talkmagic.co.uk

In real life, I'm a writer. A comedy writer, in fact. I don't do magic professionally (it's simply an interest raised to the level of a compulsive disorder), instead, I spill out words for a living. Mostly, it's novels, but I am sometimes involved with TV/radio/etc.

Finally, to the point. For some time I've been struck by the similarity between the, um... narrative of comedy and the narrative of magic. I won't tire you by the details of this; suffice it to say that I've been thinking that perhaps there's a programme in it. Supporting my case of a core similarity is the crossover between comedy and magic. I don't mean 'comedy magic', I mean that it's almost as if the mind that is drawn to one is often drawn to the other too: they are different expressions of the same thing. So: Woody Allen likes to do card tricks; Steve Martin started off working in a magic shop; Jerry Sadowitz - the two in scary symbiosis; Jay Sankey - creates magic and is also and stand-up; Darren Brown can't resist a double entendre or gag that (often) has nothing to do with needing misdirection at that point; Dan Harlan - loves puns so much that you want to kill him with a spade. Actually, forget that last one. Bad example.
So, do any further examples leap into the brains of anyone here? If the evidence becomes overwhelming, I can perhaps move this from a vague thought I had while in the shower to an actual pitch to TV or radio folk.

Sexton Blake wrote:In real life, I'm a writer. A comedy writer, in fact. I don't do magic professionally (it's simply an interest raised to the level of a compulsive disorder), instead, I spill out words for a living. Mostly, it's novels, but I am sometimes involved with TV/radio/etc.

Coo. That sounds interesting. What have you done?

Tomo wrote:Coo. That sounds interesting. What have you done?

Fff - stuff. That doesn't matter, Insomniac Tomo. I'm not Dan Brown - I simply write books and so forth, and sometimes perform rent-a-gob duties on the airwaves. The only 'important' thing is the notion. Or, perhaps, the general thrust: I was talking to my Film & TV agent the other week about various dull things and it came up that other of his clients had written the linking bits for Dirty Tricks. The linking bits in Dirty Tricks, to my mind, were, 'Errrr... We don't have the first clue about magic, so let's just swear lots. That'll makes us seems hip for the kids.' Interest in magic is at the higher end of a chronological curve right now, so I think there's perhaps room for more interesting things than merely saying, 'f***,' to the tune of canned laughter.

Whilst there's a good, solid background to support silent magic, there's no doubt that patter and presentation, be it comedy or dark and serious, can really make (or break) a routine. It also helps to spin a shorter routine out a bit and allows the narrative part of the presentation to involve the audience more than just showing the routine to them. I have no doubt that very few members of magic audience even begin to believe much of what is said but they go along with it because that's part of the deal and they're listening to a good old fashioned story being woven and told - shades of the tribal gatherings around the fire after evening meal etc.

Some performers prefer to work out a script and stick to it because it helps to plan the effect and cues in the various moves at the right times. Others will have a broad outline of what need to be said and will ad lib as much as possible to keep the whole thing as fresh and new as possible. I don’t think I could stick verbatim to a script - I once sat and listened to a comedian doing the same act four nights in a row and every word was the same. Boring as hell after the first night but very funny for those hearing it for the first time.

This is only a personal preference but I much prefer the narrative story telling type of routine and there's a feeling of having seen a well rounded and fully entertaining evening rather than just sat through a performance of a lot of excellent tricks. As you mention, Derren Brown revels in patter and presentation and we've commented on several of his 'in-jokes' before now. Indeed, Mentalism wouldn't work very well without patter even though supposed to involve mind to mind communications without the need to verbalise! Penn & Teller are also worthy of inclusion here - one is always mute but the other never seems to stop talking - a great contrast and it works very well indeed. Houdini always liked to ramble on a bit during his stage shows but with the reedy voice and rather heavy accent, perhaps he should have stuck to the silent stuff? Another style would be that of illusionists such as Franz Harary who seem to spend some time describing the setup and intention of their effect then abandon the mike and just go do it. I suppose we have to include David Blaine in here somewhere but I'm not impressed with his voice and tone, loads of ,' Here, here, let me show you, no, come back, I wanna show you something, hey, look at this'. Stunning stuff, Shakespeare must be very jealous !

PS Then again there's the sort of patter which Jerry Sadowitz uses - I wonder which category that falls in to ?

..this might be ressurecting a post, but never mind...

..i would put Jerry Sadowitz in the derek and clive bracket of magic...with a pinch of the lenny bruce's...

...my favourite double entendre(s) from derren brown was in the last series where he boldly announced...

"now, which one of these women am i going to give a finger-ring too?"

i spat out the liquid i had in my mouth when i heard that...(phnarrr)

I think Sexton meant that they both, comedy and magic, lead the participant down a path full of imagery, a sense of 'what is coming next' etc
are we talking about this? x

guess not. good 'thread' though compooota speak. x

I think it's a serious point.
Have you ever sat around a campfire when an old man told you a ghost story? You're only eleven; sitting by a midnight lake first time away with school.
His dark solemn voice tells you 'THEY' take the adults... first.

Then the children. they come from there.

He points to the lake. you all turn and look.
and when you turn back.

He's gone...



story, imagery, effect.
x

cheekyzombie wrote:I think Sexton meant that they both, comedy and magic, lead the participant down a path full of imagery, a sense of 'what is coming next' etc

Yep, he did - it's the similarity of narrative structure, the use of the unexpected, the fact that comedians seem drawn to magic and magicians equally drawn to comedy, etc., etc. Though I also sniggered like a loon at Brown's 'finger ring' double. I operate of so many levels it's dizzying.