This i think is a very over-looked idea stemming from the fact that we aren't hailed as sorcerors with amazing and uncanny powers like the conjurors from the past, who demonstrate feats of inhuman strength or resilience. The modern magician, though typically similar to the conjurors of the past are looked at and act like the supernatural of the past and the magic of today are two distinct abilities, one a mortal imitation of the divine other.

What then is the implication this brings to the quality of magic we perform, and the reactions that we get?

Suppose you perform a simple ace assembly where after repeated attempts at separating the aces, they all appear in one pile at the end. If performed well, the spectator/s would no doubt be amazed, but after the
amazment, surprise and novelty, the question that begs is :"so what?" But suppose someone says "i'm starving" and you ask him to look in his left coat, in which he finds a sandwhich. This has a point, it makes sense, and although we cannot perform such miracles, we can add meaning to the tricks that we know in this similar way.

If we could really do magic, why waste it on a pack of cards? Why not produce gold from your hands and become a philantropist? Why not predict all the soccer match scores and make you and your friends rich?

These are logical things a true worker of magic would do, instead of playing around with cards. Although we obviously can't do thoes things, we can make it seems as if we have used our magical talents purposefully by adding meaning to our tricks and turning them into illusions.

The fact that the performer claims a supernatural power and proposes to demonstrate it arouses attention. It gives the spectators a definite idea on which to focus: Can this man substantiate his claim? instead of How is he doing it? Therefore the mental attitude of the spectator is one of conviction between success and failure and not that the performer is using deception to achieve his end.

A typical trick has no meaning beyond the fact that it presents a puzzle and challenges an audience to find the solution. Many people find puzzles dull, and conjuring puzzles are not likely to fascinate most.

Furthermore, conjuring puzzles have one fatal weakness: When a spectator meets a challenge by solving the puzzle, the magician loses. When the spectator fails, the regards the conjuring puzzle like any other puzzle; he gives up and feels entitled to be told the answer. This places the performer in an utterly insolvable dilemma. If he refuses to divulge the secret, the spectators feel frustrated and resentful; if the conjuror yields, the explanation seems so trivial that they feel let down.

When we supply meaning, we eliminate the challenge, and the puzzle becomes secondary. After the climax, the spectator may wonder how it was achieved. But even then, the puzzle element is greatly weakened. In
fact, if the meaning is made strong enough, many spectators may not even realize that there is any puzzle to solve. I'm sure all of us have experienced spectators buggings us to tell them how a trick is done, and i'm sure all of us have felt the same way as the magician did in the previous paragraph. In today's context, it is increasingly impossible to create illusions as opposed to tricks because of the drastically increased amounts of skepticism we face in our audiences as well as the way we present oursleves as distinct artists from the sorcerors of the past.

I am not supposing that we all don robes and pretend to pray to satan while creating scary but undoubtedly convincing illusions. It is impractical and completely inappropriate in today's world. But we still need something that can eliminate the puzzle, a sense of meaning stemming from a logical step a true magician would take had he really had the powers he claimed. These are a few points that I feel can help the modern magician to find that meaning and to apply it consistently throughout his routines.

1. Expand your repertoire.

It makes no sense that you can only perform magic with cards and nothing else, unless you can give a detailed and convincing explanation on the magical ability of cards and how they amplify your talents, which ithink can never be convincing.

2. Present your material as experiments and not as magic tricks.

It can't be helped that in the past a performer of magic did not need to hide his identity as a magician to perform convincing illusions. Skepticism is a prevailent way of life now, and so we need to change with the times. If you come in and say proudly that your going to perform "a magic trick with a pack of cards" while flourishing them obsenely and flouting your digital dexterity right in front of their faces, they will treat your trick with skepticism and will do nothing except try to solve the puzzle your smugly presenting to them.
If however you say you want to try out an experiment, on say subconscious memory and say that everyone has an amazing subconscious memory, almost savant-like, then people will challenge your claim and you can respond with an OUT OF THIS WORLD routine.
Or you can start a conversation about extra-sensory perception and with that idea, perform a mentalism routine disguised as an experiment of ESP. As we can see, if done properly, the puzzle element is completely gone.

3. If possible try to stay away from mainstream or exploited magics.

If spectators have already seen a similar trick performed by someone else, the amazement factor is gone and that just leaves the puzzle, or even worse, a puzzle with no solving interest. Personally rubber-band routines for me are completely boring just because of the fact that they are known to be able to do knotting tricks with that have no amazing or meaningful element in it. Not only are rubberbands completely unmagical objects, they are difficult to create convincing illusions with and the puzzles themselves are boring and uninteresting. ( this is a personal opinion and no one should feel offended by it unless they value my opinion or find some truth in my point of view, both of which are not common in one who could feel offended by this)
Again, in my opinion, following this train of thought, i believe mentalism can have the most potential meaning infused into it.

4. Perform to people who don't personally know you.

Its a no-brainer.

5. ... No, i think thats about it.

Lastly i'd like to say that i don't think that there is much wrong in wanting to perform just for the sake of the puzzle. Although the starting motivation may be an egoistical holier than thou sentiment that is by most means a destructive approach to the art of magic, it does have benefits, and that is the motivation to perform the very best one can, unlike a performer who has the spectators minds in his control and therefore
becomes complacent digitally. But in the end, adding meaning makes life just so much easier and increases the reactions you get. It also turns you into a more respectable person, and you'll always have the audiences
undivided attention. I think that bodes well on all accounts.

Summary of your article in one sentence:

Perform magic with meaning, because it's more solid that way.

There are a few points I disagree with or doubt and would like to question you:

1. An ace assembly has its implications and meaning: it can be either that you are unbeatable in poker, you are some gambling king, you are an excellent magician or an excellent entertainer. Don't stop thinking too soon and be restricted by "so what?" Every effect has its meaning, or at least has a potential for its meaning. It's up to the magician to add the implications in him or herself.

2. If you had REAL magic powers (whatever that is), would you use it for selfish purposes, or noble purposes? Admit it, human nature includes something called Greed, and if someone REALLY had magical powers, he'll probably make the whole world his slaves or something.

3. I don't like the phrase "Why waste it on a pack of cards?"

4. "Typical" tricks are not meant to be puzzles. They seem like puzzles because you perform them badly, or with the wrong attitude and mindset. (I agree that by adding your own meaning to your magic, puzzle mindsets can be reduced. But remember, meaningful magic done with the wrong attitude still leads to puzzlemania.)

5. Doing card flourishes obscenely and arrogantly "in their faces" is wrong. Doing card flourishes to enhance magic is good. To me, you give the impression that you believe card flourishes make people "skeptical" of your magic and makes magic puzzles. I totally disagree.

6. Have you even tried rubberband effects before? Your view on rubberband magic is extremely one-sided and unsubstantiated. Many amazing effects have been created with rubberbands, and believe me, they are very workable, very practical and is no less amazing than the next card trick or mentalism effect.

7. I realised that in your whole article, you seem to be putting forth the idea of magicians portraying themselves as people who can work the supernatural. Therefore, there are a few things that came out from such an idea: the redundancy of a pack of cards, mentalism should be the strongest, audience thinking you have supernatural abilities... I don't really agree on such a view, because it doesn't hold water - keep in mind that in between the 1300s to the 1700s (if I remember correctly) it was the days of burning witches. People were afraid of magicians because, well, they had supernatural powers! These miracle men had convinced people SO well that they were supernatural, that people started to fear them - especially the royalty and the church leaders back then. There were attempts to stop such a misconception, such as the publication of The Discoverie of Witchcraft by a judge named Reginald Scot towards the end of the 1500s. It wasn't until people such as Isaac Fawkes and Robert Houdin came along and made magic respectable again, simply by making magicians entertainers and modern. No longer was there the "holier-than-thou" attitude in magicians, and look at how much magic has progressed!

I do not deny that even till now, audiences do have that subconcious thought of magicians like us are "miracle men" who can do anything they want with their "powers".

Bottom line is: you can choose how you wish to portray yourself as. A supernatural being? A magician who entertains through amazement? It's all up to you - no choice is necessarily wrong or right.

Second bottom line is: Never debunk any magic effect as "meaningless" and should never be performed. Every effect has its potential for meaning. The meaning can be as complex as how it links to someone in real life, or as simple as "I'm just here, as a magician, to entertain you all. Hope you like my magic effects."

And yeah, meaningful magic rocks.

Thank you Harapan Ong for giving such a detailed criticism on what i wrote. Its going to be difficult to answer most of your questions especially since i don't disagree with them.

Using powers for selfish gain is indeed a natural choice for most people, but thats a problem that can't be solved so theres really nothing more to say.

Flourishing is a good thing, but too much is not. I know sometimes i seem totally against flourishing but its just that it never really helped me personally.

Yes, that rubberband thing is a rant, and in my defence i did mention that it was a personal and subjective opinion.

And i completely agree with your first bottom line, its basically my point as well.

I hope i answered some of your questions.

I think it all boils down to one thing.

What is the meaning of magic?

Is it to perform tricks where your audience knows that its a trick but are still amazed? Or is it just to entertain them? Or is it to present the impossible?

Even Lance Burton, tells his audience that his magic is tricks. David Copperfield admits that he misdirects his audience.

In my opinion, the meaning of magic is a subjective thing. I perform almost all effects that I like, and my audience tells me which is the impressive. I scrap those which don't get praises.

And lastly regarding playing the role of a sorceror or claiming supernatural powers, i have one more thing to add that i neglected to mention, this is an excerpt from "magic and showmanship" by Henning Nelms:

Realistic illusions raise the question of ethics. Conjuring, like poker has its own code; some deceptions are permissible, others are unforgivable. No one expects a poker player to tell the truth about the cards he holds. However, if you try to deceive by dealing from the bottom of the deck, you may be shot, injured, and you will certainly been shunned. A conjuror is allowed to lie about his methods but not to leave his audience with the belief that he really possesses supernatural powers. Men like John Scarne and Frank Garcia spend much of their time exposing dishonest gamblers, and the magic profession as a whole has done more to combat fake spiritualism than all other groups combined. The difference between a charlatan and a conjuror is comparable to that between a real-life faker and an actor who plays the role of the faker.
Even if ethics were not involved, you would be foolish to delude people about your powers. If you present a cold reading effect and leave your audience with the belief that you are a genuine astrologer, you get no credit for performing an illusion. Furthermore, some spectator will buttonhole you later and bombard you with questions that you cannot answer. When some trusting souls asks, ' Is my husband true to me?" or "should i make this investment?" you have no advice to give. But if you refuse to give any, your questioner is sure to think that you lack the will to help him and cannot be convinced that you lack the power.
The conjurer needs both deception and conviction. Where does the deception cease to be legitimate and become both unethical and a source of future embarrassment? Fortunately the answer is easy. We should deceive our audiences about our devices but merely convince them about the supernatural powers we imitate. The deception should be permanent; the conviction should never be more than temporary.
When you give a realistic presentation, by all means convince the spectators as thoroughly as possible. However, disillusion them at the end of the performance. As you are about to leave, make some remark like "Don't tell anyone that i can read the stars, they won't believe you, and besides, it was just amazing luck." This eliminates any deceit, but it reveals nothing about how the effect was achieved. On the contrary, it creates a new mystery. You have amazed your friends by presenting a strange phenomenon. You now astonish them by divulging the fact that they cannot credit what they saw.



This is the idea that i'm trying to put across, which is i think a realistic and less troublesome approach to playing the role of a magician. I'm sorry if i didn't explain it better before. I trust this magician has put it in the best way anyone can.

I hope i answered some of your questions

This is the thread of long posts. I wonder how many bothered to read this far. B) Good thread.

Just one more point I would like to add....
I feel there is a difference between "purpose" and "meaning" in magic.

Like what Lumpy suggested, if someone mentioned that they are hungry and you make a sandwich appear, that is "purposeful magic". There is a reason to do it. (To satisfy someone's hunger)
Plucking a rose out of the air and giving it to a girl is "purposeful" magic. (To present the girl with a gift)
Turning a cup of coffee into a cup of coins for a street begger is "purposeful" magic. (An act of practical charity)
Pulling a burger out of a signboard is "purposeful" magic. (Magically producing food)
There is a "reason" to perform these feats. And these are usually impactful and impressive. It is great if you can come up with a plausible "reason" for your magic.

However, i think for a great number of magic effects, it is difficult to put a purpose to it (try explaining most manipulative acts). Or at least, it's almost childishly far-fetched when you try to put a purpose to it.
But is it complusary to have a purpose/reason in your magic?
Does fire twirling has a purpose? Does hip hop dancing has a purpose? But these (when done well) are entertaining right? And I don't mean cracking a joke every minute kind of entertaining.

I feel it's possible to still give magic "meaning" without "purpose".
When I say "meaning" I mean it very broadly and ambiguously as an emotional edge. Let me explain what i mean.
You take a card, you tear it up, and then you restore it. Great. But why the hell do you wanna tear it up in the 1st place if you are gonna restore it? Seems like a pointless exercise.
But if the card is the world's most valuable baseball card. The implied meaning (risk) is now much greater, with the same meaningless exercise. It is now much more interesting to watch.
You are going to make a big structure disappear for 1 min and then appear again. Why? Whatever for? No real purpose right?
But if this is the Statue of Liberty, one of the world's most recognised structures, and America's pride and symbol of freedom. Now the implied meaning (emotional attachment) is much enhanced. It is now interesting to watch.
And it doesn't have to be this drastic all the time either. Even things like multiplying balls, linking rings, cups and balls, dove magic, card manipulation etc. Now these are acts that's REALLY difficult to give a (believable) purpose. But by using other dramatic elements and tools (conflict/resolution, theatrical twists/surprises, choreography/music, composition/routining etc) it is still possible (albeit difficult) to have a nice act that can be enjoyed by layman. Even if the act broken down seems like a pointless demostration.
Meaning without purpose.

That's my 2 cents.

I would just like to point out that Aloy has got a good point there. Read it guys, and digest it.

Although we cannot always attach some emotional/sentimental element to every effect we do, I still believe laymen enjoy our performances.

I mean, I just find it lame to try attach some emotional feeling to every effect you do, such as like, saying how these 2 worn and tattered rubberbands were passed down from your great-grandfather from China and now it's in your hands, glowing with pride and diginity of Ancient China's glory, and then proceed to do a Crazy Man's Handcuff.

Some effects can still be done well without a really solid purpose. But magic should always have a meaning so that people will not think "So what?" after your show.

- harapan. magic!

EDIT: I had a discussion with a friend of mine, and we came up with a definiton I like. PURPOSE of magic means WHY YOU DO IT, while MEANING of magic means WHAT YOUR AUDIENCES PERCEIVES IT TO BE. Purpose can be fixed by yourself (such as you do magic or you do this specific effect because you want to entertain etc) but the meaning of the magic you do depends largely on WHAT your audiences thinks, and HOW you present it. IF your purpose and meaning matches, then you have successfully gotten the message across.

Glad you liked it. :) Just some thoughs, maybe someone else would like to share theirs too.

I just want to clarify that when i say "purposes", i meant perceived purpose, not practical purpose. I.e. to find an "excuse" to do what you gonna do.
Example, to give a purpose to walking thru a glass panel, pretend to be kept out of a club by a bouncer, so you had to go in thru some other way, ala T.H.E.M.

Motivated and situational magic will always play stronger to people.

Which is exactly why our "street magicians" on TV are an instant hit, be it with magicians or with the public. We then think to ourselves "oh my, that was a great idea..." or "gosh, great presentation for a..."

We see Cyril separate chopsticks in a restaurant.
We see Derren perform with photos of dead people with an undertaker at a cemetery.
We see Blaine produce coins in a coffee cup for a poor man.

We fail to realise that these TV productions create the situations but make the sets seem impromptu. We can also re-create these situations in our daily casual performances. It's the framing of the effect, and waiting for the right moment, then only doing 1 appropriate effect that will leave your echoes behind.

You could perform a haunted deck casually, just doing it. Or you could wait, make them ask you to show them a trick, refuse politely, steer conversation towards spirits, make them beg to show them a trick, refuse, talk somemore, then perform that one thing before leaving - and leave it at that.

Think of situational magic like situational comedy. Some jokes are funny, but will send everyone rolling if delivered during the right time.

Finally, I managed to read through the posts and get a grab of understanding of what others said about magic.

To me, the meaning of magic is very much similar to what the rest of you are thinking. But there are some points that I will highlight also in my views.

Some people only stick with mentalism or maybe only card tricks, because of some personal reasons or their preference. Let say me, I don't do coin magic mainly because I wear rings on my fingers and the clicking sound is a getaway, I don't do rope because I don't like the idea of rope magic. Thats a few example. Like Mr Pam, he cannot do a pass or a double lift (Maybe he does know now), mainly because he wants to appear simple to the audience, no special movement, but simple genuine moves. (Thats my thinking when I know him)

So I think it is not necessary to expand your repertoire, but further more, expand your knowledge about magic, the principals behind each effect, each performer. I feel, it is this principals that build a magician into knowing what he is expecting and what he can discover. And also, by widening your knowledge over magic, you get to know what you can do, what you cannot do, what is your favorite. And the most important, the things that you can confidence pull it off.

I like the idea of using the experiment way of expressing magic, because it doesn't give the audience too much hope that you creating a big miracle, but space for them to know that, WOW it be great that it works. And things like that. Experiment is also a back up situation when everything fails on you, and you can back out easily without much damage. Protraying myself as a slave of satan or someone that holds supernatural power is a no no to me, because most people in singapore are very hostile, if you can make a card fly today, why you cannot make a card fly tomorrow? Since you can read my mind, then why still take exams? Thus, the using of experiment give a free play when this situation happens, "It doesnt always works, but lets give it a try" Space is then given, room for failure is also available.

Another point of reading up on different magic and materials also give you a chance to develop different styles or routine for a similar effect done by others. A normal biddle effect can be handled differently with different presentations. That gives you room on what should be in, what should not be in.

Lastly before I go on and on, I think its up to an individual on how he see magic is. Is magic a rice bowl to him that he need to do impactful magic each time and differently? Or is magic just a interest for him to show off to his friend? Or is magic a source of education for you to look at things differently?

For me, I take the last one, because ever since I started magic, I appreciate things more and think more, its like, you don't need 52 cards to do an effect, just 1 can be good enough. :)

Larry