Mailbag #133

/

Do you have any tips for not coming off as a smug prick when revealing Cryptext in a formal show?

I know when you use it it’s generally something you discover with the audience, but in a show that doesn’t really work. Or does it?—YG

It doesn’t, no.

You’re right—in formal shows, the typical Cryptext reveal often comes off like this:

I predicted you would get that number… aren’t I clever?

Actually, I’m even more cleverly clever than you knew—because if you flip that number over…

So if playing it as something you planned makes you sound like a “smug prick” (as you put it)…

And if playing it as something you didn’t expect feels phony…

Then maybe the route is to play it as something you hoped for.

Not “I knew this would happen,” but “I hoped this would happen.”

That won’t work for every Cryptext routine, but it will work for a lot of them.

Usually, the audience generates a number, you show you predicted it, then you do the Cryptext reveal. But what if, instead of calling it a prediction, you frame it as a kind of “wisdom of crowds” experiment? A moment where the audience is trying—together—to land on the number you wrote down earlier that day.

So when the final number matches, you’re relieved. You’re happy for them that they got it right. “Because if anyone had been even one number off, the result would’ve been totally different.”

Then maybe you say:

But you might be thinking: it has to be a trick. Even working together, how could you have come up with the number I wrote down? None of us is psychic. So how did your number match mine?

Well… maybe because you weren’t matching a number.

Remember when I asked you to focus on why we’re here tonight—at Chris and Kathy’s rehearsal dinner?

There was a thought I wanted you to land on. A thought you don’t have to be psychic to recognize. Something that describes the reason we’re all here—in two words.

Words I hoped you’d arrive at. Even though I only gave you numbers to ‘speak’ with.

The reason we’re here tonight… is True Love.

And then you turn the paper, and the numbers say TRUE LOVE.

Or something like that. I’m just spitballing. Obviously, that example is for a wedding/rehearsal dinner situation. But I think you could find a way to do something similar with many other events or corporate situations.

Re: The full color-blind test presentation from the video in this post

I find this happens often with some participants. The premise of the effect sends them off on a rambling anecdote and one must either indulge them or impatiently hurry them on. I generally don't mind this happening as it shows engagement and takes some heat of the fact that I'm performing rather than just showing something weird. However, it can be distracting. Do you have any advice on how you might handle that situation —AB

The standard advice when someone interjects with a story during your performance is to engage them—listen, respond, don’t keep your head buried in your cards or coins. And I think that’s generally sound.

But context matters. If I’m going for a casual, conversational vibe, then audience interjections are expected—and often welcomed.

But if the tone I’m setting is more focused—like, “I’ve got this wild thing I want to show you”—and someone cuts in with a tangent about 4th grade gym class, that’s a sign something’s off. Either my presentation didn’t land, or they’re just not that into it.

Imagine someone says, “Hey, I’ve got something cool to show you,” and your immediate response is a personal anecdote that derails the moment. That’s not a great signal.

So my rule of thumb is: if the interjection feels like a natural part of the interaction, I lean into it. But if it cuts across the momentum I’m building, I might take it as a cue to wrap up or disengage. (To be clear, I haven’t actually had this happen.) It’s not about punishing them—it’s just reading the room. If they’re not interested, that’s fine. I just prefer to save it for someone who is.

I have to laugh when creators on facebook or the Magic Cafe tell critics to “look at the demo and you’ll see how strong the trick is”. I worked with [company withheld] for almost 5 years and was always involved in shooting the demo videos. We’d film multiple performances and always pick the best takes. And before rolling, we’d even coach spectators to amp up their reactions for the camera. And even then, we often had to sweeten those reactions in the edit lol. And these performers know this! So it’s really disingenuous to say “LoOk At ThE dEmO”!

I think that’s why you’re seeing more demo videos with magicians performing for other magicians or. Those guys already know how to fake the reactions we want.

If you use this email, please don’t even us my real initials. I want to continue to work with magicians.—XX

I'm not surprised at all. In fact, what surprises me more is that, despite everything you do to get strong reactions, some of them still end up being so weak.

Sadly, magic demos aren’t great for gauging spectator reactions. YouTube reviewers are almost equally useless because if they perform at all, it’s usually to their full-time spectators, who are nothing like real humans anymore. (Of course, you can’t expect them to go out and find different people to perform a constant stream of new tricks on.)

I’m at the point where I put no weight on the demo video reactions. I put a little weight into my own judgment of the trick. But mainly I just need to get it in front of real people, in the types of scenarios I actually perform, to know if it’s going to work.