To be (you), or not to be (you).

[Toby]

I just red in another thread (Skilled Hobbyist vs. Magician) something that got me thinking. Benjamind said this: "People - performers - need to put some freakin' personality into their performances (for REAL PEOPLE, NOT THE CAMERA) if they want an inkling of a good reaction. Be funny. Be stupid. Be silly. Make them laugh."
And I was thinking: "Wait, wouldn't that just draw attention away from astonishment?" What I mean is, if I saw some magician who is goofy and silly and pretend to be stupid, at the end of the performance I would think "wow, he is really funny, and that was a good trick." The key word is TRICK.

Like Andrew Gerard said on TA, if you present yourself like "Hello, my name is *name*, and I'm a magician" the people will say "Ok, show us a trick."
Also David Blaine questioned great Dai Vernon. Vernon said "never perform magic without patter", and David Blaine question that, and did the opposite. And we can all see where did that thinking got him today. Blaine said that people who can really do magic, they wouldn't narrate their performance, they would just do it (his example was rock into sand) without any word, or they may only say "watch, look, look, watch"
I agree with Blaine on this one. And admire him. Would any of you EVER question great great Dai Vernon?

So, where is the line between great patter and not saying a word and let magic speak for itself? Where is the line between being silly/funny and being mysterious and magical? And where is the line between showing a TRICK and showing something incredible that will leave audience in pure astonishment?

Thank you for reading

 

[The Tumbleweed]

So Vernon said to always have a good presentation, and Blaine does stuff without speaking.
That's just Blaine's character, and not speaking is his way of having a good presentation.
So Blaine isn't going against Vernon at all, he's just personalising his performances.

 

[Toby]

So Vernon said to always have a good presentation, and Blaine does stuff without speaking.
That's just Blaine's character, and not speaking is his way of having a good presentation.
So Blaine isn't going against Vernon at all, he's just personalising his performances.

Ups, my bad. Vernon said "Never present magic without patter" and Blaine said "That doesn't make any sense".

Hope it is more clear now, thanks for pointing my mistake.

 

[aznofspades]

Depends how you prioritize;

If you put Magic Over Comedy (MOC!!) and you respect the magic moments and don't tell jokes that would distract the audience from the effect it is effective. This is why I completely shut up during the climax. The jokes before kinda show my personality and frame the effect (setup) and the climax (punchline)

David Blaine showed a different approach to magic. His patter is carefully scripted to give off the impressions he wants it to. I think he's just expressing his dislike for absolute rules in an artform.

 

[praetoritevong]

The issue I see is that very little magic speaks for itself. Turning sand into rock? Alright. Make three selections appear in the middle of the deck between four face up aces? Huh. What David Blaine does works for David Blaine (and for camera). Could he become better if he adopted Vernon's approach? Debatable. But I would simply like to add that Vernon is considered the greatest of all time. Blaine is considered very good. *shrug* Not criticising either, just a few observations. Anyway my brain hurts, I'm off to bed. The line, if it exists, is a figment of only our creativity.

 

[Jessb1]

Personality makes the magic seem more real and less like a routine.

 

[Lex]

So, where is the line between great presentation and not saying a word and let magic speak for itself? Where is the line between being silly/funny and being mysterious and magical?

I'm not sure I would equate Blaine not speaking with him having no presentation: his patter is just all nonverbal (see also: Teller). He has a strong enough personality and presence that he can use gestures and simple descriptions to accomplish what requires words and a story for other people. I wouldn't say the magic "speaks for itself" any more for Blaine than for the Professor; Blaine just speaks less while doing it.

Is that "better"? No, just different. That's the style that works for him, because he can pull it off (as praetoritevong said). In order to make a less verbal style work, you would have to have very strong acting skills: your gestures would have to be definitive and concise, with no wasted motion (the nonverbal equivalent of mumbling). It would also have to fit the persona you're projecting: imagine Derren Brown doing a routine nonverbally. Doesn't really work, does it?

The line between funny and mysterious is wherever you want it to be: either one (or both) can work for the right person. And both can have a shattering impact on the audience.

But this gets back to another bromide: Know Your Audience. If you're performing for the Peoria Bar Association, you know you're facing a bunch of lawyers who will analyze a trick to death because they deal in words. Fool the intellect: someone like Derren Brown would send them through the roof. On the other hand, if you're playing Club Midnyte Vampirica, you're probably looking at a more Gothic crowd, and a louder venue. So break out your Edwardian collars and work on a routine with dramatic gestures, much bowing, and little speaking.

In either location, for either audience, you can play to humor or to seriousness and astonish the audience. But you still have to know your audience, and perhaps adapt your presentation to accommodate them.

 

[michael_weiss]

Well i always believed that when performing i of course introduced myself, an i build the connection tween me an my audience. I try an indulge them into impossiblities, so wen i perform, i jus give them subtleties in verbal commands an slowly make them anticipate the final outcome, it really helps with my performance, plus i incorporate styles of diffrent performers an sorta mold it into something workable.

 

[Toby]

When I said "presentation", I meant "patter". I corrected that now. My bad.

I think that too much jokes and goofiness and playing stupid, can really draw away from the result we want to achieve. The more goofy you are, the less mysterious you are. So the people will think that you can do really nice TRICKS, that you learned from that comic book in which you found your jokes also.
When I think of the word MAGIC and MAGICAL, I think MYSTERIOUS and BEAUTIFUL, not GOOFY and FUNNY.

I think that jokes are good to break the ice, when you are talking to people, to make them relax and enjoy. But I wouldn't set the tone of my performance around jokes and goofy style. There is a big difference between being pleasant and positive, and being goofy and a comedian.

I think that this is how it should go: Pleasant introduction - jokes to break the ice and set the mood - mysterious and magical atmosphere - polite but mysterious exit.

We are trying to be magicians, not clowns. If you didn't know, clowns also do tricks, like "water from flower" "red nose to green nose" "a bag with tons of c*ap". I think that there should be a line between those two.

 

[RickEverhart]

I like to build a connection first and then show them the magic. That way not only do those people walk away saying he was a great magician, but they also say, "He seemed like a good guy with a fun personality. That is someone who I would hire to come to my house and do a private gig for my friends." Even if you happened to flub one of your tricks...they are on your side and they still enjoyed your entertainment.

I don't know. Just my two cents.

 

[bd]

You misinterpreted what I posted.

I did not mean that magicians/performers should turn their act into a comedic show; that would be rather repulsive. Rather, I meant that I believe the performer needs to engage with his or her audience in a positive manner. Usually, the best way to engage with strangers is by bringing smiles to their faces.

Under no condition do I suggest that a magician becomes a funnyman during the climax of his trick. That would be retarded.

 

[MagicShadow9]

It all depends on your character. If you wanna be mysterious and not talk, fine. If you wanna make people laugh, fine. The important thing is to not let comedy take away from the magic, don't say a one-liner right when you're gonna reveal the climax. But otherwise, it doesn't matter if you have patter or not. Though some tricks are tough to do without patter, while some tricks can go without patter.

 

[Cardistry77]

i feel that this could go either way.. as everyone has stated before, it depends on your personality. what you like. Blaine is the kind of person that does his effects silently, but his gestures speak for him. they are just as good as words in his case. while vernon uses patter to explain/animate the effect as it is happening.

personally, i find that some tricks in themselves, are better off without patter. while some desparately need patter. for instance, Dream of aces. this trick requires no patter what so ever, which is why i always do it with music. this effect is so powerful, that it speaks for itself. while other tricks like comedy routines and other things to that effect, NEED patter. or else people will be confused, and the effect won't be as strong.

so to sum it all up, it is completely your personality, you may choose to so it one way, while others differently. but what ever fits your style, is what you should do.

 

[bd]

but what ever fits your style, is what you should do.

Gee, back to square one. Or at least, back to what I stated in the other thread.

Performers should have their own personality etched into their performances. Not someone else's. Not performing without a personality. Have a personality, and show it in your performances. Period. Whoo.

 

[kevin]

Gee, back to square one. Or at least, back to what I stated in the other thread.

Performers should have their own personality etched into their performances. Not someone else's. Not performing without a personality. Have a personality, and show it in your performances. Period. Whoo.

hahaha way to be classy benjamind.

I think that jokes are good to break the ice, when you are talking to people, to make them relax and enjoy. But I wouldn't set the tone of my performance around jokes and goofy style. There is a big difference between being pleasant and positive, and being goofy and a comedian.

It is like was said about your style. Magicians are performers- entertainers. To make people smile is a sign that I am succeeding, but telling jokes wont really get you there- gain some rapport with your audience. Get connected- these people should want to get into your brain and figure out what the heck is going on up there.

BUT- back to the actual stuff. Patter. I was actually thinking about this last when watching Dai Vernon lecture in the revelations series. He said that people are interested in a story. He said "people aren't interested in how skillful you are, in fact, it makes them kind of jealous. There is no appeal. A story, now, that creates interest."

Yesterday, I posted something about how I hate patter, and think that story mode tricks aren't really interesting to the audience, because, in this day and age, the audience isn't interested... well, at least the audience that I perform to. I'm not saying that stories cannot be interesting, it's just not really my thing. I think that I can make magic happen without it, mostly.

thanks for the heads up
kevin

 

[Saw The Rub]

I'm against any kind of comparison that would result into having one of the option be proved wrong....
You see you can't compare 2 totally different times, w can't imagine how less lay audience knew at that time, there was no need of such deep thinking that David put in of having his style cause Magic in itself was a astonishment, even a simple Card Change, which now performed would let the skeptic out of anyone, which we don't want in a performance yeah? it's something to have fun with, not an excuse to argue.
The thing is we can't go against any of those Giants, and we can't say or claim something we ain't sure about.
At the time of Professor, street magic was unknown, so he was talking about performing magic in a party, fete, birthday, stage etc where there was no need to give a strong proof that I'M SOMETHING REAL.
On the contrary, street magic is a totally different thing, that's why it's so popular and be seen as a doorway to a ton of opportunities, where you have a freedom to make anything out of that first interface with someone.

Hope i was able to state my point ....

 

[b_08]

Only in magic do we have this discussion. In music you have pop, rap, rock bands, country...and even within each genre of music you have very different personalities. Adele will present music very different than Eminem, yet they're both highly successful. You have to know your audience and you have to be the best version of yourself. (Not just "be yourself"...that's bs advice that's meaningless).

In acting same thing...very different personalities and presentations of sometimes even the same character! Michael Keaton played Bruce Wayne/Batman very differently than Christian Bale. Jack Nicholson played the Joker very differently than Heath Ledger.

Who are you as a person? What is your interest other than magic? What are you experiencing in life currently? What are your successes and failures? What are your passions in life? How do you interact with people when you're not doing magic? Are you an interesting man, if so what makes you interesting?

The answers to questions like those is what should be fueling your character. If you're a boring person by nature and you want to present magic like a rock star, that isn't going to work. You're not authentic.

Take a page from successful artist from other genres of entertainment and you'll see that there is no right answer. There is just a right answer that fits you.

 

[PurpleMustache]

I read an article about Bill Malone that said (roughly) "Bill Malone does an amazing trick and ou hardly notice because you're laughing so hard." for me, if thats how the audience really percieves it, then thats bad. i like to make the audience laugh and have a good time right up until i do the trick then i want them to be amazed. unless im doing an ambitious card routine or something of that nature then i like to keep em laughing. but if im doing something like rapture or prophet then i like it to be more about the trick.

 

[Toby]

Darwin Ortiz said in "Strong Magic" something along there lines: Be funny and entertaining, but entertain with magic. Don't let your jokes and persona overshadow the magic. You are a magician, so magic should be your main tool for entertaining, not the other way around. "Entertain with magic".

 

[JButterfield]

Everything should serve the magic; the humour/drama/whatever theatrical device you use should serve the magic and not overshadow it.