Tons - thank you so much for clarifying that your responses are only based on your "reading between the lines." I ma a simpler sort, I guess.

I fail to see where anyone asked a question about any detail. "pushed" was your term. I have receive several PM request for more details. They will be answered.

Hard to say more without seeing it performed. Please consider sharing so we can give you feedback. Maybe it should be PMed, so if you want eventually to market it, it isn't exposed to the world.

The constraints, if they are accurate, make this particular effect an impossibility.

On Oct 16, 2017, funsway wrote:
While I do not feel you speak for the "people" you allude to, you may have closer alignment to what many magicians feel today about performing and magic.

You offer the opinion that, "for most magicians, seeing is believing." My opinion is that if you can't role-play the effect in your imagination you are not a good magician (not to be confused with an entertaining trickster). If I decide to publish the approach (even for free), it will contain all of the explanation and detail necessary for mastery. The entire question is whether or not the effort is worth it.

An "effect" in magic is what the audience sees or remembers - not necessarily what the performer does. For me, the competent performer is concerned with audience engagement as much as the skill of manipulating props. There is no confusion except in your own projections. It is the very fact that today's audience might not see or remember what I desire them to that lead me to pose the questions I did.

It has been surprising to me that most posts have jumped to making guesses as to method that do not meet the stated conditions. Why?
Instead, most attack the conditions because they cannot fathom an easy solution - and nastily at that. Why?
If one wants clarification on a thought, why not ask for clarification? What is the value in re-defining a word or misstating a phrase, and then attacking you own view?

I now realize that I am tarred by the brush of what many marketers have done in misrepresenting their product. Why?

But, let me clarify further about how I create a new magic effect (based on imagining how the audience will see or remember). I create a theoretical model of an ideal demonstration of the "inexplicable phenomenon" represented by the use of props or theme. I observe/study existing presentations and compare them to this standard. Then I either study why the "popular"method succeeds despite its less than optimum approach, or explore alternative methods that would overcome the possible flaw. Often times I can come up with a superior method, but one that is too difficult to learn vs the popular method, or would only work in certain settings. Occasionally, I find a method that is greatly superior (meeting the conditions) and may even be simpler that the popular method. These I write up and get into the hands of earnest performers. I request a response as to workability of the method so that I can refine it.

What is missing, perhaps, is my inflicting a partially developed effect on an unsuspecting audience and then pretending that their response has value. I thought to rely on "magicians helping magicians" on the Café before putting in the work to market a fully developed product (sold or gifted away).

I posted such ideal conditions against which I developed this new method. They are accurate, complete and read require no reading between the lines or assumptions.
I claim that I have an approach that provides a magic effect that meets those conditions. Why doubt that? Why challenge the conditions?

All I asked for was opinions as to how such an effect might play with today's audience. Can a performer "imagine" themselves performing such an effect, and what audience might be suitable?

So, I start again. I have a method for performing the described effect that meets these stated conditions. Period! Those desiring to explore this effect can contact me at ken@eversway.com
Be prepared to convince me that such communication is worth my time. I am busy building a deck for a hot tub.

of greatest interest within all of your diversions is the notion that spectators might ind such an effect "too good to be true."

but, your assuming/inventing that there is any "our job" for all readers with you as a spokesman is ludicrous.

Yes, I do feel that a good magician can (and should) role-play a planned effect from the assumed/projected/desired view of the potential audience. I did not "mix the two" in any flawed manner -
both are essential (opinion). Are you saying that most magicians can't do this? Or do not want to?

Yes, I can evaluate your "communication style" and find little reason to value any opinion you might have about magic.

It is obvious you are craving to learn my method. Why? You would never perform this.