talkmagic.co.uk

First things first, I apologise for the pretentious topic title (although you must admit it has a nice ring to it).

After studying magic for many years and reading lots about theory and presentation, I have discovered that, for me at least, almost every trick I do needs to have some sort of story behind it. Not necessarily a narrative, but some sort of plot that explains what phenomenon I am trying to demonstrate and why. This not only justifies the trick and helps the audience suspend their disbelief, but apparently it also makes it more interesting for them. After all, magicians are interested in the techniques involved but general audiences should be more interested in the illusion itself and the rationale behind it.

The only problem with this approach is that it often necessitates quite a long exposition at the start of the trick, before I even start doing anything magical. I do try and make the exposition engaging and amusing, but am never fully confident that my audience really cares that much. Are they really enjoying the story, or do they just want me to 'get on with it'? Are they really listening that carefully, or are their minds wandering a bit while they wait for me to stop waffling? I am never entirely sure.

I would appreciate any thoughts on this matter. How long do you spend introducing a trick? Have you had any feedback from audience members saying whether they enjoyed the plots of the tricks? Perhaps I'm just a little paranoid, assuming that audiences' attention spans are minimal, but I would like to hear what other people's experiences have been.

This is fine, but simplify and shorten the explanations so that the are much briefer, write them down and take out all the unnecessary words before relearning them - a sentence and a half or otherwise its starting to get too long.

There is nothing wrong and it sustains interest if you provide the explanation as patter while you are performing the actions, so you are explaining why you are doing it while you are doing it. Theatrically this is better.

I am a great believer in NEVER having long introductions to a trick. I cringe when I see magicians do this. You need to start the action within seconds. Waffle should be ruthlessly cut out. This is a great failing of magicians. Some present very badly but a lot present too much. In the Royal Road to Card Magic it says "Be careful not be verbose. The student often feels that he must talk interminably and this can become tiresome" or words to that effect since I don't have the book in front of me.

In other words cut the yap and get on with the bloody thing.

I think you have to mix it up a bit depending on the effects you're performing.

Some tricks require minimal patter whereas others benefit from a good story that supports the actions taking place.

Upon learning from the masters, such as Mr Mark Lewis, and a few of the working pro's i have the fortune to know and bend their ear for advice, i find getting into it quickly is key.

I also love the moment of silence/astonishment, which i see lots of magicians talk over the top of.....don't! let them enjoy the moment, and bask in your glory as you were responsible for that moment!

Much love

Aza

It depends a lot on the routine that you're performing. Mental or bizare pieces can really benefit from a good back story but if you're doing something more visual then I agree that often it's best to jsut dive right in, there's often no real need for a lengthy introduction. In fact I've seen magicians really spoil the suprise of the effect by talking too much.

At the International Magic convention this year i met a guy who presented an effect with a presentation based on quantum physics, after the effect him, myself and another magician talked about the presentation.

The performer had removed any element of science from his presentation and just kind of hinted at it. Myself and the other magician felt that the bare hint of science wasn't enough to add interest at the start of the effect, and it didn't bring everything together,

The performer and myself both have a background in science (to varying levels) and I suggested that it might be better to explain the science in a very short simple way, as i understood the science myself i started to give an example of what i might say. After the first sentence the other magician cut in and said that sentence was all it needed to make sense to him.

In short: for any explanation before the start of the effect, try to work out a way of summarizing it in 1 or 2 short sentences, and to get across enough of the essence of the explanation so that it a) increases the audiences level of interest before the trick starts and b) gives the audience enough of an understanding of what is about to happen so that they can understand the effect itself (but perhaps not too much understanding so that it ruins any suspense or surprise).

Thanks for the tips - this is all really useful advice. The bit about quantum physics was particularly interesting, as I am studying a science so often use scientific patter. It seems that the general consensus is that the patter should be just long enough to explain the plot, and that it shouldn't take over/distract from the magic itself.

I too create a story around the effect. Its always some sort of full blown story that can take a while to tell. And yes the preamble can take up a lot of time. But here is the thing.

Use your story as a starting point for your routine. But only as a starting point. The trick becomes polishing it all down to the bare minimum. The effect should start within seconds of your patter, otherwise people do want you to just get on with it and that is because for the most part, that part of the story really is only of concern to you, and has little to do with the effect. By all means weave your story. Then perform the effect from beginning to end without the story. When the two merge, from start to finish the whole thing should not take much longer than it did for the trick to be done without the story.

There is however another way to look at this. Quit being a magician. Become a story teller so that the entire focus is on the story. The magic happens to enhance the story not the other way around. Be warned if you are known as a magician, or presenting yourself as a magician people are expecting to be entertained by magic. So that has to come first. Unfortunatly there is not a lot of work out there for story tellers anymore. Perhaps a library or two and there are really only a handful of sucessful story tellers I can think of and most of them make the bulk of their money at Christmas shows doing readings of the varius christmas stories. One I know of even throws a little magic into it now and again.

Two different art forms.

The answer to this also depends on your performing environment. I am a table hopping magic often entertaining people between courses or between ordering and service in a restaurant. mI don't have the luxury of time to be a story teller. I have to get in, perform and get out. There is nothing worse than having a trick crashed by a waiter with 4 plates of roast beef balanced on his arm.

I had a good example of getting my timing wrong last Sunday. I was performing Peter Nardis Random which is not a hit and run trick and the meal came just as I goth to the interesting bit. So off I had to go and going back to perform the second half of any trick just doesn't work.

Johnny Wizz wrote:I had a good example of getting my timing wrong last Sunday. I was performing Peter Nardis Random which is not a hit and run trick and the meal came just as I goth to the interesting bit. So off I had to go and going back to perform the second half of any trick just doesn't work.

A similar thing happened to me once, I used to have a little routine that was all based around a love story during the second world war. It's a nice, feel good piece of magic but does have quite a story attached to it. More than once I was interupted by food, speeches or other things in the middle of it.