Blog
Episode 49 – Method Vs. Audience Experience
Please wait while you are redirected...or Click Here if you do not want to wait.
The podcast has ended and is no longer available online. It is available as a USB Package, click here for more info.
Have you ever had to revert back to an older method after trialing a new ‘improved’ version of an effect?
Indeed. And not just a few times, I must admit. In some instances, I’ve attempted to improve on a few of my CT techniques for one that seemed to be more deceptive. In fact, it *may* have been, but after using two methods repeatedly over the years, attempting to learn a new one was frustrating and awkward.
It could have been trying to teach an old dog (guilty as charged) new tricks when the old tricks worked just fine. I found myself really having to concentrate getting the handling *just so* in order for it to not look, odd. In addition, I found myself either needing or wanting to look at my hands while conducting the moves which is exactly the wrong time to actually look at my hands.
After three months of practice, I chucked it all and went back to the previous methods, which in truth were just fine, thank you. But as you mentioned, the quest for new mysteries can cloud one’s judgment as to what truly mattered, the perception and reaction of the audience.
Similarly, it is easy to lose sight of what matters most to an audience. Pseudo Psychometry is a perfect example of this. I learned the hard way that the true effect on the audience is not the perceived ability to mysteriously return an object to its owner, but the vibrations, emotions and experiences that the object supposedly holds. They want a reading and not the master of the lost and found department.
Again and again, I/we need to keep the audience in mind with everything presented before them. They are signing the check, providing the reaction and applause.
Cheers.