It does, and it doesn't.
It does answer my question (thank you for pointing me there) but it raises too many more.
While I can appreciate what he is trying to do, his definitions do not do a good job of defining how and why "cardistry" is different from the other terms. (It doesn't help that he says "Cardistry and Card Flourishing actually mean essentially the same thing. " He offers some delineations, but these are not clear and easily refuted with examples - nor does he offer enough examples to establish how cardistry has gone beyond things which are "essentially the same."
He ignores the fact that acts comprised on nothing more than fans, spreads, springs, etc. have been performed for decades - thereby making his "cardistry as something both stands alone and is different/more evolved" an inaccurate view.
He confuses the matter further when he says one can combine "cardistry" and magic in the four ace production example. Seems to me, that puts us right back to where we were with the flourishes.
So, while I think I have a better idea of what is intended by the term, I do not think these definitions have been considered to the degree necessary for understanding, let alone acceptance.
Brad HEnderson
