Magic pet peeves.. stir things up!

Discuss general aspects of Genii.

Postby smokemist » 06/25/11 09:25 PM

Why oh why, does it seem like every magician who does stage magic feel compelled to do the floating table? After a few seconds, is it really that deceptive? Reminds me of the "Invisible Palm", but less obvious.

I personally can't stand the effect. I'm almost tempted to buy the table, then float the dang thing with an okito ball hookup, just to open some minds a bit. I really think the same of all zombie effects out there where the magi must hold onto the cloth at all times..

I also mentioned the Invisible blatent palm effect.. I cannot think of a more obvious effect in all of magic. I think laymen are mostly too polite to bust the pros.

What's on your list?
User avatar
smokemist
 
Posts: 79
Joined: 05/15/08 11:52 AM
Location: California

Postby Dustin Stinett » 06/25/11 10:41 PM

My pet peeve is people who believe magic is to blame for bad magic.
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 5922
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 06/25/11 11:16 PM

Let me get over to the kenel where I have the peves caged for the night. Okay here's a few from the first row:

Peer magicians who don't know of, believe in or practice magic to start. The Emerald Tablet - is that like the red or blue pill in the matrix they might ask.

Times when folks who claim to be well read proudly announce that they are not familiar with the representations of magic in current literature.

Other times when folks who claim an interest in history then go on and demonstrate that they are not so attentive to the process by which things get shuffled, sorted, sifted and finally settled into the popular myth that most settle for as history.

Folks demanding respect for bringing inferior and naive versions of themes from other fields into the magic shop as novel discoveries. For example; consider the amount of denial that went into writing the phrase "theoretical and psychological elements of magic as understood by magicians" next to "Although the book is concerned with the 'psychology of magic', there has been no attempt to make substantial links with academic psychology" - nor the exploration of NLP or clinical or experimental or social psychology - all of which offer generations of experience getting results with real live people.

One more for fun: Pandering to the reader in the way Robert-Houdin did in his Secrets of Conjuring and Magic. IMHO a mistake that has crippled generations in our craft and leaves the student isolated by language and practice and without the support of his peers in the performing arts who (by my experience) are usually almost eager to help.

Peves about post deletion by folks who don't see the irony of playing Winston Smith in a place that is part of the written record in this craft can wait till next round.

One more peve: Offering criticisms in a way that does not lead to "how to do better", especially when not requested.
Last edited by Jonathan Townsend on 06/25/11 11:23 PM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: it's only lemonade, not vitriol.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6698
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Richard Kaufman » 06/26/11 12:07 AM

Losander's Floating Table is a work of genius.
Jennings' Invisible Palm Aces is a work of genius.

Both of these gentlemen, and their creations, have changed the way other magicians perform magic.

Don't dump on them.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20801
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Brad Henderson » 06/26/11 12:46 AM

I have seen the Losander table performed poorly and performed well. Was at the Castle the other week and saw it performed on stage. My guest was the volunteer. She experienced a full magic moment. The crowd loved it too, but by that point the performer had thoroughly won the crowd over and pretty much anything he did would have been well received.

I remembering thinking I had never seen the zombie effect produce a magical moment, and then I saw Tommy Wonder float the birdcage in DC. The cage floated, and it was real magic.

I've seen a lot of crappy mimes who do not look like they are trapped in a box, but then I've also seen Marcel Marceau. Should we say mime is un-effective just because it's really hard to do well?
Brad Henderson
 
Posts: 2463
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: austin, tx

Postby smokemist » 06/26/11 05:13 AM

Richard Kaufman wrote:Losander's Floating Table is a work of genius.
Jennings' Invisible Palm Aces is a work of genius.

Both of these gentlemen, and their creations, have changed the way other magicians perform magic.

Don't dump on them.


In my opinion.. yes my opinion both effects are lame. Let me explain. Floating table: If you were Really floating ANY object, why would you need to cover them with a cloth & why would you need to hang on to the cloth at all times.. unless..

Invisible Palm: Oh geeeezzzz guys. I have seen video of Jennings do it, with no reaction.. and may I be so bold as to say I was astounded at how obvious the effect was.. Where could the card possible come from if a normal person uses a normal amount of logic?? Do we call these effects great because a prominent magician performs them, or because the effect is good?

If John Doe did the invisible palm the same way, would we say it was a great effect? I refuse to go along with the herd. I choose to form my own opinion, disregarding who performs it. I think many magicians are fooling themselves big time. There are numerous examples of this in the magic world. Ive witnessed this 1st hand at 6 magic competitions. The politics are horrendous.
User avatar
smokemist
 
Posts: 79
Joined: 05/15/08 11:52 AM
Location: California

Postby Richard Kaufman » 06/26/11 01:22 PM

You're entitled to whatever opinion you want to have, but that doesn't mean you know what you're talking about.

I've been performing the Invisible Palm Aces for 35 years and have never failed to get an enormous gasp from the spectators every time a card appears on the table. Never fails. Your opinion only tells me that either you have never performed the trick yourself (or you did it really poorly) or you have never seen it performed well.

As for the Floating Table, imposing real-world restrictions on magic props is often a folly. What you completely fail to understand is that the cloth on the table adds mystery to the effect--it's not just an excuse for the method.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20801
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby John Lovick » 06/26/11 02:34 PM

Richard is right. Smokemist doesn't know what he's talking about. I never perform Invisible Palm Aces, but have seen it performed dozens of times by many different magicians in the Close-up Gallery at the Magic Castle, and it is consistently one of the most effective card tricks I see. Lay audiences are always amazed and love this trick.

As for the Losander Table: I have seen it done poorly, and I have seen it done well. And when done well, it is about as magical as it gets. And audience reaction confirms this.
John Lovick
 
Posts: 175
Joined: 07/14/08 12:11 AM

Postby Dustin Stinett » 06/26/11 03:16 PM

Smokemist,

Your opinion only matters to you and has no bearing on the effects you find lame. And in this case, the facts do not support your opinion. I believe that you are only seeing the trick through a magicians point of view and are actually unable to view magic the way a layman views magic. You are one of of those guys that professional magicians hate to have in their audience; you (metaphorically) sit on your hands and have no reaction because you know how its done. In my opinion, thats a flaw that affects your ability to select suitable material and perform anything you do choose to present well. I learned this lesson the hard way a very long time ago.

I love to perform Dingles Quick 3-Way. Technically, I do it well. But when I first started doing it, I was not getting much of a reaction, and finally a girl simply said to me, you do that with sleight of hand.

To borrow a phrase, How else?

So is the trick lame or my presentation of itmy inability to create magic through the sleight of hand I was in fact performing?

It was, of course, the latter. It took me a while, but I worked through my issues and now the trick is about the people watching it and not me or the cards in my hands.

Tricks are not lame. But many magicians are.

Dustin
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 5922
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby M Petersen » 06/26/11 11:03 PM

I try not to comment too much in forums, but for this, I have to make an exception. I witnessed Losander perform his Floating Table before an audience of lay people and magicians. All I can say, is in his hands, that table floats. It is an incredible illusion that received an enthusiastic response from both sides of the aisle. I have seen it done poorly, but in Losander's own hands, it is incredible. Just my two cents.

Marshall
M Petersen
 
Posts: 20
Joined: 10/02/10 11:56 AM

Postby smokemist » 06/27/11 04:57 AM

It's really a pet peeve of mine to see an effect done by sooo many. For me, this would be & is and instant turn off. That's really my main issue with the table. I'd love to see a guy use some creativity with it and mix other methods with the table. What happened to adding to magic? sigh....

Mr. Richard Kaufman, I'd really like to see your version of this performed on a vid link, or a clip you guys find to be a deceptive version, so I can try to comprehend where you are coming from.

Granted, I have seen a clip or 2 online of the routine that seemed to get good reactions.. but nothing in my 20+ years in magic has astounded me more than how cards "appearing" in such an obvious way could fool any laymen with an everage IQ. This really amazes me... I suddenly have thought of every zombie routine I've ever seen pop into my head..

Surely, you guys must have similar examples. Just becuase the majority of magis like something, doesn't mean it's good.

This is what I'm talking about: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bK3sYSoihhU

No offense to Jennings or followers meant..
User avatar
smokemist
 
Posts: 79
Joined: 05/15/08 11:52 AM
Location: California

Postby Kent Gunn » 06/27/11 10:52 AM

Smokemist,

You should probably keep your pet peeves to yourself. I'm pretty sure Neil Foster doing the Zombie is on youtube somewhere. I know it's not the table, but it looks like magic. It won't look like magic to you, because you're so knowledgeable.

Hey, I found it. Snappy music too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOSkcjrOE7I

I don't have any particular love for invisible palm routines. I believe the Jennings routine has seen some wonderful interpretations though. Michael Vincent does it as well as I've seen it done.

http://www.youtube.com/user/michaelvinc ... BAjUqbAOr4

The effects themselves only need a great magician to perform them. Don't confuse your knowledge of the nuts and bolts of how a trick works with what these effects can look like in the hands of a good magician. If you don't like these particular effects, don't do them. I don't care to perform the linking rings. I've seen some powerfully magical performances. Just because I know there's key to the whole thing doesn't mean I can't enjoy seeing Kim Silverman or Kainoa Harbottle do a great ring routine.

If you think an effect is not any good. You're bound to find, on
a large public forum that you're stepping on the toes of devotees of that routine. You probably perform pieces I'd find complete rubbish or you don't perform at all. I find mostly dilettantes and those who only perform in their fantasies have such strong and difficult to defend opinions.

KG
Kent Gunn
 
Posts: 579
Joined: 05/15/08 02:05 PM
Location: Florida

Postby Naphtalia » 06/27/11 10:56 AM

I work part time in a magic shop. It is not unusual to have someone purchase an effect they just saw, learn the secret and then say, "That wouldn't fool anyone." Of course, they forget that the reason they made the purchase was that it fooled them.

I listen to the audience reaction when the floating table is done well. These are not people who have figured out a method and are just being polite.

If you find a particular trick "lame" I recommend you do not perform it. Find the magic that speaks to you and fits your personality. Rehearse that magic and perform it well.

My pet peeve in magic - people who do not rehearse.
Naphtalia


Impropriety is the soul of wit.
Naphtalia
 
Posts: 109
Joined: 01/30/08 01:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Richard Kaufman » 06/27/11 10:57 AM

And what exactly do you find lacking in Jennings' performance of Invisible Palm Aces?
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20801
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Dustin Stinett » 06/27/11 03:15 PM

smokemist wrote:It's really a pet peeve of mine to see an effect done by sooo many. For me, this would be & is and instant turn off.

And that is you thinking like a magician. You are either forgeting or you simply do not know that the average layman might see one magician over a one year period; if that.
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 5922
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Bill McFadden » 06/27/11 05:16 PM

Lest we lose sight of the fact that there's live, and then there's YouTube. Those among us who knew/saw Larry Jennings carry much more weight in the argument.
Bill McFadden
 
Posts: 617
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Villesville-on-the-Chesapeake

Postby Terry » 06/27/11 05:25 PM

Bill McFadden wrote:Lest we lose sight of the fact that there's live, and then there's YouTube. Those among us who knew/saw Larry Jennings carry much more weight in the argument.


You nailed it Bill.

Watching Mr. Jennings in person was a lesson in relaxed performance. The fact his hands were the size of catcher's mitts didn't hurt.
Terry
 
Posts: 1245
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Kentucky

Postby smokemist » 06/27/11 06:48 PM

Kent Gunn wrote:
You probably perform pieces I'd find complete rubbish or you don't perform at all. I find mostly dilettantes and those who only perform in their fantasies have such strong and difficult to defend opinions.

KG

As for Mr. Gunn's comment, it makes me chuckle a bit. Sorry to dissapoint, but I'm no armchair magi. I've done stage magic in 6 different countries, been on highlighted tv in 2 of them over the past 5 yrs, while winning awards in 5 magic competitions over a 1 yr period.. I won't ask for your credentials, don't worry.

I must admit, this boxing match (1 against all others) has been entertaining, although I don't have gloves on for the sport of it. I do believe what I say here.

That being said, I found the Jennings clip to dissapoint on the appearance of the aces. I beleive if you ask a spectator to come up with a method to do this, after watching a clip, then they should have no trouble identifying the method. To me, it's just blatently obvious beyond anything I've seen in magic. I would love to ask a layperson about the clip and see what they say.

Although, I think Mr. Foster did the zombie about as well as it could be done, it is still a zombie and just didnt do it for me. Compare it to something like an Okito ball or Dawn Wayne method.

I do agree that thee one and only true judges are laymen.

I know I must be striking some nerves due to others on this board performing these effects, but I do love my country of origin, the USA and its freedom of choice / speech, dont you? So, I will express my opinions freely, & I expect no less from others here..
User avatar
smokemist
 
Posts: 79
Joined: 05/15/08 11:52 AM
Location: California

Postby Steve Bryant » 06/27/11 08:25 PM

For the record, your country has its freedom of choice, not "it's."

Also for the record, I agree with you regarding this clip. The first person I saw do the Invisible Palm Aces was Larry, and he fooled me badly. I had been in magic for quite awhile, and I had no clue. In this video clip, however, he just brushes the pile aside and there is no magic moment. It looks much better if you place your hand flat on the pile (or "single card" the first time you do it) with the heel of your hand secretly moving the top card of the double a little to the side, pause a moment, and then lift your hand straight up to show that an ace has appeared. Paul Harris has written this up very nicely, and I suggest you read his take. I consider it to be the best of the "classic" approaches. There have been many others, including those that use the aces only, no extra cards. Most recently, I saw John Carney do a brand new take on it, and it knocked my socks off. It was just beautiful.

With a little thought, this is an amazing trick and it will elicit gasps from spectators, even when I do it.

Although I am no longer as fond of Neil Foster's zombie routine as I once was, I remember the first time my friends saw him do it, on Don Alan's Magic Ranch, when we were in junior high. They said, "You should have seen this guy with a floating ball. It must have cost $10,000!" This was way back before it had ever been exposed. As to Dirk's handling of his tables, it is just beautiful in his hands, especially when he combines it with the little box. Derren Brown also combines it with other methods, and it is likewise beautiful in his hands.

Anyone can butcher any trick, but, when well done, the two you have mentioned are some of the best in the business.
Last edited by Steve Bryant on 06/27/11 08:28 PM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: comma instead of decimal point
User avatar
Steve Bryant
 
Posts: 1676
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Bloomington IN

Postby Kent Gunn » 06/27/11 10:15 PM

Smokemist,

I'm so glad you didn't ask for my credentials, boy that would've been embarrassing. If you want to be taken seriously, try coughing up a name. Complete [censored] end up on television routinely. I can think of several magicians who make their entire living from magic who should be taken out and shot simply because they're that bad for magic.

Negativity breeds negativity. Making strong expositions about what you don't like will often bring responses like the one you got from me.

How does you slamming two tricks serve any purpose except allowing us all to see how smart you are about methods?

Are there any effects you do like? Of what part of your world-renowned shows are most pleasing for you to perform?

I'm not all sunshine and light but I do realize magicians with far more talent than either of us have, can take nearly any trick and make it a thing of beauty.

So who is Smokemist? Gotta a name you'd care to share brother? Wait a minute . . .

JC Sum?

Just guessing. The snark rings a bell.

KG
Kent Gunn
 
Posts: 579
Joined: 05/15/08 02:05 PM
Location: Florida

Postby Al Schneider » 06/27/11 11:28 PM

Hmmmm?
Throwing stones are we?
I call this place the thundering heard.
When someone says something about magic art, I say magic is not an art. Then I am asked to prove it. Well, I have observed that when a magician claims his magic is art, it sucks. So, I say magic is not art. It solves that problem.

About Larry Jennings. He was a dear friend of mine. I miss him. We kind of grew up in magic in Detroit together. He stole a lot of my stuff and admits it. I don't care.

But here is a story. We hung together at an IBM con in Milwaukee in about 1972. At three in the morning we went back to our respective hotel rooms. They happened to be in the same hotel. We walked into the front door and the lady behind the desk said to Larry, "When are you going to show me that trick." He replied, "Now." He did the invisible palm thing. She responded with, "You just had two cards there!" Larry was pissed. He said to me, "You show her a trick." I did the ring and pencil trick from my new book. It blew her away. Larry said, "I'm going to bed," turned and walked away.

I am not saying good or bad. That is what I saw.

About floating tables. The L table is awesome. It kills. Prof Nightmare is overdone. I use it in every walk around thing I do. Is that bad? If you say it is, you are not a pro. I admit I am not.

Someone from far away had to email me many times criticizing my DVD's He ripped it. I was kind to him. He told me all the problems with everything. He said there was only one good trick in the whole bunch. That is where I made a coin disappear under a card. I did not explain it. That was an oversight. I intended to. I got some mileage for not explaining it. The point is, that guy liked it because he didn't know how it worked.

Go figure.

But that is standard for the thundering heard.

Someday I will write abut what peeves me.

But no one will care.

Townsend, speaking of peeves: please do not respond to this post.

Al Schneider
The single absolute truth is that we don't know.
Al Schneider
 
Posts: 7
Joined: 07/08/10 08:55 PM

Postby Kent Gunn » 06/27/11 11:47 PM

Mr. Schneider,

How very strange . . . I just got your big purple book from L&L today. I'm re-reading some of the stuff you'd put out before.

I'll never forget getting my hands on Al Schneider on Close-Up Magic, ca. 1980. I was on a submarine at the time. I learned how to do magic far more effectively from that book. I think it taught me the magic of self-evaluation.

For that book, and The Theory and Practice of Magic Deception, I thank you. I don't know if I'm smart enough anymore to learn from the big new book. I hope so.

Having no reputation, as noted, by JC (ok I think it's JC) makes my adulation for your work less important but I touted your work in the only work I put out about magic.

Thanks for your work Al. It means a great deal to me.

We return you to vitriol and diatrabe as your regularly scheduled programming.

Kent Gunn
Virtual unknown in magic
Redwood City California
Last edited by Kent Gunn on 06/27/11 11:49 PM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: I couldn't spell vitriol, which I find ironic.
Kent Gunn
 
Posts: 579
Joined: 05/15/08 02:05 PM
Location: Florida

Postby Richard Kaufman » 06/27/11 11:54 PM

Al, what did Larry take of yours beside the Pop-Up Move?

And I'm really looking forward to your book!
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20801
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby smokemist » 06/28/11 01:24 AM

Kent Gunn wrote:Smokemist,

I can think of several magicians who make their entire living from magic who should be taken out and shot simply because they're that bad for magic.

How does you slamming two tricks serve any purpose except allowing us all to see how smart you are about methods?

So who is Smokemist? Gotta a name you'd care to share brother? Wait a minute . . .

JC Sum?

Just guessing. The snark rings a bell.

KG

Classy comment about murdering magicians Mr. Gunn.. Shall we stone them to death or a quick kill with an AR-15? You are surely a gentleman and a scholar.

The point of my post was to vent & understand why magis do these routines. No doubt, I have stuck a very deep nerve with you in particularI couldnt care less, since I have not attacked you. Ok, lets all breathe. There, thats better.

Also, this is not JC Sum, so lets hold off on accusing the innocent buddy.




I thank you Al for your honest Jennings Invisible palm story, & proving my point.

Cheers
User avatar
smokemist
 
Posts: 79
Joined: 05/15/08 11:52 AM
Location: California

Postby Gordolini » 06/28/11 07:20 AM

What seems to hit a nerve is your overly simple definition of a lame trick from a magician viewpoint. Could this include the dancing cane - obvious method if poorly performed and also done by so many? I believe you agree that the dancing cane properly performed can be magic beyond belief. Enjoy
Gordolini
 
Posts: 111
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Louisville, KY

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 06/28/11 07:28 AM

? About as far as I go with the criticisms is noting the lack of thumper to establish the weight of the table from the start for the Losander item and the awkward setup for the Jennings trick which can also easily be worked around - just needs a little scripting IMHO.

As to why so many do the tricks - likely that they have proved themselves sufficiently effective and workable in venues.

If you (to the OP) are asking why these items are performed poorly by many - that's likely the case (from your perspective) with most items as not so many have the option to refine their work over years and with the help of informed feedback on matters of blocking, character and audience dynamics.

BTW folks, you can watch and listen to the audience on the Jennings and Losander performance videos.

Some of us own our clicks and ticks in this herd,

Jon
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6698
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Al Schneider » 06/28/11 10:18 AM

Richard

I do not know.
I have not read his book.
At the convention I mentioned in my post, I had not seen him for some time.
Almost the first words out of his mouth when we met that day was, "Al I apologize. I put a lot of your stuff in the book and did not give you credit."
I do not keep track of whose is what.
So many times I have had someone show me my stuff.
Much of what was in print years earlier.
I don't keep track.
When you remind someone of something, you will not win and simply grow animosity. I try to stuff it but I often fail.
I get plenty of it anyway. My skin is thin and I generate enough anyway.
And I commend you for you willingness to endure the thundering heard.
But, I guess its your job.
That is not my job.
However, I must point out one thing. In magic I have found one of the worlds highest pleasures. That is sitting around talking to some magician someplace. I wish I could get a beer with Larry some day.

Al Schneider
The single absolute truth is that we don't know.
Al Schneider
 
Posts: 7
Joined: 07/08/10 08:55 PM

Postby Rick Ruhl » 06/28/11 10:21 AM

My pet peeve is getting anonymous emails on youtube from 'know it all' magicians who know nothing. and this was directed to Bob Sanders, not me :( Bob is a great guy but if you're going to offer critism, then at least use your real name.

from mrclose up, who doesnt have a real name.

.. first comment

You have got to be kidding me... This is utter garbage! I would seriously rather get a root canal then sit through this [censored] again. Newsflash..THIS IS 2011! When Vernon said that horrible magicians should take up stamp collecting, he was referring to "magicians" just like YOU. No wonder the general population views magicians as "cheesy" and "hokey." You'll probably delete my comment and say to yourself that "this guy doesn't know what he's talking about." That is the worse thing you can do

and the second comment

By the way...

I noticed that you have to approve my comment before it posts. Guaranteed you will mot post it, which is probably the reason that you don't have any comments and your video has been up since 2009. Seriously, PLEASE take a look at your act and TRULY understand what I am saying to you. I mean this in a blunt, constructive way. Your act is HORRIBLE. You are receiving PITY applause. This is NOT what magic is supposed to look like. How are YOU giving people advice on the magic cafe?
Rick Ruhl
 
Posts: 587
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Tampa, FL

Postby Bill McFadden » 06/28/11 03:48 PM

"thundering heard." I love it! Makes me want to listen to Woody Herman's 2nd Herd - late 40's. Cray-zee . . .
Bill McFadden
 
Posts: 617
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Villesville-on-the-Chesapeake

Postby Kent Gunn » 06/28/11 04:47 PM

Smokemist,

You don't respond very well to questions. That's ok though.

You're the one that moved from shooting to murder. I just wanted to inflict pain, you're the one who's extending my comments to murder. I never did trust you stage guys.

Adjudging someone as gentleman or scholar is not very easy from a post. In my world the gentlemen are comprised of Commisionned Officers in the U.S. Navy. I was enlisted scum, so you're right on that note.

Scholar . . . that's open to interpretation. I've been to school, this time through I might finish the third grade.

Relax oh smokey and misty one. Don't get your stage magician support hose in a twist. Tell us what effects in your show you think are especially effective and why. Put some positive energy into this discussion. Since you're willing to open a post with all negative comments and you obviously don't like them when pointed in your general direction. Go for the good. See the light. Strike a positive note here.

Oh, and cough up your name!

Kent F. Gunn

F stands for . . . well you know.
Last edited by Kent Gunn on 06/28/11 05:08 PM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: Removed unecessary twitage.
Kent Gunn
 
Posts: 579
Joined: 05/15/08 02:05 PM
Location: Florida

Postby Oli Foster » 06/28/11 06:20 PM

Hi, I'm abit of an armchair magician really but thought I'd still stick my unqualified oar in here. It would be easier not to, since I share smokemist's reservations about the floating table, but what the hey - none of us are real people after all :) I don't know whether I'm entitled to without a lifetime's experience but this is just based on seeing it done a few times by members of my local club and by the otherwise fabulous Derren Brown, regretably therefore disagreeing with Steve.

I went to see his Evening of Wonders tour, which featured the table and I have to say I think it was the worst thing in it, which could be partially due to it being featured in that particular show. The main routine was his 'oracle' question and answer act, with a twist that all of the answers had been predicted. This part was cracking and went down a storm but, half way through, he came to the table.

He went through a load of patter about mediums and table tipping with an explanation of ideomotor movements responsible for tipping a smaller table. He then did the Losander table as per the instructions and in exactly the same way as the slightly less fabulous chaps at the club, complete with the little box, serving to hold some 'dead person's name'. It was greeted politely.

I was with my family, who otherwise believe he does use psychological techniques and I haven't wanted to spoil this for them, but their only criticism was, "why did he do that cr*p magic trick half-way through?" - and this one thing made them question the rest of the show. Perhaps, during what is pretty much a programme of mentalism, a more visual illusiony-type trick might be abit incongruous and, going back to the old 'too perfect' idea, might even be just that (for all that I am otherwise inclined to believe it's more imperfect). I think the whole ideomotor tipping tables patter didn't gel with a table then rising in a slightly phony way and, rather than being a twist, it just made the whole thing look abit silly.

As for Secrets of Conjuring and Magic (and older books in general) pandering to the modern magician, where peers would do a better job, I take not entirely the opposite view as I agree that there is alot to be said for sitting down with somebody and watching them go through something in a way that can't be duplicated by books and DVDs. However, that particular book is fantastic and why shouldn't all books pander as much as they possibly can? We should think for ourselves but aren't books just something else to be lapped up?

Older books seemed to have wanted to offer as much as they possibly could with an apparent aim of being broadly encyclopedic, without caring about stepping on anyone's toes in the process. Something seems to have happened, both in magic and business generally, where there now seems to be more value in specifying things, in setting up niches and specialising - giving less for more for the sake of perceived value and perhaps to the extent of forgetting the broader aim. It's therefore almost antidotal to turn off a one-trick DVD and sift through some yellowed pages to inhale their musty etchings and superfluous descriptions.

Pet peeve number one though: think about this - there are some things and some people that you and I can't criticise. Not because they don't warrant criticism but because we'd be shot down in flames the second we open our mouths by people who may indeed harbour the same views or at least not wholly endorse the views they profess. A kind of conservative political correctness seems to have been present in the underbelly of magic, ever since its promotion as a 'gentleman's hobbey' - and this can only perpetuate bad magic by anyone who can't be bothered with b******t. Let's play devil's advocate occasionally and take the p*ss out of some well-loved figure or trounce some critically acclaimed volume. Why not?! It would make this little niche of ours alot more entertaining and we might all learn something in the process. Otherwise we're just blowing smoke up each other's rear ends. Floating table? Rubbish! Invisible palm? Equally rubbish! (slightly exaggerating on this last one, as I don't really have an opinion, but lets slate it anyway and see how it's defended) Stand by and prepare to fire...

Oli
Oli Foster
 
Posts: 111
Joined: 09/29/10 08:40 AM

Postby smokemist » 06/28/11 06:37 PM

Kent Gunn wrote:Smokemist,

You don't respond very well to questions. That's ok though.

You're the one that moved from shooting to murder. I just wanted to inflict pain, you're the one who's extending my comments to murder. I never did trust you stage guys.

Adjudging someone as gentleman or scholar is not very easy from a post. In my world the gentlemen are comprised of Commisionned Officers in the U.S. Navy. I was enlisted scum, so you're right on that note.

Scholar . . . that's open to interpretation. I've been to school, this time through I might finish the third grade.

Relax oh smokey and misty one. Don't get your stage magician support hose in a twist. Tell us what effects in your show you think are especially effective and why. Put some positive energy into this discussion. Since you're willing to open a post with all negative comments and you obviously don't like them when pointed in your general direction. Go for the good. See the light. Strike a positive note here.

Oh, and cough up your name!

Kent F. Gunn

F stands for . . . well you know.


Ok, now you have me laughing.. you certainly are a character Kent! I am really amused by your postings. Congrads.. This has become fun.

Hmmm lets see who is doing the personally attacking with calling me scum. Like I said, Classy. Also, I was unaware you only intended to maim people. Very classy and civilized. (sarcasm bud)

Who I am is irrelevant. I will not give my name to do the fact that I may be judged in future competitions by the very same people who disagree with me on my posts on this board. That may unfairly influence judging decisions. What is important is that I have an opinion that Id like to express in a free country. Surly Mr. Gunn of all people would understand this.

I couldnt understand what you meant about your 3rd grade comment..

Liked effects: Since we are dealing with cards a little, I like & do: Easy Ace Estimation -Paul Gordons, a variation on Allan Ackermans card at any number, memorized deck estimation techniques, Biddle trick, Out of This World, to name a few.
Stage: I create a lot of my manip act, but along that line you may know of: card manip, Windshear, Hospitality, but like I said, I do create most of my manip act, so its not easy to explain.

( again, this Thread is about hearing from others about what they were tired of seeing performed, & why.)

Ps. I assume F stands for fantastic guy? That would be my guess.. If the middle initial was C it would have to stand for Classy!
User avatar
smokemist
 
Posts: 79
Joined: 05/15/08 11:52 AM
Location: California

Postby Kent Gunn » 06/28/11 07:14 PM

SmokeMist,

I called myself enlisted scum, not you. I'm not certain if you're from the U.S. or if certain colloquialisms are always going to make sense. But I rarely call other people names, well not on magic boards anyway.

I called you JC Sum, which can be an anagram for J. Scum, but that's way too obtuse and it was a bad guess.

I'm glad you realize I'm not very serious about any of this. I appreciate your sharing the parts of your show that give you the most pleasure to perform.

I'm willing to accede your need for keeping your opinions on the down-low. I have had zero success in competitions. It wasn't because of anything I said on a board though. I lost soundly because there were better magicians in the competition. I do realize not all judges can keep their minds solely on the performances they see. I've a sense of you now, I'm good.

If I make any comments about your sources for card magic I'll just stir up a hornet's nest. I do love Ackerman's stuff though. He is top-flite, tops!

The F stands for Featherstone oddly enough. It's me Mum's maiden name.

I hope I get to see your manipulation act someday soon. I was fortunate enough to see An Ha-Lim perform at WMS. That was magic!

I'm all about positivity. There's plenty of bad magic out there. We don't have to look very far to find themes, popular tricks or popular magicians we don't care for. I don't know why your initial post struck me so hard. I suspect it's because I tend to revere all things Larry Jennings. I think his magic is excellent stuff. I saw Losander float a table once. It really is magical beyond measure, to me.

For me, I try to concentrate on the lousy magic I do and try my very hardest to improve my least favorite magician; Kent Gunn

Stay well my anonymous friend. Best of luck with your competitions and career. Wow 'em all!

KFG
Last edited by Kent Gunn on 06/28/11 07:16 PM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: Capital letters really should start most sentences.
Kent Gunn
 
Posts: 579
Joined: 05/15/08 02:05 PM
Location: Florida

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 06/28/11 07:53 PM

Oli,

I criticized Robert-Houdin for his knowing and almost explicitly regretted use of language stilted toward what magicians were using rather than the words he suggested as more useful. Prestiges and wonder-workers were his preferred terms to tricks or escomateurs or prestidigitation. Similarly for use of theater/direction terms where they apply. He, and later the authors of Our Magic, could have done more to help folks explore the role of our character in performance and also to seek help in the larger theater. Instead they chose to put a focus on 'clever me(thods)' that serve backstage to make tricks work. Our Loss as The Secrets of Conjuring and Magic remain just that for many in our craft.

As to calling a garden implement a hoe, no problem here.

Some might call it being full of sh** while others euphamize that it's a fertile imagination.

:)
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6698
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby smokemist » 06/29/11 03:50 PM

Kent Gunn wrote:SmokeMist,

I called myself enlisted scum, not you. I'm not certain if you're from the U.S. or if certain colloquialisms are always going to make sense. But I rarely call other people names, well not on magic boards anyway.

I called you JC Sum, which can be an anagram for J. Scum, but that's way too obtuse and it was a bad guess.

I'm glad you realize I'm not very serious about any of this. I appreciate your sharing the parts of your show that give you the most pleasure to perform.

I'm willing to accede your need for keeping your opinions on the down-low. I have had zero success in competitions. It wasn't because of anything I said on a board though. I lost soundly because there were better magicians in the competition. I do realize not all judges can keep their minds solely on the performances they see. I've a sense of you now, I'm good.

If I make any comments about your sources for card magic I'll just stir up a hornet's nest. I do love Ackerman's stuff though. He is top-flite, tops!

The F stands for Featherstone oddly enough. It's me Mum's maiden name.

I hope I get to see your manipulation act someday soon. I was fortunate enough to see An Ha-Lim perform at WMS. That was magic!

I'm all about positivity. There's plenty of bad magic out there. We don't have to look very far to find themes, popular tricks or popular magicians we don't care for. I don't know why your initial post struck me so hard. I suspect it's because I tend to revere all things Larry Jennings. I think his magic is excellent stuff. I saw Losander float a table once. It really is magical beyond measure, to me.

For me, I try to concentrate on the lousy magic I do and try my very hardest to improve my least favorite magician; Kent Gunn

Stay well my anonymous friend. Best of luck with your competitions and career. Wow 'em all!

KFG



Ic where youre coming from Kent..

I do welcome criticism on my material in hopes of improving it. Sometimes I really dont want to get rid of an effect that I am proud of creating, but if prominent magis are telling me, I gotta listen.

I have found that if I can pass well with anonymous comments on vid hosting sites by laymen: toughest critics.. then I may be on the right track.

As for competitions I take winning or not with a grain of salt. We have all probably scratched our heads at why some have won, while others have not. Are there politics at play? Big time.. But, I do like competitions because they force me to get rehersing & working the way I need to be. If you can make it through comps ok, I think you can make it ok an any stage.

This may be a shock to this threads readers, but I have just recently started working on an invisible palm version to see if I can satisfy myself and others with it. I will post it on a vid site to see what comments I get.. to see if I can disguise the simple secret.
I see doing this as the ultimate challenge for myself.. ( to do something with a routine that I have never liked ) It may come off as hypocritical though. :D Who knows.. maybe I can fool a few laymen with it.. I have seen the basic routine from a few has gotten wows from others but it is my fascination about how it can fool anyone.

Cheers..
User avatar
smokemist
 
Posts: 79
Joined: 05/15/08 11:52 AM
Location: California

Postby Justin Wheatley » 06/29/11 07:44 PM

Here's the Big Secret to the Invisible Palm.

Ready?

Convince them that you are not, in fact, spreading two cards.

Read up on some Tamariz. Cancel those methods, broseph.

Seacrest out.
Justin Wheatley
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 06/04/09 12:32 PM
Location: Lawrence, KS

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 06/29/11 09:29 PM

Justin Wheatley wrote:Here's the Big Secret to the Invisible Palm.

Ready?

Convince them that you are not, in fact, spreading two cards.

Read up on some Tamariz. Cancel those methods, broseph.

Seacrest out.


It's rather difficult to convince someone of a negative, especially if you are going to be vulnerable to their inquiry on the matter later. Likewise when attempting to demonstrate a thing one has to make sure they understand the thing - and so could lead them to look for a thing.

What specifically do you suggest, and how has that worked for you in this context?
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6698
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Glenn Bishop » 06/29/11 09:49 PM

My pet peeves in magic?- boy could I write one long post.

Al Bach and I worked out an invisible palm routine that I ended up using it for only a short time. It was published in a Mike Powers book - I think it was called "Powerful Magic".

I never liked the idea of the invisible palm as a plot - I guess it did not fit my style - however I have seen other magicians do it and use it - each to their own.

I worked out a sorta invisible palm routine using four signed cards that one at a time vanished as they are placed on the table and they end up in my pocket. It started off as a cards through table but it ended up to be cards to pocket.

The two routines that inspired it were the invisible palm - and the cards up the sleeve into the pocket. This with the signed selected cards fit my style much better than the four aces did.

And if I may add - I think that Al Schnieders DVD's are one of the best investments I made when I purchaced them.

Cheers!
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby smokemist » 06/29/11 10:26 PM

John Kennedy's Translocation is what I wish the invisible palm could be like. Convincing the specs that the card is gone from the 1st pile, & appearing in the 2nd is of course the hardest part.

So, my thinking is: stealing off the card with the palm quickly, using sweat or adhesive, to have the card stick to the palm while being able to spread the fingers & elevate the hand off the table before the appearance of the card.
For the vanishes: I thought of just openly "palming" a card off into your pocket, therefore doing away with the vanish phase itself.
User avatar
smokemist
 
Posts: 79
Joined: 05/15/08 11:52 AM
Location: California

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 06/29/11 10:45 PM

smokemist - what's your feeling about having the cards counted down to the top of the face down deck, squared then doing the trick as a palm off the pack, a transfer then a placement? IE losing the tent vanishes?
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6698
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Next

Return to General