Not so sure someone who would refer to fellow human beings and artists as 'animals' is the best judge of character.Originally posted by Jeff Eline:
... "Why give tools to the Animals?" ...
Here I'm forced to jump in with my two cents worth.Originally posted by Jeff Eline:
In another thread, there was a link for an article written about Ricky Jay. He is, with a doubt, one of my favorite performers. And you have to respect his talent and skill.
However, after finishing the article, I was left with a portrait of man that is anything but admirable, maybe even repugnant. And while I know that great artist tend not to be great humans - it's still a bit disappointing.
The other thing that struck me was his fervent belief that the treasured secrets of magic (specifically, but not limited to, Vernon) be kept that way forever, or in his words "Why give tools to the Animals?"
I am not advocating that everybody have access to these techniques and theories - hell, I don't think I'm entitled to them at this point.
However, if it weren't for the kindness and generosity of great performers like Slydini, Vernon, Miller, etc... we wouldn't have a Ricky Jay.
It seems selfish and condescending to withhold this legacy in such a fashion. But then again, after reading that article, it's not surprising.
I intend no disrespect to anyone here. I'm a hobbyist myself ... and not a highly skilled one, I admit.Don't you just hate when someone spoils the fun of a hobby by teaching you how to do it?
It seems to me (and it is just my personal opinion) that Vernons obvious willingness to share his material late in his life(via books and even video) seems to belie the attitude toward secrecy held held by Messrs. Jay and Diaconis. Here is the link to the complete article for those interested.To their dismay, Vernon wrote a series of instruction books. When these began to appear in print, Diaconis said to Vernon, Why did you publish these, Professor? We dont want the animals using tools.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think the primary thrust of this discussion is of Vernons legacy, not necessarily the work of Jay or Diaconis. As such, I agree with you that the dispersal of ones personal material is a decision best left to that individual. I would not put the onus on Jay or Diaconis to release their personal material if they do not wish to do so.IMHO - a person's secrets/methods in magic are the property of the individual. It is up to this individual to decide if sharing is appropriate or desirable.
Perhaps it's just me, but I think more than a few "philistines" out there actually appreciate and read the books they collect. I doubt such behaviour is the exclusive purview of Mr. Jay.There was a time, within the past decade, when he seriously considered becoming a bookdealer himself. The main thing that dissuaded him, he says, is that I wouldnt want to sell a book to a philistine, which is what every bookseller has to do. Unlike a lot of collectors, he actually reads and rereads the books and other materials he buys, and puts them to scholarly and performing use.
Cliques need to have that exclusivity thing in order to function. Cool is a good fallback when you don't have the talent to create or the interpersonal skills to entertain.Originally posted by Chris Aguilar:
... it seems that all (or a majority) of magicians can be dismissed as "'magic lumpen' or hoi polloi, not worthy of his time." Nice stereotyping eh? :rolleyes: ...
Jonathan?? The names 'animal', 'lumpen', 'hoi polloi', etc... to describe magicians came from Mr. Dianconis and Mr. Jay. NOT me or Chris or others on this board. I"m confuses by your comments.Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Let's try to leave Persi Diaconis and Ricky as people out of this. The issue of referring to other members of this community as 'animals' or 'philistines' is more troublesome than the antics of a couple of misguided people.
If you want to help solve the problem... treat other folks better.
As I do not know the entire context, my thoughts here may just be simply wrong; however, I read this quote quite differently. "Animals" in this quote does not seem to refer to other "Magicians" (humans), but to the lay public or audience (e.g., chimpanzees). Like I said, I could be wrong, but that is the anthropomorphic context that I read.According to this article, Diaconis said, "Why did you publish this, professor? We don't want the animals using tools."
Another point slightly off topic: who is paying the bills?There was a time, within the past decade, when he seriously considered becoming a bookdealer himself. The main thing that dissuaded him, he says, is that I wouldnt want to sell a book to a philistine, which is what every bookseller has to do. Unlike a lot of collectors, he actually reads and rereads the books and other materials he buys, and puts them to scholarly and performing use.
Ladies and Gentlemen,. . .hoi polloi, etc. . .
On the contrary. The real workers would make a better living, if it were not for the herd of wannabees working for $50 an evening.Originally posted by WarlockDrummer:
Without the philistines, the "chosen" would have a much rougher time, if able to survive at all.There was a time, within the past decade, when he seriously considered becoming a bookdealer himself. The main thing that dissuaded him, he says, is that I wouldnt want to sell a book to a philistine, which is what every bookseller has to do. Unlike a lot of collectors, he actually reads and rereads the books and other materials he buys, and puts them to scholarly and performing use.
Well, from a mythalogical perspective it does bring great misfortune to the giver.Originally posted by Jeff Eline:
"Why give tools to the Animals?".