"Towards an empirical theory of performing Tenyo tricks and other magic gadgets"

For decades, the Japanese magic trick company Tenyo has delighted amateur conjurers with their little magic gimmicks, which can be very clever indeed, but which are nearly guaranteed to fall flat when performed for friends and strangers.

The deficiency in Tenyo tricks is the core problem with magic: situating it in the wider world. Is the performer claiming to have supernatural abilities? Are they challenging the viewer to spot the gimmick? Are they showing off their cleverness (and if so, how clever can you claim to be on the basis of having bought a gadget?).

https://boingboing.net/2017/03/08/i-am-o......ful.html

Any thoughts?

Followed by this article; Tenyo Trio Trial http://www.thejerx.com/blog/2017/3/7/tenyo-trio-trial

I admire Cory Doctorow, but as a non-magician he has no frame of reference to make his comments. I perform Tenyo exclusively for lay people. They love it and are fooled by it. So, he's wrong. I wouldn't write about subjects about which I have no experience.

And Andy, is ... well, a Jerx.

That was very interesting, thx.

I just love it when people criticize something they know very little or nothing about. 😕

Thanks for the link Ed, interesting to read for sure I like "Mystery box/No traditional "magician" and will give it a chance when I perform a little gimmicky Tenyo

For what it's worth, although Cory isn't a professional magician, he seems to be a dedicated hobbyist, based on this and other posts.

It's also worth noting that the criticism of Tenyo as "nearly guaranteed to fall flat" is Cory's, rather than Andy. Here's Andy's comments on Tenyo, which I think are a little more nuanced:

[i]Tenyo tricks are so fun and so fascinating to me as a magician, but I would just never perform them. They seem so far removed from anything truly "magical." By that I mean there's no staying power to the effects. People watch them and think, "Huh, well... there you go. I guess he's got a plastic thingamajig that allows that to happen somehow. Neat." Not only is the trick obviously "a trick," but it exists only in that little bubble of space in front of you for that moment in time. It's almost impossible to make it about anything other than that plastic gizmo.[i]

I love Tenyo, but I see where Andy's coming from-- his particular presentational style is centered around making it look like magic is just casually happening around him, and that makes it hard for him to justify pulling out something that very clearly looks like a magic trick. I don't think that's a problem for people with different performing styles, but I see why it doesn't fit into his.

Andy's article about the focus group testing is actually a followup to an early post, in which he offered a really intriguing presentation idea for Tenyo tricks. You can find it here:
http://www.thejerx.com/blog/2016/6/12/a-......rq=tenyo

Andy is just plain wrong. I live by empirical evidence, and have plenty in this case.
Cory is wrong, too.

I love Tenyo and have a huge collection of it. But the question about using it to perform (and I do use it from time to time in the right circumstances) is really more about a separate question: What have you got in your repertoire to use to entertain your audience? If Tenyo is all you've got then it's fine to use and, contrary to the OP's linked article, I find that Tenyo effects mystify when presented well. But if you have something better, why not use that instead? All of us should go for the jugular every time we perform by using our very best effects and show pieces.

I can do extremely difficult sleight of hand with cards, and sometimes I mix that and Tenyo. The contrast tends to add to the overall psychological misdirection.

I agree. That was interesting. Thanks for sharing that.

Thanks for sharing.