Whoa, waitaminute. heh. I haven't confused anything at all, MK, we're not trying to define magic, after all. I asked, if it were real, what would you do.
I never said anything about "divine" magic. That's your definition, not mine. By your very mention of "divine" magic, you are already making an implication as to the nature or definition of "magic". I can see that perspective if I'd spelled it "magick" in my topic, but.. I meant magic in the classic conjuror sense of the word. Hopefully that allays any confusion.. ?

Frankly, in the world of the magician, who can saw people in half with not even a scar, or make cards magically transpose themselves in a deck or teleport to a wallet, or cut rope and restore it, or produce 20 coins from one, or none.. who can read minds, levitate objects, levitate themselves, make items vanish into thin air, etc, I would say there is really no effective difference between magic and superpowers. Afterall, what defense would superman have against somebody who could just wave their wand and make him vanish, or produce shard after shard of green kryponite to cling to him ? In that sense, magic might be the ultimate superpower.

And yes, frankly, I think the thread did go slightly astray with talk of spiritual magic and power and religion. I do not think LeLand was off base. Clearly no one here has the real magic they pretend to have, or you would not have to resort to tricks, gimmicks, double-lifts, chemicals, or any of that stuff that we do in the trade.
Please do not confuse effect with magic, in that sense. I really meant from a more conventional perspective, although yes, I posted in the bizarre section.
It's okay though, I understand where some of you are coming. For Baba and Sensei Strange, whom I know pretty well and somewhat well, spiritual magic is the only kind they really do. They're already doing what I asked in my post. They'd do exactly the same thing they're doing now, just without the physical "cheats" they need to rely on. And I look on that as a sign of maturity in their art, they've achieved consistancy and purpose. It doesn't help much when trying to brainstorm up new effects maybe, but .. lol

See, the true intent of the post was to brainstorm for rough ideas for new effects. It's a mental exercise. If I really could do these things, w/o having to worry about the methodology involved , what would I do ? Once you have an answer, you have a good, interesting effect to work with. It's the first step in the creative process to develop new material. Then you must work backward to figure out how to achieve that effect by non-supernatural means, because let's face it, you can't really levitate that ball, or make the domination of a card appear on your forearm without some "cheating", or most of the other numerous things magicians appear to do "for real".

There are exceptions: tarot readings, cold readings, these things are subjective, but in and of themselves don't constitute much in the way of "new" effects. They vary from sitter to sitter naturally, but in principle it's the same general premise.

I wanted to provide an environment to nurture interesting new ideas. For example, let's say I came up with an effect whereby I um.. I turned piece of white bread into rye bread. That would seem to be magic surely, but frankly, who cares ? What's the purpose ? Who wants to see that ? It's just not interesting enough. It's petty. It might come in handy if I really liked rye bread better than white bread, but you get the drift.
All in all, though, I'm happy with results of this thread - lots of profound discussion, some good insights, and no flames. Can't really ask for more than that.

Mystician - I do not wish to turn this into a debate. However, in your original posting you did say, and I quote, “It seems to me that a great many classic "magic tricks", those involving playing cards, coins, ropes, under the light of a truly divine power, are completely, utterly, banal. Trite. Just plain stupid.”

Did you not use the word “divine” within your statement?

In your response to me, you wrote “I never said anything about ‘divine’ magic. That's your definition, not mine. By your very mention of 'divine' magic, you are already making an implication as to the nature or definition of ‘magic’.”

Well, I never said anything about divine magic either. What I did write was “The believer/practitioner of such “magic” does not possess divine power(s) but may request assistance from that energy to bring about a certain result.”

The reason for that section of my post was to alleviate the confusion that I see when most people involved in performance magic attempt to discuss real magic. I did not intend to criticize you but decided to take the opportunity to clarify things and respond to what I believed you were asking. I apologize if I have offended you.

As far as whether magic is spelled with or without the final “k” makes little difference. After all, the topic of the post was “If magic were real - what would you do with it”. Perhaps we have a different definition of what real is.

As an aside, I did answer your topic title question as well as your posted questions. It is now apparent that the intent of your posting was to gather ideas in the realms of developing new tricks and not for what I had mistaken for a deep discussion of greater mysteries. Again, I must apologize. But, perhaps I may suggest that you read what has been presented by myself and others and increase your skills in developing a meaning that enhances the “tricks” you currently do.


Best of luck in your endeavors.

It is clear from the above discussion that we don’t all agree on what magic -- is or could be -- whether in a real or theatrical sense. Like religion and politics it is unlikely that we will reach a consensus on this issue. And that’s okay. I think there is a great deal here that can be used to help us improve our performances.

Mystician, I would like to thank you for starting this thread. It has led to some enlightening discussion. With all due respect, however, I think that the real value of this thread is not in looking at new effects but in examining how we perform our effects. More questions are raised than answers provided, but this it a good thing. If we ask hard questions about what we are doing, then our magic can only improve.

All to often we forget to ask ourselves the why? Why are we doing this effect? While I agree that throwing some bizarre patter around a classic trick does not necessarily save it from being trite, many of those same affects viewed in context, with the proper motivation of the performer can be profound. The simple vanish of a coin may seem banal if done just to be done. It is another matter entirely if the coin was just snatched by an unseen hand as a toll to allow a soul to cross the river Styx. The same can be said of card tricks. If a performer portrays someone with the paranormal ability to make a card lost in the deck keep reappearing, then it is less than impressive. After all, why would one do that. However with the proper motivation – telling the future, breaking a curse, what-have-you—it becomes something more.

I know that I am rambling. Point is, sometimes the questions are more important than the answers and some good ones have been raised here. Where does or magic come from? What is the performers motivation? What are his limitations?

I hope this thread continues in the vein of thoughtful (and respectful) discourse – on answering the above questions and more, as well as perhaps providing some fodder for new effects – rather than devolving into debates over semantics or who has the correct belief system.

Just-my-two-cents-worth

Dave

Hi MK,

OOPS!! * sigh *
No debate there, that's pretty open and shut.
I did use the word, divine, didn't I ? So that is clearly my fault for denying any use of the word. It's fine that you caught that, in fact, I'm glad you did. I hate when I contradict myself though :-(
Sorry about the confusion that caused. I didn't mean it in a spiritual sense, but as a synonym for "Godlike". That's probably why I don't even remember using the word - it was meant in a light manner, not to describe magic as an enlightening kind of spiritual gift so much as just, well, power. I often speak with my tongue in cheek. Maybe I ought to hold it in check
I didn't mean to sound argumentative, I just didn't realize where the perception was coming from, so to speak. Now that you've pointed that out, it makes sense to me now.
No offense was taken, though it might've read that way. And I thank you for clarifying matters !
Let me add that while not everyone follows the spelling of magic or magick as a rule, I find it's handy to help differeniate between the serious occult practice, and conjuroring.

Well, as Dave points out, it still lead to a quality thread here that many have participated in and enjoyed, so I have no regrets whatsoever. Quite the contrary, if the majority of you are getting more out of this thread via a discussion based on sudden spiritual enlightennment/abilities, or how we perform, by all means, please continue.
The thread has taken on a life of it's own, in a way, and I, for one, do not wish to stand in the way. Perhaps both perceptions can continue in parallel. For the most part, they have so far without major incident. Well .. until now
I know there was more to your post than that, but, I often post when things get slow at work, which usually doesn't last very long, and sometimes I only have so much time to reply or read, so I might address just one aspect for the time being, but I normally go back over things once I get home and dig into it deeper.

Dave, you are not rambling in the least. That was indeed part of the point of my post - coming up with effects that have a reason. If the power were real, I think we would do certain things, and not others. Both choices have a logic behind them that a normal "trick" might not reflect, a certain insight, lacking in an effect that's been created just because it can be done, or because I have a certain gimmick that I'm trying to get my money's worth out of.

I guess I must've done a really poor job of expressing myself this time, but at last everything is becoming clear - at least, for me.
I think I'll step back in the shadows for a bit though, hopefully I didn't just kill this thread.

Oh pooh.
I think I really did kill the thread.

Divine? Which divinity is acting? Can you imagine a routine that involves the aid of a few such entities, who are at this time involved in a conflict amongst themselves. Your intended demonstration could potentially become a skirmish.

Divine? Why not?

Faustus sold his soul to do real magic and ended up performing trite nonsense.

Yes magic is good

Every culture has a "trickster" as one of its gods or demigods.

If people could do real magic, I'm sure that there would be more than a few "tricksters."

Thinking more upon the subject, I'd like to be able to communicate in any language. Imagine the possibilities, I could read or write any type of code, understand computers, Ozzy, and even the in-jokes on message boards without hassle. I've always said that the real power lies in communication, and I'd definitely add this to my list of desired magical abilities.

Definitely ahead of shrinking an invisibility, but maybe second to locating lost objects.

Chris

If magic were real???
I just want to have the power to raise the dead... just that

What if they resent being raised?

Steve

This will sound corny, but just such an issue was raised in the TV series "Buffy the Vampire Slayer", which was actually a very well written show that garnered a lot of critical acclaim.
At the end of season 5, Buffy died. In the beginning of season 6, they brought her back - well, Willow did anyway, with her new-found uber witchy powers.
Her friends believed they'd rescued her from the bowels of hell - when in fact - they'd violently ripped her away from the embracing bliss of heaven, imposing upon her to awaken in a pitch black claustrophobic casket 6 feet under, from which she had to break out and claw her way up to the surface, and then, only to face the horrors of the "real" world all over again.

On the other hand, if sinnead just wants an army of mindless zombie slaves with which to take over the world, who cares what they think ?
Hackers are doing that all over the world right now, to countless home computers running the Windows operating system !!
--> -->

I would care what they think. I'd hate to raise an undead army just to have them declare me the enemy.

Steve

It’s been reported that Pepsi had an ad campaign which stated "Come Alive with Pepsi". When this was translated into Chinese, it became "Pepsi Brings Your Dead Ancestors Back To Life", and in German became "Come Out of the Grave with Pepsi".

As to how Pepsi should be used in this ritual -- well, I'm not sure. Perhaps you'll need to read the ingredients backwards. However, it may only work in China or Germany.

RE: Raising the dead

What about taking a CPR/AED class?

Chris

P.S.--To quote Herman Munster, "Sometimes dead is better."

P.P.S.--Apologies to Mystician. It was either the above or the re-hashing of one of my favorite Redd Fox jokes. I'm still enjoying the serious side of this thread.

Don't apologize to me silly - I like the humor !
I just didn't want the thread to turn into a "magic is real because the magic of a flower, is beautiful" kind of thing. Those who have no room for humor in their thinking have small minds indeed !

Geez! Got me thinking about "The Night of the Living Dead" and "Pet Sematary".

Yeah, of all the powers, I don't think that'd rank very high on my list, personally. Yuck.
But, perhaps sinnead's motivation is more.. personal.
Sorry if I'm prying, but you did mention it as your sole wish, which seems peculiarly focused.

BTW, you play blues guitar ? What kind, the Stevie Ray Vaughn style, or more "classic", BB King type stuff ?
Ask Babakali about the devil stuff, he'll sort that out for you. It's all the same thing - I love his outlook on life.

If I had real magic powers, I would then use my knowledge to dispel certain nasty social illusions that cause mass suffering. For example: money. Money in itself has no intrinsic value, other than the worth of the paper and ink that it is printed on, and yet it has such an all-encompassing hold over our lives, and most of our waking hours are spent chasing after this worthless symbol. We have replaced the true valuable (the rice and wheat that grow from the soil, the clean water that is essential to life and health, fresh air) with a paper symbol of exchange. Somehow we convinced ourselves that a pretty coloured paper with a picture on it is worth as much as a bowl of rice. (Try eating a dollar bill!) The true riches that sustain us (soil, water, air) are compromised. We are abstracting ourselves to death. This is a nasty mass illusion.

Based on that thought, I have twice performed this 'trick': showed a real five dollar bill (we no longer have one dollar bills in Canada), had it examined, and burnt it. When everyone waited for it to be restored, I said "That was the illusion; that silly piece of paper is actually worthless!"
Subversive magic. Gets a weird reaction. People were more disturbed by the burning of a piece of coloured paper than they were when I did sword-thru-neck to a spectator. Funny world we live in.

Todsky, I really like that subversive bill burn.

May I suggest that this would be a whole not more subversive if you did it with a hundred dollar bill, instead of a five...

Warm regards,

Caleb Strange.

RE: Raising the dead. I sometimes presents seances (I'd say fake seances, but that's redundant...) as though the entity being contacted does not wish to be disturbed. It's a classic literary device, often applied in other genres (notably, sci-fi -- what if the aliens aren't nice like E.T.?), and brings a nice edge to a pleasant little Day of the Dead gathering.

RE: Pyrokinesis. Sensei Strange, at the risk of being deleted for going off-topic, this is just the kind of debate I enjoy. First, however, the Zen master making the claim about knowledge (person "X" has "Y" power) has to explain how anything can be known if everything is an illusion. If there is no real, then there can be no knowledge, and claims about anything cannot be made. Of course, if claims are made, then the claimant is purporting to be enlightened and thereby showing himself to be a 'false Buddha' -- one to be 'cut down,' or disregarded as unenlightened.

Further, the person who recognizes a 'false Buddha' is also supposedly enlightened, proving himself to be a false Buddha, who then -- if recognized as false by someone else -- causes the process to repeat ad infinitum, eliminating all possibility of knowing anything.

I'm not sure how you're going to make a claim of knowledge from the Zen perspective, but I'd enjoy reading your thoughts on pyrokinesis.

Leland