|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
cataquet Veteran user England 363 Posts |
In a separate thread, the matter of whether to use a gimmick was raised. I thought I would take this opportunity to address this issue with my thoughts.
Let's start at the beginning: You want to produce an effect with coins. Now, suppose you could actually do the effect with real magic, what would it look like? That's the goal. Now, you can't really do magic, so you have to make some sacrifices. In general, gimmicks serve two purposes: they minimize the required effort (although handling the gimmick may require some skill) and/or they add an extra conviction to the effect. The ubiquitous [ is the perfect example. You could do coins across with an extra coin, but the shell allows you to reveal a given position and show that no other coins are involved (i.e., you are not somehow hiding a coin). Gimmicks also allow you to perform effects that might not otherwise be possible with skill alone (e.g., 3 coin monte), but these effects tend to be sneered at by magicians as either "effects where the coins [and not the magician] should take a bow" or "It's too perfect" (and screams gimmicked coins). If the effect is really good, magicians try to find a non-gimmicked version. Most of the time, the non-gimmicked version is nowhere near as clean as the gimmicked version, but these magicians shout "But it's ungimmicked" the way that people on a diet say "It's low in sugar!". That may be true, but it doesn't taste as good!! So, what's the downside? Generally, costs and practicality. When you use gimmicks, some of these "coins" do not sound the same as normal ones (e.g., tapping a normal coin on a flipper [regardless of who makes it] does not sound the same as tapping a normal coin on a normal coin]. So, you have to watch your sounds! Some magicians don't care about this (arguing that people won't notice), but I do. Also, some of the gimmicked coins are not examinable. That's not too much a worry as you can usually structure the routine so that the coins are examined at the beginning and/or the end. [Look at all the routines with CSB to handle this] Finally, the gimmicked coins usually require some resetting. This can be incredibly messy!! So far, I've dealt only with gimmicked coins. However, roughly the same arguments also apply to additional gimmicks that can be used with coins (i.e., holdouts, pulls, clips, etc). In short, it comes down to this: You work hard on a routine to make it look as “magical” as possible. However, in the end, that routine involves making sacrifices of one sort or another. I think it’s naïve to eliminate gimmicked coins from the outset simply because they are gimmicks. In my coin repertoire, some of my routines involve gimmicks (these include [, c/s coin, flipper, magnetic coins, etc), some involve none (although I assume extra coins and okito boxes are allowed in this category). Without a doubt, the most impressive ones are the ones that use gimmicks. Well, that's it for now....
Harold Cataquet
|
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
The ONLY time I use gimicks is when sleight of hand can't get the job done. I invented several Edge Grip and Backclip sleights to allow me some freedom in coin routines... and yet will use a c/s for one trick and ... well you know.
My feeling is that I just want the routine to look magical and would use a body rig, nanobots and hypnosis if that would get the job done most effectively. Just my two bent duckets.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Bob Sanders Grammar Supervisor Magic Valley Ranch, Clanton, Alabama 20504 Posts |
If you work for a paying audience, your job is to entertain. In the case of paid entertainers, if a piano player is allowed to use the pedals on the piano and the guitar player is allowed to use the capacities of the amplifier, if a race car driver is allowed to have personal radio contact, and a baseball pitcher is allowed signals from the catcher; why wouldn’t an entertaining magician be allowed to use gimmicked coins? His skill is entertaining. Magic tricks are just a vehicle like a guitar or racecar.
If the purpose is solely to compete with other magicians with mechanical skill and the rules prohibit gimmicks, that is an entirely different endeavor. That is about magic technique, and not professional entertainment. The rules are certainly different. As one with over forty-five years in the professional entertainment industry as talent, management, talent buyer, union business agent, producer and booking agent, I can assure you that top billed magician entertainers use gimmicks in the paid shows that they would never use in a bull session with the other magicians. On stage they are paid too much to risk an effect that fails. Among the guys, it will cost you a beer. In your professional career as an entertainer, it will cost you your living. It is a matter of what your role is at that moment. As a rodeo contestant we do all we know how, to get every spark of dirty tricks we can out of the bucking bronc so we can show that we can handle it. As a horse trainer we use every trick in the book to prevent the horse from ever bucking. The purposes are very different. Both require tremendous skill. Some magicians have both mechanical and entertaining skills. Some do not. Having one is neither a prohibition nor a predictor of the other. They are different endeavors using some of the same props. Bob Magic By Sander |
|||||||||
Dan LeFay Inner circle Holland 1371 Posts |
Good insights here. I tend to agree.
When putting "magic" before "method" I really can not think of a reason to ban gimmicks or gaffs. Almost all of the arguments that speak against the use of gaffs aim towards a lesser method. Tinny sounds, not practical, you do not end clean, expensive, can not be borrowed... I encountered a reaction that might be a challenge for purists, lately. After doing a coin-effect for a gentleman who custombuilds some of my specialty-gimmicks (a performer as well), he sighed: How is that possible without using a shell? I used two. Expert use of gimmicks in real live is as much a challenge as omitting them in front of your magic friends;-)
"Things need not have happened to be true.
Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths, that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot." Neil Gaiman |
|||||||||
ithomson Veteran user 330 Posts |
It seems to me that we should just use the right tools to get the job done.
If the job at hand is to entertain (or mystify) fellow magicians, then the choice of tools might well be different than if the job was to entertain/mystify a set of paying, non-magician customers. So, in my opinion, Jonathan's "My feeling is that I just want the routine to look magical ..." and Bob's "It is a matter of what your role is at that moment..." say it all (though I'd love to know where Jonathan gets his nanobots from). Finally, it seems to me that eschewing any weapon in our magical arsenal limits our ability to express ourselves through our art. Many artists choose their medium according to the effect or emotion (or audience if they're being deliberately commercial) they want to address. I don't think we're any different. We may limit our choices because of personal preference or to challenge our expression, but to do it 100% for "ethical" reasons seems a bit too restrictive to me. Cheers Ian |
|||||||||
GeorgeSantos Inner circle San Diego, CA 1106 Posts |
You got it right there! Magic before method.
Audience is always the concern not us. So gimmick or no gimmick, it all comes down to one goal as magicians, -ENTERTAINMENT. :spinningcoin:
"David Roth is the greatest coin manipulator in the entire world.."
-Dai Vernon "The Professor" I AM A FILIPINO MAGICIAN |
|||||||||
Tom Wolf Special user Harrison, Ohio 580 Posts |
Use gimmicks and entertain your audience.
They are the important ones. Go forth and amaze. Tom Wolf
The magic director and performer at the Rincon Gaucho supper club in Mexico City,
We opened the first and only close-up room for magic in Mexico with Wolf Ruvinskis. have several new coin vanishes and routines to share shortly just as soon as I can find someone to film them for me. Now living in Harrison, Ohio |
|||||||||
Clarioneer Special user Ferndown, Dorset, UK 624 Posts |
Personal Choice, pure and simple.... although personally I agree with Jon...
Having said that - I also have a holy moly coin set a friend has made up - but it's a necessary part of the effect
catch you later
Clarioneer |
|||||||||
Mike Wild Inner circle NY, PA, TX, MA, FL, NC 1290 Posts |
RE: "If you work for a paying audience, your job is to entertain."
Great point Bob! So is the point you make afterwards pertaining to competition with other magicians. I think that a magician (a paid entertainer) is obligated to provide the highest level of entertainment he or she can, and should use whatever practical methods are available. (Werner - I remembered to include practical this time ) Mike |
|||||||||
Werner G. Seitz Inner circle 3131 Posts |
Quote: Yes Mike , I know, you know, that one can do miracles when being rigged up with half a tons of equipment behind ones back and inside ones sleeves and under the jacket..one just can't walk around all day with all this great stuff..
On 2005-03-03 08:30, Mike Wild wrote: A holdout can do miracles as you know, and so does a pull..unfortunately it's not always practical to be rigged with either of them, the pull being a minor attachment, like f.ex. a Dual Control. It's also not that much fun (for me) to do magic depending on this stuff, nevertheless it HAS to be used once in a while when one wants to *kill* them.. Normal daily use, summertime in short sleeves aso, well, I wouldn't miss to be able to do what I like to do, therefor I prefer not to be dependant on the mentioned stuff and so I have to accept I miss a lot of clean and great effects...but that's the sacrifice one has to suffer with for the *art*'s and pleasures sake..
Learn a few things well.....this life is not long enough to do everything.....
( Words of wisdom from Albert Goshman ...it paid off for him - it might as well for YOU!!!- My own magic is styled after that motto... ) |
|||||||||
Mike Wild Inner circle NY, PA, TX, MA, FL, NC 1290 Posts |
I think you illustrate a good point Werner. Sometimes our flexibility is highly reliant upon external factors. The weather for example. I can't look normal and innocent if I'm wearing a long-sleave shirt, sweater (or jacket), etc. if everyone else is wearing shorts and tee-shirts. In those cases, some gaffs, gimmicks, devices cannot be employed, because they simply cannot be hidden. I didn't really think about that prior to now. 99% of the gimmicks I use are hand held as opposed to being fixed to clothing, but for the users of larger apparatus, I suppose some thought needs to be given to this issue prior to the performance.
Mike |
|||||||||
Karl Miller Elite user 494 Posts |
A lot of excellent information here. Heres my $.02:
For me, what it really comes down to is being adaptable. In my performances, I almost always have a coat on. The venues I tend to work in dictate that. I think that venue really dictates what kind of "fixed" apparatus you employ. If you do magic for friends and family exclusively, then putting on a coat everytime you perform is probably not the best idea. But, if you have an effect that would benefit from the use of such "fixed" apparatus, and the venue you work in enables you to employ that apparatus, go for it. But, it is also hard to not over-use fixed apparatus when your venue allows you to employ it. I have seen many performers that use a topit or holdout for every little thing they can think of, and after a while people start to associate certain actions with certain results, and it ceases to be magic. I believe that the smart combination of polished slieght of hand and gimmicks makes for some amazing magic. But if we become "attached" to a certain gimmick or apparatus, I believe the method becomes transparent. I believe in using gimmicks to create effects that would not be possible with slieght of hand or to clean up a slieght of hand effect. If an effect is possible with slieght of hand and the only reason a gimmick exists for that particular effect is to enable more people to do the effect, I will go for the slieght of hand method. But if the gimmick improves the effect in a large way, the I will go that route. I want to use the method that gives the greatest illusion of magic. If my venue allows me to use effects that require a coat, I will use some of those effects. But I can also work without a coat, as I have a completely different repertoire for those situations. All in all, for me, it is mostly about entertainment and audience inpact, but I also like to get satisfaction from my work. It is difficult to find a balance, but it is possible. |
|||||||||
nique Special user Singapore 940 Posts |
As with many strollers I perform a coins across with 4 coins and a [. In it of course (standard handling) there's lots of nesting and un-nesting. Halfway thru the routine, my expanded [ decided to become a locking one and the coin and it were stuck together (dropped the ***ed thing). I finished the routine with sleights, utilising the coin and it's new found buddy as one coin.
I guess gimmicks allow us to perform effects really cleanly and convincingly. I feel there's a method-effect ratio at times; with a [ the phases look really clean, without it they don't look that clean. But one's gimmicked and the other's not. So I guess it's up to the individual to decide on the best ratio he prefers to work with. That said, it's also good to be versed in the versions with sleights - as they can sometimes get you out of tight spots if your gimmicks aren't with you or they fail.
https://youtube.com/user/nateuqin
"ChairLess - A Chair Prediction" "Epique - A Mental Epic" "TAP - The Assignment Prediction" PM or email me for details: niquetan@gmail.com Reviews here: http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=462773&forum=303&13 https://m.facebook.com/niquetanmindreader/ www.niquetan.com |
|||||||||
Curtis Kam V.I.P. same as you, plus 3 and enough to make 3498 Posts |
Those who use a gimmick or a mechanical aid to solve every problem will never have any reason to investigate, and thereby discover, the full untapped potential of ordinary objects.
Look at the wonderful tools that now await our application. Do you think Kainoa's EG work, or (okay, I'll say it) Mickey Silver's SUV, would exist if they each stopped thinking once they saw a holdout? Most often, the sole benefit a gaff conveys is cleanliness. The hands can be shown empty and innocent at times when that otherwise would be impossible. That said, the next question is "how much difference does that extra degree of cleanliness make?" In my experience, the answer is usually, "not much". I routine my effects to keep the audience out of a frame of mind where they will notice, and therefore appreciate, cleanliness. After all, why get them to chase you just so you can run? Of course, there are some effects that cannot be done as effectively without a gaff. I still prefer the gaffed versions of the cig thru quarter and the coin in the bottle to the alternatives. And my personal favorite handling for the VCA requires a flipper, for reasons that have not yet been mentioned here.
Is THAT a PALMS OF STEEL 5 Banner I see? YARRRRGH! Please visit The Magic Bakery
|
|||||||||
Patrick Differ Inner circle 1540 Posts |
Method only matters in how it affects the effect. Darwin Ortiz.
Does it matter if you're gimmicked or not? You bet. Keep your audience in mind and find the best way to do the job.
Will you walk into my parlour? said the Spider to the Fly,
Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy; The way into my parlour is up a winding stair, And I've a many curious things to show when you are there. Oh no, no, said the little Fly, to ask me is in vain, For who goes up your winding stair -can ne'er come down again. |
|||||||||
Dougini Inner circle The Beautiful State Of Maine 7130 Posts |
Real coins require the skill to do the effect. A gaff is a shortcut to the same, or similar effect. The question arises as to "when" it is appropriate. My case may be different than most (-ahem- yes, I know..."as usual")...
After spending countless hours with my silver dollars, I find that all my gaffed coins are quarter and half-dollar sized. I'm a collector, and find that there are very few Eisenhower gaffs, short of an E ]...very few folding, flipper, mag/shimmed, chinese coins in that size (save for the wonderful new ones I am finding recently, complete with ])...etc. I'm fond of carrying a quarter ], and doing an impossible coins thru the table, using a shot glass. The gaff, in that case is necessary, plus, Lethal Tender is one I love. Consider that C/S/B, 3-Fly (sorry!), Coin In Bottle, Bite Out, are all TERRIFIC effects that by using a gaff, it can create the "impossible" aspect that sleight of hand ATTEMPTS to create. It is a given, that an SUV by itself is one of those "impossible" situations, and that is an argument AGAINST using gaffs, but in that case, one must learn that tool, and apply it. That could require years of practice to achieve, and well it should. Gaffs, like sleights, are tools. It's HOW one uses those tools to an end, that matters. I have a lot of unusual coin gaffs I'll never use, but are just a part of my collection. IMO, for a collector of magic, a good Schoolcraft, Lassen or Johnson gaff should be in EVERY collection. But, that's just me. Doug |
|||||||||
Mike Wild Inner circle NY, PA, TX, MA, FL, NC 1290 Posts |
RE: "Real coins require the skill to do the effect. A gaff is a shortcut to the same, or similar effect"
I'm not too sure I'd agree there Doug. A gimmick or gaff is not a shortcut to the same result that you would achieve using straight coins. If that were the case, the gimmick would be pointless... magic isn't a drag race, so shortcuts do nothing for you. A gimmick, IMO, should only be used if it serves a unique purpose, creates an illusion that's impossible to do otherwise, or takes an overly complicated routine and makes it "do-able" in real world scenarios. Going for short cuts to the same finish line is "gaff abuse", and needs to be stopped at all costs . I totally agree with everything else you wrote Best, Mike |
|||||||||
mike gallo Inner circle 1341 Posts |
Gaffs are great, heck...I've been known to use a few myself. But for gaffs to be truly effective...one must have the basic ability to perform sleight of hand. A good combination of sleight of hand and a few gaffed coins can be very very powerful! But if you are pulling gaff after gaffed coin trick out of little envelopes...well...who do you think is going to get credit for the magic?
Mike |
|||||||||
Dr. Faust Regular user Louisville, Kentucky 183 Posts |
This is all very simple. Gaffed coins produce some of the cleanest, most truly magical effects possible. There is nothing bad, less skillful, or less professional about using them whenever you can. After all, most of the best magic of any kind involves a gimmick. So, why should coin magic be held to any higher standard?
I do sleight-of-hand and gaffed coin magic equally well. However, it is only after a gaffed coin trick that I have a spectator say, "Now that was really magic!" After as-good-as-gets sleight-of-hand, I may have the same spectator say, "Now that was some good sleight-of-hand!" I don't want to be known for good sleight-of-hand. I want to be known for good magic. The fact is that even the best sleight-of-hand often involves moves that look a bit confusing, deceptive, complicated, and/or shifty to most careful observers. I'd rather have a spectator see something looking totally clean--so clean that they don't see anything fishy and, therefore assume, at least for a moment, that it is "really magic!" Magically Motivated (at any cost), Dr. Faust
"I have such sights to show you!"
|
|||||||||
Dougini Inner circle The Beautiful State Of Maine 7130 Posts |
Mike, you're right.."shortcut" was a poor choice of words. Now, while we're on this subject...
Now that silver dollars have become my favorites, especially Eisenhowers (1971/72), are the expanded ]'s by Johnson as good as the rest of their lineup? I saw a rather poor example (caved-in looking) of a Johnson Eisenhower, and thought $60 was not worth it. I don't like to buy a gaffed coin sight unseen. I am now thinking towards Schoolcraft/Lassen, but I don't think they do Eisenhowers, or...? I WOULD buy sight unseen from them, though. Mike Gallo said, "...A good combination of sleight of hand and a few gaffed coins can be very very powerful!" Man, you're not kidding! That's why I've started looking into Eisenhower gaffs! LOL! Doug |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Nothing up my sleeve... » » To Gimmick or Not to Gimmick (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 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 < |