Paperclipped HELP

Sep 3, 2007
308
0
I perform it just like how Jay Sankey recommends it on the DVD, ACR, Homing Card, Paperclipped. But I only get soso reactions. Any ideas on how to fix that?

(I know freak out wtfS? aren't always the best, but that's what I'm aiming for)
 
Apr 28, 2008
596
0
I believe the lack of reaction could be because of the nature of the effect. The spectators know that the card hasn't been in the paper clip the whole time, it's just not possible. They will probably be confused as they won't know when you switched it. It's more of a puzzle than a magic effect.

Sometimes, you'll get some people who won't immediately think of the obvious explanation and will freak out. Although I don't see this happening often, at least not for the sort of people I regularly perform for. This is why I don't use this effect.

It seems popular so i'm sure a lot of people can use it but it just doesn't work for me and my performance style.
 
I believe the lack of reaction could be because of the nature of the effect. The spectators know that the card hasn't been in the paper clip the whole time, it's just not possible. They will probably be confused as they won't know when you switched it. It's more of a puzzle than a magic effect.

Sometimes, you'll get some people who won't immediately think of the obvious explanation and will freak out. Although I don't see this happening often, at least not for the sort of people I regularly perform for. This is why I don't use this effect.

It seems popular so i'm sure a lot of people can use it but it just doesn't work for me and my performance style.

I totally agree that it is more of a puzzle than a magic effect and that is the reason i don't perform it.

However, I have gotten great reactions performing jay's variation of paperclipped called "Mercurial Prediction" which can be found on his 22 blows to the head dvd. As it is a prediction effect it may not fit in with your performance style but if you want a great, hard hitting piece of mentalism then this is a great effect
 
Sep 3, 2007
308
0
For the signature: just standard ACR patter

I'm thinking I'll try to milk the prediction part about that matching its also the _____ as much as possible before I reveal the signature.

Any other ideas?

Can you elaborate further on the mercurial prediction?
 
Sure

For the mercurial prediction a paperclipped card is introduced that is a different colour from the deck of cards you are using (e.g. if it's a red deck then the paperclipped card will be blue or black etc). The spectator sees any card they wish, and when the different coloured card is taken off the paperclip it matches the selection.

I much prefer this to the original paperclipped but it may or may not fit your performance style but i'd recommend giving it a try.
 
I have a lot of handlings on this, and even the most basic flips people out. I've been gigged just because of this trick, with the client calling to make sure I "do the one with the paperclip in it."

When I wasn't in grad school and had time to work restaurants, I'd open a table by introducing myself and telling them I have a prediction about one of them. I'd place a silver box on the table and tell them we'd get to it in just a few.

During the course of the set, I'd have a card signed and at one point I'd make sure the card was face up in view and I'd open the box and drop out the paperclipped card next to the selection.

I'd then do one more thing with the selection, then perform paperclipped with this type of script:

"You know how when I first came over I told you I had a prediction about one of you? I wanted to predict a card one of you would think of, so I took a card from another deck and put it in this clip. (Removing the clip and folding back one pip-corner of the card to show the side of the table the selector is not on) Which card did I guess? (They confirm I predicted the card correctly.) But the funny thing is that I didn't write the prediction inside...(unfolding the card)...you did."

This trick kills. If it comes across as a puzzle, it's the fault of the presenter, not the effect in this case. You're likely violating the Too Perfect Theory, which I've seen many who perform Paperclipped do.

PM me if you need specific help, I will not expose more publicly.

Pj
 
Jun 10, 2008
921
1
Newcastle upon Tyne
This is interesting.

I have played with paperclipped a lot, and have found some points of interest.

This piece is not effective when used as an opener. The reason for this is, I believe, because the switch of the cards is an obvious conclusion to jump to. For this reason, I will open my set, go through some material, then introduce this with a transpo. If they are conditioned to understand that you can cause a card to travel to an unlikely place under test conditions, the switch is less likely to be assumed.
This effect is also very audience dependent. In essence, someone will adore this, will be absolutely stunned and will have no idea how it was done. Others, however will think 'Oh, very clever, quick hands', rather than 'Wow, how possibly?'. Basically- they'll think sleight of hand rather than magic.

Apparently this is Jay's single greatest selling effect. I don't get that, but it is rather good.

CL
 
Apr 28, 2008
596
0
I get what you're saying but... aren't we supposed to be doing the impossible? :confused:

- Sean

Yes, we are. However, I think there are limits to what we can expect people to believe. Expecting them to believe that their signed card has been in a paper clip before they even selected it and signed it is unreasonable.

It's similar to showing every card to be the same on a Svengali deck and expecting the audience to believe it isn't a trick deck, they just know it can't be done.

If you use the Svengali deck in a more subtle way it works far better, e.g. to do a card at any number and presenting it as a mentalism piece using suggestion. I think this would be far more plausible, it still appears impossible but is far more believable.

Using Paperclipped as a prediction with a card that isn't signed would be far more effective in my opinion.

This trick kills. If it comes across as a puzzle, it's the fault of the presenter, not the effect in this case. You're likely violating the Too Perfect Theory, which I've seen many who perform Paperclipped do.

Simply because an effect doesn't work well for somebody doesn't mean there is a problem with their presentation. Not every effect suits every magician. Different magicians perform for different types of people. Some people think very logically and this is very difficult to overcome, they will immediately work out that it couldn't have been there the whole time so it must have been switched. If you frequently encounter people like this you need to be careful with your selection of effects.

When i'm choosing effects to perform I always make sure they are respectful of the audiences intelligence, for me, Paperclipped is not.

This is interesting.

I have played with paperclipped a lot, and have found some points of interest.

This piece is not effective when used as an opener. The reason for this is, I believe, because the switch of the cards is an obvious conclusion to jump to. For this reason, I will open my set, go through some material, then introduce this with a transpo. If they are conditioned to understand that you can cause a card to travel to an unlikely place under test conditions, the switch is less likely to be assumed.
This effect is also very audience dependent. In essence, someone will adore this, will be absolutely stunned and will have no idea how it was done. Others, however will think 'Oh, very clever, quick hands', rather than 'Wow, how possibly?'. Basically- they'll think sleight of hand rather than magic.

Apparently this is Jay's single greatest selling effect. I don't get that, but it is rather good.

CL

I agree with this, it would be far better as a closer. As you progress through a routine you can do effects that the audience would not appreciate at the start of the routine. They generally stop trying to catch you. If somebody wanted to perform Paperclipped I would definitely recommend doing it as a closer.

I wouldn't do it as I try to make sure I entertain the whole audience equally, I don't want a couple of people screaming and freaking out then a few sitting there thinking 'whatever, he just switched the card'.
 
Sep 1, 2007
1,572
2
34
Leicester, UK
www.youtube.com
Yes, we are. However, I think there are limits to what we can expect people to believe. Expecting them to believe that their signed card has been in a paper clip before they even selected it and signed it is unreasonable.

It's similar to showing every card to be the same on a Svengali deck and expecting the audience to believe it isn't a trick deck, they just know it can't be done.

In the same way that they just know two cards transposing can't be done? In the same way they know that pips can't move on a card? - I'm just saying, all these things are on the same impossible level; for me there is no range of impossibility, things are either impossible or very very very unlikely or less. You can't get more impossible or less impossible - there is just impossible.

I do get what you're saying, but for me, the whole point of magic is to temporarily disrupt what is and isn't reasonable if you want to use that word. It's our job as magicians to completely shatter their reality and what they know - but at the same time we must entertain to complete them again with just a few cracks.

I do agree somewhat though, I think paperclipped would be far better off as a closer, a prediction, a transposition type effect. But I don't think we should rule it out as it being unreasonable to expect someone to believe it. By the same token, Here then There is also the same - after all... we all know two things can't transpose in such a manner, right?

- Sean
 
Apr 28, 2008
596
0
In the same way that they just know two cards transposing can't be done? In the same way they know that pips can't move on a card? - I'm just saying, all these things are on the same impossible level; for me there is no range of impossibility, things are either impossible or very very very unlikely or less. You can't get more impossible or less impossible - there is just impossible.

I do get what you're saying, but for me, the whole point of magic is to temporarily disrupt what is and isn't reasonable if you want to use that word. It's our job as magicians to completely shatter their reality and what they know - but at the same time we must entertain to complete them again with just a few cracks.

I do agree somewhat though, I think paperclipped would be far better off as a closer, a prediction, a transposition type effect. But I don't think we should rule it out as it being unreasonable to expect someone to believe it. By the same token, Here then There is also the same - after all... we all know two things can't transpose in such a manner, right?

- Sean

I believe there are 'degrees of impossibility'. Different effects get different reactions, I think this is because of the perceived impossibility. I think some effects are so impossible that they lead the audience to the solution.

It's nice to be able to try and shatter somebody's reality however I find in many situations this just isn't a realistic goal.

In some circumstances, with the right people and right atmosphere I believe you can perform what people will believe to be miracles with no explanation. However, I don't think you can go into every performance with these expectations. People have their guard up a lot of the time and it can be very difficult to get past this.
 
Sep 1, 2007
1,572
2
34
Leicester, UK
www.youtube.com
I believe there are 'degrees of impossibility'. Different effects get different reactions, I think this is because of the perceived impossibility. I think some effects are so impossible that they lead the audience to the solution.

It's nice to be able to try and shatter somebody's reality however I find in many situations this just isn't a realistic goal.

In some circumstances, with the right people and right atmosphere I believe you can perform what people will believe to be miracles with no explanation. However, I don't think you can go into every performance with these expectations. People have their guard up a lot of the time and it can be very difficult to get past this.

Hehe, I guess that's where we differ then. :) Although I wouldn't say exclusively that different effects get different reactions in the sense the tricks themselves do - it's the performer and I'm sure you're the kind of person to agree to this - though I know what you mean.

It might not be a realistic goal in every situation, you're quite right - every audience is different and we can't expect everyone to react or think the same.

What you say about people having their guard up I think is a great way of saying it, what I would say here is the importance of making a connection with the spectator so that they feel comfortable with letting their guard down; make sense? :) Of course, not everyone is going to let their guard down and this is something we just have to accept. Not everyone is going to be running away screaming - everyone is different and thinks differently. It's an important aspect for the performer to take into consideration which effects would be appropriate for the spectator.

Can I just say that I've been enjoying this discussion though, Squ!rrel . :)

- Sean
 
Apr 28, 2008
596
0
Hehe, I guess that's where we differ then. :) Although I wouldn't say exclusively that different effects get different reactions in the sense the tricks themselves do - it's the performer and I'm sure you're the kind of person to agree to this - though I know what you mean.

It might not be a realistic goal in every situation, you're quite right - every audience is different and we can't expect everyone to react or think the same.

What you say about people having their guard up I think is a great way of saying it, what I would say here is the importance of making a connection with the spectator so that they feel comfortable with letting their guard down; make sense? :) Of course, not everyone is going to let their guard down and this is something we just have to accept. Not everyone is going to be running away screaming - everyone is different and thinks differently. It's an important aspect for the performer to take into consideration which effects would be appropriate for the spectator.

Can I just say that I've been enjoying this discussion though, Squ!rrel . :)

- Sean

I agree the performance is by far the most important factor in getting reactions, what I meant to say is, All other things being equal the reaction will be based on the perceived impossibility.

I always try and make a connection with the spectator, I believe it should be the main objective of any magician. It's nice if you can get them to let their guard down but I plan my performance assuming this will not happen. Most people will still enjoy the magic even if they don't let their guard down as long as you don't push them too far.

I've been enjoying this discussion as well, it's a very interesting topic.
 
Yes, we are. However, I think there are limits to what we can expect people to believe. Expecting them to believe that their signed card has been in a paper clip before they even selected it and signed it is unreasonable.

Simply because an effect doesn't work well for somebody doesn't mean there is a problem with their presentation. Not every effect suits every magician. Different magicians perform for different types of people. Some people think very logically and this is very difficult to overcome, they will immediately work out that it couldn't have been there the whole time so it must have been switched. If you frequently encounter people like this you need to be careful with your selection of effects.

When i'm choosing effects to perform I always make sure they are respectful of the audiences intelligence, for me, Paperclipped is not.

Your logic is solid, and for the most part I agree. However, you too are alluding to the Too Perfect Theory with or without realizing it. (Have you studied it at all, by chance?)

Paperclipped can easily be too perfect, or to use your terms, too impossible. It needs to be layered and played right, I agree with you there. I disagree that it is disrespectful of an audience's intelligence, though. I've played it to far too many people of all ilks to great response to say that it insults them in any way.

Also, if the effect itself is weak, then I agree that it could simply be the effect that is not working for the magician. This effect is not weak, though, therefore I found it easy to conclude that the troubles were mostly magician-centric here.

Still, different strokes for different folks.

Pj
 
Apr 28, 2008
596
0
Your logic is solid, and for the most part I agree. However, you too are alluding to the Too Perfect Theory with or without realizing it. (Have you studied it at all, by chance?)

Paperclipped can easily be too perfect, or to use your terms, too impossible. It needs to be layered and played right, I agree with you there. I disagree that it is disrespectful of an audience's intelligence, though. I've played it to far too many people of all ilks to great response to say that it insults them in any way.

Also, if the effect itself is weak, then I agree that it could simply be the effect that is not working for the magician. This effect is not weak, though, therefore I found it easy to conclude that the troubles were mostly magician-centric here.

Still, different strokes for different folks.

Pj

I was referring to the Too Perfect Theory, it's something i've given a lot of thought to. There seems to be a point where an effect can be too impossible and spectators won't accept it. I find it very interesting as all magic should be impossible (as Sean_Raf mentioned) but it appears that it can't be too impossible.

I think I should clarify my statement about it being disrespectful, I perhaps didn't explain myself as well as I could. I meant to say that in the context of my routine (and perhaps the routine of the original poster) it just doesn't work and could be perceived as insulting to my audience. I'm not suggesting that it wouldn't work with a different performance style and presentation.

The troubles may well be 'magician-centric' however this doesn't mean the magician is doing something wrong, as I said earlier, some effects just don't work for some magicians performance style.
 
Sep 3, 2007
308
0
What kinda character would you attribute to Paperclipped?

What about me do you think is taking away from that?

Make as many assumptions as you want about me, based on my username, posts, avatar,etc. lol
 
Aug 7, 2008
70
0
In the same way that they just know two cards transposing can't be done? In the same way they know that pips can't move on a card? - I'm just saying, all these things are on the same impossible level; for me there is no range of impossibility, things are either impossible or very very very unlikely or less. You can't get more impossible or less impossible - there is just impossible.

I do get what you're saying, but for me, the whole point of magic is to temporarily disrupt what is and isn't reasonable if you want to use that word. It's our job as magicians to completely shatter their reality and what they know - but at the same time we must entertain to complete them again with just a few cracks.


- Sean
This is exactly why you save your best effect for last, by best, I mean most impossible. You do your most visual first because it temporarily breaks what's possible and what isn't, and then when you continue with some lower degrees of impossibility (sounds weird I know) and by the time you get to the end, anything is possible, allowing you to get the best reactions for your best effects. If someone walked up to you with a deck, and had you cut it once or twice, and they then named every card in order, it wouldn't be that impressive. You might think "oh, a stacked deck." If he performed tricks before that one though, it would be much more impressive because he already interrupted your rationality. Also, don't do magic for people as rational as James Randi, it doesn't work.
 
Sep 15, 2008
69
0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean_Raf View Post
I get what you're saying but... aren't we supposed to be doing the impossible?

- Sean
Yes, we are. However, I think there are limits to what we can expect people to believe. Expecting them to believe that their signed card has been in a paper clip before they even selected it and signed it is unreasonable.

It's similar to showing every card to be the same on a Svengali deck and expecting the audience to believe it isn't a trick deck, they just know it can't be done.

I respectfully disagree.

My only thought throughout this entire thread was that "we are magicians." If we limit ourselves to what people will believe, then we are no longer doing magic, was are just very skillful.

For example, you do a double lift and show the queen of hearts. "Bury" it in the middle and then show it's back on top after a "fair shuffle." You do this to explain how card sharks can move cards anywhere they want. In reality, you did nothing you said, but the specs believe it; it's believable.

In magic, I strive to make it seem impossible.

Paperclipped is all about presentaion.

I always use PC with either ACR or 51 cards to pocket. Then I end by referring to my prediction, saying that I took it from a different deck, so it could match their card. "Wow. And it does....I just didn't expect it to match exactly."

I always gotten great reactions and always get told "There's no way that my card was there the whole time!"

That's what you're supposed to get from this effect. After I hand them their selection back, I always give them the paperclip as well to clip and keep on their card.

---

In my stand up routine, I have someone bring up a dollar bill for me (larger the better) and after I take their money I give them the paperclipped card and a reciept. Thanking them for their transaction.

They sit down and throughout the hour show I am constantly cracking jokes about the card and his bill.

---

PC is all about presentation. If you present it as a puzzle, as "see if you can tell me when I switch the card," then that is how they'll see it. And more often than not, the reason they view it as a puzzle, is because your sleights involved make it look suspicious and "movey."

*Word Count*[/joke]
 
Sep 3, 2007
308
0
I'll try it out as a standalone trick instead of as a closer to an ACR. See if it works better then.

Thanks! Anything else?
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results