watching this clip kinda blew my head off in the first 3 minutes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVNBLnQy71M
Penn said: "when we ask chinese people which magician they like the most, you don't get a person, you simply get 'chinese magic'"
so it made me wonder....if you ask chinese folks now, very likely they can give you a name now. And very likely we know what that name is.
how much as Lu Chen been doing do inherit all that from our rich chinese history? I'm not burdening him with the responsibility. Lu Chen did more than he could ever give to the community, he got all my respect. I am just wondering, is it even possible (to inherit the chinese mysterious veil in our magic)?
To first achieve that, we therefore need to ask the question: what IS "chinese" magic?
not just the props and the clothes, but the "what for"? is there a plot? Is there a reason for NOT having a plot? Is there a reason for just producing endless stuffs and sticking to that?
I need to interview gurus on this to know what this chinese magic thing is about.
2012年12月6日 星期四
So, what is this "magic" thingy about? [incomplete note]
wanted to write a post on what "magic" is.
I mean, my exploration into "what really is magic" (in the theatrical sense) has been in the back of my head for years, but it was recently triggered by this stats posted by Edward Lam on his facebook:
what he said:
"我心目中的「變魔術」不是Make Believe"
(imo, doing magic is not "make believe".)
"I choose to let people imagine: then they see."
(it's about inducing imagination and let the person take off with their experience.)
wow.
that one quote leads to so many envisions of many juicy theatrical metaphors.
somethng like how Nolan would envision a "frisky feline" or a "superhero bat catching a bad guy from Hong Kong".
imagine a mastermind interpreting multiple events to a very simple gesture "clicking of fingers" when it fact it was all part of a long convoluted scheme of events, but the events creates a pattern that allows people to perceive a supernatural figure/force responsible for the happenings. something along the lines of the below few mental processes:
--that it is EASY to perceive the pattern,
--that most people are only AWARE of the pattern,
--that even the SKEPTICS tend to attribute it to that pattern(but that requires a lot of left-brain logicism, not sure whether that is what magic wants)
--that people KNOW it has no real relationship with the pattern, but they can't help seeing it. (like "seeing" a santa claus)
Examples would be things along the lines of dark knight, what you would see Wayne do, or now you see it, or leverage,
or something like clooney in ending scene of Ocean's 13...what if instead of placing the chip there, he made it appear with a magical flourish, and what if instead of being the man, the lucky recepient is a kid?
Or maybe the story can go like this: in the beginning of the movie the the story of Clooney in his childhood was displayed; somehow the young Clooney often dreams of a magician standing in front of him, and with a magical gesture he makes this magic bag appear in front of him, and gifted it to him. Cute kid Clooney then realises this bag is magical and is filled with unlimted amount of coins. Now approaching the ending scene, clooney looks at the chip and his mind reminded himself of his dream. With sudden intuition, he walked up to in front of the kid, did a magical gesture, and made the chip appear (via the exact same hand flourish as he had saw the magician do it in his dream,). The kid realises the chip will turn into unlimited fortune by way of lottery.
Or, it doesn't have to be a chip. It can be a key or a cheque origami or a bank account or anything for that matter, any metaphor relevant in the modern world.
sounds like a romantic scene. Romantic...why? dunno. Just that fulfilling something in your dream somehows always grant that "warm fuzzy feeling".
But then again, it's romantic, yet lacking a message. I want to go up a notch and actually make clear what message I am sending with that scene, and not just for the sake of romanticism.
afterall, it's dangerous appealing to populist emotional triggers.
I wanted to find for him this video (my memeory tells me it is said by teller or Brown but I can't be sure) where a magician explains what is the real "good stuff" about a performance piece--it's when the audience reaches the point they simply wanted to "let go" of the shackles of skeptism, that the experenince in front of them is so believable, so seductive that they just will themselves into the "magic", sumbits themselves into the world the magician consturcted for them and simpyl enjoys the messages / the journey the magician carries them into.
I loved the description, but at the same time understanding that this notion does not apply to all magic; some of the more "make believe" school performers (I regard blaine as a prime example) focuses the atmosphere build on the "Realism" of their magic, i.e. the entire threatical expereince comes solely from "oh man that is impossible!", aka moment of astonishment. And it usually ends there.
And this has a chain effect to the audiences. Audiences who are given a regular dose of magic and is accostomed to such type of "astonishment moment" performances, they will react the same way even if they are given a threatical piece.
of course, that is what my assumption that the feelign of astonishement can be voluntarily suppressd via a conditioning process.
Actually I don't think Yann is a good example. Bad choice of case study I guess.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv_Xkz9zepI
at 23:51
Penn reiterates what teller remarked about magic: "Magic is supposed to be an intellectual thing"
How does one reconcile between the Mystery school VS Wonder school?
just namedropping to remind me of the inspirations I got.
--tommy wonder (on astonishment from attention)
--Garleon (conflict is one convenient/sufficient elemwent to drama)
--Garrett thomas X Paul Harris (impact of magicial performances seem to be more strong when approached with the "entire atmopshere geared towards one, unique moment of astonishment".)
(this is what I feel slightly uncomfortable with garrett's proposition, for I believe the reason why most products in the market attempts to construct "single moment" effect, is becuase that moment is easy to communicate through a video demo, as opposed to the atmosphere of a successful piece of theatrical performance. example like tamariz's close-up, something you can translate through a camera record)
--Cyril Takayama (magic out of mystery and surprise)
--Yann
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUv-Q6EgEFI
(what is the atmosphere in my head between 2:15 till 2:30?)
--Marco Tempest his philosophy about "magic as in liberally anything that creates wonder and awe, not absense of knowledge in methodology"
--Derren Brown (magic like hyponsis is seduction to believing into the illusion, so realistic you cease to critique)
--Penn and Teller
--Pop Haydn (magic as a logically valid conclusion with false premise, but even with that fulfilled does that means the emotional feelings and atmosphere of threatics expected of a magical performance will arise as a natural product of achieving/fullfilling this formula?)
* * * * * *
I also bumped into this video:
* * * * * *
the following, I ask myself, are they magic?
--a perception-fooling optical illusion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBNHPk-Lnkk
--the japanese numchucks video with white scrteen + syncing background
--the wall of 3D projection on buildings
--a video of very realistic miming with light projection (a briefcase that stops ans suspends in midair whenever locked by a light beam that penetrates through the case)
--a video of contact juggling (upload by huron on his FB)
--a video of "dancing presenters" in TED, dance and human sculpting as metaphors of objects.
--a clip of video editing trick (by thomas edison)
--a video of Yif with french bread
--a video of big bang with cards flying around the big LCD screen and make people imagine the feelings of gambling, risk, taking a bet, anticipation, and a "pull card from screen, colour change, puts it back" finale to mix with all the build-up anticipation. (WTF am I talking about)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYrYtp3UctI
(add in Derren's gambling emotion highlight video at "the events sp4")
--
and now for a really random inspiration from the guy sitting next to me who also happen to know Denis Huen purely out of chance. what is that feeling that I am getting when I realised the situation?
--you can't know everyone. if you do, you are really just knowing a tiny impression of what you got from those you know. you only have that much time.
another random inspiration.
https://www.facebook.com/ayochan.yn?ref=ts&fref=ts#!/
"孫悟空、唐僧、豬八戒、牛魔王，神仙妖怪，明明一切都是中國製造
那一段對白，每一個人都知道，但每一個人都當是一個玩笑――直到
the above is another example of "art as a lie to tell the truth".
oor is it simply a way to metaphorise an event?
yet another random encounter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUtS52lqL5w
what to waste 7 minutes of your time? watch this. entertaining shit.
the thing is, the creator himself spent 600 hours. applying fun theory, what motivated his 600 hours of dedication?
imagine if he had spent that 600 hours building the exact same thing for a school in africa...!
I mean, my exploration into "what really is magic" (in the theatrical sense) has been in the back of my head for years, but it was recently triggered by this stats posted by Edward Lam on his facebook:
what he said:
"我心目中的「變魔術」不是Make Believe"
(imo, doing magic is not "make believe".)
"I choose to let people imagine: then they see."
(it's about inducing imagination and let the person take off with their experience.)
wow.
that one quote leads to so many envisions of many juicy theatrical metaphors.
somethng like how Nolan would envision a "frisky feline" or a "superhero bat catching a bad guy from Hong Kong".
imagine a mastermind interpreting multiple events to a very simple gesture "clicking of fingers" when it fact it was all part of a long convoluted scheme of events, but the events creates a pattern that allows people to perceive a supernatural figure/force responsible for the happenings. something along the lines of the below few mental processes:
--that it is EASY to perceive the pattern,
--that most people are only AWARE of the pattern,
--that even the SKEPTICS tend to attribute it to that pattern(but that requires a lot of left-brain logicism, not sure whether that is what magic wants)
--that people KNOW it has no real relationship with the pattern, but they can't help seeing it. (like "seeing" a santa claus)
Examples would be things along the lines of dark knight, what you would see Wayne do, or now you see it, or leverage,
or something like clooney in ending scene of Ocean's 13...what if instead of placing the chip there, he made it appear with a magical flourish, and what if instead of being the man, the lucky recepient is a kid?
Or maybe the story can go like this: in the beginning of the movie the the story of Clooney in his childhood was displayed; somehow the young Clooney often dreams of a magician standing in front of him, and with a magical gesture he makes this magic bag appear in front of him, and gifted it to him. Cute kid Clooney then realises this bag is magical and is filled with unlimted amount of coins. Now approaching the ending scene, clooney looks at the chip and his mind reminded himself of his dream. With sudden intuition, he walked up to in front of the kid, did a magical gesture, and made the chip appear (via the exact same hand flourish as he had saw the magician do it in his dream,). The kid realises the chip will turn into unlimited fortune by way of lottery.
Or, it doesn't have to be a chip. It can be a key or a cheque origami or a bank account or anything for that matter, any metaphor relevant in the modern world.
sounds like a romantic scene. Romantic...why? dunno. Just that fulfilling something in your dream somehows always grant that "warm fuzzy feeling".
But then again, it's romantic, yet lacking a message. I want to go up a notch and actually make clear what message I am sending with that scene, and not just for the sake of romanticism.
afterall, it's dangerous appealing to populist emotional triggers.
I wanted to find for him this video (my memeory tells me it is said by teller or Brown but I can't be sure) where a magician explains what is the real "good stuff" about a performance piece--it's when the audience reaches the point they simply wanted to "let go" of the shackles of skeptism, that the experenince in front of them is so believable, so seductive that they just will themselves into the "magic", sumbits themselves into the world the magician consturcted for them and simpyl enjoys the messages / the journey the magician carries them into.
I loved the description, but at the same time understanding that this notion does not apply to all magic; some of the more "make believe" school performers (I regard blaine as a prime example) focuses the atmosphere build on the "Realism" of their magic, i.e. the entire threatical expereince comes solely from "oh man that is impossible!", aka moment of astonishment. And it usually ends there.
And this has a chain effect to the audiences. Audiences who are given a regular dose of magic and is accostomed to such type of "astonishment moment" performances, they will react the same way even if they are given a threatical piece.
of course, that is what my assumption that the feelign of astonishement can be voluntarily suppressd via a conditioning process.
Actually I don't think Yann is a good example. Bad choice of case study I guess.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv_Xkz9zepI
at 23:51
Penn reiterates what teller remarked about magic: "Magic is supposed to be an intellectual thing"
How does one reconcile between the Mystery school VS Wonder school?
just namedropping to remind me of the inspirations I got.
--tommy wonder (on astonishment from attention)
--Garleon (conflict is one convenient/sufficient elemwent to drama)
--Garrett thomas X Paul Harris (impact of magicial performances seem to be more strong when approached with the "entire atmopshere geared towards one, unique moment of astonishment".)
(this is what I feel slightly uncomfortable with garrett's proposition, for I believe the reason why most products in the market attempts to construct "single moment" effect, is becuase that moment is easy to communicate through a video demo, as opposed to the atmosphere of a successful piece of theatrical performance. example like tamariz's close-up, something you can translate through a camera record)
--Cyril Takayama (magic out of mystery and surprise)
--Yann
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUv-Q6EgEFI
(what is the atmosphere in my head between 2:15 till 2:30?)
--Marco Tempest his philosophy about "magic as in liberally anything that creates wonder and awe, not absense of knowledge in methodology"
--Derren Brown (magic like hyponsis is seduction to believing into the illusion, so realistic you cease to critique)
--Penn and Teller
--Pop Haydn (magic as a logically valid conclusion with false premise, but even with that fulfilled does that means the emotional feelings and atmosphere of threatics expected of a magical performance will arise as a natural product of achieving/fullfilling this formula?)
* * * * * *
I also bumped into this video:
* * * * * *
the following, I ask myself, are they magic?
--a perception-fooling optical illusion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBNHPk-Lnkk
--the japanese numchucks video with white scrteen + syncing background
--the wall of 3D projection on buildings
--a video of very realistic miming with light projection (a briefcase that stops ans suspends in midair whenever locked by a light beam that penetrates through the case)
--a video of contact juggling (upload by huron on his FB)
--a video of "dancing presenters" in TED, dance and human sculpting as metaphors of objects.
--a clip of video editing trick (by thomas edison)
--a video of Yif with french bread
--a video of big bang with cards flying around the big LCD screen and make people imagine the feelings of gambling, risk, taking a bet, anticipation, and a "pull card from screen, colour change, puts it back" finale to mix with all the build-up anticipation. (WTF am I talking about)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYrYtp3UctI
(add in Derren's gambling emotion highlight video at "the events sp4")
--
and now for a really random inspiration from the guy sitting next to me who also happen to know Denis Huen purely out of chance. what is that feeling that I am getting when I realised the situation?
--you can't know everyone. if you do, you are really just knowing a tiny impression of what you got from those you know. you only have that much time.
another random inspiration.
https://www.facebook.com/ayochan.yn?ref=ts&fref=ts#!/
"孫悟空、唐僧、豬八戒、牛魔王，神仙妖怪，明明一切都是中國製造
那一段對白，每一個人都知道，但每一個人都當是一個玩笑――直到
the above is another example of "art as a lie to tell the truth".
oor is it simply a way to metaphorise an event?
yet another random encounter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUtS52lqL5w
what to waste 7 minutes of your time? watch this. entertaining shit.
the thing is, the creator himself spent 600 hours. applying fun theory, what motivated his 600 hours of dedication?
imagine if he had spent that 600 hours building the exact same thing for a school in africa...!
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)