Hi. I had an idea that a topic comparing magic for magicians as compared with magic for laymen would be interesting. Also suggesting a comparison between angly one-on-one magic with magic that can be (almost) surrounded, and that magic for a camera is a subset of the above, being even narrower and for one eye only instead of two. Regards, Gregg

Magicians, or at least those who've seen some tricks before, look for different things than non-magicians. And magicians are often not interested in presentation unless that's done very well.

Most magic is performed by magicians for other magicians...especially close-up. Outside a magicians circle of friends and family members there are almost no possibilities of a layperson seeing a well developed close-up show.
Many may refute this but as magicians we need to realize that we do relatively little to expose our craft to the public. The bits and pieces that the layperson is exposed to through restaurant magicians (Who are few and far between to say the least) and television specials is about the extent to which magic plays in the average persons life. A shame really.

With all that, I say "Thank God" for laymen when it comes to presenting magic. It is their amazement that satisfies me the most. I'm lucky that I've gotten a tremendous amount of opportunity to do magic for regular folks, that could honestly just appreciate the moments for the sense of wonderment that it gave them.

I have often enough done magic for magicians as well, but as noted here, it is quite a different bag, one often more of talking shop/analyzing the moments than any such belief in the magic. I do alright in both areas I suppose, but much prefer laymen because to them in most cases, the magic is as real to them as it often still is to me. I'm just sayin'.

Most laymen have been exposed to close-up magic only on TV, which is why they are amazed when seeing close-up magic live for the first time (assuming a competent magician). Seeing magic on TV is not the same as "experiencing" magic live. Magicians, on the other hand, can appreciate videos because they are looking for technical details which are unseen (hopefully) by laymen.

As I've pointed out before in other discussions, the problem with the English term "close-up magic" is that it can theoretically include a trick like the Substitution Trunk since for the volunteers from the audience who examine the trunk the effect is in a sense viewed "close-up." Likewise for the audience members who examine linking rings, that is a close-up effect. For the volunteer who puts his/her head in a guillotine, that is technically a close-up effect.

The European term "Micromagic" is probably a more apt label for what is often called "close-up magic" since it defines the size of the props and their visibility to the spectators rather than their proximity to the performers.

I have seen some comments about the acts in close-up contests at conventions that they are more "parlor magic" than close-up magic. But let's face it... it's hard for a roomful of spectators with rows of chair often ten rows deep to really see what's happening in, say, a matrix coin routine.

----- Sonny

A side question.
Are some magicians like lay people , except they have magic biz ness cards.

Above quote is by " unknown ".


Harris

Magic cannot be created that does the same thing for magicians that it does for lay people.

Magicians are familiar enough with the Technology of Deception that it will never appear to them as "magic."

The dilemma will not be created.

One difference between performing for magicians and laymen is IMO the use of sucker effects:
useful for magician-spectators, for laymen (adults) a no no.

What? Why?

I use sucker effects like Sucker Silk to Egg, Color-Changing Handkerchief, etc. with audiences of all kinds, especially "adult laymen."

Why would you make this statement?

Most magic is a mystery to me. As amateur card guy I sometimes even get fooled by card magic, which bugs me a little bit more, or differently I think.

Most magicians like being fooled, no?

Maybe. But they don't like to stay being fooled. They immediately want to know the secret.

Yes I do, although I am not sure what like is. I think when I see card magic that fools me I want to do it. when I see other magic that fools it is not so.

Magicians tend to be the very best audiences. We are magicians because we have that child at heart who enjoys believing, who likes to be amazed, and we are generally very "accepting" of magic tricks, despite our knowledge of what is going on behind the curtain.

I think our deep love for magic overcomes our intimacies of the working of tricks, making conjurors much less skeptical, and a much more appreciative audience, in general, than a lot of folks who don't have much time or appreciation for the art.