I'm trying understand the components of story telling as it relates to the writing of a screen play and the performance of a magic act. One big difference is the lack of any transformational arch in either the story or the character (a generalization of magicians). Movies, stories, novels and other mediums use the arch to move things forward. You start here, you go through this and you come out different somehow. Most variety acts are demonstrations of skill tied together with light comedy. I've been wondering how to embed some arch in my act/character. To take the audience on a bit of a personal journey and let them feel some sort of change from the beginning to the end. For example, start the act with a cynical distaste for wonder, dismissing it as a puzzle. Acknowledge that magic is the butt of many jokes and accept that it's all a big fake. Then through the course of presenting the effects, somehow the magi begins to get it. To discover or rediscover how wonderful and beautiful it is to put a smile on the face of a person who needs to feel that sense of wonder.

I used to end every performance by saying,

"Your smile is the light in the window of your face that shows the world your heart is at home."

Scrooge, a great story of transformation.

I yearn to make my act relevant for myself and my audiences. Strangely, I think it has less to do with tricks and more to do with writing. I continue to work on my craft. To hone and refine it. Polly said to me last night, "You must really love what you do, most people would have hung it up by now."
I do love what I do. I go out there every day and try and make the world a better place. . . one smile at a time. As a street performer, I get my teeth kicked in regularly and am humbled nightly. Fighting all forms of distractions, I try and cut through the thick, scaly exterior of people's psyches and get to the root of the matter. To answer the question, what are we all doing watching this guy?

I hope to figure this out before I die. . . . in a long. . . long time.

This is very interesting, Tom.

I have been through a few Hero's Journeys myself, as we all have. My journey from when I started in the late '70s to where I am now is what I am talking about. One of the biggest changes is my motives for performing.

I, too, have wondered if I can incorporate an ARC into my performance. And I believe that it may be too much to do in a short period of time. I mean, most people ARE IN THEIR DAILY ORDEAL, and to interrupt that for a quick relief, than I feel we have fulfilled our calling to disengage 'heroes' from their quest to even provide fuel for their journey.

It's almost like we are in the 'mentor' role...or if we are not, maybe we could be. Providing insight into THE SPECIAL WORLD.

I appreciate your desire to extend this to passers by...but maybe in a different venue? Or, maybe we could develop mini-performances for different stages of the Hero's Journey. But wouldn't that leave people with incomplete circles...like an independent film that you leave from wondering what happened to the main character vs. a complete circle where you know what happened to the main character that happens in most Hollywood films?

I believe US/WE/YOU/ME are IN EVERYONE'S JOURNEY as a MENTOR figure to guide and provide insight...not just skill and light comedy. Or, maybe, that is just my call.

But I do believe we can do that by TRIGGERING that which resides in the human heart...that eternal desire set in our hearts is being tapped into every day, one way or another. If I tap into it and give it some form of LIFE, then I fulfilled my motive for performing. That form of LIFE can be expressed in many ways...even through the many tricks that fill the books on our shelves.

So, I am getting into this with you as a experiment. I would love to explore what you are talking about. Maybe I hit on with what you are talking about, maybe I added/subtracted from it, but I would like to do the same thing you are inquiring about.

How?

-Scott M

Hi, Tom, greetings.
This is a tricky one. I think 'Magic' as it is presented today, by most 'Magicians', is viewed by the audience as 'clever trickery'...when it's done well. Therefore, this Character of a 'Magician' is what? ...a clever trickster.

Guys working as Gamblers,...or Con-men (Harry Anderson), have more believability in their character; therefore, they can "go places" with stories. This 'Believability' is the key.

On the other hand, Variety Acts,...physical variety acts, often DO have a tension bow. "Will they accomplish it?!?" The audience sees the challenge, understands it...and, with luck, wants to know the outcome.

So, how do we achieve this with Magic? I try to incorporate Magic with other Art Forms. When the people watch me, they are attracted by Music and Dance,... the Magic happens within this package. Therefore, the emotions are carried by another horse. For me...it works.

gallagher

P.S.: You mentioned 'the distractions'. This is probably the biggest challenge for Sidewalk Workers...getting the audience in a quiet, peaceful...safe moment. I believe this is the biggest benefit of keeping the circle size smaller. A 'tight', closed circle, yes. But, not too big. A 'homey' feeling can be very stimulating,... for BOTH sides of the table.

Wow...great stuff. I'm also a writer and in my act it is important to me that it tells a story. More to the point, MY story.

The classic hero's journey is usually done in serial format. Chapters, episodes, whatever. These combined create the arc of the story.

In magic a magic 'show' each trick, can tell a different part of that story, for that character. In order for it to be entertaining to an audience it must have the elements that connect your hero to everyone else. The best of these stories have an element of truth to them. In my act there are a lot of jokes, and light humor, but I am also telling the audience about me and my journey as a magician through those jokes and humor. There is enough truth to what I am saying that my audience can identify and responds.

When I first started out particularly on the street, I tried to write comedy. Man, I had some GREAT jokes. But they all fell flat, I wasn't telling a story, more to the point I wasn't telling MY story.

I took a look at my horrible act and say that the best response I was getting from my audience was from the vanishing bottle. For some reason when I did that trick, I connected with them on a level that was beyond my surface understanding. The premise of the trick revolved around my uncle Tootsie. My uncle tootsie was a real guy, and he really did show me my first magic trick. All of the shtick that went along with it wasn't necessarily true but there was enough truth to it that it sold it to my audience. I was telling them something about me, and I was telling them something about them as well.

When I realized that, a door opened in my head and I started choosing effects that began to fit my story and not trying to work the other way around. I talk about my obsessions, and my family, and where I hope to be and where I've been. I try to do all of this while identifying with them, my audience. All of this culminates to create my arc ending with the grand finale. By that time the audience is now part of the never ending story and help me with the big finish.

My audience might not ever know any of this is going on by just watching my act, but in my mind the entire story is there and subconsciously that is why I believe they identify. What I do know is when I incorporated this premise into my performance and my script that is when I started seeing HUGE results from my audience and hearing good things instead of bad from my peers.

If you look at a really good magic show, stand up comedian, monologist, with this in mind you can really see it.

One quick example where you might not think this is going on, but it is definitely going on. In the Amazing Johnathan's act he does the hoary old "you got a spot on your shirt poke the finger up your nose gag". he does this gag three times in his act. By the third time it is pee your pants funny as it establishes his character. This is a guy who has NO CONTROL over himself, he really just can't help it. Johnathan even says, "I'm sorry man, this is like crack to a guy like me."

Now this could not be further from the truth because on stage NOBODY is more in control or scripted to the point of uber pro than Johnathan. But there is just enough truth to it that it sells his story and his character. that act is a journey that climaxes with his fantasy of being on a Vegas stage performing the 'Classic' Zombie to the theme of 2001 or thus spoke Zarathustra (which he now does on a Vegas stage, how cool is that!). Inside you get the feeling that this character wants to be Lance Burton or Channing Pollack but he's just to insane to see it's never going to happen. Pure fantasy, and a true hero's journey. The audience doesn't necessarily know any of this but it has a complete arc, that is why they connect.

The big issue when trying to apply this to a magic act is it is easy to get heavy handed with it. I mean this is some deep and clever stuff if you are intentionally doing it. You almost want your audience to know how you are pulling the strings. But, in my experience, subtle is better. Once they see the strings or the man behind the curtain, once they know they are being manipulated, they are no longer able to suspend disbelief. It's a balancing act to be sure, and it is like cayenne pepper, a little goes a long way.

Best,

Dan-

Nice Danny! Great to hear that there are a few on this site who are exploring this and even more UNDERSTAND it.

When I was a pro photographer, I studied a bit in other peoples work/art/photography and was amazed at the point when people buy something. Most people buy when they know MORE about the artist THEN more about the piece they are buying. This then gives a STORY for the buyer to tell others.

I took this and stopped all sales techniques and started educating people on my art and what it means to me. Most of the time they found something in their hearts to relate too and would buy, then they would tell others and I would get new work.

I am, and some of us can and are doing this in our routines. I don't find anything wrong with that...if it fits you. Being a bit vulnerable and open is a part of who I am. This relates to the type of person I want to buy my act and maybe some unexpected people who all of a sudden 'can relate'.

Regarding 'pulling strings'...I wonder if this happens unconsciously? I mean, I do not intend to pull strings, I believe it just happens. My motive is not to pull their strings, story does it on its own. Its in the heart. I guess those who desire to consciously can manipulate that and enter into manipulating and produce a bad situation to break the arc of trust. As another part of my character is creating an arc of trust...from, 'do I want to give this guy a chance to entertain me...or what is he doing, ah this is good'...TO, 'I believed this guy and he hook line and sinkered me (manipulated me)...what a bum...Im leaving.' So, what ARC do we as entertainers desire to create? I believe a persons heart/spirit knows the difference. My wife sure does know when my heart is into something or not...as one looks good and the other looks half/assed. I should have just said 'no' from the get go.

So I guess its a matter of motive for our story acts...to 'leave someone feeling better than what they did 15 minutes ago and we all had a blast' is what I intend for a person to experience. How I do that is by my script, effects and other ingredients.

The cayenee pepper part is perfect...for what time we spend with them. It is like a GOOD fast food experience, as it can satisfy and be healthy for me. Some of my acts are not like a GREAT sit down meal at my favorite restraunt that we go to on our anniversary for a LONG meal. That is like going to a Cirque De Solei for me. But since we are talking about Busking, maybe a circle show CAN do that?

Entering INTO the arc...this is interesting.

I gotta chew on this some more!

I wonder if this effects the size of your hat? Regardless of the economy?

-Scott M

It will absolutely make a change in your hat which is why I don't understand why the topic go moved here. People put money into your hat because they like you, and you like them. They like you because you entertained them and connected with them. During that construct using your character's story you also let them know that you like them. When it comes time to pass the hat the money that goes into it will be from people you connected with.

Best,

Dan-

Sometimes the arc is in the gradual revelation of the character that was hidden at the beginning. Gazzo and Phil Cass both take this path, digging a hole in which the audience is not sure they like or trust the performer, and then gradually winning everyone over to the point the audience both respects and likes them.

The defensive, quick to attack, rude and filterless Gazzo of the first ten minutes evolves into a generous, warm and almost sunny character by the end. You realize that he is playing a role and having fun, and can take the same sort of abuse that he dishes out. This is a fascinating and dangerous approach, and I always love to watch Gazzo pull this off. The danger of course, is that you can lose the audience very easily before you get a chance to pull them along with you. I have seen Gazzo dig himself too deep a hole to crawl out of--but that is very rare.

Phil Cass must be seen in his full-length show. The Phil "Trust Me" Cass character is a smart-ass brute, clever enough to be entertaining but perhaps a little too roughshod in his treatment of spectators and their belongings. People think he is funny and talented, but somewhat untrustworthy and boorish. Eventually, as everything rights itself in the end--the spectator's tie is restored, the lady gets her ring back, etc.--the audience realizes that he is "just kidding" and that he was a "good sort" all along.

One approach to the arc, when there is not enough time to demonstrate a real change in character, is to make the arc one of revelation rather than change.

Good to see you Mr. Haydn...

Being one of revelation rather than change...wow, I gotta sleep on that one.

Thanks!

-Scott M

I agree with Whit about playing with the gradual revelation of character, rather than showing transformation. (This has been known to work in standup comedy, as well.) At the risk of overgeneralizing, it seems like any attempt to create a transformational arc via fictional techniques would come off as insincere in a magic show. Characters transform as the result of conflict and experience, but it's hard to convey a believable conflict if the fourth wall is absent and the audience is perceived as a factor in the proceedings, as it is in most magic shows. Any conflict that would help demonstrate a development and transformation of character would cause the audience to wonder about how the performer goes through this sort of evolution every single night, with the promise of a reboot at the next performance making the change register as being impermanent and therefore not meaningful. I think it would ring false and over-engineered.

This assumes that none of us here is interested in going all Andy Kaufman with it...

One (stripped down) definition of drama is, "A changes B". In a magic show, which has no fourth wall, the spectators, in a sense, become characters in the show. So why can't 'A' be the magician, and 'B' be the spectator? Then there's a sort of dramatic journey (arc, what have you), but it's the audience that goes through it, not the magician. They enter a magical cave (theatre) and emerge changed?

Too airy-fairy?

-Travis

P.S. Does Derren Brown's "Something Wicked..." do something like that? The audience's encounter with a magical character changes their perception about influence...?

Not to fluffy, like it! as well as all the other posts.

Digging it

You could use the paradigm that Syd Field uses. I think it should work for an act. Act I is the set-up. It is one quarter of the length of the story. Right near the end of this section, something major happens to turn the story around. This is called Plot Point I.
Act II is the confrontation. This is the main body of the story. It is half the length of the story. This contains the dramatic context. About half way through this is the midpoint. There should be something that happens here that creates some kind of irony that links the first part of the story to where it will go from there.
Before Act II ends, something important happens here. This is the point of no return. This is called Plot Point II. The character must confront this or die (literally or figuratively).
Act III is the resolution. The character must be at his lowest. He or she must have difficulty resolving this. It must seem that it is impossible and the odds are against him or her. Once this has been resolved, then you need some kind of coda for the finale. All great entertainers do this.
I just saw Bette Midler and her show followed this pretty much. Also, she ended the show with her signature, “Wind Beneath My Wings”, but didn’t end the show there. She thanked the audience, then proceeded to sing one more song, then to her final applause.

Also, I think if you redesign the actual routine, you can put the same kind of conflicts into it and then have it build in two ways; within the routine and the body of the act. That’s because routines themselves have a beginning and middle and end.
I think your proposal is a good idea and should work. Good luck.

Mtpascoe, dude...you nailed it.

Whit...you also nailed it

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. There must be a character. There is rarely a character for character's sake. That character is always telling his/her story.

Best,

Dan-

A story ARC is a general over arching story, during which other events and stories might occur.

So I read.

Transformational Arch is the same I guess except the over arching story is a transformation. Like a guy starts young and ends up old.