|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10~11 [Next] | ||||||||||
Zombie Magic Inner circle I went out for a beer and now have 8733 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-12-13 07:40, Lawrence O wrote: A bit off topic, but that is a GREAT name for a band or song. |
|||||||||
Pete Biro 1933 - 2018 18558 Posts |
Off subject but I just thought of it. What say you show four aces and used these aces for the matrix cards, and at the end of the routine you turn them over and they are now four KINGS. ???? Also, Johnny Paul's c&b routine, with 3 cups only had ONE final load.
STAY TOONED... @ www.pete-biro.com
|
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
Pete, glad you showed up.
A young man on this forum had the same idea and performed a clip for us all to see. It was posted someplace on the forum. He did Matrix with business cards. At the end of the routine, the business cards were shown to be different. He did an admirable job. Not pro but admirable. But the wizards of smart on this forum that claim to be intereted in helping: flamed this kid. It was very unfair. The kid performed slowly and clearly. So this community has already flamed that idea. Then about Johnny Paul only using a one ball finish. There have been many one ball finishes for cups and balls. I cannot remember them but they have been discussed on other threads. They are some really great names. In fact there are many cup and ball routines out there that have no large finish at all. Consider the Rub a Dub Dub penetration routine. It is a classic. Another factor is that the wizards of smart here accuse me of not finishing cups and balls right. I only use one ball. Well, the routine is but one routine on the DVD from L&L. In another routine the finish consists of three bursts of silk explosions. Another routine consists of tipping back the cups and two are filled with shards of ice. Another consist of a standard production of three large load balls. The difference here is that the load sequence is so strong, it can be repeated immediately for the same audience and the shock will be the same. My point is that these people are ripping me for only producing one ball in one routine. These other routnes are inovative and far beyond their capability at creativity. Yet, they persist at blasting me for producing only one ball. Let's look at that routine. The entire routine fits into three cups. When I performed at a coffee shop, I just let the cups sit on the table. I picked them up, did the routine, and put the cups back on the table. They were always ready to go. The routine is self resetting. There are no body steals. I never go to my pockets. I don't use my lap. The routine can be done standing or sitting. It can be done surrounded. It can be done in your birthday suit. It can be done immediately and it will still fool the crowd. One of the owner's friends hung around the coffee shop and has seen the routine dozens of times. He confesses he has no idea where the large load at the end comes from. Yet the wizards of smart here rip me a new hole two feet wide becasue I don't adhere to their way of doing things. Then, they declare they are fair. This routine has been designed over a forty year period to be done in very hardened enviroments. It works well. It sells well. I admit it has some flaws. I ain't perfect but I try real hard. People ask me questions and want to share to develop something. Hey, I just put half my life into a DVD of significant material and you want talk about developing something new. That offends me. Then you offer ideas and want feedback. I offer feedback and the feedback is either ignored or claimed it is wrong. You ask for it, then you blast it. Is that fair? Of course, you know better than me so of course I am wrong. Of course I am going to get ****ed. Then, you take my words and twist them and tell me I am not cooperating. Then you guys go on for post after post telling the world I am a bad guy. Of course you can tell me I am rotten but I can't tell you that you are rotten. Laurie, when I saw your first post on this thread. I said to myself: this thread is dead. Pete. I miss you. I wish I lived in LA so we could get together and chat. You were the person that gave me one of the most valuable moves of my life. At a convention long ago you showed me a move to do expansion of texture. I have used that move all of my life since then. When someone invites me out to go bar hopping, I take that trick along with me. It is the second trick I teach my students. When I perform it the person helping me freezes in shock. It is featured in my big theory book. I asked where you got it long ago and you told me you knew nothing about it. I remember you showing it to me at a convention near Duke Stern's booth. We were talking near his table. Then you showed me a coin throgh the table move one could do without sitting. You used Duke's table to show me the move. Duke came over and told us to beat it. We both know him and consider him a friend but he had vision trouble and did not recognize us. Those were the days. Conventions are not the same. Anyway, I wanted to remind you of the move you taught me and forgot about. And while I am talking about old times, rainboguy: the time we spent at the Houdini club talking was not enough. I thought about moving to Madison but Angie doesn't want to. The University of Wisconson has a decent physics program I was interested in. And for anyone that cares about me personally, my biggest joy in life is sitting around talking to magicians. If you see me at any event: please walk up and say hi. All I ask is that you buy me a Mudslide. Ya, I have a big ego. And I have a short fuse. If you dump on me, I'm gonna dump on you. But if you don't yank my chain, I'm a chubby fuzz ball. I mean real chubby. And old. All the best. Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
Lawrence O Inner circle French Riviera 6811 Posts |
Al,
Let's consider that we both started on the wrong foot and let's take up, if possible, the discussion in a positive spirit. "The wizards of smart" here (congratulations for this creative name calling which doesn't offend me) didn't accuse you of "not finishing cups and balls right". I just wanted to understand your rationale. You explainned it when you say that you want to express that the small ball "explodes into a large one. Fair enough. I doubt that it flies as such but, thinking it over, this effect could get through if the script is subtle enough to delineate that this is the effect. As you rightfully explain in your Theory of Magic that, again I adhere to for 99% of it (some interrogations on the management of the audience attention rhythm), what hte effect is must be very clearly understood by the audience. This I think is a major point. For example, in the Multiplication Pass, there are two possible effects: the balls can "come back" from the pockets as in Dai vernon's routine and in fact most of the performers nowadays; or the cups "keep on producing balls" that are pocketted as in Laurie L Ireland routine. The visual is the same but not the effect. So, please, I'm not accusing you of anything, I just would liike to understand the rationale behind what you do when your theory of magic doesn't cover the topic. Please accept my apologies if my questions did go through as an accusation. And yes there are several C&Bs by celebrated performers that either finish with only one large load like Ken Brooke and, in some instances Patrick Page or with no large load at all like Sam Leo Horowitz (another genius that will hopefully one day gain proper recognition for his numerous insights). This being said, your explanation still leaves me with interrogations. After the one ball climax, and because the appearance of a large load is so surprising, the audience will question what is under the other cups. Now this could be dealt with when packing up (as a "follow through") using Pete Biro's Karate move to let the other two cups to be packed as empty. Now this point has been teasing me so much over so many years that I raised it because of the feeling that the audience has about the other two cups. Ken Brooke solved that dilemma differently by stacking the cups before revealing the one large load under the bottom one: in their stacked condition, there was no question left open as to whether a similar large load could be in the other cups. Gazzo also produces a single real large load climax by producing a water melon from his hat (not the first magician to conclude the C&Bs with a single large load from the hat, Robert Houdin was producing several canon balls from a hat), but the cups had already produced larger loads than the small balls. Thus, without feeling accused of anything, can you tell us more what you feeel about this and what your trend of thought is in this respect. Now an additional point that I have no problem to credit you either, is your search for large load without getting to the pockets. and for me it's related to the question of the number of large loads. Scott York in his X-rated cups and balls, came with the very bright idea of placing his stacked cups mouth down in their bag and to wedge a large load into the lower cup but from the outside. Then as he would take the cups out, that large load could be secretly lapped. Now from discussion I had with Tommy Wonder on this topic and his 'rule of three, I came with the idea to use Scott's principle for tabling the load under the bag and drag it aside to the left of the table near the table'es inner edge. From there on, instead of getting to the pockets but using Tommy's misdirection technique with the pompom and the bag, the large load could be stolen, from under the bag and loaded into the cup. This works beautifully but I had this "one large load only problem" linked to "what about the other two cups". With Tommy I also worked on using the pendulum (that he used to vanish things) to deliver a load but the leaning forward that C&Bs require was making the solution unpractical (even with a safety pin break in the jacket (or we didn't find the prooper solution.) I then got an idea from Tom Stone who uses a smart (but too complex for me) doctor's bag delivering a magnetic ball under the sole of his shoe, and bringing the foot up for a steal. taking up the idea, I did use a clip for holding the pants tight when bicycling. I stuck a magnet to the clip and shimmed a large load that I put against the magnet under the pants at ankle level. It's great when performing sitting especially if using Slydini's Imp-Pass to ring it in. It feels uncomfortable when standing but bringing the foot up is not more detectable than stealing a load from the table with proper audience focusing. The solution for the third load came to me from David Berglas who simply uses his sleeve to deliver the load. I just made a clip that releases the load when tugging the sleeve, to avoid loosing liberty of movement during the routine itself. All of this to say that I went a long way to find solution to what, for me, is an audience psychological problem with the one large load ending. Thus you can understand that I was really not accusing you of anything but, because I respect very much your theory of magic, because I'm after virtual magic rather than theatrical one, because I see you performing what you preach, I just (and still do) wanted to get your point on this. As you say yourself, your fuse seem to be short or you've been burned before and it still hurts, but believe it I'm not asking for justification, I'm asking for explanations and thinking since I noticed that many of your effects seem to be tamed on the climax or ending. After I understand what the rationale behind this observation is, I may agree or disagree, but right now I have no judgement (and therefore no accusation) as I simply don't understand what's behind this observation and I have developped an inclination to follow your line of thougth. If we can succeed resuming or initiating a topical dialogue then I may kindly ask you to exchange ideas and their rationale on the playing with rhythm in a performance for reinforcing virtual magic. With hopes for positive and exploring discussions The Wizard of Smart (even if it wasn't said in a very nice way, I like this better than Houdini'ss title of "Handcuffs King" of or Pop Krieger's title "King of C&Bs" )
Magic is the art of emotionally sharing live impossible situations
|
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
I have three things to say.
First off, I suspect there is a problem of going from English to French. When I used the term Wizards of Smart, my implication was that you and I are Wizards of Smart. My implication was that you and I were going on and on about tech stuff that was boring to other people. I certainly do not want to do that. I want other people to be a part of all this. And eventually someone said that the discussion was run by huge egos crashing against each other. I am not pleased to say that was true. And, I was attempting to avoid it. Normally on this forum, when such a thing occurs, the other Wizard of Smart grabs it and won't let it go and becomes their battle cry for the next century. You, fortunately, have pulled back from that and I can speak with more freedom. I guess that is the second thing I had to say. You are changing your stance and sacrificing some ego to enable us all to move foreward. Then the third and final point. In the routine, the audience does not wonder what is under the other two cups because they are lying on their side and the audience can see into them. With that said, here is a discussion. I understand that in comedy there is a three rule. Repeat something three times and it sells well. The first is perhaps an accident. The second is a pattern. The third is proof. That sequence is established in the second phase of the routine. Then in comedy, as I understand it, the three is repeated with a twist. The fist is accident. The second establishes a pattern. Then on the third, the audience expects the proof but gets the twist. With that said, the three events in the third phase are the small balls disappearing from the hand and appearing under the cups. The audience is to get the idea that will happen three times. However, on the third that is to be proof, a big ball suddenly appears instead of a little one. Normally in cups and ball routines, the big ball appears when the performer lifts the cup and says, "Oh, here is a big one." Now, to use your device of using a line to represent audience attention, the line is not high just before the large load is produced. When the final loads are produced, the line jumps up. My philosophy here is that becasue the audience is looking for the third ball under the cup, the line is high. When the large ball is seen instead, the line jumps even higher. My intention is to use audience expectation to drive that line up. Now here is a word on the vanishes. Begin with the cups mouth down and the balls on the bottom of the cups. Most sequences of this sort cause the three balls to disappear and then the cups are lifted. In such a sequence, the audience is witnessing three vanishes in sequence. As they are false passes, I do not believe the vanishes have a lot of power. The audience knows they go somewhere. So, the magician is being clever with his hands and hiding them somewhere. Thus the audience's mind is tied up wondering where the balls are hidden. In my version, a ball is caused to disappear and appear under its respective cup. A great deal of energy has been devoted to getting the audience to see an image of the ball in my hand and suddenly see the ball under the cup. The time between the vanish and appearance is to be as short as possible. The goal of this is to create the idea in the mind of the audience that the ball jumps instantly from the hand to under the cup. There are a couple of thoughts here. First, the vanish move has not been used up to this point in the routine. So, the first vanish is the first time in the routine the audience sees a ball vanish from the hand. It should be a shock. In most routines, the vanish has been used several times. Then, the audience will be accustomed to the motion. Here it is the first time. Secondly, the ball is seen to vanish from the hand and has made an appearance under the cup. The effect is complete. The audience need not worry where the ball is if it just vanished. They know where it is. They see it lying on the table in front of a mouth up cup. It is a complete sequence. Note that they can also see the other balls used in the routine. The other two are on the other cups. The point here is that the audience has seen a complete effect. A ball jumped from the hand to the cup. The effect is over. Their mind is free to move on. They also know exactly what to expect next. Then, that is exactly what happens. They see a ball disappear and go under the next cup almost instantly. Again, the effect is complete. But people are not stupid. They now know what is going to happen. Note also that in the first two cup manipulations, the cups were raised from the table a bit kind of demonstrating there was nothing under them. The third cup is not raised from the table and I am about to do the ball thing a third time. Clearly I have a small ball under the cup already. That could be their point of view. Then the ball vanishes, the cup is lifted. If they expect to see a small ball, it apparently has grown. Hopefully, this is an application of the third time but a comedian's twist. A suggestion has been made that the cups could be stacked to produce the final load. I feel that would alter the expectation that there is a small ball under the cup. I want that bang, Bang, BANG. I want that to look like your smooth sine wave but each wave is higher than the previous. If the tempo is broken by stacking the cups, the sine wave is discontinoius. That is it is not continiously differentiable. (trying to be funny) Now, I am not sure this is better than a production of three balls. At one time I took a survey of what my acquantiences thought of three balls vs. a single ball production. The consensus was that the three ball production was more impressive. But my observation is that the single ball production gets more of a suprise or shock. I do not know which is better. And please understand that I do not appreciate suggestions to change the routine. The things I am relating here have required some years to develop and implement. While I don't mind discussing them, a suggestion that I change anything brings a kind of mental pain. To implemnt anything, even minor, means months of practice and trying out something in the real world to see if it flies. And any suggestion that what I am doing is wrong simply throws me into a rage. As with Matrix that has over forty years of demonstrable success, for someone to say it is dramitically incorrect simply does not fly. Matrix and this routine consistantly get kick in the teeth strong response. Well, I hope you understand how insulting that can be. I am not saying that all of this is the right way to do it. I am saying that many years of performeance have proven that, if not perfect, it works really well. Well, I do not know what to say about all this right now. Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
pabloinus Inner circle 1681 Posts |
Great posts from both of you, thank you, I am back to read this thread. Laurie was right the thread did not deserved to be dead.
I am wondering if you could address Laurie's point on Climax and conclusions, or if the Climax should be the conclusion or viceversa, or who cares and again depends on the entertainment value of the end to end trick Example here with C&B, assuming 3 loads, for me the climax is when the 3 loads show up,normally people will applaude at that point or gasp or smile, but in most of the routine a 4th identical load appears under the central cup at the end, for me this is the conclusion of the routine, not the climax, people were already astonished. However in John Mendoza's routine that I liked a lot, his routine has 3 loads, the previous climax, however after that John makes hundreds of pennies show up under the center cup, so in this case this is the climax, and the conclusion. Pablo |
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-12-14 02:35, Al Schneider wrote: Al, I'd appreciate it if you'd reconsider whatever it is you seem to have against me. My first post on this thread was intended for the benefit of all. I'm actually in agreement with you on subtlety in C&Bs. And I highly prefer to stay away from the pockets. Large loads seem copycat-ish to me. Rub a Dub Dub C&bs is one of my favorites. If you will, I'd appreciate if you'd take a look at what I've been performing with the C&Bs. I don't consider the final load a large load- it's not. I think it is a surprise load, but my reason for using it is (and those who know a bit about me will doubly know this ), it makes sense. My mention of through-line, continuity, integrity, interest was meant to emphasize that I think they are important in determining the last action(s) in a routine. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvpK9_PX-......e-hUiiDQ Laurie |
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
You are asking a very embarassing quesiton.
I take it very seriously. However, an answer is difficult. I will contemplate this and see what unfolds. Now, I would like to comment on the video of the two cup routine you displayed. It is interesting. I would like to share with you what I first saw. As you perform it, I percieve you are about two inches in front of your solar plexus. That is a nerve complex in about the center of your body as I am sure you are aware. I think it is a major chakra. My guess is that there is something tied up there. I'm not really into that sort of stuff. This is just my observation. This observation wants me to suggest to you to be in your audience. That concept must be in your theater training somewhere. The performance suggests you have not done it for many people. I also feel that your desire to avoid copycatness is inhibiting the way your heart wants to go. The routine is OK and a bit novel. You are making some errors in body language that my eye can pick up. I think a normal observer will not pick them up but will unconciously be aware of them. Thus, the magic suffers. Your handling of the wand lacks confidence. That could be corrected by repitition of the action. You could easily correct the body language problems with honest self analysis. The filming is a bit awkward. I did not realize what the final element was until the very end. As an aside. I feel odd in writing this. I do not normally speak in this manner. You see, I have a personality quirk. I reflect the attitude of those that are talking to me. Perhaps this is my problem. Many people speak in platitudes but have a subtext of viciousness. My tone then becomes vicious. It gets me in trouble all of the time. I feel very uncomfotable talking to you. Your tone now is very polite and that enables me to speak openly. Don't know what else to say now. Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
Dave V Inner circle Las Vegas, NV 4824 Posts |
Laurie,
I too could not see what your final load was until your closing shot displaying the props. Gazzo has a way to reveal two balls so they're always side by side. He moves the cup forward, then back so they square up against the front edge of the cup before he shows them. This could possibly work for your third load as well so it's presented broadside to the camera (audience).
No trees were killed in the making of this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
|
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
The routine is a work in progress and this was filmed 8 months ago. I have performed it just a few times this summer for an audience, you are correct in that, Al. This video was made prior to that, for assessment of where performance was at and where it needed to go. The video is not as clear as I'd like and ends abruptly (and knowing it lacked clarity, I added the closing still photo) but it allowed me to see what needed improvement. I'm not sure I like the timing and that may be due to the influence of keeping time with the music.
I'd like the reveals to be a little more punctuated, I think. Part of my problem, I think, is I sit too close to the table, or the table is a slightly awkward height for me, maybe, or both. I know where my heart is and where it wants to go, however, so I don't agree that it's inhibited, except perhaps by fear that others frown at it. The performance I did for audiences were done without the music and timing was in those cases informed by their responses. Audiences were a few people at a time standing directly in front of the table and so visibility for them was high and they recognized the cow immediately. Thanks very much for taking a look, Al. I appreciate your comments. Thanks for the tip, Dave. I might incorporate that. I believe, though, that I can also consistently direct the orientation of the cow with direct handling. It's certainly a key point I've been working at. |
|||||||||
Lawrence O Inner circle French Riviera 6811 Posts |
Al,
Thank you for having taken the trouble to come back into the thread. For future reference, please understand that I've not been and will not try and suggest any change in any of your routines. There aree several reasons to this. First, like you, the routines that I work are polished over the years and express my personality, so a change even smart, has to fit into that. Second, I have been working very thoroughly on every part of the script and acting or body language for the effects not only to be very clear but also for the misdirection to come in progressively. It's bit like what you say about getting the audience to get used to the way to hold the cup for the routine in your DVDs. My misdirection structure is not on the spot but is pre-built and made to grow until the time it's used. Third, following a Bill Palmer's advice I get the audience, and only the auddience, filmed to check the amplitude of reactions and their frequency. Thus any change has not only to be integrated with a shoe horn but also its impact has to be compared with what it replaces. My personal slope is to have the audience sharing a moment of magic, supplying themselves an imaginary work that naturally they will not try to challenge. Thus, for example, if spectators applaude during a routine, I'll change either the amplitude of movements or the text or the voice or the script, because applauses during a performance -for me- express that the audience is not in the magi moment and have externalized themselves from their moment of virtual magic. I'm therefore well aware of the fact that suggesting any technical change would be ... let's say touchy and alter more than meets the eye. So my report on large loads, was more to express that my search had also driven me away from the pockets. Thus I was understanding your quest on that: that's all. I only referred to my large load approaches, not to suggest you to replace what you do with any of what I'm doing and, please, for future reference, see what is common rather than what is different. If I have a point where I may disagree with you, I would say it honestly and tell you why so that you can express where you think I missed your point and where I should reconsider my perception (for me it's easy because I don't believe in any truth but I believe in tested attempts) The third reason is that, for pure selfish reason, if I ever was founding a substantial improvement to one of your routine, I'd use it for myself. It would tke years before I woudl mention it to you (lol) Now I'd love to hear about your analysis on my perception of timing because, it seems to me that you only got part of it. Allow me to describe it a little more before you make some judgement on it. First there is an attention to our complete act. I have a character (an intellectual historian who studies what's concealed in official history). Each trick in my acts (I have a cards one, close up one, and a cups and balls one) is implicitely revealing some values or facets of this chatacter (caring, happy, mildly anarchist, poetic, knowledgeable in several fields like mythologies, religions or economy...) So I manage the attention to the show, for each of the traits of the character to have briefly a high amplitude of attention. Naturally this is based on what you underline yourself, no one can remain focus on one point for very long and I have to make sure that the spectator with the worse attention deficit disorder can get these messages because it's what the shows are about. Thus I have a curve of attention to the show and I made an empirical scale to evaluate attention gained on such charater's values/facets on the videos made of the audience. And one of my own personality traits is that I'm not complacent. Naturally, your understand that the frequency of such a line is wide but I manage that the initial amplitude is fairly high for the character to be kindly accepted as sharing concerns with the audience, and naturally, I want the climax of the show (which has to match the climax of the last effect) to have a higher amplitude of attention and surprise than the initial introduction. The act itself has the character as protagonist and obstacles as antagonists. Each of the act in the effect before last are creating the stress that the character and the audience will be defeated (kind of like the "magician in trouble" approach but with the audience involved) This is used to build up the last effect chosen with a strong climax: the audience wins (not against the magician, against the really impossible defenses of a new antagonism) That's the first curve and it's not "told" but expressed. The second curve is the one you understood perfectly (I see it from your comments) and the attention to each effect has to be strong enough at the beginning and stronger at the end, BUT STILL not as strong as the climax of the last effect. Otherwise the show would loose, in my own logic, its dramatic structure. So you can infer from this, that I need a climax for each trait of the character to be valued but not a climax that would be so strong that what comes after looses attraction. In each of such effects, the curve of attention cannot be kept at the maximum and fluctuates. Generally when the theme and the atmosphere are introduced and the cooperation of the audience is requested to create the illusion the atteention is fairly high. As an example, I'm using a purse frame in the close up act and I'm asking the audience to imagine that it's a purse with a chameleon skin. Since the theme has been introduced as a way to safely go through financial crisis with magic: the level of attention is very high. Then as I describe the addvantages of such a purse and show how it would work if it existed, the attention level progressively goes down (it doesn't crash but slightly weakens over time). Thus I manage the curve of attention to each effect itself. Naturally, I'm playing with the amplitude of attention at certain moments and also, in order for both the effect and the show not to be boring, there are changes of rhythm alongside: the frequency isn't equally paced (if I may describe it like this) and, naturally, this curve of attention to the effect has to be incorporated into the curve of attention to the show, designing a bizarre and seemingly irregular curve. The third curve of attention is the audience attention to the movement. There, like most of us, I'm using the Ascanio In Transit actions, the Slydini principles of breathing in and out, the larger movements covering the smaller ones, the chest leading the hands, the Ramsay principle about where to look when and why, the use of questions to reduce the awareness to movements ... and some footwork that I adapted from reading simple Body Language and acting books. All of this to say that the audience perception of our movements follows a sort of binary sine wave with a frequent series of high and low. We can easily play with the pace and the amplitude to keep the entertainment and the attention where we want it. This third curve is also blended into the previous already erratic one making the final curve seemingly very erratic but, as underlined in a previous post a sort of intuitive Fourrier Transform helps keeping the show where needed even with spedctators unclled for interruptions. Hence I'm not advocating for any ideal (complex or not) sine wave, I'm offering that this approach for any performer and any character in any routine can be a help for reaching whateever goal the performer has taking into consideration hsi own personality. The only thing that I make a claim for is that it's impossible to keep any spectator focused on something for more than a brief time and that switching from attention to the act and the character to the attention to the effect and to attention to the move improves the entertainment value of any performance. Being aware of these three levels (and I know of other dimennsions) in designing a routine seems a potential help and doesn't preclude any personality transfer. Now progressivity in the management these three curves to get to a strong climax in the last effect, for the show to have some form of apotheose, is definitely something that I would recommand. It's a reputaton maker whatever methods on uses to do it. So I can agree with you on the fact that math will never encompass the infinity of the human mind and imagination, but I can't help to try and understand it further. Symbolically, I'm eating the apple (some form of knowledge) that the snake (intelligence) gave to Eve (magic) being careful not to be kicked out of the Garden of Eden (entertainment) ;) The second Wizard of Smart
Magic is the art of emotionally sharing live impossible situations
|
|||||||||
Zombie Magic Inner circle I went out for a beer and now have 8733 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-12-14 14:09, Al Schneider wrote: WHO ARE YOU??? Al, just when I think I know you, I get blown away by you writing about Chakra's. I know I'd never have the guts to film myself performing like laurie did ( thanks Laurie ). I'm going to use what you wrote her to help with my own magic. Al, you help far more people than you think! |
|||||||||
Pete Biro 1933 - 2018 18558 Posts |
Lauri: Is there any chance you could do another video with an audience?
STAY TOONED... @ www.pete-biro.com
|
|||||||||
motown Inner circle Atlanta by way of Detroit 6127 Posts |
Quote: Laurie,
On 2012-12-14 12:58, magicalaurie wrote: I see nothing that suggests Al has anything against you. It seems to me you have misinterpreted his thoughts in some way.
"If you ever write anything about me after I'm gone, I will come back and haunt you."
– Karl Germain |
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
Water under the bridge, motown, & Al knows what I was talking about, but for the record, here you go:
Quote:
On 2012-12-14 02:35, Al Schneider wrote: Pete, I have a photo from performance this summer- best I can do at the moment. I'll try to get some performance video of this routine for you, though. For now, here's a pic: |
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
Lawrence O I can't follow that.
Zombie, I don't know if I should take you serious or not. All I can say is that I have spent my life studying life. Laurie, I think that most of your thoughts are Arguments from Authority. My perception is that you judge with your opinion but refer to it as some other authority. You write to hallow your ego without being aware of it. That is my opinion. Everyone has an ego. Those that recognize it can see the world with reality. And I wish I could take pictures like Pete. From my perspective I am just a fat mouse in the corner that squeeks loud now and then. I think the most valuable thing that could occur now is for Dave V to discuss his philosophy of doing the cups. Right now, I just want to hide in the corner and watch. Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
Dave V Inner circle Las Vegas, NV 4824 Posts |
Is that sarcasm? It's hard for me to tell with the way this thread has progressed.
No trees were killed in the making of this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
|
|||||||||
djkuttdecks Special user Portland 662 Posts |
:: Strikes match::
I think the Cups and Balls is an antiquated and boring magic trick used by people that can't perform large stage illusions with tigers! ::Tosses match on the gas can and RUUUUUUUNS:: (Dave V... now THAT was sarcasm!) -LK |
|||||||||
Artie Fufkin Special user 853 Posts |
With a small parade of folks eager to sound "smarter" than whomever posted before them, this thread actually has nothing to do with ego, and is a pure and epic example of unbridled hubris.
The crap is piled so high on these couple of pages, it nearly blocks out the sun. Anybody wondering "what's wrong with magic today" just needs to take a painful 10 minutes and read this thread. |
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts |
Dave V
Yes, I am serious. I suspect you have put a lot of serious thought into what you do and you apparently really do it. Hearing from a person that is really on the street is valuable. I am curiuos what you experience. Unlike Artie Fufkin who simply wants to sound smarter than the rest of us by calling us fools. I am amazed at how well people describe themseleves when they do something like that. Yes Dave V, I want to hear your opinions on what you do. Al Schneider
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Ever so sleightly » » Al Schneider's cups and balls (4 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10~11 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.18 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |