talkmagic.co.uk

The original poster asked for obsolete effects... surely something that you have to reinterpret and update (A thoroughly worthwhile practice for everything, even for texts published yesterday) is by definition obsolete?

As a recent example, Andrew Mayne's IPhone illusion, as simple and cunning as that is, it is dependant upon the screen size and resolution of the IPhone. The same method can be transposed to anything else, but as written the effect will become obsolete when IPhone's do. Or the internet. (!)

Likewise the changing opinions and fashions of a period can make an effect obsolete. I wouldn't want to perform the Decapitation of John the Baptist as described in Discoverie of Witchcraft, as it lacks the social relevance that it had then as a mystery play. (Maybe in "gospel" magic I suppose) Not that the actual magic, or even the methodology is any less sound. Indeed, take the same illusion, add a few mirrors, some decent fake body parts and a decent plot and you've got a winner.

I wasn't commenting on the quality of Sachs, although what you say is true. A lot of the original magic texts copied each other verbatim, sometimes even inaccurately.

There is no such thing as an obsolete methodology, but since when in Magic was the method the most important part of the illusion?

Now, given the chance i would perform the decollation of john the baptist exactly as it appears in discoveries.
Historicaly the piece has some merit, and would create interest if framed right.

Opening patter describing how the, political and religious storm around at the time of the books writings, drove mortal man to create wonders hither to unseen, would set the piece to perfection.

and indeed one only has to look at the footage on Simon Drakes secret caberet dvd, to realise that aparent magical dinosaurs like decollation of john the baptist, are worth reviving.

DominicRougier wrote:There is no such thing as an obsolete methodology, but since when in Magic was the method the most important part of the illusion?

To an extent The method is always important. Though usualy the simple uncomplicated methods are better than those more complex.


But what is most important is choosing the right method for you , and applying the correct presentation to it.

Lady of Mystery wrote:I wouldn't have said that any magic tricks are obsolete, it's just that some don't aways fit in with the circumstances that you might be in. If you were working a formal event then you may well be wearing a waistcoat.

As one that's literally worked with and played with history I can assure you that there exist methods and technologies long forgotten and with only limited documentation that's been cast off to the side and yet, when we see it "revived" from out of said ashes, it totally blows our mind. Case in point, Henning's reprise of the Mascot Mouth Illusion. He used the original method and it blew minds. But Doug was responsible for other revival bits based on the antiquated contributions of Jarret, Sielbit and others of that period and prior.

Circumstance, as has been noted, is the other point; if you discard some of these older methods and just place them on an "ignore" list, then you neuter yourself and your ability to dazzle the supposedly brilliant. It's when you find archaic techniques and learn to exploit them to your advantage that you honestly begin to prove that you are more than another trend follower of the Ellusionist/Penguin caliber.