talkmagic.co.uk

by **bmat** » Feb 14th, '11, 18:31

If you give a prop a legitimate reason for being there, (no matter how far fetched or outrages that reason is). The spectators will accept the prop as legit.

If you were performing as a modern day magician using victorian era props then the props becomes suspect. If you are performing as or telling a story about the victorian era, then such a prop works out very well.

If you perform with respect and approach people properly, they really do want you to succeed.

I have a pewter okito box with a dragon etched into the lid. As long as I explain 'dragon lore' the prop fits and is not suspect. If however I don't attempt to explain it away people tend to look at it funny.

by **Erwin** » Feb 14th, '11, 18:39

Sorry this is off topic but bmat reminded me, it's Danny Kaye and the flagon with the dragon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS75NtlH3gI

by **Vanderbelt** » Feb 14th, '11, 18:41

bmat wrote:If you give a prop a legitimate reason for being there, (no matter how far fetched or outrages that reason is). The spectators will accept the prop as legit.

That there advice is worth it's weight in gold for anyone, regardless of their flavour of magic.

by **jim ferguson** » Feb 14th, '11, 18:54

In my opinion the 1800s are different from a standard novelty deck. A pack of black cards or similar look different and unusual to the audience, the 1800s are standard cards that look old - there is a difference.

The design on these cards is far from modern, yes its the same design as is used today, but that design is very old. The heirloom decks are an even older design, and are more akin to the original hand painted cards that at the time were VERY expensive, and used mainly by the elite.I quite like the oppertunity for patter that the 1800s offer. At one point I was toying with the idea of using these for an Ace Assembly routine centred round the story of an old gambler. He was a sort of mythical figure who travelled the world during the 20s and 30s and made his fortune from playing cards. Some suspected him of cheating, but he was never caught, and his life was shrouded in mystery. Then, during the 60s, his widow discovered a box...inside was an old deck of cards and a single dollar note.....
All nonsense of course but the cards would fit well

jim

by **kolm** » Feb 14th, '11, 20:11

stardust wrote:Mostly I would agree, but if the character performing the trick were a Victorian magician then an 1800 series deck would be more in keeping with the character than a modern deck.

Morgan and West (both members on here), are utterly brilliant and play the victorian magician character really well, and I've only ever seen them use bright green bikes

Which makes sense. I think cards are seen by even laymen as throwaway everyday props you use to do magic (even if they're not throwaway) - I mean, you write on them, tear them up, fold them up and put them in a shoe, burn them, put them in your mouth, and put them in a bottle - if that's not the definition of throwaway I don't know what is

So why would you have a 100+ year old deck of cards if they're throwaway? Would you have a 100 year old sharpie and a 100 year old pad of paper?

The audience know you're not Victorian, you're just playing a part. Having a deck of cards that look odd will just look odd and they'll wonder why you're not just using a normal deck of cards

by **Erwin** » Feb 14th, '11, 20:28

I think the M&W guys require bulk purchase; that may be irrelevant to their choice of greenbacks but whether it is or not, I don't think Stardust should be discouraged from using aged look cards if that's the aesthetic decision she's taken. If anything her Victorian style means she will likely be careful of NOT aping Morgan & West. As far as having her deck snatched away for inspection, if it's going to happen (and the jury's defo out on that, we have both opinions in this thread) let it happen with an ungimmicked deck then switcheroo.

by **stardust** » Feb 14th, '11, 20:43

Erwin wrote:I think the M&W guys require bulk purchase; that may be irrelevant to their choice of greenbacks but whether it is or not, I don't think Stardust should be discouraged from using aged look cards if that's the aesthetic decision she's taken. If anything her Victorian style means she will likely be careful of NOT aping Morgan & West. As far as having her deck snatched away for inspection, if it's going to happen (and the jury's defo out on that, we have both opinions in this thread) let it happen with an ungimmicked deck then switcheroo.

I love the Victorian aesthetic but am well aware that I am not the first person to think of it so there will be other Victorian acts out there. Which is why I am very keen to work on being as original as possible.

I think the bottom line is, I actually just really like the cards. No particular reason, I just like them. For me this is a good enough reason in itself to perform with them, so maybe I will just have to save up for 52 decks of them to make my own sven deck!

At least I'd have plenty for signing and tearing!

And in anser to the question about what pen I would use....I hadn't thought about that yet, but I own a fine selection of fountain pens and quills. Whatever I use will be in keeping with the image!

by **Part-Timer** » Feb 14th, '11, 20:52

The cards might, or might not, make sense. If you were a time travelling magician, for example, then your cards would appear new. They would have travelled with you, and unless you are going to appear to be 120 years old, there is no need for your cards to look that way either.

If, however, you were a modern magician recreating a Victorian era act, the aged cards could work. It would depend upon whether you were doing the act with props from that time, or simply trying to capture how such an act would have looked.

Ultimately, I think this is just one of those issues where magicians have different opinions, because there is no right answer. While I don't believe that audiences carefully analyse every aspect of a performance, I think they sometimes pick up on something that doesn't quite fit, even if they don't know exactly what is wrong. It won't necessarily ruin the act, but might make audience members feel a bit "mmm".

by **dat8962** » Feb 14th, '11, 20:55

A lot of great points made in this thread and on the price of the Casdshark cards, as with most other ready made props...

Buy cheap, buy twice!

by **Arkesus** » Feb 14th, '11, 22:26

At no point did I say that spectators would treat a special deck of cards with any more suspicion than a regular deck of cards. I merely pointed out, that upon seeing a vanity deck of cards, there are a large number of people that will want to get their hands on them

BECAUSE THEY LOOK COOL.

It has nothing to do with any performers ability, placing, timing, sleights ANYTHING. It is simply that they are near something that looks neat, that they do not have the opportunity to see everyday because they are used to boring cards, and they want to look at them because they might not get opportunity to look at them again. I would say roughly 70% of the time the people asked to see the cards, before I had even performed the effect. (The other 30% of the time, they were polite and waited until afterwards.)

Feel free to try this, take an 1800 deck, (or black tiger, magic makers red deck etc) spread them on the table and ignore them. Bring out some coins, do a coin trick, leave them on the table and invite them to inspect anything on the table. Does anybody here seriously think nobody would pick up a playing card?

I'm more than happy for anyone to inspect any vanity deck I use, there will be nothing to find, save for a design different to one they are used to.

by **The_Outlaw** » Feb 15th, '11, 03:17

Speaking of the Series 1800's,
I took a lighter to the 'inside' of both my 1800's card cases to 'complete' the 'look' of aging. (Old looking cards with an old looking case that still has a 'shiny white interior' does not quite add up if you catch my meaning.)
I love my 1800's & they really look 'old' now!

P.s. Ditch the Svengali idea & utilize a well rehearsed ACR instead. Completely 'examinable'. Good luck!

by **teknohippy** » Feb 15th, '11, 16:25

I like the 1800s personally.

stardust wrote:so maybe I will just have to save up for 52 decks of them to make my own sven deck! At least I'd have plenty for signing and tearing!

You'd only need 26 decks to build a sven wouldn't you?

by **dat8962** » Feb 15th, '11, 16:40

You've already saved hiom 50% of the initial cost - sound like a bargain now :lol:

by **jim ferguson** » Feb 15th, '11, 17:07

teknohippy wrote:You'd only need 26 decks to build a sven wouldn't you?

by **stardust** » Feb 15th, '11, 18:06

dat8962 wrote:You've already saved hiom 50% of the initial cost - sound like a bargain now

*ahem* her.

And yes.....I was having a durrrrrr moment!

talkmagic.co.uk

1800 series svengali deck

Who is online