talkmagic.co.uk

For me personally, gaze and inclination of the head probably plays a bigger part than pointing or gesturing, simply because it suits the way I work.

As for how much/too much/too little, obviously that's a piece of string question, to which one answer might be to look at the rhythm of the social interaction.








Whatever that means...

Misdirection is really the directing of attention - something that should be going on 100% of the time.

I've seen time misdirection woefully abused to the point where the effect has been forgotten. The only time when there's no such thing as too much time misdirection is with something like a watch steal, although it's not really time misdirection then, that's more like a preparatory move for a later effect. Sometimes I'll steal a watch an hour in advance of the reveal, which gives me pretty much whatever effect I want. Having somebody's watch (who firmly believes you haven't touched them) is probably my favourite spot to be in.

Speaking of pickpockets though, I've never seen a group of magicians - if the thieving rats and borderline criminals that make up my colleagues can even be called "magicians" - utilize "misdirection" less effectively. Anyone who wonders what I mean would do well to pick up Byrd & Coates' "Mastering The Art Of Pickpocketing" (then, after watching it, setting fire to it and burning it in the name of all that is good and decent), where you'll find gems such as these:

James: "Verbal misdirection is important. I'll often say things like 'oh, is it your birthday' - and then they'll be confused, and as they think '...birthday?' I've already taken the tie."
Nick: "When I've been taking ties, I've gone one step further and said 'is that a canoeist?'."

"Misdirection" and "talking so much about nothing that the victim can't really focus on anything as you practically stuff their head through a mangle in an attempt to peel their tie off" are not, apparently, the same thing.

Craig Browning wrote:Dale, that rule #2 would get you into a ton of trouble if you were every around Mr. Vernon and doing such

The Professor would literally crack your knuckles with a wand if he caught you doing it.

There's a wonderful story about Greg Wilson when he was about 8ish. Vernon agreed to watch the boy whilst Mark & Nani were off doing something and during which time Dai worked with Greg on some vanishing methods... the boy ended up flawless... until dad came back.

Greg shows what he'd learnt and after doing a perfect act of control Mark says, "That was great son, but you forgot to point"

Vernon got rather red-faced, is said to have grumbled as he departed shaking his head in utter disbelief.

Yeah tho that was most likely due to Mark being a Stage guy primarly and Vernon being a close up guy. Still kind of funny to hear about that. There are probably other stories as well about many other "giants" in the biz doing things like that.

I trust people have read the rest of my posts.
I do go on to talk about pointing with the eyes, rather than pointing with the fore finger.


( b.t.w... how many people reading Craigs post thought of the wrong Greg? )

Im collating the posts i've made here, and adding more info, thoughts ect, to create an idiots guide to misdirection.

Its something that many have covered, in huge, dry tomes.

It's my aim to simplify the whole area. I was asked via email last night by a mate " Do we really need another book on misdirection".

my answer to that question is an unreserved yes ... and no.

We, the experienced magicians may not need another book, but the beginer.. they do. something easy to read, and clear to understand.

What say you?

Should i continue with this project?

D.

daleshrimpton wrote:What say you? Should i continue with this project?

I say Carry On Collating.

daleshrimpton wrote:What say you?

Should i continue with this project?

D.

I say continue- you'd definitly have one customer at least. I've read quite a few books that have chapters or bits and pieces on misdirection but it would be very nice to have it all in one volume- especially if it was aimed at the less experienced and gave advice as to common errors and mistakes to be avoided. it's all well and good to learn by your mistakes but it always nice to have something to refer to which explains why you made them in the first place.

madvillainy wrote:Anyone who wonders what I mean would do well to pick up Byrd & Coates' "Mastering The Art Of Pickpocketing" (then, after watching it, setting fire to it and burning it in the name of all that is good and decent),

I agree. Should be called "Mastering The Art Of Making People Feel Confused, Cheated, And To Hate You."

Talking about Verbal confusion.

Im victim to this way to many times.

It happens here at work, but more often it's outside work.

If i am shopping at the weekend for something specific, and i intend to go to the one shop that has it, and i know exactly where it is, The last thing i want is an over enthusiastic shop assistant asking me if "I need help" the second i enter the shop.

this has happened several times. As soon as they ask, i forget what the hell i was going there for, and where i was going to get it.

More than once i've had a go because of this over enthusiastic assistant.

Staples in Maidenhead have to be the biggest offender of this.

but this isnt misdirection.

And as you say, unfortunatly some well meaning folks have decided to label it as such.

I agree. Should be called "Mastering The Art Of Making People Feel Confused, Cheated, And To Hate You."

I would be quite tempted to buy any book bearing that title, but maybe that's just me.

and no one's even mentioned 'indirection' yet!

I'd have thought I'd have said it by now at the very least! I love a bit of it.

Dale, a mean trick I used to play when working in an art supply store was to ask the customers if they wanted a bag thus:

"Would you like a bag?"

rather than

"Would you like a bag?"

this would almost always force them into saying that they would not like a bag, irrespective of the 12 loose pencils, putty rubbers and rolls of A1 card.

IAIN wrote:and no one's even mentioned 'indirection' yet!

Indirection basically refers to saying one thing and meaning another

This is more akin to Dual Reality.

And yes, in a mass audience envioroment, it could be looked upon as a form of misdirection, in that the audience as a whole, dont notice whats really happening, because they are looking at the event from a different angle.

you cant really use this in a one on one situation though.

can you?

well, maybe you could.
one ahead principle is strictly speaking Indirection, as you tell the sitter that you are writing down one thing, when in fact you may well be doing something completely different.

miss calling items could also be seen as indirection of sorts....
Its hard to deal with this, without exposing.

indirection is the art of indirectly calling attention to, or not calling attention to something...

if i tip out a cardboard box and a few pencils and rubbers fall out, cos grue has failed to give me a bag, i tap the base of the upturned box...you will now assume that the box is empty...

i have indrectly suggested that the box is empty, due to the tipping, and the patting - no verbals needed...

kenton wrote a rather good book on it all...

Aye. It's about getting the audience to come up with the lie for you, in a sense.

Don't say all the cards are different as you show them, just show them.

Don't show them to bring attention to the fact that they are all different, do it for another reason congruent with the effect in hand.

I think it goes hand in hand with Cassidy's thinking on logical disconnects, too. You don't shout your logical disconnects, you just have them there so that when someone tries to backtrack the effect, they stumble over them. Well he could have had all the cards the same, but when he was running through them at the start, they were all different, so that's out...

I have an ESP effect I'm quite proud of that involves the participant having a free choice of target cards. A possible solution is that all the target symbols, on folded billets, are the same, so at the end, without making a show of it, I unfold each of them, just in the process of packing them away. So that's indirection even though you're demonstrating something that is genuinely the case; you nevertheless want to rob them of the possibility that the method they have come up with could work.