For decades, possibly centuries, magicians have fretted and argued over if and when it is acceptable to reveal the secrets of their tricks and illusions.
Now two British academics — who are magicians themselves — have written what is believed to be the first detailed study examining what is known in the trade as “exposure”.
Gustav Kuhn and Brian Rappert, academics from the universities of Plymouth and Exeter, asked hundreds of magicians from around the world about attitudes to exposure.
Photo: AFP
They found that exposing another magician’s trick when they are still alive was a big no-no, with fewer than 3 percent feeling this was acceptable.
However, it was deemed much more justifiable to expose a trick invented by a magician who was dead or to explain how an illusion you had developed yourself was done.
It was seen as wrong to reveal a trick for self-promotion and, while many thought it reasonable to pass on the secrets of a trick to a fellow magician, it was much less acceptable to draw back the curtain to someone who just wanted to know how it was done for the sake of it.
Photo: AP
Rappert and Kuhn, both members of the Magic Circle, are readying themselves for flak when their paper is published on Monday.
“It’s a huge, really controversial topic within the magic community,” said Kuhn, of the school of psychology at the University of Plymouth and an exponent of closeup and street magic. “Magicians get emotional about it.”
As in most aspects of modern life, money appears to come into it. Kuhn said: “If you pay for a magic trick, it’s OK to expose the magic secrets. If you pay me for the secrets, then I’m allowed to expose it, but if I give you the secret for free, then that’s not OK.
Photo: AFP
“Magic could only advance through the sharing of certain secrets and magicians need to make a living so that financial transaction seems to play a really important part.”
Kuhn was at the center of a storm in 2019 when the global charitable foundation Wellcome Trust ran a free exhibition called Smoke and Mirrors in London that explicitly explained general principles in magic, such as misdirection and forcing.
Kuhn, whose research featured in the show, said some magicians saw the free access to such information as a violation of the rules and he was formally investigated by the Magic Circle’s exposure committee.
“It seems very unlikely that the exhibition would have created the same kind of controversy had visitors been charged an entry fee,” he wrote in a paper.
It also examines some of the history of exposure, highlighting how the first president of the Magic Circle, David Devant, was forced to resign after extracts from his book Secrets of My Magic appeared in a popular magazine.
The paper investigates twisty tricks where some exposure arguably enhances a show. For example, the magician Caleb Morgan performed the classic trick in which he stuffed a silk bandana into his clenched hand only to open his fist to show the bandana had transformed into an egg.
Morgan then revealed the egg was plastic with a hole in the back for the bandana to enter — before cracking the egg to demonstrate it was, in fact, a normal egg.
Rappert, whose work includes using magic to convey how disclosure and concealment figure in everyday life and international relations, said this sort of exposure seemed acceptable.
“Some said it was perfectly fine to unveil a closely guarded secret if it’s in the context of performing a trick that relies on a different method.”
Kuhn and Rappert argue the study is needed because the internet has made it much easier for tricks to be exposed and therefore changes the rules of the game.
Their paper ends with a comment from the Magic Circle, which was shown the research before publication. The organization sternly makes it clear it was founded in 1905 upon the tenet of protecting the secrets of magicians.
But it adds: “The ramifications and implications of exposure are a grey area which are little understood and understudied. We welcome and applaud any research of this nature that helps us all to gain a better insight and understanding.”
The paper, Towards a Theory of Exposure, is available in the Journal of Performance Magic.
June 23 to June 29 After capturing the walled city of Hsinchu on June 22, 1895, the Japanese hoped to quickly push south and seize control of Taiwan’s entire west coast — but their advance was stalled for more than a month. Not only did local Hakka fighters continue to cause them headaches, resistance forces even attempted to retake the city three times. “We had planned to occupy Anping (Tainan) and Takao (Kaohsiung) as soon as possible, but ever since we took Hsinchu, nearby bandits proclaiming to be ‘righteous people’ (義民) have been destroying train tracks and electrical cables, and gathering in villages
This year will go down in the history books. Taiwan faces enormous turmoil and uncertainty in the coming months. Which political parties are in a good position to handle big changes? All of the main parties are beset with challenges. Taking stock, this column examined the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) (“Huang Kuo-chang’s choking the life out of the TPP,” May 28, page 12), the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) (“Challenges amid choppy waters for the DPP,” June 14, page 12) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) (“KMT struggles to seize opportunities as ‘interesting times’ loom,” June 20, page 11). Times like these can
Dr. Y. Tony Yang, Associate Dean of Health Policy and Population Science at George Washington University, argued last week in a piece for the Taipei Times about former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) leading a student delegation to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that, “The real question is not whether Ma’s visit helps or hurts Taiwan — it is why Taiwan lacks a sophisticated, multi-track approach to one of the most complex geopolitical relationships in the world” (“Ma’s Visit, DPP’s Blind Spot,” June 18, page 8). Yang contends that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has a blind spot: “By treating any
Swooping low over the banks of a Nile River tributary, an aid flight run by retired American military officers released a stream of food-stuffed sacks over a town emptied by fighting in South Sudan, a country wracked by conflict. Last week’s air drop was the latest in a controversial development — private contracting firms led by former US intelligence officers and military veterans delivering aid to some of the world’s deadliest conflict zones, in operations organized with governments that are combatants in the conflicts. The moves are roiling the global aid community, which warns of a more militarized, politicized and profit-seeking trend
RSS