talkmagic.co.uk

Would any one who has Conjunction by Joshua Quinn like to review it please

I haven't bought the effect, I simply worked out how it was done from the video and the info he gives on his website. I suggest you do the same if you have time on your hands and you like that sorta thing as I had a lot of fun playing with pieces of paper and blue tac.

My verdict on it - it's very, very impressive, as it's an excellent example of lateral thinking. You literally rip two solid rings out of a business card and show them permanently linked. The slight downside is that your audience will discover the secret if they examine it (of course they will want to) - but it does make an excellent bar bet. The other downside is that tearing the business card properly is very tricky, and I'm tempted to purchase the trick just to get a proper set of instructions.

To reiterate what Joshua Quinn says himself:
- This will method will not work for all business cards
- This will method will not work for a playing card

I'll leave it to someone who's not so tight fisted to post a review of the full product.

May I suggest that you do not try to reverse engineer the effect, but instead buy it from Joshua to compensate him for the time and effort he put into the development of the manuscript.

Aside from the ethical issues, there are a number of touches that disguise the method that are explained in the book that would not be apparant from hacking a video. Without these, the method would indeed be blatant to a spectator. The beauty of a correctly made item is that is stands up to very close scrutiny.

The book is not expensive, very nicely made and the effect is wonderful. It may not be for everyone, but it is fantastic for someone.

Take care, Ian

Excuse me? Ethical issue to do with working out a trick? I thought the point of "magic" is that you present an effect that baffles your audience. If your audience turns round and makes an educated guess at how they have been baffled then that's their prerogative.

I have been nothing but honest in my account to my understanding of the effect, and I find it very, very impressive. I have said nothing contrary to the official wording of the site, and have made no attempt at exposing the method as I understand it. It's very possible that I am completely wrong as the method I am using is my own that I unsuccessfully tried with playing cards.

Furthermore I would like to add that I have never performed this trick, and that should I decide to, I fully intend to purchase it for the full set of instructions and advice on handling. I apologise if this was not clear as I do believe in credit where credit is due.

Edit: To quote the creator himself

"... I'm an intellectual elitist who spits on the unwashed masses of plebians, troglodytes, and philistines indolently and self-righteously expecting to have everything spoon-fed directly into what's left of their atrophied brains through a CRT screen"

I completely agree - hence my preference to think for myself.

Steady on chaps...before we too far down the usual route, the point here is that we've seen many posts before where it's been mentioned about working something out from the vids on youtube etc. Whilst I have no doubt that your intentions are honourable, most of the previous posts weren't and we've had no end of trouble as a result. For this reason the mere mention of reverse engineering or working it out tends to be viewed with suspicion simply because of the eejits who've made similar statements before. Just a legacy of the less worthy visitors we get from time to time.

Calm down, calm down...

There's no need to get hot under the collar! You have to remember, there's a lot of distrust, short fuses and very VERY cautious attitudes around TM at the moment, mainly due to the sudden influx of pillocks we've had (present company an exception, of course).

It's starting to grind all of us down, and it would be nice to have just one week pass where everyone gets on like a bunch of burning houses.

(Darn, I always get that one mixed up)

Ooops, sorry I'm new here. I hadn't realised that there's a history regarding people undermining magical effects. This was not my intention as I simply wanted to offer my opinion, as I thought the Conjunction effect is excellent. I apologise for any offence caused.

Quietly and calmly, here's why I used the word 'ethical'. Too many times people have engineered a solution to a marketed effect and then performed it. The problem is that the person has not purchased the performance rights, which are implicit in sales in our field.

Since you recommended that we have a go at working out the secret ourselves, it sounded like you were advocating that action.

Also, as you pointed out, without the various subtleties outlined in the manuscript the effect does become obvious, which will belittle the power of the final object.

Finally, the quote from Joshua (delivered tongue in cheek in the book) is in explanation for publishing the work in a book instead of a video. The irony is that you worked out a method from a video...

Take care, Ian

As Seige and Mandrake pointed out the ethical debate is one that crops up here from time to time, but it is an important one and would be worth searching for.

My own feeling is that - as helpful as you were trying to be (which I appreciate), you shouldn't have made that post. I accept your intentions were good. I acccept you haven't broken any law or forum rules, but I would say there is something that doesn't sit well.

If you think about it, someone has had a new and wonderfully ida, that rather than keep to them selves they wish to share with the comunity. Should not that person be due his reward?

Even if you yourself reverse engineer the effect, which in itself isnt so bad, but I feel if you then chose to perform that effect you should reward the inventor by paying for it.

It is certainly not somthing that you should encourage others to do...

Please don't take this as an attack on you. I am just explaining where I am with the scenario.