Skip to main content

Experiencing the Impossible: Gustav Kuhn ***

I have to admit I find magic acts rather tedious entertainment - but I do enjoy trying to work out how the trick was done and then (ideally) finding out how it really was undertaken - so I was fascinated by the idea of a book that claims to cover 'the science of magic'. (By magic, I should stress, I don't mean the fantasy sorcery version, but the very down-to-earth engineered version used in magic shows.) This handsome book proved to be a distinct curate's egg: there were sections I pretty much skip read as they were somewhat dull, but other parts that really captured my attention.

 The reason that some sections don't work so well was the classic academic writer's problem of not realising the importance of narrative and storytelling (which you'd think a practising magician like Gustav Kuhn would realise). The book comes alive when we are told about specific tricks or people or situations, but sometimes it becomes a collection of facts, a lecture on, say, a particular psychological trait, and then it can lose the reader's attention.

 It's not that the psychology parts aren't interesting - and inevitably, apart from engineering, most of the 'science of magic' is about psychology and how the brain works (and doesn't) - but they need to be presented with much more context and more tying back to the magic that they are supposed to be illustrating. Similarly, it's not that the science is too heavy - if anything, we don't get enough of it. So, for example, Kuhn introduces a theory of Bayesian misdirection which I absolutely loved as a concept, but wasn't able to read much about.

 If you read the book to get the lowdown on how all the famous tricks work, you will be disappointed. Kuhn does explain a few very basic tricks, but mostly brandishes the magician's traditional veil of secrecy. This is a real shame and is another reason the book doesn't work as well as it could. You don't explain science by saying 'the researchers did an experiment, but I'm not going to tell you how it worked, just what it looked like' - but that's exactly what happens here. A great example is Kuhn's use of a Derren Brown illusion, where someone was given the choice of any toy in the huge toy store Hamleys, and Brown apparently predicted what the choice would be. Kuhn tells us that Brown 'explained' the trick by telling us it was due to repeated suggestions - but that this explanation doesn't hold up. We're then told 'Brown is one of my favourite magicians and I have no intention of revealing how his trick is done...' - but that's exactly what's required to make the book work. There's too much tease with no reveal.

 One other thing that I was surprised wasn't covered, perhaps because of the author's obvious love for magic, is its rapid decline as a popular adult entertainment. A couple of decades ago, magic shows were primetime TV fixtures. Now, magic tends to be much more niche. It may be that as we are so used to amazing CGI, we don't really care about illusion. Or something else. It would have been interesting to have seen a professional analysis of this.

 I don't want to give the impression that this book is devoid of interesting content. I repeatedly came on sections which really grabbed my attention, primarily those built around actual magical tricks. But it could have been so much better.

 Hardback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...
Post a Comment
Read more

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...
Post a Comment
Read more

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more