Visual vs. In the spectators hands

[010rusty]

It's time for the age old debate!

Arguably the most controversial debate in all of magic. Personally I'm impartial. For years magician have been arguing whether or not in the spectators hands or visual trick is more powerful. A classic example would be first hand vs. prophet. 2 absolutely amazing bill changes of $5 to $500.

One(first hand) is in the spectators hands, but the other(prophet) is visual and happens in front of their eyes.

The answer is up to you. What do you think gives a better reaction.

 

[William Draven]

Depends on what you are going for. There is no one right answer.

 

[RealityOne]

It is a false dichotomy.

Magic occurs in the spectator's mind. It is up to the magician to convince them that they are actually perceiving a reality that is impossible.

 

[Al e Cat Dabra]

I didn't cast a vote because so much of the impact depends on the particular effect, the performer, the performance and the performing conditions. It is a very powerful effect to change a card in a spectator's hand, or to make coins magically travel from the performer's to spectator's hand, for example, but the impact will be far greater upon the spectator whose hand is used than upon the other observers. So, effects that happen in the spectator's hands are most optimal, powerful and memorable when doing magic "one-on-one," as opposed to for a group. There are many powerful effects that do not happen in a spectator's hand such as the production of 3 or 4 pieces of fruits at the end of a cup and ball routine, the revelation of the reversed "thought-of" card in the Invisible Deck, and Signed Card on the Ceiling. These are effects (among others) that spectators will remember and talk about for a lifetime.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Another vote for: It's all in the ability for the performer to create the space where the audience feels comfortable enough to experience something magical. At that point it won't matter if they're holding the props or not, or even if there's no props at all.

 

[Justin.Morris]

Though I agree with the above comments, I might push a little and say that while of course it happens in their minds, which method can me more effective in making that happen?

I would lean towards in the hands just simply from the reactions I've gotten. If I do a snap change, I (or perhaps my props) get credited for making it happen - doing something. But when I do something in their hands and they are actually convinced that everything is legit and they feel in control - then whatever happens in their mind is much more meaningful.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I have previously mentioned that I think "visual" magic is overrated in today's market. We will never be able to show the audience something better than what we are capable of making them imagine is happening.

The same kind of applies here - Something visual they can see happening is just something that happened. But something where they are imagining the crazy thing happening will always be more powerful. Whether they are physically holding the props or not is not really relevant to this.

The key is building the routine and script with garden paths for them to walk in and then find any supposedly possible methods negated without the magician pointing that out.

 

[Josh Burch]

Personally I lean toward in the hands. Not saying this is the one true way. I just find that in the hands stuff tends to have less angles, and much of the time less moving parts.

Darwin Ortiz mentions that with visual magic the method doesn't always separate itself from the effect. This gives the trick an added hurdle if it wants to be successful.

 

[CWhite]

It's time for the age old debate!

Arguably the most controversial debate in all of magic. Personally I'm impartial. For years magician have been arguing whether or not in the spectators hands or visual trick is more powerful. A classic example would be first hand vs. prophet. 2 absolutely amazing bill changes of $5 to $500.

One(first hand) is in the spectators hands, but the other(prophet) is visual and happens in front of their eyes.

The answer is up to you. What do you think gives a better reaction.

I don't think it's a debate at all. Nevermind "controversial"...

 

[Al e Cat Dabra]

Great comments! I also think that a huge element that goes into what makes an effect "powerful," is what Vernon referred to as the "emotional hook." In fact, this might be a more significant factor than whether it is done in the hands versus visual. As an example, I learned an effect years ago (and I'm sorry I don't know who to credit for it right now) that involved borrowing a spectator's business card and having him fold it several times, with the magician pattering about how it involved doubling his efforts in business, which is likely to produce success. Already, this personal element, arouses interest, engages the spectator's emotions and draws him in psychologically - I guess you could say, giving him/her a stake in the trick. Anyway, after the folding is completed, magician takes the folded card momentarily from the spectator and accomplishes a switch for a pre-folded dollar bill and places the bill (they think the card) in the spectator's hand, immediately closing the spectator's hand over it with the request that he/she hold on tight so magician cannot get anything in or out of the hand. (Of course, the work is already done.)

After further suitable patter, such as asking the spectator to imagine producing wealth by his/her efforts in business and positive thinking, the spectator is asked to open their hand, where much to their delight, their business card has transformed into a dollar. Very shortly after performing this trick for a while, and getting a wonderful reaction, I realized how much better it would be to let them keep the dollar. Sure it costs some money out of my pockets, which aren't exactly lined with gold, but the reaction was exponentially greater, and the spectator feels great when you tell him/her to keep it as an omen or good luck token of more abundance to come. It means the world to them, as opposed to taking the money back. On top of it all, you now have their business card, and you can text or email them, if you like, to tell them how much you enjoyed performing for them, provide your own contact info, and to please keep you in mind for their next party or special event! Often, they will immediately ask you for your business card. Packs super light, happens in their hand, and provides a whole lot of bang for the buck!

 

[010rusty]

It is a false dichotomy.

Magic occurs in the spectator's mind. It is up to the magician to convince them that they are actually perceiving a reality that is impossible.

Wise words my man....

 

[Tower of Lunatic Meat]

It's time for the age old debate!

Arguably the most controversial debate in all of magic. Personally I'm impartial. For years magician have been arguing whether or not in the spectators hands or visual trick is more powerful. A classic example would be first hand vs. prophet. 2 absolutely amazing bill changes of $5 to $500.

One(first hand) is in the spectators hands, but the other(prophet) is visual and happens in front of their eyes.

The answer is up to you. What do you think gives a better reaction.

I thought the most controversial topics in magic is either:

- piracy
- DVD VS books
- Criss Angel vs Blaine

If you can't tell. Semantics is my favorite board game.


Anyway. Magic in their hands VS visual. It REALLY depends on your presentation and what you're trying to accomplish.

Personally, I gravitate more towards tricks that can happen in their hands. I'm trying to make a whole show of 'magic in their hands'. But, as David has pointed out to me in the past, the problem with running tricks where 'it happens in their hands'--especially a while show of it. People will suspect that you did 'something' to still make it happen. I think this CAN be alleviated with a proper presentation as well as ones character.

I think that, to make the best 'magic in their hands' performance, it needs to have a good script. If you have a lot of it, I think you need to have a haracter that can make sense of why there is a magician who essentially does no magic.


So, to summarize. Depends on what your aim is.

 

[010rusty]

I thought the most controversial topics in magic is either:

- piracy
- DVD VS books
- Criss Angel vs Blaine

If you can't tell. Semantics is my favorite board game.


Anyway. Magic in their hands VS visual. It REALLY depends on your presentation and what you're trying to accomplish.

Personally, I gravitate more towards tricks that can happen in their hands. I'm trying to make a whole show of 'magic in their hands'. But, as David has pointed out to me in the past, the problem with running tricks where 'it happens in their hands'--especially a while show of it. People will suspect that you did 'something' to still make it happen. I think this CAN be alleviated with a proper presentation as well as ones character.

I think that, to make the best 'magic in their hands' performance, it needs to have a good script. If you have a lot of it, I think you need to have a haracter that can make sense of why there is a magician who essentially does no magic.


So, to summarize. Depends on what your aim is.

Yeah, that is basically my opinion.

 

[AllenPenaluna]

I feel like magic that happens in the spectator's hands is always a lot more powerful. The reason is because they think the magic happens in there hands and not in yours. While visual magic is great it still happens in your hands and the spectators will always think of some sort of explanation. But if you give the cards to them and something impossible happens in their hands it makes the trick that much more amazing.

​