Understanding different strengths of magic tricks

[Zeal]

Hello all,

I'm just wondering. Are there any books or DVDs out there that help you to understand how to construct routines
based on the strength of different magic tricks? I'm trying to understand how to have appropriate openers, closers, and everything in between in it's proper place when I'm constructing a magic act for any given situation. I don't want to come off too strong so quickly, and I think for a while I've been doing that. Any help on this one is much appreciated.

-Z

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

It's good that you're thinking about this - but your thinking is a bit off. The strength of a trick comes from how it's performed. Therefore, if you want it to be 'weaker' per se, just make it weaker.

Here's an example. Tossed Out Deck. Strong trick, right? Well, it can be. When I used to do the ToD it was a big trick. Took about ten minutes, I did a lot of selling of the trick. It went over smashingly. A good friend of mine does ToD and it ends up being a 2 minute, almost throw away routine for him - filler. It gets a reaction, but not much of one.

Furthermore, if you only worry about how strong a trick is, then there may be disconnect between each one. The lack of flow will make the show or routine feel strange and lose effectiveness.

Rather than worry about how powerful an effect is, worry about how well it fits a theme. I'm not sure if you're in a place where you're worried about whole acts, or if you're just putting together routines for now. When I construct a routine I do it around a theme. Pictures and symbols, the connection between people, the power of the mind, etc. I think of what I want to say with this routine, then I pick the tricks that best express that.

Then you generally want a build up with a climax at the end. I think of it as "Introduction, Exposition, Climax". I introduce the concept, I elaborate on the concept through demonstration, then I wrap it up with a solid, definite ending.

 

[Scyne]

Chris, as always, is spot on. If you would like a more hand on explanation I would strongly suggest Dan Harlan's PDF More Than Meets The Eye which helps you organize your performance to maximize impact. It's tailored toward workers, but it gives you a quick (and cheap) insight into the pro mindset. For a little more theoretical discussion on the power of magic Joshua Jay's Magic In Mind is a wonderful collection of articles that helped me get my mind around that makes what I do strong or weak. At the whopping cost of $0.00 it's more then worth the trouble.

 

[slicksleights]

If your looking for a book about how to structure you act and improve your performance skills then I would highly recommend Strong Magic by Darwin Ortiz, I've read that book so many times and each time get something new out of it. After reading that if you want to further your understand on magic theory on a varied range of subjects again I would recommend the Books of Wonder by Tommy Wonder again two (its a two volume set) of my favourite books ever and changed the way I thought about my magic. Another notable book to read is Magic and Showmanship by Henning Nelms some argue that its a bit dated now, but im my opinion still a relevant read.

For an outside magic perspective read up on some theater/acting/script writing books. There is a mountain of techniques that can be taken from this art and applied to magic. When I am developing a act I always fall back on my theater training and knowledge. Hope this helps a bit.

 

[Zeal]

Thank you all so much for your wisdom and references! I will definitely be checking out those books and putting your advice to use as best as I can.

 

[Justin.Morris]

I would recommend Strong Magic as well. A great breakdown of how magic and performance 'works'. Also worth your investment is 'Maximum Entertainment' which deals with many of the other performance factors that are less talked about elsewhere.

(you can add those to this list of material: https://store.theory11.com/products/what-to-read-jason-england)

 

[WyattSB]

Absolute Magic by Derren Brown is an absolutely excellent book that covers this subject, sort of. It doesn't really contain how to construct a routine in the way that you asked, as in order of tricks, how to start finish etc.; what it does do is explain his own performance model on the ways he has made his magic as powerful and effective as he can. Its fairly advanced, but you can apply it as you will, either way it will help a lot.

 

[slicksleights]

Absolute Magic by Derren Brown is an absolutely excellent book that covers this subject, sort of. It doesn't really contain how to construct a routine in the way that you asked, as in order of tricks, how to start finish etc.; what it does do is explain his own performance model on the ways he has made his magic as powerful and effective as he can. Its fairly advanced, but you can apply it as you will, either way it will help a lot.

I agree this is a excellent book, again one I have read many times over, but as it it out of print copies are very expensive now, and I wouldn't recommend spending the money on this book until you have some background understanding on theory and performance, because as you say it is quite a advance book.

 

[ChrisWiens]

I would also recommend "Designing Miracles" by Ortiz. While "Strong Magic" focuses on the presentation part, "Designing Miracles" is more about the construction of a trick and how laypeople think about the magic.
AFAIR in "Magic in mind" (which Scyne mentioned and linked) you will find excerpts of most books recommended here (Books of Wonder, Strong Magic, Magic and Showmanship, Designing Miracles etc.)

 

[slicksleights]

I would also recommend "Designing Miracles" by Ortiz. While "Strong Magic" focuses on the presentation part, "Designing Miracles" is more about the construction of a trick and how laypeople think about the magic.
AFAIR in "Magic in mind" (which Scyne mentioned and linked) you will find excerpts of most books recommended here (Books of Wonder, Strong Magic, Magic and Showmanship, Designing Miracles etc.)

After a long search and eventually paying quite a lot for it, i found Reflections by Helder Guimaraes, when it comes to constructing effects and how lay people think, I haven't read a book like it, its awesome. If you can find a copy and willing to spend the money on it I would highly recommend it.

 

[TeeDee]

While all of the recommendations are definitely worth reading, I'd like to chip in with a note of caution. When magicians start pontificating on "the way laypeople think", I feel a bit sad. Laypeople aren't, as a group, a different species, a recently discovered tribe or developmentally disabled. They're just people who've found other aspects of life more interesting than magic, so haven't studied it as much as we have. That's the difference. They're not more stupid than us because of that, and we aren't more clever. I believe that rather than thinking about "the way laypeople think" we should think about "the way humans think", and realise that we think in exactly the same way, even though we have taken more of an interest in magic. Storytellers in other media don't talk about "how non-filmmakers think", "how non-comedians think" or "how non-novelists think". The good ones recognise that empathy and connection through shared values and experiences is a better starting point.

So, having said that, I have to echo what Christopher said in the hope that it doesn't get drowned out. What you're looking for is the skill of story-telling. Learn that first and then apply it to magic. Seek out books (or websites, there are loads of them) on how to structure plays and film scripts. Watch your favourite movies and stand-up comedy sets and re-read your favourite novels. Analyse the rise and fall of energy and tension, where the writer puts in call-backs and twists and how new characters or concepts are introduced. That all sounds complicated, I know, so it's much easier to read Strong Magic and imagine that you know what you're talking about. If you put in that extra bit of effort, though, you'll be a much better writer and performer because of it.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Laymen do think differently to us, though. We have purposely trained ourselves to think a certain way. Much like a computer programmer learns to think very logically and methodically, we have trained ourselves to think deceptively. Which is how we do our jobs. But we also tend to get caught up in tricks that are "impossible" and forget that "impossible" doesn't necessarily equate to "magical". I've seen a lot of magicians who blast through a trick that I know is extremely technically difficult then look at their audience like this: http://moesucks.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/pun-husky.jpg

Audiences don't care how hard a trick is. They shouldn't even know how hard it is. We have to remember to keep in mind the mentality of someone who is totally untrained in this art so that we're not trying to impress people who can't understand why they should be impressed.

To take it to another field - think of juggling. Juggling is an act which experiences a very strong spectacle creep. Juggle 3, people want you to juggle 4. Juggle 4 they want 5. So on. But as impressive as it is for someone to be able to hold a 7 club cascade - That gets boring. Fast. As in, in under a minute people are going to be wondering if you can do 8. And that's a generous estimate - I start tuning out after about 15 seconds. To other jugglers that's very impressive, but someone who forgets that non-jugglers don't know how impressive that is is going to bomb.

So it's important to recognize that we are entertaining people who are not obsessed with magic like we are.

 

[TeeDee]

Laymen do think differently to us, though.

I would agree with that, but maybe a more useful way to put it would be that we think differently from non-magicians. It's a subtle difference, but, I think, an important one. My point is that the onus is on us to alter our thinking in order to build empathy for the people we're working with and for, rather than viewing a magic performance as an "us and them" situation. Which I think is pretty much what you're saying. A lot of magicians who preach about getting into the mind of a layperson, however, seem to do so with the same tone that people use when talking about teaching apes to commmunicate. It can come across as very condescending. I think that the approach that you and I are advocating, though, is that we realise that we're the weird ones who need to modify our behaviour to fit in with normal folks.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I would agree with that, but maybe a more useful way to put it would be that we think differently from non-magicians. It's a subtle difference, but, I think, an important one. My point is that the onus is on us to alter our thinking in order to build empathy for the people we're working with and for, rather than viewing a magic performance as an "us and them" situation. Which I think is pretty much what you're saying. A lot of magicians who preach about getting into the mind of a layperson, however, seem to do so with the same tone that people use when talking about teaching apes to commmunicate. It can come across as very condescending. I think that the approach that you and I are advocating, though, is that we realise that we're the weird ones who need to modify our behaviour to fit in with normal folks.

(emphasis mine)

I think that's because most magicians are condescending and think they are more clever and overall better than their audiences who are just there to be fooled and bask in the glorious magnificence of the magician's poorly rehearsed card tricks.

 

[TeeDee]

(emphasis mine)

I think that's because most magicians are condescending and think they are more clever and overall better than their audiences who are just there to be fooled and bask in the glorious magnificence of the magician's poorly rehearsed card tricks.

Amen brother!

 

[ChrisWiens]

They're not more stupid than us because of that, and we aren't more clever.

Ortiz is in NO WAY disrespectful towards lay audiences. In contrary. He just pointed what someone with no background in magic thinks about the way we do things.
He also mentioned that`s this doesn`t mean it`s EASIER to do magic for lay people.
The thing about this is, he doesn`t care at all doing magic for magicians. He openly says that he doesn`t care doing magic for magicians and in order to create the best miracles possible you have to know how lay audiences (and not magicians) think about tricks. What about their perspective when they experience a magic trick ? Too often this is a hardly neglected, but highly important aspect, if not the most important one.
There is no general, excact rule for every layman, but there is a tendency which you can use as a starting point(I agree with him most of the time. I'm often talking to lay people after I did something for them. In fact, nothing can replace a direct conversation with your audiences in order to learn and progress. After all, theory is just that...theory, and not an universal truth. And even the great ones Wonder and Tamariz say that theory is fine, but it can be different from your practical experiences ).
He even mentioned examples where magicians did tricks for lay audiences that are normally constructed for magicians and it didn`t fool them. So please don`t think that this is a book about magicians who are more smart than lay audiences. They just think different and you have to keep that thinking in mind to create the best miracles possible.
Ortiz also mentioned that a general mistake of many magicians is that they are mostly doing magic for magicians and he thinks this is not very helpful in the long run. The thinking that "if it fools magician it will also fool lay audiences isn`t (always) true" and I agree that this is an arrogant attitude.

 

[TeeDee]

Dude, if you had read the book you wouldn`t say this.

Sorry for any confusion but my comments weren't specifically aimed at Darwin Ortiz. I was speaking more generally about an undercurrent which flows through a lot of magic theory teaching. Whether people are right or wrong about their observations of "layperson thinking" is kind of irrelevant. The element that I find a bit insidious in many sources is the attitude that discusses "laypeople" purely from the perspective of their differences from magicians. To me, it almost has the feel of a white anthropologist writing a book telling me how "the blacks" feel. I think most of us would find that kind of attitude condescending and even offensive, but, to me, it's exactly the same mindset reflected in a lot of magic theory. Interestingly, it's not an attitude which you find in modern mentalism. Peter Turner's work, for example, emphasises the power of empathy and connection, which is perhaps one of the reasons why his work is so much more powerful than many magicians.

 

[ChrisWiens]

Sorry, I did get it, and edited my post.
I just want to make clear that "Designing Miracles" is not a book which talks about laypeople as a degenerated, inferior "species". Quite the opposite is true. It`s rather the magician`s magician attitude which is being criticized

After a long search and eventually paying quite a lot for it, i found Reflections by Helder Guimaraes, when it comes to constructing effects and how lay people think, I haven't read a book like it, its awesome. If you can find a copy and willing to spend the money on it I would highly recommend it.

Oh believe me I have tried to get Helders book. I'm a big fan of Helder and his thinking is greatly inspired by my hero in magic. In fact he learned and stills learns from him and you can see this in his awesome constructions. ATM no way to get a new copy at a reasonable price. So I will wait for a reprint

 

[James I.(2)]

I'm not very deep into the magic game, but one thing that ive found is to really pay attention to what you're trying to say with the routine. Ive been delving into this aspect myself as of late. If you have a routine, but feel the ending isn't as strong as the beginning, then try reorganizing the order of operations. Move 1, 2, 3, etc. You may not like the result, but you may also find inspiration that wasn't showing itself prior. It kind of opens a door for creativity and gives your mind a chance to reconstruct what you thought was set in stone before. It's helped me infinitely. The more you play, the more you find.