On 2004-06-10 13:43, crashfreze wrote:
I know the subject of Blaine has been absolutely beaten to death and back. For that I apologize in advance. I would like to offer some insight into his success and the feelings other magicians have for Mr. Blaine.

The reason magician's do not like David Blaine is they feel many many more magicians are more deserving of his success. Magicians like Michael Ammar, Bill Malone, Dai Vernon, Ed Marlo, THESE should be the household names, not David Blaine.

First of all, David is a businessman. A very good one as well. He developed a plan to successfully market his magic to ABC executives and did so. So in other words Blaine marketed his product rather than focusing on making his product better than anyone else's.

To give you an example of this I have been asked the question before: can you make a hamburger better than mcdonalds? Yes of course, anyone can. But, can you create a more efficient business plan than the McDonalds corporation? No, I don't think so. But I don't go around screaming "no fair I can make better hamburgers than mcdonalds" which essentially is what the magic community is saying about David.

So here are a bunch of magicians claiming David does not deserve his success. On the other hand David created a great business plan, marketed it to ABC so I believe he DOES deserve his success, as is often the case, strategy is more important than product.

It's no accident McDonalds is the most successful and profitable food franchise in the world. So essentially I'm saying David Blaine is the McDonalds of magicians, and I definitely don't mean that in a bad way. David did not "get lucky" and fall into his success. And magician's have a problem with that. We should be congratulating David instead of tearing him down.

On 2004-09-22 06:23, Dr_Stephen_Midnight wrote:
>"They're just dumb stunts."

Some feel the same about magic, or about entertainment in general; a pointless activity that achieves nothing functional (how many Amish illusionists have we seen?)

>"But that doesn't mean I have to be interested in them."

No it doesn't, but that brings up a greater truth about stunts, about magic, and about life in general.

Importance and where we place interest is a matter of perspective. Most average Joes could not quote you the name of more than one magician (usually Houdini or Merlin).

That alone should deflate the egoes of most self-important magicians (especially escape artists, who have egos as big as Texas).

Strip away the religious beliefs and the self-directed philosophies and we're microbes on a cosmic speck clawing to maintain a pointless survival in a universe that is slowly expanding and unravelling at the molecular level. From that perspective, life itself is a joke and all our efforts an exercise in wheel-spinning. Guess what that says about everything we do or concern ourselves with...including magic?

Steve

On 2004-09-23 17:19, Dr_Stephen_Midnight wrote:
"I don't ask that everything in life be functional. I would like things that are not functional to be at least entertaining."

So...if it's not entertaining to YOU...it doesn't go for anyone?

Steve

On 2004-09-24 18:38, Dr_Stephen_Midnight wrote:
Well, first off, I wonder how far your denigration of "stupid stunts" goes; does it apply to all performers doing them...or just David Blaine (in which case it's not the stunt, but the man).

Harry Houdini spent an hour and a half in a sealed coffin in a swimming pool. The Amazing Randi did the same thing in the 1950s, staying down an extra hour. Years later, Randi broke a guinness record for being entombed in ice.

Do all extraordinary performances that do not involve productions, vanishes, transpositions, etc. constitute "stupid stunts?" If so, I'm afraid a large portion of the human populace are in opposition to your absolutist view.

For, if so, the feats of Houdini, The Wallendas, Petit, Karel Soucek, Evel Knievel and countless circus performers have been totally 'un-entertaining.'

Amazing!

As for 'real magic': I've seen illusions; I've yet to see REAL magic, but that's another issue.

Steve

On 2004-09-25 17:17, Dr_Stephen_Midnight wrote:
Oh, but before I move on, perhaps I should qualify the point I have been trying to make, since it doesn't seem to be registering.

My issue is not with whether or not you like or dislike stunts; if you don't, that's fine with me.

My issue is with the way you worded your opinion: "stupid stunts."

The term basically says two things:

1. You don't like the stunts. (perfectly fine; no problem there)

2. People who perform such stunts, and those who like such stunts, are STUPID. (an allegation that is both irrational and patently insulting to both the performers and those who enjoy what they do)

Now I'll move on.

Steve

On 2004-06-14 19:21, Midnight333 wrote:
I dislike David Blane for one simple fact> That he beat me to the punch. I wish I had thought to go to a magic store buy 200 dollars worth of easy to do magic and then market the hell out of it. He's not an artist, he's a business man. That's fine. don't give him all this credit for being a magician, he's not. He's some guy that found a niche then sold the f*** out of himself. By the way after all the levitations exposes that followed his premier, the balducci has become worthless. Oh by the way the other bad thing is that all you young kids should be inspired by the aformentions artists, not Blane. And to the gentleman ripping on those so called "pretty boy" magicians. Don't hate. Just because they get to be in close proximity to ultra hot girls and you are not doesn't mean one day that you cant. Don't hate the magic player, hate the magic game.