I must tell you that I reread The Craft of Magic and Other Writings several times. After the frrst time through, I decided that it was a strange little booklet, fairly dark and often obscure. I did have the sense that I was evidently struggling to express certain ideas and, in large measure, I decided that I had failed. After a few more readings, I began to feel somewhat more hopeful. The frnal poem, by Wang Wei, has always been a favorite of mine. Short and simple though I'm afraid I haven't yet fully quieted my own "poisonous dragon"-but I am working on it. And what was that final dialogue all about? Perhaps too much caffeine that evening! I guess it was a my magical homage to Jean-Paul Sartre and his play No Exit. (Actually, I believe the French title of the play is Huis Clos which would be translated as "Closed Exit"-a rather different existential situation.) I don't remember a lot of the details of writing this after all these years, but I do recall putting a great deal of effort into keeping the gender of Boots unspecifred. The frrst essay, "The Craft of Magic," is a basic nuts-and-bolts approach to things that we should already know and be doing. I still subscribe to these ideas today. I think this first essay is certainly the most successful piece of writing in the booklet not only because it is clearly written, but also because I believe that these topics remain absolutely fundamental if one wants to learn magic successthlly. The second essay, "The Future of Restaurant Magic," is interesting to me primarily because it marks the movement in my work, which I have already mentioned, away from seeking tips or gratuities from patrons in public places and focusing my attention, instead, on booking more lucrative parties. This essay, further, marks my growing realization that, while every performance is an end in itselfl, restaurant magic (in terms of one's career and frnances) was a rrleans and not an end. Restaurant magic is a stepping stone to other work, work that has fees that are suffrcient to support oneself! The exception to this, of course, is the amateur performer whose only goal might be a desire to perform magic one night a week for strangers rather than for relatives or friends. The essay on "Presentational Style" is another issue altogether. I'm afraid that it never seems to get to the heart of things. Consider the four propositions that (like Martin Luther-oh, dear!) I set forth: Style emerges after we have mastered the techniques of an effect. Style is the sum of the details, the touches, the nuances, the little things. Style is governed by restraint and exhibited in the performer's awareness and balance. The most commercial close-up style is not simply the performer doing his tricks; it is an interaction-a relationship between persons.
INTpnLUDE Sx 199 While each of these propositions still strikes me as being true enough, I am not at all clear whether, individually or collectively, they lead us very far into the heart of the question of performance style. They seem, instead, to skirt the perimeter of the circle without really ever entering it. I would still insist, however, that the magic that is discussed in this essay is very strong indeed. These are all magic effects that I still enjoy performing today. In regard to the final two effects, I think that I have made some signifrcant changes in presentation or method. The main thing that I want to say about the frrst effect, Easy Spelling, is that I am today thoroughly humiliated by its title! Over the years, I have certainly grown in my appreciation of the difference between something being simple, on the one hand, and. easy, on the other. The idea that any piece of performance magic is easy now strikes me as being a completely wrong-headed notion that is harmful to magic as an art form. Now, of course, I realize that I should have called this effect Simple Spelling because, while the method is indeed quite simple, the performance of this or any magic effect is never eosy. In my view, this is a delightfully simple idea for a most stunning spelling effect. In short, it is but a theatrical frame around a card force. The frame requires that the performer make the spectator suspicious about whether the selected card is in the deck and then, with that as the motivation, proving that it is-and secretly setting up three cards to spell at the same time. This theatrical structure has a diabolical quality that still greatly appeals to me. I think that the force discussed here to be used with this effect, Al Baker's Impossible Force, is really quite special in the world of card forces. It is one ofthe few card forces that I know that you can really sell as a fair selection once the spectator has made his initial choice. With this force, the frnal selection seem absolutely fair because you offer the spectator one of three options after the deck has been cut: the spectator may drop cards, pick some more up or stand pat. This can be sold as a truly free choice. There are not many card forces that can be sold so strongly once the initial choice has been made. I might add that over the past year, I have performed this spelling effect at several magic lectures that I presented in various parts of the United States. I have been pleasantly surprised by how many magicians are fooled by this routine. I think that I have made some interesting changes in the presentation for Milbourne Christopher's effect, which I call The Flying Match. My primary motivation was to bring this effect into real focus for my audiences. I think that, for a magic effect to work, at least two conditions need to be met: first, I must convince you that what you are seeing is special and, second, I must keep everything that happens in focus. When I performed this effect as a teenager, for example, I used all the matches that happened to be in the book and counted them all, keeping the one burnt match hidden. Can you imagine someone tryrng to follow the counting of frfteen or sixteen matches? I think it would be impossible; most everyone would give up tryrng to follow and might or might not believe that my counting was accurate.
200 Eucnxn BuncER In the version published in The Craft of Magic,I removed all of the matches from the book, leaving only five (plus the one secretly hidden under my thumb). Using and counting only frve matches was defrnitely a step fonvard in clarity and focus. My present version reduces the number of matches to three. Let's begin, however, by discussing two different openings which might be used with this effect. There is, first of all, the situation wherein I remove the book of matches from my pocket or from my magic box. Second, there is the decidedly more interesting situation in which I appear to pick up a book of matches from the bar or from the restaurant table. The difference in the power of the effect produced in these two situation is, to say the least, staggering! If I can convince you that I have picked up a book of matches from the bar (whether I am the performer in this bar or simply a patron with a group of friends), the effect that I will create is utterly impossible. How could a burnt match return to an unprepared matchbook picked up at random. It seems quite impossible. If, on the other hand, you see me remove the matchbook from my pocket or from my magic box, the effect, while still very good, is never as powerful in its impact as the one produced in the other situation. What lesson do I draw from this? My personal lesson is this: whenever I go out to a lounge or to dinner with friends, the first thing I do is find out what kind of matchbooks are available. If it is a matchbook in one of the two standard sizes-either 20 or 30 matches-I put two matchbooks in my pocket and wait for a while. Eventually, I excuse myself and go to the men's room where I bend a match in half toward me and then all the way down. Using a match from the second book,I light this bent match and immediately extinguish it. Then I remove another (unburned) match from the second book and put it behind the matches in the frrst book (with the prepared match) (frg.l). I put the prepared book with the hidden match in it in my pocket and return to the group. The challenge which now faces me, and which I very much enjoy, is adding the matchbook to the table or bar surface without having this action be noticed by anyone when I do it. Magic, as I have said, in part is a delightful game of wits. The secret to how I do this, put in words, is to make the action invisible by giving it absolutely no attention myself. After many failures, you may develop the sense of how to do this. With the matchbox now in place on the table or bar, I begin by saying 'It is common today to say that we are gaining h,nowledge, but the truth is that we are also losing hnowing. I'll giue you an example by asking you a question whose answer almost eueryone knew the 1930s." I remove the book of matches and hold it up. "Here is the question: How tnany matches are there is a new standard book of matches? In the 1930s, when smoking cigarettes was sophisticated and fashionable, probably eueryone who smoked knew the answer to this question. Today, fewer people know. And so we are losing hnowledge." I now ask the audience if they happen to know the answer to the question.
INTanLUDE Sx 20L I go with their replies and, eventually, say,"There are 20 matches in a standard new book of matches. But don't take my word for it, we'll count them." Opening the book of matches,I pull the hidden match into my right hand (fi5.2). My left thumb pulls down and hides the one match that I have already burned. My right hand approaches the matchbook and tears ofi, in a group, about five or six matches. I allow them to drop into my palm (oining the match secretly there) and I immediately drop all of the matches onto the table in front of a spectator. oHere, count them from here to here," I say to one of the spectators, pointing with my finger, first at the point where the matches lie on the table and, second, to another point about 10 or L2 inches away. The spectator begins to count the matches. Immediately, I tear out another group of matches and add them to the pile of uncounted matches. I continue removing matches until there are only three matches apparently left in the matchbook. I look at the spectator as he continues counting. When finished countirg, the spectator invariably looks up and says, "seventeerl." I smile, as if I have proved a point, and count aloud the remaining matches in the book: *Eighteen, nineteen, twenty. Yes, there q,re exactly twenty matches in a new book of matches. You will notice that I haue left three matches in the book. Three ls a mystical number, a number of magic and mysterious flight. Here, I will giue you orue of these three matches." I tear out the match in the book above the one hidden by my thumb and grve it to the spectator. "This leaues only two matches." I close the matchbook and, using my right thumb and flip the secretly hidden burned match back up into place (fig.3). I close the cover and set the matchbook on the table. *So you haue the third match. Let's identify it. Why don't you bend the match in half, Perfect!'Taking the bent match I hold it so everyone can see it. Then, I continue as already described, I burn the match and blow it out (by blowing in the other direction and sharply twisting the bent match between my thumb and frrst frnger). The match then vanishes from my hands and appears, bent and burned, back inside the matchbook, an example of mysterious flight. As you might have guessed, I am rather fond of this effect, especially when I can create the illusion that it is all impromptu and not planned in any way. It is quite a challenge but magic, I repeat, is a game of wits. I am very excited about the method I am presently using for the SlowMotion Bill Change. I have been a great fan of this effect ever since I first read about itinTarbell,Yol. S. It is a perfect piece of magic to carry o
202 EucnNn BuncER in your wallet or purse because it allows you to perform something utterly magical at any time. I have carried this effect in my own wallet for almost 20 years. The story of how this effect developed is rather interesting. I taught it to my friend David Parr who lives in Milwaukee. David began performing it regularly and then, on one of his visits to Chicago, completely fooled me with this trick that I had taught him! Not only did David fool me, he had completely changed the dramatic structure of the routine so that, now at Iast, the spectator ended up with the smaller of the two bills and the performer ended up with the larger bill. I felt, and still feel, that this was a tremendously important step forward. David's exceedingly clever handling is discussed in his book, Brain Food. Basically, David cut out the small "1" and the shell around it from the lower right hand corner (with the President side facing you) of a one dollar bill. He then put wax on the lower part of this fake and stuck it to the same point on another one dollar bill. During the routine, this small fake was moved to cover the "5" of a five dollar bill. Jay Inglee then made the really exciting discovery that the fake would also cover the "20" on a twenty dollar bill. Needless to say, I instantly changed my own handling to do what David was doing;his handling was so much better. I was very happy. What was a very good trick in Tarbell was now a great trick-and, best of all, I could carry it in my wallet where it took very little space! I was very happy indeed. Then the bottom fell out of my happy magic world! The United States Government, in the closing years of the twentieth century, issued a new twenty dollar bill, with the promise that all currency would eventually match the new bill. I looked at the new twenty dollar bills in horror! I could not believe my eyes. This beautiful effect would soon be history. We would no longer be able to perform it. It would no longer work using either U. F. Grant's or David's method. I was now most unhappy. David and I grumbled about these new changes in the U.S. currency for about a year. Then one evening I sat down and decided that I would begin working on this effect to see if I could bring it, as it were, into the twenty-frrst century when the new bills would be the only bills. I frrst worked with a fake that was the size of an eighth of the bill. Others have also worked with this type of fake. I made the fake more rigid by doubling it and then even by putting a piece of file card between the two Iayers to give it greater rigidity. Using wax I could add this to the face of the folded bill, but I couldn't turn the bill over to display the other side. I talked with David each step of the way. For a period of several weeks we spoke nightly about this effect and our thinking moved so quickly that it is difficult now to decide who added what. In truth, this is something that both of us put together. Finally, we arrived at a fake that is very practical-and deceptive!-both to make and perform. If I were writing a dealer advertisement for this bill transposition, I would stress the following points: First, both bills may be freely handled and examined by the spectator. Second,the performer may borrow and use ony denomination of U. S. bill.
IurpnLUDE Stx 203 Third, the performer may use the new U. S currency-again, using any denomination. Fourth, the folded bills are shown on both sides and the performer's hands are seen to be otherwise empty. Fifth, this effect will also work with some non-U. S. currencies. As long as a country's currency has two bills of the same size (regardless of color), the effect may be performed. If you reread the above points,I think you will realize that this effect has now been brought into the next centurX. So,let's call it: ru HsilU-Flrsl 0gttlttru BiIl Trans[u$iliotl (Eugene Burger and David Parr) Let's begin with making the new fake. Lay a one dollar bill on the table with the president side down. Fold the bill lengthwise. You may wish to mark this fold by running a pen along it. This side will not be seen when we are finished. The next step is to glue two pieces of file card in place (fig.l). Make sure the two pieces do not come completely together. This will make folding easier later. Using a glue stick, cover the file card surfaces with glue and then fold the right side of the bill onto the glued left side $5.2). Before you do anything else, allow this to dry thoroughly for several hours. The reason we have inserted the frle card between the two layers of bill
204 EucnNp BuncER is to grve a stability which allows us it and the bill, to know where the purely by our sense of touch. Plus, dling quite a bit easier. You will now cut the fake so that size of the bitl (fig.3). The next thing I do is, using a burnishing tool, run the ball of the tool over the point in the bill where the two file cards come together. I run the tool, in other words, in the trench between the two file cards (fre.4). This is done on both sides of the bill. The fake is now ready to use. Fold the upper portion of the fake behind the lower portion along the trench (frg.5). I put the fake, along with a one dollar bill, in my to feel the difference between bill is and where the fake is the stiffened bill makes hanits size is one quarter of the t) =\ wallet. I am now ready to perform an amazing piece of magic. From here, I will explain my own handling of this fake. David's handling and routine are different from mine. I'll let him explain it when he is ready. I will only add that David applies wax to one side of the fake so that it can be stuck onto the bill-both at the beginning and the conclusion of the effect when the bill is displayed at the frngertips between two empty hands. My routine is no longer framed with the idea of a con game. Currently, the frame deals with the diffrculties of observation. I ask an audience member for the loan of a bill, any bill other than a one dollar bill. Assume the spectator removes a new twenty dollar bill. I take the bilt and, as I am speakitg, fold the bill into eighths so it is the same size as the folded fake. Then I fold the last fold in both directions, thus breaking it in for its later turnover. I remove my one dollar bill, along with the fake secretly in finger palm from my pocket. I grve my one dollar bill to the spectator and take the twenty. I will now instruct the spectator to fold the one dollar bill into eighths, so that a number can be seen on each side. Holding the fake in my right palm (fig.6, notice the way the fake is oriented in my hand), I place the spectator's bill directly on top of the fake and then fold the bill back away from me and over the fake so the fake now rests inside the folded bill (frg.7). I take the folded bill with my left hand and show both sides but, when I do this, I always keep the folded edge toward the audience.
INtpnLUDE Sx 205 As I am speaki.g, I now transfer it so that I am holding it in my right hand, the folded bill slightly open but hidden in my right hand (fig.8 is your view, frg.9 is an audience view). The one dollar bill is taken from the spectator and placed behind the bill in my hand. Actually, it secretly goes into the open fold but this fact is hidden by my fingers (fig.10). I pause and my hand freezes for a few moments in this position. This is important. I let the picture settle in: I am holding two bills in my hand, one behind the other. The bill in the rear is apparently the one dollar bill ber of the twenty is facing the audience. In my presentation, I now explain that I will mix the bills so the spectator does not know which is which. My hands come together and, as they begin turning the bills, my left thumb and frngers push the upper and lower edges outward (frg.11), and then together (fi9.12) so it has been turned inside out. The fake is now on the outside and the twenty is on the inside.I continue turning the bills over between my two hands and frnally come to a stop with the fake facing me (fig.L}). This fact cannot be seen by the audience. t3 I ask that the spectator extend his right hand palm upward. I place both bills on the spectator's palm (frg.14: notice the orientation of the bill on the spectator's palm). Never letting the spectator see the bills because my fingers are covering them, I ask that he close his hand (frg.15). I immediateIy turn his hand over so the back of his hand is upward. since the num-
206 Eucnun BuncER If I now reach into his closed fist and remove t}ne bottom bill, I will be removing the twenty dollar bill with the fake wrapped around it, so it appears that I am removing the one dollar bill (frg.16). I can now show this one dollar bill on both sides. 16 Since I have removed the one dollar bill, I ask the spectator which bill he is holding and he will reply that he must have the twenty.As I am saying this, I transfer the bill so that I am holding it in my left hand. Notice that my left first finger is inside the fold (fig. L7). What the audience will now see is this: my hands come together and I raise the bill near my mouth and blow on it. My right hand moves away and I am seen holding the folded twenty dollar bill and two empty hands (figs.18, 19, and 20). What happened, of course, is that as my hands came together and began 17
lNrnnLUDE Sx 207 moving upward, my right thumb flipped the bill open (fig.21) and then over (fig.22) so the fake now rests inside the folded twenty dollar bill. Once the bill has changed,I slowly lower my hands so the other side of the twenty, and my empty palms, are visible to the audience (fig.23). I slowly turn the twenty over so the other side can be seen and immediately ask the spectator to show us the bill they are holding. As the spectator begins to open his hand,I begin unfolding the twenty, allowing the twenty to flip up so that my right thumb can drag the fake into my right palm. I frnish unfolding the twenty and, if I am sitting, lap the fake as I move forward to place the twenty on the table. Everything is now examinable. If I am standing, I simply retrieve my one dollar bill and place it, along with the fake, in my pocket. There is little reason for the spectator to want to examine the one dollar bill since this is the bill he has been holding. The audience is usually much more interested in seeing the twenty. Needless to say, David and I retain all manufacturing rights to this routine but urge you to try it out for yourself. We both believe this is a major step forward in bill transposition effects and hope that you give it the practice and rehearsal it desenres-so that you can truly enjoy it. * What now follows is the text of a seventh booklet, frrst published in L994, Rediscoueries. As you read it, you will see that it reflects shifts in my thinking that are still developing and growing today. In the early 1990s, I fell under the spell of the distinction between presenting tricks as opposed to performing magic. This distinction still lies at the center of my present thoughts about magic. Three routines are discussed: Psychic Sense, my developing thoughts on presenting the "Three Card Prediction" (from Intimate Power), the Visibly Ttrrning Cards, my thoughts on the effect "Double Reverse" (discussed in my book The Performance of Close-Up Magic), which Max Maven has now convinced me should be credited neither to Paul Rosini
208 EuceNB BuncER nor to Nate Leipzig but, rather, to Walter Gibson, and the Ashes on the Palm for Non-Smokers, my current handling of "Voodoo" (also from Intimate Power). One very important addition to the Ashes effect in this booklet was provided by David Parr who has discovered yet another excellent product to use for making the mark. It is made by Lor6al, and called "Soft Effects Eye Color." The particular color that David prefers is called Raven. One interesting feature of this product is that the container in which in comes is magnetic. It could, therefore, be conveniently held under one's coat with a magnet.
l$$4
To grow is to change, but unfortunately not all change is growth. We grow as magicians when we change in ways that create better performances. It may surprise you when I tell you that only rarely am I satisfied with my own magical work. My thoughts endlessly revolve around how each moment in my show might be made stronger, how the sense of magic for my audiences might be made deeper and more intense. These, of course, are questions that one never answers once and for all. Indeed, the answers are not even necessarily verbal formulations; rather, any answers come to us as we involve ourselves in the process of trying out new ideas, changing things, and taking more chances and risks in our magical performances. It shouldn't surprise you, therefore, that over the years I have subjected my own performing repertoire to sometimes constant revision and change as I have tried to create better magical mousetraps. The truth is that sometimes, really m.ost of thLe time, the changes turn out to be awful in practice and they must be rejected. Sometimes, however, new changes can be quite wonderful and they can breathe new life into old routines. My point is that we never find the wonderful in our magic-or in life-if we aren't willing to risk failure with the awful. I believe that to perform requires courage because it demands that we take risks. Here, then, are some new thoughts on three routines that have long been part of my performing repertoire. I begin with a new analysis of the "Three Card Prediction" (from Intimate Power,1983) because this allows me to raise a variety of issues that are central to my present magical thinking, especially the distinction between doing tricks and performing magic,but also issues of how to begin an impromptu performance, how and why the deception is created, and how to bring it to a defrnite conclusion. Paul Rosini's "Double Reverse" (from The Performance of Close-Up Magic, 1987) has always appealed to me as an effect that has beautiful simplicity and directness.It can be performed slowly and with real focus, and the climax, when the two cards are shown to be reversed in the pack, is always surprising. Here, I have tried to enrich the effect by adding a uisible dimension wherein the spectators seem to see the cards turning over. I was surprised when I first tried this and saw the responses of my audiences to a rather simple strategy of adding a "Glorpy''handkerchief. This addition, however, has greatly added to the entertainment value of this effect because it helps transform a card trick into card magic. "Voodoo" (from Intimate Power,1983), my version of the ancient'Ashes on the Palm," has been one of my favorite pieces of magic since childhood. Yet, as a professional performer, I more and more frnd myself in situations where cigarette smoking is not allowed. Cigarettes have always been an integral part of this effect. Years ago, Berlin's Ted Lesley told me how he had taken a/oodoo" and transformed it into a stage piece. One of
Rnolsco\rERrEs zll Ted's delightful subtleties is using a thumbtip filled with ashes in his vest pocket. Thus, no ashtray or cigarette is required. My own handling is much simpler and, hopefully, will revive this marvelous effect for new generations of non-smoking magicians. It is my sincere wish that these new handlings of old effects will please you and your audiences in your own performances, and that these new thoughts will stimulate even newer ones in your own mind. Eugene Burger hUoliu$snso A New Analysis Of The Three Card Prediction This effect is a perfect place for us to explore the performance of magic for several reasons. First, everything here is accomplished almost automatically and this means you can concentrate your attention on the way in which you are presenting the mystery rather than upon its methodology. Second, this effect raises the question of how we sh;all initiate our maglcal performance. Shall we begin simply by removing a deck of cards from our pocket and announcing, "Let me show you a card trick?" Third, this effect wiII give us practice coordinating our words with our actions. The deception here is accomplished through a mis-description of what has happened. Once believed, this mis-description renders logical explanation impossible. Fourth, this effect will make us aware of the importance of timing-particularly when we utter the mis-description of what has happened. Fifth, this effect gives us an opportunity to practice giuing instructions to people. In a performance, it is absolutely crucial that we give our instructions with directness and clarity. Sixth, and frnally, this effect shows us the importance of a presentation's closing line,t}re line that brings the magical effect to a definite conclusion and, in more theatrical settings, cues the audience to applaud. This magical mystery uses a deck of playing cards. In this case, the playrng cards may be borrowed from the host or hostess. There are magicians, of course, who tell us that we should never begin a performance with a card trick. I don't agree. Cards, after all, are convenient. They are easily carried on one's person or found in someone else's home. If the magician used a borrowed deck of cards, as I suggest, the impact of what is done is always much stronger in people's minds simply because they know that these borrowed cards are unprepared. Everyone knows that borrowed cards aren't marked cards; nor are they trick cards such as" TV Magic Cards" (Burling Hull's "Svengali Deck"). Using a borrowed deck of cards, when possible, helps create the audience perception that everything happening really is fair-and this lays the groundwork for the creation 9f a magical experience.
212 Eucnuo BuncER Cards are convenient in a second sense as well. Not only are they convenient to carry or to find in other people's homes, they are also convenient because they comprise 52 different and easily recognizable symbols (53 if you have a Joker in the deck) in a small and manageable size. Playing cards, further, have definite associations in many people's minds, not only with games and fun, but also with such fascinating ideas as chance,luck, and good (or bad) fortune. Each of these ideas could provide an excellent basic promise or frame for many different magical presentations. In defense of those who believe that magicians should never begin with card tricks, it isn't dilficult to understand why they might feel this way. Card tricks, after all, seem so perfectly trivial, so absolutely irrelevant to the real concerns of everyday lives! The very word "trick" implies a degree of triviality, doesn't it? Yet the magician's task always is to transcend his or her props, whether those props are playing cards, coins, or anything else. All magic, if it is to be effective, must move beyond the magician's props. How is this done? We will discuss specific strategies later, the general answer is that we must learn to invest our card trick with a sense of real importance. Our aim is to move our audiences away from the experience of a card trick and toward the experience of a mrystery-a mystery performed with a deck of cards. How does a card "trick" differ from a card "mystery"? I would answer by setting forth the following general axiom. A card trick is about what happens to the cards; card magic is about life. Let's explore this axiom more carefully. It tells us that when we seek to perform a piece of magic-a card trick or any type of trick-we need to do more than merely demonstrate the magic trick. A card trick, th.e axiom states, is about the cards and what happens to them. The cards may change into other cards, or they may magically become reversed in the deck, or they might even rise up from out of the deck. The point is that if the audience's attention is focused purely upon the cards, and upon what they are doing and what is happening to them, the axiom states that the audience is experiencing a card trick. A mystery performed with cards is quite a different matter. A mystery is about life itself. The cards are introduced not for the sake of demonstrating something about them but, rather, to demonstrate some larger conceptual point that is being made by the performer. What happens to the cards, then, is not the point ofthe proceedings. The point ofthe proceedings is revealed through what happens with the playrng cards. The cards, we might say, are the medium for the performer's message. In the mystery that we shall be discussing here, the message is about the uncanny powers of the human mind-in this case, the power of intuition. The cards are introduced as tools in a demonstration that is centered on this larger side of intuition. In one sense, the cards are almost incidental to the larger point (message) that is being mad+-namely, that human intuition is uncanny! If this is played convincingly in performance, at the conclusion the spectators are not simply surprised that the cards match, they are primarily surprised that the performer's intuition proved to be so astonishingly accurate!-a fact that is revealed by the matching of the cards.
Rrorsco\mRIES zLB Cnoatlrvc rsp M.lcrcar, Errpct Let me now describe this magical mystery. As you read the description,I want you to imagine that it is happening in your mind. Picture it all in your mind. To do this, it is a good idea not to read too quickly. Take your time. It is important that you imagine each of the steps as it is explained. Imagine, further, that you are the performer here, the one who is creating wonder with this amazing demonstration. Basically you predict in advance three playrng cards that are apparently chosen at random. You do this by removing the mates (the other cards of the same color and value) of these cards. This is the core of the magical effect. As you will see, this core will be wrapped in a presentation that stresses the uncanny powers of intuition. Imagine, first of all, that you are at a party and the conversation turns toward strange and mysterious subjects such as Stonehenge, lost continents, people living inside the earth, or amazing mental powers such as telepathy or clairvoyance. It may be that conversations never turn in these directions at the parties you attend. If that is the case, you will need to liven things up a bit by assuming the role of the conversation-turner. Once you have turned the conversation toward strange subjects, you will probably frnd that most everyone has an opinion to offer or, hopefully, a weird tale to tell. Become quiet for a time and allow some of the others to tell you their stories. Just when you sense that the topic of strange subjects is about to run its course in the conversation, you offer to demonstrate something that you think is extremely strange. It has to do, you explain, with the strange and uncanny mental power of human intuition. Specifically, you offer to demonstrate your psychic sense or intuition. A deck of playing cards is borrowed from the host or hostess. Before receiving it, you ask that it be thoroughly shuIfled. You receive the shuffled deck and comment, 'You haue rnixed these cards. I will not change their order. What I shall do is this: I will look through the cards and see if one card attracts m.e psychically." You continve, "It is dfficult for me to explain this. All I can really sa.y is that, as I look at the faces of the cards, one card will sometimes uisually jump out at me I can't explain it, but I know it when it happens." You slowly look through the cards with their faces toward you. You square them between your hands. "No, nothing happened that tim,e. None of the cards struck me. Sometirnes nothing happens.I'll try one rnore time." Again you begin looking through the cards. Suddenly you stop and exclaim: 'Tes, here! This card! I definitely get a strange sense from this card." Without showing the card to anyone, you place it face down on the table. "Let me try this again," you continue."Sometirnes I am able to get an intuitiue feeling about seueral cards." Once more, you look through the cards until one particular card seems to catch your eye. This card is also placed face down on the table next to the first card. "Let me try to get one final card," you explain. One final time, you look through the cards until you stop and a look of recognition comes over your face. nYes,'you say, "here is the third card." You place the third card face down on the table next to the other two cards.
2L4 EucBNn BuncER 'As I looked through the cards, these three face-down cards seemed to stand out from the others.I had a definite psychic sense about them.I can't really explain how this happens. We use the word'intuition.' The important thing is that we learn to trust our intuition. We'll see how well I did in a moment. First,I want you to think of any number between 10 and 30. Do you haue a nurnber in mind? You may change your mind as often as you wish, but decide finally on one number and then don't change your mind again. You haue one number in mind?" Handing the deck to the spectator you say, "Take the cards and deal that nurnber of cards face down in a stack on the table. If you are thinking of the nurnber 10, then deal ten cards." The spectator does this. The unused cards in the spectator's hands are put to one side. *Now pick up the cards that you dealt," you contin\e,"and deal thern into three piles." The spectator deals out the cards into three piles. You say, "Of course, you could haue thought of any numben You chose the number 14 and that generated these three card.s." You immediately turn over the top card of each of the three piles and, as you turn these top cards face up, you name them by giving their color and value: A red Ace, a black Ten and a red Queen." You pause for a moment,look the spectator in the eyes and smile. "Before I asked you euen to think of a numbe4 I found three cards purely by my powers of intuition and I placed them face down on the table ouer here.' You now slowly begin turning over and naming the three cards discovered by your psychic sense: A red Ace, a black Ten and a red Queen." CoNcper,rNcrHn Mnruoo Let me now explain the principle upon which this effect is based by discussing its original use in the magical production of the four Aces. To simplify things, put the book down and get a deck of playing cards so that you can understand this with the cards in your hands. Begin by removing the four Aces. Place these Aces on top of the facedown deck. A spectator is now asked to name a number between 10 and 30. Suppose they name the number uL2." Deal the top 12 cards face down into a single pile on the table. What you have done here is to transfer the four Aces from the top of the cards in your hand to the bottorn of the pile of 12 cards on the table. If you now pick up the 12 cards and deal them into four separate piles, the Aces will move from the bottom of the 12 cards to the /op position of each of the four piles on the table. It appears as though the number named by the spectator produced the four Aces. The use of the Aces here is simply to demonstrate the principle (the cards being transferred from top to bottom to top) by which the effect is accomplished. What actually happened in the effect "Psychic Sense" is this: When I first looked through the shuffled deck to find my frrst psychic impression, I spread the cards faces toward me and noticed the top three cards of the deck (farthest to the left, rearmost, in the spread). I then found the mates (the other black King or red TWo or red Nine) to these three top cards which I noted and placed the mates on the table. We will discuss this thor-
RporscovERrEs 2L5 oughly when we turn to the actual performance of the effect. Here, it is enough to understand the basic principle and how it automatically works. If one were to think about what is happening with the cards, of course, it is all rather obvious, isn't it? How, we might ask, could such a bold-face procedure actually deceiue anyone? First, let me assure you that it does deceive people. I have performed this effect thousands of times and I have taught it in my talks to thousands of magicians around the world who, I am sure, also deceive people with it. Bat why does it deceive anyone? If what is actually happening to the three cards during this procedure is as obvious as it appears to be, what is the source ofthe deception? The answer is simple: the procedure is obvious if you think about it, but the truth is that people don't t}rink about it. In the "Psychic Sense" presentation that you have just read, the magician keeps the audience from being attentive to what is really happening with the cards through the words that are used and also through the timing of the actions. The effect pleases me because it is based upon the Big Lie. In this case, the Lie is contained in the statement which the performer utters just before turning over the top cards of the three piles: "You thought of the number 14 and that generates three cards." This statement, needless to say, is absolutely false. The number which the spectator chose didn't generate the three cards on top of the three piles. The only thing the spectator's number generated was the number of cards originally dealt off the top of the deck onto the frsf pile. The performer's timing is important. The performer says the Big Lie and immediately begins turning over the three cards. The audience has no time to consider what really happened with the cards, no time to evaluate the Big Lie-and so the easiest course of action for the audience is simply to belieue it! Once the Big Lie is believed, that the spectator's randomly chosen number generated the three cards, the effect is indeed astonishing. How could the performer have known what number would be selected? The performer's psychically-selected three cards were placed face down on the table before the spectator even was asked to think of a number. Yes, once the Lie is believed, the fact that the performer seemed to know in advance what three cards would be chosen is very mysterious indeed. Notice, further, how the effect began in the frrst place. How was the performance initiated by the performer? The performer did not pull a deck of cards from his pocket and announce, "Let me show you all a card trick!" Instead the performer waited for the right moment, when the group was talking about weird and amazing things. The magician may have needed to steer the conversation in this direction but, if that is what happened, other people were allowed to talk and give their opinions before the magician offered his or her amazing demonstration of psychic powers. The raising of weird or amazing subjects, such as Stonehenge or psychic powers, is to place what I call a "frame" around the magic trick. Much like a picture frame goes around a picture and sets it apart, the frame of a
216 Eucnxn Buncnn magical effect gives the proceedings some larger meaning. What the performer has demonstrated is not really t}ne cards at all. If you are the performer, this is about your psychic powerst I would set forth the following general axiom for magic presentations: Atrick is about what happens to the props; magic is about life. This general axiom means that when we seek to perform a piece of magic, we need to do more than demonstrate the magic trick. We must create some frame of meaning that gives our actions purpose and even importance. Here we are reaching into the realm of life experiences and selecting one, a person having intuitive or psychic abilities, and using that general idea to frame this rather elementary card trick that, if you correctly follow the procedure, happens automatically. I have purposely selected this effect because it does happen automatically if you follow the procedure. Because it is automatic, you can put your full attention on the way in which you are presenting it. Here,I must tell you that I believe that magic is best performed when the performer is not thinking about the specifrc actions that need to be followed but, instead, is focused on the quality of the interaction with the audience. We will discuss this later in much greater detail. Here, it is important to see that, because the trick is automatic, we can put our energy into creating a magical effect and, through it, a magical experience upon our audience PpnronuaNcn To the extent that the magician is able to sell this frame (here "psychic abilities") and convince the audiences of his or her sincerity in offering a demonstration, the frnal effect upon audiences, as I have seen when I have performed this myself, can be staggering. Again, the fact that I could know the cards before the number was thought-of is a real mystery to people. Let us now examine the performance of this effect step-by-step. 1. The conversation turns (is turned) toward unusual subjects which gives the performer a motivation to offer an unusual demonstration. 2. The performer asks for a deck of cards. Before receiving them, it is insisted that the cards be thoroughly mixed. 3. The performer receives the cards and does no further mixing of them. The performer says: Tou haue mixed the cards. I will not change their order. What I shall do is this: I will look through the cards and see if one card psychically'jumps out' at n';e." 4. Hold the cards between your hands, with the faces toward you. Spread through all the cards until you get to the last (top) card of the deck. Remember the color (red or black) and value (Ace, TWo, Three, etc.) of this card. For purpose of illustration, let us say the top card is a red Ace. 5. Square the cards and explain that you didn't get a psychic impression that time but that you will try again. 6. Spread through the cards again with the faces toward you and, when you reach the mate of the top card (the other red Ace in the deck, identical in color and value), pull it up slightly and continue spreading the cards from one hand to the other. When you come to the end of the deck, this
Rnusco\rERrES 2L7 time, remember the color and value of the second and third cards from the top of the deck. Let us say these cards are a black Ten and a red Queen. 7. Remove the mate to the deck's top card (the other red Ace) and place it face down on the table, as you say, nYes, here! This card!" Make sure the audience does not see the face ofthis card. 8. Say, "Let me try that again.'Look through the cards again and this time remove the mate to the second card (the other black Ten) from the top of the deck. Place it face-down on the table with the frrst card. 9. "Shall I try one final time?" you ask. Spread through the cards again and remove the mate to the third card from the top of the deck (the other red Queen). Place this card face-down on the table with the other two. 10. You say,"Well, here are the cards that seemed to stand out from the others. We'll see how I did in a moment. First, I want you to think of any nun'tber between 10 and 30." The reason these parameters are given is simple: a number less than 10 might make the principle too obvious. If the spectator named "3," even an unobservant spectator might realize the method! On the other hand, if a number greater than 30 is named, the counting process becomes too long and potentially boring. For these reasons, the spectator is asked to name a number between 10 and 30. The performer continues: "Do you haue a nurnber in mind? You may change your mind as often as you wish, but decide finally on one number and then don't change your mind o.gain.You have one number in mind?" 11. Give the cards back to the spectator. Say, "Take the cards and deal the nurnber of cards you.'re thinking of face down in a stack on the table." As you say this, point with your frrst frnger to the place where you want the cards dealt. (You will use your finger again later when the cards are dealt into three piles.) 12. As the spectator is dealing the cards, silently count the number of cards dealt. We will use this knowledge later. The spectator deals the selected number of cards into a stack on the table. 13. Continue: "Pick up those cards and deal them into three piles." With your first frnger, point to the spot on the table where you want the frrst card dealt. When the spectator deals the frrst card, point to a second spot on the table where you want the second card dealt. When the spectator deals this card, again point to the spot where you want the second card dealt. When the spectator deals this card, again point to the spot where you want the third card dealt. As the spectator deals the third card, point to the first spot again. Keep pointing to the piles onto which the cards are to be dealt until yoa feel the spectator understands the procedure. What we are doing here is using gestures (pointing) rather than words to communicate what we want the spectator to do. This saves us from too much talk in giving instructions. Here, our finger is doing much of the "talking" for us! It is crucial to realize that economy of words and clarity in giving our directions is important if we wish a spectator to follow our instructions without confusion. The spectator completes dealing the cards into three piles. 14. It's time for the Big Lie. Look the spectator directly in the eyes and say, as if it were quite obviously true, "Of cou.rse, you could haue thought
218 EucnNn BUnGER of any numben You chose the number 14 and that generated three cards.' What happens in over 50Vo of my performances, at this point, is that the spectator is surprised that I know the number! Some people are really easy to deceive. T}:re timing is important. I do not allow the spectator the time to say to himself, "He tnust haue counted when I was dealing!'Nor do I give the spectator the time to consider the Big Lie-that this number is what generated the cards. Instead, I keep right on moving and talking. I do not want the spectator to feel I am rushing here; that would actually call the spectator's attention to the procedure that was used. I keep the pace of my talk and actions deliberate but not hurried. 15. As I utter the frnal words above, "You chose the number 14 and that generated three cardg" I immediately turn over the cards on the tops of the three piles. As I do this, I name their color and value: 'A red Ace, a black Ten and a red Queen." 16. Now we come to the climax. Again, look the spectator in the eye and say with conviction ,"Before I asked you euen to think of a numbe4 I placed three cards face-down on the table." 17. Pause for a moment. Smile. Begin slowly turning over the face-down cards on the table and, as you do this, name them A redAce, a black Ten, and a red Queen " These words must be uttered with finallty. Stop Talking. This is the concluding line of the presentation. Too many performers keep talking after they have uttered the routine's concluding line. They say things like, "Well, what did you think of that?" Or "Pretty amazing, huh?" No, no, NO! Respect the routine's frnal line. After you have delivered it, smile and sit down. The performance is over. FuRtrnR Iores Now that I have explained this effect in its most direct form, I want to discuss a curious alteration in the routine which produces an even more surprising impact on people. Instead of removing the three mates to the deck's top three cards, I remove two cards that are mates and a third card that is the correct value but the wrong color. These three cards are placed face down on the table. The following change in presentation then occurs at the conclusion, when the cards are finally revealed. I say,'Before I euen asked you to think of a numbe\ I put three cards ouer here. I was close, but not perfect. I got the red Ace and the black Ten, but I thought it was going to be a black Queen!" Why include this error with the performance? The answer is that the performance is framed as a psychic demonstration. Such demonstrations always include emors! Not to have an eror is to encourage spectators to view this as a magic trick rather than a psychic demonstration. As a budding psychic, of course, if you always get euerything correct, people will start asking you why you aren't playrng Blackjack in Las Vegas or Monte Carlo! Interestingly, one of the assumptions that most of us make is that if someone could get something right, they would get it right. By not getting the result l$OVo correct, we increase the believability of it all. It gives our demonstration a greater sense of reality.
Rnorsco\mRrEs 2Lg T[lgYisffilu Turn[U0arils My basic handling of this effect, wherein two selected cards magically become reversed in the deck, remains unchanged from that described in The Performance of Close-Up Magic with two exceptions. First, the known card which I secretly reverse on the bottom of the deck is the Ace of Spades. Later, when the card is revealed, I think it makes perfect sense that I would have chosen it. Second, before I begin the routine, I stretch out a "Glorpy" handkerchief on the performing surface. "Glorpy", should you not know; is a commercially available magical prop, I handkerchief with a bent wire concealed in its corner (fig.1). When folded, the wire is pressed and it appears that something is happening inside the folded handkerchief. I place the deck (with the secretly reversed Ace of Spades on the bottom) on top of the "Glorpy" and ask the spectator to cut off about half of the cards and take them. I pick up the lower half, turn them so their faces are toward me and spread the cards between my hands, concealing the reversed Ace as I do this. Keeping my actions ahead of the spectator's, I ask that any card be removed and placed face down on the table. By the time the spectator has completed this action, I have also placed a card face down (fig.2), squared my cards (fig.3), and Iowered my hand (ftg.4), pointing to the table where his card is to go. This simple action of lowering my hand actually turns the cards I am holding over. The reversed Ace is now on top of the cards I hold. The spectators, of course, presume that all of my cards are face down. I regrip my cards so that I am holding them in my Ieft hand from above, with my fingers along one of the long sides and my thumb on the other (fig.5), I ask the spectator to hold his or her cards in this way as well. \ 1t /_
220 EucnNp BuncER "Please insert your card, face down, into my half," I say. As the spectator inserts the card, I gently pull the cards away and then complete the insertion myself. I pick up my face down card,look at it again (as if I really wanted to be sure I remembered it) , and insert it half way into the spectator's half. "Push it in all the way," I say. I nod my head toward the spectator when I say this and innocently transfer the cards from my left hand to my right hand, turning the left hand palm up in the process (frg.6). This last step is not in any way a move. It is done without any conscious attention being paid to the action. My attention and interest is focused on what the spectator is doing. I tell the spectator, "Place your cards face down upon the table.'I place my cards on top of the spectator's. I fold the "Glorpy" over the cards so that they are completely covered. "I selected the Ace of Spades," I announce. "Watch. Ace of Spades, come out of the pack!' I pause for several beats and then jiggle the "Glorpy" just a bit. "Now, Ace of Spades, stand up!" I slowly manipulate the "Glorpy" so the wire is standing as high as possible (frg.7). "Ace of Spades, turn ouer and return to the pack." I relax the "Glorpy" and jiggle it a bit again. It is important that I now pause and look at the spectators so that what has just happened can sink in. Don't be in a hurry here. "What card did you select?" I ask. I instruct the spectator to ask the card to come out of the deck. I pause and manipulate the "Glorp/ exactly as before. The spectator's card is then asked to turn over and return to the deck. I then slowly and carefully open out the handkerchief and ask the spectator to pick up the cards and turn them face up. Using only my right frrst frnger, I spread the cards until I frnd the frrst face-down card. I push it
Rnorsco\mRrEs 22L out away from the spread and continue to look for the second face-down card. I push it out as well. "I selected the Ace of Spades," I repeat. And you picked the ... ?" The spectator names the card. I pick up both cards, backs toward the audience, and slowly turn over, first, the Ace of Spades and then the spectator's card. I am now holding two cards raised, in a perfect position to receive some applause (frg.8). flslus orl [[tu Pm for ilor$l-tofisrs First, you need to make a trip to the best cosmetic department in your area. Buy some eye shadow, as dark as possible. I use an eye shadow made by MAC of Canada (#415, Nehru in color). Put it in an old-style small aspirin tin (frg.l). (Starbucks coffee shops sell mints in a similar metal tin that is slightly larger but will still do the job.) I also imagine that other shades of this product would produce an excellent daub for marking playrng cards. I keep my container in my close-up box along with some small pieces of flash paper. It is quite simple to get the smudge on my finger as I reach into the box for the flash paper. On each piece of flash paper I have drawn the outline of a small hand. Only one piece of flash paper is used in each performance. The frnal item required for this presentation is a small hand (frg.2). Van Warren, of Santa Fe, New Mexico, created a lovely one for me-a small sterling silver hand in a meditation posture or mudra. The artistry of
222 Eucnue BuncER Van's sculptured hand greatly enhances the visual beauty of the effect. One might, of course, simply purchase a small doll and saw the arm off. TneNsrrnruNc Tnp Manx Method One: I now use two different methods to effect the transfer of the smudge from my frnger to the spectator's palm. If I am performing close-up, seated at a table, I transfer the eye shadow using the method described in Intimate Power. I frrst ask the spectator whether she believes in Voodoo. Whatever her answer, I respond as if I am particularly pleased and ask her to extend her hands palm downward, *like this." I extend my hands. Whatever the spectator does with her hands, I look her in the eyes and immediately correct her. 'Nq no, no,'I say, 'a little lower" (or "closer to me," or "higher," or whatever is different from what she had done). As I say this, I take her hands in mine and move them into the correct position. I take her hands with my thumb on top so my frnger contacts her palm and the transfer of the mark is made (fig.4). Method Tfuio: T}lre second method of effecting the transfer is used when I perform this effect, as I often do, in a stand-up setting-say, in a parlor for a seated audience. I frnd a suitable lady (one that I think will react when she sees the mark on her hand) and ask her if she wiII assist me. I extend my hand with the marked frnger, take her hand and mark her palm as I assist her into position. This method, needless to say, is highly deceptive. SplpcrING THE Flexo I continu€, "Now make two fi,sts and drop one." I make my hands into fists and drop my hand that is opposite the spectator's unmarked hand. The psycholory is so strong here and 90Vo of all spectators will now drop their unmarked hand. I say, "Fine. We're finished with that hand." Pointing to the marked hand, I say, "Don't moue this hand." What do I do with the two percent of the spectators who begin to lower their markedhand? Once I see this is what they are doing, I immediately say,"Not all the way, just a bit. Good. Keep it right there." Then,lookAing at the (unmarked) hand they did not move, I say, oWe're done utith that hand. Place it behind your back." In other words, I focus my attention and interest on the marked hand regardless of what the spectator does. DaNcnnAvomnu I must point out that when I use the second method of transferring the mark, there is a slight danger that the spectator will see the mark prematurely. This danger is easily avoided i{ once she is in position,I immediately say to her,"With your hands at your sides, make two fists." I do the same with my hands to illustrate. Then I ask her to extend her fists "straight out in front" of her, and, then I ask her whether she believes in Voodoo. Using this procedure, I have never had a spectator prematurely see the mark on the hand.
Rporsco\TERIES 223 A Fusn Or F nrp! I now remove one piece of flash paper, write the spectator's name inside the outline of the hand (fig.5) and crush it into a ball. As I am crushing the paper, I am also cleaning my finger by wiping the eye shadow which remains on my finger offonto the flash paper. I like things tidy. I light a match, look the spectator in the eye, and say, "One thing: if you don't moue, it won't hurt." I touch the match to the flash paper. Flash paper, I sincerely believe, is truly one of the wonders andtreasures of the magical world. In the eyes of audiences, the sudden flash of fire greatly enhances the magical quality of any effect into which it can logically be introduced. Performing in a restaurant or lounge, or at a party, flash paper especially creates quite a bit of interest in people for whom you are zol presently performing, but who are seeing this flash of frre from across the room. What is going on over there? When I am performing this as a stand-up routine for a seated audience, I always ask the spectator to hold her hand out toward the audience. This generates two marvelous moments: the moment when she opens her hand and the audience sees the mark, and then the moment when I ask her to look at her palm and the audience sees her reaction to it. Before sending the lady back to her seat, I hand her a cocktail napkin which I keep in my close-up box so that she can clean her hand of the smudge. Believe me, the spectator and the audience will both appreciate your thoughtfulness. Let me conclude with a different presentation of this effect, again using flash paper, which I call: A Wrrcu's Cunsp "Do you belieue in witchcraft?" I begin. "I'll show you something rather strange. First, hold both of your hands out in front of you. No, no, no, a little highen Now lower one. Put that one behind your back, we're finished with it. Now form the other hand into a tight fist and hold it as still and steady a,s you can. Perfect!" f remove a small piece of flash paper, a pencil, and a book of matches from my pocket and place them on the table. "My interest in magic and things mysterious has giuen me the opportunity to meet son'te uery unusual people. A few years ago,I met a woman who claimed that she was a witch. I was neuer sure about it, sometimes I thought she was simply crazy. Yet she did teach rne something that might surprise you-the ancient art of sending the mark of the witch's curse. In tribal cultures, this always conuinces the uictim of the witch's euil and harmful power ouer them." I smile. "Of course, you must not worry.You shall only represent a uictim; you won't be a real uictim. This is simply an innocent demonstration.' I draw a circle on the paper and write the spectator's name in the center. Then I draw some arrows out from the circle.
224 EucBxB BuncER "If we were really doing this, of course, I would need a strand of your hair, or sorne article of your clothing. Since we aren't using any personal object here, you are quits safe." I light a match and pick up the flash paper. One corner is lighted and, as the flash paper goes up in flames, I extend my hand palm upward and blow sharply in the spectator's direction. I immediately say, "Curse, fly to your new home!" The spectator is asked if she felt anything strange. Whatever her reply, she is told to open her hand. There, in the center of her palm is a big black smudge. The witch's curse has indeed flown to its new home.
And so we have come to the end of our journey. My hope is that you have found this experience to be of genuine value-for yourself and also for your own magical performances. When these writings first appeared, the ideas discussed clearly struck a responsive chord with many magicians. When the first, Secrets and Mysteries for the Close-Up Entertainer, appeared in 1982, I was genuinely surprised by how positive the response was in the magic community. As they say in literary circles, a market for my writing was slowly being created. I am probably the last person to attempt to explain exactly why this happened since I am much too close to it all. From my perspective, I, like some others, was primarily urging the absolute centrality of theatrically viable presentations fot our magic, even when our magic is performed in the close-up setting. The idea was hardly new. Yet, as the Greeks distinguished two forms of time: chronos or clock time and kairos, meaningful time, the right time, these booklets happily appeared at the right time when many magicians were ready to listen. In these writings, then, to a gteat extent,I simply returned to the basics. I restated some rather obvious things that too many magicians are in danger ofoverlooking, taking for granted, or understanding purely on the verbal level of words. I insisted, for example, that I always worked with a written script. I explained why a memorized script gives you freedom. I talked about the basic differences between practice and rehearsal. I insisted that an excellent presentation was very rarely simply the demonstration of the magic trick. To a large degree, I believed that magicians had spent the greater part of the twentieth century under the wonderful and enchanting spell of learning and developing new sleights and techniques; they had been literally dazzled by such things. Lost in seeking perfection of the perfect Pass! While there is something genuinely beautiful about this, a good presentation of magic for laypeople remains quite different from the performance of disembodied sleights or endless expositions such as those typically done by the magic dealer who sold us the trick. Like others, I wrote to say that enough is enough and that it was time to move on by getting back to the basics: to the art of magical presentation. If I have a gift as a writer, it is the gift of my astrological sign, Gemini: the ability to communicate with others in effective ways, to write about these things and to put these concerns into words-words that sometimes had the power to move some readers to lew action with their magic and not simply to further though, about it. I further suggested that readers should face the fact that this is going to require changes in our magical (and real!) lives. It will demand a great deal of work because a good presentation doesn't typically just appear by magic. No, on the contrary most good magic presentations are the result
226 EUcBNB BuncER of work and thought and sometimes even suffering and anguish and terrible feelings of failure and pain. Unfortunately, these are not the sorts of feelings that many people are looking to obtain from their hobbies. On the contrary, most individuals look for a hobby to help them relax and take them away from the stresses and cares and pressures of their working lives. This brings us to the twentieth century claim that magic is easy to do. It sadly represents the triumph of commerce over art!This notion, that performing magic in an entertaining way is easy to master, is surely one of late twentieth century magic's most serious and crippling delusions. Not only does it open the doors of the house of magic to those who are but marginally committed (e.g., those seeking what is easy to do), this idea sets an exceedingly bad image and goal for each of us. For you and me. Along with instant coffee, potatoes, rice and pudding, we also want to be instant magicians-and we delude ourselves into believing this utterly mad claim that there is instant, easy magic out there, just waiting for us to copy from a videotape. Honestly, I think this notion is absolutely crazy and, Iike many crazy ideas, utterly dangerous for us to hold. It asks less of us, rather than more. Far better we face the reality that, as with any kind of perfornl,ance, the performance of magic in a captivating manner is going to require a great deal of work! So I will ask: Are we merely seeking what is easy to do? Is that what you wantyour involvement with the art of magic to be? Let's be realistic here: how we answer that question will, in large measure, determine not only the fate of our own magic performances but also the future of magic as an art in the next century. Growing up in Chicago and seeing so many wonderful close-up magicians when I was young, I was never under the delusion that magic was easy. Even as a teenager, when I read the magic dealers'ads which promised "No Practice Necessary," I never really believed it and, further, imagined the only people who did believe it were idiots. In my own involvement with magic I had very quickly realized that here was something that not only required work but, because of that, was endlessly fascinating-and I realized also that I could never exhaust all of magic's secrets in my entire lifetime. I found that to be both a sad and beautiful realization. The art of magic is so vast, so deep, that none of us can learn all its real secrets. Each of us only moves along this path that can never end, never be frnished and completed. George Bernard Shaw once said that the most beautiful roads lead nowhere because that way they have no end. * How have my views about magic changed since the early 1980s when these seven booklets were first published? I would say that these booklets stress the importance of good presentations to frame our magic. They discuss some of the tools and techniques that are important if we are ever to appear as confident performers of magic. Interestingly, many non-magicians-wives, husbands, brothers, sisters,lovers and friends-have told me or written to me to say that they
FlNar, Wonos 227 read this or that booklet too and that what I wrote applied equally to presentations in other fields-and that they too had enjoyed and learned something from these writings. In my later writings, I think the emphasis has shifted and my thinking has become concerned more with putting a sense of magic into these magical presentations. I have come to appreciate, on a much deeper level than before, the difference and challenge between demonstrating magic tricks and really framing and presenting them in ways that are appear truly magicalt In short, I now want some of my presentations to emphasize the sheer power of magic-and mystery and silence! These turns of thought, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, were profoundly influenced by my close friendships with Max Maven, the late Tony Andruzzi, Jeff McBride, and Robert Neale. I owe each of them a great deal, much more than I can express in words. Each has played a wonderful and indispensable role in my magical and personal growth. I think that I am presently also much more concerned with communicating to my audiences a sense that magic itself is a deep and beautiful art. And, further, it is an art that does not need always to be framed with comedy. If you were to see one of my shows, for example, you would certainly (hopefully!) experience many humorous moments, but you would experience some other moments as well that were not framed with humor, moments that were dramatically quite different. In this way, as I see it, my show develops a sense of texture: in the mind of the audience, the show or performance isn't all the same thing, the same kind of presentation being done over and over and over. When I wrote these booklets, in the early 1980s, on the other hand, I think that I was much more interested in selling myself as a fun and charming magician. I wasn't thinking so much about the big picture of magic; I was concerned about success then and there. I believed, further, that my success pivoted around developing my own magical persona as a fun and charming magical performer for people to experience. If I am correct in charting this new change or direction in my work, I suspect that I have experienced a rather healthy turn in my magical life, a turn away from simply selling myself and on toward seeking to communicate something wonderful about the art of magic as well. This new direction pleases me. * The central question that each of these booklets attempts to address is this: How can I take this magic trick and make its presentation reflectme and my values, hopes, dreams, and life experience? I have just finished reading Chuck Romano's book on Paul Rosini. When we study Rosini's repertoire we find, perhaps to our surprise, that the effects he performed were pretty standard for the day. Even a casual perusal of Max Holden's delightful, Programmes of Farnous Magicians, which tells us about the content of some of the great magical performances of the early part of the twentieth century, will confrrm this. Paul Rosini performed the "Egg Bag," the" Thumb Tie," Cigarette Productions,
228 Eucnup BuncER the "Cups and Balls" (with baby chicks) and card effects. Outwardly, nothing very exciting here. You can see this same repertoire repeated throughout the Holden book. But Rosini must have added something of himself to these tricks. His performance of these standard effects must, in some way, have made them special and memorable. There must have been an appeal in his performances beyond the content of the tricks. How else can we explain the fact that Rosini was one of the highest paid magicians on the night club circuit, a magician who was held over in room after room, sometimes creating new records in these rooms? I conclude that the secret to Rosini's success was Rosini himself not the magic tricks that he performed. This, then, is the task that is set before all thinking magician s: to present our magic in ways that reflecl us. The question of how one can achieve this task lies at the heart of my early writings collected here. After rereading these seven booklets, I believe that today they do stand pretty much on their own. They didn't need to be propped up by me, and so I have consciously tried, instead, to share a little of my current thinking about some of these ideas and some of these effects-perhaps so that we can both discover if I have grown much as a magician in the process. Whether these writings will have the power to speak to new generations of magicians, I will Ieave for others to decide. I suppose the words of Ludwig Wittgenstein, the great twentieth century philosopher, hang ominously over the heads of all of us who dare to write books that are labeled non-fiction: 'At present we are combating a trend. But this trend will die out, superseded by others, and then the way we are arguing against it will no longer be understood;people will not see why all this needed saying." Thank you for joining me. Eugene Burger