Searching for Art

It's after midnight once again and I'm sitting in a cold dark room with nothing but my computer, my thoughts, and a fresh pack of cigarettes to keep me company.  A dangerous situation because it often leads me to start thinking about strange little bits of philosophy.  In this case, I got to thinking about art.  What is it that makes something artful?

Traditionally, art was a term used to describe anything done with great skill or mastery.  But during the Romantic period, this definition changed (I think for the better), and art began to be viewed as a human pursuit equal to but separate from religion and science.  I would, of course, argue that religion should be disposed of and that art and science should take their places as the two leading instruments or expressions of human knowledge and experience, but that's neither here nor there.  The important part is that art is created in order to provoke thought or emotion.

This is separate and distinct from any number of skillful acts that I think do not deserve to be called "art."  Eugene Burger, one of magic's leading philosophers, makes a distinction between "stunt" and "magic," in that, though a stunt may be impressive, it doesn't point to anything beyond itself.  It simply is what it is.  There's nothing wrong with stunts, but they are not art.  Art should point beyond itself to something more profound.

In an episode of the comedy show Family Guy, a teacher instructs his class to remember the proper performance hierarchy: legitimate theatre, musical theatre, stand-up, ventriloquism, magic, mime.

It's an old prejudice, and is unfair to any number of performers.  But why is it still so commonly held?  Because the lower one falls on that hierarchy, the less likely one is to be working toward something artistic.  Entertaining, sure.  But art?  Sadly, all too rare.

Within the first few pages of the first volume of The Art of Astonishment, Paul Harris describes the reactions he received when he told people he was working on a book about magic.  I can certainly relate to his experiences.  One thought he was talking about children's magic.  It's another old prejudice that says magic is only for children.  Another insisted that he knew some card tricks.  It was only when Harris, instead of using the word "magic," said that he was working on a book about the moment of astonishment, that he was able to generate what seemed to be legitimate interest in what he was doing.

Roger Ebert, the noted film critic, recently wrote that video games can never be art.  In that case, he was more wrong that the video game industry deserved, but is it really any surprise?  It's somewhat understandable that an older man without gaming experience will lack understanding of the artful qualities of a video game, but it is also true that game designers could make more of an effort to truly create art, instead of just a fun game.  Some do, and I admire them greatly.

I was recently reading through the pages of a forum for magicians, looking to learn and share my limited knowledge as I was able, when I came across a section devoted to those who "table hop," or stroll at parties.  I don't particularly like the term "table hopper," as it immediately conjures images of a performer, little better than a beggar, going from table to table soliciting tips, rather than attempting to create an artful and memorable performance.  In all too many cases, the term seems to apply.  For the few exceptions, it is useful only in that it (somewhat) accurately describes the performing venue.  Within the pages of this forum, one finds many balloon twisters--performers who make balloon animals for children.

A repeated topic of conversation is the poor treatment of these performers by parents who feel cheated when the performers have to "cut the line" in order to get home or to their next gig on time.

Let me make myself clear.  If you want to perform for children, more power to you.  But in any consideration of "performance hierarchy," whatever your prejudice may be, can you think of anyone lower than a balloon twister?  I can't, and I think that's a shame.  Sure, they're not traditionally artistic, as painting can be.  But why should these performers confine themselves to the hell of working for overprivileged children, instead of creating art?  I've seen what a masterful balloon twister can create when not working for six-year-old yuppies-in-training, and it's quite impressive.  Sometimes, it even reaches a level of--dare I say it?--art!

Likewise, magic shouldn't be just for children, but should be used to create thoughtful or emotional experiences for audiences.  All forms of performance art should be thought of first and foremost as ART.

Am I a voice in the wilderness?  Whatever your skill, whatever your talent, whatever your interests...stop wasting your time with meaningless stunts or simple unartistic creations for children.  Start working on making your performance REAL ART.  Then, and only then, will a wider variety of performance arts become readily acceptable.

I've performed stunts.  But I don't want to be a performing monkey anymore.  I'm not going to do stunts.  I'm going to create art.  And I hope you will to.

When Words Fail

Sometimes, even for a writer, words just aren't enough.  They fail to express.  They fall short of communicating emotions.

And yet, what is one to do when words are all one has, and they still fail?

Stephen King once said, "The most important things are the hardest things to say.  They are the things you get ashamed of because words diminish your feelings--words shrink things that seem timeless when they are in your head to no more than living size when they are brought out."

Nuff said.

Overprotective Parents

Okay, people.  I get it, I really do.  You love your children and want no harm to come to them.  We live in a scary world, and there are countless bad things that can happen.  I understand.  But are there really predators around every corner?  Nope.  Will video games make your kids violent?  No, double no, and a "hell no" to top it off.

Here's the deal.  It's the parents responsibility to ensure their kids safety.  Sure, and by all means do so.  But I'm reminded of one of my favorite Benjamin Franklin quotes: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."  He was talking about political policy, of course, but it applies here as well.  Children, especially once they reach a certain age, require the liberty to make mistakes and experience life.  To deprive them of this experience in the interest of protecting them will not prevent harm, but will CAUSE it.  Part of psychological development is learning how to make and deal with your own mistakes.  Part of life is learning how to properly deal with society.

What brought on this discussion?  I was working at the bookstore the other day, and a woman came in with her son (I would guess perhaps age fourteen or so).  He wanted a book on dinosaurs, so I showed them to the science section and offered a few suggestions.  Of course I avoided the advanced scientific books, but I found a couple nice oversized "illustrated encyclopedia" type books that seemed to be precisely what they were looking for.  I gave him a few to flip through and see how he'd enjoy them.

The mother said, "I'm going to go look around.  Can you stay here and look through those?"

"Yes."

"Okay, there are chairs right over there.  You can sit down and have a look."

"Okay."

"Now don't wander off, and if anyone tries anything funky, you scream.  And I don't mean scream like 'ehh,' but you really scream."

This is not a six year old child we're talking about here, but an adolescent.  An acquaintance of mine who I met at a magic theatre owned his own business, was involved in non-prophet work, and a decent stage performer by the time he was that age.  Many lose their virginity earlier than that and though becoming sexually active at age fourteen may be a mistake (not a horrible mistake, but perhaps a mistake nonetheless), I can't help but wonder, what the fuck is wrong with this mother?  The child is old enough to live a little, and unless he's severely mentally challenged (which is obviously not the case), he should be able to visit the bookstore without a lesson on how to scream "if anyone tries anything funky."

Do you want to create a world full of people who don't know how to engage someone in conversation?  A world full of people afraid to get on a plane for a business trip without someone to hold their hand the whole way?  A world full of socially inept, mentally incapable buffoons?  That's what you're contributing to if you're an overprotective parent.  Get over yourself and let your kids live life the way it's meant to be lived, because guess what--there aren't predators around every corner, sitting on the toilet seat isn't going to give you a disease, and as long as you use protection, sex isn't evil.

By all means, teach your children about the dangers that do exist.  The world isn't always a pretty place.  But sheltering them from life is not the answer.  It will only leave them ill-prepared to face challenges later.

Magical Etiquette: Tipping

People don't see magicians every day, and so many people are unsure of proper etiquette when dealing with a magical performer.  In this new series of posts, I provide a few tips to help put your mind at ease and make your experience a little more magical and a little less worrying.

Tipping

One of the first questions people typically have is "Am I expected to tip the magician?"  The answer depends entirely upon the setting.

Of course, in a theatrical setting, where the magician is performing on stage, tipping is uncalled for and would be entirely out of place.  You've either purchased a ticket for the show, or your host has paid an all inclusive fee to have a performer at your event.

If it's at a private function, but more of a walk-around, casual setting (ie., the magician is hopping from table to table, or is mingling with guests at a cocktail party), we begin to enter into the area where people don't know what to expect.  Generally speaking, it's safe to assume that at any private function, the magician has been well-paid for his appearance and tipping is unnecessary.  If you feel you've received exceptional treatment and want to show your thanks, a tip may be accepted, but you should feel under no obligation.  The magician is not expecting a tip at this type of event, and receiving one is the exception rather than the rule.

If you feel you want to offer a tip but are still unsure, I would advise you to consider the type of event you're at.  If you're at a wedding, or other type of "special" event, I would consider tipping out of the question.  Were I offered a tip at such a setting, I would likely turn it down, not to be rude to the audience member, but to be polite to the bride and groom.  At a casual cocktail party, I would certainly never expect a tip (if I'm performing in such a situation, it is literally the farthest thing from my mind), but would be far less likely to refuse it if offered.

Again, feel under no obligation, but if you have a strong desire, just use common sense.

If the magician is performing at a restaurant, hopping from table to table, we find ourselves in the situation where people become really uncertain about the proper etiquette.  A magician working in such a situation should be financially taken care of by the management of the restaurant and thus should not be soliciting tips.  In fact, I consider those performers who actively solicit tips (such as by wearing "I work for tips" buttons on their lapel) unprofessional and rude (and therefore, perhaps somewhat paradoxically, much less likely to receive a substantial tip from me).  But if the magician is not rudely soliciting tips, you might wonder if it's customary to offer one.

The answer is that tips are welcome but not necessary.  Though these performers are well paid by the management, they're not receiving the same level of pay they would from private functions (most restaurant performers work only a few nights a week and are available for private functions on other days), and tips are a nice bonus.

You should feel under no obligation to open your pocketbook if a magician happens across your table.  In fact, if tipping the magician is going to cause you to lessen your tip for the wait staff, I would advise against it most strongly.  Though the magician may be grateful for a little extra money, the wait staff actually work for tips.  The magician's hourly wage is substantially larger than the waiter's.  But once the wait staff are covered, if you still have a little money for the magician, it's certainly appreciated (but again, not necessary).

I would say, in a restaurant, if you enjoyed the show and the magician was not rude, it would be appropriate to offer a few dollars.  If you really can't afford it, though, just enjoy the show and don't worry about it.  The magician is probably counting on receiving some tips, but is certainly not expecting them from all (or even a majority) of the tables.

Another way to show your thanks is to make sure and pick up the magician's business card and keep him in mind for your next private function (or tell a friend who may be seeking entertainment).  Even more than tips, magicians count on these private bookings (many of which may come from having performed for someone at a restaurant) for their livelihood.

The only situation in which I would consider tipping to be strongly encouraged, is if the magician is busking, or performing on the street.  In this situation, he has received no hourly wage or up-front compensation for his time and labor, and is relying entirely upon the generosity of his audience.  So if you watch a busker's show, and have a little cash in your pocket, by all means drop it in his hat.

Would I consider tipping mandatory, even for a busker?  No.  By contrast, I would consider it mandatory for a waiter or valet (by which I mean to say, I consider it extremely rude not to tip these people, unless they've provided truly horrible service).  However, the busker needs to feed his family, and the only money he's getting comes in the form of tips.

This means WAR!

I got another of those damned "Fun and Freedom" CDs from the MLM people today.  This lady was even worse.  Didn't mention her business until after she'd asked for my card in relation to my own business, then she brought out that goddamn CD.  Apparently she gave it to other people at the store, too.  So now I've got two of these jokers trying to get me to buy in to their scheme.

One of my coworkers described multi-level marketing as "a cult, without the religion."  It's an apt description.  Here's a message for all of you:  I don't like cults.

And now that I've discovered there's apparently a whole herd of these people invading my neighborhood, all I can really say is, they've successfully pissed me off.

Elderly Gay Couple Forcibly Separated, Abused, Robbed By County Officials in California

I really don't have much to say about this, except that the story deserves more attention than it seems to be getting.

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/04/18/elderly-california-gay-couple-forcibly-separated-abused-robbed-by-county-officials

Review of Horns by Joe Hill

It is rare that a writer emerges on the scene in any genre with a book that will have people talking for years to come.  When Joe Hill released his short story collection 20^th Century Ghosts, this is precisely what happened.  This new writer came out with a book that took not only the horror genre, but the literary community as a whole, by storm, and demonstrated a most rare skill for blending the subtle and the horrific into a worthy mixture.

His first novel, Heart Shaped Box, was another very good book sure to please any reader, but lacked the same punch delivered by his short work (I’m referring to the collection as a whole, but also specifically to one story entitled “Pop Art”).  When Horns was released, I wondered for a while what to expect.  Clearly, he had a strong talent, but would it be best enjoyed in short form, or would his second novel stand even stronger than the first?

I was most pleased to discover that, indeed, it does stand stronger than the first.  It provides precious few truly scary moments, but instead brings to the table strong characterization and an artful subtlety at combining the real with the surreal; the quiet and philosophical with the brutal and disturbing.

The story follows Ig Perrish, son of a rich and famous father, with a brother following in the family business.  Ig, however, is not joining the family business.  In fact, he doesn’t have much of a life for himself at all.  A year prior to the novel’s opening, his girlfriend, Merrin, was brutally raped and murdered.  Ig was never convicted, but has always been the only suspect in the crime.  He wakes up one morning, after a night of drinking and “doing terrible things,” to discover that he’s grown horns on his head.  With said horns, he has acquired devilish powers, and sets out to use these powers to discover Merrin’s killer.

Horns is a “deal with the devil” story with a unique perspective.  What if the devil isn’t the bad guy, after all?  It’s certainly not a new idea in literature, but Hill crafts his tale with an expert hand, dragging the reader along from emotion to emotion as we learn more and more details about the characters’ lives and situations.

Throughout the book, the observant reader will find repeated use of traditional symbolism, some obvious, some more subtle.  We see snakes, horns, and pitchforks regularly.   When Ig, playing the devil, encounters these objects, their meaning is perfectly clear.  However, Hill also uses his allegory more subtly than that, as in one instance later in the book in which another character has a run-in with a pitchfork.  The reader is left to wonder what, if anything, this particular bit of symbolism is meant to represent, and the reader’s perspective is sure to be colored by his own theological preferences.

Hill takes a big risk in the way he presents this book, laced with flashbacks ranging from the characters’ childhood to the more recent past.  In the hands of a lesser author, such a technique would come across simply as a bold information dump, and a distraction from the overarching story.  In Hill’s case, however, the ploy pays off.  The reader is not bored by the back story--indeed, it is as fascinating and integral to the novel as the presence of the horns on Ig’s head--and yet, rather than being distracted by the alternate narratives, we see a larger picture taking shape: a portrait of how and why the characters’ lives are interconnected, and the formative events (seemingly inconsequential at the time) that led to their present situation.

Only once, very briefly, did this back-story become tiresome, at a point where it didn’t seem to make much of a difference to the business at hand.  However, by the end of the flashback, we’ve discovered new aspects of a key character, and a deeper understanding of how these events came to be.

Another risk that paid off quite brilliantly was Hill’s decision to leave Ig’s “moment of truth,” at which point he apparently made a deal with the devil and earned his horns, shrouded in secrecy throughout the text.  Very quickly, Ig, along with the reader, stops even caring why this unexpected turn of events has come to pass, and simply accepts that this is the way things are.  It’s risky because it could easily come across as a “cheat,” to give a character these new powers with no understanding of the cost he had to pay to get them.  However, in this situation, the cost is known: the weight of sorrow over Merrin’s death almost seems like a tangible thing throughout the text of this book, and is implicitly understood as the cost Ig paid for his powers.  All that remains unanswered is the precise mechanism by which the powers were acquired, and the book is stronger for it.

When the news broke that Joe Hill is actually a pseudonym for Joe Hillstrom King, son of the famed author Stephen King, speculation ran wild that he was simply exploiting his father’s unique status to sell his books.  Of course, an attempt to avoid this speculation is what prompted him to write under an assumed name to begin with.  Every thing he’s written so far--his short story collection and his two novels--demonstrates conclusively that he is a brilliant author in his own right.  Surely his father’s career had an influence in his formation as a writer, and one would be foolish not to take an opportunity to learn from one of the undisputed masters of the genre.  However, it is obvious that he’s paid his dues, and has proven himself as one of the new masters of the genre, boasting an impressive ability to create sincere and believable characters about whom the reader feels genuine concern.

Bob