Pure Effect Study: Appreciating the Audience's Experience
I'm in the process of studying Derren Brown's Pure Effect again, and something hit me pretty hard this time around. Early in the book, Derren preaches about the importance of focusing our efforts on the audience to ensure they experience something special and memorable. I wanted to share this epiphany with T11 to see where members stood on the topic and what they think about it all. This initial post is essentially a compilation of the highlighting and scribbles in my copy of Pure Effect.
I'll wait here while you grab some popcorn and and blanket. I'm warning you now this thread'll take a while.
Oh, and you'll probably need some reading glasses to handle this God-forsaken font. Apologies.
I've read countless posts from other magicians talking about the importance of the audience and their interests and opinions. Despite this, it appears there is an overwhelming majority of videos posting the exact opposite of this line of thinking. I've been into magic for a few years. After seeing a wide array of live performances, likewise, I feel that although most magicians agree their audiences are everything, they still mostly perform for themselves. They perform the same flashy flourishes that initially impressed them. They perform the same material that initially fooled them. They say the same lines that initially amused them. The result becomes a cookie-cutter act that has no genuine focus on the audience.
Derren Brown addresses this issue in the second chapter of the book. He talks about how most magicians' starting point for forming a routine often involves the "latest and greatest." This is really relevant to today's magic community with the advancement of its commercialism and industry. We read a high-profile book or watch an acclaimed DVD and fall in love with an effect we see. We then ask ourselves how to incorporate that effect, or move, or line into our presentation to make for a hard-hitting routine.
I'm really guilty of doing that. But evidently, it's the wrong way.
Simply because we want to use an effect doesn't really mean the audience will want to see it. That's the question we have to ask. What does the audience want to see? Focusing on the audience at all times will always give them precisely what they want and expect out of you. And by accomodating to their personal interests, you become more of an interactive performer-- someone they can genuinely relate to... rather than being a mere trick monkey for them to watch.
Focusing on the audience is effing difficult to do. I recently tried to reformat my act with the audience always in mind, but I kept running into the same circles of my own preferences in material. I'm contemplating scrapping the entire thing and starting from a blank slate. ...Which could suck...
*****
It should be noted now, that the audience's experience of your performance has so much more to do than the effects you do. Remember it's an experience. On most occasions, it will be a rare one: not many people see a live magician everyday of their lives. For professionals and active hobbyists, it's so easy to become jaded with what we do and think that we're not offering something unique to an audience. We get into the habit of intruding on an audience's privacy, saying hello, doing some tricks, and rinse and repeating.
Every audience isn't the same.
It's important that the audience understands what you do and is comfortable with who you are before you decide to perform. First impressions are lasting impressions. Looking back on my own career, I've no idea how many people genuinely liked me or was just being polite in seeing my magic. It is so easy to rush into a magic routine for an audience. Showing magic before people are ready for it will never reach its fullest potential. It's important to develop a solid rapport with an audience before sharing what you want to offer. Charm them. Make them laugh. Kiss some butt. Something I learned from the book was that focusing on the audience means treating them how they want to be admired; telling them what they want to hear; and ensuring they're comfortable with who you are prior to you using a single prop.
Question: How do we get the audience to believe we have something special they will want to see?
The answer is the Golden rule: treat others the way you want to be treated. Allow them to appreciate who you are as a person by showing you appreciate them first. Allow them to wonder what it is you have to offer. Doing so will make them want to see magic the way you want to perform it. Ultimately, it will make for a much more fulfilling experience for everyone involved-- including you.
Doing this at each and every table will make each and every performance unique and authentic. Granted, you'll most likely be doing the same old routine, but you'll appreciate doing it for different people each time. You'll build off their energy. You'll listen to their lines. Before you know it-- the same act you've done hundreds of times will look and feel like the first time. It's a refreshing experience.
You're still reading? Kudos.
Lastly, I want to touch base on the quality of the material we perform and how we present it. I would imagine most people do a routine like Triumph. I'll use such an effect as an example. I find that a lot of people tell the story of how a drunken spectator or magician accidentally shuffled the cards face-up and down to find themselves in the predicament. With a lame magical gesture, the cards turn the same way again while revealing the spectator's selection. Right?
Regardless of your technique or method-- doing Triumph this way is a puzzle. A puzzle that will ultimately build a wall between you and the audience if you don't show them how it's done. If you have the book, turn to page 22 and re-read that parargraph detailing how people respond to puzzles. It's overwhelmingly not a positive reaction.
Presenting magic as puzzles not only devalues the art as meager tricks but it also establishes barriers between the audience and the performer. Magic, in my opinion, should more or less present a conflict that the performer and audience can resolve together for a more gratifying experience. Focus should-- again-- always be on the audience's perception and understanding of the effect.
Here's how I personally present Triumph. I have a spectator select a card and I lose it into the deck. I purposely make it look like I'm manipulating the cards with a dextrous sleight. I make them suspect I'm doing something fishy. Once I grab their attention this way, I accidentally drop the cards. They fall to the table or on the floor. The cards are a mess. I find that most people will initially laugh and then respond with a sincere, "Aww," because it legitimately looks like I messed up the effect. Everyone helps me get the cards together, and I spread them to show that the cards are all face-up and down. I hand the deck to the person who chose the card and I ask her to imagine how amazing it would be if the top card of the deck turned out to be her selection. I get her hopes up. She turns over the card and finds that I messed up again. Laughter all around. I then bring down the mood, and have her think about her selection. In her hands, the cards all turn the same way again, and she'll find her card in the center of the deck facing the other way.
Notice how this performance actually involves the audience and gets them to interact with me. They're not only laughing at me, but they're also feeling bad for me. It's a great moment for spontaneous comedy and drama. I also let the magic moment happen in the spectator's hands so they can take the credit for the effect's resolution. I'm not working against the audience-- in fact we're working together to make it all happen nicely.
Oh, and for those of you who want to know-- It's Kostya Kimlat's Culligula.
So I'll end on that. I hope this ridiculous attempt at a summation of the fist few chapters of the book will offer something new to people here.
Pure Effect is a great book. I would love to session and workshop it to death here. If you're interested to do so-- please respond. And in regards to this particular thread, ask yourselves-- how well are you really relating your act to your audience? And for those of you who are confident in your abilities to make magic an appreciative art-- how was the road to finally getting your act to where it's at?
...You're still reading. Unbelievable.
RS.
I'm in the process of studying Derren Brown's Pure Effect again, and something hit me pretty hard this time around. Early in the book, Derren preaches about the importance of focusing our efforts on the audience to ensure they experience something special and memorable. I wanted to share this epiphany with T11 to see where members stood on the topic and what they think about it all. This initial post is essentially a compilation of the highlighting and scribbles in my copy of Pure Effect.
I'll wait here while you grab some popcorn and and blanket. I'm warning you now this thread'll take a while.
Oh, and you'll probably need some reading glasses to handle this God-forsaken font. Apologies.
I've read countless posts from other magicians talking about the importance of the audience and their interests and opinions. Despite this, it appears there is an overwhelming majority of videos posting the exact opposite of this line of thinking. I've been into magic for a few years. After seeing a wide array of live performances, likewise, I feel that although most magicians agree their audiences are everything, they still mostly perform for themselves. They perform the same flashy flourishes that initially impressed them. They perform the same material that initially fooled them. They say the same lines that initially amused them. The result becomes a cookie-cutter act that has no genuine focus on the audience.
Derren Brown addresses this issue in the second chapter of the book. He talks about how most magicians' starting point for forming a routine often involves the "latest and greatest." This is really relevant to today's magic community with the advancement of its commercialism and industry. We read a high-profile book or watch an acclaimed DVD and fall in love with an effect we see. We then ask ourselves how to incorporate that effect, or move, or line into our presentation to make for a hard-hitting routine.
I'm really guilty of doing that. But evidently, it's the wrong way.
Simply because we want to use an effect doesn't really mean the audience will want to see it. That's the question we have to ask. What does the audience want to see? Focusing on the audience at all times will always give them precisely what they want and expect out of you. And by accomodating to their personal interests, you become more of an interactive performer-- someone they can genuinely relate to... rather than being a mere trick monkey for them to watch.
Focusing on the audience is effing difficult to do. I recently tried to reformat my act with the audience always in mind, but I kept running into the same circles of my own preferences in material. I'm contemplating scrapping the entire thing and starting from a blank slate. ...Which could suck...
*****
It should be noted now, that the audience's experience of your performance has so much more to do than the effects you do. Remember it's an experience. On most occasions, it will be a rare one: not many people see a live magician everyday of their lives. For professionals and active hobbyists, it's so easy to become jaded with what we do and think that we're not offering something unique to an audience. We get into the habit of intruding on an audience's privacy, saying hello, doing some tricks, and rinse and repeating.
Every audience isn't the same.
It's important that the audience understands what you do and is comfortable with who you are before you decide to perform. First impressions are lasting impressions. Looking back on my own career, I've no idea how many people genuinely liked me or was just being polite in seeing my magic. It is so easy to rush into a magic routine for an audience. Showing magic before people are ready for it will never reach its fullest potential. It's important to develop a solid rapport with an audience before sharing what you want to offer. Charm them. Make them laugh. Kiss some butt. Something I learned from the book was that focusing on the audience means treating them how they want to be admired; telling them what they want to hear; and ensuring they're comfortable with who you are prior to you using a single prop.
Question: How do we get the audience to believe we have something special they will want to see?
The answer is the Golden rule: treat others the way you want to be treated. Allow them to appreciate who you are as a person by showing you appreciate them first. Allow them to wonder what it is you have to offer. Doing so will make them want to see magic the way you want to perform it. Ultimately, it will make for a much more fulfilling experience for everyone involved-- including you.
Doing this at each and every table will make each and every performance unique and authentic. Granted, you'll most likely be doing the same old routine, but you'll appreciate doing it for different people each time. You'll build off their energy. You'll listen to their lines. Before you know it-- the same act you've done hundreds of times will look and feel like the first time. It's a refreshing experience.
You're still reading? Kudos.
Lastly, I want to touch base on the quality of the material we perform and how we present it. I would imagine most people do a routine like Triumph. I'll use such an effect as an example. I find that a lot of people tell the story of how a drunken spectator or magician accidentally shuffled the cards face-up and down to find themselves in the predicament. With a lame magical gesture, the cards turn the same way again while revealing the spectator's selection. Right?
Regardless of your technique or method-- doing Triumph this way is a puzzle. A puzzle that will ultimately build a wall between you and the audience if you don't show them how it's done. If you have the book, turn to page 22 and re-read that parargraph detailing how people respond to puzzles. It's overwhelmingly not a positive reaction.
Presenting magic as puzzles not only devalues the art as meager tricks but it also establishes barriers between the audience and the performer. Magic, in my opinion, should more or less present a conflict that the performer and audience can resolve together for a more gratifying experience. Focus should-- again-- always be on the audience's perception and understanding of the effect.
Here's how I personally present Triumph. I have a spectator select a card and I lose it into the deck. I purposely make it look like I'm manipulating the cards with a dextrous sleight. I make them suspect I'm doing something fishy. Once I grab their attention this way, I accidentally drop the cards. They fall to the table or on the floor. The cards are a mess. I find that most people will initially laugh and then respond with a sincere, "Aww," because it legitimately looks like I messed up the effect. Everyone helps me get the cards together, and I spread them to show that the cards are all face-up and down. I hand the deck to the person who chose the card and I ask her to imagine how amazing it would be if the top card of the deck turned out to be her selection. I get her hopes up. She turns over the card and finds that I messed up again. Laughter all around. I then bring down the mood, and have her think about her selection. In her hands, the cards all turn the same way again, and she'll find her card in the center of the deck facing the other way.
Notice how this performance actually involves the audience and gets them to interact with me. They're not only laughing at me, but they're also feeling bad for me. It's a great moment for spontaneous comedy and drama. I also let the magic moment happen in the spectator's hands so they can take the credit for the effect's resolution. I'm not working against the audience-- in fact we're working together to make it all happen nicely.
Oh, and for those of you who want to know-- It's Kostya Kimlat's Culligula.
So I'll end on that. I hope this ridiculous attempt at a summation of the fist few chapters of the book will offer something new to people here.
Pure Effect is a great book. I would love to session and workshop it to death here. If you're interested to do so-- please respond. And in regards to this particular thread, ask yourselves-- how well are you really relating your act to your audience? And for those of you who are confident in your abilities to make magic an appreciative art-- how was the road to finally getting your act to where it's at?
...You're still reading. Unbelievable.
RS.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd say more but I don't have anything to add, so a thank you is all I can offer I'm afraid. I can only hope that someday I'll come to owning those books and I'll possibly be able to engage in a discussion.
