Mailbag #143
/
Announcement
If you downloaded the shortcut in last Thursday’s post, download it again. It’s been updated to fix a bug and to handle single digits.
How the hell did you lose the FISM award you were up for? 😆 You can say that didn’t bother you, but given the things you were up against, it has to gnaw at you.—CB
Well, I’m sure shitting on the awards the moment they were announced didn’t help. I also asked not to be considered. And as far as I know, none of the judges even follow the site.
But no, it didn’t “gnaw” at me. You have to understand, I feel zero connection to the broader magic world. I don’t resonate with what’s happening at FISM, at the Magic Castle, on message boards, or in most magic-related spaces. The style of magic and the skills they value are almost the opposite of what I care about.
I’ve long felt out of step with magicians. I used to chalk it up to magicians being dull dorks, but I don’t really believe that anymore. I think, as people, magicians are as interesting (or uninteresting) as any other group.
It’s really just the way most of them approach magic that I don’t vibe with at all. A five-minute ring and string routine? The cups and balls? A 20-minute card set that no one remembers any specific details of the next day? What’s the point?
If a trick doesn’t give people a story to tell or serve as a way to connect with others, I have no interest in it.
I recognize the skill and artistry that’s celebrated in places like FISM. It’s just not what I’m personally into.
I know there are people out there whose interest is much wider than my own, and they can appreciate this site as well as more traditional styles of magic. But I don’t have that ability. I only have a narrow focus of interest when it comes to magic, and it’s pretty much the stuff I write about here.
So it doesn’t bother me not to have won. It wouldn’t have registered with me in any meaningful way. I’m glad someone who cared more about it got it.
Here’s some feedback from recent posts that present some further options/info that you might find worthwhile, but don’t really need a response from me
I really like your “Fencing” concept. I’ve actually been using a similar idea in a few tricks without realizing it. One of the best examples of “Fencing” I can think of is a subtlety from Max Maven: In most Gilbreath tricks, you have to cut the deck into two piles and ask the spectator to do a riffle shuffle—which can feel a bit unnatural. What Max did was cut the deck and begin a riffle shuffle himself, saying, “Let’s shuffle the cards.” Then he paused mid-shuffle and added, “Or better yet, you shuffle the cards,” as he split the packets and moved them toward the spectator.
It reminded me a bit of a concept from Darwin Ortiz called “False Progression”. It’s when a method is so fooling that you can repeat it multiple times. So to make the trick have a crescendo and not be boring, you start under seemingly worse conditions in the first phase, then slightly better in the second phase and for the third phase you perform it using the full potential of the method.
There are tons of “Bi-Reveals” in magic literature. I had always thought of them as just multiple outs, but your distinction makes perfect sense—and they really are stronger than standard multiple outs. One of the most curious “Poly-Reveals” I’ve come across is in The Purloined Letters from The Essential Stewart James. In it, a poem by Edgar Allan Poe reveals three different cards:
The seven of clubs is revealed by taking the first letter in the first line, the second letter in the second line, and so on, to the twelfth letter in the twelfth line. The four of spades is revealed by taking the first letter in the last line, the second letter in the second-last line, and so on, to the twelfth letter in the first line. The five of hearts is revealed by taking the first letter in each line commencing with the last line and reading up. —GD
I really liked your post from yesterday: The Box: Grocery Delivery. The Damsel List Force is a really fantastic idea and I'll definitely been using it.
But I mostly wanted to suggest that you talk to Marc Kerstein and Albert Chang about this being added as an official feature to DFBX. I think being able to use this force with DFBX's input methods would take it to the next level. —AO
I reached out to Marc and he may have something planned that will work similarly in a forthcoming update to DFBX.
You’re on a generational run with your recent posts. Bi-Reveals, Fencing, Phantom Hits, and the Box are all things I would have expected you to save for your books.
One Bi-Reveal I’m surprised you didn’t mention is the “Switch” feature in the Jerx App. When sitting across from someone I will make my prediction then lean the phone against something on the table so it faces me. I’ll do a trick that whittles down their options to two, followed by a clearly free choice. Then by having them join me on my side of the table or having them take the phone and look at it themselves, I can control what outcome they see without touching anything. So clean. —GM