I have been thinking about how magic should be presented. How do you all like to present your magic and routines? Do you like your magic visual? Or meaningful?

Visual magic eg: Colour changes, flourishy productions.

Meaningful magic eg: every magic effect has a meaning to it.

So, for example 'invisible palm', it is very visual if you do it silently. But many prefer to give it meaning by adding patter like 'how to cheat in card game'.

Ambitious card, card in middle jumps to top, very visual. But some choose to use the 'cheating in card game' theme, others have interesting patter with meaning.

Colour changing deck. Do you give a reason why the deck changes to a colour? or do you let the spectators notice the change in colour and not say anithing about it.

What does it mean to show visual magic without much meaning? But also, why must we give a reason for every effect we present? What do you guys think?


ZiAn

Due to my experience with Uncle Charles, I would say meaningful.

Even within visual magic (the way you defined it), I think you need to provide a meaning as to why that thing is happening. To paparphraze something from Henning Nelms' Magic and Showmanship:If you suddenly produce a hotdog sandwich, it will mean nothing. But if your friend is hungry, you produce a hotdog sandwich for him to eat.... now that's magic.

Yes, though I can write it down now, more often than not, I failed to put it in parctice, as evident from the Uncle Charles incident.

Axl I don't know if you can remember our discussion that day (I think it was lennart green's lecture) where I stated what my main problem was with mentalism? i.e there is no 'logic' in most mentalism effects. We didn't finish the discussion, but what I actually meant to say was this:

Without meaning, magic is a puzzle. Because all puzzles must have answers, your spec will automatically look for answers. This is an automatic response, and it is not the spec's fault and neither is he being a 'heckler'.

To prevent this, I believe one must have meaning in the magic. This serves 2 purposes:

1) If proper meaning is ascribed to the effect, magic is no longer a puzzle.
2) If the attached emotions are strong enough, they can override the natural reaction from the spec to 'figure out' the effect. I call it emotional misdirection. Derren Brown uses this all the time. If you are interested, you can read more about it in his books.

As for the meaning itself, no need so cheem. Simple humour is good enough. I also like to talk about the gambling habits of the Chinese race - since that is the most logical frame to put card effects into.

My 2c.

I remebered Richard Osterlind performed a mind reading effect with cards. It totally blew everyone away. He ends the effect by saying "Maybe we should have a poker game later?"

Yes, the effect shows that he can read minds. But why? What are the meanings and implications of that ability? Richard gave the audience a reason for doing that mind reading effect. He let's the audience imagine what he is capable of if he used that ability in a poker game.

At first the audiences might be thinking "How did he do that?'
After giving the mentalism effect meaning, they will be thinking "Wow, imagine what he could do with that!" They already subconsiously accept the "fact" that Richard can indeed read people's mind.

Yup, it is not easy to attach meaning to every single piece of magic.

May be the title should be changed, since I don't think there are definite ways to present magic, but some ways are certainly more artistic than the others. For instance, I suppose you can say that a meaningful trick is more artistic, while that of a visual flourishy no-presentation trick is less so.

Also they are not exclusive, I am sure you can have a flourishy meaningful trick too. (As pointed out by Axl)

But what really is a meaningful trick? Well, thats a difficult question. And I admit I that I am not entirely sure myself? For instance, in the above threads. The word meaning is used with different meaning all together. (Haha, this is cute, its my second ambiguous sentence I have written in a week.)

For instance, in Axl's post:
He refer to meaning more as a justification of what we are doing? Why we are doing magic for instance.

Whereas in mattlee's post:
He is talking about humour, and quoting Derren Brown about emotion.

As for Ace, his meaning is somewhere between the two.

I would say meaning for me is more of mattlee's or Derren Brown's type. Emotions for instance. But meaning is not limited to emotions, may be it can be something thought provoking. May be it can be just to know the magician. Or as Eugene Burger put it, (or was it some other person?), an exploration of a character. Well, I suppose it can be anything that is interesting and worth the time of your audience. And I don't think every trick you do need to be meaningful either. And no one force you to be meaingful, too.

Just some food for thought:

Magic should be presented based on the context of the show, the audience, and venue/ environment. For discussion, I will call the above collectively ‘the context’ of the show.

We have ideals of how we want our magic to be presented and how we want our magic to impact our audience but one has to ensure that the context is suited for that.

Some examples will put this into perspective:

1) A David Blaine street magic style presentation will not work in a stage show for a formal corporate event setting
2) A theatrical presentation with emotion ala Copperfield will not work in a birthday party living room setting for 4 year old kids as the audience
3) A patter intensive ‘intellectual’ mentalsim piece ala Derren Brown would not work well in a family day show setting for a RC event where half the audience does not understand English

If your show context does not fit with your desired presentation of magic, then you have three options:

1) Change the context (your environment, audience etc). Do not perform in an environment not conducive to your desired presentation of magic
2) Change your expectation of how your magic is presented
3) Compromise and find some middle ground.

Finally, remember, you cannot please everyone (including yourself) and you cannot be everything to everyone all the time. Regardless who you are and what you do, there will be a percentage of people who will not be as enthusiastic about how you present your magic. The trick is to figure out how to ensure that this percentage of people is lower than those who like your magic.

Best,

J C

My opinion: No rules. Do whatever you want.

Mr JC Sum's point is closer to what I believe in. See what kind of situation you are in, and change accordingly.

- harapan. magic!

Thank you all for all your contribution. Allow me to just throw in a few more examples.

Imagine the classic Linking rings. Some do it with patter, some silent with music. Which do you think is stronger?

How about cups and balls? Most has patter. But Jason Latimer does his without patter and with transparent cups. Blooding visual. But what do you think he is trying to bring to the audience?

And of course the Ace assembly with patter but David Copperfield did his without. Do you all think that that has strengthen the effect or do you think that it actually has some shortcomings.

It's like in a colour changing deck routine, letting the audience suddenly see the cards change to another colour is very different from actually saying 'hmm actually i prefer my cards red', and then doing the change.

Am i making sense?

ZiAn

I'm not going into a long winded discussion here; I think JC has covered most of the relevant ideas in his post - do as the situation requires.

But I do want to emphasize that just as important as the context of your situation (ie setting, audience, etc), is also the message you wish for the audience to take home with them. It's important to keep that in mind when you're constructing your effect. What is it that you wish for them to take home with them after they have seen your performance? In other words, your measureable objectives (I think this is so common in the working world).

I'll just use the examples you gave to highlight a few points:

With patter - you're walking them through the process; intelligent and emotive patter can transcend music and take an audience through a SHARED EXPERIENCE or a SPECIAL MOMENT IN TIME. Novelists use this very effectively - that's why the written word will never die out.

Without patter; silent with music - this kind of performances can transport the audience into a fantasy world but they will be relegated mostly into a SIT AND WATCH position. It's possible to create emotion and even connections with the audience with good structuring in the routine, but the experience is more personal - one that the audience feels within himself.

Again, what do you want for your audience to feel? do you want them to say, "The card just APPEARED - he didn't do anything! It's just not possible!"

OR - do you want them to think you managed to SOMEHOW control that card to thë top in spite of the strongest scrutiny - "Damn; hé's good. I hope I never have to play cards with him!"

Both serve to provide a very magical and profound experience for your audience, but they take home VERY DIFFERENT feelings.

In the former case, they leave with a sense of wonder and awe. In the latter, it is a mixture of wonderment, awe and even a little trepidation.

It really depends on your purpose in performing and the character you wish to create in your audience's mind.

Once again, the message you send is different - in the first case, the message is "The cards changed colour on its own accord. OR it is due to the influence of the conditions they are subjected to."

In the second case, it's "I [the magician] can change the colour of the cards ANYTIME I wish to."

In BOTH cases, the subtext (unspoken; implicit message) is different.

I usually ask myself this question before I work on the presentation and structuring of my routines - "At the end of this effect, I want my AUDIENCE to FEEL/THINK ....."

I think it helps to be structured in constructing any effects. But how strong magic is depends on too many factors to simply tone it to presentation. I think every factor has an important role in creating a magical experience for your audience - the context, the subtext, the routine, the structure, your presentation, your character, etc. the list goes on and on and on. Only real experience performing will eventually help you figure out WHAT WORKS FOR YOU.

Seriously, nobody can truly tell you what works for YOU. It's a process that takes refinement and experimentation over a LONG period of performances. So theory aside, get your @$$ out there and perform MORE! :)

Shade

Well said guys ^_^ To sum it all up, I guess the magic word @ the end of the day is really CONTEXT! A lot of people don't know this, it's a secret but you REALLY, REALLY, REALLY need to work hard to create the right context for your performance to present magic in the way YOU want to leave the audience with the desired state that you want.

It's something I've learnt while working with J C & it's honestly quite amazing, the lengths and efforts we go to ensure that staging, lighting, sound, audience position & all the other essential elements are adjusted accordingly to make the show look the BESTEST it possibly can! :lol:

So yes. Contrarily to popular belief, you don't always have to fit your show into the environment. You can fit the environment to best make your show look good. Now, I completely agree with Shade. Theory aside, get your butt off that cushy chair in front of the computer and start performing for real... now!!!

;) Ning

You know what.

I was reading the mentalism book(I won't reveal what is it) and also keep mentioning about context, context and context.

I love JC Sum's description, and totally agree with it. Actually I got more to say regarding context.

I believe the Context that all of us is saying here, doesn't apply just during the act. It actually also applies before and after the act. And also, a Context doesn't mean just tons of words that come out from your mouth. Heard before "Actions speak louder than words".

Now to make things easier, I will explain what i meant further. Some people, esp David Copperfield, likes to do slient acts, illusions. But ever realise that he actually says alot of things before the acts are performed? Also, during the act, he used visual actions and gestures, to suggest what he going to do, whats going to happen. After the act, he also further say about the history or any stories that he can link up to.

From here, you guys are wondering, how does it going to link with meaningful and visual aspect of magic? I will say that this 2 are really linked together, deeply. Why? A very well developed visual magic will deliver a very meaningful visual aspect to the audience. A very well presented meaningful act, will deliver a very strong visual in their mind. Let say, I say, I have a black cat in the room, So you are already thinking of a black cat in the room. Its a visual aspect but doesnt happen live.

From my view, be it a slient act or not, the aspect of the magic is to deliver IMPACT to the five senses, be it sight, smell or hear, touch, or taste. Once the IMPACT is delivered, the impression that its a fanastic magic will be implanted into the audience. I believe no act is slient, because all acts delivers loud and strong impressions to people in their five senses.

The only act that is slient, is when slient is delivered to the audience's though, and that will happen in a library. :)

Wah Shade, my fullest respect for you once again man. You have gotten magic down to the finest detail.

And to everyone else, your posts were truly enlightening.

So now, what is the solution?

Should we have one trick that can fit into many different context?
Or have many tricks, each fitting into a different context?
Or should know some tricks, and find contexts that are suitable for these tricks?

I imagine that either way, you can be rather successful. I am not talking about professional making big money successful. But smaller scale success, like whenever you perform be it to friends or strangers. Adopting any of the above tactics, you should be able to deliver your magic to your audience relatively well. But, which strategy do you think is the best? And more importantly, which strategy do you adopt?


ZiAn

In general, all applies.

Its up to you as a performer, on how you deliver your product. I personally will look at the audience, if he/she is the direct concept, I do the magic flat, straight, not much explantations. Though as some point, this kind of people will not have the greatest impact, but at least, you won't bored them because they know you are telling a story, and magic to them, are all about speed.

Another type will be the listener, those people listen to what you say, even though you not doing magic to them, those people, you can enjoy your pace and take your time, make sure that everything was neat and clear, and you got a good magic ahead.

So in general, I guess, looking at your audience, choosing the correct style to go ahead with the magic is also quite important, unless you telling me a threatre style, then its different again.

Hope it helps.

In David Stones' dvd, he mentioned that magic(but in his case, table hopping) is like a commercial break. And there are people that like and dislike commercial breaks. Some commercials are good some isn't. How you perform, the audience will be the same. If you're serious, your audience will be seious in catching you and make you nervous as they are feeling when you perform. And if you're relaxed, they'll feel slack like you and the whole effect will end with fun and laughter.

What JCSum and Harapan Ong said is very true, perform accordingly to situation, is the same things as when to crack a joke. And when to get down to business.

Finally, I think if you're confused on which is the best, just go out there any perform, maybe can vary your performance style in a single event.

my thoughts

Hi ZiAn,

To answer your question specifically, which I think has not been done:

As a performer, regardless of amateur, semi pro or pro, this what should be done (and is done) by top magicians.

Regardless whether it is an impromptu casual or formal stage performance, prepare various effects, routines or sets that fall into different catergories that will fit different contexts (as per my definition above).

As a general guide:

1) Multi-purpose Routines - These are routines and effects that you can perform under any condition, regardless of venue, audience etc. Ideally, you could perform these routines with full patter, abbreviated patter or even silent.

For eg, I have my dependable Coins Across, Fork Bending, Nut & Rope, Coin Bending, a dozen Card Effects, Mentalism effects that fit into this category

2) Conditional Routines - These are versatile effects that can be performed in most conditions but are subject to simple set-ups, certain angles, lighting, right audience etc.

For me, I would place my Bill Switch, Floating Bill, more patter intensive/ intellectual routines like my presentation for Kollosal Killer, certain gimmick deck routines ec.

3) Presentation Showpieces - These are strong routines that require the right place, time, audience to perform to pull off well. Usually, confined to more formal performances (not necessarily paid but situations where you can perform your environment, audience position, lighting etc) These routines may also require elaborate set-ups or pre-show work etc.

For me, this might be my goldfish production, dice routine, cups & balls, most table work, gambling demos etc.

All the above are my close-up stuff. THe stage goes for stage and illusions. Different acts for all occasions and special illusions for special shows that allow for the staging of them.


If you design and chose your various effects wisely based on the above citeria, you will be able to create the right magic (that you desire) in the right context, in most cases.

Best of luck,

J C

Wow, JC Sum, that was damn insightful. Thank you very much. That really placed me on the right track in dividing my routines into categories.


ZiAn