Harry houdini died in 1926, so I don’t expect there are many people around who recall him performing! From what I read, he was the dean of American magicians, and his escapes were said to be absolutely marvelous. I haven’t been able to find any of his books, and what I know about him is mostly from the old Tony Curtis film (ca 1956?).
Anyway, for thoseof you who know stage magic, how would old Harry compare to a modern illusionist? Would Houdini’s tricks still dazzle modern audience, or would somebody modern just blow him out of the water?
By the way, has any modern magician duplicated Houdini’s classic tricks?
Quite well.
Doug Henning has duplicated some of Houdini’s tricks (the disappearing woman, the water escape), and they held up just fine. I wouldn’t be surprised if other magicians use them, with perhaps a little updating.
And even the most cutting edge of today’s magicians admire Houdini and can only add variations to what he originally did.
Doug Henning also duplicated Houdini’s final “disappearing act” at roughly the same age.
Henning was also once married to four-time-married Barbara DeAngelis–a “relationship expert.”
I think he would easily…magic is mainly the suspension of belief…misdirection of attention…
Everything else is just smoke and lasers…
D.
Yes. And it was just as sad. Henning was the best magician I’ve ever seen (that poseur Copperfield can’t hold a candle to him) and his disappearance was a great disappointment.
HH didn’t have access to the tech that current “stage” magicians use and many of his showery effects might not look snazzy enough to modern audiences. But his showmanship was first rate and not many of the “showbiz names” can match it.
I don’t believe that HH was known for closeup magic (my fave). So perhaps not as good as most such artisans.
But he excelled (or so it is claimed) at a lot of physical feats that probably no one today has the fortitude to train for.
Houdini was not a very good close-up magician at all. What he had was the innovation to come up with creative large-scale illusions, the physical fitness to pull off some of them, and–most importantly–the showmanship to make people care.
A simple effect, presented well, has far more impact than a complicated, baffling trick presented poorly. Even if Houdini’s effects didn’t stand up today–and I think they absolutely would, on their own–he still would have been able to floor audiences with them.
Dr. J
It was Harry Houdini who gave young Buster Keaton the nickname “Buster,” or so Keaton’s autobiography claims.
Sorry, I just wanted to add something and that was all I had…
If he had his own “Showtime” radio program, cultural values would have required to name it BullFeces.
Houdini would kick their butts, then make it look like they were kicking their own butts!
Take Harry Houdini from three days before he died, transport him forward in time to today and have him compete directly against a big name magician: Houdini’s impressive but the big name knows what modern audiences want in terms of showmanship and comes out ahead. The principles haven’t changed but the tools available have improved.
Give Houdini three months to study and prepare and I shudder to think of the kinds of illusions he’d come up with. Forget making the Statue of Liberty disappear, we’d be lucky if he didn’t make Manhattan vanish.