talkmagic.co.uk

Do people consider this a form of magic?
I know a lot of XCMers are on the forums and I was just wondering what peoples views of it were.

Magic in a different way?
Or just a flash way of handling cards?

EckoZero wrote:Do people consider this a form of magic?

no

I'm going to plump for it being an impressive display of dexterity.

XCM aka Card Flourishes is not magic.

It's display of skill with a deck of cards.

XCM sits within a broader of genre of card manipulation that has been around for hundreds of years. Other types of card manipulation such as productions, split fans, vanishes etc I would consider magical, e.g. Cardini's act. This type of card manipulationis not XCM though.

In fact Cardini's act is as close to 'real' magic as you're going to get IMO.

Glad you're all saying it's not magic.

I know a few people who say "there's much more skill than magic and closer to real magic anyway" which I disagreed with.
Not sure why I posted the question though.
Probably just really tired

XCM is just a fancy term coined by De'vo. I enjoy flourishing but I mainly perform magic to people. No, I don't consider it magic... I just do it for fun and I have never associated it with magic. It's more of a hobby thing, but if I do get well at it, I would be able to perform "XCM" on its own.

And no, I am not going to start another arguement about "XCM".

Not only is it not magic but I think that when used with tricks it removes the magic from them. A card invisbly jumping to the top of the deck is magic. A card appeaaaring at the top of the deck after the cards have been moved around into various cuts at the speed of light is showing off.

If people know you have some extreme cards skills then it isn't magic that got the card to the top its your skill. Keep flourishes to a minimum.

I agree.
I try to keep flourishes to a minimum.

I make shuffles etc very sloppy, and try to only use moves used by card players.
Although that's probably because I have digested RRTCM and Hugard makes the valid point that if you seem to be sloppy and somewhat inexperienced, it's a much more magical experience. And if you just show off all the time people will discount your tricks as knowing how to handle cards...

I guess maybe XCM and Magic shouldn't be performed together.

what was it we classed it as... "magical masturbation" ?

I like that term

Larry wrote:what was it we classed it as... "magical masturbation" ?

Coffee just came back down me nose!

EckoZero wrote:I know a few people who say "there's much more skill than magic and closer to real magic anyway"

I really don't see how somebody could justify that statement. Card Manipulation is impressive, and I have friends who are very good at it and I enjoy watching them do it. However, they know that there has to be a distinction between card manipulation and card magic and they don't ever mix the two.

The closest I think these two areas come is in such an example as Bill Malone's Sam The Bellhop routine in which he uses several "flourishy" false cuts during the telling of the story. In that context it does amplify the magic, but only due to the nature of the effect.

Like Johndoe has mentioned, if you were to use XCM in an ambitious card routine it would seriously detract from the overall effect. In that instance it is the simple fact that the card was in the middle and is now ontop which makes the whole thing magical. That idea can be applied to the vast majority of card effects; simple magic is strong magic. By adding flourishes, you are detracting from magic, not strengthening it.

Tomo wrote:

Larry wrote:what was it we classed it as... "magical masturbation" ?

Coffee just came back down me nose!

fantastic!

I think flourishing can play it's part in magic. But to follow on from Goldfish's point, you certainly need to ask yourself why you're doing it...are you just showing off for showing off's sake? (Points to the door...)

I have a really simple trick I do called "invisible cards" that I got off a Gerry Griffin DVD. Supposedly using a fancy false cut will magically bring their card to a position named by them (a number from the top of the deck), but when it doesn't work you try it with an "ID" (not the prop, a deck that's actually invisible) and mimmick an even fancier cut with these "invisible cards" saying you must not have got the cut right. Then you count down the same number of cards in the "ID" and show them their invisible card. They of course are not impressed, but then you name it. Then you can go back to the real deck and try again after "regaining your confidence" and doing another cut the card is at the numbered position. Sorry if that was condensed and unclear, I might make a video of this trick soon (competition entry comes first though) as it's one of my favourite impromtu routines.

I like this trick and decided to change the presentation a bit to involve some funky false cuts (normally Trinary or my version of the Pendulum Cut) to add a bit of eye candy to the trick and make them think I really do have that much control over the cards (even though I get it wrong first time).

I think Sankey makes a good argument for using Flourishes in magic. His argument is that (especially in restaurant/walk-around magic) you don't have much time to impress your audience, you get 10-15 minutes at the most with a close-up set usually and you need to be able obtain some credibility right from the start so doing eye-catching things such as Card Springs and Butterfly Cuts instantly tell your audience that this isn't "Uncle John" at the wedding reception, you're someone who might actually be good at this magic stuff (apologies to anyone who's uncle John is actually a competent magician).

EckoZero wrote:

I make shuffles etc very sloppy, and try to only use moves used by card players.
Although that's probably because I have digested RRTCM and Hugard makes the valid point that if you seem to be sloppy and somewhat inexperienced, it's a much more magical experience. And if you just show off all the time people will discount your tricks as knowing how to handle cards...

From experience, I personally find that showing a good card handling skill with a funky cuts and springs and stuff does prove your point but I don't find this a bad thing. Unless you perform for children your audience will not believe what you did was ACTUAL magic, they know it's done with gimmicks and sleight of hand, but they still don't understand how these work and enjoy being confused by these techniques and props.

I personally find that demonstrating a card ability above the average joey in your local pub will often suspend their pestering to know how it was done and leave them just in awe at what you just did because they think even if they found out that they wouldn't be able to do it (without alot of practice).

I have a kid who wants to learn flashy xcm. I have tried and found a few dvd's, does anyone have any tips for the best one around?

This kid is good, and i think he'll crack them all pretty quick..

(little sod!)