Illusion and Magic

[TeaDidikai]

Most of the modern non-YHVH based faiths born from older forms of indigenous European and North African theology draw heavily from recorded mythology.

While some look at the amazing things presented as metaphor and perhaps- fable designed to rest certain fears there is a hint of another possibility.

We know that Heron of Alexandria designed and crafted amazing mechanica- mostly steam powered figures that seemed to perform amazing tasks. Statues that would move and dance, dragons that would roar in time with a death blow, heck- the world's first Holy Water vending machine! (I love that one! heart )

However, I am sure most of us have heard someone on ED or the like claim they spell Magic with a K to set it apart from stage magic.

Which brings me to this question: should it be set apart?

It is clear in mass group ritual (such as the ones at Festivals) that the psychology of the ritual is very important- perhaps as important as the actual energy employed.

Yasmine Galenorn in one of her books makes a distinction between "Dramatic Play"- the kind of Drama Queening that takes place at some gatherings and "Deep Play"- something that heightens the sense of "otherness" and lends itself to the task at hand.

If one works with the pretense that they are drawing from older traditions- then perhaps one need not exclude illusion from magic and ritual. Perhaps flash powder and other special effects belong on the alter along side the wand and sword.  

[Sir_Catherine]

Interesting notion...playing with the idea of setting and mood being half the journey to the goal, right?

I'm interested in what all of you who work with magic (of any sort or path!) have to say in this thread.  

[jaden kendam]

Well, since it appears that group magic often has a bit of psychodrama, then no, I do not think a distinction needs to be made. In ED it seems as if the majority of those who make such a distinction have no clue as to what they are talking about. Instead of researching the K, they listen to a friend or fellow "coven member" that says the K makes magic actual, instead of slight of hand. What is wrong with smoke powder if it gives the desired effect? Nothing, in my honest opinion.  

[patch99329]

I have no problem using smoke powder etc in maic, as long as you aren't trying to mislead people.

After all, it's a great way to get you in the 'magic mood'. It's like me with my insence; I find it hard to concentrate on a spell if the room isn't heavy with smoky scents mad D  

[Pelta]

I find it hard to concentrate if the room is full of smoky scents. Mostly because I'm allergic to it. confused

I don't practise magic in groups. Thus I see no reason to fool anybody with excessive psychodrama. The only person I'd be using it on is myself, and if I know it's real I don't really need any extra flashy effects.

Sure it's nice if something looks pretty, but that's more for the realm of group practise than for the individual.  

[TeaDidikai]

Pelta

I find it hard to concentrate if the room is full of smoky scents. Mostly because I'm allergic to it. confused

That's only one example. What do you think of the concept beyond the single example?

Quote:

I don't practise magic in groups. Thus I see no reason to fool anybody with excessive psychodrama.

Why is it "fooling"?

What part of using a tool becomes something that turns those it is used on into a fool as long as it is used to meet the agreed goal?

Quote:

Sure it's nice if something looks pretty, but that's more for the realm of group practise than for the individual.

How do you figure? I mean, I know a fair few CMers that will say point blank that solitary work done correctly (in the case that comes to mind quickly- that means having some very expensive sigils) it has to "look pretty".

patch99329

I have no problem using smoke powder etc in maic, as long as you aren't trying to mislead people.

What about it is misleading?

And- even if it is "misleading", why is that bad? Did the Roman or Egyptian temple preists do a disservice to the faithful by providing them with what they were looking for? Awe in it's truest sense?  

[Pelta]

TeaDidikai

Pelta

I find it hard to concentrate if the room is full of smoky scents. Mostly because I'm allergic to it. confused

That's only one example. What do you think of the concept beyond the single example?

I think the concept as a whole is a very old and valid one.

Quote:

Quote:

I don't practise magic in groups. Thus I see no reason to fool anybody with excessive psychodrama.

Why is it "fooling"?

You misunderstand. The reason it would be useful is to enhance and create the appropriate atmosphere for a magical working. As useful as this would be in a large group ritual (and it has its place in solitary work too), I personally see no reason to use it.

Quote:

What part of using a tool becomes something that turns those it is used on into a fool as long as it is used to meet the agreed goal?

It depends on what is being accomplished. The old example of the shaman biting his tongue and spitting out a bloody "disease spirit" is useful as it creates a placebo effect for the patient, and perhaps also accomplishes a magical goal.

Someone throwing cards at an audience amazes people but doesn't really accomplish anything besides lightening their wallets, which of course is magic in its own right but not the sort that I would condone in a religious setting.

Quote:

Quote:

Sure it's nice if something looks pretty, but that's more for the realm of group practise than for the individual.

How do you figure? I mean, I know a fair few CMers that will say point blank that solitary work done correctly (in the case that comes to mind quickly- that means having some very expensive sigils) it has to "look pretty".

Let's just say it's not my thing. I see nothing wrong with people who want to do it. Kudos to them.  

[TeaDidikai]

Pelta

Someone throwing cards at an audience amazes people but doesn't really accomplish anything besides lightening their wallets, which of course is magic in its own right but not the sort that I would condone in a religious setting.

Why not? Why would it be wrong for clergy to use special effects for profit (prophet? wink ) within a religious setting?

Granted some paths do have prohibitions against it, but for the others- as long as the base work is valid, why shouldn't they be paid more to be amazed as well?  

[Fiddlers Green]

If the packaging is used to help the psycho-drama, more power to it.
Altho I'm not a the greatest proponent of such, I find no fault in it...
However, I draw the line at blatantly telling someone that something is what it is not.
I am all for leaving people wallow in ignorance, but intentionally misrepresenting the whats and whys of the happening grates horribly against me.

As far as Ceremonial Magic looking pretty...
Sometimes it really has to, at least by the standards of whatever the ceremony is designed to appease/cajole.
Other formulae are far less pretty, and, honestly, foul to be around... toxic in some regards. Some people may argue for the aesthetics of magic... but directly, unless it is psychodrama or petitioning of some sort, The only aesthetic I see is a quasi-coincidental completeness that is as much a result of propper harmonics with embedded laws (iow: Feng Sui, or just good geomancy) as anything else. ninja

Last quip, and this is a real personal issue...
Clerics using special effects for profit doesn't bother me, especially if it is pleasing to their Master, however, clerics using such prestidigitations in lieu of actual divine presence are just as bad as the semi-literate Xian revivalists who have learned to parrot a single line of the bible, often from the OT, and proclaim it as Gnosis.
But then again, if the deity being slandered really cared, I suppose they would do something about it... ninja
Regardless, motivating the masses with false miracles really gets under my skin. confused  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

Last quip, and this is a real personal issue...
Clerics using special effects for profit doesn't bother me, especially if it is pleasing to their Master, however, clerics using such prestidigitations in lieu of actual divine presence are just as bad as the semi-literate Xian revivalists who have learned to parrot a single line of the bible, often from the OT, and proclaim it as Gnosis.
But then again, if the deity being slandered really cared, I suppose they would do something about it... ninja
Regardless, motivating the masses with false miracles really gets under my skin. confused

I'm interested to know your opinion on the Hellenic Priests that used the Heron of Alexandria's tools.

Also- from a "Naturalistic" perspective, if one were to view deity as having created the chemical reactions and physics- would you consider that to be an exception?  

[TatteredAngel]

I associate stage magic with a con man personality. I understand it isn't always the case, but what stage magic is about is, at its heart, outright trickery. As long as it's not being done as a con, that's fine. You go see stage magic so that you can be fooled. The magician's job is to trick you.

I feel it's different from group or even personal psychodrama. The psychodrama of non-stage magic should, in my mind, aid the (for lack of a better way of phrasing it) real magic going on. I really am not comfortable with intentional stage magic-type trickery in what purports to be a real magic setting.  

[TeaDidikai]

TatteredAngel

I associate stage magic with a con man personality. I understand it isn't always the case, but what stage magic is about is, at its heart, outright trickery. As long as it's not being done as a con, that's fine. You go see stage magic so that you can be fooled. The magician's job is to trick you.

Is this your opinion of the Hellenic Priests who used Mechanica?  

[Fiddlers Green]

TeaDidikai

I'm interested to know your opinion on the Hellenic Priests that used the Heron of Alexandria's tools.

I have mixed feelings, and would honestly like to know more about the surrounding events...
It's far enough back in antiquity that any presumptions I make will be purely speculative.
I could venture a few If-Then samples if you want, but my ability to look at the whole matter as it was is hampered by centuries of displacement.

However, I will state simply that just because something was done in the past, does not make it righteous nor of necessity true.
I am of a mind that people have profitted off each other's gullibility for quite some time. Mayhaps 'tis merely my own cynicism.

Quote:

Also- from a "Naturalistic" perspective, if one were to view deity as having created the chemical reactions and physics- would you consider that to be an exception?

Created is a special word for me.
However, to try to answer that point, I would have to say it lies with the deity's own intents.
If the deity wishes it's creations to be used in such a manner, or if the deity is one who enjoys chicanery and manipulation of the easily fooled, then I see nothing wrong, on an ecclesiastic level, and would not find such priests to be the same type of gaudy charlatan as someone who is merely putting smoke and mirrors around the depiction of a divinity more concerned with truth, and/or direct dealings.

Now, mind you, I am the height of impiety, and will call a god a miserable wretch just as easily as I will another human. And a divine entity which does encourage it's pious to actively mislead or misrepresent, is still a deceiver. wink  

[TatteredAngel]

TeaDidikai

TatteredAngel

I associate stage magic with a con man personality. I understand it isn't always the case, but what stage magic is about is, at its heart, outright trickery. As long as it's not being done as a con, that's fine. You go see stage magic so that you can be fooled. The magician's job is to trick you.

Is this your opinion of the Hellenic Priests who used Mechanica?

Ehhhh... without a whole lot of personal knowledge of such myself, it's really hard for me to make that kind of call. I've never read about it or anything, so please bear with me, because I don't fully understand what was done. Did they build the things and attribute their awesomeness to the gods? Or did they build things that worked by explainable mechanics, and then offer a magical explanation in place of the mechanical one, even with the knowledge that said mechanical explanation was available. If that was the case, I'd have to ask why.

Patent Tattered Silly Example: I'm housesitting here with an awesome remote control that reduces the complexity of this gigantic multifaceted entertainment system to me making a menu selection on its little screen and pressing a single button to turn everything I need on and off. It is mystifying and I love it. However, I know that there is a mechanical explanation available. I can go find out about it if I want. I wouldn't object to being told that it's the awesomeness of the gods that makes such a thing possible (other than wondering which gods sit around making sure we can design awesome remotes), but I would object to the thing being presented as just this magical object that works because the gods will it, with the pretense that the mechanical explanation is not available. I object because that simply isn't the case-- even if whoever is telling me this is broadening the idea of magic to include all technology, pretending there is no other explanation beyond pure magic is not so.

I hope that helps some. Sorry I can't address more specifically, but I'd need some more information on the mechanica thing to do that.  

[Pelta]

TeaDidikai

Pelta

Someone throwing cards at an audience amazes people but doesn't really accomplish anything besides lightening their wallets, which of course is magic in its own right but not the sort that I would condone in a religious setting.

Why not? Why would it be wrong for clergy to use special effects for profit (prophet? wink ) within a religious setting?

If that's all they're doing, then yes, in my book it's wrong. I see nothing wrong with using special effects to enhance a ritual. But if all they are offering are pretty pictures then I'm off to another religion. Sorry, something has to have more than fancy card tricks to offer me spiritual satisfaction.