Here's something I have been thinking about. HOW moveless should your magic appear. I mean if it looks like you literally didn't do anything, people could come to the conclusion that you used a gimmick or something. So do you mix up the sleights with the move-less idea. Thus throwing them off the trail.
Moveless Magic
- Thread starter Randy
- Start date
That is a good question. From what I've experienced, if it looks like you did something you did "something." So my thoughts are that any magic you do should be completely move less. There should be no tell to anything graspable by your specs. Most "moves" should be non-moves.
Hmmm, good thought. I think the best way to avoid making your magic a ppear 'movey' is to literally get rid of as many moves as possible. The more self working, the better. My suggestion? A stack of some kind, so you can focus on presentation instead of focussing all your attention on sleights.
substitute your logic for the old saying, "every move must have its motivation". Problem solved?
Darwin Ortiz talks about this in Designing Miracles:
Basically during the point when you reveal the effect to the spectator, if should be as clean looking as possible because you strategically decided to most of the dirty work before or after this moment.
Basically during the point when you reveal the effect to the spectator, if should be as clean looking as possible because you strategically decided to most of the dirty work before or after this moment.
I have thought of this before. And this is what i decided:
1. Cut the bs and make your acutal moves as moveless as possible.
2. Have a good patter. It usually seems like youre doing something.
3. Along with patter, have movements of magic. Not sleights. Movements like snaps, waves, little flourishes here and there (not a sybil. Like a spin or what ever).
4. Explain what is going on. All the tricks I do, I have an "explanation" to it. For example, my ACR, i say its misdirection even though they stare at the deck. This gives them a unbelievable explanation which they lean against which takes out the gimmick or what ever possibility.
5. i sometimes go with the patter where I dont know whats happening so it takes out the gimmick possibility as well "lemme try something.. wait. damn. wait.... oh right... if we take out this.. and .... wait... wat was your...? then how come? OMG!! NO WAY!!!! ITS A SANDWICH!" yea...
1. Cut the bs and make your acutal moves as moveless as possible.
2. Have a good patter. It usually seems like youre doing something.
3. Along with patter, have movements of magic. Not sleights. Movements like snaps, waves, little flourishes here and there (not a sybil. Like a spin or what ever).
4. Explain what is going on. All the tricks I do, I have an "explanation" to it. For example, my ACR, i say its misdirection even though they stare at the deck. This gives them a unbelievable explanation which they lean against which takes out the gimmick or what ever possibility.
5. i sometimes go with the patter where I dont know whats happening so it takes out the gimmick possibility as well "lemme try something.. wait. damn. wait.... oh right... if we take out this.. and .... wait... wat was your...? then how come? OMG!! NO WAY!!!! ITS A SANDWICH!" yea...
"The art is to conceal the art."
Your magic shouldn't be suspect to sleight of hand or gimmicks. It should be clean and unsuspicious.
I would have to disagree with that. In my opinion, the key to having a good trick is that no explanation is provided. Even if the explanation is an impossible one. When you give an explanation, the audience have something to fall back on when they try to looks for a method. For example:
I tested this out in school one day. In my first class, i did a trick where they picked a card and i was able to read their minds and tell them their card (I just used a force). The reactions were good but not quite as good as i expected. The audience might think "Wow, he can read minds. That's pretty cool." Then, later in the day. I did the same trick but instead, i brought out a red card, had them pick a card from a blue deck, and the two cards matched (Again, it's just a force). But the reactions were TEN TIMES STRONGER. No kidding, i got screams and laughs and "No way!"s. Then i heard a girl go "What?! That's not even possible. HOLY SH*T!!!"
Now if i were to do that trick with a "i can see into the future" plot, then i', guessing the girl might have said "Wow, i've never met someone who could predict the future before." Then it wouldn't be magic, it would be me showing off my abilities.
One of the best moveless magic effects I've ever seen is Rene Lavand's Oil and Water routine. Simply beautiful. It Can't Be Done Any Slower
Yes well he HAD to make his magic look slow and move less. I mean there isn't a lot of sleights you can do with one hand.
Yeah well I am going to test this out once I get done learning a few things with Juan Tamariz's Mnemonica and I'll see if they can come up with a reasonable excuse for how I achieved the effects.
All magic should be moveless...
"Be natural" and the other two quotes put it perfectly. Even self-working tricks take practice, just not where technical ability is concerned.
"Be natural" and the other two quotes put it perfectly. Even self-working tricks take practice, just not where technical ability is concerned.
I use Mnemonica in just about every performance, and they never come up with an excuse. I personally feel that if the audience suspect a gimmick, and tell you so, then you haven't been as moveless as you think.
Yeah I think a lot of magicians can learn a lesson from Rene Levaland. It's not just the fact that he takes his time and performs everything at a slow casual speed, but it's also the fact that he tells beautiful stories that go along with his magic.