I do not trust Chu's Magic!
Why? Because they are SPAMMERS!
I have never bought a single item from Chu's Magic. I never even heard of them until I started recieving advertisements from them. Advertisements for people I've never heard of for material I have no interest in.
The only way they could have gotten my address would be to have bought it from someone else or harvesting it from somewhere.
In any case, SPAMMERS are already annoying enough. Getting SPAM from a business I might have considered doing business with if I had found out about them through legitimate means is not only annoying, but flat out enraging.
I will not do business with Chu's Magic and if you care about your privacy I would suggest that you don't either.
Santiago
Enter a World of Elegant Magic
Santiago's Magic
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Friday, September 22, 2006
Where have you been?
Sorry I've been gone for so long. It's been a busy couple of months.
Right at the beginning of July I was in the middle of producing a theatrical show called "Gothic at Midnight" starring my friend Joshua Kane. Joshua came out and gave us a fantastic performance, and although the audiences weren't nearly as large as I would have liked, the experience was amazing. Joshua taught me a lot about producing shows as well and so next time around things are going to be much better for my star.
He was an absolute champ.
At the very same time I was busy purchasing a house. That's right, the fates are twisted and while my wife and I had literally spent a year looking around at houses, the perfect one didn't fall into our laps until I was so up to my eyeballs in production work that I literally drove myself crazy trying to keep it all running.
Then, of course, was the move itself, which was mostly handled by me since my lady wife was busy working to pay the bills. Though we did get professional movers to get all the furniture over, which was a nightmare in and off itself. If you happen to live in my area (Santa Cruz, CA) and you need to move - do not, under any circumstances, use Bluebird Moving. You have been warned.
As the world has settled out I have been busy getting my contacts back into play. Working the Ren Faire this year, arranging gigs, and generally getting my entertainment business in shape again.
Soon I will also be teaching at a local Arts Academy as well. A place called "The Radiant Life Academy." I will be teaching acting and magic classes. I look forward to it.
So that's the past few months in a nut shell. I promise that I will have some better thoughts on the world of Magic from this side of things soon.
Thanks!
Right at the beginning of July I was in the middle of producing a theatrical show called "Gothic at Midnight" starring my friend Joshua Kane. Joshua came out and gave us a fantastic performance, and although the audiences weren't nearly as large as I would have liked, the experience was amazing. Joshua taught me a lot about producing shows as well and so next time around things are going to be much better for my star.
He was an absolute champ.
At the very same time I was busy purchasing a house. That's right, the fates are twisted and while my wife and I had literally spent a year looking around at houses, the perfect one didn't fall into our laps until I was so up to my eyeballs in production work that I literally drove myself crazy trying to keep it all running.
Then, of course, was the move itself, which was mostly handled by me since my lady wife was busy working to pay the bills. Though we did get professional movers to get all the furniture over, which was a nightmare in and off itself. If you happen to live in my area (Santa Cruz, CA) and you need to move - do not, under any circumstances, use Bluebird Moving. You have been warned.
As the world has settled out I have been busy getting my contacts back into play. Working the Ren Faire this year, arranging gigs, and generally getting my entertainment business in shape again.
Soon I will also be teaching at a local Arts Academy as well. A place called "The Radiant Life Academy." I will be teaching acting and magic classes. I look forward to it.
So that's the past few months in a nut shell. I promise that I will have some better thoughts on the world of Magic from this side of things soon.
Thanks!
Monday, June 19, 2006
What Impresses You?
I was considering some of the things that happened at The Dragonslayers event I did this weekend, and I think I'm finally narrowing in on one particular incident that sort of unsettled me.
The Dragonslayers event was a Ren Fair kind of thing and I had a booth which I preformed magic and fortune telling out of. It was fun and I had a good time.
However I knew that I wasn't going to be the only magician who attended the event. One of the other local professionals was there as well. I've known him for a number of years and typically when someone calls me for a kids show I direct them to this performer because he is very good with kids.
He showed up at the event and came in behind one of the audiences I had gathered while I was performing my three rope routine (yes, I know what it's called, but I'm trying to be general here for the lay people in my audience.) which actually works in a fashion most magicians aren't aware of. In fact every magician I've shown it to claims they have never seen this variation, which is why I keep it this way.
After my show was over he approached me and we caught up with each other. We hadn't seen each other in a number of years and the last time that he and I actually even worked a gig together was something like 8 or 10 years ago.
After a few minutes of catching up he pulled out one of the ubiquitous card wallets that magicians are plagued with and proceeded to show me a trick. Now you have to understand that these little care wallets, or as they are often referred to: "packet tricks," are sometimes very problematic. After all, when you pull one of these out, the first and automatic assumption on the part of the spectator is "these must be faked/gimmicked." And very often they are correct.
Okay, admittedly I have one or two of these myself. I stopped buying them years and years ago when I realized the problem with them I just mentioned. But to be perfectly fair, there is one that I still use once in a while. I choose to use it because I feel that the effect is strong enough to outweigh the obvious problems and suspicions.
However this particular effect presented to me was, well, kind of lame. In my opinion anyway. I'm sure that it is probably impressive to some people. I'm certain that it must be impressive to the children who are his primary audience.
What struck me as strange in this case was that he seemed to think that I would be impressed as well!
Now I'm not saying that to somehow brag. That isn't the case at all. Rather what I'm getting at is that when magicians get together to talk shop we aren't usually going to try and impress one another with a "packet trick." It just isn't going to happen. We'll show them to each other to discuss the mechanics and see how clever the creations can be, but trying to impress one another with a "packet trick" is just plain foolishness.
This morning I realized why this bothered me so much. When last he and I worked together, all those years ago, this was the same kind of thing he was doing then. He was doing a number of other things as well, but this was indeed a substantial part of his work. Over the years I have worked hard to expand my repitior and to move away from these kinds of things because they are so common and so "obvious" to me and therefore I assume to my audiences.
That was a long time ago and I'm sorry to see that this performer is still stuck in the world of "packet tricks." I would have thought that he would have moved on from there by now.
Damn.
The Dragonslayers event was a Ren Fair kind of thing and I had a booth which I preformed magic and fortune telling out of. It was fun and I had a good time.
However I knew that I wasn't going to be the only magician who attended the event. One of the other local professionals was there as well. I've known him for a number of years and typically when someone calls me for a kids show I direct them to this performer because he is very good with kids.
He showed up at the event and came in behind one of the audiences I had gathered while I was performing my three rope routine (yes, I know what it's called, but I'm trying to be general here for the lay people in my audience.) which actually works in a fashion most magicians aren't aware of. In fact every magician I've shown it to claims they have never seen this variation, which is why I keep it this way.
After my show was over he approached me and we caught up with each other. We hadn't seen each other in a number of years and the last time that he and I actually even worked a gig together was something like 8 or 10 years ago.
After a few minutes of catching up he pulled out one of the ubiquitous card wallets that magicians are plagued with and proceeded to show me a trick. Now you have to understand that these little care wallets, or as they are often referred to: "packet tricks," are sometimes very problematic. After all, when you pull one of these out, the first and automatic assumption on the part of the spectator is "these must be faked/gimmicked." And very often they are correct.
Okay, admittedly I have one or two of these myself. I stopped buying them years and years ago when I realized the problem with them I just mentioned. But to be perfectly fair, there is one that I still use once in a while. I choose to use it because I feel that the effect is strong enough to outweigh the obvious problems and suspicions.
However this particular effect presented to me was, well, kind of lame. In my opinion anyway. I'm sure that it is probably impressive to some people. I'm certain that it must be impressive to the children who are his primary audience.
What struck me as strange in this case was that he seemed to think that I would be impressed as well!
Now I'm not saying that to somehow brag. That isn't the case at all. Rather what I'm getting at is that when magicians get together to talk shop we aren't usually going to try and impress one another with a "packet trick." It just isn't going to happen. We'll show them to each other to discuss the mechanics and see how clever the creations can be, but trying to impress one another with a "packet trick" is just plain foolishness.
This morning I realized why this bothered me so much. When last he and I worked together, all those years ago, this was the same kind of thing he was doing then. He was doing a number of other things as well, but this was indeed a substantial part of his work. Over the years I have worked hard to expand my repitior and to move away from these kinds of things because they are so common and so "obvious" to me and therefore I assume to my audiences.
That was a long time ago and I'm sorry to see that this performer is still stuck in the world of "packet tricks." I would have thought that he would have moved on from there by now.
Damn.
Monday, June 12, 2006
John Edward is at it again....
Holy crap. He's on TV again. A new series. "John Edward Cross Country." Now he's going every where to get the audiences.
TiVo caught it for me. I'll be letting TiVo know that was a bad thing. "Bad TiVo. Bad bad TiVo."
In the meantime I decided to watch. Definitely the same old tricks which anyone who picks up their first book of "mental magic" would know. Interestingly enough he has a few new tricks for how to pass the buck. At least they are new tricks to my experience.
Okay, I know I don't need to tell all of you this, but I feel a need to state this anyway.
John Edward is a fraud. He can not "speak with the dead." No one can. He is doing nothing more then a battery of well known linguistic tricks and basic salesmanship skills such as active listening. He is using techniques familiar to magicians all over the world.
Don't fall for this crap. Even when I do it as a magician to entertain you, don't fall for it.
Please.
TiVo caught it for me. I'll be letting TiVo know that was a bad thing. "Bad TiVo. Bad bad TiVo."
In the meantime I decided to watch. Definitely the same old tricks which anyone who picks up their first book of "mental magic" would know. Interestingly enough he has a few new tricks for how to pass the buck. At least they are new tricks to my experience.
Okay, I know I don't need to tell all of you this, but I feel a need to state this anyway.
John Edward is a fraud. He can not "speak with the dead." No one can. He is doing nothing more then a battery of well known linguistic tricks and basic salesmanship skills such as active listening. He is using techniques familiar to magicians all over the world.
Don't fall for this crap. Even when I do it as a magician to entertain you, don't fall for it.
Please.
Thursday, May 11, 2006
David Blaine Drowned Alive???
Since I was asked about my opinion regarding the New York Underwater Bubble Guy, AKA David Blaine, I thought I'd go ahead and make a general post about him.
Personally, I have never liked him. My reasons are fairly straight forward.
When he first appeared on the air waves a few years ago, he was performing his "Street Magic." David is pretty much responsible for the current wave of popularity in this particular field of magic, and while I can't fault him for that, I do have a problem with the impression it has created.
In the same moment as creating the popular movement of "Street Magic" David also convinced a huge segment of America's youth that it would be cool to be a "Street Magician." The only problem is that for the most part they all STINK AT IT! More then any other popularity boom in the magic world that I have had the opportunity to witness, "Street Magic" has led to a higher percentage of "bad magic" then any other type.
Like most magicians, David spent the entire hour doing various small effects while hyping the one "grand illusion" that would be presented at the end of the show. He would levitate himself in the street.
Now, for what it's worth, I know the levitation that he used. I know how to perform it, though I haven't practiced it in the least. And I know that you can get a couple of inches off the ground when you do it. But more about that later.
So, the rest of the TV special David is doing a selection of card tricks, one coin trick and one 'body' trick (a kind of controtion). The entire time his presentation almost always involves him walking up to someone, looking down at his shoes and mumbling something that sounds a bit like "heyyawannaseeeatrick."
Poor presentation, poor presence and nothing at all to make me want to like him.
Now before I start sounding like a bag of sour grapes, let me just say that David's *technical* skills are really impressive. Some of those card manipulations he does are certainly beyond me. He is an extremely good technician. It's his persona that I have problems with.
Then it was time for the grand illusion. He is going to levitate himself on the street in front of people. And he does it! Except that what we all saw on TV and what they saw live WERE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS! That's right, David used a camera trick. The people who were there live saw David come off the ground a couple of inches. On TV we saw him come off the ground by 12 to 18 inches.
Since then every special David has done has followed the same basic format of about four tricks repeated over and over again for different street audiences spliced together with hype for whatever "grand illusion" he is currently doing.
Except that after the levitation he hasn't done another "grand illusion." Instead he has done various kinds of "endurance stunts." So far he is been put into a block of ice for how ever many hours it was (which was done by James Randi years ago when he was still performing regularly by the way), he has been suspended in a box over a river for several days, he has stood on top of a pole for several days and then jumped off into a pile of cardboard boxes and now it's spending time in a bubble of water. YAWN.
Did you know that when he was hanging from the bridge in a box he actually had an active internet connection? There was a big deal about it because a bunch of people kept sending him email telling him how lame the stunt was.
He also had a show in Vegas. A show that opened and closed in less then a week. Why? The audiences were bored. He simply couldn't sustain their interest.
But there is some sense of justice. The "kids" who all want to be "Street Magicians" are getting bored with him as well. At least as far as I can see in the various forums I watch. They are complaining that the stunts are stupid and boring and they want to see magic instead. Not only that, they are starting to realize that David isn't that interesting a person either.
So I have some hope. A tiny flicker of hope anyway. And maybe, just maybe, even David Blaine will start to realize that stunts are not magic and there are better things for him to be doing.
Personally, I have never liked him. My reasons are fairly straight forward.
When he first appeared on the air waves a few years ago, he was performing his "Street Magic." David is pretty much responsible for the current wave of popularity in this particular field of magic, and while I can't fault him for that, I do have a problem with the impression it has created.
In the same moment as creating the popular movement of "Street Magic" David also convinced a huge segment of America's youth that it would be cool to be a "Street Magician." The only problem is that for the most part they all STINK AT IT! More then any other popularity boom in the magic world that I have had the opportunity to witness, "Street Magic" has led to a higher percentage of "bad magic" then any other type.
Like most magicians, David spent the entire hour doing various small effects while hyping the one "grand illusion" that would be presented at the end of the show. He would levitate himself in the street.
Now, for what it's worth, I know the levitation that he used. I know how to perform it, though I haven't practiced it in the least. And I know that you can get a couple of inches off the ground when you do it. But more about that later.
So, the rest of the TV special David is doing a selection of card tricks, one coin trick and one 'body' trick (a kind of controtion). The entire time his presentation almost always involves him walking up to someone, looking down at his shoes and mumbling something that sounds a bit like "heyyawannaseeeatrick."
Poor presentation, poor presence and nothing at all to make me want to like him.
Now before I start sounding like a bag of sour grapes, let me just say that David's *technical* skills are really impressive. Some of those card manipulations he does are certainly beyond me. He is an extremely good technician. It's his persona that I have problems with.
Then it was time for the grand illusion. He is going to levitate himself on the street in front of people. And he does it! Except that what we all saw on TV and what they saw live WERE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS! That's right, David used a camera trick. The people who were there live saw David come off the ground a couple of inches. On TV we saw him come off the ground by 12 to 18 inches.
Since then every special David has done has followed the same basic format of about four tricks repeated over and over again for different street audiences spliced together with hype for whatever "grand illusion" he is currently doing.
Except that after the levitation he hasn't done another "grand illusion." Instead he has done various kinds of "endurance stunts." So far he is been put into a block of ice for how ever many hours it was (which was done by James Randi years ago when he was still performing regularly by the way), he has been suspended in a box over a river for several days, he has stood on top of a pole for several days and then jumped off into a pile of cardboard boxes and now it's spending time in a bubble of water. YAWN.
Did you know that when he was hanging from the bridge in a box he actually had an active internet connection? There was a big deal about it because a bunch of people kept sending him email telling him how lame the stunt was.
He also had a show in Vegas. A show that opened and closed in less then a week. Why? The audiences were bored. He simply couldn't sustain their interest.
But there is some sense of justice. The "kids" who all want to be "Street Magicians" are getting bored with him as well. At least as far as I can see in the various forums I watch. They are complaining that the stunts are stupid and boring and they want to see magic instead. Not only that, they are starting to realize that David isn't that interesting a person either.
So I have some hope. A tiny flicker of hope anyway. And maybe, just maybe, even David Blaine will start to realize that stunts are not magic and there are better things for him to be doing.
Monday, May 08, 2006
"Gothic at Midnight"
Yes, I have been gone for a bit. I've been busy. I am preparing to produce a show here in Santa Cruz. My good friend Joshua Kane is coming to do his one man show "Gothic at Midnight."
Want to know more? Of course you do!
Gothic at Midnight
A Tribute to the Masters of the Macabre!
The Demons of Darkness have come to Santa Cruz!
Join us as we cheer away an evening with tales of revenge, madness and despair. Classically trained actor Joshua Kane, inspired by the old-time radio dramas of Orson Welles and Vincent Price, populates the stage with unforgettable characters, bewitching audiences with a devilish sense of fun and whimsy. Audiences will experience a roller coaster ride of terror and laughter.
June 30th, July 1st
8:00 pm
Rio Theater
Downtown Santa Cruz
For more information and to buy your tickets visit:
http://www.wildbabu.com
An award-winning tribute to the Masters of the Macabre drawing from the works of Poe, Dickens, and Bierce, Kane “amuses you with his antics, frightens you with his intensity and charms you with his tales of the fantastic.”
—The Charleston City Paper, Spoleto Festival, SC
“If you have forgotten how good it can be to listen to a real storyteller and be swept up in a story, or if it’s been too long since you experienced the joy of listening to someone tell you a tale that makes your blood run cold, you need to listen to Joshua Kane, a man whose voice is an instrument of delightful terror.”
—Neil Gaiman
author of American Gods, Neverwhere, and Sandman
"Savvy, witty, and spell-binding....
-Peter Straub, bestselling author of Ghost Story
Want to know more? Of course you do!
Gothic at Midnight
A Tribute to the Masters of the Macabre!
The Demons of Darkness have come to Santa Cruz!
Join us as we cheer away an evening with tales of revenge, madness and despair. Classically trained actor Joshua Kane, inspired by the old-time radio dramas of Orson Welles and Vincent Price, populates the stage with unforgettable characters, bewitching audiences with a devilish sense of fun and whimsy. Audiences will experience a roller coaster ride of terror and laughter.
June 30th, July 1st
8:00 pm
Rio Theater
Downtown Santa Cruz
For more information and to buy your tickets visit:
http://www.wildbabu.com
An award-winning tribute to the Masters of the Macabre drawing from the works of Poe, Dickens, and Bierce, Kane “amuses you with his antics, frightens you with his intensity and charms you with his tales of the fantastic.”
—The Charleston City Paper, Spoleto Festival, SC
“If you have forgotten how good it can be to listen to a real storyteller and be swept up in a story, or if it’s been too long since you experienced the joy of listening to someone tell you a tale that makes your blood run cold, you need to listen to Joshua Kane, a man whose voice is an instrument of delightful terror.”
—Neil Gaiman
author of American Gods, Neverwhere, and Sandman
"Savvy, witty, and spell-binding....
-Peter Straub, bestselling author of Ghost Story
Friday, April 07, 2006
Embracing Masculine Magic
Recently I went on a rampage regarding the presentation of a card trick by a woman who decided that the best way to keep the attention of her audience was to be dressed like a hooker and to reveal the card by pulling down her top and showing her breast where a duplicate of the card had been stashed.
In the process of the ensuing discussion the point was once again raised that women in magic have a really tough time and that magic has a lot of very heavy handed masculine themes along with having appropriated very important feminine themes.
I'm not here to tell anyone that this isn't the case. Quite the contrary, but I'm also not going to give anyone a lecture about what it means to be a woman in magic. For starters I am not gender equipped to really know.
But a thought did get raised which I feel deserves some consideration.
With the trend towards recognizing the real differences between what women in magic are doing and what men are doing, there has been plenty of focus on women rediscovering the things that are decidedly feminine about magic.
Yet there seems to be no thought whatsoever regarding what is masculine in magic. The assumption is that magic has, all along, been masculine in nature but I think that assumption must be questioned.
Men doing magic have for sometime hijacked feminine themes such as production and restoration. It is clear, when looking at the entire repertoire of magic, that many effects are very feminine in nature and yet it is men who have been doing them.
This got me to thinking that the reason magic seems so unnatural is the fact that performers are crossing over gender lines in a particular way.
Now in the past I have argued that effects are not gender based, but rather routines are. I still stand by that. I do not believe that specific effects are either masculine or feminine, which may seem in contradiction to the premise of this essay, but bear with me and I think you will see that this isn't the case.
I am going to use one of the classic effects as my example and see what kinds of conclusions can be drawn from it. My choice for this is the "Sawing" illusion.
Now right off the bat we can already see that this might very well be a definitely masculine piece. After all, it is all about what a man is forcing his female assistant to endure. Or is it?
Historically the piece was originally performed by a man who was sawing another man in half. Admittedly this didn't last long, but it did start out that way. So from that alone we can safely assume that at least the conscious attempt was not intended to be one of masculine authority asserting itself over that which is feminine.
But then why the change? It happened almost immediately. So much so that almost no one ever remembers that it didn't start out that way!
Yet when the change did occur there was an immediate reaction which had to be significant enough to let this mode of presentation continue. The audience responded to it much more strongly. Why?
Could it be that on a certain level they understood that destroying this woman was somehow wrong? A violation of the natural order of things? Perhaps.
But let us look further into this effect.
It isn't complete until the victim is restored. Healed. If the premise holds true, then this effect holds a balance of both masculine and feminine themes as healing is very definitely associated with a feminine perspective in our culture.
It took Richiardi Jr. to bring this effect into a vastly unbalanced state by doing the illusion without restoring his victim; his own daughter. The audience sat horrified and left hanging in limbo waiting for what they knew should happen but never did! And without that healing restoration at the end, he produced real horror in his audience. Which was his goal!
So what does this really tell us?
I think it points to a true idea about magic. That truly good magic is balanced between destructive and creative perspectives. Or masculine and feminine ones.
There is almost a kind of Yin Yang approach to every effect. A card is lost and then found. A rope is cut and then restored. It may very well be possible to see every effect as having a destructive beginning and a restorative ending. Or at the very least a large balance of them.
In recent years women have been reclaiming their role in magic. For this I am grateful. I even do my small part by teaching a female student in the art. In this headlong rush of women re-entering this world there has been a lot to learn both for the female magician and the male.
I am a child of the era of Women's Lib to a certain extent. I was raised by my mother operating as a single parent for many years and there are many behaviors and standards that I hold to which I can directly attribute to being raised by a strong female figure. I am also very aware that I am not alone in this. I have observed many of the same standards among male peers who grew up in similar circumstances as mine. We know a little something about "feminism" from an honest male perspective.
But one thing that troubled me over the years is "radical feminism." Growing up I did have the opportunity to observe many women for whom the words "all men are scum" was a kind of constant mantra. So much so that even some of the girls I dated in my high school years would make the same comment and follow it up immediately with "but you're different" when they realized that I was still standing there.
As you might imagine this generated a certain amount of confusion on my part as well as a certain amount of discomfort and even out right dislike. I told off any number of them for being so short sighted that they would mouth such a slogan without spending any real time thinking about it's source or why they were saying it in the first place.
From points similar to this have grown "masculinism" movements similar to "feminism." Men celebrating their "masculinity." Now before you go off thinking I'm talking about various sorts of hunting and fire related events I want to point out that I'm thinking more of an intellectual appreciation of what it means to be a man in these times. Those "wilderness man" type retreats have their place I'm sure, but it's never been one I've felt a need to embrace.
So what does all this have to do with magic?
Well, I've begun to wonder if men have lost their way in magic as much as women have. Do men really embrace the seemingly destructive urges of magic? Do we really need to set things on fire or cut them up in order to appreciate the masculine side of the art?
Is it possible that we've somehow given up a noble aspect in favor of a more basic one?
There was a time when a true look at what it was to be a man meant something closer to what we think of as "gentleman." A real man, a gentleman, was someone who embodied nobility, dignity, grace, intelligence, chivalry, courtesy and honor.
Gentlemen engaged each other with dignity and grace. Their power was measured not by the things they could destroy but by the things they had control over, starting most importantly with themselves.
It is true that the things we can destroy we have control over, but at what price? We seem to have given up displaying our power over something in a different less obvious manner in favor of simply saying "see I control this thing because I destroy it *and* bring it back!"
So perhaps the question we masculine magicians need to ask ourselves is "what is it to be a real man?" Take magic out of the question for a while and consider just what a "real man" is.
Do we really think that a "real man" is one with destructive tendencies? One who thinks nothing of shoving a woman around and being rude to the people who are paying attention to him? Does a "real man" need to be pushing people around at all?
I might offer an answer of "no" to these questions. Generally we don't think of this as being a "real man." We think of this as being a jerk. Or worse.
Or perhaps a "real man" is someone who treats everyone with kindness and dignity? Is a "real man" someone who is secure enough in themselves as a person first and a man second that they need not always be the one in charge? Does a "real man" not only recognize his essential masculinity but also recognize and respect it in other men?
Consider the issue of magic again as part of the equation.
Would you really think that a female magician sawing a man in half would work? Would you consider it a "novelty?" If so, why? Answer that and then consider your answer and what it might actually mean.
I think it is entirely possible that we have lost our way. Women have certainly become over encumbered by images of beauty and restrictions of expected behavior over the years. They have needed to break out and I think that they are achieving that break out.
However, along the way I think we have over looked the possibility that men have become over encumbered by a set of expectations which can be just as debilitating. Men have to be strong and rational because that is what we are told to be by the same kinds of societal sources that women have been receiving their mixed messages from.
And whatever direction society goes, so to does art.
So now I encourage you to reconsider what you see as masculine and feminine, not just in your magic, but in your everyday surroundings. I think you will begin to see that many of the things expected of all of us are artificial at best.
Okay, does this mean that we should all give up our "Sawing" illusions, or our "Sword Through Neck" or whatever else which seems excessively violent, and therefore may be in danger of being excessively "masculine?" No, I don't think so.
But I do think that we need to reconsider our attitudes and expectations when it comes to these kinds of effects and what kind of impression they have on audiences.
Where this will take us, I do not know. What I do know is that by thinking about it we can not help but be taken somewhere.
This is merely a first step.
In the process of the ensuing discussion the point was once again raised that women in magic have a really tough time and that magic has a lot of very heavy handed masculine themes along with having appropriated very important feminine themes.
I'm not here to tell anyone that this isn't the case. Quite the contrary, but I'm also not going to give anyone a lecture about what it means to be a woman in magic. For starters I am not gender equipped to really know.
But a thought did get raised which I feel deserves some consideration.
With the trend towards recognizing the real differences between what women in magic are doing and what men are doing, there has been plenty of focus on women rediscovering the things that are decidedly feminine about magic.
Yet there seems to be no thought whatsoever regarding what is masculine in magic. The assumption is that magic has, all along, been masculine in nature but I think that assumption must be questioned.
Men doing magic have for sometime hijacked feminine themes such as production and restoration. It is clear, when looking at the entire repertoire of magic, that many effects are very feminine in nature and yet it is men who have been doing them.
This got me to thinking that the reason magic seems so unnatural is the fact that performers are crossing over gender lines in a particular way.
Now in the past I have argued that effects are not gender based, but rather routines are. I still stand by that. I do not believe that specific effects are either masculine or feminine, which may seem in contradiction to the premise of this essay, but bear with me and I think you will see that this isn't the case.
I am going to use one of the classic effects as my example and see what kinds of conclusions can be drawn from it. My choice for this is the "Sawing" illusion.
Now right off the bat we can already see that this might very well be a definitely masculine piece. After all, it is all about what a man is forcing his female assistant to endure. Or is it?
Historically the piece was originally performed by a man who was sawing another man in half. Admittedly this didn't last long, but it did start out that way. So from that alone we can safely assume that at least the conscious attempt was not intended to be one of masculine authority asserting itself over that which is feminine.
But then why the change? It happened almost immediately. So much so that almost no one ever remembers that it didn't start out that way!
Yet when the change did occur there was an immediate reaction which had to be significant enough to let this mode of presentation continue. The audience responded to it much more strongly. Why?
Could it be that on a certain level they understood that destroying this woman was somehow wrong? A violation of the natural order of things? Perhaps.
But let us look further into this effect.
It isn't complete until the victim is restored. Healed. If the premise holds true, then this effect holds a balance of both masculine and feminine themes as healing is very definitely associated with a feminine perspective in our culture.
It took Richiardi Jr. to bring this effect into a vastly unbalanced state by doing the illusion without restoring his victim; his own daughter. The audience sat horrified and left hanging in limbo waiting for what they knew should happen but never did! And without that healing restoration at the end, he produced real horror in his audience. Which was his goal!
So what does this really tell us?
I think it points to a true idea about magic. That truly good magic is balanced between destructive and creative perspectives. Or masculine and feminine ones.
There is almost a kind of Yin Yang approach to every effect. A card is lost and then found. A rope is cut and then restored. It may very well be possible to see every effect as having a destructive beginning and a restorative ending. Or at the very least a large balance of them.
In recent years women have been reclaiming their role in magic. For this I am grateful. I even do my small part by teaching a female student in the art. In this headlong rush of women re-entering this world there has been a lot to learn both for the female magician and the male.
I am a child of the era of Women's Lib to a certain extent. I was raised by my mother operating as a single parent for many years and there are many behaviors and standards that I hold to which I can directly attribute to being raised by a strong female figure. I am also very aware that I am not alone in this. I have observed many of the same standards among male peers who grew up in similar circumstances as mine. We know a little something about "feminism" from an honest male perspective.
But one thing that troubled me over the years is "radical feminism." Growing up I did have the opportunity to observe many women for whom the words "all men are scum" was a kind of constant mantra. So much so that even some of the girls I dated in my high school years would make the same comment and follow it up immediately with "but you're different" when they realized that I was still standing there.
As you might imagine this generated a certain amount of confusion on my part as well as a certain amount of discomfort and even out right dislike. I told off any number of them for being so short sighted that they would mouth such a slogan without spending any real time thinking about it's source or why they were saying it in the first place.
From points similar to this have grown "masculinism" movements similar to "feminism." Men celebrating their "masculinity." Now before you go off thinking I'm talking about various sorts of hunting and fire related events I want to point out that I'm thinking more of an intellectual appreciation of what it means to be a man in these times. Those "wilderness man" type retreats have their place I'm sure, but it's never been one I've felt a need to embrace.
So what does all this have to do with magic?
Well, I've begun to wonder if men have lost their way in magic as much as women have. Do men really embrace the seemingly destructive urges of magic? Do we really need to set things on fire or cut them up in order to appreciate the masculine side of the art?
Is it possible that we've somehow given up a noble aspect in favor of a more basic one?
There was a time when a true look at what it was to be a man meant something closer to what we think of as "gentleman." A real man, a gentleman, was someone who embodied nobility, dignity, grace, intelligence, chivalry, courtesy and honor.
Gentlemen engaged each other with dignity and grace. Their power was measured not by the things they could destroy but by the things they had control over, starting most importantly with themselves.
It is true that the things we can destroy we have control over, but at what price? We seem to have given up displaying our power over something in a different less obvious manner in favor of simply saying "see I control this thing because I destroy it *and* bring it back!"
So perhaps the question we masculine magicians need to ask ourselves is "what is it to be a real man?" Take magic out of the question for a while and consider just what a "real man" is.
Do we really think that a "real man" is one with destructive tendencies? One who thinks nothing of shoving a woman around and being rude to the people who are paying attention to him? Does a "real man" need to be pushing people around at all?
I might offer an answer of "no" to these questions. Generally we don't think of this as being a "real man." We think of this as being a jerk. Or worse.
Or perhaps a "real man" is someone who treats everyone with kindness and dignity? Is a "real man" someone who is secure enough in themselves as a person first and a man second that they need not always be the one in charge? Does a "real man" not only recognize his essential masculinity but also recognize and respect it in other men?
Consider the issue of magic again as part of the equation.
Would you really think that a female magician sawing a man in half would work? Would you consider it a "novelty?" If so, why? Answer that and then consider your answer and what it might actually mean.
I think it is entirely possible that we have lost our way. Women have certainly become over encumbered by images of beauty and restrictions of expected behavior over the years. They have needed to break out and I think that they are achieving that break out.
However, along the way I think we have over looked the possibility that men have become over encumbered by a set of expectations which can be just as debilitating. Men have to be strong and rational because that is what we are told to be by the same kinds of societal sources that women have been receiving their mixed messages from.
And whatever direction society goes, so to does art.
So now I encourage you to reconsider what you see as masculine and feminine, not just in your magic, but in your everyday surroundings. I think you will begin to see that many of the things expected of all of us are artificial at best.
Okay, does this mean that we should all give up our "Sawing" illusions, or our "Sword Through Neck" or whatever else which seems excessively violent, and therefore may be in danger of being excessively "masculine?" No, I don't think so.
But I do think that we need to reconsider our attitudes and expectations when it comes to these kinds of effects and what kind of impression they have on audiences.
Where this will take us, I do not know. What I do know is that by thinking about it we can not help but be taken somewhere.
This is merely a first step.
Monday, March 13, 2006
Turning "Tricks"
I read various forums on magic. This everyone knows. I post on them as well when I can, but this time I am utterly unable to think of what to comment.
Well, that isn't true. I can think of what to comment, I simply can't think of a tactful way to do it.
Last night, just before going to bed I checked in on one of those forums that I watch and discovered a link to a short video clip of young lady doing a card trick.
Except that this was more along the lines of "bad magic" combined with "soft porn." Seriously.
This lady is reasonably attractive looking, but to my eye appeared to be deliberately made up and dressed up to look like a hooker. At least that is what I'm hoping because if this is the way she usually appears then I would strongly suggest a fashion consultant.
She performed one of the most obvious card forces on the face of the planet, mainly because it's clear that someone told her "if you wave the deck around really fast people can't see what you are doing" and she took that as advice rather then a warning about presentation.
Once the card was forced upon the spectator she pauses for a second and half and then says "I won't try to read your mind but instead I'll just reach down here...." and she pulls down her leather-iod bodice from her left breast and shows a miniature copy of the card which just barely covers over her nipple.
"Is this your card?" she asks.
Sigh.
I am utterly disgusted.
Aside from the obviously tacky nature of the clip, the magic itself is pathetic. The revelation at the end is lame, ham fisted and completely pointless. (No jokes about the point being hidden behind the card please.)
Starting with the card force. As mentioned above she is using a method which should be smooth and clean. In most peoples hands it is, and as such is virtually undetectable. It is not a method I use personally, but not because it isn't good, only because I have no need of the method for any of my current effects. If I had an effect where I needed to force a card on someone I would seriously consider this method. When done right it is extremely effective.
Presentationally she is clearly leaning on the idea that waving her arms in the air makes it impossible for the audience to focus on the deck of cards and this covers the action she needs to do in order to accomplish the force.
Okay, so by this point she has managed to force a card on the spectator. Badly, but the job is done.
Next she gets the card returned to the deck and then does nothing.
Nothing.
Okay, maybe that doesn't mean anything to anyone else, but if you watch me or most any other magician you will find that when we do something that involves returning the card to the deck, we also then proceed to mix the deck up. Shuffle, cut, whatever.
We do this for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is to reinforce the idea that the card is truly lost in the deck. Some magicians will even say "... and now I'll lose the card in the deck."
Why? Because you can't find a card if it isn't first lost!
No, little miss magic hooker just holds the deck and pulls down her top to show off her breast, and oh yeah, a miniature duplicate of the card.
"I'm not going to try and read your mind..." she says. Well no kidding. Really? Probably on some level she realizes that dressed as she is the card is not what is on the spectators mind anyway.
"Instead I'll just reach down here...." making your eyes really focus on what you've been looking at the entire time mister spectator man.
"Is this your card?" First response? Yes it is and thank you for letting me look at your boobies.
Second response? Nope. Because if it was my card it would, at the very least, BE THE SAME SIZE!!!! That is obviously a different card with the same value on it so I now know that you just made me pick that card from the deck. Thank you for letting me look at your boobies.
Women in magic have a really tough time. I get that. Magic as a form of entertainment has long been dominated by men and as such has developed strong masculine themes.
So what ends up happening is that many women coming into the magic world are taught by men and have male perspectives presented to them as if they were cannon. Sadly most women, when starting out, don't even realize this problem and the result is presentations exactly like this one.
I can only hope that someone will point out to her exactly the problem with this. I would do it myself but there doesn't seem to be a good way to contact her.
Not only that, but upon doing two seconds of research, I have discovered that this woman is, in fact a model who does nude work. And while I don't mean porn (because her profile suggests otherwise), it wouldn't surprise me any to discover that porn could be involved.
So it appears that being a magician isn't a goal. For her it is a tool to help set herself apart in the modeling world. I suppose I can understand that. Just like any other business world you need to have something that makes you different from all the rest.
I just wish someone would teach her to turn her "tricks" into magic.
Well, that isn't true. I can think of what to comment, I simply can't think of a tactful way to do it.
Last night, just before going to bed I checked in on one of those forums that I watch and discovered a link to a short video clip of young lady doing a card trick.
Except that this was more along the lines of "bad magic" combined with "soft porn." Seriously.
This lady is reasonably attractive looking, but to my eye appeared to be deliberately made up and dressed up to look like a hooker. At least that is what I'm hoping because if this is the way she usually appears then I would strongly suggest a fashion consultant.
She performed one of the most obvious card forces on the face of the planet, mainly because it's clear that someone told her "if you wave the deck around really fast people can't see what you are doing" and she took that as advice rather then a warning about presentation.
Once the card was forced upon the spectator she pauses for a second and half and then says "I won't try to read your mind but instead I'll just reach down here...." and she pulls down her leather-iod bodice from her left breast and shows a miniature copy of the card which just barely covers over her nipple.
"Is this your card?" she asks.
Sigh.
I am utterly disgusted.
Aside from the obviously tacky nature of the clip, the magic itself is pathetic. The revelation at the end is lame, ham fisted and completely pointless. (No jokes about the point being hidden behind the card please.)
Starting with the card force. As mentioned above she is using a method which should be smooth and clean. In most peoples hands it is, and as such is virtually undetectable. It is not a method I use personally, but not because it isn't good, only because I have no need of the method for any of my current effects. If I had an effect where I needed to force a card on someone I would seriously consider this method. When done right it is extremely effective.
Presentationally she is clearly leaning on the idea that waving her arms in the air makes it impossible for the audience to focus on the deck of cards and this covers the action she needs to do in order to accomplish the force.
Okay, so by this point she has managed to force a card on the spectator. Badly, but the job is done.
Next she gets the card returned to the deck and then does nothing.
Nothing.
Okay, maybe that doesn't mean anything to anyone else, but if you watch me or most any other magician you will find that when we do something that involves returning the card to the deck, we also then proceed to mix the deck up. Shuffle, cut, whatever.
We do this for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is to reinforce the idea that the card is truly lost in the deck. Some magicians will even say "... and now I'll lose the card in the deck."
Why? Because you can't find a card if it isn't first lost!
No, little miss magic hooker just holds the deck and pulls down her top to show off her breast, and oh yeah, a miniature duplicate of the card.
"I'm not going to try and read your mind..." she says. Well no kidding. Really? Probably on some level she realizes that dressed as she is the card is not what is on the spectators mind anyway.
"Instead I'll just reach down here...." making your eyes really focus on what you've been looking at the entire time mister spectator man.
"Is this your card?" First response? Yes it is and thank you for letting me look at your boobies.
Second response? Nope. Because if it was my card it would, at the very least, BE THE SAME SIZE!!!! That is obviously a different card with the same value on it so I now know that you just made me pick that card from the deck. Thank you for letting me look at your boobies.
Women in magic have a really tough time. I get that. Magic as a form of entertainment has long been dominated by men and as such has developed strong masculine themes.
So what ends up happening is that many women coming into the magic world are taught by men and have male perspectives presented to them as if they were cannon. Sadly most women, when starting out, don't even realize this problem and the result is presentations exactly like this one.
I can only hope that someone will point out to her exactly the problem with this. I would do it myself but there doesn't seem to be a good way to contact her.
Not only that, but upon doing two seconds of research, I have discovered that this woman is, in fact a model who does nude work. And while I don't mean porn (because her profile suggests otherwise), it wouldn't surprise me any to discover that porn could be involved.
So it appears that being a magician isn't a goal. For her it is a tool to help set herself apart in the modeling world. I suppose I can understand that. Just like any other business world you need to have something that makes you different from all the rest.
I just wish someone would teach her to turn her "tricks" into magic.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Tim "Santiago" Converse Joins the Ranks of The ICBM
San Francisco/Santa Cruz - February 18th, 2006.
Local Magician Tim "Santiago" Converse, while attending the West Coast Inner Circle of Bizarre Magic gathering in San Francisco, was admitted to the very exclusive ranks of that magic fraternity.
The Inner Circle of Bizarre Magic, founded by Joe Cabral, is devoted to bringing the art of story telling and theater back into the art of the performance magician. Although the ICBM has existed for about fifteen years now, it is only allowed a very small number of people into it's actual membership.
Every year, in Connecticut, the ICBM holds an annual gathering where magicians from many different disciplines gather to discuss their art and share their knowledge with each other. Often this gathering provides entertainment to the public as part of the festivities and that entertainment is always of a most unusual and fantastic nature.
The ICBM has many noted magical names among it's members including such Las Vegas luminaries as Eugene Burger, Jeff McBride and Max Maven.
"Being invited to join their ranks in an extreme honor," says the Santa Cruz Magician.
For more information about "Santiago's Magic" visit the web at:
http://www.santiagosmagic.com
Local Magician Tim "Santiago" Converse, while attending the West Coast Inner Circle of Bizarre Magic gathering in San Francisco, was admitted to the very exclusive ranks of that magic fraternity.
The Inner Circle of Bizarre Magic, founded by Joe Cabral, is devoted to bringing the art of story telling and theater back into the art of the performance magician. Although the ICBM has existed for about fifteen years now, it is only allowed a very small number of people into it's actual membership.
Every year, in Connecticut, the ICBM holds an annual gathering where magicians from many different disciplines gather to discuss their art and share their knowledge with each other. Often this gathering provides entertainment to the public as part of the festivities and that entertainment is always of a most unusual and fantastic nature.
The ICBM has many noted magical names among it's members including such Las Vegas luminaries as Eugene Burger, Jeff McBride and Max Maven.
"Being invited to join their ranks in an extreme honor," says the Santa Cruz Magician.
For more information about "Santiago's Magic" visit the web at:
http://www.santiagosmagic.com
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Who-dini
The other day I was sitting in a friends living room and he happened to mention that he met someone at a convention I might be interested to know. A writer by the name of Paul Dini.
Now as it happens Paul writes for many of the animated series I have loved to watch over the years.
But what caught my interest in this particular moment was that someone else in the room, upon hearing the name "Paul Dini" automatically thought that my friend was speaking of some magician.
It's that dreaded "-dini" addition to the name. Everyone thinks that and they certainly have a reason to. For how long now have people been adding the "-dini" extension to their names in order to say "Hey I'm a magician."
One wonders if the Oxford English Dictionary, that bastion of language, will eventually include "-dini" as a suffix meaning "the magician."
Certainly this is an honest mistake to make. Look at this history at play here to begin with. The man everyone knows as Houdini was actually named Eric Weis. He changed his name to Harry Houdini in deference to the two magicians who had the greatest impact on his life; Harry Keller and Jean Eugene Robert-Houdin. He took the name "Houdin" and added the "i" on the end in the mistaken belief that it would mean something like "Son of Houdin."
Isn't it ironic then that generations of magicians have named themselves after a man who named himself after other men?
Well I think it is. Imagine what some of those famous magicians might have called themselves if they had followed the pattern.
Eugene Burger -Eugeni! Hmmm, interesting thought.
Teller - Tellini? Sounds like a talk show.
Penn - Pennini. Okay, I think I've seen that on the menu of an Italian Restaurant.
David Copperfield - Davini! Oh wait. He actually did that when he was a kid.
Well, I suppose if there is anything to be learned it's one of the same lessons I have gone on about before.
Develop your own character.
Develop your own style.
Develop your own personality. (Especially if you don't have one.)
There are enough amature "-dini's" out there. I don't think we need any more.
I wonder if Paul ever gets asked to do a card trick?
Tim "Santiago" Converse
You Are Invited to Enter a World of Elegant Magic
Santiago's Magic
Now as it happens Paul writes for many of the animated series I have loved to watch over the years.
But what caught my interest in this particular moment was that someone else in the room, upon hearing the name "Paul Dini" automatically thought that my friend was speaking of some magician.
It's that dreaded "-dini" addition to the name. Everyone thinks that and they certainly have a reason to. For how long now have people been adding the "-dini" extension to their names in order to say "Hey I'm a magician."
One wonders if the Oxford English Dictionary, that bastion of language, will eventually include "-dini" as a suffix meaning "the magician."
Certainly this is an honest mistake to make. Look at this history at play here to begin with. The man everyone knows as Houdini was actually named Eric Weis. He changed his name to Harry Houdini in deference to the two magicians who had the greatest impact on his life; Harry Keller and Jean Eugene Robert-Houdin. He took the name "Houdin" and added the "i" on the end in the mistaken belief that it would mean something like "Son of Houdin."
Isn't it ironic then that generations of magicians have named themselves after a man who named himself after other men?
Well I think it is. Imagine what some of those famous magicians might have called themselves if they had followed the pattern.
Eugene Burger -Eugeni! Hmmm, interesting thought.
Teller - Tellini? Sounds like a talk show.
Penn - Pennini. Okay, I think I've seen that on the menu of an Italian Restaurant.
David Copperfield - Davini! Oh wait. He actually did that when he was a kid.
Well, I suppose if there is anything to be learned it's one of the same lessons I have gone on about before.
Develop your own character.
Develop your own style.
Develop your own personality. (Especially if you don't have one.)
There are enough amature "-dini's" out there. I don't think we need any more.
I wonder if Paul ever gets asked to do a card trick?
Tim "Santiago" Converse
You Are Invited to Enter a World of Elegant Magic
Santiago's Magic
Thursday, February 09, 2006
The Act of Destruction and Creation
It is certainly human nature to destroy. It is also human nature to create. We forget that.
We assign "creation" to specific groups of people. Women create. Artists create. Builders create.
But in doing this we also block ourselves from accepting the role of creator.
"Men don't create, women do."
"I don't have any artistic talent to create."
"I'm not good with tools so I can't build or fix anything."
Denying that side of things makes us weaker. Destroys us.
Destruction and Creation are often the very heart of what the Magician is about.
Things are "Cut and Restored", "Torn and Restored" or in some fashion destroyed and reformed from the parts, the ashes, the remains.
So why do so many magicians focus upon the act of destruction but give so little thought to the act of creation? You've seen it without thinking about it I'm sure.
Consider the "Cut and Restored Rope."
Magician's cut that rope with great zeal and enthusiasm. They use huge knifes or scissors and they struggle as if cutting the rope were hard. All done in the name of "convincing the audience of the reality of the rope being cut."
Destroying it is somehow difficult. And so much effort, so much focus is placed on this act of destruction that the assumption must be that the act of creation or restoration is equally as difficult.
But when the time comes to restore the rope it is treated as if there could be nothing easier. It is handled with an almost casual, off hand manner, as if such things are almost common place.
Is there magic in this? Is there really a sense of magic to be gained? Perhaps.
Or could the thought simply be "Well, I'm so powerful a magician that restoring this rope is child's play!" Indeed it would seem that this is very much the thought that crosses the minds of these magicians.
However if that is the case and you are that powerful a magician then why was cutting the rope so hard in the first place? Haven't we always been told that the act of destruction is always easier then the act of creation?
Consider what kind of impact the "Cut and Restored Rope" might have if it were approached in this fashion.
Cutting the rope is easy. Casual. Yet another act of sad destruction in a world which is always suffering such things. A casualty of common place proportions.
But to restore it. Ah, there is magic. With gentle strength the magician picks the ends up and weaves them together right before your eyes. It takes focus and concentration. It takes control. It takes real power. Something mysterious is happening that shouldn't be.
It takes an act of creation, of restoration, of healing.
As a magician think about it. Try it. Consider your "Cut and Restored Rope" routine (or some other "Torn and Restored" type routine) from this light. Try changing the way you perform the routine to conform to the idea that the hard part is the restoration of the rope.
You don't even necessarily need to change the words you speak. Just change the way you relate to the object you are using your magic to restore and see what kind of impact it has on your audience.
You'll feel the difference I'm sure.
And maybe it's for you and maybe it isn't. But you won't know until you try.
In that effort you will destroy your old perceptions and create new ones. You will think about what you have accomplished in the minds of your audience.
You may just give them a deeper feeling of wonder then they've felt before.
And that is a true act of Creation and Destruction.
We assign "creation" to specific groups of people. Women create. Artists create. Builders create.
But in doing this we also block ourselves from accepting the role of creator.
"Men don't create, women do."
"I don't have any artistic talent to create."
"I'm not good with tools so I can't build or fix anything."
Denying that side of things makes us weaker. Destroys us.
Destruction and Creation are often the very heart of what the Magician is about.
Things are "Cut and Restored", "Torn and Restored" or in some fashion destroyed and reformed from the parts, the ashes, the remains.
So why do so many magicians focus upon the act of destruction but give so little thought to the act of creation? You've seen it without thinking about it I'm sure.
Consider the "Cut and Restored Rope."
Magician's cut that rope with great zeal and enthusiasm. They use huge knifes or scissors and they struggle as if cutting the rope were hard. All done in the name of "convincing the audience of the reality of the rope being cut."
Destroying it is somehow difficult. And so much effort, so much focus is placed on this act of destruction that the assumption must be that the act of creation or restoration is equally as difficult.
But when the time comes to restore the rope it is treated as if there could be nothing easier. It is handled with an almost casual, off hand manner, as if such things are almost common place.
Is there magic in this? Is there really a sense of magic to be gained? Perhaps.
Or could the thought simply be "Well, I'm so powerful a magician that restoring this rope is child's play!" Indeed it would seem that this is very much the thought that crosses the minds of these magicians.
However if that is the case and you are that powerful a magician then why was cutting the rope so hard in the first place? Haven't we always been told that the act of destruction is always easier then the act of creation?
Consider what kind of impact the "Cut and Restored Rope" might have if it were approached in this fashion.
Cutting the rope is easy. Casual. Yet another act of sad destruction in a world which is always suffering such things. A casualty of common place proportions.
But to restore it. Ah, there is magic. With gentle strength the magician picks the ends up and weaves them together right before your eyes. It takes focus and concentration. It takes control. It takes real power. Something mysterious is happening that shouldn't be.
It takes an act of creation, of restoration, of healing.
As a magician think about it. Try it. Consider your "Cut and Restored Rope" routine (or some other "Torn and Restored" type routine) from this light. Try changing the way you perform the routine to conform to the idea that the hard part is the restoration of the rope.
You don't even necessarily need to change the words you speak. Just change the way you relate to the object you are using your magic to restore and see what kind of impact it has on your audience.
You'll feel the difference I'm sure.
And maybe it's for you and maybe it isn't. But you won't know until you try.
In that effort you will destroy your old perceptions and create new ones. You will think about what you have accomplished in the minds of your audience.
You may just give them a deeper feeling of wonder then they've felt before.
And that is a true act of Creation and Destruction.
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Read a Book!
My mother used to say that to me all the time.
“Read a Book!”
“Go outside and play!”
Anything to prevent me from being sucked into the television.
Of course now I read all the time.
I’ll bet you do to. After all, you’re a magician. Your reading books and pamphlets all the time right?
But what else do you read?
If you had to stop and think about that one, then you may be having the same revelation I had not long ago.
Before I got involved in magic I read all the time. I read Science Fiction and Fantasy mostly. The occasional Horror or Mystery. I read them all for pleasure.
Then I got into magic and gradually I was reading fewer and fewer novels and more and more magic books, magazines and instructions. I got pretty darn good at all the stuff I spent time with as well.
But what use have I for telling the story of ‘Sam the Bellhop’ or ‘Diamond Jack’?
Don’t get me wrong. These are good stories and for the right performer they are hysterical. I remember watching Doc Eason do his version of ‘Sam the Bellhop’, which just killed me. But I digress.
So I was learning more and more magic and I ran across this thing called ‘Bizarre Magic’. I was at that stage where I was just absorbing everything I could, so I checked into it and I found that it really appealed to me.
Okay, so I wasn’t sure about some of the darker aspects that the whole field seemed to be filled with. I wasn’t sure I wanted to deal with all the ghosts and goblins and stuff. I don’t believe in that stuff, but I knew that I had read some really good books about it. Like there was this one..... but I digress.
Well, I found, after some open minded digging, that the real goal of Bizarre Magic is story telling. Good story telling, and I knew that I liked a good story. There was this movie that I saw not to long ago..... but I digress.
So there you have it. The trick is story telling. I liked that a lot. I sat down at my computer with a deck of cards, determined to write a story using some particular new card sleight I had just learned.
My brain locked! I couldn’t write a word. I had no referent to work from.
No books, short stories, recent movies. Nothing.
I had so completely immersed myself in magic books and magazines that I had lost touch with popular culture and just didn’t know what to write. I hadn’t developed a character, I just knew that I wanted to write stories for my effects.
After all, what audience would really want to hear a story about how I learned to do a “Luben Gearing Pass”? (Thanks for teaching me that one Mr. Mruzik.)
What is a “Luben Gearing Pass” you ask? Well I could tell you, but then I would be digressing.
And then the voice of my mother came flooding back.
“Read a BOOK!”
Not a magic book. A novel. A story. Mystery. Fiction. History. It didn’t matter. Just something other then magic.
So what’s the connection?
Check out a Bizarre Magicians reading list sometime. You’ll find that unlike most other magicians, the Bizarrist is reading books about history, culture, mysticism, religion and a fair amount of trivia as well.
The Bizarrist is getting ideas. He/She is collecting them from all kinds of places.
Check out the music a Bizarrist is listening to as well. You’ll probably find lots of interesting stuff there.
The point is this: Immerse your self in more then just magic books, videos and magazines. You aren’t going to find stories there.
You’ll find them in music and movies and novels.
You’ll find them in history, science and religion.
You’ll find them in popular culture.
In other words: “GO OUTSIDE AND PLAY!”
“READ A BOOK!”
“Read a Book!”
“Go outside and play!”
Anything to prevent me from being sucked into the television.
Of course now I read all the time.
I’ll bet you do to. After all, you’re a magician. Your reading books and pamphlets all the time right?
But what else do you read?
If you had to stop and think about that one, then you may be having the same revelation I had not long ago.
Before I got involved in magic I read all the time. I read Science Fiction and Fantasy mostly. The occasional Horror or Mystery. I read them all for pleasure.
Then I got into magic and gradually I was reading fewer and fewer novels and more and more magic books, magazines and instructions. I got pretty darn good at all the stuff I spent time with as well.
But what use have I for telling the story of ‘Sam the Bellhop’ or ‘Diamond Jack’?
Don’t get me wrong. These are good stories and for the right performer they are hysterical. I remember watching Doc Eason do his version of ‘Sam the Bellhop’, which just killed me. But I digress.
So I was learning more and more magic and I ran across this thing called ‘Bizarre Magic’. I was at that stage where I was just absorbing everything I could, so I checked into it and I found that it really appealed to me.
Okay, so I wasn’t sure about some of the darker aspects that the whole field seemed to be filled with. I wasn’t sure I wanted to deal with all the ghosts and goblins and stuff. I don’t believe in that stuff, but I knew that I had read some really good books about it. Like there was this one..... but I digress.
Well, I found, after some open minded digging, that the real goal of Bizarre Magic is story telling. Good story telling, and I knew that I liked a good story. There was this movie that I saw not to long ago..... but I digress.
So there you have it. The trick is story telling. I liked that a lot. I sat down at my computer with a deck of cards, determined to write a story using some particular new card sleight I had just learned.
My brain locked! I couldn’t write a word. I had no referent to work from.
No books, short stories, recent movies. Nothing.
I had so completely immersed myself in magic books and magazines that I had lost touch with popular culture and just didn’t know what to write. I hadn’t developed a character, I just knew that I wanted to write stories for my effects.
After all, what audience would really want to hear a story about how I learned to do a “Luben Gearing Pass”? (Thanks for teaching me that one Mr. Mruzik.)
What is a “Luben Gearing Pass” you ask? Well I could tell you, but then I would be digressing.
And then the voice of my mother came flooding back.
“Read a BOOK!”
Not a magic book. A novel. A story. Mystery. Fiction. History. It didn’t matter. Just something other then magic.
So what’s the connection?
Check out a Bizarre Magicians reading list sometime. You’ll find that unlike most other magicians, the Bizarrist is reading books about history, culture, mysticism, religion and a fair amount of trivia as well.
The Bizarrist is getting ideas. He/She is collecting them from all kinds of places.
Check out the music a Bizarrist is listening to as well. You’ll probably find lots of interesting stuff there.
The point is this: Immerse your self in more then just magic books, videos and magazines. You aren’t going to find stories there.
You’ll find them in music and movies and novels.
You’ll find them in history, science and religion.
You’ll find them in popular culture.
In other words: “GO OUTSIDE AND PLAY!”
“READ A BOOK!”
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Corteo
Laurie and I went to see a new Cirque du Soliel show last night called "Corteo."
We had excellent seats, but I think just about every seat in the house would have been good. The stage was set completely in the round with entrance and exits set at direct opposite sides from each other. We were six rows back from the stage with completely unobstructed views.
Since I bought the flea circus I have been looking for resources to improve my performances and make them different from anyone else. What a surprise right? Not that I expect I could do anything with the flea circus that would be reminiscent of Cirque, but inspiration comes from lots of places and I watched the show with different eyes then I would have had before.
The show was really good, but there were a couple of things that didn't work for me. Laurie and I both felt that Act 2 wasn't as strong as Act 1. For me at least, the problem was part technical, part enthusiasm and part lost story.
The story of Corteo is basically the visions of one man, a clown, imagining or experiencing his death and the procession of his journey from this life to the next. Visions of his childhood, of his life as a clown and of those who care for him giving him the send off/celebration only a circus could provide. Very artistic in that respect, but this is what we've come to expect from Cirque and in that they do not fail.
The first act was filled with wonderful routines, but I think my favorite had to be the trampoline act. They took two trampolines and dressed them up as beds, complete with brass head and foot boards. Then all the acrobats involved, obviously dressed as children, proceeded to have a massive pillow fight. Obviously a memory of childhood, the acrobatics were exactly the kind of thing I wished I could have done as a child bouncing on my own bed.
The jugglers were excellent, firing stuff around the stage at least as fast as we've ever seen the Flying K's do it. And they added a certain amount of acrobatics as well, making the routine extremely dynamic.
And then there was the Ringmaster.
Wow.
That guy had all the power you would expect a top Ringmaster to have. His voice was stunningly powerful and when he cracked the whip he carried it sounded like a gun shot underscoring his commands. But more about him for the second act.
Also in the first act was a Chandelier dance. As Laurie and I sat waiting for the show to start we could see, through the scrim, three chandeliers and Laurie said to me "Someone is going to be swinging from those soon."
She wasn't wrong. Four women, representing the clowns passed loves, came out and proceeded to do a whole aerial ballet which was really amazing. One detail I caught, only because I happened to look at just the right moment, was one of the women nearly clobbering someone in the audience as she took a running leap off a far exit point, hanging onto the chandelier. Her kick reached out over the head of the person sitting in the exact corner seat there, who flinched mightily. In a way it was nice to see that these people are people and therefore not perfect.
The Cyr Wheels were also amazing, but I've always been found them. These are the big single hoops which an acrobat braces themselves into and then spins around in, doing continuous cartwheels and other stunts. Always wanted to try that.
And then there was the highwire act. This was good, but in my opinion probably the weakest part of the first act. Mainly because I think most people don't really realize just how hard it is, especially when the performer manages to make it look so effortless. She really was excellent, but managed to be so precise and controlled that she took some of the drama out as a result.
Her final bit was to actually walk up an inclined wire which is a real difficult feat to perform. Don't believe me? Try walking up a two inch wide inclined blank (45 degrees please) and then imagine how hard it is on a wire! The one thing that probably threw people off though is that the wire under her was moving in a continuous loop downwards. This gave her the appearance of "moon walking."
There were a couple of performers who were midgets. Mostly they were clowns, but they did have a couple of routines in the second act.
But the end of the first act involved the lady midget wearing a harness which attached her to a cluster of very large helium balloons. The size of the balloons combined with her small size basically turned her into a floating toy which got tossed into the audience where people could simply hold their palms up and launch her back to the stage. Very amusing, if slightly creepy. I would consider this to be the closest Cirque would come to doing a traditional "Side Show" act or stunt.
End Act 1.
The two scrims were lowered creating a corridor across the stage and as we watched we could see that they were setting up something for the next act. The Intermission was half an hour and it took them pretty much the entire time.
They set up the trapeze act.
This was the first, and only technical problem I had with the show, but I can't see how they could have solved it either. The Trapeze Act was strong. Probably the strongest thing in the entire second act, but because of the required setup there was no place they could put it except at the very beginning. As such, the rest of the act suffered by comparison.
But what a routine. A trapeze act with no trapeze! Everyone who went flying back and forth between the platforms did it completely on the strength of the catchers on each platform. No trapeze bars, just strong arms to catch and throw people. It was damn impressive.
And then back to the Ringmaster!
Once the trapeze act was over they lowered the lights so the stage crew could clear the setup, so you had to do something to distract the audience. For the next five minutes (it only took them FIVE MINUTES to strike the trapeze!) the Ringmaster performed out in the audience by whistling classical music! And I mean really whistling! He could hit those notes like you would not believe! I swear there must have been dogs across country who were perking their ears up and saying "What was that?"
Once the trapeze was struck, the Ringmaster and a few of the clowns and other performers ended up on stage to perform a complete musical number on Whistle, Water Goblets, Violin and Tibetan Bowls!
Again, very cool.
Then we got the aerial banner dance. I don't know what it's called, but that is the way I think of it. Basically it's the bit where the acrobat (usually a woman) suspends herself from long banners of cloth and wraps herself up and does various stunts while being swung around the stage.
I've lost my appreciation for this act unfortunately. The first time I saw it I liked it a lot. It impressed me. But I've seen it repeatedly since then and the act really doesn't seem to evolve any or, for that matter, connect all that well with the story. We started losing the story here and that made things a bit difficult to follow.
Yes, she did the routine well, but it just doesn't really do much for me anymore.
Next we had the weirdest moment of all. A juggling act involving balls, a hoop and one of those streamer toys. All good material. Except for the chickens. Just before this started the Ringmaster marched across stage yelling that he hates chickens. Then jugglers came on, doing some really impressive stuff that I want to try and figure out, but at the same time rubber chickens start falling from the sky.
Is this some kind of French thing or something? Neither of us got it at all. The act ended with the performers huddled under a large umbrella as a huge load of rubber chickens were dumped on them. They leave the stage and the Ringmaster, followed by four guys with brooms, comes back on the stage yelling about hating chickens.
I don't know. Strange. Not story related at all that we could figure.
Then the two midgets came back on stage and did one of those "strength" acts where they do balances and poses on a spinning platform. Interesting but again it didn't carry any of the story thread in it.
The next act didn't have any story thread in it either really, but it was so worth watching and really wish that Seamus could have been there to see it. It was a ladder walker and he was hilarious. His style was very frenetic but his balance was absolutely perfect. Most of the routine was done with a ladder that looked about seven feet tall to me, but after he finished that, one of the angels descended from the sky with a ladder that was at least twice that height. He only did one trick with it, but it was great. He got all the way to the top of that thing and stood, not on the highest rung, but two little platforms that topped the struts of the ladder. And was then rescued by the angel.
There was a comedic presentation of Romeo and Juliette done by the midgets in a stage they rolled out which I looked at and thought, "Wish I had a place to store something like that because it would make a great performing setup!"
Then there was the Teeterboard. Which was presented as some kind of "gang showdown." I liked this. It had a story again and was really impressive to watch the two rival heroes try and out do each other.
For the final routine they set up a series of horizontal bars for acrobatics. They actually had four set up in a square and two ends were flanked by another bar each. Then, on top of that they spun things in various directions, just to keep it interesting! So you had all these acrobats swinging around the horizontal bars, trading places and moving into and out of the basic "flight pattern" around the central square.
I know I keep saying this, but "VERY COOL!"
End Act 2.
Other moments to be remembered - well, with Cirque there is always various characters who are floating around the action, providing a certain amount of interaction or spectacle.
Because this was a vision of traveling to heaven, there were plenty of people who were dressed as angels running across the stage at various points, or floating down from the sky to watch and participate.
There were basically two images from these characters which stuck with me.
First was one of the angels. She floated down over the dwarf couple doing the "strength" act and dropped "snow" over them. Because of the music, the lighting and the general image this struck me as being very similar to the "Snowstorm" illusion I have performed on a few occasions, and even they they didn't do it as magic it was very magical to me.
Second, and I think much stronger then that, was one of the clowns walking across the highwire. Sounds simple enough yes? Sure it does. Until I tell you that he was walking on the UNDERSIDE OF THE WIRE!!!
That's all he did, but he was on the underside of the wire carrying a pair of candelabra whose flames were pointed down to the stage just as his head was. The illusion was absolutely brilliant.
That was a great moment.
It was a wonderful show. One of the better ones from Cirque I've seen in a while. Seeing it live certainly makes a difference and while I did feel that the second act wasn't as strong as the first, it was all still a really excellent show.
If you get a chance to see any Cirque show it's probably worth it, but I'd rate this one higher then most, probably because I like the story itself as much as anything else.
And come to think of it, there might just be one thing I can do to put a Cirque-like act into my flea circus...... hmmmm....
We had excellent seats, but I think just about every seat in the house would have been good. The stage was set completely in the round with entrance and exits set at direct opposite sides from each other. We were six rows back from the stage with completely unobstructed views.
Since I bought the flea circus I have been looking for resources to improve my performances and make them different from anyone else. What a surprise right? Not that I expect I could do anything with the flea circus that would be reminiscent of Cirque, but inspiration comes from lots of places and I watched the show with different eyes then I would have had before.
The show was really good, but there were a couple of things that didn't work for me. Laurie and I both felt that Act 2 wasn't as strong as Act 1. For me at least, the problem was part technical, part enthusiasm and part lost story.
The story of Corteo is basically the visions of one man, a clown, imagining or experiencing his death and the procession of his journey from this life to the next. Visions of his childhood, of his life as a clown and of those who care for him giving him the send off/celebration only a circus could provide. Very artistic in that respect, but this is what we've come to expect from Cirque and in that they do not fail.
The first act was filled with wonderful routines, but I think my favorite had to be the trampoline act. They took two trampolines and dressed them up as beds, complete with brass head and foot boards. Then all the acrobats involved, obviously dressed as children, proceeded to have a massive pillow fight. Obviously a memory of childhood, the acrobatics were exactly the kind of thing I wished I could have done as a child bouncing on my own bed.
The jugglers were excellent, firing stuff around the stage at least as fast as we've ever seen the Flying K's do it. And they added a certain amount of acrobatics as well, making the routine extremely dynamic.
And then there was the Ringmaster.
Wow.
That guy had all the power you would expect a top Ringmaster to have. His voice was stunningly powerful and when he cracked the whip he carried it sounded like a gun shot underscoring his commands. But more about him for the second act.
Also in the first act was a Chandelier dance. As Laurie and I sat waiting for the show to start we could see, through the scrim, three chandeliers and Laurie said to me "Someone is going to be swinging from those soon."
She wasn't wrong. Four women, representing the clowns passed loves, came out and proceeded to do a whole aerial ballet which was really amazing. One detail I caught, only because I happened to look at just the right moment, was one of the women nearly clobbering someone in the audience as she took a running leap off a far exit point, hanging onto the chandelier. Her kick reached out over the head of the person sitting in the exact corner seat there, who flinched mightily. In a way it was nice to see that these people are people and therefore not perfect.
The Cyr Wheels were also amazing, but I've always been found them. These are the big single hoops which an acrobat braces themselves into and then spins around in, doing continuous cartwheels and other stunts. Always wanted to try that.
And then there was the highwire act. This was good, but in my opinion probably the weakest part of the first act. Mainly because I think most people don't really realize just how hard it is, especially when the performer manages to make it look so effortless. She really was excellent, but managed to be so precise and controlled that she took some of the drama out as a result.
Her final bit was to actually walk up an inclined wire which is a real difficult feat to perform. Don't believe me? Try walking up a two inch wide inclined blank (45 degrees please) and then imagine how hard it is on a wire! The one thing that probably threw people off though is that the wire under her was moving in a continuous loop downwards. This gave her the appearance of "moon walking."
There were a couple of performers who were midgets. Mostly they were clowns, but they did have a couple of routines in the second act.
But the end of the first act involved the lady midget wearing a harness which attached her to a cluster of very large helium balloons. The size of the balloons combined with her small size basically turned her into a floating toy which got tossed into the audience where people could simply hold their palms up and launch her back to the stage. Very amusing, if slightly creepy. I would consider this to be the closest Cirque would come to doing a traditional "Side Show" act or stunt.
End Act 1.
The two scrims were lowered creating a corridor across the stage and as we watched we could see that they were setting up something for the next act. The Intermission was half an hour and it took them pretty much the entire time.
They set up the trapeze act.
This was the first, and only technical problem I had with the show, but I can't see how they could have solved it either. The Trapeze Act was strong. Probably the strongest thing in the entire second act, but because of the required setup there was no place they could put it except at the very beginning. As such, the rest of the act suffered by comparison.
But what a routine. A trapeze act with no trapeze! Everyone who went flying back and forth between the platforms did it completely on the strength of the catchers on each platform. No trapeze bars, just strong arms to catch and throw people. It was damn impressive.
And then back to the Ringmaster!
Once the trapeze act was over they lowered the lights so the stage crew could clear the setup, so you had to do something to distract the audience. For the next five minutes (it only took them FIVE MINUTES to strike the trapeze!) the Ringmaster performed out in the audience by whistling classical music! And I mean really whistling! He could hit those notes like you would not believe! I swear there must have been dogs across country who were perking their ears up and saying "What was that?"
Once the trapeze was struck, the Ringmaster and a few of the clowns and other performers ended up on stage to perform a complete musical number on Whistle, Water Goblets, Violin and Tibetan Bowls!
Again, very cool.
Then we got the aerial banner dance. I don't know what it's called, but that is the way I think of it. Basically it's the bit where the acrobat (usually a woman) suspends herself from long banners of cloth and wraps herself up and does various stunts while being swung around the stage.
I've lost my appreciation for this act unfortunately. The first time I saw it I liked it a lot. It impressed me. But I've seen it repeatedly since then and the act really doesn't seem to evolve any or, for that matter, connect all that well with the story. We started losing the story here and that made things a bit difficult to follow.
Yes, she did the routine well, but it just doesn't really do much for me anymore.
Next we had the weirdest moment of all. A juggling act involving balls, a hoop and one of those streamer toys. All good material. Except for the chickens. Just before this started the Ringmaster marched across stage yelling that he hates chickens. Then jugglers came on, doing some really impressive stuff that I want to try and figure out, but at the same time rubber chickens start falling from the sky.
Is this some kind of French thing or something? Neither of us got it at all. The act ended with the performers huddled under a large umbrella as a huge load of rubber chickens were dumped on them. They leave the stage and the Ringmaster, followed by four guys with brooms, comes back on the stage yelling about hating chickens.
I don't know. Strange. Not story related at all that we could figure.
Then the two midgets came back on stage and did one of those "strength" acts where they do balances and poses on a spinning platform. Interesting but again it didn't carry any of the story thread in it.
The next act didn't have any story thread in it either really, but it was so worth watching and really wish that Seamus could have been there to see it. It was a ladder walker and he was hilarious. His style was very frenetic but his balance was absolutely perfect. Most of the routine was done with a ladder that looked about seven feet tall to me, but after he finished that, one of the angels descended from the sky with a ladder that was at least twice that height. He only did one trick with it, but it was great. He got all the way to the top of that thing and stood, not on the highest rung, but two little platforms that topped the struts of the ladder. And was then rescued by the angel.
There was a comedic presentation of Romeo and Juliette done by the midgets in a stage they rolled out which I looked at and thought, "Wish I had a place to store something like that because it would make a great performing setup!"
Then there was the Teeterboard. Which was presented as some kind of "gang showdown." I liked this. It had a story again and was really impressive to watch the two rival heroes try and out do each other.
For the final routine they set up a series of horizontal bars for acrobatics. They actually had four set up in a square and two ends were flanked by another bar each. Then, on top of that they spun things in various directions, just to keep it interesting! So you had all these acrobats swinging around the horizontal bars, trading places and moving into and out of the basic "flight pattern" around the central square.
I know I keep saying this, but "VERY COOL!"
End Act 2.
Other moments to be remembered - well, with Cirque there is always various characters who are floating around the action, providing a certain amount of interaction or spectacle.
Because this was a vision of traveling to heaven, there were plenty of people who were dressed as angels running across the stage at various points, or floating down from the sky to watch and participate.
There were basically two images from these characters which stuck with me.
First was one of the angels. She floated down over the dwarf couple doing the "strength" act and dropped "snow" over them. Because of the music, the lighting and the general image this struck me as being very similar to the "Snowstorm" illusion I have performed on a few occasions, and even they they didn't do it as magic it was very magical to me.
Second, and I think much stronger then that, was one of the clowns walking across the highwire. Sounds simple enough yes? Sure it does. Until I tell you that he was walking on the UNDERSIDE OF THE WIRE!!!
That's all he did, but he was on the underside of the wire carrying a pair of candelabra whose flames were pointed down to the stage just as his head was. The illusion was absolutely brilliant.
That was a great moment.
It was a wonderful show. One of the better ones from Cirque I've seen in a while. Seeing it live certainly makes a difference and while I did feel that the second act wasn't as strong as the first, it was all still a really excellent show.
If you get a chance to see any Cirque show it's probably worth it, but I'd rate this one higher then most, probably because I like the story itself as much as anything else.
And come to think of it, there might just be one thing I can do to put a Cirque-like act into my flea circus...... hmmmm....
Thursday, January 19, 2006
A Solution in Search of a Problem
Over the years I've noticed that there are many magic dealers at there who churn out garbage. Okay, not a brilliant insight I realize, but recently I came across something that really amazed me, and not in a good way.
One of those dealers out there is now selling a product called "The Devil's Bottle."
The effect is simply that you show a glass bottle that is empty, you whack it up against something, but not to hard, to show that it is indeed a solid glass bottle. Then you give it to someone to hold on to (making sure that they hold it over a trash can or something like that) and with the "power of your mind" you cause the bottle to shatter in their hands.
Sounds pretty cool really. On the surface.
Then you start looking into it.
The price tag for this miracle is $1000.00! That's right. $1000.00.
For this miracle you get the secret and 12 prepared bottles.
Prepared bottles? Yes, you get told how to prepare your own bottles as well, but apparently they are expecting to sell replacement bottles along the way. They say so, but they haven't yet stated the price tag on said replacement bottles.
And apparently, from what I now know regarding the secret (revealed to me by someone who saw their science teacher do this about 60 years ago), it's not worth $100.00, let alone $1000.00.
Now here is the thing I mean about "A Solution looking for a Problem."
About three years ago someone was selling an illusion prop where you put a glass on a tray, set the tray down on a table, walk away and the concentrate and the glass shatters. Price tag: $50 (as I recall). Also, that was a remake of an even older version of the same product.
And if you were even remotely inclined towards being a tool user you could probably have built the gimmick for even less then that.
That's what I mean about "A Solution looking for a Problem." They wanted to go further by making the effect involve even less objects and more interactive, both good things, but in the process they "solved the problem" by creating a nightmare.
How much more effective would a good presentation around the old method be compared to creating a new method that is 20 TIMES MORE COSTLY?? Not to mention the replacement bottles in case you are not able to manufacture them yourself!
Great solution. Was there a problem here? Were magicians really clamoring for a "better" way to break a bottle so loudly that they would be willing to spend this kind of money on an effect with limited application anyway?
Or were they just hoping that somehow magicians were just stupid enough that they would part with $1000.00+ on something that would likely only ever get used a few times and then sit on the shelf next to their Imp Bottles?
One of those dealers out there is now selling a product called "The Devil's Bottle."
The effect is simply that you show a glass bottle that is empty, you whack it up against something, but not to hard, to show that it is indeed a solid glass bottle. Then you give it to someone to hold on to (making sure that they hold it over a trash can or something like that) and with the "power of your mind" you cause the bottle to shatter in their hands.
Sounds pretty cool really. On the surface.
Then you start looking into it.
The price tag for this miracle is $1000.00! That's right. $1000.00.
For this miracle you get the secret and 12 prepared bottles.
Prepared bottles? Yes, you get told how to prepare your own bottles as well, but apparently they are expecting to sell replacement bottles along the way. They say so, but they haven't yet stated the price tag on said replacement bottles.
And apparently, from what I now know regarding the secret (revealed to me by someone who saw their science teacher do this about 60 years ago), it's not worth $100.00, let alone $1000.00.
Now here is the thing I mean about "A Solution looking for a Problem."
About three years ago someone was selling an illusion prop where you put a glass on a tray, set the tray down on a table, walk away and the concentrate and the glass shatters. Price tag: $50 (as I recall). Also, that was a remake of an even older version of the same product.
And if you were even remotely inclined towards being a tool user you could probably have built the gimmick for even less then that.
That's what I mean about "A Solution looking for a Problem." They wanted to go further by making the effect involve even less objects and more interactive, both good things, but in the process they "solved the problem" by creating a nightmare.
How much more effective would a good presentation around the old method be compared to creating a new method that is 20 TIMES MORE COSTLY?? Not to mention the replacement bottles in case you are not able to manufacture them yourself!
Great solution. Was there a problem here? Were magicians really clamoring for a "better" way to break a bottle so loudly that they would be willing to spend this kind of money on an effect with limited application anyway?
Or were they just hoping that somehow magicians were just stupid enough that they would part with $1000.00+ on something that would likely only ever get used a few times and then sit on the shelf next to their Imp Bottles?
Monday, January 16, 2006
Hope for the Puppies
A glimmer of hope raised it's head the other day and I just had to share.
A new kid appeared on the forums I have been watching lately. He states flat out "I'm 15 years old and don't have much money" so we know where he is coming from. He then talks about what he's interested in and asks that dreaded questions: "What DVD's should I buy?"
Okay, why is this a "dreaded" question? Because DVD's and Videos do not teach new magicians to think. They teach them to repeat. Yes, I do indeed have a fair number of DVD's and Videos in my own library, but when I'm working out something new I always turn to my books first. Most often my Tartbell collection. And truth be told, I haven't purchased a new Instructional Magic DVD or Video in a long time.
But books! Ah, the books are there and every time I read them they are wonderful and I learn something new.
But I digress.
I responded to this young magician with the comment that if he was so short of cash he would be better served buying a couple of books (and I recommended a couple focusing on the areas he is interested in) and pointed out that for the same amount of money he could get five times as much useful material and be learning skills rather then repeating things that are being fed to him.
No real response from him.
But here is where the hope comes in.....
Other kids, the same age, jumped in and said "Yeah, what he said." There are kids out there, new magicians, who are starting off learning the value of books and basic skills. Who recognize that what they get from a book is ultimately better for their development as magicians then learning the "hot new tricks" being poured out of the magic marketing machine.
A bright bit of hope indeed.
A new kid appeared on the forums I have been watching lately. He states flat out "I'm 15 years old and don't have much money" so we know where he is coming from. He then talks about what he's interested in and asks that dreaded questions: "What DVD's should I buy?"
Okay, why is this a "dreaded" question? Because DVD's and Videos do not teach new magicians to think. They teach them to repeat. Yes, I do indeed have a fair number of DVD's and Videos in my own library, but when I'm working out something new I always turn to my books first. Most often my Tartbell collection. And truth be told, I haven't purchased a new Instructional Magic DVD or Video in a long time.
But books! Ah, the books are there and every time I read them they are wonderful and I learn something new.
But I digress.
I responded to this young magician with the comment that if he was so short of cash he would be better served buying a couple of books (and I recommended a couple focusing on the areas he is interested in) and pointed out that for the same amount of money he could get five times as much useful material and be learning skills rather then repeating things that are being fed to him.
No real response from him.
But here is where the hope comes in.....
Other kids, the same age, jumped in and said "Yeah, what he said." There are kids out there, new magicians, who are starting off learning the value of books and basic skills. Who recognize that what they get from a book is ultimately better for their development as magicians then learning the "hot new tricks" being poured out of the magic marketing machine.
A bright bit of hope indeed.
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
Searching for Inspiration
Where do you find inspiration?
It's interesting to me that many magicians don't seem to find inspiration at all. I mean that they simply use the "patter" that comes with the trick they bought and that is all they do.
The nature of the artist is, in my opinion, the ability to push yourself beyond the usual boundries. And if you look at the range of most popular magicians out there, they are all defined by the fact that they are inspired by something outside of the magic that they do.
Inspiration comes from so many places, but I've begun to wonder if inspiration is a kind of infinite loop. If each art form takes some inspiration from some other art form. Ultimately I suppose all of these art forms take their inspiration from life. The often repeated phrase "art imitates life" certainly comes to mind.
And certainly we have seen many a person who tries to live a life which imitates art.
Is there really a circle of inspiration here?
Makes me wonder.
It's interesting to me that many magicians don't seem to find inspiration at all. I mean that they simply use the "patter" that comes with the trick they bought and that is all they do.
The nature of the artist is, in my opinion, the ability to push yourself beyond the usual boundries. And if you look at the range of most popular magicians out there, they are all defined by the fact that they are inspired by something outside of the magic that they do.
Inspiration comes from so many places, but I've begun to wonder if inspiration is a kind of infinite loop. If each art form takes some inspiration from some other art form. Ultimately I suppose all of these art forms take their inspiration from life. The often repeated phrase "art imitates life" certainly comes to mind.
And certainly we have seen many a person who tries to live a life which imitates art.
Is there really a circle of inspiration here?
Makes me wonder.
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
Magic Puppies Revisited
Not to long ago I was discussing Magic Puppies and how I found myself in the position of being more like one of "the old guys" then one of the young guys.
I had been considering it for some time now, but I decided to go ahead and ask about establishing a new forum on their list. They have forums for cards and coins and rope and videos and other such things.
They had no forum for "creativity."
Now they do. And I'm the moderator.
I guess that makes sense, since I suggested it and I offered, but now I'm committed, or at least I should be.
These really are kids. The other day I took a look at videos one of them posted of himself doing a couple of card tricks. I use the word trick deliberately here because they weren't good enough to be 'effects.' The videos were horrible. I was diplomatic but I really wanted to say "What the heck were you thinking?"
Well now there is a forum for discussing creativity and character development. Now I'm sheperding people online in discussions that will hopefully open their eyes to ways to be more then just the average finger flicker.
I hope.
I had been considering it for some time now, but I decided to go ahead and ask about establishing a new forum on their list. They have forums for cards and coins and rope and videos and other such things.
They had no forum for "creativity."
Now they do. And I'm the moderator.
I guess that makes sense, since I suggested it and I offered, but now I'm committed, or at least I should be.
These really are kids. The other day I took a look at videos one of them posted of himself doing a couple of card tricks. I use the word trick deliberately here because they weren't good enough to be 'effects.' The videos were horrible. I was diplomatic but I really wanted to say "What the heck were you thinking?"
Well now there is a forum for discussing creativity and character development. Now I'm sheperding people online in discussions that will hopefully open their eyes to ways to be more then just the average finger flicker.
I hope.
Monday, January 02, 2006
New Year's Eve in Review
Well, that was cool!
This year for New Year's Eve I spent the evening at a friends house and using everyone who came as a test audience for "Professor Scratch's Flea Circus - Something Itchy This Way Comes!"
Everyone was great! The Circus went over beautifully and I had one heck of a time performing it.
I'm going to have to spend some time writing down all the jokes that people offered up to add to the act afterwards. There was some great stuff and of course I've already begun planning the additions to the Circus that I want.
Princess Tiffany certainly won over hearts. She's so cute that way. I'm starting to think that I might have to keep her and Katinka seperated though. They are starting to compete for peoples attention.
Guiseppe broke his high diving record and now he wants a medal for his bathing suit. Where the heck can you pin a medal on flea sized Speedo?
Kalishnakof is starting to yell. I think his hearing is going, but then that cannon is loud.
But it was definitely a great show and everyone had a good time!
What more could you want really?
This year for New Year's Eve I spent the evening at a friends house and using everyone who came as a test audience for "Professor Scratch's Flea Circus - Something Itchy This Way Comes!"
Everyone was great! The Circus went over beautifully and I had one heck of a time performing it.
I'm going to have to spend some time writing down all the jokes that people offered up to add to the act afterwards. There was some great stuff and of course I've already begun planning the additions to the Circus that I want.
Princess Tiffany certainly won over hearts. She's so cute that way. I'm starting to think that I might have to keep her and Katinka seperated though. They are starting to compete for peoples attention.
Guiseppe broke his high diving record and now he wants a medal for his bathing suit. Where the heck can you pin a medal on flea sized Speedo?
Kalishnakof is starting to yell. I think his hearing is going, but then that cannon is loud.
But it was definitely a great show and everyone had a good time!
What more could you want really?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
