Intro
The first in the series had some success. Here’s volume two in which I take a huge swing at some memes, clichés, and misconceptions that are like a rash on my thighs. Some of these myths aren’t necessarily magical, but you see them a lot in the artistic community and need to be put down. There are some things a man just has to do.
Myth #1: Closing/deleting threads is violating freedom of speech.
Some of you probably already know how badly this one gets under my skin. This is the default argument of stupid people, and children who don’t want to admit that they broke the rules. Freedom of speech gets thrown around like beer at a college house party. There’s just one problem. According to the United States Constitution (which is what people are inevitably referring to), the first amendment states this:
“Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.”
Last time I checked, the staff of magic forums are not Congressmen. Especially in cases like my fellow moderator Brendon Selley. Kind of hard to hold a seat in government in a country you don’t live in. Also, forum rules are not legislation. Shocking, I know.
In a privately owned space, actual or virtual, the owners dictate what is and is not acceptable under their roof. Some people don’t allow guests to swear in their house. They’re allowed to do that. I don’t allow guests to speak ill of Adam West, Bruce Campbell, or William Shatner in my house. I’m allowed to do this.
People who talk about freedom of speech a lot also inevitably compare that which they don’t like to nazis/Hitler, or communists/Stalin. Let me ask you something. Do you think Henry Kissinger would close negotiations by saying that anyone who didn’t agree with the treaties he proposed was a nazi? No, because that would be stupid.
The nazi/commie analogy is used almost exclusively by people who were kicked off the debate team for not making any sense. Why? Because you’re trying to compare the enforcement of forum rules with men who commissioned the totalitarian oppression of entire countries and engaged in acts of torture, genocide, and the liberal application of force in place of actual diplomacy. Calling someone a fascist does not work unless they actually are a fascist, which includes but is not limited to a belief in corporatism, nationalism, and militarism.
If after reading this you still think it’s okay to call people you don’t like fascists or commies, then you’re probably also the type whose vocabulary is so weak, your only other rhetorical weapon is gay jokes.
Remember when someone says magic is too political don’t prove them right by making it literal.
Myth #2: The definition of exposure is subjective.
No it isn’t.
The definition of exposure is a tricky business, and everyone seems to want to keep the definition as flexible as possible, resulting in some rather embarrassing moments for the magic community in general.
Celebracadabra in particular has become a hot button issue now that the Chicken Littles of magic have figured out that no one’s listening anymore once they start screaming about YouTube. People are saying magic is exposed on the show even though they never actually watched it. And then when they learn about the free trick Brad Christian teaches, all bets are off. The howling and flinging of excrement begins with a fervor and vitriol seldom seen outside of a British soccer game.
Accusations of exposure are thrown at everyone and everything that displeases a magician. Criss Angel, Adam Sandler (Click), Ben Stiller (Night at the Museum), and really just about anything else that threatens a magician’s tiny microcosm of elitism in which they don’t want to share their table with anybody else. It’s obscene.
Rick Maue in his tome of wisdom and effects The Book of Haunted Magick said that exposure is “the senseless and destructive revelation of secrets with no positive magical intent.” If you can find anything about that definition you don’t like, keep in mind that you’re wrong. I’m not trying to be cute; I’m dead serious.
The reason magicians refuse to agree upon a standard definition of exposure like that is because they’re still hung up on their vendettas. Exposure is one of the worst accusations to level at another magician. Performers in general love to use it to attack those they don’t like, and in order to do that they need to keep the definition vague.
Unfortunately, this just creates more divisiveness among the community and distracts us from dealing with real problems in a proactive manner. Internet petitions to YouTube fail every time, but every few months we get someone wasting everyone’s time by trying to resurrect the idea. FOX is going to continue airing the Masked Magician specials every few years, regardless of what a bunch of high school and college students have to say. And there’s always going to be some punk in your school who buys DVDs just to show everybody the methods in a shallow bid for attention and social status.
How about instead of sounding the klaxon every time one of these events comes up, you just practice more? I know what you’re thinking. “Alex! If people know how to do a pass, how can practicing it ever help?” I never said to practice your sleights. And if you think of asking, “What else is there?” keep in mind that you will be personally responsible for me once again attempting suicide with cheese fries and vodka.
Myth #3: Rules about props and style are absolute.
Hot on the heels of the last myth, here’s another one that bugs me that's on the opposite end of the spectrum. The idea here is that every other magician seems to think his rules for props are gospel for everyone else, confusing those who prefer to let people use their own personal styles and infuriating those who take the same absolutist attitude but for a different reason.
Say for example one magician prefers to only use props he bought from Office Depot. If he has the sort of character that makes that sort of thing work, who would argue with him? The problem comes when he starts insisting his way is the only way.
We see this all the time. We see whimsical magicians who abhor bizarre magic and spirit theater, impromptu-styled magicians who want custom decks banished from this earthly plane, and bizarrists who take their characters way too seriously and insist that everyone else should as well.
People who subscribe to these mindsets often namedrop as part of their arguments. The problem with namedropping is that it’s easily countered with more of the same. Jay Sankey says never to use suspicious-looking props, but Mark Edward (resident medium at the Magic Castle for those not in the know) says that a small collection of props that have a healthy amount of character to them can greatly enhance some shows by adding an air of verisimilitude to the story.
So basically, we’re left with a group of voices all conflicting and vying for our attention. Where do you go?
You experiment. You listen to everyone. You test things out with real audiences. And you find advice from people who are willing to take the time to understand your character.
Not all magic is suited for everyone. The simple truth is that it all comes down to personality. Some have the persona it takes to use custom decks, some can perform séances, some are more cut-out for bare-bones mentalism, some are better at comedy magic… Trying to turn your style into the industry standard is not only pointless, it’s also arrogant and egocentric.
The root of the problem is the same as many others: most magicians don’t actually talk to their audiences. They project onto them. I used to believe some of the myths I’ve mentioned in this and the last installment. When I went professional and started busking, I started talking to my audiences and learned that many of the memes going around didn’t apply to the average person. They’re not magicians, so they don’t think of things the same way we do.
Your approach may work for you, but until you interact with another performer’s audience, don’t profess to tell them they should be more like you.
The first in the series had some success. Here’s volume two in which I take a huge swing at some memes, clichés, and misconceptions that are like a rash on my thighs. Some of these myths aren’t necessarily magical, but you see them a lot in the artistic community and need to be put down. There are some things a man just has to do.
Myth #1: Closing/deleting threads is violating freedom of speech.
Some of you probably already know how badly this one gets under my skin. This is the default argument of stupid people, and children who don’t want to admit that they broke the rules. Freedom of speech gets thrown around like beer at a college house party. There’s just one problem. According to the United States Constitution (which is what people are inevitably referring to), the first amendment states this:
“Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.”
Last time I checked, the staff of magic forums are not Congressmen. Especially in cases like my fellow moderator Brendon Selley. Kind of hard to hold a seat in government in a country you don’t live in. Also, forum rules are not legislation. Shocking, I know.
In a privately owned space, actual or virtual, the owners dictate what is and is not acceptable under their roof. Some people don’t allow guests to swear in their house. They’re allowed to do that. I don’t allow guests to speak ill of Adam West, Bruce Campbell, or William Shatner in my house. I’m allowed to do this.
People who talk about freedom of speech a lot also inevitably compare that which they don’t like to nazis/Hitler, or communists/Stalin. Let me ask you something. Do you think Henry Kissinger would close negotiations by saying that anyone who didn’t agree with the treaties he proposed was a nazi? No, because that would be stupid.
The nazi/commie analogy is used almost exclusively by people who were kicked off the debate team for not making any sense. Why? Because you’re trying to compare the enforcement of forum rules with men who commissioned the totalitarian oppression of entire countries and engaged in acts of torture, genocide, and the liberal application of force in place of actual diplomacy. Calling someone a fascist does not work unless they actually are a fascist, which includes but is not limited to a belief in corporatism, nationalism, and militarism.
If after reading this you still think it’s okay to call people you don’t like fascists or commies, then you’re probably also the type whose vocabulary is so weak, your only other rhetorical weapon is gay jokes.
Remember when someone says magic is too political don’t prove them right by making it literal.
Myth #2: The definition of exposure is subjective.
No it isn’t.
The definition of exposure is a tricky business, and everyone seems to want to keep the definition as flexible as possible, resulting in some rather embarrassing moments for the magic community in general.
Celebracadabra in particular has become a hot button issue now that the Chicken Littles of magic have figured out that no one’s listening anymore once they start screaming about YouTube. People are saying magic is exposed on the show even though they never actually watched it. And then when they learn about the free trick Brad Christian teaches, all bets are off. The howling and flinging of excrement begins with a fervor and vitriol seldom seen outside of a British soccer game.
Accusations of exposure are thrown at everyone and everything that displeases a magician. Criss Angel, Adam Sandler (Click), Ben Stiller (Night at the Museum), and really just about anything else that threatens a magician’s tiny microcosm of elitism in which they don’t want to share their table with anybody else. It’s obscene.
Rick Maue in his tome of wisdom and effects The Book of Haunted Magick said that exposure is “the senseless and destructive revelation of secrets with no positive magical intent.” If you can find anything about that definition you don’t like, keep in mind that you’re wrong. I’m not trying to be cute; I’m dead serious.
The reason magicians refuse to agree upon a standard definition of exposure like that is because they’re still hung up on their vendettas. Exposure is one of the worst accusations to level at another magician. Performers in general love to use it to attack those they don’t like, and in order to do that they need to keep the definition vague.
Unfortunately, this just creates more divisiveness among the community and distracts us from dealing with real problems in a proactive manner. Internet petitions to YouTube fail every time, but every few months we get someone wasting everyone’s time by trying to resurrect the idea. FOX is going to continue airing the Masked Magician specials every few years, regardless of what a bunch of high school and college students have to say. And there’s always going to be some punk in your school who buys DVDs just to show everybody the methods in a shallow bid for attention and social status.
How about instead of sounding the klaxon every time one of these events comes up, you just practice more? I know what you’re thinking. “Alex! If people know how to do a pass, how can practicing it ever help?” I never said to practice your sleights. And if you think of asking, “What else is there?” keep in mind that you will be personally responsible for me once again attempting suicide with cheese fries and vodka.
Myth #3: Rules about props and style are absolute.
Hot on the heels of the last myth, here’s another one that bugs me that's on the opposite end of the spectrum. The idea here is that every other magician seems to think his rules for props are gospel for everyone else, confusing those who prefer to let people use their own personal styles and infuriating those who take the same absolutist attitude but for a different reason.
Say for example one magician prefers to only use props he bought from Office Depot. If he has the sort of character that makes that sort of thing work, who would argue with him? The problem comes when he starts insisting his way is the only way.
We see this all the time. We see whimsical magicians who abhor bizarre magic and spirit theater, impromptu-styled magicians who want custom decks banished from this earthly plane, and bizarrists who take their characters way too seriously and insist that everyone else should as well.
People who subscribe to these mindsets often namedrop as part of their arguments. The problem with namedropping is that it’s easily countered with more of the same. Jay Sankey says never to use suspicious-looking props, but Mark Edward (resident medium at the Magic Castle for those not in the know) says that a small collection of props that have a healthy amount of character to them can greatly enhance some shows by adding an air of verisimilitude to the story.
So basically, we’re left with a group of voices all conflicting and vying for our attention. Where do you go?
You experiment. You listen to everyone. You test things out with real audiences. And you find advice from people who are willing to take the time to understand your character.
Not all magic is suited for everyone. The simple truth is that it all comes down to personality. Some have the persona it takes to use custom decks, some can perform séances, some are more cut-out for bare-bones mentalism, some are better at comedy magic… Trying to turn your style into the industry standard is not only pointless, it’s also arrogant and egocentric.
The root of the problem is the same as many others: most magicians don’t actually talk to their audiences. They project onto them. I used to believe some of the myths I’ve mentioned in this and the last installment. When I went professional and started busking, I started talking to my audiences and learned that many of the memes going around didn’t apply to the average person. They’re not magicians, so they don’t think of things the same way we do.
Your approach may work for you, but until you interact with another performer’s audience, don’t profess to tell them they should be more like you.
