|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
Tukaram Loyal user Iloilo, Philippines 227 Posts 
|
I agree with a lot of what Pop Haydn wrote when he said that you buy the effect and the script - why mess up a great script?
But Harry Anderson also made a good point in a lecture I was at. He said he is not proprietary on any of his stuff but you run the risk of looking like Harry Anderson. He used the example of the needle through the arm... he insists he did not create that effect but people don't believe him because he became so known for it. If you do his bit no one is going think of Bruce Spangler, only Harry. I think there is nothing wrong with using an effect & script if that is what you bought - the magician sold it for you to use. But there is a point (to use the musical idea) where you may look like a cover band and not an original artist. |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts
|
There is a particular problem when it comes to using someone else's lines, because, more often than not, they won't fit your persona and you won't get the same reactions as the originator. For example, I say things in my act that could be offensive if not delivered in exactly the right way. I get great reactions with them, but I've seen copyists who have alienated entire audiences because the lines just don't suit their character, age, image and personality.
Despite popular wisdom, magic routines are NOT "one size fits all." They've got to be customized to fit you- just like your clothes. |
|||||||||
Banedon New user 74 Posts
|
You are right, Master. This is why many books, videos, lessons, advice, etc. that provide patter to accompany routines frequently remind you to adjust or create new patter to fit that which best suits you so as to make for a better and more natural presentation.
|
|||||||||
|
wwhokie1 Special user 512 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jul 1, 2015, Tukaram wrote: Good points. I think what Pop said still stands true though. His point wasn't to never write your own script, but to realize the time and effort that goes into perfecting a script and make sure that you are willing and able to put forth that effort, otherwise you will end up with inferior magic since the original script incorporated that time and effort. For me, his comments inspire me toward creativity and challenge me to make sure I put forth the time and effort. I purchased Pop's "Six Card Trick". I am using it to open a three trick routine I am developing. But I am completely changing the script and some of the handling to make it work with the new script. I have been working on it periodically for months. My magic is part time, mostly weekends. I am a teacher. I am thankful for the summer, hoping I can finish up this routine. But, I have to admit that such changes are a lot of hard work. I am doing the same thing with the other two pieces of the routine so that they all fit logically together. It is much, much easier to use someone else's script. When taking someone else's work apart you begin to appreciate the importance of the parts and details. Their script has also been thoroughly audience tested and revised. A new script still has to go through that process. |
|||||||||
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts
|
Just to be clear, I would never support copying material that was not published. My point was that imitation is the best way to learn the complicated nuances of performing. When one begins the journey, it is important to copy and to learn how a great routine feels.
You don't hand a student a guitar and say make up your own chords and your own songs. I think that Garett may be misreading my article. I wouldn't consider myself a classicist. I don't think my work is unoriginal or stiff. I find that complicated tasks such as performing magic are best learned by imitation. That it isn't until you understand the craft that you should try to be creative. Originality is the last goal of the student, not the first. I describe the path that got me to originality, it is not the only one. The genius needs no teachers. I would not prescribe the path for the intuitive artistic genius to take. But the way I learned my craft was by imitation and copying of the very best performers and routines. My name is Whitney Haydn, but most people call me Pop, now. It is easier to spell. What bothers me is the world of organized magic seems to encourage "originality" even from 14 year olds, who should be encouraged to learn the basics of the craft first. In case Garett has not seen my work, here is some recent video. I think it is the opposite of stiff, classical or lacking in freshness: |
|||||||||
|
Banedon New user 74 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2015, Pop Haydn wrote: These are critical points, and I think are probably the most important things to take away from this thread. Thank you, Pop. |
|||||||||
|
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts
|
If you can't be entertaining performing a great routine by someone else, you probably are not ready to create your own.
Creativity is largely about solving problems. The more problems you solve in someone else's routine, the faster it becomes something "original." All art is theft. Steal intelligently and in a way that the creator can't recognize his own work--you have to put a new coat of paint on it. If someone thinks you are copying, you have done it wrong. To change a routine that has been polished and honed over many years, without sufficient reason, is not art. It is vandalism. "Magic is the only artform in which beginners are encouraged to paint over masterpieces." ~Dai Vernon |
|||||||||
|
Banedon New user 74 Posts
|
You are correct, creativity is largely about solving problems. Many people think that creativity is "magic" - creating something from nothing. Creativity is rearranging what exists in a new form to bring something new into existence - be that in concept or concrete or both. Generally, as you point out - the rearrangement is to solve a problem - either implicit or explicit. You become a master in a discipline by learning the building blocks of and being able to reproduce as much of what came before you as possible. Then you can be creative with them to produce something new. Creativity does not need to be "original" either - it is utilizing your powers of reason to make something, which does not imply "originality".
While I do not agree with the "all art is theft" argument - it is because of the "theft" supposition. You are not "stealing" from the past - you are building on it and producing something new that would not have existed without your effort. The next logical step from the argument you make of "all art is theft" is to make a "you didn't build this" argument. It is a slippery slope towards "property is theft" and all sorts of other arguments towards non-ownership of anything ever. At that point - no one owns any routines, nothing is original, no one should be credited for any work they do, and no one should own anything or is capable of creating anything new because they are "stealing" from those who came before them all the way back to the guy who discovered fire. |
|||||||||
|
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2015, Banedon wrote: There may be a difference between how the act is perceived from the point of view of ownership and legalism, and from the point of view of the artist. I steal. I grab everything that isn't nailed down. I seldom ask permission. No one has ever come to me to ask for anything back. No one has accused me of being a copyist. An artist hides his resources well. |
|||||||||
|
Banedon New user 74 Posts
|
Pop, I am speaking of morality, not of legality.
|
|||||||||
|
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts
|
If the owner doesn't miss it, and doesn't recognize it, you have stolen morally.
|
|||||||||
1KJ Inner circle Warning: We will run out of new tricks in 4388 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jul 22, 2014, Terapin wrote: NO. Why would you follow good advice with this? It has been made clear. If the originator is selling their creation, you are free to perform it within any restrictions they have layed out. If they have not offered it to the community, you are not at liberty to "rip it off" Common, man! Your parents would not be proud of you. Use better judgement. Don't make us pull this car over right now! KJ |
|||||||||
|
1KJ Inner circle Warning: We will run out of new tricks in 4388 Posts
|
Oh no. I thought you said "rip off" when you said "riff on". My bad. Now my parents will be disappointed from their graves. Sorry Mom & Dad.
KJ |
|||||||||
Necromancer Inner circle Chicago 3076 Posts
|
Sorry to bump this, but I just found it. And as it turns out, my recent lecture eBook, "What Becomes A Magic Legend Most," addresses this issue head-on, in ways some might find controversial (especially if your act leans heavily on the classics). See more here:
http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......forum=14 Best, Neil
Creator of The Xpert (20 PAGES of reviews!), Cut & Color, Hands-Off Multiple ESP (HOME) System, Rider-Waite Readers book, Zoom Pendulum ebook ...
|
|||||||||
|
supertoad12 New user Choose a number between 1 and 88 Posts
|
Thanks for pointing this out Neil. Lots of good stuff!
Steph
"The moment you doubt whether you can fly, you cease for ever to be able to do it"...J.M. Barrie |
|||||||||
|
Dick Oslund Inner circle 8357 Posts
|
I seldom read much in this area, but, the OP, Solid Snake, and, many of the others posting above, have caused me to 'say a few words". So, here are a "few" thoughts.
My dear friend, and fellow member of the SECRET SIX, the late Dick Jarrow, nephew of the late EMIL JARROW (bill in lemon fame) used to say (and, I don't know if it was his original thought or not, but, it "says it well".) "ORIGINALITY IS THE ART OF CONCEALING YOUR SOURCE." Looking back over this thread, I agree with Pop Haydn. Most of the rest of the posters, need to define their terms, before they speak! For example: One can't BUY a TRICK, OR AN EFFECT! A TRICK only exists while it is being performed! An EFFECT is what the spectator perceives, or thinks that he perceives. I don't think that there is any way that one could STEAL AN EFFECT. I started performing as a PART TIME PRO. when I was 13, going on 14. I read books like Tarbell, and, bought PROPS , NOT TRICKS OR EFFECTS!. For the first few years, as Pop H. has noted, I was experimenting, and, learning, how to perform with those props. Eventually, after some mentoring by a few old pro's. I began to experiment and develop my own PRESENTATION(S) with those props. It was a slow process. ("One learns by DOING the thing" --Sophocles, a few millenia ago.) But, over a "few" years, I've done fairly well. After about 20 years, I "went" full time pro., and, was on the road for almost 50 years, performing from coast to coast and border to border. I've never been seriously "at liberty". My repertoire is composed of the "latest tricks"! I use generic props like silks, rope, coins, golf balls, etc. I also use a few dedicated props like the egg bag, the "spot card", linking rings, trouble wit, mutilated parasol, 20th Century Silks, Misers Dream, etc. Senor Mardo "duked me in" with the Mardo/Sterling egg bag, but the presentation is mine! Mardo also taught me how to use a dye tube, but the presentation is mine. T. Francis Fritz (Frank Ducrot) "invented" the 20th C. silks, but the presentation is mine! (It's next to closing for the elementary school program. I learned the Tarbell routine for the Misers Dream, from Stuart Ross, and developed MY routine with suggestions from "Red" Friend, Roy Mayer, Jim Perkins, et al., but, the presentation is mine. Karrell Fox gave me his 3 ring routine, in 1975, but the patter and presentation is mine. After Don Lawton died, I put his mutilated parasol routine, in the show, so, his marvelous concept wouldn't be forgotten. I completely rewrote the lines to fit ME, and my audiences. For young fellows, and old guys, too, I published most of my routines in my book. I hope that readers will appreciate the PRESENTATIONS, and, learn some of the "fine points", that I learned from hard experience, and, from mentors and friends, along the way. "ORIGINALITY IS THE ART OF CONCEALING YOUR SOURCE!"
SNEAKY, UNDERHANDED, DEVIOUS,& SURREPTITIOUS ITINERANT MOUNTEBANK
|
|||||||||
|
ThSecret Regular user 147 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2015, Pop Haydn wrote: This thread has some great material! POP, being somewhat of a beginner, I found it very interesting to watch how you controlled the crowd. Very impressive! (Like at 1:30, you correct the heckler, do not let is phase you, and continue on with the act as if nothing happened. Layman may have agreed with him, when in actuality it had nothing to do with the trick.) I've also been re-watching some of my favourite magicians' performances, particularly paying attention to how they present their acts. I feel like it is a great learning tool, to see some of the best performers and to try to understand what makes them stand out. Now I would never copy them, but I feel if you understand what it is they are doing, you can adopt the key principles and make them your own.
"A play does not take place on stage but in the minds of the spectators."
|
|||||||||
|
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts
|
Quote:
On Dec 3, 2016, ThSecret wrote: That is exactly what you should do. Steal everything you can from everyone you like and then make sure it is covered with a new coat of paint so the owners won't recognize it. That is the way of the artist. |
|||||||||
|
thomasR Inner circle 1189 Posts
|
This, and Whit's previous thread, are extremely useful and inspire a lot of thoughts.
One thing I would add.... Kevin James Floating Rose is a routine that is available through him. Copperfield performs the floating rose exactly the way Kevin performs it. Darren Romeo performs it VERY differently. In this case... Darren took floating Rose and made it totally unique to him and his performance style. Copperfield felt the piece suited him as is and made no changes (at least not any major changes). I don't think either are wrong. I'm sure both of them paid for the routine and have permission from Kevin. |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Originality! (3 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
Posted: Jul 1, 2015 10:48 am 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.07 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 < 
|