Invest In Your Happiness

[Weekends are for non-magic posts.]

This is a subject I've written about before, but it's going to take on a new importance in regards to this site very soon. (Foreshadowing!)

Here is what I wrote about it a year ago.

I will tell you what I do. I put an item in my budget (I don't really have a budget, I just do this mentally) for $30 a month. Then I decide what my 3 favorite sites/performers/podcasts are and donate $10 a month to them. Of course, I support other content providers as well by buying the things they release or whatever, but this is what I do for the three entities that provide me the most joy on a regular basis. I don't just do it for them, I do it for my own peace of mind. Peace of mind in the sense that if the site I'm supporting does eventually shut down, I don't have to wonder if my contribution could have made a difference. (And when we're talking about very small enterprises (not something like NPR), a few donations a month one way or the other could very well be the deciding factor.)

That "line in my budget" is now $50. And as i said, it's not just about supporting those projects. I do it for my benefit. This is the way I think about it. "These things make me happy. The fact that they're free is great. But if I'm not supporting the things that make me happy, what the hell am I doing? Why am I hoping to just skate by and hoping these things stick around?"  I watched too many blogs, podcasts, youtube channels, and things like that fall off the face of the earth because people weren't backing them. Now at least I can say I've done my part.

You may think I'm setting you up with this post, and I am, in a sense, because Season 2 of the Jerx will happen only if people are on board to support it. But that's not my point in writing it. I'm completely content either way regardless of what happens with this site. I'm writing this because I think it's a genuine tip that has made my life better.

You get more enjoyment out of the things you like when you support them. It makes you feel more enmeshed in the good things in your life.

I've come to realize that not supporting these things is the ultimate form of low-self esteem. There's something that gives me a couple hours of pleasure a month and I'm going to mull over the idea of giving them a few dollars a month? Fuck that noise. I value my happiness too much to be cheap about it. So should you.

Gardyloo #16

Hey app owners. Version 1.3 should be in the app store now or will be shortly. It adds a pretty sweet new feature to the app that I think you're going to like called "Light Lunch." Check the instructions for the details.

---

JL writes in to suggest this mask for those of you want to go as a homeless Kenton Knepper for Halloween. (Or regular Kenton Knepper. What's the difference.) 

---

Professor Andster writes in to suggest combining the recent Drone Strike trick with Bazillion Dollar Bill Mystery and having the second half of the bill appear attached to the drone. It's a good idea. The nice thing about BDBM is you can literally cause that bill to appear anywhere. A floating island in the sky is a good place. 

---

Friends of the Jerx: Andy Martin Wants You to Listen to Derek and Clive

["Friends of The Jerx" is where I highlight people who have contributed to this site, the projects they're involved in, or the subjects they're interested in.]

Andy Martin has many products and services he could ask me to shill if he wanted to, but he doesn't. Instead he just wants me to spread the word about British comedy duo Derek and Clive.

Derek and Clive are characters created by Peter Cook and Dudley Moore. Well "characters" might be too much of a stretch. The audio recordings they made aren't exactly big character studies. In fact they remind me of the audio tapes I used to make with friends when I was a kid. Just two people sitting around trying to make each other laugh. But Derek and Clive are much, much filthier than I ever was or have been, and much darker too. Apparently Moore and Cook's relationship was falling apart and you can hear it in these recordings. I don't know about that because I knew nothing about Moore and Cook's partnership. 

There's not really much to say about the albums they put out. They defy any critical analysis really. I wish I had discovered these recordings when I was a 13-year-old British boy in the late 70s. I have a feeling I would have found them to be the funniest thing ever back then. These days the language, while hyper crude, isn't so shocking. So something like a horse race where the horses are named dirty words doesn't really reverberate that much with me. Although watching how much Dudley Moore gets a kick out of it during the recording does make me enjoy it.

So do Andy Martin a favor and check out some Derek and Clive. If you're a genuine sick fuck weirdo you'll probably really be taken with it right away. I've been listening to it on and off for a year now. I particularly enjoy the improvisational style and the dynamic between the two performers. At the very least you'll start talking about everything giving you "the horn" which is something I picked up and enjoy saying about pretty much anything. (Because pretty much anything does give me the horn.)

Here's the album Andy recommended to me:

Drone Strike: Public Record

Last week an ebook was sent out to a couple of GLOMM members called Drone Strike: Classified. It requires the use of a quadcopter. Ideally you want one with a camera and FPV (first person view, meaning you can see what the camera sees via a live feed) but it's not mandatory. The tricks below are described as if it has a camera. 

Yes this is a somewhat significant expense (depending on which model you buy), but this is also a pretty major league effect. And the quadcopter is fun to own regardless of doing tricks with it.

Here is the effect.

You stand out in an open field with your spectator. About 20 feet behind you the quadcopter rests on the ground. You tell your spectator you wanted to do this trick out away from everyone where you couldn't have any assistance from a secret helper. "In addition, I'm going to have the drone film us from above so you have a full 360 degree view of everything and you can be certain that no one else is involved. There's no one behind you, no one at all around. Okay?" 

You launch the quadcopter and both wave at the camera. it hovers about 20 feet over head as you have a card selected and signed by the spectator. The card is returned and they are given the deck to shuffle as the quadcopter continues to raise in the air to the point where you spectator can see on the video that it is just the two of you alone in a field with no one around in any direction. You take the deck back, squeeze it between your hands then offer it to the spectator to look through and find their card. It's not there. At this point you could strip naked and have every orifice searched. The card is truly gone. The drone hovers hundreds of feet in the air capturing everything. 

You slowly lower it towards the ground and the spectator can see it on the video feed making its way towards you. When it gets closer you tell your spectator to look up. They do so and they begin to make out the details of the quadcopter. As it gets closer and closer they see that attached to the quadcopter is their signed selection.

• No switches. The card they sign while the drone is already in the air is the one that appears attached to the drone later on.
• No assistants are used. Just you and the spectator.
• The video from the drone can be watched and it tells the same story as the spectator experienced. It raises in the air and hovers well overhead while the spectator selects and signs a card. It continues to rise hundreds of feet into the air as the spectator shuffles the card back in the deck. It then lowers back down above you two and you see the spectator's face as they realize their card is attached to the drone.

Drone Strike: Classified is the work of GLOMM Elite Member #16. It was presented to me to gift to two random GLOMM members.

I don't mention it here just to tease you, I'm mentioning it because I've thought up a variation on the effect that I want to present to you.

Drone Strike: Public Record

I haven't performed this myself (it takes a while to become good with one of these quadcopters) and I'm sure there are some kinks to be worked out, but I think the heart of the method is definitely workable. It's a similar but not identical effect to the Classified version. 

It starts off the same. You launch the drone and your spectator looks at the video feed and can see it filming the both of you as you stand out in a field. They notice nothing unusual about the video they see. The drone stays in the air and rises above you two as a card is selected and signed. You have your spectator look at the video feed again and they notice that something is now dangling from below the quadcopter. As it's lowered towards you to it becomes clear that an envelope is now hanging from a string from the bottom of the drone. You pluck the envelope off, open it up, and reveal the spectator's signed card inside.

Okay, let's work backwards. The first question is how to get the card in the envelope. The answer is, you don't. You are going to use any of the commercially available card to envelope methods where the card is loaded into the envelope after the fact. 

Now the fun part, how do we get the envelope to appear? 

We're continuing to work backwards, so let's start with the final image of the envelope dangling down from the bottom of the quadcopter. Attach one end of a 12 inch string or ribbon to the envelope and attach the other end to the bottom of the drone. Now, that's the final position, but we want to keep it out of the way at the beginning. For this we need three things. Two magnets and 40 feet of fishing line. Yes, yes, I know. This all seems like a lot of work. It is. But it's also a really amazing effect. The idea of suspending something—like a prediction chest, for example—makes it seemingly impossible that it could be manipulated in some way. And in this case the item isn't just "suspended," it's floating in mid-air, untouched by anything.

So you have your drone, envelope dangling. Let's start with the two magnets, they should be relatively small and not overly powerful, and one should have a hole in it. Glue one magnet (the non-hole one) to the side or bottom of the drone. Where exactly you glue it will depend on which model you're using. You want to position it so when the envelope is held to the magnet it is not in view of the camera. That's all that matters. Take your fishing line and tie one end to the magnet with a hole in it. You will tie the other end to some object in your performing space, around a tree or a swing-set or something. Set the drone up so the envelope is pinched between the two magnets.

You see what happens, yes?

Your spectator does not examine the drone beforehand. You can gesture to it on the lawn, but you should be a ways away from it so they can't make out the envelope connected to it. When you raise the drone you have 40 feet where it will provide a clear shot from the camera. At this point you can have the spectator look at the drone as it flies, they shouldn't notice anything unusual. 

At some point you will raise the drone higher in the air. The outer magnet will get pulled off and the envelope will fall into position. Your friend will see something on the video feed and in real life that was not on the drone a moment before. 

You lower the drone, remove the envelope and remove their signed card. 

(You don't have to use a drone with a camera. In that case the audience will just see it flying overhead, they'll select a card and sign it, and when they look up again the drone now has something dangling from beneath it.)

Dear Jerxy: The Audience-Centric Gambler

Dear Jerxy: Are you still doing these? I agree with much of what you say about an approach to magic that lessens the emphasis on the performer, but I prefer gambling demonstrations to typical "magic" tricks. Any way to apply your lessons to the gambler? And how would you assemble the 100 trick repertoire you talk about in AATKT for a gambler? 

Sincerely,
Knows When To Hold 'Em

Dear KWTHE: It's a good question, and one I have some thoughts on.

The first question to ask yourself is if you're really into gambling effects. The reason I ask that is because I've known a couple of people who were drawn to that type of performance only because they didn't want to be thought of as some weirdo doing...

So presenting magic effects under the guise of gambling demonstrations gives you that distance from the "mystical" that a lot of people are looking for. In fact, I think that's often why many of us prefer to perform for other magicians. It removes much of the awkwardness a lot of us sense when performing tricks for normal folks. (If you don't sense that awkwardness you might not be great at reading social queues.) The performance styles I detailed last week go a long way in removing that awkwardness by distancing yourself from the mystical elements or ramping them up to the point where it's clear they're not supposed to be taken seriously. So if you're drawn towards gambling material because you dislike the supernatural stuff, then you might want to try other types of effects, starting off in the Peek Backstage style which undercuts the awkward magician stereotype you see in pop-culture.

But maybe you're really into gambling and that's what you want to focus on. That's valid. If that's the case, I still don't think, "Look at my prodigious skill," is a great presentation. I think that's still somewhat off-putting, even in the context of gambling as opposed to magic. So I would similarly present it as a peek behind the scenes as you work on some skill related to a game they're interested in. That, for me, would be the most audience-centric approach:

Step 1. Find out the game they play.
Step 2. Ask them to assist or observe while you show them something you're working on related to that game.

This also goes to the 100 trick repertoire for someone who is strictly into gambling material. There's really no reason to have a half dozen poker tricks that are indistinguishable to your spectator. Instead I would try to have a different trick mastered for every potential game a spectator might name. That would be the start and the heart of my repertoire. 

My full repertoire would probably be constructed something like this if I wanted to come across as the guy who was into gambling:

20 tricks that are directly related to actual card games (poker, blackjack, bridge, gin rummy)

20 traditional magic tricks that I can couch in a gambling presentation. For instance, a color changing deck could be presented as a deck switch. I sometimes present an ambitious card routine as a demonstration of "middle palming" (palming a card out of the middle of the deck). I don't actually show it on top. I place it in the middle then palm it off the top, if that makes sense.

20 gambling effects with things other than cards.

40 Proposition bets

Here's the thing, if you try to seriously imply you're some shady underground gambler type it's going to come off as totally phony. You might be able to convince the 13-year-olds at Ellusionist, but real underground gamblers are as likely to expose their skills as serial rapists are. Instead I would look to people like Titanic Thompson and Amarillo Slim as your influences. Guys who were always trying to think of different ways to win a buck. This is, I think, a more broadly interesting approach than trying to come off as just a card mechanic. In this way you can not only be the guy who wins at poker, but the guy who can control the flip of a coin, the guy who knows how to beat all the carnival games, the guy who hustles a little pool, and the guy who makes and wins the most inconceivable bets. That's a much more interesting character than the guy practicing his bottom deal for hours on end (you know, like the loser you really are).
 

Criss Angel's Trick'd Up

Last week Criss Angel aired an unwatchable and unwatched TV special called "Trick'd Up." The 49th most popular show on cable television that evening, Trick'd Up was Criss Angel doing what Criss Angel does best:

- Looking like a budget Nikki Sixx impersonator
- Ruining Banachek's reputation

Here are some of the highlights of the show for those who missed it. Which is all of you.

The show started with Criss tearing MMA fighter Paige VanZant in two to the "dismay" of her "friends."

He doesn't restore her. He just leaves her there. I think this may have been a nod to Richiardi, but it's a confusing way to start the show because we know that he hasn't been arrested for killing Paige VanZant. So essentially the show starts with him demonstrating he's using stooges and phony reactions. And I'd be cool with that. If he came out and said something to the effect of, "These are all actors and this is theatrical magic presented in real world scenarios," that's great and all, but then you can't chop up the video 100 different ways because there's nothing resembling a magic trick left. I'm surprised I have to explain this because it's kind of a fundamental concept of magic on television. I either have to believe it's real people (in which case the editing doesn't matter because I believe in the people's response) or I have to believe this is what it would look like live (in which case it doesn't matter if I think the people are actors because I feel like I'm seeing what I would have seen if I was there myself). But if I believe in neither the people or the presentation you have the world's dullest magic special. 

He tries to liven things up with visceral magic. He makes a coin vanish and appear under his skin. He sucks a temporary tattoo of a cockroach off a woman's arm and a cockroach appears in his mouth. He tries to pass off a 4 inch by 18 inch silk as a "napkin" at a restaurant. He swallows it and then pulls it out of his neck. He does an Impaled illusion with a meat kabob sword at one of those Brazilian steakhouses. It all kind of falls flat.

There are a couple nice moments. There's a sequence where he penetrates a "spectator's" watch into a water bottle that looked nice. There's a one-shot transformation of a random dude into Steve Aoki that was decent. There was a cute thing with stuffed animals and a group of sorority girls that would have been much better if it hadn't been shot so poorly.

And for non-fans there was a nice sequence where he was punched in the stomach a lot. (But it wasn't as good as when Blaine did it with Kimbo Slice.)

Always timely, Criss has framed this special as if his crew are the dudes from Jackass (a show from 16 years ago), going around, having fun, causing trouble. But Jackass consisted of real friends genuinely enjoying each other's company. There is zero chemistry in Criss' group. And really no one is given anything to do besides Criss.

If you look at the magic shows on TV today in the US that seem to have some sort of audience (Fool Us, Carbonaro Effect, and AGT) it may be that this style of show is no longer what people are interested in. It certainly felt dated. I'll be interested to see if Blaine can revive or evolve this sort of show (the magician traveling around and showing magic to "real people" in non-theatrical environments) in his upcoming specials. 

I think the most compelling show Criss could put on right now is one where he blows up the stuff he's done before. Put on 20 pounds. Stop dying his hair. Be like, "Look, I'm a fucking 50 year old man and I'm tired. I don't want to have to suck on cockroaches to get your attention. I don't need that kind of validation anymore. It's been fun and all, but I've spent 30 years late to the party jumping on trends to try and appeal to you. I'm done with that. In this show you're going to meet the real me and see real magic unlike anything you've ever seen before." And even if this "real" Criss is completely bullshit too, at least this would give him the chance to abandon this rut he's stuck in—this beyond middle-aged man with a goth teen sensibility of darkness. Or just keep doing this nonsense and I'll look forward to the Criss Angel 2Spooky4You show coming soon.

Four Ways to Vanish a Coin, Part Four

The Romantic Adventure style gets its name from the introduction to the old radio program, Escape!

The idea behind this performing style is that you present things that are "designed to free [your audience] from the four walls of today." That sounds grandiose and if you're walking into it thinking, "I'm going to give this person a life-altering experience," then you're putting too much pressure on yourself and the moment. Instead the thought should be, "I'm going to guide this person along on a brief expedition through a unique and interesting scenario." That's all.

"Ah, no, no, no. Not my friends. They won't go for that sort of thing."

Oh, no? Your friends don't like unique and interesting things? They just come home from work every night, peruse the encyclopedia, then read thru the digits of pi starting where they left off the night before?

By definition, people are interested in interesting things. (Check your etymological dictionary, those words are actually related.) If you think your friends won't be into this type of presentation because you've seen them check-out of things you've shown them before, you have to remember that that's because they weren't engaged. The solution to that is not to dull-down your presentations to match their level of investment. You need to entice them with something more interesting.

Here are two tips when getting into this style:

1. This is not the sort of thing you'd want to perform for someone you've just met. However it is the sort of thing you can perform for a group of people you just met. "You want to try something weird?" is an intriguing lead in when you're hanging with a new group. But one-on-one, with a stranger, it sounds like a potential lead-in to forced sodomy or a murder-suicide.

2. Do not ask too much of someone, especially the first time you perform for them in this style. It's perfectly acceptable to ask for their time, interest, and to have them follow along with simple instructions. But if they don't know you, and don't know they can trust this will turn out to be something worthwhile, it's a little awkward to ask people to invest emotionally or to play a part that is not themselves. This is an intimate style of performance, and just like any type of intimacy, it's best if it grows organically. You don't invite someone in at the end of your first date and lead off with dry anal fisting.

So let's look at a coin vanish done in the Romantic Adventure style. In this approach the effects aren't used as an end in themselves. Instead they're used to establish a reality slightly askew from the one your spectator is used to.

The presentation that follows is for a complete three coin vanish. Something like Joshua Jay's Triad Coins. It's done in four acts or movements. It incorporates some elements of the previous styles mentioned—they are seeing the process of practicing magic as in the Peek Backstage, and they are seeing things get slightly beyond your control as in the Distracted Artist—but the main focus of the effect is to bring your spectator into a world where belief affects reality and re-writes memory. Want to get away from it all? We offer you... Escape!

Remember Sammy Jankis

Imagine

Your friend Hannah comes over.

You answer the door, "Oh, hey! What's up? I mean... come on in."

"Am I early?" she asks.

"Oh, no. Sorry. I knew you were coming?"

"Is that a question?"

"No. No. Of course not. My head is all over the place today. My brain is scrambled. You're here to watch a movie and get dinner. I remembered. Go take a seat and I'll get you a drink."

You come back in the room with a couple beverages. 

On the coffee table there is a post-it pad and a marker. 

"What does that mean?" she asks.

You read what it says on the Post-It.

Remember your
vanishing coins.

"Huh. I haven't the foggiest idea what that means. What are my 'vanishing coins'?"

You pick up the note and look at it, then look around the room, confused. You notice your copy of The Amateur Magician's Handbook on an end table nearby.

"Oh shit. That's right," you say as you uncap the marker. "I just spelled it wrong. It's not remember my vanishing coins" You uncap the marker and make a quick change to the note so it reads:

Remember, you're
vanishing coins.

"It's 'Remember YOU ARE vanishing coins.' I was just trying to remind myself of what I was working on."

Movement One

Before she can ask for an explanation you say, "Actually, could I get your help with something? I want you to let me know how this looks."

You grab three half dollars off the end table and hold them in a fan in your right hand. You take one with your left. Close your eyes. Squeeze it for a few seconds and open your hand. Then you open your eyes and stare directly at Hannah.

"Oh, hey! What's up?" you say.

She looks slightly confused. You act slightly confused. You look down and notice the coins in your hand then the note on the table. "Aw shit... did I just vanish a coin?" 

She's like, "Uhm... yeah," and looks at you strangely.

"Yeah... sorry,  I spaced out...uhm... can I tell you something that sounds a little strange?"

She gives you the okay.

"Alright... well... first, did you ever learn any magic as a kid?"

Movement Two

She says she knew a couple of card tricks. 

"I'm going to teach you how kids are taught to vanish a coin. Here, take one of these," you say, offering her one of the half dollars in your hand. As she goes to take it you say, "Actually, that's too big. Let's use something smaller." You set the half dollars down and grab two other coins.

Now you teach her how to do a french drop. Yes, I know, I know. This isn't some big secret. And you're teaching the french drop to make the presentation stronger and the magic stronger at the end.

Practice it a few times with her. "That's looking pretty good," you say. "But that's just the first step. The physical step. As I said, this is what they teach little kids. And, actually, the physical part of a coin vanish is never more difficult than that. Do you know what the next step is? It's a mental step. To make your vanish really convincing you have to believe you really take the coin and you have to believe the coin is really disappearing."

You demonstrate a bad french drop (where your attention is on the hand which is supposedly empty) and then you demonstrate a good french drop (where your attention is on the hand that supposedly has the coin). And you get your spectator on board with the concept that the magician's belief is a key part in making the effect stronger.

"Here's where it gets weird. As you advance in learning magic, a coin vanish becomes less and less about the physical actions and more and more about your belief. It gets to the point where it's all belief, and you're not doing any sleight-of-hand at all. But the problem is, there is an infinitesimally small line between believing hard enough to make the physical coin go, and believing so hard that your concept and memory of the coin itself goes too. And that's where I'm at. I can get the coin to vanish, but I can't control it beyond that. The existence of the coin and what I was doing with it vanishes too. And it just feels like it's eroding my memory. But this is a phase everyone goes through who tries to learn this stuff."

"I know. It's hard to believe. Let's try again."

Movement Three

You pick up the two half dollars. 

"I believe there are two coins in my right hand. I believe I'm taking one of the coins with my left hand. I believe I now have one coin in my right hand and one coin in my left."

You close your eyes.

"I believe the coin in my left hand is now dissolving away into nothingness."

You open your left hand. 

You open your eyes.

"Oh, hey! What's up?"

You look around and let it slowly dawn on you what's going on.

Movement Four

"I'm sorry. This is weird. I'm going to tell you something a little strange. Did you ever learn magic as a kid?"

She tells you yes, you already talked about this.

"Oh, we did? Good. Good. Oh...so you know everything. I want to try again and I want you to do me a favor. After I put the coin in my hand I want you to clasp my fist with your hands. When I close my eyes I want you to silently count to three and then say, 'You're vanishing a coin.' Okay?"

She agrees.

"Okay. Here goes nothing. I don't see any other half dollars so this might be the last one for a while. The truth is I don't know if it disappears because I believe it disappears or if it's here because I believe it's here. Well...either way. On with the show."

"Ladies and gentlemen," you say, very presentationally. "I am about to make this coin vanish. Nothing up my sleeves," you say, rolling up your sleeves. Then you abruptly stop.

Up and down both forearms are notes to yourself written in black marker:

Remember, you're vanishing a coin.
Amateur Magician's Handbook, page 79.
Be here. Only the coin goes.
Started with $600 in half dollars.
The Jerx - 10/14/2016
Hold onto the memories
Your name is Steven Drake. Your parents are Betty and Theodore Drake. You're 43 years old.

A dozen or so messages up and down your arms.

"Sweet Jesus... how long have I been doing this?"

You take the coin in your left hand and squeeze it. Your friend places her hands around your fist. After a few seconds she says, "You're vanishing a coin." 

"Ah... I remember," you say. "But it's still here." Your right fingers reach into your fist and remove the coin. 

"This time, maybe, wait until I open my eyes. But the moment you see them open say, 'You're vanishing a coin.'" She agrees. You take the coin back into your left fist and hold it palm down. Her hands go around your hand. You close your eyes.

After a few seconds you open your eyes. She says, "You're vanishing a coin." Your left hand opens in her hands. This is something of a weird tactile vanish of a coin. She doesn't see your empty hand but she can feel there's nothing there. Remembering the french drop lesson she will look to your right hand which is clearly empty as well. Your right hand joins your left as you softly squeeze and pat her hands.

"I vanished a coin?" you murmur. She nods.

You look gently into her eyes. "I'm sorry," you say, quietly. "Who are you?"

---

I can't really suggest to you how to end the interaction. The trick ends with "Who are you?" Where it goes from there depends on your spectator. They may laugh, they may sigh, they may punch you in the shoulder. If you're a good actor it may come off as a very wistful moment. You may immediately snap back to reality or you may play it out some more, slowly regaining your memories. 

Yes, this particular routine involves a bit of acting. But really nothing more than being confused and unaware of what's going on. That's something I'm sure you can handle, you box-of-rocks.

Let me be clear about the Romantic Adventure style of immersive effects. These aren't meant to be practical jokes. You're not trying to convince anybody of anything. But you should still play it straight to allow your spectators to emotionally connect to the situation. To get wrapped up in the story. You don't have to think something is real to be affected by it. (This is pretty well understood in every other art form in existence.)

But if you're doing everything with a nudge and a wink, you'll never get any reaction. It's like sexual role-play. You've got to be willing to commit to the fiction if you want to get those juices flowing, baby! 

In fact, that may be the most useful way to think about this style of presentation. It's a non-sexual role-play where neither your nor your spectator change personas. Instead you use magic effects to allow the universe to masquerade as something it's not.

How does this address the Seinfeld critique? It completely obliterates it. Seinfeld's critique was about the pointlessness of magic. That it's only purpose was to fool you. This style puts magic effects in a greater context. The coin vanishes in this routine are part of the story not an opportunity to make the spectator feel stupid.

Four Ways to Vanish a Coin, Part Three

As originally described here, the Distracted Artist style of presentation is one where the magician causes magic to happen either unintentionally or absentmindedly. If this sounds hokey to you, I understand why. It's because you've seen this style of presentation in a formal show where it's completely ridiculous. 

Magician: "I had no idea these handkerchiefs would knot themselves together!"

Audience: "Well, you brought them on stage. You're dangling them together by the corners. What exactly did you think you'd be doing on stage if not these magic tricks that you're pretending to be surprised by?"

But this style does work for the amateur, for these reasons:

1. You're not claiming magic is "just happening." You're just claiming that you hadn't intended to perform a trick now, under these circumstances. You just did it without thinking. This is logically consistent with a non-professional performance. Not so when you're standing on stage. 

2. It makes sense for such a moment to happen one time in a casual situation It doesn't make sense for such a moment to happen continually over a 45 minute show.

3. People don't really understand what it means to perform magic and practice magic as an amateur. They understand it in relation to shitty card tricks or the magic books they may have checked out of the library when they were a kid. But the things you're doing should seem far removed from those simple tricks. So maybe it is possible to absentmindedly perform a trick. You can noodle around on the guitar without really paying attention. Maybe small magic tricks can happen that way too. In the forthcoming example, the idea is that you were working on your coin vanish so much recently that now you're just automatically doing it even when you don't intend to. Is this believable? Maybe not. But it's relatable.

To understand the mindset, think about coin rolls. If you've ever done them regularly then you know that when you get good enough at them you will often pick up a coin and roll it across your knuckles without thinking. Now just extend that concept to an actual effect.

The Distracted Artist presentation lends itself very well to a two coin vanish.

Imagine

You're getting a bite to eat with a friend. You pull out a scratch-off lotto ticket.

"Do you have a coin?" you ask.

She puts a penny on the table. You pick it up and go to scratch off the card. "If I win, dinner is on me you say."

You look back at the hand that held the coin and it's gone.

"Oh crap. Do you have another coin?"

Your friend will be slightly confused. She saw you had the coin, but now it's gone. As she goes into her purse to get another coin you explain what happened. "I've been playing around with this new coin vanish and now it seems like every time I grab a coin I accidentally make it disappear. You know, it's like muscle memory. I'm not really thinking about it. It's a pain because I've lost like 4 bucks."

She sets a quarter on the table. 

"I feel like if I'm not super deliberate," you say, staring intently at the coin and slowly picking it up with your right hand.

"And suuuuuuppperrr cognizant of every move I make," you continue to give the coin 100% of your focus as you place it into your left hand. "That it's just going to disappear. You know?" For a brief moment you break concentration on the coin and look at your spectator for confirmation. Immediately you look back at your hand.

"Aw dammit, there it goes again." You open your hand to show the coin gone. 

"Do me a favor," you say, sliding the lottery ticket over to your friend. "Scratch this off. We'll split anything we win."

I'm particularly happy with the structure of this little 90-second vignette. The first vanish is a simple lapping vanish that happens on the periphery. The second is whatever complete vanish you perform. The first vanish catches them off-guard. Then the presentation completely justifies the deliberate actions of the second vanish. And the scratch-off card makes for a nice pretext for everything and a button at the end.

How does this address the Seinfeld critique? With the Distracted Artist presentation the magic is over before it starts. The spectator never has time to feel like they're being set-up. And your role of the magician is not one where you're trying to trick this person. You're just obliviously manifesting these little moments.

Tomorrow we combine these presentations and push them further into the outer limits on a Romantic Adventure.