A tip for those developing a new routine,
a lot of folks buy a new trick and try to come up
with things to say while performing it, and this can and does work
but here's something possibly better if You're developing a show...

Write your lines before you decide on an effect.
decide what theme story and narrative You're going for in a particular set,
make note of what lines gags interactions etc. you want in a particular spot in your show.

Than look over your current effects and see if anything fits, if not try to alter routines or look to
books/marketed effects.
When you've decided on an effect that goes with your lines than make any needed editing to
combine them together.

From there rehearse until you can't mess up the effect, as for your lines you should
have a good understanding of them, I personally don't think lines should be over rehearsed
till they become rigid, instead allow for improve as the situation calls for.

Anyways hope this gave some ideas.

Same thinking applies to a sleight. Too many fall in love with particular sleight and mangle an effect to fit it in.
Instead, look to the final results and work backwards to select the best sleight to fit with the natural flow of movements.

A purchased trick may suggest a sleight that is inconsistent with your other effects or story line.

Same for props. If you use wand in one effect use it in all. It is easy to change your story to justify using one,
but difficult to not use it when it is demonstrated as magical.

There is no story line that supports pulling four cards from one pocket, performing an effect, then putting them away -
only to pull out four different cards from another pocket for a different trick.

Part of "choosing your lines" means asking, "what is an observer thinking right now?" and What expectation does my words create?"

Fedora,
I agree with your sentiment but think you have UNDER-stated your case!



Do you have evidence it can and does work? Or is this just an assumption? There are plenty of examples on YouTube etc of it NOT working. Magicians who execute their sleights well, but "umm" and "ahh" through their presentations.




Rigid delivery is not necessarily a result of "over" rehearsal. It could just be bad acting. In fact it is more likely to be caused by under-rehearsal. If you are trying to remember your lines, you are less able to focus on how you deliver them. When you know them thoroughly, you can focus on how to interpret them. You can also safely go off-piste (ad lib) then easily come back to the script.

A great example is Pop Haydn, who treats all his effects as Performance Pieces, including carefully crafted scripts. If you watch multiple performances, you will see he does not repeat every line verbatim - but there are only minor divergences from the script. And there is certainly nothing rigid about his delivery!

Yeah I was giving the benefit of my doubt.

Does that look backwards as well as forwards? In other words, if you have the wand present, say sitting on the table, but you don't use it until you get partway through your routine, is it enough to then use it thereafter? Or will the audience look back and say 'Well he didn't need the wand for x y and z?'

I think it depends on what you represent the wand as doing - its role in the "must be magic" framing.

"For this next bit of magic I will need some help focusing the magic energy all of you can provide - like lightning rod" can allow for the now and on approach.

What does not work for me is saying, "I need this wand to do magic" and then tossing it aside while searching for Woofle Dust.

I do no think the audience will replay to any prop just because it is sitting there. But, a wand that you NEVER use but glance at could used for misdirection/false expectation.

not really sure what "Harry Potter" raised folks even consider to be a wand. I have many effects that use a wand other than a stick so the issue is different. I never call it a wand, or course.