I think the OP means his post well. I hope that it just came across wrong. Nonetheless, I also more or less agree with what TheatreHead is saying.
Yes, there is a lot of segregation. Yes, it sometimes hurts magic. But there are good, practical reasons why it occurs.
Taking for example the separation between magic and mentalism, yes, there is often an almost arrogant rift between the two elements. But the truth is that they are completely different to perform, as any serious mentalist would realise. This rift is a practical way of attempting to convey the size of this difference. What we have is a significant portion of magicians thinking that they are performing mentalism, when in reality they perform nothing but tricks. And the problem is this is that not only it is self-delusional, it weakens what you perform. You must understand the art before you can perform it. That is why this rift occurs. Mentalists are not performing magic. Although its roots are one and the same, the performance of mentalism, and therefore its perception, is wholly separate, and because of this, it must remain separate as a category.
To take one more example about magic companies, two companies I have criticised lately are Magic Makers (who regularly rip off products) and Hank Lee (who is perhaps the worst stocked "big" magic shop I've seen). Why be critical? The reality is that we live in a consumer driven world. A lot of magic shops are simply there to make a quick buck. One of my local brick and mortar ones is exactly like that. Criticism is a valid way to communicate a dealer's unethical and or disappointing aspects. Criticism is what brought the whole LJ discussion up on the board (which, although I'm prepared to eat my words on this, I find it highly likely that LJ will ever appear to face the music). Simple fact is, we should not be supportive of such dealers.
Since your post uses Ellusionist as an example, I will address that briefly. Many people do bash E. Yes, it's true. They also bash T11. But don't confuse bashing with criticism - there are many valid criticisms. Taking E for example, one sometimes hears that their communities are filled with newcomers to the magical world. I think this is a valid observation - valid too of T11. I count myself amongst these newcomers. I certainly don't blame people for that observation. The truth is, certain trends in the youth movement today have caused some pros cause for concern. You can't blame them for stepping back from the rush of newcomers, and opt instead only to teach those who are most gifted.
More to the point, one often hears criticism about E products. On the whole, I certainly agree. I consider Kard Klub the only useful E DVD I ever bought, because it dealt with presentation and things like timing - not just the secret of the trick. But I have reservations even about that. In it, Brad states that he prefers to approach spectators looking like an amateur so they expect less of him. I cannot express how ridiculous I find this advice. Why would you disadvantage yourself like that? Sure, people like Lennart Green make it work - but how many people are Lennart Green, and why would you give advice applicable only to 1 in 1000000 people? I also disagree with his philosophy on Ninja 1 about the pass. Showing people how the pass is done? I think that's absurd. The moment you talk about technique, much less actually show them technique, you are no longer performing magic. You may well still impress them - but not with magic. You can also impress them with juggling 6 balls simultaneously, or doing a backflip. Magic has lost what is so special about it - wonder.
I also disagree not only with Brad's philosophy on magic, but some of the way their products teach magic. When I say "I", I am implying here than many people share these (in my view) legitimate criticisms as well. E is poised in a very important part of the market - it is perhaps the biggest online magic store. Which means that it attracts a very high percentage of its profits from newbies. In other words, it has a key position in determining how that individual will go about exploring magic. The wrong choice will set them back a year or two. E would have a lot less criticisms if it focussed on teaching newcomers to the art about magic in the way for example that the Tarbell Course does. Unfortunately, the way that E is set up as a company (this is not a criticism per se, merely an observation based on the fact that they are a company) means that the very nature of their business is tempting people with products. Some products are better than others, and they run the gamut in terms of quality. But what it does do is mislead the newbie magician, and hinders their learning by feeding them tricks - which seems to be the order of the day in many of their DVDs - they teach you tricks, rather than how to be a magician. With the exception of Kard Klub, this is true of every E DVD I own.
I will stop here, because this post is not meant to be a critique of Ellusionist. I simply want to mention that your categorisation of criticism of E as exaggerated and baseless "crap" is sometimes true, but also, usually, "crap". There's more to it than you might realise. And whilst segregation does indeed have some downsides, in reality, there are a lot of practical benefits for dividing magicians from mentalists, companies from companies, and so forth.
Actually, I've written nothing that TheatreHead hasn't already written, so in closing, go back to his post.
