Got time for some theory?

I often see the word "teleportation" and "transposition" being used for the same thing. Well it's not....

Let me explain by starting from the very beginning. The first two basic effects are "vanish" and "production". Basically something fades out of existence and then comes back. If you want to be all nit picky than you might see, that it is actually just one effect. One of them is just the reverse of the other. But keep in mind that those two effects are the two basic effects that the following will build on.

Transformation: So an object changes into another object. Think about it. When seeing this our brain could interpret this as two different events. The first one is, that two objects are in play. The first object faded out of existence while the other one appeared from thing air. All at the same place in space creating the effect. Now the second way to see this is the following: Just one object, which changes it's attributes. We just haven't see the actual change. And because our brain cannot easily decide which scenario is the actual case it makes up this third effect. Simply called "transformation".

Teleportation: Very similar to the transformation again we have two possible events taking place. The first one again is about two objects. At place A object A could vanish, while at place B object B could appear. Or the second was out brain could see this is, that the object becomes invisible and moves to the new location unseen to become visible again. In most cases both scenarios are thinkable and again our brain cannot decide which on to pick. So "teleportation" becomes the fourth effect in magic.

So if we call the first two effects in magic basic effects, then the next two, the transformation and the teleportation become effects of a higher level, as at least both of the basic effects are needed to explain them.

An even higher level of effects would be the Transposition: When two objects swap places, two possible events could take place. Both objects could simply be still where they are, they just transformed into one another, or the two objects teleported to the other ones location. Both cases are valid, our brain cannot decide which one, so the "transposition" becomes the fifth effect.

So you see that teleportation and transposition are not the same thing. Thank you for reading and sorry to have bothered you being a bitcher about a problem that apparently only I am seeing.

Read More

Stuff becomes Stuff

In close up magic most often coins are changed for other coins. It's so common that we have a word for that particular effect: Spellbound. But the minds of the magicians don't seem to stray very far from it. Sometimes the coins change into rings and keys. Sometimes little balls change color....

So just to make you brain consider more possibilities I'm offering a few things here.

Nuts: Are great for magic. They have the right size to do all sorts of manipulations. You can change certain kind of nuts into any other kind of nuts. Like changing a peanut into a hazelnut. "I'm allergic!"

Stones: Come in all sizes and colors. Think about changing a coin several times. It becomes older and older. Finally you turn it into a stone. "Too far we're in the stone age!"

Hardware: Bolts, nuts and Gears... all could be added to a Steampunk themed act. You could have a wire and roll it around the finger. Then change it into a gear. One of those smoke producing gimmicks could visualize the technical change.

Office Stuff: Paperclips could change color. Priority labels could be "downgraded". I imagine a routine where the magician writes something with a pencil, looks at his writing, shakes his head and then visually changes the pencil into an eraser and rubs away his writing. A stamp could become a more valuable stamp.

Food: In fact I remember posting my little idea about gummy bears. Which was motivated and nobody paid attention to. But what if you use the switch for something more layered. Effect: A steel ball bearing is eaten. Many actually. No tricky moves, they really go into the mouth and are swallowed.
Method: You will need ONE real steel ball and the other ones are cocktail tomatoes treated with silver edible spray paint. That way all you need to do is to show how real the real steel ball is, switch it for a tomato and eat it.

Mentalism: Think about mentalism when it comes to spellbound. A regular key can be visually changed into a bent key. A fresh leaf could become an old, dry leave, which in presentation could be a "changing season" thing or in mentalism could be a "sucking out the aura" thing. Two magnets; if you switch one from something that looks similar both will no longer attract each other. Ergo "sucking out magnetism" could be the effect. (Where does the magnetism go? Maybe a demonstration of PK-effects is in order. The falling block of wood makes sense now!)

Changing the Effect: A broken monocle could repair itself.... you see stuff has not to become other stuff. The effect could be perceived differently. In this case a restoration. Now think even further. Some that gets repaired could also just go back in time to a point where it wasn't broken. Now if you think about changing an old toy into a working, shiny version of the toy... you are on the road to create a memorable, emotional effect. As it refers to so many aspects of any body's childhood. When wonders where still acceptable!

Go bold with the plot: What if it is not just the objects that changes, but the whole universe? What if a pack of salt in this universe is a pack of sugar in the other universe? What other changes might occur? I hope you can see where I'm going with this. I swear if I hear the King Midas story again I will leave the room. Changing stuff to gold is a great trick, but don't go back to plots that have seen better days.

Changing parts of nothing: Have you ever done the Spellbound Move with "nothing"? You could see something in the air and catch it. Show the "nothing" between your fingers and then mention the fact that the audience probably won't see it. The simple reason. They are seeing the wrong side. "It's a hole, but you are looking from the inside out. That's why you don't see the edge. Let's me twist it around a bit!" Then add the palmed steel ring to the picture in a twisting motion, as if you have turned a hole inside out.
This is a stupid premise and will not believed by the audience, but they will play along as long as they are entertained. And I think that this premise is a bit of a mind twister. One that is entertaining. (Of course you could continue with the steel ring. It's a portable hole after all. But what's one the other side of the hole? I hope you can see that this flies off in many directions!)

So you close up guys. I hope you put your coins and balls to rest for a while and experiment with other little objects that have the right size for manipulation. Such as: finger rings,
walnuts,
screws, billets,
bunched up silks,
blocks of wood,
feathers,
springs,
crystals,
germs,
jewels,
locks,
caps,
dry beans,
bells,
rattles,
sugar cubes,
dice,
USB-sticks,
pocket knives,
poker chips,
cookies,
washers,
nail clippers
safety pins,
corks,
small candles,
small light bulbs,
LED's,
soap,
buttons,
keyboard keys,
blocks of glass,
ice cubes,
chess pieces,
monopoly houses,
jewelry,
sea shells,
chestnuts,
acorn,
bones,
pencil sharpeners
and matches.

One more effect that is easy and cool.

Effect: "Have you ever seen MacGyver? I love this guy. He can build the most complicated stuff from simple stuff." You get out a box of matches "All he needed was a box of matches. He would take just a few of them." A few matches are taken and the box is put away. "And a rubberband. He would wrap the rubberband around the matches and then add a paperclip."

Method: A rubberband is taken and wrapped tightly around the matches, so they become -sleight of hand-able. Then a paperclip is taken as well as a palmed minibomb (basically just a small black ball with a piece of flash string attached) the paperclip is slipped under the ruberband as well, and then a Boboswitch is made. One hand assumingly holds the match-rubberband-paperclip bundle, but in fact that hand holds the bomb. The other hand goes in the pocket getting a lighter and ditching the bundle.

"That is how you make a small bomb which can take out two, may three blocks."

Then the fuse is lit. "Damn, a dud!"

Read More

Stuff under Stuff

FreePhotoBank

Is it really that hard to come up with creative magic on your own? I cannot be the only one that has no problem whatsoever to be creative. In fact I got the opposite problem. I have so may ideas that I cannot use. Some routines that I come up with do not support my character, some go over my budget and some are too close to other routines that I do.

Example: I got like 5 routines floating in my head where stuff ends up under other stuff. I got this coin routine where three coins one by one end up under the purse. I love the purse as it is a completely motivated prop having around coins. Cards need one hell of a motivation. Also with cards there is "floating" going on the purse doesn't float. My purse has a metal frame so it will naturally create a sound when put down on a hard surface. That sound will completely camouflage any secret placing of a coin. So using a purse makes it possible to do the routine on a hard surface. At the end you can put the coins into the purse and so on. I've been using that idea for a few years now. Darn practical I tell ya!

Another routine would be an ungimmicked Chop Cup routine. So a ball would go through the cup in a variety of ways. Through the table, through to bottom, the side, from the pocket and so on. The main premise was that I have a little assistant who helps me doing all the magic. And that would turn out to be my final load, a stuffed mouse. The main creative point would be the premise. I do that routine for kids and they love it.

The third thing would be the heavily gimmicked version of the Chop Cup by Alex Hecklau. His premise is about how gamblers cheat and so on. I changed it so I explain that magic works by being one step ahead. I show the die and have it roll a few times, so people see that the die rolls all numbers. Then I cover the die asking the audience if they remember what number was up. Whatever they say I lift the cup to reveal the die gone. Then I take the die from my pocket saying "You thought it was about the numbers... it was about stealing the die. You couldn't catch me because you mind was occupied with the other task... let's continue" Then I somehow explain how I steal the die. After having it openly placed in my pocket I reveal that it is back under the cup. The patter continues: "You see, you thought it was about me stealing the die... and again you couldn't catch me putting it back, only because I was one step ahead" Than I seemingly explain how the die comes back only to set up the next phase... you see where I'm going with this. The premise is about how magic works... the creative point again is the premise.

The fourth idea is a take on the Benson Bowl. Mainly the last ball. The audience has seen two of the balls go from the table under the bowl. The last ball would seem pretty anticlimactic if it went under the bowl the same way. So I change the structure by offering a solution, a funny solution. Here it is for your pleasure:

The magician says that he will explain how it works with the last ball. He picks up the ball with his right hand and false transfers it to the left hand. He picks up the wand with the right hand and says that the ball "travels" along the left arm, (wand points along the way) up to the shoulder, behind the neck. To prove this ridiculous claim, the left hand is opened and seen empty. The left hand takes the wand and the right hand goes up behind the neck, producing the ball from there.

The wand is put on the table, as the ball is shown, then false transferred to the left hand. The left hand pretends to put it behind the neck, is shown empty afterwards and then picks up the wand again.
The claim continues. The ball "travels" from the neck down the right arm (again wand point out the supposed path) into the right hand. The right hand opens to prove the statement.
The wand is put on the table again, as the right hand shows the ball and transfers it to the left hand. The right hand goes to the pocket and picks up an extra ball as you claim that there is a hole in the pocket. To prove it the right hand comes out (ball hidden) and the left hand does a shuttle pass to the right hand. "Just watch" the magician claims as he visually puts the ball in his pocket and the ball is plucked right from the outside of the trousers' pocket with the left hand.
"It goes even further" the magicians says, as the right hand comes out of the pocket empty. The ball is false transferred from the left to the right and again the right hand goes in the right pocket.
The wand is picked up with the left hand. And the motion of the ball travelling is pointed out. All the way down the right leg. The right hand comes out of the pocket and is casually shown empty.
The wand is tossed in the right hand and the ball produced with the left hand form the foot area.
The wand is placed in the right pocket (sticking out) and the ball transferred to the right hand. "And now comes the most difficult part of that trick" (looking at the bowl)
The ball is false transferred from the right to the left hand, the left hand goes down to put it back in the "foot area" as the right hand goes for the wand in the right pocket ditching the ball in the pocket for good.


The left hand is shown empty, the right hand is shown empty (aside from the wand of course) and again the pointing out of the assumed path of the ball is shown with the wand. This time from the foot area across the floor (hilarious I think) to the table, up the table's leg through the table's surface, finally pointing at the bowl and lifting it, to show it has arrived.

And there is a fifth idea... but I spare you this one.

You can see that I cannot put those in one show. No way too darn similar, even though they are different. Take those ideas if you need to. But let's make a deal. If you take one of those ideas you must promise to never ever use stock patter again. Never do a trick right out the box and never ever use the suggested handling. Always add your own.

PS: Using a blue silk instead of a red silk to vanish is not creativity.

Read More

Stuff based on Stuff

Let me give you two plots in magic that have not been explored to the full extent.

Here is a nice card plot. The survivor plot. "Imagine there is zombie apocalypse. Hordes of zombies roam the land and only a few people are in shelters desperately trying to make the next day. One of those shelters has run out of food. Food needs to be organized. So a group of three people is set up and goes outside." The deck is separated into reds and black. "The red cards representing the survivors and the black cards the zombies." The red pile is in a sheltered, that means a spectator holds on to them. "Three of the red cards go out and look for food. Unfortunately they run into a group of zombies and are surrounded." The three red cards are sandwiched into four black cards... "suddenly the zombies leave, leaving the survivors alone. Why? Well turns out they have evolved... and have a plan. In fact one of the group is infected." One of the three cards has become black... "but nobody knows... on the way back to the shelter the other two become infected as well." All three black cards are then pushed into half the deck the spectator is holding... "can you imagine the horror?" When the spectator turns over the cards in his hands, they all have become black.

I'm not gonna talk you through a possible handling. Check out Walton for that.

And here is a nice plot that can be taken from close up to stage. The phantom hands. "Imagine a set of invisible hands, right next to my own hands. They do whatever my real hands do." You show a cup and a stamp. You let the stamp fall into the cup. Then both hands mime taking out the stamp, claiming that the phantom hands actually take out the stamp. You mime tearing the stamp into fours pieces and then dropping them back in the cup. When the cup is turned over the stamp in there is torn into four pieces. Method: There is a torn stamp in the cup to begin with. You show a regular stamp and false transfer it to the other hand which pretends to put it in the cup. You ditch the real stamp and the rest is just presentation. There is not much to this... but let's elevate this into a creepy stage piece....

"You know the sensation of being stared at? Well think about being touched with nobody around." Think PK Touches with just one person. Suddenly everything gets a theatrical veil, the veil of mystery.

Read More

Stuff from Stuff

Producing objects don't need a lot of justification. The simple fact that you can make something appear from thin air already is a great deal. Think about it. From nothing you make something by sheer will and it will be whatever you want it to be. These are enormous implications. God is supposed to have that sort of power. But of course any production can benefit from some sort of justification or logical or emotional reasoning.

Here is a bad example: Silk and Ball routines. They are pretty, yes but what is the relationship between silk and ball? Do they come together naturally? No! Yet all the production strike us as beautiful when done right. The intrinsic aesthetics are enough to make us not question the purpose of the choice of props. Is there a way to add to the routine by giving it a better justification aside from the "pretty"-aspect? Yes! Here is how:

Basically you talk about your childhood and all those things you encountered during that time. And that all those things might be responsible for your later outcome of your personality.
Of course a fitting music should go along that. Something nostalgic. Something that reminds us of childhood.
Then you grab a piece of silk and from it you produce a baby's rattle. Then a toy block, a mechanical tin toy, a toy car, a marble, a yo-yo, a Game Boy, a pager, a cell phone.
In between you show the silk to be empty. All the standard ball to silk moves come to mind when thinking about methods to accomplish this.
The aim is, that people will recognize those props. Either referring to their own childhood or the childhood of their own children. Along with the music it will lead to an emotional reaction, hopefully. And you end in the "here" and "now". Returning from memory lane.

This is an example of an emotional reasoning that make up the choice of props to be produced. You still have the God like power of creating stuff, but less random and with much more focus on a given subject.

Here is a cool little bit of wisdom. If people can choose what you produce the production will be stronger. Here is an example: Three imaginary coins are floating in the air. A 2 Euro coin, a 1 Euro coin and a 50 cents coin. The magician claims to hold a real coin in his closed fist. The spectator is asked to pick one of the imaginary coins. Then the hand is opened and the named coin is the only one in there. In terms of method: (C/S two times out of three or Shuttle pass, one time out of three.) Technically it's just a 1/3 chance that you are correct. But the fact that your audience could choose elevates it to a much more appreciative realm.

Let's give you an example for a logical production. This was created from the basic "bottle from a bunch of silks"-effect. It is designed to fit in a kids show.

Effect: Explain that you can Different pieces of clothing are shown. Warm socks, a scarf, gloves, a stupid hat. The kids realize, that all of that is needed in the winter. And from this whole bunch of clothing a thermos bottle is produced. The hot chocolate for later.

Method: A chair is standing around. Behind the backrest on a hook a sock is hanging. Inside the sock the thermos bottle. The clothing is shown and put on the backrest to show the next one. Near the end everything is picked up the loaded sock goes along for the ride. The bundle can be seen from all sides. Push down on the sock and the rest of the clothing and the thermos bottle will seemingly pop up.

You introduced the theme of winter. Coming up with stuff that keeps you warm. What could warm you more than hot chocolate? Right! Nothing.

A what the hell, one more: You may be familiar with the effect, that a rope is shown and a knot is tied. Then as the knot is tightened a colorful piece of silk appears in the knot. (Flash Silk on Rope by Doug Edwards Vol. 15 Issue 12 of the Apocalypse, read it, it's cool!)

Problem: There is absolutely no reason for the silk to appear aside from the surprise.
Solution: I put it at the beginning of my knot routine, by explaining that there are three basic simple knots. The first one; The real knot. I do a real knot to demonstrate. I open the knot again. The second one; The knot that is not. I do a false knot. And third; The magic knot. I do the knot and the piece of silk appears in the knot.
It is not the best solution, but it gives it a bit more reason and time... Yes time to see, that the rope is indeed normal.

And as an afterthought I might add a fourth knot. The knot that comes off. To do that, the piece of silk is twirled together like a rope and a false knot made. In your palm should be a removable knot, or it might by tied to the silk to begin with. That way you can pretend to take off the knot which would come as a real surprise and would justify the piece of silk in a strange way. And if you would open the piece of silk and it would have a hole in the center, it would even further explain why a cloth was used and not a rope. Aside from being funny.

Read More

Three Realities

What book would you recommend for a beginning magician? "Magic for Dummies" by David Pogue? "Close-up Magic" by Nicholas Einhorn? "Magic Tricks for Grownups" by Jon Tremaine? Or even "Magic: The Complete Course" by Joshua Jay?

Think back when you first learned magic. Did you really get a book first? Only a few of us have been so lucky? Before we got a book we had a trick.

In my case it was the Ball and Vase that my grandpa used to own. It was a plastic version. It was dark green and the ball was black. Like a black pearl. He used to fool the hell out of me. And one day I stole the darn thing.

So that was my serious introduction to magic. A criminal act. Next Christmas I got my first magic kit... yeah who's been naughty or nice? My first book on magic was years later. I was in third grade and my reading skill finally has come to a degree that I had fun doing the reading.

But before I read the book I had tinkered with magic stuff many times. And if I hadn't done so I probably would have had a hard time to comprehend even half of what the book was talking about. I was 8 years old. I had a hard time to differentiate between the reality the spectators where perceiving and the reality I had. And that I had to pretend to have the same sort of fake reality that my spectators had. And rather difficult concept really! Now imagine the enlightenment the following trick had on me:

A bowl of rice. You place a wooden ball on the surface of the rice. Then you lift the bowl above every ones head. And then you shook the bowl slightly. And when you brought the bowl down the ball had become golden. I knew what was going on, but realizing to pretend to be amazed myself got me a greater reaction I slowly understood the meaning of magic. Because I didn't see the ball change my reality was the same as the spectators reality. Now I only had to deny the absolute reality of it being a trick and physics and all.

That knowledge really helped me to "pretend". Now when I change the color of a ball I see it. But I can pretend not to see it. Therefore I don't send any signals of guilt or that of a different reality apart from the spectator's reality.

And that is something that those books do not teach you. At all. I made this little drawing I should have seen many, many years ago:

Read More

Stuff in Stuff

So we got this cool little gimmicked wallet. What do we do with it? Card to wallet... yeah how boring. Here is an idea to spice it up, possibly being a prelude to the card to wallet.

Have the wallet in you left inside jacket pocket. Borrow a finger ring and remark it's beauty. Do not make cheap jokes about it. People might chuckle, but they won't like you! The vanish the ring. Anything by Gregory Wilson is nice. Show your hands empty and then get out the wallet. Open the wallet and reach through the zipper compartment to the outside and pull in and then out the ring.

If you do card to wallet anyways here is my little addition, even though a few bits need to be figured out. Open the wallet and show a face down card in one compartment. It's one of those wallets where a transparent window let's you see what is there. Usually for drivers licences and shit. But in this case you see the back of a card. Leave the wallet open as you have a card selected and signed. Free choice of course. Then the usual shenanigans and finally the card is vanished. You claim it's the card they've been staring at the whole time. Cleanly you pull out the card with no funny moves and it really is the card. The method is nothing but a combination of two gimmicks. One is the wallet and the other one is the transparent window in the wallet. It's basically the face down version of the Wow 2.0 gimmick by Masuda. So before any card is in the wallet the gimmick poses as a card. And once the card is in the wallet the gimmick becomes transparent. Now you got a miracle.

Do not load one card, load more than one. It is much stronger.

Borrow the business card of a spectator... look at it, wondering, then saying, "have we ever met?" Then reach for your wallet and inside there will be the same business card. Looking back at the first business card is has now become your own business card which you hand to the spectator. Do I need to tell you how commercial that is?

Have you ever played around with the option of stealing stuff from the wallet as well. That opens up room for transpositions and all of that fun stuff.

Read More