So my suggesstion is.. get a black background, and some cards. amke an uncut routine, NO MUSIC OR EDITING, and seeif it entices emotion or is purely aesthetic, then we can determine if cardistry really is artistry
- To say that Cardistry is an Art, is to say that the deliberate arrangement of the elements of playing cards in certain ways affects the emotions. -
what the ****?! cardistry is art! in my opinium the best! its art, no more no less... so wha do u still debate on this? it's 100 % clear that is art... everybody says that... braint udor... andrej... e.t.c
and to the thing with the werm? if there is no emotion in a flourish... who cares? it just looks got maybe t has an emotion in it that we don't understand... art means to be creativ ... no more not less so stop to ****ing talk about **** like emotions and just do the flourish's and be creativ so and stop ruining this wonderfull artform with some bull**** like that. and i think not every flourhish should have an "emotion" like u call it (like the agressiv style in bullet) but how u perform it with other flourishes should give an emotion...
sorry for my words but people like theatrehead make me sick -.-
"let them know this is fun, let them see how you enjoy what your doing"
its when the audience can see a passion for something its when that passion for what a performer is doing is conveyed to those watching that it hits them square in the gut and they see how much you love what your doing.
Web
i think also that u can't say art is to submit emotions.... i think it's to create something...
its when the audience can see a passion for something its when that passion for what a performer is doing is conveyed to those watching that it hits them square in the gut and they see how much you love what your doing.
so i believe anything can be art. be it baseball cardistry music impressionistic art. you name it. if the person doing it enjoys it and those viewing can see that passion portrayed. thats when it becomes art.
Web
I don't necessarily agree that playing baseball is an art, but this guy does, because we have differing definitions of art.
A quick question for you, Web. If we don't have an audience, does what we do stop being art?
I think our opinion is skewed because in videos we see a nice setting, and we have music to evoke emotions. So how can we say that its the flourishes themselves that are enticing the viewer to feel a certain way? maybe its the music? or the background?
As for andrei's point, yes he might feel emotions while flourishing, but thats different. he is in control of what he is doing, so he can use style to portray how he feels. But, his style might not be able to cause a spectator to feel any emotion at all.
So my suggesstion is.. get a black background, and some cards. amke an uncut routine, NO MUSIC OR EDITING, and seeif it entices emotion or is purely aesthetic, then we can determine if cardistry really is artistry
i didn't say baseball in itself was an art, i was just trying to get my point across that anything can be an art. if the love and passion for the activity is evident
on the audience thing. its the passion that makes it art. its the love for what ones doing and the ability for anyone watching it to see that love and passion.
doesn't necessarily mean somebody has to see the passion and the love.
did i answer your question sufficiently?
Yes you did, I liked your response very much.
I guess if art is looked at in that way, it really does give everything the potential to be art, which is what I'm having trouble processing.
For example, the baseball thing. If you really are passionate about it, and put all of your being into it, I'm not sure that constitutes art.
Then again, maybe I need to re define what I see art as.
Slow down, you're telling me that in order to determine whether Cardistry is an art or not, it has to be stripped down to its most basic form? How does that make any sense? That is like saying dancing should not be put to music, or a song be removed of vocals, or a painting should first be black and white if it is to be determined of its worth... the list goes on and on.
Is it not selfish to say something is not an art because it does not evoke YOUR emotion? A painting may be meaningless to me in every sense of the word, does that mean it is not art? I may dislike a song or think absolutely nothing of it, is music now all together not an art? Again, the list goes on and on.
The same can be said for performing, is it truly that difficult to envision a stage Cardistry performance of a larger caliber than ever before? Is it truly such a leap of faith to see the potential in using Cardistry to evoke audience emotion? I thought I gave a concrete example of that in my previous post.
Or is it simply that we've all got so used to believing Cardistry is nothing more than a very well edited video? I guess I can see why you share that twisted perception of the potential of our art. I am grateful for people who like to think this way, it makes the future prospect of success that much more gratifying.
-Andrei Jikh
the video does lose a lot in my eyes with out the music, what the music does is add an art, what the music does is turn the cardistry into a visual aid for the music, not the other way around.