|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 [Next] | ||||||||||
wwhokie1 Special user 512 Posts |
Ancient effect and ancient prop can be just as effective, it just may need a different meaning from a modern prop. Sometimes I prefer the opportunities for meaning that less familiar props provide. Doesn't make one right and one wrong, just different choices. I just think people too quickly throw out options because they are not familiar or modern, and that is not the basis upon which that choice should be made. Unfamiliar or older/antique doesn't make it a bad prop. Neither does being modern make something a bad prop. A prop that is inconsistent with the meaning being established makes it a bad prop.
|
|||||||||
Aus Special user Australia 996 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 16, 2015, wwhokie1 wrote: I believe the answer is balance, as much as we can take it to the extreme we can also not take it far enough, magic is full of illogical procedures that on the face of it don't make any sense to the lay person, but if we leave these things unaddressed they undermine our performances as meaningless distractions or worse a bread crumb trail for suspicious minds to follow. Look at Paul Harris Las Vegas Leaper, the counting of the piles facilitates the method yet when considered with a logical perspective why would this method of counting be any more efficient then how one would normally count cards? Sometimes necessity of circumstance dictate actions, if I wanted to buy one of the many commercially available gaff coins made by tango and others, I would most likely have to get one of the US or UK types because Australian gaffs aren't made on a commercial scale like other country's unless I ask for a custom make. So how then would I justify a trick with a foreign coin when it could be reasonably assumed that I could use Australian coins just as easily? I agree that distinguishing "meaning" with "avoiding suspicion" needs to be clearly defined to clarify motive, but I don't agree that one is at the exclusion of the other, I think that meaning can adequately address both these things. The real issue is when and if we should do this given the circumstances which brings me in agreement with your observations about props. Magically Aus |
|||||||||
wwhokie1 Special user 512 Posts |
Nice points Aus.
My comments probably were a little too extreme. For example, when I said "I don't care about rationalizing the effect for the audience", I should have said "rationalizing the prop". A little careless of me. And my point was being opposed to rationalizing by forcing a meaning onto the prop just to make it appear less like a magic prop. I think that meaning should be aimed at creating an experience for the audience not for trying to disguise your props. If the prop is going to be such a distraction that it needs to be disguised then perhaps it is a bad choice and should be replaced. |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Techniques like metaphor for story telling are an effective way of imparting an idea but it must be presented in an amusing way in our magic. Some magicians don’t much like story telling at all but each to his own I say. Some are good and some not so good at telling a story. There is more than one way of telling a story but in essence they ought to be plausible nonsense. The reason for that is that if the cause suggested is serious then there is no conflict between what is and what is being suggested. It must be what is can’t be for it be our art. They are there for their amusement as opposed see real magic. The idea in the story though at the same can contain some truth about life. That is something in life they can relate to. They cannot relate to magic, as magic is out of this world. Magic makes the world vanish at the climax. All the BS in the world and the BS we have fed them in the lead up to the climax is blown away. At that magic moment, there is no meaning. Therein is the difference between drama and magic. There is no denouement in magic. No, oh that explains the story. What you have at the the climax of magic is rather the opposite to meaning I think.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 26, 2015, tommy wrote: What you have is nonsense. The conclusion of the magical argument is impossible. |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Yes. The thing is though, what concerns me, is a charlatan can convince people that what is in fact nonsense and impossible, is in fact reasonable and possible. What concerns me is that if one tries to dress up magic with all this sort of serious meaning and all that, then one is in danger of ending up with a charlatan act. if one isn't careful.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts |
I am very careful that no one takes me too seriously, tommy:
:) |
|||||||||
Alan Wheeler Inner circle Posting since 2002 with 2038 Posts |
For some mentalism and bizarre magic performances, the magic is presented as believable or realistic, bordering on the work of the charlatan. The disclaimers may be shoddy or at odds with the tone of the performance or even nonexistent.
Max Maven asks a question which is really a clever linguistic move because it seems to put performers who choose NOT to present magic seriously in the position of being 'fraidy cats: Why do magicians seem to be afraid of magic? This question with the attending implication that our magic should be deep and meaningful is dealt with near the beginning of Burger and Neale's book Magic and Meaning However, I think Tommy has the higher ground on this issue. Yet perhaps our magic can still be thoughtful and meaningful in other ways. Engaging the mind, heart, and will of the audience does not necessarily mean bringing in politics, social issues, theology, or other deep themes. This engagement may include certain dramatic elements. In his book, Ask Roberto, Roberto Giobbi asks, "You wouldn't perform a trick for an audience if it had not a dramatic plot, besides the inherent trick plot, would you?"
The views and comments expressed on this post may be mere speculation and are not necessarily the opinions, values, or beliefs of Alan Wheeler.
A BLENDED PATH Christian Reflections on Tarot Word Crimes Technology and Faith........Bad Religion |
|||||||||
BeThePlunk Special user West of Boston, East of Eden 887 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 26, 2015, tommy wrote: Yes, that would end up in a tedious performance. But a performance doesn't have to end up like that to have some resonance with the audience. To quote Burger, we're only trying to avoid magic which is no more than "the adventure of the props in the magician's hand". A performance like that doesn't have to be deep or serious, but it does need at the very least an engaging "frame" (Burger out of context again). Good points, Alan. Thank you. |
|||||||||
Terrible Wizard Inner circle 1973 Posts |
"Just say this three times: Magic is a quality of being beautiful and delightful in a way that seems remote from daily life and because I am a magician I am therefore beautiful and delightful a way that seems remote from daily life."
I really like this. It works for me |
|||||||||
AaronSterling Veteran user 319 Posts |
Some resources that I don't see mentioned as often as I think they should be:
Get Your Act Together, Joanie Spina Impro for Storytellers, Keith Johnstone Creative Authenticity, Ian Roberts Disc 4 of Bravura, Paul Daniels Also see the Paul Daniels YouTube video on Making Magic Interesting: http://youtu.be/1DycRyG1xYM |
|||||||||
Terrible Wizard Inner circle 1973 Posts |
Nice ytube with thoughts from PD. Very good thanks Aaronsterling.
|
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9981 Posts |
Every spectator holds some memory of magic in their life that you can kindle ...
my Dad beyond 90 was in my care with advancing dementia. He loves simple magic effects I would do with common objects. One of my sisters asked why I though he would laugh at magic tricks and not remember other things. So I wrote this ... More Than Seeing My Dad was a land surveyor until he was eight-four, and now surveys memories and future dreams confused. This takes a different vision than used by me – and I sometimes wonder which of us is impaired. Nevada is a magical place for you never know what the next hill or arroyo will reveal: a rainbowed mineral trace, the remains of a broke wagon, a rattlesnake, or a clutch of flowers that blooms but once in fifty years. Did you know that Nevada is the most mountainous State – that “high desert” doesn’t mean barren, but is a stark reminder of an ancient sea? Aye, fossiled clams lay next to arrow heads and forgotten bones and future dreams of those who want a stretch of land to call their own. And then there are the stars of night untethered by man’s abuse – another magic. When walking into an unknown space you need three eyes, or so is claimed by Dad. “One for the treacherous ground beneath, one for your planned fifth step and possible treasure, and one on the bumbling idiot at your side.” This sounds a bit like seeing the past, present and future as a completed tapestry rather than individual parts and perceptions. Was he a seer or oracle or wizard? No – just a man not buried in himself who cares more about living than impressing others. It was never strange to me that he could find hidden metal with two bent coat-hangers, tell when a man was lying and always had a butterfly fluttering nearby though we be far from nowhere. Some would call it magic. Those who call themselves magicians (the pretenders at the magic nurtured within our souls) must know something of this third eye. When performing a clever trick to bemuse and beguile one must pay attention to what the audience believes is certain, solid and predictable; while always watching the hidden script unfold that will ensnare the spectator in another reality. Yet, that sudden, startling ripple in the now of time and space that rends a hole in the fabric of impossible makes of the performer a guide rather than enchanter. The unknown landscape of the observer’s minds is where we draw strange figures in the sand. As guide we must watch this stranger stumble through joy and fear with invisible outstretched hand to lead them back again. The magic is not in the colored props or dancing fingers or sudden gasp of breath. It is not even in the story of amazement and mystery that will be told to friends. The magic is that you and I can share a special instant of being more than lonely, more than boring – more than just alive. Thanks, Dad!
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
Robert D. Adams New user Birmingham, UK 64 Posts |
(Signed up mainly because of these sorts of threads and loving Pop Haydn's thinking on magic!)
Sorry to follow so many heartfelt posts with this but I'd love to shed some more light on the topic and I believe improving theories requires criticism!... What 'meaning' in magic? I'm failing to understand this concept at the most basic level. Words have a largely agreed meaning. Art may have an intended and an interpreted meaning. Mathematical symbols have a precisely agreed meaning. But magic isn't like any of these 'sorts of things'. Why are people assuming that magic is a 'symbol' for something else? Magic is the phenomenon of something impossible seeming to happen. The 'reason' to cut a rope and then repair it in a magical fashion is precisely because it (seemingly) is a demonstration of the impossible and people are entertained by experiencing the impossible. Relating an effect to an engaging story and presenting it beautifully will make the experience more engaging and memorable by giving the audience a richer emotional experience but I fail to see how any story or presentation can give magic 'meaning' in the way I understand the word. I don't even think a story can give magic its purpose! Why would a magician enact some magical part of a story or do something analogous to some part of a story if it isn't because experiencing magic is entertaining? I doubt any audience is going to seriously think that you are performing magic because it is the best way to tell your tale. I imagine that audiences will always assume the story and presentation to be in some way enhancing the magic but nothing to do with the motivation for performing magic (even if the content of a story truly does relate to the motivation for performing magic!). I get the feeling this makes some magicians uncomfortable but I think it is the truth and what the audience expects and pays for. So while the magic and the performance in it's entirety can be entertaining, beautiful, moving, even inspiring, I'm comfortable with the magic having no meaning and little purpose beyond entertainment. And I don't think this attitude impoverishes my appreciation for the craft. (I'm wary of seeming confrontational here; I really do respect the opinions of more experienced magicians. I only mean to get my self educated!) - Robert |
|||||||||
AaronSterling Veteran user 319 Posts |
Quote:
On Mar 11, 2015, Robert D. Adams wrote: My position isn't a standard one in the magic community, but I think the question of meaning in magic can best be addressed by looking to other arts where this has been a big issue for a long time. According to Matisse, a rose is the hardest thing to paint, because everyone's done it, so how can you make the painting your own. Same issue with card magic: we might see a difference between card trick A and card trick B, but the audience just sees a card trick. So the specialness doesn't come from doing a different card trick, it comes from painting the trick as your own. The late Rene Lavand was someone who, for me, checked all the boxes. 1) popular among the general public, 2) technique at a high level, 3) performances full of meaning. Not many English-speaking performers can check all three boxes right now. Maybe none, except for people who intentionally stay outside the magic community, like Ricky Jay or Penn&Teller. Your question is a fundamental one IMO. It's the difference between a showman and an artist. That said, I think "meaning" as understood by the magic community, is mostly for the benefit of amateur magicians who want to find personal meaning in their childhood hobby. There's a cottage industry of books and lectures about making magic more meaningful, by people whose ability to get rebooked by the modern audience is unclear to me. That's why I think it's more important to focus on interestingness, instead of meaningfulness. Some meaningful things are turgid, and some interesting things are vacuous, but, most of the time, the more interesting something is, the more meaningful it is. So be interesting. |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
I think meaning can be a wish. For example: bending bars in prison is something the prisoner wishes he could do to escape. Poker players wish for a Royal Flush. Tramps wish for a cup of money. Such stuff as dreams are made on.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
lynnef Inner circle 1407 Posts |
Quote:
On Mar 11, 2015, tommy wrote: Totally agree! Along with a good story, the 'wish' is a big part of a good magic effect. Time travel, telekinesis, money and other objects plucked from the air, laws of physics totally violated ...? all possible in magic. Yeah, and dreams too in which things happen which are impossible in real life; but we strangely accept them.... til we wake up! Lynn |
|||||||||
Robert D. Adams New user Birmingham, UK 64 Posts |
Quote:
On Mar 11, 2015, AaronSterling wrote: Not sure how your parable about Mattisse addresses meaning in magic but I like where you've ended up here. I'll assume people agree we are really talking about creating a meaningful show rather than looking for meaning within a specific act of magic (trick). Obviously what we do and say in an act shouldn't be completely meaningless. So if the question is 'should magic performances attempt to be profound?' - I think you are quite right to say we should focus on being interesting (and more generally engaging and entertaining) rather than profound. |
|||||||||
AaronSterling Veteran user 319 Posts |
Quote:
On Mar 12, 2015, Robert D. Adams wrote: Of course magic performances should attempt to be profound. As I've said in the Workers forum, "Did you ever make someone cry with a card trick?" Armando Lucero has. David Copperfield has. I imagine Rene Lavand must have, though I don't have proof. But being profound doesn't mean being pretentious, and it doesn't mean making people cry. Comedians can be profound, and so can magic comedians and children's entertainers. I'm saying: focus on being interesting, and on creative authenticity. The "creative authenticity" part is where the Matisse quote factors in. Find a way to express an interesting aspect of yourself, and give the audience something they didn't realize they wanted. |
|||||||||
lynnef Inner circle 1407 Posts |
Quote:
On Mar 12, 2015, AaronSterling wrote: Perhaps the object is to be BOTH entertaining and profound. Could the word "astonishment" suffice? I watched the Armando Lucero video from a Japanese TV show; and indeed it was not just strong but astonishing. While the woman was crying, I was laughing, but both were from astonishment. If a 'dream' (not a nightmare that is) is made real, think of the different emotions that could unleash. I'm enjoying and learning from all the different posts on this topic! Lynn |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » Meaning in Magic (16 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.09 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |