Friday, February 05, 2021

When is it ok?

Magic has always had it's bouts of "exposure", from Reginald Scot to Penn and Teller, and it has kept plodding on. Various performers have exposed magical props and effects over the years. It's usually for comedic gain or to make a point. Where magical knowledge was once relegated to back rooms of magic clubs or brick and mortar stores, the internet has allowed the widespread exposure of magical secrets to many who wouldn't have given it nary a thought otherwise.

When someone gets called out for sharing a bit too much or the "wrong way", their defense is to always point to someone else and exclaim, "why is it ok for them to do it!?". The answer to that question is up to you ultimately but let's examine some cases shall we? 

At the top of this clip, Harry Anderson straight up shows the gaff of a well known (usually) kids show prop. How he doesn't walk the audience through it's workings, but it's enough for a thinking person to infer what's going on. Now the audience doesn't know this isn't his to show off. For all they know, he invented it and is exposing his own trick. The interesting thing about presentational exposure like this is, when combined with comedy, it has less of a sting. It's the same reason Penn and Teller's "Ripoff of Love" routine is hardly balked at. It's clearly a parody of magical illusions. 

On a personal note, I sit in a weird grey zone with this kind of stuff. While I am ok with certain people using magic for a comedy punchline or using it to make a point, I also don't LIKE it and wouldn't do it myself unless it was my own invention. I think the main thing is, the people who ARE exposing magical effects and apparatus also understand when it's ok and when it's not. The people who get away with it love magic but also know the power of letting people peek behind the curtain a bit.

What about when it's not for comedy? Using P&T as an example again, they have a whole act showing how they do their version of cups and balls utilizing clear cups. While it exposes the basic concept and their routine, by the end, you haven't learned anything. A week later, someone could see another magician do the cups and balls and still be fooled. They know where that fine line is as well as the publicity of making the magic world grumpy. Again, is it ok for them to do it? That's up to you.

I think in this day and age the biggest difference is the intent and reach behind the exposure. It's no longer seemingly for entertainment, education or parody. It's all about views, clicks, likes and other imaginary internet points. (And money, let's not forget that) The audience is much wider and more varied. You can "educate" more people on the internet than you could on TV. Magic has survived exposure of all types and it will always continue marching forward because even people with knowledge can be fooled and entertained. I know how to edit video, but just because I can work Premiere Pro doesn't lessen my enjoyment of movies any less.

We will survive.


1 comment:

  1. I loved Harry , but I didn't love this (his exposure of the tricky bottles), and I didn't love it when he chose to expose other things like the 'daylight seance' gimmick. I realize he was only doing it for a quick laugh and no one who knew him thinks that Harry Anderson hated magic or was in general an "exposer", but in principle it's not that far a leap to exposing the linking ring key or the Himber ring ... "see, you can't do it because you don't have one of these" (holding up the exposed Himber ring) ... the same punch line works to expose the Himber ring ... and pretty much any other magic apparatus. "You can't do it because you don't have one of these." Audience: "Ha-ha, I guess there's really not much to it after all, not so clever as we thought, Mr. Magic Guy, it's just crap you purchased at some joke shop."

    ReplyDelete

Say something funny!