An Exposure Koan

Imagine I give you a deck of cards, you shuffle it, select a card, return it to the deck, shuffle it, then you hand me the deck and I find the card. Assume I achieved this by the use of a marked deck.

You might say that’s not that interesting a trick. You’re probably right. In its most basic form, it’s not very interesting.

Okay, now let’s say I give you a deck of cards, you shuffle it, then I spread it on the table face-up and take a picture. Then you select a card, replace it, shuffle the deck and hand it to me. I spread it again on the table and take a picture of it.

“It’s a pretty complicated algorithm,” I say. “The program compares the order of the deck in the first picture to the order of the deck in the second picture, calculates in the shuffles, looks for the card that is out of sequence, and voila, it identifies the card you chose. How else?”

It’s a goof, of course. The truth is I just used a marked deck and all the picture taking and talk of algorithms was just presentation. A presentation that many would think is more interesting than just saying “pick a card and shuffle and I’ll find it.”

But, here’s where it gets complicated.

The fact is, there is an app—well, a combination of apps—that can do exactly what the “goof” presentation suggests. That is, you can have a deck shuffled, take a picture of it, have a card selected, returned to the deck, and have the deck shuffled again (multiple times), then you can take a picture and the app compares the first picture to the second and identifies which card was selected.

You need Vision: The Card Spread Analyzer by Martin Eisele

And CardTrack by Marc Kerstein

What is the point I’m making? I’m not sure, really. That’s why I called this a “koan” not “a well considered point on exposure.”

I guess what I find odd is this: if you do this trick with a marked deck, you’re a thoughtful magician putting some effort into presentation. If you do it with the app, you’re exposing the trick and breaking a cardinal rule of magic. But the experience for the spectator would be (essentially) identical regardless of which version you performed. In fact, even a knowledgable magician might have no idea which version you did if they were just watching. The president of the IBM might say, “If that trick doesn’t use an app, I’d like to write up your presentation in the Linking Ring. If that does use an app, then you’re kicked out of the IBM for exposure.”

I just find that interesting.

We’re probably due for a complete overhaul of what exposure means in an era where laymen can discover the secret to nearly any trick with a couple minutes of searching online. We can’t think of it the way we did in the 1950’s. “Call the ethics committee! Blackstone revealed the rubber pencil illusion on the back of a Sugar Rice Krinkles box!”

I don’t know what the answers are, but I have done pretty much the best writing on the subject. Specifically about how we can utilize exposure for stronger magic. See this post, Four Uses of Exposure, and the beginning of this post. That’s a starting point.

Dustings of Woofle #4

Congrats to finalist #9, MT, who god (or fate in the form of the New York Lottery) chose as the winner of the Exaltation of Joshua Jay contest. He donned a red jacket, put together a globe puzzle and smashed his hair down on his forehead and now he has the prize package coming his way. Of course, he happens to be in Greece so it’s going to cost me $60 to ship him this stuff. Damn me and my incredible cross-cultural appeal!

---

Here’s Eva Anderson (Harry Anderson’s daughter) on the Doughboys podcast with a couple quick anecdotes about David Copperfield and Criss Angel. They’re amusing, but not particularly surprising. After each story I thought, “Yeah, that sounds about right.”

---

If you like dumb jokes in your patter, here’s a mildly funny one I heard on an old Cheers episode (there are no new Cheers episodes, in case you were waiting for them). It’s similar in structure to some other jokes I’ve heard magicians tell, but I think it’s a little funnier.

“Do you believe in intuition?” you ask. They respond with whatever.

“Interesting. I don’t believe in intuition. But I have this strange feeling that someday I will.”

---

View this post on Instagram

It's not often you can say you know someone changing the world. My friend @itsjasonflom is a legendary record exec., and he's also a founding board member of the Innocence Project. This organization has freed hundreds of people wrongfully convicted of serious crimes using DNA evidence. Through Jason I've met some of these people, including the woman pictured here, who spent a decade in prison for a murder she didn't commit. Thank you both for coming to our show! #joshuajay #siximpossiblethingsshow

A post shared by Joshua Jay (@joshuajaymagician) on Apr 29, 2019 at 9:28am PDT

Oh my god… this poor woman. Can you imagine being locked in prison 10 years for a murder you didn’t commit, only to finally be set free. And then, just when you think your nightmare is over, you have to sit through a Joshua Jay show?

Whose demented idea was this? After all she’s been through.

“Andy, you’re looking at it the wrong way. She lost 10 years of freedom, and this 90 minute show feels like it takes about a decade to finish. So perhaps seeing this show helped balance the scales in some way—gave her a greater sense of time on the outside.”

No, that’s not how it works. All they did was steal an hour and a half more of her precious freedom. Those monsters. My heart goes out to her.

The Self-Working Hook

An email I received recently:

Here's a quick testimonial,

Monday night, I met with a friend to catch up and talk a little about magic. He's been learning a few things so I brought both of us a deck and "Self Working Card Tricks by Karl Fulves" just so he'd have some easy tricks while he learned to handle the cards.

We were at a bar and as the night went on our waitress saw the cards and book each time she came to check on us. They weren't terribly busy, so when she brought the checks, I used Peek Backstage but using the book as icing. "Hey, we're trying to learn magic, can we try a trick if you have like a minute and a half?" 

I kinda expected her to half-heartedly sit through one but she seemed genuinely interested in seeing a trick. So I performed a short magician-in-peril type plot where the card in her hand becomes hers, all the while consulting my "Self Working" book. I ended it with "It says: 'If the card she stops on isn't her card, then have her turn over the card in her hand'"

Great reaction, only did the one so we didn't hold her hostage, and all the credit went to the book. 2 minutes later another waiter came over and said "I gotta see this trick". 

10/10, would recommend presenting yourself as amateur at the bar table.

—TW

Yes! I use magic books all the time as a Hook. There is really no more natural segue from someone saying, “What is that?” To you saying, “Oh, it’s something I’m working on for my nephew’s birthday [or whatever reason]. Can I try something out on you?”

Hooks make the transition into an effect feel essentially seamless. The reason they’re not a more popular concept in magic is because the best ones take the “power” from the magician. Obviously, sitting around with a self-working card magic book is not a power move. In fact, it probably undermines your actual level of skill. And that’s not a look most people who perform magic tricks want to portray. But for me, a magic book makes an ideal segue into performing

I’m not suggesting you go around with The Art of Astonishment stacked up on your table at Starbucks, but there are a few benefits to carrying something like the Karl Fulves book mentioned above.

1. It’s small and slim. It may even fit in your back pocket. When people see it, it draws attention, but it doesn’t obviously demand it.

2. It’s a perfect gift to give someone on the fly if they show an interest in magic. I’ll buy a few copies at a time to have some to give away.

3. If someone picks it up and flips through it, they’re unlikely to stumble on any important secret of magic.

4. It misdirects their suspicion. When I use a self-working book as a hook, I don’t actually perform a self-working card trick (at least, not generally). And I’ll take advantage of the implication that they don’t need to be on guard against sleight-of-hand.

5. Here’s something I would never have realized until talking about it with laymen: The phrase “self-working” magic can be very intriguing to people who aren’t familiar with the vernacular of learning magic. Erase what you know about magic. You see a book entitled, “Self-Working Card Tricks.” What would that even mean? And then someone says, “Yeah, let me show you something unbelievable. I have no idea how it works.” That can seem almost believable. If it’s something that works, “by itself,” the implication is that it doesn’t need the performer to direct it.

Okay, but what if I show them something and then they say, “Let me see where that’s written up in the book. I want to try it.”

That’s a possibility. For that reason, I generally don’t present it as TW does in his email to me, where I’m constantly referencing the book. I just use it as a hook. They see the book and ask something about why I have it or whatever, and that propels us into the conversation. I only imply that what they’re seeing is straight from the book, but I don’t reference it. If, at the end, they say, “Okay, show me where that is in the book,” I’ll spend a minute or so looking for it and then say, “Hmmm… that must be in Volume 2.” The book has already served its purpose of naturally guiding us into the trick.

The Exaltation of Joshua Jay Finalists

Below are the 10 Finalists in the Exaltation of Joshua Jay contest as chosen by members of the Jerx Advisory Board.

The ultimate winner will be picked by the New York Lottery Commission. Next to each finalist is a three digit number range. The winner of the Exaltation of Joshua Jay Contest is the person whose range contains the selected number in the midday three-digit Numbers drawing on 4/30/2019.

Below the finalists are a number of Honorable Mentions.

Thanks to everyone who entered. It’s a very special situation when the public can recognize a genius/messiah in his or her own time. In this respect, Joshua Jay is way ahead of Christ, who had essentially no photo contests done in his honor when he was still alive.

For those who entered and don’t end up with the prize package, keep this in mind… Your life situation is such that you have internet access, a camera, and enough free time that you’re able to read this site regularly. Your mindset is such that you were willing to engage in some mindless stupid fun for a chance at a prize. And your picture is bringing some small level of joy to people you don’t know. You’re all winners in the big scheme of things.

Finalist #1 - CL - 000-099

Finalist #2 - DM - 100-199

Finalist #3 - KG - 200-299

Finalist #14- SW - 300-399

Finalist #5 - CG - 400-499

Finalist #6 - AI - 500-599

Finalist #7 - MH - 600-699

Finalist #8- SC - 700-799

Finalist #9 - MT - 800-899

Finalist #10- LH - 900-999

Honorable Mentions

Being Neighborly

The Exaltation of Joshua Jay Contest ends today at noon, New York time.

The entries will be voted on by the Jerx Advisory Board (i.e., some friends of mine). The top vote getters will be announced on Monday with the winner chosen in some random manner on Tuesday.

---

Just a quick anecdote today…

The apartment across the hall from where I’m staying had been vacant for a few weeks. The door was unlocked during that time and I would go in and walk around the empty apartment wondering if there was some things I might be able to set up and utilize in a trick at a later point in time. Maybe months from now. This may seem psychopathic, but it was kind of just a mental exercise.

So I set up for the Time Traveler’s Toilet (they certainly may lift the toilet lid in the ensuing months, in which case they might be a little confused, but I don’t think they’d find it that weird). And I carved a little something on the underside of a drawer to be used as part of a revelation in a routine. And a couple other little things.

I figured I may never even end up speaking to these people, and even if I did, we may never have the sort of relationship where I’m showing them magic. But that’s okay. I don’t mind planting a seed that might never grow.

The other night I got home around 9:30, grabbed some items from my place and went across the hall and opened the door to the other apartment.

And there are three people sitting on cardboard boxes eating pizza.

And there’s me with a bottle of anti-fog spray in one hand and a q-tip in the other. (Long story. Part of a trick idea I had with their bathroom mirror.)

“Oh…hey,” I said, cleverly, as they all stared at me.

“Sorry, I didn’t know anyone had moved in and I heard noises and I came to check it out.” So I just barged right in instead of knocking in this scenario? I guess. And what was my plan? Was I going to blind the intruders with anti-fog spray and bludgeon them with a Q-tip? I tried to play it off like I just happened to have those objects in my hands from something I was doing back in my place. I’m not sure how convincing I was at changing their perception of me from “home invader” to “good samaritan,” but I did my best.

I sort of salvaged the interaction by being warm and welcoming and normal for the next 15 minutes or so. But sadly I lost that element I had hoped to take advantage of in a future interaction: the notion that I had never been in their apartment and obviously couldn’t have arranged anything there. Now if I ever do something I’m sure they’ll think, “Oh, he probably set that up when he was creeping around our house like a maniac before we moved in.”

I’ll update you if I ever take advantage of anything I set up over there. Don’t hold your breath.

EoJJ Contest Update

One day left to get in your entries for the Exaltation of Joshua Jay contest. See the April 11th and April 23rd posts for details.

The prizes are a box full of Tenyo effects and a $100 gift certificate to Vanishing Inc.

Two quick updates:

Vanishing Inc is now officially sponsoring the contest and providing the gift certificate. Thanks to Josh and Andi.

Also—and this is for real—here is part of Josh’s recent email to me on the subject.

“So we'll sponsor the $100 gift card, and I'll include a high rez photo of any pose requested by the winner with their order.”

I’ve given him veto power on the “any pose” requested, although you can certainly take a shot with requesting one of these 33 Impossibly Sexy Boudoir Photo Poses.

Actually, I think the best idea would be to have him mimic a photo of you. So then you’ll have a photo of you posing as him and him posing as you.

The Limitations of the Professional Performance

I was recently sent this clip from Britain’s Got Talent. It came up in an email exchange between two friends of the site. They were discussing if there was a Jerx-like element to the performance.

The performer’s name is “Elizabeth.” Can you even imagine? Just going by your ordinary, everyday first name? It’s not like her name is Mandrake or something cool. How stupid.

Uhm, but Andy…

Shut up!

While I don’t believe this woman was inspired in any way directly by this site (other than maybe some of the ideas being more prominent in the magic zeitgeist because I’ve been writing about them for four years), there are some things in the performance which are possibly Jerx-esque.

For example, while she’s obviously doing a magic trick, her role isn’t exactly a magician. And taking the judge off stage is sort of an example of reframing a trick, and is a small sort of buy-in. Even just going by “Elizabeth” could be seen as a way to eliminate an element of “performance.” (If you see it as her suggesting this is not “about her,” so her full name isn’t important. Sure, “Elizabeth” could still be seen as a stage name, but certainly not an obvious “performer” stage name like, “The One and Only, Incredible Elizabeth X, the Second 1st Lady of Magic.”)

There is still much that is very presentational. Her patter, for example, comes off as highly scripted, not like someone chatting with you, or even like a lecturer speaking casually. It sounds like a memorize monologue. Which is fine and perfectly appropriate for the environment, but obviously un-Jerx-like.

So yeah, I can see some similar elements there. I’m curious to see what her next appearance on the show is like.

What I really want to take note of in this post is how limited the professional performance is to invoke feelings, compared to the same effect in a social setting.

I mean, this woman put a lot of effort to create a creepy effect. And I think she did a good job. But still, how scary was it?

On a scary scale of 1-10. Where this is a one…

And a 10 is being hunted by mutant mental patients who were left in an abandoned asylum in the woods and have survived all these years by slowly feasting on the bodies of people who lost their way while traveling the back roads. (They eat them piece by piece, not killing their victims until they absolutely have to. They start with your penis, which they place on the grill, still attached to you. And the mental patient doing the deed used to work at one or those hotdog places where they butterfly the meat first.)

On that scale, what is this Britain’s Got Talent performance? A four maybe?

Now, imagine the exact same trick, but performed in a social context using the tools I write about here.

Imagine engaging someone in a conversation about some creepy location you read about. It’s not “patter,” so they’re not quite sure how to take this.

They’re experiencing something one-on-one, not in the comfort of a crowd.

You get to utilize a time investment to perhaps build a sense of impending creepiness. On Britain’s Got Talent you pretty much have 3 minutes between the time you’re introduced and the time you have to change into the ghost of Rhea Pearlman. That’s not really conducive to generating any true fear or dread.

But what if I get you to make a buy-in, and you agree to join me on a car trip to this location. Not too far. Maybe twenty minutes away. But as each mile passes, we’re getting further and further away from civilization. The streets are no longer lit. And the trees are much closer to the road.

Instead of this all happening in a set-dressed greenroom off the stage, it’s happening in a genuinely haunted location (“genuinely” “haunted,” I mean, of course.). It’s happening somewhere dark, and moist, amidst the scent of decay.

It’s in this location that—by a slowly dying flashlight—you look through the pictures and select one. And there, on the rotted wall behind you, you see the name of the person you selected. When you turn back, I am now the person you saw in that old photograph, lunging at you.

Here’s the truth, if you did that trick in a social magic setting like I just described, you would be a fucking asshole. It would be cruel.

The same effect that was somewhat creepy on stage would be genuinely terrifying off. But this goes for all emotional responses. They’re all amplified in a social context. The wistfully nostalgic trick on stage might bring someone to happy tears in a social setting. A sweet trick in a professional setting can be genuinely romantic one-on-one.

The magic feeling itself is intensified when the effect isn’t seen as part of a “performance.” That’s why I recommend stripping any of the trappings of a '“show” from your magic interactions, e.g., patter that isn’t conversational, routines that feel meticulously planned, etc. Your spectator may very well know it’s all still a trick, but if it feels like a “show” then they’re going to feel like an audience, rather than a participant. And getting them to feel like a participant is one of the goals of social magic.

I don’t mean it as a slight against professional performers to say a social performance has the potential to be more affecting to the audience. It’s just the nature of human experience. Professional magic is at a disadvantage when it comes to really connecting with people. It’s easy to think Copperfield has the edge in creating powerful magic because he’s got the money and a staff of people working for him. But the lights, the stage, the staff of people, even the name “David Copperfield,” all serve to distance him from his audience. Not connect with them.

When Copperfield flies in a theater in Vegas, the response is, “Ah, how delightful! I feel like a child again when I see that!” But if he was just a guy you knew from the bus stop and one day he was like, “I feel really weird. I think a moth crawled in my nose last night and got in my brain. I know it sounds ridiculous. I’ve just been light-headed and dizzy and having…like… moth thoughts all day.” And then he just flew up and started buzzing around a street lamp, you would not be talking about “the splendor of magical flight!” You’d be cursing up a storm, or grabbing your gun, or running down the street leaving a trail of poo dripping from one of the legs of your freshly shat pants.