Ye Olde Magick Blogge

Chapters 3 and 13: Flourishes

As I’ve said previously, I know next to nothing about flourishing, so my commentary here is going to be pretty brief. Prepare to be underwhelmed…

Chapter 3, Flourishes
Introduction

There’s the usual caution against overuse, etc. One thing that isn’t talked about is how they could be potentially useful in immediately establishing some prestige and/or credibility. Jay Sankey talks about using springing the deck as his opener, since it basically separates him immediately from Uncle Jim who knows a few card tricks, and that can be helpful if you’re in a situation where you’re having to approach an audience cold. Personally, I like the idea of being able to do something magical instead — even the usual cliched production of an item off a spectator is a cliche for a reason. Still, that’s an academic discussion best left for elsewhere. There are some other considerations that I’ll talk about later on.

Displaying the top card

(A) seems alright. (B) seems alright. (C) doesn’t even seem like a flourish, but whatever. One thing that’s worth considering is that if you’re going to display cards, it might help to do it in a manner that will match how you might need to do it whilst in the middle of sleight-of-hand, for conditioning purposes. (A) and (B) in particular might be tricky to do if you’re handling a double, for instance. If you don’t have to worry about that sort of subterfuge, though, disregard that advice.

Ruffle

I like this sort of thing more than other flourishes (such as endless Z cuts) in that they can be used to signal a magic moment of some kind. Ruffling (or riffling, as we’d say these days) the deck onto a single indifferent card to change it into the spectator’s selection, for instance, has a nice feel to it, perhaps even better than snapping the fingers, which to me is such a massive claim to power that it instantly renders itself false and trivial without having the magic to back it up. Anyways… (A) seems alright. (B) seems alright. (C) seems like it could be nice, if you can get the sound they talk about.

Click

It seems weird to me that one would want to make this particular noise with a deck of cards, but whatever.

Spread and Turnover

(A) can be pretty, and there’s a technique to divide the turnover so that two cards (one in each hand) seem to be guiding two different waves. If there’s a nice side-effect of this sort of thing, it’s that it can look as though the magician were trying to do something flourishy, wherein extra information could be conveyed at the same time (such as implying that the deck of cards has been well-mixed, when you’re really working with a mem-deck). (B) will require some practice to make it look really good and even. (C) should be fine so long as you’re not working on a splintery table.

Springing the Cards

I learned this through the method described in Expert Card Technique, and frankly, I’ve found that it gives me better control over the cards. Basically, in ECT, they talk about having the pressure being created by the thumb at the inner left corner (assumes you’re doing this right-handed), and the pinky at the outer right corner, and using the rest of the fingers to just guide the cards rather than put pressure on them. Again, though, I’m no aficionado.

A Flourish Count

As before with the card displays, since I think that it’s best to make sure that such actions match what you’d need to do if you were trying to do something secret (such as a false count), I’m not drawn to this sort of technique. However, if that’s not an issue, this would probably look pretty for people if done well.

Throwing a Card

Actually, if you can get the boomeranging action down, this is not a bad flourish. I never do this sort of thing so I can’t tell you if the way it’s taught is good or not. I’ll assume it is since it strikes me as an old move.

Waterfall Shuffle

This is worth learning if you’re ever going to be doing in-the-hands shuffles. Frankly, I think that doing this smartly can be just as good at conveying that you know what you’re doing with a deck of cards without using something potentially obnoxious like springing the cards or gratuitously making card fans. Speaking of which…

Card Fans

Practice makes perfect on these sorts of things. “The Fan” is a rudimentary method. “One Hand Fan” is something I could never get down to my satisfaction, and my lack of interest in being a flourishy card guy probably didn’t help foster the discipline needed to perfect it. Some people divide the deck into two and do this with each hand, and I think (besides making the flourish that much grander) it helps to make the fans appear more spread out (with an entire deck in one hand I think they have a tendency to bunch up in an unsightly way — unless you’re a master at the move). “Thumb Fan” is probably a prettier method than “The Fan”, especially if done quickly, but it requires having the cards in decent condition. “Pressure Fan” is a nice alternative if the cards aren’t in great condition — again, I learned using the way they describe in Expert Card Technique, where the grip they suggest is similar to the one for Springing the Cards.

Chapter 13, Miscellaneous Flourishes
Color Change

I don’t really like this technique for a couple of reasons. First, the hand that’s going to be depositing the card almost looks like it could be concealing a card — the fact that you need feints in order to sell a cramped hand-posture as fair is a bad sign, as is the fact that the hand is going to look that way immediately after apparently covering the deck, even if only for a moment. Second, a lot of colour changes benefit from making it look like the hand covering the deck couldn’t have just deposited a card there. Smooth execution and a natural-looking hand will often be enough to get beyond my second objection, but if the hand doesn’t seem empty, then you’ve got a problem. The last thing you want it to seem like you did is just deposit one card over another one.

There are tons of colour-changes out there, and finding the right one can be a long search. I eventually settled on something out of Marlo’s Revolutionary Card Technique, but that sort of thing suits me. You might want to consider looking into the Erdnase (Houdini?) Two-handed transformation in Expert At The Card Table, which pretty much everybody calls the Erdnase Colour Change, and which many magicians have since come up with some pretty finesses for. After that, well, here’s the requisite Denis Behr list you can start plowing though (go back a page in the directory to get to the tabled and free-handed ones, which can also look nice).

One thing to consider… if you want to magically change one card into another card, you don’t HAVE to do a colour change. It can look pretty, but like many visual moves, in order for people to appreciate the magic, they have to be looking at your hands at the moment it happens, and that frequently means that they could spot tells on your moves at a bad time. Frankly, I think that despite their visual nature, the level of mystery is low if you’re doing it on the deck, and while I’m happy to have one in my multiple selection routine, I usually get it out of the way before going to stronger stuff (like having the card magically travel somewhere).

I do like the byplay talked about at the end of this section, though. I think if it’s delivered in a really dry manner, that’s funny stuff.

Double Color Change

This one I’m torn on. While it’s nice to have two cards visually change at once, colour changes are really meant to be visual, and I don’t like the idea of one of the cards being concealed in the manner they talk about. I think, for maximum impact, you’d want to have two spots change into two face cards (or vice versa), and ideally those cards would be related in some way, and that’s not an easy thing to just get into (both in terms of mechanics as well as laying out a clear effect). In Daryl’s Revelations DVDs (volume 2), he does a trick called “Two Cards in the Eyeglasses” which basically involves the same thing (two cards change into the two selections), but the magic is so much better overall — another case of visual magic not necessarily being better.

The Changing Card

Again, not a big fan of it, since it’s supposed to be a visual change, and yet the card is very palpably obscured from view at the start. The immediate nature of the change is nice, and nobody’s really doing this these days, so you might want to consider it on that basis alone. I know Steve Draun had something really similar to this as part of a four-ace revelation, and it was a nice touch, in that (if I remember correctly) three of the aces were discovered in a way that suggested skill, but the last one was an indifferent card that was magically changed into the fourth ace.

Self-Cutting Deck

Some have used this as a revelation in a Multiple Selection routine. If you’ve got a dozen cards selected and you’re trying to find novel ways of producing them, this might be of interest.

A Pretty Cut

It’s… well… pretty?

Pop-Up Card

Again, like the self-cutting deck, possibly of interest for those who are looking for extra revelations in either a four-ace discovery routine or a Multiple Selection routine. It strikes me as angle-sensitive, though.

A Bit of Byplay

I think, if you’re doing a routine where the same card keeps showing up again and again, this sort of thing could fit in. I can’t imagine doing it on its own as anything other than a throw-away.

Charlier Cut

The famous one-handed cut you’ve probably already seen somebody do. This should be fine if you like that sort of thing.

“Acrobatic Aces”

Not exactly my idea of a major mystery. It could be a decent part of a larger routine where a pair of cards aren’t doing what they’re supposed to be doing, but there’s a bit too much action on the part of the magician for me to think that people buy that the cards magically jump back to where they were. For it to work, it needs to look like you’re just splitting the deck open (rather than cutting it). Perhaps it could be done in conjunction with something like Daley’s Cavorting Aces, maybe as a lead-in. If you’ll remember, the authors recommend doing it in the middle of the Razzle Dazzle Routine in Chapter 19, where the cards are apparently misbehaving throughout.

General Thoughts on this Chapter

And now you know why I put the flourishes off until last — due to my background and biases about magic, I don’t exactly have a lot to say on the subject. I get the feeling that somebody looking to really blow people away with the cards undergoing visual acrobatic antics will probably not get much out of these chapters other than a basic foundation. These are some pretty standard flourishes that I guess would have to be added to any book of card magic, but if you’re looking to take it to the next level and get all fancy-dancy, I wouldn’t know where to suggest you go at this point. Jeff McBride has a DVD series on playing card flourishes, but I’ve got no idea as to its quality (or the quality of any other resource on card flourishes, for that matter) because, frankly, I don’t like to treat a deck of cards like Tony Hawk does his skateboard.

If you’re just starting out, it’s probably best to just learn as much as possible so that you can get your skillset as broad as possible, but later on, when you’re going to be choosing a performing character, then trying to figure out the role of flourishes isn’t exactly a small thing. Flourishes imply skill. Do you want to be seen as skilled? There are artistic arguments to be made both ways. If you’re going to specialize in mental magic, I’d argue against them vehemently. If you’re going to specialize in gambling effects, I’d say go for them, even if only to say “Just make sure you’re not going to sit down and gamble with a guy who does this.” There’s comedy potential in flourishes (“Here, just shuffle them like this.” whilst doing some crazy Sybill Z-Cut sequence) just as there can be in their absence (“Now, to do this trick, you have to shuffle them in a really fancy matter like th-” and the cards accidentally explode and spill all over the place). If you want your magic to look graceful or pretty or spectacular, they can have a place, whereas if you want to make it seem like you have no sleight-of-hand ability (which can be nice psychological misdirection for actual sleight-of-hand ability), you might want to avoid them altogether. It’s not a small decision, and it’s something that you’ll have to figure out on your own.

It’s a shame that card dribbling (which I don’t think is a modern innovation) was left out, as was spinning a card at the fingertips. Some people have gotten some nice mileage out of spinning a single card out of the deck — Audley Walsh and Martin Lewis both have long-distance spinners talked about on Daryl’s Encyclopedia, and Daryl’s own hot-shot cut is also a nice spin-out production of a card. Also, look into Piet Forton’s work.

On the whole, though, I’m sorry I’m not better able to offer advice. Up next, concluding thoughts on the entire book.