The Faux Secret Imp

This idea comes from friend-of-the-site, Cristian Scaramella. It's an example of the type of thing I was writing about on Monday, and in line with a lot of the stuff I've written about in recent months about extending the effect with "exo-trick" moments (things that happen outside the trick itself). 

Here is how I used it this weekend. 

After a yoga class this weekend (yeah, that's right, don't judge me) I had a couple friends from the class come by my place to watch a movie and order some dinner. 

After dinner I asked them if they wanted to see a trick I was working on. They said, "No," and then went home.

No, I'm kidding. They said "sure" and I went and got a few half dollars. 

My two friends were sitting on the couch and I was standing facing them behind a coffee table. I asked them to hold on for a second and I went to a bookshelf across the room, opened a little box, fiddled around with something, and then walked back to them.

I was now wearing a ring. The ring wasn't weird or ostentatious. If I'd been wearing it all night it wouldn't have stood out. The only unusual thing was that I went out of my way to put it on before this trick.

FullSizeRender.jpg

I then showed them the trick. 

I had three half dollars and one by one they disappeared into thin air. (The trick is Joshua Jay's Triad Coins.)

The only thing different in my handling is that before each coin would vanish, I would tap it with my ring. It wasn't like an obvious gesture of tapping the coin with my ring for some kind of emphasis. It was just a kind of quick movement, not hidden, but not overt or done for attention. 

The last coin didn't vanish the first time I tried to make it go. And, if you were one of my friends, you might have noticed me sliding my ring up and down the coin a few times while I ad-libbed some stuff about making the last coin disappear. Eventually I tried it again and the coin did disappear. 

When the trick was over I walked back to the bookshelf, took off the ring, attached something to it, and put it back in the box. Then I excused myself to go to the bathroom. 

I went around the corner, turned the bathroom light on, and closed the door, but I didn't actually go in. Instead I hung out and listened to them talk. I couldn't make out exactly what they were saying because they were speaking softly. Eventually, they got up and walked to the bookshelf. I saw them pull the box of the shelf and open it.

Here's what they saw...

Screen Shot 2017-11-08 at 3.12.20 AM.png

One of them started laughing, the other turned to her with her mouth open and placed her hand on the other girl's shoulder. 

I snuck back to the bathroom, quietly opened and shut the door, flushed the toilet, washed my hands, and came out. 

They had scurried back to the couch by the time I got in the room. They were both looking at me. One was smiling with bright eyes. The other was cutely scowling.

"Whaddup, whaddup?" I said, plopped down in a chair, and fired up my Netflix account.

"So...," one of them said, "I liked your trick, Andy. Very impressive. Very interesting," she said.

I knew what she wanted. She wanted me to say, "Oh, thank you. And did you happen to notice my box of magic rings?" If I acknowledged it, then it would sever that tiny thread of mysterious tension. It would confirm their suspicion that this was all a little bit of theater. But while I know that's what they're likely to think anyway, I don't want to confirm that for them. I want a small part of their brain to wonder if maybe there's some practical reason why I need to wear certain rings for certain tricks. And I want to keep alive the tiny spark of an idea in the irrational part of their brain that maybe somehow these rings allow me to do certain things. 

So instead I was just like, "Cool, cool, cool. Ooh... Avalanche Sharks... this looks interesting."


The Faux Secret Imp is the idea of using a ring (or some other kind of "artifact" as Cristian described it to me in his email) as the impetus for the magic. But you act like you're trying to hide it from them. 

To a certain extent this should be how you treat most Imps. That is to say, the term Imp is short for Impetus, but it can also serve to remind you that, most often, these things should be IMPlied. 

What I mean is this: If I say, "If we sync our breathing, I can read your mind," that's pretty easy to dismiss as nonsense. On the other hand, if I try and read your mind and it doesn't seem to be working, then I ask you to do some deep breathing with me, and then I'm able to read your mind, the implication is that there's some connection there. But that's a connection you make. If I say it outright, it's easier to dismiss. If you make the connection yourself, I think you're likely to consider it more.

That's why I say that in most cases the impetus should be implied. 

The Faux Secret Imp takes that a step further. Not only don't you directly credit the Imp as causing the magic, you seemingly try and hide the use of it altogether.

I'm hoping this example clarifies what I was talking about on Monday. Looking at a 3-Coin Vanish from an endo-trick perspective, you might try new sleights or new gimmicks to improve the trick. I think Josh's trick is about as good as your going to get. There may be advancements that make it better from a knowledgable magician's perspective, but they will be things that most laypeople will never pick up on. So the endo-trick perspective is limited in that way. And, as great as the effect is, I think it has the same issue a lot of magic tricks do (certainly coin tricks). That being that it's visually arresting but not the type of thing that's going to be captivating long-term for the spectator.

While endo-trick improvement is limited, exo-trick improvement is infinite. The things you do before a trick and after a trick and the seemingly extraneous things within a trick—these things that place the effect in a different context—are things that can always be honed and refined in a way a spectator can understand and appreciate. 

A lot of this type of stuff is kind of "meta" in a way. It's presentation about the presentation of magic. And I think that's a good thing. You're not going to convince someone that your fiction is somehow truer than the reality they know. No one will say, "I thought coins couldn't disappear, but I guess I was wrong" But you can put a twist in your own fiction, so you still get that same kind of surprise moment. "I thought this was happening, but really it was that." Even if "this" and "that" are both just different levels of fantasy, that's still an engaging experience.


Now we're back at my apartment the other night. The smiler has left and the scowler has stayed to watch another movie. When it's over I walk her out to her car. Under the light of the street lamp I give her a hug goodbye, then I take her left hand in mine and press my right hand on top in a kind of odd way. She looks down. There's a ring on my finger! Which one? The mind reading one? "Yes, yes," I say, nodding. "I had a good time too," as if agreeing with some unspoken thought.

She smiles then bites her lower lip and punches me in the shoulder.

Own a Piece of History

I am auctioning off "Locks of Hair," the original artwork for The JAMM #7, the female Houdini image created by Stasia Burrington. This is an ink painting on heavy white paper. It measures 8.5x11 inches, and will be shipped to the winning bidder in a cello bag and stay-flat mailer

There is only one of these in existence. Buy it now and then, in a few years, really stick it to Copperfield when you sell it to him for his collection.

This is a silent auction. You can email me with your bid over the next week. The winner will be notified on Tuesday the 14th.

IMG_4372.JPG

The Evolution of Magic in the Early 21st Century

This is the second in a series of pompously titled posts where I make pronouncements on the future of magic.

Just about 45 minutes ago I tried out a new Imp that a reader of the site submitted and it went over really well. I'll write it up on Wednesday. It's similar in some ways to the Pulp Fringe-Imp (the post where the Imp terminology was coined). I was particularly delighted to read it because a lot of my thinking recently is about these techniques that push the magic experience beyond the effect itself. But for the most part, if I want to read about that sort of stuff, I have to write it, because it's just not the type of thing that's discussed in magic literature.

In a world where most magic secrets can be so easily discovered, magic needs to be less about the secrets. And what I'm finding more and more as I explore ideas of presenting magic that push beyond the traditional boundaries of the effect, is that the secret doesn't matter that much. In fact, the trick itself doesn't matter that much. I'm not sure if that is reassuring or disheartening. I used to pick up a John Bannon book and think, "A-ha, these 3 effects are bound to get the best reaction so I'll put my effort into learning them." Now I can look at the same book and think, "Yeah, I'd do any of these 40 tricks." I feel like the trick itself matters so little to the audience's experience that I can take any decent trick and then—via the manipulation of presentation style, imps, reps, buy-ins, etc—create something really fascinating for my audience.

With secrets becoming so accessible, I suspect magic will evolve along the lines of endo-trick (within the trick) and exo-trick (outside the trick) thinkers and performers. 

Endo-trick thinkers are more fascinated by the elements of the trick itself: the difficulty of the sleights, the obscure mathematical principles, the "beauty" of the method. I think, for the most part, everyone with an interest in magic is an endo-trick thinker on some level. And some of you are only endo-trickers.

Exo-trick thinkers and performers will be more concerned with the elements that come before and after the trick, and the elements that are extraneous to the trick but affect the spectator's experience.

In a way, these are two very different interests. Think of it this way... Imagine Person A: He likes to learn all of the stats for every quarterback in the NFL, he spend hours on his fantasy football line-up, he knows all the betting lines for every game. Now imagine Person B: He loves going to football games, tailgating with friends at his alma mater, and throwing huge Super Bowl parties for everyone in the neighborhood. 

You would describe both of these people as "into football," but the way that interest manifests itself is quite different. And it's the same with these branches of magical focus.

Despite having endo-trick interests, I like to talk about the exo-trick aspects of magic here because that's just more appealing to me at this point. And I also think I'm in a unique position to do so. If you want to talk about the different grips for a second deal you can bring that up in any number of message boards or facebook groups. You can get thoughts on how to approach a table from dozens of Penguin Live lectures. But there's only one person who is being given the support to explore amateur performing and some of these exo-trick ideas and he's laying on my couch with his hands on my genitals (I'm talking about me).

So here's what I see happening over time. Secrets will become more and more accessible to the point where they have almost no-value. Endo-trickers will feel free from the sense of obligation that they should be out performing because the one thing they're offering (a fooling trick) can so easily fall apart by having the secret exposed. And so they will go more in the direction of interacting with other endo-trickers.

The exo-trick movement will grow because when secrets have little value, the only way to give someone a valuable magic experience is to make the experience about more than just the secret (which is the same thing as saying that the experience is more than just being fooled).

Magic has traditionally been presented as a demonstration of skill. 100s of years ago it was a demonstration of a fake skill (magic powers). In 1950, a more sophisticated audience would see it as a demonstration of skill that wasn't supernatural, but whose means and methods were not easily known to them. If we assume the path continues and secrets become more widely known and available, then magic as a demonstration of skill will eventually be just a literal demonstration of magic skills, as in, "That's a good second deal." "I almost didn't see that pass." "Your Downs palm is really good." etc.

So I think magic will evolve away from being a demonstration of skill (real or imaginary). Instead, I think the exo-trick movement will push magic into the realm of immersive fiction.  I suspect magic will be seen as a form of experiential storytelling. Instead of being a one person exhibition (like being a juggler or ventriloquist) it will be more aligned with things like escape rooms, haunted houses, or parlour games. I think magic won't be seen as something you do, but an experience you create. The best magicians will be those who craft the best immersive stories for people. 

And that's going to happen by looking beyond methods and secrets and the tricks themselves.

You might be saying, Oh gee, Andy. So the you think the next evolution of magic is going to be the stuff you write about on this site? Well, yeah, kind of. I mean that's why I'm writing about this stuff. I think this site is on the vanguard of a transition in magic. It's not because I'm creating something new. I just have people supporting this site which gives me the chance to be in the crow's nest and see what's on the horizon. And you're lucky because 95% of the magic community isn't feeling what I'm writing at all. Another 2% likes it but gets upset when I say the F-word or "suckin' on a titty" or something. So if any of these ideas resonate with you, you can be pretty sure you're the only one in your area implementing them. You're getting in on the ground floor, baby!

You might also say that I'm crazy to think magic needs to evolve. "Magic is more popular than ever," you could say. And that's true. But is it more popular than ever as something that generates wonder? Or is it more popular than ever because it's a source of clever puzzles that people can watch and then learn how they're done with an internet search? When it comes to popularity, if you want people to watch your youtube videos, you're better off exposing tricks than just performing them.

So we can't just look at "popularity." A lot of magic's popularity in the modern age isn't reflective of its ability to amaze or enthrall people, which is what a lot of us are going for.

25 years ago, if I wanted to learn how get a coin in a bottle, I'd have to drive, potentially hours, to a nearby magic store and pay real money to get the secret (perhaps after waiting a few weeks for them to come in from the distributor).

Now you can do this and get an answer in literally less than a second.

IMG_4371.PNG

There's no reason to think things won't continue to move in this direction. So putting your stock in secrets alone may not be the best investment. 

But I'm not worried. I started writing this post tonight because I had another experience where an exo-trick technique left my audience starry eyed and smiling. You'll read it on Wednesday. And these are the types of magical experiences that can't be undermined by a google search. It would be akin to googling, "How does the magic of the first snowfall of the year work." 

Screen Shot 2017-11-06 at 5.27.37 AM.jpg

Tonight, in your email boxes, The JAMM #10.

Screen Shot 2017-11-06 at 12.51.37 PM.png
Screen Shot 2017-11-06 at 12.58.38 PM.png

Gardyloo #39

What's Ellusionist up to these days? Well they've come up with a Kickstarter campaign with a goal of $54,000 to make... a fidget toy

Screen Shot 2017-11-02 at 9.02.47 PM.png

Gee. Great.

At the rate they're going, there is no way this is going to get funded unless Butt Plug Aficionado magazine comes out with a review in the next couple days that calls it "both a tactile delight and a challenging puzzle for your anus."

In the video on the kickstarter page they say it will make you the center of attention at any party, "whether you like it or not." Huh. Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and suggest the type of attention you'll get at a party with one of these is going to be strictly in the "or not" category. "Hey everyone, come look at this nerd with his overly complicated fidget toy. Let's beat him up and drag him behind our pick-up truck." If you have at least two braincells to rub together I guarantee you can come up with something better to do to garner attention at a party than pull out one of these. What reaction would you expect with this? You think everyone is going to be like, "Gather round everyone! Come look! Trent's got something stupid!" 

I'll give Ellusionist this, it looks like they're not dumb enough to invest too much of their own money in this product. If you want to do a product related to fidget spinners, or Pokemon Go, or the Ice Bucket Challenge or any other thing you failed to recognize as a passing fad, Kickstarter is probably the way to go.

Or else you're this guy...

V0u1KHG.jpg

Ellusionist also came out with Abyss yesterday. A variation on Paul Harris' Twilight Angels effect. 

Now, I don't want to be a bummer, but you can't use a lighter in a trick where the secret is based on something appearing or disappearing due to a temperature change. You can't do it because there is no difference between effect and method if you do. It's a non-trick. Something changing color with heat is not a new or obscure concept. Even I, as a young kid watching the Freezy Freakies commercial, wasn't blown away by the idea. They show this over and over in the trailer as if it's mysterious how it works. It's not. Trust me, I'm dumb, I have a layperson's brain. It's obvious.

Also, the original Twilight Angels effect left the spectator with a card that was augmented in a truly unique way. This effect leaves them with a normal card. That's a downgrade.

And finally, the paddle move with a zippo lighter is pretty unconvincing.

That being said, they pretty much make it clear exactly what you're getting here, so it's not like they're trying to mislead you. And if you disagree with the premises I've  stated above, then maybe this trick is for you.

Or perhaps there's a way to incorporate the lighter into the original Twilight Angels effect. For example, maybe you pull out the lighter and show the angel on one side. You explain that you'll show them how it got there. Then you use the lighter to remove the angel from the card (as in Twilight Angels). Now you show an angel on each side of the lighter (sketchy paddle move). Then you place the angel back on the card (on the opposite end, as in the original effect). Spectator is left with a unique, signed object. No obvious use of fire to make the magic happen. And the lighter is examinable. I've almost talked myself into buying this thing just for the lighter.


This is old news and it's not directly magic-related (although it does feature a magic trick and Neil Patrick Harris). It's the opening to the 2013 Tony awards. If you're not familiar with it, it's one of the most entertaining production numbers you'll ever see. It's one of those videos I watch every few months just because it's kind of thrilling to see so many people working together to pull it off. And you can't deny how insanely talented Neil Patrick Harris is in this: singing, dancing, joking around, magic-tricking, sort-of rapping, playing guitar (I think), literally jumping through hoops. It's incredibly impressive. 

I like to imagine traveling back in time to myself as a kid, watching Doogie Howser, and telling myself, "You know, one day in the future you will find him to be one of the greatest all-around talents of his generation."

Then the 13-year old me would say, "Oh yeah? Doogie? Gee, I always thought it would be Balki Bartakamous? Get out of my room, old man." Then I'd kick the shit out of my future self.


I expect Nikki, our JAMM Muse for November, will bring an interesting energy to her Uri Geller inspired cover on the issue coming out next week. 

The reason I say that is because below is a pic of what she looks like when she's "running to the store for a few minutes to get some Pringles." 

Screen Shot 2017-11-01 at 9.51.03 PM.png

 

 

JAMM #10 Arrives Next Monday

The JAMM #10 will be in subscriber's email boxes late Monday night.

In Issue 10:

  • A really strong triple prediction effect, with an interesting combination of methods. 
  • My current favorite routine for a peek wallet
  • A ridiculous (and impossible) trick with cereal
  • And reviews of a couple magic kits you may want to give or receive this holiday season. 

You can purchase a full volume of the JAMM here. As of now, that comes with The Jerx Deck, which is being produced by the Expert Playing Card Company as we speak. The plan is for it to ship out at the end of this year, give or take a couple of weeks. The Jerx Deck bonus offer will disappear at some point, likely with little warning. (Well... consider this your warning.)

The Dumbest Thing I've Ever Seen In Magic

What's the dumbest thing you've seen in magic?

You might think back to one of those rejects who speared himself (or someone else) in the hand during some tired russian roulette type effect.

Or maybe it's that escape artist (or, more accurately, "gets stuck in shit" artist) on the Criss Angel tour who had to be rescued from his escapes twice in the same summer. (Either he not competent, or it was a poorly conceived publicity stunt. "Poorly conceived" because—while it may garner publicity—that's not good publicity for someone who nobody knows about. Failure can be good publicity for someone who's established. It makes it seem like that person is taking on new challenges. But if nobody knows who you are they're not going to be like, "Let's go see this guy who sucks at his job!") 

Or maybe the dumbest thing you've seen in magic was Brian Brushwood rocking this look for a fucking decade!

Screen Shot 2017-10-29 at 7.06.02 PM.png

How you go about avoiding reflective surfaces for 10 years is beyond me. Honestly, you don't even need a mirror to realize this looks like shit. Your goddamn shadow makes that clear.

But no, that's not the dumbest thing I've ever seen in magic.

The dumbest thing I've ever seen is Jeff McBride's version of Chad Long's trick, The Shuffling Lesson.

Now, Chad Long's trick is a modern classic. You and the spectator each take half of the deck. You give them a lesson in shuffling and cutting the deck. At the end you've each shuffled and cut your cards into four piles. You turn over the top card of each of your piles and they're all kings. "Don't feel bad," you say, "I've been doing this for 20 years." When the spectator turns over the top cards of his piles, he's found the four aces.

It's a great trick because not only is it easy to do, but it builds beautifully. When you show you've found the kings, it's an okay moment, but not that impressive as those cards were in your hands and it's not inconceivable that you could have controlled them in some way. But when the spectator finds that they've located the aces with the cards in their hands, it's damn near a miracle. 

It's kind of similar to a sucker trick, but rather than them thinking you messed up and you showing you haven't, it's a situation where they think what has happened is only mildly impressive but it turns out to be very impressive. Not what you did, what they did.

McBride's performance is a bit of a cluster-F. It's part "shuffling lesson," then he does this weird mirroring stuff...

IMG_4328.GIF

And then he keeps repeating "YOU cut the cards. YOU control the game." Which is bizarre because there's not supposed to be a "game" at this point. It's supposed to be a lesson. If you asked someone what McBride's version of the trick is supposed to be about, they would have no idea.

But that's just a convoluted presentation. It's not the dumbest thing I've ever seen in magic. The dumbest thing I've ever seen is how he concludes the effect. He has it structured so he beats the spectator at the end.

What is he thinking?

Does McBride not understand the trick? Does he think it's truly about who has the highest cards?

Listen to his justification for why he does it this way. It genuinely bananas. (I particularly like the sweetly condescending way he pauses and say, "That was a choice," when discussing how Chad Long originally structured the routine.)

The hell? There is no defending that structure. He starts with something impressive (the spectator finding four of a kind) goes onto something less impressive (the magician finding four of a kind) and caps it off with something not impressive at all (showing that together they have blackjack hands—the trick has nothing to do with blackjack! If you want that to be a "moment" you have to establish blackjack as being relevant at some point early on in the trick (he doesn't)). He calls this the "punch" and the "second punch." Those aren't punches. They represent a fundamental misunderstanding of what an audience—certainly what the main spectator—would find amazing about the routine. 

You beating the spectator does not make it a win/win. I'm puzzled by how he could even come to that conclusion.

I bet the hardest thing for someone who knows as much about magic as Jeff McBride does, and performs as much magic as Jeff McBride has, is to get back in the layperson's head. But it really needs to be part of the process of creating a presentation. Try to forget everything you know about magic. Imagine yourself at the age before you knew secrets. Someone gives you half a deck which you shuffle and cut and then you discover you've found four of a kind. Imagine how unreal that would feel to you. Really try and put yourself in that feeling. Now, is that feeling intensified or diminished if the magician says, "Hey, I did that too. And I did it better." Does that feel win/win to you?

In magic, as in life, your goal should be to preserve or amplify people's positive feelings about themselves or their situation. Make this your hobby.

I guess you could say, "Well, Jeff is a professional magician. So he has different concerns. And, for him, it may be important to come across as the winner because he is really playing the role of the the archetypal Magician." But if that's your goal, this is a bad trick for you. Just do a regular routine where you cut the aces yourself. Don't set up the audience member only to take away from their moment. No one sees what you did as more impressive anyway. People understand the symbols on the cards are arbitrary when it comes to cutting four of a kind. No one is like, "Yeah, sure, I knew he could cut to four twos. But four aces!? Now I'm impressed!"

Honestly, McBride has such a strong presence that it would be so much more interesting for him to be like, "And despite all that shuffling and cutting, I have managed to find the four kings!" Then do a real cocky magical flourish and raise an eyebrow. "I can't take all the credit. Yes, I have an incredible gift. But a gift is something that is given to you. I am the descendent of Merlin, of Hecate, of 1000 generations of magicians before me whose power now flows through these nimble fingers." Then gesture to the spectator and say casually, as if it's an afterthought, "And how about you? Did you find a pair maybe in your first attempt?" The spectator turns over all four aces. The cocky smile falls off Jeff's face. He furrows his brow and sniffs through his nose. "Uhm...yeah. So that's... I guess... I mean, that's great, that's great...uhm... hmm...." He goes off, scratching his head, mumbles some nonsense analogy about how the other guy may have opened the pickle jar but he was the one who loosened the lid. In my opinion that would be a much funnier and more compelling "storyline" for the effect. 

I remember watching this on the True Astonishments DVD set when it first came out and feeling sick. Not because he screwed it up by needing to be the one who "won." But because McBride is pretty well respected in magic, and Eugene Burger is also in the room when this is being filmed, and it's on Paul Harris' DVD set. And none of them thought to say, "This is retarded." It was like the feeling you get in school when you realize you're smarter than your teachers. That's not a good feeling. "You're supposed to be the smart ones! You're supposed to be teaching me!"

It was at that point I realized it was up to me to come back and save magic. And yes, I sat on my ass for another 5 years before starting to blog again, but eventually it happened. Get off my back.

Three Quick Administrative Notes

1. The update to the Jerx app with the Wisdom of Crowds word reveal should be available today, or very soon. Remember, if you're ever lost in the app, swipe two fingers to the right to get to the menu. From their you can get to the instructions and routines page for the app which has been updated with this new mini-trick. There are now about a dozen different effects using the app described on that page.

2. This is only important if the following things are true of you:

a) You started a month-to-month subscription to the JAMM sometime after January of this year.
b) Getting the Jerx Deck is important to you.

If those things are true then, at some point, you'll want to convert your monthly subscription to a purchase of the full year of The JAMM. 

How do you do that? You go into paypal and find out how much you've spent on The JAMM, you subtract that from $120 (the cost of the full year subscription) you paypal me the difference (thejerx@gmail.com) and you cancel your monthly payments. That will get you the issues you missed, the three to come, and the Jerx deck.

There is no hurry to do this, and it's only an issue if getting The Jerx Deck was part of the reason you subscribed.

3. If you ever asked me a question over email and I said that I would write a post with my response and I failed to do so, let me know. I don't just say that to put it off, I say it because I think I might have something to say on the subject that is of interest in general.

You may remember a few months ago I lost my list of upcoming post ideas due to some gmail sketchiness. So some of those things I had planned to write about are lost in the ether.

This is a general message as well. If you're expecting to hear from me about something, or are expecting something in the mail and I don't get back to you, don't hesitate to get in touch. Some things slip through the cracks. And sometimes I think something is being done by one of the people who help out with the site and there's a miscommunication. But regardless of the reason, don't hesitate to remind me of something. I don't like to have unclosed loops.


Happy Halloween, everyone! Eat some candy. Don't be a dumb idiot. Sugar is GOOD for you.

QX7sGRMs1JU-6BvZ9fi2eoH3w-wtm0blMMtErDvvTFA.png