talkmagic.co.uk

Hey all,

In the middle of writing an article for MagicSeen, and I was wondering on other magicians opinions of this?

At the LADs convention in October, they had an impromptu interpreter, Emma Jane Heap, come and sign for a lot of the lectures at the convention.

Her boyfriend is a magician, but when a few deaf magicians turned up, she asked Dave & Craig (organisers) if it would be okay to get up and sign for it.

Having spoken to Emma in depth, she understands enough about magic to explain terms such as DL, top change, etc. without it being, say a hired interpreter to come in and have to manually spell out each word for them.

The lecturers were fine with it, the organisers were fine with it, as far as I could tell, the convention goers had no problem, and it didn't cost anyone anything.

If this is the case, why are there no deaf interpreters at Blackpool for example?

For the sake of research, would anyone have a problem with having an interpreter at the Blackpool convention?

All the best,
Croz

I have no problem with someone signing at lectures. During a performance I would, as a performer, have a problem. I have worked with interpreters and it slows down the act and eliminates most of the comedy.

I suspect that the reason it is not common is the cost; not every audience has a signer who would be able to step in and not charge. I also suspect the silliness abut exposure will be mentioned; the signer would have to be in on the secrets. So what? I am on record as being in favour of exposure.

So I say go for it at lectures, if there is a demand. But how many deaf magicians are there? Do they go to conventions? If they do, their needs need to be met. If they don't, not a problem.

there is a pretty big magic convention in the states for the deaf, and the reason you dont see many at the moment is because there aren't interpreters.

i think the performers should leave it up to the interpreters to get the job done, and not have to worry about slowing down for them

crozboz wrote:i think the performers should leave it up to the interpreters to get the job done, and not have to worry about slowing down for them

Thats actually easier said than done. Tony is right in that having an interpreter signing does slow down the performance. If someone is deaf and has to look at someone signing to understand whats going on, then unless the performer pauses, they are going to miss half the effect.

I have a few family members and friends who are deaf. I can also sign. Signing yourself while performing can also throw up a few problems, because in this country we use both hands. I have found that if the effect is clear theres really no need to sign at all.

jim

There is also the issue that sign language is not universal. American sign language is not the same as British sign language.

I'd be interested to see what the specialist sign-vocabulary for magic is. I know there are specialist interpreters for science conferences, because it's a pain in the backside to spell out the names of compounds and elements every ten seconds. I wonder if the signs reflect the moves...

The topic of magic for the deaf has been touched on before - see http://www.talkmagic.co.uk/ftopic13784.php - but if it were possible to have signing for lectures that would be excellent. Not so good in performance of course but that's where the silent acts score, their performances are universal and need no interpretation or translation.

Yann Frisch appeals to yet another audience!

'zackly!!! (and Scott Penrose!)

Even Scott Penrose used music. Deaf people wouldnt appreciate that.

Not sure about that, I've done discos for Deaf Clubs and the vibrations, the lights etc convey the sense of the music quite well and there was always a full dance floor. Scott's act doesn't rely on the music, it's more of a pace thing to give the act even more flow and style than without music.

Perhaps, I just feel that the strength of Yann Frisch's routine was a sense of, not improvised routining, but a lack of structure which you can't get with an act to music.

His act was totally unique, refreshingly new and certainly didn't need music. It would be good to have the opinions of those who are deaf - I'm still chuckling at the facial expressions he was pulling!

I have attended shows at the Theatre Royal Stratford in London and frequently seen Signers on stage performing as part of the show while interpreting for the deaf, even happens during musical numbers and musical theatre as well as comedies and pantomimes. It doesn't slow the action even in musical theatre so long as the Signer has been briefed on the script beforehand. My understanding is that it is only slower if the Signer is having to follow the speeches because they are interpreting live without an idea about what is about to be said. It is merely a matter of making sure the Signer has been sent a copy of the relevant script beforehand, which is a very basic courtesy anyway.

So I see no good reason why it can't be done during a magic act or convention.

Even if the bit of my brain used for language is rubbish at doing new ones, I'm still fascinated by other ones. I know enough about the structure of BSL to believe that while the grammar is different, it shouldn't matter because it's about as fast as spoken English. The obvious problem is expressing the necessary technical jargon involved in magic. It seems to me that being around magic enough to easily explain and express its concepts in BSL is a must.

My understanding from working with a few deaf people is that any particularly new jargon that doesn't already have a recognised sign 'word' is treated just like a name and spelt out quickly using letters.