February 08 :: Books Vs. Video

[waynehouchin]

Greetings!

This month we will be taking a suggestion from one of our members - JimBowmanJr. The topic will be Books vs. Video: What are your opinions on the current state of how magic is being taught in a 'distance learning' environment and the serious lack of actual 1-on-1 training and performance?

Books vs. Video. Which is better? This is a question that has been debated for over a decade now - there are passionate arguments that are presented on both sides. Some argue that books are essential because they help to protect & preserve the secrets that they hold. Others argue that video is superior because it allows the student to study subtleties that are not easily expressed in written form. It has often been said that video leads to "cloning" of a particular performers style & presentation, but it has also been said that video promotes & highlights good performers & thereby helps to create good performers.

So... what is MY opinion? This may surprise a lot of you - but I prefer to learn... from books. Everyone is different. Some people are audible learners, others are visual etc. Reading a description to a magic effect forces me to visualize & mentally comprehend the secret. It forces me to work it out for myself as opposed to mimicking how someone else does it. The end result is that the particular effect or sleight becomes INGRAINED into my consciousness.

With that said, video accomplishes something that books cannot. Video allows the student to physically see elements such as: timing, mis-direction, nuance, and improvisation performed by the teacher - these elements are damn near impossible to teach & properly demonstrate on the page. Magic on video can also be incredibly entertaining. We as magicians LOVE to watch magic - for most of us, that's how we got into the art. The instructional videos on the market allow us the thrill of watching a master perform.

For these reasons (and plenty more) it is my opinion that both books & video are essential to learning our art - and the serious student WILL NOT limit themselves to one or the other.

What are your thoughts? Do you agree or disagree? Which method of learning do you prefer & why? How do you think YouTube plays into this? Also, what are your thoughts on the lack of physical magic mentors? It use to be fairly commonplace for an upcoming student of magic to "apprentice" under a professional. Are videos taking the place of the physical mentors? Is this a good thing for the art?

This is a very interesting topic & as I said, everyone is different. I look forward to reading your thoughts.

[The Dark Angel]

I learn from both. Video, as you stated, provides very important subtleties that you can not pick up from a book, such as timing, misdirection, etc. I also have a hard time visualizing things correctly at times, and with a video, you see exactly what you are supposed to learn.

However there is something "magical" about learning from books, perhaps it is just me, but I feel a closer connection with the author of a book than I do when watching a DVD. Reading the words that have been printed on the page before me is like reading the author's private thoughts, and for me there is nothing more intimate than that.

In the end, both are valuable teaching tools. I do not believe that one is greater than the other, it is merely personal preference.

[RebelAce69]

This topic I'm sure is going to be great, I can't wait to see some of the points everyone gives.

As for me, I'm part of today's "YouTube Era" or whatever you want to describe it as. I'm a teenager who knows all the technological lingo and where to download things, and what's faster and holds more memory. Where anything you can imagine is instant, and there right in your face in mere moments. I'm not going to lie and say that 90% of my learning material has been in video. This either from DVD's, Downloads, Youtube, or other ways....if there is any more.

This is for one reason, I did not know of the large variety of material there was in print form. When I started magic I thought the old books taught you only The Pass, Riffle Shuffle, and Over-hand False Shuffle etc. from front to back. I thought DVD's had the newest, best, and most appealing effects on the market to date. So, I went through countless of dollars purchasing DVD's. Yup, they give you everything you need to know but, all this information is easily copied, and distributed to the masses. Unfortunately, it seems the "Youtube Generation" in some cases is more generic copies of the material they watch.

Now this seems sort of off-topic since I haven't mentioned books, due to the fact I do not own many in-print magic resources. I've been caught up in buying all these DVD's I let some of the greatest learning tools fly right past me. I own Royal Road to Card Magic and have read it front to back, and glanced through it a couple more times after that. And I learn everything I need to know clearly, I'm able to digest the words and make them a reality with my hands. But, I'm also performing it my own way since, I don't have a teacher visually instructing my every move. But, that is another debate.

Now, I can learn from both print and visual teachings. Others may not. Both have it's advantages, and disadvantages. DVD's give you what everything is suppose to look like so you become a carbon-copy, in a lot of the cases. Books, they can't show you what to do so you have to be able to decipher what the words say into reality. But, the thing I have to say is don't just stick to DVD's. Take the time to read the books since the information contained in them is just too valuable to pass-up. But, as the others have mentioned, and will continue too, don't limit yourself to one or the other.

If this was confusing and all over-the-place with incoherent babble about stuff not related to the topic I'm sorry. I tried to type this before I went to bed, been a rather long day.

-RA69

[Nate Malini]

The magician hand book was my first book and so on.... then came stars of magic V.H.S tapes.
I snapped my first tape trying to learn Frank Garcia's Aces trick, you know the stop, rewind, stop ,rewind ,pause ,rewind ,fast forward "POP" oh and no money back on that." Never again will i buy another tape!" I yelled in Tannens Magic shop (more like mumbled to my self ) . then came the DVDs,the answer to my prayers ,so i purchased for 60 bucks at the time "THE FLICKING FINGERS the MOVIE" over 5 hours of terrific,mind-blowing magic it said that right on the case (I still read the case now and then). I cracked the disk trying to get it out of the case. no one told me i have to push a button in the middle to pop the disk up and out. anyway I have lots of books now i love my book collection I even convinced myself that it's way more dramatic to hand a library of books down to my two son rather then a VHS or a DVD set.

sorry for the bad grammar.I can read but I cant write.

[Gatitoxxx]

I will just give you my opinion as simply as I can: videos are excellent teaching tools, as has been mentioned. But there is something about books that has always attracted me. I enjoy the versatility of books in that they allow you to infuse the magic with your personality. Not that videos do not do that, but it is so often that I see people who learn from videos who use the exact same patter use on the video for example. where as in books, you can use your own ideas and think "how can this look fluid?"

I do not know how to express this sensation clearly, I just have a preference for books, but honestly if you can learn and have the confidence to perform, then that matters much more than where you obtained your material from.

[FliXeRoCk107]

Well, i only have one book on magic, but i found that really hard to understand. I myself prefer DVDs, because you can atually see what you have to and what not to do. But books are still good for school, say you finnish a lesson early and want to continue on with something you were practising in the morning. You can't exactly play the DVD in class, so just read the book. And also, DVDs hurt your eyes after a while, and books help you learn not jsut magic but also reading. Im interested to see what everybody else thinks.

Felix

[The Emogician]

I think that books and PDFs are great, but it's video for me. Watching someone perform a move helps you get it down so much easier. I own 2 books, and many PDFs, but I just find them difficult to learn from. I'm not saying I won't learn from books - it's just easier to learn from videos.

Hope that made sense. :)
Great topic this month Wayne (and JimbowmanJr).

[Sean_Raf]

Definitely an interesting topic no doubt.

Personally I love learning from books. There's just something wholesome about holding a book on card magic in my hands. It feels more bare bones and like how the masters would have learned - Remember a lot of our greats wouldn't have had DVD's to learn from. I may only have a few, but there are quite a few hidden gems in each book and that's the beauty, for me at least, in books - with a DVD you get what you get and you know what you're getting; nothing more, nothing less. A book on the otherhand has many ideas that are more often than not skipped over and whilst the same is possible with a DVD, chances are you knew it was there all along and just decided not to look at it. Confusing I know but I'm sure someone will have the same twisted mind as me.

However, as many have said, the DVD's have the advantages of a visual learning tool. You can see EXACTLY where finger placement should and shouldn't be, you can learn where the timing and misdirection can go through watching performances. It's these little tid bits that books cannot physically offer you to the full extent, I mean sure, they can tell you that you need to put your finger placement in a certain position along with a diagram but diagrams are often hard to understand and can lead to misunderstanding of sleights and the like.

Both have their advantages and disadvantages, and I guess it's just down to personal preference. But those who say "I'm a visual learner", I say "Sure you are..." Why? Because books can be just as visual as a DVD, it takes a little more work and effort but if you're not willing to put that in then so be it. It's all personal preference and no one can tell you that it's wrong either way.

Of course, that's just my stance on things.

- Sean

[Jakeh]

I'm a very visual learner, so it's DVDs for me. I have two magic books, 13 Steps and Royal Road, and even though I did learn from them, I found it slightly harder.

[EugeneSoh]

i perfer videos.
ex: DnD's Ginastare Double
-No one knew how to do it until someone posted a video -A visual.
i agree with wayne on books and videos -both great thoughts.
i dont mind learning from both, but if had to choose a side... Videos.
-I chose videos for the same reasons as wayne posted

[btaylor]

Personally,

I love books. I started out learning from DVD's like most of today's magicicans. Then I had a friend fool me so bad with the easiest effect ever. After hearing the phrase "If you want something kept a secret, put it in a book" . That changed my life. The more you think, books have advanced the art so much more than anything. I find that even trying to put classic books on DVD does not work. Wesley James put out his peice of crap Expert at The Card Table DVD. That was a disgrace to Erdnase. Somethings can only be put in books. Books also tend to be eternal resources. DVD's come and go and stick for a month or two, then are forgotten about. Books are great because they teach you something new everytime. Even little things. And books give you more for less. Think of all the material in Ed Marlo's Rev. Card Technique. On DVD, I'm sure it would be about $200. That's insane. Books are portable, and you can read them anywhere.

Peace
btaylor

[Flyspazz]

I was fortunate enough to have a very accomplished mentor that took me under his wings. I believe magic suffers from the lack of physical mentors today. My mentor was old school. He ensured I had mastered a lesson before we could move on to something new. Which, I believe was a good way to keep me motivated and show him I was dedicated. I remember him saying “OK, go mow my yard and while I plan for your lesson.” I hated it then but looking back I think it was his way of saying it’s not going to be a free ride and your going to have to work for it.

When he passed I started with books. How many times have you read a book and then went to see the movie and it just wasn’t the same as you had it in your imagination. I feel imagination is overlooked sometimes in the magic realm. When you learn from a book your use your imagination and put your own spin on a technique a little easier because you’re not pre-exposed to a patter or routine. It’s your imagination working it out alone. I also think overall books seem to be a better value. However, I can’t get away from DVD’s as personally I learn from them much better due to the visual aspect.

Flyspazz

[sky_lark]

This is a subject that many people have discussed for the last several years.

And I believe there is NO answer to it. Simple as that.

Books and video are each taught their own way. Let's say a card trick was revealed in a book. It was then revealed the exact same way through a video. Which is better, people will wonder. But if they are both taught the same way, what does it matter?

Why were DIY videos created if they could be taught by books? I believe the answer is as simple as pie. People just wanted an easier path. People wanted to see the DIY, not just read it. But to be honest, I think, that if everybody on Earth had the same level of literacy, then it wouldn't really matter which path they took.

Personally, obviously going away from my point, but all the same, I prefer books. No matter how easy it is to watch a video, books have been around for hundreds of years. Videos have been around for perhaps the last century.

So books could be brought in, redifined, scrapped, changed, and so on so forth.

Videos haven't had much time to be re-done. Perhaps in a few thousand years I'll change my mind.

[Dastra]

I like both very much!

But it's by far easier to watch a video and go over it than reading a book. You have to concentrate on every single word since it could be the one that makes you understand the trick. ( Hope you can follow me...)
Videos you just have to start and let the magic come to you.

What I like about book is that even if they are older you can get so much new and great tricks that nobody knows about. They contain stuff that is not recorded on video.
An example: The Bucks' Ginastaire double has been printed but there are just few people who really do it. But Tivo 2.0 which was released on DVD you see all the time.

Dastra

[palaceguard]

When I started magic I started by reading. Some effects were easy to pick up but others were difficult to follow so I started using DVDs. Now that I have some experience, I use both books and DVDs but I tend to have preference for DVDs.

[HeTaL]

In my opinion, if you were to learn beginner slights, or slights in general, videos are better; but if you were to learn an effect, it would be better to learn from books.

[cbols23]

Books. They are cheeper than dvds have more information and aare just as good but better.


For example: Paper Engine, TOOC, Drawing room deceptions, Art of astonishment 1, 2, and 3, card college,Expert at the card table, Jennings 69, and many more.




Also


most dvds: 1 trick maybe 5, price $40


Books: more than 1 trick, theories, and more. price $20- $40

[MitchellStafiej]

I look at some of the books I have compared to some of the DVD's that are sitting on my shelves and I realize that there is so much more valuable information within the books. Instead of having one trick DVD's I have a vast library of 1000+ effects, performance tips, etc. Whereas in DVD's I have under 100. I think one of the factors is that there just IS so much material in books and some magicians don't feel like reading through the entire book to find an effect that they'll use. For me, I find it's worth it because a magician will stumble upon hundreds of gems that can't be found on any DVD.

I like the idea now of books being converted to DVD's, such as RRTCM and Art of Astonishment. I think that keeping all of the material is vital if these conversions are taking place because as I stated, there is so much valuable information in books that you just can't find on any DVD.

Mitchell

[DannyT]

Learning from DVD's is good because it helps me understand what's being taught better because when I learn magic tricks, I need to visually see what's going on to get a better understanding of it.

Now I like reading books too, but sometimes I don't always get what their saying. When I read a magic trick book, I make sure it has some pictures in it to show me what's going on, otherwise I'm toast.

I think that you, Wayne, should put out a magic book with a few tricks in it. The thing I like about books is, that kids who are only interested in magic to reveal the secrets won't take the time out to read a book to figure out a method to post a tutorial of it on youtube or some other video site.

So I think books are better because less exposure happens from them than DVD's that kids just have to watch then go on youtube and post a tutorial within minutes.
So the ultimate tool for learning to me is a book with pictures in it. (does that sound preschool-ish?) :D

-Dan

[J.R.]

I think that as a beginner you should try to learn as much as you can from DVDs and downloads and then move on to books. The reason is that the video is a much faster way to see and learn magic. But video currenetly covers only a very tiny portion of the universe of magic, the rest can only be found in books. So in order to expand your knowledge of magic you have to study books. It's just not possible to put every effect and variation out there on video. In fact some old and not very popular effects from books can really make some nice blockbuster magic DVDs :cool: Even some effects from Royal Road to Card Magic are begging to be put on video for the youtube generation to master. It's not a bad thing. The damage is caused by people who do not honor the magician's code.

[Sinful]

I have not yet read any of the replies posted. I will read other replies after I post this because I don't wish to have my opinion toyed with before I actually post my real opinion.

I prefer video, however I feel most magicians should learn from books and for a few reasons.

DVDs werehow I started and got used to learning. I liked video because it shows specifically how to do everything, however as Wayne said, books allow you to create your own variations possibly instead of doing literally what is shown in the video. If you try to watch a video, chances are, you are going to mimic exactly what the teacher is doing. However, DVDs I feel are important because:

1. The teacher is actually talking to you. They are demonstrating things as they teach them. There are details in the video that may not be written on paper.

2. I'm a visual learner, although I can learn from books, DVDs are just a lot easier for me.

3. Entertaining. Most videos put out by sites such as E and T11 are just plain entertaining to watch because of their style. T11 videos such as Control and TnR are actually funny to watch. You don't just get the information you need.

Some people believe that books have more information than DVDs. MOST of the time this is true, but not all. You just have to know where to look. T11 obviously is for single trick DVDs and are a bit costy, but they are worth every penny. T11 has a great community, along with a media section for videos, and the DVDs they put out are awesome and entertaining. That is why I buy them. They don't release just small DVDs that aren't worth the price. TnR is totally worth it as it is just so outside the box. Control.... Pulse stop is awesome! Panic is just... oh man I highly recommend it as a great opener. The work that goes into these things are amazing. However, if you want tons of information, there are DVDs out there. Card Stunts by Greg Wilson, a lot of DVDs by Jay Sankey, DVDs from Oz over at Penguin Magic, and more.

There are DVDs that have lots of good information out there. People just tend to focus on the single trick DVDs.

However, despite the fact I like DVDs A LOT more than books, I will have to face the facts that books are more important. We have many people out there that buy these DVDs and then expose the secrets on Youtube. Have you seen any tricks from books exposed? I bet you haven't and if you have I doubt you have seen half as many exposures from books as you have for DVDs.

DVDs are also important though. They get new people into magic. It's how I got started. Most people when they start magic quit once they get passed the self working effects. However, a select few stay with it and continue to work. I am one of those people. I am also starting to stray away from DVDs (although I will continue to buy them). I started learning from The Royal Road to Card Magic, and soon I will purchase my 2nd book. However, I am still perfecting other things right now such as my ACR which I have from Crash Course 2 (which has a lot of stuff in there, I recommend it).

So I feel DVDs and books are equally important, however, I think that more experienced magicians should learn from books. The sooner you move to books the better because then you won't have your tricks revealed on the internet.

DVDs are my strong point, but I am willing to stray from it and exercise my brain to get used to learning from books like most magicians years ago learned.

Cerca Trova. :)

-Doug

[Mshade]

I don't think their is a competition in between them. I usually like to learn from books because a) I like reading and b) I can read it anywhere. Plus, in many instances you can get a lot more bang for your buck when buying books over a DVD.

In many instances I learn from videos too. Usually however I only use videos when the move that the book is trying to explain is hard to imagine. I also use videos to watch other magicians perform and learn from their mistakes and if I see something that I like I will incorporate that or take that idea and make my own version of it. Also, you can learn a lot of the timing and psychological subtleties from watching videos that you just cannot learn from a book.

So really I can't choose on over the other as they are both invaluable tools. I thing I must say is that I wish that I had a teacher along the way, someone who could take my under their wing and really watch me perform and teach me what I'm doing right and wrong. The problem is that all the information is out in books or on the internet that most magicians have never been truly taught what they know from a professional that knows them.

[roby11]

Both are great. Magicians have to come to realize that technology is advancing. In the future illusions will get more advanced and gimmicks will be more technologically advanced. We will still be many steps ahead of the spectator. Books vs Video is not only a great debate with magic but with Novels. The Novel is always better than the release on the big screen. Everyone knows why. Novels are more detailed and we get to use our brain to decide what the characters are going to look like as for videos we are watching someones vision on what they thought characters looked like and everything goes according to the way their mind thought it up. This is great because we have people out there who learn in different ways. I also feel its the same way with magic. The sleights you are seeing on video are the way THEY want to perform it. They just both are really great.

The Art of Astonishment is an awesome read, but its also great to see Paul harris bring out these effects in real situations in his video.

Its up to your good judgement to decide what looks good written on paper and what looks good in yur repertoire.

books and videos both have their pros and cons.

[Steerpike]

I have just as many books as I do DVDs. I say that both have their advantages and I have a whole slew of derogatory words for those who fall hook, line, and sinker for the dellusion that limiting themselves to one makes them an inherently better magician than everyone who has gone cross-platform as it were.

I notice that most of the arguments levelled against DVDs are made by people who only reference single-trick DVDs. These are the same people who seldom acknowledge that there are a lot of booklets out there that also teach only a single effect.

DVDs are, as some have mentioned, ideal for beginners. What many pros fail to realize is that the human mind learns through emulation. For the true beginner, actually seeing a performance is incredibly valuable. You always hear the complaints that they'll turn out to be clones, but that ignores the fact that with consistent performance, that which does not suit you is slowly stripped away. This fact has been pointed out by Justin Miller, Garrett Thomas, and numerous other magicians, so I don't see why so few people seem to ever admit this.

The appropriate medium also depends heavily on what's being taught. Jeff McBride's Art of Card Manipulation DVDs are considered a must-have for card workers. Jeff himself points out that when he first began learning stage manipulation, many moves simply did not translate well into print and were utterly indecipherable. It wasn't until he actually saw the moves performed that he was able to understand what was going on. In this way, DVDs are the ideal way to teach that material.

On the flip side of the coin, the material in The Garden of the Strange relies very heavily on power of suggestion and theatricality that is more efficient to describe in text. It works better in a book as its easier to get more information into a small space in the context of the routines. Caleb Strange also assumes the reader is already a competent performer with a strong grasp of personal style, and rightly so as the material is not for beginners.

At this point you should have figured out that a huge sticking point in this particular debate for me is that almost nobody considers who the teaching material is targeting, what it's trying to teach, and how it plans to teach it. This makes all the difference, but nobody seems to care.

[DavidMisner]

It really depends on what you're trying to learn, and what you are interested in.

Often times, DVDs will not have as much material on them, but the teaching will be much much better. I think in general seeing something performed rather than reading how it should look is much easier.

Books will usually have fairly decent teaching, as well as much more material for a cheaper price. Books like the AoA and TOOC have great teaching, as well as a butt-load of material to look through and try.

A perfect example of this would be a story Wayne told us. He said that when he and Dana were younger, they would sit down, and each learn an effect from AoA (Art of Astonishment). They would perform it for each other, and then teach each other the effect. Books can keep you busy for so much longer.

As a personal preference, I would probably go with a book more than a DVD. In my opinion, books refer to all written material, ranging from full length "novels" to ebooks and lecture notes. I like being able to sit down and just browse through at my own pace.

Also, it depends on the artist and trick. I'm sure Wayne could write a phenomenal book, but I prefer his visual teaching on DVDs. It's much the same with Danny Garcia. You can't appreciate his sense of humor through a book.

Some tricks work better in books than others. I have found that knuckle-busting card and coin magic are much easier to learn through a book, while the simple, visual, impossible effects such as Torn and Control are easier to learn through DVD teaching.

I'm sure you guys have your own opinions, and these are just a few of my thoughts.

David

PS_ "Cerca Trova":: The Circumcision of a Small Rodent

[Dana Hocking]

My 2 cents on how YouTube fits into this equation:

There are two major problems with learning magic from YouTube.

Problem 1: It sucks.

Problem 2: It will probably also suck in the future.

Since I'm preaching to the choir here, we're all just going to assume that those two premises are and will always remain true and that I win the hypothetical argument right here and now. Still, I'm going to keep typing.

The issue here is the system of psychological rewards that magic offers to its performer. Assuming that your performance is terrible and your patter is terrible and you're on autopilot the whole time spewing canned lines and corny jokes that haven't actually made anyone laugh in over a decade but you just barely perform the actual effect well enough to fool people, it's still possible to get a good reaction.

People like seeing things that they don't understand. As a race, we're naturally curious. That feeling of astonishment is incredible and its becoming progressively more difficult to find in our modern world. This means that some people will put up with an awkward, otherwise entirely non-entertaining wreck of a performance just to see if they can be fooled again. The bar for getting a reward (a positive audience reaction) for your performance is often very low because of the inherent nature of magic and the effect that it has on people.

Now, because the poor performer is often rewarded, he makes no attempt at getting better. He (which I use as a generic pronoun, there are bad female magicians too) continues to learn magic from people who are often just as inexperienced as him, never really knowing or understanding what these effects could have been.

Instead of an interesting moment in the middle of a bad performance, he could have created something genuinely affective and dynamic. A moment that his spectators will remember for years to come. A story that they will begin telling by saying, "I met the most interesting person yesterday," instead of saying, "Some annoying guy did something really cool yesterday."

For a perfect example of this, I would recommend that people check out Control by Wayne Houchin. Watch that DVD. Learn the effect. Then ask yourself if just the secret alone would have been enough to create the same type of impact that he has on his audience.

Dana

[DavidMisner]

My 2 cents on how YouTube fits into this equation:

There are two major problems with learning magic from YouTube.

Problem 1: It sucks.

Problem 2: It will probably also suck in the future.

Since I'm preaching to the choir here, we're all just going to assume that those two premises are and will always remain true and that I win the hypothetical argument right here and now. Still, I'm going to keep typing.

The issue here is the system of psychological rewards that magic offers to its performer. Assuming that your performance is terrible and your patter is terrible and you're on autopilot the whole time spewing canned lines and corny jokes that haven't actually made anyone laugh in over a decade but you just barely perform the actual effect well enough to fool people, it's still possible to get a good reaction.

People like seeing things that they don't understand. As a race, we're naturally curious. That feeling of astonishment is incredible and its becoming progressively more difficult to find in our modern world. This means that some people will put up with an awkward, otherwise entirely non-entertaining wreck of a performance just to see if they can be fooled again. The bar for getting a reward (a positive audience reaction) for your performance is often very low because of the inherent nature of magic and the effect that it has on people.

Now, because the poor performer is often rewarded, he makes no attempt at getting better. He (which I use as a generic pronoun, there are bad female magicians too) continues to learn magic from people who are often just as inexperienced as him, never really knowing or understanding what these effects could have been.

Instead of an interesting moment in the middle of a bad performance, he could have created something genuinely affective and dynamic. A moment that his spectators will remember for years to come. A story that they will begin telling by saying, "I met the most interesting person yesterday," instead of saying, "Some annoying guy did something really cool yesterday."

For a perfect example of this, I would recommend that people check out Control by Wayne Houchin. Watch that DVD. Learn the effect. Then ask yourself if just the secret alone would have been enough to create the same type of impact that he has on his audience.

Dana
Well said Dana well said.

By the way, we missed you yesterday at the party. Good luck with the music stuff!

David

[Sinful]

Well said Dana. Presentation is everything. As Wayne said, if you just stopped your pulse sand said "I am one with Dead." (I laughed at that part:)), the reaction is.... nothing. I know that a lot of people are disappointed with the method of Control (personally I'm not as I was expecting something simple), but with the correct presentation, you can make it into a miracle.

That's the problem with a lot of new magicians as well. A lot of people think knowing the secret to something is everything. Knowing the secret is only part of it. People need to get used to this.

-Doug

[DavidMisner]

Well said Dana. Presentation is everything. As Wayne said, if you just stopped your pulse sand said "I am one with Dead." (I laughed at that part:)), the reaction is.... nothing. I know that a lot of people are disappointed with the method of Control (personally I'm not as I was expecting something simple), but with the correct presentation, you can make it into a miracle.

That's the problem with a lot of new magicians as well. A lot of people think knowing the secret to something is everything. Knowing the secret is only part of it. People need to get used to this.

-Doug
Speaking of funny presentations for Control, I'd like to share Randall's with you all:

"Do you believe in the dead?"
"....Yes?"
"Well, there are dead people."
"....."
"I'm going to die for you!"

David

[Sinful]

Speaking of funny presentations for Control, I'd like to share Randall's with you all:

"Do you believe in the dead?"
"....Yes?"
"Well, there are dead people."
"....."
"I'm going to die for you!"

David

LOL! Perfect example. Good call there Dave. :) I laughed so hard :)

This is how you perform Control. Dress like Randall, chase someone down as they are going into a store and ask them if they believe in the dead. See what happens.

-Doug

[DavidMisner]

LOL! Perfect example. Good call there Dave. :) I laughed so hard :)

This is how you perform Control. Dress like Randall, chase someone down as they are going into a store and ask them if they believe in the dead. See what happens.

-Doug

Better yet, stand on the corner saying, "Magic show, right here. Only 5 dollars!"

Or, you can burst out laughing while you are "dying". That always gets 'em.

David

[Medifro]

As an avid reader and DVD watcher, let me say what I think about this debate in simple points.

The fact that there is a visual learner is simply crap, as Simon Lovell say, simply an excuse for someone who's too lazy to learn how to read a book. Learning from books is not hard at all, but its hard because people think its hard. With that in mind, what I HATE about magicians, is many say "Don't watch DVDs, read books", this is rubbish at itself.

Lets compare:

Books:
- Deteiled explanations of sleights and effects. ( Timing is taught too, but seeing it is better )
- Alot more effects in one book.
- Alot of great books are not in DVD form, like Carnycopia. Some are, but the DVD doesn't explore all the items in the book ( Steel and Silver by Paul Gartner ).
- Added deteils on the explanation of effects ( Darwin Ortiz books contain "Analysis" section, which is very valuble, yet not in the DVD set.

DVDs:
- Many great effects are on DVD form rather than book form.
- Learn the timing of doing the sleight, which although explained in books, seeing it done is different.
- See the performance section, which is always a joy to watch, not to mention its a superb learning experience.

So, with that in mind, a magician limiting himself to books only is wrong, a magician limting himself to DVDs is wrong. Because not only he's missing out great magic effects on both forms, but he's missing the detailed explanation of books, and enjoying performances and learning timing in dvds. Thats why many books actually have a performance DVD.

[Dom Kabala]

So, with that in mind, a magician limiting himself to books only is wrong, a magician limting himself to DVDs is wrong. Because not only he's missing out great magic effects on both forms, but he's missing the detailed explanation of books, and enjoying performances and learning timing in dvds. Thats why many books actually have a performance DVD.

I don't believe a person limiting himself to books or DVDs is wrong, they are just confining themselves. I own both, (books & DVDs) but I prefer to learn from books. Darwin Ortiz summed it up as written in my signature...
Dom Kabala

[jimbowmanjr]

What are your thoughts? Do you agree or disagree? Which method of learning do you prefer & why? How do you think YouTube plays into this? Also, what are your thoughts on the lack of physical magic mentors? It use to be fairly commonplace for an upcoming student of magic to "apprentice" under a professional. Are videos taking the place of the physical mentors? Is this a good thing for the art?


Been a busy weekend sorry for getting in late on the discussion here :(

When I first started out I learned by books and through personal instruction from "that uncle" who knew a few tricks. This was quite a long time ago and well before there were videos to teach sleights that were as widely available as they are today. I thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread to be able to pickup a book and learn the secrets of magic.

Today I still feel that the core of my learning comes from books but I supplement that learning with videos to get down the timing and watch how a magician moves about during the course of their presentation.

Books have and should continue to remain the core of learning for individuals serious about learning magic. There are far too many excellent books out there to ignore them simply because there is a HD video that looks flashy and teaches a few tricks. Books also force you to think a bit more about what it is you are learning by reconstructing the effects and sleights almost blindly aside from the few illustrations usually provided.

DVD and assorted videos can't and shouldn't be ignored simply because the old school of thinking dictates that books were where magic started and where most of the currently well established magicians found their way. Video gives you the visual presentation that alleviates that need for imagination when constructing how an effect should be performed. Video also often gives you critical timing and pauses that should take place during routines. On top of all that you get to watch magic which as Wayne said all of us enjoy and likely what got us into magic in the first place.

Personal interaction with another magician is a priceless part of learning magic and finding your way in magic in my opinion. Whether it is through lectures, sessioning, or just hanging out at a convention with other magicians. If you ever have the means or there is a magician nearby you that you can spend time with I would highly encourage it. Over my time in magic I have been very fortunate to spend time with magicians who have given me advice and insights I would never find in a book or on a video. These insights are the result of real world experience, successes, and failures these individuals have had throughout their careers in magic. Marc DeSouza, Nick Verna, Justin Miller, Danny Garcia, John Born, and Steve Duschek are just a few of the guys I have spent time with either in person or through e-mails and learned some of the most valuable lessons I will carry with me for my entire life. Now they may not have know what their influence was or that they were mentoring me in some fashion but I think that is entirely on us as students of magic to take in everything you are told and digest it to make yourself a better magician and performer. I would say that anyone who dismisses the value of learning in person from another magician is doing themselves the most extreme disservice towards their progression as a magician.

I think distance learning can work provide it is dynamic and not static content. There has to be some measure of back and forth either via e-mail, phone calls, or video conferencing. Distance learning isn't as valuable to me when I get the same cookie cutter video that everyone else is going to get with a few added changes here and there. This isn't personal training and it certainly isn't one-on-one education in magic. This is no different than learning from a multi-effect/sleight DVD. Without the back and forth you aren't really sessioning or brainstorming to push yourself in magic. Without that individual to push you and motivate you to better I find it difficult to envision real growth in magic. Performing for friends who pat you on the back or give you a complimentary "nice one" isn't real constructive towards getting better on magic. Performing for someone who will tell you the real deal and not mince words about what was good and bad in your performance is worth it's weight in gold.

I think the reason you don't see more of this these days is because we are living in the world of being politically correct and scared to hurt anyone's feelings. How is that type of approach really going to help anyone? I am not trying to say people should be an ass to one another, just be honest and tactfully give your opinion in a constructive manner.

I don't think it is a good thing period of videos do take the place of personal education. I think it takes away from the social aspect of magic and the brotherhood of magic. Getting out and talking with other magicians is part of socializing and developing those social networking skills. Learning from a video sitting in your office or bedroom isn't giving you any of that. Again though this gets back to the way our society is headed where socializing is headed more towards text messaging, internet forums, cell phones, and all around asynchronous communication. My advice, get out of the house and socialize to develop those "people skills" that I find so many people in the younger generation seriously lack these days because they were bottled up playing the Xbox or computer games talking over some chat server.

Anyways just some random thoughts from the edge....

--Jim

[adjones]

I'm like Wayne... I would prefer a book over a DVD any day. I think that a lot of the newer magicians are spoiled being able to learn from DVDs and all that. When I first started five years ago, which admittedly, isn't that long ago, I didn't know there were such things as DVDs to help me learn magic, cool custom decks, Instant Donwloads... all available at the click of a mouse.

I started with Nicholas Einhorn's Practical Encyclopedia of Magic... a very condensed version of Mark Wilson's Complete Course in Magic. For two whole years, I learned from that and that only. My only performance material came from that book. Looking back on those two years, it makes me appreciate DVDs even more.

Maybe it was because of how I got started in magic that I prefer to learn from books. I'm just more comfortable sitting down and reading it, learning a few things as I go along.

However, DVDs do have great advantages. Things such as visually seeing how to do sleights, moves, what the effect looks like in real time. You get to see how the performers pull off the effects, what their body language is, etc.

And because of those things, I don't mind learning from DVDs at all... in fact, I enjoy them immensely. But I still prefer books over them... for reasons listed before, and because they give you more material for your money.

Just my two cents...

[Ampersan5340]

I enjoy both but I think book's could hold more trick's and cost less.

I only have one book and it's very old, published in the 90's, surprisingly I found it in my garage and read it.

It was spectascular, it didn't look appealing but I learned 3 new forces and a lot of great new tricks.

It also had a variation of the luke jermay's poker deal. But the trick itself has been around for a long time

[Steerpike]

But I still prefer books over them... for reasons listed before, and because they give you more material for your money.

I've been turning this over in my mind for a while now, and I'd like to put forward this consideration:

When you buy a DVD, is it the quantity of material, or is it the quality of the teching of that one effect or small handful of routines that matters more?

I know people have been throwing the Simon Lovell quote around a lot, the one about people who learn from DVDs being lazy. I personally think that's mostly crap, but there's a grain of truth.

The visual learning principle can become a crutch for some, but the fact is that most beginners as I've stated do best learning by example. Raise up your hand and place your palm on the top of your head. Easy, right? But there was a time in your life where you couldn't do that. You had to figure out how to will the muscles in your arm to move. Then you had to control your fingers and hand enough to keep the palm open. Then you had to be able to coordinate your arm to move in the direction of your head. Then you had to gain enough awareness of your body that even though the crown of your head was out of visual range, you could still locate it without having to fumble around for it.

And how did you do all of that? You learned by mimicking the movements of adults. You saw the way they moved and instinctively tried to copy that. You slowly gained awareness of your body and were able to develop your motor skills. When your mother touched her ears, you could do the same. When she touched her nose, you could do it too.

Eventually, it was this gradual mastery of motor skills, coordination, and spacial awareness that allowed you to learn to walk.

Humans are programmed by nature to learn by emulation. This is what DVD instruction offers us. And though this is most natural and advantageous for the novice, the advanced practitioner would have to be a complete rube to believe he has nothing to learn from the medium himself.

[DavidMisner]

As an avid reader and DVD watcher, let me say what I think about this debate in simple points.

The fact that there is a visual learner is simply crap, as Simon Lovell say, simply an excuse for someone who's too lazy to learn how to read a book. Learning from books is not hard at all, but its hard because people think its hard. With that in mind, what I HATE about magicians, is many say "Don't watch DVDs, read books", this is rubbish at itself.

Lets compare:

Books:
- Deteiled explanations of sleights and effects. ( Timing is taught too, but seeing it is better )
- Alot more effects in one book.
- Alot of great books are not in DVD form, like Carnycopia. Some are, but the DVD doesn't explore all the items in the book ( Steel and Silver by Paul Gartner ).
- Added deteils on the explanation of effects ( Darwin Ortiz books contain "Analysis" section, which is very valuble, yet not in the DVD set.

DVDs:
- Many great effects are on DVD form rather than book form.
- Learn the timing of doing the sleight, which although explained in books, seeing it done is different.
- See the performance section, which is always a joy to watch, not to mention its a superb learning experience.

So, with that in mind, a magician limiting himself to books only is wrong, a magician limting himself to DVDs is wrong. Because not only he's missing out great magic effects on both forms, but he's missing the detailed explanation of books, and enjoying performances and learning timing in dvds. Thats why many books actually have a performance DVD.

I think that's BS. Being a visual learner means you can absorb more information by seeing pictures and videos instead of just reading. I'm sure there are lazy people who don't want to read, but there are also people who do better when they are watching something.

In school, I'm like that. Textbooks don't really help me, but informational videos and the like do.

David

[Sinful]

I think that's BS. Being a visual learner means you can absorb more information by seeing pictures and videos instead of just reading. I'm sure there are lazy people who don't want to read, but there are also people who do better when they are watching something.

In school, I'm like that. Textbooks don't really help me, but informational videos and the like do.

David

Math comes to me a lot easier when my teacher writes it on the board and does example problems rather than me read it out of my textbook. I am as well a visual learner. I can learn from text and pictures in magic books, but it is a lot more difficult. However, I can cope with it.

-Doug

[CDarklock]

What are your opinions on the current state of how magic is being taught in a 'distance learning' environment and the serious lack of actual 1-on-1 training and performance?

I think a lot of people who would have simply walked away from magic twenty years ago have options now. I don't think they are the best options, but they're something - and they're better than anything else we've had. Ever.

Nobody ever really developed a passion for magic out of a book. They developed it from seeing a performance, from having that bar set before them. YouTube puts those performances in front of more people than anyone else, and that means it awakens those passions more than any of us ever could. How many of us are going to be in Medford, Oregon this year? Or, like, ever?

YouTube is. YouTube is everywhere. So when some kid in Medford thinks "I'd like to know how that David Blaine trick works", he can go to YouTube. And most of the time, he'll watch the levitation trick and go "oh... that's lame" and he's done. But every so often, he'll go "that was lame, but what about this?" and keep checking out different stuff.

What makes the difference is when he thinks "I could do that". That's the magic moment (no pun intended). But he has to be interested. He has to see the trick, seek out the explanation, and then go try it himself. If you make it hard to seek out the explanation, sure, you only get the most devoted and dedicated people - because a lot of only slightly less devoted and dedicated people can't get in at all.

It's always worried us when more people are allowed into the fold. When IBM first said you could get in just by having a couple people agree you knew a few things, there was concern. When SAM said you can just pay your dues (yes, SAM is older than IBM, but it had much stricter membership requirements in its early days... similar to those of the Magic Circle (http://www.themagiccircle.co.uk/main_nav/index.php?Link_ID=A0020002) in London, England), there was concern. And when local magic clubs started saying you can just show up... yeah, you guessed it, there was concern. YouTube doesn't even make you show up; all you have to do is look.

But each and every time we've opened the doors wider, it's been good for us. It's made magic stronger and better.

So I'm very much in favor of YouTube, no matter what people do with it. I think it will go the same way as any other mass communication outlet: first it will be used to "fight the power" and "buck the system" and "stick it to the man" by stupid and immature people, and then over time the power and the system and the man will co-opt it for their own profit-motivated purposes. Somewhere in the middle, Good Things will happen, and around the time we're all agreed it's gone down the toilet - an alternative will appear.

I think the short and inexpensive one-on-one format Theory11 is pursuing is a better option than the $60 magic course DVD or the $30 single-trick DVD, even though - when you really get detailed about it - you're paying a lot more for it.

Do the math. You buy a $60 DVD to learn magic, and it's got four to six hours of stuff. That's 16 to 25 cents a minute. You buy a $30 single trick video, it's got an hour and a half - 32 cents a minute. A $5 one-on-one?

Well, the average here on Theory11 is 9 minutes (exactly nine minutes, shockingly enough: 19 videos totaling 171 minutes), or 55 cents a minute. The best value is the 24 minute card fundamentals, at just over 20 cents a minute - about the same cost per minute as the $60 instructional DVD - and the worst value (on a pure cost-per-minute basis) is the 2 minute Hugh Scott shuffle at a whopping $2.48 per minute.

And yet... I doubt anyone who bought the Hugh Scott 1-on-1 is complaining about it. Because the complaints about the other formats are largely that you paid for minutes you didn't want. I'll bet the Hugh Scott shuffle 1-on-1 is exactly what it says it is: two minutes of instruction on how to do it. No bloopers or gag reels or outtakes or performance videos. Just pure balls-to-the-wall "do this". Zero filler.

And that's the future of instruction. We just plain don't want the hype anymore. More and more people are saying "just shut up and give me what I wanted". Split that $60 DVD into sixty individual lessons and sell them for $5 apiece, you get $300 for the exact same thing. But because I get to pick and choose the ones I want, I can skip all the ones I think are stupid, and all the ones I already know, so I don't pay $300 for it. Chances are I pay around $60, because I only want a dozen or so lessons.

But even though I paid just as much for less stuff, I'm happy. I don't pay $60 and say "80% of this DVD was crap I didn't want". I pay $60 and every single thing I got was something I wanted. I like that. It's what the modern consumer expects: everything I want and nothing I don't. People are willing to pay extra not to have all the crap.

And here's Theory11 right on the cutting edge. Go-go gadget magic. :)

[Brad Henderson]

Let's take a moment to dispel a few myths:

MYTH 1:

DVDs are a more efficient (or faster) method of learning than books.

TRUTH:

It takes longer to watch a DVD than it does to read the same amount of information. Case in point: recently I was coordinating a project that required the purchase of a marketed magic item. The instructions for this prop were on a DVD. This DVD, was in French and subtitled. So, I ended up "reading" the instructions anyway. Had I transcribed the printed text I would have had no more than a page or a page and a half of material. However, it took about 30 minutes to watch the instructions - about 25 minutes more than I would have required with a printed text.

You do not need to "see" something being done to understand what needs to be done. Further, with books, you can quickly scan a paragraph and know whether or not it needs to be read thoroughly. If it is a description of a move you already know, you can skip it or skim it. With DVDs, you never know what you will be missing unless you watch every moment.

MYTH 2: You actually get more information from watching an explanation than you can be reading about it.

TRUTH: While you might be able to get a better understanding of the timing of a move, DVDs fail to provide all the necessary information needed for a complete understanding of a piece to the level needed for professional performance.

Case in Point: Richard Osterlind released a series of commercially succesful DVDs which some consider excellent. However, he also felt compelled to release a series of companion books explaining theory, structure, and elements of performance he felt were needed for a full understanding of his material. Why was this material not included on the DVD? Clearly it was important, if not critical. The answer is simple. While DVDs are excellent at conveying visual information visually, there is so much more to our performance art than visual information. This type of information is not suited to be conveyed via DVDs. And while some have tried with interview sections in the like, they inevitably take far too long to wade through (see myth 1) and are not an efficient reference source to come back to.

With a DVD you will never receive the depth of understanding and type of information which can be conveyed via a well written book.

MYTH 3: I'm a visual learner and DVDs are better for me.

FACT: Having a Master's Degree in Education I studied learning modalities. People who are visual learners process information well through READING. READING is a visual modality.

People who say DVDs are better for them because they are visual learners are either ignorant of the proper meaning of the term or are lying to themselves. They are using it as an excuse. What they mean to say is, "I don't like reading" or "I'm not very good at reading" and I prefer DVDs. Let's stop deceiving ourselves on this one, shall we?

So, here are three MYTHS exposed. There are many more, but hopefully this will provide food for thought.

Brad Henderson

[JackOSpadesNik]

Personally I would choose books. Why?

Material: Most books have way more material than Dvd's. Also it's takes less time to learn effects if you put our time into it.

Presentation: Whenever I watch a Dvd there is most likey a performance on there with presentation. Alot of the time books don't give you this, or it's just cheesy presentation, This forces me to be creative and make up some completely original patter.

Exposure: Most of my performances are at school. A very challenging place to perform surrounded by Hecklers. Also a lot of the students go and look up tricks on the internet to find out how they're done. It's very hard to find effects in books revealed on the internet unless they were also explained on video. This prevents people from going up to me and obnoxiously saying" I know how you did that!"

Creation: Books can sometimesbe confusing. This can be turned into a good thing. Sometimes I misread an effect in a book and create a new effect entirely.

Also, Dvds have more mainstream material. If you picked out an effect from a book, most likely, you won't see anybody else performing it.





I rarely buy Dvds, but the good things about Dvds are:

Teaching: IMO it is easier to get information from a Dvd. It may take longer, but most good Dvd's teach the tricks in complete detail. It gives you timing, angles, and it's could be a lot more entertaining than a book depending on the magician. Also Chupacabras eat books and not Dvd's, so that's a Pro for Dvd's.


Thats my input. Love the topic.

[Guardian452]

to me its like this.

Would you rather get to the store in vans or converse?

they both get you there

[Brad Henderson]

No...no, they don't.

[CDarklock]

FACT: Having a Master's Degree in Education I studied learning modalities.

Then you ought to know they're wrong. The divisions are simply inapplicable. Allow me to digress slightly onto other results in modern research (and by "modern", I mean "since the 1960s").

An infant learns more readily from watching a physically present human being than from a video of that same human being (and, incidentally, we don't know why... that's how smart the "experts" are). A sound video, in turn, is more effective than a silent video. A silent video is superior to a series of still photographs. Photographs are superior to line drawings. Realistic line drawings are superior to diagrams.

It doesn't matter how well the child learns from diagrams; yes, many children learn better from diagrams than other children learn from video. But the same child will learn better from video than he will learn from diagrams. Every. Single. Time.

Experimentally proven, time and time again, the bread-and-butter of child developmental psychology. Mom teaches better than television. End. Of. Story. The key factor is not how the information enters your brain, but the level of abstraction your brain must track and decipher to extract the meaning.

No sensible human being can honestly expect to argue that words are a less abstract representation than diagrams.

The classical description of learning modalities is wrong, and has always been wrong, and it is only through sheer pigheadedness that the educational science community hasn't replaced it with a better model. If you have taught anyone anything with any degree of success, you know the key question is not whether they get the information through their ears or their eyes, but whether the information they get is readily understandable in the context of the information they already have.

Which is just patently obvious to anyone who's actually paying attention.

Learning modalities are really just bad descriptions of how much abstraction a particular human brain can correlate to reality, combined with a notion of how distant two abstract thoughts can be in cognitive terms while still being productively connected by the student, then expressed in terms of their source of sensory input. It's a linear scale measuring two variables that aren't even related, then arbitrarily labeling them as belonging to a physical capacity that has nothing to do with either of them.

That's... well, insane, not to put too fine a point on it. If you remember your calculus, you know that you simply can't do this. It's every bit as backwards as the idea of the four humours coursing through the body, and pressing books on people who learn better from DVDs is the intellectual equivalent of bloodletting.

What they mean to say is, "I don't like reading" or "I'm not very good at reading"

I say a DVD is superior to a book as the teaching mechanism for performance art, whether it be magic or guitar or martial arts or whatever, because it is simply unnecessary to encapsulate such an art in any sort of abstraction - verbal or otherwise.

Now tell me how much I don't like reading and am not very good at it.

[VagueTheory]

Books are definitely major magic enhancement.....tools. They contain SOOOOOO much material that'll take hours to put on a DVD.

The only thing with me is that I learn visually more than by reading, even with pictures. For example, a book might say , "Now clip card on the outer right edge with your pinky and ring finger. Now rotate it counter clock-wise. Flip it in a way so that the back isn't exposed by alternating your fingers like so..." I just can't do it.

However, I would love to read books. I'm just not that great of a reading learner.

[Brad Henderson]

CD,

Whether or not modalities are an accurate theory is irrelevant to my point.

As learning modalities are defined, a visual learner (which is a term from that theory) is someone who learns well from information which includes READING - by definition.

When someone chooses to say, "I am a visual learner" and that they are handicapped by trying to learn from books they are invoking the "visual modality creed."

But, and this is my point, they are wrong.

In schools of education - where these concepts come from, whether you agree with them or not - teachers are taught that they need to appeal to a wide variety of modalities in order for their students to maximize their learning potential. They are taught about "visual learners" and that term and a general (but inaccurate) understanding of that concept has leaked into the public awareness.

When someone chooses to adopt the "visual learner" moniker and use it as an excuse for not understanding printed text, they are making an error - more importantly, they are making an excuse.

There are aspects to material conveyed via visual media such as DVDs that may make them more attractive to some people (I do not think anyone would argue with that), however it is NOT because these people are - as defined by learning modality theory - visual learners.

If you are going to invoke a theory as your excuse, the least these people can do is use that theory properly.

The problem isn't with the theory (which I too feel has it's flaws). The problem is with people who do not understand what it is meant to say, using it as an excuse.

Make sense?

Brad Henderson

[Brad Henderson]

I say a DVD is superior to a book as the teaching mechanism for performance art, whether it be magic or guitar or martial arts or whatever, because it is simply unnecessary to encapsulate such an art in any sort of abstraction - verbal or otherwise.

Now tell me how much I don't like reading and am not very good at it.



If your understanding of "magic" is merely, "I place this finger here, I place this finger there, and they can't see the coin" then maybe a DVD is all you will ever need.

But as far as magic as an art, a tool which provides a feelingful response from those who participate/witness it, the abstract thought will be required. The artist must have an intent and then - using symbolic structures (paint, color, sound, even card tricks) - creates a presentation of those structures which produces in the audience that response. The very tenets of aesthetic theory are by their nature abstract.

You do not come to an understanding of them without abstract thought. I suppose you could have someone read their ideas to you on DVD, but not only is that an inefficient use of time it does not change the notion that we are still dealing with abstractions. Sure, they are words entering our head via sound versus light waves - but they are still abstract.

Of course, without practical application then you have little to nothing either. But that's YOUR practical application. Watching someone else does not "get us to the same store."

All great artists understand theory. Even "untrained artists" can tell you that something will work and something else won't and why. They may not use the same language, but they see more than the merely physical.

All theory is abstract. And you can't understand your art without theory. Without understanding, there is only mimicry.

B

[Steerpike]

If your understanding of "magic" is merely, "I place this finger here, I place this finger there, and they can't see the coin" then maybe a DVD is all you will ever need.

So there's nothing to be learned or gained from watching a performance outside of the purely mechanical?

All theory is abstract. And you can't understand your art without theory. Without understanding, there is only mimicry.

And am I to believe that books are the only way understanding can be achieved?

I recall when I first started taking this seriously. I watched performances very intensely and studied what was going on. I figured out the things that worked and why they worked.

That suggests two things. It could be that it is possible with the right frame of mind to gain from observation what could be gained from written instruction. Or it could be that I'm just a genius. Personally, I'm cool with either answer.

[Brad Henderson]

Of course, you can watch a performance and glean information from it. However, that is different from a teacher communicating theory in a usable form to the student. DVDs are an excellent tool for communicating visual information visually. However, there is more to our art than understanding purely visual information. Likewise, when we look at the body of work already in existence, you find (as a rule) authors relying on the printed word when it matters to them to communicate theoretical or aesthetic concepts to their students. Even Osterlind chose to supplement his DVDs with books because he knew that critical information was left out of the project. Not his fault. It was information that simply did not transfer readily for a mere watching of the DVD and clearly many people were missing the point. While you may be a genius and be able to draw the perfect conclusions from watching a performance, not everyone can. How wonderful is it that we have the opportunity for creators to share the insights so we can understand them EXACTLY as they intended, free from our guessing! How do they end up doing this - well, non-visually, through words. And the most efficient means to transmit words is through text.

But let's look at the real issue: A DVD is a tool. And sadly some are so emotionally attached to this tool they fail to be able to evaluate it critically. It can do some jobs VERY well. But like any tool, there are some jobs it can sort of do if you force it, and there are some jobs it cannot do at all.

Further, the quality of the teacher wielding the tool and the experience of the student witnessing the product produced by the tool also must be taken into account.

Simply because something is delivered via DVD does not make it good. Some brilliant teachers can exploit the medium brilliantly, and others fail.

Likewise, some material can be taught effectively through DVDs and other types of material can't.

The printed word, by its nature, can do a better job of communicating certain types of critical information in a more efficient and accessible manner than a DVD. Sure, you can have theory on a DVD. But I can also use a screw driver to remove a nail from a wall. Its messy. It takes longer than it should. And I end up with an ugly wall, but I suppose you can say it got the job done.

But when all is said and done, do you really want to build your house using only ill fitting tools, or would you be better serve investing in the best tools to get the job done to the best of your ability - even if that means taking some time to train with tools that may not be the easiest to use, at first?

Brad Henderson

[CDarklock]

The problem isn't with the theory (which I too feel has it's flaws). The problem is with people who do not understand what it is meant to say, using it as an excuse.

If I claim that I like orange juice because I have more orange genes than blue ones, the explanation may be completely insane, but it doesn't mean I don't actually like orange juice.

The student has a problem - a real problem, and one which only he can see - which he is simply not equipped to understand. He does the best he can, but the available information is confusing... and what appears understandable to him, he doesn't properly understand.

So because of this ignorance, a perfectly natural and normal and understandable ignorance, the people who are equipped to understand the problem are claiming the problem does not exist. After all, his explanation is clearly wrong.

That's just plain sadistic.

Remember, my position is that these are people who have trouble understanding abstract concepts. If you observe that they improperly explain the abstract concept of how they learn, doesn't that actually support my position?

[Brad Henderson]

No.

First, you cannot equate the ability to understand abstract concepts with the idea that people process information better through certain channels over others based on the degree of abstraction inherent in those channels. Some ideas will always be abstract by their nature. Whether the contemplation occurs in person, on video, or in a book there WILL be abstraction and we might as well accept the fact that in order to be a well rounded succesful person, we need to develop the skills to be able to deal with abstract thought/ideas.

But you argument misses the point.

The idea of learning modalities have allowed many people to claim an unearned victim status - "It's not my fault I did bad in class, my modalities are not being addressed."

In magic we see it all the time - "I can't learn from books, I'm a visual learner." The reason they glom onto this idea is because they believe that it gives them an excuse. It's not their fault they have a hard time with books - it's something genetic - inborn.

The title "visual learner" is almost like putting a handicapped sticker on one's liscense plate. But the thing is, they have filled out an application for something they are unqualified to receive. If Learning modalities exist, which apparently these people beleive as they have adopted the language of the field, then their self defined modality is NOT the reason they have problems reading.

Now, could there be other reasons they have difficulty with the printed word? Of course. You and I are in complete agreement.

They could have a real learning disability - dyslexia for example. They could have issues with memory. They could simply be unpracticed and unskilled at comprehension.

But all of these are accurate reasons and do not carry the same "victim mentality" the "I'm a visual learner" does.

There is nothing wrong with having a difficult time reading. When I was in high school, reading was a chore. I could not understand my text books if my life depended on it. There is nothing wrong with not liking to read. It wasn't until my college years that I began enjoying the process. But this IS something wrong with making excuses, and the "I'm a visual learner so Ic an;t learn from reading" mantra is - by its very nature and definition - nothing more than an excuse.

And here's why it's a problem.

When you "give up" which most self proclaimed visual learners seem to be using their title as an excuse to do, you will NEVER improve. I couldn't read a text book in High School. but I can work through the most challenging of materials now. It used to take me hours to read a few pages, but I can devour a book now.

If I made excuses and gave up, I would have never improved - and an entire world of knowledge would have remained closed to me.

"I'm a visual learner" is an excuse. People who make excuses will not improve. And if you do not improve, you are selling YOURSELF short.

If you have a real problem with reading, that's understandable. But real problems have real solutions. Made up problems are the lazy way out.

Brad Henderson

[Steerpike]

How do they end up doing this - well, non-visually, through words. And the most efficient means to transmit words is through text.

But what good is theory without execution? The two are inseparably linked.

It's not enough to read theory, you have to witness it through field-testing and personal experience. Part of this is watching others perform. Does the printed word convey complex theory better? Generally, yes. Obviously, there's some merit to the spoken word or no one would ever go to see lectures, but as a general thing...

But it really doesn't matter if you don't have a visual cue to follow in the earliest stages.

[Brad Henderson]

You are confusing teaching and performance. Theory cannot exist without practice. From a teaching perspective, books do a much better job of communicating theory explicitly.

Of course, without putting those ideas into practice in your own work, it remains purely academic.

We have hundreds of years of history of people who have developed an amazing understanding of magic solely from personal practice and books. ( Of course, they may have had access to fellow magicians from whom to learn, but that condition still exists in the DVD world.) The very act of reading a book and translating those ideas into practice FORCE understanding as decisions must be made. We KNOW that you can become a succesful and well rounded magician solely from books. We have hundreds of years of proof to that effect.

DVDs however do not force the same level of understanding. Further, I do not think any would argue that they are a less efficient means of communicating theory explicitly. Finally, there are many people who think that they "know a trick" because they saw it explained on a DVD. You and I both know this to be bunk, but I say this to affirm your point that these ideas must be brought to life through PRACTICE by the performer in order to be real.

This can be done through both books and DVDs however books necessitate understanding, DVDs do not. Both books and DVDs can communicate theoretical concepts, but books do so much more efficiently and effectively given the nature of the medium of communication.

I was around when the very first magic videos appeared.

I consulted on some of the most influential early video projects.

I have seen how the producer's goals were met, and were failed to be met, by the intended audience. I have seen how the "magic scene" has changed and how students have been affected.

With a diet solely of DVD content, one can get by with mimicry and imitation without understanding. With books, that is nigh impossible. Great students can learn from DVDs but in every case they eventually realize the importance of books.

How's this for a simple fact, there are thousands of essential texts that will NEVER be realized on DVD. They can't be. The best we could hope is one man (or woman's) interpretation of the material in a great classic text, but even then, unless we go to the text, we will never know if we truly are getting a representative picture of the author's intent.

The smart student learns from all sources. The smartest students learn from the sources which teach the most, most efficiently.

[Steerpike]

We KNOW that you can become a succesful and well rounded magician solely from books. We have hundreds of years of proof to that effect.

DVDs however do not force the same level of understanding.

I'm just going to let this stand on its own and trust the rest of you to figure out what I'm implying.

With a diet solely of DVD content, one can get by with mimicry and imitation without understanding. With books, that is nigh impossible. Great students can learn from DVDs but in every case they eventually realize the importance of books.

But in the end, performance is the crucible.

How's this for a simple fact, there are thousands of essential texts that will NEVER be realized on DVD.

Quite a bold statemnt. Also difficult to prove.

The best we could hope is one man (or woman's) interpretation of the material in a great classic text, but even then, unless we go to the text, we will never know if we truly are getting a representative picture of the author's intent.

This sounds more like a rant about Lord of the Rings than magic.

What of textbook standards like Royal Road and Modern Coin Magic? Luke Jermay at one point was going to work on a DVD set for 13 Steps to Mentalism (although that fell through for a couple different reasons).

Nobody's going to try to put Strong Magic on DVD, because it just wouldn't translate well. Not even Ken Burns could make it watchable. But it's not beyond the imagination to take a textbook and turn it into a DVD.

And you talk a lot about forcing a level of comprehension and understanding. Isn't that what I did? I watched performances to figure out why they worked. Then I went and tested them to see it for myself.

As I said, performance is the ultimate crucible. It doesn't matter how many DVDs you watch, your first performances will still look like a robot. And it doesn't matter how many books you read, your first performances are still going to be bland.

You say to use what tools teach most efficiently. I guess that's why my library includes DVDs like Art of Card Manipulation, Ring Thing, and Psychokinetic Silverware right alongside books like The Secret Art of Magic, Capricornian Tales, and The Garden of the Strange.

[jimbowmanjr]

Tommy Wonder - Books of Wonder vs. Visions of Wonder. Now I don't own Visions of Wonder I only own the books. I am still reading the books but I plan to buy the DVD's simply to watch Tommy perform and make me feel like a little kid watching his style and presentation of the wonderful routines contained in the DVD set.

You have a better chance of convincing a pit bull to drop a beef flank from its teeth than you would of telling me that those videos remotely compare to the content of those two volumes. This particular example is one where I fail to see how much of the content (essays and theory) could be conveyed in a DVD or video that is more enjoyable or better understood than reading it from the book itself.

I don't own a library of books but this particular example came to mind simply because I happen to own these books and have seen bits and pieces of each DVD. I am sure a more well-read magician that has been around the block could pull plenty of more examples similar to this out of their hat.

--Jim

[Brad Henderson]

Steerpike,

When you study literary criticism you will learn that there is always an issue when it comes to translations. If a text is written in one language and translated into another, that translation can NEVER capture the full meaning and quality of the original. Teller himself was quoted as saying "All translations suck." Translations reveal as much about the translator and their understanding of the topic and language as they do about the original authors intent.

Do you really believe the DVD edition of Modern Coin Magic accurately reflects the content of the text? Have you read the book? Do you know what coin work is supposed to look like?

Paul is a smart card man, but even he will tell you that these are his interpretations of the material in Royal Road. He is not seeking to replace the book, only offer his contributions to the original work.

Luke is a dear friend, but when he approaches 13 Steps he does so with his experiences and understanding. Those experiences and understanding will color his interpretation of the Corinda material. If you never go to the book yourself, you will never know if you are really getting what Corinda intended - or what you would have thought Corinda intended. You are now playing the "telephone game" and we all know how that turns out.

No "Lord of the Rings" stuff here, just ideas that have been understood by semioticians, academics, and literary critics for decades.

Now, as to my statement that thousands of books will never find their way to DVD, that's something you can bank on. Sure, the TEXTS may be reproduced on DVD, but that's not what we're discussing. Houdin will not come back from the grave and share with us his thoughts on The Secrets of Conjuring and Magic. The countless contributors to Expert Card Technique will never come back and share with us what they knew. I don't know if anyone - maybe 2 guys - really understand what Zingone was going for in is Tabled Pass. And believe me, those 2 guys are NOT going to do a DVD, EVER! Hofsinzer, DeCremps, Carlysle, Buckley, Goldston, Hilliard!. Greater Magic on DVD? Never.

Who among us is qualified to try and put out a Greater Magic DVD? No one. And if you choose to avoid that text because you can't "watch it" you are choosing to handicap your magical studies. Same with Houdin.

I am not of the school who says "DVDs are bad, burn the DVDs." I am of the school that says the student should avail themselves of the best material available. If someone willingly chooses to ignore valuable material because it is printed on paper, that person is either an idiot or arrogant beyond words.

If you choose to avoid magic books you are choosing to remain ignorant. Likewise, someone interested in gambling technique would be a fool not to own Forte's videos. But the video's without his books produce something we see in our world - people whose fingers can do the moves, but whose mouths betray utter ignorance of where, when, and how these moves work.

Open you mind. Take advantage of all the wonderful tools available to you. Stop making excuses.

Brad Henderson

[Steerpike]

Do you really believe the DVD edition of Modern Coin Magic accurately reflects the content of the text? Have you read the book? Do you know what coin work is supposed to look like?

I don't actually own the DVD set. I'm just playing the devil's advocate since nobody else will.

Luke is a dear friend, but when he approaches 13 Steps he does so with his experiences and understanding. Those experiences and understanding will color his interpretation of the Corinda material. If you never go to the book yourself, you will never know if you are really getting what Corinda intended - or what you would have thought Corinda intended. You are now playing the "telephone game" and we all know how that turns out.

But if what we're concerned with is pureness of message, why are the voices of yestertear's experts more valid than those of today's? And through performance, don't we eventually come to our own interpretation of an effect or routine anyway?

Who among us is qualified to try and put out a Greater Magic DVD? No one. And if you choose to avoid that text because you can't "watch it" you are choosing to handicap your magical studies. Same with Houdin.

I never said I would avoid the book. I simply question why I shouldn't be allowed to have both.

If someone willingly chooses to ignore valuable material because it is printed on paper, that person is either an idiot or arrogant beyond words.

If you choose to avoid magic books you are choosing to remain ignorant.

And I'm presenting the mirror argument that to deny the value of a well-made DVD is also foolish.

Open you mind. Take advantage of all the wonderful tools available to you. Stop making excuses.

I'm not making any excuses. Didn't you read the part where I said I own just as many books as DVDs? I'm questioning why everybody seems to believe that one medium must be inherently superior to the other.

[Brad Henderson]

But if what we're concerned with is pureness of message, why are the voices of yestertear's experts more valid than those of today's?



The voice of the creator is always to be given primacy. Al Baker understood his material better than anyone else. To read Roy Benson in his own words is to reveal elements of magical performance that cannot be found in print anywhere else. When we allow others to translate for us, we are choosing to remove ourselves from the source material. We are loosing the chance to understand the lesson of the master from the master. How many magicians alive today truly are in the rarefied echelon of Baker, Benson, Cardini, Vernon, Miller, Malini, Leipzig, Koran, or Fogel? To restrict ourselves to the study of people who are alive today is to intentionally cut ourselves off from dozens of masters whose lessons are waiting for those willing to seek them out.



And through performance, don't we eventually come to our own interpretation of an effect or routine anyway?


Sometimes. Not always. I worked with Ammar on the ETM series. He was convinced that these tapes would become tools for students to reach out to teachers and texts which may have alluded them; he hoped his real secrets would help students understand the tricks and help make them their own. Is that what happened? No. It's not.

What we saw (and this isn't just something which happened with Michael's work) were people mimicking everything on the tape, from the rhythm of speech, to the exact handling.

Bob White was approached by a young man who asked for his help. He did a trick and White was puzzled. Everything the boy did was backwards - literally, backwards.

Why?

Because he was copying the moves on the TV EXACTLY.

This is the danger with DVDs. You CAN copy them exactly and then parrot them in performance.

While people like you, Steer, may be more conscientious than that, you are the exception, not the rule. And that's the danger of DVDs. Unless you add more to the process, you will relegate yourself to parroting and mimicry.

Can the same be said of books? Not so much. Sure, someone like you who uses his books as a tool will get more out the them, but by their very nature the student is forced to add a bit of themselves to the process.



I never said I would avoid the book. I simply question why I shouldn't be allowed to have both.


Well, in some cases, you will NEVER have both. You will never get anyone to replicate the entire Houdin ouvere on DVD, you will never find someone who can bring Greater Magic to life.

But, let's say someone decides to release their work in both formats - as Carney has done, for example.

Of course you can have both. But you are trying to make this argument about YOU and the way YOU think when I am trying to address the bigger issue: the person who believes that DVDs are superior to books and that they can get a full education and training from a diet of them alone. These people exist, they have commented on this thread. There is no problem with using the best tool for the job, we just need to remember that our job is more than technical. We NEED books.

Historically we KNOW that you can receive a full magical education from books alone (coupled of course with personal thought and practice.) Can the same be said of DVDs? Right now, based on what I and others have seen, it does not seem to be the case.


And I'm presenting the mirror argument that to deny the value of a well-made DVD is also foolish.


No one would or should argue with that. However, the bigger issue is the same: Even the most well constructed of DVDs tend to fail when it comes to communicating everything one truly needs to know about a performance piece. Can the student figure this stuff out on his own, as you have done? Clearly. But a great teacher should strive to empower their students fully and completely. You can do this through a book; I have yet to see it done with a DVD. Is it possible? Maybe. But I have yet to see it.





I'm not making any excuses. Didn't you read the part where I said I own just as many books as DVDs? I'm questioning why everybody seems to believe that one medium must be inherently superior to the other.

You may not be making excuses, but others do. Again, this discussion is about something bigger than you and your approach to magic. But to the larger issue, I think it is fair to say that one medium IS inherently superior to another when it comes to conveying certain types of information. It's the nature of the beast. When we rely on the right tool for the right job we will be successful. When we choose to fill our tool belt with only screwdrivers and nothing else (as some seem to want to do) we are destined to fail.

I bought some of the very first magic videos that came to press. For someone who did not have access to professional caliber magicians, they taught me a lot. I am not some "old timer" that dismisses technology because it is shiny and scary. I was right there from the beginning.

But having been there from the beginning, I have been able to see how they have influenced and affected those who have adopted them as a learning tool. Like dynamite, in the right hands for the right purposes that are invaluable. But, you can't do fine work when all you have is a quarter ton of pyrotechnics.

Ok. enough with the analogies.

Here's the bottom line. If you love magic, if you want to be the best you can be, you need to avail yourself of the best information available. A lot of that information is in books - important books - books that you as a magician NEED to study. (when I say 'you' I mean everybody). If you choose to avoid these texts, you are choosing to leave gaping holes in your foundation. Is that what you really want to do?

Brad Henderson

[Steerpike]

The voice of the creator is always to be given primacy. Al Baker understood his material better than anyone else.

Granted.

When we allow others to translate for us, we are choosing to remove ourselves from the source material. We are loosing the chance to understand the lesson of the master from the master.

How does this apply to the teaching of that which is so old we can no longer trace the creators?

How many magicians alive today truly are in the rarefied echelon of Baker, Benson, Cardini, Vernon, Miller, Malini, Leipzig, Koran, or Fogel?

I can name a few whom I would be willing to wager will survive the test of time. I own material from a few of them as well.

To restrict ourselves to the study of people who are alive today is to intentionally cut ourselves off from dozens of masters whose lessons are waiting for those willing to seek them out.

Of course.

This is the danger with DVDs. You CAN copy them exactly and then parrot them in performance.

When I said that performance was the crucible, it wasn't a one-dimensional statement. For a serious performer, it allows that which does not fit him to be slowly burned away, leaving only the pure, true personality within.

On the other hand, performance is also the crucible in that it allows the audience to distinguish performers who have the greatest ambition, drive, creativity, and charisma. If you don't have these, you either quit or you work to develop them.

Can the same be said of books? Not so much. Sure, someone like you who uses his books as a tool will get more out the them, but by their very nature the student is forced to add a bit of themselves to the process.

That only works if they have something interesting to say.

I've met a lot of guitarists in my lifetime. Some of them were future virtuosos. But of those would-be guitar gods, I'd say only a few will actually go anywhere. Why? Because they had interesting lives outside of their instrument. Guys who lock themselves in their rooms all day practicing may have chops, but they have nothing interesting to say.

I've seen a guy who used the scripting right out of the book and looked at his hands the whole time. Needless to say, I wasn't impressed.

But you are trying to make this argument about YOU and the way YOU think

When you get right down to it, who am I more qualified to speak for?

Historically we KNOW that you can receive a full magical education from books alone (coupled of course with personal thought and practice.) Can the same be said of DVDs? Right now, based on what I and others have seen, it does not seem to be the case.

Again, you say historically. With DVDs/VHS we have, what... about a generation or two maybe? It's a medium still in its infancy.

Personally, I'd like to sit back and wait a few more years to see what develops.

I have yet to see it done with a DVD. Is it possible? Maybe. But I have yet to see it.

In typical me fashion, I've taken that as a personal challenge. I'm certainly in no position to make the incredibly ballsy move of trying to release a teaching DVD right now... but as a long-term goal perhaps.

But to the larger issue, I think it is fair to say that one medium IS inherently superior to another when it comes to conveying certain types of information. It's the nature of the beast.

I addressed that earlier. Art of Card Manipulation would suck as a book series because of the complexity of many of the moves and the choreography, and The Garden of the Strange would probably eat as a DVD because Caleb's theatricality is so heavily based on subtlety and scripting that a book is simply a more efficient way to keep it simple and concise without losing the most important details.

I bought some of the very first magic videos that came to press. For someone who did not have access to professional caliber magicians, they taught me a lot. I am not some "old timer" that dismisses technology because it is shiny and scary. I was right there from the beginning.

Good to hear. I can't stand the attitude that books are the end-all because they came first. And it's not just limited to the magicians either. I'm a man of many faces artistically and I've had to deal with folk music snobs who think music went downhill with the invention of the electric guitar, film theorists who can't stop carressing their Orson Welles plushie long enough to actually watch a movie made after 1970, and genre literature elitists who won't give even Neil Gaiman the time of day.

[waynehouchin]

Greetings! I want to thank everyone for their participation. As this thread indicates, this particular debate has some strong opinions on both sides - some excellent points & opinions have been expressed here.

We know (based on the trafic & number of page views) that hundreds of people continue to read & re-read these Cerca Trova topics long after they have been closed. It is my hope that this thread will provide some real fodder for thought & will challenge the reader to consciously examine how it is that they learn magic the best. Great job - We will definitly re-examine this topic in the future. I'll see you guys next month!