The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Is exposure wrong? (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
edh
View Profile
Inner circle
4698 Posts

Profile of edh
How many here think that if laymen are exposed to a method in one context. Then the magician wraps the same trick in a different context. Would the laymen still recognize the method? I would say no.
Magic is a vanishing art.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20537 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On 2010-05-19 21:13, funsway wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-05-19 09:56, Dannydoyle wrote:
The question is "should magic fool people?" I think the answer must be yes to this, or you are doing something other than magic. I hope we agree magic should fool people.

I do not agree at all -- neither that the purpose of performance magic is to fool people,


I have to admit I stopped right here. If you don't want to fool people DON'T USE MAGIC AS A MEDIUM! My lord all the pontification in the world does not change the fact that the word magic has a meaning and an implied meaning to an audience and as such carries the EXPECTATION of being FOOLED!

It is possible you just think way too much. Shakespear was right about brevity.

Use all the words you want to try to couch things in terms that make you comfortable, but if you are not on some level fooling people they do not think of you as a magician. This should be a pretty basic concept.

Much the same as unless you actually paint something, people will not consider you a painter. Every great chef must cook at least one edible meal. At some point a magician who does not "fool" people will not be thought of as one of the greatest magicians.

How can anyone not agree with this? (oh that was a rhetorical question, please don't burry me in words I don't have the strength)
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Mr. Mystoffelees
View Profile
Inner circle
I haven't changed anyone's opinion in
3621 Posts

Profile of Mr. Mystoffelees
I think it would depend upon the complexity of the effect. Say you expose loops, for example. I think it would be pretty hard to do any in-the-hand levitations, regardless of what you were "levitating". Further, any levitation would have those specs thinking of invisible thread, wire, etc. So, instead of enjoying the magic, they are trying to figure our how it relates to invisible gimmicks.

This makes it harder for the spec to "suspend disbelief", and the harder that is, the less magical the performance. Say, for example, a Harry Potter movie was produced that showed a panned-out video, so that you could see the cameraman, microphones, lights, etc. Would that lessen the magic of the movie?
Also known, when doing rope magic, as "Cordini"
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20537 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
So you think giving credit for those things at the end of the movie is wrong?

Or do you perhaps think that while the movie is going on people do not really think that stuff is happening?

Perhaps instead of asking them to believe or disbelieve it is just better to let them watch.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27140 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On 2010-05-20 08:04, funsway wrote:...
... Knowing how to do the effect does not deminish the appreciation of the magic at all -- just makes you envious of the work he put in to be able to do this impromptu.


Lost is that sense of wonder about what impossible thing is happening somewhere that permits the effect to happen.

Folks, kindly stop posing about things like appreciating skill, technique, dedication, sleight of hand etc. in this context. If that's all you want become a craftsman and show your furniture or painting or a juggler and let them appreciate your skill. Magic requires something else. If that "something else" is a mystery to you then perhaps you'd be better off at some other performing art. No mystery - no magic. It's not about secrets but instead about leaving them with a mystery to savor and describe to others.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9022 Posts

Profile of funsway
Why so judgmental, Jonathan? For me "appreciation" of magic (and anything) is the ability to retain that "sense of wonder" separate for a personal view of what is "possible." If you have lost that I am sorry. Every spectator brings to the table a sense of awe and wonder from life experience that a magician can kindle with an effect, a storyteller can caress with words ans other artists with their media. Knowing how something is technically accomplished does not destroy that sense of wonder -- it is still ready to be prodded by a different effect -- or the same one in a different setting. The key is the ability to be present in the here and now for a particular performer and a specific effect -- the ability to suspend prior bias as well as disbelief. That is appreciation.

For the effect described I "know how it is done" from reading, but had never seen Oil and Water performed -- and was able to allow myself to be present for the experience. The only mystery is where your sense of awe and wonder went. Perhaps if I perform for another 50 years I will loose it too.
"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
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20537 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
I have to ask, is magic and performance the primary way in which you earn income?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9022 Posts

Profile of funsway
Quote:
On 2010-05-21 08:30, Dannydoyle wrote:
I have to ask, is magic and performance the primary way in which you earn income?


guess that is meant for me, not not sure why that is relevant. Currently, it is the way that I earn discretionary income. For more than forty years as a business consultant, magic was a part of what I used to change the perceptions of thousands of business owners -- so, in that sense, yes, but probably not what you would consider "performance magic" as it was all 'one-on-one' presentations or appreciation. Often the owner would use the word "magic" to describe something related to their business, then I would expore what that meant to them. Whether I thought it was a 'sense of wonder' was irrelevant, while their perceptions was vital. Most often I would use a magic effect to guide them to a solution they had never considered before. Since this new approach came from their own lips they could not argue with it.

Do I do magic effects for entertainment? Rarely. Instead I am focusing on innovating new effects that others can use effectively. So, in a sense magicians are my audience, and the fact that they "know how" is not a limitation to appreciating something new.

Is "magic" the primary way I produce income -- absolutely.
"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
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27140 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Kindly do not presume upon what folks believe etc and from that go on to offer pity and worse. It's just short of flaming.

Let's proceed form a shared concern that our tricks work as designed for audiences.

Here's a link: http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......um=217&3 to some explorations designed to help us learn when our trickery works. It's not quite proper experimental design for real publishable science but you can extend the procedure to get there. Smile

Can you honestly say here that your coin pass works well enough for others to reliably choose the wrong hand when you offer them the contents of either hand? Can you honestly say here that you have successfully (not) placed a few silver coins in a bag and then shown a few pennies in your hand and offered them a choice between the coins in your hand or the coins in the bag and have audiences reliably choose what's in the bag? Without that kind of functioning basic machinery of deception - there can be no magic.

I'll review the Feher video. I was given the impression the kid was just enjoying the "doing" rather than being surprised by the magical outcomes. I would be happy to be wrong about that one. And I like that Feher put's some of his work up for display.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20537 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Jonathan, lets define "our audiences". Once we do that we can move along.

There is a HUGE difference in audiences that have paid money to see a magic show, and those who you are doing tricks for with other intents.

Notice how I do not claim one is better than the other, or one is right or another wrong, simply different with different goals.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9022 Posts

Profile of funsway
Quote:
On 2010-05-22 08:36, Dannydoyle wrote:
There is a HUGE difference in audiences that have paid money to see a magic show, and those who you are doing tricks for with other intents.


I readily agree, but would suggest there is third classification of those who apply the word "magic" to observed phenomena when there is no intent to do a trick. I would venture that an average American uses the word "magic" several times a day -- innundated my advertising, early learning and lazy thinking (opinion). Some of those mental images may include a sense of awe and wonder, while other simply have an expectation of "other than ordinary." As performers we might like to pretend that all magical responses include awe, mystery, paradox, dilemma, etc.,and this might be true of paying audiences. For more casual engagments, however, you have to work with what the spectator brings to the table with as few assumptions as possible. I would humbly suggest that some audience training is required in an early effect to get the spectator's attention and align their thoughts with our 'higher order' of magic experience -- then perform an effect that might create a lasting memory of astonishment. If you do not have the spectaor's attention there can be no magic.

When magic effects are used in a teaching venue, or to enhance a story, or to create a 'lemma' against which to compare a concept; then a sense of wonder or mystery might be deminished. My experience is that such efforts serve to sustain attention for the main theme more than mystify.
"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
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27140 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Funsway, the average product of our educational system uses the word "think" when they mean "feel" and "want" when they mean "desire". Let us not pander to such, please.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20537 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
So then if the audience is different, and the magic is different, then perhaps if you make it clear which you are pontificating about. I am afraid the idea that magic does not have to fool people in the performance of a magic act is not going to fly.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9022 Posts

Profile of funsway
Perhaps if you had read my previous post it would be clear. I have made no statements that could remotely be consider pontificating. In response to your fairly universal statement that fooling people is essential to magic, I offer a different view based on my personal experience in thousands of situations in which "magic" occured in the mind of the spectator but no 'fooling' occured, nor was my intent to fool anyone. I am sharing those experiences in support of the theme "is exposure wrong." I believe that exposure makes too many assumptions about what the audience thinks, feels wants or expect

We all have to make assumptions about the audience before us. You appear to prefer the idea that they wish to be fooled. Jonathan seems to offer that they are confused about what they feel or think or want out of magic. I prefer to make as few assumptions as possible and offer effects that can get me and the audience on the same side -- magic on the other. It is just semantics, I guess -- but if I tell the audience exactly what will occur and it does, they might be amazed but hardly fooled. There is nothing to "fly." Other readers can read what has been presented and make up their own minds -- or emotions.

However, if you wish to restrict "performance magic" to planned performances before a paying audience I will agree that fooling them is a formula that ussually works, but would suggest a variety of effects to accomodate those who did not come to be fooled. Just an opinion -- since I never charge for my performances I am only guessing.
"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
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20537 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
I could think of few things more disapointing than paying money to see a magic act that did not fool me.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9022 Posts

Profile of funsway
Well Danny, you have the right to feel you were fooled any time you wish, and (as notred earlier) buying a ticket to a magic show sets you up to be fooled -- or deceived I think is better, But consider your own quote, "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act...".George Orwell

A magician can tell the truth but the audience won't beleive him so they are deceived. A magician may demonstrate a litle known scientific principle and the some in the audience may apply the label "magic" to what they see -- deceiving themselves. But in neither case is it the intention of the magician to fool anyone -- even worse, to make a spectator feel foolish. And, of course, not all magic is done by an announced magician before a paying audience.

Why don't we look for those parts of "exposure" on which we can agree?

If you were to offer that magic is about "deception" I would agree, understanding the the performer creates the conditions under which such deceptions might occur -- but doesn't 'cause' them to happen. Any sense of deception and or magic occurs in the mind of the spectator and is reletive their prior experience and expectations.

Staying on theme, I agree with you that exposure may not effect the spectator's propensity to be deceived at all, but may have an influence on the performer's ability to do his part with a straight face. A fear of exposure may undermine a performer's confidence.
"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
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20537 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
No. First we need to figure out a language, and from what "experience" we are speaking from. Then we can see what we agree upon or not. You want to skip this very important step and just pontificate using lots of words, which make for long posts to read, but have little relevance across the board. Matter of fact if we are just talking about magic like you seem to be, I don't think it has any relevance in any way shape matter or form to my life, so talking about it at all is a waste of time.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9022 Posts

Profile of funsway
You could always just quit reading my posts then. If it wastes your time you need not comment at all. I have shared what 'experience' I come from. Others may find that of value even if you do not.
"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
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20537 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
I still have major trouble with a magician who does not think that fooling people is part of the equasion. It is one of those strange sentences that just can not make sense.

Write all the words you choose to, pontificate and disect things to the smallest degree and right where the rubber meets the road how can you say magic is being performed if you do not fool anyone?

I do think people can benifit from this idea, just not the way you seem to think.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9022 Posts

Profile of funsway
It is wearisome to be continuously misquoted. I have never said that deception is not part of the magic 'equation' -- only that it is not the entire equation. I have been in thousands of situations in which a spectator has used the word "magic" to describe a phenomena where there was no attempt to 'fool' on my part, nor any sense of 'being fooled' on their part. It is their words, not mine.

You suggested that the type of audience must be considered as part of the equation, and I have agreed that peforming magic effects before a paying audience alwasy includes some degree of deception. But when the spectator is caught unawares, does not know that you are a magician or you tell them exactly what is going to happen as a demonstration there is not necessarily any 'fooling' going on. Magic can cause many emotions in the mind of the viewer -- and deception is one of them -- but not the only one.

By the way, you might look up what "pontificate" means since you seem to be in love with the word. I am not telling anyone how they should think, just countering your statement that 'fooling' always has to occur in a magic effect. "Always" is an all inclusive word that requires only one exception to invalidate it. So, your claim is "mostly true" -- but not always. I can say "magic can be performed without 'fooling' occuring" because I have the experience to back it up. Perhaps you can provide the studies, research or personal experience which supports your opinion hat even 'most' magic requires 'fooling people'. Otherwise it is just your opinion.
"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 » » Right or Wrong? » » Is exposure wrong? (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.19 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL