn V.I.P. 5449 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2010-01-18 22:12, Andrew Musgrave wrote: My Teleportation Device is not a magic trick. It is a scientific curiosity--an interesting demonstration of the powers of Radio-Magnetism. My device was constructed entirely by accident. |
|||||||||
|
Lawrence O Inner circle French Riviera 6811 Posts
|
Andrew,
I know that you are well aware of projective psychology. Thus I'm surprised that in what you are discussing in your post, you seem to forget to keep a clear difference between the performer and the character.
Magic is the art of emotionally sharing live impossible situations
|
|||||||||
|
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2010-01-18 22:51, Whit Haydn wrote: Patent pending? Quote:
On 2010-01-18 22:52, Lawrence O wrote: Right...
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
|
Whit Haydn V.I.P. 5449 Posts
|
Etienne, is Pop a protagonist or a submissive in this routine? I am not sure I like the terminologies, although it is a good distinction.
Even if the character "discovers" a magical object that possesses the magic, that character is the "possessor" of the object and motivator of the story--still a protagonist. The magician becomes the ptrotagonist in the act of having a card chosen. He is the initiator, the one who begins things. Even if he is to be merely another witness, he is the guide and the motivator and director of things. The distinctions you are making are to the sort of claim or lie the person is making. One could Lie about one's own Powers, Skills or Being (Spiritualist Medium, Mind Reader, Magician, Alien Scientist). One could Lie about the powers or abilities of an Object or Device. (Teleportation Device, Egg Bag) One could Lie about the abilities of Another (Two-person Telepathy, Georgia Magnet) In all of these cases, the prior and more important artistic decision has already been made--what is the intent of the performer; either Charlatanry, The Theatrical Depction of Magic, or the Theater of the Dilemma. |
|||||||||
|
Lawrence O Inner circle French Riviera 6811 Posts
|
Whit,
I agree with you that it's all up to whether we look at things from the performer's point of view or from the spectators' point of view. You know me well enough to be aware that (possibly due to my business -including marketing- background) my natural slope is to try and increase customers satisfaction from their point of view. Now it doesn't mean that I ignore the fact that, in magic as well, the feeling we generate is the result of a careful thinking, study, packaging, distribution... Thus we put the spotlight (we lie) on one aspect or the other. Therefore I think that you are semantically right "initiator" is probably a more proper word than protagonist which I drew from another post of yours (admittedly on a different topic). To answer your question "is Pop a protagonist (or initiator) or a submissive in this routine?" I wish to remind that I'm not in favor of freezing a character into one of the other category. Pop is the character of an act and during this act he plays various parts (initiator and submissive) at different steps of the act. Because Pop is a clever character downplaying his intelligence, he doesn't switch from one to the other effect by effect but sometimes along one trick. The point in my previous post was to encourage the variety facets that you carefully granted Pop with. Now you have the talent to do it not only in an act but even to do casting shifts even inside one trick. It seems to me that before teaching the art of the impressionists or of the Quatrocento, magicians should learn that they are not bound to use only the red color. I felt, but I'd love to be wrong, that most of the tricks are red based and that we should first share the use of more varied colors before sharing our perceptions of and attempt to benefit from the subtleties of Vermeer, or Chardin, Fragonnard, Meissonier, Manet, Monet, Van Ghogh, Matisse, Picasso, Norman Rockwell... Defining categories is always arbitrary and my attempt was only aiming at opening the thinking towards building subtle evolving characters in our acts. It would miss the target if it was restrictive. Naturally I expect the normal defense of the color red (there is nothing wrong with red if it's not the only color) which is not under attack but may feel it does.
Magic is the art of emotionally sharing live impossible situations
|
|||||||||
|
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9987 Posts
|
With a much stronger Speech Communication background than a Theater one, I look to the Stories being told and how they interact. The most important Story is the one that will be told by the spectator to others a day, week year and score years after the performance. That story will be an amalgam of the lesser Stories.
There is the story of the performer – what drew him to the art of magic, what experience forged this particular routine, what brought him to this stage on this day? Who is this magician? Then there is the Story of the Character(s) played or revealed. Is this a shy person pretending to be a magician who pretends to do magic as a way of overcoming fear? Is he a powerful wizard who masks his true powers behind a screen of pretended illusions? Is he but a mirror in which the spectator can see his grasp understanding of ‘impossible’ more clearly? A third Story is the one presented to the audience as a reason or causality of the effect, which may overlap Character in many ways. This Story unfolds with words, gestures, pantomime, music and interaction with objects and props. There is the Story of the spectator – what bought him to this particular stage tonight, who is he with, what are the dynamics of his participation? What are his expectations of the entertainment? What are his expectations of the magic? Never forget the Story the performer tells himself after the show – part of the learning cycle, and the story he tells friends and peers and his confessor. There is also the Story of the Magic – of how something occurred beyond the skit, beyond the interaction of these Stories and Objects, and outside of reasoned anticipation. How is Surprise, Astonishment and a Sense of Awe and Wonder nurtured into a memory of Magic? Did the other Stories cause, invoke, allow or prompt the mental response of “magic!” in the spectator’s mind. This is something more than “magic is the message” or “magic is the dilemma”, but “Magic is the Story.” Within the theme of “originality” any of these Stories can allow for variations of “being different” or “being new and refreshing” except “The Magic”, for all the performer can do is create the conditions under which it might happen, and make the event memorable. Sometimes this magic occurs in spite of our fumbled efforts. Sometimes it never happens because the Performer’s Story is not about magic, but about ego or power or confusion. What I know to be true is that sometimes people tell stories of Magic that the performer never did at all, and that as long as the magician has faith that at least one spectator embraced the Magic Story the art will continue. That’s my story, anyway …
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » The Superhero Theory (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Jan 15, 2010 12:07 am 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.09 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 < 
|