theory11 — Magic Tricks & the World's Finest Playing Cards

Justification

cedwards90

cedwards90

Aug 18, 2008
680
3
Every time some new trick comes around, the first criticism usually relates to justification, why put the card back on the deck, why put the cap in the bottle anyways.

In your opinions, how much of an effect needs justification?
-The whole trick in general?
-Each slight as an individual?
 
The effect generally has to have a point. specifically, you should make things look as natural as possible. Get rid of all the crap (technically) that doesn't need to be involved, then go from there.
 
Z-Magic said:
The effect generally has to have a point. specifically, you should make things look as natural as possible. Get rid of all the crap (technically) that doesn't need to be involved, then go from there.
Click to expand...

I agree with that statement.
Some effects are much easier to justify then others, changing money into a higher denominations for example. Do you think you need to justify why you are tearing a bill only to restore it?
 
cedwards90 said:
I agree with that statement.
Some effects are much easier to justify then others, changing money into a higher denominations for example. Do you think you need to justify why you are tearing a bill only to restore it?
Click to expand...

Should you tear a bill up, only to restore it?

If an effect doesn't make sense/can't be justified...should you perform it?
 
I know I've had a lot of discussion about Torn and Restored effects here, even with people that have created great ones... Glenn West comes to mind... and it makes you wodner why you would rip a card up simply just to put it back together?

Same goes with sandwich effects. I've always had trouble finding the justification of it... other than it's cool.
 
Rmana said:
I know I've had a lot of discussion about Torn and Restored effects here, even with people that have created great ones... Glenn West comes to mind... and it makes you wodner why you would rip a card up simply just to put it back together?

Same goes with sandwich effects. I've always had trouble finding the justification of it... other than it's cool.
Click to expand...

That's all the audience needs to know. (for that type of an effect)
 
Im sure the audiance does not think a bout it like we do, they see us tear a card, and put it back toether, something impossible has just happened there jaws hit the floor, im sure there are no spectators that will question why you did what you just did. Magic is for the spectator, not the magician. No spectator would question stuff like that.
 
heavymetalholic said:
Im sure the audiance does not think a bout it like we do, they see us tear a card, and put it back toether, something impossible has just happened there jaws hit the floor, im sure there are no spectators that will question why you did what you just did. Magic is for the spectator, not the magician. No spectator would question stuff like that.
Click to expand...

Just because they dont question it doesnt mean you dont have to improve a performance.
Spectators always notice whether they say it or not.

People WANT substance.Give them a reason to watch the trick other than the "magicians are gods" act.
 
I agree with the fact that I don't think T+R tricks need justifying, as such. We do it for the same reason we do any trick, to entertain and perform. Of course there are some that appear to be practical magic, eg. appearing a cigarette and having it levitate itself to your mouth, because if you had magic powers, that's the kind of stuff you'd actually do, but there's no less justification for the trick itself with a T+R than with many other good tricks. Sandwich tricks I don't like, however, as I feel that they do need justifying. Why use two cards, when you could find their card just as easily without them? The fact that a sandwich is 'just another reveal' means it needs justification as to why you're using the extra cards, if that made any sense at all...:rolleyes:

Moves in a trick definitely need justifying, however. Whether you justify a move or not could be the difference between a 'trick' and 'magic'. If they think there's something to try and spot, it's not pure magic. If, however, you give them a reason for everything, then there's nothing fishy and nothing to find. And justifications don't always need to be verbal either, as that leads to monotonous and boring patter. It could be implied, for example performing a shapeshifter and then dropping the card onto the deck as though it has suddenly turned very hot.
 
I mentioned the issue with sandwiches in a thread not too long ago in the card magic forum.

As far as the spectators go - visualartist is correct, they notice more than you think. And while they probably will never think "Why is he using two cards to find one?", I believe that discrepancies, inconsistencies and little things that don't make sense have a tendency to subconsciously place the spectator into a heightened state of awareness, per se. I don't want to get too psycho-analytical here but suffice to say that an effect which is unjustified can destroy an entire routine. For one, it will interrupt your continuity as a performer and hence detriment your credibility. It creates doubt and cynicism towards your patter, and towards the general mood of your routines. This in turn hinders rapport which is essential for the full success of magic.

Unjustified routines make it that much harder for you to do your job. Even if they never consciously think about it. Think about it - if you had a mentalist performing to you, explaining that he was reading your body signals, and then started performing metal bending - well it's probably fairly obvious he wasn't reading your body signals before, was he? He certainly isn't reading the spoon's body signals. The performer and the performance rather than the effect specifically suffer.

And one final thing - ok, so you're showing me something cool you can do. So? Who cares? It will still be cool, but magic can be much more than that, and I believe that the majority of "Just because" effects don't reach their potential because of it. Just because is great - it's awesome. But magic's effect comes from the spectator's involvement; just showing them something you can do just because you can do it will never be enough as justification.
 
praetoritevong said:
I mentioned the issue with sandwiches in a thread not too long ago in the card magic forum.

As far as the spectators go - visualartist is correct, they notice more than you think. And while they probably will never think "Why is he using two cards to find one?", I believe that discrepancies, inconsistencies and little things that don't make sense have a tendency to subconsciously place the spectator into a heightened state of awareness, per se. I don't want to get too psycho-analytical here but suffice to say that an effect which is unjustified can destroy an entire routine. For one, it will interrupt your continuity as a performer and hence detriment your credibility. It creates doubt and cynicism towards your patter, and towards the general mood of your routines. This in turn hinders rapport which is essential for the full success of magic.

Unjustified routines make it that much harder for you to do your job. Even if they never consciously think about it. Think about it - if you had a mentalist performing to you, explaining that he was reading your body signals, and then started performing metal bending - well it's probably fairly obvious he wasn't reading your body signals before, was he? He certainly isn't reading the spoon's body signals. The performer and the performance rather than the effect specifically suffer.

And one final thing - ok, so you're showing me something cool you can do. So? Who cares? It will still be cool, but magic can be much more than that, and I believe that the majority of "Just because" effects don't reach their potential because of it. Just because is great - it's awesome. But magic's effect comes from the spectator's involvement; just showing them something you can do just because you can do it will never be enough as justification.
Click to expand...

Hmm, there's a lot of truth in this, actually. I think your last point is why impromptu looking magic with everyday objects is so powerful. Referring back to my cigarette trick analogy, that is exactly what I would do if I could do magic (and I smoked, which I don't). However, if I could really do magic, I wouldn't go around performing for tips in a restaurant, which kind of renders magic obsolete.
 
Like pressure.... Why the F*** would you want to put a phone inside a balloon?
Click to expand...

I laughed.

Because you can :)

Why dribble the cards. Why spring them. Why put it back in the deck. Why make it levitate. Why use two cards to find one.

Why.. Why.. Why?

It feels like were 6 again asking how a TV works. or is that just me?
 
I recently created a new handling for Do As I Do out of justification.

I hated that with most handlings you had to either trade cards or place the card in opposite packs, or trade packs, and then go through them again to find what your card was, etc. Why do all this? Doesn't make since.

So, I set out to eliminate it and I have. In the new version...

Deck is shuffled by participant.
They split the deck in half and chooses who gets what half.
We each spread through our half face down.
Take out a card and place it on the table.
They match!

It is that clean and I'm LOVING it!
 
Sinful07 said:
I laughed.

Because you can :)

Why dribble the cards. Why spring them. Why put it back in the deck. Why make it levitate. Why use two cards to find one.

Why.. Why.. Why?

It feels like were 6 again asking how a TV works. or is that just me?
Click to expand...

We dribble and spring as a demonstration of skill.

We put it back into the deck to create a challenge situation.

We make it levitate to demonstrate an ability many often dream about.

I use two cards to find one for a specific reason, but you've got me there - most people have no freaking clue about that last one.
 
I remember staring at the little squares back then.. They changed colours. Constantly.


Anywho, with Sandwich routines- that reason may be..?
 
If you want to be a good performer...Justification of every action is important.

Perhaps a better word would be motivation.

Bad actors do things without a reason. They walk across the stage, they put their hand on their hip, they stand in one spot etc.

Good actors move with intent and motivation. They cross the stage only to get loser to or further form something. They place their hands in natural positions and gesture to emphasize reaction etc.

If you are doing a trick, and you are fiddling with something, and that fiddling isn't justified (or motivated), it gives you away. The audience may or may not see exactly what you did, but a sharp audience will think "hmm, he just did something there..." and then "hmm, I'm pretty sure he must have switched them when he did that weird thing with his hands"

Someone on these forums mentioned that they want their magic to be absolutely solid and leave no possible solutions. They want things in their act that are perfectly put together. If you want magic like that then justify your actions - every action!

This is why it is great to record yourself and watch for the tells that you have (or anything that might look like a tell).

As far as a justification for using an effect, well, you can do it "just because", but that is a matter of scripting and building a routine, and it makes the difference between an okay show, and an amazing show.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.