Some thoughts on performing the supernatural
December 18th, 2007
Joe Coover made some interesting comments about the ghost in the jar effect. One point in particular I thought I’d comment on is the use of paranormal themes in magic.
I’m pretty involved in the skeptics community and do a lot of work with teaching critical thinking and science skills. Some people might think this would make me shy away from performing effects with a paranormal theme. Actually, the opposite is true. I love to use paranormal themes.
For an effect like Ghost Vision I’ll perform it pretty much like I teach it on the DVD. Before I do it though, I set it up like this: “I don’t believe in ghosts, spirits or anything supernatural. I believe that we’re highly suggestible creatures. I believe our belief in these ideas is rooted somewhere deep in our psyche. Some of us need to believe in these things. The need to believe is so powerful that I can just suggest these things and people will believe they see them.”
This kind of sets out from the very start that the strange things that happen aren’t paranormal. It puts them into a psychological context. It ultimately gives you credit for making them manifest themselves. The after performance discussion tends towards suggestion, hypnosis and hallucination, which is a much more healthy and rational conversation than one about spirits and leprechauns.
Joe says:“…if you (like me) don’t like to speak about supernatural powers, then leave this trick for somebody else. My performing character attributes all the magic to skill and practice but for those performers who have more of an edge of mystique about them this would be very nice.”
I’ve never seen Joe perform and don’t know the context by which he attributes something to skill. In some performers hands I could see this removing all the theatricality and mystery of magic and making it something on par with technical juggling. But that’s just my fear.
“I’m sure there are logical ways to use it in a non-supernatural way but you should watch out not to cheapen it? It’s like using spirit slates as the climax to your ambitious card routine. I’m not bashing creativity but I think more performers should think about how to be creative within their style and not just any idea they come up with.”
I don’t believe that it’s a binary situation. As I suggested earlier, I think the most powerful way to present an effect like this is a non-supernatural lead in. Claiming it’s real would just cry “fake” to half your audience and destroy your credibility.
I absolutely agree with Joe that more performers need to be creative within their style. However, I think performers need to be aware that magic is a form of theatre and we have license to go in many more directions than we may realize.
“Andrew might agree that alot of ideas he comes up with might be cool looking and creative but outside of his personal performing style…be glad that he’s able to share those with us so freely so that we can use them if they fit our style.”
Andrew would not agree with that! I can’t think of anything I’ve come up with that doesn’t fit into my performing style. My show is like a trip to Disneyland. One moment we’re on Space Mountain, the next I’m leading you through the Haunted Mansion. I’ve created a persona that lets me cover a lot of territory and tell a lot of different stories. I try to think like the author Ray Bradbury in a sense. But that’s just me.
My thanks to Joe for bringing up an interesting discussion. I’m sure Joe might have some more thoughts on this. I’m also sure there are other points of view out there. I’d be curious to hear them.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
I think that this topic stuck a chord with me because I am currently doing some deep thinking on my own performing persona.
In brief, I currently don’t do anything out of the ordinary in character, only expand on my own personality. I suppose that almost every good performer is in some way an extension of his real self but I guess I’d put myself on the side of the spectrum with Mike Close or Bill Malone in the respect that they seem, having spent a small amount of time talking with them when they are not performing, rather similar to the way they come off on stage. The other end of the spectrum would have performers such as Sylvester the Jester, Rudy Colby, and from what I hear Mr. Blaine. I try and be friendly, nice, and as I heard it once “be yourself on your best behavior”.
The deeper question might be, what do you say when they ask, “how was that done?” (A master magician may very well routine his mysteries well enough that the audience never verbally asks the question because the magician has already subtly answered it) As I am not a master magician most of the time sometime they ask and I tend to simply tell the truth, mostly, that it is an art not that different to playing the violin or dancing, and that the real secret is practice. I also tend to say a few other things during my performance that tie into this idea somewhat. When a girl says, “you’re not going to scare me are you?” I smile and tell her that while what I do may be startling that it’s not real, the art is to make it appear real”. I also mention that,
“Magic essentially influences perceptions of reality. Magic works best for the people who think about it the most. This attention that you’re giving me is what I use to build my illusions, the cards or coins are just the props. You see that guy over there(across the bar), he’s not paying attention to me so I can’t possibly do any magic for him. This is why magic actually doesn’t work AS WELL for drunk people or small children(another discussion issue for some I’m sure)because they have less of an attention span to give me.”
I say that last bit because I don’t want to fool them or make them feel like fools, I want to entertain them while having a good time. I use good nature, some gags (my ‘gags’ are just funny lines or unique situations that I come across constantly that I at one time built into my routine to capture that moment for all my performances), a good dose of wonder, a little dash of howdy-do-dat, topped off with the “I don’t know but it was good”. (usually followed by a firm hand shake and an offer to buy me a drink)
When I say I attribute my magic to “skill”, I don’t do so in a juggling kind of way. I have a friend who does magic and juggling similar to the Buck Twins and while impressive as it may be it doesn’t appeal to who I am. My definition of skill might be better suited to, clever, well planned, subtly in control, confident, and well executed. These are the things that I hope my audience believes to be the tools of my trade.
I perform both close-up (strolling/hopping) and stand-up (clubs/events) at around a 3:1 ratio and it is how I’m supporting myself. I work 3-4 nights a week at three venues + events.
I also have not seen Andrew perform, outside of the few instructional videos, but I agree with the way he briefly introduces Ghost Vision. It is a very direct and simple without being too rigid so to allow for the imagination to entertain the chance of seeing something special. It is a fine line, and every successful theatrical magician must overcome it even if he doesn’t do “ghost magic”. I think that David Copperfield does a great job in his shows. Listen to what he says before he goes to Hawaii. He says it’s not about insulting your intelligence, about what’s “real” or not “real”. When your magic becomes powerful enough regardless of effect, people will start to question it on a more serious level. Even a card trick done right can appear impossible enough to break the spectator’s reality base. Since we all strive to reach this level we should be prepared to answer the questions that follow.
I think I may be limiting my creativity but sometimes I come up with idea for effects/rouines/acts/shows that don’t fit me. I still write them down just to be sure, but there is something to be said for Andrew, who has come up with a wide variety of effects and performs them all. But there is the other side of the park who specialize and find that niche. Derron Brown said on his videos he put out with cards (The Devil’s Picture Book?) that he was releasing that material because his personal didn’t fit with it anymore. Does that mean he doesn’t do card tricks? No, he is just very selective in the ones that fit.
One thing I have become aware of recently is my shying away from the strongest effects in my repertoire because I didn’t have a strong enough backing for them. I used to get a kick out of people screaming and running away because they thought I was in league with the devil, but that doesn’t fit with my venues anymore. With some good thought and some help from fellow magicians, I’m sure I’ll get to a place where I can still do that magic without scaring my clients. I’m going to try and work an organic non-spiritual lead in to some of my old workers and see if I can’t breath some new life into them thanks to this discussion.
Again I think some performers need to find out who they are first. I think by limiting your presentation style and effects you sharpen your impact. You don’t want to be that magician that does a serious mind reading act followed by something with a rubber chicken (or maybe…). BUT once you really know who you are you can explore the ways you could do any trick you wanted to in your own way. Andrew’s persona obviously allows for more variety in presentation than Luke Jermay might (although I heard on iTricks PodCast that Luke does an invisible deck routine…in his own way of course). I’m pretty sure that Mac King could do, or maybe does do, a mind reading trick that INVOLVES a rubber chicken. But that’s him.
Who are you?
I’m Joe Coover,
Norman, Oklahoma
Currently performing in the UK