talkmagic.co.uk

In my opinion, the best way of having something examined is say something along the lines of ''could you hold this for me'' this implies that you don't actually want it examined but simply want someone to hold the prop. In tricks that have examinable props I never say at the end of the tricks "Now you can examine the props" for two reasons:
1. By saying "now" you imply that they could not be examined at the start of the trick
2. You also imply that the props could have been gimmicked.

Basically these are some good guidlines to follw when it comes to letting things be examined if you are a beginner:
-Never, ever say that something is normal! Why shouldn't it be normal? By saying it's normal you are putting the thought into the spectators mind that it may not be normal. If anything say that the object is magical, and keep refering to as beeing magical and that it contains mystic powers, you will quickly find that when spectators hear this they will believe that the object was normal!
-If you have one of those people in the audience that needs to examine everything, one of the best things to do is have a few ungimmicked tricks or gimmicked tricks that can be examined. Then, make sure that the apparratus is examined by that person. But, when they do examine the trick, keep telling them them to keep examining it until they become annoyed and don't want to examine anything. Then you can start using props that may not be able to survive such examination.
-Never ever imply that you use gimmicked props

I hope that this info helps helps anyone who is new to magic and I would like to hear everyone elses thoughts on this subject.

A favorite line, rarely used, is one that should be tossed off casually and humorously as if it -- and, more importantly, the "dirty" prop -- couldn't matter less:

"I'd ask you to examine this but it has already been examined so many times it's pointless."

I LOVE it!

Very often we forget the obvious ("don't call anything 'normal' or 'ordinary' " falls into that category) when it is anything but obvious to the beginner.

And, face it, we were ALL beginners at one time; no one was BORN knowing this stuff.

Tips for beginners can be invaluable, even for the experienced performer.

I've seen David Blaine doing a few card tricks for some girl and two guys and one of his lines after a few tricks was

''You can see its a normal deck''(which it is)

and straight after the woman replied in a tongue in cheek manner:

''it aint a normal deck''

if he had said nothing then the seed of doubt may not have been put into her head perhaps

one another note,to give a spectator a gimmick to hold for a sec is actually quite a bold move if ya ask me,but if they are co-operative then they would most likely not look thru/at the gimmick and JUST hold it like theyre told.I'm sure that it would add to the effect two fold tho if they had the gimmick in their hand and then u take it off them and produce a miracle

The question must be asked "When it it best to ask for examination vs. not?"

Magicians, by our very nature (we tend to be suspicious about everything) will go out of our way to "prove" all is fair, not realizing that in so doing we actually create the opposite affect in the mind of the average layman; we create suspicion when we push too much at making things look "fair". That is why I love the theory shared in Kenton Knepper's book INDIRECTION in that it teaches us how to "prove" a point without being as deliberate as to say, "here, take a look and make certain that there are not trap doors, mirrors or hidden compartments..."

In escape work as well as mentalism trying to make things appear to be too "genuine" can and will work against you. It's best to JUST DO IT and then AFTER THE FACT, let people look to their heart's content. There is one prop I will take exception to on this... well, "type of prop" I guess I should say in that I've applied the same psychology to one of my pet effects. I refer to those bits, like the old Canvas Covered Box, in which a couple of guys from the audience assemble the thing on your behalf.

Trust me, if you have one that's been made the "right" way, there is no way they will find the gimmick and for that matter, there are ways of ringing in the gaffed part of the prop AFTER they've done their work, right under their noses, which makes the thing even more "safe" when it comes to the audience inspection.

My Spirit Cabinet works as well as it does for a similar reason; it is assembled right there on stage in front of the whole world by two dudes from the audience... there's nothing to be discovered! Yet, they haven't a clue how someone obviously gets inside the thing, let alone out without their ever being the wiser (no traps, no mirrors, no bases or silly steps, etc.) It's the psychological fact that I allowed them to touch it all and play with it for quite a bit of time and this fact in and of its own, sells the point to the audience that all is fair.

Kenton has a wonderful Headline Prediction known as THE SECRET COMMITTEE that exploits that very same touch... less being more... or, as it were, confirmation being assumed in that no validation is directly required.

Because of the approach made by our fore-parents in this business, we think we need to build the better mouse-trap with each effect... more gauze and coins or tape for the blindfolds or using steel plates to build the escape trunk instead of wood... the list goes on and on and we all seem to not stop ourselves long enough to consider if or not it's over-kill or when our actions are actually taking away from our objective and the effectiveness of the illusion... not the effect but the over-all illusion... the presentation.

These are things we owe to both, ourselves as well as our audience if we are to deliver "our" very best.

One line that makes me bang my head on the nearest wall whenever I hear it is "Now, with no funny moves..."

i like kenton's way of introducing a potentially gimmicked card...very bold..

On the other hand, giving out something ordinary for examination can be used for entertainment purposes, and in fact it regularly is by fair number of magicians.
"Here is a deck of cards, please check that there are no trap doors, mirrors or hidden compartments..."

Or, depending on your routine, you could say something like:
"Would you like to examine it? Here...oh, I don't think we have time for that" (I think David Stone uses something along those lines in one of his routines)
Of course, the audience shouldn't feel genuinely cheated but the feat following should be such that it is obvious to the audience that the object is, in fact, 'ordinary'.

First, I love using the line, 'with no funny moves' I have used it tongue in cheek and I am carefully holding the deck and then just as the card is magically going to come to the top. I hit them with the line, 'with no funny moves' then I wiggle my left foot or something stupid.

Secondly, I was born knowing it all. At least that what everybody tells me that I am such a...okay never mind that.

Thirdly, Once again I never worry about handing stuff out for exanimation in any form doesn't matter if I'm handing them the deck to shuffle or a coin to hold for a moment. I loved watching Al Goshman perform. I've seen him countless times in front of lay audiences and nothing ever came into question. I honestly believe it was because the audience was too busy being entertained.

When I do tricks for my friends, I always start with tricks that don't require any gimmicks. I let them look over what I begin with all they want (but obviously there's nothing to find). What's so great about magic is after you perform the first few tricks, the audience settles in and stops looking for mistakes and just wants to be entertained. I use any gimmicked tricks later - after my audience has given up on discovering any secrets.

"If you can convince them that you aren't using trick cards, great! Use trick cards."
-Teller

I think as long as the props look like everyday, normal objects, they won't need to be examined. As long as the attention isn't completely on the prop, I don't see why anyone would need to have it examined. The PK pen is, to anyone looking, a normal pen. After using it as a pen, then as the prop for the effect, Banachek simply puts the pen back into his pocket.

David Abbott, for his double envelope letter, would ask the sitter to breath into the gaffed envelope to 'magnetize' it. The whole purpose of this was, obviously, to call attention to the fact that the envelope is empty without saying so explicitly.

if things go wrong, and someone really does want to examine something...you could say "yes, of course you can, but a little later ok - first i want to share this with you all..."

and just move on...by the time you've finished, people will of forgotten about asking to examine it, or they're tied up in the next thing you're doing...

and some will even mis-remember that you just said "yes of course you can..." even though no one actually did...

i would say though, never argue with anyone over it...just saying "yes, but not now..." is both polite, but also being in control....