The Whitman's Algorithm

Today I thought I would offer a little idea based on one of the most popular posts in the history of this site. That post is Variations on the Konami Code which features a trick by Tomas Blomberg and some ideas of how you could use it and how I had used it in the past.

The Konami Code takes a little time to wrap your head around, but basically it's just a way of forcing any position in a grid. And once you understand it, you'll find yourself looking for grids in everyday life that you can apply this concept to. 

With Valentine's Day coming up, I've decided to use the technique with a box of chocolates. 

Imagine

You bring your friend or loved one a box of chocolates and ask if they've heard of this thing called The Whitman's Algorithm.

"I read about it on BoingBoing or somewhere. Apparently it's the series of moves that can... predict... or find... I don't even really know how to put it. But it can locate your favorite chocolate in a box of assorted chocolates. It just kind of narrows in on it somehow."

"I wanted to try it with you." You give your friend a bunch of paper squares or index cards cut in half with different directions on them and ask her to mix them up. "Those are the moves it gave me for you. They calibrate it based on your birthdate and it gives you a custom series of moves.  I'm not quite sure of the science behind it...." you trail off.

You then lay a little paper "map" on top of the box of chocolates. Similar to the one below. It should match up with the position of the chocolates in the box. You place a coin or some other marker where it says Start.

You then have her go through the moves in the random order she mixed the cards in. Going forward, backwards, left and right as the cards tell her to. If she can't make a move because it would take her off the map, have her place that card on the bottom of the unused stack, and you'll come back around to it later in the procedure.

Eventually she'll land on one space on the map. You push the papers aside and draw her attention to where she ended up. 

"Okay, your favorite kind is the pecan cluster, right? And you ended up right here... one up and one to the right of center. Open the box."

When she does, she finds that right in the location she landed on is her favorite piece.

"That wasn't a fluke. I'll show you," you say. "I'll move it to a different location." Behind the cover of the box you mix the chocolates around then cover them back up.

You tell her to pick up the direction slips up and mix them into a completely new order. This time you tell her to take one out at random, don't look at it, and put it in her pocket. She does. 

You go through the process again with the coin and the map, moving around based on the slips of paper. 

At the end of the procedure you have her remove the cover from the box and find out how close she was to her favorite piece. She's two pieces in front of it.

"But remember," you say, "You put one slip in your pocket without looking at it. Pull it out. What does it say?"

She pulls it out and it says, "Move 2 Spaces Backward," landing her right on her favorite piece.

The algorithm works!

Method

This is a good introductory effect to familiarize yourself with the Konami Code. Tomas has more complicated ways to hide the method, but it's best if you first understand what is going on. 

Here's a PDF of the map, and here's a PDF of the move cards (to be cut out). You probably wouldn't use this exact layout, but you can practice with it and see how you can apply it to your own box of chocolates (or anything else in a grid). 

Print the move cards, cut them out, and set the last two aside for now (1 to the right & 3 backward). Now put a coin in the middle, shuffle up the moves, and then go through them and see how it plays out. You will always end up one forward and one to the right of where you started, unless you screw it up, which I wouldn't put past you.

So, assuming you know what your friend or girlfriend/boyfriend or spouse's favorite type of chocolate is, you just put it in that location to start and you're good to go. 

Before the next round you will place her target piece two to the right and two down from center. The diagram below indicates where the marker will wind up at the end of the first and second round.

But Andy, if the directions always bring you to the same spot regardless of the order, how do they end up in a new spot for the second round.

Well, remember, you have those two extra move cards. As she goes through the cards the first time, have her turn them over and set them aside. At some point get the two additional ones palmed in your hand. When she's done you will push the paper slips aside, dropping off the two other pieces. It's a completely invisible move. She thinks you're done with the pieces and you're just getting them out of the way. Now the moves in the pile will always lead to position #2 no matter the order.

The bit about hiding one of the slips in her pocket without looking at it doesn't change the workings of the trick at all. (Well, it does in one small way. You may have to move "off" the map temporarily in this 2nd go around, due to the fact that you're holding out one specific piece until the end. Just pay attention to where you are and move as if you're going into spaces that exist off the map. Of course if you have a bigger box of chocolate (and bigger map) you won't have that issue.) Essentially, that's just the last slip in the pile, except it's not in the pile, it's in her pocket. Well, that doesn't change anything. But it feels like it does. So she ends up two spaces ahead (or whatever) of her favorite piece of chocolate. But wait! There's one more direction to read... Go back two spaces! Well, that's the only direction that would have landed her on her piece and she just so happened to set it aside ahead of time. Crazy!

If you're still not following what's going on, just print out those pdfs and try it. 

There's no magic or even any math to coming up with these series of movies. If you want to come up with your own, just write down a list of moves and see where it lands you. That's position two. Now remove one horizontal move and one vertical move (those will be the ones you palm in) and see where that lands you. That's position one. 

You need a big square-ish box of chocolates. It doesn't have to be 5 by 5 like in the example above it can be bigger. You can make up a map for whatever size you find.

People will argue this trick is too procedural. "It would be a better trick if they just named any position and her favorite chocolate was there." And that's likely true. It might be a better trick. But as I said at the beginning of this year. I'm no longer thinking in terms of tricks, I'm thinking in terms of experience. And the experience of mixing up these cards and having this coin travel around at random, like a Plinko disk, and eventually landing on the location of her favorite chocolate is arguably better than: name a position, and there it is. It all depends, of course. I'll have more to say on this soon as I will be adding a couple of new broad performing styles into the Jerx lexicon, one of which would entail tricks like these.

You could do other tricks with this technique and the box of chocolates too. I'm not quite sure what, exactly. But it's a grid found in the real world, which makes it ripe for the Konami Code. Maybe you could have your girlfriend play the game and in the exact spot she lands, instead of a chocolate is an engagement ring. 

Or maybe you print up the move cards and you talk about a game called Chocolate Roulette. "Since everyone knows there are always a few gross pieces of candy in a box of chocolates, some guys created Chocolate Roulette. You play the cards in any order and whatever you end up on, you have to eat it, even if it's a flavor that sucks." And then you play a round and she ends up on the only piece of chocolate in a box filled with nuggets of dog shit.

Or the other way around. She lands on the only nugget of dog shit in a box of chocolates. When it comes to dog shit and chocolates, you're limited only by your imagination. Your sick, twisted imagination.

Get New Friends

One of the nicest things anyone can say about this site is when they ask if I really perform in the manner I suggest here. "Are these write-ups of actual things you've performed? Or are these, like, allegories or something?"

This is like doing a freestyle rap battle and afterwards someone says, "There's no way you made that up on the spot. You must have pre-written that." Or beating someone so bad at Trivial Pursuit they question whether you memorized the cards. 

If someone finds the effects and presentations I describe here to be unbelievable, I'm flattered by that. I take it as a compliment. No one reads a Cameron Francis ebook and says, "Hmmm... I wonder if he really performs this way." Because it seems perfectly reasonable that one might. 

As I wrote in the "So You're New Here" post:

Do you really do these grand, drawn-out presentations? Don't you ever just do a normal quick trick?

Yes, I really do the presentations I write up. And yes, I do a ton of normal tricks too. But I don't have much to say about those types of presentations so there's really no need for me write about them.

Unless I specifically say, "I haven't performed this," then I have performed it. I may combine multiple performances into one retelling, and I certainly clean up my presentation which is even more rambling and free-flowing than suggested here, but other than that, it's a pretty fair representation of what occurred.

Yes, I perform this way quite regularly. I would say once a week I perform something more involved than the typical trick, and I always like to have at least one little scam on the horizon. If I just had a wife and two close friends I performed for, then I agree, that would be a pretty overwhelming amount of intense effects to make them sit through. But I have a fairly broad social circle and travel a lot meeting new people. Even close friends who I see regularly will have, at most, a dozen "moments" with me throughout the year that involve magic. And only one or two will be long-form tantric magic.

Now, the only reason I'm getting into this is because if this site appeals to you, I don't want you to dismiss it as some sort of inspirational literature. These aren't intended to be thought experiments. I'm saying this is a genuine lifestyle choice you can make. To use magic in a more intimate way for the benefit of the people you spend time with. If you're a funny person then you know the experience of meeting up with someone and having them express gratitude that they get to be around someone who makes them laugh. I enjoy being one of the funny people in my friend's lives. And now, in recent years, I enjoy being someone who can bring a wholly different type of experience to people. 

I think most of the people who question this sort of style are really questioning their own ability to have someone engage with them one-on-one while a trick plays out over more than a few minutes. If all you're familiar with is performing heavily scripted tricks with hacky jokes for an indifferent audience, it's hard to believe that slowing things down and taking out the "bits of business" could make the experience richer and more interesting to people. But I've found it does, and I would not be surprised if there comes a point in the future where the notion of presenting magic in the "traditional" way in casual settings seems as bizarre as doing your stand-up comedy set in someone's living room. When you're interacting with people in real life, you're not an entertainer, this isn't show-biz, and it's alienating to have that dynamic when you perform. (Most of the mockery of magicians in pop-culture is directed at the off-putting "performer" attitude in non-performance situations.)

More traditional performance styles can feel like a lecture, or a demonstration. In an informal situation, presenting magic like that is like pulling out your dick and just talking about it. "This is the shaft. And these are my balls. I have two. As you can see, my dick is really long. But it's also very hard too. That's important. Now I'd like to measure its volume via a water displacement test." And you're just showing them how wonderful your dick is. And their feeling is, "I wish he would just fuck me with that thing." If you're not on stage (literally or figuratively) people don't want a show, they want an experience.

---

Over the December break I got an email from S.Q. that said, in part:

Since I essentially live with my friends all the time, I perform a lot, and for the same people. However one thing that tends to happen is, just through the fact that I tend to perform the same tricks after a week or so of cycling through different ones, my friends will start to catch on to how I do some of them, or start to watch super closely and try to mess up the effect(this happens somewhat often).  I can't really blame them too much, and I don't think I'm putting off an attitude of being smarter/better than everyone (maybe I am, who knows), I think its just my friends are trying to fuck with me because they know they can.  I end up in a situation where people ask to see a trick, so I show them one, but they either say "I've seen this one already" or try to bust me.  Maybe this happened to you at college.  Do you have any advice you could share that would help me?  Or should I just get less asshole-y friends?

I don't want to address the bulk of the question, which I did in my response to him, I just want to address his final sentence and say, yes, I think it may be time for you to get new friends. And by that I mean the lot of you, not just the letter writer.

If you're unhappy with the dynamic in your magic performances for your friends, and you feel you're struggling against their disinterest or a kind of adversarial relationship where their only interest is in figuring things out, then you need to find new friends to perform for. 

I will tell you what happened from my experience with a similar issue. When I decided I wanted to stretch the boundaries of my magic presentations, I received two different types of responses. Some people were immediately on board and made the transition right along with me and were engrossed in a new kind of interaction. But there were many other people who just weren't into it and didn't get what I was going for. They were too ingrained in our previous relationship where I would half-heartedly goof around and show them a trick and they'd play the part of "audience" and either consume what happened and be done with it or try and figure it out. So when I'd try to do something more involved, they weren't feeling it. So I just stopped performing for these people and I found new friends to perform for. 

And with those new friends I could kind of slowly build up the idea that yes, I do magic tricks, but the way I do them they're going to be little interactive moments between us that require their input. They're mini-happenings that you take part in (not just watch). And it's much easier to establish that concept with a new friend than try and change an existing relationship between you, an old friend, and your old style of performance.

What eventually happened with me is that a lot of my older friends, who I had stopped performing for, would end up hearing a story second-hand about some trick I had performed. And second-hand, from a non-magician, many of these tricks sound completely unreal. And some of them would ask me why I didn't show them stuff anymore and I would be honest and say that I was trying some different sorts of tricks and I didn't get the sense it was the type of thing they'd be into. 

I wasn't trying to be manipulative. I didn't mean it like, "Oh, well I have these new friends and we sort of have a thing going on that I don't think you'd be into." That wasn't my intention, but I see how it could come off that way. And, unsurprisingly, a number of them wanted to be included and became open to a different kind of experience than they had been previously. So that just broadened the population of people who got something out of the style that was slowly evolving in my work.

So if your interaction with friends and magic has grown stale, I definitely recommend finding some new friends to perform for.

---

Similarly, I recommend finding some new friends within magic if you find your current situation unrewarding.

There's the saying that we are the average of the five people we spend the most time with. They say this is true in regards to your physicality and health, in regards to your finances, and in regards to your mindset and outlook. Heavy people don't spend all their time with 5 fit people. Motivated people don't surround themselves with unmotivated people. And so on. 

I think this is true in magic too. If you're spending time with people who only care about sleights and the inner workings of magic, it's going to be hard for you to evolve in your presentations. Similarly, if you really want to be the world's greatest gambling cheat, or an expert in magic history, then spending time with someone like me wouldn't help you in either of those pursuits. So try and surround yourself with people who are working in the direction you want to go.

My closest friends in magic are mostly unknown to other magicians, but they're the people I want to spend time with because we have similar goals in how we want to utilize magic. To a greater or lesser extent, most of us appreciate effects that require a more significant investment of time or energy on the performer and spectator's part. For us we've found that these types of effects produce more profound reactions, or at least more interesting reactions. 

My friend Andrew, who does most of the videos for this site and photography for the JAMM, has a phrase that I stole and use all the time. He says he has a "patience fetish." He likes things that take a long time to come together and that idea has had a big influence on the evolution of my style. 

I could write a book of the effects my friends have done, but for now I will share this one. Andrew hired our other friend (and JV1 illustrator, Stasia) to produce a custom deck of tarot cards for him, which she did over the course of a year. Fast forward to a later point in time. Andrew would often meet the girl he was dating at a coffee shop. This coffee shop had a bunch of games and decks of cards for people to amuse themselves with while they consumed their drinks. Andrew had taken to bringing the tarot deck with him in his bag, and planting it somewhere so he could pick it up as if it was just something that happened to be there. He did this two or three times. Perhaps the first time he just spread through them with his girlfriend, looking at the artwork. The next week maybe he did a tarot layout or a trick with them. I don't really know, I haven't heard that part of the story much.

A week or two later, they're in the coffee shop and he picks up the tarot deck. "I want to try something. It's an old gypsy procedure that's supposed to be really powerful and uncannily accurate at identifying a particular card that represents you. And knowing that card can supposedly be very helpful when it comes to navigating certain situations in life. Should we try it?"

So they go through a procedure where she is shuffling, counting and dealing through the cards based on freely chosen numbers that have a personal significance to her. At the end of all these free and random choices she is left with one card, The High Priestess. "I think that's supposed to be a pretty good one," he says. Then he looks up on his phone some more information about it. "Yeah, this is perfect for you. It's representative of wisdom and serenity." He goes on to list the positive attributes of the card and how they relate to her. She agrees it's a good card to have as the card that represents her and her future.

"There's one more thing we need to do. It's a final step where you become imbued with the card's essence and vice versa. It creates a permanent link." He places the card on the table face down and she lays her hand on top of it. "Now close your eyes and wish for anything for your future that you think would be possible if you fully possessed the traits indicated by that card. Don't tell me what it is."

She closes her eyes and makes a wish. 

"Done," she says.

As she takes back the card she notices something. The card has changed. Not to a different card—it's still the High Priestess—but the image has changed. Now the picture... is her. She freaks out. "It's me!" she says.

"Don't be ridiculous. Isn't that what it looked like before? Hmmm... it does kind of look like you.  It's got to be a coincidence, right?" Andrew says.

"She's wearing my scarf!" she squeals.

Time and effort. Yes, he commissioned a custom deck of tarot cards so he could one day commission a separate custom illustration of the girl he was dating by the same artist and seamlessly interweave the two. This is the sort of thing I love. In reality it was a convoluted card force involving a lot of dealing followed by a top change. He turned it into a tarot ritual with a very strange, semi-inspiring Twilight Zone finish.

Once you do these sorts of effects you'll no longer wonder if anyone really performs like this. You'll immediately recognize the pull to want to create these experiences for people. It's not selfless. You'll find how enjoyable it is for you to be the watchmaker setting the gears in motion and watching it all come together. 

And if you're lucky, you'll find five friends like I have in magic (Andrew, Andrew, Mark, Ben and Lana) whose average pushes you in the direction you want to go.

Of course, the difficulty is how you find these friends if you don't currently have them in your life.

Now, I can only speak from my perspective. But if your interests and performance philosophy are similar to mine, my one tip for finding other people—both as spectators and collaborators—who might be interested in this style of performance is to search for creators and not consumers. My job and lifestyle have brought me in contact with a lot of creative, active people and I find them to be, generally, very receptive. (It's also true that a lot of self-proclaimed "artists" are a nightmare to be around, but that's a separate issue.) If you want to broaden your social circle, look to things like local theaters, comedy scenes, filmmakers, open-mic nights, even groups that go out hiking or something like that. People engaged in creative or physical action. You don't have to be an actor or comedian yourself. You can work backstage, or just become known in that community by being a fan or supporter. I've found much higher interest in those types of groups for my style of performing than I have in something like a book club or movie group. Which, don't get me wrong, are great places to meet people as well. But in my experience it takes a little more effort to bring those people into your world for something unusual. Whereas in some place like a local theater or an improv class if you say something like, "You want to check out something a little weird?" It's immediately a reaction of, "Yes! What is it? Let's do this. Let's go!" 

So make new friends. New people to perform for, and perform with. Here... let's start easy. I'll be your friend. Now build from here.

Daughters of Zeus

The JAMM cover models will collectively be known as the JAMM Muses.

Why did I settle on that? Well, for a few reasons. It's a positive association and label that I don't mind slapping on a group of people. It's literally true for some of these women. There is a magical/enchanting association to the name. The dictionary definition of a muse is "a goddess presiding over a particular art," so it's perfectly appropriate for this niche performing arts magazine.

Not only that, but JAMM Muse evokes the French phrase j'amuse, meaning "I amuse" or "I entertain."

And if you put that into google translate and go back and forth a few times you get this.

I amuse. I entertain. I have fun.

That's as close to a motto as this site has. It's the, "I Came-I Saw-I Conquered" of the casual magic scene. I'd translate it into latin to give it some extra gravitas, but everything I try just translates "I have fun" to "I have fun."

Which is kind of winningly stupid. I like to imagine a Roman general screaming to 1000s of soldiers.

"Ego ludere!" 

[Audience roars.]

"Ego concepi!"

[Audience roars.]

"I have fun! Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!"

Much thanks to JM Beckers for the suggestion. [By the way, JM co-authored an unbelievable variation on the Kruskal effect called A Bumblebee's Flight where the deck is shuffled by the spectator. It's one of those methods that amazes you that it actually works. I specifically like the variation from a new deck that is demonstrated by Tomas Blomberg. I have a couple presentational variations for this style of effect. One of which will likely come out here or in the mag. However, it could be a while because it's a little complex and I want to have the opportunity to try it out a couple more times before I write it up.]

If you signed up to support year two and you haven't yet subscribed to the JAMM, and you intend to, it would be great if you could do so before this weekend. [Subscribe here.] This will just give me some idea of how many are on board and how many flaked. Plus, once an issue is released any new subscriptions will start with the next issue. 

Here is the first JAMM Muse (J'AMMuse? I don't know. I'll play around with it) Jessica Michelle, showing us the 21 card trick while on a break from shooting.

Gardyloo #17

Thanks to everyone who submitted suggestion for the JAMM model's group name. Most of the suggestions were terrible, but some were pretty good. There were too many for me to write back individually so consider this a group thanks. 

I did end up choosing someone's idea and I'll reveal it tomorrow in Thursday's mini-post. Mainly I just wanted to choose something that made sense and was pleasant. I'm friends with many of these women, or they're friends of other people who help out with the site. I don't want it to be like, "Hey, look, you're the JAMM Cum Dumpster for March!"

---

Yo. Why didn't anyone tell me about this movie? It's like everything I enjoy all rolled up into one thing: magic, genre movies, the backing of the WWE, black people. If you don't think I'll be seeing this opening weekend, you don't know me very well.

---

Imagine you walked out to your driveway and there were two new cars there. 

"I want you to picture one of those cars begins to float in the air," I tell you. "Which one is it?"

"The blue one," you say.

"Okay, that's the car you get to keep."

You would never think, "I chose to keep the blue car." You wouldn't actually know what to make of the whole "picture a floating car" thing. But, hey, free car, what the hell, you're not going to complain.

This is bad equivoque. And it's especially transparent when you're implying the spectator is making free choices that have some meaning. 

For equivoque to feel convincing, they have to feel like they know the outcome of their action before they make a choice. I've written more about this on this site and demonstrate it with a couple effects in JV1 in the Third Wave Equivoque section. But that was over a year ago and I want you to keep it in mind if you do any effects of this type. 

As a reminder, I've created this public service announcement. (Apologies to Chris Ramsay who does a lot of things well, but this technique isn't one of them. Think of it this way: If at the end of the selection procedure the spectator is holding one card, there is another "floating in the air," and then it turns out the "selection" is the one the magician is left with... that ain't good equivoque, baby-boo.)

---

A week or so ago I posted about the concept of pouring water on dry-erase marker to make what you've drawn release from the surface. As per this gif that was circulating...

While in an email conversation with James David I came up with an idea that might push you further towards a magical effect. Or at least something a little more layered than, "This is what happens when you pour water on dry-erase marker."

Let's say you're with your friend. You have a plastic folder or a small mirror or something else you can draw on in front of you. "Tell me if you know who this is," you say. And you draw a stick-man on the surface of the item you have with you. 

"Okay. Any idea?" you ask.

They stare at you blankly.

"Really? Uhmm... uh...." You kind of shake your head and stare at your drawing as if to say, How do I make this any more clear?

Struck with inspiration you pull the marker back out and draw a rectangle around the stick-man. 

"So...." you say, expectantly.

"What is... I don't know what you're asking...you want me to tell you who the stick-man is? I don't...," they blabber.

"You seriously don't know? The context clues aren't helping?" you ask, pointing to the box. "Wait... I know," you say, and you flip the drawing upside-down.

They shrug. 

"It's Houdini, you jackass! Oh my god. You're losing it," you say. "It's Houdini in his water torture cell." 

You hold up the marker. "This is Houdini's Sharpie," you say. "I bought it from a collector. He wanted 500 bucks for it, but I talked him down to $450. That sucker." You lovingly admire your obviously brand new Sharpie for a moment.

"I think it still has some of that old Houdini magic in it. The water torture cell was like a phone booth filled with water that Houdini would be placed in upside-down, and then he had to escape."

You take a little bit of water and pour it over what you drew. The stickman floats off the surface and you blow him out of the box or tip the surface so he slides out.

The method is, of course, that you draw the stick man with a dry-erase marker that looks similar to a Sharpie. You put the marker away as if you're done.  Then when you decide to draw the box you remove the Sharpie as if it was the same marker. And that's what you leave in play until the end

I haven't performed this for anyone other than myself. I realize it's not the most mystifying thing in the world and played straight it would be a little corny. But with the right attitude I think it would be a fun and charming little visual moment. The marker switch is motivated and shouldn't be an issue, it happens before the trick starts. Pouring on the water makes sense to the story. And you get to preen like a smug idiot when you talk about how you bought Houdini's Sharpie.  

Proposed Names for JAMM Covergirls

I like some of these, but don't love any. 

"JAMM Majokko"  has a nice sound/rhythm
- Jean Marie B.
[It does sound nice, but too obscure.]

How about calling each of them a JAMM Miss? Then there's the obvious joke of putting them on you before you sleep.
- Brandon T. 

I think something along the lines of the JAMM Janes or the JAMM Jenny's might be a fitting name for the cover models... Either one of the J names were somewhat popular in the 60s, 70s (which echoes the awesome retro vibe of the mag) It also makes them sound like they'd have Daddy issues and just need to get out of this God forsaken town... 
- Justin G.

JAMM Muffins (same problem as tarts?)
JAMM Kittens. Everyone likes kittens.
- Chris H.

I suppose if Tart is derogatory, then JAMMETTE would be way over the top:  http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jammette 
- Christopher C.

As for the monthly centerfolds, it's got to be 'JAMM Tarts' surely!  
- Jon S.

JAMM Jugs
JAMM Jars
The JAMM Center-Tears
- Thomas J.
[If Center-Tears is a play on Centerfolds, that's pretty clever. If it's just a euphemism for a vagina, that's awful, and also pretty clever.]

In reference to the two cats in your artwork…
Which is of course a reference to The Jinx…
Without further ado…
Pussycats.  (Perhaps derogatory?)
Maybe this makes JAMM Tart a viable option.
- Kerry D.

How about JAMM-Role Models.
This is terrible and barely a pun.
But in my defense they are models.
It conveys something of the inspirational role that JAMM plays.
I think you might call the same thing 'a jelly roll' - which makes it even worse.
- Dan R.
[Yeah, swing and a miss on that one.]

Right now "bunny" is still the leader in the clubhouse. It may be the most obvious, but that could be due to the fact that it's the perfect combination of magazine model and magician reference. Although I'm still taking suggestions.

If I had thought more about it, I would have only chosen women from the Iroquois Indian tribe. Then I could call them JAMM-Iroquois.

Subscribe or die.

A Brief History of Magazines for the Amateur Magician

This is brief, not because I'm being lazy. It's brief in the same way an article with the title, "A History of Joshua Jay's Heterosexual Sex-Conquests," would be brief. By necessity. (Yes, Josh is married, and yes his wife is a knockout. But let's be honest, no one has said, "Actually, I think I'm just in a cuddling mood tonight. Cuddle-Monster time!" more than our boy, JJ.)

In researching magazines geared towards the amateur magician, the first thing I came across was this magazine with outstanding cover art, but a dubious title. 

No, I kid. Of course, magic is fun. I mean... not the way you do it. It's a big chore the way you do it. But it can be fun.

Magic Is Fun was published by D. Robbins & Company. It was an "Independent Magazine for the Amateur Magician" that came out in 1946 and 1947. There were 7 issues all together. You can get a complete digital file on Lybrary.com. 

What made Magic Is Fun different from other magic journals is that it was released to the general public on newsstands. 100,000 copies of the first issue were printed! Holy Christ! I mean, I don't know how many were sold, but that's a pretty insane number regardless.

And because it was sold to the public, magicians of the time, predictably, threw a shit-fit because their precious secrets were being discussed. This, ultimately, led to the publisher removing the magazine from the shelves and it died soon after. Here is the publisher talking about the demise of the magazine in the final issue:

Magical organizations wrote us letters protesting the sale of a Magic magazine on newsstands, claiming it would ruin the professional magicians, that we were unethical in selling it at newsstands. Some of the old, established magazines even refused to accept our ads of magical effects. We could have paid no attention to the protests, but on second thought, decided that perhaps it would be better to retain the good will of magical societies and publishers, so earlier this year 1947, we discontinued the newsstand sales of Magic is Fun. By printing only a small quantity of magazines, we found that subscriptions did not cover our costs. There was only one thing left to do . . . stop publishing.

In all honesty, that may have been an excuse as to why the mag folded. I haven't read the magazine itself, but looking at the contents of it, it looks to be a real snooze. 

The next reference I found to a magazine for amateur magicians was in this book Harry Harrison, Harry Harrison by, unsurprisingly, Harry Harrison.

In writing about a guy named Alfie Bester he wrote:

While I can find more info about Alfie Bester, I can't find any other reference to this magazine for amateur magicians. Perhaps he "wrote the whole thing himself" and then "read the whole thing himself" and never actually published it. I don't know. I'd be curious if anyone has any other information on it. 

Now, the truth is, of course, that all magic magazines are for amateur magicians to a certain extent. It's not like Copperfield is flipping through the Linking Ring to find stuff to add to his show that weekend. 

When I say my new digital magazine, the JAMM, is geared towards the amateur magician, I specifically mean the amateur who connects with the style of performance I champion on this site, in JV1, and in TAATKT. Yes, it goes without saying that eventually my ideas will just be the standard for amateur magic, and everyone will walk around feeling like goofballs for the time they spent harping about patter and routining effects together and all that junk. But until that bright future comes, I'll continue to proffer these ideas here and in the new Jerx Amateur Magic Monthly.

That's not to say it will be of value only to amateurs. While its primary focus is casual performances, even professionals perform casually. And there will be ideas and effects that can be used in many settings. The first issue has something that could easily be transposed to the stage. A future issue has a friend's table-hopping routine. But yes, the POV will be the that of the amateur magician. And that's a lifestyle for me. This is a lifestyle magazine. Like Oprah's.

The premiere issue comes out this Saturday and new issues will come the first Saturday of every month. This is a Saturday type of magazine. Not a Sunday thing. This is going to be fun. Not filled with whatever sedative Sundays naturally possess. 

The layout and design of the JAMM will start pretty simple, but will grow as I become more proficient with the design software. Not that many of you give a shit as long as the content is good. I'm content with a relatively simple style starting out. And if anyone complains I'll say they've got it good. For much of my youth, the most popular magazine in magic looked like this shit-show:

And every month they would just swap out one cruddy black and white promo picture for another. The designer apparently asking, "What's a Pantone color that's good for a suicide note?"

The interior looked like it was composed on this:

As I mentioned when the JAMM was first announced, its design is inspired by an old exploitation rag called Secrets.

They had "color" printing on the inside as well. But just one color. Red.

Here was the first test at mimicking that style (before we got the color right) with a shot from The GLOMM membership kit photoshoot.

The entire JAMM isn't in that style, because A) it would be annoying to read, B) it would be wildy time intensive, and C) the pdf file would be huge. It's just the cover and one of the feature articles that are like that. Why did I choose that style? I don't know. I like it. Plus I like the double entendre of a magic magazine aping the style of a magazine called Secrets. See? I'm pretty clever.

This site can only exist via people supporting it through subscribing to The JAMM.  So, if you like this site, and you're not destitute, I hope you'll consider subscribing so we can keep this going for a while. My goal is to get to 100,000 subscribers to match Magic is Fun's publication numbers. As of now, I'm falling short of that goal by nearly 100,000 (if we round). 

And yes, I realize I could shutter the website, just release an 8-page ebook with one effect once a month, type it up in Word with no thought into presentation, and charge more for it than I am for this. I'd probably make more money or, at the very least, save 95% of the time I put into this site. Don't look to me for business savvy. This site isn't about creating a business, it's about creating a symbiotic good thing with all of you.

Subscribe!

Here is the cover for the JAMM #1, hitting your email this Saturday. With Jessica, our lovely JAMM model for February on the cover. (Is there a good name for this? Like you have Playboy Bunnies. And Penthouse Pets. What would make a good JAMM model name? I thought of JAMM Mistresses (after Jam Master Jay) but that's a stretch. Perhaps JAMM Bunnies is good, to keep the magic connection. I don't know. If you have a good idea, send it to me. There will be a reward for you. (JAMM Tart, suggested by Jon Shaw, is frustratingly almost perfect. I'm trying to convince myself it wouldn't be seen as derogatory, but I don't know if I can manage it.)) She's doing everyone's favorite overused "Shush, I'm a magician who sucks at palming" pose. I considered having every JAMM cover model do that, to beat the joke into the ground. But it's just going to be this once. And don't get excited by the headline above the title, that's always going to be taken straight from an actual Secrets magazine cover.

Intent and Approach

[If you're at Magi-Fest this weekend and you would like to connect with other Jerx readers on the down-low, use this subtle code phrase to see if they're part of the Jerx "in crowd." Stare at their crotch, lick your lips, and say, "Oooh, daddy, it looks like you're packing a long-barreled cum gun in your trousers." If they say, "Fully-loaded," then you know they're a fellow reader. If they say anything else, they're probably not a fan. Also, please let me know what they say.]

This is another long, rambly post about presentation. Don't worry, there won't be a ton of these. But things kind of reset with the beginning of year 2 and a lot of new readers have come to the site, so I want to clarify some things for those who haven't read the huge archive of posts. 

In his review for The Jerx, Volume One, Jamy Ian Swiss wrote this, in regards to some of the more immersive effects outlined in the book. 

[T]o me the situation risks leaving the participant with an underlying sense, when the dust settles, of having been the victim of a practical joke. I am willing to accept at face value that the author manages to avoid this, largely by way of his degree of conviction and commitment, and probably a fair degree of personal charm. But I’m not much of a practical joker, and the kind of magic that is sometimes presented with that implied sensibility invariably rubs me the wrong way. At the end, the spectator recognizes that you were prepared for the event, you planned it, you carried it out, you made it happen. Some people will delight in that. Some might be profoundly turned off by the sensation of a sneak attack.

While his assessment of my "fair degree of personal charm" is spot on, I don't think his apprehension about people feeling like they were taken, or the victims of a "sneak attack" is a real concern, even for a charmless bastard like you. Or, at least, it shouldn't be.

I can understand why Jamy thought it could be an issue. One of the reasons I was not particularly hyped to have The Jerx, Volume One reviewed in Genii or other places is that I felt there was a good chance of it being misunderstood. Not because it's so "deep" or "revolutionary," but just because it's kind of a companion piece to this site. I didn't know how well it would work as a stand-alone thing. (As it turned out, I was fortunate to get really positive reviews from Kainoa Harbottle and Jamy Swiss, as well as from John Lovick in his review of AATKT. So now I'm happy they exist and are "in the record," so to speak.) And without the background of having followed this site, it's possible the intent and approach I take when performing wasn't 100% clear. (It may also be due to a failure of my writing because there were a couple issues in Jamy's review where he got what I was intending completely backwards.)

So, for new readers, and as a reminder to old readers, I want to talk about intent and approach. And also give you the rules I follow to keep my style of presentation a fun experience rather than a manipulative one.

First, my history, quickly.

For a long time I didn't perform much because it made me feel awkward. I didn't like performing because I was accustomed to seeing magic as an exhibition of my skill or power. In the best case scenario, people walked away thinking I possibly possessed these abilities. In the worst case they walked away thinking I wanted them to believe I had such skills or powers and just did a bad job faking it.

People would say, "Ah, to perform magic for someone is to give them a gift!" But if that's true, it's often like giving someone a gift that consists of a framed picture of you flexing your muscles. Like, yes, technically that's a gift. But it seems designed to reflect attention back on the giver.

I think a lot of amateurs have this feeling about magic, and so they become people who study magic, but never performed it. That's where I was until I realized I was like a person who read a bunch of cookbooks but never cooked anything. And that's kind of retarded.

What I wanted to do was shift the emphasis off me and on to the experience. (This entire blog could be seen to be the results of those efforts.)

We are accustomed to presenting magic with a certain pace to it. There is a traditional rhythm to performing that is nearly identical between the professional and the amateur. What I was trying to do was take all of the prevailing rhythms away.

And that leaves us with something new. And it's new for both the performer and the audience. If you're interested in the style I suggest here, you have to get used to it. And you have to ease others into it as well.

Here are the rules I follow to draw people into this style of presentation. And once they're in, you don't have to worry about them feeling tricked or manipulated. They're on board.

1. Start slowly - My first trick for someone is never some two-hour weird excursion that comes out of the blue. Instead it's something quick, done in one of the pared-down performance styles I've mentioned on this site. If they're receptive to this then I can push the boundaries on each subsequent performance. Eventually they are just game for whatever you do because there is a history there of them buying in and being rewarded with an interesting experience. Imagine I take you on five dates and we have a really great time. If I suggest we go on a weekend trip, you're not going to think, "This will probably suck," you're going to be pretty positive it will be worth the effort. (And come on, baby, it's been five dates. When are you going to put out?)

2. Perform for people who enjoy seeing this type of stuff - This may seem obvious, but you will read on the Cafe questions about how to perform for people who don't like magic, or grabby spectators, or people who are constantly trying to expose what you're doing. The simple answer is, you don't. Don't bother with them. Seek out the people who are into these types of experiences and proceed with them. That way the experience will feel like something they invited upon themselves, not something that was forced on them. 

3. Don't toy with their emotions - 

Here's a joke you can tell your friends:

You: Did you hear about that actress who stabbed her husband?

Them: No. 

You: Yeah. She stabbed him to death. It was... dammit, what's her name? Uhm... Reese... Reese...

Them: Witherspoon?

You: No. With her knife.

Do people get upset when you tell them this joke? Are they bothered to find out it wasn't a real news story and instead just a bad pun? Do they feel set up? No, because they didn't invest much into it. And they realize that you were setting them up for their benefit.

Traditionally magic has felt like a set-up for the magician's benefit. And that's a bad corner to paint yourself into. Magic can never feel like a "gift" when it's self-serving or manipulative. 

The key is I'm not toying with their emotions by trying to present something as real. I interest them with something obviously fantastic. I don't play around with something hyper-personal to them. If their kid died in a house-fire, I'm not like, "I call upon the ghost of little Toby to move this sponge ball from my hand to yours." I don't even like presentations where it's like, "Our cards matched because we have such a strong connection." I think that's pretty creepy. Instead I like presentations for my immersive effects that are based on alternate universes, time travel, ghosts, esp, aliens, haunted locations, secret societies, long lost twins, dreams, ancient curses and those sorts of things. Things that are interesting, but things that no one takes so personally that they would feel duped or suckered for being wrapped up in them for a moment. As I've stated before, my absolute favorite style of performance is to suggest that what's about to happen is due to something the spectator knows is nonsense. And then do something which gives them no other explanation to fall back on other than that same nonsense. (See The Sealed Room With the Little Door)

Look at something like, "Will You Let Me Into Your Dream." (I'm singling out that one because it's one of the only tricks on this site I haven't had the opportunity to perform myself, so I can look at it as an outsider.) It was a four-day effect when my friend performed it. At the end, everything comes together and it's clear it was all part of a trick. Would anyone feel manipulated or set-up if they were on the receiving end of this? I can't picture that. It's not at a trick at their expense. You would only bother performing it for someone who was into that sort of experience. Someone who would see it as a trick for their benefit.

A practical joke implies someone believing something is real and then finding out it's not. What I want is for them to not know what to believe and then have that ambiguity crystalize into a unique experience.

So the main reason the style I advocate for doesn't come off as a practical joke is that people are under no delusions about what they're seeing. They know it's a trick. The dichotomy of this style is that I suggest removing yourself as the magician behind the effect, but I don't suggest you remove the notion that it's a trick. I never want the spectator to think, "I thought it was going to be something cool, but then it turned out to just be a trick." I want them to feel like, "I knew it was a trick, but it turned out to be something cool." 

As I've said before, I want the trick to feel real in the moment. You go to the movies and you know you're going to a movie, afterwards you know you've seen a movie, but in-between you get caught up in it. 

The point of not taking credit for what is occurring is not so people really think it's a voodoo ritual (or whatever) that caused the effect. It's for three different reasons.

First, it's to free the spectator from feeling obligated to acknowledge your talent/skill. I often find, outside of a formal magic performance, people are a little awkward about how to respond to magic. If someone plays the flute for you—or does any kind of artistic performance— you feel compelled to say, "Hey, nice job," when they're done. But magic, whether it's done well or poorly, is a different thing altogether. They're not quite sure whether to treat it like a trick, or if you want them to pretend you really read their mind, or what. What are they supposed to be complimenting you on?

Second, it puts the two of you on the same side. You're experiencing something together. You can guide their reactions by your reaction.

Third, it forces them to sit with the mystery a little while longer. I had the experience, literally just fours ago, of performing a trick in a fairly traditional way, and the woman I was showing the trick to said, "Ah, you just did something without me seeing it." Like, that was her explanation for how I did it. So she essentially wrote off the whole thing almost immediately. How did that magical thing just happen? Well, he did a trick. If instead I had come up with an alternative presentation that took the focus off of me, she couldn't have backed out of the moment so quickly. 

But she would still know it's a trick. 

Yes. I'm not quite sure how to explain this. Just because someone knows what is true in reality, they can still indulge in the feeling of a fantasy. If you buy your wife flowers she may be grateful or she may be suspicious, but either way it's a fairly straightforward transaction. You buy flowers, she thanks you for them. But what if you sent those flowers anonymously and signed it from a "secret admirer"? She may still know they came from you, but as long as you scratched your head and said, "Huh. Wasn't me. Who is this guy? I'm going to murder him!" Then she just gets to live with the feeling of being someone worthy of receiving mystery flowers. She can't immediately wipe out that debt by saying thank you, because you won't take credit for it. And maybe you spend the rest of your relationship sending her anonymous gifts and never taking credit. Maybe Valentine's day rolls around and you buy her a hand-held vacuum cleaner, but her "secret admirer" sends her a diamond tennis bracelet. "Goddammit!" you say. She plays along and holds her heart and bats her eyelashes thinking about her secret admirer. If you never actually cop to it, then the bubble of the fantasy is never really popped, regardless of what everyone knows the reality to be.

Is this all getting too fruity? It's a little ethereal, I know. I'm just telling you the things I've learned in the past 5-10 years about performing. And what I've learned is that it is always wise to emphasize the interactivity and the mystery because people are craving these things.

People have suggested that technology will kill magic. And I think that's probably true for magic on tv and online. But this is a actually a golden age for live magic. Especially close-up magic. And extra-especially amateur close-up magic. I don't want to sound like Old Man Jerx here, but we don't live in a time of sock-hops and taffy-pulls. We don't even live in a time of going to the arcade and interacting with people while you play video games. These days, if you can give someone a unique experience—one that requires their presence and engagement, that is happening in the moment and playing out live in front of them, that is perhaps grander and more personal than a typical magic trick—it truly is a kind of gift.