I’ve been seeing too many topics lately discussing “The Art of Magic” or “Advancing Magic as an Art”. These topics take for granted that magic is an art. I don’t agree with that opinion and I’m going to explain why. Along the way I’ll offer some viewpoints on magic as an art. The goal of this essay is to draw comparisons between “magic” and “art”.
I’ll compare magic to the art I’m most familiar with, contemporary visual art. If you ask art historians or theorists to define art you will probably get a different answer from each one. I think the most common definition of art used by the public at large is that art is a form of “self expression”. I think this is far too simplistic. You can express yourself by the clothes you wear or the stuff you buy. That doesn’t make fashion or consumerism art.
I don’t have anywhere near the conceptual or educational background needed to attempt to define contemporary art. I’ll limit this to two key points that I think play a part in defining art, and particularly contemporary art. I’ll compare magic to these two main points.
I’d just like to point out that comparing contemporary art to magic is a stupid thing to do. Contemporary art plays an important intellectual and cultural role in society. For the most part magic is a bunch of people doing tricks. This is really my point. Calling magic an art places it in the same category as literature, sculpture, dance, theatre or film. Magic can be a wonderfully enriching form of entertainment and amazement. It can reconnect audiences with a childlike sense of wonder, but I think talking about “the Art of Magic” is pretentious. A card trick isn’t a shark in formaldehyde. A coin trick isn’t an unmade bed. Being able to simulate reading someone’s mind isn’t an upturned urinal.
The first defining element of art is the way that art engages in dialogue with society, culture and philosophy. Art is involved in a give and take with the society it exists within. Contemporary (or Avant Garde) art evolves and shifts in reaction to the changes that society undergoes. Dada had its roots in the First World War, which presented death and destruction on a scale never seen before in Western Society. Dada was a way of making sense of the absurdity of life and making life, and art, absurd. Surrealism had its basis in Freud’s theories of the unconscious. Art can be a reflection of a particular society or time.
Does magic do this? If you were to watch a magician in the 1940s compared to now, would there be a noticeable difference? Magic seems to be stuck in a fixed mode that makes no reference to the world in which we live. To paraphrase Eric Mead’s wonderful essay “Say Anything” in his book Tangled Web, being a performer gives a platform for communication. What are we using this platform to say? For the most part it’s magic for the blind. Magic doesn’t evolve or shift in relation to the outside world. Sure, magic does change at times. Take street magic. Although arguable, I think this shift was purely on the basis of commerce. Street Magic targeted a particular audience and shifted magic to make it appealing to the target consumer. Magic remains fixed, unchanged, unyielding. We make no attempt to be relevant, culturally up to date. We could we transplanted back fifty years and our scripts would still be perfectly relevant.
The second key point that I think defines contemporary art is controversy. There have been some spectacular controversies which left the art world and were picked up by the world at large. My personal favourite is the work of Piero Manzoni. Damien Hirst and Tracey Emin are two other artists whose work has generated controversy. The incredible shift in art that Picasso and Braques brought about was controversial. Marcel Duchamp’s “Nude Descending the Staircase” was harshly savaged and mocked by some critics at the time. The constant progression of art within a society means some ideas are too new or daring for the public to accept. The ideas and concepts being put forth by artists are challenged by those both within and without the art world. It ignites debate. The punter in the street asks “Is this s**t art?” Looking back with hindsight we realise that artists were often responsible for making incredible leaps forward in terms of aesthetic or conceptual ideas.
When was the last time a magic act or performer ignited controversy outside of the magic world? If we’re really conveying some type of viewpoint some people won’t agree with what we’re saying. This could lead to controversy. If we’re bland and tasteless everyone will be just fine with us. We’ll be entertainers, not artists. No one has ever complained about a Ken Done painting. Actually, I’m sure people have complained about Ken Done paintings but I don’t think it was on the basis of it’s conceptual value. “Is this s***t art?”
In his book Designing Miracles Darwin Ortiz observes that magicians seem to be the only group who prattle on about art. Other people talk about CRAFT. I’ve found this to be very true. Other creative people I know like artists talk about the aesthetics of their works, the materials used, the conceptual framework involved in the work or the theoretical underpinnings. They don’t spend time discussing “the art” or how to further “the art”, they spend time discussing specific aspects of their work or the work of others. They work on their technical skills. They organise exhibitions. They clarify and research the conceptual ideas and philosophies that underpin their art practice.
Just because you think something is an art doesn’t make it one. If you ask a layperson if they think magic is art, what will their viewpoint be? Entertaining with magic isn’t an art because of the profoundly low level of craft in magic. Entertaining with magic isn’t an art because it offers no reflections to the world we live in. Magic doesn’t evolve and shift with changes in society. Magic doesn’t ignite controversy. Before we start discussing how can advance the “Art of Magic” let’s think about how we can improve as performers. Let’s discuss with each other how we can enhance the design of our effects. Let’s work at creating better emotional hooks for our scripts. Let’s work at being more memorable as performers. Let’s work at expressing some of our viewpoints to the people we’re performing for. Perhaps then we can start calling ourselves artists.