Monday Mailbag #42
/
Would you mind kicking the tires for me on this new release? It’s called Gossip and it’s a trick where a spectator thinks of a name from a page torn from a celebrity gossip magazine. You can reveal the celebrity like you would with the classic Baby Gag or something like that.
You’ve got me wanting to perform more and this is advertised as an “everyday magic carry,” so it seems like it could be a good option to have on me for casual performing. But as the king of casual performing, I thought I’d get your thoughts before I take the plunge. —CB
Okay, you guys are asking these sorts of questions more and more. I’m fine answering them (assuming I have any thoughts on a given product). But keep in mind, these aren’t reviews. I do proper reviews in my newsletters that the supporters receive. In those I own the products and I’ve tried out the products. So what I write in these posts are just my thoughts based on watching the demos of these tricks. And my thoughts come from my very narrow perspective of social performing in the style I like to perform.
So let me start by saying I think this trick will fool the majority of people and get a decent reaction.
That being said, I do see a number of issues with it. I’ll go from small to large, issue-wise.
The selection procedure: The version shown in the demo requires two people. One to think of an odd number and one to think of an even number. The reason given is he “doesn’t want them to think of the same number.” This rational is used in other effects where two people are choosing something from a list and it’s usually no problem. But here it doesn’t make sense because those numbers aren’t being used to pick from the same subset of items. There’s no reason they couldn’t think of the same number. One number is used to select which list to use and the other to select the item on the list. This will probably fly by most people, but particularly analytical people will recognize this procedure as unnecessary and limiting.
Pocket Space: Carrying around a folded up page from a magazine isn’t too bad. But carrying around the reveals for each possible option as well takes this well past the definition of “everyday carry” for me.
Preparedness vs Spontaneity: “I found this page in a magazine and I ripped it out because I thought it might be interesting to try something with it,” can certainly come off as something that wasn’t overly planned. But once you start pulling out a celebrity baby picture you brought along with you, you’ve gone from “off the cuff moment” to “pre-planned magic trick.” If you’re okay with that, then it’s not an issue. But I’m frequently going for an experience that feels like something we “stumbled into,” rather than something I planned out from the start.
(Both of the two previous issues could be solved by simply not using the baby gag reveal and just revealing the celebrity verbally.)
The Prop: If you’re trying to pass something off as a normal, real-world object, it has to be unimpeachable. If people get a whiff of it being phony, then they’ll just say, “I don’t know how it was done, but it had something to do with that phony thing.” And unfortunately I don’t think this passes the sniff test as being a real magazine page. You’re not going to find a celebrity gossip magazine with a couple pages of the blandest lists you could think of.
Will they have one list in a the corner of a page to fill up space? Yes.
Will they do a feature long list that goes on for many pages and is an excuse to show a bunch of pictures (e.g., People’s 50 Most Beautiful)? Yes.
Will they maybe have a collection of lists of things that are potentially interesting, (10 Shortest Running Sitcoms, 10 Actors Who Were Replaced Mid-Season)? Sure.
What they won’t do is just have a bunch of random lists on the most basic and subjective topics, “Best Looking Men,” “Most Talented Women.” Such lists would mean absolutely nothing to a reader without a bunch of pictures and commentary to go along with it.
So, to me, this is too obvious a prop unless you’re performing for someone who has never seen a celebrity magazine. But in that case you’d be performing it for someone who is the least interested in the subject matter.
Some people don’t really care about that sort of thing. They think, “They already know it’s a magic trick, so who cares if they know it’s a magic prop.” There’s definitely a certain logic to that. But my approach is, “They already know it’s a magic trick. But now let’s try to make them forget that. “ And you do that by having as little as possible—in regards to the props, procedures, and logic of the experience—that feels false. Ideally I want nothing to feel out of the ordinary other than the premise and the moment of magic.
All of those issues noted… I think I can work around a lot of them. And I may end up buying this trick after all. More so for the thinking behind it and the nuances of the method as opposed to the particular premise and prop for this effect.
Here’s what I’d do. I’d write out a bunch of lists on a piece of paper torn from a spiral notebook. “Hottest Babes.” “Coolest Dudes.” “Funniest People.” “Least Favorite Celebrities.” “Celebs I Imagine Have the Longest Dongs.” And so on. I’d tell them I found the page in an old notebook of mine from 8th grade. Apparently I was writing these lists out when I was bored at school.
Then I’d do essentially the same trick, but with the most interesting page from my middle-school math notebook, as opposed to the least interesting page from a generic celebrity magazine.
An argument could be made that the magazine pages are more innocent because they’re not something you made up yourself. But I don’t really know if that’s how it would play out. In either case, it’s ultimately just lists of names. Both are fairly innocent.
Even if I felt the prop provided with this trick was perfect, I’d still probably do the handmade version. I just think it’s more interesting. Would you rather see some goofy lists your friend wrote out when they were 13 and they recently discovered in some old notebook? Or some generic lists from a magazine that he’s carrying around for some reason? And by using lists that have some supposed personal relevance to myself as the performer, I can have some rationale for why I have some intuitive connection to these lists other than just, “I’m a mind-reader.”
If I wanted to do a “baby gag” type ending, I could remove a drawing I ripped “from the same notebook” of the celebrity they’re thinking of.
And then I’d reveal the celebrity’s name on the other side or under a part that was folded over or something like that.
I think I’ve found the dumbest trick ever. It’s Pi Revelations by David Penn. I didn’t buy it, but this is my understanding of the routine:
The spectators create a random four digit number by adding up a bunch of other numbers (including one of their pin codes).
They tell you the random number they’ve created and you tell them where in the book it can be found. [Andy’s Note: Just to clarify, that means where in the first 50,000 digits of pi the number can be found.]
Applause????
You then tell them that you will direct them to where they can find their pin code in Pi, even though they never said it out loud. You tell them to go to a certain page and location in the book and there is their pin code.
Amazement??? Confusion???
If you can salvage this trick, I will be a supporter for life. —KD
Let’s be fair. This is not the dumbest trick you’ve ever seen.
I will agree that it’s one of the more convoluted tricks you’ve ever seen.
A good test to know if your trick is too complicated is to imagine your spectator telling someone else about it. Do you really imagine them saying:
“He knew my pin code without me ever saying it… and he knew where it was in Pi !!!!”
That’s like saying:
“He made me chocolate cake… and there was brisket on top!”
Those are two potentially fine things, but what does one have to do with the other?
The first phase of the trick seems to be a demonstration of your memory. Although wouldn’t someone just say, “You memorized pi? Okay, start from the beginning and let’s see how far you go.” I’m not sure they’d be convinced you memorized pi by your ability to find four digit numbers within pi. But I don’t really know. I’ve never tried it.
I’m not sure what the second phase is supposed to be a demonstration of. You’re taking a pin-code revelation, which is strong in its own. And then you’re muddying it by doing the exact same thing you just did in the previous phase. Structurally, it’s a mess.
I’d actually scrap all of that: the memorization, the pin code reveal, and repetition of the performer finding two different numbers.
I’d do this. I’d have the book out. I’d tell people I was planning on memorizing pi, but then I got bored after 6 digits.
“There’s no real reason to anyways. I learned from this guy on NPR that we all have an innate understanding of pi since it comes from circles and circles are the primary foundational and formative shape for humans. The egg. The womb. The pregnant belly. The breast. The nipple. (Well, not for you, Tom. Your mom and her jank-ass titties.) We don’t need to memorize the digits of pi because we know them instinctually."
I’d then demonstrate this fact by having them generate a random number. Once they gave it to me, I’d trace a circle in the air and gaze at it as if I’m sensing something. “Okay, the number 6045 is going to be….let’s see… I’m guessing somewhere like page 30 in that book. Yeah, go to page 30. 9 or 10 lines down. A couple numbers in.” There they would find the number they generated.
End of first phase.
See what I did? Instead of making it a demonstration of memory (which they wouldn’t believe), I made it something crazier (an inborn knowledge of all the digits of pi).
So now instead of them thinking, “He didn’t memorize pi. He must have some way of knowing where to find certain numbers.”
They might just end up thinking, “He doesn’t have an innate knowledge of pi. The son of a bitch probably memorized it!”
Second phase. At this point the method allows me to know where the spectator’s pin code is in the book without them saying it. So what I’ll do is I’ll find that page while casually flipping through the book and talking, and I’ll hold essentially a “pinky break” so I don’t lose the page.
“Here, you try. Think of a number. Did you use your pin number before? And you didn’t tell anyone it did you? Okay, think of that then. Tell me when to stop.”
I’d then force the page with a timing force. Just making sure I end up on it around the time they say stop.
Then I’d force the location on the page with another timing force. “I’m going to run my finger all over the page. Just say stop when it feels right.”
This would be an easy timing force. I probably wouldn’t even do it with the page facing them. Since I “don’t know what number they’re thinking of” it’s not like I can really “cheat” this, from their perspective. Then I’d turn the page towards them. “Did you get it?”
So it starts with me finding a random number. And ends with them finding a secret number—that nobody else knows—somewhere in pi, by just “intuiting” where it was.
I think that would be pretty strong.