2007-01 Rebuttal to Dennis' Review

Dennis recently wrote a scathing review of a recent lecture plus a stage show by Franz Harrary. I certainly respect the opinion of Dennis, but I must disagree with his assessment.

First, I need to point out that Franz did, in fact, lie. He stated at the start of his lecture that, “there are no secrets,” meaning that he would explain any effect that the audience asked about. I suppose that there is a line somewhere. I believe that he lied by the letter but not by the spirit.

I have never been a fan of this illusionist. I have never found magic spectacle either interesting or entertaining. By the conclusion of the lecture in question, I had become very respectful of the work Franz does. I still cannot be considered a fan, but my appreciation of his style of magic has skyrocketed.

Franz made no attempt to hide the fact that he does not have a lecture. He explained that the idea was thrust upon him and he agreed to wing it. The same holds true for his stage act the following night. I have seen no evidence that those statements are untrue.

So, let’s take a look at the “lecture.” This performer is, very obviously, a great self-promoter. Considering that Houdini would never have made it without that same talent, I think it’s safe to say that Franz is in good company. I do not feel that the lengthy video clips presented were strictly self-serving promotion. Who would he be promoting to?

It seemed to me that, in the case of the first video, he was showing what a good audition tape should look like. Forget the magic; the timing of the sequences, the graphics, and the constant use of name and image are key. I have seen few better advertising vehicles in magic, and much can be learned by watching his.

The other video presentation was as much a time-killer as anything, but it did show the performer to best advantage. It would seem that anyone interested in this type of magic would enjoy seeing this.

The so-called lecture consisted of Q&A. Audience members would ask questions of various topics, many of which were of the, “how did you?” variety. Dennis feels that he did not answer these questions. I feel that he answered them as well as he should have.

Rather than give detailed information on how a particular effect was set up, Franz gave clues as to how they could be accomplished. He explained the nature of shooting for television and how it can be done to the illusionist’s advantage. He explained that the answers are all really right on the screen if you care to actually examine it. It is the essence of misdirection with the large image or action covering the small image or action.

What purpose would it serve for him to go into detailed explanations? Would anyone in his audience actually want to duplicate the effect? At what point does this make the switch from teaching to exposing?

Those are not rhetorical questions. I would really like to hear the answers Dennis has to them.

I feel that Franz succeeded in giving some terrific information to the audience. He told them to think. He encouraged them to decide what to do and then to think of a way to do it. It is my belief that telling magicians to think is one of the greatest of all lessons. We see way too many copycats because copying is not only allowed, but encouraged through lectures and patter-heavy magic instructions.

If Dennis had stayed for more than 20 minutes of the lecture, he would have known that Franz did, indeed, borrow his props for his stage performance. Though far from a stellar show, it had solid entertainment value. And that is what we should all be striving for.

- MJ Emigh