Me Doing a Card Trick

[Cain]

http://media.putfile.com/triplecoin

You might want to click on the link now since it is 20 megs.

Nothing original here; it's really a combination of two fairly well-known principles in the magician world (especially with the publication of Bannon's new book). In actual performance for real people the handling would be modified. Herein the audience-interaction dynamic -- which I think is crucial for this type of effect -- is completely lacking, if for no other reason than the fact that I performed it alone in a room with a camera. Simulating audience participation is not exciting to watch. . If spectators were present I would have all of us select cards from the face up deck and these would be shuffled by someone other than me . As it were I chose all the cards (necessarily), put them in one big packet, and mixed up them up by laying them into rows.

As for script, and to be consistent with my own philosophical interests, it will probably deal with metaphysics -- notions of free-will, determinism, compatibilism. Ooh, degrees of freedom. I think. Still not sure.

I'm most interested in what people think of the the trick itself (method, revelation, etc).

"Perspective" not "percep-peactiativee"

"So I'm like, 'I gotta pick cards...'"

I've gotten mixed reviews. Hobbyist friends find it perplexing. I sent this to my brother and he thought it was, what were his words again? -- ah, yes, "BOR-ing". He added, "I was waiting for when all the cards would turn blue."

 

[magicflute]

I will reserve my final judgement until you have worked out the final patter and streamlined the trick. I have found that most card trick that take longer than 2 minutes to perform are usually not as well received. It has to have a HUGE finish to make it worth while their time, or at least more audience participation at different stages of the trick so they do not get bored. Try to cut down the performance time, Add interesting patter and you have a good card effect.

 

[Cain]

Thanks for your comments; I agree with much of what you said. I don't think the total length of time is an issue, however, as there are tricks that can take four or five minutes and receive outstanding reactions (ACR, predeckability). The central problem here is that the revelation comes at the very end, and although puzzling, it is not truly astounding. However, the shuffling, the randomness, is presumably what makes the trick impossible, so it's a necessary component.

I should add that with the assistance of spectators, things would be happening simultaneously. Also, with audience participation the shuffling/card choosing etc. would not be as tedious because they're actively DOING something, namely exercising free agency, rather than merely witnessing something be done to them as passive, uninvolved, impotent observers.

 

[Bob Klase]

I don't think the total length of time is an issue, however, as there are tricks that can take four or five minutes and receive outstanding reactions (ACR, predeckability).

I still use dial up, so can't take the time to look at a 20 meg file. But I agree- the total time not an issue- it's how entertaining that time is that would be an issue. The same trick that took 4-5 minutes and received an outstanding reaction could easily result in spectators leaving. Even Predeckability (assuming that you're talking about Colombini's trick Pre-Deck-Ability) can be boring when done by a boring performer, or an unpracticed/unrehearsed performer.

 

[magicflute]

When I mentioned total time, I was relating to the time from begining to revelation. You can have a long trick with several revelations, or degrees of revelation and that would be fine as long as the audience is entertained. You also need good patter to keep the flow going. I also agree that even a great trick can be made boring by a boring performer. Just as a dull trick can be spiced up by a good performer. I have always found that your skill at patter is just as important as your other skills. Something that many amateurs forget. They concentrate on the mechanics, but the presentation lacks. David Williamson can take 10 minutes to go thru a simple trick, as witnessed by me at "Mostly Magic" in NY; but his audience is never bored. On the other hand Eugene Berger can put me to sleep.
Maybe is all the time I spent doing tricks while bar tending. I had to knock off a trick or two and served the next round, so I kind of lean towards shorter effects or effects with multiple revelations.
When I get a chance I'll post a card effect that I created that has several revelations, a little comedy, and leaves the audience examining the cards for hours!

 

[rikzilla]

Cain, I really liked your deft card handling. I'm just a beginner and so only know a few simple flourishes. (I'm working on it) The way you fanned the deck was very nice...I hope to get that right someday soon. The trick itself puts me in mind of "The four piles" from "The Royal Road to Card Magic" except that you complicated it further with the faceup and facedown cards. I'm sure it works much the same way...you know....throw in alot of nonsense complexity to keep your victim from following the cards too closely....

I liked it...I wish I was nearly as good as you. As for me I'm still only on chapter 6 of the afore-mentioned book and have never before done card magic although I've done a few well worn tricks for the last 20 years. (I'm 46)

Right now my 13 year old daughter and I are reading Royal Road together and are having a real father-daughter bonding moment!