Angel announces sale of Coin-In-Can on TV

Discuss your favorite close-up tricks and methods.

Postby Steve Hook » 09/29/05 07:50 AM

Surprised no one has commented on this:

Did anyone notice that Criss publically announced on the show that he will be selling a DVD on how to do the Coin in Can routine? I believe that's a first in our art/business/hobby.
:confused:

So probably fewer magicians will buy it (a small source of income anyway) and many laymen will buy it (a bigger pool of potential income), so this is a wise business decision.

Or will all the same magicians still buy it?

Or will laymen forget to buy it?

Steve H
Steve Hook
 
Posts: 768
Joined: 10/21/08 11:50 AM
Location: North Carolina, USA

Postby Guest » 09/29/05 08:35 AM

Originally posted by Steve Hook:
Surprised no one has commented on this:

Did anyone notice that Criss publically announced on the show that he will be selling a DVD on how to do the Coin in Can routine? I believe that's a first in our art/business/hobby.
:confused:

It has been mentioned on other boards and probably here too in another thread, IIRC.
Thing is, some ppl do everything to GTFM :(
I don't wonder!

Being *professional* for some of those *professionals* means just to GTFM, no matter how much harm is done, luckily not all real pros are like that.
Also, still remember what the word *professional* stands for..it just means one is doing what one is doing for a living, it doesn't say anything about ones moral, not even about the quality of ones magic.
I've seen *professionals*, whose work/performance couldn't be in the footsteps of devoted *amateurs*, so always remember that being a *professional* isn't a quality mark for ones work, it's *just* that one is making -and has to make- a living by, in this case, performing magic, doing it good or bad is another matter.

Reminds me of the word prostitution somehow, but note, I'm not generalizing, though it fits in some examples..

Also note, I didn't had the opportunity to se Criss Angels show, so my remarks are not aimed at him, howewevr, also read the remark by Benzai at:

http://geniimagazine.com/forum/cgi-bin/ ... 1;t=002089

posted after seing the mentioned routine done by Angels...
Guest
 

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 09/29/05 08:43 AM

Originally posted by Steve Hook:
Surprised no one has commented on this: ...
Since the thing is offerd to muggledom, there is no further need to worry about discussing its mechanics. Welcome to open discussion.

So, any comments about the method as seen on TV?
[ edited the above to remove refs to stuff in particular;) ]
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Steve Hook » 09/29/05 10:52 AM

There IS something to consider about this marketing to laymen:

He isn't taking anything from magicians because it hasn't been sold to any magicians, i.e., he isn't giving away any magic tricks we already do (retention-of-vision-vanish-discussions elsewhere notwithstanding.)

Unless you pre-ordered the DVD and I'd assume you could even get out of that if you wanted to (if they even allowed pre-orders, I'm not sure.)
Steve Hook
 
Posts: 768
Joined: 10/21/08 11:50 AM
Location: North Carolina, USA

Postby Richard Kaufman » 09/29/05 11:19 AM

If a layman buys the DVD and learns the trick, then he is no longer a layman, but an amateur magician.

Very few laymen are going to spend $20 simply to learn how a single trick they've seen on TV is done.

I think Criss's remark about putting out a DVD of the trick is directed just as much at all the amateur and professional magicians watching as the laymen. After all, if there are 10,000 magicians watching, that's a larger number than the circulation of either Genii or MAGIC. It's great advertising.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20678
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Guest » 09/29/05 11:25 AM

As with all things in the magic world, if you have enough fame and juice you can do whatever the hell you want and no one will say "Boo".

If Copperfield had been the guy under the Masked Magician mask, everyone in magic would have gone "WOW! What a great way to interest more people in magic, David! You're the BEST!"

The only secrets Criss would be criticized for selling would be those of people more powerful in, or essential to, the magic community than he.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Criss stole anything, so get your dander down. I'm sure he and the guy who taught it to him have an arrangement. Perfectly legit.

But ethical? Not so sure.

I do know that this will ultimately cost him in terms of his public image. Subconsciously, the GP will perceive him as whoring out his art. (More than one does when performing on TV anyway, I mean)

Banzai
Guest
 

Postby Ryan Matney » 09/29/05 11:27 AM

I can't help but think that selling a dvd in this way undermines any image he is trying to establish.

You spend 11 episodes telling everyone you 'ARE the mindfreak' and it's all about mind control and becoming one with the pain and the universe around you and then you say.."Oh yeah, if you want to do what I just did...send me $20"

What would you think of Copperfield if he did a great trick and then said "Wasn't that good? You want to know how I did it? You can do it too!"

Selling something is one thing but selling it right after you performed it is tacky. Are you a magician or a pitchman? Are you the Mindfreak or some guy that had $20 to spend?

I fail to see how that could be good for Criss Angel but I'm sure he will sell a lot of dvds.
Ryan Matney
 
Posts: 738
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Hurley, Va

Postby mrgoat » 09/30/05 05:38 AM

Watch out for next season where THE UNMENTIONABLE ONE will be doing his sven pitch as a special guest...

;)

Damian
mrgoat
 
Posts: 4088
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 09/30/05 06:07 AM

Originally posted by Steve Hook:
Surprised no one has commented on this:

Did anyone notice that Criss publicly announced on the show that he will be selling a DVD on how to do the Coin in Can routine? I believe that's a first in our art/business/hobby.
....
I watched the show, and again on my TiVo.

1) product mentioned is ambiguous DVD release
2) missed a "buy it now muggles..." reference.

What I got from the viewing is a simple message that he is going to share his magic (in some form).
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Pete McCabe » 09/30/05 07:42 AM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Since the thing is offerd to muggledom, there is no further need to worry about discussing its mechanics. Welcome to open discussion.

So, any comments about the method as seen on TV?
I am astonished to hear Jonathan Townsend spouting such utter crap. This is a trick -- a new trick -- currently on the market. To discuss the method openly here is absolutely unethical -- even more so since it's a method-only (i.e. no gaffs to buy) effect.

The fact that he's offering it to non magicians has nothing to do with the basic principle that we do not discuss methods here unless they are are either public domain or ours to give away.

I would think that Jonathan, of all people, would have some sensitivity on the subject of not revealing methods that are not yours to give.
Pete McCabe
 
Posts: 2078
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 09/30/05 07:50 AM

Originally posted by Pete McCabe:
I am astonished to hear Jonathan Townsend spouting such utter crap. This is a trick -- a new trick -- currently on the market....
We don't need to be coy about the way uncle charlie puts a dime into a thumbtip to show children a coin vanish, he learned the trick from a book at the local bookshop.

Unfortunately IF this "new" coin in can is put on the muggle market, it would be public domain IN MAGICDOM and hence open to public disucssion of methods.

Such is part of the price for selling magic to muggles in their market.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Steve Hook » 09/30/05 08:01 AM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
I watched the show, and again on my TiVo.

1) product mentioned is ambiguous DVD release
2) missed a "buy it now muggles..." reference.

What I got from the viewing is a simple message that he is going to share his magic (in some form).
The original statement was "...Criss publically announced on the show that he will be selling a DVD on how to do the Coin in Can routine?"

Not quite sure how you arrived at your conclusion, Jonathan.

"This is a demonstration I'm actually going to teach on an upcoming DVD..." is the quote from Criss.

Certainly what importance you put on that statement is relative.

Would it be fair to say that's not something magicians usually say before they perform a trick on national TV? Come on... :rolleyes:
Steve Hook
 
Posts: 768
Joined: 10/21/08 11:50 AM
Location: North Carolina, USA

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 09/30/05 08:17 AM

Originally posted by Steve Hook:
...Would it be fair to say that's not something magicians usually say before they perform a trick on national TV?
I prefer to believe that Criss Angel is not opening up magic secrets to the muggle market, and that the items will NOT be available TO MUGGLES.

I likewise wish to believe that what we call our magic market is not ready to ethically immolate itself on a pyre of muggle money.

The comparison to prostitution is IHMO inappropriate. Prostitutes offer a trade of money for pleasure. An open magic market offers a cynical perspective and taints the wonder of wayward muggles.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Randy DiMarco » 09/30/05 08:50 AM

This is what I think is going on with this (as if it mattered what I think)

Criss (or someone involved with Criss) saw how many people flocked to magic shops to buy "biting coins" after David Blaine did that trick on one of his specials. This is their attempt to cash in on the same type of thing. They will probably sell this trick through the traditional magic market knowing that the viewer that wants the trick will know to go to the local magic shop to find it. The difference is that David Blaine did the trick and didn't anticipate (or profit from) an increase in the sale of the gimmicked coin. Criss is producing the effect and using his performance on TV as a marketing tool.
Randy DiMarco
 
Posts: 146
Joined: 03/13/08 03:45 PM

Postby Richard Kaufman » 09/30/05 08:54 AM

... and Criss has already advertised the trick in Genii.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20678
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Guest » 09/30/05 08:56 AM

I prefer to believe that Criss Angel is not opening up magic secrets to the muggle market, and that the items will NOT be available TO MUGGLES.>>>>

A trip to his website will relieve you of your belief.

"I AM THE MINDFREAK!!! Now, you can be the mindfreak, too! Just log on to CrissAngel.com and order your very own mindfreak starter kit. You get...A big Paul Stanley from KISS wig...a brother who can say 'I wish he wouldn't do this s#%t!" and "S#%t! I'm gald that's over!" as many times as you need...a girlfriend whom you'll likely dump as soon as you're famous enough to date supermodels...and a cool trick I didn't invent; Coin-in-Can! Imagine the look on your friend's faces when you go from geek to mindfreak...all for the low, low price of $35. But wait, there's more. If you act now, I'll throw in......."

I'll throw UP.

Banzai
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 09/30/05 09:03 AM

Another ethical question...

Since I came up with the same method years ago...and I described it to Pete Biro in an email WELL before the broadcast...I think there's a legitimate claim to be made that I, too, can do whatever I want with it.

Since Criss has seen fit to offer it for sale, (in order to "further people's interest in magic" I'm sure,) would I not also have to right to give it away free, if I choose? Wouldn't that further MORE people's interest in magic if I, say, posted it on alt.magic.secrets, or someplace?

It's mine, after all...
Banzai
Guest
 

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 09/30/05 09:31 AM

Originally posted by Randy DiMarco:
...They will probably sell this trick through the traditional magic market knowing that the viewer that wants the trick will know to go to the local magic shop to find it.
... Criss is producing the effect and using his performance on TV as a marketing tool.
If the item is available ONLY via magic shops, great.

Marketing to magicians on TV is very cool. Good for him and in a way, also good for US.

My concern comes from leaking magic out into the muggle market.

Selling cauldrons and wands on ebaY to whoever bids is simply unsafe and may cause us some grief when we hear from the neighbors that so-and-so accidentally turned their car into a pumpkin while junior was still strapped inside.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 09/30/05 09:40 AM

Originally posted by Banzai:
Another ethical question...

Since I came up with the same method years ago......It's mine, after all...
Banzai, I feel your pain. The similarity of your vanish, grip sequence, load and display to what was shown on TV is surprising. That all those elements were independantly discoverd is remarkable.

I would prefer to address the two items:
1) muggle marketting of magic
2) the provenance of the item you claim
as seperate and distinct for now.
Combined they are disturbing and potentially explosive in our enviroment. Blowing up bridges of good will is easy and does not usually improve things in our community.

Building bridges and keeping them in repair is a more worthy cause IMHO.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Pete Biro » 09/30/05 10:15 AM

I'll tell you one thing ... IT IS NOT EASY TO DO>

A great example of "what to pitch" -- Ken Brooke was a great pitchman before he opened a magic shop.

What did he pitch and why?

A flick book.

Why? Ken told me, even with the Svengali Deck there was a problem... a gent would buy it and when he got home would want to show it to his kids... and even the Svengali deck was too hard to do for that kind of buyer and Ken didn't want him to be disappointed.

So he sold the Charlie Edwards Flick Book as ANYONE could do it and not foul it up.
Stay tooned.
User avatar
Pete Biro
 
Posts: 7124
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Hollyweird

Postby Spellbinder » 09/30/05 12:56 PM

There are two sections of the I.B.M. Code of Ethics that apply here.

The first applies to those posting in this forum:
Section 1 (c) Members shall not furnish information concerning modus operandi of magical effects to the lay public through the mediums of magazines, periodicals, newspapers, internet , radio, telephone, television, motion pictures, giveaways, premiums, or through the use of any other means whatsoever whereby the same may be transmitted.

Note:The Genii Forum is open to the lay public.

The second applies to Chris Angel and all of us other magical prostitutes:
Section 2 (a) Magical textbooks that might eventually reach the lay public must be published and sold, in good faith, for not less than Two Dollars ($2.00) per copy.

Both Chris and I are in compliance in that regard. Any trick or book sold in a magic shop, whether brick & mortar or Internet is available to the lay public. The assertion that all items sold in magic shops and through Amazon.com have somehow "been released to muggledom" and therefore can release magicians from the ethics of Section 1(c) is absurd.
Phineas Spellbinder
The Magic Nook
User avatar
Spellbinder
 
Posts: 352
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Jersey

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 09/30/05 01:18 PM

Originally posted by Jim Gerrish:
There are two sections of the I.B.M. Code of Ethics that apply here....
Jim, What specifically do you mean by about you and Chris being compliant?

I need not make comment on the I.B.M (SUGGESTED) code of ethics and its meaning in magicdom.

As to discussing the item...

If it's in an offering made in the muggle's market and available DIRECTLY for muggles to buy , I see nothing to distinguish it from any item in the books we find at the bookstore.

Since we don't need to be coy about stuff in Hoffmann's books or the contents of "erdnase", by extension there seems no prohibition against discussing this item, expect perhaps openly discussing the item on THIS forum since it's a rule of THIS FORUM about marketted items. However, since the books mentioned above are marketed, we have a contradiction.

So, which is it to be? If the thing is part of the muggle market, it's open season. If the thing is part of the "magic market" then we have a different issue with the marketing TO muggles.

* I hope folks also enjoy that this discussion is not going ad-hominem. Even with Jim's fallacious argument which suggests that since muggles are allowed into a magic shop, all of what's in magicdom is part of muggledom. Not a bad question of its own Jim, though in this case perhaps a call for a larger sweep than we can accept today.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Guest » 09/30/05 08:06 PM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Such is part of the price for selling magic to muggles in their market.
You remind me of that Dr. Seuss story about the Star-bellied Sneetches. Seemingly, in your world either somebody has a star on their belly (and hence a "legit" magician who can boast of rightful access to information), or no star at all (and therefore a mere muggle).

I don't think it's that simple, and that magic benefits from being overly exclusive.

If somebody invests in the craft and puts the time in to learn effects, they are by most reasonable people's definition an amateur magician or hobbyist. And if they pay for their effects and support the industry, I say GOOD. If they get so good and do it so much that they are paid, we'd call them a professional magician, would we not? Every single professional magician who ever amounted to anything started out as a curious kid hungry for knowledge, and I think we're all diminished if we keep it from them because of exposure paranoia.

Until and unless laymen (i.e., people who have no interest in pursuing magic as a hobby or career) start buying this stuff just to "see how it's done," it's a little silly to poo-poo the popularization of magic. It often seems like a fairly thin veil for envying the greater success of others. But what's good for commercially successful, famous magicians need not be detrimental to everybody else. And even the popularization and performance of mediocre effects creates opportunities for pros to distinguish themselves in comparison.

A rising tide lifts all boats. "The Magician" with Bill Bixby certainly raised the tide in the 70s, and now this. It's a good thing.
Guest
 

Postby Pete McCabe » 09/30/05 08:21 PM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
We don't need to be coy about the way uncle charlie puts a dime into a thumbtip to show children a coin vanish, he learned the trick from a book at the local bookshop.

Unfortunately IF this "new" coin in can is put on the muggle market, it would be public domain IN MAGICDOM and hence open to public disucssion of methods.

Such is part of the price for selling magic to muggles in their market.
The reason you don't openly discuss the method of a current for-sale trick is because it takes sales away from the person who is marketing it. This is why it's okay to discuss methods of Professor Hoffman, say -- because it won't takes sales away from the rightful seller.

Unless you think Criss Angel stole the trick from you, it makes no difference how he markets the trick. (And forget for a minute that every trick you can buy on the internet is offered for sale to non-magicians.) It is wrong for you to deliberately sabotage Criss Angel's sales.

If you truly believe that just because someone does something you don't like, you can therefore act unethically towards that person, then let's just end this conversation right here.
Pete McCabe
 
Posts: 2078
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 09/30/05 09:42 PM

If I were to decide I wish to DO the trick, I agree that I should buy a copy of the thing and it would be unethical to be performing the thing without having made a purchase to get the grant of license to perform. I trust we are not going to get stuck on that point of order. I believe this addresses the issue of endangered sales of the item.

Pete, I read your fallacious arguments and ad-hominem comments and am disappointed in you.

Let's explore something where we may actually disagree:

Originally posted by Pete McCabe:
... it makes no difference how he markets the trick.
My question on this issue is not so simple.

If something is sold to the muggles in muggle venues, do we have to treat it in the same way as we treat items that are for sale only ( via magic/specialty venues ) to magicians AS FAR AS DISCUSSION.

Let's explore the topic in a frame that permits discourse.

Working from an example muggle market product, let's go with the TV Magic cards deck. WE can discuss the deck, the routines we know and variations here with no problem. Likewise, muggles who buy the thing in the "as seen on TV store" can show the stuff, the props, and amuse more make a mess of the thing as they see fit. They can ask their friends and co-workers to explain parts of the trick to them. They can ask their magician friends for assistance on how to do the thing as seen on TV AND/OR tease their magician friends with the knowledge and props. Such is the reality of magic made available on the muggle market.

Knowing the behavior of muggles, let's take the CA product in particular, and go with the ASSUMPTION that the product is available on the muggle market.

By way of example let us imagine that two people buy the product, one a magician and the other a muggle. The muggle is free to bring the thing to work, show everyone at the shop the props, instructions and ask anyone they meet for help, feedback and to clarify any part of the item they see fit. Now let's consider the case of the magician. Is the magician to be somehow prohibited from asking their peers for similar feedback and assistance with the item due to an ethical code which does not apply to the muggles. Even for the same item?

And so, well over two hounded years after another Jonathan wrote and offered for free a pamphlet warning his peers NOT to exchange their gold coins for copper coins ... we have the same cultural problem.

The gold in our community is its secrets and tradition of respecting those secrets. If we wish to trade in the muggle market, we must treat ANY item one can afford with mere copper coin, as something outside of trade for our gold currency, lest our economy implode, as happened in Ireland back Swift's time.

If CA is trading his gold for the copper in the muggle market, I feel it inappropriate to treat the product as part of our economy of secrets.

What are your thoughts on this matter?
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Guest » 09/30/05 09:52 PM

I took the comment Criss made about doing the trick on an upcoming dvd to mean on a dvd for magicians. I didn't have a problem with it at all, and was surprised to find people were upset.
Guest
 

Postby Steve Hook » 09/30/05 09:56 PM

Jonathan:

Man, that "muggles" thing is getting old fast.
Steve Hook
 
Posts: 768
Joined: 10/21/08 11:50 AM
Location: North Carolina, USA

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 09/30/05 10:14 PM

Originally posted by Jim Coles:
I took the comment Criss made about doing the trick on an upcoming dvd to mean on a dvd for magicians....
That is the impression I got and I hope that is the case. The ad text on the CA site uses language similar to what we have in our magic ads.

As to muggle/magician... perhaps if we gave the matter some thought we would find the distinction of interest. We have a similar distinction in our society in adult/child. Another such distinction comes with having a driver's license. When one becomes a magician, one lets go of the wonder of not knowing in exchange for access to the knowledge to create that feeling of wonder in others. All of magic shifts from unknown wonders to mere mechanics and procedure.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Spellbinder » 09/30/05 11:48 PM

I "buy into" the Muggle-Wizard distinction on my site because it is part of the fantasy aspect of The Magic Nook, just as I make a distinction between Wizard-style magic and traditional Magicians. It's part of the gig.

I caution against carrying the fantasy distiction too far into the real world of magicians and conjuring on this forum.

There IS NO world of "Muggledom" and "Magicdom" as they exist in the fantasy world. In the real world, there are only Magicians and the unfortunate term of "lay people." Yes, I much prefer Rowling's term of "Muggle" over "Lay people," but not if it's going to confuse the fantasy world with the real world. It's time to come back to reality.

Go to Chris Angel's site and you will see that he is marketing, not to Muggles, but to magicians and "wannabee" magicians.

On my site I am marketing to magicians, wizards, and "wannabees." I encourage the link between fans of Harry Potter and Wizard style magic because I am convinced there are potential magicians or at least "wannabee" magicians in that populace. But the first thing I try to do is bring them down gently from the fantasy world to the real world where they can actually learn to do "real magic" as it exists in the real world.

Chris Angel similarly sees a potential market in his TV fans who are not magicians but potential "wannabee" magicians. If they cough up the $30 for his DVD and then continue on to visit magic stores, reading books on magic, and yes, even buying more Chris Angel stuff... they can cross over from "wannabees" to magicians. If not, the DVD will be resold on e-Bay or passed on to someone else who can make better use of the knowledge.

Everyone starts with just ONE trick that inspires them. For me it was a pack of Svengali cards. How my father ranted and raved about my paying a whole dollar for a deck of cards back in those days! But that was my start, and I'll bet everyone in this forum has a similar story (for another thread).

So for some magicians of the future, they may be able to look back at the Chris Angel DVD, paying the unheard of price of $30 just to learn a secret, and getting their start in magic because of it.
Phineas Spellbinder
The Magic Nook
User avatar
Spellbinder
 
Posts: 352
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Jersey

Postby Pete McCabe » 10/01/05 12:46 AM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
If I were to decide I wish to DO the trick, I agree that I should buy a copy of the thing and it would be unethical to be performing the thing without having made a purchase to get the grant of license to perform. I trust we are not going to get stuck on that point of order. I believe this addresses the issue of endangered sales of the item.
I don't think this addresses the subject of endangered sales of the item at all.

These are my thoughts on the matter.

1. If you were to post the method of this trick on the Genii Forum, many magicians who might otherwise buy it would not.

2. Unless this secret is yours to give away, to post it would be a deliberate act of sabotage against Criss Angel.

3. To deliberately sabotage another magician's sales is unethical and assinine behavior.

I am fascinated to hear which statement you disagree with.


While we're at it, an ad-hominem attack attempts to invalidate a position by denigrating the person who put forth the position. I attacked your position very directly. I believe you need to retract that accusation.
Pete McCabe
 
Posts: 2078
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Postby Spellbinder » 10/01/05 01:04 AM

Oops, Pete! I believe the "assinine" remark might qualify with your definition of "ad hominem." Let's keep it on a higher level.

Here are some items from "Magicdom" that have crossed over to "Muggledom" by being for sale on amazon.com - right in the heart of "Muggledom" to my way of thinking.

Instructional Magic DVDs
Paul Daniels' Inner Secrets of Professional Magic DVD
Quentin Reynolds' Perform Like a Pro (Magic Seminar) DVD
Highlights of Paul Daniels Magic Masterclass DVD
Paul Daniels Performs the Magic of Max Malini DVD
Lost Works of Bro. John Hamman DVD

25 Amazing Magic Tricks with a Thumbtip VHS

Amazon.com also lists 1,603 books about magic and magicians, including the revered Tarbell Course in Magic: For the Professional, Amateur and Beginner (7 Volume Set)

I believe Jonathan Townsend's original remark that led to this argument was: "Since the thing is offerd to muggledom, there is no further need to worry about discussing its mechanics. Welcome to open discussion."

Is that pertinent in the case of these items being "offered to muggledom"?
Phineas Spellbinder
The Magic Nook
User avatar
Spellbinder
 
Posts: 352
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Jersey

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 10/01/05 06:41 AM

Originally posted by Pete McCabe:
...
1. If you were to post the method of this trick on the Genii Forum, many magicians who might otherwise buy it would not.

2. Unless this secret is yours to give away, to post it would be a deliberate act of sabotage against Criss Angel.

3. To deliberately sabotage another magician's sales is unethical and assinine behavior. ...
In statement number 1, an ethos is adequately described which makes the notion of selling secrets suspect. If a muggle is not honor bound, and can disseminate the secret freely (see my earlier post) then the rest of the argument falls flat then and there.

In statement number 2, if taken as a premise, a policy exists which if actually in action among magicians implies many things, one of which is that anyone who builds/owns a zig-zag also owns the Harbin book. By inspection such is not the case and the argument fails as based upon false premises.

Statement number 3 implies that an ethos which does not respect or even reflect statements number 1 and 2 should hold as ethical the primacy of sales rights over open discourse of material available to the anyone and freely discussable in the company lunchroom by anyone so long as anyone they happen to know and who happened to purchase the item decides to discuss it. I wrote a 'what if' about the thumb tip vanish of a tiny coin as marketed item to open that issue for discussion earlier as well.

I was looking to get past the holes in the argument presented and its insulting connotations without reminding all that the ethos in magic has no issue with the sale or dispersal of other people's secrets. As Richard stated earlier, secrets are not protected by any laws of our larger society. To that I suggested we consider our market and social group something which has some additional rules which DO protect those secrets. A fantasy? I guess that's how some here wish to view that approach. I respect that many here wish to see things in terms of supply of product and demand for product. The product is somehow linked to secrets and yet we have not set up the protections for, much less the recognition of secrets as product. The thinking behind some of the statements has a hole there. The principle of adding labor/effort to something in an old book and claiming it as property may be applicable here.

My position remains that since the item is for sale and the Genii forum has a rule about discussing the mechanics of items for sale here, that I will respect that rule. Likewise I suggested something which could be used as an ethical rule about owning the material one uses.

I await cogent response to the hypotheticals posted earlier.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Scott Fridinger » 10/01/05 08:35 AM

Originally posted by Steve Hook:
Jonathan:

Man, that "muggles" thing is getting old fast.
Glad you said it, I feel like I am in a room full of first graders.
Scott Fridinger
 
Posts: 234
Joined: 03/16/08 03:36 AM

Postby Scott Fridinger » 10/01/05 08:40 AM

Originally posted by Spellbinder:
Oops, Pete! I believe the "assinine" remark might qualify with your definition of "ad hominem." Let's keep it on a higher level.

Here are some items from "Magicdom" that have crossed over to "Muggledom" by being for sale on amazon.com - right in the heart of "Muggledom" to my way of thinking.

Instructional Magic DVDs
Paul Daniels' Inner Secrets of Professional Magic DVD
Quentin Reynolds' Perform Like a Pro (Magic Seminar) DVD
Highlights of Paul Daniels Magic Masterclass DVD
Paul Daniels Performs the Magic of Max Malini DVD
Lost Works of Bro. John Hamman DVD

25 Amazing Magic Tricks with a Thumbtip VHS

Amazon.com also lists 1,603 books about magic and magicians, including the revered Tarbell Course in Magic: For the Professional, Amateur and Beginner (7 Volume Set)

I believe Jonathan Townsend's original remark that led to this argument was: "Since the thing is offerd to muggledom, there is no further need to worry about discussing its mechanics. Welcome to open discussion."

Is that pertinent in the case of these items being "offered to muggledom"?
Just because it is on Amazon does not mean it is open to the public anymore than something on E-bay. Amazon isn't selling these things direct, ANYONE can sell through Amazon, just like Ebay. Amazon had auctions before Ebay was around, but they are now gone. Therefore, if any magic item was ever sold on Amazon, just like on Ebay, it will show it in it's database (Ebay doesn't show this active History). So, saying it is on Amazon does not make it public domain or open to the public anymore than selling something on Ebay or HERE, since this forum is open to the public.

Houdini's Magic shop primary sales are to laymen, if you have ever been to Vegas you will know what I mean. In fact when I was there a few years back I spoke with one guy and asked "Do you have this, do you have that?" They had none of it. He told me they didn't really cater to the "Pros". That doesn't mean we should be talking about how that card is able to spin around that guys body. Chriss Angel is going to make some cash on the effect, the same people who buy it are the same guys who searched for the Balducci Levitation after seing Blaine do it and saw the Street Magic revealed show. They will buy it, realize it isn't what they thought or it is too hard and it will go in a drawer, just like all those little spinning cards Houdini's sells.

Chriss isn't hurting anything.
Scott Fridinger
 
Posts: 234
Joined: 03/16/08 03:36 AM

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 10/01/05 08:44 AM

Originally posted by Scott Fridinger:
Originally posted by Steve Hook:
[b] Jonathan:

Man, that "muggles" thing is getting old fast.
Glad you said it, I feel like I am in a room full of first graders. [/b]
It's more like a room with where MANY triasomy 21's insist they are adults, but at least some adults are on call.

Asking a child to form a cogent argument may be a but much. Asking an adult to offer an argument and reviewing their argument can be downright telling.

My intention in using Rowling's terms was to offer a model as guide for us to do better. I understand the reluctance to adopt a metaphor which comes with responsibilities and some fairly clear demands for respect of community property and also ethical constraints on free trade of secrets from the magic shop into the general market.

First graders know they will be punished for breaking rules. Magicians have made great efforts to deny themselves that learning experience. Fortunately the general public has stepped in and acts to remind magicians of their emotional maturity and ethical status in society. Perhaps we would do well to add to our list of "must have books" this one: All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten by Robert Fulghum

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... 4?v=glance

I'd discuss further here, but it is a marketed item.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 10/01/05 08:46 AM

Originally posted by Scott Fridinger:
...Just because it is on Amazon does not mean it is open to the public anymore than something on E-bay. ...
Therein lies the question.

If anyone can buy a thing, and do with it as they please, then why should a magician have additional restrictions as regards the thing?
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Guest » 10/01/05 08:54 AM

And that plug about the DVD being just to magicians??????????????

What planet are you lot from?.We had selective vision on the Greek deal on the magic caf and now we have selective listening on the genii forum!

If Blaine or Angel fart in a public place, it will be on the Genii forum quicker than you can say That wasnt me
Guest
 

Postby Scott Fridinger » 10/01/05 08:57 AM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Originally posted by Scott Fridinger:
[b] ...Just because it is on Amazon does not mean it is open to the public anymore than something on E-bay. ...
Therein lies the question.

If anyone can buy a thing, and do with it as they please, then why should a magician have additional restrictions as regards the thing? [/b]
And as far as the I.B.M code of Ethics goes, if you are not a member of I.B.M. do you really care? How many "working" childrens magicians are not member of a club? Kinda like the Geneva Convention. We, the U.S., tries to follow it, but what do you do to a country who never signed the treaty? Do they care about it? No.
Scott Fridinger
 
Posts: 234
Joined: 03/16/08 03:36 AM

Postby Matthew Field » 10/01/05 09:09 AM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
In statement number 1, an ethos is adequately described which makes the notion of selling secrets suspect. If a muggle is not honor bound, and can disseminate the secret freely (see my earlier post) then the rest of the argument falls flat then and there.
Sorry, Jonathan, I disagree. Magicians have a code of honor which laymen are not bound to follow. Because one group does something which we (as magicians) feel is wrong, that surely does not give us the moral right to do the same.


In statement number 2, if taken as a premise, a policy exists which if actually in action among magicians implies many things, one of which is that anyone who builds/owns a zig-zag also owns the Harbin book. By inspection such is not the case and the argument fails as based upon false premises.
I've got to disagree with you again, Jonathan. I think it is wrong to build or own a non-legitimate Zig Zag, or any illusion or trick for which one does not have the right. The fact that some others do not follow this code of ethics does not relieve one from following that code. Unless you are an anarchist. (By the way, I consider myself an ararchist, but a moral one.) I learned Out of This World first, then purchased the Paul Curry manuscript so I could feel my performance was legitimate.

Statement number 3 implies that an ethos which does not respect or even reflect statements number 1 and 2 should hold as ethical the primacy of sales rights over open discourse of material available to the anyone and freely discussable in the company lunchroom by anyone so long as anyone they happen to know and who happened to purchase the item decides to discuss it. I wrote a 'what if' about the thumb tip vanish of a tiny coin as marketed item to open that issue for discussion earlier as well.
Yow! Magicians (supposedly) take an oath to protect secrets. Among other things, that oath makes it ill-advised, if not downright immoral, to discuss methods in open forums (like this one or the lunchroom).

It's not an open and shut case, of course. Go to Toys-R-Us and you can buy a cheap magic set made in Hong Kong or someplacxe for a few bucks that has a thumbtip, some Linking Rings, and maybe even the instructions for the Professor's Nightmare. But the person who buys that set has paid for it.

The laymen discussing an effect like Criss's Coin in Can, like the laymen flashing their D'Lights up and down the street, do indeed dminish the value of the effect for the magician, precisely because we deal in secret methods. But even if the method is common knowledge, I believe if we take the oath, we are bound to remain silent.

Of course, you are free to do what you wish.

Matt Field
User avatar
Matthew Field
 
Posts: 2476
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Hastings, England, UK

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 10/01/05 09:12 AM

Originally posted by Scott Fridinger:
Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
[b]
Originally posted by Scott Fridinger:
[b] ...Just because it is on Amazon does not mean it is open to the public anymore than something on E-bay. ...
Therein lies the question.

If anyone can buy a thing, and do with it as they please, then why should a magician have additional restrictions as regards the thing? [/b]
And as far as the I.B.M code of Ethics goes,... [/b]
Scott, the mention of the IBM code of ethics (which is a suggestion last i heard) is a non sequitor in the context you posted. I'm sorry to point this out in public yet I don't have your email address.

* of course I will delete this post if you offer refine or revise yours. -Jon

[ jt adds this after Scott replies below: Mods, I don't know how to clean this one up while leaving the discussion intact. IMHO it's most important to show how folks can be courteous even when having an argument]
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6666
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Next

Return to Close-Up Magic