See the insults are easy, now show me some real intelligence. Now you go away..whoooosh because he still won't get it.
You're trying way too hard.
What do you want me to say to you? All you did was attack me for asking a question that made you uncomfortable. So I called you out on it and told you to leave.
Notice how you're the only one here truly getting your frilly panties in a twist over this. Still, in the spirit of fairness, allow me to gleefully prove you wrong by intelligently (and laboriously it seems) explaining my point and motives.
As I said, you're the only one getting hostile over this. Everyone else has either said outright that they don't care because they do this for themselves and no one else, or they've actually tried to advance the conversation. The latter category get it. Sort of.
Almost everyone here is attempting to justify the art of flourishing itself. But justifying an art is utterly pointless and futile. I learned that several years ago when I got into arguments with people about the legitimacy of metal as a genre of music. I attempted to draw parallels to Classical music and jazz (which do exist, but don't necessarily help my argument), I tried to explain the virtuosity inherent to several subgenres (technical skill in metal is still very low compared to Classical virtuosos who concentrate exclusively on technique), and at one point I resorted to the "It just is" cop out. None of that worked.
I eventually came to understand that what I was trying to do was argue taste. In the history of debate, never has there been a more futile argument than arguing taste with another person. And that's what most of the thread here has been. Flourishers are trying to justify their art through arguments of taste, but that's not what I came here to argue. I already like the art, so they're only selling me on something I've already bought.
What it all comes down to is that many of the world's best manipulators and magicians have drawn a very clear parallel between their arts that is as true here as it is in any other artistic endeavor: connect with your audience.
This is something that has been largely glossed over. Trashman was the first one to get it, and it seems he's also the only one who understands it.
The mantra here is showing off, blowing people's minds with how much more dexterous you are than them, showing an incredible skill that nobody else can, yada, yada, yada. But I don't give money to people like that, and neither does anyone else I know. If you're being paid to perform, you have to entertain the audience and not simply you. If I want to see someone satisfy himself at the expense of everyone else, I'll watch politicians.
Trashman was the first and only person to point out that you could balance a birdy fan on someone's hand other than your own. Just as De'vo has been doing for years. Little things like that go a long way to helping an audience relate to you. Of course, I put this thread here as opposed to Handlordz or Decknique specifically because I thought more people here needed to start discussing the fundamentals. That was a rather arrogant judgment call on my part, but I don't really regret it. Anyway...
Bob Cassidy said the greatest tool to a mentalist is to stay connected. I've taken that advice to heart and consider it the single most important aspect of performance theory I've ever learned. It applies to you guys as well.
As I said, most of you couldn't give two sh*ts because you don't perform. Fine. But keep in mind then that this conversation was not aimed at you, and coming here to try and justify to me why what you do is still an art amounts to simply talking for the sake of it.
But those who really do perform need to be asking yourselves these sorts of questions.
With all that mind simons, I've been nice to you for long enough. You have nothing of value to add here and are just projecting onto me while acting worse than you accuse me of being. Go in peace and say no more.
