Magicians and Competitions?

[Lord_Magic]

So...Shin Lim won!

I know...it's prolly old news and stuff, after days now...but still...It's good for the magic community as a whole (MAYBE...read on.).

Personally, I liked Mat Franco's style more but, anyways...Lim did it, and how!

But the point of thread isn't that...the point of the thread is, with all due respect and admiration to Mat, Shin, and all other magicians to win such competitions...

Do such competitions really benefit the magic community? Or does it harm it more?

Don't these competitions make magic more of, I dunno, for the lack of a better term, a ''competitive form'' of art? Doesn't it take something away from its innately ''magical'' quality?

I know...magic isn't really magic and all that stuff, but I was just wondering...because some things when made too accessible to the ''wrong'' people take away from its speciality.

What do you guys think? I might be seriously wrong in my (unfinished and haphazard) outlook, so feel free to correct me. Or tell me what you guys think about this...

 

[JoshL8]

Competitions aren't inherently bad but there is some issues with judging something as subjective as entertainment that is cause for concern. I think the format of AGT is a bit of a problem.

First off in competitions like AGT the criteria that is being judged is very broad and poorly defined due to the broad base of acts they showcase. The judges themselves may not have a background in the subject they are weighing in on giving a non professionals a false equivalence in their importance of opinion, magnifying a minority voice that isn't qualified. This issue is further compounded by the apples to oranges comparisons we are given, like a dance troupe act versus a magic act, as to which is supposedly more entertaining. Leaving the winner to be judged by mostly non professionals on completely subjective matter.

Can a winner based on talent be reliably produced with such methods? The judges themselves narrow the field down initially but then the votes are up to the viewers. Really it is just a measure of ad populum we see with shows like AGT rather than a measure of talent as judged by professional peers.

Is this bad for magic in general? If we are seeing who can 'magic better' sure that is a problem...but thats not the aim of shows like AGT so I don't think that is the larger issue. AGT's pitfalls are small in comparison. What we see with AGT and the like is a barometer or measure of public opinion towards certain types of entertainment. Being viewed in the context of 'is this entertaining' is a better way to steer the general populations idea of magic and how to view it rather than how shows like Fool Us steer the audiences thoughts towards being fooled or methods.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

AGT is "reality" TV. What you see, contractually, has no obligation to resemble what happened in the studio. Also, AGT isn't looking for "the best" of anything. They're looking to get ratings, and they're looking to get someone who can fill seats with shows. That's all they care about.

Personally I am not into competitions. I only do one - and that's mostly because the prize is a really awesome statue that I WANT. But I feel that competitions automatically create a particular type of magic that is often devoid of meaning. To be able to judge an act in any form of objective way, it must conform to certain generic standards. Otherwise they couldn't be compared. Also, therefore, there's restrictions on how artistic one can get - if it's too far out there they'll never win because they can't be compared to or judged with other acts.

Shin is a talented magician, who is charming, has an endearing back story, looks good, and resonates with contemporary audiences. They wanted him to win because he'll probably continue making them money.

Is this bad for magic? No.

Anything that gets the public talking about magic in a favorable way is beneficial to all magicians and mystery performers. It doesn't matter if this is a competition - it gets people thinking about magic and wanting to see it in person. If someone sees magic on TV, and then sees magic live - that live performance should automatically have an advantage over the TV performance. Magic is best experienced live. On TV there is a literal barrier between them and the performance. Live it just seems .. more real. So if a magician can't capitalize on any other magician doing well on TV, that's their failing - not the fault of the TV performance.

Hope that makes sense.

 

[Lord_Magic]

What you see, contractually, has no obligation to resemble what happened in the studio. Also, AGT isn't looking for "the best" of anything. They're looking to get ratings, and they're looking to get someone who can fill seats with shows. That's all they care about.

aah...Reality is harsh...