Mailbag #15
/
I’m thinking of starting a magic blog or something similar and I want to identify an angle to approach the site from. Did you start this site to write about amateur magic or was that just the direction things went as it progressed? —HP
I don’t think I ever thought, “I’m going to write a site about amateur magic.” It just turned out to be a through line in a lot of what I was writing about, because I’m not a professional performer. And most of the advice that I thought was bad was advice was obviously designed for professional magicians, but people just gave it as if it was general magic advice. “Script out your performances.” “Put your tricks together into strong routines.” “Make sure you clearly define your abilities.” “Don’t let them touch your props.” All of this stuff that—I guess—makes sense for someone performing magic professionally, makes you look like a real weirdo when you’re hanging out with someone and showing them a “casual trick.”
On the discussion forums, people were always asking about things like reset time, “can you do it surrounded,” and pocket management. It seemed weird that there was no one talking about things like, “What’s the best way to use your couch cushions to switch stuff when you’re hanging out with someone.” To my mind, it would seem like that would be something a lot more people could benefit from
Given the concerns of most people on the Magic Cafe, it seemed like everyone was either doing tablehopping, weddings, or trade-show magic. I found that strange. In my entire life I don’t think I’ve ever walked into a restaurant or a wedding and seen a magician performing there. And trade shows? I don’t even really understand that market. I get the sense that companies used to set aside a bunch of money for whores to woo potential clients and that has fallen out of fashion, so they’re like, “Uhm…. I guess we could get a magician?”
(When I see a trade-show magician lecture, I always find it highly suspect. It’s always stuff like, “And you can write the product’s name on the Ambitious Card to show that their product always rises to the top!” Like…the hell? Does that sort of thing really have any impact? If I ran a corporation, and I sent someone to a trade-show to scope out some new vacuums for my hotel chain, and he came back and said, “I was going to get the new Eurekas, because they gave us the best offer. But then the guy at the Hoover display made a big red sponge ‘dustball’ go from his hand to my hand, and he showed me a card trick that clearly demonstrated that Hoover ‘Makes dirt disappear like magic,’ so I went with them for multi-million dollar contract.” I’d be like, “It’s been nice working with you, but you’re fucking fired. Beat it.”)
So it always surprised me how little was written about performing from the amateur/social perspective. I didn’t really set out to write about it, I just wanted to write from experience, not theory. And all my experience was as an amateur. And writing about it made we want to try out new things and that caused me to perform more which brought on more ideas and on and on it went.
I think it’s probably helpful to have a POV when you’re going to start a blog or a youtube channel or something like that. But content trumps POV. If you have 100 ideas for posts, but no centralizing theme, just start putting out the content and your voice will emerge.
Okay, so what’s the best way to use your couch to switch objects?
The item to be switched in should be behind the throw pillow on your side. The item to be switched out gets shoved down between the cushion and the couch.
Example
You have a loose blue deck behind the pillow. In your hands you have about 45 red cards with 7 blue cards on top. That deck is placed in a blue case. There is a Sharpie on the end-table on the spectator’s side.
You pull the deck out of the case and spread the top few blue cards. “Usually a magician will have you select one like this, so you don’t really know what you’re getting. It’s kind of sketchy.”
Turn the deck face-up and spread the cards wide across the cushion between you, leaving the top cards (the blue ones) somewhat bunched up. Have your spectator slide out any card towards themselves. Unbeknownst to them, the card will have a red black.
Scoop up the rest of the spread and take it in your outside hand (the one closest to the arm of the couch). Turn to the end-table near you. The deck is hidden from view by your body. Turn to your friend and say, “Hmm. Maybe it’s on your table. Is there a marker over there?” As they look and grab it, you jam your deck in the couch cushion and pull out the other deck behind the pillow.
They sign their card.
Now you have a freely-selected card with a different colored back and an examinable deck. Do something interesting with that set of circumstances.
Hey Andy I really like the way you wrote up this version of Paul Harris’ Son of Stunner but there was something in It that seemed illogical. After you say you switched all the cards to face the same way, you then say you switched every card for one from another deck. The illogical step is that you switch their orientation, and then just get new cards when in fact getting new cards would be reason enough that they are all switched back.
Do you think that it would be better to combine this into one step. “While time was frozen I got a new deck, see they aren’t mixed up like the one we used, here I can prove it look at the backs” (something along those lines).
Or, would it be better to first freeze time, switch the orientation, and then freeze time a second time and switch the cards. I'm curious If this extra pause (freezing time for a second time) would add to or diminish the final effect.
Or, does this illogical step not really matter at all? —KO
You’re right. I never thought of it before and I’ve performed that quite a bit. I don’t think it matters that much, given that it’s such an absurd explanation to begin with, and it’s not the sort of thing most audiences would pick up on. But it’s always better to strive for a more logical impossibility.
I think freezing time twice is the way to go. Actually… maybe freeze it three times. That would be a good structure for the trick:
Freeze time.
“I knew what card you selected because I froze time and looked. You don’t believe me? Geez. Okay.”
You freeze time again.
“Okay, this time, while time was frozen, I reset the deck back to normal from the mixed up condition it was in. Proof positive I can really stop time. Wow… you’re still not believing this? Hmmm… I’m sure you think your skepticism is a strength but actually your inability to accept something I’ve pretty much proven beyond a shadow of a doubt suggests a profound weakness in your character. Okay. Whatever. I’ll try again.”
Freeze time. Then reveal the rainbow deck.
I like that. Thanks for pointing out the illogicality.