The Magic Menu

[Pete McCabe]

Feel free to lock this thread and the other half-dozen or so that are all exactly like this one: all noise, no signal.

In another month you won't be able to tell the Genii Forum from the Magic Cafe.

[Paul Gordon]

I mean ... really. How hard is it to have a decent discussion about this magazine without allowing it to get derailed by some twits.

I hope I don't fall into the "twits" dept. I think my replies are very courteous...

Best, Paul Gordon

[John LeBlanc]

Tom Frank the prophet. Who knew.

(Frankly, the back page of the new Magic Menu magazine is my new Parallax.)

[Jonathan Townsend]

Glad to read that Jim's got his Magic Menu started up again. Best wishes on this run Mr. Sisti.

[Nathan Muir]

It is amusing that Nathan, with such low standards as to use obscenities in his posts, whines that a magazine he hasn't read doesn't meet his standards. And he whines that everyone is picking on him, trying to "shut down" his "free opinion."

Mind you, being an American, I'm of the opinion everyone is entitled to their informed opinion. I'm also of the opinion that a "free" opinion is worth what one has paid for it. Evidently, Nate-boy feels that a "free opinion" means having no information whatsoever about the magazine other than the names of columnists. And, of course, the fact that it's not titled "Genii."

A magazine which is aimed at the hobbyist in each of us, compared to a magazine with a tight focus towards the close-up magician - with strong nods to the restaurant magician - such a comparison is, at best, ludicrous.

The quality of the Magic Menu speaks for itself. Did the first issue have problems? What first issue didn't? Will it improve? Undoubtedly. Does Nate have the slightest idea what the strengths, qualities, and problems might have been? Doubtful.

What we are seeing is a troll with a desperate need for attention. He's not even amusing. Mark Lewis serves a purpose and keeps us not only amused, but downright jolly. Nate is a pale imitation, who wants to grow up to be someone whose opinion counts.

*jeep!
--your obedient Grandpa

What an emotive and blunt criticism. You may not grasp the irony, but if you had written a similar critical and excoriating post about The Magic Menu you would be ostracized and receive bullying posts from young magic bucks you've never heard of or read about. How ironic that you feel compelled to post in this manner to defend a magazine simply because I have compared it with others in the market and found it not to be on par with the better ones.

As for Gordon and the other one: you are the product and I am the consumer. I decide whether you meet my expectations. Threats and snide little comments questioning the validity of my opinion are nugatory. Your time would be far better spent working on your writing and reasoning skills, as is evident from your posts.

Now if Richard wants me to bow out of this thread, I am happy to do so, though I don't see that expressing a dissenting opinion should be all that controversial.

Nathan

[Glenn Bishop]

I am sure the magazine is very useful to a complete beginner who wants to do some bar or restaurant magic. Some of the tricks were excellent in that regard.

Having been a magician that used to pitch magic to magicians from a magic shop. When a magician often calls a book or some other publication "good for beginners". Or something to that sort.

I think "good commercial magic for the entertainer that wants to make a living doing magic".

I think that tricks like the vanishing shot glass. The vanishing coin in the shot glass - coin penetration and other bar and close up magic as commercial magic.

Just because a trick is simple in method doesn't make it a beginner trick in my opinion. And just because a trick is hard to do in my opinion it does not make it a trick for the serious advance magician as well.

Magic for an audience can be simple or advanced in method because the audience doesn't care about the method - only the magician does. The audience only wants to be entertained. The method is only needed to get to the entertainment and the effect of magic. And often the simple method is the better method.

I am interested in this publication because I am looking for new commercial ideas - not cards. I know enough card work - more than I need to do my job as a performing commercial magician.

Who "IS" working!

Please PM me more info about Magic Menu.

Thanks in advance.

Just my opinion.

[Nathan Muir]

There you go. I got you one new customer.

Funny how this discussion thing works, isn't it? Stimulates the debate. Encourages enquiring minds to check it out for themselves.

[Glenn Bishop]

Nathan - Just because you are not into good commercial magic that doesn't say that others are not. There are some magicians out there in the world - that do magic for a living.

I have been in magic for 40 years are more. Good commercial magic is very rare in my opinion because it has to grow and evolve over the acid test of doing shows over and over again for real audiences.

I am working and at this time I am looking for new ideas because I get lots of repeat customers.

Having said that - if it is not your cup of tea - I hope you have fun doing what ever it is that you do.

Just my opinion.

[Silly Walter]

Dear Silly Walter,

May I ask why the rudeness? Have you read the 1st issue, or are you prejudiced? If you have read it, what don't you like?

Yours, Paul Gordon

Have I read it? In the past, yes. I have all of the issues from the first 10 years and the second run made around the turn of the 21st century. I was looking forward to another run.

Do I have any interest in reading it now with contributors I laughed at?

No.

Why? For the same reason I won't go see a movie starring Larry the Cable Guy. Because I know it is going to suck.

I do retract my earlier statement about Scott guinn. He is nice.

[Paul Gordon]

Do I have any interest in reading it now with contributors I laughed at?

No.

Why? Because I know it is going to suck.

This comment says far more about you than it does me or my fellow contributors.

Paul Gordon

[John LeBlanc]

On the other hand, Paul, that allows for the possibility that such low expectations can easily be exceeded. Frankly, it occurs to me negative comments are more likely to produce additional subscriptions than glowing ones, and for that very reason.

[Necromancer]

Do I have any interest in reading it now with contributors I laughed at?

No.

Why? For the same reason I won't go see a movie starring Larry the Cable Guy. Because I know it is going to suck.

Point of fact: Pixar's Cars was very enjoyable.

Best,
Neil

[Jonathan Townsend]

What does Necromancer's enjoying Cars have to do with Silly Willy the Polar Bear avoiding movies with Larry the Cable Guy?

[Jim Maloney]

Larry the Cable Guy provided one of the voices in Cars.

-Jim

[Jonathan Townsend]

Jim, since when does one person's taste invalidate another's taste?

It's not like Gertrude really disliked her son even if she might have preferred his father's brother.

[David Acer]

Hi Folks,

I think it's worth mentioning that, in its first incarnation, the Magic Menu was a grass-roots endeavor by a working pro who was grappling with the same theatrical and practical issues as his fellow columnists and readers. To me, that gave the magazine a real-time, real-world feel that was unique in the trade, and as a restaurant worker (at the time), I got a lot from reading it.

In 2009, the audience for The Magic Menu has likely changed, just as audiences at restaurants have changed, since 20 years ago there was no Criss Angel, no "street magic" and (even more horrifying) only six or seven ways to do Three Fly. If The Magic Menu has been resurrected to address those changes, and the corresponding challenges (opportunities?) they present, then it should have as its readership all the magicians struggling to address them as well. Whether or not that's you is easy enough to determine.

[Richard Perrin]

No need to lock this thread. I find this interesting until the solution has been made BUT it's your forum... you have the rights to lock it.

[Scott F. Guinn]

I do retract my earlier statement about Scott guinn. He is nice.

Thank you, Walter. Retraction accepted (FWIW).

[Scott F. Guinn]

For some reason, the rest of my post didn't get entered. so i'll try again.

I do not claim to be the greatest restaurant magician who ever lived. I have done restaurant magic for a long time, and I learned a few things as I went. I'll share some of those things as we go along, and I'll try to make my articles as well-written and engaging as possible. But do I think I am the end-all, be-all of restaurant magic? Absolutely not.

I'm still learning from other people, and maybe there are some people out there who can learn something here and there from me. My intent in participating as a columnist for TMM is simply to offer what I can to those who maybe aren't as experienced as I, just as others more experienced than I have helped me. Nothing more, nothing less.

I have no qualms with performers who have more experience than me stating they feel my columns are too basic. I don't begrudge anyone his right to opine that the content of my articles are dead wrong. Whether you decide to even bother to read my column is totally at your own discretion, as it should be.

I do want to say this, however. Say what you will about Christopher Lyle, but there is no denying that he is a skilled magician who has been performing regularly at restaurants for a long time. Maybe you personally don't care for Paul Gordon for some unknown reason, but there is no denying that he is a prolific author with more success and name recognition than all but a very few in the magic community. Paul Green's body of work speaks for itself, as does Jim Sisti's. I, for one, am honored to have been asked to be a part of this publication.

The Magic Menu isn't for everyone, though. And that's OK. Isn't it?

[Nathan Muir]

Silly Walter,

I agree, Guinn's good value, as is Paul Green. I also think that Sisti's reviews of products were pretty good value.

Nathan

[El Mystico]

Good commercial magic is very rare in my opinion because it has to grow and evolve over the acid test of doing shows over and over again for real audiences.

I'm surprised no one picked up on this comment by Glenn. I thought it was spot on.
I think most magic in all magazines and most books fails this test - there are some glorious exceptions.

But, of course, just because one magician has evolved a routine to suit himself over years doesn't mean that evolution will suit you..in fact, it probably guarantees it won't. But such routines are worth studying for the lessons they provide.

[Jonathan Townsend]

continuing on from El Mystico's analysis

... and this is why it is critical to present the performer/inventor's intentions and presuppositions when offering a work for publication so the student can understand both the contributors objectives as well as their findings and so build from that knowledge by way of the example offered.

From the above one might start to wonder if works failing to offer more than rote procedure are a suitable subject for literary review by way of deconstruction, a sort of historical record of what folks wanted others in this craft makes some sense in some context.

For just desserts Gertrude had a pumpkin mousse with vanilla Chantilly topped with whipped cream.

[Christopher Lyle]

For those of you that have have expressed your positive thoughts regarding The Magic Menu, I wanted to say say THANK YOU for your support...not only of The Menu itself, but of the columnists involved in the project. Thank you for giving us a chance to wow you...

To those who elect to post hateful comments about the project based on nothing more than the fact that we're not Genii and many of the contributors are not well known to the magic community, all while cowardly hiding behind false identities and screen names...well, you have my pity.

I find it very sad and discerning that there can be people out there in the world who are so close minded that they cannot see past their own level stupidity.

[Jonathan Townsend]

...
I find it very sad and discerning that there can be people out there in the world who are so close minded that they cannot see past their own level stupidity.

Always good to have an editor's help before going to print.

[Nathan Muir]

Nathan - Just because you are not into good commercial magic that doesn't say that others are not. There are some magicians out there in the world - that do magic for a living.

I have been in magic for 40 years are more. Good commercial magic is very rare in my opinion because it has to grow and evolve over the acid test of doing shows over and over again for real audiences.

I am working and at this time I am looking for new ideas because I get lots of repeat customers.

Having said that - if it is not your cup of tea - I hope you have fun doing what ever it is that you do.

Just my opinion.

Glenn,

You know nothing about me and are in no position to speculate in an ad hominem fashion. However, I know quite a deal about you.

I therefore think you would benefit from a subscription to The Magic Menu.

Paul Green's column, as I have noted, is excellent. As are some of the interviews with "name" magicians.

Nathan

[Brad Henderson]

Nathan's last comment aside, I do think we find an interesting dynamic in the world of magic commentary. It never ceases to amaze me how upset people get when someone puts forth a negative opinion shortly after a release hits the shelves (especially if that release stems from a popular person). Immediately the defense team circles. Invariably we hear comments about how the person may be unqualified to give an opinion or hasn't given the material enough time to judge it. Yet, no one seems to have a problem with positive reviews suffering from the same set of conditions. (Or positive reviews BEFORE an item comes out!)

In my mind, as long as the opinion giver has viewed or obtained the product in question, they should be allowed to comment. It is nice to know about the opinion giver as it allows one to not only put their opinions into context but also give them the weight one feels they might deserve. But to dismiss that opinion outright, or worse, to attack someone for having a differing opinion is - well, it's what we do, apparently. (I remember a Cafe thread where a well known producer and his fans bullied the hell out of one poor guy because he found their DVD on restaurant magic to be a rehash of material previously in print.)

Don't get me wrong, there is nothing improper about a heated debate fueled by clashing opinions, but simply because we know the people involved - or even like them - is no reason they should be above critical commentary.

I appreciate that Nathan offered his opinion.

[Mark.Lewis]

I understand that the contributors do this work for no money. That is the bit that baffles me most of all. Of course I have always had a mercenary nature.

[Silly Walter]

Gentlemen,

I have reread this thread and read everyones views even the hostile ones. I went back through my previous issues of the Magic Menu and reevaluated my initial assessment and I started to realize that perhaps this one time I might be mistaken.

I might even go as far to say as that I was dead wrong.

Lets face it. The restaurant and entertainment business has changed over the last 20 years. Who better to write about working at restaurants than todays workers?

As a result, I will be posting individual apologies to some of the magicians that may have felt "sleighted" by comments made by yours truly.

My apology will be sincere however I will be offering some friendly advice along the way.

Stay Tooned

[Christopher Lyle]

In my mind, as long as the opinion giver has viewed or obtained the product in question, they should be allowed to comment.

That's my point Brad. Guys like Nathan and Silly Walter (both of whom are obviously hiding behind false names) HAVE NOT read the Menu...yet, their offering up their opinions based soley on the fact that they have never heard of us before. It's insanity!

I know that the Magic Menu isn't for everyone. I get that. I also know that those who subscribe will not agree 100% with the material that's contained between the covers. I get that too.

It would be one thing if these guys had come out and said "we've read it, we think it stinks and we hate the contributors." That would be unfortunate, but oh well...it is what it is.

But that's not what's going on here...

There is no informed decesion being made here. I'm just having a very hard time with someone who has never read the new installment blasting us for absolutly no reason...and then when asked WHY they clam up and refuse to answer the questions.

[Mark.Lewis]

I will be delighted to tell you why but I will only be able to relate why somebody else felt why since I haven't read the new issue myself. A young restaurant magician who happens to be a subscriber told me he didn't like it and wished he hadn't subscribed. I asked him why and he told me that one of the contributers rambled and rambled and took up too much space to make a simple point. He also felt another contributor was reviewing material that was old hat and "out of the seventies" whatever that is supposed to mean.

There. That is why.

[Christopher Lyle]

Mark,

The difference here is that the person you speak of has in fact READ the Menu.

[Nathan Muir]

I have read The Magic Menu. If you go back and read my initial comment I was making an observation on the earlier publication. You appear to have blended my comment with Silly Walter's.

I made no observation or judgments on you or Paul Gordon at all. However, each of your contributions to this thread and your bullying PM to me have allowed me to make a pretty accurate assessment of whether the new Magic menu is likely to meet my expectations as an experienced magician and magic consumer.

[Silly Walter]

Mr. Lyle,

Please accept my apology. I checked out your website, read your bio and I must admit that you definitely have something to offer to the magic community. Your experience, longevity and dedication to your art will only benefit the readers of the Magic Menu. You are living what many magicians dream of doing so at the very least, I think you will make a fine contributor.

Now, I was asked why I found it comical. Now this is before I checked out your website, but there might be a lesson in here somewhere.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I recognized Christopher Lyles name as the dude on the Caf. Normally I am very suspicious of the members whose posts reach the thousands, but I read many of Mr. Lyle's posts whilst lurking on the Caf (yes, I was one of the few that got kicked off I am afraid. I guess I do have something in common with Chris Kavanagh ) :) Mr. Lyle comes across as a bully at times, but deep down he means well and is obviously very passionate about what he does. Actions do speak louder than words (even when they are in all caps, or at least it would be a tie).

Recently there was some discussion about hecklers on another thread and it got me wondering , How could I apply the techniques Mr. Lyle uses to handle internet hecklers on the occasional spectator who heckles me at the restaurant?

Check this out.

I was at my lucrative corporate gig (a gig I stole from another magician by the way <wink wink>) and did my standard three tricks. I approached a table occupied by a very nice gentleman and a really foxy woman. As I draped my close up mat on the table, I crouched down and pretended to pick something up. I said Maam. Did you drop this? and I magically produced some fake dog poop (I had it in Tenkai Palm if you were wondering). This always gets a laugh.

Then I went into what I consider to be the second strongest card trick ever invented Color Monte. After the performance, that couple asked me if I could do real magic. Not to mention, the guy was a good sport and paid me the $14 he owed me after the trick.

Then I closed with what most card magicians would agree is probably the strongest card trick you could do for people. Thats right Jay Sankeys Paperclipped. So I have the female hold the paperclip holding the card and I tell them its a mystery card so they will think they are getting ready to see something spooky. The man selects the card, signs it and returns it to the deck where it gets secretly replaced to the top by using the bluff pass quickly followed by an Ego change sending it to the bottom face up which I reverse with a gravity half pass which sets me up for a Larry jennings one handed bottom palm as I hand the deck back to the spectator to shuffle (the misdirection of him shuffling is irresistible and allows you to fold the card). So I go to show them that the mystery card is really the same card the dude signed and the woman said Uhhh. You switched the card. Granted, this is such an incredible trick that I couldnt believe what she said. Personally I dont like hecklers. Then I remembered how Mr. Lyle handles the internet hecklers and I immediately went into instant defense mode. I scolded her with What are you talking about? I didnt switch the card. She insisted that I did and I started yelling at her. I demanded that she tell me why she thought that but she started to back peddle so I knew I was winning. Even though I repeatedly asked her for her name, she wouldnt tell me. I told them both that they were stupid and idiotic because Paperclipped fools everybody. After I put down the hecklers, I decided that they didnt deserve to see the sponge balls and I walked away. This girl had dropped off her business card to try and win a free lunch but I took it out of the jar, wrote down the email address, set the card on fire and emailed her asking her why she wont tell me what made her say I switched the cards.

OK, maybe it didnt go quite like that but the point I am trying to make is you need to relax and not get so worked up over what people on the internets say. You can make your point without being so confrontational. A little bit of diplomacy might establish more credibility with your readers and possibly secure some new adoring fans. You can still be a controversial contributor without being a bully with the need to always be right.

Once again, I think you will make a great contributor and I retract my post that got you upset enough to join this forum.

[Christopher Lyle]

However, each of your contributions to this thread and your bullying PM to me have allowed me to make a pretty accurate assessment of whether the new Magic menu is likely to meet my expectations as an experienced magician and magic consumer.

I never sent you a "bullying" PM Nathan. My PM was short and sweet and absent of tone. I was simply trying to put my finger on the "why?"

If you took what I said as "bullying" then please accept my apology as it was not intended as such.

Read or don't read it. It really matters not to me. But if you haven't read the "new" Menu, then to slam the magazine and those who subscribe to it as you have been doing is just out of line.

[Nathan Muir]

I didn't slam the new magazine. I commented on the quality of the old magazine.

Pay attention.

[Christopher Lyle]

Walter,

I accept your apology...and thank you.

You are correct...I am very passionate when it comes to the world of Magic. I've been called "The Angry Magician" and "The Pitbull of Magic" because of how I present myself in forum chats. I don't consider myself a bully...but I will always speak my mind and if necessary, fight my point down the bone to make sure it's heard.

I don't mind if someone disagrees with me. What a boring place the world would be if we always agreed with one another.

The thing is, I see a lot of bad advice dished out on the internet by people who are not qualified to advise anyone. They lack the knowledge and experience of both our craft and the industry to act as an advisor, yet they begin preaching their garbage to others as if they know what their talking about.

My experience has made me very opinionated about how things should be. I do get worked up when it comes to Magic because I see so many things done so poorly by so many people who think they've got it down that I just want to scream.

It bugs me to no end some of the outlandish nonsense that is dished out in these forums by people who have only been in magic for a year or two. People who have no place to give advice out there providing their insight to people as if they've had years of experience and they don't. They should be the ones asking for advice...not providing it.

So yeah...there's a bit of an edge to my personality. When I post something, I'm not going to sugar coat it with flowers and sunshine. I've always been against all this PC nonsense as I'm am anything but.

Some may think that I bully people. I would consider myself a straight shooter who just says it like it is. If I ruffle feathers to get my point across...then I'm fine with that.

So yes, I'm rough and abrasive at times and there's a definite venom to my style, but I always have our art in the best interest.

Thank you for your apology and for your kind words. It's very much appreciated...

[Nathan Muir]

Mr. Lyle, I'm guessing there's not a whole lot of observational comedy in your act.

[Christopher Lyle]

I didn't slam the new magazine. I commented on the quality of the old magazine.

Pay attention.

You have said in your previous comments:

It was always a bit of an "amateur hour" effort, The Magic Menu. Like reading your great aunt's seasonal bulk letter. It's where guys from the little leagues get to pretend their A-Grade writers and authorities.

Because I have a low but honestly held opinion of third rate magic magazine

Charming little amateur publications are fun to read at times, too. I just don't think the magazine and many of its commentators are in the league of a product like Genii. I have both of the L&L compilations and they are like the Curate's egg: good in parts. I very much enjoyed the Swiss interview, for example. But many of the advice columns are somewhat sophomoric at times, or simply obvious in their wisdoms and insights.

Whether your speaking of the old or the new, everything that I have quoted you on is slamming the magazine, the columnists, Jim Sisti, and all who subscribe.

If comparing us to a magazine that is intended more for the hobbiest and refering to us a 3rd rate isn't slamming us, then I don't know what is. Calling it "amateur hour" when every single person involved is or has been a full time pro in the restaurant magic industry is insulting.

If you're not slamming the Menu, I'd hate to see it when you start.

[Nathan Muir]

You had a hissy fit about me not reading the new magazine. I am correcting your confusion: I was clearly criticizing the old magazine. You can call it slamming, I call it robust criticism. It is entirely valid and no amount of whining and bullying will stop people from expressing their minds.

You claim to be hard headed in your response to Silly Walter, but I think it's clear that you have a glass jaw and certainly no eye for detail.

[Christopher Lyle]

I will agree to disagree with you on this subject as I'm growing tired of this debate. Walter came around as I hoped you would...sadly it's not going to happen. The one thing that we apparently both have in common is our abilty to be a stubborn ass. It is what it is.

Call it what you want...it matters not to me.

Peace!