Magical Myth Busters: Volume 2

[Randomwrath]

Brad, can you please drop it. You have made your point but repeating it over and over again won't make convince people it's right, they just get bored. I respect your opinion but since every other person posting on this thread has agreed with Steer, what makes you so sure that you are right?

ANYWAY the subject appears to have moved on from that now so just please let it drop.

EDIT: btw great post, Steer, whens the next one coming out?

 

[Flyspazz]

Brad Henderson
May I respectfully suggest you spend a little more time exploring our art, learning it's history, and honing your own craft prior to making dogmatic statements.

Base your definition on the history of exposure and not make up a claim that it has always been rooted in vendettas. When your definition becomes congruent with history, then you have a good starting point. Until then, you are just talking to hear yourself talk.

You can't p[pontificate when the basis of your ideas have no bearing in reality or history.

so often you make statements that contradict everything that has ever happened in history.

History is written and can be referenced accordingly. He wasn’t saying this is written in the stone of magic history, which would be different. He was giving examples from his experiences and other issues to ponder.

 

[Flyspazz]

The root of the problem is the same as many others: most magicians don’t actually talk to their audiences. They project onto them. I used to believe some of the myths I’ve mentioned in this and the last installment. When I went professional and started busking, I started talking to my audiences and learned that many of the memes going around didn’t apply to the average person. They’re not magicians, so they don’t think of things the same way we do.

Your approach may work for you, but until you interact with another performer’s audience, don’t profess to tell them they should be more like you.

My group is a little older than some groups in these forums but I have had many conversations on this. My friends that are non-magicians get shown quite a bit of effects by me. Mostly before I start performing them for specs so I can get the feel of the trick and to see what kind of reactions I get so I can make necessary improvements where needed.

When I discussed some issues with them I was surprised to learn that none of them ever went to you tube to see how it was done and none went to a website to purchase it.

When we watched Celebracadabra none said that they were going to Ellusionist because of their advertising.
One said it well “while he is often amazed and wonders how its done he knows he’s not going to do it as a hobby and he’s not going to waste his time or money getting How to do Street Magic because he knows he wont practice any of it.” He just likes how he feels being amazed makes him feel. Hopeful, “in a time when gas is heading towards $6.00 a gallon.

Only one spec I talked to said he looked something up on you tube but he didn’t remember what it was and he couldn’t even remember the method.

Only one other said he had ever been to a magic website and that was to purchase “some cool looking cards with a tiger” for his Saturday night poker games.

Another said he went in a Magic Shop once and that was to rent a Halloween costume.

All the rest. None of the above. Very few could even describe a trick they’ve seen in the past. “There were some cups and some balls and they changed places and moved around and stuff” or “he found the card I picked in a cool way” and lets not forget “the Statue was there then it was gone.”

If you watch another performer sometime pay attention to thier specs. They are not watching it like you are.

My conclusion personally is laymen aren’t going to go through as much trouble as I thought they were and they are not trying to ruin our art as much as we think. While we are passionate about protection which we should be. Sometimes we are our own enemy.

 

[darosa.justin]

Brad, can you please drop it. You have made your point but repeating it over and over again won't make convince people it's right, they just get bored. I respect your opinion but since every other person posting on this thread has agreed with Steer, what makes you so sure that you are right?

ANYWAY the subject appears to have moved on from that now so just please let it drop.

EDIT: btw great post, Steer, whens the next one coming out?

Just because people agree with Steerpike, doesn't mean his views are totally unbiased and not fully opinionated. Neither does it mean that what Brad is saying is wrong.

 

[Steerpike]

Brad, can you please drop it.

History is written and can be referenced accordingly. He wasn’t saying this is written in the stone of magic history, which would be different. He was giving examples from his experiences and other issues to ponder.

Guys, while I appreciate the support, Brad an I have a long history of disagreeing (mostly by me saying something characteristically offensive) and I'm talking with him privately to straighten things out.

 

[Brad Henderson]

Steer is passionate, and I respect that. However, he is offering up theories that have little basis in the history of ideas as we know them. This is unfair to those who are trying to learn. When someone writes something that is - to be blunt- wrong, that needs to be called to attention.

For example, Steer has claimed that the issue of exposure revolves around personal vendettas. I personally know of no historical example that supports this claim. Steer has said to me that this is based on what he has read on the forums.

The forums are a small world and are far from representative of the big picture that is magic. While it is wonderful for so many to have an opportunity to share their experiences, we must not loose sight of the fact that those experiences are limited - and to draw conclusive maxims from them could be a mistake.

If people truly care about understanding magic, then I would think these people would want to consider ideas that are actually based on the history of ideas of our art OR are truly representative of magical experiences. Some people here have been doing magic for less than a year. I wish them nothing but success. However, to assume that their experiences should be the basis of a theory of magic is misguided.

I think Steer is interested in a lot of important questions, however I fear he is too quick to answer with a definitive conclusion. I do not have all of the answers. But I have been around a while, and I know a good deal of the history of this art. When I read things that contradict what history has told us to be true - I worry that others might be basing future decisions and actions on misguided information. When I read things that contradict what my experience has taught me to be true - I think it is important that others know that this may not be the only answer.

I have no problem with Steer as a person. I just want him to consider his answers a little more thoroughly before posting them as dogma. When it comes to matters of personal opinion, it is what it is. When it comes to statements that make claims that are not backed by history or general experience, then I think we all should be concerned.

Brad Henderson

 

[Randomwrath]

Just because people agree with Steerpike, doesn't mean his views are totally unbiased and not fully opinionated. Neither does it mean that what Brad is saying is wrong.

I know, I'm just saying the majority of people seem to agree with Steer.Therefore one would logically assume that Brad IS wrong and Steer is right. I'm not saying this as a hard and fast fact, just what jumps to mind.

 

[Huruey]

I know, I'm just saying the majority of people seem to agree with Steer.Therefore one would logically assume that Brad IS wrong and Steer is right. I'm not saying this as a hard and fast fact, just what jumps to mind.

That isn't "logical", that's merely an appeal to popularity, there is a big difference. It wasn't that long ago, relatively, that most people thought the earth was flat. Does that "logically" mean they were right?

While I agree with many of the things Steer says about exposure, I can't say I agree with his overall dismissive attitude towards it. "It's not going to affect your magic" seems to be quite popular as a response to exposure debates recently, but my recent experiences simply don't corroborate with this claim. I don't want to have an argument about how it affects my magic, I find it hard to believe that I have actually been asked to give evidence of how my performances have been affected, but I'm not trying to PROVE anything, if people don't want to believe things I say based on my own experiences, then that's their problem. I'm not trying to shape anyone's opinion, I simply have my own opinions that I am perfectly entitled to share.

I have essentially been told that as long as the audience have fun, are entertained, whatever, even if many of your secrets get exposed by people shouting out "Hey, I saw that on youtube...".

It seems that many people around the internet are buying into this idea of doing everything for the spectator. "They are the reason we do magic, it's all about them", it's certainly an attractive idea, which is why so many people try to sell themselves as such, but I just can't tell if it's all that realistic or not. Am I just a bad magician or something, because I actually do magic largely for myself, because it's something I enjoy doing. If the magic of the effects are spoiled by exposure, I understand it's best not to let it affect how you perform, but that doesn't mean to say that it hasn't affected your performance. If an effect isn't magical, but you still give the audience a fun and entertaining time, are you actually a magician, or just an entertainer? Forgive me if this sounds selfish in any way, but I signed up to do magic, because that's what I wanted to do.

Another common view is of those who say "there's nothing we can do about it anyway". This simply doesn't work for me as a person, it just feels like giving up completely. Sure, there have been many futile attempts at abolishing exposure through internet petitions and the like, so it may be fair to say that these things are normally a waste of time, but to just give up completely and ignore it seems a bit extreme to me. Ah well, each to his own I guess.

Huruey

 

[Steerpike]

"It's not going to affect your magic" seems to be quite popular as a response to exposure debates recently, but my recent experiences simply don't corroborate with this claim.

Technically, my stance is that it won't hurt your magic, provided of course you're willing to find a proper solution.

Sure, there have been many futile attempts at abolishing exposure through internet petitions and the like, so it may be fair to say that these things are normally a waste of time, but to just give up completely and ignore it seems a bit extreme to me.

No one I know says to give up. Just that attacking the problem directly seems like the intuitive, logical thing to do, but is also the least likely to succeed.

Almost no one believes me when I say this, but the truth is that you have to start by accepting everything as it is. I know you're scratching your head right now, but before you hit that reply button to ask if I'm high, let me finish.

Once you've accepted the current state of things, then you can seek positive change. If you don't accept things first, you'll always be hung up on every "what if" and "woulda, shoulda, coulda" that drifts through your mind.

I've accepted that attacking the issue of YouTube exposure directly doesn't work because we don't have the legal/financial backing to win a class action lawsuit or give a petition any real weight, and we can't stop bored, rich white kids from being bored, rich white kids. Where some would find that depressing, for me it's liberating. I no longer have to get hung up on attacking the problem directly. I can now focus on finding creative solutions and winning one battle at a time.

 

[Medifro]

The forums are a small world and are far from representative of the big picture that is magic. While it is wonderful for so many to have an opportunity to share their experiences, we must not loose sight of the fact that those experiences are limited - and to draw conclusive maxims from them could be a mistake.

I encourage you to explore your thoughts here, but to be so bold as to claim that you have the answer - when the answers you have ignore everything we know about the history of ideas in our art - is ludicrous.

I just want him to consider his answers a little more thoroughly before posting them as dogma. When it comes to matters of personal opinion, it is what it is.

From reading Steerpike's posts in the past, me and many others can tell you this: These is THE EXACT PROBLEMS Steerpike, dare I say, suffer from.

Steerpike, I think its time to tell you this. I personally and other people don't comment on your threads for the above exact reasons. We know that you will disagree with us, because of the above reasons. Brad hit the mark way better than I was intending to tell you, you are lucky to have someone to point out your mistakes.

Your attitude when it comes to posting, like putting things like facts when they are mere opinions based on what you see in online community ( which is why you're experience in this is not yet valid ), is wrong. Problem is, at least it would be better if its an online community like the Cafe, while its online communities where beginning and younger magicians ( hate to stereotype, but I think you get the idea ) are, where these issues seem to arrive. I can tell you that some of your posts in the past had flawed logic, including the ones here. I won't spend my time addressing them, as Brad did far better than I could do.

Consider yourself lucky to be pointed out, and I apologize if anything here was offending.

 

[Steerpike]

I personally and other people don't comment on your threads for the above exact reasons. We know that you will disagree with us, because of the above reasons.

I also get the impression that you think I'm kind of a prick in general, as I can't recall the last time you ever really spoke to me about... well, anything really.

If I'm wrong about that, great. If I'm right, don't worry about offending me as I've been called far worse things for less.

 

[Medifro]

I also get the impression that you think I'm kind of a prick in general, as I can't recall the last time you ever really spoke to me about... well, anything really.

If I'm wrong about that, great. If I'm right, don't worry about offending me as I've been called far worse things for less.

Here is the idea. Don't take the online community as a representation for the magic community ( I still didn't see you reply to Brad's points ), and stop making your opinions and make them sound as facts. You might not know it but some look you an "elitist", who ( and this is purely describing the term ) lay things as facts but when it comes to application, you see nothing. I would even say that a friend of mine doubted that you perform magic and attend conventions in first place, seeing some of the logic in the posts. They may look good for those inexperience in it, but for the people who know the stuff, they will be like "Huh? What the heck is this guy talking about? ", one of those things is your Dark vs Punk thread, and this thread concerning exposure in particular.

I would love to see you're reply to the concerns Brad brought up above, and the ones I quoted in particular.

Anywho, I think you're a cool guy. Virtual pizza and coke? Cheers.

 

[Steerpike]

( I still didn't see you reply to Brad's points )

I'm speaking with him privately. It's a conversation I'd prefer not to have in public.

I would even say that a friend of mine doubted that you perform magic and attend conventions in first place, seeing some of the logic in the posts.

He's half-right. I don't go to conventions because I don't have the money right now. Magic is my main income right now, but if you'll look at my web site, I'm trying to launch a multi-media studio. The reason there isn't more content is a story much longer than I'm willing to go into here, suffice to say that an unforeseen event set me back several months of work and several thousand dollars worth of hardware/software.

When you think about it, conventions are a luxury I can't afford right now.

one of those things is your Dark vs Punk thread,

Would you mind PMing me about what was wrong with that?

I wrote that more as a catharsis than anything else. Long story.

 

[Medifro]

Glad you're working out with Brad.

I don't go to conventions either ( more like because I live far away from all the action ), but I talk with magicians online chatting and sessioning. Its real fun.

I'll PM you on the dark Vs Punk thread soon mate ( 1am here )

Regards,

 

[Randomwrath]

That isn't "logical", that's merely an appeal to popularity, there is a big difference. It wasn't that long ago, relatively, that most people thought the earth was flat. Does that "logically" mean they were right?

I'm just here to say my opinions. From what I read, I would say that my opinion was logically sound in my opinion. You gave one example of when my logic may not have worked. In general, though, the majority of people tends to be more accurate. That's why scientists repeat tests.

Still, I'm not getting at anyone, I'm just saying what occurs to me.

 

[Huruey]

I'm just here to say my opinions. From what I read, I would say that my opinion was logically sound in my opinion. You gave one example of when my logic may not have worked. In general, though, the majority of people tends to be more accurate. That's why scientists repeat tests.

Still, I'm not getting at anyone, I'm just saying what occurs to me.

Please don't think I'm getting at you in any way, I'm not. I was just trying to help by pointing out an slight error in your logic.

Opinion does not come into logic. Logic is a form of structured reasoning based on FACTS, not opinions. I was pointing out a fallacy in your statement, which is what is known as an "appeal to popularity", and it is basically a flaw in an argument that is not actually, by definition, logical.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define:fallacy&btnG=Search&meta=
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html

I complete respect that you have your own opinion, but opinion isn't logic. Maybe it was just a wrong choice of words?

Hope this helps.

Huruey

 

[Aris.SA]

Its good to have here people that dont agree with SteerPike, I agree with Brad.. Steerpike HEAR man he is in the genii magazine, he knows more than us..

You think that because you are a mod, you can make everything to your advantage, but you cant man... You wanna be the authority here, but you arent, you are on E.. I think that you should post the speech and freedom thingy there and not here.. cus for me you are explaining in that myth your problems about e.. and this isnt e this is t11..

With all respect..

P.S. Hear man hear..

 

[Steerpike]

You think that because you are a mod, you can make everything to your advantage, but you cant man...

I don't actually.

cus for me you are explaining in that myth your problems about e..

Actually, it happens here too. People get all whiny when their posts get edited for profanity, exposure, or attacking people and start crying about freedom of speech. I've had to deal with this problem whenever I disagree with somebody no matter where I am. If I tell someone I don't like what they had to say, I get called a fascist trying to take away someone's right to have an opinion (as if their minds were worth brainwashing?).

I posted that here because my experience as a moderator has taught me to appreciate the work put into it. And it irritates me to see anyone else trying to keep a modicum of sanity and intelligence on a messageboard being attacked by some screaming, teenage throwback.

 

[Brad Henderson]

Aris,

Thanks for the kind words, but just because I write for Genii and Magic is no reason to take my experiences as privileged. I am NOT right about everything. However, I do try to back everything I say up with evidence that comes from many years of performing experience, many years of studying magic, or thoughts that have been uttered by real authorities in our field.

The problem with online discussion (or one of the problems) is that we rarely know to whom we are speaking. While I think everyone deserves to have a voice, the opinion of someone who has never performed a trick should not carry the same weight as someone who has made their living for years as a performer (at least when it comes to matters of performance.)

I get concerned when I see "advice" handed or taken that may not have been born out of real experience or expertise. I think it is great that people have a chance to ask "What if?" or "Has anyone else had this happened?" or "What would you do if?"

But that is different from someone saying: "This is why it happened", "This is what you must do" or "This is the way things are" WHEN THOSE OPINIONS ARE NOT BASED ON EITHER YEARS OF EXPERIENCE OR AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE HISTORY OF IDEAS.

If we knew more about the writers to put their words into context, and were willing to do that, then we would not have to be so concerned.

I just would hate for someone to waste time developing bad performance habits based on misinformation. (And this is something that extends FAR beyond Steer's posts.)

Brad

 

[SHANE BLACK]

Here's my thoughts on this matter. Does Steerpike approach with a aggresive dogmatic approach to threads. YES its in his nature and thats his persona. BUT saying that does he have a judgemental approach in those replys NO, but were judging him now and that makes us any better absolutlely not. I've had it out with Steerpike but at the same time I've had intriuging conversations with the guy that bury most threads Ive seen. I consider Brad a brilliant guy (and I love your review on Fred Rosenbaum's Szechuan Sampler this month by the way), anyways sorry for going off there, but I consider both these guys friends and great contributors to this art. I really wanted to respond to the thread and my opinion to Steerpikes essay.

First I'm not quite sure if someones response so short and quick or whatever makes them ignorant it could also be a response of frustration to someones approach to a thread and not wanting to go into a irrelevant battle of wits. I think your thoughts on props was the best subject you've wrote on to date and I couldn't agree with you more.

Saying that I believe exposure can be subjective given the type of audience thats viewing it. Some minds dont think for themselves therefore their more subjective to advertising and equations.

Shane