Is this really a debate? (Genii Aug 2022, page 60)

[Michael Rubinstein]

Magic is the art of illusion. We all understand that the audience accepts the fact you are not doing real magic. So, your performance is already an accepted lie. And if your patter is relatable to the effect, it doesn't matter if it is based on truth or not. If your patter is NOT relatable, you may find that you have less connection with your audience.

If your audience realises you are telling a deliberate lie then you won't have any connection with your audience in the first place. If you don't tell a lie then they can't catch you telling one.

I agree to an extent. As I said, your patter needs to be relatable to both the effect and your audience, not something stupid and obvious.

[Joe Lyons]

These cards were given to me by Bill Mullins, who tricked the septuagenarian Morgan Fairchild into dating him...

[Edward Pungot]

DC is good at this sort of thing.
[past tv specials]
His current show at the MGM is full of these melodramatic vignettes about his father. It’s hard to get real sentimental about these overly scripted presentations though. They seem too contrived to invest real genuine emotions to. But every once in a while everything clicks and these stories become a great vehicle to grand scale theatrical illusions. Probably the best of them all is the teleportation to a island complete with boy reunites with father storyline. I remember seeing this live on a large stage back when he was touring his shows. He got a standing ovation.

[Tarotist]

Some years ago a cynical old British grafter (pitchman) once told me what he thought of David Copperfield and his stories. He remarked, "He is all teeth and moody". I suppose I had better translate for the innocent among you. The word "moody" in grafter's language has nothing to do with moods of the mind. It actually means false or fake. He meant it was all false smiles and artificiality particularly the stories. Of course the culture of the British is to ridicule artificiality and over the top sentimental stories. Perhaps that is why Copperfield did not go over well in the UK and I remember he took out a full page advertisement in a British theatrical newspaper sarcastically thanking the British public for their lukewarm reception. I still remember a TV guide mentioning "an over-the-top American magician"!

A great show for an American audience though. They like that sort of thing. Big illusions and spectacle plus fake sentimental stories.

[Jonathan Townsend]

One of our magic books ( pre 1954 ) makes the example of a youngster doing a trick with patter about his time in the Raj as example of unsuitable choice in presentation.

The old Warner Brothers cartoons seemed to get this stuff right. The characters were understandable and consistent so the stories could have any location. Topical references amused the adults while sight gags amused the young of all ages.

Maybe some are confusing comic monologues with polemic or rhetoric? Once upon a time… Let’s test that: Did Buck Rogers exist in the same fictional universe as Flash Gordon? Was it established canon that the two were related? … They sure looked related in the films.

[Diego]

When Copperfield tells a story setting up an illusion, maybe about something in the first person that related/happened to him, some know this is show business and it may or not be true or appropriate to share for entertainment, but he listens to his audience and knows what works and what doesn't, (they're not buying it and/or it doesn't affect them as intended). It doesn't have to be believed as Gospel, just be a good story that works for the moment.

In conveying love/joy of performing and an audience feeling the same about experiencing it...I remember audiences loved Doug Henning AND his magic too. (Click below, he get over the footlights to them)

https://youtu.be/FNfDmu--i4w?si=5mHz3e-XZFEfBIqv