Technique And Presentation/Style

When you google the word "Best Juggler" you find that the first three entries are for a man named "Anthony Gatto".  This is a man who works for Cirque D' Solei, holds numerous records in juggling, and is without a doubt truly amazing.  What you will also find that he is referred to in the community as the best "technical" juggler, which makes me ask the question "What is the difference between a technical juggler and a "normal" juggler"?  I don't think that there really is a difference but rather instead the question here is why do we say this sentence.  Rather in many artforms such illusion and object manipulation there is a growing trend in which we are more likely judged not on form of presentation but rather instead technique of presentation.

Technique stems from the green word techne meaning "craft/manship".  When we talk about the technique of a particular art form we are discussing the necessary skills in order to do certain things.  This is your brushstroke,  your ability to do various patterns and juggling while isolated from the ground, your method of glazing pottery,  your ability to do a "classic pass" or a "hindu shuffle".  These are all  examples of "techniques".  If something is a technique then we can say that they can normally be taught in form or another and that they can also be compared and judged to other users of the technique.

This is different from what we might call "presentation/style".  Don't get me wrong there are techniques for how to talk in front of a crowd but while those are techniques of presentation they are different from what I am talking about.  When you present a work of art, an illusion, etc there is usually a "way" in which you do so.  Often enough if people look at many of your works of art they will see similarities between them and they might refer to this as your "style".  How you choose to interweave your various techniques to create a demonstration of/or attempt at art can be considered your style of presentation.

It is difficult to argue about which style of "presentation" is better or worse,  it happens but seems that eventually such arguments are reduced down to I "feel" statements.  The arguments are those of subjective personal statements like "I feel that Gatto is a better juggler than so-and-so" or " I think Francis Menotti (an illusionist out of philly) is an artist in his craft while so-and-so is just a hack".  There are trends that do occur and certain styles of performers will emerge as a whole.  In this way it easy to go back to technique as a judgement criteria,  "I feel that Gatto is a butter juggler than so-and-so because he is able to juggle seven rings and bounce a ball on his head".

The act of demonstrating technique is itself a presentation of sorts.  In this way the lines between presentation/style and technique become blurred especially within the walls of illusion and juggling.  I can't comment on anything else (but I assume there are instances of this).  Within juggling any act of juggling is itself a presentation and therefor technique and presentation are difficult sometimes to determine while in illusion the presentation is often enough used to cover technique and so "blocking" is technique and once again it is hard to determine.

It is relatively easy to comment on the notion of technique,  but in a display of art and skill technique is only half the battle.  I understand that there are some performers who are known solely for their technique and that there performers who are known solely for their style of presentation but both of them are using the other half.  Gatto's style of creating "challenges" in order to demonstrate talent with juggling without actually having to create much "artistic" flavor allows him to use technical juggling primarily for instance.  While he is a "technical" juggler his style allows for that.

So I argue it is not the best of ideas to reduce grading criteria of a routine down to technique without talking about the method of presentation as well.  

Supply and Demand In Sideshow and Entertainment

This is sort of a post in response to a thread on a Facebook forum dealing with sideshows.  I had a few thoughts on the topic of how undercutting or "free" performers/djs/ or other entertainers affects the rest of the industry when it comes to how much we get paid.

Supply and Demand are concepts from the financial world that have just as much impact in the world of sideshow and entertainment.  By understanding how Supply and Demand work within the industry I feel that we can hone ourselves to take advantage of these principals or at least understand what it is that we are actually dealing with.  Entertainment itself is not “one” supply and “one” demand,  but instead it is many demands and many supplies that relate to each other in the same that we as performers relate to each other.  As I am influenced by another performer from whom I learn I find that my finances are interwoven with theirs.

Supply and Demand is a theory of finance about how the supply of a product is related to the demand for a product.  The theory basically holds the cost of a product will decrease as either the supply for it goes or the demand for it goes down.  On the other hand said product’s price will increase when the  demand increases or the supply goes down.  In this instance we performers are a product,  we’re selling ourselves as entertainment.

So the supply for performers and entertainment should also be related to the demand for that entertainment.  In the thread that influenced me to write this there were a number of stories from performers who found that as they taught or were “underbid” by performers they found that the money they could make tended to decrease as well from those venues.  So the notion is that as the “general” supply of performers increases the amount of money we tend to make will decrease.I have heard this from performers over the last few years about the sheer amount of new “entertainers” attempting to make their name.  I have also heard about problems concerning the notion of getting paid.  It seems that this is the case that these two factors are related to each other.  Unsurprisingly there is a demand for teachers for these sorts of circus arts and skills which has caused more people with these skill sets to emerge and add to the supply.

But, I don’t think we are without hope.  I think that by understanding supply and demand we can at least make things better or understand what we are playing against.   What we are often asked is what our specialties are, what makes us different from other performers.  Often enough the fact that I am a 5 club juggler puts me over a 3 club juggler (what juggling entertainers refer to as “hack shows”) in terms of what I am capable of doing.  I am a different “juggler” and there for the supply and demand is going change, there is a different supply of “advanced” jugglers then there is of “beginner” jugglers.  So by me having a specialty that I can “sell” I suddenly become a much more “marketable” entertainer.  So we can change “who we are”.  For the first two years of being an “entertainer” I found that there were so many fire performers that as a male it was impossible to actually get paid as a male fire performer.  For every one fire performer requesting money there was at least 3-5 who would do it for free.

Now I can also change my venue, instead of performing at parties, clubs, and raves I can perform at kid shows, talents shows, ren faires, and the like.  Each of these are a different demand and they each have a different supply.  All of a sudden by being a fire performer who does not mind working with children or talking with others I completely change and now there is much less in the way of supply of performer who do acts like I do.

You can also change the demand.  Jim rose is famous for doing this with Marilyn Manson(you can look up his methodology and study it).  There are a number of sideshow entertainers such as Brian Brushwood and flow artists such as Ben Drexler who have made their name and living by being prominent on YouTube and providing to the community which has a completely different supply and demand.  However being successful on YouTube has catapulted them both to the point where there is a demand for them in the actual world.  So with that being said, you can create demand.  In the case of copycats you can also take advantage of the demand for specific performers or specific style of performers. 

But it also seems that these are all related to each other.  While shows such as AGT and the X-Factor have increased the visibility of side show entertainment,  it has also made it so that the television and YouTube have become part of the supply as well.  As the other aspects of the entertainment industry such as DJ’s have their problems those problems also become part of our problems.  Just some food for thought.

On Persona and Voice

When I originally started to write this,  this was going to a set of thoughts on the notion of performer's personas and the notion of what is referred to in some literature as the "Ultimate Voice" technique. But as I started writing, other experiences I have had sort of fedinto this.  So just to let you know part of this is me writing about my own experiences so I can think about them, and some of this is me trying to share my knowledge and experiences with everyone else.  So if unusual jargain from other genre's slips in,  that is where it comes from.

A persona is the "apparent mind" that can be seen, for instance what subjective qualities does an audience notice about you.  Are you confident or timid; are you a jock or a nerd.  These qualities that give insight into other minds are qualities of a persona.  The interesting thing is that the persona can change.  We see this frequently in acting in which a person plays a character that is completely unlike the person you met onscreen (which of course into the problem that I want to talk about which is associating personas with the persons actual or possible natures).

When an individual is cast repeatedly into similar roles, we call this type casting.  For instance do the names Hans Gruber of Severus Snape have anything in common.  Besides being characters who have similar traits (thick voices, villainous (or anti-hero),  and extremely standoffish) they are also played by the same actor.  We tend to associated the character with the roles he plays rather than his own nature (Chuck Norris Jokes anyone).

A performer who I worked with at a ren faire once said that his persona came to him in the sense that it was everything that he ever hated about entertainers and performers in general.  But everyone loved him (especially considering that every moment was complete with satire due to the purposely goofy hat and his age which he repeated a lot),  but thats the thing when you have a persona is that those qualities are pretty much tied to you forever more.  People associated them with you when you are out on the street.  Hence why I feel for actors who are typecast.

As a guideline I don't enjoy entertaining for my personal circle of friends and family because my "performance" persona is radically different from the person most of my friends know me to be.  I love to show technique and tricks that I have learned but I don't enjoy entertaining because the person that "I" (little "I" here) am is not what you really would call entertaining.  In my search for a better presenation and asking for opinions I come off as insecure.  A few friends of mine who know me in both worlds have often joked about the difference being similar to "Clark Kent"/"Superman". 

Surprisingly in my spiritual practices (warned you "jargain") I have a similar problem.  I find that the persona of the magician isn't the same as the persona of the guy who came in the front door.  To quote my mentor Robert (R.I.P.) about divination "Your just the guy in the room".  But that is what many people see,  the guy in the room.  That honestly is something depends on the initial impression.  It is possible for people to see more than this,  it just normally doesn't happen (of course the word "normal" depends on your social circle).

This all means that one faces a rather difficult choice if ones performance persona is different from ones normal persona.  Are you always in performance persona or do you seperate your world, that is there is a group of people that know you and a group of people that know the other you.  For me,  because I have not found a way to resolve the differences into one persona I tend to shift depending on the circumstances.  I am lucky to have people in my life who know the big "I" and thus most of my quirks tend to be okay but it's a lot more difficult for those who don't.  The big "I" get's to occasionally dance and create art and therefor there is no need to try to be entertaining.

Your Voice-
So the thing that got me to thinking about this is that I found that my ideal performance voice is actually the same voice I use for what is called "vibrating" (in spirit speak).  In the book entitled "Social Engineering" (Which i highly reccomend for any performer) the author talks about a technique for what he calls the "Ultimate Voice" for implanting suggestions or convincing people to do something.  I discovered this voice a while ago when I was learning intonation and vibratory work,  but the technique for each is essentially the same (some food for thought)

Wit Verus Intellect

The last two weekends have been a whirlwind of work,  a performance retreat (Wildfire) and a working burn-style event (Be the Strange).  At both of these events a common thought popped up at both of them; the differences between artistry, entertainment, and performance.  I have given my thoughts on them before (Performance evolving to entertainment; followed by art) but another thought crossed my mind as well.  One's wit and one's intellect.
We use wit and intellect interchangeably or at least it seems that way in our society (I might just be wrong),  but I feel that they are very separate creatures.  Deep thoughtfulness that leads to exploration of ideas is how I use the word intellect.  One applies ones brain to an issue until that issue is resolved correctly. Wit or Cleverness is the capacity to look at a problem and to quickly come to a solution or response to that problem.
To paraphrase someone I know,  "My Job is to be Clever".  After taking comedy courses and theater classes I know that a lot of time is spent create thoughtful intentful comedy routines or acting choices.  To paraphrase my comedy professor (yes there is one), "someone spills a drink on the stage and "NO ONE" stops to pick it up; so much for suspension of disbelief".  There are also plenty of comedians who have been roasted over open flames for saying something extremely inappropriate (The Host of Tosh 2.0 and his rape jokes comes to mind).
I honestly find it more than a little difficult to be thoughtful and clever at the same time.  When I am in the mindset of being an entertainer (which is more and more as time goes on) I find that I can either be clever regularly and rarely thoughtful or I can be rarely clever and regularly thoughtful.  But the truth is that I don't get paid to be thoughtful.  I am paid to be clever ((Making David Carodeen jokes as I have a rope dart wrapped around my neck comes to mind)).
Within the communities that I belong to there is a lot of reliance upon music and non-interactive skills (one of the best jugglers within the industry Vova Galchenko actually has stage fright problems).  In other words artistic endeavors in which social interaction is done within the frame of music, entertainment is done through other means (I have made comments on the nature male/female performances), and or sheer talent (there are plenty of amazing seven club jugglers who are so amazing they do not require the ability to speak or interact). 
But on the other hand I have seen plenty of performers who do not react to a crowd or how a crowd reacts.  Or I have spoken with people who have plenty of room to criticize but are incredibly bashful on stage.  I honestly would have to liken it to any form of partner performance in which danger was involved such as whip targets, knife throwing, or interwoven fire poi.  It takes a certain amount of skill and talent to be able to do that and when it goes well it is an amazing experience and when it goes badly,  it's on youtube for life.  And honestly it isn't the amazing experiences that get as much air time as it is the horrible experiences that are passed around (two girls one cup and any other number of videos that are out there).
The point is,  is that there is a difference between being witty and being intelligent.  I feel that one should keep that in mind before lambasting a performer on how one should do ones job.  It is easy to think after an event how one should have responded to said event but hard to do so during said event.

Sports Juggling Versus Being Entertaining

For those who don't know; there is a disparity between the performance community and the "sports" community in the juggling world.  A friend of mine, "Hobbit" from Hvbris (Web Site For The Troupe ) once said that "Most audience members can't tell the difference between a three beat and a five beat weave".  Most people who sit and watch in an audience can't tell the difference between a technically complicated move and a less complicated move that looks similar.  I have spent five minutes working on a three minute three club act involving moves that would make a five club juggler gasp only to have the audience start clapping the moment a fourth club goes into the air.  I may not be able to tell you the reason why (or if I did it might offend some people....it could go either way) but laymen audience members have a harder time appreciating technical juggling.  But jugglers as a whole tend to judge each other based upon technique rather than upon showmanship.

This is most manifested within the juggling community.  ESPN within the last few years started showing casing World Championship Juggling, in which technique and accuracy are judged to be the most important aspects( I believe this event is part of the World Juggling Federation).  This trend has itself carried over to the juggling community as a whole (not the entertainer community) and a routine is often judged by how technical it is.    This in reinforced by the cirque nouveau in which music predominately is the narrator and mover of events within the show itself.  

This doesn't tend to be a problem at the level that you find on WJF or within the realms of Cirque D'Soleil but here at the level I exist at it does tend to be a problem.  A common occurrence might be a performer finding an amazing and complicated technical move and "using" the hell out of it for a show but in the process of doing so might end up boring the heck out of everyone else.  What a lot of performers do is to create a form of artificial difficulty where they find some way to make the act that they are doing more complicated by creating a challenge within it.  Things like adding in Rola Bola's, Balls for head/shoulder bounces, and Spinning Plates tend to be common.  Doing things like this creates a very dynamic show in which there seems to be a goal for the performer.  There are other performers who's routines allow them to never have a "dull" moment.   But we also have performances in you have repetitions of the same basic movement over and over with the occasional "difference" and a serious case of the jugglers mouth (a large o expression that we traditionally see with extreme focus and concentration). (juggling performans of sergio tapia - juggling convention melipilla 2013)  Watch the first minute and a half for an idea of what I mean.
Other things can help as well such dynamic movement of the objects knowing your material (drops happen but are generally speaking the mark of a bad performer when they keep happening.

Material needs to be created that engages the audience, the people who are not familiar with what you are doing.  

Hey, I know how to do that

Stop me if you have heard this before,  your finishing up some art piece.  Be it doing camera shots in the park at a waterfall,  doing a contact juggling bit for some spectators,  or playing your guitar.  As this is going on someone walks up and says,  "hey I know how to do that to".  A few years ago when guitar hero was all the rage,   I heard a few stories about teenagers who thought they knew how to play guitars because they played expert on a video game (Guitar Hero Destroying Music).  I even heard a few stories (rumors) about actual guitars getting damaged.

Tonight I did some art gallery work at the Art Alliance in Philadelphia.  One of the bit's that I did was a hundred foot rope escape,  in order to make it more aesthetically pleasing I went ahead and did it as an open challenge for anyone to work on while wearing a blindfold (because everyone is more impressive when you wear a blindfold ;) ).  While I was i this state someone went ahead and actually cut my rope and took off about eight feet or so of rope.  Now I can still use the rope that I have, though I will have to replace it.  But I am torqued.

I saw the man who cut the rope performing demonstrations of  various ways to tie someone in at the hands. I know enough to know that this person was at least proficient.  That right there is the thing that burns me so completely,  that he as a person who is proficient with rope (as well as the cost of rope and equipment) would without any consideration purposely break, damage, or put someones equipment into a position of risk.  If he had asked or offered a trade I would have more than be glad.  The rope isn't going to set me back to replace so I am not worried.

The thing that worries me is how common of a practice this is, not asking or touching just doing.  I have walked away from my equipment in a gym to use the lavoratory to come back and have about 20 kids going through at least 500$ worth of equipment that I really can't replace with adults just watching.  "Oh we just assumed this was campus equipment".  I have been to juggle festivals where 5-10 clubs went wondering off because someone thought that the clubs from a friend and I were "communal".  A club is at least 30.  Three Hundred Dollars worth of juggling equipment that literally could have walked out of the facility.  I have seen people literally walk out of friends houses with equipment.  And there isn't any sort of negative intentions, they usually just don't have the presence of mind to think about it.

I write this because I really would like spectators and not professional amateurs (be they jugglers, magicians,  musicians, etc) to think really long and hard before they start randomly borrowing equipment because you might be the person who breaks the piece of equipment that you can't afford to replace or damage.  I have equipment that is "stage" only that is to say I only use it for professional shows or to practice for professional shows.

 I also write this because these are also the people who make our lives purposely difficult as performers and people out to make a living.  Most people who make a living at an art know enough to not try and screw someone at their art,  the danger is when someone knows enough to think that they know enough.  These are the people who jam locks, break apart gaffs to show that they are gaffs,  yell how something is done to the audience,  etc,  You can't do anything about these people outside of what you do with hecklers (which depends on the person).  You need to learn how to recognize these people and NEVER bring them up on stage, unless you know how to screw with them (one of my personal favorites is to have a "screw" card at the bottom off the deck)

Shock and Awe: Being an Entertainer

When I perform in front of an audience I know that only 10% of the audience in front of me is going to have any sort of appreciation for the kind of skill or talent that I actually have.  I have performed with four clubs before and gotten a bigger reaction from doing four clubs then I have for doing a three club routine that includes extremely difficult tricks (five club level difficulty).  There is a huge difference between performing for a laymen audience and an audience of performers.  (There is a rather large set of problems within the fire performance community with this problem as often people will perform as if everyone was a performer).
There is a sense in which before I can be an artist I must be an entertainer first.  I have to entertain the audience.  Think of Monty Python, they make you laugh with slapstick and humor.  After you are being entertained they throw an intellectual micky into the concoction and often enough a lot of people who won't realize it,  but they do that after they have the rest of the audience engaged and enjoying themselves.
This is the same thing that we as entertainers have to do.  We need to create a sense of emotions, awe, or shock in the audience that is going to keep them engaged and enjoying themselves before we can create any form of "intellectual micky" (this is the point when we start calling ourselves artists).  But the thing is we need to create that emotional reaction.  Comedians do it with humor,  burlesquers often do it with lust,  other performers do it with blood and danger, there are many ways but they are necessary.
Now that being said,  there is a sense of novelty within many of these areas.  Just as our emotional reactions get lessoned each time we get exposed to something we lose a little bit of our reaction to it.  We lose a little bit of novelty.  Often enough illusionists will stop performing an effect when enough illusionists are doing a similar effect (even when the methods are radically different). 
So with these all being said then that makes a huge level of responsibility on the performer to be able to understand these things.  And to be able to accept the responsibility for these things as well.  That means that when an effect is widely known among the audience or potential audience, since only 10% of people are really going to care for the difficulty( since the novelty and emotional reaction has been lost) ;it isn't nearly as good as other effects as we could choose to use.  I encounter this when I choose to do say juggling,  say between doing a three cigar box routine (which is almost never done) and say contact juggling (say the words fushigi I dare you ).  I have to pick and choose because the audience that pays me is a laymen audience it isn't the other professionals.  Performing for other professionals is honestly "showing off" then anything else.

Photographers During a Street Performance

The above photo was taken during one of my first evenings doing a local street fair called First Friday in Philadelphia   I recall this photo as a performer because what the photo doesn't show you is me finishing a quick set and looking across the street and seeing this photographer and making a large "X" with my clubs indicating I wasn't happy with him taken candid snapshots of me without compensating me.

I am an artist and an entertainer,  or at least I try to be.  I understand that when I perform for public events I take the chance that someone will take photos of me since I am in a public venue, which is usually okay because most people will put a dollar in a bucket as a way of saying thank you.  But there are also lots of photographers who behave in a way that makes me think that I am there simply as a "moment" of street art.

What I do costs money and takes time (which is another valuable resource).  A set of five juggling clubs will run at least 150$-300$ and that's only one prop.  So needless to say I understand that when I perform I am trying to entertain,  but I am also attempting to recoup costs/ earn money from my art.  It is also the most direct way to network.

So let's say that this photo actually becomes used for a financial gain.  Because of where I am,  I am in no way protected by any form of copyright for my art form or privacy acts.  So a photographer who happens to get lucky and capture an amazing image is doing so at the expense of the performer.  Simply put at least give us the respect that if you capture an image from us, thank us and acknowledge what you are doing.  We understand if you can't give us cash but you can acknowledge who you took the photos if you are going to publish them as your own work.
  We can't afford to create art for the sake of art alone.  So please either give us thanks by giving us credit in your photos or giving us what we call a "tip of the hat"
The photos in question were taken by http://www.s18photography.com/

Beginnings

I am a local street performer to Philadelphia.  I grew up and learned fire performing from the local community and branched out into doing actual performance work (street busking,  corporate gigs, sideshow, cons).  It's a different experience when you stand on a street corner or underneath a stage light to perform because all of a sudden nothing really matters any more except how good you are,  and how much other people like you.

I am a public performer,  you might see me on a street corner or at a septa top,  or even on a train platform at 30th Street Station.  The art I create is as public as art ever can be so I am setting up this blog to talk about that kind of art and how it relates to myself and others both as an artist and as an entertainer.