On Something Old

A work in progress and that is if I am being extremely polite lovely readers... yours truly has been rather bussy lately but I have come up with a few interesting subjects that shall be exposed and dealt with in the upcoming series of articles.

Must dash now, Ricky Smith's dowload on the Diagonal Palm Shift awaits me.

On Hanky Moody and the ethics of a self working card effect

“…I probably won’t go down in history, but I will go down on your sister…”

Hank Moody, Californication

Professor Moriarty Here, your one and only source into the scandalous lives of magic’s elite. Who am I? That’s a secret I’ll never tell…

Ok, enough with the Gossip Girl Jokes and let us get down to business:

Oh how I miss the taste of a sweeter life my lovely readers for I cannot stand being geographically and intellectually surrounded by magicians who are constantly trying to find the easy way out when it comes to designing the internal logic of an effect.

As an initial clarification for the present article and its topic I would like to quote Mike Vincent when he said that there was no such thing as a self working effect.

Let us think about it for a second: If you have a folding half dollar and a bottle right in front of you, they will stay there unless you pick them up, the effect will not happen without the intervention of the performer, who, incidentally, has to be familiar with the elements in question and the proper way of handling them if he desires to present the effect in a decent manner.

The fact that the internal logic of the effect is somewhat automatic does not mean its performance will.

In the long lost blog “Double Facers”, Sleight of hand god Tony Chang wrote a lot about the invalidity of difficulty as a parameter when creating magic. In other words, you should not care about difficulty when working on a desired effect’s internal logic for the only thing that matters is its final strength and impact when ultimately one chooses to perform it live.

Automaticity, in conclusion, must not be a predisposition but a consequence. If the strongest outcome demands we practice the longitudinal swivel steal for 10.000 hours, we shall take it. On the other hand, if the effect benefits the most from a method that happens to be self-working, we must take it as well.

However, I’ll be the first to come out of the move monkey closet and admit that I love difficult sleight of hand and the in depth study of the different methodological paths one may take when creating an effect and I found myself totally reflected on the introductory words Derek Delgaudio wrote in “Only Notes” when speaking about his “Newton’s center deal”:

“…False deals are a wonderful barometer in assessing one’s proficiency and dedication to card technique. This is not to say that if one does not false deal, one is not proficient. Simply, perfection in any false deal takes a certain dedication. If someone claims they are a “Card Man”, the quality of his false deals can tell you a lot. I like that”

I certainly hope Derek does not get upset with me for quoting him but whatever the result may be, if it gets him to read this it will accomplish the primary motive of the author, as he needs the attention.

I should mention that the idea for the present article came to mind after I saw a Facebook picture advertising a lecture containing only self working effects by whom I consider to be one of the most intelligent magicians in the area. Although I have nothing against him in particular, the example may serve us well in explaining those more realistic variables that come in to play when one creates and shares magic.

The truth is I am writing this article with an amateur’s point of view, which I am extremely proud of but if one works magic for a living some other things may be more important when selecting and creating an effect. These things present themselves as variables such as the time it takes to re set the effect, the time it takes to perform it, pocket management and so many other things.

When it comes to a lecture, two variables that are not so pretty in pink stand the out like a sore thumb:

A lecture must be commercial; it must have variety both in effect and difficulty. Magicians like to press a button and see something happen, if they do not walk out of a lecture with something that they can go home with and perform for their Persian cat then it does not get the money.

Most magicians, sadly, are not very skillful when it comes to sleight of hand and they hide themselves behind the poorly constructed idea of hobbyists when in reality they do not want to embrace their despicable laziness.

I’d ask you to pardon my French, but that is the way it goes…

An example of what has been discussed herein will be provided in the following delivery of the much acclaimed “Crème de la crème” series

David Gilmour’s acoustic rendition of "Wish You Were Here" now accompanies me as I type the final words of this fantastic article/essay.

XOXO lovely readers, Professor Moriarty now checks out…

“...I think if I'm 40 and I don't have any kids and I'm not married, I would have a baby artificially inseminated. I would feel like Mary - like Jesus is my baby…”
Kim Kardashian

On a much needed comeback newsletter

"...I feel like I'm too busy writing history to read it..."

Kanye West

Long time no see lovely readers, Apologize I must for my rather prolonged absence from this equally lovely platform which I so deeply care about...

I am however extremely proud to admit that the almost two months of non stop studying have paid off since last friday I finished high school, I am now a free man and I plan on spending the next four months writing and practicing magic, much to your own delight.

The sound of Bob Dylan's "All Along the Watchtower" now accompanies me as I start what will probably not make much sense thematically for it's my urgent need to write that surpasses my desire to stay organized, I therefor apologize in advance.

I am pleased to inform that the first contribution to the guest bloggers section is being given its final touches and will shorty come out to the public. I chose to start with Alan Muicey, who, apart from being one of my closest confidants is a fantastic technician and cardistry artist. His column will deal with how he found a way to combine all of his passions under the wings of a very spanish-influenced performance style which I think you will all enjoy...

Having said that I must now confess that I have been revisiting my old friend the push through shuffle. Although I much favor the strip out shuffle in every aspect, I must confess that my love for the work of Jason England along with my constant appreciation for the hands of whom I think may be the greatest sleight of hand artist standing on the face of the earth, Mr. Steve Forte, have caused me to welcome the push through back to my practice routine.

In doing so I noticed a few subtleties which I think are worthy of mentioning. Firstly, I consider it crucial that the moment in which the secret action takes places be totally imperceptible and for that I must recommend two strategies:

The first is Vernon's idea of only moving the right hand half through the other. Although I think this notion is quite fantastic, it does make for a somewhat slower shuffle, which is fine if that is what you are looking for.

On the other hand, if you may be looking for a more dynamic shuffle you must notice the way Steve Forte handles the present technique. Although I am still not sure how he does it, Mr. Forte achieves and enviable fluidity when it comes to the stripping out of the packets. If you ever have the pleasure to watch him you shall notice how there is no pause between the shuffle and the subsequent running cut. Another nice touch is displayed on 52, the special bonus section of his much acclaimed GPS series. If your eye is keen enough you will notice how he pushes the pack forward at the crucial moment, That may be something applicable to any kind of false shuffle since it follows the Erdnase commandment of the larger motion covering the smaller one.

Regardless of which path you may choose, there is a subtlety that is equally applicable to both styles of shuffles since it deals with what I consider to be the biggest issue with the push through, overcoming the friction created by the undesired contact between the fingers of both hands at the moment of the push through. To my mind, the matter is solved by the consideration of the action of the both thumbs at the crucial moment, I found that if you keep them in contact with each other the pushing of the packets through one another becomes much fluid, no matter the size of the brief.

On a rather modest closing remark I shall link you to a video of my own in which I can be seen mixing up Zarrow shuffles, strip out shuffles and other kinds of artifice.

Click here and prepare to be utterly amazed by my dazzling chops!

Taylor Swift's "You Belong With Me" joins me as I hope you have enjoyed this needed comeback as much as I have...

ta-ta lovely readers, Professor Moriarty checks out...

"...Sex without love is a meaningless experience, but as far as meaningless experiences go its pretty damn good..."

Woody Allen

On miso paste and how it relates to TV magic

"I am as bad as the worst, but, thank God, I am as good as the best"

Walt Whitman

Hello again my lovely readers, today I present to you a short essay that came to me while I was performing one of the daily rituals I enjoy the most, practicing at the table while I watch "the mind of a chef"

You would not find it so odd if you remembered that when I first started writing on this beautiful platform I mentioned how much I enjoyed cooking. While I do not think I am as good a cook as I am a card technique aficionado I do find myself making constant links between the two crafts, being the one I Present to you today perhaps the most direct of them all.

Season one of the show stars culinary extraordinare and ramen fanatic David Chang. Cofounder of Momofuku Noodle Bar in NYC, David travels around the globe visiting some of the best chefs and discussing a particular topic with each episode, usually ending with him blowing your mind using the feature ingredient or technique in a way you did not think possible.

However, it was not David's innovation and wits that impressed me the most but rather an experience documented on the episode dedicated to miso paste.

The place Chang visits the most is Japan and in this particular occasion an establishment in which miso was made like nowhere else.

After watching the extensive process of crafting the paste in question Chang has a profound experience as he finally gets to taste the result.

"I wish people knew this is how miso should actually taste" David exclaims as he reflects on the poor quality miso people usually get on a regular basis

Oddly enough I feel the same way about magic and how people usually get exposed to it. Laymen consume magic on tv and said magic seldom is as good as magic really is. For example, instead of watching Fred kaps pour endless amounts of salt from his hands they see smoothini on America's got talent.

But do not get me wrong lovely readers for I am not blaming it entirely on the magicians but rather on the initial fault that lies in not considering the specificities of television as a media of communication before planning to go on it and perform magic

We cannot go on the air and behave the same way we would on stage due to the fact that we are quite simply not working in the same circumstances. Our attention must be focused on the camera's eye rather than on the spectator's and we must use the way tv technically works to our advantage, even if it means cheating a little bit

As a closing remark I would like to recommend Luis piedrahita from Spain, whom I consider to be the biggest authority on the present subject. Luis' performances at "el hormiguero" are simply wonderful and his thoughts on the matter may be found at dani daortiz's magazine "El Manuscrito" as well as in his EMC 2012 talk

Must dash now boys and girls, I hoped my insight was enjoyable

Yours truly, Professor Moriarty

"Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works"

Steve Jobs

On the presence of the artifice

"You have to learn the rules of the game. And then you have to play better than anyone else"

Albert Einstein

Howdie again my lovely readers, I thought today I would share with you my views on a subject long exploited and investigated in extent by the Spanish school of magic and not so much by the American

I am of course referring to the presence of the artifice in the presentation of magic 

Last year I attended an exclusive premiere for a lecture called "art and artifice" by the amazing Argentinian conjuror by the name of Roberto Mansilla. The event represented a turning point in my magical journey for it was right at that point in which I left the Spanish way of thinking and I was taken under the wings of strong magic, however religious the latter may sound

I noticed that both the Tamariz paradigm and Darwin's have something in common when it comes to the way in which they conceive the spectator's elimination methodology when trying to find a plausible solution for a magical effect.

Nevertheless I have always found it annoying that so many American magicians feel the need to constantly remind to the spectators that magic is not really real by making said elimination process rather annoyingly explicit.

Sometimes they also make the same mistake almost unconsciously by calling themselves "sleight of hand magicians"

The fault becomes quite evident when you put it in perspective. Could you imagine Henry Evans handing out a business card that read "gimmick magician", I guess you get my point, do you not?

I would however seem a tad Of a hypocritical idiot not to mention the fact that being most of my performance items superlative displays of skill I find myself presented with a dilemma. 

Is it possible to sustain the performance persona of a magician and at the same time eliminate the presence of the artifice entirely?

The question shall remain unanswered...

For some exceptions to the previously exposed postulate I must urge you check out the work of who I think is quite simply the best performer of the present times. I am speaking about the lovely Derren Brown and his show "Svengali". To this day it remains the best show this humble writer has ever had the pleasure to watch 

Professor moriarty now leaves the building lovely readers, workout must once again continue.

"If it's the Psychic Network why do they need a phone number?"

Robin Williams

  

On the guilty pleasures of a sleight of hand aficionado

“The main reason Santa is so jolly is because he knows where all the bad girls live”
George Carlin

Hello my lovely readers, as I sit around lovesick by the stupid idiosyncrasies of social media and other so called communicational devices of the present times I thought I would share a piece of my mind on a subject that spikes my interest due to its rather taboo nature

I am speaking about the degree of Organicity in the performance of magic and due to the rather philosophical nature of said topic this post will not pose any definite statement but instead I hope it leaves you questioning a few things we just simply take for granted

Once again I find myself quoting Darwin Ortiz for in his books one theory he states that when working for a lay audience we shall aim towards fooling the emotional rather than the intellectual reasoning of our spectators.

In other words, one must accept the fact that the spectator does not intellectually believe that us magic performers posses real magical powers for if we really did we would instead be producing food for the hungry or curing cancer or simply solving all of the world's problems, would we not?

This limitation also stems from the fact that right from the word go the spectators know that we are magicians, even more so when one is a professional working a paid event.

However I could not help but notice how the impact of my magic increases when performed under the most organic of situations. 

Stripped from every stereotype or clever verbiage, magic achieves its moment of true astonishment on the minds of the spectators. Something as simple as a well performed color change for a stranger is sufficient.

I do think this happens simply because it catches said individual off guard and it knocks him or her down to the canvas in the least violent of ways.

So next time you are on the bus, instead of not taking your eyes off your phone, scan the room, make eye contact and do something with the cards when you know they are looking, then quite simply put the cards away, smile at them and walk away knowing you have created the most memorable of performance experiences.

This is just one way of achieving it and I urge you to look at Michael Vincent, John Armstrong and many others for a way of getting the same result on a formal performance setting.

You must also check out Dan and Dave's organic lecture notes, its insightful nature will take you by surprise.

Cheerio lovely readers, Professor Moriarty's workout routine shall now continue 

“If you can make a girl laugh, you can make her do anything”
Marilyn Monroe

On how the Goldberg Machine aids in the understanding of Darwin Ortiz's contributions to the construction of the magical Effect or quite simply OHTGMAITUODOCTTCOTMEOQS

"Time spent with cats is never wasted"

Sigmund Freud

Those of you lovely readers who happen to be in the luck of calling yourselves friends of yours truly are aware of at least one of the following two things:

First of all, I am a devote student of Darwin Ortiz and what I call the "Strong Magic paradigm" named so dearly after Darwin's stellar book on the theory of magical presentational strategies. However, there is a newer book on construction of the magical effect considered to be the underdog of Darwin's vast contributions to this craft we all know and love and that is the book entitled "designing miracles". While this second book is recent and considerably shorter than what Ortiz has us used to, I think it really encapsulates the real work on the subject in hand.

In both “Strong Magic” and “Designing Miracles” Darwin explains his approach to methodology by posing an interesting axiom that constitutes one of his so called "Darwin's laws", it goes something along the following lines: 

"If the spectators cannot figure out the when, they will never spot the how"

Keep this in mind for before I forget I shall address the second fact about my persona that one must be aware of if it is one's desire to be a reader of this fantastic blog of the modern shenanigans of card artifice

On a more philosophical note, I do not fear a blank canvas but I do not seek inspiration either, I honestly enjoy waiting for an idea to click into place and construct itself in the most perfect of manners.

On the other hand, that may be the reason why I chose not to keep a regularity of any sort when it comes to posting things on this platform. It is my game and therefore I play by my rules, however egotistical that shall sound.

Precisely it was yesterday when that sweet epiphany I was longing for came to me and I decided to begin writing the present essay.

Have you ever heard of a Goldberg machine? Well, allow me to retort:

"…A Rube Goldberg machine is a contraption, invention, device or apparatus that is deliberately over-engineered or overdone to perform a very simple task in a very complicated fashion, usually including a chain reaction. The expression is named after American cartoonist and inventor Rube Goldberg (1883–1970)…"

It is not by mere chance that I first teased you with the quote from Darwin's book. You see my lovely pilgrims, it refers to methodology in quite a revolutionary and one could also admit controversial way.

What is really fantastic about Darwin is that he thinks from the spectator's point of view when creating an effect and from a magician's when technique is concerned. I truly believe this to be the reason why he is quite simply the best effect constructor at present, especially but by no means exclusively when it comes to gambling flavored routines

Spectators have a rather linear way of solving problems or seeking plausible explanations to a seemingly impossible effect, Darwin states. In order to prevent the spectators from finding said solutions he employs an indirect methodology in the form of various devices of both manipulative and psychological nature. This change of paradigm demands a higher level of technical ability from the performer which I personally find quite convenient since I absolutely love difficult and unorthodox sleight of hand, even more so when I can properly apply it to my magic.

Magicians often opt for a direct methodology resulting from their inability to differentiate the effect from the method.

Having clarified that I do think that the best Effects are often simple and direct while having quite indirect inner workings, just like the Goldberg machine! Magic is wonderful, is it not?

In an attempt to wrap up I would like to mention one of Darwin's most controversial statements about the methodological directness of Vernon's travelers and Michael Vincent’s solution to the problem entitled "the ultimate travelers". In this routine, Mike manages to get to the true meaning of Darwin’s law and use time displacement to achieve a cleaner version of the effect that ends up with the deck in the box and the magician reaching with empty hands in order to remove the four aces from the pockets, because they are already there.

However, I would feel guilty without mentioning an exception to the previously exposed thesis.

I am of course speaking about my friend John Carey, who manages to fool the spectators by using amazingly simple and direct methods and still keeping that nice balance between smoothness and Spanish influenced psychological ploys.

I hope that trough the use of the comparison between the Goldberg Machine and Darwin’s approach to methodology I may indirect you to a better way of thinking about methods when it comes to constructing a magical effects and ultimately fooling the pants off of the audience.

Cheerio lovely readers, Professor Moriarty checks out

"I'm not interested in preserving the status quo; I want to overthrow it"
Niccolo Machiavelli