To say that this will be interesting for me is an understatement! Most of my lecturing and teaching is based on verbal communication and adapting to the knowledge and interests of the attendees. During the course of that process; examples, theories and other data come to mind. In this (at first a rather one sided lecture) I don't have the benefit of visual communication or any non-verbal help in attempting to demonstrate my points. In most lecture situations I start with a concept or structure but many times get on to vastly different topics depending on the needs of everyone there. This will be tough to establish this type of string of thought here but we'll see how it goes! In the Q & A section that follows, feel free to go off on any tangent or different topic that interests you. I'll start off on "Structure" only because it's important to most people. If something else is more interesting just ask!
The number one problem I've seen in most acts is lack of dynamic contrast and structure. The purpose of this lecture is to enable you to more fully understand the need for "structure" or "formatting" in assembling effects to build an act or show. There is a real need to sculpt a show to keep it from becoming mono-dimensional, and to keep the interest up. A side benefit of routining is that by knowing what spot you have to fill, it makes you more able to define the needs of a new effect. There are some effects that can work in many different spots in any show, but most are suited more for one location then another. Some are openers or "icebreakers", while others are too strong to follow, so they have to close. In between are some tough spots to fill and only by understanding some different formats can we begin to fill in the blanks to produce the strongest show order.
I use the term "produce" because unlike most other performance arts, magicians end up being their own producers. Because of this, it is mandatory that we be knowledgeable in the invisible structure that supports an act. In an ideal situation, we would be able to take advantage of writers, directors, costumers and the other professionals that comprise the creative team needed to produce a show. However this is not always possible, so more knowledge is necessary to make up for these other artists.
The rules and theories that I will be discussing are my own and are for any person designing an act or show. I think the material can apply to any magician who does any act anywhere in the world. Even the casual performer just "doing a few tricks" should use a specific structure to avoid being a "run on" act. This is the guy that shows you his favorite killer effect, then proceeds to keep performing until he runs out of good stuff.
It wouldn't make any sense to open a donut shop on a corner with three other good donut shops that weren't always filled. It would be different if the others were always packed and had lines around the block, but in magic, that's rarely the case.
Designing an act for a specific market gives you a much better chance for success, assuming that your chosen market has a need that you have correctly assessed and that you have the act to fill it. Look for a market, then study the demographics and needs that are peculiar to it. Study people, other than magicians, who are successful in it. If you are just used to performing for friends at parties, the same rules apply. You will have a certain set of parameters that will apply to that type of venue. If you are designing for a paid job and that market has some space, and you have what it takes to fill it, then start working on an act.
The old rule for structure that I learned growing up was, "Put your best trick last, the next best first, then fill the middle in with the rest!" This is not all that bad a concept, but a little simplistic and leaves out a lot of details in the middle.
Since we are painting in such broad strokes, I'm going to leave out the finer details for now. Our hypothetical act will be designed to fill a 15-17 minute time frame. This is a good length for close up, stand up, or most other basic acts. Even for the casual magician, this length is well suited for the normal attention span and could work in most impromptu situations. My design for this length show is as follows:
Each of these 5 elements is there for a very specific reason. The "Opener" is designed to acquaint the audience with you as a performer, to establish your credibility as a magician, and to set the tone for the rest of the act. It should reflect your character and individuality so that they will know from the beginning what to expect. It is best to use shorter "strong" magic effects in the opener. The audience's attention span is shorter at this point as they are trying to assimilate a great deal of information about you, and complex or compound effects will soon become wearying. They tend to lose interest in the whole act before even getting to know you. For example, when you meet someone for the first time and they say "How are you?", they don't REALLY want to know all of the details of your recent prostate operation. Remember, the opener is an "Introduction." Keep it casual, simple, but most of all, IMPRESSIVE! The opening "hook" is a very important part of the opener. It is the first 30 seconds where people decide if you're worth watching. It acts as the ice breaker to attract interest and relax your prospective audience.
The "Personality" spot is there to acquaint them with you as a real person, just as the opener did with you as a performer. If it's a musical act, this doesn't HAVE to be a "talk" trick, although this is usually easier. This is their chance to get to know you and most importantly, to LIKE you! The only problem of showing the "Real You" comes if the real you isn't likable. This is different if you are doing an act with a specific character as opposed to a personality close to your own. It also depends on the intimacy of the setting and the tone of the performance. If the audience is in a theatrical setting, a more eccentric character is possible. In an impromptu show, it tends to be a little odd to jump into a wildly different persona just to perform. Some people live out their characters so it then "becomes" their personality and is consistent from show to real life. Eugene Burger can easily move from any conversation to the most bizarre effect because his personality will support it.
If you have any proclivity towards comedy or humor, this is the ideal time to introduce it. In terms of this spot in a stage or theatrical situation, it is best to use situational comedy as opposed to audience participation. Let them focus on YOU until your full identity is clearly defined, then you can begin introducing other outside characters into your world. In a casual show, the audience is usually more closely tied in to the performance, so spectator involvement is fine. Next, we'll be going over the other segments and the interrelationship between them, and some handy tools to help you visualize the production techniques to increase audience reaction. Also my "Act as Roller Coaster" and "Act as Seduction" analogies that will help you understand the reason behind each of these section.
DAVID VANVRANKEN asks:
What kind of suggestions would you have for a close-up worker?
My toughest time is getting started off on the right foot.
Just remember the opener is only an introduction, not a whole story. Just set the hook. For close-up I try to stay away from cards as an opener, especially any pick-a-card effects as there is a predisposition to them. Again the market will dictate a lot. Will you be starting as part of a structured show? . . . making a "cold-opening" at a table or strolling situation? Remember the opening is just to represent you as a performer. My style appears rather spontaneous, so I try to "sneak" into the magic before they know what's happening.
DAVID VANVRANKEN continues:
I'm familiar with the standard range of card and coin stuff with a few pocket "prop" tricks. I've found out already that opening with cards is a good way to scare off a group.
You're right, unless they've specifically come to see you, but this is a rare occurrence.
I can see two opening scenarios:
The first is the most common. That opening is what makes the real pros. It has to immediately grab the attention without being too intrusive. It has more to do with style than effect. I'll walk right up and ask them a question to get immediate involvement. "Hi, could you help me with something? Did you see any invisible coins here when you sat down?" This is just an example, but you could go into virtually any effect with the right intro. When I was doing strolling a lot, I had a routine with a Mental Photography Deck calling them a "practice" deck of cards. I would ask if there was a deck of cards there because all I had was my practice deck. Certain statements like this a very leading, making interaction very easy. I would show them the blank cards and say, "You've seen magician's practice cards haven't you? I start out with these blank cards so I won't be distracted by all of those numbers and colors. Of course if they were real they would have faces like this (flash face) but these don't have faces or backs . . . " The routine proceeds to have the faces and backs appear one at a time and then altogether before vanishing. The last line is ". . . but of course these cards don't have any faces or backs, that's why I can't do any magic with them!" They've just seen a lot of magical content in a relatively short period of time and they usually just shake their heads in amazement as you finish. Then you can go into a legit intro into your personality segment.
In the second case you could eliminate the opener as they are already familiar with you as a performer, so you would be better starting with the more familiar personality opening.
This could use more direct involvement by borrowing an item or something that allows you to be charming or clever. One of my generic premises is the "my first magic trick" concept. It allows them to learn a little more about YOU during the course of an effect. After the opener, I'll follow with, "I love magic . . . I started learning all of this when I was about 8 years old. My grandfather took me to visit a friend of his who was a magician, and this was the very first thing that he taught me." I use a similar intro for about a dozen different effects! I try and imagine what questions people would ask if we were just sitting around talking. They are usually things like, "How did you start doing magic?" The more of these questions you can answer in the course of an effect, the more interesting it is to the casual observer.
Sincerity is very important in a very close up situation. They should feel that this is more than just an act. Even if it's the thousandth time you've made that ring reappear in the envelope, it has to hold the same intensity time after time.
More than anything, magic is an acting exercise. We are professional liars. We have to lie convincingly, because if we don't really believe what we are doing, they'll see right through it when you're up close. After we get to the point of being able to believe what we are saying, we must then become story tellers.
Work on adding details to your stories to give them credibility. I have created an incredible amount of detail, only of some of which I use, to give the plot more dimension. They get sucked into your world if it becomes real to them. Make it real, and the magic grows from that "truth."
DAVID VANVRANKEN comments:
I am a fan of Michael Ammar, John Bannon, and Eugene Burger, John's being the closest "personality " to myself. I don't try to BE any of them, but it helps to learn from those that most nearly resemble my own style. (Eugene's nothing like me, I'll have to wait a few more decades before I'm ready for his "style")
It helps if the personality comes from inside unless you're an incredible actor. Even then, for long term satisfaction, there should be a basic overlap of character traits. One key is to examine how they "fit" into their market. It's usually not just luck, there's a science to it.
Would you elaborate on some choices for opening a close-up performance under the above scenarios?
There are some effects which are better suited then others, but many effects can be used as an opener or personality effects in a close up situation depending on the presentation.
PETE BIRO answers DAVID VANVRANKEN:
One approach I like is to get set to do a copper silver (I use a Dollar Size Lincoln Penny and a Silver Dollar) and you ask someone "Have you seen the magician? No? Oh, well, does anyone have a penny I can borrow? I have this Dollar, but I need a penny." (Then you do the silver copper in spectator's hand).
You also mentioned:
"Cold approaching a table, and having to establish yourself without turning them against you in the first few seconds."
If you are a pleasant sort you won't turn them against you. I also use a small brush and dustpan, like an elegant waiter, brushing some crumbs up THEN DUMPING THE STUFF INTO SOMEONE'S LAP!
PETE BIRO comments to RAY PIERCE:
First point you make that hits me is the fact that magicians need to be producers. This is really too bad. There is no real structure out there like the acting and singing professions,where you go to coaches, classes, etc. I was watching PBS the other night. A show from Spain showed a group learning Flamenco Dancing. What a lesson. A pair of "past masters" HAMMERING THE SKILLS into a group of youngsters . . .
You're right! It's possible, of course, to hire the needed talent to assist in production, but is frequently beyond the means of many people when it's needed most. Even when the money is available, I've found a real deficit of production personnel that truly understand the needs of magic.
Oh how nice it would be to have a daily rehearsal hall for magic with Channing Pollack, Norm Nielsen, Tamariz, et al ... standing there watching you, stopping you, screaming at you ...getting you to understand the total skill and techniques required.
It does happen occasionally, but usually requires such an incredible amount of time and energy, it must be a pretty "special" case. The outside producer/director has to first analyze, then sculpt the required result out of the materials available. It goes back to my analogy of performers being like precious stones. Some are potentially valuable, some "commercial" grade, and others worthless as stones and used as dust. It takes a good eye to pick out the best ones, appraise them and make the right cuts to make them priceless. Without the combination of raw materials and perfect cutting, the end result is diminished.
Benny Chavez did this . . . many years ago, I happened to be in Hollywood and got to visit his classes. And you know who graduated, Channing, Norm and Don Alan . . . and each . . . having learned the BASICS and the disciplines from Benny, EACH went his own way and created his own special act . . . top class as well, I might add.
. . . and Dale Salwak is continuing with the teaching. I agree with the concept of learning the basics first hand, but the finer aspects of performance have to be very carefully customized for each individual. This is sometimes difficult to do within the restrictions of certain teaching methods.
The SEGMENT idea is good. Billy McComb, in one of his earlier books worked out an index card system that I adopted ... and on the back of the cards I wrote the new bits within the frame that developed.
Basically, McComb's card system had a square in one corner with the TIME an effect ran. Also at the top (the cards are vertical in use) the name of the trick. I drew a line below and described the NEEDED BITS and SETUP . . . then below that the KEY patter and actions. What worked here was you could (OH, I also made a note along the bottom if it was an opening, middle or closing effect) lay the cards out and "frame a show" based on the time needs as well as the sequential needs.
Interesting that in may cases, as time went by, the individual tricks "TIME" changed. One item started out as a 6 minute routine and wound up being a solid 13 minutes! All gags that were added, no change in the trick, just bits, mostly lines!
I frequently use the same thing to format a show. The top line is the name and time with the other info below. I pull out every effect that "could" fit (given the parameters of the particular event), and then start playing with the order to get the right structure. I keep my "main" effects in one pile and my transitional or "in one" pieces in another to add in as needed to break up the segments and allow for set change time. Even with computers, it is still easier sometimes to sit on the floor shuffling cards to set the show. Now, I have enough "basic" show orders for every type of event, I'll frequently start with a template for a certain type of show and fill in the spots as needed, but for unusual formats, cards still have it.
PETE BIRO continues:
I also kept taping the shows, and would write (on the back) how many laffs an item got. Never achieved the same LAFFS PER MINUTE ratio of the ALL-TIME CHAMPION . . . CARL BALLANTINE. Nobody I ever watched (taped) got as many L's per M than he did!
A great point you make is to "Acquaint the Audience with Performer."
How many times have you seen a silent opening sequence, WIN THE AUDIENCE and have them GOING . . . when the Mage stops, moves over, fumbles to get the mike set and starts to talk . . .AND LOSES THE POWER HE HAD, LOSES THE AUDIENCE and it is dead time?
When you go to all the trouble to dress well, perform, move, mystify well, then don't even have the mike stand PRE SET, and worst of all . . . don't have a voice worth using!!! ARgh . . .
This also frequently happens when the silent act does too much time before talking. The audience has built up to many preconceptions about his persona and voice, and it is always awkward when those first words come out. Of course, Johnny Thompson uses this to his advantage, but few others can. That is the reason for the personality segment second in the mix. After 3 to 5 minutes, they need to move to the next stage of communication (verbal) to allow that interactive growth to take place.
Something I discovered many moons ago about doing funny stuff. If you are dressed wrong it is not as easy. Believe me wardrobe can really "telegraph" your intent.
An example is Jay Leno. He can wear the expensive suits BECAUSE he is already established as a funny guy. But in the early days in the clubs he ONLY wore the standard comic's outfit. . . Blue Jeans and a shirt, no coat, no tie.
If you walked on stage in a suit at a comedy club . . . GOOD LUCK. You gotta be dressed like the audience NOT ABOVE their level. If you are an ABSURD act, you can go nutz with an outfit.
I found (in my experience) that material went over funnier SOONER when I wore the blue jeans and shirt, but added a misfitting tail coat. The tail coat said I was a magician, the jeans said I was a comic . . . it was really noticeable in the reactions.
STAN LAKE asks:
Ray I've enjoyed the first part of your lecture thank you! One question on material. You said that some effects are so strong they can only be used as closers. For the sake of discussion let's call them "Killer" effects. Assuming you can weave some continuity to them is there any reason you couldn't do a great show of only killer material? Just one jaw dropping, eye popping effect after another? Do you think audiences need some recovery period between killer effects?
Great question! The problem lies with the law of diminishing return. All things being equal, if 2 tricks of similar strength were performed back to back, the second would appear weaker. There has to be some type of growth to effect a build. If a magician pulls one rabbit out of a hat, it's great.(OK, maybe not but it's just an example!) The second rabbit is a strong "kicker", but by the fifth rabbit, it has lost it's punch and has become routine. Madonna made a career by constantly shocking everyone, but when the "shock" is expected each time, it soon fails to elicit the desired effect, as her current revues are showing. I'll go into these thoughts more in the next section on sculpting.
A fairly well-known escape artist did a cable special of his "greatest" stunts. They were all pretty equal, and soon wore thin, where one alone might have succeeded in seeming more "special" because it allowed for more growth.
We have to realistically admit that we have a finite potential in any given show. We have to position (or select) each piece for maximum impact. Think of it as building a tower out of blocks. If you keep stacking the same size blocks up very far, it soon becomes very unstable. The secret is in realizing the engineering need for the structure of building something with the right foundation for each area, and the artistic need to texture and color it to make it appealing.
DAVE KNAPP answers STAN LAKE:
Have you ever seen a movie that was nothing but car chase scenes, one after another? Or a movie that consisted of nothing but special effects? Or sex, for that matter? I find those pretty one-dimensional; if there is no "shape" to the act it would feel like an assault. Of course, I also know several well-known magicians who think that is the best way to present magic.
TABBY CRABB asks:
Ray, is there any way the performer can learn to "read the crowd" better?
I think the first thing is to have the mechanics of the show down to the point of being unconscious actions so that you can focus on the audience. There is of course a difference here between a "performer" who works for the enjoyment of himself and an "entertainer" who works for the enjoyment of others. If you are the latter, you have to be sensitive to the needs of each group. With time, you find certain barometers that will help you gauge the crowd and you can respond and adapt accordingly. I feel the best pros get a consistently great reaction not by doing exactly the same thing each time, but by sensing the needs of each audience to pull out that reaction.
What is the best way to follow the general mindset of the audience as a whole???
I'm not sure I really understand the question, but I try to play to the audience as though having a private conversation with a single (albeit complex) person. The complexity of this "person" grows with the size of the group. As with any relationship, you just have to listen! A trombone player knows by feel about where the slide should start. Then they listen and with practice learn to automatically bring each note in tune. We have to do the same thing with each reaction spot in a show.
BILL WELLS comments:
Ray, you stated :
"There is of course a difference here between a performer' who works for the enjoyment of himself and an entertainer' who works for the enjoyment of others. If you are the latter, you have to be sensitive to the needs of each group."
Amen! I have known many magicians whom I feel have NEVER done a trick for anyone else. Every time they perform they are doing it for themselves. There is SUCH a difference here, and it is missed by so many. The audience senses the difference as well. A great and seldom mentioned point.
You're right, I forgot to mention the audience's perception! When any performer plays down to an audience or ignores them completely as if they were "beneath" them, most sense this condescension. A positive audience reaction (applause, laughter, etc.) is a gift and should be acknowledged as such. If you give someone a gift and it's not accepted graciously, you soon learn not to be so generous in the future. Audience reaction is the same and we have to give them credit for noticing these distinctions.
Those who perform mainly for themselves seldom project any further than the microphone or the footlights.
Or just as bad, are the ones that DO project past the mike and appear smug and egotistical because they feel the audience should be honored to watch them work! Jonathon Neil Brown and I used to call that distinction the difference between an "artist" and an "artiste"! I truly enjoy being an entertainer and bringing the feeling of amazement to a person (or group) as an end result. Everything is geared toward that. Some are driven to advance the art for their own enjoyment, and that's alright, but you don't usually see most of them performing. The bitter ones are those who are past the point of caring about anyone's enjoyment (including their own) and just cranking out the shows. As with many philosophies, if we keep the needs and feelings of others in focus, it can bring out the best in each of us.
PETE BIRO comments:
There is no better feeling onstage than reaching the point when the tricks, etc. you are doing are totally ON AUTO PILOT ... and I can just run amok on stage and do bits, lines, reaction,talk, etc. and am at ONE with the audience.
It's great if you don't get lazy! Some go on FULL auto pilot and would never notice if the audience got up and left! Mike Caldwell told me once he had some of his act so "pat" he actually could think of other things, the stock market, what to eat, etc. while doing a show.
When I worked theme parks back in the early 70's, we would do up to about 2000 shows a year! At that point, you achieve a different level of consciousness during a performance. As it was not a cabaret or "interactive" type show, we actually did better when we thought about anything OTHER than the show! In a performance where you are dealing directly with an audience, I prefer to keep at least a few brain cells online!
LEE THOMPSON asks:
You told BILL WELLS:
"A positive audience reaction (applause, laughter, etc.) is a gift and should be acknowledged as such."
Would you say a few words about applause cues? Timing, acknowledging applause, lack of applause at (in the the magician's mind, anyway) appropriate time, and lack of applause altogether?
Applause technique is a specific art. There are very talented acts who don't get the applause they deserve due to bad applause cueing, and mediocre acts who get a great reaction through nothing but knowing how to play the audience.
The first theory is of "tension and release." If you are in an active (or as I sometimes call it "Do not disturb") mode, the audience doesn't feel comfortable applauding for two reasons. The first because they don't want to break or interrupt the moment, and the second is that they are afraid that by relaxing their focus to applaud they will miss something.
It is important to establish this technique early in the performance and then be true to the form throughout the show. When you are about to do something magical, you should go into an active magical mode so the audience will understand the importance of the moment and pay attention. Without this focus, they feel cheated when the effect happens and they were not watching. After the moment or "effect" has occurred, you hold a beat and then release the tension you have established and let your focus shift back to the audience. This tension and release technique serves to condition the audience to be aware of the "moment" and serves the magician to allow him to do any dirty work during a release period while the audience's attention is waning. It also allows for a more relaxing viewing experience. Too many silent acts go through an entire act without ever doing a total release because they are worried about losing control. The REAL control is knowing how to turn the audience on and off to control both misdirection and applause at the same time.
You do an effect let's say, cut and restored rope. Reach the climax without releasing the tension (rope restoration) by keeping the focus (the rope) at eye level. Hold a beat, drop the rope to waist level and shift focus to the audience until the applause starts, then relax the arms and release the tension to accept the applause. If you don't release the energy, you haven't acknowledged the gift of the applause, and it will cut the applause in half. You can do a partial release in the middle of a routine, for example, and a full one at the end if that is what the climaxes of the routine call for. There is a moment in my floating bill routine when the bill first floats that is a potential applause cue, but by accepting it there it would lessen the reaction at the end, so by not doing a release and adding tension, if any applause starts, it stops the reaction immediately and strengthens the moment. If this isn't clear I'll go into more detail as needed.
The other real applause technique is a staging trick that I call the "Zone theory." I feel that you have 3 different relative zones on stage. Up Stage is your preparation zone where you get ready to work, Mid Stage is your working zone where the tricks take place, and Down Stage is your reaction or interaction zone where you communicate with the audience. This, of course, is mainly a platform tool but can apply in some form to any market. If you have your table in the US zone and go there to get the prop (and do any dirty work while in a release mode), then step DS to your working zone to perform the effect, you again condition the audience. You set your "tension" while you are in the middle zone, then on your release, step forward into your reaction zone to accept your applause before returning mid stage to "work." With the proper conditioning, simply by performing a release and stepping into the DS reaction zone the audience will applaud! I know this is true because I've had tricks not go as planned where there was NO EFFECT and by following the rules, I got good applause even though they didn't know what happened! Very Pavlovian! Most magicians have trouble doing a release unless they're clean, when in fact, your guilty moments require a release more than ever to take the heat off.
To recap, applause can be substantially increased by applying "tension and release", "Zone Staging" and the visual focus shift consistently throughout the act. There are many other isolated techniques that can be applied, but these three are the most efficient way to get more applause and ultimately more control!
STAN LAKE comments:
I think of applause as more of the audience showing their appreciation for the enjoyment they have received watching your act. This is why I find it tremendously annoying to have a performer stand downstage center making motions with his hands and arms to encourage the audience on to more applause.
I agree! If the audience perceives the cue, it has been done wrong. In the proper scenario, the performer has done something well, the audience wants to respond but doesn't know when the time is right. By relaxing, you are letting them know that you are finished for the moment so that you can turn your attention back to them. They, in turn, want to show their support by applause. Anyone who "milks" applause is irritating. The key is to allow the audience to respond properly where both parties feel good.
Johnny Ace Palmer's lecture notes include tips on how to get a standing ovation. This is all an interesting topic for discussion. If a performer does an act one way for an audience and receives appreciative applause and the next day does the same act but subtly encourages the audience into more applause and ultimately a standing ovation, does the second audience perceive the act to be better?
They do if they don't feel forced into it. If it feels spontaneous, it makes the audience perceive the show as a better event. The buyer is paying not for a show but for customer satisfaction. If you get a stander you have made the buyer a hero. The secrets to a standing "O" are very subtle and need a certain number of prerequisites to succeed on a consistent basis, not the least of which is a very strong show as a base. Unfortunately there are many excellent shows that don't succeed simply due to bad applause technique.
How many times have you applauded politely because the performer struck a pose for an applause cue and not because you particularly enjoyed that portion of the performance? Personally,I don't perform for the gratification of hearing applause. I only want to bring them enjoyment, whether that be through laughter, amazement or spine tingling mystery.
But in general, applause is a good barometer of audience satisfaction as nearly any evening at the Castle can attest. Certain acts just don't cut it! If someone willingly participates in a standing ovation, it raises their satisfaction index because it makes them feel they were part of a "special" event.
I would rather hear one person give me a heartfelt applause then an auditorium full of people who are politely clapping on cue.
That's fine if that "one person" is the one who pays your bills. Keep in mind this is only for those who desire to earn their living as a professional entertainer. If you are a professional plumber, would you make a living if you said, "I would rather have one customer give me there heartfelt thanks than have everyone else politely paying their bills on time." It is fine for the hobbyist, but professionals are judged by their ability to entertain (satisfy) a group of people. There has to be some measure of that ability and applause is one of the most widely accepted.
Again, good applause technique is as much of an art as any other, and should be studied as such. To do otherwise is naive.
Following your "personality" segment:
Your "Ballad" is to show them emotion, to let them know that you care about your art. Without this piece, the act feels a little mono dimensional. It's like a character that only allows you to see a "certain" image, always protecting his public persona. People can have some respect for a one-sided character, but real admiration comes when you open yourself up to expose a more well rounded person. When you see a person's faults and how he has risen above them and conquered his weaknesses, you feel a closer relationship to them. One of the most important aspects of the ballad is CONVICTION. I've seen dozens of acts do a slow ballad with their hands but not with their hearts. You can look into a performer's eyes and tell if he has any conviction about who he is and what he's doing. Without your soul, the ballad serves the audience only as a chance to check their programs or take a quick snooze. The ballad is the most overlooked of all of these segments, because people are afraid their audience will lose interest. It takes a good deal of confidence to do a ballad with enough conviction to hold the energy, but it's the difference between a person who just does some tricks and real performer. It should form an intrinsic link to the heart. Whether this link is real or imagined doesn't really matter if you are a good enough actor. However, it should be rooted in reality to be more convincing. If you can't select a piece of material for a ballad that you care enough about, drop it. It will only slow down the pace of the show.
The "Rouser" is to wake up the people that you put to sleep with the ballad! This is actually the start of the build towards the end of the show to move up to your "final lap" pace. As this is mainly a transitional piece, you can be a little more relaxed coming out of your ballad, as opposed to a "punch" opening, that you would use in an opener. Now, is a good time to try more of a complex effect where several smaller tricks are linked together with a common climax. There is an automatic internal build as the audience is watching several parallel plots accelerating simultaneously. If they're still with you, that means you have the control to attempt effects that require more concentration for a greater pay-off then would be possible earlier in the act. Many times, the Rouser will be perceived as a "Closer." It should have a strong ending payoff so that it fulfills the audience's expectations as a closer.
For the strongest possible show, we continue on to the "Closer." This should serve as a capper, an efficient effect that encapsulates your style and talent in one final punch. This is not the best place to put risky effects! People work years to develop a successful closer and it is always worth the effort. One trick for ending a short act is the magical equivalent of a comedian's "callback." That's where after several routines, they tie in to one of their earlier punch lines or running gags to pay off the whole show. This can very strong depending on how cleverly or uncontrived and unexpected the link is. In magic, all we have to do is set up some running gag or bit that never pays off as expected, then at the last minute, comes together. It makes an instant closer. Many close up acts use the technique of finding multiple cards, then missing the last one. After several failed attempts they give up only to discover it as an unexpected climax to a final effect.
Ideally, the closer is one straight forward effect with one or two strong climaxes in a row, and then a "Kicker" from left field to close it. To elaborate, there is one "surface" effect that the audience is following. As it pays off, there is a secondary effect that has been following along a parallel course which the audience wasn't aware of until the end, followed by the final "kicker." This should be a topper that is totally unexpected. It is the final event that makes the audience give up all logical thought. This release of logic is a necessary ingredient for total amazement.
If these three events happen with enough separation to count as separate storylines, the brain will handle each as single events. However, if they occur so close together that they overlap with increasing speed, they will work to overload the brain with stimulus and create this unique feeling. There has to be both an increase in power and speed of effect to have the necessary build.
I hate to use a "card illustration" but it has a commonality that everyone can understand. Let's say you're doing a "triumph" routine with one selected card (blue backed deck). After shuffling and mixing everything, the selected card is now named. Ribbon spread the deck face down and the cards are now all face down except for the chosen card (face up). Then as the cards are flipped over, they see that you've also returned the deck to new deck order with the same shuffle, but the now face down card has a red back. It is removed and has changed from the current spectator's card into the missing card from your earlier trick where you found all the cards but one out of a red backed deck. The first climax is okay, the next (all cards in order) is a hidden simultaneous plot revealed at the last minute. The last element comes out of nowhere and in this case ties the whole show together. The final "kicker" doesn't have to be a "call-back" to an earlier effect, it should just be slightly unexpected. I just came up with this example on the fly but it should illustrate the technique for making anything into a closer.
There are two analogies I use to describe proper act structure. One is "G", the other "PG". The first is the "Act as Roller Coaster" concept. Any good roller coaster ride forms a complete storyline with rising interest, plot twists, surprises, heart-stopping action and a great chase toward the final climax. As you pull out of the station, there is an anticipation as you head toward the first lift. After you get to the top, there is a small drop that acts as a teaser of what is to follow before hitting the next lift to take you up even higher. Now you have some feeling of what is to come so the excitement is increased even more. When you are released from the top, you begin a sweeping adventure with a surprising range of feelings, from the positive g-force of being pulled down into your seat to the negative g-force of weightlessness. In between you are thrown a combination of stimuli to bring out different feelings than you would have in daily life as you go racing through the experience and flying back into the station.
The second analogy is the "Act as Seduction" concept. This is not so far off track as it sounds as most performers are attempting to establish some form of relationship as they "romance" their audience. The more intimate a bond is formed, the more effective the magic. The Opener is the meeting. Most people have a physical attraction to others based on visual stimulus. You see someone enter the room and immediately form an impression of them. Right or wrong, this impression will make you either desire more interaction with them or less. The first effect has to create that desire in the audience to want to know more about you. The Personality spot is the conversation where you actually communicate with someone, and they realize how fun and interesting you are. At this time, they begin to feel an interest and begin to care about the experience. The Ballad is the emotional encounter. They gain intimacy as you open yourself up, revealing more inner emotions. The audience begins to care more and slowly lets down their guard. The "fire" is lit! The Rouser is the sexual encounter. It is a slowly building event that, well ... you can figure that out for yourself! Let's just say it's an exciting part of the roller coaster ride! The "Closer" is the phone call, the flowers, the unexpected bonuses the next day that tell you it is going to be more then a one time encounter. Without the follow up, it's as hollow as the "one night stand." Not that it isn't done, it's just not as rewarding an experience, and cheapens the experience.
It should be fairly easy to see that you can equate these elements to any well produced show. It is, however, considerably harder to actually do it! Application is always the difficult part of any theory. Hopefully this will start the process of experimentation in structuring to build a well designed act for fun or profit.
This technique is also helpful in working in new material as the structure helps define the area to fill. New material doesn't start out as a killer piece but grows into that status. New magic can be added by "hammocking" it between two stronger pieces to support it. Even if the new section dies, it is only a small moment before you can pick back up the pace. This can give you a great deal of confidence to try riskier magic without fear. A really strong segment in the middle of the show is called a "tent pole" as it can support two weaker pieces on either side of it. When these new segments get strong enough, the old weaker things are moved out to keep the act growing.
In life, rules are made to be broken, but it is my belief that you must first hypothesize, test, and determine what the rules are before you can break them. After producing, directing, and choreographing shows all over the country for years, I began to realize that there were formulas and rules for successful shows. The "Creative" art is in application and customization of these formulas to suit your own magic and style.
STAN LAKE asks:
Questions on the outline of the act. You named the five ingredients Opener, Personality, Ballad, Rouser and Closer. I realize there are exceptions but it sounds as if the model act would ideally have one of each ingredient, making a 15-20 minute act, correct?
Originally, I designed that formula for a 15-20 spot as that the most practical for a wide variety of markets. Each segment should average 3-4 minutes.
... Just so that I could see what you have outlined, are there any acts that frequent the Castle that follow that outline?
My best buddy Jonathon Neal (Brown) has a very good structure as we were studying these forms at the same time. Many others do have a good format to their acts, but not all understand the structure, they just developed it over time based on what works. That's all right if you have the time to try and fail, but to have better odds of succeeding quickly, I've tried to form some basic rules.
Unfortunately, I was out of town during your run. Other acts such as Loren Michaels comes to mind.
I haven't seem him recently but he is very clever. He probably has some formula for the act.
How about Jade? It seems like she is heavily weighted in the Ballad and Personality categories.
True, Jade does have a great act, but for her to break out and do more time she will need more contrast. I believe Pete (Biro) is working with her along those lines right now. I can't recall anyone in the closeup room that follows the formula. There are quite a few that have good structure, but if it's done right it should be invisible.
It also seems that this would best fit a straight or traditional magic act. Would a comedy act be a different animal altogether? Not exactly, but it takes a different twist, mainly with the ballad. In this spot, you would do the more introspective bits that reflect on your concerns about issues. Look at Whoopi Goldberg or Lilly Tomlin's one woman shows. Same rules, different application . . .
How about mentalism, is that in a separate category? Only one of them (mentalists) was exceptional (Max Maven) and I seem to remember that he had at least most, if not all of those ingredients.
Once again it applies. If you are doing more then 5 minutes, you need to have some structure. I've worked with Max doing a full evening show, and there is a sound reason why each piece is where it is. It builds synergistically. You spoke of breaking in new material and hammocking it between two stronger effects until you get it just right. Do you mean that this type of show is modular and you can unplug one Ballad and plug in a new one until you get it right?
Yes, each piece can hopefully be moved, given certain parameters of costuming, scenic elements and so on. With a little change, some pieces can be converted from one type of effect to another. The billiard balls don't work as a ballad, try them with different music as an opener. You have to look at the real strengths of each trick, and the flow of your show to best determine the final placement of different tricks. If one rouser isn't pulling its weight, swing in a new one, upgrading the show bit by bit.
... Or are there several effects within the Ballad section of your show that you can work with?
Generally, I try and keep each routine the same once it's fine tuned, but during the preliminary stages of developing something, there's a lot of moving going on. This 5-step outline is good for a "short-form" show. For the longer form, you don't just lengthen each segment but add other segments such as medleys, character pieces and so on. I just don't go into it as much as it doesn't apply to most situations.
Well that's it! The elements of an act in a very large nutshell! These concepts should work in most situations with the proper application. Granted, most of the ring members here might not need much of this information, but I hope it will give some a little help with getting a consistent act formula when needed.
DAVID LICHTMAN :
Ray, Alas, I've had to be one of the "lurkers" in the back of the room during your lecture. But I have to tell you that it has truly been one of the highlights of MAGIC! and is a super start for the Ring 2100 lecture series. Your post on applause has been one of the best and clearest pieces I've ever read anywhere.
THANK YOU.
STACEY MACKENZIE:
This lecture has been one of the highest points on MAGIC!, and a beautiful, wonderful learning experience for me and I am sure for others. Thanks so much for your time, your patience and your insight. You're terrific!
KEITH RAYGOR:
Though I did not have time to get in on questions afterward, I wanted to let you know that your lecture at RING 2100 was excellent. I have read and reread your notes many times and I'm sure will many more times. I've already started to put into action some of your ideas, examining my table routine for proper placement of effects to lead to the desired outcome. By trying to define the qualities of each and determining which of your categories they fall into, I've made changes to some of the routines themselves, and also to their placement within my time at the table. With noticeable results. Not just in their appreciation of the tricks but in what they think they know about me as a person also. It's been exciting and you HAVE saved me a lot of time. Thank you!
Thank you VERY much! I talk about this stuff so much I'm not sure if people want to hear it or just learn some new tricks! I have a real thirst for "performance" knowledge so it has been a fun pursuit of data to test my hypothesis. I just hope that it has been helpful and might save a few people the time I spent formulating these ideas!