THE ERLAND ELEPHANT CHEAT SHEET
The Erland Elephant: Whenever somebody is in the middle of doing a magic show, the proverbial "Elephant in the Room" is that the person there isn't capable of real magic.
* There are various ways to get around that issue.
* Some of these ways are at direct odds with each other.
* People have found success using all of these ways
* The approaches used to deal with this problem can frequently be grouped under more general approaches
* These groupings represent performance character archetypes that different magicians can follow
* Archetypes can be identified by their claims to power, the relationship with the performance character to "magic", and different approaches to presenting a feat
* On a personal level, I do not believe that any approach is better or worse than any other
* Magic of the various archetypes is generally analogous to book genres and formats (fiction, non-fiction, horror, self-help, poetry -- none of these is inherently superior to any other, although people might find differing personal tastes)
* Despite the vast differences between these archetypes, and the potentially heated divisions on certain fundamental beliefs, the archetypes have more in common with each other than they do with other genres of performance (eg: poetry readings)
* It is possible for real-world performers to be able to embody more than one archetype. In fact, it's probably rare to find a performer who embodies a singular archetype all the time
............
Archetype: The Jester
Aliases: Trickster
In a nutshell: He will fool you, and take pleasure in doing so.
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Indifferent. Whether or not he is capable of real magic is irrelevant, because he can still fool the pants off you
Claim to power?: None is required. It's less important for him to make you believe he has real powers than it is to fool you. However, if these claims can help serve his purposes during the show, he might go with it. A cynical audience reaction would be expected, however, and for the most part the audience and the performer are really on the same page about it.
Types of tricks/presentations: Three card monte, shell game, fast and loose, paper balls over the head, sucker effects, pretty much any conventional magic trick that can be respun into a presentation appropriate for the archetype
Key Characteristics:
* Doesn't mind it if people call what he does tricks, or trickery
* Arguably one of the few archetypes that does not insult the audience's intelligence
* Embraces the cat-and-mouse, catch-me-if-you-can game
Role models: Harry Anderson, Penn and Teller
For more information...
............
Archetype: The Mechanic
In A Nutshell: Probably what most people think of as a modern-day magician... somebody who does magic tricks. Not to be confused with a "card mechanic".
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Not really too scared by it, although he does want to keep his methods secret.
Claim to Power?: In most cases, probably none.
Type of tricks/presentations: Unrestricted, for the most part, although he would not foray too deeply into any of the other archetypes' territory (eg: Wouldn't do a Q&A act, wouldn't do a massive levitation, etc.)
Key Characteristics:
* Probably doesn't make a claim to power, or examine the concept of power claims too closely
* Has the largest body of material to draw from
* Almost always involves apparatus and/or props of some kind. If he is able to make the props truly seem incidental, however, I believe he shifts to a different archetype
* If the trick is good, and he can present it entertainingly, it can go in the act
* Frequently tends to have a favoured prop, and will explore as broad an arsenal of tricks available with that prop
* In my opinion, this scales to stage illusions. If the performer somehow suggests that he is capable of demonstrating a power without apparatus, suddenly he changes archetypes
Role models: Michael Ammar, Daryl, Dai Vernon
............
Archetype: The Gambling Demonstrator
Aliases: Card cheat, Card Mechanic
In A Nutshell: Demonstrates sleight-of-hand and deception as it fits into the cheating at card games
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Probably the only archetype that is completely unaffected by it, despite the similarities between the dynamics of his act and a regular magic show (ie: behold these amazing feats)
Claim to Power?: None, unless we consider non-magical powers such as the ability to win at will in a card game of chance
Type of tricks/presentations: Poker/Bridge/Blackjack deals, demonstrations of individual sleights, challenge effects centered around card games
Key Characteristics:
* The one archetype that, despite the similarities between his effects and regular card magic, doesn't make a claim to power
* Also, the one archetype defined by his chosen prop, cards
* Not immune to its own blatant deception, however, such as stacking the deck to set up the appearance of center dealing, but in fact is actually just second-dealing
* Probably could do more to examine demonstrations that involve "tells", as there's a great deal of mentalism techniques to draw from
Role models: Fernando Keops, Ricky Jay (during his card control demonstration)
For more information, click here. (feature not available yet)
............
Archetype: The Scientist
In A Nutshell: Builds as complete a conviction as possible in the fairness of the surrounding conditions of an effect, before pulling it off
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Willing to tackle any subscribers to the theory that what he does isn't fair
Claim to Power?: That's up to the performer
Type of tricks/presentations: Similar to the Jester, it's more about tone than it is the type of effect. Could be regular magic or mentalism.
Key Characteristics:
* Chooses effects that can withstand the highest scrutiny
* Presents in a manner so as to make sure the audience is allowed to scrutinize
* Frequently forsakes the element of surprise so that the audience is not left with the feeling of having missed something
* Called the Scientist because he might treat his effects as experiments, offering necessary proofs of success
* Has a difficult road when it comes to presenting entertainingly, and avoiding making everything a challenge puzzle
Role models: Juan Tamariz, Max Maven
For more information...
............
Archetype: The Manipulator
In A Nutshell: Of all the archetypes, the one that's most concerned with making the magic consistently aesthetically beautiful (or, at least, visually striking) on a sustained level
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Variable. Manipulation tends to limit spectator interaction, so if the Elephant's in the room, he won't hear about it
Claim to Power?: Depends on the magician.
Type of tricks/presentations: Multiple-phase effects in which the magic appeals to the senses. The magic must be observable visually.
Key Characteristics:
* Arguably has the ability to communicate magic to the widest possible audience
* Arguably the magic equivalent of dance
* The focus on visual magic makes it such that the magic is evaluated not just in terms of the impossibility, but the aesthetic value of the product
Role models: Younger Jeff McBride, Cardini in the lobby, John Carney doing the Coins and the Glass
............
Archetype: The Allegorist
Aliases: Story-teller
In A Nutshell: Fuses magic and the telling of stories
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Variable. Arguably, magic is not the sole focus of the Allegorist's presentation.
Claim to Power?: Variable. Probably most people are going to leave his performance thinking about the Allegorist in terms of presentational ability rather than trying to parse the magic looking for evidence of power
Type of tricks/presentations: Triumph (drunk spectator story), Gambler vs. Magician, Hollingworth's Once Upon a Time, Hamman's Two Twins
Key Characteristics:
* Has a delicate balance to strike between the value of the story and the value of the magic. Neither should overshadow the other
* There's leeway with the stories. They could also be poems, allegories, parables, memoirs...
* Similar to the Manipulator, there's an infusion of elements from traditional art
Role models: Eugene Burger
For more information...
Story-telling in magic
Using Metaphors in a Magic Trick
............
Archetype: The Bizarrist
In A Nutshell: Borrows on themes from magic as it has been known to exist in the real world
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Variable. It's possible to bring in themes that people might actually believe to be true
Claim to Power?: Variable
Type of tricks/presentations: Anything that deals with the themes of life, death, pain, love, etc. can fit here. Things with exotic props and/or a sense of ritual fit. (See below)
Key Characteristics:
* Bizarrism has been commonly associated with storytelling magic in modern times. Insofar as my definitions here are concerned, the two are separate.
* That said, Bizarrism and Storytelling have been known to coexist quite happily. There is frequently no power conflict between the two
* Things like shamanism, witchdoctors, voodoo, paganism, the supernatural, etc. are all ripe for study. Practitioners from these and other real world "magic" groups offer potential character models
* Arguably, he might gain from embracing the special nature of his props, rather than running away from them
Role models: Eugene Burger, Robert Neale
For more information, click here. (feature not available yet)
............
Archetype: The Clown
Aliases: Comedian
In A Nutshell: Combines comedy and magic
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Variable, but so long as people are having a good time, the Clown can probably survive if his magic doesn't withstand the highest scrutiny
Claim to Power?: Variable, although comedy's nature of usually not treating subjects seriously will probably undermine a magic claim (which would have serious implications)
Type of tricks/presentations: Anything that gets laughs is fair game.
Key Characteristics:
* Laughter is great for misdirection
* As laughter is a frequent byproduct of people expressing their surprise and/or amazement, it's natural that comedy in the more traditional sense would eventually merge with it
* Can probably get away with taking more liberties with the audience
* Needs to get laughs. If a magician's magic is solid and he's not getting laughs, he might be a great magician, but he won't fit this archetype
* Can be VERY commercial
Role models: Michael Finney, Bill Malone
For more information, click here. (feature not available yet)
............
Archetype: The Superman
In A Nutshell: Performs gigantic feats that are rife with spectacle
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Variable. The feats themselves might not all entirely be magic-based.
Claim to Power?: Variable, although whatever claim it is that he makes, it's not subtle. He does not float if he can fly. He doesn't vanish a coin if he can vanish a Volvo.
Type of tricks/presentations: Pretty much everything Copperfield does.
Key Characteristics:
* Must play big, and there must be a sense of immediacy and drama to what he does
* Must push the envelope
Role models: David Copperfield, Harry Houdini
For more information, click here. (feature not available yet)
............
Archetype: The Magus
Aliases: The "Real" Magician, The Demigod, The Creature of Power
In A Nutshell: A magician who gives very specific and identifiable demonstrations of a power, or set of powers
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Generally in denial of it.
Claim to Power?: Absolutely. In effect, this is what people are at his show to see -- demonstrations of his power
Type of tricks/presentations: Anything that supports his claim. Effects must be carefully chosen to reinforce, rather than confuse, the claim
Key Characteristics:
* Although this sort of character (somebody who understands and can frame their powers theatrically) is common in mentalism, it is less so in magic
* It cannot be overstated that effects are chosen VERY carefully
* Will often shy away from claims to power that are unsustainable (eg: I can change blank paper into money)
* Unlike the superman, he will float rather than fly
Role models: David Blaine, Derren Brown
For more information, click here. (feature not available yet)
............
Archetype: The Charlatan
Aliases: Huckster
In A Nutshell: The one archetype that works outside of the traditional theatrical context, attempting to convince people his powers are real
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Defies it by undermining the usual ideas of what a "magic show" is
Claim to Power?: Very specific, similar in scope to the Magus, perhaps even more limited.
Type of tricks/presentations: Most real world success of the charlatan has been in the realm of mentalism and readings.
Key Characteristics:
* A controversial, polarizing figure in the magic community
* Will have a great deal of difficulty selling traditional "magic" effects
* Relies on a strong personality, ability to create the aura of having power
* Might be able to leverage character to add significance to what might otherwise be considered simple tricks
* Despite ethical considerations, I personally feel that real-world charlatans offer great case studies for traditional, in-theater performances
Role models: Uri Gellar
For more information, click here. (feature not available yet)
............
Archetype: The Mentalist
Aliases: Mental Magician
In A Nutshell: Does magic of the mind
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Has a bit of an advantage over other magicians by relying on magic that is more plausible
Claim to Power?: Can make impossible-seeming things happen by the mind.
Type of tricks/presentations: Usual brand of effects are Divination, Clairvoyance, Limited Telekinesis, Influence, Thought Transference, ESP, Future Sight, etc.
Key Characteristics:
* Focuses on a different brand of effects than the traditional magician, despite using similar techniques and methods
* Capitalizes on greater real-world acceptance of the effects
* Also has to fight a different set of audience suspicions
* Set of powers goes very cleanly with The Reader archetype
* Props are psychologically invisible to the audience
Role models: Richard Osterlind, Max Maven, Banachek
For more information, click here. (feature not available yet)
............
Archetype: The Reader
In A Nutshell: Works to connect with a spectator to get hidden information
Relationship to the Erland Elephant: Has an even greater advantage over the Mentalist in terms of plausible nature of the effects
Claim to Power?: Can get hidden information from audience members
Type of tricks/presentations: Q&A Demonstrations, Cold Reading, Psychometry effects, mind reading, muscle reading
Key Characteristics:
* Under common definitions, the Reader would fall into the more general category of Mentalist
* Differentiates himself from the regular mentalist in that the key is on revealing information from spectators
* The more personal the information, the better
* Well-done readings are so entertaining, frequently they can be done without the usual promise of pay-off that comes in traditional magic shows
* Readings can also be fairly controversial, due in part to affiliation with charlatanry. Some mentalists have elected to leave that aspect out of a traditional Mentalism show
* There's a modern movement in mentalism to go propless in this area
* Set of powers goes very cleanly with the Mentalist archetype
Role models: Richard Osterlind, Kenton Knepper
For more information, click here. (feature not available yet)
............
Further information:
* The information presented here is a basic summary of "The Erland Elephant" manuscript, the first draft of which was written in fall 2007 in Jinju, South Korea
* Other parts of the manuscript included a study of the Key Card principle in card magic, additional theoretical considerations, and effects, routines and presentations that could be applied to each of the archetypes
* This body of theory had its genesis in the dichotomy between the performance models of the Con Artist versus the Card Cheat, identified by Whit Haydn as being the two major influential performance models for modern close up magicians
* In trying to identify other potential types, I eventually created different definitions, broadening the context towards everything that might be considered a "magic show"
* Despite any inferences that might be drawn from the above, I do not consider any archetype to be superior to any other, with the possible exception of the charlatan
* This experiment is not meant to pigeon-hole every performer out there, but instead to provide potential models of study, abstract examples to draw from
* These archetypes might not adequately address escapology, stage illusions, and "geek" magic
* These definitions are my own, and are not necessarily meant to be imposed upon the general magic community
* This page may be updated periodically
1 comments:
I have found word from Andy Hall!
http://www.magichat.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=17047
Scroll through there towards the bottom there is a post by jennings. Read it!
Post a Comment