Fundamentals: Zero Carry

The final fundamental concept I want to examine this month is the newest of the three.

When I first introduced the term Zero Carry, it was a designation for one trick I wanted to have in my repertoire—a go-to impromptu effect with an engaging premise.

Since the time I first wrote about it, it has evolved into something else entirely and become a guiding principle I'm using to design my current 100 Trick Repertoire.

This is an example of me introducing a term for a concept that still wasn't fully formed. I knew there was something I was circling around in my brain that went beyond just wanting to do "impromptu" effects. But, like I was with the Magic Eye portraits of my youth, I was too focused to see the full image. I needed to let my vision blur for the image to come clear.

(We had a Magic Eye store in the mall near my house when I was young. It was just people standing around staring at pictures on the wall with their eyes glazed over asking themselves if they were seeing something or not. What did they imagine the shelf-life of that business would be when they opened it? Did they put their arm around their 6-year-old son and say, "Someday, this will all be yours." Cut-to four months later: "Going out of Business!" "Everything Must Go!" "Buy 1 Get 14 Free!")

I now realize that what I was circling around with Zero Carry originally was not an impromptu trick or repertoire. But a genuinely carry-less approach to performing.

Why?

The stuffed-pockets of the EDC crowd often leads to magic that feels stilted, inorganic, and scripted. That doesn't mean bad magic, but it's frequently magic that is more dismissable. The magic is seen in the gimmick or the prop rather than in the moment.

The minute you pull out a fake red button to do a trick with, you've eliminated the element of spontaneity which is one of the cornerstones of powerful casual magic.

It may be a strong trick, a fooling trick, and great for walk-around magic at a restaurant gig. But for casual performing in social situations it creates a weird vibe. It comes off almost as desperate. People frequently see magic tricks as an attempt for you to show how clever you are… and now you're carrying around something to do that with? It's not a great look.

That level of seeming preparation dials down the impact of what you do.

It's the difference between making an off-hand funny comment or telling a funny story, and carrying around a small box that says Genuine French Birth Control Device on it, which, when you open it, reveals a little guillotine to chop your dick off.

Oo, la, la, indeed.

Even if you think that's funny, it's canned funniness.

Carrying around stuff to show people tricks feels like canned magic. Not farm-to-table astonishment.

There are three elements to my Zero Carry Philosophy

Impromptu Magic

This is the obvious one. Magic with objects that can be entirely found in your environment.

The issue with impromptu magic though is that it's frequently a little too quick and meaningless. "I take the ring off my finger and it appears back on my finger!" It's a fine trick, but it's not going to stick with people long-term.

So what I find myself looking for these days are impromptu tricks that feel like a full experience—that have a full storyline to them. So it's not just a brief, throwaway moment, but a genuine little story for them to walk away with.

Wonder Room

The Wonder Room is my concept of having magic tricks in some sort of permanent display in your house. There are various approaches to this that I've written about on the site, but a "basic" setup would be to maybe have a shelf somewhere where you display "weird objects" you've come across due to your interest in magic, and then maybe another display of interesting decks you've stumbled upon.

You're not carrying around these objects or decks with you on the regular. Instead, they're openly displayed in your house. This leads to a very natural way of presenting magic where people can just ask you about something you have exhibited and you can show them what makes it "weird" or "interesting."

There's a very pleasant flow to this type of interaction. Rather than you seemingly having a secret stash of magic props in some other room that you bring back when you want to perform something. Instead you have an interest in something (magic and/or strange phenomena), and, like most people with an interest in something, you have it on display where you (and others) can appreciate it. People ask about things and you talk about them.

You treat these things like objects of interest. Rather than treating them like shameful objects—hiding them under the bed like Nazi memorabilia or furry porn.

Organically Housed Tricks

"Housing" your repertoire is a term I came up with which means having a place for a trick to live where you can easily perform it whenever you're inclined to.

For example, if you keep Color Monte cards in your wallet at all times, you can always perform Color Monte whenever you feel like it.

Organically Housed Tricks are tricks that live in a natural context.

Your wallet isn't a "natural" context for a card with a red diamond, a card with a blue diamond, and a card with a guy gloating because he won $14.

But really no context is normal for such a trick.

On the other hand, think of Jeff Prace's Random Card Generator. Put that in your wallet, and again you're just seen as carrying around a magic gimmick.

But I will frequently use it as a bookmark. And that's an "organic" house for the trick. People use cards of all types as a bookmark. If the subject of magic comes up I can say, "Sorry, I don't have any cards or anything on me." Then I can "notice" my bookmark. "Wait, they were giving these away at the casino the other day... it's supposed to help you identify a lucky card." And then we're off.

This may seem like a small thing—using a card as a bookmark rather than carrying it around in your wallet, but it's an added bit of authenticity that I find adds a lot to the casualness of the best social magic.

Further examples from Jeff Prace (since I'm on his site).

Penrose Pendant could live around your neck.
Mon-key could live on your keyring.
Chapstick-Addict and The Passenger Wallet could live in your pocket.

How does this differ from EDC? you might ask.

The difference is that Jeff Prace could be walking around with all these tricks on him, get hit by a bus, and the people at the morgue wouldn't be like, "This guy sure liked carrying around a bunch of magic tricks."

I'm not suggesting building your repertoire around impressing the mortuary attendant, I'm just pointing out how invisible and inconspicuous organically housed tricks can be.

---

Impromptu magic gives us a stable of effects that we can go into at any time in many different situations. It’s Zero Carry because you literally don’t have to carry anything with you.

The Wonder Room concept gives an outlet for tricks that don’t have to be carried around with us. And it allows our friends to guide the interaction by what objects they take interest in. It’s Zero Carry because they objects are on display, not carried on you.

Organic Housing is an approach to props and gimmicks which emphasizes their everydayness by putting them in a natural context. It’s Zero Carry because you don’t *seem* to be carrying anything with you solely for the purpose of showing someone a trick.

The goal of these three branches of Zero Carry is to create magic that seems more spontaneous, natural, unrehearsed, free-wheeling, and in-the-moment. This is what casual magic should feel like.

Zero Carry isn’t exactly about having nothing. It’s about never seeming like you needed anything.

Save Your Money

I saw your new post on the Unnamed Magician’s open prediction trick. I have collected a lot of his published work. So I am familiar with his thinking. 

There are some tricks that he’s already published that also appeared impossible prior to his publishing them. It’s because of this that I suspect this open prediction trick of his may be real. This wouldn’t be the first time he’s come out with a trick that seemed impossible. 

As an example of a seemingly impossible trick that he’s already published, have a look at the demo video contained within this product page:

There are also some conditions listed in the page. In light of those conditions, I and many of my magician friends thought this trick to be impossible before it was published. It was originally released as a magic contest, which I was a part of. I was sure that one of the conditions had to be false, but that wasn’t the case in reality. —M

A bunch of people have emailed me to ask if I'd been taken up on the offer in my last mailbag post to promote and purchase 200 copies of The Unnamed Magician's Open Prediction.

The answer is no. Which means you can pretty much put this one to bed. It's vaporware.

To the emailer above I wrote:

There's a big difference between the tricks though. The Gift has all the hallmarks of a magic trick: the performer's deck, no shuffles, very rigid procedure, the deck going out of play behind the magician's back. Even if you don't know exactly how it's done, you can see the areas that can be exploited to make the trick work.

If you look at the Unnamed Magician's work, it all has very unnatural, procedural methods. To think he all of a sudden figured out a straightforward trick with no apparent method seems unlikely to me.

This is sort of how you know the trick isn't real—by comparing it to his previous releases. There's no connective thread between the types of tricks he has released in the past and this one.

And he just happens to have a completely different marketing strategy for this effect: "If enough people pay me, I'll release the trick." Oh, that's convenient.

I feel bad for the guy, because it seems he needs money. But this isn't the way to go about it.

I'm not trying to pick on him. I'm in a position where I can help him (if this is real). Or help everyone else (by pointing out it's not real).

No need to email me to see if he's been in touch about taking me up on my offer. I will update this post if that ever happens.

A Thought Experiment: The Impersonator

Imagine this… You're on a business trip to Nashville. Your first night there you go down to a little club near the hotel you're staying at. You settle at the bar and order a drink. On the opposite end of the club is a small stage and a Taylor Swift impersonator is doing her thing. It's a fun time. There's a great energy among the small crowd. As a big fan of Taylor Swift—she's probably your favorite modern artist—you're really enjoying yourself. The singer's look and vocals are very close to the original. And since you could never shell out thousands of dollars for a seat at her concert, this is kind of a pleasant alternative.

You sit at the bar, enjoying the music and playing a game on your phone. After a couple more drinks, the place is getting more crowded, so you make your way out of the club and into the warm night air. "That was fun," you think, "I wish my town had venues like that where you could relax and enjoy a drink and some good live background music."

The next night you head back to the club. It's not as busy tonight, but there's a good country-folk trio playing.

You turn to the bartender and say, "Is the woman who was here last night a regular performer?"

"Huh?" he says.

"Does the Taylor Swift impersonator from last night come here regularly? Like every week? She's talented."

The bartender says, "There wasn't a Taylor Swift impersonator here last night."

You feel like you're losing your mind. "There definitely was. I sat here for almost an hour playing Candy Crush and listening to her last night."

The bartender looks at you quizzically. "That was Taylor Swift. She dropped in for a surprise performance to rehearse the setlist for her upcoming tour."

What are you left with after this experience? Did you see a Taylor Swift show?

Kind of, I guess. But you can't really go back and have the experience of actually having seen the show. You were half-paying attention to it—lost in your phone and your thoughts. Even if you had been paying attention the whole time, there's a difference between watching it thinking you're seeing Taylor Swift and watching it thinking you're seeing a cover artist. You didn't really have the experience of seeing Taylor Swift in an intimate setting at a small club, because you didn't know that's what was happening.

I try to keep this in mind when performing.

You can't go back and retroactively impress someone with what they saw.

I frequently see magicians playing it too cool when they perform and then having to go back to clarify what the spectator saw, and how that was better than what they remember seeing.

"No, don't you remember? I showed you my hand was empty before reaching into the bag and pulling out the egg. Yes. I swear."

"No, I dealt the packet and there were only 10 cards before I gave it to you. Do you remember? I dealt them out slowly. I said, '1, 2, 3,' and then silently counted out the rest up to 10. You weren't paying close enough attention?"

Not in those exact words. But that's the general gist.

It happens because there’s this philosophy that you shouldn't go overboard clarifying the conditions when you perform.

"Don't run when you're not being chased," they say.

"A real magician wouldn't say, 'Notice my hand is completely empty.'"

Actually, that’s exactly what a real magician would be doing. He would be making the conditions explicitly clear so you could be certain of what you were experiencing in the moment.

There is an art to this, but that art isn't about subtlety. It's about making the conditions completely clear while not undermining the surprise element.

Think back to the Nashville bar. If you'd known it was actually Taylor Swift, every moment would have been vivid, meaningful, and memorable. You would have paid attention and you would have been there.

This is what we should be trying to give our spectators: the full experience of what's happening, as it's happening—not a post-performance clarification session.

Mailbag #167

Is there any chance this trick is real? It’s an open prediction with apparently no method or procedure. It’s being released in a couple of months if it sells enough copies at $100. What do you think?—AM

I think it's 100% bullshit, and obviously so. If you got taken in by this, please have your grandchildren screen your text messages in the future because you are clearly susceptible to some pretty blatant frauds.

And when I say it's bullshit, I mean there is no trick like this that uses a borrowed deck, no process, and would actually work one-on-one as implied by this "demo."

Isn't it awfully convenient that the trick might not get released if not enough people buy it? I guarantee you… not enough people are going to buy it. Because that would mean releasing it.

It sounds like this guy needs a quick influx of cash and he can't take out a bank loan so he's taking out a "Dupes on the Magic Cafe" loan instead.

If you had cracked the code on this "holy grail" of an effect, would you maybe put a touch of effort into a demo for it? Multiple performances for different adults to show how impressive the trick is? Here, we have multiple performances for the same bored ten-year-old (and apparently a busy open-air street market outside the window).

Why? Because it's hard to get actual adults to play along with your fake trick.

Andy, you're going to feel pretty stupid if this is real.

I'm not, because it's not real. But if against all odds it turns out to be real, I'll be delighted.

In fact, I'm going to provide a service to the person releasing this effect: send me the explanation.

If this is a real effect with a real method that will actually fool the spectator taking part in it, I will come on here and let everyone know. I have 10+ years of credibility built up. It would be a huge endorsement for your product and you would have many times the preorders.

In addition, I will guarantee 200 sales ($20,000) that I will cover up front.

You have absolutely nothing to lose. (If this were real. (Which it's not.))

---

You asked for tips for nervousness in your post today. The best advice I ever got was to contextualize your nervousness and give them a reason for it. I sometimes tell them I’m nervous because I need to get this trick right for some future big event. Or I’m nervous because I’m worried whatever we’re doing actually MIGHT work which I frame as being unsettling. This seems to completely negate any actual nervousness I’m feeling.

By the way, I got this advice from YOU in a post a while back. —DE

I got a few different emails from people on this subject which referenced this post on nerves and fear that I forgot I wrote back in 2023. Reading it now, I can see some seeds of the Carefree philosophy idea beginning to sprout here.

---

This isn't a specific email I want to reply to, but a sort of general response to a type of email I get a lot. People will ask:

"Why do a big card revelation? People will know it's a force."
"Why use a peek? People will know you somehow saw the information."
"Why do a levitation? People will know it's somehow suspended from something."

And on and on.

I understand this kind of thinking, but honestly it feels like armchair theorizing that comes from thinking about magic instead of performing it. I don’t find this to be an actual issue in performance.

For example, I once had an issue with forces and reveals because people were saying to themselves, “It must be a force.” So I started developing the techniques I've written about on this site to eliminate that potential explanation, and now I rarely have anyone suggest that the card was forced. I saw the issues and I addressed them.

Yes, you might be thinking, but if the card shows up frosted on a sheet cake, they're going to know it's not real magic. So even if you seemingly eliminate the idea of a force, they'll still know it must have been a force.

Don't think so hard you get your head stuck up your own ass. Spectators aren't doing some sort of deep Aristotelian logical analysis of the tricks. They're not like:

This trick would traditionally use a card force.
From everything I can tell, no force was used.
But epistemologically we know a force must have been used.
Ergo, a force was used.
Q.E.D.—I'm not impressed.

They don't go that deep with it.

When spectators watch something impossible, they reach for an Easy Answer for it.

The card was forced.
He peeked at what I wrote down.
It's hanging from a string.

If you address that Easy Answer in your handling or presentation of the effect, then you've done what you need to do and you've laid the groundwork for feelings of astonishment, wonder, mystery, etc. (The issue with many magicians is that they never attempt to address the Easy Answers in the first place.)

"He must have seen what I wrote down… but how could he have? I put it in that envelope and it's completely opaque. But he must have."

That feeling—I know what he must have done, but I have no idea how he could have done it—is still the feeling of magic. They can only conceive of one potential explanation, but they don't know how that could be the case. That's a success. You've done what you set out to do.

You don’t need to get ahead of the philosophical underpinnings of what it means to be fooled. You just need to leave them with a mystery.

Dustings #143

On Tuesday I wrote about the idea of using duplicates with other people’s decks. Most of you probably know this, but if not, Google does a really good job of tracking down things based on pictures. If you’re visiting a friend’s house and they have a unique deck and you take a picture of it, you can just drag that picture into the search bar on Google and there’s a good chance it will be able to find it if it’s available somewhere online.

---

Here are some Epstein file magic deep-cuts from supporter, MC. (Supporter of this site, I mean. Not an Epstein supporter. (Well, to be fair, I didn’t ask))

- Molester-enthusiast Lawrence Krauss advising Epstein that Penn Jillette's wife, Emily, is "too old for you though". The message thread of Krauss bungling an intro to Penn is something too.  https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01747351.pdf

- David Blaine arranging to comp tickets in 2013 to Nothing to Hide [haw-dee-haw-haw] by DelGaudio & Guimaraes.  https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01755209.pdf

- And David Blaine seemingly filming for his 2013 special Real or Magic in Epstein's bathroom with everyone's favourite upstanding citizen, Woody Allen.  https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01952288.pdf

Not to make light of the horror of it all but it does seem pretty on-brand for magic that Epstein would be really into it.—MC

I don’t know what to make of this. I think people misremember and assume Epstein was a household name pre-2016, but he wasn’t really. So it’s certainly possible those who interacted with him just thought he was some rich idiot who liked magic (or comedy or science or art or whatever thing caused their paths to cross with him). Or maybe I’m naive and everyone who interacted with him in some way knew exactly who and what he was? If that’s the case, I can certainly understand not wanting anything to do with someone even just tangentially involved with him.

I’m just glad he never found this site and wrote me. I respond to everyone and never google your names. I would have had some dumb multi-email interaction with him about the Ellusionait video Brad Christian’s Kard Klub or some other stupid shit. Next thing I know I’m lumped in with Bill Gates and Bill Clinton and the world is asking “Who is the Jerx?” and “What does it mean to be in the Kard Klub? What goes on there?”

Fundamentals: The Eight Pillars of The Carefree Philosophy

If I was a reader of this blog, rather than the writer, I think one of the things that would be interesting to me is seeing ideas start from their most nascent stages, grow, evolve, get dismissed, etc. It's great to read a book with a fully-formed concept, clearly explained. But a blog is not a book. The fun of a blog is to see the day to day fluctuations in someone's focus and interests and see how a passing notion becomes something fundamental to their thinking.

The issue with that is that if the concept you're building isn't fully understood by yourself when you start talking about it, people can misunderstand what you're saying and just move forward with their own interpretation of what you were trying to get at.

This happened when I started talking about the Carefree Philosophy.

A lot of people who write me about it, since I first talked about it on the site almost two years ago, interpret it as me suggesting you just do self-working tricks or something. But that's not accurate. So today I want to revisit exactly what I mean with the term "Carefree."

Carefree Magic is based on this simple premise: Unintended tension kills magic.

If we are walking outside at night and I say, "Want to see something crazy?" And I have you look at the sky as I casually wipe my hand through the air and the moon disappears, that will feel like the most magical thing you've ever seen.

Now think of this. Same exact effect. Same method. But…

I tell you to look at the moon. Then I'm like, "No, like this," and I grab your shoulders and turn you at an exact orientation. Then I tilt your chin up to look at the moon from a precise angle. "Don't move. Stay just like that."

I'm breathing heavy. My mind is clearly preoccupied.

I step in front of you and say in a rushed monotone:

"Since the dawn of recorded human history, mankind has gazed upward at the night sky and marveled at the celestial bodies therein. Chief among these bodies—and I think you'll agree is the moon. The moon has been a source of mystery, wonder, and also inspiration, for poets, sailors, and lovers throughout the ages. Tonight, however, I would like to invite you to consider the possibility that the moon, despite its long and storied history as an object in the sky, is not as permanent as we have perhaps come to assume. If you will maintain your attention upward, to where the moon currently is, I think you will find what happens next to be... surprising. Please enjoy."

Then the moon disappears.

You would likely still be stunned and feel it's a very fooling trick. But it's a profoundly less magical-feeling experience because of all the areas of tension that shouldn't be there if this was a genuine impossibility.

And while my goal is not at all to make people think what's happening is actual magic. The goal is certainly to make it feel like that. Otherwise, what's the point?

The 8 Pillars of the Carefree Philosophy

Carefree Magic is Easy

Does this mean self-working? Not necessarily. Just whatever is easy for you. It's a trick you can do without focusing on the sleights.

Some magicians can't do any sleights without creating tension at the moment the sleight occurs. For them, self-working magic probably is the best route to take.

Some magicians can do a lot of sleights flawlessly. But these magicians are very, very rare. I'm not one of them. You're probably not either. Most of the magicians touted as being "great" at sleight-of-hand aren't. Not that I've seen. I watch them on video and can almost always tell when they're doing a sleight.

We often talk about "invisible" sleights. And what we mean is that if you look at the deck of cards (for example), you don't see the magician doing the sleight. But that's just one aspect of it. If someone sees tension in your face, your shoulders, your forearms, or wherever, then the sleight isn't invisible even if you can't see it in the hands and cards.

If you feel mentally engaged in a sleight when you're doing it, then it almost certainly shows as tension somewhere. I try to only do tricks that have sleights I can do without thinking about them. That's what I mean by "easy."

Carefree Magic is Present

This one is related to "Easy," but it's not the same thing.

A trick can be technically simple regarding sleights, but still require you to keep track of a lot of moving parts. Maybe you're using a memorized deck. Or a trick that requires a bunch of mental math.

Whatever it is—if part of your brain is occupied with something other than the actual interaction you're having, it shows.

Sometimes it’s fine. If your premise is about how much mental focus something takes, then it’s not an issue.

But if the mental gymnastics are part of the method and not the premise—and if you’re not comfortable doing them under fire—it’s going to feel awkward and tense in performance.

Carefree Magic asks you to be in the room, responding to the person in front of you. Actually present for the moment you're supposedly creating.

If your trick requires you to mentally duck out of the conversation while you do some bookkeeping in the back of your head, it's not Carefree.

Carefree Magic is Unscripted

And by that I mean it is unscripted or it feels unscripted.

Scripting your presentation can be great for helping you guide the experience in a way that makes it as compelling as possible.

But it's dangerous too, because if you're performing casual magic and someone senses you're reciting something, you no longer have something that feels magical.

It also means you can't adequately respond to the things your friend might say to you. You see this a lot when you watch magic demos. The performer is "on book" and if the spectator says something that isn't in the script, the performer ends up brushing past it. Or, just as bad, they'll engage with the spectator for a bit and then switch back into performance mode and continue on with what they planned to say. So you get this abrupt shift between scripted presentation and casual conversation.

Carefree Magic should feel like a genuine interaction. Even if the content of what you're talking about is clearly theatrical or unbelievable.

I will talk more about what I think you should script for a Carefree presentation and how to do so in a future post.

Carefree Magic is Unmanaged

"Spectator management" is a term magicians use which means, "Imposing your will on the spectator to get them to do something they wouldn't normally do."

Examples:

• Rushing them through a selection procedure.

• Removing an object from them before they've looked at it as much as they want.

• Giving them minute, unjustified directions on how you want them to do something they would normally do differently.

We usually think of 'spectator management' as a good thing. We've given it a professional-sounding name and convinced ourselves it's craft. But in most cases it’s just weird and unnatural.

Carefree Magic is Hands-Off

The less you have to touch the items that are in play, the freer and less tense the effect feels.

"I'm going to deal the cards. I'm going to stop. I'm going to turn over a card. I'm going to shuffle it back into the deck."

Carries much more tension than:

"You deal the cards. Stop where you want. Turn over the card you stopped at. Then shuffle it back into the deck."

The reason this works is that your hands on an object keep you in the causal chain. You remain the person responsible for what happens, and on some level, the spectator knows that. When they're the ones handling everything, you're removed as a suspect. There's nothing to control. And when there's nothing to control, there's no tension around the controlling of it.

Carefree Magic is Unprepared

Seemingly unprepared.

When you're carrying around a pocket full of props, there is a psychological weight to that. You're locking yourself into those tricks that you have with you. You're not like a shortstop in baseball, "light on your feet" ready to go in any direction the ball might be hit. It's not that you don't know other routines that don't require that stuff. It's just that if you're bothering to carry that stuff around with you, you're naturally going to default to those tricks. It's the sunk cost fallacy.

Also, when you start emptying your pockets of little props and gimmicks to show people, you put pressure on the moment. It's no longer a seemingly spontaneous moment of impossibility. Now it's this thing you prepared for and bothered to carry around things with you so you could show it to them. It better be worth it.

Stand-up and sketch comedians often dislike improv comedians, because they'll frequently get bigger laughs from less funny jokes. But that's because improv is unprepared, so people are more impressed when it seems like you weren't practicing for this moment.

Similarly, if you can give your magic an improvisational flair, it will get a greater reaction than a technically stronger trick that you've clearly been carrying props around for.

Carefree Magic is Examinable

Introducing objects of interest into an interaction and then not letting someone get an unbothered look at them is a source of tension.

Think of it in any other situation. "Look at this beautiful rock I found!"

"Oh, cool," your friend says. "Let me see."

"Hold on a minute, buster. Keep your hands to yourself," you say as you put the rock in your pocket and walk away.

Does that sound crazy? Uhm, you realize that's how almost all magicians handle unexaminable objects in magic, yes? "Here, pay attention to this interesting object. Now, I'm going to put it away where you can't see it."

Carefree Magic is Comfortable

A fully Carefree performance requires you to be fully comfortable with the audience, and the audience to be fully comfortable with you.

The other pillars of the Carefree Philosophy are going to go a long way toward allowing the person you perform for to feel comfortable with you. They release the tension that makes magic feel awkward.

But what if you are nervous? That will create tension that an audience picks up on and lead to a less Carefree interaction.

Now, obviously the other pillars will mitigate some of the reasons you might have to be nervous. If you're doing a trick that is easy for you and you're not sticking to a rigid script, there will be less reason for performance anxiety.

But what if you're just nervous performing for people in general, regardless of the material?

That's rough, because that's the hardest thing to do something about and the hardest thing to hide from a spectator. I don't know what the answer is, because I don't have that issue. I'm pretty comfortable around people generally—performing a trick or not.

But I will think about it some more and see if I have any techniques beyond reducing the tension in the other areas of your performance. And if anyone has experience getting over generalized discomfort when performing, let me know your tips and I'll pass them on.

---

One final thing: these pillars are all on a spectrum. They're not binary. And you're unlikely to find a given trick that is fully Carefree. These are dials, not switches. The goal isn't to find a perfect 8-for-8 effect. It's to understand where the tension is coming from so you can make conscious choices about it.

The pillars don't even necessarily support each other. The easiest tricks are often the least examinable. The most hands-off tricks often require the most spectator management. The eight pillars could be seen as eight horses—not always pulling in the same direction.

It's difficult to find a completely Carefree effect, and it would be impossible to construct a completely Carefree repertoire. But I’m not chasing perfection, I’m chasing a particular feeling. And every bit of tension I remove gets me closer to it.

Noted Notes

I've been searching for a good impression pad for years. I looked at easily a dozen or more in that time. Mostly all do a good job of getting the impression. That wasn't the issue. The issue was they often looked weird and/or required an unusual procedure before the spectator wrote something down or in order to get the read of the impression. The great thing about Chris Rawlins' Noted is not only is the impression clear, it's also the most inconspicuous and recognizable impression pad I've ever used.

I keep one on my bedroom dresser along with the marker. That's where it lives for spontaneous performing.

For example, the other day my friend stops over on his lunch break. I tell him I want to try something. I open the drawer on my living room end-table as if looking for something. "Actually, go in my bedroom. On my dresser there's a Post-it pad. I want you to write a four digit number on it and shout when you're done."

He went in the other room and wrote down a number and let me know when he was finished.

I tell him to pull off the sheet he wrote on and attach it to the back of one of his credit cards, and sandwich it between two other cards in his wallet.

"We'll pretend that's important information, like a PIN code for your bank account," I tell him. "We'll get back to it later."

Later on I call him up and ask him if he did anything after work.

"I stopped at the used bookstore," he says.

"Interesting," I say. "Do you remember seeing me at the bookstore?"

No, he tells me.

"Did you feel anyone bump into you or get particularly close to you while you were there?" Not that he remembers. "And if you don't remember it happening once, you certainly don't remember it happening twice, of course."

I then go on to explain I'm trying to learn a new system of pickpocketing techniques. And that I grabbed his wallet, peeked the number he wrote down, and put it back in his pocket all without him knowing. I then told him the number he wrote down.

He—having forgotten precisely what he wrote—had to double-check in his wallet. And he was audibly taken aback when he confirmed I was right.

Did he really think I pickpocketed him and put the wallet back? Probably not. It's just a more interesting premise than saying, "I know the number you wrote down."

---

This is what I like about Noted. You don't need to be near the spectator when they use it. They write on it and remove the sheet as they would if the pad were ungimmicked. You don't need to micromanage them or get them to do something unusual.

---

The other day I was in my bedroom with a woman. (We were just listening to records, mom!) I stayed in the bed and rolled onto my stomach and asked her to go over to the dresser and write a word on the Post-it pad that was there.

It's very clear from this setup—me, on the other side of the room, face down (ass up?) in bed—that I can't see anything she's doing. I told her to take off the note and leave the room and go to another room, or even outside, and find an interesting place to stick it and then come back to me.

When she came back, I said, "Okay, so I can turn over now? There's nothing for me to see, yes? The paper is not even in this room anymore, right?" She agreed.

I rolled over onto my back and patted the bed for her to sit down.

"That was a free choice of word, yes? You don't feel like I made you write that word over any other word, do you?" Of course not.

"Okay, let's try this. Tell me where you stuck the note." She said it was on top of one of the blades on the ceiling fan in the dining room.

I told her I was going to try and project my consciousness out of my body and that note was going to be the proof I really did it. I did some deep breathing and then lay still for a moment. After ten seconds or so I did a big inhale as if I was just coming back to my body. I propped myself up on my elbows. "Okay, this is good. Thanks for helping me test this. I was trying it earlier and I thought it was working, but there's no real way to know for sure if you're not just imagining you're doing it. That's why this word thing works as a test. I did see a Post-it with a word on it when I left my body. But again, I'm not sure if it's real or not. Did the word you wrote start with a B?" I asked, as if I was afraid to fully commit to what I saw just yet.

"Yesss," she said, dubiously.

"Was it 'blossom'?" I asked.

"What!" she said, and picked up a pillow and hit it against my chest. "How?"

"Oh, sorry. When you told me where you put the Post-it, I sent my consciousness out of my body and it floated down the hall to the dining room and I went up above the ceiling fan where I read the word you wrote down." I said. As if that explained things.

Actually (if it’s not obvious) when she left the room, I quickly jumped out of bed, got the peek from the pad, and jumped back in bed.

Noted is available directly from Chris. I believe it's currently sold out but will be back in stock later this month, including potentially the larger square-sized Post-it version (although I'm not sure about that).