wiki-exposure

Discussions of new films, books, television shows, and media indirectly related to magic and magicians. For example, there may be a book on mnemonics or theatrical technique we should know or at least know about.

Postby Guest » 04/23/07 07:37 AM

http://www.wikihow.com/Do-the-iPod-Cord-Cut-Magic-Trick

Google is my homepage; down in the lower, left hand corner is a section called "How-to" generally filled with amusing instructions. I'm not so amused by this one.
Mark
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/23/07 10:24 AM

Sadly, the Internet is giving voice to the smart-ass kids in our audiences who used to wave their hands, shouting, "I know how that's done."

YouTube and other such sites are filled with explanations, sometimes correct and sometimes not, by teen and pre-teen kids. Then there is the phenomenon of kids trading secrets like trading cards, opening advertising what they have for what they want.

One torrent site advertises "all the magic tricks ever invented" for free by download. The idea of actually spending time to understand and learn something is being replaced by a "fast food" ethic, conditioning a generation of kids that whatever they want is available at the push of a button.

And yet, I can still walk into a high school and entertain 400 kids as if all that technology didn't exist as I did a few weeks ago.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/23/07 11:00 AM

It's interesting how the "If it's published, it's mine to use as I see fit" ethic comes back to bite magicians on the....well....YOU know.

P&L
D
Guest
 

Postby Brad Henderson » 04/23/07 11:05 AM

Dee,

If you are refering to the performance rights issue from another thread, I think you are over reaching. If you buy a trick in a book, as historical magic literary tradition dictates, it is yours to perform unless an agreement with the creator was reached in advance.

However, no where in our history do we have a tradition that says republishing another's ideas or exposing of another's secret is an ethical act.

No one anywhere has advocated the "it's mine to use it as I see fit" attitude. They HAVE said, "If I bought it in a book of tricks sold to the magic public, then I have the right to perform it."

Completely different situations.
Brad Henderson
 
Posts: 2391
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: austin, tx

Postby Guest » 04/23/07 11:18 AM

Dee,

This isn't the Monty Python Argument Clinic. If you have something on point, fine. If you want to endlessly continue an argument that you have no further traction in from a now-closed thread, go over to the Magic Cafe. They'd love you there.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/23/07 11:29 AM

Thank you....thank you very much. Dustin and I will be here all week..... :whack:
Guest
 

Postby Dustin Stinett » 04/23/07 11:29 AM

David Alexander said:
This isn't the Monty Python Argument Clinic.
No; this is Abuse.

(According to some, anyway.)

:D
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 5750
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Guest » 04/23/07 11:39 AM

This isn't the Monty Python Argument Clinic.>>>

Yes it is.

;)

P&L
D
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/23/07 11:42 AM

Seems almost harmless as no holdout or thumbtip is discussed.

Just a shame to offer the mechanics of guile at all. I wonder what they were thinking.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/23/07 11:46 PM

While I don't agree with the magic exposure, I think we all can agree that magic audiences are much much more educated today than 10 years ago or even ever.

Like working at a hardware store, one day a Walmart will move into town and will crush you if you don't change. It would be dishonest to think no one will ever learn what a standard double lift or TT is used for but it's going to happen. The painful truth is not to be lazy and pull out those old (or new) books and use methods that aren't popularly used.

BTW..that cut and restored IPOD trick as featured on the link in this thread is either ripped off from andrew mayne's website or Andrew himself is the author.

-A
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 05:16 AM

Like working at a hardware store, one day a Walmart will move into town and will crush you if you don't change.
Can you imagine if Walmart opened a magic section? The mind shudders.

Gord
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 05:56 AM

re
While I don't agree with the magic exposure, I think we all can agree that magic audiences are much much more educated today than 10 years ago or even ever.
and who is doing that educating as regards the mechanics of guile?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 10:02 AM

The credit at the bottom of the Wiki was:
Initial Author: Josh W. .
Contributors: Jack H , Krystle , Anonymous, Mikeeg555 , Rob S and others.

This page has been accessed 141,809 times. It was last modified 15:47, 24 April 2007.

Above it, something I didn't see a couple of days ago:

External Links
Shock Magic - Original trick by magician, Andrew Mayne. Thanks to shockmagic.com for sharing the pictures and instructions used in this article.

Shock Magic leads to Andrew Mayne's site.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 10:05 AM

Al Hastings wrote:
Like working at a hardware store, one day a Walmart will move into town and will crush you if you don't change.
__________________________________________

The evidence seems to show that the little guy stands no chance against the behemoth of Wal-Mart and will be crushed no matter what they do.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 11:06 AM

Those who bitched when I password protected the cups and balls museum can thank Wikipedia for the inconvenience. They have an odd sense of what is a public resource.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 02:04 PM

The Wiki people are operating under the fantasy held by many people in today's society that "information must be free." This brings about the downloading and trading of music, videos, magic books, all manner of copyrighted material without compensation to the owners and producers of that material.

What those people fail to understand is that when people aren't paid for their creativity they stop creating.
Guest
 

Postby Dustin Stinett » 04/24/07 04:38 PM

David,

I agree with everything you said except one word: I dont think its a fantasy: Its a delusion.

The thing is, there is plenty of free information out there that theres simply no reason to attackand thats what it is; an attackcopyrighted material.

Its the old adage of just because you can do something doesnt mean that you should.

Dustin
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 5750
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 05:13 PM

Quote:
"It would be dishonest to think no one will ever learn what a standard double lift or TT is used for but it's going to happen. The painful truth is not to be lazy and pull out those old (or new) books and use methods that aren't popularly used."

I think you make a good point, and its the only silver lining I see in how the information age is impacting magic it is forcing us to be more creative, to find new ways of doing existing effects and searching out effects not so widely known. There is a very real danger, however, of convoluting effects to the point where they make little or no sense in an effort to prove were not doing what they think were doing as is the case with many magician foolers when performed for a lay audience. I believe a subtle touch is essential in canceling out possible explanations without corrupting the effect.

As to sharing, trading and exposing copyrighted material, its theft pure and simple and those doing it, as in the case of magic, are taking money out of the pockets of those who get damn little compensation for their efforts in the first place. I hate the attitude of dont worry about it, relax, and kids will be kids that kind of idiotic complacency is at the root of the problem and if it continues to go unchecked where will it end? Somehow weve arrived in a world where stealing is okay and even acceptable. You dont want to buy something? Just get the latest file sharing program and download it for free. Its a sad state of affairs with no easy solutions.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 06:01 PM

Who is this "us" who are getting forced to be more creative?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 06:34 PM

Those who realize that audiences are changing as the public's general knowledge of magic increases.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 06:42 PM

Till we are done "stealing" from eachother in magicdom it will be difficult to stop the larger world from taking from us.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 09:02 PM

Johnathan,

I couldn't agree with you more! however; magic is not -all- about secrets. It is a performing art. Knowing (or not knowing) how video editing works does not make me enjoy movies any less.

-A
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 10:15 PM

David wrote>>>This brings about the downloading and trading of music, videos, magic books, all manner of copyrighted material without compensation to the owners and producers of that material.>>>>

Oh, I couldn't agree more!

P&L
D
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/24/07 10:19 PM

I'm sure you couldn't.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 11:12 AM

I'm sure you couldn't. >>>>

*sigh* Yeah, silly me. I pine for the old days when secrets had to be earned, and I long for a future where eveyone's personal artistic integrity prevents them from using other people's lines.

You may say I'm a dreamer....

P&L
D
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 11:36 AM

Al, folks,

With all due respect it is precisely the secrets which distinguish magic from the other performing arts.

And unlike a movie which involves an active and willing suspension of disbelief in the very means of perceiving the story (the flashing pictures which keep changing perspective, addition of music etc), magic happens in real time using real objects and real people.

By way of example consider the Asrah levitation. When the magician whips the cloth off the floating lady nobody yells cut but none the less she is gone. It's exactly the opposite of what's done in words or movies... it's magic happening in the moment in our shared physical reality.

Now as to whether you would enjoy seeing this performed without knowing its engineering or having any clues as to its methodology... I strongly suspect you would prefer to have that sense of magic back rather than just admiring the theatrical performance and engineering and perhaps some vicarious enjoyment from the rest of the audience who gasp and wonder where she went.
Guest
 

Postby Dustin Stinett » 04/25/07 12:16 PM

From DeeBrennan
I long for a future where everyone's personal artistic integrity prevents them from using other people's lines.
I know several fulltime professional entertainer/magicians who use other peoples line and have no qualms about other people using theirs.

Heres the MAJOR difference that makes what they do okay: Permission was asked and granted.

In many cases, material was traded (value for value).

These guys and gals know very well they will likely never work for the same audiences, so its not an issue at all for them.

This kind of thing has been going on in show-biz since there was a thing called show-biz. Sadly, so has just straight theft, so when we see a performer doing, say, a Jay Marshall line, some might think Thief! when in fact Jay gave that performer permission to do the bit. And theres no way for us to know the truth (unless we know the performer).

A sad result of this is that some of the younger guys, so worried about being labeled a thief, dont recognize a gift horse when its staring them in the face.

Im going to tell a story using no names, but the principals (at least one of them) should know that I am talking about them. (And I hope I dont get in trouble for telling it!)

A very experienced performer offered up to a young up and comer an unpublished, but tried and true, routine that maybe five guys in the world do. This is a routine that I, if I were a working pro, would have tripped over myself to get permission to use. The newbie passed for reasons that he felt were about artistic integrity. He wanted to be true to himself and build his on routine from scratch.

This sounds great, except this guy just blew a golden opportunityan opportunity that might not come his way again.

What he failed to realize is that he could have received the piece, adding four or five solid minutes to his act, with the only work he needed to do being the application of his personality to the lines. Over time, with performance experience, he would have added his own lines to the piece, allowing him to remove those that dont work and so forth, working the piece until finally making it his.

There is no loss of integrity in doing that. In fact, its smart. Andto my way of thinkingif you have workers coming to you willing to hand over material, its a sign you are trusted, respected, and you have arrived. That is the height of integrity.

Dustin
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 5750
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 02:17 PM

I pine for the old days when secrets had to be earned, and I long for a future where eveyone's personal artistic integrity prevents them from using other people's lines.

You may say I'm a dreamer....
I long for the day when people's paradigms are internally consistent.

I know I'm a dreamer...
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 02:28 PM

Can you imagine if Walmart opened a magic section? The mind shudders.
Yeah, but they do have a good returns policy.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 04:15 PM

There is no loss of integrity in doing that. In fact, its smart. Andto my way of thinkingif you have workers coming to you willing to hand over material, its a sign you are trusted, respected, and you have arrived. That is the height of integrity.>>>>

Great point!

I think your friend made a mistake as well. Even if he never acutally performed the bit, the instruction the giver would have given him into his way of thinking would have been invaluable.

I just prefer to watch original material. It's a personal preference. I'd rather see YOUR "B" material than see you do someone else's "A" material.

In other words, I love Mullica's (Fully authorised and approved) Red Skelton, but I'd rather see him do his Crazy Horse act. (Which is also "A" material, to me.)

P&L
D
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 04:19 PM

They even have card warp on wiki:

http://www.wikihow.com/Do-the-Card-Warp-Magic-Trick


The people at wiki have no sense of humor. I once did a spoof ehow on 'how to treat your wife right' with tips from Ike Turner and Bobby Brown but was never approved by them. Strange....
Guest
 

Postby Dustin Stinett » 04/25/07 05:30 PM

Dee,

I need to make a clarification: (and dont take this the wrong way) It is highly unlikely that you will ever see the routine Im speaking of. Very few magicians ever will. The people who do it will never knowingly perform it for magicians (at conventions, the Magic Castle, etc.). They know that doing so would be a colossal blunder: They only perform it in the real world (re: corporate gigs, etc.). As far as the audience is concerned, they are seeing that performers A material because, like any good artist, they have turned it into their A material.

Dustin
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 5750
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 08:33 PM

>>>I need to make a clarification: (and dont take this the wrong way) It is highly unlikely that you will ever see the routine Im speaking of. Very few magicians ever will. The people who do it will never knowingly perform it for magicians (at conventions, the Magic Castle, etc.). They know that doing so would be a colossal blunder: They only perform it in the real world (re: corporate gigs, etc.). As far as the audience is concerned, they are seeing that performers A material because, like any good artist, they have turned it into their A material. >>>>

I see your point. Once it's in the show, who could tell if it was "his" or not?

Fair enough.

To me, though, the only magic worth watching is tightly scripted from a VERY unique and specific point of view. David Parr's Resurrectionist. Teller's Rose. Cardini's entire act. Losander's Floating Table. Mac King's Fig Newtons. Steve Martin's Great Flydini. Eugene's Gypsy Thread.

These are bits that can only be performed by their creators because of their unique POV's.

You *could* teach someone else the 'How', but they could never truly understand the "Why" because it's an integral part of the creator.

P&L
D
Guest
 

Postby Dustin Stinett » 04/25/07 09:13 PM

Ah, but the whys can be taught if the right people are teaching it and the right people are learning it. When people at this level trade, the whys are a big part of what they get. Thats because, at that level, they know its the whys that make all the difference. Do you think that David Copperfield (or his people) created the different comedy pieces hes performed over the years? No way. In almost every case, he asked for and received permission to use pieces that were created and honed to perfection by others. But David has the talent to make them his because he understood all the whys.

Additionally (though Im not saying who), I know for a fact that at least one of the persons you cited is famous for a piece that became theirs precisely the way I described.

Heres a fact of life we amateurs, and I might add quite a few professionals, need to understand and come to grips with: There is a lot of very exclusive material out there that we will never get to see (let alone learn) unless we are both extraordinarily lucky and trustworthy.

Dustin
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 5750
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 09:22 PM

>>>Ah, but the whys can be taught if the right people are teaching it and the right people are learning it. When people at this level trade, the whys are a big part of what they get. Thats because, at that level, they know its the whys that make all the difference.>>>

Respectfully, you can't teach the "why". You can explain the "why", but in truly great bits, the "why" comes from the sum total of the creator's life. I can tell you my "why", but it'll never be rooted in your bones. You'll never understand it because you didn't live the life that led up to it.

>>>>Do you think that David Copperfield (or his people) created the different comedy pieces hes performed over the years? No way. In almost every case, he asked for and received permission to use pieces that were created and honed to perfection by others. But David has the talent to make them his because he understood all the whys.>>>

David isn't even remotely funny. This example works against you.

P&L
D
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 09:32 PM

Harry Blackstone Sr was born around the time the Vanishing Birdcage was invented. It was performed as a signature piece by several people before him and several people during the time he was doing it, notably Bert Allerton. They all understood the "whys" and each made the effect "theirs."

The Dancing Handkerchief was done by Anna Eva Fay (probably the inventor), Kellar, Thurston, and another chap before he gave it to Blackstone Sr when his show was sidetracked in the early 1920s.

Bill Malone made Sam The Bellhop famous, except that it was famous before Bill did it, because Frank Everhart had been doing it at the Ivanhoe Bar for 20+ years.

Both DeBiere and Malini did their own version of the Egg Bag and each man made the trick "his" because they both understood the "whys" of the effect.

Frakson was producing lit cigarettes before Cardini in a different style as well as doing card manipulation with gloves before Cardini. Both men made the presentation of similar effects "theirs" because the both understood the "whys."
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 09:35 PM

...and here's proof.

The flat-out funniest moment in David's show goes by without so much as a reference.

When David transports an unsuspecting audience member to a foreign country and LEAVES HIM THERE WITHOUT A PASSPORT, that is the single funniest moment in the history of DC shows, yet he doesn't get the laugh because it has never occured to his not-in-the-least-bit-funny mind,

P&L
D
Guest
 

Postby Dustin Stinett » 04/25/07 09:45 PM

By DeeBrennan
David isn't even remotely funny. This example works against you.
Well, his audiences sure seem to think so, so my argument works well for anyone who knows what they are talking about.

Dustin
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 5750
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 09:50 PM

With respect, David, you're missing my point...or I'm not amking myself clear.

The "why" isn't, "Why this trick/bit/joke is entertaining."

The "why" is in "Why the creator of the piece wrote the script the way he/she did."

For example, Cardidni. You could duplicate his every move down to stoop in his shoulders, but you could never use the internal monologue he relied on to get the character over. You wouldn't understand it, even if you had the internal monologue script, because you don't know precisely what those words mean to him.

Therein lay the "why".

Here's a musical analogy; if I have the choice of seeing Aretha Franklin sing "Natural Woman", or seeing Carole King sing it, I'm going with Carole 10-out-of-10 times. She wrote the song. And even though Aretha's chops FAR outstrip Carole's, Aretha does not, CANNOT know the "why" behind the words because she doesn't know in her bones what they meant to Carole when she wrote them.

(You're now thinking of Elvis and Frank, and you're right. They were extrordinary interpreters of other's writing. I'd rather hear either one's "My Way" over songwriter Paul Anka's version, anytime. But there are always exceptions t every personal rule-of-thumb.)

P&L
D
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 04/25/07 09:59 PM

>>>Well, his audiences sure seem to think so, so my argument works well for anyone who knows what they are talking about.>>>

Ineresting double-bind you've put me in. If I disagree with you about David, by your definition I don't know what I'm talking about.

Hard to counter that with logic.

Audiences laugh at David because he's famous, and they've paid a bundle to see him. Celebrity laughs. Not because he's "funny". He isn't. That's why his "Impregnating a Woman Onstage" bit is so creepy. It *could* be funny, but never will be as long as he's the one doing it.

But what the hell, if I really knew funny, I'd be starring in the kinds of venues David plays, now wouldn't I?

P&L
D
Guest
 

Next

Return to Alternative Media