Impromptu

Today I'm going to settle a debate that comes up from time to time on The Magic Cafe and in other places. It's one of those questions that comes up frequently enough that I think, "Wow, we're a bunch of idiots," because as a sub-culture we haven't settled the issue yet. But now I'm going to settle it so the next time it comes up you can be like, "Oh, that's settled, let's shut up about it."

And that issue is: What is impromptu magic?

You would think we would have figured this shit out, given that it's a term used in magic advertising. But no, in fact, the definitions are so broad that virtually any trick you can think of will fit in someone's definition of impromptu. That's a shitty usage of the word when it can be used to mean absolutely anything.

No more. Here is what "impromptu" means in the context of magic. 

An impromptu effect is one that requires no secret props or gimmicks of any kind and could be immediately performed with borrowed objects common to the performing environment.

There you go. So that's settled.

"no secret props or gimmicks" - When people say, "This trick is impromptu as long as you have a loop on your wrist." That is like saying, "That would have been consensual sex if she had just said 'yes' when I asked her to fuck." Or, "This dish is vegetarian except for the ground beef." You can't exclude the one thing that makes something NOT something and then claim that it is that something, except for that one thing you're excluding. Yes, I know that sentence is super confusing. For something to be impromptu then the only objects in play are the ones the spectator knows about. 

"Immediately performed" - Meaning the objects in play don't require any secret preparation that can't be done in front of the audience. A full-deck stack would eliminate a trick from being impromptu, but one where a couple of cards had to be set-up or a card reversed without the audience knowing could be considered impromptu because these are "set-ups" that can be done in the process of performing.

"borrowed objects" - The items don't have to be borrowed. But for an effect to be considered impromptu, then everything could theoretically be borrowed. 

"objects common to the performing environment" - In a way this broadens the definition of impromptu. Impromptu does not necessarily mean that it can be done anywhere at anytime. It's not a judgment on the practicality of a trick. For example, a trick that requires a secret extra penny would not be considered impromptu even though there's a good chance you already have one on you or could acquire one very easily. It's a secret prop, so that's not impromptu. On the other hand, a trick that requires a ukulele and a jar of mayonnaise can be impromptu if you could borrow those items and go right into the trick.

Impromptu does not mean that the trick "appears spontaneous." That is a stylistic performance decision on your part. It's not an inherent quality of a trick.

Impromptu does not mean that it doesn't require practice. The amount of practice something requires is unique to each performer. If you release a book test and the method requires the performer to have memorized the Bible, that trick still might be impromptu. Impromptu is a description of performance conditions, not an indication of the level of practice or rehearsal needed.

Again, we're talking about the usage of the word in magic and as a magic marketing term. 

The purpose of defining the word so strictly is so we can actually use it and allow it to have some meaning. "Impromptu" is not a word that you should slap on a product and have it be meaningless, like "tasty" or "delicious." It should be something like "no dairy" or "this product contains nuts" or something that actually helps you make an informed buying decision. 

Of course this is all predicated on my definition becoming universally accepted, which is unlikely because magicians would rather stumble around and not come up with anything useful than listen to me because I'm a bad man who uses naughty words. So unfortunately you can't just direct people who abuse that word to read this post.

However, we can trick those people. I've put the same definition up here and attributed it to Martin Gardner and Dai Vernon. Now we can use that as the official definition and move on with our lives.

Statistically, Who is the Cafe's Shittiest Guest of Honor?

Sometimes I get a bug up my ass to figure out something completely meaningless. Recently I decided to take a look at all the Guests of Honor in the history of the Cafe and to determine which one stank up the joint the most. To do this I looked at the stats for their "Chef's Special" week and gave each Guest of Honor a score according to this formula: 5*(the number of topics)+the number of posts = total score. I think it's safe to say this formula will not only determine who was the best Magic Cafe Guest of Honor, but without question it will also indicate who the 10 greatest living magicians are.

Here are the 10 best.

There you have it. Those are the best our art has to offer. "Really, Andy? You're suggesting Randy Wakeman is the third best magician on the planet? This list doesn't include Copperfield, David Blaine, Penn & Teller." Yeah, no crap. If those guys are so great, then how come they've never been invited to be the Chef's Special on the Cafe? Use your head, ya dummy.

On the other end of the spectrum, here are the 10 lowest ranked Guests of Honor. Sorry, you guys, but you all stink.

And that answers the questions of who the shittiest Guest of Honor of all time was. It's Owain B. Miles. Or, as he's known in the magic world: Who?

You can see the whole ranking of all 154 Guests of Honor here. Finally we have a mathematical proof of who the greatest magicians of our time are. "But Andy, doesn't this score just reflect how well their 'Chef's Special' week went? It doesn't really reflect how good a magician they are." Oh, it doesn't? How dare you question me. Go. Leave. You're not allowed to read this site anymore. If this score is so meaningless then how come it accurately reflects what everyone says about these magicians? Like what do people say about David Regal all the time? "Yeah, he's not quite as good as Rudy Coby, but he's a little better than Michael Rubinstein." Everyone says that. It used to be on his promotional poster, for the love of god.

And you know how everyone confuses Jade and Troy Hooser? Well, surprise surprise, they just happen to have the same total score.

You can also compare their scores to see their relative greatness. For example, Joshua Jay has a total score of 342. Dan Harlan has a total score of 1915. Therefore Dan Harlan is 460% better a magician than Joshua Jay. Sorry, Josh, that's just math. If you've got a problem with it, take it up with Pythagoras.

FMK

In our emails talking about Hide, Keep and Give Away, Pete McCabe wrote:

I can’t believe you didn’t take this just one more step and show the spectator a series of photos of celebrities, and ask them who they would fuck/marry/kill. Now that would be a trick.

Yes, that would be a trick. And now it is.

Effect

You predict someone's choices in a game of Fuck, Marry, Kill.

Method

I want to talk about the method first before getting into a detailed description of how I've performed this. (I've only done it one time.) The method I used is the app iForce by Greg Rostami. What iForce is, essentially, is a way to display any one of 8 drawn or written predictions on your iphone in a manner that seems like you're just turning over the phone or opening the app. Unfortunately, I can't tell if this app is still available. If it is, pick it up, it's a great app. If it's not and you don't already have it, don't worry. In a game of Fuck/Marry/Kill there are only 6 possible outcomes. So you just need an index that can hold six predictions (a pocket index, a wallet index, or whatever). I prefer iForce because it's easy, there's nothing more to carry, and I can do multiple-phases. However if I was doing it without the phone I would make a fake prediction on a business card then switch in the correct one while talking things through with the spectator. [Update 2022: I now use the Draw Cycle feature on the Jerx App.]

Imagine

I send this picture to my friend's phone. 

"Take a good look at those dudes," I say. "Is there a row you prefer?"

"Prefer?" she says.

"Yeah," I say. "Like which one has the hotter guys?"

"I don't know... the lower one, I guess." 

"You think those guys are hot? Wow, you've got issues." [Judging her based on her choices when she only has the choice of shitty options is a running bit in this routine. It's fun.]

"Okay," I say, "Let's make this harder and use the top row. I don't want your burning desire to make things too obvious. And I don't want to have to reupholster my couch if you get it wet from whoever you're hot for in the bottom row. So just take a real close look at each guy in the top row. Give me a minute while I do something."

I fuss around with my phone for about a minute and then set it down. 

"You know, scientists believe attraction is most often based on how we think our features will mesh, genetically, with those of another. This is an evolutionary trait intended to produce the most attractive offspring. So I think I can tell by your facial features what features you would find most attractive in someone as a long-term mate or a sexual partner. Can you smile for me? Okay, now pout. Now crinkle your nose. Perfect. Can you raise one eyebrow? It doesn't matter, just try anyway. Great."

I then maneuver myself over to her so I can look at her phone with her. I look down at the picture and back up at her a few times as if I'm sizing things up. Then I say, "Okay, just do me a favor, can you try and make this face that Charlie Manson is making here?" I go back to looking at the picture and then back at her. "I think I've got it now," I say.

I pick up my phone, make some quick annotations and set it back on the table face down.

"We're going to play Fuck/Marry/Kill with these guys in the top row. Which is only appropriate because I'm sure they'd like to fuck, marry, and kill you. Just probably not in that order. And I believe I have been able to predict which person you would assign to each of those roles, just based on your facial features and how I think that you perceive your own face, and in turn, these faces." 

"So let's start," I say. "Which of these guys do you want to fuck?"

She considers it. "Ugh... I don't know. David Berkowitz."

"Wow," I say. "What is it you find so attractive? That he killed six people or that he's a fucking lunatic who thought a dog was talking to him? You really need to up your standards. Whatever. Who would you marry?"

"I guess this guy. Gacy."

"ooooookayyyyy... uhm, sweetheart, he killed 34 people. And worse than that, he was a clown. That's what you consider marriage material? Look, you're free to make your own decisions, but you have self-esteem issues. This is real talk. Okay, let's move on. So you would kill Henry Lee Lucas? What's the problem? He didn't murder enough people to be your type?" 

"So you'd marry John Wayne Gacy; you'd fuck the Son of Sam, David Berkowitz; and you'd kill Henry Lee Lucas. Correct?"

She agrees. I turn over my phone and she sees this picture.

---

That is where I ended the trick this weekend and it went over well. It's not a huge miracle, but it's a fun little trick. The nice thing about iForce is that you can instantly repeat it with a different group of three things. I think in the future I will repeat it with two more phases that are increasingly strange. I might suggest that it's almost too easy to run this test with people as the objects, so let's try to go a little deeper, and the second round would be Fuck, Marry, Kill: Apple, Pear, Banana. Then after I successfully predict that I'd suggest that even that is too easy because the shapes and symbolism behind those objects are so ingrained in us by our culture, so let's go with something more abstract. Fuck, Marry, Kill - This, That, or The Other Thing? "Just as I predicted," I'd say, "You chose to Marry This, Fuck That, and Kill The Other Thing."

Method Part 2

[2022 Update Again; Draw Cycle makes this part of the method 1000 times easier.]

Here's how to keep track of your predictions. There is probably an easier way to do this, but it didn't occur to me, so this is how I did it. In iForce the prediction will have a value of 1-6. Or if you're using an index, you'll have each prediction in a position that corresponds with the numbers 1-6.

Whatever the options in the game are, think of these as 1, 2, and 3 going from left to right. Your prediction are as follows.

1. Prediction One: F1, M2, K3

2. Prediction Two: F1, M3, K2

3. Prediction Three: F2, M1, K3

4. Prediction Four: F2, M3, K2

5. Prediction Five: F3, M1, K2

6. Prediction Six: F3, M2, K1

This might sound complicated but if so, it's only because my writing is unclear. In reality it's pretty straightforward. You present the three possibilities to the person in the same 1, 2, 3 order that your predictions were based on. 

For the first round, Fuck, each object has a value of 0, 2, and 4 going from left to right. After they choose their Fuck-target, remember the number associated with it. Then in the second round, Marry, whatever objects are left have a value of 1 and 2, going from left to right. You just add the fuck-value to the marry-value and that will tell you which prediction to use.

So, in the example above, you show her three serial killers. You mentally label them 0, 2, and 4 for the Fuck round. She picked the middle one, so you remember the value 2. For the Marry round, whatever is left has a value of 1 and 2 from left to right. She chose the person on the left to marry, so that's a value of 1. Added to the 2 from the first round, that gives you a total of 3, so you show prediction 3. 

In the example above I present 6 images to them at first. I do this just because it's more people to talk about initially with the spectator, so it's more stuff to joke around about. You could easily set up iForce so you could give them a free choice of either row, but I don't even bother. I just ask them which row they find more attractive, and then depending on which they choose, I will say that we want to use the row they find more attractive or we don't.

Thanks again to Pete McCabe for suggesting the effect and Greg Rostami for creating the app that makes the whole thing self-contained.

The Sealed Room With the Little Door

I spent much of the last 10 years working on my presentations for effects. And I've tested a lot of concepts with real people and one of the concepts I've tested the most is what my spectators respond to the strongest in regards to the implied method behind the trick. So, I looked at:

1. A strong trick with no implied method.
2. A strong trick with a believable implied method.
3. A strong trick with an UNbelievable implied method.

And I consistently get the best initial reactions with 1 and 3. The most mild reactions with 2. And the most long-term reactions with number 3.

Here is why I think this is. I'm not saying the analogy I'm about to give is necessarily true, but it's how I picture things in my mind and it's true when I perform.

A very strong magic trick (where the spectators don't have any insight into the actual method) is like taking a person and sealing them in a square room with no windows or doors or any means of exit. When you give no explanation, people become trapped. They are amazed, but often, after a little while, they give up because there's no where for them to go. 

However, when you give them a believable explanation it's like putting them in a room with a door for them to walk out of. When you say, for instance, "I know where the coin is because I read your body language," you are giving them an exit. And they have two choices: 1. Feel trapped or 2. Walk through the exit you've given them. And so they will do number 2. (Not shit, I mean, they will go through the exit.) They may still be amazed ("That guy can read my body language!") but you are kind of sacrificing the mystery, in a way. And the mystery is the beguiling, interesting, frustrating, and long-lasting part of the magic trick.

Now imagine this, you're in a sealed room with a little tiny door the size of a cereal box. You're trapped, but there's this thing that beckons you as if it's an exit. Your rational mind knows it's not. You know you'll never fit through it, but you can't help but keep returning to it and shoving a hand or a leg out and seeing if maybe there's some way to work your way through. Rationally, you know it's not the way out, but it's the only thing that even suggests a way out, so your mind keeps returning to it. (In the same way you keep looking in your jacket pocket when you can't find your keys, even though you've already checked it five times. You know they're not there, but you can't imagine where else they could be.) This is, I think, the cruelest way to trap someone because they have the hope of escape and each time they reach out that little door and feel around in hopes of finding something that will let them out, it reinforces that they're trapped.

This is how I believe presenting magic with an unbelievable (yet internally logical) implied method affects people too. They know it doesn't provide the escape they need but it's something for them to explore when they feel they have no other option. And I feel like it's a way of fooling people multiple times with the same trick. You show them the trick and fool them, and then their mind looks for a logical explanation and when no logical explanation presents itself, they start poking around your unbelievable explanation (the little door) in their mind. "Okay, I know he didn't really stop time like he said... but maybe he stopped me perceiving the passing of time for a moment? Like maybe when he twirled that card he hypnotized me to not notice time passing? What the fuck am I saying, that's nonsense too." And every time they consider your unbelievable explanation, even partially, they are fooled again.

With a believable explanation you have two possibilities. 1. The spectator believes it, which is good for your ego, but not great entertainment, I don't think. 2. The spectator doesn't believe it and is put into the awkward position of wondering if you really want them to believe this somewhat believable explanation. For these people the believable explanation often seems less like a "presentation" and more like you're lying in order to impress them with some skill/power your don't really possess. Which a lot of you are, of course.

With an unbelievable presentation, you don't have this issue. They understand that you're doing this to entertain them, not to get them to "believe" anything. At least that's my experience. Do they still get caught up in it? Yes. You'll know this because they'll come back an hour later to poke some hole into your bogus explanation. "You said you found that metal disc in the wreckage of an alien spaceship when we were camping. But you couldn't have because I was with you the entire time." To which I'll either say, "Yeah, no shit, I was goofing around. It was just a magic trick." Or, "What are you talking about? I went for an hour hike by myself that night. Wait... you don't think they sent some kind of replicant in my place, did they? Oh my god, please tell me you didn't have sex with my alien cyborg doppleganger." 

Again, I'm not suggesting this is the right way to do things. Just my preferred way of doing things. For me it's more interesting and definitely more entertaining. Of course this is all on a spectrum. Some of my presentations are completely unbelievable, and some are partially believable. Some of the doors I give them will be just big enough to get their pinky through, and some they'll be able to poke their head through. But I always stop short of giving them something they could comfortably walk through.

Sundry Drive No. 5 - Re:Dougs - Redux

It's a special Daffydoug edition of Sundry Drive. Daffy, my readers can't get enough of you and your 10-year old email! 

I received this email from D.D. (not Daffydoug) wherein he solves a decade old mystery. A mystery less consequential than "What is the flavory of the mystery Dum-Dum?" but a mystery none-the-less. And that is, "What the hell did Daffydoug mean when he called me 'cardosian'?"

Andy,

Having studied economics in Santiago, Chile (ca. 2000-2001) during my senior year in college, I can tell you with some certainty that “Cardosian” refers to the former Brazilian president and marxist sociologist Fernando Henrique Cardoso.  Clearly, that doesn’t make any sense within Daffydoug’s rant so, given his penchant for misspelling, I tried googling “cardosian” with what I assumed to be its synonym: “devilish”.  And what did I get?  

Google: “Did you mean “Cardassian devilish”?

Well, I have no idea what Cardassian means, either!  But with just one more Google I find out it has to do with weird Star Trek characters!  Oh, “This must be it!," I think to myself.  Getting excited, I wiki CARDASSIAN!: (And I think we have our answer, Andy… excerpted From Wiki on “Cardassian"):

The Obsidian Order is a Cardassian intelligence organization in the Star Trek universe. Security Chief Odo of Deep Space Nine remarked that it was one of the most brutally efficient organizations in the galaxy, being even more ruthless than the Romulan Tal Shiar. The Order kept close tabs on all Cardassian citizens to ensure loyalty, and was greatly feared. It was said that the average Cardassian could not sit down to dinner without the contents of the meal being noted and logged by the Order. Odo also noted that the Order caused people to disappear for even less than eating something of which the Order did not approve, although this statement may have just been an exaggeration for effect.

You are greatly feared, Andy.

Sincerely,

DoubleD

I think that solves that. I mean, it's still no clearer to me what the hell he was talking about. But that goes for most of that email.

---

A.S. writes in to draw my attention to Daffydoug's Cafe profile...

I'm not sure you need to say your interests include  "magic" on a website devoted to people interested in magic. If you were on a site devoted to big titties, you wouldn't feel the need to proclaim your interest in big titties.

Some might think he's missing a comma, but I'm going to bet "ventriloquism chess" is a real thing. Like you play chess against a stuffed animal or some shit? So you always win or something. I don't know. I just know when I picture Daffydoug playing chess I imagine him picking up the two kings and smashing them together to "fight" like I used to do with my GI-Joes.

His interests also include: word and vocabular. That has to be another Start Trek thing, right? He didn't really mess up the wording to indicate his interest in words, did he? He never fails to disappoint. 

---

But then J.L. had to write in to inform me of a thread on the Cafe and totally bring me down.

Speaking of Daffydoug, did you know he used to carry his vent dummy around to amusement parks? there was a whole thread of him first telling people, then everybody saying he was a weirdo, then Daffy defending himself.

Some sad shit. 

Sad indeed! Look, Daffydoug, I think you're a good dude. I don't like to think of you roaming amusement parks looking for attention. I'd be happy to be your friend if you need someone to talk to. Yeah, I know you essentially wished cancer on me, but I don't have any hard feelings. It's not that I don't carry a grudge. It's that I feel no grudge in the first place. Sure, you may never look at me as anything other than your "orgulous, bovaristic young nemisis" but I have no ill-feelings to you at all. Or any of the other goofballs I used to make fun of on my old site: Steve Brooks, Glenn Bishop, You, the Cafe Staff member who was using the same screen-name in his magic groups as he was on alt.fan.cocksucking as he trolled for "bears" to fuck, or the kid who regaled us with his story of performing for some Chinese people with their "squinchy little eyes." I have great affection for all of you dips. Oh sure, I'd bash my skull in with a Thermos if I had to take a 20-minute bus ride with any of you as my seatmates, but that doesn't mean I have any real dislike for any of you. So if you're feeling lonely and contemplating a trip to the amusement park to... I don't know... pretend you work there?... and try and make friends with your dummy, you can always send me an email instead. We can play online ventriloquism chess or something. 

And It's Magic, If the Music Is Groovy

Here's a tip for all you ladies out there. When you're out on a date with a guy, and you're thinking of taking things to the next level, tell him you have a personal question that's "a little dirty." This will get him all wound up. Then ask him what kind of music he likes to fuck to. If he says anything like:

• Let's Get It On by Marvin Gaye
• Sexual Healing by Marvin Gaye
• Can't Get Enough of Your Love by Barry White
• Love to Love You Baby by Donna Summer

Just kindly excuse yourself to the restroom and then run home as fast as you can. That is not going to be a satisfying sexual experience. That's going to be two minutes of missionary and a sticky belly. 

Your fuck-mix is supposed to be songs with beats and intensities that are good for sex. It's not supposed to be songs about sex you goddamned knuckleheads! How cliched and uncreative can you be. Is this how people are with music in the rest of their lives?

"What song would you like us to play at the end of your father's funeral?"

"Thanks for asking. Could you play, 'I'm So Sad, 'Cause Daddy Died'?"

You're supposed to be scoring a situation. Not describing it. 

Magicians have a similar problem. Can we stop using songs about magic in magic performances? 

No more:

• Abracadabra by The Steve Miller Band
• Do You Believe In Magic by The Lovin' Spoonful
• You Can Do Magic by America
• Magic by Olivia Newton John
• I Put a Spell On You by Screamin' Jay Hawkins
• Magic Man by Heart
• Magic by The Cars
• Magic by Pilot

And so on. 

Or, if you feel the song has to be about magic, how about choosing a song that isn't completely fucked-out? I mean, unless you need the double whammy of obvious and hackneyed. Actually, for most magic shows, "Obvious and Hackneyed" would be a good subtitle. Or they could be a new magic duo.

Here, for the lazy, are some genuinely good "magic" songs that aren't completely played-out. 

God! Show Me Magic by The Super Furry Animals

Camilo (The Magician) by Said The Whale

Magician in the Mountains by Sunforest

Magic by The Blakes

Uri Geller by The Wannadies

Flashback to... The Time Daffydoug Flipped His Shit Because He Was Nominated For the Brooksy

Just a reminder to get in your nominations for the 2nd Magic Cafe Golden Idiot awards. They may take a different form this go-around. I think there are a lot less lovable idiots on the Cafe these days. So we may recognize other achievements instead. Dumbest thread. Worst post. Shittiest Avatar. Most pointless section on the Cafe. We'll see. I like calling an audible on these sorts of things. 

Thinking of the Brooksy awards reminded me of a highlight of the last time we did this. And that's when Daffydoug, after finding out he was in the running for dumbest member of the Cafe, whipped out his thesaurus and harnessed his anger into the email below and then dared me to publish it. I was delighted to do so. And if this is your first time reading it, you'll completely understand why. Below is the post from The Magic Circle Jerk, May 24th, 2004.

---

The Annotated Daffydoug

What follows is an e-mail I received from one of the nominees for the Brooksy, Daffydoug. I have added footnotes, but otherwise it is exactly as I received it. Enjoy.

Let me see if I have this correct now: One lucky contestant, if the stars are right, gets the coveted Magic Circle Jerk award, with all subsequent rewards and priveledges intact. 1

Those priveleges include #1; one hundred green backs out of your own pocket,* #2 one hundred bucks to spend at Penguin as, I assume, an honored "Penguinite" 2

Ahhh! But here's the catch!: The person, whoever they may be, is cleverly put into what you hope will be an "uncomfortable" little paradox. That paradox, reeking of the "genius" that conceived it, is this: If they take the money and give an acceptance speech, then they are, in a sense, admitting to their dumbness. If they don't take the money, then you imagine them at home , biting their lower lip, thinking, "Oh wretched man that I am! Oh, Woe is me!! " 3

This ensuing thought, this imagining, I presume, helps you, my facinorous friend, to get your rocks off. 4

Another way of saying it is this. You are attempting to put them in a position analogous to that of Quasimodo, in the classic old film "The Hunchback Of Notre dame", starring Charles Laughton (sp)5 

Remember that scene? The hunchback was crowned "King Fool", and the mob laughed at him, he being the only one to not realize the intent, gladly clowned around and paraded himself with the crown on his head, little realizing that he was a laughing stock, and even further not realizing that he was just making himself look more stupid. 6

That's the basic intent of your ploy, is it not? (Oh sorry, I forgot. I'm supossed to be so abysmally stupid that I can't even see through it. No way could I EVER concieve of having your astonishing perspicacity, my acuminous little friend! Do you wish for me at this point to do my impersonation of Mortimer Snerd or Beaky Buzzard? Your option, my orgulous, bovaristic young nemisis.. 7

Hell, you ARE one sly dog, aren't you? Aren't you proud? You are such a genius that I don't see how you can stand to look at yourself in the mirror without kissing your image!. When Wile Coyote called himself "super genius", he must have been thinking about YOU! 8

Seriously, man, I can almost SEE the little horns growing out of your head! How deliciously sardonic! How delightfully cardosian of you! You sly dog, you!! How long will you continue to regale us with your rapier like wit? How long will you continue to endear us with your eloquence an undeniable charm? Oh yes! When it comes to wit, you are undeniably the king! As Anna said to the king "Yes your majesty, no your majesty, tell us how high to go your majesty. Don't let us off of our knees your majesty. Give us a kick if you please your majesty!. Oh!! That was GOOD your MAJESTY!! " 9

Is your mama proud, or WHAT? After all, you've made your self KING of your own blog! 10

Now pardon me for a minute , while I go and throw up. 11

O.K. I'm back. Let's see, where was I? Oh yes! We were talking about your incredible ingenious plot to make me squirm. O.K. If it makes you feel better, here goes: (Drum roll please.) 12

I can feel the pain allready. OH MY GOD!! It's piercing through to the very depths of my inner soul! I feel it!! Oh PAIN!! Oh AGONY! Oh excruciating, hellish TORMENT!! God SAVE ME!! God SAVE me!! I'm In HELL! ARRRRGHHHH!! 13There. Did you get your rocks off yet? 14

I'll tell you what, Mr smart ass, here's one for you. I'll take your little wager, and I'll sweeten the pie. Here's what I'll do. Since my intelligence, and subsequently, my IQ has apparently been called into question by he who has set himself up as judge over his fellow man. Let's do it this way. If I win.(And IF a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his ass when he jumps) But I'm saying IF I win, I'll offer you a little challenge to see how godamn smart YOU are. 15

And I'll do it publicly, right on your blog site.(Providing you'll give me access.) (But of course you won't, because you don't have the guts.) 16

That's right. Let's settle this like real men do. With a little duel of wits, a little battle of IQs, as it were. And I name the terms, which I shall refrain from naming until the time come, should I win.. 17

Do you read what I'm saying? Well read my lips. I'll say it slower. PUT your Money where your big mouth is!. 18

That is, IF you think you are man enough. Personally, I don't believe in my heart that you'll go for it. I don't think you have the guts. No, I really don't. Why do I think that? Simple! Because people who talk about other people behind their backs, as you have done about me, are usually cowards, and blow hards, who can bloviate for endless hours about someone they despise, but are really, on the inside, whited sepulchers, clean looking on the outside, but on the inside, really just full of "dead men's bones" and other kinds of vile things. You are, in fact, full of the gall of bitterness. Bitter, bitter, bitter to the marrow of your bones. In fact, this is the very kind of bitterness and hatred that usually MANIFESTS ITSELF in the later years of a person's life as cancer, arthritis, arthersclerosis, or some other equally foul and vile disease. (Which, by the way, serves very nicely to illustrate how hideous and ugly these kinds of spiritual sicknesses really are. In other words, cancer is the very FACE of bitterness! All I can say is this: Keep on planting the seeds, and sure as the sun rises, in season, you'll get your harvest. May be ten years down the road, may be twenty, may be when you are very old, but it WIll happen. You can take it to the bank. Make no mistake about it. Ther'es an eternal law built into the earth that says that a man will harvest EXACTLY what he plants. Call it Karma, call it the "circle of Life", call it what you will, trying to buck it is like trying to jump out a ten story building and saying "I'm not gonna get splattered when I hit the pavement., because I am IMMUNE to that law!" The rest of us will just laugh as they are scraping you off of the pavement with a spatula. 19

Son, you "strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel" You are in fact, blinded by your own strife and bitterness. That's right. I said STRIFE. 20 

If you don't understand those sayings, then I would suggest you go some place,do some EXTREMELY deep soul searching, and gain a little wisdom, because as of now, you have demonstrated precious little. In fact, in the whole grand finiculatum of things, I would say, as George Baily said to Mr Potter, that you don't amount to much more than a "scurvey little spider." 21

BTW, Let's see if you have the guts to post this letter on your blog. Go ahead! I want all your little toadies to read it. UNEDITED! 22

*One hundred bucks out of your own pocket!! Hmmm. They used to say that cats and dogs are the dumb ones, but but I see them getting free meals and board, I see people bending over to pour FREE food into their little bowls. Don't cost the cat anything. It's FREE. Hmmm. Now let;s think here. Who's the one doing the serving here? And who's getting free stuff? Who's REALLY the dumb one here?? It's a no brainer. 23 

Don't matter though, because even if I do win your little contest, you won't ever give me the money. I don't believe that YOU are even THAT dumb! In fact, I will NEVER believe it until I see the money in my hand, providing I win your little "contest" 24

Annotations:

1. First, it's not the Magic Circle Jerk award, it's The Magic Cafe Golden Idiot award, aka The Brooksy. Second, and this is going to be an important theme in my critique, if you're writing an e-mail defending how intelligent you are, please, send that shit through spell-check. You don't want to be spelling privileges with a "d" in there. Now, granted, I misspell shit all the time, but I'm not trying to convince anyone how smart I am.

2. Again, it's privileges, try not to misspell the same word twice, in two different ways, two words away from one another. It's unbecoming. And while I understand you might not be up on your Civil War era slang, the term is greenbacks. One word. If it's two words you have the adjective "green" modifying "back" and it makes no sense. 

3. Hmmm, no, I didn't imagine anyone like that. Not until I got this e-mail, I mean. After reading this panicky, defensive e-mail, I do picture Daffydoug sitting home, shaking his fist at the sky, cursing me, cursing life, cursing this whole tainted orb.

4. Yes. I'm masturbating to this right now.

5. I like that only once in this hideously misspelled e-mail does he whip out the old "(sp)" trick. It's so funny and insufficient. It's like walking through a city that has been demolished by an earthquake and saying "Hey, that stop sign is crooked!"

6. Yeah, that was a sweet scene. Hey, do you remember in the remake of Dawn of the Dead how that one guy was shooting the zombies from the other rooftop and the other guy said he should shoot Burt Reynolds and then the first guy shot the zombie with a mustache? That was awesome too.

7. Misspelled words: supposed "supossed," conceive "concieve," nemesis "nemisis."

How could he misspell these simple words yet accurately spell perspicacity, acuminous, orgulous, and bovaristic? Well, obviously, he's poking around some website or book devoted to obscure words. That can be fun, and it can be fun to try and drop them into conversation because the words themselves are a conversation piece and we can all enjoy how varied and specialized the English language can be. But when you try to make yourself seem smart by using them over and over again, oddly enough, you actually end up sounding really stupid. Strange how that works. Maybe it's because trying to make yourself seem smarter by using long or unknown words is a standard thirteen-year-old thing to do and most thirteen-year-olds are pretty stupid.

8. I doubt that. I wasn't born yet. And he's a cartoon. Oh, and usually when someone calls himself something, he's thinking of himself.

9. Can someone please get their copy of the 2004 Word-A-Day calendar and tell me what the fuck cardosian means? Thanks!

10. I don't think my mother knows that I write a blog. And I didn't have to make myself king of my blog, I'm the only one who writes on it so I guess I'm king by default. 

11. Okay.

12. Brrrdddddddddttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

13. Look, I understand you're trying to be facetious. And you're trying to imply that you're not really affected or bothered by all of this. And that's great, that's the way it should be, you shouldn't be bothered by a stranger saying you're a dope (or multiple strangers in this case). But if I had to guess which nominee was most bothered by this whole thing, I'd guess it's the one who sent me a 17k e-mail telling me how little he gave a shit about it.

14. I'm getting close. Don't stop. 

15. I really think "smart ass" should be hyphenated. And the phrase is "sweeten the pot" not "sweeten the pie" although that does sound tasty. 

16. I won't give you access, not because of a lack of guts but because people don't come to this site looking for your bullshit. They get enough of it at the Cafe.

17. I'm guessing it's a vocab competition.

18. You can see my response to his challenge in my reply to this e-mail.

19. In an e-mail full of dumb paragraphs, that one distinguishes itself without much elaboration. But why stop now? First, is writing about someone on a public blog really considered talking about them, "behind [their] back"? And why am I bitter (bitter, bitter to the marrow)? Because I think Daffydoug makes some dumb post on a message board? Well, fuck, Daffydoug, I'm not the only one who thinks it. The many, many people who wrote in to say what a dumb motherfucker you are seem to think it too (oh and that includes some of the staff at your beloved Cafe). What a cunt, what a Daffycunt. He's so self-absorbed that he thinks anyone who doesn't like his Magic Cafe posts is bitter and is going to get cancer! Oh, and did you not know that cancer is a "spiritual sickness" that only "bitter" folks suffer from? It's true, Dr. Daffydoug says so. So if you have a sweet aunt, or a loving parent who suffers or suffered with cancer, it's because they're bitter, miserable people. Daffydoug HAS to believe I'm bitter. He can't conceive of someone who is happy and has a lot of good friends and is active and kind to people and, at the same time, happens to think Daffydoug is a complete moron.

[Update 2015: Sadly, I believe Daffydoug, has dealt with some cancer issues in his family since he wrote this email. I don't know how those situations resolved themselves, but I truly hope things worked out for the best. And I hope he didn't exacerbate the problem with his poisonous, evil attitude about such situations being the sufferer's fault.]

20. Did he say strife? Wait, I guess he did.

21. I bet when Mr. Bailey said it that he spelled scurvy correctly. As far as finiculatum goes, he's got me stumped. He must be very intelligent to be able to look up an obscure word and then use it. Or maybe he made it up. Perhaps it's the Contrabulous Fabtraption of Professor Daffydoug.

22. Dear little toadies, I hope you've enjoyed daffydoug's e-mail. I was going to edit it to correct all the awful grammar and spelling mistakes but DD wants you to see it unedited.

23. Yes, Daffy, you are as smart as a cat or dog. I do not doubt that.

24. Oh my! Aren't you a bitter, bitter, bitter little man. Watch out, you're going to get cancer if you don't chill out a bit. Why would I lie about giving the money? How would that benefit anybody? Whoever wins will get paid via paypal so there will be a record of it.

For the sake of completeness, what follows is my reply to Daffydoug.

Doug,

I'm sorry you're so offended. Ultimately it was supposed to be all in fun. To quote my site: "I'm actually hoping that whoever wins has a good sense of humor about it and enjoys the whole thing."

And no, you're not supposed to be "so abysmally stupid" that you can't see through my "ploy." My ploy, as you describe it, was completely outlined on my site, so there's really nothing to see through.

I don't need to get into a battle to prove who's more intelligent. If someone wants to do that they can judge us by our past output. And honestly, I don't care if you think you're smarter than me, you may very well be. I don't care. I wish I did; it seems to mean so much to you. 

I know you need to think of me as bitter or  power-hungry or whatever, and I know no amount of remonstrations will convince you otherwise. But the truth is, I'm very happy, and I write the site because there is a group of people out there who seem to enjoy it. But it's a very small part of my life, and I'd be perfectly happy if nobody liked. I don't need that kind of validation.

I'd honestly love to post your e-mail, unedited, on my site. I'm really happy to post people who disagree with me. But I'll give you a day to rescind that offer because I'm sure you'll agree when you reread it that the tenor of your e-mail makes you sound kind of silly.

And there's no E in Brooksy.

Take care,

Andy