In
the overall of magicdom this is not of extreme
importance, yet it does deserve some discussion.
I'm talking about the patter lines we magicians
use when performing card magic, or what
we call in the trade show business "the
pitch." First, let's admit to this. Some
card effects always seem to play better
than others, yet the apparent weak effect
may actually be technically better than
the popular effect. Perhaps it's due to
the way the layman viewer relates to the
trick being done. Years ago when I was young
and just feeling my way into magic I was
told by an elderly statesman, Mr. Peter
Warlock, that laymen would always have a
difficult time relating to magic, especially
card magic. Back then the statement didn't
make much sense to me. Now it does: especially
in card magic. For instance, some card effects
have an automatic natural appeal, or what
we might call a built in "hook." Gambling
themes come to mind for this built in hook.
Who hasn't dreamed of winning great fortunes
at the gaming tables? Hence, an effect where
a royal flush just seems to magically happen
has an automatic appeal. The same might
be said of four ace effects since, contrary
to what many magicians believe, there is
a mystical appeal about four aces. Look
how the Mac Donald Ace effect has held up
through the years. The hook is there and
little needs to be explained when doing
these effects. I can list others such as
Magician Makes Good, Gambler vs Magician,
and of course the Hotel Mystery. You get
the idea.
Let's
move to the other side of the coin, card
tricks that we as magicians know to be good,
yet they are more difficult to sell to a
layman viewer. Oil and Water might be one.
Technically it is a wonderful trick. Red
and black cards will not mix no matter how
much "proving" is done to mix them. That's
certainly magical. Levand has proven this
on network TV. Still it is a difficult effect
to pull on a layman viewer. The viewer interest
just isn't there. I suggest it's simply
this. . . There's no hook. People simply
don't relate to trying to mix oil and water.
It's something they are taught early in
school, and beyond that who really cares
or tries to do it.(Marlo loved the effect
incidentally.) People do dream of winning
great sums, but who dreams of mixing oil
and water? In all my years it's never been
something of interest, and I doubt that
it will become of interest. It's at the
bottom of the list if I had such a list.
I will, however, wager a few coins when
next in Las Vegas. There's just no emotional
appeal to the Oil and Water effect as there
is with, say, The Hotel Mystery or something
to do with a royal flush. (Yet magically
I tend to agree with Marlo. The Oil and
Water effect is truly magical.)
Let's
take another. How about the effect known
as Follow the Leader? Technically it's a
dandy card trick. Packets of cards are crisscrossed
again and again about the table and the
respective colors follow the leader packets.
Does the layman viewer care? Moreover, it
doesn't make much sense when presented with
a follow the leader theme. Everyone has
played follow the leader as kids, but that
popular child's game of duplicating the
goofy actions of another in no way relates
to the packet switching of cards on the
table. It just doesn't make sense. There's
no hook and no reason for the viewer to
want to relate to it.
How
about the Ambitious Card? Wow, I'm treading
on sacred ground here. This might be the
most often performed card trick in magic,
so let's discuss it for a moment. I have
magician friends, card men, who openly and
proudly state that the Ambitious Card is
their favorite card effect. I often wonder
if it's favorite because it's the most fun
for them to do, or if it's their favorite
because it creates the greatest response
from the viewers? Indeed it is fun to do.
You get to parade quite an arsenal of card
sleights and subtleties. It also gives the
viewer much to watch as the card jumps about
in the deck. So what's my gripe? Nothing
with the trick itself. It's a good trick
and one that I also use. My heartburn comes
when I see a magician presenting it with
the pitch stating that the card is "ambitious."
The word "ambitious" just doesn't make much
sense in this context. Yes, yes, of course
it makes sense to us; it's shop talk to
magicians. But does the viewer understand
why the card is called ambitious? He's going
to have to give it some serious thought.
My guess is his thoughts on ambition run
more along the lines of fame, power, and
success. A card jumping around in the deck
doesn't quite relate.
Let's
move on. How about this one. The magician
removes a playing card from his pocket and
proudly states that it is a "Prediction
Card." Now in the mind and eyes of the viewer
just what in hell does that mean? Of course
the phrase is in our jargon, but will the
layman understand it? I suggest you stand
on a corner in Times Square showing everyone
a card while stating it's a "Prediction
Card." The most you'll gain is to be relegated
to the ranks of the other kooks in Times
Square!
OK,
I'll quit: no more examples, but please
stick with me and I'll try and tie all this
together. Are the effects I've mentioned
bad tricks, and should we not perform them?
Of course not. Some of them are the standards
of card magic. So what's the point in these
ramblings? Here's the point ......
Many
excellent card effects suffer simply because
the viewer can't relate to the trick, and
the problem just might be the pitch. The
viewer needs to be given a reason to want
to believe or a reason to want to relate
to the effect. There needs to be a hook
that he can grab while watching the routine.
At times just adding an element of humor
is all that's needed, or perhaps giving
a bit of history about the effect, or maybe
just pointing out the utter impossibility
of what's about to be done. Something that
will make the viewer want to watch and follow.
I
could babble on about this, but I've already
devoted more than 1,000 words to this opinion,
and more would simply amount to continued
babbling.
