theory11 — Magic Tricks & the World's Finest Playing Cards
Magic Is A Puzzle
- Thread starter StevenLevitt
- Start date
To be entirely honest with you, I'm not in the mood for a long post. However, that said, I would advise all interested that Ken Weber's book Maximum Entertainment has a few paragraphs on this very subject, magic as a puzzle.
Personally, whilst there are many factors, including the mindset of some audience members towards magic, the most alarming one is the frivolous and/or disrespectful presentation of one's magic.
Personally, whilst there are many factors, including the mindset of some audience members towards magic, the most alarming one is the frivolous and/or disrespectful presentation of one's magic.
Card material is a puzzle if and only if you present it as a puzzle. Good magicians take puzzles and present them as mysteries, a huge difference in intent and effect.
This is simply untrue, it will only appear like this if you present it poorly.
Spectators will be perceive magic as a puzzle if you present it as a challenge to them, many magicians do this unintentionally. You need to get the spectator involved as much as possible, if you just do magic where people stand and watch (e.g. Tivo, The Queens) then it can seem like your showing off and will probably prevent you from forming any kind of connection with the spectators. They will become irritated by this and will just try and work it out.
If you are continuously talking and interacting with them and giving them things to do they will feel like a part of it and will therefore be less inclined to try and work it out as they no longer feel like they're being challenged. You should be doing magic with your spectators not 'at' your spectators.
I think that one cause of this "puzzle" perception of magic is the fact that we, magicians in general, concentrate too much on the tricks, as if they are the essence of the performance. I believe the tricks should be merely manifestations of the magician's character, so that, rather than someone being fascinated by your abilities with a deck of cards, they are intrigued by you as a person. Uri Geller, Derren Brown, David Blaine and Criss Angel have all acheived this, in that they, in the public's mind, are more than the sum of their tricks. People are interested in them as people.
Once you've established a strong character, some of your effects can be presented as a puzzle, or explicitly as sleight-of-hand, while still maintaining their magical impact. The key to it is to decide who you are as a magician. Are you genuinely psychic? Are you a master of underground card cheating techniques? Are you a comedian? Then, your choice of effect and style of presentation should all be informed by this persona. This does mean that you limit your choice of suitable tricks, but it means that your performances will be infinitely more interesting than a series of disconnected routines.
So, my view on this, is really that we worry too much about whether our tricks look like puzzles, or whether the audience can tell it's sleight-of-hand. Real magic comes from the intimate theatre, the connection between you and your spectators, regardless of what trick you perform or what "Presentation" you use.
Once you've established a strong character, some of your effects can be presented as a puzzle, or explicitly as sleight-of-hand, while still maintaining their magical impact. The key to it is to decide who you are as a magician. Are you genuinely psychic? Are you a master of underground card cheating techniques? Are you a comedian? Then, your choice of effect and style of presentation should all be informed by this persona. This does mean that you limit your choice of suitable tricks, but it means that your performances will be infinitely more interesting than a series of disconnected routines.
So, my view on this, is really that we worry too much about whether our tricks look like puzzles, or whether the audience can tell it's sleight-of-hand. Real magic comes from the intimate theatre, the connection between you and your spectators, regardless of what trick you perform or what "Presentation" you use.
So magicians like Ricky Jay does present his material poorly? I have seen some of the best magicians on this planet together with allot of friends, who does not know i do any kind of magic, who simply thinks all they does is puzzels.
People can enjoy sleight of hand card magic, but almost anyone knows that they are doing something that they do either not know about or can see and they want to figure out what that is, so it becomes a puzzel.
It does not mean that the magician did pressent it good or bad, some material does just look like a puzzle.
Does Ricky Jay's status mean that he is unable to do something poorly? Does his skill mean that he could not possibly improve his routine, or his presentation. I can't speak on behalf of your friend, but also note that just because you look for the solution, doesn't necessarily mean you respond to it like a puzzle. Furthermore, no theory of this nature is universal. Sometimes, you have highly logical people. Fair enough. But again, I point to my third sentence.
Some great points brought up in this thread. Squ!rrel's assessment is an interesting point. If the presentation is demonstrative of a TRICK - something done just to fool them, it is the spectator's natural, instinctive reaction to react as if it was a puzzle. Puzzles were meant to be figured out. Magic, in the eyes of most performers, is meant to entertain; to suspend belief.
Presentation and engagement with the spectator - interacting - is the most important part of performance. If you can connect with a spectator; if you can break down that barrier, you are on your way to a MUCH more memorable performance than with the core sleights alone. The effects and sleights are your tools, but what you make of them is the final masterpiece.
Great performers of all types - from Ricky Jay to Derren Brown to David Copperfield - all put an incredible amount of thought not only into the core technique, but the manner in which it is shown to each spectator. Therein, each performer stands out and has their own style, tone, and persona.
Presentation and engagement with the spectator - interacting - is the most important part of performance. If you can connect with a spectator; if you can break down that barrier, you are on your way to a MUCH more memorable performance than with the core sleights alone. The effects and sleights are your tools, but what you make of them is the final masterpiece.
Great performers of all types - from Ricky Jay to Derren Brown to David Copperfield - all put an incredible amount of thought not only into the core technique, but the manner in which it is shown to each spectator. Therein, each performer stands out and has their own style, tone, and persona.
It's all about taking their minds off the "trick" and getting them into the "effect". You must connect with the audience and have them view something other than a regular card trick. It then all lies on the performer. The performer must change that regular card trick into an experience like no other for the spectator. The performer can't leave the spectator thinking about how it was done, but about the entire experience of being amazed as a whole. You want that feeling of amazement to stick more than anything else.
After that amazement wears off perhaps one will think about how it's done, but to be honest, I think that is purely natural. People have desire to "know". And that's perfectly acceptable, but first you have to make them feel something that they've never felt before.
Mitch
After that amazement wears off perhaps one will think about how it's done, but to be honest, I think that is purely natural. People have desire to "know". And that's perfectly acceptable, but first you have to make them feel something that they've never felt before.
Mitch
Thank you, I have always been wanting to get that book but keep forgetting, I shall purchase it now, I have heard lots of good things about it!
I like your way of thinking. Thank you.
Yeah, almost every post in here had at least one great point.
That's true in a lot of cases, but it doesn't have to be. As you say, the reason for this perception is that magic is "anti-logic". Therefore, to give our audience a full experience of magic, we need to deal with this problem. And, there are at least two ways of doing this.
The first option is to give them an plausible explanation by the way you perform. Derren Brown's presentation style implies that he's using psychological techniques, playing to the intelligence of his audience and giving them a logical solution. However, this in no way diminishes the magic, as, even though they feel that they can see what he's doing, the level that such talents can be honed to still astonishes. This style of presentation goes back at least to the 19th century, when magicians would claim mastery over some hitherto misunderstood property of electricity or magnetism to cause their effects. It fed into the zeitgeist at that time, people didn't feel that they were being "fooled", and they were happy to experience an apparent miracle of science.
The second option is to bypass your spectator's intellectual processes and tap straight into emotional responses. In other words, make it clear in your style of performance that your magic is a piece of intimate theatre, establishing your role as that of showman, and theirs as audience, even though they may very well be called upon to participate. Basically, this just means you have to be entertaining. If people are genuinely interested in whatever story, plot or presentation you are offering, the method becomes almost immaterial, as the trick is just an expression of something else. I think Eugene Burger and Jeff McBride are great exponents of this style of presentation.