Pick a card; now I will begin swaying back and forth. Huzah!
- Thread starter MalibuARMY
- Start date
Anyone who does magic to perform for magicians is wasting their time in my opinion.
With that said, there is no excuse for poor technique or being unprepared. It's just laziness on the magicians part to think 'good enough' is good enough. Sometimes it's okay to settle on things, sometimes half-assing it doesn't cut it. And as for him only having one good hand, Rene Lavand only has one arm, and his sleights are better than most magicians who have 2 good hands.
As far as being able to stand still, there are ways to set your feet that won't allow you to rock and shift your weight without falling down. One can be found in Steven Cohen's book Win The Crowd.
It's probably something he doesn't realize he's doing, much like blinking when you do the pass or holding your breath when you're bluffing in poker. It can be overcome, but if it doesn't distract his audience then it's not a big problem.
You're comparing to completely different performers who do two completely different acts.
As the old saying goes. One man's trash is another mans treasure. Maybe what hasn't worked for many magicians, actually works for Gazzo.
Alright, I'll state it again without comparisons, no professional magician has any excuse to not be technically perfect. What he's doing is entertaining, and may fly by most laymen, but that's not an excuse for less than perfection. He does these moves and routines day in and day out when he's performing, probably spent more time performing them than practicing them. But performances should enhance and refine any flaws in technique, it shouldn't plateau when it's 'good enough' to get by laymen.
I will agree that what he does is different, it's original, and it works for him. Most people couldn't do half the material he does in the same manner he does it. The same could be said for Penn and Teller, they do things differently and most magicians would disagree with some of their methodology. But it works for them, just like insulting people works for Gazzo. Edit:This was a comparison, but I do think it's a justified one, as I can probably name many other people who do things different and it works for them.
The difference is he obviously Can't perform without his audience. His jokes, one liners, and audience participation are what make his show. There is nothing wrong with that, but not having that element shouldn't hurt your performance of a routine you've done 10,000 times.
As far as Um's and Ahh's, if it was during the performance he may be filling time where he'd usually be interacting with the audience. If it was during an explanation then they were unnecessary. Anyone who does or plans on doing public speaking should learn to cut every Um, Ahh, 'you know what I mean', like, yeah...etc out of their vocabulary.
Try performing something in front of people that requires you to interact with an audience heavily, then drop into a lecture hall where it is full magicians that remain quiet and barely clap for you. It doesn't matter if you have performed something a million times, when you loose a certain element to your magic, it will seem different and very very awkward.
Okay you have a week to drop the words Um, uhh from your vocabulary and while your at it prepare a thirty minute lecture that thousands of people may see. Here is a fun exorcise, talk to me about what magic means to you. But you may not stop for more then three seconds, may not use the words uhh or umm or other derivative of it and you must continue this topic for a minimum of three minutes. Ready set GO!
Pretty hard right? There are more then one perspectives in certain situations try and see it from others positions before demanding perfect professionalism from someone.
Different, agreed. But I've attended lectures where there was no loss in the magic from the performer. No stutters or um's and uhhs, they know what they're trying to portray and practice teaching these effects just like you practice in order to perform them.
I will agree, a room filled with laptops and cameras is still different than a normal lecture, but how many other magician's had this problem?
I dropped the Um's and Uhh's over two years ago. I may pause when I speak to gather my next thought, but that's just public speaking 101. Every place that you're about to say the word 'um' or any variation, just pause, it's that simple. It'll make you look 100% more professional and will have people wanting to hear what you have to say instead of thinking 'this guy is stumbling an awful lot to be an expert in what he's saying...'
As far as the 30 minute lecture on what magic means to me, sounds like more of a speech. Lecture's generally teach something (in the magic community) and I haven't gotten a full opinion on what Magic is. I wouldn't take a challenge on a lecture that I'm unprepared for, and anyone willing to listen to has been thinking and formulating opinions, moves, or routines for years.
I don't consider myself perfect, and don't demand it from anyone, but anybody who is consistently stumbling throughout a lecture they had ample time to prepare for should be notified. If there were other lecturers at the EMC that did the same thing, stumbled and looked unprepared, then my statements would ring true for them as well.
The question is irrelevant because everyone is different. Just because magician A performs better in front of a virtual audience doesn't mean magician B or C will do the same. My point is don't be so critical on your fellow brethren, who are taking their time out of their schedule to hopefully help others in the same field..
Not every magician is a public speaker. Let me explain. Magicians spend countless hours and years perfecting scripted routines that for some last their entire careers. Gazzo's street routine is no exception. Street performers or people who perform "Off the Cuff" have pre scripted material and even though it appears impromptu and improvised. It really is not. The effect has been practiced and run through so many times that it has become second nature. For the people who are public speaker more specifically debaters, because lets be honest Obama doesn't write all of his own speeches, have to go on the fly. They do not know what their opponents are going to do say or how they are going to react. This is not the case with magic performances. Gazzo is not a politician, debater or a public speaker. Just a magician.
I didn't say make a thirty minute speech about anything mate. I said talk for three minutes strait on the subject of "What magic means to you." Without pausing for more then three seconds and without uttering the words um or uh or any derivative of that word. Anyone reading this post, do this little exorcise as well, it will help with your speech.
Look, EMC was a trial. There were mistakes and there were blunders, it happens with everything that has a first run. Your statement has been made and acknowledged. I was only attempting to throw a different perspective that I felt was being overlooked. Continuing to restate that lecturer A was bad because of (Insert whatever here), is the same as telling a big named actor that just got an Oscar for his performance, that he kept the same emotion on his face the entire movie.
Looking back, Prae mentions others he was disappointed in, and some who did fine. This'll probably be the last post for our discussion as there isn't much more to say, it is true that different people react different when placed in atmospheres or situations that are foreign to almost everyone (a first time digital magic conference).
...I just want to say thanks for backing up my point? You just told me that Gazzo has a script for his routines that make his improvisational performances polished...where as debaters (of whom Obama is not the top of the list, the man can't say anything without a teleprompterAs seen here talking to 6th graders....)
Debating and lecturing are different in such respects that lecturers have Less reason to stutter or stumble because they Do know everything they're going to say, and might only have a question or two to answer. Someone in a debate gathering their thoughts because they were unprepared is more cause for stumbling or a casual 'um' than someone who had time to prepare without anyone questioning their ideas.
And I replied such, I don't have 30 minutes of material on What magic means to me. I might have enough if I took the week to really prepare, but it is still just a speech, or at best an essay read aloud, and not the same as a lecture. Same style perhaps, but going on about what magic is to me for 30 minutes...doesn't seem worth my time, as I'd rather have a discussion with others on that particular subject. I will, respectively, consider doing the exercise if work is light this week.
And it was definitely an underlying cause. He's also taught his material on DVD...which is nothing like a lecture or a performance...giving him the benefit of the doubt-he's done something similar in the past.
Even if it's true?
Just because Barack Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize doesn't mean he deserves it...just because someone has an Oscar doesn't mean they're a great actor. It just means they were the best this year, in this movie.
Right, how many times have you heard of Gazzo lecturing live compared to others? Bottom line is, some people are just more experienced at teaching then others. Yeah some people stutter in lectures it happens, don't be so damn critical of the performance.
Dangit I already stated twice that I didn't want you to create thirty minutes of anything. However, you did seem to see that I was only trying to suggest an exorcise, so why all the rabble about making a thirty minute speech?
That isn't what I am saying. If you complain about Obama getting a nobel prize after the fact, it will not matter because it is in the past. You are not Mart McFly, you can't change the future. But you can suggest that Obama not receive the noble prize again, but to rant about him receiving it is completely useless and a waste of time.
So by ignoring the past, we can better mess up in the future?
By pointing out mistakes we can help to prevent them in the future. Arguing day and night may not change the past, but did you ever stop to think it might help someday down the road?
An example?
I perform, I mess up. You can tell me not to make the mistake in the future, but you'd have to point out that I made the mistake and argue about why the mistake was made (if we disagreed on it) before I could properly prevent it in the future.
Edit::I'll go ahead and call myself for such a weak example...Just look at the underlying theory.
Last edited by a moderator:
So, those that think Gazzo did poorly ... out of curiosity, do you understand that he's had a stroke? Does anyone else think that may be in effect in this situation?
Do you really think I am that dumb?
"That isn't what I am saying. If you complain about Obama getting a nobel prize after the fact, it will not matter because it is in the past. You are not Mart McFly, you can't change the future. But you can suggest that Obama not receive the noble prize again, but to rant about him receiving it is completely useless and a waste of time.
I would like to point out a select few words from the above, which is my original ending paragraph. If you complain about Obama getting a nobel prize after the fact, it will not matter because it is in the past. But you can suggest that Obama not receive the noble prize again. Is that not learning from the past???
Did I really even suggest that we shouldn't look to the past for lessons and learn from mistakes? But I do thank you for supporting my other point, "but to rant about him receiving it is completely useless and a waste of time." By stating, "Arguing day and night may not change the past, but did you ever stop to think it might help someday down the road?" I already dignified the last question in that quote, earlier.
After thinking about it I know where some confusion set in, I won't worry anyone with it, but any offense against your intelligence was unintentional, and for any that resulted I do apologize.
Onwards,
Saying we shouldn't give future Nobel Peace Prizes away without proper credentials is, in itself, a complaint of it happening in the past. Complaining about injustice has its merit, when done properly and respectfully. I put my opinion out there that anyone who is going to be in front of any type of audience should be prepared for it. Being thrown into the lions den without notice is one thing, preparing a show where you fight lions is another.
I used specifics for the sake of arguments, but putting a politician in a setting where he doesn't have a speech to give and letting him talk shouldn't effect how he presents himself. He should be eloquent, intelligent, and articulate. Hopefully he uses less rhetoric off of the podium, but that may be too much to ask for.
With that said, I did rush my response, we do agree that while the past can't be changed, it has to be used as an example for future actions.
I didn't state it before, but Gazzo does do lectures, maybe not as often as some performers-but he is a seasoned lecturer. The knowledge of his stroke does change things, but he also wasn't the only one with complaints against him. He just happened to get singled out this time.
Onwards,
Saying we shouldn't give future Nobel Peace Prizes away without proper credentials is, in itself, a complaint of it happening in the past. Complaining about injustice has its merit, when done properly and respectfully. I put my opinion out there that anyone who is going to be in front of any type of audience should be prepared for it. Being thrown into the lions den without notice is one thing, preparing a show where you fight lions is another.
I used specifics for the sake of arguments, but putting a politician in a setting where he doesn't have a speech to give and letting him talk shouldn't effect how he presents himself. He should be eloquent, intelligent, and articulate. Hopefully he uses less rhetoric off of the podium, but that may be too much to ask for.
With that said, I did rush my response, we do agree that while the past can't be changed, it has to be used as an example for future actions.
I didn't state it before, but Gazzo does do lectures, maybe not as often as some performers-but he is a seasoned lecturer. The knowledge of his stroke does change things, but he also wasn't the only one with complaints against him. He just happened to get singled out this time.