by LobowolfXXX » Dec 15th, '07, 09:37
Thoughts for the year --
1. Magicians aren't laypeople. This revelation is as simple (and as silly) as it sounds, but it is very frequently either misunderstood or underappreciated. There are two main subpoints.
A. Most magicians are, when shown an effect, overly concerned with method. It's hard to get them to suspend their disbelief, and (so) god help you if the effect you're showing utlizes a plot, etc. Instinctively, I think we generally know this; how silly do you feel going into the explanation of how the four 7's are really four merchant marines lost at sea...all the while knowing perfectly well the only thing running through the other guy's head is, "I'm going to nail him on his pass."
B. Most laypeople (the exception being engineers, and approximately 37% of actuaries) couldn't care less about method. They're into the effect (if it's good). If you can achieve the same effect in their minds with less work, it's all good. It's not a piano recital, where genearlly the audience has an inkling as to which pieces are harder to play. If you killed your audience with the Stripper Deck, and the jerk at the magic club only did so-so with a classic pass he's been working on for 7 years, that's HIS problem, not yours. Nobody cares about his whining (and if you're that guy, it's best you hear it now) except his two friends who have been working on it for 4 and 2 years.
One of the best illustrations of the spectator/magician distinction can be found in the profileration and popularity of many magic videos. Top names in magic release DVDs, and the community goes gaga for them (and I'm not saying we shouldn't). Generally, these are innovators, theoreticians, etc. A good chunk of them, however, are NOT great performers by any stretch of the imagination. I'm not interested in naming names in a public forum, or trashing anyone. That's not the point. The point is that MANY magicians you probably wouldn't recommend to your brother-in-law as entertainment director for the Shriners' Christmas part are REVERED by magicians. Why? Because there's a difference between instructing and routining a series of creations for magicians, who are looking to learn and reproduce an effect, and entertaining laypeople, who are looking to enjoy one.
Of course, there are many, many fabulous magicians whose instructive videos are superlative, and whose performances for lay audiences equally so. Thank you, Whit Haydn. Thank you, Bill Malone. Thank you, David Williamson. Thank you, Michael Vincent...insert your favorites here ____________
Sorry...distracted myself there for a sec. Oh, so please bear in mind that spectator/layperson distinction. Will it fool them? is the primary question if you're performing at the magic shop, or at the club contest; if you're not performing for magicians, though, start with "Will it entertain them?" Only if the answer to THAT question is a resounding yes does the other question come into play. When our magician friends show us something new, when we're impressed, we usually say, "Wow, I was fooled," and I believe that we conflate "I was fooled" with "That was a great effect." At least we who spend a fair amount of time showing our work to other magicians.
Thought for the Year, continue --
2. The method is the starting point.
The internet generation has brought us some good reference material, some brilliant work, etc.; it's also spawned a good host of spoon-fed, mostly intellectually curious performers who didn't pay much in the way of dues and who (probably consequently) don't have as much respect for the art as...well...as they could have.
I don't purport to have any idea how to make anyone a better person, but I do have the ability, from time to time, on a good day, of making people better at particular things. Therefore, if you're in the latter category of magicians I mentioned in the last paragraph, I'm not going to try to change you. That's for people far more quixotic than I. I WILL, however, suggest that there may very well be a general problem with your approach to magic, and one that probably greatly diminishes your performances.
For many of the new-breed (often, but not always, younger) magicians, I have noticed a fairly common thread. I tried to figure out what they had in common that struck me as problematic, and I hit on it. The old-school guys...when they had a clever method for solving a problem or creating an effect, that was where they STARTED thinking. When you're really digging into your art, you notice a TON of problems that demand your attention. "Can we use a regular deck? Yes, but we need a stranger. ok, probably won't be noticed, can the card be taken by the spectator? No, it's gaffed. Can it be signed while held on the face of the deck, so she'll swear she held it? Maybe..."
New breed...they see the video on You Tube..discuss..debate...buy a video...they get "The" answer. "OH, it was a triple lift with a double backer." Trick over. The method IS the trick.
I'm not saying this is a universal attitude; I'm just saying it's way too common, at least in my experience in California in late 2007. The method ISN'T the trick. The method just gets you in the door so you can BEGIN to think about the trick. Everything that comes after the method... that's what separates the move-masters of today from the true masters. ANd if you don't think about psychology, philosophy, misdirection, rapport with the audience...I don't care if you have an invisible pass with no cover or misdirection needed...your're going to stink up the joint. You can do every sleight better than a genuine master of the craft, and still give a far inferior performance. If you want to do something about it, bear in mind at all times, that the method is only the beginning, and it's actually a pretty short beginning; most of the work is ahead.
Just for anyone who finds it applicable.
It probably all sounded a little precocious but I’m really not trying to present this as some great revelation, just some general methods that work for me. I imagine most people have simmilar idosyncratic approaches to learning things, I'd actually be intrested in hearning about them too.
