"Spectators"
2, October 2024
Why do we call the people who take part in our effects spectators?
Maybe choosing a card is not enough participation for a person to be considered a participant?
It seems that these people are of interest only when they are needed to write something on a piece of paper, select a card, or draw a picture.
The only things we know about them is their name; and we must be careful not to forget that the human prop... I mean "person" this time is John.
John says something funny on stage in reaction to something that happens, we say "I didn't see your name in the script, John!", not even thinking about why John said what he said, and did it provide value to the show.
Without non-magicians there's no magic, just a sausage fest of men twiddling with their d*cks.
That's decks by the way.
Why are we not interested in the people we perform magic for?
Why our interest only extends up to "Did I fool them?"
David Blaine revolutionized magic with his "street magic".
What was different with his magic?
They realized that maybe it would be nice to film the "spectators" reactions too.
That was it.
Maybe we should try to engange with our participants and our audience more.
Point out how important it is that they are there to help you, or watch you. Ask them meaningful questions. Take their experience into account. React to their reactions. Have them be part of the show.
Nothing is more boring than a magician who thinks that he's the most interesting person in the room.
- Max Arcanie