Are magicians hypocrites or not?

[Albert]

Hey guys, seems like the forum is getting quiet again, so I posted here my little thoughts/essay on the 'opinion of lying' that I used for my school. This is a self-reflection essay, so it won't be your typical essay format you see at school. If you are bored or want to give me an opinion on what you think about this, go ahead. [Didn't put this in the Opinions on lying in a youtube video since it's not just about youtube videos ]

P.S. Rokk, I used your argument as a reflection of my thought process for essay purposes, so your argument isn't really quoted. Hope that's alright!

P.P.S The palming example I used here about Enigma is simplified as a palm to control the card to the top for essay purposes, so don't hate on me for this!

Originally Posted by Albert

Magicians naturally dislike or hate other magicians who lie about a magic trick and I am no exception. More specifically, we magicians hate it when we are lied to about the impromptu factor of a trick; not about the secrets behind the effect, but rather, the preparations required to perform such an effect. The same card trick could be performed using different methods, such as using sleight of hands, a duplicate card, or special gimmicks and props. To magicians, discovering new techniques to achieve the same effect is both interesting and intriguing, and thus, it is the preparedness a technique requires that I believe we emphasize as the most important factor of a new technique, as that’s what truly demonstrates one’s creativity and skills. Exactly how the technique is performed is of secondary importance.

That being said, let me explain a live example I've experienced, where I cannot explain the reasons for my frustration as of yet. It was when a magician named Tom falsely proclaimed the invention of a new technique. In more detail, he claimed that he had discovered an impromptu, new, and advanced palming technique to control a card to the top of the deck, which he called Enigma, and had demonstrated it in a video performance. When he performed it, it was very obvious to me and other advanced magicians that he used a duplicate card and not his newly proposed advanced palming technique. On a side note, this ability to see through a magician’s sleight of hands in a trick originates from one’s experience and knowledge they have at that moment. Eventually, my fellow magicians and I were able to verify from Tom himself that he lied about the creation of such an effect after numerous failed attempts to expose him. We eventually exposed his inappropriate attitude because we were upset that he lied about such a creation.
A phenomenon that struck me very hard after this event was the seemingly hypocritical action that we performed to expose him. More importantly, I didn’t know why I was angry about his lie. Reason being, magicians perform through deception, through lies, and through manipulations all the time. All Tom did was exactly that. He performed an effect that seemed impossible to other magicians through a method unfaithful to what he had claimed. They claim to their spectators that they are doing something, but then naturally perform a secret move disguised under that supposedly claimed action to manipulate them into thinking he performed real magic. Just like so, magicians lie to spectators too, and with such ease! In our case, we were Tom’s spectators, which would mean there is no reason for us to be angry.

Then, I started thinking to myself, ‘does that mean magicians are hypocrites? Why do they hate such lies when they lie all the time to their spectators?’ In one sense, if magician A (mA) performs for both laymen and magician B (mB), there really is no difference between the laymen and mB: they are both spectators to mA. But we (mB) find it so unethical and wrong to have been lied to about the impromptu factor of the sleight in most situations. But why is that? All Tom (mA) did was lie about the trick to entertain the spectators by making oneself look bigger and greater than the actual skills he possessed. Is it because he lied about having skills he didn’t, and if so, why should I care in the first place? Every now and then, any magician becomes a spectator, and ultimately, a layman to effects in which we are foreign to the secrets of. As explained before, there are many methods to achieve the same effect. Then couldn’t it simply be that Tom’s new method to achieving an effect could be to lie about the method used? In the same way that magicians might fascinate laymen by deceiving them into thinking we could do impossible things, he attempted to fascinated magicians by deceiving them into thinking he could do an impossible technique! Usually, blatant lies like this aren't used directly to falsify an effect in magic, but used as a supplement only to another method to hide the real method. So from that different point of view, Tom using lies as the main method shouldn't be unethical or offensive to us, but rather, we should have accepted him as being creative. Yet, it still is offensive! Is it because Tom had deviated from the social norm of magicians? I don't think so, assuming that most magicians, including myself, are not such hypocrites.

Then, the fundamental point of motive struck me. What was Tom’s motive behind his lies? His motive definitely didn’t seem like it was to entertain the spectators to us. This is known due to his presentation of the trick, in which it was openly directed towards other magicians. I can only believe that it was to obtain fame and recognition from them. The present magic industry popularizes the idea of creating new techniques to sell for money and fame; for commercial purposes to get recognition from the magician's community, which leads to better advertising for more money. Maybe Tom wanted that kind of prestige? Regardless, a good analogy that may explain my opinion is, "If you tried to murder someone and failed, that failure has very little significance. It's the fact that you tried to murder someone that matters." To turn that into an analogy to relate to magic, it becomes something like this: "If you tried to fake the creation of a new technique and failed to convince, the size of the failure is of small significance. It's the fact that you tried to lie to other magicians that disgusts fellow magicians."

From this, I think I want to say that magicians want truthful behaviour from other magicians. It is like an unwritten, but expected code of conduct to be kept, directly from the magician's code that we generally understand. A fellow magician should not hold a motive to fool another magician in an unethical way. Then, here comes the question of ‘what is being unethical’, at least in terms of the magician’s conduct? An unethical behaviour in terms of the magician’s code would indicate, at least to me, an intentional deception by a magician towards their fellow magicians done to obtain or earn prestige from them in a way that betrays the general expectations of his/her fellow magicians. An example of an unethical behaviour would be what Tom had done. I believe that if he had lied for performance purposes only, the other magicians and I would have been fine with it, as his objective was for entertainment purposes. Thus, I believe that it’s not the fact that magicians are hypocrites that makes them mad at lies of another magician. Ultimately, I believe what truly concerns us are the history and credits of magicians’ compilation of their techniques as well as the truthfulness of another magician’s contribution towards it. We want to maintain the art form as clean and pure as possible without involving fraudulence in the majestic history of the art. This seems to be the reason why I felt so frustrated and upset to see such an unethical behaviour from a fellow magician. I guess I am a lot more passionate about history than I thought!