EDIT: This section became wildly long, so I split it into two parts. This (part a) is “Act I” and part b will cover Act II and III.
SETLIST CONTINUED: A Conversation With The Audience
Here’s a bit of an experiment. Normally at this point (with so much concept work laid out), I’d usually start in on the script. I’m comfortable with longform writing so it feels natural for me to start filling in the blank spaces with the full “story” of the show.
But in an effort to dig into what my ShowCraft process truly entails, I thought I’d try something that’s been kicking around in my mind: thinking through the Setlist as though it were a conversation with the audience. Almost like an interview where the individual pieces respond to the natural next questions of the audience.
Our art is inherently audience-focused. We need people and their brains for magic to exist, so it behooves us to think through what they’re (probably) thinking throughout our show. If ShowCraft is intentionally choosing what to perform when, part of what can inform that decision is what questions and thoughts are in our audience’s minds. Using the Setlist from the last ShowCraft post, I’m going to flesh out the message of each trick, possibly do some re-organizing, and hopefully find the conversational thread that begins to unite disparate parts of the show.’
SHOW WALKTHROUGH
Welcome/Intro: Audience members enter a museum/gallery/warehouse feeling space. If it leans more ‘gallery,’ they can roam around, look at art on the walls featuring card imagery. If it’s more ‘warehouse,’ it feels minimalist – even empty – perhaps the space is filled with soundscape/music to set the mood? The mood is curious and excited, with the predominant question being “What’s about to happen?” At showtime, the lights go down to a full blackout, and after a few moments augmented by sound effects, flashlights begin to turn on, spotlighting a deck of cards and the magician.
Hotel 52: Adapted to an art heist, sets up the 52 cards as unique, priceless art works. Lean on dramatized story to get in medias res opening feeling. One card is selected, revealed at the top of the deck. Rest of the deck crumpled up. Box revealed to be destroyable/made of paint/etc. Effect sets up obviously that the show is about heists/theft, and the first questions are probably a response to me; Who am I? Why am I doing this show? What interests me about the topic?
Ring, Watch, Wallet: Possible elements to include: 1) Story about being stuck in Paris at the almost empty Louvre, thinking “I could steal that;” 2) Only ever considered (and my skills only qualify me for) a handful of jobs: Librarian, Magician, International Art Thief; 3) We so often define ourselves by our jobs to the point where it becomes the first thing we ask a person about (set up for a moment of transformation later on where the focus should really be not on what we do when someone is giving us money, but what we’d be doing when no one pays us for it at all); 4) Being a good magician requires skills inversely proportional to being a good person. This section needs to not only introduce me, but immediately establish trust because the nature of the material is such that twists/mistrust is rampant, and especially if I want to play with that towards the end for a “twist” of some kind, I need the audience on my side right away. This effect should be funny, somewhat self-deprecating, and relatable (use storytelling technique to find the relatable moments). Possible objects to include as part of the effect: Money (Material Value, Wealth), License (Identity), Watch (Time), Business Card (Identity – Becomes Calling Card Later?). Sort of a Thief vs. Magician presentation? Both… “creative problem solvers.” ***Set up the premise of the show at this point: That I think a smart magician could pull of the Perfect Heist*** This leads to a bunch of questions that need to be tackled in a targeted way: Why Magicians? What skills do they have? What would you steal? How would you do it? What would it look like? Generally, I want to save the “Demonstration” for Act III as a finale. Promise to show them exactly what it looks like (though they won’t be able to see it if everything works correctly).
Out Of This World: Refocus all the attention by putting the audience on display a bit. There are a lot of disparate questions happening which is good for interest but bad for controlling the show. Fauxcess of this piece is that audience can do things without always understanding how (Magician’s aren’t special/unique in doing things people don’t understand); I have information and they (apparently) don’t and I’m going to ask them to make decisions. But information is constantly being translated and communicated (SETUP FOR AKA LATER… Maybe incorporate “Pointing”), we just need to be aware of subtext. Flow of the effect should start conversational; maybe with a back and forth about jobs as a callback. As it goes along, I should react positively but subtly because I have the information they’re doing well and I should actively try to give them less information. “Don’t try to solve it, just trust that the information is already making its way to your brain.” Revelation should include the idea of this being the perfect audience (affirmation) for the show and once again tease the ending somehow. Questions will probably focus on “How did we do that?” At this point. I want to refocus that question (Because there’s not enough time to understand “How” of it all as it’s too broad) into “How did you make the ‘right’ decision?” Ask who felt unsure vs who felt sure of their choice. Bring up different representatives and have them hold onto that feeling at the moment of decision making. Afterthought: Set this routine up as being “out of my control” because all the decisions will be made by you and while most magicians wouldn’t give up that much control early on, this isn’t exactly a magic show.
NO Poker: We know why the audience is here (Need a better resolution of this idea in the previous routine); and now we need to know why I’m here. Magician’s are attuned to reading the subtext of a situation. Gleaning extra information and working in the barely-perceptible periphery (call back to the idea of information already being in the brain, just not being processed). And above all, subtly manipulating situations for their own preferred outcomes. This routine is all about manipulation (so I need to take the sting out). Phase 1: win at a hand of cards quickly. Phase 2: Set up the win/lose dichotomy so that I’m attempting to “lose” (fun wording). This routine activates the audience’s critical analysis, so play with that and then come back to a more enjoyable (while still active) mindset to appease critics. By controlling a series of decisions to a T, I can prove my own self-imposed challenge of why I’m leading the show, and I can bring a sort of resolution to “were my choices in OOTW fair/my own?” The answer(s) potentially being: 1) if they feel the same, does it matter? 2) The choices were completely fair in OOTW, but in NO, they made the exact series of decisions I wanted them to. Big takeaway is that THIS IS THE KEY: those two situations felt the same [This show probably needs to use the interactive/conversational moments to check in with participants who should be checking in with themselves]. By this point, folks should be wondering where the line is between what they can control themselves and what is being manipulated by me; I need them to trust me again, so address that and bring them back onto my team. That might happen by shifting the topic towards actual Heists (this Act I has been more general skills), OR the kicker word reveal (rather than “LOSE” could potentially be something related to the scripting transition from control/attention/etc. to heists and the kicker moment is what propels us into Act II.