Antinomy No 5

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Table of Contents The Antinomy Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 The Artful Ledger: Spontaneous Bop Cunning – Jon Racherbaumer . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Unexpected Prediction – Edward Marlo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Converse Sneaker – Max Maven . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Inflated Transposition – Joshua Jay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Oops! – Michael Daniels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 Fold ‘em Oops! – Michael Daniels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 A Misrepresentation of Vision – Everett Chapman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 The Double-Jointed Card – Jeff Pierce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 Separate But Equal – Thomas Baxter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 The Honest Liar: Creative Hits and Misses – Jamy Ian Swiss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 In Closing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48

ANTINOMY Issue 5, Vol. 2 No. 1, February 2006. ANTINOMY is published quarterly by Antinomy Magic. Subscription rates are $72 inside the United States, $77 for Canada and Mexico, and $92 for International Airmail shipping to the rest of the world. Antinomy Magic is a Sole Proprietorship of Eugene Taylor. ANTINOMY™, the phrases “Perception & Deception”™ and “Appearing at your door four times every year”™ are Trademarks of Antinomy Magic. The Antinomy Half-Moon and star-field logo are copyright © 2006 Antinomy Magic. Contents copyright © 2006 Antinomy Magic and the authors and creators presented here. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or technological, including photocopying and recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted in writing by the copyright owners. Submissions and subscriptions may be sent to: ANTINOMY, P.O. Box 39, Allenton, MI 48002. More information is available online at www.antinomymagic.com

page 1

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

The ANTINOMY Perspective Disproving that Nothing Good is Ever Free... If you’re a subscriber to this magazine, then you received a unique deck of specially printed Bicycle brand cards with this issue. The “Oops!” deck is provided compliments of Michael Daniels and Innova-Magic. When Michael approached me regarding this possibility, it seemed too good of an opportunity to pass up. I’ve always been interested in providing good value for the people who support this magazine, so enjoy the “Freebie.” And if you happen to come up with any good ideas that utilize the “Oops!” deck, pass them along to Michael. His contact information is provided in the descriptions of two routines for your “Oops!” cards later in this magazine. Synergy leads to even more Free Stuff While preparing this issue with the “Oops!” deck in mind, I was drawn to a submission of Jeff Pierce’s. His take on “Card Warp” incorporates a “Factory Rejects” theme. This rang a tiny bell in my mind. Since I occasionally look for and order odd things, I get a few odd catalogs. It didn’t take long to find a supply of “Rejected” stickers to order. It seemed appropriate to include a few of these stickers for subscribers to play with in this issue as well. You’ll find them inserted along with Jeff’s trick later in the magazine. A word about subscribing I know there will be those who purchased this magazine elsewhere who will be a bit miffed that they bought the magazine and missed out on the “Free Stuff.” My perspective is this: I make this magazine available through other outlets primarily to promote it to potential subscribers. If you’ve read it and enjoy it, and you’re not subscribing, you should subscribe. This magazine will survive or fail based strictly on the number of people willing to commit to it by subscribing. So, the message to you, the reader, is subscribe. You never know, we just might do this “Free Stuff” thing again someday. It’s still renewal time Those that started their subscriptions with Issue #1 received renewal notices with Issue #4. Those that started with Issue #2 will see a renewal form included with this issue. We’ll try to send out reminders to those we haven’t heard from yet. To all of you who have “re-upped,” my thanks. I was surprised at the number of you who went out of your way to include a comment on how much you’ve enjoyed Antinomy. The word “great” was included in the comments a great deal. My thanks to all of you. The best thing you can do to ensure Antinomy keeps winging its way to you is to help spread the word. Close-up greats found in the heart of Ohio Recently, I attended “Magi-Fest” in Columbus, Ohio. I had hoped to be a dealer at this event, but found out their list of dealers was finalized some six months prior to the convention. I couldn’t resist attending anyway since the Close-up lineup included John Carney, Paul Gertner, and David Williamson. It was great seeing each of them. Unique in their own ways, from the skilled classical style of Carney, to the polished professionalism of Gertner, and the expected wackiness of Williamson, these are the kinds of performers who set the very highest standard for magic in general and close-up magic specifically. A truly rewarding experience. Overlap overachieves Joshua Jay, who was kind enough to submit a couple of items to these pages, showed me his new “Overlap” release. This is truly a beautifully designed (by Ben Harris) product that is also substantial in content. With a 142 page book of material, a DVD showing performances of the routines, seven Bicycle poker-sized gaffs, and four Jumbo-sized cards, this is an amazing value for the price. Anyone who is interested in card magic, and particularly gaffed card magic, will simply be overwhelmed with the potential contained within this package. The gaffs scream “play with me.” This package, of course, features Joshua’s work with the Overlap gaff first released to the magic community in the pages of MAGIC maga-

page 2

The ANTINOMY Perspective

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

zine. This is an updated version of the original DeLand gaff first marketed in 1907. But there is more than one gaff included, with several intriguing versions of the same type of gaff included. I like this type of approach to a trick, with an in-depth treatise on a single idea. It reminds me in some ways of Jon Racherbaumer’s The Wild Card Kit (1992) in that it provides the gaffs and a tool-kit on using those gaffs. I hope we see more of this kind of release where, instead of a single trick, we see the emphasis on the ideas and substance behind the gimmicks. Well done. And special thanks to Joshua for his submissions to this magazine. As the editor of the trick column in MAGIC, he would have every reason to avoid being associated with this journal. I thank him for his support. Found Things It’s been a full year since we featured a “found object.” What I had thought would be a semi-regular feature of Antinomy has turned into an “almost never” feature. Better sometimes than never, I suppose. So in this issue we show an attractive metallic gift box, perfect for those “Card in Box” routines. This particular object was found at the dinner table of a wedding reception. I wasn’t actually attending the wedding, but instead playing in a band at the wedding reception. It wasn’t stealing, though, since the band was given dinner at the wedding. This type of box contained a small chocolate within its soft, fabric lining. While I haven’t found this exact box online, I have found similar offerings that are promoted for this purpose. A quick “Gaffed Card Corner” Another supposedly semi-regular feature of Antinomy that only appeared in Issues 1 and 2 is “The Gaffed Card Corner.” While digging up gaffed cards for use in Jeff Pierce’s routine, I ran across a handmade Mis-Made card I had obsessively created. It differs from Daryl’s Mismade Card in that the face is the face and the back is the back. Daryl’s version mixed the front and back quadrants. I made this card by slicing up two thin split cards, a front and a back, into the four quadrants. I cut around the printed areas only of the back and the court card and then attached these to both sides of a “blank on both sides” card. By gluing these into position, and then trimming around the rounded corners, you get close to the desired look. The obsessive part was that I cut-out the ‘Q’ and the ‘heart’ from the pip area and glued these on as well. A more practical option would be to use the rub-on transfers available from some dealers. The end result certainly produced the desired look, as shown in the photos. Comments on some previously published tricks Blair Bowling contacted me for information on obtaining a card box appropriate for use with Dean Dill’s “Reflection.” His comments follow. Anyone who is looking for the ultimate box for Dean Dill’s wonderful effect “Reflection” (Antinomy Number 3), look no further. Gene pointed me to the website www.worldofboxes.com which sells the perfect box. The item number is TW-13 which holds two decks in their cases with a divider between them. The lid is beveled on all four sides and the hinges are not visible. Another nice touch is that there is a raised lip creating an air tight container when the lid is closed. The boxes are manufactured in Poland and the best part is that they are only $10.80 plus $2 for shipping. Here is what I did to give it a very classy look. I applied a cranberry stain plus a coat of fast drying clear gloss, polyurethane which gives it a very deep rich looking tone. I used the Minwax brand found at most craft stores, sold in small containers. To finish it off I placed a black felt liner in the lid and in the base of the two compartments. You will want to use it in your performances as it has a nice feel to it as well as being very eye appealing. To make full use of this beautiful crafted box I make it a centerpiece for three of the four possible revelations in line with the theme of “Reflection” as follows. The Three of Spades is as written up. For the King of Hearts and the Seven of Clubs I place both decks on the top of the box.

page 3

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Finally, do not pass up this excellent effect. Thanks again, Blair I should mention that this box is very close to that used by Dean himself and is different from that shown in the photos illustrating the routine in Issue 3. The box used for the photos is one I happened to have and is not ideal in size as the decks can slide around a bit inside. My thanks to Blair for his comments. ****************************************** Richard Paddon from Australia points out that, in the area of candy and magic, Raj Madhok’s “Melts in Your Mind” from SYZYGY Vol. 2, Number 16 (Issue 34) is a valid “touchstone” for Dr. Giorgio Tarchini’s “The M & M Trick” from Issue 4. ****************************************** After reading “Flash Coins Re-Lit” from the last issue, Nathan Kranzo mentions that he believes he may be the first to publish a routine where the nesting of a coin into a shell, along with waving the assembly over a lighter, is used to create the illusion of two coins melting into one. Nathan’s routine was first featured in the Hit the Road DVD (2002) featuring R. Paul Wilson and Lee Asher. Nathan also included this routine on his own Visual Voodoo (2002). ****************************************** Philippe Billot sent me an email pointing out that Marlo also explored the “shutter card” technique used in “The Impromptusible Twist.” He cites Marlo Magazine No. 3, 1979, page 84 to 100, “Flexible Visual Change.” I should also mention that in Joshua Jay’s Overlap book, he mentions that both Andi Gladwin and Ray Kosby (on Impossible Card Magic, video, 2000) have done work in the same area.

That’s it for now. Enjoy the issue and the FREE Stuff. Keep those comments coming. Gene Taylor editor & publisher ANTINOMY February, 2006

page 4

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Photo: Erik Racherbaumer

Spontaneous Bop Cunning Marginal Notes Regarding the Unplanned O sweet spontaneous… e. e. cummings I’m a great believer in spontaneity because I think planning is the most destructive thing in the world. John Cassavetes actor, writer, director, independent film-maker

The Artful Ledger A journal documenting the fringes of compelling card magic

Jon Racherbaumer

Real life isn’t scripted. Most happenstance comes at us point-blank. Yet a large part of us wants control. We want to be prepared and forewarned. We want to be ready. Another part of us wants to be surprised. So, we often relish jack-in-the-box moments—stuff that is unprompted, spur-of-the-moment, and off-the-cuff. And, yes, as tricksters our magic should seem spontaneous—a wave of the hand and it happens, an incantation and it appears. Yet underlying what we do are contrived methods. There is always a specific calculus, a carefully rehearsed and practiced course of action to follow. Yet… …sometimes as long-time practitioners (fighting boredom) we long to experience real spontaneity. We desperately want to be immersed in unbidden moments and squarely face the challenges of contingency. And when we do, we test our mettle as magicians and we start having fun again. Thinking about this recently brought me back to my teens when I was reading J. D. Salinger and Jack Kerouac. Back then I was particularly enamored with what Kerouac called Spontaneous Prose. I was attracted to the risk-factor, the edginess, and the fact that you would eventually find “forms” that work if you were submissive to everything. The goal was to find the “flow;” to act and react. Although I was learning and performing tricks at the time (mostly card tricks), I never connected what Kerouac was talking about to the performance of magic. That came later when I met Chan Canasta… The seeds to appreciate Spontaneous Bop Cunning indeed began with this unforgettable meeting, although I didn’t know it at the time. The experience he unleashed, a hammering of my twenty-one-year-old psyche (“back in the days”), thrust me into a mental no-man’s land. Afterwards, I was delirious for answers and had not yet discovered the term “retrograde analysis” nor was I aware of “tricks that cannot be explained.” I was in an alien place. There was no back-tracking, clues, or starting points. Besides, there weren’t any terms to fully capture what Canasta was doing.

page 5

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Sidebar: Although the subject of Retrograde Analysis is tangential to this ramble, it may be appropriate to reprise an old article I published several years ago. It also provides a germane lead-in to my initial meeting of Chan Canasta. This will be apparent as you read about that meeting later on. About Retrograde Analysis Most people, if you describe a train of events to them, will tell you what the results would be. They can put those events together in their minds, and argue from them that something will come to pass. There are few people, however, who, if you told them the result, would be able to evolve from their own inner consciousness what the steps were which led up to that result. This power is what I mean when I talk of reasoning backward, or analytically. Sherlock Holmes: “A Study in Scarlet”

The younger, studious-looking man held the deck of cards as though it was a carton of eggs. His eyes moved up and across when he spoke: “I see how you got one of the cards, but not the other.” The older man stood with his arms crossed, grinning. “Remember, the cards were shuffled. Then you put the deck behind your back and cut the cards. I never touched them. I was ten feet away with my back turned.” “I know, I know…and it’s my deck and they aren’t marked. And I remember shuffling them, but somehow you must have spotted the bottom card.” “Perhaps,” said the older man, lighting his cigar. “The trouble is you can’t remember everything that happened. Every detail in the chain of events is important and most people remember only salient points, stand-out stuff.” The older man continued, puffing smoke and talking with measured pauses. He took a deep breath. “There are peaks in the continuum of serial happenstance. The valleys in the continuum, when attention flags, are not perceived and if they are, they are inevitably forgotten.” “Serial happenstance? Give me a break!” The older man laughed. The younger man shuffled the deck, held it behind his back, cut off a portion from the top, turned it face up, and placed it underneath the other cards. He paused—he was trying to reconstruct the action procedure. He thought: The two sections are now face to face. The deck stayed behind my back. Nevertheless, the old man named both cards facing each other in the middle of the deck! “The second card is bothering you, isn’t it? Because you performed the cut and were apparently in complete control.” “What do you mean—apparently? I was in control!” The older man interrupted, “The cutting action destroyed the evidence. You can’t backtrack now because the tracks are gone. You erased them!” **** Variations of this episode happen all the time in the Land of Magic. Magicians love to fool other magicians and when a magician is fooled, duped, puzzled or “beat-up” by a trick, he will strike Faustian bargains to find out why this happened. He will dog it to death, and if begging for the secret and wholesale bribery doesn’t work, he’ll try to reconstruct the chain of events. He will struggle to discover or remember details he missed. In short, he will attempt to deduce a method and if he is lucky, he may figure out the method or a method!

page 6

The Artful Ledger

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Raymond Smullyan calls the reconstructing process “retrograde analysis.” By the way, the double-prediction trick featured in the above episode is credited to Richard Himber in the Tarbell Course in Magic, Volume 2, p. 205. It’s a shamefully simple trick: You sight the two bottom cards of the deck prior to performance. Suppose they are the Two of Clubs and the Six of Diamonds. You then secretly reverse the bottom Six of Diamonds and you are set. The spectator takes the deck behind his back, cuts off a portion from the top, turns it face up, and places it under the other portion. Facing the halves destroys the evidence of the previously reversed card and the 2C and 6D are forced. Game over The sly, old man took additional steps to flummox the young man by making preemptive strikes against future retrograde analysis. This is called “canceling out,” which did by stealing two cards from the young man’s deck. He then asked the young man to shuffle the cards to divert him. This provided an easy opportunity to face the pair and palm them. When he took back the deck and placed it behind his back with both hands (ostensibly to demonstrate the next action), he put the faced pair on the bottom of the deck. Easy? You bet. The Canceling-Out Principle is generally based on salient points in the performance continuum the spectator is likely to remember. Consider Himber’s “Double Detection.” There are four salient points: (1) The deck was shuffled beforehand, which cancels out the use of gaffed cards, prearrangements and key cards. (2) The deck was out of sight during the critical facing action, which cancels out glimpses. (3) The spectator performs the cutting, which cancels out controlling factors. (4) The old man apparently never touched the cards after the cutting action, which cancels out last-minute maneuvers to obtain the final result. Retrograde analysis is now problematical. Where does the analyzer begin? How can he backtrack? I learned Himber’s trick in 1951 and for ten years thereafter I fooled everyone with it...until 1961, when I learned an important lesson from the great Chan Canasta.

I met Chan Canasta 45 years ago in an inconspicuous “bottle club” in Houston, Texas called The Little Hut, a hangout for university students, oil men and members of an elite bridge club. Regular habitués knew my hobby was magic and frequently asked me to perform. It was a Saturday afternoon and a member of the bridge club ran through the front door and shouted, “There’s guy at our club who reads minds!” “Who?” I asked. “Somebody named Chan.” “Chan Canasta?” “Yeah. That’s him!” I was astonished, thinking: What is he doing here? I had watched Canasta perform miracles on Jack Paar’s show (precursor to “The Tonight Show”) and his presentations were offbeat, highly original, and I had no idea what he was doing. My informant wanted to see Canasta do something. So, he suggested that I show a few tricks when he arrived and perhaps entice him to perform? However, I was unnerved by the prospect of showing Chan Canasta anything. Two beers later, Canasta strode through the front door, looking dapper, cerebral, slightly introverted. In fact, he reminded me of George Sands, the film actor of the ‘40s and ‘50s. (Film buffs will know him.) Canasta was immaculately dressed in a dark, three-piece suit and he moved with subdued confidence. He had the rehearsed body language of a diplomat, a political aide, or perhaps a spy. After being introduced, he receded into the shadows to lean against the bar, carefully scrutinized everyone and everything. My informant, on cue, shouted, “Hey, Jon! Do a trick!” I faked begging off, and then quickly moved to the brightly lit pool table where everyone could see. My nervousness was obvious and my card-trick repertoire at the time was limited. Besides, trying to bamboozle or impress Canasta would be foolhardy. Therefore, I decided to perform an old stand-by— “Double Detection.”

page 7

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 Canasta stood about 15 feet away, leaning against the bar. He wasn’t drinking anything, a bad sign. I asked for a female assistant. As she sashayed over to the pool table, a definite distraction, I lowered my hands and quickly glimpsed the two bottom cards. (These cards are etched in my memory: the Queen of Hearts and Two of Spades.) I then explained the premise. My assistant took the deck behind her back and performed the cutting/facing procedure. I cautioned her to keep the deck out of view. At this stage, the rest (as they say) was a matter of showmanship. “Let’s review what’s happened,” I said. “The lovely lady took a shuffled deck behind her back. She freely cut off some cards and placed them face to face with the rest. There are now two cards face to face somewhere in the middle. It’s impossible to know the names of these cards. . . “ I took a deep breath and looked intently at the audience. It was supposed to be a pin-dropping moment, but Canasta’s articulate voice shattered the silence: “It’s not impossible!” Everyone looked at Canasta and then looked at me, who was looking at Canasta. I was thunderstruck. Canasta was grinning. “The two cards in the middle of the deck,” he said, “are the Queen of Hearts and the Two of Spades!” He then asked the woman to show the face-to-face cards and the crowd went crazy. For the next two hours he performed one miracle after another, and what he did is difficult to define or summarize. Also, I thought that his persona was elusive. He had the suavity and presence of a George Sands or Al Koran, but his behavior was a tad other-worldly. Have you seen the Spanish film “Man Facing Southeast”? The unknown man in this film—possibly an alien—reminds me of Canasta’s presence. He talked fast (almost stuttering at times), but you felt you were in the presence of somebody different from everyone else…much different. In retrospect I realized that he had been a strange, glib, uncanny opportunist, a quick-witted, bold psychologist, and a superb showman. His performance that fateful afternoon in Houston was unforgettable. And, yes, in case you’re wondering, I have no idea how he was able to name the Queen of Hearts and the Two of Spades! Splendiferous memories beat retrograde analysis every time and Canasta’s personal demonstration made me swoon in appreciation of theatrical effects that are emotionally combustible and appear to be unrehearsed and unforced. Canasta made me grateful that such things are possible. I also realized that there are many wonderful, unexplainable things “out there” that truly resemble real magic. Much later and after considerable reflection I realized what truly attracted me to Canasta’s magic. It was its instinctive, wholly extemporaneous nature. Everything he did seemed to happen naturally and effortlessly and there was a sense of playful experimentation. I thought: Could this work for others? Would this work for me? What I did not know at the time—unlike most magical feats—Canasta was riffing, doing what we call jazz magic. Moreover, he did not know exactly how each experiment was going to proceed and unfold. This goes against the grain. Most magicians precisely know how their tricks will unfold. If they don’t make a mistake or misstep, they know how the trick ends. Canasta, on the other hand, may have known the outcome or outcomes he wanted to achieve, but he didn’t how he was going to get there. He may have had supreme confidence that certain results could be reached by orchestrating human tendencies and taking different, possible tacks, but he did not know if he could successfully reach his goals. More amazing was that he was unflappable. He never wavered or stumbled or bumbled. He gave the impression that everything was somehow predestined and certain. A few years later I met two other wonder-workers of the same pedigree: Eddie Fields and Ed Marlo. Both understood jazz magic and both patiently taught me the indispensable importance of mastering spontaneous resourcefulness—another term difficult to pin down. It is easier to tag it as being a form of tacit knowledge (like riding a unicycle) and one can get a sense of it by studying examples. So, what does spontaneous resourcefulness mean?

page 8

The Artful Ledger

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Sidebar #2: Spontaneous Resourcefulness Pitted against our need (as magicians) for excessive, compulsive planning is another desire: we wish to seem spontaneous in our execution of deliberate schemes. We are also mindful that “best laid plans” are subject to hazard and unpredictable happenstance. Shit happens. In the case of “magic,” mysterious shit happens—really weird, unbidden stuff. This is when, if we are seasoned performers, “spontaneous resourcefulness” comes to the rescue. If we are “on our game” and the moon is right, we are able to devise “saves,” “outs,” and instantaneous solutions from our expansive memory bank. “Spontaneous resourcefulness” is a wonderful, useful term coined by Bill Simon, (Effective Card Magic, p. 18) Simon wrote: Resourcefulness will depend upon your imagination or experience. If you are naturally resourceful there is probably no situation from which you cannot extricate yourself, but regardless of how clever you may be with a deck of cards, or how much time you spend on a particular trick, you can never foretell when something may not work as you had anticipated. For example, your spectator may be the “wiseguy” type, or the challenge type. Or, you may lose control of the cards; perhaps the deck will slip and scatter. Any one of a hundred things may interfere with a particular trick. If you are resourceful, you can bring the effect smoothly to a satisfactory conclusion. If you do not possess natural resourcefulness, you should attempt to develop it in yourself to some degree. Charles Hopkins wrote a book (Outs, Precautions, and Challenges) that will give the student a certain amount of background in this sort of thing. Reading it will teach you several dependable devices you may call upon to come to your rescue at some unexpected moment. Experience, however, will be your best teacher. An interesting way to prepare yourself for unexpected incidents is to assume that you were doing a certain trick and something (any defeating action) occurred that would interfere with the successful conclusion of your trick. Starting from that point, say: “What can I do now to end this trick successfully?” Then, simply think out as many possible ways as you can. Take the best way you have discovered, smooth it out, and tuck it away in the back of your mind for use in a future emergency.

This is what Fields and Marlo taught me, namely that it is possible to create magical presentations based on different kinds of design. The only thing you know beforehand are a range of possible contingencies and outcomes, and these contingencies can prompt plans of action based on what spontaneously happens or what a spectator does during the course of the trick. You can induce a spectator to behave in a desired way, but you cannot completely control what he does. In other words, if a spectator behaves one way out of a possible thirteen ways, you must have at least thirteen contingent plans of action. If you want to reach only one predetermined goal, you must be able to accommodate all of the contingencies to force the outcome. In this sense, the situation that exists in jazz magic is similar to equivoque. Spectators are permitted to act freely, making choices that seem discriminating but in reality lack categorical basis and consequential merit. They do not know the nature of the experiment where they seem to be consequential players nor do they know the real purpose their actions appear to be determining. They are, until the drama ends, in the dark yet seem to be in control. If you can convince them that they are in control and you are perceived as an innocent facilitator, the result will be miraculous.

Enter Dai Vernon. Much later in my apprenticeship, when Spontaneous Bop Cunning or Jazz Magic was still nebulous in my mind, I stumbled onto “The Trick That Cannot Be Explained.” (This title ranks up there with “The Force That Never Was.”) It’s likely that readers of this journal are familiar with this classic trick as it was yeomanly explained by Lewis Ganson in Inner Secrets of Card Magic. The creator of this intriguing approach was Dai Vernon, who claimed that the trick was “impossible to put in the book” and he “always thought of it as ‘the trick that cannot be explained.’ ” Why? Because whenever the Professor decided to perform it, he never knew what the effect was going to be. Nothing was scored and the trick always turned out differently because everything depended on “quick thinking to obtain the strongest outcome based on the circumstances one encountered.” Ganson summarized this approach this way:

page 9

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 The performer, after learning a certain pattern of actions, is on his own because the whole thing depends upon the circumstances which arise. Then he must use these circumstances to create the effect. If anyone is unfamiliar with “The Trick That Cannot Be Explained,” it begins with a prediction. Therefore, the performer knows the name of the card that must eventually match the written prediction. His task is to then contrive matters so that this predicted card is revealed in an unpredictable, uncontrolled, non-manipulative, direct, and logical manner. Furthermore, the less the performer does during the course of the action, the stronger the outcome will be. Before explaining Vernon’s procedure, keep in mind the following: 1. The spectator throughout the action procedure must feel that he is in control. He is the person determining the course of actions. 2. Each action should be unrushed, clear-cut, and confident to emphasize the apparent fairness of the actions. 3. The strategy is similar to equivoque insofar as you are forcing a card; however, you are not doing this by giving the spectator choices or options. The spectator is not exercising discernment. He is apparently acting freely but he is not making discriminating choices between two or more things. 4. The performer has another advantage from the outset: the spectator does not know what any action means until all of them are interpreted or are contextually understood. This provides the performer with an enormous range of opportunities to capitalize on chance. Vernon’s method begins by having the spectator shuffle his deck. If one is lucky, the spectator may shuffle the selection to the bottom (face) or top. If this is the fortunate case, you are set. So the deck is turned face up. If the predicted card is on the bottom, the deck is left face up as though that was the end of the free actions. One emphasizes this and the fact that you never touched the deck. Have the prediction read to finish. The same applies if the card ends up on top, which necessitates a glimpse. If the predicted card is not on top or bottom, ask the spectator to perform a straight cut. This provides two more opportunities to get lucky. If the card does not appear, have the deck cut again. This gives you two more chances. If these cuts do not pan out, stop the cutting and point out the fairness of these cuts. Now you must find out the location of the predicted card. Next, ask the spectator to spread the deck face up across the table. Have him spread the cards so that they are evenly spaced with the indices of every card showing. Say, “Notice how random the mixture of cards is?” As the spectator takes note, you have time to sight the position of the predicted card. Once you know this, you must see if there are any opportune situations that can be logically connected to the selection’s position. Examples: 1. Note the values of the top and bottom cards at either end of the spread. If they coincide with the numerical position of the selection you can use either card as an “indicator.” Suppose that the predicted card ends up seventh from the top. If the top or bottom card is a Six or Seven, you are ready to count down or to the selection. 2. The top and bottom cards can also be used to spell to the predicted card. Suppose that the selection ended up thirteenth from the top. Any card that spells with 12 or 13 letters, providing that they lie at either end can be used to spell to the selection. (Personally, I find using the “spelling” approach to be an out of last resort.) If the selection is not among the top or bottom 15 cards and occupies a position in the central sector, then Vernon’s “fingertip discernment” is effective. Ganson: “Ask the spectator to hold his hand over the spread cards, and with his forefinger pointing downwards, move his hand backwards and forwards along the row, stopping wherever he wishes. He may point to the predicted card—there’s another near miracle.” If the spectator does not directly finger the selection, then divide the spread at the point indicated by his finger. At that point you have two new cards that may coincide with the position of the selection in relation to them. If so, you can use either card as an “indicator card” where the spread divides. For example, if one of the cards is a Five and the selection is positioned four or five cards away, you can end

page 10

The Artful Ledger

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

the trick. Also, you can determine if the indicator cards can be added or subtracted to match the numerical position of the selection. Your strategy at this stage should be apparent. The primary drawback of this approach is that you should not drag out the effect too long or have the spectator perform too many complicated or contrived actions. If you do this, the spectator will probably realize the nature of the “game” you are playing. Also, you cannot repeat the trick because different procedures are followed each time. Nevertheless, Vernon’s effect is an excellent primer to practice Spontaneous Bop Cunning and the basic principle seems unlimited. I recently discussed this approach with Harry Anderson, a master of jazz magic who developed his skills in the trenches performing street magic, stand-up comedy, and by working in television for almost a decade. Harry not only understands how to make split-second decisions he knows how to glibly stutter-step-and-talk and seldom misses a beat. One night I watched him devastate several astute bar patrons (at Oswald’s), by combining a memorized deck with Spontaneous Bop Cunning. He began by spreading the deck face up and then performed a few false shuffles and cuts. Next, he asked someone to name a card. Once the card was named, the fun began. Harry asked, “Are you sure you want that card? You can have any card you want? Want to change your mind?” He would be relentless about acting nonchalant. After the card was named, Harry knew its position. Now he has countless contingent plans to “plug into” the action, depending of what the spectator wants to do. Also, each time the spectator cuts the deck, Harry knew the new position of the predicted card and could happily play the finite game of that which can be explained. The nice feature of Harry’s approach is that the deck is never spread face up. As far as the spectators are concerned, the deck is mixed and the performer never looks at the faces of the cards. For years I was happy playing the Unexplained Game from time to time until Ed Marlo sucker-punched me by performing his “Unexpected Prediction”—a trick that should be renamed, “The Trick That Can be Explained.” Putting aside the puzzling features of Marlo’s approach, it has two more strong aspects: (1) The audience does not know the nature of the effect until the end. In other words, there is no foreshadowing. (2) The trick, if repeated, also looks basically the same; the action-procedure seems more or less identical. Here is Marlo’s basic approach with a few embellishments: As in the “The Trick That Cannot Be Explained,” the deck may be borrowed and shuffled. Set-up: Take any card from another deck—say, the Jack of Diamonds—and place it in your outer breast coat pocket. After the borrowed deck is shuffled, the spectator is asked to cut the deck so that no one will know the top card. Next, he is asked to deal out three cards face up to the table. You must count to yourself, enumerating each three-card deal. That is when the initial three cards are dealt, count “one.” After the second set of three cards are dealt, count “two.” Continue in this fashion until the JD appears and the dealing process is continued until all of the cards have been dealt into three piles. Where the matching selection (JD) turns up during this process determines your next moves. The best-case-scenario is that the JD is one of the first three cards dealt. If this happens you can stop counting. The next best situation is when it is the second or third card dealt in one of the three piles or is the one of the last three cards dealt in one of the three piles. In other words, when that pile is turned face down, it is positioned near the top or bottom. If this happens you stop counting. After the count of “fourteen,” stop counting by “threes” and then simply wait for the JD to show up. When it does, mentally count the number of cards counted onto it until all the cards have been dealt. If this occurs, afterwards you know which pile contains the JD and you know its position from the face. If the matching card is one of the fourth, fifth, or sixth cards dealt, turn each packet face down and more or less un-squared. Then, as an afterthought, use the top card of each packet to scoop up the packet, re-square, and neatly replace on the table. The top card of each packet is handed to spectator and the routine is concluded as already explained.

page 11

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 The same scoop-displacement is used if the matching card ends up second from the face after the deal. Simply use the face card of each packet to scoop up the packet. Each packet is then re-squared and replaced face up on the table. Finally, the three face cards are handed to spectator to be mixed. In the cases just explained there are twelve chances to arrive at the matching card. So, if you get a match-up in these 12 instances, ask the spectator to mix the three cards and deal them in a row onto the table. At this stage you are ready to force the matching card using equivoque. Have the spectator turn one of the cards face up. If he turns up the matching card, the other two cards are moved aside. The card in your pocket is instantly removed and tossed face down onto the now face-up matching card. The spectator is asked to turn it face up to show the match. This is truly an unexpected prediction and is the best-case-scenario. If the first card turned face up is not the matching card, have the spectator turn over one of the other two cards. If this card does not match, move these two cards aside. Stare at the remaining face-down card and then instantly remove the card in the pocket and toss it onto the face-down card. Show the match. If the second card turned face up by the spectator is the desired card, remove the remaining face-down card and extend your left hand. Ask the spectator to hand you one of the two face-up cards. If he hands you the one that does not match, discard it onto the deck. Then the card in your pocket is instantly removed and tossed face down onto the face-up matching card. The spectator is asked to turn it face up to show the match. If the card handed to you is the matching card, turn it face down as your right hand removes the card from your coat pocket. Both cards are then handed to the spectator as you remove the last card from table and add it to the deck. Have the spectator turn both cards face up to show the match. What happens when the matching card shows up among the first 39 cards dealt? When it does, you know its position from the bottom of the face-up packet wherein it lies. Suppose it lies eighth from the bottom. There are several ways to proceed. For example, note the value of the last card dealt on the packet where the matching card lies. If it is an Eight or a Seven, you are set. If this is the case, say: “Let’s use the face cards of all three packets as indicator cards. This way we will leave everything to chance. There is no way that we could have previously known the identities of these three cards.” Remove each face card and place each behind their respective packet. Then turn each packet face down. Explain that you will deal down to a face-down card in each packet, using the value of the respective indicator-card as a guide. Needless to say, you can then force the matching card by dealing down seven cards and then dealing the next one aside, or by dealing down to the eighth card and placing it aside. Handle the other two packets in the same manner. Now you use the equivoque procedure already explained to narrow it down to one card. If you are unlucky and do not arrive at a usable value-card at the face, I often ask the spectator to name three random, different numbers between 5 and 15. Chances are the number 7 or 8 will be named. If “nine” is named, simply use the scoop-displacement to reposition the matching card from eighth to ninth. The same approach is used if the matching selection ends up fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, or fourteenth. Simply juggle the numbers. You can also use the indicator cards to spell down to the matching card, providing the number of letters in the spell is workable. If it does not show up in the initial 39 cards, do nothing until it appears. As soon as it does shows up, note the packet where it appears, count the number of cards dealt onto it, and remember that number.

page 12

The Artful Ledger

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Suppose that the number of cards dealt onto the matching selection is ten. You are now set to use the same contingency procedure just explained; only this time work with the packets face up and deal down from the face. If you “hit” a matching value-card, deal or spell down to the force-card. In the final analysis if you have an unlucky day and cannot arrive at the matching force-card without too much fiddling or contrivance, simply use the three cards in some other routine. Remember: You have not committed yourself with a written prediction. The spectator does not know the reason for the action procedure you are asking him to follow. This is why Marlo called this method the “Unexpected Prediction.” It is important that you place the stranger card only in your outer breast coat pocket. If your coat does not have such a pocket, then place the card in your shirt pocket. The use of any other pocket may suggest the possibility of a card index. Also, do not remove the card until after the spectator has arrived at the matching card. By the time the effect is over, it will be too late for the spectator to easily reconstruct the procedure used.

Jazz Magic may be the most challenging to explain, describe, or capture in print. It is also unlikely to supplant dependable, tried-and-true modi operandi that serves us well. Most times it is relegated to late-night sessions or other situations where experimental material is tested. Yet when such “magic” is successful, it is unforgettable. This brings me back to Chan Canasta. Canasta, besides being spontaneously resourceful, knew how to combine other principles and deceptions in unusual ways. Let me close by providing an example. One of the effects he showed the group at the Little Hut in Houston used a borrowed deck. I watched him carefully as he quickly shuffled it. He held the cards by the sides rather than the ends when he performed Overhand Shuffles. This, like so many other things, made him different. He then had three people select cards, saying: “I’m going to let you freely select any card you wish, but although you seem to be acting in accordance to your own volition, I can exert influence on that which you think is free.” In other words, he claimed at the outset that he could force us to act in certain ways. (I don’t remember if he uttered the word “force,” but the implication of coercion was clear.) Since I knew about “forcing,” I thought that this was heresy to say. Also, he did not seem to be using any of the standard magician forces. In fact, his attitude was recklessly indifferent and casual. He had one spectator remove one from the spread. Afterwards, he repeatedly said that the spectator could substitute that card for another. Another spectator merely thought of a card. Canasta shuffled the deck again and then dealt out six or seven cards face down. Finally he asked another person to choose one of those cards. Again, he emphasized that the spectator could change his mind. What impressed me most about this seemingly insouciant manner was that despite what spectators did, Canasta insisted that their behavior or decisions did not matter. He would be successful anyway. In this case, it turned out that all three spectators chose the same card, which was the card the last spectator selected in the row. This was truly astonishing. Meeting and experiencing Chan Canasta remains vivid and memorable because of its utter uniqueness. Canasta transformed me into a lay person with a beginner’s mind, permitting me to experience pure mystery, along with all of its attendant ecstasies. Could any magician ask for more?

page 13

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Converse Sneaker A Sneaky Strategem to Unload a Few Things

Max Maven Perception The spectator and the magician engage in some reverse role playing. The spectator, acting as the magician, instructs the magician (who is now the spectator) to select a card from a group of nine cards. The selection is returned to the group of cards held by the new magician. The new magician is surprised to find they successfully cause the selection to vanish from the group of cards and to reappear, reversed, in the deck of cards that has been on the table the entire time.

Deception Written by Max Maven The recently published book Random Acts of Magic by David Acer contains a pleasing routine entitled “Count On It,” devised by Acer and Jay Sankey. The effect and method are outgrowths of Elmer Biddle’s “Transcendent,” the trick that introduced the Biddle Steal (Genii, April 1947). The plot has been expanded, bearing a relationship to Alex Elmsley’s “Diamond Cut Diamond” (Genii, November 1954). The duo frames their trick in an effective “spectator-as-magician” presentation.

Fig. 1

The result is an eminently performable routine. However, the method contains the same problem I feel exists in the Biddle effect and most of its descendants: A display takes place while you are holding the deck (in the Acer/Sankey routine, half the deck). There is a technical purpose for this: It enables a card to be stolen under the pack. However, should the audience subsequently recap the sequence of events, that proximity provides a peg at exactly the wrong point in the routine. Thus, I set about developing an alternate construction that addresses this. The presentational structure is unchanged. There is no set-up; a borrowed pack of cards may be used. Begin by asking a spectator if he or she would like to become a magician. Presuming you get an affirmative response, continue by explaining, “Because this is new for you, we’ll use a reduced deck: just the single-digit spot cards of whichever suit you like.”

Fig. 2

Have the person nominate a suit (for this explanation, we’ll say clubs). Run through the face-up pack and upjog the ace through nine of clubs as you come to them (Fig. 1). Strip out the jogged cards. Turn the rest of the deck face down, holding it in your left hand (Fig. 2). The left fingertips and right hand openly sort the clubs (which functionally rest atop the pack) into numerical sequence, with the ace at the face. Square the nine clubs, and as you do, obtain a left little finger break beneath the top card of the face-down deck (Fig. 3). The right hand grasps the deck from above with fingers at the outer end, thumb at the inner end (Biddle Grip); the break is taken over with the right thumb. The right hand now sets the pack on the table (Fig. 4, next page), about a foot forward from the table edge and approximately in line with your left shoulder. (The reason for this placement will be explained shortly; once it’s understood, you will easily ascertain for yourself the correct position.) Immediately, the right hand lifts off the ten-card packet from above the break. The audience assumes you are holding just the nine sequential spot cards.

Fig. 3

page 14

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 Say, “With only one suit involved, it’ll be easier for you to keep track of everything.” To clarify this point, the cards are now counted from the right hand into the left. The packet is still being held from above by the right hand. The left thumb draws the ace into the palm-up left hand, as you say, “One.” The deuce is drawn on top of that as you say, “Two” (Fig. 5). This activity is continued, but at some point you will steal one of the middle-value cards (for this example, we’ll say it is the five). When the left thumb draws the 5C onto the left-hand stock, the left little finger takes a break beneath it. The hands come together to enable the 6C to be drawn on top of the left-hand stock (Fig. 6), and when the right hand’s packet comes over the left’s, the 5C above the break is stolen beneath the righthand stock (Fig. 7). This is a standard Biddle Steal. Without pause, continue drawing the remaining clubs into the left hand, one by one. When you reach the 9C, the right hand will actually be holding three cards: the 9C with a face-down card beneath it, and the stolen 5C beneath that. Simply drop the right hand’s card(s) on top of the left-hand stock, obtaining a left little finger break beneath that trio, as you conclude, “Nine” (Fig. 8) Say, “Even with this simplified ‘deck,’ we have a range of options.” As if to illustrate this point, perform a Double Undercut to the break. (In brief: The right hand retakes the packet from above, and lifts off about half the cards; the break is taken over by the right thumb (Fig. 9). The left hand pinches its stock at the left edge [i.e., at the crotch of the thumb and forefinger], which allows the left fingers to extend downward, opening a gap beneath that stock (Fig. 10). The right hand inserts its packet into that gap. Promptly, the right hand lifts off the stock above the break (Fig. 11), and the left hand deposits its stock on top. The result is that three different cards have been seen during these cuts: the 9C, a lowervalued card, then the 8C which is on top of the packet at the end of the cutting actions (Fig. 12, next page). The bottom card of the packet is now the 5C, with the indifferent face-down card above it.) All of the above has taken far longer to describe than it takes to perform. You’ve simply displayed the nine clubs, then cut the packet a couple of times.

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Fig. 10

Fig. 11

page 15

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 Obtain a right thumb break above the second card from the bottom of the packet. (The fact that this card is face down provides a natural curvature break that helps to facilitate this.) Say, “Okay, let’s begin your performance. Hold out your left hand.” As the spectator does that, lean forward slightly and reach out with your left hand to touch the person’s left hand. Simultaneously, the right hand comes over the tabled deck, and allows the two cards beneath the thumb break to drop on top of the pack (Fig. 13, with the right hand doing the dirty work. Shot slightly exposed from the spectator’s POV). This action will not be observed, first because the audience’s focus is on the spectator’s left hand, and second because your left forearm, crossing the table diagonally, essentially screens the right hand from view. Fig. 12

Continue by instructing the person to spread his or her fingers and show both sides of the left hand, so that the audience knows they aren’t hiding any extra cards. By the time this is being done, your right hand should be far away from the tabled deck (Fig. 14, with the dirty work completed). Deposit the packet onto the person’s palm-up left hand. Direct the person to display their right hand as also being empty. This done, have the person turn the packet face down and mix it. Tell the spectator to spread the face-down packet so that you can select a card. (The fact that there are now eight cards instead of nine will not be discerned.) With as much banter as you deem appropriate, pick a card from the fan, and appear to note it. In fact, you ignore the identity of that card. Return the card to the spread, and have the participant reshuffle the packet.

Fig. 13

Instruct the person to hold the packet in his or her left hand. Say, “You’ve done this so well thus far, perhaps we can incorporate the rest of the pack in your trick.” Direct the person to give the tabled deck a complete cut. Say, “Ask me what card I chose.” When the person does that, announce that you took the five of clubs (i.e., the card that was stolen earlier). Direct the person to mime the action of removing a card from the packet and tossing it to the tabled deck. This done, have the person turn the packet face up and spread the cards on the table, revealing that there are “now” only eight cards, and the selected five of clubs is missing. Have the person spread the remainder of the deck, revealing the 5C face up in the middle. Congratulate the person for a trick well done.

Fig. 14

The Antinomy Perspective What I find intriguing about this trick is the technique to offload the necessary cards. Max has taken what normally requires close proximity to the deck and “remoted” part of it. This approach could be applied to ATFUS and its variants, eliminating a key weakness to them. The fact that it is all part of an entertaining routine is just a bonus.

Touchstones & Crossroads Jay Sankey & David Acer – “Count On It,” Random Acts of Magic, 2004. Written by David Acer. David also mentions the Frank Garcia routine below as having a “methodological resemblance.” Frank Garcia – “Surprise Reversal,” Exclusive Card Miracles, 1980. Written by Frank Garcia. Alex Elmsley – “Diamond Cut Diamond,” The Collected Works of Alex Elmsley Volume II, 1994. Written by Stephen Minch.

page 16

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Inflated Transposition A Bill Switch Where They CanÕt Keep the Change

Joshua Jay Perception The magician shows a one dollar bill and asks to borrow a five dollar bill from the spectator. Both bills are examined, then folded and placed in the spectator’s hand. The magician removes his one dollar bill and, with a wave of his hand, shows that it has changed into the spectator’s five dollar bill. When the spectator opens their hand, instead of finding the expected one dollar bill, they find a one hundred dollar bill.

Deception

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

You will need: • A one dollar bill • A hundred dollar bill Your bills are prepared as follows. Take the one hundred dollar bill and hold it by its ends so you can see Ben Franklin and he is looking at you with his head right side up (Fig. 1). You should be looking down on the bill. Fold the right half of the bill down and under the left half (Fig. 2). Crease and then repeat the same process, folding the bill into quarters (Fig. 3). You should see the value of the bill at the top and bottom corners. Conclude the folding by folding the bottom half down and under the top half. The final folded packet is shown in Fig. 4. Fold the dollar bill in half and place the folded $100 bill inside it as shown in Fig. 5. Place the setup bills in a pocket or wallet and you’re ready to begin. Bring out the folded one dollar bill. Show both sides of the folded bill. Ask to borrow a bill from the spectator. The denomination doesn’t matter as long as it’s something other than a one dollar bill. Of course, if they volunteer a $100 bill, then your surprise ending won’t be such a surprise, but it will still work.

page 17

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Fig. 7

Fig. 9

Fig. 11

Fig. 8

Fig. 10

Fig. 12

While they search for and remove their bill, open up the one dollar bill and pin the $100 bill against the back of it with your right thumb as shown in Fig. 6, previous page. Explain that you’re going to cause your bill and their bill to change places as you take their bill. Continue to explain that you want them to examine your bill so they know that everything is fair. As you explain this, take their bill with your left hand. In the photos this bill is a Twenty Dollar bill. Position their bill so its face is against your bill and slip its right end between your right first and second finger (Fig. 7). During this process, you continue to hold both your bill and the hidden $100 bill between your right first finger and thumb. Once their bill is secured, you slide out your one dollar bill with your left hand and offer it to them to examine (Fig. 8). The $100 bill is re-positioned behind their bill (Fig. 9). Handling the bills in this way ensures that the folded $100 bill is not seen. You now instruct the spectator to fold your bill in the same way that you folded your prepared $100 bill. As you do this, you will also fold their bill in the same way. In your case, you will continue to conceal the folded $100 bill as you make the fold. Instead of working downward as described in the $100 bill preparation, you will make the folds away from you and to the right. So, with the face on their bill looking at you, and the $100 bill still secured with your right thumb, fold the left half of the bill away from you and then back over the other half of the bill (Fig. 10). Repeat this process to fold the bill into quarters and crease the bill (Fig. 11). Once the crease is in place, use your right thumb to push the $100 bill across the other bill and behind the left fingers. Position it so that it still overlaps a portion of the just folded bill. Pausing at each part of the folding process will allow you to show a clean edge opposite the hand holding the bill. Move both the spectator’s bill and the concealed $100 bill back into the right hand fingertips, shifting the $100 bill behind the right fingers.

Take the folded one dollar bill back from the spectator and position it in front of the spectator’s bill (Fig. 12), but down-jogged exactly half of its length. Both bills should be positioned so that you can see their numeric indices. The $100 bill is moved behind both Fig. 13 Fig. 14 of these bills into the center third of the arrangement (Fig. 13). So, half of the borrowed bill will be above the $100 bill and half of the one dollar bill will be below it (Fig. 14).

page 18

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 You now form an impromptu double-sided bill as follows. Fold the spectator’s bill forward and down over the one dollar bill (Fig. 15 & Fig. 16). Follow this up by folding the one dollar bill forward and up over the just folded borrowed bill (Fig. 17 - Fig. 19). This puts a V fold into each of these bills and the V’s are inserted into each other (exposed view Fig. 20). The $100 bill, of course, remains hidden behind both of the other bills throughout this procedure. Ask the spectator to extend their right hand. Place the bill packet (all three bills) onto their right fingers so the $100 bill is lowermost (Fig. 21). Pin the bills gently against the spectators fingers and ask them to close their fingers (Fig. 22). Keep your fingers in place until their hand is almost closed (Fig. 23). This ensures that the bills will turn over in their hand (i.e. the $100 bill is uppermost). Ask the spectator to turn their hand palm down (Fig. 24, next page). This again makes the $100 bill lowermost. This orchestration of the placement of the bills into the hand ensures that you know where the $100 bill is.

Fig. 15

Fig. 16

Fig. 17

Fig. 18

Fig. 19

Fig. 20

Fig. 21

Fig. 22

Fig. 23

page 19

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 Say “I will remove my bill, the single” as you reach into the spectator’s fist to retrieve the impromptu double-faced bill (Fig. 25). It will be the uppermost and since the two bills are interlocked, it is easy to remove them both as one. The one dollar bill will be the one in view (Fig. 26). The spectator still feels a bill in their hand so has no reason to believe you have two bills.

Fig. 24

Fig. 25

Wave the one dollar bill in a broad motion from your chest to your waist and turn over the bill in the process. The larger motion conceals the smaller one. Show that the one dollar bill has turned into the borrowed bill (Fig. 27). Say “I’ve caused my bill to change places with your bill. If I’ve got your bill, what bill is in your hand?” As they move to see what bill they have (Fig. 28), use the moment to unfold their bill and conceal the one dollar bill behind it as follows.

Fig. 26

Fig. 27

Fig. 28

Fig. 29

Orient the bill packet so the one dollar bill faces you and the creased edge of its V-fold is to your left (Fig. 29). Pinch just the one dollar bill between your left finger and thumb. Given the spectator’s distraction, it’s not necessary to hide the entire bill behind the fingers as the next sequence happens pretty quickly. Open up the borrowed bill from the front forward and to the left, going from eighths to quarters (Fig. 30). Rotate the borrowed bill counterclockwise while still loosely pinned between the V-fold of the one dollar bill (Fig. 31). Insert the right fingers into the first flap of the borrowed bill facing you from the right side (Fig. 32, next page). Using the left fingers, reach across the front of the borrowed bill and open up the next fold (Fig. 33, next page). In a continuing motion, pull the just opened flap to the left. This unfolds the borrowed bill completely while leaving the one dollar bill concealed behind it still folded into quarters (Fig. 34). When the spectator opens their hand, they will discover the $100 bill. Ask them to unfold it and then take the bill back with your left hand. Insert it between the right hand first and second fingers just as in the first part of the routine. Continue with the same motions to move the concealed one dollar bill behind the $100 to return the spectator’s bill to them.

Fig. 30

page 20

Fig. 31

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

The Antinomy Perspective It’s the turning of the two bills into the paper currency equivalent of a Copper/Silver coin that is the coolest part of this routine. It’s a good feeling when you’re able to easily and secretly remove two bills as one from the spectator’s hand. The unexpected appearance of a $100 bill provides a good finale when a more typical transposition is what is expected by the spectator. I’m sure people will play with a variety of endings using Joshua’s routine. Another real asset of this approach is that it truly doesn’t matter what bill the spectator gives you. Unlike other bill routines, you don’t have to worry about matching a gimmick in order to produce the effect. Also unlike some bill routines, this one resolves the question of how to handle the transformation of the spectator’s bill into a high value bill. It is implied that your own bill is the one that has changed denomination in this routine. At the conclusion of the routine, you’re left holding the spectator’s borrowed bill. It’s only natural to return it and keep the $100 bill as your own.

Fig. 32

Touchstones & Crossroads Like the work of Max Maven, Joshua Jay’s routine came already credited. In addition to the routines cited below, Joshua mentions that the Z-fold he employs, while independently created by him, was the invention of Dr. Raymond L. Beebe and was published in Hugard’s Magic Monthly, March, 1963. I should also mention Joshua’s routine is in his current set of lecture notes “Sleight of Hand and a Twist of Fate” and they’re well worth checking out. Got to www.joshuajay.com for more information. U. F. Grant – “Slow Motion Bill Change,” a marketed routine, also published in The Tarbell Course in Magic, Volume III, 1927. Written by Harlan Tarbell. Eugene Burger – “Slow-Motion Bill Change,” The Craft of Magic, 1984 Written by Eugene Burger. David Parr – “Slow-Motion Swindle,” Brain Food, 1998 Written by David Parr. Roger Klause – “The Ultimate Slow Motion Bill Transposition,” a marketed effect.

Fig. 33

Fig. 34

page 21

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Oops! A Torn Card is Restored But is Never the Same Again

Michael Daniels Perception A card is selected and then signed on its back by the magician. The magician tears the card in half, clearly displaying the separate halves. The halves are placed together and folded into quarters. This packet is given to the spectator to hold in their closed hand. The magician waves a lighter under the spectator’s hand. When they open their hand, they find the pieces fused together incorrectly. The spectator is allowed to keep and inspect the uniquely misprinted souvenir.

Deception • A prepared card from an “Oops!” deck. Subscribers received an entire deck of these cards with this issue. • A matching red deck of Bicycle cards. • A black Sharpie or other permanent marker. • A lighter.

Fig. 1

You first prepare one of the “Oops!” cards. You will be forcing a card of the same value from your regular Bicycle deck. While you can skip the preparation, a little work produces an even better match of the duplicate card when it is torn, folded, and switched later in the routine. It also produces a souvenir that looks more like it was restored incorrectly rather than one that simply looks misprinted. An unprepared “Oops!” card and a prepared one are shown in Fig. 1. Preparing your “Oops!” card First, sign your name in a “mismade” manner as shown in Fig. 2. You will sign the “Oops!” card in this way regardless of whether you proceed with the rest of the preparation. Using a straight edge and Xacto blade, trim each narrow end of the “Oops!” card by a fraction of an inch. This removes much of the curved corners of the misprinted card.

Fig. 2

Fold the card in half back outwards along where the white borders meet at the middle (Fig. 3). Using nail clippers, round each corner at the fold. Alternatively, you can use the corners of a card as a template and trim around these to produce the rounded corners. Fold the card in half again into quarters (Fig. 4, next page). The completed prepared “Oops!” card is shown in Fig. 5 on the following page. Amazingly, it looks just like a normal card would when folded in the same way. Place the prepared and folded “Oops!” card in your left jacket or pants pocket. Also place the lighter in this pocket. The black marker goes in your right jacket or pants pocket.

page 22

Fig. 3

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 The Routine Introduce the regular deck and explain to the spectator that you’ve been working on a new effect. Sounding a bit hesitant about the outcome helps prepare the spectator for the unexpected ending and allows you to act out your “mistake” at the conclusion. Force the card whose value matches that of your prepared “Oops!” card on the spectator. Use the method you’re most comfortable with. Explain to the spectator that they get to make the selection, but you get to sign the card, as you ask them to hand the card back to you. Remove the black marker from your pocket and sign the back of the selection in a manner similar to the way you signed your “Oops!” card. By using big, bold letters, and by referencing the visual “landmarks” on the back of the Bicycle cards when you sign them, you should be able to produce very similar signatures. Hold the signed card in your right hand and replace the marker in your left pocket. As you do so, retrieve the prepared “Oops!” card from your pocket into left hand finger palm. The placement of the “Oops!” card in finger palm is shown in Fig. 6. Note that the large crease is against your fingers and the narrow crease points downward. As you retrieve the card, you can choose to blow on the ink of the card in your right hand to further distract from the actions of your left. Hold the card briefly with your left hand fingertips to reinforce that only one card is in play. Then, using the fingers of the right hand, and making sure the palmed “Oops!” card remains hidden, fold the selected card in half, first face inward, and then face outward. Repeat this inward and outward folding a couple of times. This breaks in the crease and makes it and easy task to tear the card cleanly in half (Fig. 7).

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Display the two halves, one in each hand. Then hold both of them at the left hand fingertips, but with them slightly angled into a ‘V’ shape as shown in Fig. 8. Note that both halves are oriented the same way with the torn sides pointing to the right. Slowly line up the halves (Fig. 9) and then fold both pieces into quarters to form a packet that closely matches the appearance of your folded “Oops!” card (Fig. Fig. 10 Fig. 11 10). As you complete the fold, briefly lineup the folded selection on the folded “Oops!” card (Fig. 11) and then move both to the fingers of the left hand (Fig. 12, next page). Since the sides

page 23

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 of each packet that face the spectator are nearly identical, nothing seems out of the ordinary. It should appear as if all you have done is folded the card. To switch the cards, a series of coordinated movements take place. These do not need to be rushed. You ask the spectator to hold out their hand. As they do this, you move the cards in the left hand briefly behind the fingers of the right hand (Fig. 13). Under the natural cover of taking the “Oops!” card (the one closest to the spectator), you pull back the torn selection into the left hand with the left thumb. The cards are only briefly covered as you come away with the “Oops!” card at the right hand fingertips (Fig. 14). The left hand continues and goes to your pocket to left pocket to retrieve the lighter. As it does, it ditches the torn card. The switch is complete and you’re ready to conclude the effect. Fig. 12

Place the folded “Oops!” card onto the spectator’s open palm and have them close their hand around it and then turn their hand palm down. This helps to ensure they won’t prematurely reveal the condition of the “Oops!” card since if they open their hand, the card would fall out. Hold the lighter under their hand and light it far enough away so that you don’t burn the spectator. Explain that this is the part you’re still working on but that, if everything goes okay, you should be restoring the torn card. After an appropriate pause, have them turn their hand palm up and slowly open it. Have them try to open the card. They will try to open it from its now fused center before finally opening it up by its ends. The card has been restored, but it looks like you still need to perfect your technique! Fig. 13

Fig. 14

The Antinomy Perspective When Michael approached me and explained that he had a misprinted deck he wanted to promote to the Antinomy audience, I didn’t know what to expect. I pictured a deck full of cards similar to Daryl’s “Mismade Card.” When I received a sample deck, I was pleasantly surprised at its difference. Like Michael, I think the deck and its cards are just one idea away from producing a wealth of different effects like crazy color changes, card warp and tunnel effects, twisting effects where the cards invert themselves, and others. In fact, what Michael is looking for in releasing this deck as an exclusive offer to the readers of Antinomy are those ideas. Michael will be releasing the “Oops!” deck to the general magic community soon and will be packaging it with an assortment of effects. So, if in playing with your “Oops!” deck, you create a great routine, share it with Michael by contacting him at [email protected]. If you received this issue without being a subscriber, you can contact Michael at the same email address to inquire about purchasing an “Oops!” deck. This routine is pretty simple while still packing some “Oomph” to go with your “Oops,” but an even simpler “Oops!” effect follows. I hope you enjoy your “Oops!” deck and I thank Michael for allowing it to be distributed to the Antinomy subscribers. Michael wanted to personally thank a long list of magicians for their contributions in relation to the torn and restored card effect. His list is presented below. Some specific credits are given in the “Touchstones and Crossroads” section that follows the next trick.

Magician’s associated with the Torn and Restored Card Effect: J.C. Wagner, Ben Harris, Charlie Miller, Wesley James, Paul Harris, Guy Hollingworth, Gary Ouellet, Dave Williamson, Paul LePaul, Michael Ammar, John Lovick, David Forrest, Alexander DeCova, Jay Sankey, Craig Alan, Chris Kenworthy, Sam Berland, Yves Doumergue, Brent Braun, Daniel Garcia and Vini Marini.

page 24

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Fold Õem Oops! A Simple, No-Tear Routine

Michael Daniels Perception After having a card selected, the magician folds it in half and then into quarters. When it is opened, things have not remained the same. The card has transformed into a mismade card and is given to the spectator as a souvenir.

Deception This routine is a playing card version of the popular “Mismade Bill” trick where a dollar bill is folded, and then switched for a misprinted dollar bill. Prepare an “Oops!” card just as you did for the previous effect. You can choose to sign the card with your own name if you wish. It’s probably best to do this since the black marker will serve as “motivation” to ditch the folded selection. The marker is placed in your right pants pocket. The prepared “Oops!” card goes in your left pants pocket. Force the card whose value matches your prepared card. Explain to the spectator that you’ve been practicing Origami, the Japanese art of paper folding, but have been having trouble with the basics. As you explain this, put both your left and right hands into your pockets. Your left hand retrieves the prepared “Oops!” card into finger palm and comes out while your right hand brings out the marker from your right pants pocket. Continue to explain that you’ll demonstrate the problems you’ve been having. Have the spectator hand you the selection. If you choose to sign the card, explain that you always like to sign your work. Place the marker to the table. You then fold the selection into quarters, back outwards so that it matches your prepared “Oops!” card. You perform the same switch sequence from the previous “Oops!” routine and the switched in “Oops!” card ends up at the right hand fingertips. Retrieve the marker with your left hand and return it to your pants pocket, ditching the signed selection in the process. Conclude by explaining that even when you only perform the simplest folds, things don’t always work out right. Unfold the card to show the results of your simple fold and hand the “Oops!” card to the spectator as a souvenir.

Touchstones & Crossroads Along with the list of Magicians presented on the previous page, Michael also mentioned the most obviously similar effect. That being Daryl’s “Mismade” card effect, which was itself directly inspired by the “Mismade Bill” effect. Since the method for the “Oops!” restoration is more akin to a billet switch than the many currently in vogue piece-by-piece restorations, specific “Torn and Restored Card” references are not cited. But I would recommend checking out the work of Don England for some under-explored (and not over-exposed) methods. Daryl – “Mismade Card,” a marketed effect, 1994. James Lewis – “The Mis-Made Dollar Bill,” a marketed routine recently released in an authorized addition with a Booklet written by John Lovick. For a performance of the routine by James Lewis, see Million Dollar Mysteries, The Magic of James Lewis, a video, 1992 Howard Lyons – “Money Maker,” Ibidem 7, September,1956. He describes creating a “mis-made bill” (though doesn’t call it that) for use with the “Money Maker” magic bill printer.

page 25

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

A Misrepresentation of Vision By Definition, An Illusion

Everett Chapman Perception The magician illustrates Webster’s definition of an illusion by causing a single coin taken from a coin purse to vanish and reappear. The coin then multiplies from one to three coins, followed by each of the three coins vanishing in turn. For the finale, the magician causes each of the three vanished coins to travel invisibly to the coin purse which was previously shown empty.

Deception You will need: • Three half dollars. • A half-dollar sized flipper coin. • A matching shell. • Two matching coin purses. These are the Ton Onasaka, large-size “pressure release” style purses. I purchased mine from Stevens Magic Emporium online and commend them for their prompt shipping and corrective action when they originally shipped the wrong purses. I suggest you reward them as well. • A slip of paper with the words “A Misrepresentation of Vision” printed on it. To setup, place the three regular half dollars in one of the purses. Place the shell onto the corresponding side of the flipper coin and place this into the other coin purse. It’s probably best to orient the coin so it will be shell side out when the purse is opened, though the coin can be repositioned before proceeding with the routine. Fold up the slip of paper and place it in your right pants pocket. Place the purse with the flipper coin/shell in it on top of the other with both purses oriented the same way. They should be positioned so the solid black sides of the purses are uppermost. The other side of the purse would display the metallic gold edge along the top of the purse. The purses can also face the other way, but Everett positions them with the black sides forward. Place both of the purses into your right pants pocket with the purse containing the flipper coin/shell facing outward. You’re ready to begin.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

The Introduction and Purse Switch Reach into your pants pocket and grip both purses in a rough finger palm position as shown in Fig. 1. The clasp part of the purses will lie along the base of your fingers and the bottom of the purses at your fingertips. You’re not really trying to hide anything here and the position is more or less the natural way you would remove the purses from your pocket. Carry the purses across the front of your body to your left hand which meets them just to the left side of your torso. As you carry the purse to your left hand, tilt their right hand sides (the sides that lie along your right pinky) downward so that the coins within them will rest silently along this side. Place the coin purses into your left hand so the left Fig. 3 side is held by the left fingers and the other side by the left thumb (Fig. 2). Keep the purses aligned throughout this procedure. Note the slightly angled position of the purses in Fig. 3. This keeps the coins where they should be and also keeps them silent during the sequence that follows.

page 26

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 Display the purses briefly in your left hand and reach to open the front one with your right hand by pressing in on the pressure-release with your right fingers while pulling the front side of the purse downward with the right thumb. Keep the purses tilted slightly backward as you do this. After the front purse is open, use your left pinky to hold it open. One coin and an otherwise empty purse is displayed (Fig. 4). Because of the unique design of these purses, the rearmost purse is not perceived. Reach into the purse with the right hand and remove the coin. Pause to imprint the image of the empty purse on the audience and then lay the coin shell side up onto the table in front of you. Move the right hand towards the purses and bring it up behind the purses so that the open edge of the front purse lies along your right hand finger (Fig. 5). Move your hand upward to close the purse (Fig. 6). As you do this, move both hands more towards the vertical center of your torso. Don’t snap the purse shut yet. Instead, use your left hand to rotate the rearmost purse into view (the one closest to you) by turning your left thumb down in a clockwise direction. The right thumb is the pivot point and it winds up positioned over the center of the metallic edge of the rear purse and the center of the still open edge of the other purse (Fig. 7). During this action, the back of the right hand faces the audience. Now, sharply press both purses and snap the open purse shut. The illusion that you are closing the visible purse is perfect. While retaining the just closed purse in palm position, take the visible purse with the same hand and place it down to the table (Fig. 8, both purses in one hand). As you do this sequence, you’re discussing what an illusion is. Explain that you’re not sure what an illusion is, but you looked it up and wrote down what Webster’s says it is. Reach into your right pants pocket with the palmed purse (Fig. 9, showing the palm position) and leave it there as you pull out the slip of paper with the hand-written definition on it. Read from it as you say that Webster’s says that an illusion is “A misrepresentation of vision.” Fold the paper back up and place it back in your pocket. You’re in a great position because you’ve setup for the finale of the trick before it has even “officially” begun.

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Fig. 10

page 27

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Fig. 12

Fig. 13

Fig. 14

Fig. 15

Fig. 16

Fig. 17

A Vanish and Reproduction Pick up the tabled coin and turn it over a few times using both hands to emphasize its singularity. Finish so that the coin is held by the tips of the right fingers and thumb with the shell side of the coin facing the audience. The fingers of the right hand should be fully extended and the coin should be free to pivot between the right first finger and thumb. Perform a retention vanish of the coin into the right hand (Fig. 10, previous page). The technique Everett uses does not rely on the fingers of the right hand to pull the coin behind the fingers. Rather, he moves the coin in a slight upward direction along the large muscle of the left thumb. This causes the coin to pivot behind the right fingers. Timed correctly with the closing of the left fingers, the retention of vision is obtained. As the right hand pulls away, use the right thumb to slide the coin into right hand thumb palm. Make a gesture and open the left hand to show that the coin has vanished. Begin to perform an acquitment sequence by gliding your right fingers over your left hand palm from the palm to the tips of the fingers. Do this again, but this time position the right hand a little further to the left so that the palmed coin is roughly centered over the left hand. Rub your right hand along your left hand, and as the coin nears the left fingers you will find it is in position to be finger palmed by the left hand (Fig. 12 & Fig. 13). Do this, but continue to move your right hand off the left hand fingertips. As the right hand clears the palmed coin, rotate your left hand inward and your right hand palm up to show the right hand empty as well while brushing the left hand along the right hand. The left hand travels from the crotch of the right hand to the right hand fingertips (Fig. 14 & Fig. 15). Rotate your left hand palm up with the backs of the left fingers facing outward. Due to the ever popular Ramsey Subtlety, the coin is concealed while an empty palm is displayed. Reach out with the right fingers and mime plucking the coin from the air and tossing it into the left hand. Close the left fingers, gesture magically over them with the right hand, and then open the left hand to show the coin has reappeared.

The coin is squeezed into a tiny ball Pick up the coin by the right hand fingertips and thumb, again with the shell side facing the audience. Bring the left hand up and place the coin behind the left hand fingers (Fig. 16).

Fig. 18

page 28

Fig. 19

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 When the coin is hidden from view, use the right hand second fingertip to push the bottom edge of the coin inward, moving the coin to a horizontal position (Fig. 17, previous page). Reposition your right first fingertip so the coin is briefly pinched between the first two fingers. This allows your right thumb to reach to the left-most edge of the coin and pull it, still horizontal, towards the base of your right first finger. The right-most edge of the coin hits the base of this finger and the right first finger closes partially, gripping the coin as shown in Fig. 18 on the previous page. This move is associated with Mike Gallo and the grip is sometimes referred to as “The Fitch Grip.” More on the attribution of this move is included in the “Touchstones and Crossroads” section. After this grip is achieved, the right fingers and thumb are repositioned behind the left fingers. Then the left hand comes away from the right hand, pretending to grip the coin (Fig. 19, previous page). The left hand fingers squeeze and rub together, pretending to squeeze the coin. The coin has apparently been squeezed so small that it now fits between the left thumb and second finger. The right hand briefly mirrors this same position (Fig. 20). While it takes a lot of words to describe this sequence of the false take by the left hand then the apparent squeezing of the coin, it all happens smoothly and at a fairly brisk pace. You now pretend to continue to squeeze the coin at the extreme fingertips of both hands. Bring the left fingers in front of the right hand second finger and thumb, positioned to conceal the following action. Pull the right thumb back towards the base of the right first finger and slide the coin out of the grip and towards the tip of the right first finger. Once it is there, the left first finger is positioned so that it hides the front edge of the coin while the other fingers of the left hand are moved out of the way. The coin is held in a horizontal position, pinched between the right first finger and thumb. The left thumb contacts the right thumb below the coin while the left first finger rests between the right first finger and thumb towards the front (Fig. 21).

Fig. 20

Fig. 21

Fig. 22

Fig. 23

Fig. 24

Fig. 25

You will now rotate both hands downward so that the thumbs face the audience. As you do this, you’ll Fig. 26 Fig. 27 reposition the coin so that it is still concealed. Bring the fingers of the left hand in again to provide cover. Once they conceal the coin position from the front, reach behind the coin with your

page 29

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 left thumb and push it so that it extends from the other side of the right first finger and thumb. Leave it pinched there as you rotate your hands downward. The right fingers aid in providing brief cover. As you rotate your hands, reposition your left first finger so it conceals the edge of the coin from the front. Your left thumb lies below but to the left of the coin at the rear. The coin is again held in a horizontal position (Fig. 22, previous page).

Fig. 28

Fig. 30

Fig. 32

Fig. 29

Fig. 31

Fig. 33

The coin reappears Bring the left thumb on top of the coin and press down to pivot it into a right hand edge grip position. The coin is held by its edge between the right hand second finger and thumb. The left hand thumb maintains contact with the bottom of this coin as the left fingers are opened and pointed upward, displaying your empty left hand to the audience (Fig. 23). Come away with the coin still in right hand edge grip and reach downward with the right fingers as if plucking the coin from the air. As you do this the fingers of the left hand flatten against the thumb and rotate upward with the back of the fingers facing the audience. The right hand places its “invisible” coin into the waiting left fingers. As you come away with the right hand, move the coin into right hand thumb palm. Re-approach the left hand and wave the open fingers of the right hand across the supposed coin (Fig. 24, previous page). Repeat this action two or three times. On the last time, move a little further to the left so that the left fingers and thumb can pinch the bottom edge of the coin from the right hand (Fig. 25, previous page). Retain the coin in the left hand as the right hand moves away to display the coin (Fig. 26, previous page).

One coin becomes three Place the coin onto the fingers of the right hand so that it is positioned shell-side down (Fig. 27, previous page). The coin should be positioned so that it lies at the base of the fingers, roughly centered along your second finger. The edge closest to you should lie along the third finger. The right thumb is placed along the edge of the coin that overlaps the second finger. As you bring the right hand towards the left, you will use the thumb to pivot the coin up Fig. 34 Fig. 35 while maintaining contact with the right hand third finger. Pretend to toss the coin into the left hand. On the down stroke, allow the flipper coin to fall into the left hand while maintaining the right hand edge grip of the shell (Fig. 28).

page 30

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 Display the flipper coin on the fingers of the left hand and reposition the shell in the right hand slightly by loosely closing the fingers of the right hand. As you do this, catch the left-most side of the coin and pivot it around and downward, primarily with your third finger (Fig. 29, previous page). This will orient the coin so that one edge lies along the base of the fingers and the other is held against he right thumb once the fingers are re-extended. The open side of the shell will face your palm (Fig. 30, previous page). Fig. 36

Fig. 37

Fig. 38

Fig. 39

Fig. 40

Fig. 41

Fig. 42

Fig. 43

Slide the left hand coin to the fingertips of the left hand and bring it to the right hand, inserting it between the right hand coin and the right hand fingers (Fig. 31, previous page). Using primarily the right thumb, pivot the shell flush onto the flipper coin and then pull both away so they are held on either side at the fingertips of both hands (Fig. 32, previous page). In a continuing action, pull the shell away with the right hand fingers and the flipper coin away with the left hand fingers. You have split one coin into two (Fig. 33, previous page). Bring the coins back together, overlapping the flipper coin on the outer right side of the shell. Grip both briefly with the right hand fingers and thumb and lay them on the fingers of the left hand as shown in Fig. 34 on the previous page. The flipper coin is the uppermost coin. Openly display these and then grip the edge of the flipper coin with the right thumb on top and the fingers below. It is important you grip the flipper coin at the extreme edge and by the smaller, fixed piece on the bottom of the coin. You’re gripping it in position so that it can easily be opened up in the next step. Move forward with the shell in the left hand, displaying it. As you do this, move the flipper slightly behind and under the back side of the open left palm. Allow the flipper coin to open up and catch the open edge with the right second fingertip (Fig. 35, previous page). In a coordinated action, complete the action of opening the flipper coin as your left hand turns over and pretends to place its coin onto the right hand coin. Hold back the left hand shell with the left thumb. Briefly take the now open flipper coin with the left hand thumb and fingertips and reposition it so the right hand fingers can hold it in the open position.

page 31

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 Reach forward with the left hand and lever the shell over and to the left hand fingertips, producing the shell as the third coin (Fig. 36 Fig. 37, previous page). Place it in the uppermost position behind the open flipper coin to show three coins in a vertical row. Move the shell with the right thumb gently behind the others to emphasize their singularity (Fig. 38, previous page). The three coins vanish You now proceed into a Troy Hooser sequence to vanish the coins. Move the row of coins from the right hand into the same position in the left hand. As you do this, retain the shell in the right hand and then move it to the lowermost, outward position in the left hand. Do a false take of the top coin with the right hand and as you do so, use the left thumb to allow the flipper coin to close. Rub the fingers of the right hand and show that the first coin has vanished (Fig. 39 & Fig. 40, previous page).

Fig. 44

Place both of the coins onto the palm of the right hand (Fig. 41, previous page). As you close the fingers of the right hand, coalesce the two coins and pull it from the right hand. Wave the combined shell and flipper coin over the right hand and then open it to show the second coin has vanished (Fig. 42 & Fig. 43, previous page). Place the last coin onto the fingers of the right hand so that its lower edge lines up along the third finger. The coin is placed so that it is shell side down (Fig. 44). Turn the right hand palm down to pretend to place the coin into the left hand. As you do this, contact the upper edge of the coin with the right thumb and rotate it into a right hand edge grip held by the third finger and right thumb (Fig. 45). As you come away from the left hand, curl in the third finger so that it alone holds the coin. This allows for a very open look to the right hand. Rub the fingers of the left hand and open them to show the third coin is gone (Fig. 46). Finish by performing a two-handed open gesture with the backs of the hands towards the audience.

Fig. 45

The Finale All that remains is to mime the plucking of the three coins from the air and to gently toss each invisible coin towards the purse on the table. You can also suggest to the spectator that they perform these actions. Reach down and pick up the purse with both hands and open it mouth down, allowing the three coins to fall to the table.

The Antinomy Perspective Fig. 46

What Everett brings to these pages is the routine. He takes little if any credit for the specific handlings here, but he has taken a few previously published sequences and molded them into a routine that has a beginning, a middle, and an end. It has a very nice feel to it. The purse switch is especially devious and not that well known.

Touchstones & Crossroads In addition to the items below, Everett also credits a one coin sequence of Geoffry Latta’s. James Lewis – “Utility Purse Switch,” Million Dollar Mysteries, The Magic of James Lewis, a video, 1992. This is a great and versatile technique. I believe James will be releasing this, along with additional ideas on DVD sometime in the near future. Jonathan Townsend – “Multiple Coin Transfer,” Apocalypse, June, 1989. Written by Harry Lorayne. This is the acquitment sequence used in the routine. Jimmy Wilson – “Jimmy Wilson’s Coin Vanish and Reproduction,” Bennett’s Fourth Book, 1981. Written by Horace Bennett. This is the first publication of the first finger grip that is sometimes referred to as “The Fitch Grip” and popularized recently by Shoot Ogawa and Apollo Robbins. Mike Gallo – “Complete Coin Dis/Appearance,” Apocalypse, Vol. 11, No. 1, January 1988. Written by Harry Lorayne. This describes the Jimmy Wilson first finger grip, but mentions the thumb sliding it into place. Troy Hooser – “Squeezed Away,” desTROYers, The Superlative Magic of Troy Hooser, 2001. Written by Joshua Jay.

page 32

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

The Double-Jointed Card A Problem in Quality Control Leads to Magic

Jeff Pierce Perception After finding a deck of factory rejects at the United States Playing Card Company, a magician discovers the uniqueness of the cards doesn’t stop with their misprinting. He demonstrates how a seemingly normal card possesses a unique property as it turns itself inside out when passing through a wrapper formed from a Dollar Bill.

Deception You will need: • A dollar bill in fairly good condition (in the photos a Two dollar bill is pictured). Fold the bill in half by bringing the two smallest ends together prior to performing the routine for the first time. For additional performances, the bill will be broken in with the other required folds. • A blank card case with the words “Rejects. Do Not Use” written on it using a Sharpie marker (alternatively, you can use the “Rejected” stickers supplied. Case shown in Fig. 1. Some additional thoughts on the case and stickers are presented in The Antinomy Perspective). • An assortment of specially printed Bicycle card gimmicks. Double-backers, double-facers, blank backed, blank faced, Daryl’s Mismade Card, etc. A couple of cards from your “Oops!” deck will fit in perfectly here. An assortment is shown in Fig. 2, • A Bicycle brand Pinochle Deck. • A regular, matching deck of Bicycle Cards. You will prepare a variation of Darwin Ortiz’s “Card Warp Deck” that will be used to present the premise of the trick. Do this by removing all of the Court Cards from the Pinochle Deck. Each of these will be prepared to perform the Card Warp effect by placing a small tear in them. In this version, the tear is made about a third of the way from one end of the card rather than half-way along it as is more typical. The placement of the tear is important to ensure success later in the routine, so grab a face card and follow along.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Hold the card by its ends so the back of the card faces you and one long side of the card is pointing at the ceiling. Tear the card approximately one inch from the right hand side so that the tear runs through the mountain range pictured in the circular illustration on the back that also contains the angel riding on a bicycle. The tear should end at the point where the seat of the bicycle would be if the seat were actually pictured. Fig. 3 shows the tear beginning, with the tear finished in Fig. 4 on the next page. Note how the larger portion of the card overlaps a small portion of the remainder of the card. Orienting the tear in this way helps when secretly folding the card early in the routine. Fig. 3

Prepare a number of the face cards in this way. The exact number will define the number of times you can perform the trick from this deck without refilling. Place each card with a tear in it between two normal, non-face cards from the matching deck. Place the assortment of

page 33

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 specially printed gimmicks on the face of the deck. The combination of cards should produce something close to a full deck. Remove or add cards from the normal deck to arrive at a total of around 50 cards. Orient the tears so they will be at the upper right corner when the deck is removed and spread, and then insert the cards into the blank case. Write the words “Rejects. Do Not Use!” or something similar on the blank card case and pocket the deck, along with your dollar bill. Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

To begin, remove the deck and explain how you found it in a waste receptacle during a visit to the United States Playing Card Company. Open the deck and spread it to show the spectators some of the more obvious printing errors. Continue to spread the deck until you arrive at the bank of cards that contain your prepared Card Warp cards. Cut the deck so that one of these cards is at the face. Remove the card from the deck and display it at the right fingertips, while hiding the fact of the tear from the audience. There are a variety of ways to accomplish the removal while hiding the tear. One is pictured in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6. Editor’s Note: I actually think it’s easier to upjog the card and remove it with the fingers of the right hand by gripping it right along the edge of the card where the tear lies. Regardless of the method, table the deck to the side while you casually display the card. Remove the Dollar Bill from your pocket. While he displays the card, Jeff explains how some of the cards “have a hidden talent that the others don’t. They seem to be double-jointed and have the amazing ability to turn and bend themselves into impossible positions.” This is his premise and he gets into the routine by explaining that these special cards need to warm up with a few “bending and stretching exercises.” This explains the following folding sequence that prepares both your bill and the card for the routine that follows.

While holding the face-up card by the right hand fingertips at its torn edge, bring the opened bill underneath it and line up the single fold in the bill along the left side of the card (Fig. 7). Close the left side of the bill over the card (Fig. 8) and then rotate both so the crease of the bill faces towards the audience (Fig. 9). Fold the face-up card in half lengthwise so Fig. 10 Fig. 11 you can see portions of the back (Fig. 10 & Fig. 11). Unfold the card and refold it face out, again lengthwise, while still in the bill so that you can see portions of the face of the card pro-

page 34

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 trude from the sides of the bill (Fig. 12). Open up the card and the bill and again orient the crease of the bill towards the audience(as in Fig. 9, previous page). The tear in the card will be at the lower right portion of the now face up card. Open up the bill and retake the card by its torn side with the right fingers (Fig. 13). Again display both the bill and the card on both sides to the audience. You will now casually and quickly set the card within the bill in preparation to perform the Card Warp effect. Place the open bill over the card and position it so the entire left side of the face up card is hidden under the bill. The long edge of the card pointing away from you is lined up along the center fold of the bill. Fig. 14 shows this position more clearly than words can describe. Your right hand holds both the card and the bill in position with the right thumb and forefinger directly opposite each other, pinching both bill and card. The other fingers of the right hand press up under the right hand portion of the card past the tear. Approach the bill and card with your left hand. The thumb will go above the bill and your fingers will go beneath it. Your left third finger makes contact with the left rear corner of the card, almost pinching it between the third finger and second finger, and folds it down and then forward (Fig. 15). The former inner long side of the long portion of the card to the left side of the tear meets the outer side of the card at the fold in the bill during this secret folding. As you conclude this hidden maneuver, the fingers of the right hand fold the outer portion of the bill down and back around the card arriving at the position shown in Fig. 16. The true state of the card inside the bill is shown in an exposed view in Fig. 17. Follow through after this by folding the face up card in half towards you along the fold previously established. This will leave you with a face down section of the card sticking out of the right side of the bill (Fig. 18). The true state of the card is again exposed in Fig. 19. Rotate the bill and card between your fingers so this end of the card is pointing toward the audience and the open ends of the bill are pointing to your right. The exposed end of the card should be positioned at a downward angle.

Fig. 12

Fig. 13

Fig. 14

Fig. 15

Fig. 16

Fig. 17

Fig. 18

Fig. 19

page 35

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Push this exposed end toward you with your right first finger until your finger hits the side of the bill (Fig. 20 - Fig. 22). The other end of the card will be pushed out of the bill, seemingly turning over in the process. Display both sides of the bill and the card to the audience. State that the card has “begun to turn face up” to emphasize the continuation of the change in the next sequence.

Fig. 20

Fig. 21

Fig. 22

Fig. 23

Fig. 24

Fig. 25

From the position shown in Fig. 22, pull the card further out from the bill until almost two thirds of the card protrudes from the bill (Fig. 23). Rotate card and bill so the outer end of the card points towards the audience by rotating your right hand at the wrist (Fig. 24). Then, reach under the bill and card with your left fingers and open up the bill so that the folded card is positioned as shown in Fig. 25. Hold the bill and card as shown, with the right hand thumb and fingers pinching the outer edge of the bill just to the right of the exposed card. This holds the bill closed so the audience will not see a glimpse of the true state of things. The true position of the card at this point is shown in Fig. 26. Rotate the thumbs of both hands toward you and then down to show the other side of the card and bill. As you rotate both hands back to their original position, fold the left side of the bill (containing the card) over and onto the remainder of the folded bill (Fig. 27). This undoes the previous folding of the bill that allowed for the Card Warp effect and allows you to show the “turning over” of the card as complete. Do that by pulling the card all the way out of the bill with the right hand (Fig. 28, next page). The tear will be on the under side of the card. With your right first finger positioned across the tear, you can reach up and over the card with your second finger to the rear of your right thumb (Fig. 29, next page). Pulling down with the second finger will rotate the card so that the bottom side is turned upward. The first finger does not have to cover the entire tear for it to be hidden (Fig. 30, next page).

From this position, insert the folded card between the two ends of the bill held in your left hand (Fig. 31, next page). Keep pushing until the tear is hidden inside the bill and then grip both bill and card with the left hand fingers and thumb (Fig. 32, next page). Fig. 26 Fig. 27 Reach into the folded card with your right first finger and unfold both card and bill. The tear ends up hidden by your right first finger and you can openly display both sides of the card and bill (Fig. 33, next page).

page 36

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

From the display position shown in Fig. 33, turn the card and the bill over so the long side of the card with the tear in it is towards you. The tear will be at the lower left (Fig. 34). Cover the card with the bill as in the opening phase (Fig. 35) and proceed to set the card for the Card Warp effect in the same way as before, but this time flip the smaller flap of card with your left third finger (Fig. 36, next page). As you do this you explain “Let’s see if we can catch the card in the process of turning over.” State that you’re going to push the card through fairly quickly and have the spectator say “Stop” at any time. The timing of it all is a bit of a bluff. Start to push the card through the bill. As they say “Stop,” make sure you’ve pushed the card as far as you can. This will leave the small back portion of the card protruding from your end of the bill. Rip this portion off (following the tear already in place) and place it on the table or the spectator’s open palm (Fig. 37, next page). Flip open the top portion of the bill with your left thumb and pinch the face up portion of the card against the bill with your left thumb (Fig. 38, next page). Pull on the bottom portion of the bill with your right hand to remove it from inside the card (Fig. 39, next page). Place the freed face up portion of the card next to the smaller face down portion (Fig. 40, next page). Remark about your success in catching the card in the act and how it proves the card is indeed “double-jointed.”

Fig. 28

Fig. 29

Fig. 30

Fig. 31

Fig. 32

Fig. 33

Fig. 34

Fig. 35

Case the deck and let the spectator keep the torn card as a souvenir.

The Antinomy Perspective This routine is from Jeff’s publication “The King Has Left the Building... with Amnesia” and shares a brevity of performance with McCallister’s original “Green Warp.” There is a directness of presentaion with no odd displays to supposedly prove the state of things. By not putting the tear at the more wellknown half-way point, you will probably manage to confuse some of your magician friends with this routine. Jeff illustrates the “double-jointed” nature of the card. In playing with the routine, I have used the “factory misprints” angle more. You can explain how

page 37

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Fig. 36

Fig. 37

it was less obvious what was wrong with some of the cards until you learned the way to test them. These odd cards become misprinted as you use them, with the backs and the fronts switching places. If you don’t have a blank card case, you can disassemble a regular case and put it back together inside out. Then, even the card case can be shown to be misprinted since all the printing is on its inside. At the conclusion of the routine, you can attach the face up and face down portions together using a “Rejected” sticker (Fig. 41). Perhaps this will subtly dissuade the spectator from trying to see how these pieces fit together and perhaps getting a glimmer of the method involved?

Touchstones & Crossroads For your enjoyment, a selection of warping effects are presented, starting with the original idea of Jeff Busby and the two card adaptation by Roy Walton that became known as “Card Warp.”

Fig. 38

Fig. 39

Fig. 40

Fig. 41

page 38

Jeff Busby – “Into the 4th Dimension,” a marketed routine, 1973. Written by Jeff Busby. Roy Walton – “Card Warp,” a marketed routine, 1974. Bob McAllister – “Green Warp,” Richard’s Almanac, September, 1983. Written by Richard Kaufman. Howard Schwarzman – “Star Warp,” Apocalypse, Vol 3 No. 7, July, 1980. Written by Harry Lorayne. Predates the Mcallister routine’s publication, but influenced by it. Jim Klayder – “Ideas for the Card Warp,” Watch Closely, 1978. Written by Jim Klayder. Describes keeping a deck of alternating cards, one torn and one not, but the deck is not brought into the open. Don England – “Card Warped,” Don England’s T.K.O.’s, 1981. Written by John Mendoza. Darwin Ortiz – “The Card Warp Deck,” Darwin Ortiz At The Card Table, 1988. Written by Darwin Ortiz. Bruce Cervon – “Warped” and “Warp II,” Ultra Cervon, 1990. Written by Bruce Cervon and Stephen Minch. The second routine uses the off-center tear. The trick also credits Stephen Tucker with the idea of an off-center tear as published in Pabular, Vol. 8, No. 7, July 1984. Michael Close – “Dr. Strangetrick,” Workers Number One, 1990. Written by Michael Close. Rainer Pfeiffer – “Mismade-Warp,” The Book or Don’t Forget to Point, 1998. A card warp using a bill where the bill is shown to have been inverted at the conclusion (The Mis-Made Bill). Wesley James – “Hyper-Warp,” Enchantments, 2004 (though the trick is dated 1973). Written by Wesley James. Combines Card Warp with the topological oddity known as “The Hyper Card.”

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Separate but Equal An Extraordinary Selection Procedure Results in Success

Thomas Baxter Perception Using two groups of 5 ESP Symbol Cards, a spectator and the magician engage in an experiment in thought transference with a successful outcome.

Deception You will need • Two matching sets of cards, each set having one each of the 5 common symbol cards: Square, Circle, Wavy Lines, Plus Sign (Cross), and Star. • An extra card showing the Square symbol. All the cards are shown in Fig. 1. • Some magician’s wax (for other recommendations, refer to “The Antinomy Perspective” that follows)

Fig. 1

Prepare for the routine by applying a small amount of the wax near the two ends of one of the Square cards. This extra card goes into your packet of cards, aligned with the other Square card. To begin, hand the regular set of five cards to the spectator. You each shuffle your packets of cards. When you shuffle your set, contrive to bring the Wavy line card to the face of your packet. Ask the spectator to deal their cards face up in row to the table. You want their Wavy line card to arrive at the second position from your right. If it does not naturally fall there, as you explain the effect to the spectator, rearrange their row so that it does lie at that position. Since they will have a series of free selections from this spread, this minor rearrangement should not attract suspicion. As you discuss the effect, and as you rearrange their cards, you hold your packet face up in your left hand. With the back of the hand facing the spectator, they will not see the Wavy line card. However, you must Flash this card to them a few times as you gesture during the explanation and rearrangement of the cards. This is to subtly imprint the Wavy Lines card into the spectator’s mind. This is part of a psychological force of the Wavy Lines on the spectator that begins the effect. The remainder of that force is to gesture with your right hand from left to right as you explain that they should mentally select one of the symbols. Instead of gesturing across the entire row of cards, your right hand stops when it is directly in front of the Wavy Lines card and rests on the tabletop. As the spectator decides on their selection, watch their eyes. You can get a sense of their selection and whether they have selected the Wavy Lines by watching where their gaze comes to rest. As Thomas points out, the ability of the gaze to reveal a mental selection dates back at least to Scott’s “Discoverie of Witchcraft.” The First Match Confirm that the spectator has a card in mind. Tell them to try to transmit that thought to you. Arrange your cards again so that the Wavy Lines card is at the face of the packet as you look through your set of cards. Keep the two Square symbol cards together at this point. Remove the card you think is the second most likely choice based on your observation of the spectator’s gaze. Hold this card in your right

page 39

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 hand with its back facing the spectator. Hold the remaining cards squared in your left hand so they cannot see the Wavy Line symbol at the face of the packet. Say to the spectator “I think I’ve got it... Did you think of... the Wavy Lines?.” There are three possible outcomes: 1. If they say they are thinking of the card you are holding, grin and reveal that you knew this was their true selection by showing it to the spectator. Lay it face down on the table. 2. If they agree that they are thinking of the Wavy Lines card, place the card in your right hand to the face of your packet, but injog it slightly. From this position, it is an easy matter to slide out the Wavy Line card as you talk about your successful hit. Show the card and lay it face down on the table. 3. If they mention some other card, show the card in your right hand and explain that it is a miss. Repeat the entire opening procedure to attempt to get the spectator to select the Wavy Lines. If they end up selecting it or your second best guess, proceed with options 1 or 2 above. If they produce another miss, put the card in your right hand back into your packet. Then pull out the card they name from your packet and lay it face down in front of you. This will end up as the only miss in the procedure. Regardless of which way this opening sequence goes, have them remove the card they named and place it face down on the table also. You will both have the same face down card in front of yourselves. This is the start of packet of cards that will be formed by both of you as you proceed with the remainder of the routine. The Second Card This time, explain that the procedure will change slightly and that instead of them trying to send the thought of card to you, you will attempt to send it to them. Spread through your cards, pretending to concentrate. Remove a card, consider it, and put it back. Repeat this and then separate the waxed card from its duplicate and remove this card from the spread. Place it face down on the other face down card in front of you. It does not need to be aligned perfectly and you shouldn’t press down on it to adhere it to the other card either at this point. This extra card will put you “one ahead” for the remainder of the routine. Stare at the spectator and tell them you are transmitting the card. Ask them to pick up the Symbol card that they received and lay it face down on the other face down card in front of them. If they happen to pick up the Square symbol, pause dramatically and show that you also chose the Square symbol by picking up the card you laid down and revealing it. If they name any other card, comment on it being an interesting choice and move on to the next selection. The Third Card Tell the spectator that you are going to repeat the procedure. Remove the card they selected last, even if it is the Square (which you have shown as a successful hit) and lay it on your face down packet. During this action, be careful not to reveal that you have four cards rather than three by keeping one card hidden throughout. Again attempt to transmit your thought and have the spectator select the card they believe was sent and place it face down on their packet. As they do this, rearrange your three cards so that the card they just selected is on top of your packet. Be careful to do this in a way that makes it seem that you only have two cards. This is easily accomplished by spreading one card off and moving it behind the others until the desired position is reached. You can now lower your left hand, spread off the face card into your right hand, and show that the two cards you are left with match the two cards remaining face up in front of the spectator. The Fourth Card Replace the card in your right hand to the face of the cards in your left and bring the packet back to a vertical position so only you can see the faces. Mix the cards by moving the face card to the back of the packet until the card the spectator last selected arrives at the face of the packet. You will now attempt to figure out what their next selection is, but it is not critical that you succeed. Reach down with your right hand and spread the spectator’s two remaining cards a little further apart from each other. Tell them that you are transmitting a symbol to them and ask if they have any sense of what it might be. If they look down, again watch their gaze. In many cases, the more prominent of the two remaining symbols will be the one selected. That is, if a Square and a Star remain, the Star is the more likely choice.

page 40

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

When you have decided on the most likely choice, rearrange your packet so the more likely match is in the middle of the three cards you hold. Retain the previous match on the face of your packet. Again, it’s not crucial that you get this right, so just consider it a mental challenge and silently praise yourself when you succeed. Before asking the spectator to reveal the card they think they received, square up your packet and, while keeping them vertical, perform the actions of a double lift to remove both the face card and the middle card as one. Place both of these cards face down on the tabled packet without showing them. To conclude this sequence, again ask the spectator the card they received and have them place it face down on their own packet. If they pick up the card you thought they would, you are home free. You can show the card remaining in your hand and point out that it matches the one remaining face up in front of the spectator. Place your card face down on your packet and tell the spectator to do the same with their remaining card. This successful hit of the last card will be called Case A.

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

If you have chosen incorrectly and the last card is a mismatch, simply turn your remaining card face down and place it on your packet. Instruct the spectator to do the same with their last card. The Conclusion The ending is handled in one of two ways, depending on the previous step.

Case A – In this circumstance, you have been able to verify each selection along the way either by showing the actual match or by displaying the cards remaining in your hand. To conclude the routine, simply pick up your packet of cards and press down on them with your left thumb to adhere the extra Square symbol card to the bottom card. Have the spectator pick up their packet as well. Have the spectator deal off their cards at the same time as you deal yours. You each form a face up row to show that every card is a match. You deal the last two cards as one, but this is easy to accomplish since they are adhered to each other.

Fig. 8

page 41

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 Case B – Under this circumstance, you have verified all but the last card as you have proceeded. In order to show that all of the cards match, you must perform a switch of the top and second cards in your packet. Perhaps the most straightforward way to accomplish this is by performing a second deal for the first card. The fact that the spectator is dealing at the same time as you provides a good cover for this action. If the cards you are using have an overall back patter (that is, no borders), then you have additional cover for the move. Thomas recommends a Jennings/Marlo technique as a alternative method to accomplish the switch. In this case, some extended explanation provides the necessary cover to accomplish the switch. The Second Deal Alternative As you pick up your packet into your left hand, you spread them slightly to obtain a break under the top two cards. These are then squared and taken by the right hand into a Biddle Grip. Use these cards to gesture to the table (Fig. 2, previous page), saying “I want you to take the cards from the top of your packet, one at a time and place them on the table....” When you say the word “table,” return the double briefly to the top of your packet, but just before it arrives, curl your left index finger onto the top of the packet so that it is wedged between the packet and the double (spectator’s view Fig. 3, previous page, exposed views Fig. 4 & Fig. 5, previous page). Clamp down on the double with the left thumb. Let go of the double with the right hand as you rotate your left hand inward to turn the packet face up. As you turn the packet over, extend your left index finger (Fig. 6, previous page). A slight pressure of this finger against the bottom card of the double will carry it out the right side of the packet (Fig. 7, previous page) into your waiting right hand which has readjusted to receive it (Fig. 8, previous page). To explain this action, you say to the spectator, “..but not face down. I want you to turn them face up as we go. Like this.” You now continue as you did in Case A, showing that each of the cards is indeed a match.

The Antinomy Perspective While it is possible to fail on the first card, the fact that one extra card and (possibly) an extra move at the end can produce four other matches offers a real economy of procedure. The psychological ploy at the beginning of the routine to attempt a force of the Wavy Lines, along with the attempt to guess the spectator’s last selection are interesting mental exercises that can help educate us in how spectator’s think. For the magician’s wax, Thomas mentions that he was fond of a product called “Handi-Ruff.” This came as a small bar, like soap, and was sold by Sid Lorraine when Thomas first came up with this routine in his teens. While this is no longer available, apparently Finn Jon sells a similar product. It is called “roughing stick” and is available online at www.stevensmagic.com.

Touchstones & Crossroads Hen Fetsch – “ Symbologic,” a marketed effect. While unrelated in method, two ESP matching routines of Nick Trost’s come to mind: Nick Trost – “Geo-Metrick,” a marketed routine released in the1970’s using two sets of five symbols. Nick Trost – “Telespo,” a marketed routine released in the1970’s using two ESP decks (slightly altered) combined into a single 50 card deck.

page 42

Photo: Virginia Lee Hunter

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Creative Hits and Misses When Good Scripts Go Bad

The Honest Jamy Liar Ian Swiss

Laymen are often fascinated by the amount of practice that magic may require, and they frequently ask questions about the hours one spends so engaged. Although there have been periods of my life when I literally spent 40 or more hours a week practicing, as the years go by I have found myself spending much more time gazing into a computer screen than into a practice mirror, trying to write and rewrite magic scripts. I spend a lot of time thinking about script writing. As a working performer I regularly create original presentations for clients, in order to adapt magic for the purposes of speaking engagements, product promotions, and trade shows. I’ve been a writer for magic-based television series that have aired both in the United States and abroad. And after some 20 years of providing private lessons I continue to assist students in the struggle to create original scripts. Recently I contributed a substantial piece about creating scripts for magic to a forthcoming book entitled Scripting Magic by Pete McCabe. The author – an amateur magician and professional writer, teacher, and sometime television and screenwriter – has written what promises to be a very interesting book. Scheduled for publication in the spring of 2006, it contains a mix of essays, interviews, and actual scripts from 24 contributors, myself included. One aspect of the subject I’ve long thought about is why some scripts fail, and the role creativity plays in both the misses and hits of magic presentation. Certainly there are countless pitfalls to be encountered along the way in developing one’s scripting skills. In an era in which many (albeit sadly not all) close-up magicians have learned that a demonstration of a trick is not the same as a performance, it is easy to fall into the trap of one’s words becoming little more than what I think of as “noise from the mouth.” A presentation must serve a purpose, and the mere filling of empty air with empty words is an insufficient task. One must make certain that the words being spoken actually matter and mean something to the performer – that there is sincerity and commitment present – but even that is not enough. One must also determine if what is being said actually matters to the audience. To be a good magician, one must possess the requisite empathy and imagination to be able to perceive what the audience is experiencing – what they are thinking and feeling. This is a requirement for any theatrical or narrative artist; in the absence of such effort and insight, one ends up with the essence of self-indulgent art, created solely to please the artist, who

page 43

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 never reaches beyond the confines of his or her own personal needs. Just as such empathy and imagination must be applied to effect and method, the same efforts must be applied to the creation of presentations and scripts. Even the most heartfelt story can fall flat, lying cold and dead between the performer and audience, if the audience cannot somehow identify and connect with it. One useful strategy, of longstanding utility to the art of the essayist as well as to that of dramatists, is to use the micro to illustrate the macro. Thus, everyone has the experience of a mentor, a first love, a death; but an effective artist provides a distinctive and specific angle to this broader experience. Mentors, first loves, death – these universal experiences may manifest themselves differently in the specific lives of a painter, a plumber, a podiatrist. The trick, if you will, is to be able to illuminate the general with the specific, so that perhaps the painter in the audience can identify with the character of the plumber on stage, thus rediscovering the eternal mystery and pleasure to be found in both the solipsism and the commonality of the human experience. But it is not sufficient merely to tell of your experience, or merely to recreate it. Through metaphor, through your unique artistic medium, you must reach across the void to connect with another human being. This is the essence of art. In the case of magic, presentation is a tool to help to connect, but a tool that must always remain in service to the magic. At a lecture for the Muhlenberg College “Art and Theory in Magic” program in October of 2004, I heard Juan Tamariz say that while many magicians talk and write about the importance of presentation, he believed that presentation is “of interest, but not so important.” I all but slapped my own ears, wondering if I had heard him correctly. Juan went on to explore his deliberately provocative statement, and it began to make sense. It’s not that presentation is not important, he explained, but rather that there are other elements that are even more important – including the person (and persona) of the performer; the meaning (the myth or metaphor) of the effect; the effect itself; and the method of the trick. Only after this list of critically important elements of the performance of magic is addressed do we finally reach the relative importance of the presentation. Put another way, as Roberto Giobbi has said to me, while the presentation of the food is important to the experience of a restaurant, one would not hesitate, given the choice, to state one’s preference for eating good food badly presented over bad food presented well. Of course, what it means for a presentation to “remain in service to the magic” is a judgment call that can vary wildly between the tastes of individual performers. For some, any kind of story magic is always merely corny; to others, close-up magic at its greatest is exemplified in Eugene Burger’s wry narrative version of Card Warp, placed within a tale of torture during the Inquisition; or Peter Samelson’s moving Torn-and-Restored Thread, stretched upon the rack of human relationships. The great René Lavand is famous for the gravitas of his performance style, yet he uses far fewer story presentations than many of us might assume; and a highly theatrical performer like Derren Brown nonetheless cautions1 that such attempts at theatrical close-up performance can often fail by becoming “overly weighty and … over-laden and rather pretentious presentation” rather than as an inducement to care, taking the audience out of the magical experience instead of drawing them into it. Indeed, in the “noise from the mouth” category I have watched instructional videotape in which the ersatz teacher jabbers on about his Chop Cup being a rare old cup given to him by an old man and blah-blah-blah, at which point the performer begins a standard Chop Cup routine and never mentions the cup’s background again, nor draws any connection between the cup’s alleged history and its present use. Such a presentation qualifies as blather, and the spectators will find it as meaningful as a ten-year-old recounting his recent trip to China where he met an old magician named Foo Ling Yoo; or they will merely tune it out as if it was the incomprehensible wah-wah of Charlie Brown’s parents. In some cases I would argue that when performing magic that is extremely strong on its own, by dint of its visual nature (such as good coin magic can be) or its fundamental impossibility, it is often best to concentrate on the beauty and clarity of the magic, without risking too much distraction by scripting. That said, my version of the Fingertip Coins Across (popularly dubbed “Three Fly”) relies on a script that takes more than four minutes to perform – yet the scripting is carefully designed to avoid conflicting or competing with the magic.

1 See my interview with Brown in Genii magazine, February 2005; an extended version is available online at http://www.jamyianswiss.com/fm/works/derren-brown.html.

page 44

The Honest Liar

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

Presentations can fail for all these reasons – for being self-absorbed, pretentious, distracting, or merely silly – and in every such case the magic suffers. It is a common occurrence, I believe, for magicians struggling to create original scripts for the Coins Across plot to come upon the Star Trek transporter premise; to wit: “We have four coins – Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. “Bones” McCoy, and Scotty. Say the magic words – ‘Beam me up!’ – and look, the first coin goes through the transporter machine and arrives over here.” Well, it might seem like a good idea at the time, but I don’t recommend it. But what exactly is the problem here? Isn’t the Star Trek transporter machine a perfect model for the translocation of the coins? Isn’t Coins Across a perfect simulacrum of the transporter? That exactness is, in fact, exactly the problem. The use of metaphor is intended to enlarge a given idea – not shrink it. When one speaks of lost love as, say, a wilted flower, one is attempting, at least, to make the experience of lost love more meaningful to the reader, to provide insight, and to help him to consider the experience in a new way. In the case of Star Trek, we are fascinated with the transporter because of its engaging “what if” appeal. And, we have seen it happen time and time again on television and in the movies. By comparison, the mere action of a coin traveling 15 inches across a close-up pad tends to pale. As an alternative, perhaps if we were to consider four modes of ordinary transportation – bicycle, car, train, and even airplane – mentioning one for each coin – we could now illustrate something far more effective than any of these means; namely our magical transportation of the coins. This is a bare bones idea that might well not be worth doing, but the value of this version lies in the notion that the presentational examples are exceeded by the magical effect, and the effect, in turn, may be enhanced by the presentation. This concept of being too exact, too spot on, is (perhaps ironically) an inexact and subjective one, but is nevertheless important to developing one’s own aesthetic – a sense of artistic taste. It was my friend and colleague Peter Samelson (an exemplar of theatrical magic whom I will cite several more times in these pages) who showed me the way of this, more than 25 years ago. At the time, I was much enamored of Peter’s marvelous presentation for his sponge ball routine, in which the sponges moved metaphorically from briefly being introduced as named individuals of a sort, to becoming abstract objects in a discussion of mathematics, and then serving as putative fruit for yet another example. Coincidentally, a new prop had then reached the marketplace in which sponge balls had little eyes and noses on them, which invariably garnered an instant reaction from audiences. When I showed these to Peter, he immediately said that they were too specific; the general was more artistically useful, in this case, in the universal element of a simple ball. His brief remark was an epiphany, the truth of which I often find myself reminded of to this day. Sponge Bunnies, as another case in point, are unarguably cute, and undeniably effective in the right setting; but they don’t let you talk about much more than, well, bunnies – a subject some of us might prefer to banish from the image of magic, rather than promote.

Talent versus Taste Although I became interested in magic when I was about seven years old, I didn’t perform my first paid show until I was 29, when I changed careers to pursue magic professionally. As I entered into the personally unchartered territory of professional magic, I knew that there were many new lessons and discoveries ahead. I felt however that I had some sense of where many of them might be found, as I explored the differences between performing magic as an amateur and as a professional, the differences between social and paying audiences, issues of pragmatism in prop and method, and on and on. I learned many such lessons as the years went by; invaluable, and new, but rarely entirely surprising. One lesson, however, came as a great surprise, and it took several years for me to discover it. As an amateur magician I had always somehow assumed that talent was special, a rare commodity. Eventually, I came to believe otherwise (and was helped to this conclusion in a conversation over lunch one day with Teller): Talent is commonplace; taste is rare.

page 45

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006 I think all of us are born talented; creativity is standard equipment in homo sapiens. Unfortunately, many of us never get the chance to develop that raw material. Some are ignored; others, sadly, are outright discouraged. Talent left unattended will, like an unused muscle, atrophy and waste away; talent is really just another word for “potential.” Talent must be developed, like a muscle, with exercise, becoming ever more toned and powerful. So, while talent is often ignored and left to wither, that doesn’t mean that talent starts out as a rarity; quite the contrary. What is rare, though, as Teller observed, is taste. Another word for taste might be “restraint.” Taste is a refined sense of what not to do. It is the space between the notes, rather than flashy rapid riffs. It is the slow deliberation of the transformation of a single card, or the vanish of a single ball, rather than the showoff jugglery of a multitude of card packets as a wanton display of skill. It is B.B. King rather than Alvin Lee. 2 Taste is leaving out that line that gets a laugh, but doesn’t suit you. Abandoning that extra kicker effect that gets a big reaction but distracts from the innate elegance of a routine. Taste is knowing what fits, and what doesn’t; what is graceful, and what is garish. Talent can be honed, trained, polished. Taste is much more difficult to teach – and for some, impossible to learn.

The Act of Metaphor But what about the effective use of metaphor in magic? To me, metaphor is a fundamental tool of creativity. It often provides not only the link between the effect and a presentation, and between the presentation and the audience, but it can also provide a glorious path toward originality. The nature of metaphor is to ask “how is this like that?” Some answers may be merely banal; some may be outright wrong. But when the “right” answer is found, great art often results. Those who would say that “there is nothing new under the sun” are typically, in my experience, those who have never created much of anything, and thus have little insight into, and regard for, the process. Often, in order to argue their point, they will break a work down into its elements, as if the act of finding precedence somehow disproves the existence of originality – a ludicrous notion, since creativity never occurs in an artistic vacuum. Consider one of the great artistic magic presentations of the past 30 years: Peter ’s signature version of Snowstorm in China. Many magicians have seen this (it was performed, among many other live and television appearances, on the 1997 PBS documentary series, The Art of Magic), and many more have been influenced by it. Samelson tells a remarkably evocative story in a mere handful of lines (perhaps five, depending on how you count them), succinctly turning what is typically a mere visual flourish – a handful of paper confetti – into a deeply emotional experience that can bring some audience members to tears. He accomplishes this without being sappy or syrupy – no small feat – without resorting to maudlin treacle, but rather with an adult account of a childhood memory that connects on a sophisticated level of beauty and metaphor. By invoking the image of a water-filled paperweight that depicts a wintry setting, the macrocosm is achieved via the microcosm – and people approach him after the show saying that they “always wanted to get inside” too. There are some who would say that the Snowstorm in China has been around for a long time. Others would say the same of the watery wintry paperweight. This is the position of the hack and indeed the thief. Of course these elements have existed – and imagine the greatness of the feat of connecting them, considering that it took so very, very long to draw that new connection between the two! This is an act of true creativity – what I like to call “the act of metaphor.” How does one go about creating such work, and achieving these many, challenging goals I have advanced? One does it with painful, painstaking effort. There is no substitute. I once got into an online debate with someone who claimed that he was not as “lucky” as those performers who were able routinely to produce original presentations. Such a claim not only reveals the claimant

2 Lee, of the 60s band “Ten Years After,” established himself – most famously at the Woodstock festival – as the quintessential speed demon guitar player. And yes, I’m dating myself.

page 46

The Honest Liar

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

as an artistic slacker, but is also deeply insulting to effective and original creative artists, because it assumes that their process is somehow easy, thanks entirely to some sort of innate gift – and thus, it completely misunderstands the nature of creative work. If there is a single greatest value to the task of scriptwriting, it is that it provides the opportunity of rewriting. This is the real work of writing, as any serious writer of any sort will tell you; because writing is only the first step, and the rewriting sometimes seems like it will never end. But consider this: If you have an idea for a presentation, and you go out and wing it ten times in ten different ways, then it is next to impossible to learn anything from the experience, because you haven’t established a baseline of comparison. The value of committing to a script for a time – subject to eventual revision – is that now you can tell what happened. Perform it the same way five or ten or twenty times, and you can begin to learn something. You can detect what, with some consistency, worked and did not work. Now, when you have some sense of that, it is time to carefully rewrite. Then go out and do it some more, continuing to create new baselines of comparison, and learning from that invaluable experience. Without this experience, presentation becomes a game of darts played with a blindfold – and someone is likely to get hurt.

page 47

ANTINOMY Issue 5 First Quarter 2006

In Closing... I wrote in Issue 2 about avoiding the “Sophomore Jinx.” In some ways, I feel that Year Two is subject to the same possibility and I am striving to overcome that possibility. While this issue, for various reasons, was a little later than my ideal schedule, it still has easily arrived within the Quarter it was supposed to. I suppose that’s the advantage of producing a Quarterly – You have three months every issue for it to appear “on time.” As a microscopic publishing company, sometimes you just need a little more time. Emphasis on the word “little.” I’ll never require extra months to get an issue out. You can be sure you’ll see all four issues for 2006 actually arrive at your door in 2006. I tweaked this issue a bit. A little spit and polish, some reformatting, chiefly to allow even more content without increasing my page count, and a new color on the cover. Around the time Issue 4 went out, I also put up a new version of the Antinomy website. It’s use of red as the primary color gave a hint as to what to expect in Year Two. It still needs some work and some additional content, but hopefully it has made for an easier shopping experience for users. It also makes it easier for me to update as we move forward. And for the first time, I have a “next issue lineup” that is already solidified (barring any changes and any limitations in space, of course!). It’s going to be the “Antinomy All-Stars Issue” since it may very well contain the most well-known lineup of contributors we’ve scheduled yet. So, while leaving room for me to change my mind, let me tease you with the following:

• Aces show up easy (or at least easier) for Allan Ackerman. • A person’s height is creatively predicted by Joshua Jay. • Two cards clearly transpose in the hands of John Luka. • Silver coins travel to China in the unique hands of David Neighbors. • Three spectators find their own cards under the guidance of Andi Gladwin. • Coins change in astounding ways when handled by Justin Miller. I might even sneak in something extra, depending on space. Add in the work of Jamy Ian Swiss and Jon Racherbaumer, and it looks to be another great issue. I hope you will all look forward to it and help spread the word about Antinomy. We’ll see you in May.

page 48