Mailbox: September 2026

More further, inner manufactured standing ovations.

Will Houstoun
Mailbox: September 2026
Illustration by Henry Martin (1955)

Standing Ovations and Art

While I can argue both the commercial merit, as well as the word “manufactured” in this standing-ovation discussion, let’s talk about how I feel that attempting to get a standing ovation from an audience is no less artful than any other choice one can make.

It might be because I have a very broad definition of what art is, but, to me, trying to provoke not just emotions and reactions, but actions, from an audience can be artistic. How is the “manufactured standing ovation” any different than the work of mid-century artists like Yoko Ono or George Brecht who would write simple instructions (e.g., “Breathe” or “Smile”) that forced the audience to perform the art themselves?

All magic is designed to get people to react and to feel something. Here we are just giving them another way to express their feelings for what they just saw. In my case, I introduce the idea of a standing ovation in an offhanded way early in my show. Then I write, block, and light the show in such a way that when the time comes and they have emotions they want to express, they stand because it feels natural. I’m not playing the national anthem or talking about my dead father, but my skills as an artist and the quality of the show they saw make them so moved that they want to express themselves.

Intent is important of course, but the artistic merit of making people “do things,” and in this case getting them to stand for your magic, in my mind, lies in shifting art from passive observation to active participation. I want to foster deeper engagement by transforming the viewer into an essential collaborator within the piece. The art here is making them stand with me, not for me.

—Jon Armstrong

Jon’s letter, to me, raises two key questions that the original piece and ongoing discussions explore. The first is the balance between forcing an ovation and making sure that audiences are alive to the possibility of standing should they wish to. I have heard several kid show magicians, particularly post pandemic, talking about the need to teach young audiences that applause is an appropriate response to enjoying something in a live performance, and perhaps some audiences need to be similarly shown that standing is an option should they so choose. The follow up, then, is whether the presentation of that option guides them toward standing or allows them to comfortably choose not to if they don’t feel the need.

The second is whether the ovation exists within the frame of the performance or outside it. In the examples of instruction theater that Jon raises, the command that is followed is clearly within the frame of the performance itself, in much the same way asking someone to perform an action like picking a card is within the frame of the performance in a magic show. The possible ovation, however, could be thought of as existing outside that frame. I remember Bobby Bernard (whose false cut is used elsewhere in this issue) talking to me about the end of a performance. He suggested that the first part of the performer’s job is to deliver the best show they can, and the second is to stand onstage at the end and allow the audience to freely express their feelings about the work that was shared. Of course we all hope that they will applaud (or more), but, Bobby argued, it is just as much their right to express dissatisfaction by not applauding or booing, and it is the performer’s job to create a space for the audience to respond to the work in whatever way they choose. Is the ovation at the end of a show inside or outside the frame of the performance itself? That is a question that everyone who stands onstage has to decide for themselves.

Ahead of the Curve

Chloe Olewitz must be feeling a bit prophetic herself since spotlighting the phenomenon of the manufactured standing ovation in the May issue, several months before mentalist Oz Pearlman illustrated the point in his nationally televised performance, at the White House Correspondents Dinner (which can be found on YouTube).

Granted, it was an extremely tough crowd, and Oz got his desired result, but was it really necessary to grovel for the audience’s approval throughout the show, and especially at the end? I wonder whether he would have gotten the same reaction legitimately, without the additional cajoling?

—Alan Kratish

Oz’s work at this event appears elsewhere in this issue, with regard to the intersection between magic and politics, and it is interesting to look at it from the perspective of Chloe’s feature as well. As you say, an extremely tough crowd, and an example that highlights the inherent challenges of maintaining an artistic or ethically driven perspective on matters such as manufactured standing ovations, alongside a practice that is driven by other measures of success.

📬 Have something to tell us?

We encourage your comments, suggestions, and prohibitions. Reach us with the speed of email at editors@geniimagazine.com. We are, as the original genie insisted, here to serve.