Magic magazine survey

[walkinoats]

The July 2002 issue of Magic has a column called E-Survey Sez. In this case, they had asked the readers of Magic magazine if there is one magazine that you feel devotes too much space to magic history and magicians of the past. 53 percent said Genii magazine. I think this was a stab at Genii Magazine.
I didn't like the question. In my opinion, we Should spend a lot of time learning about the history. The history aspect of Genii magazine is what I enjoy most about it. I have to admit that before Mr. Richard Kaufman took over the magazine, Magic magazine was my favorite to read. But since Kaufman and Co. have taken over the magazine, I enjoy reading more about the history of past magicians. For example, the issues on Bro. John Hamman and Michael Skinner. I find that more exciting and interesting than reading about the current issues in Magic magazine.

Maybe Genii should have a Survey column too ! :)

[Guest]

Originally posted by walkinoats:
In my opinion, we Should spend a lot of time learning about the history. The history aspect of Genii magazine is what I enjoy most about it.

I agree. I dumped Magic magazine in favour of Genii.

90% of magicians perform material which is not their own. We rely heaviliy on, and should be very grateful to, those that went before us. Besides, many treasures can be unearthed while researching the past masters. Like an iceberg, the classic effects only represent a small portion of the whole deal. That's what makes it exciting for me. Genii has helped to illuminate many performers that I'd only heard of, and many that I had not (Magic magazine just illuminated the dealers :D ). I am really grateful to those that take the time to research and present such stimulating and well crafted articles. Just make the check out to cash Richard ;)

Let's face it, Magic only held the poll to see if anyone was still reading their publication. I wonder how they calculated 53% from 5 replies?

Go Genii!

[Matthew Field]

The MAGIC magazine survey was a bad mistake. They admitted it was a "tainted" survey, off their own website.

I agree Genii has a focus on magic history, and thank god it does. It also has a trick section that is second to none, and some fairly good reviewers.(!)

Is an issue devoted to Germain historical? I guess it depends upon your own outlook. Certainly Teller has found that there is much to be learned from a study of Germain. Is "Greater Magic" a historical book? What about the recent Paul Curry book? "Our Magic"? "Jennings '67"? The Ross Bertram books?

It is true that Genii spends more time on historical features than it does on the latest Las Vegas flash, but certainly the recent Darren Romeo cover article, for example, is evidence of balance.

I think it is good that there is a difference between the magazines. I subscribe to both, but I'll bet you can guess which is my favorite.

Matthew Field

[Richard Kaufman]

I thought the poll was, to put it plainly, bizarre. First, no mention is made of the number of people who responded. 10? 100? Who knows?
Second, what kind of reponses do you expect from your own loyal readers? It would be very easy for me to do a poll and ask Genii readers questions such as, "Do you think MAGIC magazine has too many ads?" Of course the answer will be "yes," since even many of MAGIC magazine's own readers think this is true. Or, I could ask, "Do you think MAGIC magazine's articles are superficial and lack depth?" Many Genii readers would probably say yes--that's why they read Genii!
The poll is meaningless! And not only would it NOT occur to me to take a meaningless poll, it certainly would NEVER occur to me to publish it!