5 ms·
I feel that Penn explained this incredibly well in one of my favourite magic tricks: https://youtu.be/Jko5BGhc-Ys?si=Uz6jvQ5voEYAxg8W https://youtu.be/Jko5BGhc
by Waterluvian 1y ago
I feel that Penn explained this incredibly well in one of my favourite magic tricks:
https://youtu.be/Jko5BGhc-Ys?si=Uz6jvQ5voEYAxg8W https://youtu.be/Jko5BGhc-Ys?si=Uz6jvQ5voEYAxg8W
We have such a weird relationship with the spectacle of risk. As he says, a tightrope act is just as difficult at any height. The only need to make it dangerous is because the audience wants the circus.
And I think somewhat implicit in the point he’s making is that he believes that while the audience wants the spectacle, the performers have a responsibility not to give it to them.
- xanderlewis 1y ago> a tightrope act is just as difficult at any height Well, sort of. But surely part of the feat is overcoming the natural fear of heights.
- Waterluvian 1y agoThat’s true. But I don’t think anyone in the audience is being wowed by that detail.
- Barrin92 1y agoThat's exactly what they're wowed by. The general audience cares about the risk-taking, the bravery and daring aspect of it, and maybe the visual flashiness. It's the psychology that's interesting to a general audience because that's what they relate to. Technical excellence is always something peers are more interested in than spectators, your ordinary viewer isn't invested in the technical proficiency of tightrope footwork.
- baobabKoodaa 1y agoThere's 3 distinct things: A) The ability of walking a tightrope B) The ability of overcoming your fears to the extent of being able to walk a tightrope at a dangerous height C) The risk of falling I would argue that the audience cares about A and C. The audience doesn't care so much for B.
- majormajor 1y agoI think the audience largely just cares about C. I would not be surprised if most lay people don't know why or how it's even that hard, or what goes into training. "Oh, it's just someone who has good balance" vs an awareness of the technical details of physical fitness.
- zdragnar 1y agoHaving watched a few of Cirque du Soleil's shows, I can confirm that A is much more impressive and exciting than C. Sure, there's risk, but seeing how effortless they make it look is amazing. The skill to do it fearlessly is far more impressive than the fact that something bad didn't happen. Audience members expect that it won't happen. There's a visceral reaction, of course, but that's it.
- somenameforme 1y agoCompletely agreed. I think the first time you go with some friends to an olympic diving board, it's the exact same thing. When you look at it from the ground it's "only" 10m, it doesn't feel so scary. But when you get up there and look down, zomg is 10m friggin high! Oh and the climb up there... It's high enough that by the time you reach the platform you've completely dried off. It's completely safe and trivial to do, but awesome nonetheless, and a show for your friends, just because it's really scary the first time you do it!
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- mtalantikite 1y agoThis reminded me of an old Dave Chappelle joke about the Siegfried & Roy tiger show (around 1:10 min mark): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kth0UOU5a_M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kth0UOU5a_M
- watwut 1y ago> As he says, a tightrope act is just as difficult at any height. The only need to make it dangerous is because the audience wants the circus. Tho, only a few of the people who engage in these dangerous sports are famous or earn money on that. As in, if you look at those sports, there are always people who seek the danger and possible self destruction. They do it, because they want to do them. Not because of the audience.
- aaron695 1y ago[dead]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- Aeolun 1y agoPersonally I much prefer watching a tightrope act when I’m not constantly worried about the performers dying.