I don’t know what magic secrets exposure means anymore

By Paul Osborne

Exposure. Sounds simple, doesn’t it? When I was a lad [picture me walking up a hill carrying a bread loaf while Dvorak’s New World Symphony is playing – now there’s a reference for the teenagers] magic secrets exposure was an easy concept to understand. From my very first magic book – How to be a Conjurer by Robert Harbin – the rules of magic were clearly laid out: Never tell anyone how a trick is done, the author wrote.

However, even in those dark days before the internet, the waters were sometimes muddied. I remember Paul Daniels being criticised for including tricks such as the Chinese Linking Rings and the Rice Bowls in his magic sets, with some magicians saying that Paul was exposing these classics of magic to children.
And then, a few years later, those “bad boys of magic”, Penn and Teller, crashed onto the scene. Most of you will have noticed, in my opening line, the nod to Teller’s sublime smoking routine where classic sleight-of-hand moves are explained to the viewing audience. As a teenager, watching their first TV special, I thought, “well, this will annoy a lot of magicians, but, what the hell. I love it.”

Teller has often spoken about the duo’s approach to exposure: that most of their audience probably had a magic set as a child, that most people know what a “palm” is, and that, sometimes, a routine can still blow your mind even if you’re in on it. Check out their version of the cups and balls using clear plastic cups for proof of this. (Dai Vernon witnessed them perform this effect live and laughed his head off, according to Teller; The Professor ‘getting’ what they were doing.)

Today, social media is awash with magicians and hobbyists performing tricks and then exposing the method, and many have been criticised for doing so. But I think the argument is more nuanced than it seems.

Mentalist Spidey, who puts out many magic tutorial videos on YouTube, addressed some of his critics on the Magicians Talking Magic podcast. He said: “There’s a difference between magic secrets exposure and teaching magic. I see a lot of YouTube videos with a child who learned a trick last week, barely knows how to hold the cards, and is exposing the secret to the trick. And I don’t like that.

“I teach magic. Everything on my channel is either something I created, or something I adapted, or something that’s so old-as-the-hills that nobody could claim ownership to it. My videos, on average, are 14 to 18 minutes, and you’re learning one trick. And by the time you get to the tutorial, we’re about eight or nine minutes into the video. My average view is six to seven minutes. So most people have left the video before I even get to the secret.

“It’s all by design. It starts with me talking about the trick, then I do the performance, then I talk about the history of the trick, and then we go into the tutorial which is taught slowly and effectively. I want real students, not someone who is looking for a quick secret.”

The flipside of a tutorial though is the video that’s designed for entertainment by magic secrets exposure. One famous YouTube magician was brutally criticised by Craig Petty on his Magic TV channel for exposing illusion bases, a principle that many stage performers use in their shows.

I think most of us can agree that giving away secrets that aren’t yours is wrong. If Murphy’s Magic brings out a new product from a particular creator, and then someone immediately reveals the method on YouTube, that’s not right – and they should be called out. But for tricks that are many years old and not owned by anyone? This is where I get confused. Is a wannabe magician seeking out the Three-Card Monte trick on YouTube any different to someone visiting a library and reading the trick’s secret in a magic book? OK, for the former, you don’t have to physically leave your chair but you still have to invest time in searching for it online.

So maybe the ‘what does exposure mean?’ answer lies in how much time and effort it takes to discover that secret. A wannabe-magician spending 20 minutes watching a Spidey video, listening to his explanations and watching a performance, is very different to a layman channel surfing, coming across a repeat of the Masked Magician on the TV show Breaking The Magician’s Code and being spoon-fed classic secrets used by working magicians.

And talking of Three-Card Monte, in 1994 John Lenahan became the first magician in 85 years to be thrown out of The Magic Circle after explaining the sleight-of-hand used in the trick on the BBC show How Do They Do That? His website’s bio states: “The trick is no more than a gambling con, but I took the rap and enjoyed the publicity.” And today, happily, he’s now a Circle member again.

I contacted The Magic Circle to find out the club’s current position on magicians who give away secrets on YouTube, and also whether Vegas legends Penn and Teller would, today, be allowed to join the club.
President Megan Swann said: ”We have a committee which considers each case individually. It is complicated and often depends on the intent of the magician and what the trick is. Generally, it’s safer to avoid YouTube exposure videos though, as it’s hard to control who sees them.
“As to whether Penn and Teller would be allowed in – now that’s an examination which would fill our theatre!”

So did programmes such as Breaking The Magician’s Code do much long term damage to magic? Hopefully not, but it certainly showed non-magicians that a lot of secrets are simply ugly and mundane. Remember Julius Dein’s appearance on Good Morning Britain when the camera picked up the invisible thread used to make a pair of spectacles move on a tabletop? It was actually quite amusing reading his fans express their outrage on social media. Did they really think he had magical powers? Or did they think the method would be more elegant than it was? Into my head popped the headline: ‘Magician uses secret thread shock!’

With great card magicians, however, even if you know the moves and sleights you can still appreciate the performance. When an expert such as Michael Vincent executes a side-steal – you may know what he’s doing, you may know roughly when he does it, but you can’t see him do it. And therein lies true magic.
But let’s leave the final comment to seasoned performer Doc Dixon, who beautifully summed up the Masked Magician TV show – in that Atlanta bar-room drawl of his – with one simple down-to-earth line:
“All I could picture in my head was the guy who’d just spent two grand on a Zig-Zag the week before.”

Let us know what you think about YouTube ‘exposure’ in the comments below.

Magician of the Month – October 2021

by Merchant of Magic Leave a Comment

Liam Ying

Congratulations to Liam Ying for winning this months magic competition at the Merchant of Magic shop. On Saturday 26th September, magicians from around the UK visited the shop to show the magic shop team a specific performance routine. This month it was ‘ The Ambitious Card’.

It was great to see so many magicians traveling down to take part. Judging the winning routine was a difficult task, but Liam did a fantastic job and we are delighted to present him with this award.

We asked Liam to share a little about his journey into magic:

How long have you been studying magic?

I’ve been teaching myself magic for nearly 3 years now.

What lead you to discover it, and decide to begin your practice?

It started shortly after my daughter was born, I was suffering from anxiety and I needed something to keep my mind occupied during parental night vigils, and this was perfect to immerse myself in.

I’ve always had a fascination with magic, even from a young age but only until recently did I want to try it myself!

How did you begin to learn?

I started watching some tutorials on YouTube from magicians like Daniel Madison, Alex Pandrea, Xavior Spade, Chris Ramsay and started buying decks of cards in the bucket loads! I love collecting cards, and I’ve amassed quite a collection now!

It’s quite common for magicians to stumble into magic from Youtube, and many of the channels do a great job of introducing new magicians, but often the content can lack depth or structure… How did you progress your study?

I started reading a lot more books and The Royal Road to Card Magic has been essential for me.
Since then I’ve started performing as a side little trope when I stream on Twitch (under the name Synyster Graves) and I’ve really started to enjoy performing in front of the camera!

So you mainly perform on camera, rather than live in person?

The walk-in at Merchant of Magic shop in Bishop’s Waltham was the first time I’ve performed something in person to someone who wasn’t on twitch, or family! My wife has been very encouraging, helping me learn and critiquing how I do things when I feel I’m ready to perform on stream too!

What advice would you give to someone thinking of beginning to learn magic?

I really believe it’s never too late to begin learning, and it’s turned into a fantastic and fulfilling subject to get really into! I’ve tried to document my journey into it on the YouTube channel Synyster Graves so I can always look back and see how I’ve progressed! But as a tool to help contain my anxiety, it has given back to me more than I ever could have hoped for!

Liam, congratulations once again for winning Magician of the Month. You should definitely look to start performing at live venues and events in the future, and we wish you every success with your magic!.

Want to enter the competition for Magician of the Month – November 2021?

All ages and levels of ability are welcome to enter. Visit the magic shop on Saturday 30th October from 11am-4pm and show us your favourite Halloween themed trick. It can be anything you like, as long as it’s spooky. Everyone that performs their trick will receive a surprise magic gift for taking part, and we’ll pick one magician to win Magician of the Month. Good luck!

Visual Magic Tricks are Killing Magic

by Dominic Reyes 8 Comments

By Ben Williams

“Visual magic tricks are killing magic. Now that is a bombshell I am dropping right here, right now!”

'Ben Williams came into the shop the other day and said these exact words. These words were something I never imagined him to say. We laughed as we thought it was a joke, but when Ben began to explain his point of view, we began to think he may have a point…' – Mark Henderson

Visual Magic Tricks are Killing Magic

I can already feel the backlash against this statement. So I will begin to explain my reasoning for this bold statement.

I was driving to work one day and thinking about the plethora of magic tricks that are released nowadays and how much emphasis is put on the ‘visual’ aspect of each magic trick sold. It seems the more visual the magic trick, the better the ad copy and description is received by the public. Initial interest in these products goes sky high and causes quite a stir within the magic community.

Magic has been given an amazing spotlight on TV over the past decade. Huge thanks must go to David Blaine, Derren Brown, Dynamo, Ben Hanlin, Barry and Stuart and Troy and their teams who collectively have inspired a generation of young magicians to learn the art form. There are a few problems that have arisen due to this explosion of interest in magic tricks.

Seeing is Believing

The world of magic is craving magic tricks that are more and more visual. For a street magic trick to be deemed as amazing street magic, it must be visual. The fashion is to show the moment of magic in all its glory. I don’t know whether this stems from the saying,

‘You have to see it to believe it.’

Surely you would think that seeing the magic happen would make it better, more impossible and ultimately a more magical experience for the spectators? I think though, that if you are doing something super visual you should follow some basic rules like, you should be able to hand them the object in question should they wish to check it, also the method should not really be the obvious answer, or if it is the most obvious method then this should be eliminated from the spectator’s mind be disproving it. By making all of your magic tricks as visual as possible you are robbing your spectators somewhat, rather than gifting them with something special.

By making our magic increasingly visual, you are removing more and more mystery from the spectator.

Mystery is the core product you are selling as a magician, why would you want to filter it out of your performance?

Magic only happens in the mind of a spectator. Your fingers are not magical, your wide eyed stare is not magical, magic is a feeling or experience that a spectator gets inside. If you show them the exact moment of magic and then take it away because it is heavily gimmicked and they cannot check anything then, the magic will be lost no matter how visual it is. Their belief kicks in when they feel the props and know that there is no trickery behind them. For example, if you perform the Kozlowski $100 Bill Switch then, you can instantly, with empty hands hand them a banknote that has literally changed in front of their eyes with no funny moves. They can see there is nothing hidden in your hands, they can feel the note and know there aren’t two stuck together or anything strange. This is the moment it becomes a true mystery and your spectators experience the feeling of magic. With gimmicked notes that you have to switch out, (depending on your performance and routine structure) a spectator will lose that feel of magic as soon as that banknote goes out of view. I will stress that this is not ALWAYS the case. With a careful look at how you structure your routine and patter, etc., for example if they have checked and were honestly 100% happy with the props you are using before the magic happens; then you may have a situation where the spectators are not questioning the props just after the magic. However, this is only achieved with great care and attention to detail with respect to your routine.

Remember though, just because your spectators have seen it does not mean they will ultimately believe it.

The Instant Access Generation

Another problem is that young aspiring magicians are being thrust into this world and learning magic tricks that are sold on visual appeal. The visual of each specific magic trick is the main selling point and not the performance.

The magic tricks are usually able to be performed instantly out of the pack with a gimmick that does all of the work. Either this or they watch a video on YouTube that teaches them how to make a prop or perform a magic trick.

These magic tricks may be visual, but they lack the teaching of how to make it magical and not just a clever prop that anyone could use. There is a distinct lack of tutorials that include performing advice and the real work on astonishing your spectators.

Not long ago you had to get someone to tutor, or coach you and read books with the odd VHS tape to help out. It was this method of passing secrets on that allowed all the finer details of why magic works to be shared. Now there is very little of this. Tricks are sold and it is up to the customer to make it magical for them. This is why a lot of people feel like the magic tricks are not amazing when they receive them. They see magicians getting huge reactions on a video demo for a product that is sold as easy to do and the gimmick does all the work for you yet they fail to get the same results, this is usually down to performance. This is one reason why visual magic tricks are killing magic. They may well be clever props and ideas, true, but they lack the relevant instruction to help make the student better at performing them.

Too Perfect Theory

There is a theory in magic called the Too Perfect Theory. This means that if the effect is too perfect it ceases to be magical. For example, if you had a signed playing card vanish and then reappear on the Moon. The spectator could look through a telescope to the surface of the moon and clearly see their playing card, with their signature written upon it. This would seem to be too perfect, your spectators will not truly believe their card is there, even though they can see it through a telescope. Even if they flew to the Moon to get it and it was there they would have to concoct a theory that the telescope was a fake telescope and you simply had someone fly up before them and place it there (which in all likelihood will be the exact method employed). If, however, it was a signed card that appeared inside a sealed envelope that has been in full view (but within reach) all the time it suddenly becomes more magical and more believable.

Visual magic tricks follow the same theory, I believe. You can make a trick too visual, so visual it just ceases to be believable as possible. I do understand that we as magicians are supposed to do the impossible, but, you want the spectators to be on that ride with you and carry the impossibility all the way through to the end. You do not want them to switch off and think,

‘well it must be a magic prop and I could do it too if I had that magic bottle’ (or whatever prop you are using).

Let's take a look at the pen through banknote. If you could push a pen slowly and 100% visually through a flat banknote so the spectator could see everything then, it would be un-mistakenly magical. But the props would need to be checked in order for the spectator to truly believe what they saw and conclude it was a magical experience for them. If you performed this miracle all a spectator would be thinking is that can’t be real, that cannot be a real banknote. If you had to, (even for a moment) take the note out of view to switch it then the magic would be lost. However, if you perform the version where you fold the note and the penetration happens under the cover of the fold. The spectator then cannot see the exact area or how it was penetrating the note then there is a lot of mystery clouding the routine. The spectators have a ‘blank’ they have to fill in themselves, ideas of slits or holes can be ruled out as the note can be handed straight to them with the pen or pencil and there is no evidence left over to give them any more ammo. This is the moment they concede and give in to the magic.

A flat banknote with a pen slowly pushed through in full view begs the spectator to look for a hole, it is almost a challenge situation you are setting up for them. Unless you are doing real magic, there will be a hole in the note, there has to be. Unless you can hand the exact same note directly to the spectator and have them examine it with no worry of the method being discovered, the spectator will know there was a hole there as they saw the pen go through it. Even in this case you run the risk of them conceding that, in this case, you have an ingenious method for hiding a hole on a banknote, not magical skill.

Spectators are not Stupid

Spectators may be polite, but they are not fools. We have all seen magic props that look like magic props, but spectators still think things that look like everyday items are special magician’s props. I cannot tell you how many times people have thought a bent coin was really a special coin. I have had to remind them that I borrowed it from them in the first place AND had them sign it to prevent switches, only then do they accept it as a real coin.

A lot of spectators will also be too polite to say anything about your prop you are using; however, they will certainly go away thinking, that cup must have been a special as it is the only method they can think of. Unless you cancel this method out that is exactly what a spectator will think. If it is a special cup (or prop) then you have essentially fooled no one. A spectator will have a method in their mind for what you are doing, the more visual the magic trick, the more you will lead them (in most cases) straight to the method, maybe not the exact workings but it will lead them to the general idea.

For example, looking at Envylope, a magic trick where a deck of playing cards instantly and visually turn into an envelope. The spectator's signed card is inside the envelope, fantastic magic trick! I perform Envylope all the time, but I perform the change on the off beat, when no one is looking. One moment I have a deck with their signed card in it, the next I have an envelope with their signed card in it. It happens very quickly, but I do nothing whilst the spectator’s eyes are on it. I get much better reactions performing it this way, rather than performing the change visually in front of them.

Performing it on the off beat means they credit the deck as being normal and the envelope as a normal envelope but they credit me with the skill of being able to do it so quickly without them seeing anything. When I have performed it visually, I see people looking at the envelope, wanting to ask to look at it before I put it away or take it out of sight to switch it. The thought process the spectators have is that as they saw it change, although they don’t know how it worked exactly, they know it was not a real deck of playing cards or a real envelope, it was simply a special magic prop. By removing the visual moment in the magic trick I retain the mystery, and not only the question of ‘how’ but also the question of ‘when’ plays on the spectator’s mind. The fact that they cannot believe they didn’t ‘see’ the move happen instantly creates a moment of astonishment and mystery that is unsolvable for them.

Summary

Well, thank you for listening to my wild ramblings! These thoughts on visual magic tricks are, of course, my opinion and subject to interpretation and even plain outright denial! I have been changing the way I perform over the past year of two and I have been trying to find out what a spectator truly feels is magical and I have certainly found that by clouding the visual nature of my magic with cover or misdirection to retain the mystery certainly has my spectators reeling and questioning reality a lot more than when I perform something ultra visually.

Another by-product is that the spectators think about the magic more, the bug that eats at them continues to do so for much longer. They cannot make any sense of what they saw (or didn’t see) and I have eliminated the thought that the prop could be a magic prop by reframing the presentation.

So in conclusion I have had a look at how and why I believe that certain visual magic tricks may be detrimental to our art-form. Maybe try out performing a visual magic trick with less emphasis on the visual part of the effect, see how it goes.

Do you agree or disagree with me? What's your opinion? Let me know in the comments section below