With the advent of the spiritualist movement in the late 1800’s some magicians found another way to please paying audiences. Now whilst not only mediums based their spiritual hokum on trickery, the fact remains that many did. Even the founders of spiritualism, The Fox Sisters admitted to blatant fraud towards the end of their careers.

In many respects the first popular magician to make a stand against misuse of magic and magical techniques was Harry Houdini. Not only did he set out to expose fraudulent mediums but he was one of the original members of the Society of American Magicians to be invited to set up a committee for the investigation of psychic claims with the full support of the scientific community.

For the last thirty years or more James Randi has been actively fighting a battle against flim flam and woo. His understanding of magical techniques has given him a unique perspective which in some cases has ’seen through’ some of the flaws in scientific method and thinking.

Not only did James Randi as a performer emulate Houdini, but as a critical thinker he has donned the mantle of psychic investigator. More to the point Randi has inspired a new generation of magicians who are making a stand against the fraudulent application of tricks. Banacek, Penn and Teller, Jamie Ian Swiss being the more notable examples.

I remember as a fledgling mentalist I got angry at folks like Randi as, at the time I saw them breaking the ‘magicians code” in suggesting the methods behind effects similar to those that featured in my act. At the time my enthusiasm for the art and innocence meant that I did not feel the public needed the kind of protection Randi and his fellow conjurors were offering.

Well I”ve been performing for best part of twenty five years now and guess what – the public do need protecting. Now more than ever.

As a performer who takes the paranormal, the psychic and the occult as themes for his performances I try to be very aware of how i need to maintain the mystery of the presentation whilst not promoting beliefs in wooly thinking and woo woo.

Of course these considerations are not a problem for card and coin magicians or those demonstrating some for of manual dexterity or theatrical illusion, but they are vital for the growing number of magicians choosing to be psychological illusionists, mentalists, psychic entertainers and such like.

What responsibilities do you have in this area.

For my part I am a Rational Mystic and try to offer some entertaining distractions and provocative debates an the Haunted Cornwall radio show….

Alan

As our conversation winds down my friend asks me “Have you seen the Michael Jackson film… This is It?”

I reply in the negative, but assure him that I have every intention of catching it soon on Sky.

There is a pause…..

Kenny then adds that every magician should see it!

A bold claim I suggest, but the he goes on to describe the rehearsal sequences in the film; the attention to detail; the importance of the beat not just of the music but of every step of the performance.

I listen to Kenny’s enthusiastic description – then it hits me.

How many working magicians put that level of attention to detail into their practice and rehearsal?

The words of my friend Eugene Burger come to mind – his eloquent definitions and descriptions of the difference between practice and rehearsal.

The McBride Mystery School sessions come flooding back with Jeff and Eugene both talking about the elevation of our art through stagecraft and, what I have decided to call, stage-graft.

The magical showmen still do what they have always done – understand the ebb and flow of emotion in a performance….

The magical klutz”s still do what they have always done – move from self indulgent trick to self indulgent trick without understanding anything of the subtleties of our art…

For me “This is it” will certainly be on my watch list – to see a true showman rehearse and glean what little a mere conjuror can learn from a master of the performance art.

To the YouTube tricksters and exposure merchants I will simply say ….

You just don”t get it do you ! ? !

Alan

It is interesting that a few, who were avid readers of his Scientific American column, were not aware of his contributions to the world of magic.

He was best known for his work on ‘recreational mathematics’ and I  feel his books on skepticism are still as fresh today as when they were written. Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science was published in 1957 – a year before I was born!

As The Economist noted “WHERE literacy meets numeracy, enthusiasm meets scepticism and philosophy meets fun, there you find Martin Gardner” and this is a just reflection of his life’s work.

It may surprise some of you to know that Martin had no formal training in mathematics beyond that which he would have undertaken in high school…. goes to show you what passion can achieve when it has been given the space to do so.

So, here’s to a passionate man who contributed so much …

Martin Gardner Oct 21st 1914 – May 22nd 2010

On the personal side of things work with Haunted Cornwall FM as their Rational Mystic (skeptical alchemist??) has been very interesting and opened a few doors relating to the development of my Psychic vs Magician evening talk and workshop.

Cabaret work has also been picking up of late and I’m working on some interesting ideas with Kenny Roberts of Kernow Magic – so keep your ears to the ground!

However, the Back with a Bang heading was not intended to be a slef-celebratory reference.  I am refering to the new Derren Brown series which aired in the UK on Monday evening. Entitled Derren Brown Investigates it sees our cerebral hero taking on paranormal claims with the insights of a magician/mentalist and the thinking of a sceptic.

I have reviewed the show on my Rational Mystic blog, but I heartily recommend it to you as an example of intelligent television. I know that it will feature as a point of discussion on this weeks Haunted Cornwall FM (Sunday evening 8pm – 10pm GMT) so it’d be great if you could listen in and add your comments.

Until later

Alan

websites  of those mentioned in blog

Haunted Cornwall FM - a team made up of believers, mediums and me as the sceptic

The Rational Mystic - my other blog

Kernow Magic – Kenny Robert’s magic shop – recommended

130 guests at a ‘Masked Ball’. Two magicians have been hired to perform at the function – the organiser wanted ‘table magicians’.

Now as some of you may know I do not like ‘table hopping’ (I may explore the reasons in a future blog), so as part of the deal I arranged to do my ‘usual’ thing of finding a space in the lounge or lobby of the venue so that interested people could come to me during the evening.

The magician I was working with was doing the ‘table’ stuff.

It was a very challenging venue in terms of table layout so my sympathy was with my magical colleague. In his walk-around ’set’ he was performing some ‘mental magic’ items and I, even though I wanted to focus on more tradtitional close-up mentalism and bizarre stuff, did include a couple card effects with a ‘difference between sleight of hand and sleight of mind theme’.

As far the organisers were concerned the guests were being entertained and despite initial reservations about not having two ‘table  magicians’ the fact that I had a very steady stream of people joining me throughout the evening seemed to validate my insistance that what I suggetsed would work.

In terms of the entertainment and value for money both my colleague and I worked hard and were getting good responses from the guests.

For his part he was walking around tables, and latterly the lounge and bar area sharig his magic.

For my part I was sitting in the lounge with a old oak chest on the table, a well placed close-up mat and a few “mystical magguffins” – pendulums, an interesting stone and a silver talisman…

For his part he was approaching people and offering to amaze and amuse them…

For my part I was sitting in my best ‘Doc Shiels-Burger-esque’ pose and simply talking to people about magical, mystical and psychological things. At no point after the meal were the comfy chairs next to me empty. As one little group left another approached and eagerly sat down.

Now here’s the point.

As we made our way out at the end of the evening we were both getting praise and thanks from the guests. At the lobby of the hotel were the ‘ready-to-depart’ dignitaires who, as we approached were obviously talking about one of the ‘effects’ that I had performed for them.

As we approached the door one of the assembled VIP’s stopped me to thank me again for the ‘thought provoking and amazing evening’ and as they all called out their goodbyes a further voice, that of the organiser called out… “Oh and say goodnight to the magician too….”

The words echoed in my head… “goodnight to the magician too…”

So, I wasn’t a magician?

After a moments reflection I was overjoyed!

For some reason there was the perception that I was doing something ‘different’ to what their perception of a magician dictated.

My colleague had presented ‘magic tricks’ and somehow the frame I was using resulted in the perception of something different… not necessarily better, but certainly different and because of that perhaps more memorable?

That, I guess, is the real difference between magic and mentalism.

The former engages the spect-actor in a willing suspension of disblief or criticism..

The latter asks the spect-actor to extend their belief and challenge their scepticism…

Because of that perhaps the experience of mentalism can be far more personal than the experience of magic (or what has today seen as magic by the public – namely trickery’)

The rea magician, in tradition and in terms of the art, is not simply a trickster. They can be wizard, sorceror, oracle, sage, elder..

If you are a magician and you are reading this then perhaps you would enjoy considering how you want to be perceived.

It’s about ‘performance frames’, the way you want to present your art and the responsibility that you have for the effect your magic has.

Alan

(Before you complain about my spelling I did mean to type ’spect-actor’ not spectator. If you want to know why read Augusto Boal’s Rainbow of Desire or my forthcoming magic booklet SpellCraft).

It would be easier to answer the question if we had some idea as to what criteria we need to use to make this judgment.

Are we talking about popularity or influence on the art or contribution to the art or showmanship?

What about originality and creativity?

I guess much will dictated by your knowledge of the history of magic and your exposure to performers. Many of the younger performers may well cite David Blaine or Derren Brown as they are the wider known names. But again if you are a fan of a particular genre then perhaps the names that come to mind will be those who ‘lead’ in your field or area of interest.

For what it’s worth I’ve compiled a top 5 list under various headings for your consideration, discussion and challenge.

Historically the most relevant magicians are perhaps:-

1) Houdini

2) Robert Houdin

3) The Maskelyns

4) David Devant

5) Horace Goldin

Perhaps the top 5 Magicians all performers need to read and study

1) Dai Vernon

2) Eugene Burger

3) Fitzkee

4) Max Maven

5) Jaun Tamariz

For me the top five stage performers who bring emotion, personality and wonder to their shows

1)  Jeff McBride

2) David Copperfield

3) Fred Kapps

4) Falkenstien and Willard

5) Tommy Wonder
A top five gaggle of close-up workers

1) Eugene Burger

2) Tommy Wonder

3) Michael Ammar

4) Juan Tamariz

5) Ricky Jay

On cards – must reads/see

1) Marlow

2) Jennings

3) Bill Malone

4) Ascanio

5) Lenhardt Green

In terms of Mentalism (my favourite genre) all time greats…

1) Fogel

2) Kreskin

3) Max Maven

4) Anneman

5)  Banachek

As far as the degree of impact upon the public perception of magic, my top five would be:-

1) David Blaine – his innovative focus on the audience reaction rather than the performance of the effect

2) Penn and Teller – genius at work. Clever, funny, intelligent

3) Derren Brown – reinvigorating mentalism

4) David Copperfield – still the master of Grand Illusion

5) Paul Daniels – who really redefined the relevance of the magician in the 1970’s – 1990’s

My PERSONAL favourites and key influences

1) Tony ‘Doc’ Shiels

2) Eugene Burger

3) Jeff McBride

4) Max Maven

5) Terri Rogers

So what do you think?

As I was trying to restrict myself to a top five I found that I had to omit magicians who have inspired and entertained me…

David Berglas, Richard Osterlind, Bob Cassidy, Harry Lorraine, Roy Walton, Dunniger, Chan Canasta, Cardini, Michael Close, The Piddingtons, Ron and Nancy Spencer, Corinda…… the list goes on.

The truth is that we are all standing on the shoulders of giants and the more we learn about our art the more people we have to thank, aspire to and be inspired by.

A good friend of mine was talking to a young card magician sometime ago. The youngster was performing a version of the ambitious card. In talking to my friend, who is a professional magician, the fresh faced boy asked which were the bets magicians to learn from. When the names Dai Vernon, Michael Ammar and Marlow were mentioned the young magician looked blank and said “Who?”

It was the case that this young magician was learning is magic from You Tube. Not too much wrong with that perhaps (exposure issues asides) but his search for magical knowledge was limited by is lack of exposure to good magic. He was modeling himself on David Blaine and because he had received little guidance, and perhaps lacked the real motivation to look deeper into the art, he was really limiting his development as a magician. The more role models we have perhaps the easier it is to develop our own style and see what works for us.

Alan

For many amateur magicians ‘learning magic’ stops once they ‘know’ the secret of the trick. Professional performers will regularly come across someone in their audience who makes the claim that they ‘know how that is done!’.

But knowing ‘how’ doesn’t mean you can do it!

A magic effect is a finely crafted piece of theatre with a beginning a middle and an end. It can have meaning in and of itself, but there are few effects that do, or it can be given meaning by the context or the frame the magician places around the ‘trick’.

I feel that some of the ‘apathy’ and ‘indifference’ to magic that we experience in the UK is because there have been too many magicians who have relied upon the ‘magic’ and not considered the emotional frame they place around it.

So, for example, the magician places a coloured hanky in the spectators hand and after a few magical gestures it changes colour. Visually appealing but what does it ’say’ other than ‘look how smart I am!’

Even when such an effect is presented with ‘cod’ explanation (pretending to tell the audience how it is done) the bitter aftertaste that can be left is one of “I’ve just been conned” rather than I’ve just been ‘entertained’ or ‘amused’.

‘Frame’, ‘meaning’ and ‘intention’ are all important in crafting a magic routine. Notice I said crafting as opposed to learning or performing! A crafts-person is an artist who takes time over the creation of their art!

Meaning can be as simple or as complex as you like, but it needs to be something more than ‘look I’m doing neat things’.

Magic, as opposed to Mentalism, is a visual art and as such can access a wealth of social and cultural metaphors from which to draw meaning. The key thing is to remember that the ‘viewer’ will construct their own internal meaning from the clues you give them. Understanding this is the key to presenting (emotionally) engaging magic.

Here’s a great example of a simple piece of magic most magicians know how to do, but placed in a frame in which there is ‘meaning’ and emotional relevance for the audience.

Ian Saville : The Socialist Magician   http://www.redmagic.co.uk

Alan

Hezi Dean is pictured in the ice block as he tries to set a new record

So Israeli Magician Hezi Dean beats David Blaines record for being ’sealed’ in a block of ice!

Well not wishing to take anything away from this guys achievement, but the current cold-snap in the UK could well cause one or two folks to feel something less than admiration.

“Bloody stupid if you ask me”, blurted out one of my non-magical acquaintance’s who then went on to make some point about UK fuel poverty and people ‘having’  to be cold rather than ‘choosing’ to be!

The magician in me is, of course, impressed with Hezi’s stunt. It’s been a promotional coup and of course will do fairly good things for his reputation and 2010 date book.

I guess the question of course has to be …  IS IT MAGIC?

The problem when feats of endurance are coupled with the words ‘magician’ and ‘illusionist’ is that its not really clear what is being said or being claimed.

Magic is the mos honest profession there is. The magician tells you she or he is going to lie to you and then they do!

An illusionist is simply a magician who lies about the reality they create!

So, when folks like David Blaine or Hezi Dean perform these incredible feats of physical endurance and then the press talk about them being ‘magicians’ and ‘illusionists’ there has to be a ‘conflict of claim’.

I sometimes wonder what would happen if magicians spent a little more time thinking about the degree of congruence between what they say, what they do and how they choose to have it reported.

A number of years ago I remember sitting in a pub talking to Tony ‘Doc’ Shiels about magic and magicians and how we, as performers, fail to create a congruent and meaningful frame for our performances. We came to no real conclusions then and I have no real ones now save for the thought that magicians who THINK about the way they frame their art have a longer lasting impact with what they do.

But back to Hezi…

66 hours in an 8-tonne block of ice certainly beats David Blaine’’s 63 hours – not sure what that really means save that Hezi will probably not achieve the longer term kudos he may well deserve. Blaine did it first and maybe Blaine did it bigger!

… and yes, within this post are some very serious considerations for the younger conjurer, the magicians of the future, and it’s not just about some crazy dudes being ‘trapped’ in a block of ice!

Alan