Discussion in 'Cardistry & Flourishing Forum' started by wZEnigma, Apr 20, 2010.

  1. true... i wanted to say the same thing but because of my bad english its hard
  2. I think our opinion is skewed because in videos we see a nice setting, and we have music to evoke emotions. So how can we say that its the flourishes themselves that are enticing the viewer to feel a certain way? maybe its the music? or the background?

    As for andrei's point, yes he might feel emotions while flourishing, but thats different. he is in control of what he is doing, so he can use style to portray how he feels. But, his style might not be able to cause a spectator to feel any emotion at all.

    So my suggesstion is.. get a black background, and some cards. amke an uncut routine, NO MUSIC OR EDITING, and seeif it entices emotion or is purely aesthetic, then we can determine if cardistry really is artistry
  3. or just perform for people when they are silent... u have done a very good job and the have get the right emotions
  4. Excellent suggestion, I'd like to see this done.

    I acknowledge now that cardistry is an art, after Andrei's reply. I'd never seen it looked at in that way.

    Though the creative process which he follows is artistic, which is something I'd never heard of being applied to cardistry. I'd be surprised if 10% of the people who do cardisty actually produce art in their creative process, instead of just try to make something purely superficial.
  5. Ok, so far I would say is we have touched on the creative side of cardistry and whether this has some emotion behind it therefore making it an artform. It has also been suggested that to make cardistry PERFORMANCE an art it must be done silently to make sure that emotion does come through and it is not merely the superficial manipulation of playing cards.

    However, music can be used very well with the cards in live performances. Take the Handlordx XCM Tornament for example: Round four is entitled "chreographed music performance" whereby you use the music to create a certain style for your act. For example on stage if you had gothic music and a gothic setting, you wouldn't come skipping on stage. You would come on in a slightly "gothic" way, whatever that would be and then go on to manipulate the cards in that way using facial expressions and what have you.

    I would like to go on with the music theme by mentioning something that I think is a great idea for live performances by De'vo. In the secret books Volume 1, he has a routine called, "The Piano Routine". This is in no way a really complicated way of manipulating the cards and wouldn't, in my opinion look very good without the music. Now, if anyone has this book I'm sure you will see how well this could play on stage, but it requires music. However, the beauty of it is is that the audience is more focussed on what you do with the cards in this routine WITH the music as oppose to without.

    These are my thoughts about that.

  6. sorry if u get me wrong... i dont try to make something purely superficial... i also try to put emotions in flourishs...i also see it as an artform... but the only thing i hate if people debate on such things and can't stop with it.. they think about it to much...why u don't do a flourish and

    To be able to affect a person's emotion with art,

    the piece you have created needs to portray emotion(s)
    the piece you have created needs to be purely aesthetic.

    I don't believe that cardistry fulfils either of these two criteria, therefore, I do not believe cardistry is an art. _ (theartehead)

    cardistry is not an art? is painitng an art? it is... why? u are creating something with some specific items....cardistry is the same u are creativ with some things in this case cards instead of ... brushes or something.... also u show emotions like agrresion or it justs look good.... like some pictures ... they aren't always showing emotions...

    ok lets say it can't affect a person's emotion with art.... is it then just playing with cards? but if u crate something it's not more playing ... it's creating something with creativity... so i has to be an art? u can also just drawing some .. i don't know.. stars or something on a piece of paper in school because u are bored... but if u create a picture... nobody has ever seen... it's art... so why is cardistry no art?... just because some flourishes donT' submit an emotion like a picture.... some just look cool... also some picture just look cool... but someone did them and was creative... so its art... just like cardistry....

    i think also that u can't say art is to submit emotions.... i think it's to create something...

    if it's not an art ... what is it? tell me.... if it's just playing around... why do we learn some new techniques... why is every 4 months a new dvd released with some moves ...? did they filmed their self while playing around... i don't think so

    and i think that you are right because of the music... the flourish's should give the emotion... but i think it's okay to use music to make it stronger... and to be sure your spec don't start to sleep while you are perforeming ;-) just kidding... i think it should be jused to make it stronger^^

  7. i consider music an art. i think everybody does. anybody who doesn't, shouldn't be arguing here, until they know what art is.

    when i play music. i don't feel any specific emotions. i dont feel anger when playing a piece like Ticelli's Vesuvius. and i don't feel a sense of peace when i play some Bach chorales.

    but what i do feel is a certain energy flowing through my as i play. i feel this fire this passion that i miss when its not there. and my band director even comments saying things like "more energy", "you guys just aren't putting any passion into this" phrases like that.

    its when a passion for an art is conveyed to an audience. its when those viewing can truly sense your passion for what your doing, that it becomes art.

    during the marching season this year, our assistant director said something that influenced how i view art. she said something like "let them know this is fun, let them see how you enjoy what your doing"

    its when the audience can see a passion for something its when that passion for what a performer is doing is conveyed to those watching that it hits them square in the gut and they see how much you love what your doing.

    so i believe anything can be art. be it baseball cardistry music impressionistic art. you name it. if the person doing it enjoys it and those viewing can see that passion portrayed. thats when it becomes art.

  8. which is why black ninja won the XCM tourney
  9. and herein lies our problem. The way we define art.
    "Art" doesn't have a concrete definition. You see art as being creative, I don't. I see art as a portrayal of emotion, you don't.
    I may consider one thing an art, you may not.

    Like this:
    I don't necessarily agree that playing baseball is an art, but this guy does, because we have differing definitions of art.

    A quick question for you, Web. If we don't have an audience, does what we do stop being art?
  10. i didn't say baseball in itself was an art, i was just trying to get my point across that anything can be an art. if the love and passion for the activity is evident

    on the audience thing. its the passion that makes it art. its the love for what ones doing and the ability for anyone watching it to see that love and passion.

    doesn't necessarily mean somebody has to see the passion and the love.

    did i answer your question sufficiently?
  11. Slow down, you're telling me that in order to determine whether Cardistry is an art or not, it has to be stripped down to its most basic form? How does that make any sense? That is like saying dancing should not be put to music, or a song be removed of vocals, or a painting should first be black and white if it is to be determined of its worth... the list goes on and on.

    Is it not selfish to say something is not an art because it does not evoke YOUR emotion? A painting may be meaningless to me in every sense of the word, does that mean it is not art? I may dislike a song or think absolutely nothing of it, is music now all together not an art? Again, the list goes on and on.

    The same can be said for performing, is it truly that difficult to envision a stage Cardistry performance of a larger caliber than ever before? Is it truly such a leap of faith to see the potential in using Cardistry to evoke audience emotion? I thought I gave a concrete example of that in my previous post.

    Or is it simply that we've all got so used to believing Cardistry is nothing more than a very well edited video? I guess I can see why you share that twisted perception of the potential of our art. I am grateful for people who like to think this way, it makes the future prospect of success that much more gratifying.

    -Andrei Jikh
  12. Yes you did, I liked your response very much.

    I guess if art is looked at in that way, it really does give everything the potential to be art, which is what I'm having trouble processing.

    For example, the baseball thing. If you really are passionate about it, and put all of your being into it, I'm not sure that constitutes art.

    Then again, maybe I need to re define what I see art as.
  13. the way i see nothing in and of itself can be art. its the human (or divine) element that makes it art. and that allows everything to be art.
  14. maybe for me is art something other than to you.. but still in both points of view it is an art... isn't it?
  15. You misunderstand my points. Im not saying that cardistry ISNT art, but I think it is yet to be determined wether it is or not. We definitely need to see something in its most basic form to decide if it is art. Your example are totally meaningless, and boast no real argument. You can have music without vocals, its still music, and still art. You don't need music to dance, its still art. But on the other hand, with something like painting, COLOR is an essential piece that creates the appeal of a painting. Im not saying strip cardistry videos of the cards, im just saying take away all the other factors that enhance the cards.

    Here is an example:

    I LOOOOVVVEEEE this video:

    What I want you to do is, watch it, the whole waythrough. Then start it over and turn off the music,a nd watch it through. I gurantee you it won't be nearly as good. Sure its still cool, but it isnt the same.

    If you agree with me, you are agreeing that music is ENHANCING the cards in a flourish performance. And my question to you is... Is something REALLY an art in and of itself when an outside factor improves, and essentially "makes" that thing appear to be art?
  16. i think it just makes the effect of the moves stronger^^
  17. the video does lose a lot in my eyes with out the music, what the music does is add an art, what the music does is turn the cardistry into a visual aid for the music, not the other way around.

    i have a hard time seeing passion and energy in his performance, probably because its cut to ribbons.

    @Mr.T its beyond just comprehending the difficulty of the moves. if that were true then it wouldn't matter if my spectators saw me classic pass their card to the top, if they knew it was difficult.

  18. Exactly. The cardistry supplements another art, but as a standalone, it has yet to be proven.
  19. but that doesnt say that somewhere it cant be done, when i watched andreis video, the name escapes me, on youtube i was totally caught in the cardistry, i didnt care about the music. that to me was art. (it wasnt genesis, no exposure promise)
  20. Im not saying it cant be done, but i want someone to prove that cardistry, by itself, is an artform. maybe andrei can make an uncut vid like I said to prove his arguments?

Share This Page

{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results