June 2009 :: How deep should the rabbit hole go?

[Ozzyschach]

Industrial
Before I even got to the end I was thinking that this was a dangerous trick to do.
Because (Although not christian myself) if someone saw you doing this, they'd believe it.
But If you messed up, then they'd know you're faking it. That explains itself.
I'd say you could do it, but be careful, and don't preform on the steet until you've got it perfectly.
I wouldn't do it at all though, but that's me.

 

[Ozzyschach]

@ Randy
Please counter my statement.
And don't fight over this, these are all opinions.

 

[Steerpike]

If the people BELIEVED in your card trick.
They wouldn't be surprised, it's like if a Christian saw Jesus "Make water into wine" there would be no surprise.
If the audiences think you're going to do a trick, and you do it. It will not be as expected.
This art is NOT for you.
I didn't even know people only did this for reactions from audiecnces, sad.
You can have fun practicing, or you can have fun watching them react.
My favorite? Is the one when the person knows you, and they look at you quietly.
They say "cool."
All because they KNOW it's a trick.

I don't think there is anyone on this Earth (and by Earth I mean AMERICA- HELL YEAH) that legitamtely believes that anthing we do is REAL or that we have POWERS.

I keep bringing up the fact that the shut-eye market exists and everyone ignores me.

Why?

There are people who still believe that Harry Houdini had the ability to walk through solid matter. And everyone is dismissing it as an impossibility that such a people could exist in a stable universe. Am I talking to an empty room? Again?

 

[Orb]

This is a quite deep question and I see alot of interesting theories. I do agree that when magic is performed, why not claim it to be magic, without actually explaining that you're a supernatural god? The requirements of what something has to be to be scientific are quite strict. If you take a look at common quantumn physics as an example, there are many problem. Take these as an example:
If a tree falls, far away from you, and noone is there to observe or within its range to hear, will it actually make a sound? It might sound like an obvious question but there's no proof since noone's there to observe and therefor a scientific obscurity.

What my point is, is that i hear some of you say "most people will understand that we're using sleight of hand anyway". The human mind is quite prone to what's unlogical to their eyes. A common way of thinking is "I do not believe in ghosts, but I do fear them". Even though they are pretty damn sure there's no such things as ghosts, not many of them would want to test it by being placed in an old abandoned house and stay there overnight. What we see here is a glitch in our logics. And I do believe that by us doing magic, and them not being able to explain it, we might be able to reach that glitch.

Of course we cannot go to our family members and present ourselves as magical, as they already know our history. But to a new audience we're obscure and devious, and even if they do not wish to admit it to us, the thought of how it happened will be gnawing in their head.

I do believe that this is what separates a good performance from a bad. A good performance should leave the spectator in a shocked, amazed and wondered state of mind, whereas a bad performance simply doesnt make an impression.

I personally don't believe that in performances where you try to explain things scientifically you will be successfull. You might do an awesome performance where you tear a dollar bill and then restore it, but if you explain it by telling them that the anatoms are restoring themselves, the audience already knows they're not, that will just make a cool and good trick somewhat ruined. But whereas we have the magical word "magic", we simply refer to it as an explanation for how an impossible action happened.
I'm not by any means claiming myself to be giving the correct answers, just giving my theories on the whole matter.

 

[industrialchild]

Ozzyschach I completely agree with you. I am hell bent on mastering this trick just because it appeals to me, but I doubt seriously that I could ever perform this on the street. Anyways thank you for your response and your insight.

Sincerely,
David

 

[Steerpike]

This is a quite deep question and I see alot of interesting theories. I do agree that when magic is performed, why not claim it to be magic, without actually explaining that you're a supernatural god? The requirements of what something has to be to be scientific are quite strict. If you take a look at common quantumn physics as an example, there are many problem. Take these as an example:
If a tree falls, far away from you, and noone is there to observe or within its range to hear, will it actually make a sound? It might sound like an obvious question but there's no proof since noone's there to observe and therefor a scientific obscurity.

Ah, Schroedinger's cat. A great way to make heads go pop.

Of course we cannot go to our family members and present ourselves as magical, as they already know our history. But to a new audience we're obscure and devious, and even if they do not wish to admit it to us, the thought of how it happened will be gnawing in their head.

What you've just pointed out is one of the inherent flaws in using family as an argument for having a disclaimer every five ****ing seconds. If your immediate family is where your audience begins and ends, then you can lecture no one, not a living soul on how to perform.

I do believe that this is what separates a good performance from a bad. A good performance should leave the spectator in a shocked, amazed and wondered state of mind, whereas a bad performance simply doesnt make an impression.

I personally don't believe that in performances where you try to explain things scientifically you will be successfull. You might do an awesome performance where you tear a dollar bill and then restore it, but if you explain it by telling them that the anatoms are restoring themselves, the audience already knows they're not, that will just make a cool and good trick somewhat ruined. But whereas we have the magical word "magic", we simply refer to it as an explanation for how an impossible action happened.

Using pseudo-scientific claim can be entertaining. If you actually understand science.

The problem is that most of the people in this thread who suggest it don't understand science. They're just pretending to. And I daresay most of them are doing it because they either want to be Banachek, Derren Brown, or possibly Penn & Teller.

 

[Randy]

Using science may work, but I've believed that people will generally find you more interesting if you take a 50/50 stance on it. Like it's been stated. People won't take you seriously if you just pull words out of your ass. Derren Brown and Banachek get away with because they have likely read a ton of books on the subject.

People are also more generally interested in the unknown more than they are the known (if that makes any sense at all..)

Personally I find reading about Mediums and Psychics a bit easier than reading Psychology books and other such things. (Mainly due to psychology having it's own dictionary and often times being incredibly confusing.)

 

[visualartist]

I myself mix pseudo-scientific claims with the supernatural/spiritual.
Steerpike knows how I feel that both are interdepentant. And it has never once taken down from the effect. On the contrary,people are more interested in science than people think. You know why? Cause most people dont know crap about science.At least not the really interesting miraculous aspects of science and physics.
Mixing that with stories of the orient,spiritality and my own personal encounters with phenomena makes one hell of a show.(at least thats what im aiming for,my performance skills could always be better)

Also,whats with this preconcieved notion that everyone performs "street magic"? Not just on this thread but almost all of them. Most people perform for friends at school which is not street magic,and others at home or friends get together and whatnot but the people who say they perform street magic dont tell me anything about it.like the psychological aspect of performing for a complete stranger and how to get them to actually pay attention to you,things like that..It might be too off topic but something ive been wondering.

 

[Ozzyschach]

Okay.
SHUT-EYE MARKET time.
Yes the shut-eye market exist, and some laymen will believe in this.
But can you really respect people who look at you do something with a deck of cards and assume "god?"
No. Because with the media isn't it obvious you aren't, sometimes I think I like seeing some tricks better when I know their technique. Because it shows it's beauty in it's mechanics and such, so if the laymen understate you, it makes it better. THE SHUT-EYE MARKET IS ALMOST GONE! And I don't want to speak with people who believe that Houdini walked through walls.

Glad I could help industrial child.

Visual Artist, It makes a good show, but it isn't good to make the auidiance think that it was ALL interdependent. Let them know that at least one is a trick, or they are going to assume you beyond them = bad.
And you might get a kid trying to become an exorcist.

 

[Steerpike]

But can you really respect people who look at you do something with a deck of cards and assume "god?"

Your bull**** wording of that argument aside, yes. Being suggestible, prone to believing weird things, or even gullible does not make you a bad person.

Now make a point instead of throwing a straw man at me.

No. Because with the media isn't it obvious you aren't, sometimes I think I like seeing some tricks better when I know their technique. Because it shows it's beauty in it's mechanics and such, so if the laymen understate you, it makes it better. THE SHUT-EYE MARKET IS ALMOST GONE! And I don't want to speak with people who believe that Houdini walked through walls.

Okay, you guys know me. I'm a misanthropic prick with a violent ego problem and the pleasantness of a mound of rusty thumb tacks.

But even I'm not that judgmental.

Let them know that at least one is a trick, or they are going to assume you beyond them = bad.
And you might get a kid trying to become an exorcist.

So they're all too smart to believe your screed, but they might buy it anyway and become exorcists. Jesus...

Fact of the matter is that magic is theater. Why should I break character in the middle of the act to appease people like you? This is why actors don't come out and explain that they are in fact actors in between scene changes: because no sane person wants to see that.

 

[Randy]

Okay.
SHUT-EYE MARKET time.
Yes the shut-eye market exist, and some laymen will believe in this.
But can you really respect people who look at you do something with a deck of cards and assume "god?"
No. Because with the media isn't it obvious you aren't, sometimes I think I like seeing some tricks better when I know their technique. Because it shows it's beauty in it's mechanics and such, so if the laymen understate you, it makes it better. THE SHUT-EYE MARKET IS ALMOST GONE! And I don't want to speak with people who believe that Houdini walked through walls.

Glad I could help industrial child.

Visual Artist, It makes a good show, but it isn't good to make the auidiance think that it was ALL interdependent. Let them know that at least one is a trick, or they are going to assume you beyond them = bad.
And you might get a kid trying to become an exorcist.

Does your name happen to be Criss Angel by any chance.

It's not up to you to challenge their beliefs. Specially if you want to hire you or enjoy your stuff.

People will believe what they to. Like Steerpike said. People during that time believed that Houdini DID have powers. Hell they probably thought the same of Harry Blackstone Sr and Blackstone Jr. I am sure there used to be people who thought Criss Angel had super powers as well.

As far the media goes. They are not always has smart as you think they are. I've seen a few Mentalist perform extremely simple things for them and they generally believed that the guy/person has some Psychic ability. Even he stated that he didn't.

 

[visualartist]

So they're all too smart to believe your screed, but they might buy it anyway and become exorcists. Jesus...

Fact of the matter is that magic is theater. Why should I break character in the middle of the act to appease people like you? This is why actors don't come out and explain that they are in fact actors in between scene changes: because no sane person wants to see that.

Im quoting this because thats how my response would have been.

Why do you keep contradicting yourself saying people never really believe what we do and then say they might think im actually someone with powers?

 

[Ozzyschach]

Has no one read anything I posted?
Well I'm stepping out of the conversation now.
These are all opinons.
Bash me all you want.

 

[Ozzyschach]

Steerpike.
The T11 leaders think you ruin magic, you said that it is "theater" and they said that anyone who changes themselve kills magic.
Look it up.

 

[Steerpike]

Has no one read anything I posted?

Yeah. I read that you wouldn't even condescend to talk to somebody who entertained a belief in the supernatural. You managed to out-do me when it comes to arrogance.

Is there some sort of sub-text I missed that was supposed to negate that?

Steerpike.
The T11 leaders think you ruin magic, you said that it is "theater" and they said that anyone who changes themselve kills magic.
Look it up.

Two things. First of all, if you're going to leave a conversation, don't make a second post to take a shot at someone else. Just edit your first post to have a PS.

Second, if the... "T11 leaders" have something to say to me, then I ask them to say it to me directly. I have no reason to believe the "everyone hates you" argument coming from some anonymous guttersnipe whom I don't know from Adam. Either produce proof of this resentment of my ideas or kindly **** off. Failing that, what is the it to which up I must look?

And while you're at it, explain what the hell this whole "anyone who changes thmselves" bull**** has to do with anything.

 

[visualartist]

Also,so being yourself means absolutely no theatrical element in an act?
Does Wayne Houchin not act when he performs? (I hate name dropping but you said the T11 guys would completely disagree with us..)
Is david blaine not being himself and acting the part as well?

 

[Randy]

Steerpike. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALSgHK703DU

That's what I got from you.

 

[Jonathon Bryce]

Personally, I believe that the choice to be yourself or "act" a part, is up to the individual performer. However I believe that if you act a prat, learn to act first, than build your character.

 

[Bizzaro]

I personally prefer people to know that what I do is a skill and artform like dancing and painting. Also that it requires a lot of practice. Hell I would rather get the credit than my deck of cards.

 

[Steerpike]

I personally prefer people to know that what I do is a skill and artform like dancing and painting. Also that it requires a lot of practice. Hell I would rather get the credit than my deck of cards.

Considering I've seen you use the title, "the optical illusionist" I figure that would be the act.

What I don't get is the idea of people giving credit to an inanimate object for seemingly no reason. I've heard the argument used, but I honestly don't understand the logic behind it.