1880: "This here tellyphone contraption? Who needs it! We got us the tellygraph!"
1890: "The horseless carriage? Why, it's just a passing fad!"
1910: "Flying machines! They're mad! These things will never last the decade!"
1940: "Men flying into space? Don't be ridiculous! Who'd be stupid enough to try that?"
1950: "Music? Not hardly! This Rock & Roll foolishness will fade as soon as these youngun's get a taste of reality!"
1970: "Oil shortage? What nonsense is this. We have enough oil to last well into the next millennium!
1990: "Internet? Who needs this Internet? We have a perfectly good library right here in town!"
2008: "YouTube is a wasteland for kid's with too much time on their hands. What good is it?"

I've watched Eric's videos and I'm not sure I see anything wrong here. Nothing I've seen so far can't be found in any well-stocked county or school library, any decent bookstore or at countless sites scattered throughout the Internet. Ellusionist sold far, far more revealing secrets than this to the general public during the Celebracadabra series. Anyone with thirty bucks in his pocket can order any magic video online. Where is that outcry? Everything Eric's taught (that I've watched, so far) is readily available free of charge or at a modest cost in countless venues to the person willing to seek it out.

As Eric said, the online video is a totally new venue and market. Why shouldn't someone take what hundreds are doing for free and try to reach a new market in an innovative way? He certainly isn't the first to "expose" the weaker secrets of magic in order to draw interested students to his door for deeper studies - beginning with Harlan Tarbell, Percy Abbott and Lou Tannen.

How many magicians cried foul when the Tarbell lessons were sold through public magazines and comic books. Unlike other "acceptable" magic courses which placed a greater emphasis on self-working illusions (slum magic), Tarbell focused on fundamental drills and practice sessions involving body position, movement, and sleight-of-hand techniques. He exposed the real, innermost techniques and principles to the general public for a few pennies per lesson. The shame! And yet today we worship these same volumes as one of our dearest magical Canons.

Take a serious look at what Eric is offering before showing your "dang whippersnapper" persona. The "secrets" of magic no longer carry the importance that they once did. Presentation and entertainment quality are the new keystones to our art. It's a new age and we need to keep pace or die out. Today, we practically worship the very Tarbell Books that magicians heartily condemned in the 1930's. What may history one day say of Eric Paul's YouTube pitch?

Skip,

a very disappointing approach you have taken here. So much so I think the I.B.M. should look into your views since your represent them here on the Café.

What you are doing is condoning the method of Eric's exposure. Your poor choice of what deciding what is weak in actuality shows your own Weakness for the respect of other performers. Your insult of what appears to be an older generation "persona" as you put it has been the persona that has kept classics alive and well.

A lot of the classic secrets, remain just that secret. If you think you know them all, then you missed a huge history lesson in magic. There are quite a few classics from Derek Dingle that he passed onto just a handful of us and to this day we still perform them and do not make them public. Routines done for small venues. As a respect we do not expose or use them to profiteer from.

From the videos, the whole pitch comes off as some Carney Con and he publicly exposes to drive traffic to his site. Once on his site you have 2 options A. Fill in your first name and email address or B. Leave. Sites like this generally only want a first name and email address to build an email database to sell to companys. But I'm sure you don't mind spam.

Most people are unaware of tactics used by these "Improve your business and image" type sites. I guess the "dang whippersnapper" generation is just a step ahead of the games out there and God forbid us if we Expose them for what they are!

I'm very curious to how I.B.M. will react to your support of public exposure.

After reading this forum I had all kinds of things I wanted to say but I'm not. The things I wanted to say were already said by people far more experienced than me. I will say this though, the world is definitely changing but I guess I'm still "old school" when it comes to magic.

"A good magician never tells the secret".

Works for me and always will.

Mysto9 your thinking is right on the money. Some of these postings tell me future magic is in grave danger. Methods, secrets whatever you want to call them are of the upmost importance. For anyone involved in magic for any length of time to say that 'the secrets of magic no longer carry the importance that they once did', tells me that there are some very uneducated and I can even go so far as to say dense people now involved in this art. This particular person even happens to be part of the I.B.M. forum staff. PATHETIC.

I've already fowarded a link and a secure pdf document of his postings to the I.B.M. President. As I mentioned earlier I'm curious as to how the I.B.M. feels about this and the representation by Skippy.

If the I.B.M. supports and backs his post, then Magic is far worse off than I ever imagined.

I guess I'm just too simple of a person to understand the thinking of some of these people. I still believe in good ol right and wrong. Dannydoyle said it pretty well in his post:

"While the line (between right and wrong) may be thin, it is quite clearly delineated. Right and wrong are right and wrong, people muddle them up for their own purposes. But right and wrong are VERY clear." I agree totally.

Wandboy said "For anyone involved in magic for any length of time to say that 'the secrets of magic no longer carry the importance that they once did', tells me that there are some very uneducated and I can even go so far as to say dense people now involved in this art." You got that right!

Jake, man what can I say? You sure do have a way with words!

Skip Way, If the I.B.M. does support and backs your post, then Magic IS definitely far worse off than I ever imagined.

Eric Paul, you really shouldn't come to a gun fight with just a knife. And a dull one at that...

Elegantly put, Jonathan.

Jake, I understand completely and I await Pres. Caesar's response - provided you sent my entire post in context. In fact, I'll also send it along to the exec board and ask their advice. Fair is fair.

All I ask in return is that you show me just one of Eric's "exposure" videos that can't be found in any decent public bookstore or library. If Eric has exposed a secret that is proprietary or is not already commonly and readily available, then I've missed it and I'll openly agree with you. Without that, in my personal opinion, he's done no more harm than anyone who has ever written an Easy-To-Do magic book for the public.

We each have opinions and I am in no way suggesting that anyone here is wrong and I'm right. I'm more than willing to be proven wrong and backstep. Let's just prove the offense before we condemn one for it. In my opinion, teaching a "secret" that has been openly and publicly available for decades is not exposure.

Fair is fair, but any support of exposure is unacceptable. At least by my standards.

As to the justification that an effect is decades old in no way justify exposing it publicly, especially when there are quite a few peformers still doing it. Very few performers I know didn't have a clue that there was a version of the cut and restored rope from the 40's called the Panama Rope Mystery. Many asked how it was done and I kept the effect to myself and gave them the responsibility of searching it out in a certain book.

Here are some age old effects, 4 Queens, Miracle Mirror, Professors Nightmare, Chop Cup, the list could go on. The question I pose before you is, would it be ok for RNT II to expose these on YouTube to drive people to our website to profit from the exposure? I believe most know what my stance on this question is, or at least I would hope so.

Eric's dancing here claiming hidden agenda, what a farce, much like his website in my opinion. Eric further remarks by putting words into Danny Doyle's mouth and saying that the statements are "Acusitory". Well exposure is exposure, there is no accusations being made, he has posted exposing videos on effects that are still in use by quite a few performers, ruining the impact not only for the performer but people who have not seen the effect.

As a representative of I.B.M. I would think you would have a bit more respect for older people in the field of Magic, rather than reffering to us as a "whippersnapper" persona. That was a slap in the face to all of us that have been in the craft for any lengthly amount of time and an insult to our moral views on exposure.

Finally there is a difference between teaching and exposing. My youngest son is truely not interested in performing or the art, but wants to know how the effects I do are accomplished. I don't even expose to my youngster. My daughter on the other hand is not only enthusiastic about learning to perform and create, so I am teaching her. There is a definate distinction between teaching and exposing.

How many kids or people just "happen" to be browsing through the magic section in their local library? Well almost none.

How many just "happen" to browse you tube? Well millions a minute.

If this is not an important distinction between your local library and you tube I am not sure what is.

Why are the books in the library? For educational purposes.

Why is Eric putting out his stuff on You Tube? Naturally to drive traffic to his site. Again a stark and stunning difference.

As for Tarbell, he sold those courses did he not? He did not give them away to millions, on the off chance that a few would buy.

Again taking no position, only answering and asking questions is all.

Yes, but you aren't likely going to be looking at some "guy gets hit in the junk with a football" videos and find any exposed magic videos in the related section.

Not that they are exactly the same (even though there are some similarities) but in the 90's pro wrestling was exposed as being a "work" (meaning they aren't actual athletic competitions) by the largest wrestling company in the world and they went on to having their most prosperous period ever.

Just saying, is all.

Josh, you continue to make my point I thank you.

You're all still missing the point here. The Internet is here. Online videos are here. YouTube is here. Real YouTube exposure of true proprietary effects was happening long before Eric put his videos up. There is nothing any of us can do to stop it, deter it, deflect it or change it.

In Eric's defense, no one has yet presented a single one of Eric's videos that exposes a proprietary secret that isn't readily and easily accessible to the public. You can't expose what has already been laid bare.

The question is: Do we approach this new and inevitable medium as besieged artists who helplessly and ineffectively bemoan any and all cursed exposure or do we approach it as businessmen and use publicly available effects to attract a generation enraptured with the medium? Once you draw the interest with "library secrets" and have their attention THEN you can teach them the ethics of magic, the true techniques and the sound principles behind the secrecy and honor codes...the real side of the art. If you can draw a profit from the process, that's good business.

And my "Whippersnapper" comment, Jake, was meant for those who see change as an evil scourge upon mankind. Like it or not, YouTube and sites like it are here and it is not going away. We can choose to accept this fact and change our methods and business philosophies to embrace this new medium and the generation it embodies or we can fall behind while men like Eric explore it; with all the trials, errors, successes and failures associated with reaching out to new frontiers. If Eric erred here, at least he did so while trying to push forward.

Skip,

All the secrets are readily available. Some just need more effort and determination to seek them out. This alone deters the general public.

Selling a book to a student of magic is not wrong. That student has made an investment of time and money. All that is missing in this case and that is what makes what Eric has done, wrong.

Pardon me, but I think that there is a reasonable debate going on here.

I think, if you'll forgive me, that you might consider that just because some of us have yet to participate in the thread does not mean that we aren't reading it, so to withdraw yourself from the debate makes no sense. Are you assuming that I am closed to a reasonable viewpoint? Are you sure about that?

I find the "you people don't listen, I'm leaving this thread to the wolves" argument just a little bit short-sighted. There are many more readers than posters in any given thread.

No reason to give up just yet.

To be honest, I have kind of mixed feelings.

What makes it OK, and what makes it wrong?

At what point does teaching become exposure?

Why is a print book or hard copy DVD OK, but online video wrong?

What about in print on a website?

What about a PDF book, or downloadable page?

How is online video worse than print?

How is it different from learning from a DVD?

I know that Eric was very careful to choose very old public domain tricks.

Do you have to charge a fee to make it ok to learn the secret?

Why is free access wrong?

Then what about Al's point of mentoring for free on the thread in the little darlings section?

What about magic clubs for kids (even by mail, or email)? BTW, a really good online magic club is run by Murray Hatfield. Each month he sends a one-page PDF teaching a trick. He also points them to something they could buy online at his magic shop. I've also seen well-fun magic clubs for kids, that send them a monthly newsletter teaching them a trick.

What about all of the magicians who gave away Ed Harris teach a trick leaflets over the years?

What about magic books and magic kits that are given away as gifts, rather than bought?

Who decides what is crossing the line? Some magicians on this thread don't like magicians selling tricks and magic books BOR. Some magicians see it as ok.

What about the magic classes that a parent or child care centre pays for, but the children aren't really there because they want to learn to perform magic.

For me, the weakest point of teaching online, is that the idea of keeping the secret (that the secret and mystery is part of the entertainment value) is a little lost on the students. It does have the danger of becoming all about learning the secrets, rather than learning how to perform magic.

- Donald

P.S. Someone suggested that Eric is harvesting the list to sell to spammers. However, he states this right on his website:


Oops! A typo.



Should be...

You're absolutely right, Stone. Thanks.



I don't disagree with you at all, RJ...and thanks for the rational approach. I agree that the effort deters the mass majority of the general public. But, the point is that the information is there for those who want it bad enough to look for it. It's already "exposed" into the public eye.

So, Eric has carried that information into the mainstream in order to build a subscription base of YouTube magic fans and students. A subscription base that may eventually translate into new customers for his product line. A base that may eventually lead to fresh new blood for the IBM, SAM, SYM and MYI.

I doubt also that the mass majority of YouTube surfers are aware of Eric's videos and could care less. Sure, he'll draw some looky-loos and so-that's-how-they-do-it types...but is he harming magic by bringing common "secrets" into the mainstream or increasing magic's visibility and value as a hobby?

That's really all I'm asking? Calmly and reasonably...

Skip, the idea that the internet is here is sort of silly bud. Guns are here, drugs are here, prostetution is here, you see where I am going I am sure.

I see your point, that the secrets are "out" and he did not put them out but since they are "out" what harm is there in his doing this. At least I think that sort of sums up your position as it comes across to me.

Now question time.

Can a victim of a crime not be a victim again? The house is already open, I didn't "break in" it was open.

Is something "right" just because it has been done before?

Just because something is going in one direction, does that mean it can not be worked properly into another?

Does whining and moaning about "exposure" help, or does it hurt just a little?

As I said I am neutral, just want the debate to be had is all.

Enjoying this discussion also. I think my thought runs along the "having to search out" the info., or pay for it (to be delivered). Some think that even selling magic effects BOR is "exposing", or that only "certain" effects should be sold. Hey Danny, it's like the old joke that ends with "what sort of person do you think I am?? Answer is: "That, we already know, we are only negotiating the price now!"

The giant dollar, the Ed Harris flyers, the 2 card monte, I agree with the comments, this is truly exposure also! BUT........................????

Well, guess I will just have to keep reading this thread to see where it goes!

B

Ahh, Danny... You know I respect you highly and I believe that you wish, as I do, that magic was still dispensed from master to novice in those quiet inner sanctums common to the magic shops and clubs of old. But those days are long, long gone, my friend. No amount of prodding and stuffing will ever reseal that Pandora's box. We're faced with a new millennium and new media.

As pro's we are faced with either sitting in our rocking chairs on the ol' front porch complaining about these newfangled ideas passing us by or stepping out and developing new ways of meeting these new and daunting challenges head on. For better or worse, Eric has leapt off of the porch and landed smack into the middle of it all.

Our primary weapon against those who openly flaunt and abuse our vital secrets is through education and creating a sense of identity. One of the goals of MYI and SYM is to provide a structured resource under accomplished "masters" through which the Internet generation can learn not only the secrets, but the ethics, history and fraternal pride of the magic arts. To draw these curious few into these programs requires, for lack of a better word, bait. That "bait" is what Eric, I and every magician who creates, sells or gives away less-than-original BOR magic books, DVD's, flyers and kits consider to be the "Public Accessible" and fair game secrets of magic.

Okay. Eric's reasons may be more mercenary, but my question remains...what exactly has he exposed that has caused irreparable harm to the art of magic that warrants ruthlessly burning him at the stake of public opinion? No one seems able or willing to provide a specific answer to that one question. Until that one question is definitively and specifically answered, this entire thread stands moot because no victim exists, no house is broken, no wrong was done, no crime was committed and no offense was tendered.

Geesh, you guys are making m'wee brain hurt!