We both stare at the deck. I love that moment. Then you look at the spectator “did you see it”? At this point I am hoping that I am the “master magician showing the kid this trick” and the spectator is me.

It sends chills up my spine every time the card is turned up in the end saying “that’s why it’s called… magic”. I have to say that is a beautiful moment.

You hit the head on what my magic is all about in the perfect world. Granted, I do 5ACR all the time, but this kind of magic is pulled out for the special times.

I think this kind of magic is different than the “emotional” kind that all magicians think of. I’m not doing bizzare magic, I’m not saying “Through my travels through india…”. It’s also not some stupid fucking story about a “Puppy that lost it’s way” kind of thing. The last thing I want to do is to patronize the damn person. I hate that.

The magic I want to do is about me. Common questions to any maigcian if they are intrigued about you is many. How did you learn it? Where? How long? You must get a lot of girls. blah blah blah.

Instead of throwing the standard bullshit magic joke one-liners, use that intrigue to your advantage.

I’m blabbing here, but soon I will post another trick that is my opener when I feel it’s the right crowd. Wanted to leave you with something.

I don’t want to do tricks against the spectator. It is very seldom that I have them pick a card. If they do, I know what it is. My goal is to do magic with them. It’s not head to head, but side by side.

I am very happy you can see all of that in this performance Blaireau.

Would love to see your ACR sometime.

Wow, Mr. Chang. Just wow.

Watching this for the first time, I couldn’t believe my eyes. Watching it for the second time, I realised that it actualy happens in your hand and not a spectator’s. The third time, I smiled thinking, “It doesn’t even matter anymore that I know how. It’s just so beautiful.” When I finally did understand the method, the way that I felt watching it the first time was so embedded that method was irrelevant. The intellectual part of the trick became less important than the emotional.

I think this is what spectators see, and it is something that Derren Brown refers to in the aforementioned Floating Ring. What is communicated is not just another magic trick, and that you are not just another magician. I do believe that your friend, Bijou, did experience a moment of true astonishment. Heck, I did too watching the video.

I agree that while the 5ACR might be more entertaining and impressive–this is perhaps the intellectual side of magic that most magicians cater to–the 3ACR is more evocative of emotions. You connect with a spectator on a different level. We can agree though that without the investment of the spectator, a certain rapport and trust (gained perhaps from either friendship or through winning over their intellect with prior effects?) this emotional response would not be possible.

Mr. Kamm certainly has a different perspective concerning magic than Mr. Chang. It seems to me that Mr. Kamm’s view involves a lot of skill concerning both slieght of hand and audience handling. There’s almost a combative quality to it in that it challenges the spectator to “Go ahead. Look as hard as you want, think as hard as you can about it, you’ll never figure it out. Because you can’t. It’s magic.” It’s a battle of forces until the spectator concede that, yes, the only way it can be done is magic. I think it is an difficult way of going about performance, but I respect it and agree with some aspects of it.

Mr. Chang on the other hand seems to have a more gentle persuasiveness. At least from the 3ACR performance, it seems to be that he is saying, “Look, I know what you see–I see those same things too. But there’s something out there, something cool, something crazy, something magical. And if you’ll just be patient and sit down with me, we can watch and be a part of it. Come on, we’ll have an adventure.” Granted, this was how I’m trying to put it into words and even to me it doesn’t seem entirely accurate, but it’s how I can communicate it. I’m sure Mr. Chang can clear up my confusion in this.

I love both ways of thinking about magic. They’re the two sides of the coin of “What is magic?”. And it’s amazing to see either way so long as it is done well. It must also be noted that you it would be a gross negligence to provide only one. To only address the intellect would inevitably lead to the dancing monkey frame, and it would be tiring; the spectator having to face challenge after challenge. But to only address emotions would be undoubtedly heavy handed and distasteful; rather like being chased by someone that you are not attracted to nor could ever be attracted to because of thier blatant neediness. Get away from me you preachy bastard.

So moderation, gentlemen. Or at least consideration for your audience, and not just your ego and your view of magic that HAS to be the only way to do it. After all, you do magic for the audience right? Not your self?

(cough*Purists*cough)

Tony, this is the best version of an ACR I have seen. None of that cookie cutter “Let’s see how many times I can bring your card up” shit. It truly is inspiring, and I hope you don’t mind that because of this I have decided to start working on an ACR again. I’ll definitely be stealing some of your ideas on here.

One last thought, about technical matters this time. Derren Brown’s Velvet Turnover from “The Devil’s Picturebook”. I’ve only heard of the move, but I believe it allows the spectator to turn over a double. At the end of this routine, instead of having the cards in your hand, I think it would be cool if they could be the one to turn over the card. Slowly, and after a five minute silence of course.

That’s it. Not so speechless anymore.

Love Always,
–Blaireau

Nice performance (and I am chosing that word specifically). I am wondering why you, and many other magicians are so concerned about "lying" to their audience. Do actors in a play worry about lying to their audiences? You are doing magic, so by definition you are lying. as you aren't doing real magic in the literal sense. The card isn't coming to the top by magic. You are manipulating it somehow to make it look like magic..

If the goal is to entertain the audience by making the experience seem like real magic, then wrapping your trick in a fabricated story to turn something that might otherwise be a trick into a magical moment that connects emotionally is certainly warranted.

So to restate… Nice performance.

I used to tell stories second hand, if ever. Now I'm putting myself into them… and it makes it so much stronger.