|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
Kyle Gray New user 10 Posts |
Great replies... especially about find you. I've been in magic ten years and only recently over the last 6 months the importance of that has finally dawned on me. I believe it is the first key to being a great performer.
For the uninitiated... what is H.C.E.? Regards Kyle |
|||||||||
johndraws Loyal user Danville, Illinois 202 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-03-11 23:35, paulvigil wrote: This is exactly why I choose the magic/stories I do. When I hear a sincere "That was amazing"...and I just surpassed their expectations. That is the greatest reward for both ego and other peoples investment into the art. |
|||||||||
paulvigil V.I.P. 268 Posts |
||||||||||
dmoses Inner circle 2261 Posts |
What's it gonna take to make magic respected as an art? And what's one thing each of us can do to make it happen?
dave
"You're a comedian. You wanna do mankind a service, tell funnier jokes."
TPR by Dave Moses and Iain Dunford T-shirts for Magicians and Mentalists |
|||||||||
paulvigil V.I.P. 268 Posts |
Dave,
We must realize that the myths of magical or psychic powers are somehow evolutionary precursors of what we might become--they're revealed potentialities of the human spirit--and that these myths are, and always have been, guiding us into our future; this is extremelly important because we haven't much of an idea of where we've came from, let alone where we are going, and prophetic, because it presupposes that the human spirit is developing. Arcane enough? V |
|||||||||
dmoses Inner circle 2261 Posts |
Hmmmm.... so that's a "yes" to sponge balls?
"You're a comedian. You wanna do mankind a service, tell funnier jokes."
TPR by Dave Moses and Iain Dunford T-shirts for Magicians and Mentalists |
|||||||||
paulvigil V.I.P. 268 Posts |
High 5!
|
|||||||||
magicduro Special user Las Vegas 529 Posts |
"Hmmmm.... so that's a "yes" to sponge balls? "
Classic! |
|||||||||
paulvigil V.I.P. 268 Posts |
You know what I hate?
Sometimes you're working as hard as you can and then someone else comes along with sponge balls and actually does totally ROCK the entire party... Ouch! Whaddya do? :) |
|||||||||
SWNerndase Regular user 168 Posts |
A little bit ago in this thread you said entertainment was secondary, and magic is strong enough to stand on its own. If that is really the stance and approach you take, I think you'll have to live with the fact that someone "rocking the party" with sponge balls is YOUR EQUAL. Or maybe even your better. Because regardless of his presentation, he is doing a very strong direct magic effect, which you have said is primary, can stand on its own, and "entertainment is secondary."
I agree that powerful effects are the most important element to being a magician, but the idea that magic can speak for itself is misleading. I've seen you perform, Paul, and your magic doesn't stand on its own. It is presented and supported with real performance chops, a point of view, original scripting, etc. Again, if "entertainment is secondary" and strong magic effect is the only thing that matters, then every hack magician in the world who can fool an audience with sponge balls, invisible deck and Hundy 500 (insert your favorite hack trick of the week) is your artistic equal. And this idea is what draws a lot of people to magic in the first place. What did Steve Martin say? "Anyone who wants to be in showbiz but has no talent becomes a magician?" Something like that. And it's true to a large extent, because a person with no other abilities or talent can still get up and do easy tricks that fool people. Fool them badly! So if, as you assert, entertainment is secondary, hack magicians doing self working but good tricks are every bit as good a magician as you are. (And sadly, an audience of non-magicians has no frame of reference to decide who is the better magician and may well conclude that the sponge ball amateur is better than the Diplopia pro.) I object to this idea that magic can stand on its own, and entertainment is secondary. It is part of the myth of selling magic as a product, and has no place in the study of magic for performance. I'm sure that isn't what you meant to say. Or was it? SWN |
|||||||||
paulvigil V.I.P. 268 Posts |
SWN,
Why don't you tell me how you really feel? Let me digress; how can someone doing hack magic first of all even be considered an artist? Isn't this like painting by numbers? Or, being a cover band? And now you're telling me I should admit this person is my equal, and maybe even my better? Hmmm. OK. Yes, it was what I meant to say. V |
|||||||||
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5925 Posts |
SWN,
It is easy to do, but I think you misunderstand both what V has said as well as the moment of sponge balls rockin' a party. I apologize in advance for hijacking this moment of Paul's visit. There is bread and there is cake. Bread is it's own essence. It can on it's own be an entire meal. Cake, however, most often makes it's experiencial statement through sickeningly sweet and strangely colored frosting. Few can make a meal of it and even fewer can exist on it. Though bread and cake seem similar, they are radically different in both their experience and the sustanence they provide. It is correct that sponge balls is a very strong trick. It is a delightful kinesthetic and visually active trick in which little balls of sponge magically pop out of a spectator's hand as if these little balls have come to life. The experience, if left at this primal level, is little more than a sugar rush. How much frosting (canned gags, jokes, and other aside entertainments) is used in the display will determine where on the scale of sugar rushes the performance gets placed. Being able to trigger a primal experience doing a paint by numbers scripted sponge ball routine is not the same as conceiving and performing an original piece of magic which speaks to the poetry and beauty of the world around us. The latter would be bread for the soul. As for the actual moment, there are several elements to observe closely. First off, the stray sponge ball trick and it's reactions may just as much be a reaction to something "different", something which is a change of experience. In wine competitions there is a critical failure point when several similar and exceptional wines are competing in a pack with others. The similar wines are recognized for their achievement, but the top most honor goes to a lesser wine which stood out in this group because it was different, not better. When compared one on one with the similar wines, the gold medal winner loses. On it's own each exceptional wine dominates over the lesser wine. As a pack, however, the exceptional characteristics can become muddled. In the midst of very thought provoking and deeply touching performance the interjection of a simple sugary delight can garner greater reaction than It would standing on it's own. It is up to the artist to decide if doing so unweaves his spell or whether it allows him to capitalize on the reaction to the stray element. The true test of this is if the audience is discussing the dramatic theme or the stray element and which performer's names (in our example) do they know. This will tell you who they connected with. Too often sponge balls is an anonymous trick in that the audience connects with the experience of the little balls popping all over the place, rather than connecting with the performer and his theme. Well, unless the theme is "I don't have a theme but here, look at this." Cheers, Tom |
|||||||||
SWNerndase Regular user 168 Posts |
Mr. Vigil--
Let me try again, because clearly I was not expressing myself well. If you took my post to mean that I was asserting that a hack magician is your equal I apologize. Because I don't believe that, and neither do you. That is not what I meant. The kick off point was your comment about someone who comes in and "rocks the party" with sponge balls. This, as I suspect you know, can actually happen. It's always been a source of frustration to me that a random dude who bought a half dozen tricks in the magic store over the past couple months can "be a magician." Seriously. If someone learns to do the invisible deck, the sponge bunnies and Hundy 500 they will score well with an audience of non-magicians. No practice, no skill to speak of, and no thought or originality--and yet this person may well be seen as a very good magician. In some cases might even be perceived as better than a serious, original working pro. It's as if a cover band came out to play, played all the best songs from artists in the past 50 years, but no one in the audience had ever heard any of those songs--and gave the credit to the cover band. "These guys are fantastic." (Even the cover band must have some chops though, so the analogy breaks down.) One of the ways to separate art from "pretend art" (to use Maskelyne and Devant's term) is by bringing the performance aspects front and center. To say that the "trick" or effect is NOT enough, and the performer must also have vision, originality, performance chops, something to say, a point of view, a definable character and so on. It's not the only way to highlight those differences, but is perhaps the most accessible to non-magicians. So this was what I was trying to get at with my poorly phrased "hack is your equal" analogy. It's not that the hacky magician is your equal, it's that a non-magician audience cannot distinguish easily UNLESS there is something being communicated beyond and besides the trick itself. I was asking you to clarify your statement that entertainment is secondary, and magic can stand on its own in that light. AND does your statement mean that it's ok with you that an audience sees no difference between a guy doing hundy 500 and you doing the best material you have dreamed and sweated to bring back from the invisible world? My point was that I also think strong magic matters--or why be a magician? Be a comedian or story teller or whatever. If you're going to be a magician you simply MUST do strong magic. On that we totally agree. But I feel that strong magic is only a part of the formula, and the other things cannot, or should not be considered secondary. They are "of a piece" and cannot be separated. IF we separate the two things, and give more weight to the effect/magic, any guy who owns an invisible deck and can blow the room away IS as good a magician as I am. Am I making myself clear? Or am I stirring up the water so it's even murkier now? Comments on this, Mr. V? SWN |
|||||||||
paulvigil V.I.P. 268 Posts |
Tom,
***, I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for taking the time to write in. I resonated with all your words here. Great analogy between bread and cake? Have you met Armando Lucero? He quite often uses a similiar dichotomy by talking about the difference between candy (tricks) and a 17 course meal (magic). Best, V |
|||||||||
SWNerndase Regular user 168 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-03-13 13:25, Tom Cutts wrote: Perhaps I did misunderstand, but this last line confuses the matter for me again. This is precisely the crux of the matter-- If "entertainment is secondary" and "magic can stand on its own," I read that to mean that you WANT the audience to connect with the sponges and what happened more than with the performer and his theme. I was asking if this is what was Paul meant. And I still can't quite tell. But I did like the break/cake analogy of Tom's. SWN |
|||||||||
paulvigil V.I.P. 268 Posts |
SWN,
I follow you. The main point that is getting lost here, and to answer your question, is this: whatever ANY other performer is doing is peripheral to me, as long as I am following my own vision. And while this person with the effects you say could come in and rock the party (I admit this, too) I don't think he will get work outside of a very small pond. And, yes, this other person may be percieved as being as good as you, but, really, who cares. One one hand I realize this is all that matters, but on the other in a way it's like pearls before swine. Following the previous anecdotes, I like wine and know what tastes good, to me, but I would never think I'm a sommelier. I look at it this way too: whatever is on the top 40 is usually what I don't like. Sometimes I listen to those stations; not for the music, but for the comedy. Best, V |
|||||||||
SWNerndase Regular user 168 Posts |
Paul,
I think we agree on nearly all points here. I apologize again for any confusion--which is surely the result of my typing quick notes and not being perfectly clear. I had a conversation with Paul Harris one time where he firmly contended that the evolution of magic was toward stronger effects with simpler methods, and that studying Erdnase, Hugard and Braue, Bobo, etc. was not important if you wanted to be a performing magician. And I completely disagreed. Although his argument has some merit IF the effect is all that matters. (Why do you need to know about left and right handed bottom palms if you can blow the room away with an invisible deck? Why learn various types of concealments if you can fool people with a Scotch and Soda coin set? And so on.) I see so many magicians now who seem to think and perform this way, and frankly I don't care for the stripped down/minimalist/"watch, look" performance that is so popular today. I've seen you perform many times and I'm fairly sure that you spend a great deal of time thinking about character, about structure, about point of view, about concise and clear scripting etc.--all things that are important beyond pulling off a deceptive and magical "trick." So I was surprised at your statement of "entertainment is secondary" and "magic can stand on its own." I don't think the two can be separated really. But that's beside the point now... The important point you brought up here, is the idea of following your own vision regardless of what others are doing. And that's an idea I can get behind 100%. Yes. SWN |
|||||||||
paulvigil V.I.P. 268 Posts |
SWN,
I would have disagreed with Paul, too. I think the pragmatic approach is better. That we use what works best for the situation we are in. For instance, I don't think there is a perfect effect, but there are things better suited to certain situations. I don't care for the "watch, look" approach. I trust my performance in this area speaks for itself. Again, thanks for coming onboard. From your words I can tell you think and take it seriously--that's the very most I could hope for. V |
|||||||||
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5925 Posts |
SWN,
My understanding is that V's definition of what is magic and the definition you are using in your example are different. The factors which affect a cake are the mixture of ingredients sometimes down to the molecular level, the cooking specifics, and even the blending technique. Some flour, eggs, and oil can't stand on their own, but a great cake can with no frosting. I see the trick as just the flour. It needs the other ingredients to become a cake, just as a trick needs other ingredients to become magic. Thanks for sticking with this. I agree that the "trend" in magic is for more simple methods and higher impact. If effect comes first, one must address how effect is affected by method. Sometimes simpler is not better. V, Thank you. I am familliar with AL. He came to the Golden Gate Gathering one year. I don't recall the food analogy but boy do I remember a ballet of the hands when he performed. I had an unfortunate angle in which I got a behind the scenes view of his work. It was more devastatingly beautiful to watch from my perspective. Pure delight for the mind and soul. Cheers, Tom |
|||||||||
paulvigil V.I.P. 268 Posts |
T,
I bet the whole time you had that privileged view on Maestro Lucero's work you were saying to yourself, "No F'n Way!" Yep, I got 5 on it. OK, I know, not a fair wager. V |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The March 2010 entrée: Paul Vigil » » Practice, Rehearsal and Creativity. » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 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 < |