Big Trick Energy

[Peter Ross]

All seasons of The Carbonaro Effect are now available on HBO Max. I just started watching some random episodes and I remain as conflicted about the show as I was when I last saw it several years ago. At the time (2014), I said this on the Forum:

“Carbonaro says that "taking the magician out of the magic" was the key for him. I think that's an interesting thing to consider. On the one hand, with this approach you lose the "heat" normally associated with doing a magic trick as a magician, and gain additional creative scenarios in which to perform. On the other hand, while it is certainly enjoyable to watch on TV, I sense a subtle difference in the reactions of the spectators for which the "effect" is being "performed." Yes, there is surprise and usually delight, but sometimes I detect uncertainty, nervousness, and embarrassment (all usually associated with being pranked).
One of the purposes of identifying as a magician is to serve as a guide through the effect, so that while the spectator may feel disoriented, confused, maybe even in a little danger, they know they're safely in the magician's hands.”

On the one hand, I love watching the magic on this show - the ideas, the writing, Carbonaro’s performances - it all appeals to my magician-side. I would love to one day see a book about the making of some of these episodes. David Regal et all probably have amazing stories about how these scenarios were conceived, constructed, and produced.

On the other hand, I have a hard time seeing this series as nothing more than a prank show, albeit a good-natured one. When Carbonaro reveals he’s a magician to the marks after the prank, I cringe, because people will now associate magicians with these sorts of stunts/pranks, which I think is unfair to the label of a magician.

As time moves on, it seems like “sucker tricks” are falling more out of favor in magic, yet here is a series that is entirely based on that premise. Again, if Carbonaro were to reveal himself as an actor (or TV host) instead of a magician, then that would be different. Magic would not be associated with pranking, which it should not be. Given Carbonaro’s statement that "taking the magician out of the magic" was the key for him on this series, his declaration to his marks at the end of his pranks that he is indeed a magician is even more troubling. Perhaps Carbonaro believes that saying he is a magician softens the blow of embarrassment the mark inevitably feels? Or does the mark (and the TV audience) now see magicians as being pranksters?

I know that Carbonaro makes a concerted effort to consider the emotional states of the people he’s pranking, as he says in an interview, “the real challenge of the show and the line I dance on is the one between creating a moment of joy for someone and being cruel.” This is interesting and perfectly appropriate territory to explore as an artistic expression. However, I believe it is an entirely different matter when you say you’re doing it as a magician, which again, is a puzzling choice given that Carbonaro is “taking the magician out of the magic.” Which is it?

Even if one were to dismiss Carbonaro’s declaration of being a magician at the end of the prank as an unnoticed aside, his central concept of magic without a magician as still being labeled magic is one that rightfully should be debated. In a related discussion on the forum Richard K. points out that he ‘couldn’t disagree more” with the statement that, “removing yourself (the magician) from the equation leads to stronger magic.” It may lead to stronger something, but is it right to call it magic? When a woman in Season 3 is utterly terrified and visibly shaken as she experiences a lengthy (several minutes) shift in her reality as the Chicago subway stations and people change places, is this really an acceptable line to be walking in the name of magic?

Sure, in the end, Carbonaro tells her he’s a magician, and this was all fake (as he quickly moves in for the terror-mitigating hug). Is the poor woman supposed to think she just experienced a magic show - one without her consent? Is that what she now thinks magicians do?

The consent issue continues to bug me in these magician-less scenarios. Even the man that sued David Copperfield for injuries sustained after running and falling backstage during a trick paid for his ticket and was asked if he wanted to be a volunteer. There is no such consent before the fact with these magician-less “tricks.” That woman could have had a heart attack during the “performance.” Only after filming are the marks offered a consent form to sign, and regularly some of them decline (according to Carbonaro). Is this the route magician-less magic is to take, with some of its practitioners even content with not informing their audience a magician was ever involved at all (a notion put forward on the Jerx)?

I will still watch the Carbonaro Effect - I find it entertaining, as does my ten-year-old youngest son (who, I observe, enjoys seeing the funny things “happen” to the people more than the mystery of how it happened). But Carbonaro calling himself a magician on this show? Not so cool with that.

[MagicbyAlfred]

Peter, you definitely raise some concerning issues. Even in the context of performing professionally for people who know upfront I'm a "magician," I have shied away from presentations done in the name of magic, that are really pranks at the expense of the spectator. Maybe I'm committing magical sacrilege by saying so, but to me, the paper balls over the head falls within that category.

I remember when I purchased the 20th Century Comedy Bra Trick some years back, and posted that I had done so. Richard K and others (rightly) chided me about it, and I've never performed it, despite my original feeling that it would be a hilarious item and in keeping with the comedy theme of my shows.

I believe we have to know where to draw the line in the sand - and that line is where there's a risk of embarrassing a spectator(s) or making them feel like a fool. I actually have no problem with most so-called sucker tricks if they are performed light-heartedly and with care that the spectator is not made to feel foolish or stupid. To this day, tricks like the 3 and 1/2 of Clubs, George Shindler's "Comedy Prediction" and a couple of my own comedy creations, that could be considered sucker tricks, are real winners for me.

But whether amateur or professional, it is so important that we treat our spectators and audiences with the utmost respect and courtesy -- uplifting them and making them feel good, rather than showing off how clever we are and how we've gotten over on them. I believe it is important to avoid, at all costs, being the wisenheimer magician with the stock corny and/or insulting lines that have turned people off to magic and made them pre-judge all magicians. IMHO, it's super important to always remember that we are ambassadors of magic.

[Joe Lyons]

I remember when I purchased the 20th Century Comedy Bra Trick some years back, and posted that I had done so. Richard K and others (rightly) chided me about it, and I've never performed it, despite my original feeling that it would be a hilarious item and in keeping with the comedy theme of my shows.

I believe we have to know where to draw the line in the sand - and that line is where there's a risk of embarrassing a spectator(s) or making them feel like a fool.

I agree.

Use the bra trick on yourself. Three unattached handkerchiefs are tucked into your shirt, (to your surprise) two handkerchiefs and a bra come out.

[MagicbyAlfred]

Great idea, Joe! Much of my humor is self-deprecating anyway. Now I can capitalize on my investment on that bra trick, which has just been sitting there in my lingerie -- I mean my magic -- drawer all this time.

[Paco Nagata]

IMHO, it's super important to always remember that we are ambassadors of magic.

"Ambassadors of magic." What a beautiful expresion! Is that yours, Alfred?

I reckon that "magic pranks" are a good thing for the Art of Magic; it would add a touch of modesty to your "real" magic shows as well as your magician character.

[Peter Ross]

Well, now comes this - the Jackass-ification of magic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxpiy5o ... nnel=truTV

[Bill Duncan]

Wow. And to think I once believed that American politics were us at our worst.

Clearly I over estimated us.

[Tom Frame]

Yesterday, the “reality” street-magic series Big Trick Energy premiered on TruTV. The show’s terrible title sounds like a bad Google translation of an Asian phrase. Chris Ramsay 37, Eric Leclerc 39, Wes Barker 35 and Alex Boyer 28 star is this unfortunate display of regression to adolescence.

The series follows the “boys” as they magically prank lay folk and themselves. Think Jackass meets T.H.E.M. They laugh uproariously at whatever their crew mates say and they react to each other’s pranks like L&L audience members on meth.

One segment exemplifies the show’s artistic sensibility. It’s called Shock Collar Magic. One member of the crew wears a shock collar. His friends squeal with delight as they shock him while he is performing magic for a layman.

I’m clearly not a member of their target demographic audience, whoever they may be.

Did anyone watch it? Your thoughts?

[Joe Lyons]

Big Trick Energy is a play on words of this PG13 phrase.

[Tom Frame]

I am so grateful for being out of touch with pop culture.

[Q. Kumber]

I can see why it would appeal to teenagers.
Here's a link to it on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEdtQMQ04Ws
From my point of view, I wish they'd left the band in.

[Jonathan Townsend]

A relief from the news. Looks like they are having fun.

[JHostler]

Sounds like a sad ripoff of Impractical Jokers (which can be hysterically funny).

[Bill Mullins]

The Shock Collar thing was done on Jackass years ago.

[Liderc]

I hate everything about this

[Liderc]

I hate how the only time Magic is on TV is either in a prank format or a semi-exposure format


there is nothing "good" about this direction of Magic/Performance

[Sean Piper]

I hate how the only time Magic is on TV is either in a prank format or a semi-exposure format


there is nothing "good" about this direction of Magic/Performance

You've not seen Fool Us?

[Richard Kaufman]

I think it was inevitable that a magic-themed TV series like this would come to pass.

[Richard Kaufman]

I've merged the other topic on Big Trick Energy with this one.

[Liderc]

I hate how the only time Magic is on TV is either in a prank format or a semi-exposure format


there is nothing "good" about this direction of Magic/Performance

You've not seen Fool Us?

Yes, which is why I said "Semi-exposure format"

Penn and Teller get away with it because of their celebrity, but they are basically semi-exposing methods, and now since everyone knows they "talk in code" people are able to decipher certain things to come up with conclusions, either right or wrong

they could have had the same show where they don't describe or even talk about Method and still be about fooling them, but they have to show off their arrogance by "semi-exposing" methods

[Ian Kendall]

The big paradox about Fool Us is that it's the best stage for magicians on TV at the moment, yet reduces the magic to a challenge of method.