Exposures are performed by both professional and amateur magicians and members of the public, and may be performed as part of stage shows, or in other public media including the Internet.
Exposures as such should also be carefully distinguished from ''apparent'' exposures performed by magicians during an act; these 'exposures' invariably turn out to be illusions in their own right, usually compounded in mystery by their apparent similarity to a previous trick (or outright jokes — one example is a magician who claims the secret to unlinking rings is that "the rings have holes", and then points to the "hole" in the middle of each ring). Since a primary rule of magic is ''Never perform the same trick twice'', if a magician appears to be doing so, a surprise ending will almost assuredly follow.
- Opponents argue that exposure devalues magic tricks by removing their potential to surprise or amaze audiences, or that the exposures are over-simplified to the degree that it promotes the idea that the whole art is nothing more than cheap tricks. Advocates counter by pointing out that many magic tricks which have been exposed publicly in the past, such as the Chinese Linking Rings , have not depreciated in popularity; furthermore, those magic acts that do include exposures, such as the Masked Magician , have proved most popular in recent years. Furthermore, they believe that many members of the public are indifferent to exposures and will not seek them out nor remember them for long periods.
- Opponents argue that exposure violates the Intellectual Property of the original creators of the trick. In most cases, IP law does not protect the rights of magic methods (see Copyright Of Magic Methods ), although many magicians behave as if it does - out of respect for the work the creators put into their pieces. If the trick happens to contain a new scientific principle, as in the illusion Pepper's Ghost , that scientific principle can be patented. Patenting an essential part of the illusion prevents unauthorized use of the trick, but most tricks build on sleight of hand and psychology, not scientific principles.
- Opponents argue that exposures provide ammunition for hecklers and saboteurs to attack magicians at the point of performance. Advocates argue that these individuals will damage performances either way.
- Advocates (including the Masked Magician ) argue that exposure of old tricks forces magicians to innovate new ones and keeps the field moving. Opponents argue that innovating new magic tricks is a difficult process, whereas exposing them is a very easy process, meaning that the rate of innovation could be overwhelmed.
- Opponents argue that exposure harms new magicians, since it is the simpler and cheaper tricks that new magicians depend on which are most likely to be exposed; it also encourages existing magicians to "bunker up" and avoid discussing methods with newcomers for fear that their works will be stolen and misrepresented. Advocates claim that, since they do not believe exposure to devalue tricks (see above), exposure aids new magicians by providing them with an easy and cheap source of new tricks.
- Advocates argue that exposure enables spectators to fully appreciate the range of different skills involved in performing different magic tricks. If the method for a trick is unknown to the audience, then they cannot know what skills are involved; furthermore, the outcome of every trick becomes the same ("hey, how'd he/she do that?") leading to the variety of tricks becoming meaningless. Opponents argue that spectators still appreciate that different skills are being used even if they do not know what they are.
- The skills and secrets of a magician can be used to harm the public. Many of the secrets of magic came from the study of creative cheats and impostures that can still be powerful emotional persuaders when not used for entertainment purposes, but to prey upon others. Exposure may furnish those with a criminal intent with the necessary knowledge to attempt such deception. On the other hand, it can be argued that through exposure, members of the public can learn to be more keenly aware of the possibility of becoming victims of deception. Some argue that, even when exposed by magicians, such performances would still not be accepted as simple "tricks" by some, especially people who wrongly believe that their senses are accurate at all times and that they are, therefore, immune to deception.
|
