Perhaps the greatest motion picture ever filmed — outside of “Smokey and the Bandit“ of course — has to be “Scrooge“ featuring Alistair Sim. (I like the 1938 Reginal Owen version, too, but to me, Alistair Sim is Ebenezer Scrooge in the same way Timothy Dalton is Bond. James Bond.)
Early enough in the flick, Scrooge comes face to face (sort of) with the ghost of his departed old partner Jacob Marley. In a scene that still sends a shiver up my spine, to answer Scrooge’s suggestion that they were just doing “good business” Marley howls a blood-curdling, “Mankind was my business!” — only Michael Hordern, the actor playing the par t of Marley, enunciates the word “business” as “busy-ness.”)
Over on his blog, MagiCentric, Steve Pellegrino continues the Sankey/Penguin/Magic Makers saga, and posts a picture of me on his blackboard as he points and pontificates about how Penguin Magic/Magic Makers are not the same company; are preferred vendors for L&L Publishing and Michael Ammar; are not Evil Incarnate; and how I’m being petty by addressing Sean by the name he gave the first time I encountered him.
I’ll state again that Pellegrino is free to have and share whatever opinions he holds, and to associate with whomever he wishes, but let’s remember Pellegrino has a penchant for placing his bet on the wrong horse and having to eat crow as a result. (Pie a la Shell Game, anyone?)
Fellow Louisianian James Carville wrote a book a few years ago, partly in an attempt at explaining the unexplainable: his dogged and blind loyalty to certain people in his life. The book was called “Stickin'” and was typical Carville. By the end of the book you’ve been served so many side orders of juicy rationalizations, deep fried in the fat of blind loyalty that it’s hard to tell when he’s being serious and when his tongue is planted in his cheek. (Actually, he’s being dead serious throughout, which is why the Pellegrino-Stickin’ association came to mind.)
I respect loyalty an awful lot. It’s one of two reasons many people prefer dogs to people, the other reason, of course, explained by Mark Twain in this quote:
“If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principle difference between a dog and a man.”
Blind loyalty, on the other hand, is foolish. If I have to explain why, there’s no point to even start.
In the end, this goes back to the distinction between “ethics” and “just business.”
But it’s his final punctuation mark at the end of the piece — the part where he states “End of story. The rest of the crap is none of our business.” — that’s awfully amusing to read when one considers the source.
Powered by FireStats
It’s amusing that out of everything in that post, you pick up on the last line, implying that the whole Pinard/Haydn/Bush thing was none of my business, yet I wrote about it and got in the middle of it. You’re correct, it was none of my business AND I have publicly apologized for getting involved. I have also privately apologized to Whit via email and over the phone.
It’s also amusing to see people like you write about ethics, yet I can’t seem to find two ethical magicians agree on what is “ethical”.
Ethical to who? To you? Are YOU to decide what is ethical for me or the rest of magic?
It’s nice to know that voice of magical ethical behavior is coming from John LeBlanc.
It’s nice to know that voice of magical ethical behavior is coming from John LeBlanc.
Jeez, you say that like it’s news to you. Two years of blogging and I haven’t made that abundantly clear yet? That’s it, I quit.
John,
You might as well give up. If we have learned anything from Mr. Pellegrino’s blogs, he isn’t capable of taking a stance on any situation that isn’t clouded by his business devotion. I like to check in occasionally and see what his latest flip flop is.
My business devotion? I don’t make a dime from either Penguin or MM. I don’t get free products either. If I have a “business devotion” it’s to L&L because I cash a check from them every month. Burnham, maybe YOU can give me the definitive answer to what is ethical?
I think ethics are important but as Steve has pointed out there is no genuine rule as to what is really ethical and isn’t in magic. Sure there seems to be a general feeling on few things but that still leaves alot to be answered still.
I have found that alot of magicians are when it gets right down to it only ethical to some degree when it suites them. The rest to the time they don’t give a damn one way or the other. Altho they say they do. It is easy to see through there b.s. tho.
Here’s a general rule of thumb: if you have to ask if something you’re about to do is ethical, it probably isn’t.
The issue with ethics in magic is, I’ve often noticed when I state my position on something like this, others get defensive, as if they’ve been indicted for their own behavior. I’m just expressing my opinion. I’m even providing a platform on which other people can (politely) express theirs, too.
I’ve posted some questions on MagiCentric and would truly appreciate any comments to the latest post. As I stated in that post, I am trying to get a broader discussion going. These are important issues and while they may never be resolved or agreed upon 100%, I’m hoping that it will get some people thinking, see other sides of the issues and find out what some people consider the right (or wrong) thing to do.
Right and wrong is only a point of view. Business is about making money and not about ethics. I grew up in magic and I have met nice magicians and some magicians that are not so nice. The funny thing is that most of the magicians I have met in my life time say that they have ethics. But there are no written rules. It often becomes an argument and ethics is often used as a way to get a larger market share – and just another way of saying ME FIRST!
Business is about making money and in the magic business the magic market is only so big.
It is nice that magicians want to talk about ethics as the business of magic continues – just as It always does!
Glenn Bishop
The magician that isn’t a star!