talkmagic.co.uk

Misdirection is part of magic, and it's part of life, I probably read this somewhere, but misdirection occurs everyday from faking a pass in rugby or that game where point to someone's chest and when they look down, you flick them on the nose...

As magicians we harness misdirection and can use it boldly, like Amazing Jonathon's massive explosions, crashes and bangs, to Lennart Green, literally pointing at where he wants you to look, and subtly in the middle of a trick, like Daryl and Derren harnessing an off-beat when a move can take place...
And lying, also, by saying, I'm just going to spread this cards out and look at them (but really I'm looking at something else...)

It's also useful to comment on 'time misdirection', by sneaking a peek at say, the bottom card... doing a few shuffles, (retaining it's position) by the time you do an undercut, everyone will be looking for you to take a glimpse but you just remeber the card from before...

andycoates wrote:OK, its the basis of alot of magic trics, and makes it easier for us to do bold things without getting noticed. But what is everyones thoughts on "misdirection", or should it just be called simply "direction".
Whats your view.

The original question: Should misdirection simply be called direction? This is given a great deal of time and thought by Tommy Wonder in "The Books of Wonder" (if you don't own this two book set, you should). Wonder's argument is that "misdirection" is a misnomer for various reasons and on various levels. On one level, if we as magicians think that we are misdirecting attention, our attention itself is on the spot that we are misdirecting from. As a result, we draw people's attention to that very spot. Not good. On another level, it is a negative and negatives are not good either.

However, calling it "direction" is the way to go. If we feel that we are directing attention, then we also direct our own attention to that area rather than to the area that we don't want noticed. Also, in fact, we honestly are directing the attention of the spectator to where it belongs. The spectators don't want to see the technical garbage, they want to see magic - so we are directing their attention to where the magic happens and away from the technical stuff that simply does not matter to them.

I feel that we should keep the term misdirection simply because it has become such a strong part of our vernacular and to change it now would only cause confusion. Also, others would rail against such changes and we already have enough to discuss and debate about that such a thing would take away important time and energy from more important issues.

As for misdirection itself, it comes in many, many forms and I don't believe that most magicians fully understand the concept. As an example, we naturally misdirect our audience when we entertain them. Entertainment relaxes your audience and puts them at ease. If they are at ease, they will be more easily directed properly, their attention pulled away from the technical work naturally. An entertaining magician is working misdirection without even noticing it sometimes. The more experienced magicians will use the entertainment factor by writing it directly into their work, before they even show an audience the finished product (which really is the proper way to weave misdirection into your work - right at the beginning rather than later on where weak parts of the routine are found and identified).

Another form is repetition. Repetition of any movement becomes invisible to the spectators. For example, if you have a cigarette hidden behind your ear and you wear glasses, you can repeatedly fiddle with your glasses. When the time comes to sneak that cigarette out, nobody will notice you "adjusting" your glasses - the repetition has basically become invisible (it carries no interest to the spectator any longer). This idea is put to use in a overtly beautiful way by Michael Close. He has an "okay" hand on a stick (a little hand with the first finger and thumb in an "O" positioning, the other three finger sticking up, just like the sign language positioning for "okay"). He reaches into his pocket and pulls it out, telling the spectators, "If you see something that you really like, you don't have to clap, just give me an 'okay!'" Throughout his routine, at the highlights, he pulls it out of his pocket and flashes it, so that he'll not only get the audience to interact with him by giving him "okays" but he also now has constant access to his pocket in a very invisible manner. Excellent work from and equally excellent magician.

Every magician should make a point of studying misdirection in its varieing degrees and levels. It is of utmost import to us in our jobs.

Mike.

Excellent post Mike

ok,so I'm relatively new to magic,but i feel misdirection plays a bigger part in magic than you think.i am doing my best to research misdirection and control any body language tells which although are subtle, still noticeable..
Obviously if you are talking to your audience,at some point they are watching your mouth which is the simplest form of misdirection

They should be watching your mouth only if they need to read lips! Normally, they will be looking you in the eyes and, ultimately, the simplest form of misdirection is that the audience will look where you look. However, misdirection comes in many, many forms.

Before I go on, let me just say that you shouldn't be looking at your hands, just as a dancer should not watch their own feet. Doc Eason is fond of saying, "You should be directing your own attention up and out, rather than down and in." If you are watching your own hands, then you are looking down and in. If, however, you are looking up and out, then the magic isn't about what is in your hands, but it is about the audience members themselves. Another Doc quote, "They won't remember what you did, they will remember how you made them feel."

So, using those thoughts, we come upon another piece of misdirection, which Tommy Wonder calls "The Ricochet." Sometimes, you'll have somebody that is burning your hands. They simply will not look away. Now, if you speak directly to them and get them to look up, then you have blatant misdirection. You quickly make your move and by the time they look back, your move is done. The problem here is that they KNOW they've been misdirected, and this is to be avoided. You see, for proper misdirection to occur, the spectator must feel that they are looking where they want to be looking and not where you want them to be looking.

To master the ricochet, you need to know the names of the folks who you are performing to first. By using their names, you are using natural misdirection, because it is only natural to not only look at someone talking to you, but to immediately respond to the use of your name. Another important part of the ricochet is the very human reflex to look at someone who's talking. So, to get that guy off of your hands in a natural way without using blatant misdirection is to direct a question, or statement that begs an answer, to another person in the group of spectators.

For example, Bill won't stop looking at your hands. So, you look at Mary and say, "Mary, have you ever seen anything like this before, in your life?" Mary will immediately answer the question and, if you've done this right, Bill will look at Mary as soon as you address the question to her (by using her name) and continue to pay attention to her until she fully answers the question. You've ricoched the misdirection aimed at Bill off of Mary. Bill will have no idea of the subtle misdirection that you've hit him with especially if you keep your entire attention on Mary yourself.

Misdirection is a study all of itself.

Mike.