Magic and Magicians
Some thoughts about magic and magicians…
Few (if any) of those attending a magic show think for one moment that they are witnessing possibilities and magic is generally cloaked in a such a way as to be generally accepted as theatrical fantasy. The audience become willing collaborators by suspending disbelief in order to engage with the spectacle, narrative and so experience an emotional response.
Comedy and Close-Up magicians tend to engage their audiences by offering different rewards for being complicit in the deceit. This can range from the ‘fun of being fooled’ through to ‘amazement at the performers dexterity’ through to intellectual engagement in trying to solve the puzzle or enchantment through the stories they tell.
In both cases there is an unwritten intellectual contract between the performer and the audience.
“I’m going to create a series of illusions to confuse your senses and fool you intellectually” says the magician and “We’re going to enjoy the ride, be entertained by your skill at fooling us as long as you treat us with respect” reply the audience.
Think of Penn and Teller – they know the audience aren’t going to buy into ‘magic as a reality’ and they themselves do not ask that of their audience. What they do do is involve the spectator with the effect and its mechanics; make direct references to ‘tricks and techniques’ and go for the in-your face adrenalin rush of emotional shock tactics. Their work is a brilliant interplay of ‘theatre of cruelty’, satire, parody and puzzlement (the audience still don’t know HOW much of they do was actually done!)
Now consider Jeff McBride – he engages his audience through spectacle and theatricality. There is no attempt to convince people of the reality of magic, but through story-telling and allusion to mystical traditions spectators are guided into a world where fantasy and reality can blend.
All of the truly great performers offer something to the audience in terms of emotional engagement; a sense of bemusement… and such an offer is only accepted if the performer is offering something of themselves. As Eugene Burger says to his students… “YOU are the magic!”.
So what of mentalism…
Well here the audiences may well be willing to accept that the performer can read minds or influence thoughts. It doesn’t appear to matter how many disclaimers a performer of mind magic makes, if they are doing their job well, then there will be some in the audience willing to ascribe supernatural powers to the worker of wonders.
Let’s take Mr Brown as an example.
I first saw Derren perform at a magic convention in the South West of England. He wasn’t that well known then and in fact I don’t think he was named on the programme. The session he ran was at the end of the day and seemed to be a kind of informal after thought. He presented his act. It included the revelation of a ‘hypnotised’ spectators memory; psychologically influencing a spectator to move their arms and some of the ‘mental items’ which featured in his later International Magic DVD lecture. He was brilliant, captivating and original.
What was very interesting here was the reaction of a couple of the experienced magicians I was with. Some of them were willing to accept that this guy was actually reading body language and influencing thoughts purely through psychological means since that was how it was being presented. Knowing my interest and experience in psychology they asked me to confirm if he was actually ‘for real!’
Derren’s genius was (and still is) to camouflage some of the techniques he uses through the frame of his presentation..
After four television series; four television specials and three national tours he has further established that frame and his mix of ‘showmanship, psychological and magical techniques’ are still be perceived by believers as being their particular flavour of plausible reality.
Make A Comment: ( None so far )
You must be logged in to post a comment.
