In my magic show, I do 10 tricks which can be described in terms of Fitzkee's classification http://geniimagazine.com/wiki/index.php/......fication as follows:

1) Vanish - a sucker vanish of a big card
2) Transposition - 20th century silks
3) Transformation - silk to cane, coloring book, mismade flag
4) Penetration - red-white linking ropes
5) Restoration - cutting and restoring rope
6) Animation - Telekinetic Timber
7) Anti-Gravity - Rising Card
8) Spectator failure - tricky turvy bottles

I would think that a good magic show should maximize the number of types of effects used. So perhaps replacing Coloring Book with say Sympathetic Silks would be a good idea, since this incorporates Sympathetic Reaction instead of transformation, which is used in the Mismade Flag? Would you agree?

I like this breakdown from the link in the opening post as it gives deeper purposes for variety in an act:

"In the Genii 1988 October issue, Ray Pierce authored the first of an 11-issue series called Pansophical Production. In this first article, he describes his 5-part structure for a 15-17 minute act. Each section is intended to average 3 minutes, and to be self-contained for ease of introducing new material, as well as eliminating old material.

Ray Pierce's show position classification is
Opener - Acquaint the audience with you as a performer
Personality - Acquaint the audience with you as a real person
Ballad - Display emotion, and let your audience know you care about your craft
Rouser - Wake up your audience as you begin to close the show
Closer - Encapsulate your style, personality and talent in one punch"

Alan, that approach seems more about selling the performer as product than about the magical offerings and their thematic diversity.

I like the idea of checking that the underlying magical effects are varied, or designed to manage audience expectations if similar, as comics use callbacks.

I just found out that there is a version of Coloring Book called Stamp Album, in which you put lots of stamps in a stamp album and the stamps magically adhere to the pages neatly. This would be classified as Attraction.

Well, I'm going to come at it from a theatre type view, so maybe I'm full of it when it comes to magic. My thoughts would be this:

It's good to think in more depth about exactly what power you are displaying in an effect, but it's too mechanical to say, I must have one of each, or as some mentalists believe, they must be all alike.

From the sound of it so far, I'd rather see Ray's show than the OP's at this point. That's because there is some overarching theme that ties the elements of the show together and moves the action forward. What else is a magic show about if not the performer's personality and her relationship to her power? Otherwise, it's the dance of the soulless props. Less interesting by half.

When a performer of any kind comes before an audience, they have to answer in some implicit way the following audience questions:

Who is that?
Why is s/he doing that?
Why should I care about him/her?
What does that person think of what they do?
Does s/he like me?
Is that person good at what they do?
What is s/he going to give me?

The Fitzkee type questions can co-exist with these, but I think it's the above that drive the show and help you determine the answer to the other questions.

Maybe Mr. Haydn could chime in?

Fitzkie and Pierce's approaches can (and should) be combined
What I like is you care enough about your show and your audience to give this consideration
If you look at your set list you have 2 rope effects, 2 sucker effects, 2 card effects and two silk effects.
Care and consideration could be given that these don't appear repetitive
Personally not a fan of sucker effects unless the magician is the sucker

Vick,

The only sucker trick is the sucker vanish of a big card - http://www.magictricks.com/traffic-light-cards.html. I wouldn't call Tricky Turvy Bottles a sucker trick. I present it in a way that doesn't embarrass the spectator - make it look like something weird is happening to prevent us from getting the same orientation of the bottles.

I do the sucker vanish of a big card close to the end of the show. I am curious why you don't like sucker tricks? I remember as a kid watching the hopping bunnies and being amazed. We thought we had finally caught the magician after being fooled so many times. Then he showed us.

Find a character for yourself and a story linking these effects with some form of suspense and having each trick revealing one facet of your chosen charachter.

You're on the right track and you suceeded interesting some of the good brains on the Café like Vick, Jon and Alan... Not a bad start!

I hope to do this show for my kids' summer camp soon.

My character is a person who wants to share cool things with his audience and is excited about the cool things. My character is also playful, likes to joke around, but is also very serious about the magic. Really, just an extension of myself.

I do my show in this order:

1) I introduce myself. I tell the audience that I am here to amaze and amuse them. Then my silk turns into a cane.
2) I do 20th century silks. I vanish the yellow silk with a TT with some jokes and it appears between two red silks. This is to warm up the audience.
3) I do Tricky Turvy bottles to warm up the audience more. Mostly amusement, some amazement.
4) I do serious magic - cut a rope in half and restore it; no jokes. Just amazement. I tell them that I'm not going to play around like some magicians do with this. I'm going to give it to them straight.
5) I link two ropes, a red rope and white rope together. no jokes. Just amazement. Same type of presentation as with the cut and restore rope. I'm giving it to them straight.
6) To warm the audience up more, I do the Coloring Book with audience participation. Amazement and amusement.
7) With audience concentration and everyone saying "ummmm" meditating on the block, I do the Telekinetic Timber (a block falls down). Amazement and amusement.
8) As another serious effect with audience participation, I do the rising card. Just me doing it, not the audience helping out.
9) I do the sucker traffic lights vanish, to surprise the audience. Amusement.
10) I do Mismade flag, as it is a memorable effect. The last trick should be something that they'll remember you for, and producing an American flag is memorable.

I think my show is put together in a good way. It brings a multitude of emotions all in the same show, shifting between amazement and amusement, seriousness and comedy. It's a magical roller coaster. What do you think? I'm excited about it.

I will probably replace the Coloring Book routine with the Stamp Album, as I'd like to maximize the types of effects used via the Fitzkee classification. I just ordered one.

There are some real problems with the Fitzkee classifications. I remember reading somewhere that Tom Stone believes this book should be burned. You could take a simple effect like vanishing a coin and say well "that's a vanish" and you stop there. Your presentation can however change this effect into any number of other effects, the coin could now be invisible, or you have destroyed the coin, its transported to another location, it absorbed into your skin, ect. The classifications in The Trick Brain could trick you into hindering your creativity.

@SK, you may be conflating magic-shop shorthand for method used with the audience is supposed to process as the plot or effect.
The two perspectives, backstage (method) and audience view (effect) may be superimposed in time depending on the script and mechanics at work but they live in different cognitive worlds. The audience watches the story happen. The performer elicits conviction for a narrative.

Unity in diversity is the key:

If there is unity of props, as in, say, a card show, there should be various types of effects--transposition, penetration, restoration...

If there is unity of effect as with many mentalists who display only one power such as thought reading, there can be variety of plot/theme--names, places, numbers, question and answer, living and dead test, book test, etc.

If there is unity of plot/theme as in "medeival wizardry" or "impossible swindles," I suppose there could be diverstiy in props and effects.

What about "appearance"? Sponge ball.

The types of effect can correlate with primal themes--as an example of unity. This approach of using primal themes and mystical tone might most easily be recognized in escape artists who embody the primal theme of liberation or exodus from slavery or redemption.

Even the appearance of a sponge ball in a participant's hand could reflect in a very small, momentary way the primal, mythic, religious idea of creation.
Restorations may evoke the idea of healing, renewal, or resurrection--also mystical.
Transformations hearken back to Ovid's Metamorphosis and beyond.

If the type of effect is used for unity, as in an act consisting of nothing but productions, reproductions, and multiplications, then variety could be sought in the props and plots. Let there be light, earth, sky, land, ocean, plants, animals, people...

This approach using primal themes is only one example of unity in diversity. I do not really think it would be appropraite with sponge balls and the coloring book at a kid's show.

Who is Tom Stone?
http://www.google.com/search?q=tom+stone......t=safari

Apply teachings as they best work for you and enable them to encourage thought and growth

Before you break the rules, you have to understand them .... And why they exist

Looking at parts of this discussion I wonder why the use of classic props. I understand but enjoy seeing well thought out innovations

Totally unrelated, saw the most outstanding lecture last night. Richard Osterlind, he went on for over 5 hours!

Theory is useful for codifying data into patterns and expressing those patterns in ways that offer predictions.

Or in other words, while an expression may be valid, that qualification does not imply its underlying presuppositions are valid or that it offers verifiable predictions.

I posted a comment about how Fitzkee's classification of magic effects as they relate to manipulation acts in the Finger/Stage Manipulation section of the Café at:
http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......forum=10

For some reason, it generated no responses. Here's a quote from my comment:
"I... studied some classic [manipulation] acts (Cardini, Pollock, Hart, etc) from the viewpoint of [the Fitzkee] list. Of course, productions are far and away the dominant effect. Cardini's act was largely productions--of cards, billiard balls, and cigarettes. The serpent silk in his act was animation, and the balls appeared, disappeared, multiplied and changed color. Channing Pollock's act was productions of cards (and the vanish and reproduction of a few cards) and doves, ending with the transformation of the dove to silk and the vanish of the bird cage."

It's easier in a non-manipulation act to incorporate more of Fitzkee's categories.

I also did a study of Max Holden's 1937 publication_Programmes of Famous Magicians_ and Tony Taylor's 1975 book _Spotlight on 101 Great Magic Acts_ in my study. It would be interesting to take a look at some other acts (e.g. Doug Henning and David Copperfield's TV specials as well as all "The World's Greatest Magicians" specials, etc) to see how the effects in those acts relate to Fitzkee's categories.

A similar study might be made of the acts covered in the more recent 2010 book _Magic Shows: 30 Years of Programmes from Daniels to Derren_ by Ian Keable.

----- Amado "Sonny" Narvaez

That is a role playing not a character.
Find a character playing that role, that you feel at ease with

Your show will gain a lot from having a character