Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Discuss general aspects of Genii.
wisewoman
Posts: 4
Joined: February 22nd, 2021, 11:09 am

Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby wisewoman » March 20th, 2021, 2:53 am

Hello,

Stage/ conjuring magic is an area that I myself am unfamiliar with, but I wondered if anyone could suggest any names or authors of books on historical magicians whom I could contact with regards to tracking down some more information relating to 'The Great Vandy.' His heyday was at the turn of the twentieth century from around 1895 to 1930 and I am writing a book about one of his sons who sort of followed in his fathers footsteps, though ultimately, in quite a different way.

I have emailed Davenports and a few other places but no-one seems to be getting back to me. Any ideas or contacts would be really appreciated.

Many thanks,
Melissa

User avatar
Marco Pusterla
Posts: 516
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Suffolk - UK
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Marco Pusterla » March 20th, 2021, 5:16 am

Hi Melissa,

Not much has been written in magic history literature about Paul Vandy from Hastings (which is the person I believe you refer to), as he was primarily a juggler, albeit a "magical juggler". There are quite a few mentions of him in contemporary magazines (including a charming description of his performance in 1913) but, as I far as I know, no "study" on his career.

Currently, there is a quarterli magazine dedicated to magic history, Ye Olde Magic Mag (https://yeoldemagicmag.com) but it has not yet published anything about Vandy. Perhaps you could ask for help through the pages of the magazine to seek help for your research.

Hope this helps!
Marco Pusterla - https://mpmagic.co.uk

Ye Olde Magic Mag: magazine on magic history and collecting.

Joe Lyons
Posts: 875
Joined: November 13th, 2017, 8:27 am
Favorite Magician: Wonder
Location: Texas

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Joe Lyons » March 20th, 2021, 8:18 am

There are quite a few references to Paul here.

Perhaps a membership would aid in your research.

wisewoman
Posts: 4
Joined: February 22nd, 2021, 11:09 am

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby wisewoman » March 20th, 2021, 10:59 am

Thank you both very much for giving me some further leads and avenues to explore.

In a sort of related matter - I sat and watched Nolans 'The Prestige' last night - brilliant film - is that really the lengths that some of the late Victorian conjurers and magicians went to?! (PS I dont really believe the Tesla machine could have been real - but David Bowie played the part well) :)

All the best,
Melissa

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27056
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Richard Kaufman » March 20th, 2021, 1:47 pm

The Prestige is total bullsh*t.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Leo Garet
Posts: 617
Joined: March 14th, 2015, 9:14 am
Favorite Magician: Nobody In Particular

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Leo Garet » March 20th, 2021, 2:43 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:The Prestige is total bullsh*t.

I don't know about "total" but it's in there with a big shout.

What I found particularly interesting about "The Prestige" is that, despite the various dialogue coaches and whatnot, no one seems to have bothered asking for tips from the one person who actually sounds like he's from London.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Brad Henderson » March 20th, 2021, 3:02 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:The Prestige is total bullsh*t.


Well - no.

All the magic ‘theory’ stuff is, but magicians have taken great personal risk to create magic. Del Ray looked into having electronics implanted into his hands and the use of radioactive material for effects. One of the senior Bamberg’s had traps installed in his prosthetic leg. Magicians have had loaded guns fired just over their shoulders. We’ve used dangerous chemicals in off-use ways. And magicians of all stripes have neglected their families and flaunted civil/social responsibilities in their obsession with magic. And then there are the piles of dead animals that we left in our wake.

I saw the movie with my former girl friend and magic best friend. Upon leaving, having seen how we responded to various moments in the movie, Nancy remarked - now I get it.

This was a person who upon meeting a well known magicians at a conference remarked ‘the moment he found out I didn’t do magic I literally saw myself disappear in front of him’.

The obsession it speaks to - and value systems it encourages - is real, if perhaps exaggerated for effect

User avatar
Paco Nagata
Posts: 436
Joined: July 3rd, 2019, 6:47 am
Favorite Magician: Juan Tamariz
Location: Madrid, Spain.

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Paco Nagata » March 21st, 2021, 1:24 am

The most important thing I took away from "The Prestige" is "never compete against another magician."
As a conclusion, if two magicians fight, they both will be destroyed, as magicians that hate each other expose each other secrets.
"The Passion of an Amateur Card Magician"
https://bit.ly/2lXdO2O
"La pasion de un cartómago aficionado"
https://bit.ly/2kkjpjn

Philippe Billot
Posts: 1820
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: PARIS - FRANCE

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Philippe Billot » March 21st, 2021, 4:27 am

I prefer Christopher Priest as Science-fiction writer, in particular his The Inverted World (I don't know if it's the real title in english. I have translated the French Title: Le Monde Inverti)

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 21st, 2021, 10:39 am

Brad Henderson wrote:
Richard Kaufman wrote:The Prestige is total bullsh*t.


Well - no.

All the magic ‘theory’ stuff is...

I saw the movie quite a while ago and don't remember many examples of magic theory aside from the anecdote about the Chinese conjurer (Ching Ling Foo?) changing his normal style of walking (outside performing magic) to be in comportment with the necessity of secretly holding a bowl of goldfish or whatever between his legs within his act. Whether historically accurate or not, I thought that was a very good illustration of magic theory, a variant of being natural, however that might be defined or perceived. Were there other examples of magic theory?

wisewoman
Posts: 4
Joined: February 22nd, 2021, 11:09 am

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby wisewoman » March 21st, 2021, 1:24 pm

I'm afraid I'm in no way qualified to comment on the magic theory or lack of in the film The Prestige, but I am finding the discussion between you all fascinating - thank you.

I also had no idea that the old stage magicians really did leave hundreds of dead creatures in their wake! Still, that hardly compares to the chilling finale of the film.

All the best to you all,
Melissa

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Brad Henderson » March 21st, 2021, 1:37 pm

Bob Coyne wrote:
Brad Henderson wrote:
Richard Kaufman wrote:The Prestige is total bullsh*t.


Well - no.

All the magic ‘theory’ stuff is...

I saw the movie quite a while ago and don't remember many examples of magic theory aside from the anecdote about the Chinese conjurer (Ching Ling Foo?) changing his normal style of walking (outside performing magic) to be in comportment with the necessity of secretly holding a bowl of goldfish or whatever between his legs within his act. Whether historically accurate or not, I thought that was a very good illustration of magic theory, a variant of being natural, however that might be defined or perceived. Were there other examples of magic theory?


The movie is predicated on nonsensical and baseless theory that every magic trick is built on three acts, the final being the prestige.

It’s easy to miss - being the entire basis of the movie and all ;)

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 21st, 2021, 7:51 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:The movie is predicated on nonsensical and baseless theory that every magic trick is built on three acts, the final being the prestige.

It’s easy to miss - being the entire basis of the movie and all ;)

Entire basis? What sticks in my mind was the intricate plot with duplicates and twins etc (and the moral implications of that) coupled with the mysterious victorian era atmosphere and characterizations. The three part pledge, turn, reveal stuff (which I had forgotten) added another layer of meaning and superstructure (whether bogus or not from a magic perspective), but that's far from the movie being predicated on it. Either way, I think the Ching Ling Foo anecdote was legitimate magic theory. I don't remember if there was more of that sort of thing or not, though it feels like there might have been.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 21st, 2021, 8:26 pm

Interestingly, Ricky Jay subscribed to the three-part pledge, turn, prestige structure highighted in the film.

Jay explained that The Prestige is the payoff, the third act of any magic trick. First comes The Pledge: The magician shows you something relatively ordinary, like a dove. Second is The Turn: The magician takes the dove and makes it do something extraordinary, like disappear. Finally, there’s The Prestige: The magician tops that disappearance and makes the dove reappear.

“Magic is all about structure,” Jay said. “You’ve got to take the observer from the ordinary, to the extraordinary, to the astounding.”

https://www.altaonline.com/dispatches/a ... 0disappear.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Brad Henderson » March 21st, 2021, 8:53 pm

In the article jay explains the premise of the movie at the prompt of the authors praise for the movie.

He then says magic has a structure. (Which it foes(. That’s his quote.

The article does not suggest he believes the prestige structure was relevant to magic.

For someone with such gifts at reading subtle tone, you seem to be missing a lot of obvious and direct stuff - like the entire theory on which the books is based and even titled.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 21st, 2021, 10:59 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:In the article jay explains the premise of the movie at the prompt of the authors praise for the movie.

He then says magic has a structure. (Which it foes(. That’s his quote.

The article does not suggest he believes the prestige structure was relevant to magic.

The article says "Jay explained that the Prestige is the payoff, the third act of any magic trick." So that clearly suggests that Jay subscribed to the three part structure (pledge/turn/prestige) layed out by the author of the article (and the movie). Maybe Jay didn't actually believe that (it's entirely possible the author force fit a more nuanced statement into the desired narrative). But the article certainly suggests that he did.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Brad Henderson » March 22nd, 2021, 12:46 am

Ones study of Jay’s work (and a full understanding of the theory posited in the prestige) reveals he didn’t.

The fact he referenced ‘the prestige’ - a word never encountered in any magic text in this context - is the clue that he’s talking about the theory per the movie.

Once again, you are tuning your ears to hear what you want.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Brad Henderson » March 22nd, 2021, 1:22 am

Edit: anyone who has studied Jay’s work or the body of magic literature that exists outside of the realms of fiction . . .

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 22nd, 2021, 1:41 am

Brad Henderson wrote:Ones study of Jay’s work (and a full understanding of the theory posited in the prestige) reveals he didn’t.

The fact he referenced ‘the prestige’ - a word never encountered in any magic text in this context - is the clue that he’s talking about the theory per the movie.

Once again, you are tuning your ears to hear what you want.

Well actually, I personally don't find the pledge/turn/prestige structure very interesting or care to what degree Jay espoused it or not. But it is relevant to the discussion at hand, which is why I referenced it.

And irrespective of what Jay actually believed, the author of this article wants the reader to believe that Jay was on board with the theory. He uses Jay's words to elaborate on the posited three part Prestige structure: "You’ve got to take the observer from the ordinary, to the extraordinary, to the astounding" while having Jay explain that "the Prestige is the payoff, the third act in any magic trick." (not just w/r to the movie).

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Brad Henderson » March 22nd, 2021, 2:52 am

The point is you said you didn’t think there was other magic theory presented in the movies and that was clearly wrong. It’s literally the frame for the entire movie

Having said that, the theory as posited by the movie ISN’T “ "You’ve got to take the observer from the ordinary, to the extraordinary, to the astounding"”.

So the theory Jay actually speaks to isn’t what the movie presents as foundational to all magic.

Again, you’re trying to fit the evidence to what you want to believe is true

Tom Moore
Posts: 635
Joined: February 7th, 2012, 6:45 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Tom Moore » March 22nd, 2021, 7:04 am

In that the prestige is based on the "rule of Three" structure that just about every performance art revolves around there's a tiny sliver of truth in it but it is barely an echo.
Likewise many of the stories and ideas within it are true -
Early vanishing birdcages did involve killing lots of birds & when a non-killing version was perfected it was a sensation amongst theatre owners/bookers
Chung Ling Soo wasn't really Chinese and did do the odd walk all his life just to disguise the fact it was a method for a bowl production (though not the type or methods shown in the film)
That was a common method for a bullet catch and (as alluded in the film) the times it went wrong was when mischievous spectators added things to the barrel
Stage Magicians did have secret twins that they used for effects and who had to live top secret double lives
Rival Stage magicians did spy on each-others performance to try and steal their signature illusions - even sending spies to get jobs as assistants.
Rival Stage magicians did stage publicity stunts to mock and undermine competitors
A show could be mounted and sold on the basis of the inclusion of one new magic effect
Magicians did tell the public and press that they had had special apparatus manufactured by scientists/craftsmen thousands of miles away
Booking a Stage Magician for your theatre would mean that his team would cut trapdoors into your stage and have huge mechanical machines hidden in the wings - shows were literally built into theatres.

But this film takes those few grains of truth, spins them into new cloth, then stretches that cloth out into a film that's about an hour longer than it should be.
"Ingenious" - Ben Brantley: New York Times

thomasmoorecreative

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 22nd, 2021, 10:24 am

Tom Moore wrote: Chung Ling Soo wasn't really Chinese and did do the odd walk all his life just to disguise the fact it was a method for a bowl production (though not the type or methods shown in the film)

[various other historical magic elements in the film]

But this film takes those few grains of truth, spins them into new cloth, then stretches that cloth out into a film that's about an hour longer than it should be.

Ah, so it was Chung Ling Soo referenced in the film (vs Ching Ling Foo). Though it's strange that he would walk that way in real life to disguise a method he didn't actually use!

Thanks for listing the other interesting historical magic elements touched on in the film.

The film had a very intricate plot with lots of twists and turns and unexpected revelations along the way. And I thought it convincingly created a mysterious atmosphere from a different era. So I remember liking it a lot and don't remember thinking it was too long.

The point is you said you didn’t think there was other magic theory presented in the movies and that was clearly wrong. It’s literally the frame for the entire movie

Having said that, the theory as posited by the movie ISN’T “ "You’ve got to take the observer from the ordinary, to the extraordinary, to the astounding"”.

So the theory Jay actually speaks to isn’t what the movie presents as foundational to all magic.

Again, you’re trying to fit the evidence to what you want to believe is true

I said I didn't REMEMBER if there was other magic theory in it (besides the Chinese conjuror water bowl example). That's not the same as saying I didn't think there was. In fact, I thought there probably was more magic theory in it and was curious if anyone else remembered any. The three part pledge/turn/prestige structure that frames the movie is a good example (whether bogus or not).

As to the article itself, you said "The article does not suggest he [Jay] believes the prestige structure was relevant to magic." That's clearly wrong -- it's exactly what the author suggests. Your argument is really with the author of the article for misrepresenting both the theory of the movie and what Jay thought about it. And if you're right, then the article is relevant but ultimately wrong. As I said before, I don't have any dog in that race -- I linked to it because it pertained to the discussion at hand.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27056
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Richard Kaufman » March 22nd, 2021, 10:33 am

One of the reasons I don't like the film is that all the lead characters are d*cks. They are all antagonists. Even the one good person, the actor you can almost always count on to portray a good person, turns out to be a d*ck.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Tom Moore
Posts: 635
Joined: February 7th, 2012, 6:45 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Tom Moore » March 22nd, 2021, 12:09 pm

And I thought it convincingly created a mysterious atmosphere from a different era.

Alas the film was shot entirely on location in American Theatres and the architectural styles, layout, tropes were all completely and totally wrong for London theatre's at the turn of the century which just make it impossible to buy in to that world; when the majority of the theatres we use today are those 150 year old houses everyone in the UK is intimately familiar with what the theatres /should/ look like. It would be akin to someone going to make a telephone call and it be on a steampunk iphone; it rips you out of the world constantly once you spot it.

.... and I hadn't really found a way to articulate it but Richard nails it, every major character in it was an absolute dick.
"Ingenious" - Ben Brantley: New York Times

thomasmoorecreative

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Brad Henderson » March 22nd, 2021, 1:33 pm

Tom Moore wrote:
.... and I hadn't really found a way to articulate it but Richard nails it, every major character in it was an absolute dick.


So they got that bit right.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bill Mullins » March 22nd, 2021, 1:55 pm

@Richard Kaufman
"Even the one good person, the actor you can almost always count on to portray a good person, turns out to be a d*ck."

Spoiler Alert -- Tom Hanks beats up an orphan girl and steals her doll.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 22nd, 2021, 2:51 pm

Tom Moore wrote:Alas the film was shot entirely on location in American Theatres and the architectural styles, layout, tropes were all completely and totally wrong for London theatre's at the turn of the century which just make it impossible to buy in to that world; when the majority of the theatres we use today are those 150 year old houses everyone in the UK is intimately familiar with what the theatres /should/ look like. It would be akin to someone going to make a telephone call and it be on a steampunk iphone; it rips you out of the world constantly once you spot it.

Yes, it's a steampunk aesthetic, and I think it did that very well. i.e. Historical accuracy isn't necessarily the objective versus evoking a sense of wonder from a bygone era merged with fantasy and sci-fi elements.

http://www.cinemablography.org/the-prestige.html

The Prestige (Christopher Nolan, 2006) is a clear example of the steampunk genre in films. The story takes place during the Victorian era and deals with matters of the machine, both its usage and what it could mean for the individual artist or the “magician” who uses it. As the careers of Robert Angier and Alfred Borden progress, these matters of the steam-powered machine remain at the forefront. This is a time where originality is weakening and steam powered machines are growing.

Steampunk is not only science fiction but historical fiction as well. No matter how unreal they may be, the mechanisms in steampunk are grounded in and inspired by the time of the 1800’s and early 1900’s. It’s the Victorian era, the industrial revolution, and a thrust forward in mankind’s inventions...

Tom Moore
Posts: 635
Joined: February 7th, 2012, 6:45 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Tom Moore » March 22nd, 2021, 3:52 pm

It was not a design aesthetic - it was just an error. Like watching an “authentic and believable” western that involves everyone being on skis on a mountain that is clearly in Switzerland whilst talking about how they are in the Wild West desert with western signs randomly stuck on the goats and milk maids walking through the landscape.
"Ingenious" - Ben Brantley: New York Times

thomasmoorecreative

PressureFan
Posts: 202
Joined: January 11th, 2015, 4:17 pm
Favorite Magician: Brian Gillis
Location: Pirate, AR

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby PressureFan » March 22nd, 2021, 4:11 pm

Helicopter pilots talking on The Simpsons;
“Elvis played a chopper pilot one time. [ Chuckles ] He made so many darn mistakes... we were just laughin' at him.”

Tom Moore
Posts: 635
Joined: February 7th, 2012, 6:45 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Tom Moore » March 22nd, 2021, 5:59 pm

#burn
"Ingenious" - Ben Brantley: New York Times

thomasmoorecreative

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 22nd, 2021, 11:59 pm

Tom Moore wrote:It was not a design aesthetic - it was just an error. Like watching an “authentic and believable” western that involves everyone being on skis on a mountain that is clearly in Switzerland whilst talking about how they are in the Wild West desert with western signs randomly stuck on the goats and milk maids walking through the landscape.

Steampunk isn't intended to be "authentic and believable". Instead it depicts an alternate tech-modified Victorian era history. Whether the theaters match London of the time is not all that relevant as long as they feel old and fit the aesthetic. That's not at all like having Swiss milkmaids on skis in a classic western film. Something like that would be perceived as weird or taken as parody.

Max Maven
Posts: 524
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Hollywood, CA
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Max Maven » March 23rd, 2021, 2:08 am

When the movie came out, a well known European magician was hired to advise on the translation into his country's language. He received a copy of the script prior to seeing the movie, and promptly sent me a panicked e-mail, because although well read in conjuring literature (his English was excellent), he did not recall ever coming upon "Pledge," "Turn," and "Prestige" as an established terminology. He was greatly relieved when I explained that the terms had been made up by the non-magician author of the novel on which the movie was based.

On a different note, the premise that Ching Ling Foo (not Chung Ling Soo) used an awkward walk in everyday life, in order to divert suspicion from that manner of walking that way when about to perform the water bowl production, is nonsense. It seems to stem from two sources: First, an article in the Sphinx in 1938, with information drawn from a Chinese book by Tang Yun Chow, published in 1890. (The full article makes it clear that it is not a straight translation of that book; rather, modern information has been added, and I would guess that the author was John Mulholland.)

The story of the affected walking style was repeated, as if factual, in Henry Hay's Cyclopedia of Magic in 1949. But when Ching died in 1922, Hay was all of twelve years old, so his account is clearly not from personal observation.

It's worth pointing out that Hay describes that manner of walking as "the pompous, straddling gait not uncommon among prosperous Chinese." In other words (and ones less disparaging), it was an established style of walking. And indeed, I have seen it among older Asian men, particularly in Japan, where years ago I dubbed it the "Bushi Strut." It derives from a somewhat macho manner of walking with a sliding gait made necessary by wearing footwear held in place by forestraps.

So, I believe it is far more likely that Ching Ling Foo's offstage manner of walking was not uncommon in his own culture, and when it was noticed by western observers, they "reverse engineered" the notion that it was related to the bowl production. So far as I know, neither John Mullholland or Barrows Mussey (Henry Hay) ever performed a full-scale bowl production. I have met more than one Chinese magician who has; their offstage ambulation was quite normal.

Tom Moore
Posts: 635
Joined: February 7th, 2012, 6:45 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Tom Moore » March 23rd, 2021, 5:30 am

is not all that relevant as long as they feel old and fit the aesthetic


You seem determined to hang on to the excuse that the whole film as steampunk and therefor it fits the aesthetic. I can tell you that the theatres used simply do not fit the aesthetic THAT THE FILM CREATES - there are a number of elements in the plot that firmly ground it in a very specific geographical place (address's mentioned in the show are actual address's of actual theatres) and time; but the theatres they used as settings completely destroy that world. European Victorian theatres look nothing like early 20th century Los Angeles theatres - they're a completely different shape, size, layout, colour pallet, audience configuration, technical specification & backstage layout, repeatedly saying (as the film does) that these are representative of actual venues that magicians would have performed in in 1880's London (as the film does) is exactly the same as trying to pretend that swiss milkmaids with cowboy hats on would not be a highly distracting and aesthetic busting setting for a traditional Western.

I bow down to Max's much better researched history of the bowl production "myth" than my own.
"Ingenious" - Ben Brantley: New York Times

thomasmoorecreative

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 23rd, 2021, 9:42 am

Tom Moore wrote:
is not all that relevant as long as they feel old and fit the aesthetic

they're a completely different shape, size, layout, colour pallet, audience configuration, technical specification & backstage layout, repeatedly saying (as the film does) that these are representative of actual venues that magicians would have performed in in 1880's London (as the film does) is exactly the same as trying to pretend that swiss milkmaids with cowboy hats on would not be a highly distracting and aesthetic busting setting for a traditional Western..

It's a matter of degree. Any audience would immediately balk at milkmaids with cowboy hats and characters on skis on a swiss mountain inserted into a classic western. It would be pointed out in every review of the film (and probably interpreted as a parody). Not so with one old style theater vs another. It's not much different than the fanciful pledge/turn/prestige structure being attributed to magic. Do you think that inaccuracy also "completely destroys" the world the film creates and the supposition that it portrays true secrets of magic? I don't think so. It works in the film because it is "plausible enough" even if most magicians who watch the film have not heard of it (since the author made it up). If you're a magician or familiar with London theaters of the era these inaccuracies might be jarring (and hence undesirable). Likewise, I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla fans noticed and objected to inaccuracies in how he was portrayed. But none of this is anywhere near the level of milkmaids on skis in a western and can easily be overlooked by all but purists even if noticed.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Brad Henderson » March 23rd, 2021, 1:10 pm

Bob, you’ve demonstrated that it’s more important for you to be right in your mind than accurate in reality.

Tom is of course correct. He is basing his positions on real facts, Unlike like your Erdnase defenses which are so widely broad that they have no value. I mean you are literally trying to claim that the points tom raises can be dismissed because they simply don’t fit what you want to believe. Exactly what you’ve done with your erdnase claims.

Tom is considering the realities of the decor/styles of that day. You want to dismiss that because they seem ok to you.

You have not proven yourself a reliable judge of tone with your claims here. You’re claiming to hear/see consonances when they are measurable dissonances.

Tsk tsk

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bill Mullins » March 23rd, 2021, 3:01 pm

@Max Maven
where years ago I dubbed it the "Bushi Strut."


Inspired, perhaps, by the "Jackie Fargo Strut"?
(obscure wrestling reference complete -- return to your regularly scheduled thread)

Joe Lyons
Posts: 875
Joined: November 13th, 2017, 8:27 am
Favorite Magician: Wonder
Location: Texas

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Joe Lyons » March 23rd, 2021, 3:36 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:@Max Maven
where years ago I dubbed it the "Bushi Strut."


Inspired, perhaps, by the "Jackie Fargo Strut"?
(obscure wrestling reference complete -- return to your regularly scheduled thread)


Personally I favor the Sheena Easton Strut, but hey, to each his own.

Max Maven
Posts: 524
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Hollywood, CA
Contact:

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Max Maven » March 23rd, 2021, 3:47 pm

The Bushi Strut long predates the Fargo Strut.

And well before Sheena Easton’s “Strut” was that being offered by the Meters.

User avatar
AJM
Posts: 1530
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby AJM » March 23rd, 2021, 5:05 pm

Ah, Sheena Easton, the wee lassie from Bellshill, Lanarkshire in Scotland.

Whatever happened to her I wonder...

Andrew

Anyways, back to The Prestige...

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: Turn of the 20th century stage magician historians?

Postby Bob Coyne » March 23rd, 2021, 6:23 pm

I just checked and The Prestige received an Academy Award nomination for best Art Direction (art director and set director). Plus best art direction nominations at various other awards venues. I think that illustrates the relative unimportance of any quibbles about the accuracy of certain period design choices. The film did a great job of establishing a visual atmosphere and sense of mystery within a fictionalized steampunk victorian era setting and was recognized for it.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0482571/awards


Return to “General”