The Pivot Move

[Cliff|Bumgardner]

Just wanted to discuss something I have thought for years. Ever since I first saw McBride do a backpalm pivot I have hated that move... Is it just me, or is it very much "Hey, there's a card in my hand but I'm so damn good that you can't see it!".

Anyone else feel this way?

C

 

[TeeDee]

I think any stage manipulator who thinks the audience doesn't know that the cards are somehow concealed in their hand are fooling themselves. Basically, this kind of manipulation is just a display of dexterity.

 

[romeo sierra]

I agree. I don't believe the pivot should ever be used just to merely show the back of your hand. I think there is a proper way to use the move though. In my opinion, a good way to use it is to shift focus from one hand to the other.

For instance-- imagine producing fans of cards with your right hand. While doing so, you steal a packet to produce with the left. You produce one more split fan with the right hand, and execute the pivot as you turn to the left and being producing single cards with the left hand. This subtly shows your right hand empty without drawing excessive attention to it. You're not merely showing off, but rather using the Pivot as a legitimate utility move. I believe this was what the move was originally intended for. You can then produce another fan or singles with the right hand without having to steal another packet.

RS.

 

[romeo sierra]

I think any stage manipulator who thinks the audience doesn't know that the cards are somehow concealed in their hand are fooling themselves. Basically, this kind of manipulation is just a display of dexterity.

Actually, I'll go one further and confess that I think all types of manipulation is just a display of dexterity. When people actually bill themselves as manipulators, they openly admit to using sleight-of-hand. Now, that doesn't mean what they do can't be artistic or "magical," but I believe the audience expects and appreciates the fact that the performer is using dexterity to demonstrate his art. Whether it be classic card productions or XCM-- the performers are showing off their skill in dexterity.

RS.

 

[TeeDee]

Actually, I'll go one further and confess that I think all types of manipulation is just a display of dexterity. When people actually bill themselves as manipulators, they openly admit to using sleight-of-hand. Now, that doesn't mean what they do can't be artistic or "magical," but I believe the audience expects and appreciates the fact that the performer is using dexterity to demonstrate his art. Whether it be classic card productions or XCM-- the performers are showing off their skill in dexterity.

RS.

As a slight addendum to my previous post, I believe that the audience can still experience magic even if they know (or believe) the effect is acheived by sleight-of-hand. Something does not have to deceive in order to astonish. The prime example of this maxim is Derren Brown. Many of his audience are convinced they understand his methods, citing NLP, hypnosis, body-language etc., but that in no way reduces the impact, or the magic, of his effects. Therefore, a self-confessed manipulator still has the power to produce moments of wonder, as long as he pays attention to proper theatrical presentation. In this way, a deftly executed card flourish could have the impact of Mr Brown's instant handshake induction.

 

[romeo sierra]

As a slight addendum to my previous post, I believe that the audience can still experience magic even if they know (or believe) the effect is acheived by sleight-of-hand. Something does not have to deceive in order to astonish. The prime example of this maxim is Derren Brown. Many of his audience are convinced they understand his methods, citing NLP, hypnosis, body-language etc., but that in no way reduces the impact, or the magic, of his effects. Therefore, a self-confessed manipulator still has the power to produce moments of wonder, as long as he pays attention to proper theatrical presentation. In this way, a deftly executed card flourish could have the impact of Mr Brown's instant handshake induction.

I agree with you fully. We essentially said the same thing. ...But comparing card flourishes to an instant handshake induction is a bit of a stretch. Hehe.

RS.

 

[Cliff|Bumgardner]

As to an audience always knowing the cards are hidden in the hand, this is just simply not true. Yes, many people do understand the concept of the cards and items being hidden in the hand or on the body, but many do not. So I really don't think it is fair to say it is "nothing more than a display of dexterity" because though that may be true, the impact it has on the audience is magic. Never forget that what we do with our hands is not magic, it is deception. Magic happens in the mind of our spectators.

To give an example, I recently saw a bird manipulator in a show I went to. I knew where those birds were coming from, I knew that he had a vanishing dove cage, I knew what was going on.. but it blew me away. Whether or not I knew it was simply dexterity and skill was irrelevant at that moment because I was experiencing magic. To me, an over proving move like the pivot takes that magic moment away and brings it back into the reality of the deception.

I do agree that the pivot concept has a use in manipulation, but is certainly better used in the context romeo put it in.

And did someone really just compare a cut to Derren Brown mentalism? haha

C

 

[TeeDee]

As to an audience always knowing the cards are hidden in the hand, this is just simply not true.

Unless you're working for young children or those requiring educational support, I would categorically dispute this. To be fair, some audience members may conclude that they come from the sleeve or that some gimmickry is involved, but if it is demonstrated that the cards are genuine and the sleeves are rolled up, any spectator of average world-knowledge and intelligence knows that the cards are hidden in the hand somehow.

Never forget that what we do with our hands is not magic, it is deception. Magic happens in the mind of our spectators.

In my opinion those two sentences don't quite agree with each other. What we do is not necessarily deception. Yes, magic happens in the mind of our spectators, and what we do is provide the context in which they can create this magic. However, we can do this without deception. I believe a hypnotist (displaying a genuine, non-deceptive skill), or even a juggler (again, without deceit) can create that moment of amazement, astonishment, or, to put it another way, magic.

And did someone really just compare a cut to Derren Brown mentalism? haha

Well, I said a "card flourish", not necessarily a cut. And, I wasn't comparing any card flourish with any Derren Brown effect. I specifically picked out a handshake induction, because, theatrically, both the flourish and the induction can serve the same purpose. After the narrative of the act has begun, the audience will seek justification for believing in the character that the performer purports to portray. If your persona is a master sleight-of-hand artist, then a complex flourish will definitely prove your credentials, as a handshake induction would if you present yourself as a mind manipulator.

 

[Randomwrath]

The problem with the pivot is that it isn't a natural way to show your hand. As said, they know the card is hidden in the hand. How is where the mystery comes in. By doing the pivot, you supposedly show the hand empty.
Where is the card? His hand's empty. What's he doing? He's showing me both sides of the hand. That's not how somebody would turn an empty hand round. Why is he doing something funny when showing me the back of his hand? Ah, problem solved!
Now I'm not saying everyone will think this, but some will. Personally I don't like backpalming particularly (too angly for me and my friend does it better than me ) but I think that those that do kill the mystery by doing this. It's like having a coin palmed and the audience assume the hand's empty. You can blatantly swap hands to show both hands empty. Because of this 'move', the audience instantly suspects something, even though they don't see it. I think some people underestimate spectator's intelligence at times.

 

[Cliff|Bumgardner]

I really fail to see how you guys believe that everyone simply *knows* the cards are hidden in the hand. In my opinion you have missed the entire point of magic. Do people know that card tricks are sleight of hand? Yes. Do some people believe that card tricks are real magic? From personal experience I can say definitively yes. If someone knows that cards are hidden in my hand, great, good for them. But I intend to perform in such a way that people can believe anything they want. If the conclusion is that I am just extremely dexterous, great. But what if I can create a real moment of astonishment for someone watching? I will not do anything to jeopardize the possibility of that moment.

C

 

[Randomwrath]

I really fail to see how you guys believe that everyone simply *knows* the cards are hidden in the hand. In my opinion you have missed the entire point of magic. Do people know that card tricks are sleight of hand? Yes. Do some people believe that card tricks are real magic? From personal experience I can say definitively yes. If someone knows that cards are hidden in my hand, great, good for them. But I intend to perform in such a way that people can believe anything they want. If the conclusion is that I am just extremely dexterous, great. But what if I can create a real moment of astonishment for someone watching? I will not do anything to jeopardize the possibility of that moment.

C

I was working on the assumption that people did. Why? Because when performing something like this, there will be some people that believe it's magic and there will be others that don't. As always. However, since it's such a short sequence of events, card isn't there - card is there, the ones that don't believe won't have much trouble figuring this one out. Where could the card be? So no, not everyone will suspect trickery, but there will be people that do; I was referring to them on the whole.