talkmagic.co.uk

ok so that was far more than i expected but thanks a lot for all your help, an it may sound corney but i think there is a real sense of community between u magicians. anyway u have given me loads to think about an i think im gunna have to do a lota serching to find then right trick for me but from what i've taken in i think that cards and coins are the way to go.

Quote:
I think gimmicks are good, but i also feel that if someone wants to inspect an object you should be able to show them, especially in close up situations.


Why?
Always?
any exceptions ever?
Is it possible to avoid this?

Is it possible that even if this is true, it's not the main issue for a new magician?

I was making the point that if someone wishes to inspect something there always has to be some way to back it up. either by going onto a new trick or satisfying their need to inspect it. Which I thought showed why "basic" sleight of hand knowledge is needed(ideally). It just gives you that extra option.
I think a new magician does not need to worry too much about this but it is a good thing to think about.

I think a new magician does not need to worry too much about this but it is a good thing to think about.

agreed

Okay, the voice of one of those snobs who look down on people whe don't do proper magic with sleight of hand (what do you mean you really can't back palm an elephant!) .

I am a bit of a hypocrite when it comes to this really, I would consider myself a competent to fair card handler but I still enjoy using gimmicked cards and things. What I very rarely do is an effect which is entirely mechanical (with the exception of needle through brass block), mainly because few of them suit my style. I do get rather upset though when people come into studio 9 and want to buy a trick which requires no skill at all. Surely everything you perform reauires that you are at least a skilled performer? Some of the people we get in must be the best actors in the world if they can make a living out of this gaff cos I certainly wouldn't want them to be my focus of attention for more than a couple of minutes at a time.

Okay, got onto a rant there, I think what I'm trying to say is that, by all means, learn the easy self working stuff, but learn some more technical stuff at the same time. Hopefully that way you will avoid becoming one of those people I was just moaning about.

Of course I don't include MagicDiscoMan in the above category as he clearly is not adverse to the proper application of skill, despite likeing to use magic aardvark disappeaing boxes and the like! I am sure that there are many more like you out there, but I only seem to notice the ones that p*** me off.

Sorry, spleen vented.

Nick

BaB busily mops up spleen

next time you can bally well mop your own mess up young man!

Maybe its the company I keep, but the majority of magicians I know go for what you might call 'entertainment efficiency' - msot effect for the least effort possible.

Here, I'm defining effort as "mid-trick manouvering" rather than preparation. One act I saw recently probably didn't involve anything more complicated than a simple peek book test and an ID, yet it was very entertaining and the crowd were obviously impressed and enjoying themselves.

Of course, some tricks wouldn't work without considerable skill and practice (I'm thinking chop cup, here). On the whole, I'm firmly pro-gimmick because I find the objects help create natural plotlines and intrigue but I will be learning the basics as I go. Basics are easier on the credit card!

However, even with fairly beginner-to-intermediate slights (e.g. Hindu shuffle pass), I wouldn't rely on them unless I had a plan B.

It must be said that in my opinion, the 'art' of magic is all about learning the 'art' - rather than relying solely on props and gimmicks made by other people.

Comparison:

1: A guy who studies fine art and anatomy at art college, learns about colour, texture, light and shade. Learns about perspective, foreshortening and chiaroscuro. Spends entire life painting and drawing, and becomes a master. Shows off his work at local gallery. Impresses his peers, tutors, contemporaries, family, friends. Overwhelming feeling of self-satisfaction and achievement.

2: You go out, buy a 'Picasso paint by numbers' set at your local craft shop. Open the box, follow the instructions, and voila - after 3 hours, you've got 'The Sunflowers' hanging on your wall. Blimey - that was an easy job! Impress the socks of your mates and family by saying 'I painted that - good, or what!'


I believe in category 1.

Now Seige you have a valid point that magic is an art and therefore about learning that art.

However we need to be careful we don't superimpose our values on everyone else. Esp as it is likely that you didn't think like that when you were given your first Marvins whatever.

I'd suggest this view comes around only after getting the bug and seeing the bigger picture. For many at the start it's more about just getting the kick out of amazing some friends with something they can't figure out. Then maybe after a time doing Marvin type tricks they may just get the bug and the motivation to spend many a long hour practising moves.

If you get someone at the early stage of having for example just used a finger chopper and amazed some friends and wants another trick so asks an experienced magi for some suggestions and gets the answer of RRTCM or BoBo's in my opinion you are most likely trying to get them to run before they can walk, or are even motivated to try.

So to conclude I think it's about listening to the person and trying to see where they are at, for example when I first asked the "way to go" question I was recommended RRTCM, I wasn't in to cards and would say so but often got an answer something like "if you want to be a magician...." who said I wanted to be a magician and if I did whether I absolutely had to be a magician with cards? Maybe I just wanted a few tricks to impress my mates. The point is we need to take people where they are at not where we think they should be.

What I very rarely do is an effect which is entirely mechanical (with the exception of needle through brass block), mainly because few of them suit my style. I do get rather upset though when people come into studio 9 and want to buy a trick which requires no skill at all. Surely everything you perform reauires that you are at least a skilled performer? Some of the people we get in must be the best actors in the world if they can make a living out of this gaff cos I certainly wouldn't want them to be my focus of attention for more than a couple of minutes at a time.

As you agree your choice is made as someone that has quite a bit of experience and based on your style. A style that you have developed over time. I doubt you had these thoughts when you started. The people that want no skill tricks are just at a different point in their journey. Sure it may be the start and finish of their journey. At least they are interested enough in magic to want to have a go. Magic can seem a very complicated and skilful art which in many ways it is, so it's no surprise that lacking confidence and being rather intimidated people want tricks that require no skill. Most likely there presentation will be pants too. However this is a starting point for many people so I don't agree that "everything you perform requires that you are at least a skilled performer?" No becoming a skilled performer takes time and is rarely present when they first walk into a magic shop wanting an easy trick.

when you say "Some of the people we get in must be the best actors in the world if they can make a living out of this gaff" I doubt very much they are trying to make a living out of magic and perhaps this thinking is the reason for your frustration. Just accept them as people for whom magic has caught their attention, maybe for a fleeting moment, they have come to you and your response may determine just how far they end up going.

HT...

I couldn't agree more - but the point at which you decide to become a 'magician', rather than just someone who does tricks, you are surely becoming one who studies the art of magic, rather than someone who buys tricks?

It's my own personal opinion, and I expect a good bit of flaming for it... but to give someone who uses mainly gimmicks the same credibility as someone like Vernon, Marlo or Mullica - who's magic is based almost entirely on skill and learning would be outrageous to me.

There is no way these people should be called magicians.

Unfortunately, the dictionary states that a magician can be:

1: Someone who performs tricks and illusions

but also...

2: Somebody who uses supposed supernatural powers to perform magic

3: Somebody who has extraordinary skill, power, or ability


I agree that we all start somewhere - usually a magic set or props which give us the 'bug'. But simply following someone's pre-written script and using a gimmick which does the work for you is simply not magical.

[seige sits back, awaits a surge of negative response, and quietly skulks in a corner with his coffee]

Great wealth of comment and opinion (beat that 'bunny'!) which shows how diverse we all are yet have that same common interest. Like Tom, I'd love to be sleight proficient but, if I can't give it the time it deserves, I'm not going to do it in a half hearted way 'cos it won't work. However, I'm far more sleight proficient than 12 months ago so I'm getting somewhere - slowly.

Regardless of whether you use just sleights or rely on gaffs, the audience should suspect neither - they should be wowed by the presentation and the drama involved. A sleight or move should be as invisible as a double sided card in use and the performer should appear to be equally oblivious of both.

Sleight of hand, by definition, will be related mainly to small objects such as cards, coins, and similar items. As soon as you move on to larger or more difficult items, gaffs have to be employed somewhere - as mentioned above, you can't back palm an elephant. However, you can back palm a card bearing a picture of an elephant!

Not sure what all this proves but, if nothing else, we can engage in serious magic talk and still remain ladies and gentleman. My opinion is that I am unequivocally right - but so are you!

I couldn't agree more - but the point at which you decide to become a 'magician', rather than just someone who does tricks, you are surely becoming one who studies the art of magic, rather than someone who buys tricks?

Hmm Seige I think your having to make up non dictionary meanings for this argument to make sense. However My major point still is reference someone asking which tricks to buy after doing one or maybe a couple and almost automatically it being assumed they want to become a "magician" ( using your definition ) and having the likes of RRTCM recommended to them.

There is no way these people should be called magicians.

Unfortunately, the dictionary states that a magician can be....

Again you are so superimposing your particular understanding of how things should be ( but aren't ) that your not even happy with the meaning of the word magician according to the dictionary lol ( I do know what you mean though )

I agree that we all start somewhere - usually a magic set or props which give us the 'bug'.

Then lets stop trying to short cut this natural process by rushing people past the props to heavy, out dated ( in style ) books so they can be a "proper magician"

But simply following someone's pre-written script and using a gimmick which does the work for you is simply not magical.

Now you assume that cos someone is starting with a gimmicked prop, they will automatically be unable to use their own presentation. Further should they faithfully follow a pre written script and possibly do it very well, then it isn't magical. Hmm says who? would their mate at the pub whom they just showed the trick, think it wasn't magical?

Is this not just magicians snobbery????

Finally

but to give someone who uses mainly gimmicks the same credibility as someone like Vernon, Marlo or Mullica - who's magic is based almost entirely on skill and learning would be outrageous to me.

and in the magic community I'm sure they wouldn't get the same credibility, but to the average punter, they are not interesed in the skill needed but only the effect achieved. At the end of the day a magician is not meant to be showing off his skill, in fact it can work better if you don't appear skilled at all ie Tommy Cooper.

OK your turn.

... and to that extent, it proves that because as human beings we are all individuals capable of coherent and independent rational thought (well, most of us!), we are all entitled to our opinions.

And that's the lovely thing about all this!

If this be magic, let it be an art.

(W.Shakespeare - well known Brummie!)