And it’s not for the weird stolen valor of the brick. Nor the strange exploitation of having someone read a surprise intimate letter on stage. Nor is it for the fact DelGaudio’s voice sounds like he’s a Muppet about to cry the whole show. No, I don’t really hate the special: I hate us.

In the years since it debuted, first on stage and then on Hulu, In & Of Itself has been a staple in the conversation about what magic is and means in the 21st century. It is, for many people, the pinnacle of what magic can do. And, for someone used to a typical magic show structure, I can see how that special might be somewhat mind-blowing. It handles its magic in a fundamentally different way than the specials that came before, for the most part, and is a work of very successful storytelling. I get it.

But now, almost a decade after it was performed, and half since it came out on streaming, have we really got nothing to replace it with? Is this really supposed to be all magic can achieve artistically?

It’s not a new observation to say that magicians are stuck in the past. I will invoke here (even though I don’t fully agree with it) Carisa Hendrix’s observation of the magical zeitgeist moving forward about 10-20 years behind the general one. Magic is bad at speaking to its immediate moment, and it is primarily due to a sense of artistic laziness, complacency, and a sense that magic is somehow its own world separate from all the other shit.

But I’m not sure this analysis is relevant for DelGaudio, nor the reason why we don’t have anything newer to talk about. He’s performing a one-man show, a thing that has been around for decades to millennia, depending on definition, but which also still has plenty of new and revived productions of its sort. And it’s not like DelGaudio is the first or last to do it. So what gives?

Unfortunately, I think the answer lies in money and availability. In & Of Itself was a big production, both in its performances and its filmic version. It had Frank fuckin’ Oz behind it. The special isn’t truly new in its form, but it is likely the most polished production of its type. That is why magicians care about it, and why it grabs so much attention. That, combined with the fact that it’s pro shot makes it available for convenient study, makes it a thing that those not willing to look far point to and think is radical.

I don’t think In & Of Itself is the pinnacle of magic. I don’t even think it’s the best possible show of its type. So how do we surpass it? First, if you don’t do the kind of storytelling magic that DelGaudio does, seek it out. Find someone to watch and read and love and learn from. Study all you can, rather than going deep on a single well. And for those of us who make that kind of magic? Film your shit. Please. I’m deeply hypocritical in saying it, because I forget to film all the time. But film it. Film it so something new can be loved. Film it so we can have better conversations. Film it so I don’t need to look at that guy’s face again.

Have a comment? Email Anne at anne@themagicoval.com, Drew at drew@themagicoval.com, Franklin at franklin@themagicoval.com, or Jerry at jerry@themagicoval.com. The editor can be reached at themagicoval@themagicoval.com.
If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to our email list for updates any time we have new content for you.

2 responses to “I Hate “In & Of Itself””

  1. Orl Avatar
    Orl

    I’m with you on the TV specials, nothing has really happened since. But in the live world, I think people were pushing boundaries before In & Of Itself and have kept doing it since. The thing is, they’re doing it in separated contexts (experimental theatre, performance art etc.) and they aren’t necessarily interested in framing themselves as purely “magicians.” But they totally are boundary pushing magic performances.
    These works aren’t on the average magician’s radar because, like you say, magicians are so inward-looking and see magic as its own thing separate from other performance cultures. Which is always wild to me. It’s no wonder magic feels like it hasn’t moved on when magicians rarely engage with any other art or audiences.
    Magic is quite self-obsessed and self-indulgent. It’s about power, obviously. I think that’s why In & Of Itself is so attractive to the everyday magician; it gestures toward something more. But when magicians try to recreate it they fall flat because everything they’ve learned about magic traditionally is telling them to do the opposite: make it about yourself, your power, and how your magic makes people feel better, about you being the one creating wonder etc.
    The culture is just too insular. It doesn’t think of itself as able to experiment or dismantle complex ideas outside of those easy-to-grasp metaphors we’ve seen for decades (the “my grandfather left me this box with a bit of string” blah blah so now we should be nice to each other).
    There’s also something about thresholds. How can something have a far reach and still be boundary-pushing? Maybe you only get that with loads of money and Frank Oz, or maybe by thinking about your work as something totally different than a one-man magic show… Or something honestly theres lots of thoughts going on here.

  2. Ted M Avatar
    Ted M

    Reuben Moreland’s “Abracadabra, Bitch!” might be what you’re looking for.

    It’s the most emotionally and dramatically satisfying magic show I’ve experienced, which is not at all what I expected from it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Subscribe

Subscribe to us

Sign up with your email address to receive an email when there’s a new post. We respect your privacy and would sooner die than give your email away. See our full privacy policy here.

Just a second…

Thank you for signing up! Have an Oval-shaped day.


Search


Categories


Archive