The GIF of the Magi: Move Bitch, Get Out the Way

As I mentioned in previous posts, I won't be writing up as many fully formed routines for the site because I'm saving them for the people who bought the book. But I still have plenty of half-baked ideas that may be of interest to people, and may, in fact, be more in their wheelhouse than my usual types of effects and presentations. I will be briefly describing these with some quick GIFs I made to illustrate things in a new feature called: The GIF of the Magi.

Move Bitch, Get Out the Way

The title of this trick comes from the Ludacris song that I enjoy singing while practicing the main sleight involved in this effect. Give it a go. Really hit the bitch part when you flick the card. You'll see.

This trick involves two things I like:

1. Cards being split into component cards. Like a deuce being split into two aces. I like it because it's a bizarre concept, but it has an internal logic to it. 
2. The concept/sleight -- and someone will have to help me as to where this originated -- where you use discarded cards to hide the extra card in a color change. It's a fun one to practice and the organic "black art" principle is an interesting thing to think about.

Set-up: Face-down from the the top down: red two, red ace, red ace, black ace, black ace, black two. Turn the bottom half of the deck face-up. Turn the entire deck over so your set up is face-up on the bottom of the deck.

Performance: Start dealing off the cards in a very messy pile, and ask your spectator to tell you when to stop.

When they do, draw attention to the pile and push the cards around a little with your right hand making some comment about how many you dealt while your left hand secretly flips the deck over. 

Say, "There's no way I could have any idea you'd have me deal this many cards, stopping at this one. [You pull off the top card of the deck, the red two, and hand it to him face down.] It could have been anything, a four, a king, but in this case it's a...?" While you're saying this, get a break under the top two cards.

He says, "Two," and at the same time you say, "Ace." Act confused, take the card back from him face-up onto the deck. Scratch the face of the card a little. Say, "It was suppose to be an ace. Maybe it got stuck to another one? That can happen. " Take of the top three cards as one, and flick the edge ("Move... bitch!") over the discards, secretly revolving the packet and splitting the 2 into two aces.

"Yeah, sometimes if two aces are next to each other, they get stuck and become a two. You know, depending on the weather and whatnot."

You now give the deck an in-the-hands false-cut that doesn't expose the reversed bottom half (or you can adjust the reversed half via a halfpass during your previous bullshitting). Say something like, "Since you found an ace, now it's my turn." Do a triple-turnover to show another two. (You can spread the cards to get a break before that.) When you're done you have a two face-up with two face-up aces underneath. (I spread the cards in the GIF below, but that's just to show the condition, you don't actually do that.)

Say, "Goddamn this humidity! It happened again."

You take the three cards as one. The action that follows will be more easily explained via the GIF. Essentially you want to make it look like you rip the 2 into two aces. You hold the card(s) as if you're going to tear it. Then you push the top card into your right hand and pull down the bottom cards with your left, in a tearing motion. Your right hand makes an upward motion to draw their eyes, while your left dumps the deuce on the discards.

Now you're clean and you have four aces with which to go into your least favorite four ace trick. 

The discard camouflage pile is a fun thing to mess around with. I think it works particularly well in casual performances. I first read about it in use as a straight color change, but I can't remember where.

But I've also used it to merge cards together in order to find a spectator's card.

Or -- if you can justify the flicking movement -- you can use it as part of a delayed change: changing the back of a card or having writing appear on it.

Gardyloo #1

Hey guys, what's your favorite song about fucking your lady on a hayride after your mom suggests that might be a fun activity?

Mine is probably this one:

---

Dear Steve Brooks,

I think you accidentally deleted a thread about this site off the Magic Cafe. Joe Mckay wrote the embarrassingly complimentary post below in the Latest and Greatest section, but it doesn't seem to be there anymore. Any idea what could have happened? Maybe one of your staff members was a little over-zealous and thought you were so delicate that you couldn't withstand some gentle teasing (even though I haven't really mentioned you at all in months.) Maybe someone got mad that all the responses to the post were positive? I'm sure you didn't delete the thread. You're not that much of a puss. 

I say you put the thread back up as a gesture to people that there are no hard feelings between us and that you're perfectly capable of taking a joke. You don't need to censor things; you're not a baby. I mean, I'd happily post anything you wanted me to here, unedited and unannotated. I ain't scurred. Or, maybe I've got you all wrong, maybe you want our old antagonistic relationship back. If so, don't put that thread back and I'll take that as my cue. I'm a nice guy and I want to indulge you with whatever type of relationship you want. Frankly, for me, it's better to be viewed as the guy whose site you can't mention on the Cafe. You're just helping my brand. So don't do it for my sake. Do it for your sake. (Unless you think there's something flattering about being perceived as someone who deletes posts just because he doesn't like the subject matter.)

---

I'm finalizing the first installment of X-Communication, the email newsletter that goes out to people who ordered the book during the initial donation period or who have signed up for a monthly donation here. The newsletter will consist of reviews and presentational ideas I have for (mostly) new products. There will be just a few reviews each month but that's because I really only want to write about things that I've performed for people, that have been performed for me, or that I've seen a friend perform live. 

The first installment is written and you should get it before Thanksgiving. I'm just trying to determine the best way to send it and present it; whether as a pdf, a normal email, or via some newsletter service. If any of you who will be receiving it have a preference, let me know. 

Originally I had planned to make it look like one of those xeroxed magic publications from the mid-80s. But I think I nailed the style a little too well, to the point where it's annoying to read. I'll probably go with something more straightforward when it comes time to actually send it out.

An Example of 3rd Wave Equivoque

My friend was showing me a Russian Roulette style effect where he held his hands over styrofoam cups and there was a nail or a knife or something under one of them. I was encouraging him to do the effect with one upright dildo in a series of brown paper bags that he would violently sit on with his bare bottom. "Just think of how many hits you'll get on youtube when you inevitably fuck the trick up!" I said, in the spirit of genial goodfellowship. Despite my encouragement to consider this Russian Poo-lette, he wasn't having it. [Edit: According to Denis Behr, this exact routine was done in a German magic competition in 2008. Germany, you sick fucks. Prior to this I've had no issue with anything you've done as a country. But this is taking things a little too far.]

He started with 6 or 7 cups but was now down to two. The cups had been mixed by a third party so neither of us knew where the knife was. Well, at least I didn't. He held his right hand over one cup and his left hand over another. I knew this last move was magician's choice. He would ask me to point to a hand and then he would take that as me eliminating that hand or me saying that's the one he should slam onto the cup.

But he didn't do that. Instead he said, "I'm going to slam down one of these hands. And you're going to make the decision as to which hand I do. So which hand is safe?" he asked. I perked up a little because this isn't where I thought he was going. 

"The left one," I said.

"My left hand? Or the one on your left side? I want to be very clear about this," he said. I was thrown again by this. I thought maybe he was going to try and take advantage of the left/right ambiguity.

"Your left hand," I said.

"My left hand is safe?" he said, raising the hand slowly. I again found this odd. The slow, deliberate way he was allowing me to make the choice. 

"You have one chance to change your mind," he said.

"Okay, your right hand is safe," I said, casually, because he seemed too content with me saying the left hand. 

"Okay, I hope you're correct," he said, raising his right hand and slamming it down on the cup. It was empty. He tipped the left-hand cup over to reveal the gleaming knife standing upright. "Thanks for changing your mind."

I was confused at first. I thought maybe he was using rubber knives or something that allowed me a free choice at the end. But he assured me it was equivoque. I didn't immediately get it. I did quite a bit of equivoque work, but it always felt very different -- done at a rapid pace and without clear choices being made. "We're going to do this by process of elimination. Point to a hand. Okay, that's your selection." Or, "We're going to do this by process of elimination. Point to a hand. Okay, that's eliminated." And then move on quickly. I was tripped up by the deliberate way in which he asked the question.

"Show me the other outcome," I said.

He held his left hand over the knife and his right hand over the empty cup.

"I'm going to slam down one of these hands. And you're going to make the decision as to which hand I do. So which hand is safe?" he said for a second time.

"The left hand," I said, as it rested above the upturned knife. 

"You're sure?" he asked, raising that hand slowly. 

"Yes," 

"Okay," he said, continuing to raise the hand away from the table and then in the same motion shift it behind his back. "You've decided the left hand should be safe. But this one," he said, motioning to his right hand, "is still in danger. That was your choice. I hope you're correct." And he slammed his hand down on the empty cup. 

For a moment I was still seduced by the cleanliness and freedom of the choice that I almost forgot how we got to that point. And then everything came into focus in regards to what he was doing and that is what set me on a path of working to make all my equivoque this strong.

I received a couple emails asking me to explain what I mean by 3rd Wave Equivoque. It will be explained in full in the upcoming book, but the example above was the first time I saw it in a performance. Or at least the first time I recognized it as something slightly different than standard equivoque. Here's what makes it different:

1. It can be done slowly.

2. The choices seem to have some value. Saying something is "safe" seems to be a statement that carries some meaning. Whereas, "Point to a hand," does not.

3. You can reiterate the choice and give them a chance to change their mind after they know the apparent ramifications of their choice. In this case he could ask me if I was sure that was the hand I wanted to be "safe." In traditional equivoque they can only change their mind before you tell them what their choice means. That's a huge difference.

4. And finally, what makes it so deceptive is that the two choices are not complementary to each other. When you say, "We're going to flip one of these two coins. Hand me one. Okay, we'll eliminate it." It's not that difficult to realize that, "We're going to flip one of these two coins. Hand me one. Okay, that's the one we'll flip," is a complementary phrase that could be used if the person gave you the other coin. This is especially true in a long series of equivoque where the person soon recognizes that the result of their choices isn't necessarily what they thought they would be.

In this case we're relying on the richness of what it means to designate a hand as "safe." 

It means there is no knife under that hand. 

That makes perfect sense.

It means that's not the hand you're going to slam down.

That too makes perfect sense. And neither phrase automatically suggests the other (as happens with complementary phrases.) 

To put it another way, both statements are logically true. "There is no knife under that hand, so that hand is safe." And, "You're not going to slam that hand on a cup, so that hand is safe." Either statement will be accepted 100% because they're 100% logical. "You turned that card face-down, so that's your selection," is not a logical sentence in the sense that the second part of the sentence doesn't necessarily follow from the first part.

I don't know if I'm over-explaining this or not explaining it enough.

I'm not claiming to have invented these types of equivoque questions. Many of the ones I use I have stolen from other, longer, equivoque routines. The problem I had with those routines is that they'll have one really strong phase that is almost always followed by more traditional equivoque options ("hand me," "turn over," "point to") that I think undermine the strength of the style I'm writing about here. In the book I give a couple more examples of this style, including a way to equivoque down to one card from an imaginary full deck with no unclear decisions made along the way. (And I teach this in a manner that I think is going to make you cream your jeans. I'm legitimately excited for you people who have ordered the book. I'm seriously going to ruin you for other magic books.)

Some Junk I Found

Here is some junk I found on the internet while working on some future posts.

---

Here's a guy who is trying to explain the concept of sin via the professor's nightmare trick. Because... why not? (Now, is he just trying to cram a patter over the top of a trick that it doesn't apply to? Or is it true that god doesn't differentiate between rapists and people who commit some minor sin? That's fucking moronic if that's the case. Yeah, I'll question god. And if he doesn't like it, may he strike me de

Damn, I died before I had a chance to close the parentheses.

---

Zach King with another nice illusion...

---

I was doing a google image search for "Joshua Jay" for something dumb I'm working on. If you do that search you get a surprising number of mugshots. But I think my favorite row of results that I came across was this one. (And I do mean came across.) 

I specifically like it because the third pic makes it look like he's miming a blowjob to the fourth pic.

The $10 Peek Wallet

Testing Peeks

I have a number of very strong revelations for peeked information, but I don't have what I would consider to be a perfect peek. I think it's very difficult to know with any certainty what an audience will find suspicious when it comes to a peek. Last year I did some testing where the audience could register as they watched a performance when they thought something fishy was going on. They did this via swiping up and down on an iphone to register their suspicion. Swiping up meant they were skeptical about what was going on, swiping down meant they were believing what they were seeing. It's like those dials they give people to watch the presidential debates and register if they agree or disagree with what the candidates are saying. What we had after this testing was a little seismograph of audience suspicion that we could play along with the performance and see exactly where they were calling bullshit in their minds as they watched the performance. This may seem like a lot of effort to go to, and it was, but I've been on the lookout for a perfect peek for years now and I knew doing this would point me in that direction, or at least let me know what techniques I should avoid. 

The main thing I learned from this testing is that if you want to avoid suspicion you can't ever look in the area where the information supposedly is. This may seem beyond obvious, but many peeks do just that.

For example, putting a card with an unknown word on it in your wallet raised suspicion slightly. If you then re-open that wallet to get something, suspicion goes off the chart. (And this is the exact choreography of a number of peek wallets.) The problem is, unless you draw undue attention to it, the spectator's aren't focusing on the layout of your wallet. So they will remember you putting it in, but when you go back to your wallet they don't remember if you put it in a section that somehow precluded you from seeing the other side, so they'll just assume that's what you're doing.

Similarly, if you tear up a billet with your head clearly facing left and your hands outstretched to the right, there is little suspicion. But if you even glance at the pieces in the process, the action is completely suspect. It was disheartening to watch people be unimpressed by world-class mentalists peeking the word in real time as they tore up the card. Then to watch those same people get fooled by my friend who would tear up the card (eyes tightly closed, head facing the opposite direction), and drop the pieces in the spectator's hands to go flush down the toilet, then take all the time he needed to read the word on the stolen piece while they were in the bathroom.

So that principle, as basic and obvious as it may sound, is what guides me when looking for a new peek. The one you'll read below isn't perfect, but it's one of my new favorites.

The $10 Peek Wallet

A month or so ago, my friend showed up with a new peek wallet. It cost him ten dollars and it was pretty much the dumbest, simplest peek wallet you could imagine. But its simplicity allowed me to come up with what I found to be a very disarming handling for it. 

The wallet comes with The Ultimate Networking Tool. I do not have a clue of what the Ultimate Networking Tool is, but I do know that the package includes this wallet and it's 10 bucks total. What do you have to lose?

I should mention that it's not an actual wallet. Like it doesn't hold cash. It's meant to hold business cards. But it's not unlike the type of wallet I do often use in my everyday life which is designed to hold a few credit cards (I just keep my cash in pocket).

My Handling

You should have your license in the peek area and a couple credit cards and a business card in the wallet.

You take the business card out of your wallet and have your friend write whatever you plan to reveal on it. You're turned away throughout this. When she's done you turn back to her and say, "Hold it between... actually... hand it to me...." And you take the card and put it in the wallet (sliding it under your license and leaving a couple millimeters hanging out so it can be removed easily). 

Justifying the Wallet
People are always looking for a justification for putting the card back into the wallet. I don't know that anyone has found a good reason for this. So instead of giving a rationale (which might come off as bullshitty), you're going to imply one. And since you're not actually stating it outright, there's nothing for your audience to push back against. They're not going to call you out on a rationale that they themselves have concocted in their mind. 

The implication you make is that you were first just going to ask them to hold the card between their hands, then you "decide" to put it in the wallet as something of an extra barrier. You then have her put the wallet between her hands. And then you place your hands on either side of hers. The wallet is now just one of many layers of protection between you and the card. 

What makes this so disarming is that you're handing the wallet in the "peekable" state to your spectator immediately after you put the card in. And getting the peek as you do so. In action this looks like this (except placed onto the spectator's hand, and not your own):

The card is in the wallet, the wallet is between her hands, her hands are between yours. At this point you will act as if you're receiving/reading part of the information. So if she wrote down a name you'll be able to guess the gender or the first initial. And if it's a number you might be able to say how many digits and if it's even or odd. Then you act like you're stumped, that the information isn't coming through as clear as you'd like, and you say something like, "Can you?... actually, no... I don't want to see it." At this point you are going to have your spectator clean up for you. Walk across the room and turn your back to your friend. "Can you open the wallet and pull out the card? Toss the wallet aside, we don't need it anymore." Now you have your friend crumple up the card and hold it in a fist or sit on it or put it in her bra or go outside and bury it. Whatever you want. The point is that the effect ends with the wallet out of play and the card in a completely unreadable position and that's when you do the bulk of the effect.

But Andy, you can't put a peek wallet in the spectator's hands and have them handle it and remove the card.

Sure you can. This handling puts very little heat on the wallet and the likelihood of something going wrong is greatly diminished by the choreography of the effect. Consider:

• There is an implied justification for the wallet.

• It's immediately placed in the spectator's hands once the card is in there. And then it's sandwiched between her hands, meaning there isn't time for her to fiddle around with it.

• People are less likely to suspect an object that you've placed in their hands.

• The wallet is only not sandwiched in her hands once she's given the task of opening it and removing the card. Most spectators are more engaged in following your directions than screwing around at that point.

• The main part of the trick is done after the card is removed from the wallet. And after the card is removed, the wallet is completely examinable. So the only time they can bust you is before the heart of the trick happens, when their guard isn't up as much.

You can test the safety of this without actually doing the trick. Take a bifold wallet and ask your friend to watch you put a card in one of the slots. Then have them hold the wallet between their hands. Then ask them to open the wallet and remove the card. At no point will they turn the wallet over. It doesn't aid in any of those actions. 

And in a worst case scenario, where for some reason they start looking the wallet over rather than opening it and removing the card when you tell them to, here is what you do.

Them: Hey! You can see the card through here...

You: [turning around] What's that? Whoa, hey! Don't show it to me, you dingbat! Just put it in a different slot or something or fold it up and put it in your pocket.

Unlike most peek wallets that have some features that are clearly not normal, with this wallet you're just taking advantage of a fairly standard wallet construction. So even when the card is in peek position, it's not really unnatural and you can easily pass it off as just a mistake if it was noticed. Because the peek itself is so smooth and motivated it draws no attention to itself. The brief moment where you are holding the wallet with the card in it isn't memorable enough for them to zero in on as being the moment where you did what you needed to do.

Again, I don't know what makes this the "Ultimate Networking Tool." (It really should be called the Conjurer's Ultimate Networking Tool -- you know, so people will know it's for magicians. No other reason. None at all.) But at this point in time it is the only peek wallet I have in rotation and it allows an innocent handling that many of the $100 wallets don't.

.ORG

This is going to be some true magic-nerd type shit. Well, not even "magic" nerd, but "organizational" nerd. I'm a queeny little fusspot when it comes to organization. I don't like clutter. And magic produces two types of clutter: actual physical junk and then a kind of clutter of the mind. And I find that both of these things get in the way of me ever actually performing. 

Watching how other people organize has always been motivational to me to get my own shit together. So perhaps seeing my system will inspire you or encourage you to come up with your own system if you don't already have one.

Organizing Ideas

I have too many ideas, and if I don't track them in some way, I forget them. I used to think that was a good enough system itself: don't write anything down and if the idea is good enough, you'll remember it. Like survival of the fittest for ideas. But then I found myself having good ideas, not writing them down, and forgetting them. The only remnant of the idea that remained was the vivid memory of thinking, "Oh, this is a great idea, I'll never forget this." So I decided to establish a very basic system.

The system I use has three components:

1. A notes app on my phone. (I use Vesper)

2. A small physical notebook. (I use something like this.)

3. A documents folder on my computer

The only "goal" here is to get the idea into the physical notebook. But I don't want to always carry around a notebook and a pen. I'll bring it with me if I'm carrying a messenger bag or something, but if I'm just going out, I don't bother taking it with me.

So, if I get an idea and my notebook is with me, I'll write it in there. If my notebook isn't with me I'll write it on my phone in as few words as possible without forgetting what the idea is later. 

Once a week, I douche out the notes app on my phone and write those ideas in the notebook.

I read through the notebooks every now and then, on no set schedule, and when an idea seems worth pursuing I will open a new document for it in Google Docs. Simple.

That's the basics of it. For me it is a system that captures everything, but isn't overwhelming.

Organizing Your Repertoire

Tracking the tricks I know in a spreadsheet may have had the greatest impact on me actually performing for people on a regular basis. If you're like me, you have a ton of effects that you've worked on casually. And you remember them for a little bit, but then you forget the actual workings, and soon you forget the effect even exists. This is why a lot of amateurs end up performing the same three tricks all the time; they're the only ones they remember. Or they don't perform at all. 

I use Google Docs a lot, as you'll see in this post. The reason is because I can access it from anywhere and on any device.

In my Google Docs I have a spreadsheet called "Repertoire." These are the effects I've learned that I want to remember. There are a bunch of different tabs in the spreadsheet. Each tab represents a broad category of performing condition/necessary requirements.

Here are the tabs I have in my spreadsheet:

FASDIU - "From A Shuffled Deck In Use" - These are the effects in my repertoire that require just an ungimmicked, unprepared deck of cards.

Carry On - These are tricks that require me to carry something with me. For example, Double Deception by Mark Mason requires me to have two gimmicked coins on me. Now, I'm not someone who loads up his pockets with shit before going outside. But I may take one thing with me before I leave the house in the morning, especially if I know I'll be hanging out with people that day. And then I kind of rotate my way through this list. I'll continue to take the same item until I perform it, then the next day I'll take the next item on the list.

FASLIU - "From A Shuffled Life In Use" - This is just my way of referring to impromptu effects with normal items that I don't carry with me. Things that don't use cards and that I can get into at any moment.

Wallet - A list of tricks that would make sense to carry in my wallet (e.g., tricks with bills, business cards, etc.). I don't cram a bunch of stuff in my wallet, but I will keep one or two gimmicked items in there and rotate them out as I perform them.

Phone - A list of tricks on your phone or using your phone. There's no reason not to have a couple of tricks you can do with your phone. People used to carry handkerchiefs and we did tricks with them, now we carry phones. And that's why my phone is covered in snot.

Stacked - Tricks with a stacked deck. Not necessarily a full-stack, but any effect requiring a stack that I can't get into in the moment of the effect.

MAD - (Marker and Deck) - Tricks that use just a deck and a marker. 

Gimmicked - Tricks that require a gimmick of some sort and aren't the sort of thing I would carry around with me on a regular basis. (Tricks with gimmicked decks, for example.) 

Special - Tricks, like many of the ones I've written for this site, that are for special occasions. Meaning they require a large investment of time or set-up.

Missing Parts - Tricks I want to work on but I can't at the moment because I'm missing something I need to perform them.

New Ones - Tricks I've identified as ones I want to add to my repertoire but have not worked on yet.

Stage - Effects that I think are good stage effects (for myself or, more likely, other performers I'm working with).

Perfect - Tricks that I think are perfect methodologically, that I can perform flawlessly, and that I have a perfect presentation for. The purpose of this section is two-fold. It allows me to identify tricks that are at the heart of my repertoire and that I would use if I was only going to interact with a person one time and wanted to have a particularly profound effect on them. And by having a section for "perfect" tricks it reminds me to make note of, and work on, the flaws in the other tricks in my repertoire.

Consider - Tricks I haven't decided I want to add to my repertoire but something about them intrigued me and I might want to reconsider them in the future.

If you do something like this, you will end up with different categories than I have because what I think is important to keep track of won't be what you think is important to keep track of. 

I try to practice the tricks in my repertoire once a week. This is just to keep the set-ups and the moves in mind. I don't rehearse a script. I remember the gist of what I will say with each effect. The less my scripting sounds rehearsed the better for my style. To go through everything takes me maybe three hours, but I don't do it in one chunk, I do it throughout the week while I'm watching Dr. Phil or some other garbage. Yes, yes, I know, you need to have dedicated practice sessions to perfect a trick. Fine, I'll give you that. But just to keep the procedures fresh in your mind I find it's enough to just spend a minute or two thinking about the trick or working through it with the props in hand once a week.

Organizing the tricks like this allows me to practice them very rapidly. For the FASDIU ones I just need a deck in front of me. For the ones with a marker and a deck, I just need those two things. The effects that comprise the list of "Carry On" and "Gimmicked" are not only on the same spreadsheet but they're stored together in real life. That way I can work through those effects one right after the other without having to hunt down the props. 

Another spreadsheet I keep has a list of effects I perform across the top and friends I perform for frequently along the side. Then I fill in the field at the intersection of the two if I've performed that trick for that person. Then, if I need to, I can quickly check this spreadsheet on my phone earlier in the evening before launching into that trick later that night and determine if I've done that effect for that person before. You don't want to be like, "You know, the time is right for a once in a lifetime miracle," and have them say, "Oh, you've shown this to me before."

(I don't only perform for women. I just have different spreadsheets for men and women.)

One final bit of organizational porn for you -- both in real life and on a spreadsheet -- is how I keep track of my decks. The first thing I did was get a couple of cassette tape holders. What I have found is that people are more than happy to give you anything related to cassette tapes. Just ask around. Cassette tape storage is not a big concern for people these days, yet they often have these large organizers taking up space in their homes. Most people are happy to get rid of them. And if someone does say, "But where will I put my cassettes?" You say, "In the trash." Because that's the only right answer. 

Anywho, I have a couple of these under my bed. Then, on a spreadsheet in Google Docs, I have the same grid layout and each cell is filled out with what deck is in that slot. So if I need to find a blank deck, I just search "blank" on the spreadsheet, see that it's in the third column, fourth deck down, and then pluck it out of the holder. This may all seem very persnickety, but it has saved me time from opening and closing 50 different card cases to find the ones I want, and I've found it to be faster than labelling the outside of the box and then searching through them.

The purpose of this organization is not just to be a little twat about "everything having a place" or something like that. If you've ever had a perpetually messy room in your house -- a garage, kitchen, or basement -- and then finally cleaned it up and realized you could actually use that space for something, that's the same as this. Getting your shit in order is the first step in doing something productive with it.

I'm About To Blow Your Mind Like It Was A Super Nintendo Cartridge

I love a good interactive magic trick. The ability to reach through the screen and amaze someone in their own home from 100s or 1000s of miles away, that's real magic. 

I created this effect ten or so years ago and posted it on my old blog. At that time there wasn't really an easy way for people to spread the word about it. Since then I've seen a lot of interactive magic tricks blow-up and go viral -- which wasn't even really a concept back when I wrote this originally. I'm almost hesitant to post it because I know it's going to be all over reddit and on boingboing and all over social media and people are going to flip their shit and be like, "So wait... is psychic power real?" And I'll have to direct them to my disclaimer or else people will be sending me emails about healing their grandma's anal palsy with my immense powers. And yeah, that's all going to be a pain to deal with, but sometimes you just want to freak people's beans so bad like I'm going to do with this trick.

Take a look at the picture below. Allow your eyes to scan back and forth along the cards, finally resting on one of them. This is your selection. However, if you'd like, I will give you one chance to change your mind to another card. Go ahead. Do you have a card in mind? Don't forget it. Scroll down the page slowly and you will come to a second picture where your thought of card has completely disappeared. 

Now repeat the magic incantation..

Dear
heavenly
father,
please
allow
the
thought
of
card
to
vanish
from
the
next
picture.
For
once,
do
me
a
solid.
You
were
always
doing
stuff
for
Jesus.
And
why
was
that?
Oh,
because
he
was
your
son?
That's
called
nepotism, 
god.
And
sure,
maybe
Jesus,
like
Rumer
Willis,
is
talented
in
his
own
right
but
you
still
know
you
pulled
some
strings.
I'm
just
asking
you
this
one
favor.
Make
the
thought
of
card
disappear.
Amen.

And shazam! Your card is gone!

If you were amazed, make sure to post this to your facebook and tweet it and send it to your boss on LinkedIn and let your fellow anal palsy sufferers on patientslikeme.com know about it.