Gardyloo #24

"Card effects are the poetry of conjuring."

                                          -- J.N. Hofzinser


In a matter of a week or so, two services calling themselves "The Netflix of Magic" launched (Ellusionist's Magic Stream and Steve Valentine's Magic On the Go). And that's on top of Reel Magic, which has been calling itself the Netflix of magic for a while now. 

This is very confusing. To keep things clear, please only use these new designations when advertising your services.

Reel Magic - The CBS All Access of Magic
Steve Valentine's Magic On the Go - The Pley.com (the Netflix of Toys, but for videos and not toys) of Magic
Ellusionist's Magic Stream - The GayPornZone.net of Magic


In my failed vaudeville career I was known as the "King of Polaroid Zip Printer Magic." This is a product I've mentioned a few times on this site. Most notably in the tricks, The Look of Love and a presentation I offered for Tomas Blomberg's Konami Code.

If you own one of these printers, you may be interested as I am by this idea of JM Beckers where he hollowed out a book to put the printer in. As he writes:

I was wondering where I could hide the zip printer when not having a jacket or pocket. In some of my performances I use a notebook with fake statistics (strong bias towards strange coincidences of course) done by myself as a scientist with my participants. I thought that this book could be left in plain sight and hide the zip printer. I tried with a book that lay around and cut out the necessary parts. The printing is possible without problem with the printer still in place (I added two poker cards to help the printed image slide out). Sound is a little lower too and one would have the additional benefit that the book can be used as a transport protection.

Screen Shot 2017-05-09 at 11.58.50 PM.png

I like this idea.

Your wallet could be on top of the book and you could grab both the photo and the wallet at the same time (to then load the photo in the wallet).

The ultimate idea would be to build the printer into a photo album itself, and then have it set up somehow so it would print the photo and it would be delivered (through some kind of slit) onto a page into one of the little display pockets.

One thing I did with my printer, which I don't know if I ever mentioned, is I put a little velcro on it, and stuck the opposite pieces of the velcro on the underside of the tables in my apartment, so I could just stick it there when I wanted to perform. Then I could sit down at the table with apparently nothing in hand and pull off all sorts of tricks.


Rubik's Cube magic has become very popular. But just a quick heads-up: Rubik's Cubes themselves aren't very popular. You may want to mention why you're busting out this dated object (as many people view it). Yes, people recognize what it is, but it's not exactly an "everyday" object. So a little justification wouldn't hurt. Or just an acknowledgement that this isn't something you see much these days. Again, we think it's sort of common because it's become common in magic, but to the general public you might as well be doing a trick with an Etch-A-Sketch, a Teddy Ruxpin, or Gay Related Immune Deficiency.


I Love Watching Boxes

No real commercial message today. You know how to support the site. Please do so if you're inclined to.

Reader A.F. asked over email if I could reprint a post from the old MCJ blog it was about a trick called Watch the Box. This was a variation on a classic trick where a borrowed watch appears in the smallest box in a nest of boxes. How was this trick "improved" in this version? Well, in a shining example of magic creativity instead of borrowing a watch and making it appear inside the boxes, the magician borrows fifteen watches and makes them appear in the nest of boxes.

Great.

From May 13th, 2004

I Love Watching Boxes

Oh, what a marvelous day it is! I'm about to place my order for Erez Moshe's Watch the Box. It's a nest of boxes effect with not one watch, or two, or five, or ten... but fifteen borrowed watches! Now I have to tell you, I once tried to do a similar effect with (and I'm hideously embarrassed to admit this) a mere twelve watches. As you can imagine it was a miserable failure. At the conclusion of the effect there was nary a handclap, in fact there was only silence until one of the members of the audience screamed, "Grow a pair you asshole! And don't waste our time with effects in which you borrow a paltry 12 watches!" The rest of the audience joined in with this lone voice and the cacophony of boos quickly shamed me off the stage. Then, on the way to my car, in an effort to show their dissatisfaction with my watch-deficient trick, I was gang-raped by the unruly mob (as was the fashion at the time when a group was wont to manifest their dissatisfaction).

But now, thanks to Mr. Moshe, I can do this effect as it should be done, with 15 borrowed watches. In fact, the ad says, "you can even borrow more or less, depending on your comfortability level." Now, I haven't really gauged my "comfortability" level in regards to watch borrowing yet, but it seems to me there would never be any reason to do this effect with anything less than 15 borrowed watches. In fact, even if you were performing for an audience of oh, say, 10 people, I think it would be better to ask them to wear two watches each than to perform this with less than 15 watches. 16 watches would also be great. But I think 17 would be ostentatious.

I think we all remember those lines in Our Magic that say, "There is nothing more exciting for an audience than watching you borrow and return watches, so make sure you borrow as many as possible. This goes for other things as well. Why cut and restore one handkerchief when there are at least 60 gentlemen in the audience that have handkerchiefs? Why borrow and bake a cake in one hat when there are so many hats and everyone loves cake? You don't want an audience member to feel left out, do you? You don't want them spending the rest of your show thinking, 'What's wrong with my watch Mr. Magician? Is it not good enough to do a trick with?'"

In fact, when I do this effect, I'm going to not only take the time to identify 15 people wearing watches and retrieve them from the audience, but I'm also going to take a couple of minutes with each person to talk about their watch and where they got it and what it means to them. I think that would make the trick really something special. In fact only one word would apply to such a trick: Showstopper.

One of the more intriguing lines in that ad says, "in some mysteriously way, the watches completely vanish from within the paper bag itself!" In some "mysteriously" way, indeed! It's so mysterious they don't let you have any idea what it might look like. I'm hoping the vanish utilizes the mysterious square circle.

A friend of mine (who is apparently retarded) asked if I thought the effect might be better paced and simpler, but just as effective if only one watch was used. Hmmm....let me think. How about, "No way Jose." Are you kidding me? One watch? By that logic, David Copperfield should have just levitated one Ferrari, or made one Statue of Liberty disappear, or floated across one Grand Canyon to be with one Bonnie Tyler singing "Holding Out for a Hero." Not to mention the fact that with only one watch you lose all the audience participation. Audience members can sense that very-special place they have in the show when they are chosen for some audience participation, and what could be more significant and exciting than being one of a group of 15 people who let the magician borrow their watch? I'm hard-pressed to come up with anything. Seriously, wouldn't you feel you were a part of the magic if you had the honor of removing and later reattaching an accessory you wore to the show? 

I can't wait to get this in the mail! I've even come up with a kicker ending. It's kind of a mentalism thing (and don't even ask me to reveal it, this is my secret) where at the end I open an envelope that has a prediction I wrote before the show that indicates exactly the number of watches that were irreparably damaged during the course of the trick by being thrown around in a paper bag with 14 other watches. It's a killer!

Field Report: Little Man

If you want to feel like you've got one foot in the grave, I'd like to point out that the Paul Harris Presents' effect Little Man was first announced almost 10 years ago.

If you weren't around for that release, you missed quite a clusterfuck. 

It started when the ad was released which stated this...

A LUMP OF CLAY COMES TO LIFE! 

You bring out a small gift bag and pull out a standard container of kid's clay. You peel off the lid, pull out a lump of clay and let your audience freely squish, pull and play with it. You then help the audience mold the clay into a little man (or woman!) The only reason you help is to insure that his little proportions are correct. 

YOUR HANDS ARE ALWAYS EMPTY. THERE'S NOTHING INSIDE THE CLAY! 

A spectator then takes a final bit of clay and shapes it into a tiny clay heart. She warms the heart in her hands... and for a moment... she THINKS SHE MIGHT feel a tiny heart beat. She gently sticks the tiny clay heart onto Little Man's chest. You then stand the little guy on the flattened empty bag. Someone gently blows on his heart. Then a moment later...unbelievably... Little Man takes his first step! 

YES, HE'S MOVING FORWARD AND ACTUALLY WALKING... ONE ASTONISHING STEP AT A TIME! 

This is where you have to see the on-line demo to experience the devastating wonderfulness of it all. His entire clay body VISIBLY TURNS AND LURCHES FORWARD with each dramatic step. And not that you'd want to, but you could leave the room, go out for a burger, and Little Man would keep on walking! And after about 10 steps, when Little Man finally stops, anyone can immediately SQUISH HIM INTO A BALL OR TEAR HIM APART... AND THERE'S NOTHING TO FIND BUT A LUMP OF CLAY! 

Based on people's reactions to the trick once it was released, it seems like they were expecting the little clay man to move something like this.

Or at the very least like this...

And instead it moved like this...

I think the problem was their usage of the phrase "actually walking" in the ad copy. I don't know what that thing is doing, but it's not quite walking. If your friend started moving like that you wouldn't say, "Oh, Bobby's walking." You'd say, "Dear god, Bobby's having a stroke!"

But I think if you just saw the trick without coming in with preconceived notions of what it was going to be, you'd actually find it cute or charming. Instead of a letdown. You might not think it's $300 worth of charming, but you might find it at least a worthy release, which was not quite the consensus when the trick eventually came out (after numerous delays, if I'm remembering correctly).

I have two friends, Andrew and Michael who have had a significant influence on the style I've developed for my performances. Andrew in regards to writing and scripting, and Michael who was one of the first people I saw do what I think of as Tantric Magic. That is, tricks that don't need to conclude in 2-5 minutes, but instead can be extended over the course of half an hour or so. I've taken this and run with it, extending effects for hours and days.

A couple years after Little Man came out, my friend Michael was putting out the feelers to buy a used copy of the effect. I wondered what he had in mind. A few months after that, I found out.

We were at Michael's apartment in Astoria, Queens. We were getting ready to go out. There were four of us—Me; Michael; Michael's girlfriend, Tara; and my girlfriend, Heidi. We were going somewhere. Somewhere we needed to be at a specific time. It was probably a movie or maybe dinner. I can't remember.

We had met up maybe an hour before we had to get going and we were just talking and watching tv or whatever. Michael told us he had something he had to do for his niece before we left. "I've been putting it off for like two weeks now. I told my brother I'd make her this stop-motion animation thing she needs for one of her classes. I used to do stuff like this when I was a kid."

He pulled out the Little Man stuff and started going into the process of forming the man with Tara. I immediately knew there was something up, but I didn't know quite where he was going with this. He gave me a conspiratorial look. We have a pretty long history of being magical wingmen for each other so he knew I wasn't going to bust him or something.

So he's making this stop motion animation "movie" with Tara's help. Heidi and I are off to the side, half paying attention. Michael has his phone on a mini-tripod. He takes a picture of the little figure, moves it slightly, then takes another picture. He tells us he needs to make a video of the figure walking along this little black pad (actually I think it was a flattened bag if I'm remembering correctly), then have it turn at the end. His brother (the father of his niece) would then add sound and some titles to it. I forget all the details of the story he spun, and so does he.

Time was ticking and we needed to get going. It had been about a half hour and the little figure was only halfway across the pad. Michael was being very particular about things. "Let's see how this is looking," he said. He was using an app that strings all the pictures together to create a stop-motion film from them. He watched it, then he played it for Tara, then he plays it for me and Heidi. I'm immediately excited by what I'm seeing.

I still didn't know exactly what his plan was at that point, but he had created a stop-motion video where the little figure moved exactly as he does in real life when you perform the trick. So he's established this motion as being the motion of this figure when it's animate.

At this point everyone was agreed that we didn't have time to wait for him to finish this movie before we left for our engagement. "Shit," he said, "I promised my niece I'd have this done and over to them by 8." We sat there for a moment. "I didn't want to do this," he said. He asked for a strand of his girlfriend's hair. He lit it on fire and blew the smoke at the the little clay man. Then he started chanting something under his breath.

"You guys can't tell anyone you saw this," he said.

He put his camera back on the tripod and started recording video.

30 seconds passed and nothing happened. 

Then the little man started to move. The girls screamed. I screamed. He walked across the little black pad, just like we had seen him do in the video. It was surreal. We were seeing claymation in real life.

He finished his walk and turned out towards us. 

Michael stopped the video, said, "Great, that's done now," and squished the little man.

"Let's get going he said," putting on his jacket.

I asked him this weekend if he ever performed the trick again and he said he doesn't believe he did, other than to show some magic friends what it looked like. I asked him if it was worth the $240 he spent on it. His response was, "It was too much for that trick. But it's a fair price for the memory."

The Jerx Glossary

I make up a lot of terms here. It's not because I believe I have concepts that I think need to enter the magic lexicon at large. It's just because this blog is a record of my thinking over time. And rather than reintroduce concepts in a generic sense time after time, I put a label on them so I can refer back to them. If you've been reading from the beginning these phrases may be established in your mind at this point, but for new readers I will track and update them in this post. And I will eventually link this in the sidebar.

Amateur At the Kitchen Table (also AATKT) - A long essay containing my thoughts in regards to performing, practicing, and creating magic from the perspective of the amateur performer. Published in 2016 and available here

Amateur style - When I talk about "amateur" magic I'm not just referring to magic the performer isn't getting paid for. I'm talking about an amateur style. The amateur style is defined by lacking the trappings of a professional performance: the traditional audience/performer dynamic, heavily scripted presentations, smooth transitions between effects, the notion that everything they're seeing is pre-planned. The amateur style that I am a fan of is a way of presenting casual magic in informal situations. Even when you are showing someone something, you are not "presenting" it to them in a proper "performance." Instead you are just showing them something interesting. 

Audience-centric magic/Story-centric magic - Performing magic in a way that shifts the focus of the effect off you and your skills. Since the magician is not exhibiting a power, a story needs to be generated that explains the phenomenon we’re witnessing. And in the process of crafting that story, the audience’s role should change from just watching a demonstration or a “show,” to one where they’re playing a more active role, even if the magician is still guiding the experience along.

Buy-In - A moment in the presentation of an effect where a spectator has to invest in some way in order for the trick to proceed. See this post.

Distracted Artist - A Performance Style where magic happens on the offbeat, as if it is happening unintentionally. Someone who immerses themselves in the study of dance will find themselves dancing absentmindedly while doing mundane things. This style suggests the idea that maybe someone who studies the performance of magic would slip into an effect without thinking. See this post.

Engagement Ceremony - A Performance Style for process heavy tricks that focuses on the process itself. Instead of trying to hide the process, you highlight it by giving it a name and a history and a supposed purpose. Named in this post. First described in this post

Field Reports - Posts describing performances that you might not be able to replicate but might find interesting to read about.

Hooks - A "hook" is anything that causes the other person to (seemingly) initiate the interaction that will lead to the performance of a trick. See this post.

Immersive effects - Tricks that aren't shown to people or presented to them, but which unfold around them. Tricks in which they play an important role.. If a trick can be performed for a tree stump, a corpse, or a monkey, it is not an immersive effect. If people are unaware what's going on, immersive effects can be unsettling or feel like practical jokes. However, if they understand and willingly play along with it, then it becomes a Performance Style called The Romantic Adventure. See this post.  

Imps (short for Impetuses) - The actions or procedures that you claim are causing the effect in the moment. See Smear Technique.  See this post.

JAMM - The Jerx Amateur Magician Monthly. A 20+ page ebook in the style of a magazine that is released once a month and goes to people who support the site. It contains tricks and reviews. It's one of the bonuses for the people who keep this site going. 

Jerx Points - Imaginary points I award on a semi-arbitrary system. They're mostly meaningless but I have secretly released things in the past to people with high levels of Jerx Points, and there is an ebook coming out at the end of summer, 2017 exclusively to people with over 100 Jerx Points called 20/20 which includes write-ups on my 20 favorite tricks/most performed tricks that were created by other performers over the last 20 years. See this post.

Gloaming -  A blurred area between reality and presentation, and between method and effect. See this post. 

GLOMM - The Global League of Magicians and Mentalists. The world's largest magic organization. Everyone who has an interest in magic is a member unless they're a jerk or a sexual predator. You can upgrade to GLOMM Elite status as well, to let people know you're a member in good standing. 

Jerx, Volume One (also JV1) - The Tarbell Award winner for Best Magic Book of 2016. It was given to people who pledged $5/week to support this site from Oct. 2015 - Oct. 2016. This book is now long gone. As are the other books I’ve written since then.

Magic Circle Jerk (also MCJ) - My first magic blog which ran from 2003 to 2005. It doesn't exist anymore. You can find some of it on the internet archive. And I have most of it saved somewhere. But a lot of it is just lost forever.

Non-Explanation - We think that if an audience is fooled, then they will be affected by the magic. But I've found that people will often comfort themselves with the Non-Explanation. For example. You make their ring disappear and reappear on your necklace. You want them to get swept away in the impossibility of it, but often people will just say, "It's a trick." "It's a trick, and I don't know how it's done, but apparently there's some way of doing it." It's a Non-Explanation, but for some people it satisfies the need for an explanation, and thus puts up a roadblock to any engagement in the mystery. To battle the Non-Explanation you can blur the edges of trick and explanation which forces them to engage at least to the extent of knowing what they're dismissing and what they aren't. See Gloaming. See this post

Peek Backstage - A Performance Style where you present an effect as "an effect you're working on" and one which you're actively looking for your spectator's input. This is the most natural, relaxed style for both the performer and the spectator.

Performance Styles - A broad concept under which all your effects could exist (although I recommend having multiple performance styles). For example, your performance style could be, "I was struck by lightning as a child. Now when it rains I can manifest weird anomalies in reality." The tricks themselves may have individual presentations, but as long as you only performed when it rained, that would be your overall performance style.

Reps (short for Repercussions) - These are theatrical elements that can be added to the end of a performance blur the edge of where the trick begins and ends. See Smear Technique. See this post.

Romantic Adventure - A Performance Style based on the concept of immersive magic. It's a performance style you must build up to with people. They must have faith that if they surrender themselves to the experience they're going to have a good time, they're going to see something they've never seen before, and you'll look out for them and not do anything that's going to put them in a dangerous or awkward situation. Effects in this style often play out over a longer period of time. Hours (or even days) are not uncommon.

Smear Technique - The idea that instead of having clearly defined boundaries on a trick, you can blur the edges using different tools (See: Imps, Reps, Buy-Ins), and that by using this technique, magic tricks will feel more enmeshed with your spectator's life experience, rather than just being a disconnected, isolated moment. See this post.

Splooge - My "lifestyle blog" that took over this site for a week in 2016. Now an infrequent column in the JAMM for non-magic content.

Universal Presentation - A presentation that can be used for numerous tricks. For example, many tricks can be presented as a sobriety test in a context where people are drinking. My position is that universal presentations are stronger than trick-specific ones because, by definition, they tap into ideas that have some universal appeal or understanding. See this post.

Wonder-Room - A Performance Style where examinable and interesting objects and artifacts are on display in a room or in some kind of case. Your presentation is directed by the spectator who is free to look at and handle the objects, and if they so choose they can bring them to you so you can tell them the history of the object or how it's used. See this post. 

This Weekend

The cover of this month's JAMM (in your email this Saturday night) is a tip of the fedora to the man who is unintentionally responsible for anything I've done in magic. The inspiration behind my former blog and the Tom to my Jerry...

Breanna, the JAMM Muse for May, challenged us to a game of strip Spectator Cuts the Aces. She didn't really explain the rules all that well and I think she hustled us because, within moments, she had us down to our birthday suit and I was forced to wrap my penis around myself for warmth. The photo below might imply she was losing, but this girl had so much confidence that's what she started the game wearing. 

Romantic Redux

From The Jerx, Volume One

I listen to a lot of radio shows from the early part of the 20th century. One of my favorites is an anthology program called Escape. Each episode began with this introduction…

Tired of the everyday grind? Ever dream of a life of... romantic adventure? Want to get away from it all? We offer you... Escape!

Escape! Designed to free you from the four walls of today for a half-hour of high adventure.

Escape!

How could you resist that? I loved the notion of something that was “designed to free you from the four walls of today.” The producers of Escape were saying, “Look, we know by fate or circumstance you’ve found yourself in this life that can feel mundane or uninspired, with your loveless marriage and rotten kids. So, for the next half hour, give us your hand and allow us to guide you through a radio drama—no, not just a radio drama, a romantic adventure—where you can escape, however briefly, from the everyday grind.

This escapism seems like something a magic performance would be perfectly suited to provide, but it so rarely does. And why? Well, because it’s at odds with the magician’s traditional goals. “Step into a world where I’m an amazing person with incredible powers who deserves your accolades.” That’s not the most appealing “adventure” for the audience to go on.

The Romantic Adventure is one of the less defined terms I've adopted on this site and I've been asked to flesh out the concept some. For anyone who is at the mercy of Google Translate to read this site, the word "romantic" in this phrase doesn't have to do with love or seduction or anything like that (at least not necessarily). It's "romantic" in the following senses of the word:

1. having no basis in fact :  imaginary

2. marked by the imaginative or emotional appeal of what is heroic, adventurous, remote, mysterious, or idealized

So the Romantic Adventure performance style is about presenting people with with big, fantastical, over-the-top presentations for effects and then doing something that only really makes sense in this alternate universe you've established. You're not trying to get people to believe these incredible ideas. In fact, one of the strengths of this style is that the ideas you present are so unbelievable that it's immediately clear to the spectator that this is meant to a bit of interactive fantasy. You're giving them a moment outside of reality. And therefore it's not connected to all their real-world concerns and issues.  

Like the show Escape, what you're doing is designed to free them from the four walls of today for a few moments of high adventure!

This style has something else in common with that old radio show. Escape would always start the episode with a 2nd person narration, putting you in the story to come...

"You are high on the frozen slopes of a great mountain. Terrified and caught in a blizzard. While this thing for which you've been hunting has suddenly become the hunter. If it finds you, then for you and your companion there can be no escape."

With this style of performance you are asking the spectator to play a part in the unfolding story. They may not actually be asked to do anything, but mentally they have to be on board. 

My friends won't go for that type of thing, you say.

I don't believe that's true, but that's the subject for another post. Look for a Dear Jerxy post in the coming weeks that talks about that.

A typical mentalism trick: "I'm going to predict the word you're going to think of." The spectator says "time" and the magician turns over the card and it says "time." Many of the "best mentalists" in the world perform tricks that are nothing more than that. And that's probably fine. 

But...

In the Romantic Adventure style the identical method can turn into Cryptophasia. "You're my long lost twin and we developed a language together as infants. I'll show you. Here let me write something down.... Okay, if I say the word "flormf" to you, what do you think it could mean?" He has no idea. "Go ahead, say the first word that comes to your mind." The guy says "time" and the magician turns over the card and it says "time."

That trick is more fun, more interesting, less bland, and more original than the traditional way. And I would suggest it's better magic too, because the presentation helps obscure the method more. 

And, from my experience, that sort of thing is more enjoyable too. Magic and mentalism performed in a traditional style often just amounts to fooling people. With the Romantic Adventure performance style it's not just about fooling people. Everyone knows this is fantasy. But that's the power of it. You create some outlandish, weird, chimerical scenario and then do something so strong—not to fool them—but to briefly put them in a situation where this fantastic scenario is the only explanation they have for what just happened. It's not that they ever seriously consider it. The guy knows he's not my long lost twin (for example). But it's those few moments before any other framework for what just happened comes to his mind that I find people really enjoy. 

If I said, "There's a dragon in my closet." You would say, "Yeah sure. I bet." And I could say there really is and he ate all my clothes and go on and on. And you might play along with me or you might not. Either way, if you open the closet and see an honest to goodness dragon there you're going to have a big reaction. Half a second later you might start considering that maybe it's a projection, or a person in a costume, or a large puppet, or some other animal that's been disguised as a dragon. 

But there's still that half second. Don't dismiss that half second of them having no other context for what's happening other than the fantasy you established. If you've ever been in a car accident (or a near accident), or dropped something extremely fragile and valuable, or fell in love at first site, you know how intense and powerful a half-second memory/experience can be. 

With a more traditional performance style (and I do plenty of things in more traditional styles) the dynamic is so well established. "He's going to perform a trick, and I'm going to have no idea how it was done." That's what they think is going to happen... and that's what does happen. And the trick may be great, and they may love it, but it's still kind of one layer, and that layer is what they expected it to be.

The RA style is less straightforward. And by having them get on board with the presentation and engage with the fiction on some level it complicates things even more because they're taking a part in perpetuating the lie. So when "the moment" happens they're a little more enmeshed with the fantasy.

Of course, the fact that it's slightly different than a traditional trick is also the weakness of this style. People need to be trained to know that if they go along with what you're doing it's going to result in something fun or interesting or amazing happening. This only comes with some level of trust based on what they've seen you do before. But any performance that is non-magician-centric is going to build that trust, because it will be clear whatever you're doing isn't about your ego or anything like that.

And it probably does take some level of charm. It takes some charm to get someone to go dig up a time capsule they don't remember burying. It takes some charm to get a whole party to play along with a liar/truth-teller game. Or to get people to help you draw a deck of cards. But not some extraordinary amount. You don't need to be a real smooth smoothie to get people to play along. Again, the struggle many magicians have with getting people to invest in the process is due to the fact that those people have seen the results of the process are usually some grand ego-stroke for you. So why would they want to play along with that? I'm not unique in being able to pull this stuff off. I'm not otherworldly charismatic, I just know the type of shit that turns people off. The Jerx Charm School may need to be a separate post. Or another book.

I encourage you to explore this performance style. It's by far the most rewarding style for everyone involved in my experience.

One of my favorite examples is in the coming issue of The JAMM (#4). I took a sort of standard mentalism trick, added a rarely used coin production, then replaced the coin with a prop (and potential memento for the spectator) that people are genuinely captivated by, and turned the whole thing into a Romantic Adventure masterpiece where it's revealed I have a working arrangement with a fairy who is helping me with my tricks.

Romantic Adventure
The PERFORMANCE STYLE OF YOUTH AND LOVE!

Pay Your Happiness Bill

I've been an advocate on this site for investing in the things that make you happy

Even if you're not that into this site and you're just here randomly, I still suggest you set aside part of your monthly budget to support those things you do enjoy. It's one of the best things I started doing regularly. I look at it like paying my phone bill. Except it's my happiness bill. I'm supporting the things that make me happy. And I don't want the universe to shut off my happiness, so I pay my happiness bill every month. It feels good. And I end up getting more enjoyment from those things. It's a win-win for everyone.

Here are some of the things that bring me joy that I invest in every month:

the Doughboys Podcast

the Best Show

Cayleigh Elise's creepy true crime youtube channel

Rifftrax

Sword and Scale True Crime Podcast

Captain Disillusions youtube channel

ASMR Requests youtube channel

This site is totally reader supported, no advertisers or wealthy beneficiaries. And because this site has such a small target audience it's particularly reliant on the generosity of the people who like it to keep it going. If you enjoy this site I hope you'll consider supporting the site. You get a monthly magazine/ebook with tricks and reviews and you get the 2017 Jerx Deck of playing cards with your paid yearly subscription. Join me, for good times and good karma.