We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » What does the audience want to see? (11 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
8481 Posts

Profile of funsway
I have dealt with this problem all of my life -- one reason I decided to NOT become a performer for entertainment.
I have a failing of becoming too interested in making the effect perfect rather than allowing my audience to be able to supply the rational armament to justify the acceptance of result.

This applies to selling, group motivation, teaching, leadership, etc in addition to the performing arts. It is more than just allowing them to enjoy the journey --
is it allowing them to participate in the experience of the having something different in their life.

Many people seek entertainment as an alternative to boredom, but will remember the effect because they feel better about themselves as a result of the time spent.

Mnay come to a Mentalism demonstration with an expectation of having an a priori belief about extraordinary abilities confirmed, i.e the result of the show is never in question.

They will arrive at that destination with or without you. The degree of fulfillment and the rewards they gain from the confirmation will depend on engaging them in the process of confirmation.

Yes, once they are "with you" it is possible to introduce new goals or expectations -- a cyclical journey.

By analogy, the outcome of a mystery novel may never be in doubt. It is the building of suspense and matching minds with the hero that entertains.

Your audience may WANT to be entertained. What they NEED is validation that they are alive and important -- if only for a moment of fantasy.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst



ShareBooks at www.eversway.com * questions at funsway@eversway.com
WDavis
View Profile
Inner circle
1273 Posts

Profile of WDavis
Kevin,

Thank you for your reply, yes you are correct there is a process for strategic planning as well as procedures, but policy defines what we will and will not do. As such the policy exists prior to the vision and process as we've matures. Everyone has an inherent policy within them some more defined than others.

For example, to keep within the context of mentalism and performing,

A performer so another do a Sherlock style reading with a great response from participant. Now he wants to do readings,
His internal policy may not permit certain types due to religious and moral beliefs.

Or it could be the performer did a spirit based reading and the mentalist of question was opposed to it as it was contrary to his internal policy.

I'm not trying to have a chicken egg argument here, as the internal policy of an individual is inherent and developed over the course of ones life and it can be argued that those decisions are the process to create the internal policy... Etc etc.

What I am saying is most due the following

Ready
Fire (process)
Aim (policy)

I am suggesting we actually do this
Ready
Aim (policy)
Fire (process)

The success rate of a better outcome will be higher since there is congruency
Mark_Chandaue
View Profile
Inner circle
Essex UK
3354 Posts

Profile of Mark_Chandaue
Process is not key character is key!

Character drives the policy and the policy drives the process.

Bottom line is that if they don't find the character like-able they won't give a rats *** about the process.

What does the audience want to see? Get all your ducks in a row and the answer is ...... YOU!!

Mark
Harpacrown is available from
http://www.harpacrown.co.uk
Sealegs
View Profile
Inner circle
The UK, Portsmouth
2555 Posts

Profile of Sealegs
I agree that character and the full understanding of who you are on stage is the foundation stone and at the core of anything else you might do in performance. It sets the framework for every aspect of your performance and it's what the audience will be attracted to... or put off by.

But the thread was asking if, "the audience wants to see you do mentalism more than they want to see you give the result."

So while I agree with what you've said, it doesn't feel that what you've said really engages with, or sheds any light on the actual topic. Smile

Maybe I've got it wrong, but I read the opening post's statement as a suggestion that mentalists would benefit from showing the internal process or processes that the mentalist is (supposedly) applying. It's implying that, by utilising this aspect of what the mentalist does, as a vehicle for the performer's character to engage and entertain an audience, (rather than simply relying on the character's presentation of the procedure and outcome of routines that apparently utilise these otherwise unseen and mysterious processes) the mentalist will tap into something that audiences find inherently compelling and find that they have an extra string to their mentalists' bow.... and that this is likely to be more interesting and entertaining for an audience than the successful and astonishing (character driven) outcome of whatever routine might be being performed.

Of course a performers character will determine whether the approach of 'exposing' the process is a good fit. And it will be your character that determines how and to what degree such a tactic gets applied. But even if a performer has a well formed character it might not occur to them that this is an avenue for their character to exploit. It seems to me that this is what the opening post's firing shot and this thread in general is/was about.

Just my opinion.
Neal Austin

"The golden rule is that there are no golden rules." G.B. Shaw
Philemon Vanderbeck
View Profile
Inner circle
Seattle, WA
4161 Posts

Profile of Philemon Vanderbeck
Quote:
On Jan 15, 2016, Lemniscate wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 15, 2016, Philemon Vanderbeck wrote:
As the oft-repeated quote says, "It's the journey, not the destination."


What's a journey without a destination? Seriously. That's a common question to introduce philosophical arguments (at least in my experience). The interesting thing is the answer differs on the type of philosophical argument you want to try.



I appreciate your well-reasoned critique of my short contribution.

Certainly the performer must have a destination in mind, otherwise the journey is just aimless wandering, which wouldn't be entertaining.

However, the destination is not what will make or break a presentation. As in all good storytelling, the destination is simply the period at the end of the sentence. It's how you craft the words before the final punctuation that is the art of writing.

For example, consider my "Nature of Fate" routine, which is a 5-minute die box routine. At the end, what I have I done? I merely caused an over-sized die to teleport from a strange box to a hat. It's all the by-play beforehand that makes this routine. I pontificate over the debate of free will versus predestination, using the props as allegories for my message. Ultimately, the trick itself is nothing special, it's the entire build-up that's the entertaining component, and what the audience will remember (and mull over) after the show is concluded.

We should always strive to have our magic to have a meaning, otherwise we're just doing cheap tricks and are fooling no one but ourselves.
Professor Philemon Vanderbeck
That Creepy Magician
"I use my sixth sense to create the illusion of possessing the other five."
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
8481 Posts

Profile of funsway
Early on I was taught that all magic effects are allegorical to real life in the mind of a spectator.
The conquering of the impossible even extends to the desire to conquer death, or the hope that life might be better if something is changed.

Our body's destination is the same -- a hole in the ground. We hope that out life's journey might influence an impossible result of life after death for our spirit.

Thus, the obvious result of an effect might not be as important as the magical one and the importance of the journey.

Old fashion thinking I am sure, but some in your audience may feel that way. What thoughts do they take away?

What they want to see is confirmation that what they can get more out of life than what they now have -- or at least hope.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst



ShareBooks at www.eversway.com * questions at funsway@eversway.com
mindpunisher
View Profile
Inner circle
6124 Posts

Profile of mindpunisher
I don't agree with the original post. Audiences want results. The whole process is a result. They want to feel they have seen something amazing and inexplicable. They want the boundaries of reality to be temorarily blown apart. They don't get the full result with any of the steps left out. If someone entertainingly presents a process with no result you will get disapointment which is not what hey paid for.
Michael Zarek
View Profile
Special user
Sweden
910 Posts

Profile of Michael Zarek
Both process and result is important, audience want to see an engaging performance.
Most of the things in this thread are either obvious or wrong, also isn't it a bit late for this kind of discussion? Are we gonna come to a conclusion that we've been doing it wrong for all these years?

Technically might be, couse 95% of mentalists are rather ****...
Reader discretion is advised.
Robb
View Profile
Inner circle
1270 Posts

Profile of Robb
Quote:
On Jan 15, 2016, saysold1 wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 14, 2016, WDavis wrote:
I disagree. Process is not key! Proper presentation of the process is . People want to be walked thru, but walk them thru in away that makes it seem they know whats going on in a way that fits your premise/abitlity. This way they don't have to think about it.

if process was key, then everyone would be entertained by calculation based effects. But in the end no one is entertained by math effects that go like this:

ok think of a number add the digits together to get a single digit. do you have that? great, now take the derivative of that number and write it down so we can keep everyone honest.

Ready?

ok the number you wrote down is zero, right? of course, I knew the answer because there was zero chance of this being entertaining.

-Walter


I disagree with your disagreement.

You are splitting hairs - which sounds impressive.

The process is surely the key - but the key is making the process interesting.


Dead on.
Robb
View Profile
Inner circle
1270 Posts

Profile of Robb
Every post so far on this thread makes a good point... They're all correct in a sense.
John C
View Profile
Eternal Order
I THINK therefore I wrote
11554 Posts

Profile of John C
Quote:
On Jan 15, 2016, saysold1 wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 14, 2016, WDavis wrote:
I disagree. Process is not key! Proper presentation of the process is . People want to be walked thru, but walk them thru in away that makes it seem they know whats going on in a way that fits your premise/abitlity. This way they don't have to think about it.

if process was key, then everyone would be entertained by calculation based effects. But in the end no one is entertained by math effects that go like this:

ok think of a number add the digits together to get a single digit. do you have that? great, now take the derivative of that number and write it down so we can keep everyone honest.

Ready?

ok the number you wrote down is zero, right? of course, I knew the answer because there was zero chance of this being entertaining.

-Walter


I disagree with your disagreement.

You are splitting hairs - which sounds impressive.

The process is surely the key - but the key is making the process interesting.


But if he was splitting hairs then dividing by the square root of 8 and subtracting the derivative of X that....

I think it all matters you MUST have a result. Often if the result is impressive enough they forget about the process. As long as they understood the process. Or if we as the facilitators properly - or NOT - rephrase it in the end then....
The ULTIMATE Routine Series: rebirth soon!
Sealegs
View Profile
Inner circle
The UK, Portsmouth
2555 Posts

Profile of Sealegs
My wife who has no real interest in magic or mentalism was with me at a show recently where she saw a (reasonably well known and established) mentalist working. Interestingly she saw straight through the main big effects so the end result really meant nothing to her. (She also seemed to completely miss the smaller effects along the way saying that the mentalist didn't give them any importance and so neither did she!)

But... She really liked the performer and how he engaged the audience and so was (to my eyes) bizarrely entertained by him and enjoyed what he did. While it's obviously better to have an end result that astonishes, on this occasion, for her, the non ending didn't entirely blight the presentation. She found the character, the process and the procedure engaging. I'm sure had she not seen through the modus operandi she would have enjoyed it more but still .... Smile

I'm not advocating this as a model to work by but it was interesting none the less and seems pertinent to this thread. ::
Neal Austin

"The golden rule is that there are no golden rules." G.B. Shaw
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » What does the audience want to see? (11 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2019 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.19 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL