Please retire the term, "cardman."

Discuss the latest feature articles in Genii.
Bill Mullins
Posts: 5082
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Bill Mullins » March 5th, 2019, 6:09 pm

Foodies and historians also worry about the words they use, and the connotations they carry.

Bill Duncan
Posts: 1527
Joined: March 13th, 2008, 11:33 pm

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Bill Duncan » March 5th, 2019, 10:30 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:Foodies and historians also worry about the words they use, and the connotations they carry.


The historian makes an excellent point when he writes "Language has changed before, and I propose that it should change again."

Jackpot
Posts: 176
Joined: June 8th, 2016, 12:38 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Jackpot » March 5th, 2019, 11:08 pm

Luigi Anzivino wrote:I believe you are being intentionally obtuse here, as the point has been made several times that it is not a problem to refer to an individual who identifies as a man as such, but rather it is problematic to refer to the collection of people who performs card tricks as "cardmen," as that term excludes 51% of the population. Again, this is such an obvious and uncontroversial point that it takes astounding mental contortions (or intentional obtuseness) to deny it.

Brad makes a fantastic point: let's not wait for women to come in here and clean up our mess. We can recognize that a simple and rather small adjustment in language moves the needle in the direction of inclusivity and balance, and just do that because it's the right thing to do, not because we've persuaded women to confirm what is plain and obvious.


Nope, not being intentionally obtuse, but I have been a bit obscure to encourage thinking. Why don't more women participate in magic? It's never been because the term "cardman" is used in the books or magazines which they never read. Women don't read those books or magazines because they leave magic before they get that far. (Please see the posts by Bill Mullins and skmayhew. [Whether you like what Mr. Mullins says or not you have to admit that he is consistent and precise in his use of language.])

Bill Mullins wrote:If you read the recollections of groundbreaking women who became fire fighters (formerly called "firemen"), or joined the enlisted ranks of the U.S. Air Force (formerly called "airmen") or became cops (formerly called "policemen"), you will certainly see stories of sexism and harassment they overcame. However, whether or not "policeman" or "airman" or "fireman" was a term that excluded them doesn't seem to come up.

If I had to guess, I'd bet that the biggest thing that keeps girls/women from participating is that when they do show up at magic functions, they get treated as girls/women (for example, hit on) rather than magicians. Talk to Sara Crasson about this sometime.


skmayhew wrote:
Bill Mullins wrote:If I had to guess, I'd bet that the biggest thing that keeps girls/women from participating is that when they do show up at magic functions, they get treated as girls/women (for example, hit on) rather than magicians. Talk to Sara Crasson about this sometime.


Also Lauren Cohen:

http://explauren-life.blogspot.com/2015/08/being-magician-as-woman.html


Unfortunately the self-appointed language police don't look for real causes, but come up with simple, ineffective, non-solutions. But if it makes them feel good they should go for it.

Thank you for confirming that there is not a problem in referring to a man who performs card magic as a "cardman". Unfortunately your understanding is not shared by many who have posted here against using that term when referring to a man who does card magic.

Mr. Henderson raised several points that have merit. Some I agree with and some I disagree with, but you seemed to have failed to recognize his greatest contribution to promoting the involvement of women in magic. He taught several young women magic. This is a more important contribution than all the twisted and convoluted interpretations which some have subscribed to the term "cardman".

If one really wants to make substantive change it's time to stop blaming it on the "cardman".
Not the one who created the Potter Index.

Ray J
Posts: 31
Joined: February 12th, 2019, 8:49 am
Favorite Magician: Chris Kenner

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Ray J » March 6th, 2019, 8:41 am

One thing I've learned over time is not to let little things offend me. The other is to not ascribe motives where there are none. The last seems to have been lost in some of the discussion.

Peter Ross
Posts: 56
Joined: October 21st, 2017, 11:02 am
Favorite Magician: Doug Henning
Contact:

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Peter Ross » March 6th, 2019, 8:41 am

Jackpot, I wonder if you have ever taught anything yourself. Have you taught children? Language is extremely important when teaching. Should I continue to use male pronouns when referring to robots during my classes? Or is that something that doesn't merit any attention because there are other sexist problems concerning women and technology? When I continue to call a robot "he" or "him" in a class half-full with girls, is that not something I should try to correct?

You casually brush off the notion that endeavoring to update "cardman/cardmen" is an "ineffective non-solution." Nobody said it is a silver bullet. But you'd be surprised how little things can add up to "substantive change." Maybe you're cynically right, and that women don't get far enough into magic to read Genii (news to you, RK?), but that seems like a pretty lame excuse for adamantly refusing to update a simple term in the magic lexicon.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 3989
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Henderson » March 6th, 2019, 9:02 am

Jackpot - you claim the change in language won’t matter - if so, then why are you so resistant to it?

I’m curious your answer to the simple questions: what is gained by keeping the inaccurate and irrelevant term ‘cardmen’ - what is lost by abandoning it?

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 24807
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Richard Kaufman » March 6th, 2019, 10:18 am

It is neither inaccurate or irrelevant if it is applied to a man or men.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Leo Garet
Posts: 279
Joined: March 14th, 2015, 9:14 am
Favorite Magician: Nobody In Particular

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Leo Garet » March 6th, 2019, 10:23 am

Richard Kaufman wrote:It is neither inaccurate or irrelevant if it is applied to a man or men.

on the button.

Peter Ross
Posts: 56
Joined: October 21st, 2017, 11:02 am
Favorite Magician: Doug Henning
Contact:

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Peter Ross » March 6th, 2019, 11:33 am

Richard Kaufman wrote:It is neither inaccurate or irrelevant if it is applied to a man or men.


When there is no female equivalent, then the terms are exclusionary and inappropriate, which are worse.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 3989
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Henderson » March 6th, 2019, 11:48 am

Cardmen used to refer to the collective of people who do card magic is inaccurate as it excludes anyone who does card magic and is not a male.

Cardman used to refer to an individual is irrelevant as one’s gender has no relevance on the condition of doing card magic. It injects information that in no way contributes to the understanding or discussion of one who does card magic.

Card expert says far more about the person and what they do than cardman/men ever will. The former addresses their relationships with cards and conveys a qualitative element of that relationship. MAN says nothing about the relationship of the person to cards and conveys no information about the quality of said relationship. The latter tell us only that the person is a man - Which is likely self evident if that person is, and is silly if that person isn’t.

Anthony Vinson
Posts: 278
Joined: July 10th, 2010, 12:34 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Anthony Vinson » March 6th, 2019, 11:51 am

I was in the U.S. Army in 1978, when the Women's Army Corps was disbanded and integrated into the regular army. This was a paradigm shift and required changes in mindset and thinking for everyone. Suddenly the old male-centric cadence calls were considered offensive - okay, many of them were offensive, but that was part of their charm. We were admonished to change our language and stop using certain words and terms considered misogynistic or otherwise demeaning to women. We were all soldiers, even though at the time they were called female soldiers. There were those who resisted. They eventually retired or were discharged. Within no more than four years, the new paradigm had been established. We were all soldiers, with no sex or gender distinctions noted, except for PT tests and combat arms jobs. It was an interesting transition.

This morning, after catching up on this thread, I went to the Army's website and looked up the title for Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 11B. In my days the designation was Infantryman. Thirty-three years later, despite there now being no restrictions for women in combat arms jobs, it remains so. Apparently the army either has not, cannot, or will not change the title. And this is an organization that was among the vanguard for integration 40 years ago. Hmm. I wonder how the XX soldiers serving in the MOS feel about it? I wonder if it bothers them? My guess is no. They're soldiers first. Perhaps that is why the army has not changed the title?

In the same vein I believe we are all magicians first, he, she, or they. Addressing individuals as they request is a measure of kindness, dignity, and civil responsibility. Beyond that I believe we make the mistake the protestations of the few for the good of the many. Anyone upset by the use of cardman is mistaking its use as either a pejorative or as exclusive when in fact it is neither. Nor is infantryman.

Av

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5082
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Bill Mullins » March 6th, 2019, 12:31 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:It is neither inaccurate or irrelevant if it is applied to a man or men.


Merriam Webster
man: an individual human

Dictionary.com
man: the human individual as representing the species, without reference to sex; the human race; humankind

Oxford English Dictionary
man: A human being (irrespective of sex or age). As a general or indefinite designation, esp. with determiners such as every, any, no, etc., and in plural, esp. with all, any, some, many, few, etc.: a person.


It is also not inaccurate or irrelevant if it is applied generically to people.

Peter Ross
Posts: 56
Joined: October 21st, 2017, 11:02 am
Favorite Magician: Doug Henning
Contact:

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Peter Ross » March 6th, 2019, 12:36 pm

"He is one of the best cardmen in the world."

If this is not exclusionary, then is anyone prepared to replace "he" with "she" in that sentence?

Jack Shalom
Posts: 720
Joined: February 7th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Brooklyn NY

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Jack Shalom » March 6th, 2019, 12:55 pm

Cardman used to refer to an individual is irrelevant as one’s gender has no relevance on the condition of doing card magic. It injects information that in no way contributes to the understanding or discussion of one who does card magic.


To clarify this point it might be helpful to substitute a different identifier than gender.

Imagine an English language where there is a distinction in words describing a profession based on whether one has freckles or not. Then we might have a dentistfreckyes and a dentistnonfreck. A firefreckyes and a firenonfreck.Among magicians we would have a cardfreckyes and a cardnonfreck.

And to top it off, when talking generically we would speak of a dentistfreckyes, a firefreckyes, and a cardfreckyes.

Leo Garet
Posts: 279
Joined: March 14th, 2015, 9:14 am
Favorite Magician: Nobody In Particular

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Leo Garet » March 6th, 2019, 1:43 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:
Card expert says far more about the person and what they do than cardman/men ever will. The former addresses their relationships with cards and conveys a qualitative element of that relationship. MAN says nothing about the relationship of the person to cards and conveys no information about the quality of said relationship. The latter tell us only that the person is a man - Which is likely self evident if that person is, and is silly if that person isn’t.

Based on this don’t we need to know what the word “expert” means? Isn’t it silly to claim to be an expert without a measure of expertise?
It implies much, but how much truth does it carry? Anyway, because it tends towards ambiguous, I never call myself a card expert.

Instead I use the term Card Specialist, equally ambiguous, but without claims to levels of competence.

It suggests, rather than definitively proclaims, a degree of expertise. People can and will decide for themselves. My thinking is that anyone can specialise without being any good.

Oh yes, the fact that the term is not gender specific is not the reason I use it. At least I don’t think it’s gender specific.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 3989
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Henderson » March 6th, 2019, 2:45 pm

Here are three terms that better and more fully convey relevant information about someone who works with cards than ‘man’ or ‘woman’.

Card expert - someone known (or claiming) to have expertise with cards. Expertise must be defined, but let’s make the ‘doctoral level’ comparison here. Ron Wohl considered himself a card expert. Howard Hamburg would be considered a card expert. Expert speaks not only to ability but also base and depth of knowledge.

Card star/card worker - someone known for their work with cards, though may not be considered an expert. For example, early on my good friend Jon Armstrong gained a well deserved reputation for his shows featuring nothing but card tricks. As talented and knowledgeable as he was at the time, I don’t think he (or anyone truly informed) would have considered him a card ‘expert’. Expertise implies a depth of specialist knowledge that goes beyond and is different from the skill set required to present magic of any type, let alone card magic, effectively. Jon may some day aspire to and achieve card ‘expert’ status - but he may also choose to make money instead. The difference between Star and worker would speak to fame and notoriety. Someone could be a local card star.

Card enthusiast - someone who works exclusively with or greatly enjoys magic with cards. It speaks to passion and interest, not achievement or depth.

Luigi Anzivino
Posts: 45
Joined: June 29th, 2008, 12:44 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Luigi Anzivino » March 6th, 2019, 3:00 pm

Anthony Vinson wrote:This morning, after catching up on this thread, I went to the Army's website and looked up the title for Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 11B. In my days the designation was Infantryman. Thirty-three years later, despite there now being no restrictions for women in combat arms jobs, it remains so. Apparently the army either has not, cannot, or will not change the title. And this is an organization that was among the vanguard for integration 40 years ago. Hmm. I wonder how the XX soldiers serving in the MOS feel about it? I wonder if it bothers them? My guess is no. They're soldiers first. Perhaps that is why the army has not changed the title?


Interesting example, which led me to a search. Turns out women have actually been banned from serving in combat since they've been allowed in the army; this ban has been lifted in 2016 but is still being implemented, and essentially women as still not considered equal to men when it comes to combat duties. Does it bother them that the MOS designation still says Infantryman? My guess would be heck yes, if nothing else as a daily reminder that despite 40 years of integration they are still waiting for equality. Maybe they would love to be soldiers first, but the reason the army has not changed the title is that they don't see it that way?

Language reflects a culture's attitudes. It's not sufficient to affect change, but as you yourself noted it establishes norms and moves the needle in the right direction. I really don't understand the resistance to accept a simple, minute change that costs nothing and contributes positively to inclusion.

Anthony Vinson
Posts: 278
Joined: July 10th, 2010, 12:34 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Anthony Vinson » March 6th, 2019, 4:12 pm

Luigi Anzivino wrote:
Interesting example, which led me to a search. Turns out women have actually been banned from serving in combat since they've been allowed in the army; this ban has been lifted in 2016 but is still being implemented, and essentially women as still not considered equal to men when it comes to combat duties. Does it bother them that the MOS designation still says Infantryman? My guess would be heck yes, if nothing else as a daily reminder that despite 40 years of integration they are still waiting for equality. Maybe they would love to be soldiers first, but the reason the army has not changed the title is that they don't see it that way?


Here's an article from The Army Times https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/10/09/almost-800-women-are-serving-in-previously-closed-army-combat-jobs-this-is-how-theyre-faring/, dated 9 October 18, that addresses the continuing transition. As I wrote in my post, it did take years, about four as I recall, for the new regulations to become the new standard. That makes sense, right? We're three years into this new integration. It's another step in the process of eventual integration. I'd call it progress. Too slow? That's debatable, but it is still progress.

It is not about equality of outcome; it's equality of opportunity. Women are doing well in combat arms MOSs considering the requirements and rigors. The key is setting and applying a standard, and training to that standard. I served with lots of soldiers who applied for elite combat arms jobs - Ranger, Delta Force, etc - and saw most of them return to their units having failed to achieve the training standard. No shame in trying. Same today. If required to achieve rigorous standards set for certain positions, many soldiers of both sexes will fail to meet them. That's the way it should be, and it has nothing to do with sex.

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 1070
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby MagicbyAlfred » March 6th, 2019, 5:30 pm

It's now official. Reported in today's Conjuring Times:

The Term, “Cardman,” Retires

The term, "cardman" is now reported to be retired, living down in Florida in a senior condominium, collecting social security, approved for Medicare, and an avid shuffleboard player. (Banned, however, from participating in the Friday night poker game at the clubhouse). When asked to give a statement as to what motivated the retirement, the subject simply stated: “I just felt antiquated.”

*Disclaimer: The above was not intended, in any way, to offend any party to the current debate, which is a truly a fascinating discussion among a lot of intelligent people. It is rather, only an attempt (even if misguided), to inject a bit of levity.

Jackpot
Posts: 176
Joined: June 8th, 2016, 12:38 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Jackpot » March 6th, 2019, 9:31 pm

Peter Ross wrote:Jackpot, I wonder if you have ever taught anything yourself. Have you taught children? Language is extremely important when teaching. Should I continue to use male pronouns when referring to robots during my classes? Or is that something that doesn't merit any attention because there are other sexist problems concerning women and technology? When I continue to call a robot "he" or "him" in a class half-full with girls, is that not something I should try to correct?

You casually brush off the notion that endeavoring to update "cardman/cardmen" is an "ineffective non-solution." Nobody said it is a silver bullet. But you'd be surprised how little things can add up to "substantive change." Maybe you're cynically right, and that women don't get far enough into magic to read Genii (news to you, RK?), but that seems like a pretty lame excuse for adamantly refusing to update a simple term in the magic lexicon.


Yes, I have taught. Yes, I have taught children. Yes, language is extremely important in teaching and when communicating. I don't know enough about robots to know if you should use either the male or female pronouns. It is outside of my scope of knowledge. But I do find it fascinating that we are talking about adding a reference of gender for a robot while discussing removing a reference to gender for a person.

Cardman does describe a man who does card tricks. If someone layers on other meanings to the term cardman which disturb him than he should not use the term. If a man who does card magic wants to be referred to as a cardman that should be his prerogative. Others may feel differently, but I would not call a woman a cardman because I don't think it would describe her.

I am not being cynical when I say that women don't leave magic because of the term cardman. They leave for a variety of other reasons. It is unfortunate that more women aren't participating in magic. How they are treated has a large impact on their participation while describing a man who performs card tricks as a cardman has little if any impact.

I am not lame nor am I providing an excuse. You feel the change is needed. I believe it unnecessary when used in the context I have stated.
Not the one who created the Potter Index.

Jackpot
Posts: 176
Joined: June 8th, 2016, 12:38 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Jackpot » March 6th, 2019, 9:38 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:Jackpot - you claim the change in language won’t matter - if so, then why are you so resistant to it?

I’m curious your answer to the simple questions: what is gained by keeping the inaccurate and irrelevant term ‘cardmen’ - what is lost by abandoning it?


Because the term cardman is not the problem. Anyone who finds it a problem should not use it.

Regarding the second question, I concur with Mr. Kaufman's response.
Richard Kaufman wrote:It is neither inaccurate or irrelevant if it is applied to a man or men.
Not the one who created the Potter Index.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 3989
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Henderson » March 6th, 2019, 10:14 pm

1) no one —- NO ONE —— is or has suggested that someone cannot call themselves whatever they please. In spite of you insisting to assert this straw man, it is not nor has it ever been the issue

2) cardman to describe the community of People who do card tricks IS inaccurate. There are people in that community who are NOT men.

3) card man used to describe an individual tells us only the gender of the person - it tells us nothing about the person’s skill level or knowledge. Upon seeing a picture or a name that person’s gender is often obvious - so what relevance is it to call attention to something obvious?

4) you didn’t answer the question, you attacked the premise. What is gained from keeping this term? What is lost by abandoning it?

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 24807
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Richard Kaufman » March 6th, 2019, 10:17 pm

I AM A CARDMAN.

Now buzz off.

You, Brad, stop yelling please.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Jackpot
Posts: 176
Joined: June 8th, 2016, 12:38 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Jackpot » March 6th, 2019, 11:37 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:1) no one —- NO ONE —— is or has suggested that someone cannot call themselves whatever they please. In spite of you insisting to assert this straw man, it is not nor has it ever been the issue

This is not a straw man. From the beginning Mr. Ross has wanted to eliminate "cardman" from our vocabulary for reasons which he feels are necessary. If the word is eliminated from contemporary use please explain how anyone could use it?

Brad Henderson wrote:2) cardman to describe the community of People who do card tricks IS inaccurate. There are people in that community who are NOT men.

I have never used cardman to describe the community of people who do card tricks. I have used it to describe a man who does card tricks. Yes, there are people who perform card tricks who are not men. I do not call any of them a cardman.

Brad Henderson wrote:3) card man used to describe an individual tells us only the gender of the person - it tells us nothing about the person’s skill level or knowledge. Upon seeing a picture or a name that person’s gender is often obvious - so what relevance is it to call attention to something obvious?

Cardman tells us more than the gender of a person. It also tells us that that male person does card tricks. I agree that it does not tell the skill level or knowledge of the cardman. To do that I would use adjectives and verbs. It is not possible to eliminate nouns from language. If we did we would have to substitute in rebuses like those used to introduce children to reading.

Brad Henderson wrote:4) you didn’t answer the question, you attacked the premise. What is gained from keeping this term? What is lost by abandoning it?

I am not attacking your premise. The premise is flawed. The term "cardmen" is neither inaccurate or irrelevant. If it was inaccurate no one on this form would know what it means. If it is irrelevant to those of us participating in the discussion none of us would be commenting on it. The term refers to a group of men that do card tricks. It is a clear and concise noun. It's use maintains clear communication. If someone wants to use another word that conveys the same information they should use that synonym.
Not the one who created the Potter Index.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 3989
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Henderson » March 6th, 2019, 11:49 pm

At one time cardmen WAS accurate. It isn’t.

Frank was a cardman.

Tell me. What information is conveyed by ‘man’ that wasn’t already conveyed with ‘frank.’

He is a cardman.

Again - what information is conveyed by man that isn’t already conveyed by He.

What is a cardman other than ‘someone who does card magic’. Are all cardmen, then men?

What does one call the body of people who do card magic? Are they cardmen?

Brad Henderson
Posts: 3989
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Henderson » March 6th, 2019, 11:56 pm

Jackpot wrote:
Brad Henderson wrote:1) no one —- NO ONE —— is or has suggested that someone cannot call themselves whatever they please. In spite of you insisting to assert this straw man, it is not nor has it ever been the issue

This is not a straw man. From the beginning Mr. Ross has wanted to eliminate "cardman" from our vocabulary for reasons which he feels are necessary. If the word is eliminated from contemporary use please explain how anyone could use it?


He said ‘retire’ not eliminate. It’s literally in the title of the thread. But in case you forgot, this was his exact argument

Peter Ross wrote:
As I was reading the Theodore Deland article, there appeared another term that I believe should also be retired from the contemporary magic lexicon - “cardman”, or “cardmen.” In this case, there is no female equivalent, so it is extra odd to have it be used to encompass all card magicians (“This type of gimmick and handling is preferred by modern cardmen.” I also believe I remember Kaufman using “cardman” to describe Woody Allen in the Genii cover story on him, among other instances).

Reading the Laura London article, where it is stated she now performs only with cards, just made me think about the term even more. Is Ms. London a “cardman?” She is, of course, a card magician (a term Kaufman uses at other times). Shouldn’t that be the contemporary term? Or if there needs to be a more precise term that describes a master card magician, perhaps a “card worker.” But I think “cardman,” just like “magicienne,” should be retired to historical writings.



And You may have missed this when he addresses the issue directly to you:

Peter Ross wrote:Jackpot, my issue with using "cardman" is as a continued generalized present-day label, or category. That's why I said, "contemporary."

The quote from RK about Woody Allen was:
"Woody Allen was, and is, (if still doing the Classic Pass and various slight-of-hand card tricks qualify, and I think that they do) a cardman."

To me this implied that a "cardman" is a disticnt category of magician that one can still be. I got the same implication from the Deland quote: "This type of gimmick and handling is preferred by modern cardmen.”
As applied to master card magciains of the past, or even to ones who presently identify themselves as performing in the stlye of those magicians, the use of "cardman" is completely appropiate. It's when, as Luigi succintly put it, "writing about card magic in general, in describing effects and who performs them, using the term "cardman" excludes 50% of the population."

.


And yet you still haven’t answered the question
Brad Henderson wrote:4) What is gained from keeping this term? What is lost by abandoning it?

skmayhew
Posts: 88
Joined: October 6th, 2008, 3:58 pm

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby skmayhew » March 7th, 2019, 12:29 am

As an example of progressive language use, the MTV VMAs have eliminated gender references completely from the categories. Here are the 2018 categories:

3.1 Video of the Year
3.2 Artist of the Year
3.3 Song of the Year
3.4 Best New Artist
3.5 Best Collaboration
3.6 Push Artist of the Year
3.7 Best Pop
3.8 Best Hip Hop
3.9 Best Latin
3.10 Best Dance
3.11 Best Rock
3.12 Video with a Message
3.13 Best Art Direction
3.14 Best Choreography
3.15 Best Cinematography
3.16 Best Direction
3.17 Best Editing
3.18 Best Visual Effects
3.19 Song of Summer
3.20 Michael Jackson Video Vanguard Award

I have a feeling that last one will be going the way of "cardman" soon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_MTV_ ... sic_Awards

User avatar
Brad Jeffers
Posts: 945
Joined: April 11th, 2008, 5:52 pm
Location: Savannah, GA

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Jeffers » March 7th, 2019, 1:08 am

Brad Henderson wrote:Card expert says far more about the person and what they do than cardman ever will.

In the 40's Dai Vernon had business cards made that read simply, Dai W. Vernon - The New York Card Expert.
Do you know why he did that?

Pete McCabe
Posts: 2304
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Pete McCabe » March 7th, 2019, 10:56 am

If you were ever wondering how hard it is to effect change in the world, here we are, trying to improve the representation of half the human population in our art form, and our first step is to try to get people to stop using outdated, sexist language.

We do not ask this because we think it is the magic bullet that will solve the problem. That’s the exact opposite of the truth.

We ask this because it is the very minimum we can ask. It is step one: The smallest step we can take. It is the very least we can do.

And people object.

If we can’t get people to agree to something as small and simple as this, how are we ever going to get people to give women equal treatment on all the much more important issues—inside and outside of magic—that are the real point? Is there nothing you would do to promote equality between men and women?

We’ll keep working.

Leo Garet
Posts: 279
Joined: March 14th, 2015, 9:14 am
Favorite Magician: Nobody In Particular

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Leo Garet » March 7th, 2019, 11:52 am

Pete McCabe wrote:If you were ever wondering how hard it is to effect change in the world, here we are, trying to improve the representation of half the human population in our art form, and our first step is to try to get people to stop using outdated, sexist language.

We do not ask this because we think it is the magic bullet that will solve the problem. That’s the exact opposite of the truth.

We ask this because it is the very minimum we can ask. It is step one: The smallest step we can take. It is the very least we can do.

And people object.

If we can’t get people to agree to something as small and simple as this, how are we ever going to get people to give women equal treatment on all the much more important issues—inside and outside of magic—that are the real point? Is there nothing you would do to promote equality between men and women?

We’ll keep working.

Well that's certainly told me.
Where's my hair shirt.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 3989
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Henderson » March 7th, 2019, 12:11 pm

Leo - what do you feel is lost by no longer using this word? What do you feel is gained by keeping it?

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 8039
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Jonathan Townsend » March 7th, 2019, 12:32 pm

Brad Jeffers wrote:In the 40's Dai Vernon had business cards made that read simply, Dai W. Vernon - The New York Card Expert.
Do you know why he did that?
That's news to me. What did he say about that?
Mundus vult decipi -per Caleb Carr's story Killing Time

Ray J
Posts: 31
Joined: February 12th, 2019, 8:49 am
Favorite Magician: Chris Kenner

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Ray J » March 7th, 2019, 2:11 pm

Vernon also had a card that simply stated his name and then Sleight of Hand underneath along with a phone number in the lower right corner. You can find it on the interwebs. I like the old flyers that spelled his name Vernen.

There are examples of various cards he used during his life easily looked up on the web. One I saw listed the Hollywood Academy of Magical Arts and identified Vernon as a Member of the Board.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 24807
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Richard Kaufman » March 7th, 2019, 3:49 pm

Brad, you are being willfully obtuse.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

User avatar
Brad Jeffers
Posts: 945
Joined: April 11th, 2008, 5:52 pm
Location: Savannah, GA

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Jeffers » March 7th, 2019, 3:54 pm

Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Brad Jeffers wrote:In the 40's Dai Vernon had business cards made that read simply, Dai W. Vernon - The New York Card Expert. Do you know why he did that?

That's news to me. What did he say about that?

Glad you asked, Jonathan.

Here's what he said about that ...

"I never was proud of the fact that I was a magician.
That's why I had a card printed that said New York Card Expert.
If people I met on a plane or something would ask me what I did I would just give them my card.
I never said I was a magician.
If it was a certain person I was talking to, I would say I designed Christmas cards. For other people I would say I teach bridge.
I never said I was a magician.
Because in those days people would look down on you if they thought you were a magician. So I was rather ashamed of the fact that I knew some magic."

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5082
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Bill Mullins » March 7th, 2019, 4:16 pm

skmayhew wrote:the MTV VMAs have eliminated gender references completely


They also have eliminated music videos from their programming.


Brad Jeffers wrote:In the 40's Dai Vernon had business cards made that read simply, Dai W. Vernon - The New York Card Expert.
Do you know why he did that?


Cause he was from Ottawa?

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 24807
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Richard Kaufman » March 7th, 2019, 4:25 pm

My guess is that Vernon wrote "New York Card Expert" because it sounded impressive to be a card expert in New York.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Brad Henderson
Posts: 3989
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby Brad Henderson » March 7th, 2019, 4:26 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:Brad, you are being willfully obtuse.


Are you sure it’s i (me?) who am being willfully obtuse?

I think I’ve made a pretty good case for why the term is both innacurate in one use and redundant/irrelevant in the other.

I have made a case for what we lose by keeping the term, yet no one has made a case for what is lost by eliminating it, or what is gained by keeping it.

And I think my presentations of the arguments made are far more honest and accurate than others on the thread. Pointing out their attempts to build straw men (after denying it) is willful, but hardly obtuse.

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 1070
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby MagicbyAlfred » March 7th, 2019, 5:22 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:My guess is that Vernon wrote "New York Card Expert" because it sounded impressive to be a card expert in New York.


Yes I would agree, it is known that Vernon had some premium gigs entertaining high society people in New York. I'm sure those engagements paid well, were super-enjoyable, opened the door to further primo engagements, and that, understandably, he wanted to get as many of those as he could. With the moniker, "New York Card Expert," he could impress, and therefore make more booty from, the snooty, if you will.

BTW in a post earlier today when I mentioned IBM (International Brotherhood of Magicians), it struck me, like a bolt of lightning, that if one were to look for gender exclusivity - and its corollary, gender exclusion-icity - wouldn't that name seem to merit eons more attention than the term "card man"? I mean, we're talking here on a grand, international scale.

Has the time come for the IBSM (International Brotherhood and Sisterhood of Magicians)? Or, perhaps, the ISM (International Society of Magicians), if one wanted to eliminate any and all gender-orientation whatsoever.

skmayhew
Posts: 88
Joined: October 6th, 2008, 3:58 pm

Re: Please retire the term, "cardman."

Postby skmayhew » March 7th, 2019, 7:21 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:
skmayhew wrote:the MTV VMAs have eliminated gender references completely


They also have eliminated music videos from their programming.



Ha!

Yep, they began the process of elimination in 1992. Also occurring in 1992? The publication of Chris Kenner's Totally Out of Control and the now classic "The Five Faces of Sybil."

And 26 years later we have cardists. They practice cardistry. Their language is without gender. They are free and young and we are invisible to them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardistry


Return to “Feature Articles”