talkmagic.co.uk

in recent months, academics in psychology and elsewhere have been publishing work on magic

i think a forum that discussing academic views on magic, would be great for magicians and academics

i would be willing to advise

warm regards

We do include academic discussions on TalkMagic about magic AND psychology but generally not in the open areas of the forum, as such discussions can reveal certain secrets which is against the forum rules.

This is good for magicians but not necessarily good for ordinary acedemics who we don't want to expose our secrets to.

What sort of magical subjects do you recommend starting with?

there are articles like this:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=magic-and-the-brain

and they are growing in number

it is theory of how magic works rather than exposing tricks themselves

abecedarianmind wrote:there are articles like this:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=magic-and-the-brain

and they are growing in number

it is theory of how magic works rather than exposing tricks themselves

Without knocking it down too much, I posted a link to said article in early december and it was fairly ignored.

Although there are some members interested in the Psychology of magic, Im not too sure if thats enough to warrant our own little bit of the forum.

What I mean is are there enough posts in that area to justify such organisation?

What we need is a forum for requests for new forums...

Forgive me if I've missed the point but TalkMagic is a Discussion Board for Magic and therefore ready to discuss any topic. Why the need for a separate area just for academic discussions - isn't that part of what we already do anyway?

and here lies the potential problem from paragraph 3

Here’s how the trick works

Is the revelation of the secret justified in order to debate the reaction?

It's the tip of a very interesting debate concerning magic and academia. There is a tension where the academic meets the magician. I’m lucky enough to be a professional academic whose research area is in performance magic and I am also a magician.

Many academics are interested in magic and will often bring magicians in to work with them or look at magic practice; however a tension occurs when the magic is often revealed within a reductive argument that seeks to explain it. Look for instance at Lamont, P. & Wiseman, R. (2005) Magic in theory : an introduction to the theoretical and psychological elements of conjuring. Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press.

There is also a tension when non-magicians attempt to discuss magic performance within an academic framework; I’m thinking here of Mangan, M. (2007) Performing Dark Arts - A Cultural History of Conjuring. Bristol: Intellect Books

I think, and I am being a little tongue in cheek here, these tensions were summed up by Jamy Ian Swiss when he decried in an issue of Genii, “The academics are coming” let’s prepare to do battle.”

I think there needs to be some discussion as to the nature and audience of the growing academic discourse within magic. As someone actively involved in this area, I’d love to chat.

As an academic and a magician, I love using my academic knowledge and skills to research and study magic, as well as devise new routines, effects, and scripting in ways that bring more meaning to my magic. I find mentalism and bizarre magic the better genres for melding the two disciplines. There is a great body of literature in the academic world on magic and there are great magicians writing from an academic perspective. Laurence Haas runs an annual conference in Muhlenberg Pennsylvania on the theory and performance of magic that has a call for papers, presentations, and performances. This is a very welcome trend. I used an online survey of mentalists as the basis of a long essay on mentalism and I have been busy researching the history of magic and magick to add more material to my performances. I am not sure if this topic warrants a new sub-forum, but there have been some excellent threads already to whch Mandrake alludes, and the essay section has had some nice stuff as well. I have blogged a few things in the vein as well (drtoddlandman@blogspot.com).

Here are some good references that illustrate what I mean

Academics working on magic and related topics
Keith Thomas: Religion and the Decline of Magic
Morrison: Modern Alchemy
Albanese: Republic of Mind and Spirit
Warner: Phantasmagoria
Styers: Making Magic
Davies: Popular Magic
Yates: The Occult Philosophy of the Elizabethan Age
Thagard: Why Astrology is a Pseudoscience
Lamont: The First Psychic and The Rise of the Indian Rope Trick
Steinmeyer: Hiding the Elephant
and many more...

Magicians with an academic style
Darwin Ortiz: Strong Magic and Designing Miracles
McBride and Burger: Mystery School
Bob Neale: This is Not a Book
Chuck Hickok: Mentalism Incorporated I and II
Derren Brown: Absolute Magic and Pure Effect
Ken Weber: Maximum Entertainment
Scott Grossberg: Bauta
Jon Thompson: The 'Naked' series
Harlin and Nyrup: Sleight of Mind
Fabio Tabbo: Stop Smoking Mentalism
and many more...

indeed, the academics are coming....

they will reveal the methods, but not the packet tricks

they will be reductionist

and no one you will perform to will ever read their stuff

i'd launch a forum on the subject, it will be great for this site

d

abecedarianmind wrote:indeed, the academics are coming....

they will reveal the methods, but not the packet tricks

they will be reductionist

and no one you will perform to will ever read their stuff

i'd launch a forum on the subject, it will be great for this site

d

Still really do not see your point...

Academic study eh? No proper grammar in any of your sentences...

that's a bit personal....



grammar aint academia

my point is simple:

academics are beggining to study magic and publish papers.

i think that their work should be debated, so they can access magicians' thoughts on their theories

and so magicians can learn new theories about themselves

cheers

Ian's point is also quite valid, we ask folks to avoid TXT speak, to use spell checkers, and to capitalise words and sentences as appropriate. This is only a matter of courtesy and if it's worth posting, it's worth posting properly .

abecedarianmind wrote:that's a bit personal....



grammar aint academia

my point is simple:

academics are beggining to study magic and publish papers.

i think that their work should be debated, so they can access magicians' thoughts on their theories

and so magicians can learn new theories about themselves

cheers

That's fine with me. Happy to debate with or without a dedicated sub-forum...working on some really cool stuff at the moment