Absolutely tommy.

Thanks for the posts, they make for informative reading.

Tommy, glad to hear you have continued to have success with your
card effects, but it should be clarified this subject was mainly meant for
standup/stage situations, if a person is performing for less than a ten
folks close up and is having trouble keeping interest, either that person is having
a really bad day or the folks you are performing for really don't care.

Either way if it's strolling just move on. (Or in the other case be better)

And as one moves on, does one shout, I got a horse?

So please tell us how much Stage experience you have.

Very specific question, no problem answering it though.

Most bookings I have had is in the form of parlor/standup, usually a crowd size above
20 but below 80, most often on level ground.

A small percentage has been on a proper stage, I do prefer it when the venue has the capability,
most don't so it is a floor show.

Anything kids related, most house parties in general, and some company events are
usually standup, most the rest such as weddings are strolling.

Only the events with large crowds in certain event centers end up with a proper
stage show of any kind, once again, not often.

Hope you got something from any of that, I should point out that that prior message was meant
to contrast small groups of people and a collective crowd, not to paint myself as a
stage guy.

I more meant how many have you done?

On stage? Less than 20 I can think of.

This is obviously referring to proper stages and not simple platforms or the like,
I should reiterate I'm not much of a stage guy, most private events don't have
the setup for what I would consider a stage show.

You have worked a long time Danny, how many stage shows do you think you have
done in your career?

Over 10,000.

Which is why it shocks me you to speak as an authority on subject.

Less than 20? Where do you get your alleged knowledge from?

That's a good number.

I don't speak as an authority on stage magic, as most of what I have
done is standup/parlor, and most the rest strolling.

My knowledge of stage magic is fairly rudimentary, which is why I never
claim to be an authority.

Everything I have written here is from the perspective of someone who performs
for small audiences, most often less than 60.

Thanks for sharing your number Danny.

How often have you done that?

Another good question, I'm not near my numbers at the moment, and it would take forever to
go through, but based on when I started times the average amount of gigs per month,
I would guess around 500-600.

Certainly much lower than yours and many others Danny.

Unfortunate that this thread has thus far not attracted a higher amount of folks,
but your input has been very appreciated.

Dude the problem is you speak as if an authority on the subject and in reality you are just learning.

You seem like you should more concentrate on learning and not trying to teach. Take a breath and learn more. When you get to 1,000 shows you’ll look back on this and wish you could remove it from the internet.

Fedora,
Like others who've posted here, I just don't see the problem as you've laid it out. My performance experience is closer to yours than Danny's (hundreds of performances as opposed to thousands), but I’ve also had the privilege of watching several hundred magic performances at California Magic Dinner Theater and many theater performances in my job as a theater manager. And I just haven't seen this problem with audiences over the years.

The DTU study you link to in your July 5 post examines collective attention span of large groups by looking at trends on Twitter, Google Books and at movie box office trends. This is something VERY different from looking at the attention span of an individual or audience at a live event. Nothing to see here, as far as my work as a performer is concerned.

You said that "most folks are attentive by nature, some perhaps an increasing number, are less so. But this is far from a dire issue…." (July 4th post in this thread). I tend to agree with you here.

For me personally, the bit with the person looking at their watch that you mention in your original post sounds like a bad idea. Supposing that I'm in the middle of my act and I notice someone in the audience looking at their phone, maybe even sending a text. The branch of my decision tree looks like this:

Option 1: Do I make a hopefully witty and charming remark to the texter to send a message to them and the rest of the audience about "proper behavior?"
OR
Option 2: Do I stick with my script?

I'll take Option 2 every time. The reason is that I've scripted my pieces to make the show as entertaining as possible for the audience as a whole. I'm pretty sure that any interruption I make by addressing the texter is going to be less entertaining for the audience than sticking to the script. The texter in the front row, who is probably unnoticed by the rest of the audience, isn't enough of a "problem" to warrant that kind of disruption to the show.

(And, no, I don't treat improvisation as off limits in my performance. Absolutely I'll banter with the audience and adapt to conditions as they come. But I feel that this specific example isn't worth it.)

You suggest that, in the case of an audience member looking at their phone during a performance, that the problem is probably that "[the performer] didn’t engage them enough." I mostly agree with this, which means that the "problem" really is best addressed by having an engaging onstage persona, technically proficient magic, a good script/presentation, and all the other elements that make a live performance work. That's **always** been true, and, again, I haven't seen any real shift in audiences over the last few decades, Netflix or not.

It's not completely clear to me whether the watch example (or the equivalent "person looking at their phone" example) is something you’ve experienced personally and for which you apply these strategies in your own performance work, or whether they're hypothetical examples. From your comments, it appears that you do feel that this shift in audience attention span is a real thing that you've experienced. Obviously I and others disagree. But if you can offer some concrete examples from your own work, it may help shore up your point.

I had the heckler discussion with Don Alan many decades ago. His point, and mine, is any time you do things like that it interrupts the flow of the presentation. It is not the A show that has been paid for. Even worse when you do that then they respond, now you have to respond and then they respond and Perry soon you are way off from your intent. If your writing here is any indication of your ability to do such a thing it is not your strong suit.

So the show becomes something you never intended it to become. Improv is a skill that I have seen very close to zero magicians possess. Why would you deprive the audience of what has been intended by going down that road? 90% of the time it is the ego of the performer who feels they have to respond. News flash, you don’t.

But again 500 shows (Maybe that much probably fewer.) doesn’t give you the experience to speak authoritatively on the subject. Yes everyone has an opinion and is entitled to it but gain some experience before you let it got so ingrained that you’ll never get it out. But again that involves putting ego aside and that can be tough.

Hey ronin, your post is very much appreciated, good to hear
you haven't had any issues.

To give an example, do you remember in early Blaine specials where he would perform
something to random folks on the street and some of them would lose it and run
in circles?

That's something that sometimes happens with some folks
when you perform for a random person who has never
seen a trick before.

Now move that from 4 people on a street to 30 or so in a house that you have to perform for 40
minutes instead of 40 seconds, that's where I found myself in March of last year.

I bring up this example because it is by far the lowest attention span crowd ever devised,
it was also one of the best audiences I was ever in front of.

You ever perform at a "frat bro" party? it had the energy of that, only everyone was sober
as far as I know.

Folks getting out of their seat for no reason, grabbing me, directly responding to statements
as if I was speaking specifically to them, this one had it all.

Within five minutes I figured out no amount of audience management would account for
this level of energy, although folks were having a good time to put it mildly,
there was no way I was going to make it all the way through without chaos ensuing.

So, I did an on the spot improve of sorts, something not recommended but this was a statistically
very unusual crowd.

There was a trick that came out a year or so ago called "Flip" where you flip a coin
and narrow the crowd down to one person, there is a few versions of this concept,
I had been going about making my own.

I asked someone to dig out a quarter, while they did I pulled out a $5 bill and wrote
"Guy in orange shirt" folded it, and left it protruding from my pocket, she finally
gave me the quarter and I said I was giving someone this $5, this got everyone's attention.

I explained the rules, had everyone stand up, and raise their left hand for tails, and right
hand for heads, flipped the coin and kept going until it was just the guy in the orange shirt.

He won the money, to quite the excitement. but this had another effect, for the rest of the
show I had no problem keeping folks in their seats, they were used to sitting down when
I asked.

The thing is, I didn't buy flip, and I have no idea how it works.

I just flipped the coin and lied about what it landed on, when it was what I wanted
i showed it to someone to verify.

Never developed a routine while in a show, strongly suggest not to do it, but this
went quite well.

This example didn't really answer your question, just talking about the lowest
attention audience I have had, here is something more relevant.

Last year, don't remember when, I was hired to perform at a party at another
private residence, this was a pretty small crowd, I believe between 15-20 people,
about half were older folks, and the other half college age. (not that these
kids were in college)

I found out later talking with the older gentleman who hired me that these what he called
kids rarely left the house, and spent most their day on their screens, probably the most
specific demo I was referring to in this thread.

Although I come across folks like this often at these events, this was a particularly
high percent of the audience.

I mention this one because it has an example of the watch trick.

The show started and most of the younger folks still had their phones out, not filming
but doing something else.

After the usual introduction, and first effect, most still weren't paying attention,
so, I did a modern version of the watch trick, as a girl was lifting her phone I asked:
Did you get my text? this is a very dumb question, obviously I don't have her number,
which she pointed out, as she did said this, it got everyone's attention to say the least.

"Oh, is that why you didn't respond?". very bad joke, it's actually the start
to an old pick-up line.

From here I asked her to "volunteer" and to bring her phone because we'll need
it (we mostly won't), as she does I addressed a couple of the other folks who was buried
in their phone, this was a good chance to make a connection with them as they were
now watching.

Throughout the show I increased the pace very slightly in places, and addressed the former
phone users from time to time.

Although there was continued distractions, by the end of the show I believe everyone
was watching and involved.

I could have just focused on the folks who were watching and ignored the one's who wasn't,
they weren't hurting anyone, but if I did they would have missed most the show most likely.

I could have also begged everyone to put down to pay attention to me, and appear as the
little man that I am, but I think this is better.

These were two very different crowds, one that was extremely high energy, and had
low etiquette, and one that was low energy and easily distracted, both were
extremes of sorts, the first has always existed, I believe the second sort
is increasing but I may be mistaken.

They were the same in that I was being paid to entertain them and had
a responsibility to that effect.

Here I is the bad news. You’re going to need to learn to entertain people. Every time you tell these stories it is cringe worthy.

It is shocking you want to claim the problem is with society and not you having to learn.

What? ME tell cringy stories? That never happens, certainly not in real life,
where every story I tell begins "So there I was, being stupid".

I once tried telling my cousin how I built a phone out of legos, I got blocked.

But in this case, although the stories were well on the cringe side, your conclusion is not
strictly accurate, these crowds both were quite entertained, the first one goes without
describing.

For the second one, not only was it quite successful, the old guy who hired me stated, and I
quote to the best of my memory "That was the longest I've ever seen them [the "kids"] without
a screen" I considered this a high complement even with the obvious hyperbole.

You may be referring to my using these techniques to manage the crowd as a true professional wouldn't
need them, this may be true, but many more wouldn't have tried and may have ended up losing them.

See what I mean about improv, and funny for that matter, not being your strong suit?

I get it. You believe this is a universal issue and no number of people telling you different will ever change your mind. You are now an authority in your own mind and have nothing to learn.

The problem is you will be stuck here at this exact level until that log jam in your mind breaks free. Hopefully you reach a moment where that happens.I

Isn’t it interesting to you that you always without fail believe these stories end really well? I just am saying statistically it isn’t possible and doing the twist things in your head thing so your ego isn’t bruised will not help you learn.

Hey Danny, the odds of these stories ending well is statistically 100%,
reason being I only tell stories that went the way I prefer, if I started
telling stories of my failures, we would be here very near forever.

I never said it was universal.

As for what I've been writing not being funny, few of these posts have been to
that effort, nor is my show a comedy one strictly speaking, although people
tend to laugh when they see me.

Didn't you mention you're a ford guy? want to know how to triple your cars value?
Feal the tank.

If your father had one you obviously grew up around a lot of fords, do you know the difference
between a ford taurus and a real bull? a real bull is easier to push.

Just messing with you, fords are actually very reliable, half of all fords sold are still
on the road, the other half got home.

Anything good in this? No? Dang.

You need to spell the jokes right for them to be funny. Also they should be less than a few decades old to be abusing and such. (See how I intentionally spelled that wrong so as to be slightly amusing?)

And yea that is the problem you have. You learn very little from success. Far more is learned from failure. And I’m pretty certain the success you think happened is perception bias.