You know, Richard is probably flattered. The fact is that, as a copy, no one will ever be as good as the original. And the poor guy working for tips probably needs to make a living, fast, and it was probably just easier for him to copy Richard than to come up with his own presentations and all that.

Anabelle

There is a dangerous trend in the magician’s vocabulary when we use the word “Stolen” or “steal” so readily. This word seems batted about whenever someone sees someone performing something that has appeared on a teaching video.

Stealing is theft and theft is the taking or use of property (intellectual or otherwise) without the expressed permission of the owner of that property. So someone using material with permission IS NOT stealing. While copying purchased published material verbatim might be distasteful to the more creative, it in no way constitutes theft.

If you are performing an effect invented by someone else, especially with mentalism, there is a large portion of the presentation that MUST be performed as demonstrated. The psychological aspects, the moves and language use in performance are often germane to the successful performance of the effect. These nuances are included because in the teachers experience they are what make the effect work. You are paying for the work that has gone into the material. Using the little touches that only working material in front of live audiences can yield makes perfect sense. If it weren’t perceived as important then instructional video and literature would simply contain method without performance scripting! My father used to call this “using other peoples brains” or “learning experience from the experienced”. This isn’t stealing if the teacher gives or sells you this knowledge. It is a gift or a purchase, neither of which constitutes theft.

Copying someone’s act or material without permission simply because you find it clever or cool IS theft.

So now that that’s clear, the question is one of style. While it may be fine to copy the elements of the effect that make it a successful effect, totally imitating the style and mannerisms of another performer is exactly that; imitation. It’s like you doing Rodney Dangerfield or Elvis, you are simply a copy of the original. That’s a decision that you must make as a performer. Do you want to be YOU performing an effect or do you want to be a copy of someone else? When actors play a role they don’t rewrite the script, but the interpret the character with the help of the director. While I can recite lines from Hamlet, I can’t be Sir Lawrence Olivier; therefore I must be myself or else be seen as a poor imitation of someone else.

I have just read this thread and, yes Annabelle, I am flattered! Certainly anyone who buys my videos has a right to use anything (including the patter) in them that they like. But yes, as so many have pointed out, what is good for me may not be the best for you.

I know I have written this before (God knows I have been doing so much writing lately that I forget where I wrote what!), but let me give some advice here.

When I find a routine I like, I take it as written (or as viewed) and practice it that way first. If it requires an audience, my poor family has to put up with it! Then I forget it for a few weeks and then go back to it DOING MY BEST TO BELIEVE I INVENTED THE ROUTINE MYSELF. Then I work on it the same way I would work on one of my own. I tear it apart, think of different angles and, most importantly, think of what it means to the audience. I.E. what is there in the effect that would make them want to see it! Usually, after anywhere from a month to years, what finally is developed is so entirely different that I really can call it my own.

You have to just do two things to succeed in magic. First, make sure you do your best to make yourself the best person you can be. Second, be yourself!

Merry Christmas to all my friends and have a wonderful Holiday!

Richard

Some years ago, I watched a local performer do a Copperfield routine line for line. This was “stolen” from a TV special. He got accolades from the local ticket purchasers. Later, he tried to do some original stuff and he bombed. His greatest skill was imitating David. This act generated a lot of conversation in the magic community and the final result was that he continued doing David’s act and making good money. Most of the rest of us decided to develop our own act ( and to make less money while doing it).

Most of my present act is inspired by Richard Osterlind or Banachek. Magicians who have seen the original and my version, did not recognize that the routines were the same. The presentations are very different. I do this because I enjoy doing it. I am not a creative person, so I must start with someone else’s concept. But then I make it mine. It is fun, but it is also time consuming. I have the luxury of having the time to develop my routines. The money that I get for performing is not important to me. I have a good job that pays all my bills and leaves enough to buy some toys. If I were trying to earn a living and I was working the streets, I suspect I would be tempted to sacrifice the effort to personalize the act in return for some quick cash. The hungry performer may prostitute himself to pay the rent. I am thankful that I have the freedom to spend a lot of time working on routines before they go in front of a paying audience. I enjoy devloping the routines almost as much as performing them. I love what I do! I pity those who do not get the joy of making a routine truely their own, but I won't throw stones.

Viano

Well said!

Unfortunately, some people have the creativity of a photocopier!

As has been said, it takes time to develop a routine from something "canned" until it becomes "your own". In my experience,there is no better way to make that happen than working the routine in front of an audience. This is not to be confused with putting in the practice time to become competent in presenting the effect, but I am most inspired and develop the best jokes and patter when playing with an audience and being in "the moment" or "the zone" or whatever you'd like to call it. No amount of practice can take the place of stage time. I applaud the fellow for getting out there and performing. The author of this thread probably caught this person at the beginning of the process. In time he will likely personalize his presentation. At least he's doing something with the material which is what I believe Richard had intended.

Magicruss:

That is exactly right. Get out there do as many shows in front of a live audience even cloned material and you will be way ahead of those who hesitate and wait till they are original...Its the quickest way forward.

Shrink
The guy is out there doing it he deserves credit for that......five years from now who knows he may be famous.

You may well have caught the guy in the middle of the creative process. How can you tell WHY Richards words and moves are so perfect unless you experience them from the inside? Can you just assume your experience and knowledge are enough to understand the excellence?

Once you understand the excellence, you can move, tweak, develope the effects with a new understanding. My assumption would be that if he is doing street magic for long...many many show a day for many many days and weeks...he will either:

•1: Freeze into the comfortable rote style of presentation and imitation and never develope further.

or 2: Allow the spontaneity and the audience to morph the routines, in their own time, into his own personal presentations, with his own solid discoveries, and thus grow.

But, finally, IMHO,I would add this:

He is out doing it, and not being an armchair philosopher. More power to him. If he is not blowing the effects, ( and if he is good enough a presenter to have crowds cheering for him, that is a testament to both Osterlind's material AND his ability to perform.) More power to him. Think I'll go see the boy! Another demo of Richard's stuff would be nice to see.

I bet you guys here never know what is imitation until you see this indonesian magician named Deddy Corbuzier.........sounds familiar?!...David....Copperfield?@?
So he imitate David?!
No!
He instead imitate our greatest mentalist......Max Maven,if you wanna see how great he managed to imitate him, check these out

http://www.suaramerdeka.com/harian/0302/24/nas7.htm
http://www.kompas.com/gayahidup/news/0302/23/023322.htm
http://www.corbuzier.com/

or look for his name in google,you will find out more,i am sure for some magic community here,this is not a news,but this is still for some magician here I believe.If I am Max Maven's fan in Indonesia,i will just kill him....kidding.
BUt now,you know what's the ultimate imitation in magician!!and yet,he is the most famous magician in Indonesia,well paid,making big money and nobody knows he is actually imitating Max Maven,if Phil XXX is around reading this thread,i am sure he has something to complain though!(probably David will too)

Hey MagoStevo.

There seem to be some creative possibilities there. Combining the name of David Copperfield and imitating the look of Max Maven (Or maybe he's imitating Mickey M***e but doesn't want to get sued?) is interesting in itself and raises even more interesting questions.

Is he using Copperfield's name only and Max Maven's look and material?
Or.. is he actually using Copperfield's name while imitating Max Maven doing Copperfield's act? Now that might be worth a look!

The magic community in general seems to consist of creators, performers and sometimes a combination of the two. This performer may not be the creative type and so regurgitating the script verbatim may be his only option for performing. I do not condone this approach in any way whatsoever but, the situation has to be viewed from all perspectives. He may even have learning difficulties or special needs in some form or other. It seems hard to believe with the enormity of the internet that a bespoke presentation can’t be easily researched. Imitating a script is one thing but, timing, body language, personality, showmanship and rapport are another.