Improv. (Different subject)

Is it wrong to perform without a routine?


  • Total voters
    17
May 29, 2011
42
0
Atlantic City NJ
Hey guys, this is kinda like a survey, queastion, advice thing? im not exactly sure what it is... anyway..

I'm a walk around magician on boardwalks in Jersey and since it's the down season I use this time to practice, learn new effects, yadda yadda yadda. When I'm practicing I just can't seem to actually get down a routine. like with a set script and like an exact order i do my magic. The way i generally perform is very laid back usually with normal conversation and between and alota time during the effect. And it changes from performance to performance. Almost completely reinventing my self and the routine with each performance.

Is this necessarily a bad thing? Alot of my resource books tell me that this the wrong thing to do.
Is their anyone else who performs this way?


Oh and excuse the slang. Italian guy form Jersey it's hereditary. xD
 
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
...Is this necessarily a bad thing? Alot of my resource books tell me that this the wrong thing to do.
It's the wrong thing to do if it doesn't work. Reinvention and revolution is always out of the box. Dai Vernon once wrote the worst thing you could do was present a magic effect without "patter." A guy named David Blaine read that and disagreed and ended up revolutionizing magic. So do your own thing and keep experimenting. But be objective when you critique yourself. Is this the best way to perform? Could it be better if you scripted it? Only you can answer those kinds of questions. If it's working for you, though, more power to you, man. As long as you're striving to be the best you can be and moving forward there is no right or wrong way. Approaching art from a different angle is always admirable. Doesn't mean it's always going to work, but at least it's not the same old, same old. Hope you keep pushing forward. Good luck to you.
 
Aug 2, 2008
496
0
Cincinnati
I'd say if you are getting good reactions, it's probably not a big deal. But I am a huge proponent of adding a creative and interesting patter in a routine. To me, it makes me different from those who just perform the same effect.
 
Sep 10, 2008
915
3
QLD, AUS
Dai Vernon once wrote the worst thing you could do was present a magic effect without "patter." A guy named David Blaine read that and disagreed and ended up revolutionizing magic.

Ho hum. I don't think performing without a script is performing without patter. I think there is quite a bit of patter in Blaine's presentation.
 
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
Ho hum. I don't think performing without a script is performing without patter. I think there is quite a bit of patter in Blaine's presentation.
"Ho hum"? Not sure what that was supposed to communicate. Perhaps an attempt to convey your own arrogance and/or flippancy toward what I wrote? You are a success, my friend.

Anyhow, if you disagree, have a discussion with Blaine some time, as what I wrote was his example, and his observation of his own style in comparison to what he once read by Vernon--not mine. I'd agree with Blaine too. His "patter" is pretty much, "Look, watch. Watch, look. Watch." There's a strong character and unique style of presentation, but there isn't much at all in the way of "patter." He'll use a hook line here and there, but that's it. Fair enough if you disagree, but personally I think you're digging for fossils in a sandbox.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

formula

Elite Member
Jan 8, 2010
968
5
Change "wrong" to "bad", because whether it is wrong is subjective to our opinion.

Is it bad to perform without any structure? Yes. You confuse "reinventing" yourself with being random. People who rehearse and have a lot of structure (in any profession) aren't known by the mainstream, because they are busy being successful. David Blaine makes it look like he hasn't rehearsed but he has. Don't fool yourself in to thinking you don't need to put effort in to routining.
 
Sep 10, 2008
915
3
QLD, AUS
"Ho hum"? Not sure what that was supposed to communicate. Perhaps an attempt to convey your own arrogance and/or flippancy toward what I wrote? You are a success, my friend.

Anyhow, if you disagree, have a discussion with Blaine some time, as what I wrote was his example, and his observation of his own style in comparison to what he once read by Vernon--not mine. I'd agree with Blaine too. His "patter" is pretty much, "Look, watch. Watch, look. Watch." There's a strong character and unique style of presentation, but there isn't much at all in the way of "patter." He'll use a hook line here and there, but that's it. Fair enough if you disagree, but personally I think you're digging for fossils in a sandbox.

It was an attempt to convey that I have a completely different view.

I don't think patter equals script at all.
 
May 29, 2011
42
0
Atlantic City NJ
You confuse "reinventing" yourself with being random. People who rehearse and have a lot of structure (in any profession) aren't known by the mainstream, because they are busy being successful.

I'm not actually confusing the two. I perform magic becaus i enjoy it. I do it for ME. Not to be famous not to make money off it, and not to be mainstream. (you have a bit hipster in you if your using that word.) I create characters i use in different performances. generally while i read the people I'm about to perform to.

I thank you guys for your opinions and yes it does work for me. It works fantastically a lot. I will however work with some of the characters I have created and perhaps polish them up a bit. Perhaps to have them follow a little more of a line. granted that line will be like a crazy straw but still a line.
 
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
I don't think patter equals script at all.
Without supporting the statement, just saying "I don't think patter equals script at all" means nothing. Not saying I agree or disagree, but rather your simply stated philosophy--without anything to stand on--can only be left to interpretation.
 
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
David Blaine makes it look like he hasn't rehearsed but he has.
Blaine: OK, guys, I think I have the presentation worked out for that effect. How does this sound: (ahem!) "Look. Watch. Watch. Come here and look. Watch"?

Garcia: I don't know. I think starting with "watch" instead of "look" first might be a better opening statement. Then move into "look."

White: I think 'look" gets the idea across more directly. I almost think "watch" is just further defining "look" and is almost unnecessary.

Blaine: What do you think, Doug?

McKenzie: I kind of think it doesn't need to be "look" or "watch". Perhaps you can just look them in the eyes kind of creepily until you catch their attention.

White: That's a good idea. I like that.

Blaine: Yeah. I think something needs to be said though. Something like "look" or "watch," but different.

Garcia: How about "I want to show you something."

White: Yes!

McKenzie: No, don't say anything.

Blaine: Shut up and get back to designing cards, Doug.

McKenzie grumbles and wanders off.

White: How about "I want to show you something. Watch"?

Garcia: Yeah. Just to punctuate the end. They may be confused when the moment is you want to show them something.

White: Yeah, exactly. It also forces the moment of happening, so the magic is starting before they know what to expect. It's a pattern interrupt.

Garcia: I like it.

Blaine: Brilliant, guys. Brilliant. Glad we rehearsed this. So "I want to show you something. Watch" is it. (Out of frame) Doug! DOUG! Get the cameras ready! We need to go film this! (Back to Garcia and McKenzie) OK, boys. I'm going to spend the next four hours rehearsing the line, nude, in the mirror. It's gotta be perfect. Until then, here's some balloons and a cellphone. Make up something cool with these. (Blaine walks off.)

White: (groaning) The pressure he puts us under. (A loud flatulence sound catches White's ear) What the hell?

Garcia: Haha! Look! The balloon is wrapped around my hand! Haha! Haha!

White: You're a genius! Hand me that cellphone...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RealityOne

Elite Member
Nov 1, 2009
3,744
4,076
New Jersey
There are a number of things that go into a good performance -- character, plot (of the effect which would include routining), presentation (which would include patter, expressions, etc.) and strong magic. If you go out and perform without any thought about your character, the plot of your effect and your patter / presentation you are left with just the magic. If it is strong magic you can get a good reaction. Some magic is just that good that it will astonish people without anything else.

However, I think you can probably get a better reaction with OK magic if you have thought about character, plot and presentation.

If you have a strong character, an interesting plot to your effect or routine, engaging presentation and strong magic... then the audience will react on multiple levels.
 
Apr 1, 2009
1,067
1
33
California
Blaine: OK, guys, I think I have the presentation worked out for that effect. How does this sound: (ahem!) "Look. Watch. Watch. Come here and look. Watch"?

Garcia: I don't know. I think starting with "watch" instead of "look" first might be a better opening statement. Then move into "look."

White: I think 'look" gets the idea across more directly. I almost think "watch" is just further defining "look" and is almost unnecessary.

Blaine: What do you think, Doug?

McKenzie: I kind of think it doesn't need to be "look" or "watch". Perhaps you can just look them in the eyes kind of creepily until you catch their attention.

White: That's a good idea. I like that.

Blaine: Yeah. I think something needs to be said though. Something like "look" or "watch," but different.

Garcia: How about "I want to show you something."

White: Yes!

McKenzie: No, don't say anything.

Blaine: Shut up and get back to designing cards, Doug.

McKenzie grumbles and wanders off.

White: How about "I want to show you something. Watch"?

Garcia: Yeah. Just to punctuate the end. They may be confused when the moment is you want to show them something.

White: Yeah, exactly. It also forces the moment of happening, so the magic is starting before they know what to expect. It's a pattern interrupt.

Garcia: I like it.

Blaine: Brilliant, guys. Brilliant. Glad we rehearsed this. So "I want to show you something. Watch" is it. (Out of frame) Doug! DOUG! Get the cameras ready! We need to go film this! (Back to Garcia and McKenzie) OK, boys. I'm going to spend the next four hours rehearsing the line, nude, in the mirror. It's gotta be perfect. Until then, here's some balloons and a cellphone. Make up something cool with these. (Blaine walks off.)

White: (groaning) The pressure he puts us under. (A loud flatulence sound catches White's ear) What the hell?

Garcia: Haha! Look! The balloon is wrapped around my hand! Haha! Haha!

White: You're a genius! Hand me that cellphone...

brilliant! :p. Mr. Blaine is indeed a very smart man when it comes to presentation. He has a philosophy for what he does. And what is seen on tv is just a cut of version I'm sure. The man knows how to script. He put more than a minute or two into his act. Other people are just... too lazy to come up with anything in their performance and then say "well, david blaine this" or "david blaine that"
 
Sep 10, 2008
915
3
QLD, AUS
Without supporting the statement, just saying "I don't think patter equals script at all" means nothing. Not saying I agree or disagree, but rather your simply stated philosophy--without anything to stand on--can only be left to interpretation.

Would you call any silent magic act without script an act without patter? Teller and Cardini immediately come to mind.
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results