The Genii Forum

Article in Slate:

http://www.slate.com/id/2233986/

Here is a clip of my favourite children's entertainer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PB3wQz-Md4

Note the British pantomine style. The UK style of children's entertainment is completely different than the US style. And I believe the British style is the correct way to go. And some of the shrewder American magicians are modelling the British style.

I wish I hadn't used the word "modelling" above. It is bound to set Jonathon Townsend off again.

Damn! I wish I hadn't done that. Jolly Roger will shortly be along to post his bloody clip now. His ego is as bad as mine.

http://web.mit.edu/eccl/schulz.htm

well okay: sing along time

I am the very model of a modern British conjuror...

What's also interesting about the Slate article is the writer's inability to describe what happened in some of the tricks.

The best advice on children and the way they think is in the opening chapter of Open Sesame written by Wilfrid Tyler and Eric Lewis. Not much else is required.

Mark.Lewis wrote:The best advice on children and the way they think is in the opening chapter of Open Sesame written by Wilfrid Tyler and Eric Lewis. Not much else is required.

BINGO!!!

Incidentally, Ronnie, your psychic abilities were off the mark this time. I would not dream of posting my YouTube clip on this thread, and I disagree with you about my ego. Your ego is FAR larger than mine! JR

Tommyrot! I have in my possession an audiotape of tricks you disgracefully exposed to members of the public. There is an amusing song therein which constantly refers to you as a "superstar". I am not sure at the time you produced that tape that "superstar" was the correct description. After all running around to birthday parties in Chelsea in a green dress doesn't quite conjure up the superstar image in my mind.

As for your ego it is far bigger than mine. You are merely more subtle about it.

But then I almost think that a big ego is a mandatory requirement in showbusiness. I can only recall one modest pro in my life. Or at least he seemed modest anyway. A remarkable performer too. Jerry Bergmann. I wonder if he is still alive. I doubt it.

He gave me a wonderful tip on how to handle obnoxious spectators who came up on stage to help. I tried it and it worked like a charm. I think I shall keep that to myself for a while.

Mark.Lewis wrote:

As for your ego it is far bigger than mine. You are merely more subtle about it.

Tommyrot! JR

Oh, yes it is!

Days later and still not a raised eyebrow about violating the expectations of children?

Roger is now supposed to say "Oh no it isn't!" in the best pantomine tradition. I do wish he would hurry up before Jonathon distracts us and ruins the whole thing.

Anyway what DO children expect? And what violations is he referring to?

Okay, let's take a step back.

Do kids say - "i want to see a magician" when asked what sort of show they would enjoy that weekend?

Given a choice between a clown, a magicain, a movie, a trip to the library - do they choose the magician option?

IMHO the developmental psychology studies are wonderful and some use what could be deemed "magic tricks" as part of the experimental procedure. The one where a young child sees what looks like a toy car race behind a fence that has a gap (where they can see no car go by) is a good example.

Okay back to congratulating folks for being only a generation behind the research and noticing the word 'magician' in stuff they see online.

It is an interesting question. I bet they do take the magician option more often than not. I may be wrong. Call it a gut feeling.
Kids LOVE magic! It is quite heartening to see. The excitement they show when the magician arrives at the house or other venue is quite obvious to see. They shout with great enthusiasm "THE MAGICIAN IS HERE!". And they don't even know if the magician is any good or not yet!
No. Kids love magic.
I used to also. I don't know what the hell happened.........

Mark.Lewis wrote:Oh, yes it is!

"Oh no it isn't!"


Incidentally, when I was a child there were no such thing as magicians at birthday parties. They were all conjurors. And they were all called "Uncle". JR

Is that where we get the "Bob's your uncle" bit?

Jonathan Townsend wrote:Is that where we get the "Bob's your uncle" bit?

:)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob%27s_yo ... #Etymology

OH, YES IT IS!!!

I am afraid that you have to be British to understand what on earth Roger and I are amusing ourselves with.

I remember that magicians in the UK were always called conjurers. I used to hate the term and I remember David Berglas getting very irritated when he was called a "conjurer" rather than a magician. I am now, however fed up with magicians and all who sail in her, so I am inclined to favour the word conjurer again now that it has gone out of fashion.

Which reminds me. Old Murray of whom I often speak used to get highly irritated if people used the term "magician". He used to correct people and say the proper word was "conjurer". He said you were only a magician if you used big props and illusions. Thus he called Paul Daniels or Marvyn Roy "very good conjurers".

Only if you were a grand illusionist like himself or Dante would you be allowed to call yourself a "magician"

As for the Uncle thing that is why I got the nickname "Uncle Ronnie" sometimes varied to "Wicked Uncle Ronnie". It all happened when I started to do kid shows. I never used the Uncle term myself as a children's entertainer but one day I said to some friends "When I sell svengali decks I am horrible and nasty to kids and now here I am doing kid shows and being kind Uncle Ronnie!" I said it as a joke but the name took off and I ended up stuck with it.

Rabbit Season!

(anyone used the duck/rabbit image for that with a dye tube change to an Elmer at the end?)

I have always spelt the word conjuror with an "0" rather than an "E". I believe both are correct. No doubt Mr. Townsend will put us right on the matter. JR

Oh God! I hope he doesn't!