talkmagic.co.uk

Hi all,

All the words of wisdom written by the magicians who put pen to paper or have written in forums such as TM, continually point to one principle above all others: KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid. The simpler an effect is to perform, the better. These can often give as strong, or even stronger reactions than something which takes years to learn. Or, so I keep reading.

An example this evening: I have one of those really cheap magic sets sat on a shelf behind me. It's been in a box in the loft for around a year and I took it down the other day to have a look at it. Among a few other plastic bits, it contains penacoin (coin pushed through rubber sheet stretched over a glass), or a variation on it anyway, with the basic props needed. After a 10 minute play with this, I set it up and took it downstairs to show my wife (bingo moment!). She was completely floored. "How the hell did you do that?!?!?". She examined everything and pondered for a while, shaking her head. She's still baffled and wanted me to do it again. I politely refused!

Something so very simple, cheap to buy (if you use some certain DIY products!) and quick to perform with a reaction like that. Perfect, at least to me anyway.

Once you have acquired a few simple tricks like this, what spurs you on to go to more complex effects? Why spend lots of money on some gimmic, prop or gadget to enable you to perform an effect that won't get any stronger effect than the one I got tonight? Why spend several months learning a very difficult sleight?

I'm really curious what drives you to do this. Boredom with your "standard" repertoire? Simple curiosity? The desire to just learn? Chasing that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow? The holy grail of magic tricks?

What gets me most is that sense of wonder you see on the faces of those who've just seen something magical performed. I have only seen it a few times in response to things I've done, but it's very addictive! Is there anything else?

Cheers,
Wishmaster

It depends what you mean by simple. Lots of current tricks on the market are "simple" in the effect they produce (a coin in a bottle, a floating ring) but are highly complicated behind the scenes. There shouldn't be any difference perceived by a spectator using a simple method or a complicated method, and they both have their charms... a simple method gives you that "I can't believe I'm fooling them with this, it's so... simple!" feeling, a complicated method makes you feel all cunning and sophisticated. An advanced magician if you will.

In terms of the effects themselves, I agree. So many books and DVDs are filled with such-and-such's take on "a classic collectors plot, but with his own crazy twist!" which has an instant soporific effect on me. Very slightly tweaking an old trick, making it more complicated and giving it five semi-climaxes with a sucker ending (bingo...) might impress the old hands who have known the trick in all of it's incarnations, but it's most likely going to leave your mates at the pub cold.

However, particularly with regard to "new toys", magic is an absorbing and obsessive hobby (which I think is why it's mostly male dominated). Whether it's tinkering with a car, an instrument or any number of things, guys love to have a project they can immerse themselves in, invest in etc. and the natural inclination is to take that a bit further, get that extra piece of kit, add to it in some way... even if there's absolutely nothing wrong with it in the first place

Farlsborough wrote:It depends what you mean by simple.

<snip>

a simple method gives you that "I can't believe I'm fooling them with this, it's so... simple!" feeling, a complicated method makes you feel all cunning and sophisticated. An advanced magician if you will.

Exactly that! Yes.

The magic set I mentioned is cheap and cheerful, aimed at older kids. The trick I used took 10 seconds to setup, needed very little patter and blew someone away with the end result. That to me is amazing in itself. I'd looked at this a few times before and thought "nah, nobody would be fooled in a million years", much like one or two others I have bought. I was actually just fooling myself.

The penacoin trick had nothing to do with me or what I said. The whole thing sold itself because she saw something her mind was telling her must be impossible. Yet, she saw it happen. That's why I have a CUPS list

I used to do a lot of card tricks that needed, farao's, DL's, peeks, complete blind shuffles and so on and the reactions were always pretty good.
My friend who would perform along side of me always did selfworking effects and he got even better reactions!!
So I started thinking... Why put all that effort in performing a trick if you can get the same (or better) reactions with basic tricks. So now I mostly do selfworking effects

I still learn hard moves and tricks, but I do it for myself. So I can say to myself 'good boy, you wanted to learn it and now you can do it. Good job'

Sometimes people book me for a little poker 101 and I always open with some tricks that contain a lot of sleights, but that's just to show off because it fits the picture. But otherwhise, the less effort the better.

I'm gonna finish this reply with a question Is it me or do magic providers like T11 and E make things harder then they should be??
There is this one trick where you have to turn over the bottom card of the deck, so they say you have to use a double false charlier with a pinky break and a double turnover move while tapdancing on your roof while singing the national anthem of sweden while milking a cow with your feet...
And while they're explaining all this I'm thinking to myself 'why don't you just use a mechanical reverse idiot!"

Why spend lots of money on some gimmic, prop or gadget to enable you to perform an effect that won't get any stronger effect than the one I got tonight? Why spend several months learning a very difficult sleight?

I don't complicate where I don't have to, and I'm similarly against tricks that are designed with the strict intent of fooling magicians (if an effect is a "magician fooler!" or has "nineteen huge kicker reveals and six sucker endings!" it's usually a fairly good sign that the general public will be massively unimpressed with it, in my experience) but some complications are justifiable so long as:

A) the complication is on our side, and
B) it's invisible

Take Lennart's snap change - take a card, put it on the table, and quelle surprise, it's not the card that you supposedly put down. There's innumerable ways of doing this and it doesn't hurt to know a lot of them, especially those that rely on difficult sleights. It means you can shift method as and when the fancy takes you, and nobody gets to see the moves over and over again without being interrupted with another possibility. It's very helpful in setting up false logical patterns - for instance, a brief amusement:

DL, show the card(s) in your right hand, miracle change to table, ta-da! Keep the original card in right hand Lat Palm, pick the changed card up off the table with your left and show that it's only one card, then offer to change it back before having second thoughts - let the spec do it. Transfer the changed card to your seemingly empty right, and snap change it for the original as it hits the table face down. Lap the dupe as the spec puts his hand on it or whatever, then ta-da, it's changed back and you're clean.

Quite involved behind the scenes but in terms of plot, that couldn't be simpler and while he thinks he's seeing the same trick twice, he's not seeing the same method so he can't establish a pattern. In situations like that - not that specific trick, that was just an example - I'd say the fairly complicated latter sleight is worth learning if only to allow for a switch in method before the spectator has a chance to formulate a theory.

I know what you mean about keeping tricks simple, and I think all tricks should be simple in plot, but complicated machinations are OK by me so long as I'm the only person in the room that knows they're happening. In those situations, I'd say they're not only totally justified, but well worth learning.

I think it depends alot on the person who's performing and what they want to get out of magic. I love to entertain people and that's why I do what I do. For me, the less technical stuff I have to think about when I'm performing, the more effort I can put into the presentation and entertainment side of the effect. So me, I'll try to keep things as simple as I can.

On the other hand there are people who enjoy learning complicated techniques and for them, that's half the fun of it, trying to master that difficult move.

Lady of Mystery wrote:there are people who enjoy learning complicated techniques and for them, that's half the fun of it, trying to master that difficult move.

That's certainly part of the fun for me, but I'm always aware of the practical considerations of a sleight before I'll make the time investment - for instance, Lennart Green's tapes are fantastic but things like the top shot, while they look great, have absolutely no practical application outside of being a nice visual way of firing cards into your hand (unless you use his frankly ungodly top shot colour change, the effect of which can be duplicated by a lateral switch which takes a day to learn).

I agree on the presentational emphasis though, that's always got to be the first consideration.

Wy do i try to learn difficult effects ?

Prestige !!!


greetings from belgium

Famuus wrote:Wy do i try to learn difficult effects ?

Prestige !!!

greetings from belgium

Prestige - An awesome film about this very subject!

Greetings from England

For years I did simple, powerful and mostly self working effects. The only real card skill I had picked up was a force and I didn't feel I could do anything more complex.

Then I saw a card trick I truly loved (which I later learned was called 'red hot mamma') that required a D/L, something I was aware of but never bothered to learn. I spent weeks working on it till I had it down and started to show it to anyone who would watch.

The only problem that I got with this effect now and again, was people would insist on shuffling the deck beforehand and this was unacceptable as certain cards needed to be at certain places in the deck. So I went back to the start and worked on palming (another sleight I felt uncomfortable with) allowing me to hand people the deck and shuffle it as much as they want.

This is probably the only real card trick I know that requires multiple sleights and I went to the trouble of learning it because the effect is truly worth it.

Ultimately neither self working or complex card tricks are inherently better than the other, it's all about the effect that's created. It would be pointless to learn the perfect force, D/L, and palming to just find the card, but having a card transform while in a persons pocket it definitely worth it.

Every trick has its difficulties, if you want to present it well. It still takes practice, a script, rehearsal, etc. There are many reasons why it is a good idea to learn some skills - you can do magic with almost anything.

The coin through the rubber sheet trick is a beautiful illusion, but not a worker... On the other hand, if you had mastery of a move or two, you can cause a coin to penetrate a deck of cards into a glass, or cause the coin to penetrate through the bottom of the glass, etc. Coins can travel invisibly to the glass. The glass can catch coins as they penetrate a table top, etc. You can do these anytime, anywhere, with zero setup, no gimmicks, and they are good workers - and stunning miracles if performed well.

Tip for Red Hot Mama (and other tricks as well) - Show them all the cards are different, shuffle them, and tell them it doesn't matter which card they pick. Then they won't insist on shuffling for themselves.

Regarding CUPS - I love my collection! Is it practical? Who cares! I love it! And, it's when folks come over that they get to see new (actually old - but new to them) effects that I rarely use when I go out.

For example, I have an ID. I amazed my wife with it the other day. It occured to me - after so many years of being together - I had never shown her the ID! However, after many years of practice and performance, I can do the same effect with a regular deck - and then go on to use the same deck for so much more - all due to skill. So, I no longer carry an ID.

The KISS principle, to me, does NOT mean that you should only perform the simplest effects. It means that once you have established what the effect is to be, you should accomplish it by the simplest means without compromising the effect. It is the "without compromising" part that will often present the difficulties. Some effects are simplified so much, the effect is lost.

The other thing the KISS principle means to me, is that the effect itself should be as simple for the audience to understand as possible. As Dai Vernon once explained, if the effect can be described in a single sentence, you are on the right track.

The more you develop your skills, the better off you are as a magician.

Now, I do have some caveats. For example, and this is personal according to my performing style, I don't want to leave the audience with an impression that they simply witnessed an act of skill. I want them to experience magic. Magic has no moves! So, I don't do a lot of fancy cutting moves that are purely flourishes and a demonstration of skill. I want all of my "work" to be invisible. That's just me, and it fits my usual character.

Every trick will benefit from the skill you worked hard to attain.

[quote="Lady of Mystery"] For me, the less technical stuff I have to think about when I'm performing, the more effort I can put into the presentation and entertainment side of the effect. So me, I'll try to keep things as simple as I can.
quote]

The KISS principle, to me, does NOT mean that you should only perform the simplest effects. It means that once you have established what the effect is to be, you should accomplish it by the simplest means without compromising the effect.

I could'nt agree more ^ i highlighted the red bits, because that is how i think! I got into Mentalism because - I want my performance to look as close to 'real magic' as is possible.
I am now at the stage of having a 45min strolling type routine from my normal billfold wallet, and if i used my JOL, probably an hour and a half.

its even better when you combine two easy principles into the one effect...

anyway - i started off with cards, got bored, yet i still keep my card stuff up despite only doing "mentalism" - because those skills are transferable...

same with coin skills, i am useless, but i learnt the basics and they came in handy when working with billets...

speaking of old props, i bought two cheap black and red ball and vases the other day off ebay (£4 for two, with p&p from japan) - and now have a strange kinda left brain/right brain demonstration that i can do with these ultimately cheap and charming little props...

i think thats why mentalism can be much more interesting than magic (sorry, but its true) - that its the actual plot that is more engaging than most card magic plots...

Careful Iain
You're getting very close to Bizarre Magick there!!

when i got into mentalism, i did use to perform a kind of bizarre magick...

i had a small chinese box full of strange items (like a mini victorian cabinet of curiosities) someone would select an item and i would tell them the story behind it...