Considering the poor quality of food in some countries, I'm amazed that spectators can recall a couple of effects.

This is probably why the Classics of Magic have remained Classics for decades.

- They have an easy to follow plot.
- They are visual.
- For audiences in this day and age, they need to have simple instructions (for a spectator to follow) and cut to the chase quickly. In my honest opinion, many folk these days are not the sharpest pencils in the box.....no doubt, brainwashed by spending too much time reading cr@p on (un)social media, or watching other cr@p termed 'reality tv', etc.

Long, drawn out card effects; such as Ace Assemblies and multi-phased Oil & Water routines, will have very limited appeal to the majority of people. However, perform 'Think A Card', 'Card On Ceiling', or do a decent Top Change transformation into their hand - and they'll think you are a miracle worker with a pack of cards.

Card Magic aside, it is (thankfully!) the older stuff that still plays well. Sponge Balls, Chop Cup, Cut & Resored Rope - even the Egg Bag. The Torn & Restored Cigarette Paper still slays people. All Classics - but very easy to follow..... and visual.

I'd also take a bet that in 20 years from now, Magicians will still be buying these items, whilst the modern-day brainfarts, released just a couple of months ago at Blackpool, have long since vanished into oblivion.

The moral here then is if you want spectators to pay attention and remember what they've seen further down the line:

- Firstly, present something that's on their wavelength - so that they can understand what's supposed to be happening throughout.

- Secondly, cut to the chase (finale) quickly - so that they don't lose interest.

- Thirdly, always consider that they will generally have the memory span of a newt - so always make it a simple plot with a strong climax - with no unnecessary detail or superfluous patter to confuse them.......bless!

I wood submit it isn’t the material but the performer that gets an effect over.

To quote The Who “it’s the singer not the song, that makes the music move along”.

But I admit it is much easier to blame other things rather than looking inward.

I partly agree with that - the performer AND the style of Presentation are obviously key elements.

That said, I've seen actual effects that are just confusion personified. Again, I could use a Multi-phase Oil & Water routine, as an example. Magicians aside, the majority of the time, these will garner a "yeah, so what" attitude - at best. Again, one at a time Ace Assemblies; or one at a time Coins Through Table; can both be tedious and lacking in any surprise. In the field of Mentalism, there are effects that make my eyes glaze over.....often before anything has even happened!

To this end, I believe that some plots are just now outdated, or long-winded; for many of today's audiences and/or working enviroments; irrespective of how good the average performer is at plying his trade.

Maybe things are different here in the UK.

Yea I know what you mean but magicians have been conditioned to believe they are all equal. So to imply they they are not is sacrilegious.

I’ve seen some spectacular performers take blah effects and turn them into fantastic pieces of entertainment.

I finally stopped "liking" posts, because there were too many I liked! Pepka, your thoughts remind me of complaints I used to hear all the time from my colleagues about students (before I retired as a math professor). I myself complained sometimes, though I tried to avoid it. I decided early on -- and often remembered what I'd decided -- that we profs couldn't possibly expect most students to be as fascinated by our subject as we ourselves were. We were paid to serve our students regardless of their goals, so serve them we did. A wonderful bonus was that we had many students who truly appreciated our subject, and even some in whom we awakened an interest in it.


From what you say, it sounds like magicians sometimes experience the same problem -- most specs less interested in magic than magicians are.


So for what it's worth, keep enjoying your art, and go easy on your spectators. That, I hope, will make *you* happier.


Regards,


A Complete and Total Amateur (aka Bob)

P. S. Surely, as Danny says, some performers are better than others -- that's the way it is in all fields. I was lucky, forty or more years ago, to see Blackstone, Jr. Much as I enjoyed the entire show, I remember just one effect: the floating lightbulb. I don't think I'll ever forget the sense of wonder that Blackstone induced in me. That I remember even one trick after so much time is a tribute to him. (At least I *think* it was a lightbulb... Maybe it was a hamburger...?)

Yes nobody likes magic much more than magicians in general.

In reality I think the “brotherhood” thing doesn’t help as much as it appears. We used to make jokes in the magic shop 30 years ago about buying a thumb tip, invisible you know what and a business card so you are a magician. Suddenly this qualifies one to “talk shop” about the whole of magic. Ugh.

Any refutation of this belief system is met with immediate and harsh pushback. Watch what happens to me here! Nobody likes to admit there are definitely differences. Not bad differences or good differences, just differences.

Within those who are professional performers there are differences THERE. Pretending those do not exist is childish. It also holds magic back.

Marty wrote: "The thing I find so interesting about this behaviour is the false memory aspect. I'm sure, as magicians, we could make better use of this, although this does raise some important ethical questions."


I, too, worry about the ethics of intentionally introducing false memories into a spectator's mind. E. g, where you give a false summation of what just happened ("You shuffled the cards, I never touched the deck...") before bring a trick to its climax. I don't know where to draw the line -- if we said that magicians could never ethically do one thing while appearing to do another, then we wouldn't have a field of magic! But for me, subtly changing someone's memory of events is too close to mind control. It makes me squeamish. I realize that "It makes me squeamish" isn't a philosophical argument, but there it is.

If you don’t want to tell lies you are in the wrong business.

If you have ever used an ID you have given a false memory. Everything we do is creating false memories. That is the entire premise of magic. None of it is real. If you ever used a TT you created a false memory.

There are no ethical considerations at all. It is entertainment. My lord you do know Willie Loman doesn’t really die in the play don’t you? I mean all we are doing is telling stories and adding visual. Don’t ask for money to start a cult and you should be ok ethically. All writers create false memories when they write fiction. How far does anyone want to take the idea?

I am stating an opinion, though emphatically lol. If it is an ethical consideration all is ask for is consistency.

I think you're oversimplifying the issue, Danny. Fiction that's presented as such is fine; no one is claiming that it's real. And, of course, no moral person would pretend that they could really do magic, so I agree with you that there's a similarity between magic and other art forms such as theater.


In magic we're playing an enjoyable, consensual game of "Let's pretend." After the performance the spectator will have a true if (fuzzy) memory of his/her perceptions, and will know that the perceptions can't have matched the reality. But to manipulate someone by insidiously changing their memory of what they perceived -- that's a different kettle of fish. It isn't consensual. In some way that I can't articulate well yet, the latter is more akin to propaganda than to art.



Speaking of propaganda, I like your George Orwell quote.

Oh lord everything we do is manipulate memory! Get over it or collect stamps.

Seriously what is the line? Because every time you use a gimmick or gaff you have manipulated someone’s memory of an event. That is an indisputable fact. If that doesn’t bother you there is no issue.

By the way my father always time me everything before the word but … is meaningless.

What exactly isn’t consensual about an adult buying a ticket to a magic show and knowing full well it isn’t real magic? Do you believe people go to magic shows believing 100% of what is said and presented must be the truth? Nobody has that expectation of any art. Do you believe 100% of what happens and is said at the circus is not manipulating perception? How about movies? Or theater or heck ballet? Really it is a line that if you wish to draw go ahead. But at least be consistent.

Not a reasoned argument, my friend. More of an outburst. We'll have to agree to disagree.

Great way to avoid answering a well reasoned point lol.

If you tell one untrue thing to further the agenda of a magic effect you are giving a misperception of reality. Period. Show me where that statement is wrong.

Can’t be a little bit pregnant my friend. You may want to add an artificial line to make yourself feel better but sorry it isn’t how it works. In magic being deceptive is generally the point. While I deal in deception, what I won’t deal in is self deception. Once that Rubicon is crossed it is over. If you tell me you do magic with zero untruths that is indeed an interesting approach. I’ve never seen it, but it would be interesting.

And yes it was right when the guy said “the sting in any rebuke is the truth”. The guy being Ben Franklin. Ben Franklin.

Hi Bob. I think I understand your concern. However, I don't see a problem. I'm not sure what actual "mind control" is (or if it's even possible). But if a clever reframing of "what just happened" helps to fool and amaze someone, then more power to you. Magicians look to exploit any and all cognitive shortcomings in the human brain. They misdirect attention. They employ visual and audio illusions. They tell outright lies. So why would short term memory be suddenly off limits? Also, it would not be a very good trick if it mainly depended on confusing the spectators memory. The 'biased' reframing of events is just an additional little subtlety to hopefully enhance the effect.

At any rate, if we were to reveal the details of a trick to a spectator after they were fooled, I doubt that they would be appalled by the reframing of events. My instinct is that they would smile and appreciate all the subtleties of the trick. It's all part of the art of magic. And it's hard to argue that an ethical violation has occurred when even an informed spectator doesn't feel that a line was crossed.


Best wishes.

As a magician, professional or amateur, people expect you to cheat and deceive them. They're usually disappointed if you don't! In this context, manipulating a person's memories is perfectly acceptable because you intend to amaze, delight and entertain.

However, there is an ethical line that should not be crossed. It becomes apparent when a magician uses memory techniques to convince their audience that they possess genuine powers (I've seen many mentalists do this during a performance with a vulnerable person, e.g., someone grieving the loss of a family member). This is a breach of the implicit social contract between a magician and his audience and should be considered unethical.

Marty

I agree. This sort of thing is unacceptable, in my opinion.

If you convince them you have genuine powers in the context of the show it is great. It becomes unethical if you push past that and utilize that lie for conning them into something other than entertainment.

Now we are getting into ethical territory.

How does this affect most card tricks though?

Even if you tried to convince someone of powers and con them could you? No you shouldn’t but I doubt it could be done.

Hi R. S. and Marty,


Thanks for your thoughts. I'm a strong believer in intution, and my intuition still tells me that an ethical line is being crossed when we plant false memories. On the other hand, intuition can lead us astray, so it needs to be tempered by logic. So far I haven't been able to articulate a logical argument for my intuition.


I agree that magic is (or should be) a form of entertainment; that spectators agree to be misled in exchange for a wondrous experience. That justifies much of what magicians do, things that would be unethical in daily life.


I'm going to drop this for now; I'll return if I'm able to formulate my objections more clearly.


Best Regards,

Bob

I don't think this issue affects most card tricks.

However, I have observed magicians and mentalists offering "readings" for people. Though they do not deceive them for money, they leave them feeling that they have gained some profound knowledge about their lives or communicated with their deceased relative. I find this kind of emotional manipulation unacceptable, even for entertainment purposes, because some people believe that these practices are genuine.

Now, I'm not suggesting that there isn't a way to conduct readings more ethically, but so often, I think magicians, in particular, get this wrong.

Personally, I don't want to spread misinformation. I'm comfortable making all kinds of things up to make my presentations exciting and entertaining. But I try my best to clarify that what I'm doing is essentially total BS.

Marty