Never say "You're wrong." - Dale Carnegie

[RickEverhart]

This material came from Scripting Magic pg. 175-178 by Pete McCabe

Read both of these mini scripts and put yourself in place of the spectator. How do you feel? Why is the second better? Why then do many many magicians use number 1? Let's hear your thoughts and then I'll chime in later with info from Scripting Magic.

Script 1

Magician
I put two balls in my hand, and I put the thrid one in my pocket. Now, how many do I have in my pocket?

Spectator
Two.

Magician
Wrong.
(shows three balls.)
You're not paying attention.

Script 2
Magician
I put two balls in my hand, and I put the third one in my pocket. Now...how many do I have in my hand?

Spectator
Two.

Magician
Right. Now Watch.

Magician waves his hand over his fist.

Magician
That's all it takes.

He opens his fist, revealing three balls.

Magician
Now there's three.

 

[Magicman4131]

This is a great point Rick! I was recently reading Devious Standards by Jamy Ian Swiss, and in his JS Rules of Magic section, one of the rules is, Never Challenge a Spectator. He used the same example of two in one hand, one in pocket. I love the line in the book, "How many have I got now? Wrong, you blithering idiot! Now please stand here and allow me to continue insulting you through several more sequences."

Anyway I HIGHLY recommend his book.

 

[JD]

Here's my two cents:
By saying wrong you are doing two things.
1. You could potentially offend the spectator by implying they are dumb.
2. You took away the magic moment that occurs in Script 2.

 

[AndyW]

I have read Devious Standards too, but not Scripting Magic, I'll have to check it out.

 

[~Illogical_Illusionist~]

I agree that the second one is better. The 2nd creates a moment of magic while the 1st is really more of the, I'm better than you type situation. Although, I do admit to using the 1st one early on, the 2nd script is really the way to go. It kind of goes with the principle to do magic for/with your spectator and not at them. Good post Rick!

 

[armthehomeless]

It seems as though the performer in script one is trying to send a message to the audience that he (the performer) is superior and/or more intelligent that the spectators. In the rather direct dialogue you provided, it sounds more like a pop quiz than a performance.

I don't think a whole lot of performers tell the spectator that they are flat out wrong very much, but I do hear them say, "Well actually there are three balls." It may sound more polite, but the feeling is still the same to the spectators.

Script one presents the performer as more of a prankster trying to get away with some kind of trickery and pull a fast one on the audience.

 

[TeeDee]

I think, while the elimination of challenge is a good general principle, it's not a hard and fast rule. I think that, if it fits your character, you can introduce an element of challenge, or even explicit insults, to your performance. Off the top of my head, Penn and Teller, Gazzo, John Archer, and Houdini spring to mind as examples of performers who are or were able to make it work. The key question is, though, how are you making the audience feel? If you've established yourself as a comedian, and built sufficient rapport, the audience expectation is that you'll be a bit cheeky and take some liberties with etiquette. In that case, they won't feel too insulted or alienated, and will accept it as a joke. In the case of Houdini and acts of that kind, the dynamic is different, but still allows for challenge. If your character is established as having a superhuman ability of some sort, whether that be escaping from any handcuffs, reading micro-expressions, or whatever, then the "try and catch me out" challenge is an inevitable consequence of your demonstrations.

I think that, in moderation, and if it coherently stems from your character, then challenge can add an interesting dimension to a performance.

 

[SebaMan]

Then what about Slydini?

 

[RealityOne]

Then what about Slydini?

Slydini was unique. If you can find a video of his performance of the Helicopter Card you can see the reaction of the spectator who was helping him. The audience loved it, but the spectator clearly felt that he was being made a fool of (even recognizing that everyone dressed that way in the 1970s).

However, a lot of Slydini's magic utilized a different kind of challenge for a purpose. Slydini would challenge spectators to watch him (through words or through gestures). By doing that, Slydini directed the spectators to look at his left hand while he did "something" with his right. In essence, the challenge was misdirection.

Although the most popular and well known of Slydini's effects are challenges, there are many other less known effects that are not.

This material came from Scripting Magic pg. 175-178 by Pete McCabe

Read both of these mini scripts and put yourself in place of the spectator. How do you feel? Why is the second better? Why then do many many magicians use number 1?

How many sponge balls are in your hand?
Here, try to link the rings together...
What card do you have in your hand?

As McCabe says, "this change will improve your magic more than anything else you can do."

 

[RickEverhart]

I'm glad many of you took the time to think and respond to the post. I will post more of the information from McCabe as well as a few of mine own thoughts interwoven.

Many magicians choose to use script 1 because..."they like to feel superior to their audiences." This is NOT a good way to win friends. People don't like being quizzed when they don't know the answer and they positively hate being told they are wrong. Imagine how they feel being told they are wrong publicly, in front of others.

Second, it greatly inhibits your audience's response to everything you do. Anybody who sees you say "Wrong" to the assisting spectator will be less likely to respond after that, for fear of the same thing might happen to them.

Worst of all it completely undermines the effect of magic. It's not magic--they just weren't paying attention.

I agree with most of this however, I will say that I have seen Steve Bargatze pull this type of character off brilliantly and it is hilarious. Those of you who have seen Steve know exactly what I'm talking about.

On to the good news. People like being told they are right. So...turn your presentation around and make your magic stronger. The audience will like you more. You are also rewarding the spectator for participating. More and more people will get comfortable with getting involved. The more people are involved, the more they enjoy your show. It is a win win.

In the second script you are using the spectators answer to strengthen the appearance of the third ball instead of negating it.

Let the spectators be right. Make their being right an integral part of the effect. If nothing else, your spectators-who, if you are being paid to perform, are your customers--will be glad you did.

 

[Magicman4131]

Another thing magicians do occasionally is say, "Let me show you how it works." Do you really believe anybody in the room believes that you are going to teach them? It insults there intelligence.

Also what sounds better:
"What I want you to do is shuffle the deck."
or
"If you could, can you shuffle the deck?"

Spectators may wonder why you are demanding them to do things. So you just need to respect your audience and treat them like a friend and not challenge them, and order them to do something.

 

[Hepdini]

Rick-
I like this discussion because we are creating a magic moment in everything we do......but, I see this as more internal.

Let me explain...

We (magicians) know the audience will be THINKING wrong, and that is okay because they are "quietly" wrong since we did not say anything to embarass them. Then we finish up and they are fooled and entertained because they were wrong in their thinking, but we did not say this publically.

To me, it is as different as Day and Night, but I do think some smooth magicians can pull this technique off.

 

[RealityOne]

Many magicians choose to use script 1 because..."they like to feel superior to their audiences." This is NOT a good way to win friends.

A couple of thoughts.

First, as magicians we need to think how are performances are perceived by spectators. Even if we aren't saying that our spectators are "wrong" we often perform to show off our skills rather than to entertain. The focus should be on the spectators not on us.

My second thought is related to the basic premise of McCabe's book. If we write out or script our magic, we are better able to see how our presentation is perceived by our spectators and better able edit and improve our scripts.

 

[RickEverhart]

Very good points David. Thanks.