How does it relate?

Dec 24, 2009
61
0
How many effects do you have in your repertoire that you would enjoy performing? How many of those are enjoyed by the spectators?

Alright, so I have asked two simple questions that can be guessed at, and you have answered these two with relative accuracy I hope.

Now how many of those are card tricks? OOOOOO, that's a lot.

Alright so I have asked another question and commented on what your answer most likely was.

Now you are asking yourself "okay.... so what's the point?" Well I'm glad you asked, and if you didn't then your following along even better than imagined.

So the answer and question to the above is, how does it relate to your audience?

I could talk all day about the importance of having a unique and powerful presentation to each and one of your effects. I could also talk about how useless some effects are because the audience simply doesn't care.

So..... let's talk about this little dilemma that many of you have faced and most likely not even realized. A quick little note, this was inspired by the people who fail to understand a specs response to your magic by saying "can you levitate?"

What about what you show them makes them want to see it? So many questions I know, but you should get something out of this I hope, and my thoughts are a bit messy right now being 4:30 in the morning.

When you show them Eric Jones Ishkabibble sandwhich what makes them want to see it, or perhaps one of my favorite effects many of you know as Here Then There?

What use do they have other than to simply show off some sort of sleight of hand or what you claim as magic? It's like watching the Transformers movies by Michael Bay, full of action and something exciting yet we can all agree there was no real story or anything beyond the expensive thrill ride.

This is what many of you and your magic is being viewed as. You may not realize it but think back to all of your performances to people and ask yourself this question instead of answering mine. I wonder what they got out of it? I wonder what made it relate to them? Answer.... to those who don't lie to themselves, nothing.

Some of you are reading this and may disagree because you are a true performer like William Draven and this does not apply to you are well past this point.

What are some things you wish you could do in real life not necessarily magical?

Tell when people are lying, turn objects on and off with my mind, fly, read minds, see through women's undergarments, make objects float, and remember where I put things.

I'm sure most of you have similar wishes, to be able to do extraordinary things that almost seem impossible but in the realm of magic it's simply making it seem like this.

How on insert spiritual god here blue earth does making a sandwich effect relate to me? Yes I understand presentation goes a long way here, but shouldn't there be other ways in doing so?

Well now that all the questions have been asked I'll give you a fairly quick answer to the core subject of what I have been dabbling about.

You relate it by thinking. You think about what you want to do and make the effects relate in some sort of way. I wonder if I could tell when people are lying and how I could make this a bad a** magic trick. You see, people want to see something that they wish they could do, and believe me making a card appear to the top of the deck isn't on anybody list except for Poker pros who are getting dealt to first.

Think about this next time you find a cool effect, or working on your presentation. Put some thought into it and how on earth it would make your audience feel like they put time into watching something meaningful. It's not that difficult, at least not that difficult when you actually put some time and energy into that which you claim.

Last note, saying your fingers are a time machine for the card to appear on the top is dumb. Hate to be so rash but it is, no one believes it nor cares because while many want to travel back in time they certainly don't care that a card can go back in time and not them.
 
I generally have effects that I LIKE. Since it is simpler to make people like the effect rather than getting effects that the would like. You can alway adjust your performance to the specific needs but its hard to change the effect to fit the needs.

Also having effects what you like make you feel better doing them thus making it more enjoyable for people. When you are having fun, they are having fun.

Very nice post btw!

Mikk.
 
Dec 12, 2009
273
0
London Uk
I like effects that I like to see, So I would not perform an effect that I don't like. I try to make a good rountine that involves a sandwich effect and so on, so I dont bore my spectators.
 
May 3, 2008
1,146
4
Hong Kong
I am pretty sure atleast 75% of all members here have thought of that...
Not trying to hate on you but myself and quite a few friends realized this quite early back in our progression of magic.
As for the ""the story is dumb" thing... I think it really depends within context. I dont use the stories that much but it works. Some people actually enjoy it. saying "no one believes it nor cares" is an over generalization. They may not believe it, but they certainly care. Next time you perform a trick with a story line and ask your spectator what the thought of it. Its as easy as that. It won't ruin the trick for them, it just allows you to understand what they see.
 
Mar 2, 2008
412
0
If you are a working magicain, in private parties and restraunts and you get paid to perform. Would people understand that you are doing this as a job and you are showing them this because its your job so then you don't need a reason to make all of these elabrit scripts? Just a throught
 
Dec 24, 2009
61
0
No they are paying you the performer to have the elaborate scripts, to be able to perform. Which would they prefer, someone with half of Ricky Jay's Skill with his charisma and performance or someone with twice his skill with personality of a brick.

I guess you missed my specific point sciffydof, I said the time machine plot in an ACR is pointless. Far to many magicians do it and it is all the things as I mentioned before. I do a few storytelling effects that make sense and have some conclusion that makes the spectator really think about the story.

Sciffy I am fairly certain that 75% is an overexaggeration. I see these media videos with no plot, no substance, just cards being transported, a coin that disappears because?? This is what I see in videos, in talks, and while some people may think about it, that does little since very few seem to actually incorporate it into their acts.
 
Mar 6, 2008
1,483
3
A Land Down Under
The time machine plot is completely illogical as it has no real context in the real world. However, if you look at Gregory Wilson's version on Pyrotechnic Pasteboards he does it in such a light hearted way that the audience accepts the premise. Not rationally however they accept the comedy value of the routine and that the magic fits the patter.

One idea that you could use for an ACR outside of the worlds fastest hands 'method' would be one of coincidences, and ones ability to create them. Within the context of the ACR the context could be deja vu.
 
Mar 2, 2008
412
0
No they are paying you the performer to have the elaborate scripts, to be able to perform. Which would they prefer, someone with half of Ricky Jay's Skill with his charisma and performance or someone with twice his skill with personality of a brick.

Sorry but you tottaly missed my point. Im saying it is much easier to introduce yourself and have a excuse to talk to someone at a restraunt or a party if your working there. You don't have to open the same as you would if you were doing "street magic" as some people put it.
 
Dec 24, 2009
61
0
If you are a working magicain, in private parties and restraunts and you get paid to perform. Would people understand that you are doing this as a job and you are showing them this because its your job so then you don't need a reason to make all of these elabrit scripts? Just a throught

I fail to see how I missed the point. You never once said anything about introductions, you just stated elaborate scripts which are two incredibly different things. Need to be more specific about what you are talking about so I can understand.

As to the point you were trying to convey then yes you are correct. It's fairly simple to open when somebody is somewhat expecting you. Mr. Hankins talked about having them flip his business card over if they didn't want to see any magic. Most likely the easiest way to get somebody to open to your magic.
 
Mar 6, 2008
1,483
3
A Land Down Under
Well just because you are paid to be there does not mean people want to see your performance, or even accepting of it.

If you want people to relate to you and this is hugely important if you want to get rehired, you need to connect with them and then leave them with a favourable impression.
 
May 3, 2008
1,146
4
Hong Kong
I honestly dont think so.
It hits a lot of magicians quite early to think "what am I doing really... how does the audience see this?" its quite common...
As for the media videos of magicians, we create those videos to share with other magicians, to show them our variation on a trick or a routine, not to show our charisma. It does help the video, but we basically want feedback on the trick itself and how well we perform it.
Presentations of tricks make it memorable and enhances the impact. Would you rather "and if i snap my fingers it goes back to the top" or "and if we press the magic button again... the card rises back to the top"? Sure it may not make the greatest presentation, but it sure makes it a better one.
And if all performances require this context and relationship to your audience, then how are some of the biggest names in magic who they are? David Copperfield: Story less transposition of people
David Blaine: Shaking a card to make it switch
Criss Angel: I can read your mind by touching your finger
wheres the connection from all those people to real life other than they are famous?
 
Dec 24, 2009
61
0
I honestly dont think so.
It hits a lot of magicians quite early to think "what am I doing really... how does the audience see this?" its quite common...
As for the media videos of magicians, we create those videos to share with other magicians, to show them our variation on a trick or a routine, not to show our charisma. It does help the video, but we basically want feedback on the trick itself and how well we perform it.
Presentations of tricks make it memorable and enhances the impact. Would you rather "and if i snap my fingers it goes back to the top" or "and if we press the magic button again... the card rises back to the top"? Sure it may not make the greatest presentation, but it sure makes it a better one.
And if all performances require this context and relationship to your audience, then how are some of the biggest names in magic who they are? David Copperfield: Story less transposition of people
David Blaine: Shaking a card to make it switch
Criss Angel: I can read your mind by touching your finger
wheres the connection from all those people to real life other than they are famous?

Not talking about these webcam vids, but pretty much all of the street magic videos. They might as well be performing for the webcam with the lack of actual conversation happening.

The amount of gain from switching to snapping fingers to pushing buttons is like saying Matthew Mcconaughey is a better actor than Freddie Prinze Jr.. Yes it's true but that doesn't mean anything when both are quite horrible in their field.

Why would you possibly settle for the fourth place medal instead of trying for gold?

Copperfield doesn't need a story for his transposition, neither do all of your effects you do but since pretty much none of us can pull off a Teller like performance then your arguement means nothing.

Really? Criss Angel? I can't even tell when he's using specs or actors anymore for his effects so his little touching finger thing which I know nothing about means nothing also because of his reputation.

David Blaine was somewhat of a pioneer in the most popular magic field this generation. While he may not do the presentation all of us should strive for it's because of a few things he has going for them; reputation, character, cameras to just name a few.

First off how do you know it's common that magicians think this, because my belief is that you are basing this off of nothing except maybe your personal experiences which mean nil in a community.

I really don't see where you are going with this, as all of your arguments mean so little compared to the positive message I'm trying to give. You are giving off the message that even though someone's presentation kind of sucks it's okay because it's better than worser things.
 
May 3, 2008
1,146
4
Hong Kong
Not talking about these webcam vids, but pretty much all of the street magic videos. They might as well be performing for the webcam with the lack of actual conversation happening.

The amount of gain from switching to snapping fingers to pushing buttons is like saying Matthew Mcconaughey is a better actor than Freddie Prinze Jr.. Yes it's true but that doesn't mean anything when both are quite horrible in their field.

Why would you possibly settle for the fourth place medal instead of trying for gold?

Copperfield doesn't need a story for his transposition, neither do all of your effects you do but since pretty much none of us can pull off a Teller like performance then your arguement means nothing.

Really? Criss Angel? I can't even tell when he's using specs or actors anymore for his effects so his little touching finger thing which I know nothing about means nothing also because of his reputation.

David Blaine was somewhat of a pioneer in the most popular magic field this generation. While he may not do the presentation all of us should strive for it's because of a few things he has going for them; reputation, character, cameras to just name a few.

First off how do you know it's common that magicians think this, because my belief is that you are basing this off of nothing except maybe your personal experiences which mean nil in a community.

I really don't see where you are going with this, as all of your arguments mean so little compared to the positive message I'm trying to give. You are giving off the message that even though someone's presentation kind of sucks it's okay because it's better than worser things.

You basically waved off my points without an actual elaboration.
-Lets go over what you are trying to tell within this post: Make better presentations for your tricks because the need to relate to what the spectator wants to do themselves. Anything other than that "is dumb" and "no one believes it nor cares" cause then your audience would feel they didnt "put time into watching something meaningful"

I find this point an extreme over generalization of what makes a good effect. You are basically saying "make it relate to your spectators own wishes or else its crap which no one cares about." Do you think that is true? It is without a doubt that a good presentation will make a trick much better, but does a average one or unbelievable one make it pure bollucks? doubt it. I agree with the fact that people should try to make their presentations as good as possible, but it just bothers me to hear you say that anything else is pure crap which even the spectators find a waste of time to listen to, which is obviously untrue or else a lot of beginner magicians would be very dissappointed with the reactions they got.

"AND IF I PUSH THIS BUTTON, A KANGAROO JUMPS OUT AND EATS THE DECK OF CARDS"
"and...? so? how.. does that... relate to me.... i dont get it.." is not a very likely reaction, but rather "OMFG WTF! WHAT! WTF OMG AHHHH DEVIL!" Producing a kangaroo who eats a deck of cards isnt something people wish for, but how much do you want to bet that people will find watching that a good use of their time.

Snapping fingers and pushing buttons is definately not horrible. If they were, then many professional magicians would be out of business wouldnt they? Joshua Jay's elavator uses the button plot, Gregory Wilson uses the time travel plot, David Blaine snaps fingers. People love them dont they? People love watching them dont they? People find them a good use of time dont they? People care dont they?

Now back to the "points" you raised bout mine
Copperfield: He has no patter for his transposition yet... he gets amazing applause and respect from laymen... why is that? Since none of us can pull off a teller like performance and my point means nothing... then arent we all horrible? Doubt it.

Criss Angel: You just pointed out he might use stooges... Yet he has one of the biggest names in laymen's magic world. Laymen sit down to watch youtube videos of him just to scream at it and think its amazing. You think they feel they just wasted their time? Doubt it. You think they dont find it memorable? doubt it.

David Blaine: Once again, barely any "good" patter, but once again what is this? one of the biggest names? One of the most memorable? Wait.. that doesnt make sense.. but you said no one cares about the magic if your patter is bad... He had to build his reputation from something you know. It wasnt like the first time he performed everyone was already screaming his name.

Finally... your point about magicians not knowing this point. You honestly dont think that 75% of magicians have thought "why do people watch me? what are they gaining from it? you honestly think that? You think majority of the magicians on this forum are just 100% copies of each other, performing the exact same tricks with the exact same patter, never thinking bout their own style and what they contribute to others? you obviously have not talked to much magicians at all. Every jam or conversation i have with a group of magicians which last longer than a good 15 minutes lead onto a conversation revolving exactly on this topic. Get out and actually talk to live magicians for once isntead of jotting down every thought you have online.
 
Mar 6, 2008
1,483
3
A Land Down Under
Irrational plots (in reality, people know the deck of cards is not a elevator or a time machine) the audience may accept that this is what you are demonstrating much the same way it is in a movie. The same audiences will go as far as saying that, that is what you are doing. However, their belief dwindles to next to nothing and they use the plot as a way to describe it later.

Blaine's however gives the magic a moment to occur in. His character is so well thought out that he can get away with his very bland patter because his non-verbal communication is so strong. Not quite Teller strong but hey, Teller has a very loud partner to help heighten this and well do all the speaking for the two of them.

Just because the big three use very little patter in their pieces, (Angel's watch, watch, watch....) does not meant that they are completely patter less. A good half (if not more) of Angels show is patter about what he is going to do the dangers of it and his team talking about effects etc. I have already discussed a little about Blaine, but one thing I would like to add is That Blaine's character is probably the strongest out of the three and he has a lot of mystery about him. Finally Copperfield effects, whilst some do not use patter a lot of them have a substantial amount. His effects are very simple to understand what is happening as well, if you just watch him you can not only understand what he is trying to do and you can see it happening.

The biggest thing that I have to disagree with is that you feel that audiences are not selfish. You need to make the connection more than that feeling of amazement that is the gap between the good magicians and the good performers. This connection is a lot easier if you use something that they can relate to.

Face it people are selfish, I am sorry but that is the truth. It was demonstrated in the stop wasting my time post. People will not care about you if you are a stranger, no matter how good your tricks are.
 
Mar 2, 2008
412
0
Well just because you are paid to be there does not mean people want to see your performance, or even accepting of it.

If you want people to relate to you and this is hugely important if you want to get rehired, you need to connect with them and then leave them with a favourable impression.

Ok forget it you don't get what i'm saying.
 
Dec 24, 2009
61
0
You basically waved off my points without an actual elaboration.
-Lets go over what you are trying to tell within this post: Make better presentations for your tricks because the need to relate to what the spectator wants to do themselves. Anything other than that "is dumb" and "no one believes it nor cares" cause then your audience would feel they didnt "put time into watching something meaningful"

I find this point an extreme over generalization of what makes a good effect. You are basically saying "make it relate to your spectators own wishes or else its crap which no one cares about." Do you think that is true? It is without a doubt that a good presentation will make a trick much better, but does a average one or unbelievable one make it pure bollucks? doubt it. I agree with the fact that people should try to make their presentations as good as possible, but it just bothers me to hear you say that anything else is pure crap which even the spectators find a waste of time to listen to, which is obviously untrue or else a lot of beginner magicians would be very dissappointed with the reactions they got.

"AND IF I PUSH THIS BUTTON, A KANGAROO JUMPS OUT AND EATS THE DECK OF CARDS"
"and...? so? how.. does that... relate to me.... i dont get it.." is not a very likely reaction, but rather "OMFG WTF! WHAT! WTF OMG AHHHH DEVIL!" Producing a kangaroo who eats a deck of cards isnt something people wish for, but how much do you want to bet that people will find watching that a good use of their time.

Snapping fingers and pushing buttons is definately not horrible. If they were, then many professional magicians would be out of business wouldnt they? Joshua Jay's elavator uses the button plot, Gregory Wilson uses the time travel plot, David Blaine snaps fingers. People love them dont they? People love watching them dont they? People find them a good use of time dont they? People care dont they?

Now back to the "points" you raised bout mine
Copperfield: He has no patter for his transposition yet... he gets amazing applause and respect from laymen... why is that? Since none of us can pull off a teller like performance and my point means nothing... then arent we all horrible? Doubt it.

Criss Angel: You just pointed out he might use stooges... Yet he has one of the biggest names in laymen's magic world. Laymen sit down to watch youtube videos of him just to scream at it and think its amazing. You think they feel they just wasted their time? Doubt it. You think they dont find it memorable? doubt it.

David Blaine: Once again, barely any "good" patter, but once again what is this? one of the biggest names? One of the most memorable? Wait.. that doesnt make sense.. but you said no one cares about the magic if your patter is bad... He had to build his reputation from something you know. It wasnt like the first time he performed everyone was already screaming his name.

Finally... your point about magicians not knowing this point. You honestly dont think that 75% of magicians have thought "why do people watch me? what are they gaining from it? you honestly think that? You think majority of the magicians on this forum are just 100% copies of each other, performing the exact same tricks with the exact same patter, never thinking bout their own style and what they contribute to others? you obviously have not talked to much magicians at all. Every jam or conversation i have with a group of magicians which last longer than a good 15 minutes lead onto a conversation revolving exactly on this topic. Get out and actually talk to live magicians for once isntead of jotting down every thought you have online.

I think someone needs to watch how they put things, I'm a bit older than you and have more experience in this don't talk down like some little brother.

I never said, NEVER said that without relation it's dumb I SPECIFICALLY called out that time machine plot for an ACR is dumb. That is the only thing I called dumb, I even stated this in my earlier post. Other presentations are really stupid, a bit illogical and bland but hardly any of them are stupid like the ACR time machine.

Basically what D ICE R talked about acceptance to those effects is what I would say to that second paragraph. My little addition to that is this, Charisma. They may not do the actual presentation that gets the top level of astonishment but their charisma and how they interact with the audience makes up for it. You fail to see and think about the different levels of a performance, and how magicians talk to them is a major one.

So many new "street" magicians talk with the enthusiasm of a 40 year old man reading a grocery list. They don't interact with the spectators much, only putting a card in their hands every so often. Don't look past the point that just talking with your specs will make a bigger difference sometimes then showing them an amazing effect with a well done presentation.

Again, everything D ICE R wrote about Angel, Blaine, and Copperfield are all so very true. You seem to be just trying to look at them and find the things they don't do so you can write them down. If you really thought about it then you would understand that so much of Angel's show revolves around presenting the effect and explaining the full impact of it.

Sciffy again, watch what you say as I have been doing magic longer than you have been alive most likely. I have talked with possibly hundreds of magicians that are mostly professionals and a few that are really good hobbyists. Now a few of those are kids and rarely do they go beyond of just showing off a trick.

If you know magicians that really think about this then awesome, do they implement it at all in their performance? Do they build rapport? Do they make every piece of their performance something spectacular and have a point?

While I believe that where we live may have some importance since many Americans seem to be getting lazier and lazier, and Japan seems to be filled with perfectionists that could have some importance here. However please watch how you talk, as if I had no knowledge of the outside world, or that I genuinely don't know wtf is going on.
 
May 3, 2008
1,146
4
Hong Kong
I think someone needs to watch how they put things, I'm a bit older than you and have more experience in this don't talk down like some little brother.

I never said, NEVER said that without relation it's dumb I SPECIFICALLY called out that time machine plot for an ACR is dumb. That is the only thing I called dumb, I even stated this in my earlier post. Other presentations are really stupid, a bit illogical and bland but hardly any of them are stupid like the ACR time machine.

Basically what D ICE R talked about acceptance to those effects is what I would say to that second paragraph. My little addition to that is this, Charisma. They may not do the actual presentation that gets the top level of astonishment but their charisma and how they interact with the audience makes up for it. You fail to see and think about the different levels of a performance, and how magicians talk to them is a major one.

So many new "street" magicians talk with the enthusiasm of a 40 year old man reading a grocery list. They don't interact with the spectators much, only putting a card in their hands every so often. Don't look past the point that just talking with your specs will make a bigger difference sometimes then showing them an amazing effect with a well done presentation.

Again, everything D ICE R wrote about Angel, Blaine, and Copperfield are all so very true. You seem to be just trying to look at them and find the things they don't do so you can write them down. If you really thought about it then you would understand that so much of Angel's show revolves around presenting the effect and explaining the full impact of it.

Sciffy again, watch what you say as I have been doing magic longer than you have been alive most likely. I have talked with possibly hundreds of magicians that are mostly professionals and a few that are really good hobbyists. Now a few of those are kids and rarely do they go beyond of just showing off a trick.

If you know magicians that really think about this then awesome, do they implement it at all in their performance? Do they build rapport? Do they make every piece of their performance something spectacular and have a point?

While I believe that where we live may have some importance since many Americans seem to be getting lazier and lazier, and Japan seems to be filled with perfectionists that could have some importance here. However please watch how you talk, as if I had no knowledge of the outside world, or that I genuinely don't know wtf is going on.

1. Experience does not define knowledge. I know people who have had decades of experience yet do not learn. They still perform at amature level.
2. Sorry if I misunderstood your "dumb" quote but you implied it. You noted out the main point of stories being stupid and you gave an example. Its natural to assume that. And the ACR patter with the button may be "dumb" but you are certainly wrong in saying that "no one believes it nor cares". People definately care how you present a trick. The button plot is much better than "look look... i did the move and it came back to the top!" Honestly... "no one cares" is just once again an over generalization of what all audience think about. You definately can not just generalize every single audience in the world.
3. What D ICE R may work as a retort for what I said as it is quite true, but it also disproves your original post. Charisma is definately a great part of presenting but it does not at all relate to the audience's own wishes... All those big time performers are great at performing without your great patter which relates to everyone's thoughts and needs. I honestly found Blaine's performances very bland at first as well.. you can see for yourself. But yet it is still enjoyable to watch him perform. Why is that? I did not neglect the fact that there are a lot of different factors to performing magic. I just clearly pointed out that what you noted out was an over generalization of what a good presentation is.
4. Im sorry if majority of the magicians you have talked to failed to realize it... Then maybe coincidentally its every single other magician I meet that realize it. It is common human sense to think about the implications of what you do. And yes, most (as i said 75%) of the magicians I meet try to create as big of a rapport as possible with their audience and try to leave the greatest possible impression with everything they do. Almost every time I meet them again do they say what they have changed from last time and why.
5. My main point in my arguement is that I find it a harsh over generalization of what a good performance is. You are basically telling people that a good presentation is one that relates to your audience in what they feel they want to do, which is true to some extent but not all that there is to. You are dismissing all other types of presentation as dumb, which I find absolutely naive and quite... dumb. Please re-read your post and understand it from how other people read it. What you are trying to say may not be what you actually typed. Dont overestimate yourself.
 
Dec 24, 2009
61
0
I really don't want to have to say what I said again twice now. My post specifically talked about the time machine plot because it is over used by many magicians. It's done so poorly now and has no real point that I wanted to make an example of what doesn't relate. I talked about ONLY ONE actual presentation, not any others in any way shape or form.

Why does it seem so many young people now a days take everything that a person didn't specifically talk about as being the opposite of the conversation. I never said, nor implied that the other type of presentations that did not relate were "dumb" or "stupid." I'm also getting annoyed by the fact that you keep making these ignorant implications.

If I don't imply something or don't make a note of it then it doesn't mean I don't believe or do believe in something. The reason behind this post is that it's the first step in making a good performance, or more so a beginners step to a performance. Does every single effect have to have some sort of absolute relation to the audience? No, because everybody is different and while you will play to the majority you want your whole performance to play or everybody in some way.

To quickly summarize this as my "f" key is needing the strength of a strongman to press it I will close with the following statements. The relation of your presentation is the easiest and the most sure fire way to captivate an audience. Everything besides this is played in but once you have a feeling for performing and not just showing off magic tricks.

Charisma can and sometimes will be your only presentation for a trick. Yet you need to understand that sometimes people won't like you or the way you talk, so maybe something that isn't your own will be preferred. Perhaps how it relates to them???
 
May 3, 2008
1,146
4
Hong Kong
Your post did specifically adress the time machine plot, but you can not deny that your post was written extremely badly if that was not what you were implying. You made a point, explained it, then finally gave an example. Examples are called examples for a reason. They act as an image of anything else of the kind. If you were only adressing one certain presentation then make a note of it, dont just expect your misleading writing to show it. As for the time machine plot... how is it at all stupid... Many magicians have used it with great success. Cyril, Wilson, Kurtz, Ortiz to name a few. How is it at all dumb and not cared about?

Basically what you said was:
"You see, people want to see something that they wish they could do, and believe me making a card appear to the top of the deck isn't on anybody list except for Poker pros who are getting dealt to first.
Think about this next time you find a cool effect, or working on your presentation. Put some thought into it and how on earth it would make your audience feel like they put time into watching something meaningful."
What you said there was that people want to see stuff they wish they could do. If they don't then its not a good use of their time, which is once again absolutely wrong.
And your point about charisma is exactly like your original point. How do you know your charisma fits what the audience wants?
I see what you are trying to say, but then I blame the way you wrote your "article" You gave one point only and noted nothing else. You did not acknowledge the role of any other form of presenting nor did you acknowledge other factors of a good presentation. All you said was "What do you do? How does that work? This is the way it should be. Heres an example of a presentation I think its dumb"
Next time rethink your post and dont assume people will understand what you are trying to say and discard what you aren't trying to say.
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results