Y'know. Everything I see is exposure. Exposure to style, presentation, method, and so on...The point is, we learn from exposure. If we were not exposed to anything, we could not live. Some recent exposure that I learned from. The men in coats video (http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=128984&forum=24&7 )taught me about comedic timing and presentation. It show how something so simple can be extremely entertaining, even when the method is obvious. It's like watching a movie. You know the aliens or that comet crashing into the earth isn't real, but you still find it entertaining.

Once again, some magicians are too overly protective of the secrets and not worrying about working on their presentations. I do agree with only trying to expose your own tricks (ethically speaking) and not others. Obviously some expose simply to increase their monetary gain. Kind of like starting up a porn site. Easy money!

Magicians who "whine" (like I am now) is why I don't attend magic clubs anymore.

I should hope we can learn from eachother about the things we share and discuss.

The "exposure" issues are about private secrets, stuff that is not in the books (yet).

Mr Bill gives us yet another definition of the word "exposure".

With different people using different definitions of the same word, it's no wonder this debate will go on and on

Who was it that resurrected this tired, old discussion anyway. I believe it was someone who was trying to increase his post count. Boy, is he going to be disappointed when he gets into the secret sessions!!

I believe it was the fine gentleman above you who already has access to said forum.

Therefore, I move that his motive was genuine

As for Penn and Teller, they are great entertainers for the most part. Much of their exposure stuff is done in a sucker style anyway. You may just as well criticise Vernon for his fake transfer move in the C&B routine.

The routine was and is still criticised for that bit. The bit serves to shift and redirect some flow of attention, yet there is an unsavory element to it that some of us would like to avoid. I suspect that the bit would serve better if played as "someone once took a ball and told me that they knew what was happening. I asked them to show me. They did this and said that I never put the ball in my pocket. I said okay, that's interesting, though that doesn't get the ball under the cup. Boy were they confused." I'm sure anyone who does the routine will know that this covers the performance of the French Drop, the reveal, the actual transfer, the actual placement of the ball into the pocket, the display of an empty right hand as the cup is lifted, and of course the load. This shift of presentation frame seems consistent with Vernon's style and does not change the methods, flow or intent of the routine.

I believe Vernon himself had reservations about including it.

But he was vindicated by the fact that his audiences didn't go out into the wide world explaining how fake transfers are done. They ended up even more confused.

In a similar vain Penn did a routine where he shows the audience how a card is palmed. He then does an effect where uses the sleght and they are non the wiser. Instead of calling him on it, they are blown away by it.

Penn and Teller are unique, in that they can mock and rip apart magic while simultaneously conveying a deep love and reverence for it. They can do "Liftoff" and follow it with the goldfish bowl miser's dream. At the end of that routine, when Teller swirls his hand in the giant fish bowl and the coins turn into goldfish, the audience audibly gasps at the sheer wonder and poetry of the moment. One of the essences of great art, in my opinion, is the ability to make fun of something and to embody it at the same time, to be at once ironic and sincere. These guys have that ability, in spades. For every exposure they do, they give a larger moment of wonder. In short: I like 'em.

I like 'em too, as performers they do what embodies the essence of Gowachin law.

(It's okay to Google that term).

Ok guys, what about getting younger people into magic? Why is it that professional magicians consider magic to be their own personal property? Isn't it good to expose some simple tricks to laymen who are interested in magic?

Isn't this how all of us got started in the first place? I do not agree with exposing sleights, advanced magic etc. but much of this is already available on the internet now, check out card trick central for instance. It has literally thousands of card effects online for free?

The argument is, should this be closed down? Or is it actually encouraging more young people to get an interest in magic?

Even if you exposed 100 tricks in any forum, there are literally tens of thousands of effects out there. I believe no magician would even touch the surface of the many thousands of effects available, even if he or she worked pro for 50 years.

So, my two cents is, if someone wants to learn magic, by all means help them with simple things and let them grow from there.

Regards,

geoff.

What leads you to believe that exposing anyone to the mechanics of guile is a good idea?

After the recent P & T exposure I'm glad I'm not trying to sell this

http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k254/drsr2504/2d35fe31.jpg

Perhaps P&T will provide a "Cash for Clunkers" to those who own these or have recently purchased them.

Agreed! The scary part is, there are some respected names in magic saying that was not exposure!!! See the emperor's nice duds???

I agree, and I just don't get it.
To much *** kissing for my taste

How much is?

Wow. Another dead horse.

Well, perhaps, but it's the horse that stinks, not the beating...

Made me laugh out loud!!!!!