You VS. The Audience

[MalibuARMY]

Heya, my name is Anna and I have been talking with two of my guy friends about theory an awful lot. The first guy who is a grizzly bear is all about theory and we get into constant debates (friendly ones though) about theory in magic with the audience and magician.
The other, who looks like a panda bear is a phenomenal performer and totally agrees with the grizzly bear on this subject.
What is the subject? The material that a magician picks to perform.

This all started when the grizzly bear was helping me out with a coin routine and suggested a pull instead of a regular vanish. I agreed with him the pull would look more magical in the sense that the coin is gone and I can show both of my hands clean however I try to refrain from pulls and such because I frankly don't like to perform with them and trust a piece of elastic and what not to do something I can do already in my hands. Besides in the routine I need to make the coin reappear. So in my head it seemed too much if I make it vanish like that when I am meant to make it reappear. I couldn't show both my hands empty then.

This got a debate going of what the magician wants vs. what the audience wants. I told grizzly that it conflicted with my style and what I want to do. I take pride in my slight of hand. Even a layman can use a pull and get the same effect, but a laymen cannot make a coin vanish, do a hand wash and then make it come back at the fingertips.
Once panda came along for the weekend we all talked about this. I felt a bit heavy when they both agreed with each other in the fact that………It is NOT about what the magician wants but it is about what the audience wants and wants to see.

I felt they both had fine points however they were too extreme in my eyes. It is good to do tricks that the spectator likes however if you only do those tricks you won't have fun yourself.

Think about it. Why did you get into magic, you might have been impressed and wanted to learn magic but what kept you in magic was the fact that it is fun as hell to do. However, you pick certain effects over others depending on what you want to perform.

Even Aaron Fisher in the T11 beginners video says you should do magic that you like to do.

My friends had a great point however I feel that there are two ways to look at this. 1–If you do magic the spectator likes then they will be happy. 2–If you do magic you like, the audience sees that you have fun and so they are more inclined to have fun.

What do you think? Have you encountered this before? I believe we can find a middle ground which is the magician doing tricks they like and because it is magic the spectators will like the magic too. What do you think?

 

[JButterfield]

I try to refrain from pulls and such because I frankly don't like to perform with them and trust a piece of elastic and what not to do something I can do already in my hands.

Why wouldn't you want to perform the strongest magic you can? If a gimmick or gaff makes a trick stronger, why not? Maybe not in this instance, but does this mean you would never use them?

I take pride in my slight of hand. Even a layman can use a pull and get the same effect, but a laymen cannot make a coin vanish, do a hand wash and then make it come back at the fingertips.

Doing something simply because laymen cannot is a pretty bad reason to do something. This comes across as kind of egocentric. Besides, a layman can't use a pull as well as a magician

[I know a ton of coins across routines, and the strongest one uses a shell. It's agle-proof, and I can repeated show that there are only four coins, and that my hands are otherwise empty. Why should I do a worse routine only to gratify myself?

 

[TheatreHead]

Magic is a performance art. So eventually it goes down to your view on performing.

Yes, it is possible to perform entirely for yourself, and I know some performers, not just magicians, who do that. However, they don't get many gigs.

 

[KeoSilver]

This all started when the grizzly bear was helping me out with a coin routine and suggested a pull instead of a regular vanish. I agreed with him the pull would look more magical in the sense that the coin is gone and I can show both of my hands clean however I try to refrain from pulls and such because I frankly don't like to perform with them and trust a piece of elastic and what not to do something I can do already in my hands. Besides in the routine I need to make the coin reappear. So in my head it seemed too much if I make it vanish like that when I am meant to make it reappear. I couldn't show both my hands empty then.

I know this isn't the focus of your thread but you could use a pendulum hold out instead of a pull.

This got a debate going of what the magician wants vs. what the audience wants. I told grizzly that it conflicted with my style and what I want to do. I take pride in my slight of hand. Even a layman can use a pull and get the same effect, but a laymen cannot make a coin vanish, do a hand wash and then make it come back at the fingertips.

I mean this in the most light hearted way, but swallow the pride. Sometimes a gimmick beats out pure sleight of hand by a landslide and if the sleight of hand accomplishes the same thing that a gimmick does then what is the point? Your audience can't tell the difference between a double facer and two cards facing each other and a triple turnover.

Once panda came along for the weekend we all talked about this. I felt a bit heavy when they both agreed with each other in the fact that………It is NOT about what the magician wants but it is about what the audience wants and wants to see.

I felt they both had fine points however they were too extreme in my eyes. It is good to do tricks that the spectator likes however if you only do those tricks you won't have fun yourself.

Magic is magic, you got to do what you got to do. If you perform a trick you like, so will your audience no matter the method. Performing effects like requests from a spec isn't the best idea because if they know what the trick is called, chances are they know a bit more about the trick that is beneficial for you as a performer.


What do you think? Have you encountered this before? I believe we can find a middle ground which is the magician doing tricks they like and because it is magic the spectators will like the magic too. What do you think?[/QUOTE]

After all that, my answer is pretty simple. Just perform what you like to perform haha! The methods behind the scenes shouldn't impact your audience in the sleightist, yeah pun-tastic aint it?

X3

Really that is all Anna, it really shouldn't matter what you do to accomplish the magic, as long as the audience understands what is going on. I mean unless you are performing for magicians the layperson will not appreciate your flawless clipshift. You're better off using a side steal heh. Catch my drift?

 

[Jack]

You should do the magic that you want to do but if you're performing you have to think of how the audience is going to view the effect. What kind of impact do you want the effect to have on them. If a pull serves the trick better (meaning it will make the trick more enjoyable to watch or more astonishing) then use a pull. Afterall you are performing for the audience not for yourself. For them it's about the product (the prestige) not the sleights or methods you use to reach it. They should not be aware of those. The sleights/gimmicks you use don't affect WHAT kind of magic you do just HOW you do it.

 

[shinichikudo992000]

Anna, stuff like this is the end product of someone who has a lot of time on their hands and make things more complicated than what it is appears to be. It is nothing wrong about using a gimmick with sleight of hand, or just one or the other. It it ultimately comes down to the level of presentation and prestige. I mean like do what you have to do to achieve the effect with the least amount of tension and stress. Some people might be better at using gimmick, and others are better with sleight of hand. K.I.S.S (keep it simple stupid), don't think too much about this subject. Look at where's David Copperfield standing; he's only using gimmick and he makes more money a day than all of us combine together. Do what you have to do to achieved the effect that you wanted to have.

As far as performing what the audience wanted to see and doing what you like topic in your original post; I have one comment about that is "don't be interesting, be interested". As long as you are interested in what you are doing, the audience will enjoy it with it. Imagine a guitarist playing an off tune guitar; the audience won't appreciate in what he is doing because he isn't interested in what he's doing.

Tricky Devil

 

[YRAMagicMan]

My theory on this is that if it's not broken, don't fix it. If you can do what you want to do without the gimmick, great, but if you find that it's not what you wanted as far as reactions are concerned, try something else.

I see your point about making it reappear. I would have the same concern, but if you arrange the routine correctly, the pull becomes a non-issue because A) the audience isn't even aware that it exists, and B) you can make the steal without the audience even thinking that your hand left their field of view.

I would keep both methods in mind, and use them both. That way, when you're caught without your trusty pull, you can still accomplish the same effect, even if slightly weaker.

(Side note for those with more experience than me... Does the audience care if they see both hands (palms) empty at the same time, or can you effectively accomplish the same result with a sleight like a change over palm?)

 

[MalibuARMY]

Thanks for all of your comments back. I really wanted to see how other people viewed this topic. It is something to think about not something to argue about. Keep that in mind please.

My good friend Tricky said: "don't be interesting, be interested". I am interested when I use slight of hand because it is more fun for me therefore I am interested.

I don't want this thread to be about people correcting others. I just wanted to give everybody something to think about.

Tricky, guess who grizzly and panda are. If you get it right you get a free shirley temple next time I see you at the castle

 

[RDChopper]

I think the name of the tittle should be change for "ego vs. Audience"

There is a ton of sleight of hand crazyness routines that I like, (Wich I practice for fun) but when someone asks you to see a trick, they are in other words asking you to "show them something they may like". People are egoistical in nature, they don't care if you like the trick or not, they want to have a good time enjoying what they prefer.

I pretty much agree with theater head, in other words, is about them, not about you.

And in my point of view, I actually enjoy when they enjoy something, even when is the simplest trick ever, not when I pull off a super complex routine that I like that fools them badly. There is a difference between fooling and making them enjoy something.

 

[Toby]

I may be completely off topic here, but I see illogical train of thoughts here.
Anna, are you trying to say that when you perform, audience likes some of the tricks, and some of them they don't? Because when you say that you want to perform trick that you like, compared to the ones audience likes, I then guess that you performed both types of effects. And if YOU performed them, that means that you learned them, and you said you only learn tricks that YOU like, (just like pretty much every magician), than YOU like both types of effects. So just perform the ones that YOU enjoy as well as the audience.

Did that made sense to anyone but me? lol

 

[Steerpike]

I take pride in my slight of hand. Even a layman can use a pull and get the same effect, but a laymen cannot make a coin vanish, do a hand wash and then make it come back at the fingertips.

Alright, let's pretend I'm a spectator. This means what to me? Am I even supposed to recognize the difference?

 

[AndrewJ]

I'm kind of stunned on the "Any layman can use a pull" line. Not me. And that's putting it nicely.

In this case, however, it sounds like Malibu is asking about the method - not the effect. If that is the case, then wouldn't it make sense to go with whatever looks best in the performance? I would almost want to say to grab the video camera, do it three times each way, then review both sets.

I love props and gimmicks, but can't really see why that matters in this thread. Nor can I really figure out why this has to be about anyone versus anyone. It seems much more productive for Malibu to find what works then use it.

 

[praetoritevong]

Anna,

I wrote up a thread about this a long time ago which you can find here, entitled "Selflessness - One Precursor to Apathy".

See if you agree. The general gist of the thread is: Of course, we are performing for the spectator, and they should be our priority. But that doesn't mean that what we want doesn't matter. Magic has been around forever. There are an almost infinite set of tricks and methods. We should be picky, and choose the ones we're comfortable with. There's more than one way to go about things, so perform in a way that appeals to you - as long as it's the same for the spec.

 

[mehar]

prae

what the hell's that quote by towtox mean?

 

[MalibuARMY]

Guys I did not post this so people could bash me. I just wanted to get a conversation going about choosing effects you like to perform. I didn't know everyone here would take so much pride in picking on a little girl (me). Can we just please focus on the topic.

Would you do magic you like to do over something the audience would like to see?

 

[praetoritevong]

I don't think anyone is intentionally trying to bash you.. But to answer your question directly:

No, not exactly. I would find something the audience would want to see AND that I like. Or, I'd find something that I'd like to do, and turn it into something the audience would like to see. I wouldn't perform something the audience doesn't want to see just because I liked it, but it is important that you like what you perform nonetheless. Fortunately, the magical literature is deep enough to accommodate this. Both are important, and I think it's good to find a balance; there's no reason it has to be a question of either/or. Besides, when you like what you do, it shows.

 

[MalibuARMY]

I don't think anyone is intentionally trying to bash you.. But to answer your question directly:

No, not exactly. I would find something the audience would want to see AND that I like. Or, I'd find something that I'd like to do, and turn it into something the audience would like to see. I wouldn't perform something the audience doesn't want to see just because I liked it, but it is important that you like what you perform nonetheless. Fortunately, the magical literature is deep enough to accommodate this. Both are important, and I think it's good to find a balance; there's no reason it has to be a question of either/or. Besides, when you like what you do, it shows.

Yes, you are exactly right. It is good to find a midpoint in this situation. For me I believe the midpoint is doing something you like and the audience likes too. My friends grizzly and panda believe that you should only do something the audience likes and that it is not about the magicians preference whatsoever.

PS: Sorry if I misunderstood anyone or if they misunderstood me. I sometimes have problems with being clear.

 

[William Draven]

I can see your bears points of view. I can also agree with yours. I guess the bottom line is do what works for you. There's no one true way to do magic. As long as you're entertaining, not exposing via performance, the audience is having fun, and you're happy with it, then no harm no foul. The pull may present a more powerful experience, the sleight may be more challenging, but at the end of the day, it comes down to what you want to do.

Follow your heart.

 

[RikAllen]

It's been written in a lot of places, and I think it's what Steerpike was attempting to get someone to note, the audience doesn't care what method you use. If the coin vanishes and your hands are seen empty they don't know the difference between a pull, topit, TKO, retention vanish, toss vanish...etc.

All of these methods end up with the same result, "The coin was there...and then it vanished...and her hands were empty...and then she pulled it (or another one) out of the air..."

In the end it comes down to one simple thing to remember, the end effect is what matters, not the method. As long as the method doesn't weaken the effect (and in this case I don't believe it will) then it doesn't matter which method you do. If a pull is going to make it harder to retrieve/reproduce the coin (or make you steal another one) then it may, in fact, add unnecessary movements that weaken the effect compared to your sleight of hand.

It's an incomplete thought, but I'm sure everyone can understand it.

 

[AndrewJ]

Would you do magic you like to do over something the audience would like to see?

My thought was what praetoritevong and William Draven put more eloquently. The effect being the same, you would probably have the best time using the method that works best for you.

My analog to your situation is this: I learned decidedly beginner UN-friendly cups & balls routine first, which includes some really delicate sleights. I struggle with sleight-free routines. When given a chance to perform, I did the "risky" routine for a few crowds of people because I suck at the less risky material.

No one watching shamed me for not doing it the safe way.

Likewise, doing card tricks for a 10 year YouTube learner when I wasn't comfortable with the material proved to be my undoing.

I have to agree with the more seasoned advice. Do what looks good in your hands.