How do you deal with audience challenging you?

[Khaleel Olaiky]

So I was performing at a birthday party a few days ago, a show for about 20 people, it was not a gig I was invited and decided to entertain the crowd.

I was doing some routines, my go-to tricks, and then decided to perform the classic invisible deck routine and it went great but afterward, one of the people told me could you do it without me saying the card out loud?
"you just read my mind few tricks earlier," he said.

I took out my peeking device/notebook and told him to write it down for the audience's sake, and proceeded with the trick normally.

Don't get me wrong I know how to deal with hecklers I've been doing this for quite some time now, I think this situation is different, it is more of a challenge than someone heckling you.
My gut reaction is to immediately say "YES I can" because saying no will just ruin the fun and the spectator's theory about the secret will be confirmed.

Sometimes after I say yes I just try to move on to the next effect, but other times like the example above I took the challenge and tried to think fast.

I wanna hear about how do you deal with similar situations, and does this happen to you often?

 

[Gabriel Z.]

Card College Volume 2 has tons on this subject.

 

[Khaleel Olaiky]

Card College Volume 2 has tons on this subject.

Thanks, I will check it out.

 

[RealityOne]

I think the question was more trying to figure out a method than challenging your powers. A spectator thinks they figured out a trick if they understand one part of the method (while a magician is stumped if they can figure out everything except one part of the method). With that in mind, a good question to ask is why did the spectator think that saying the card out loud is crucial to the method?

When I perform the invisible deck, I have several members of the audience choose the card -- one chooses the color, the next the suite, the next chooses whether it is a court card or number card and the last chooses the value. The process of selecting the card requires people to say their choices out loud. Contrast this with a magician who has someone "think of a card", emphasizes that "there is no way I could know what card you are thinking of" and then, before spreading the deck asks the spectator "say the name of the card you are thinking about for the first time out loud." That presentation places an emphasis on the thinking of the card and then has the spectator saying the name of the card out loud. That is incongruent - if you could determine the card they are thinking of, they wouldn't have to say the name out loud. The magician calls attention to an impossibility (knowing a thought of card) and then eliminates that impossibility (saying it out loud).

Another issue is how the magician explains why the magic happens. For me, the spectator, with the help of the audience, does the magic through their imagination. That is, after the card is decided upon by the audience, the spectator imagines turning the card over in an imaginary deck (there is a bit more byplay but that is essentially what happens). The magic happens as a result of the spectator's actions (with some assistance from the magician). The situation makes it understood that the magic is part of the "play." Nobody is going to challenge the spectator who got credit for doing the magic. Contrast that with a magician that claims that they are able to have the card the person is thinking of magically turn over in the deck or they made a prediction ahead of time by turning the card the spectator will think of over in the deck. Exceptional claims require exceptional proof. Very few people in the audience will believe that the magician has special powers and some will challenge that claim. Often the performance of magic places the magician above the audience because they know the secret and the knowledge of the secret is portrayed as a special power. That often encourages a spectator to want to cut the magician down a notch by guessing the method.

 

[Dustrod]

I think you had the right idea of having another mind reading effect ready to go.
If they want to see it again they might not be completely fooled or it might have happened too quick and they need one more effect to seal the deal, so having one ready I think is the ticket.

Although, maybe the effect that followed the invisible deck wasn't as powerful to them and that's why you were challenged.
I mean, it is a pretty powerful effect so maybe lead up to it, work it up a bit.. Just rearranging the order could help them accept what they just witnessed. Condition them with a quick effect or two that they're about to witness the impossible and then do the invisible deck. See if they still challenge you. (and if the do, at least you have a peek device ready to go)

 

[Khaleel Olaiky]

I think the question was more trying to figure out a method than challenging your powers. A spectator thinks they figured out a trick if they understand one part of the method (while a magician is stumped if they can figure out everything except one part of the method). With that in mind, a good question to ask is why did the spectator think that saying the card out loud is crucial to the method?

When I perform the invisible deck, I have several members of the audience choose the card -- one chooses the color, the next the suite, the next chooses whether it is a court card or number card and the last chooses the value. The process of selecting the card requires people to say their choices out loud. Contrast this with a magician who has someone "think of a card", emphasizes that "there is no way I could know what card you are thinking of" and then, before spreading the deck asks the spectator "say the name of the card you are thinking about for the first time out loud." That presentation places an emphasis on the thinking of the card and then has the spectator saying the name of the card out loud. That is incongruent - if you could determine the card they are thinking of, they wouldn't have to say the name out loud. The magician calls attention to an impossibility (knowing a thought of card) and then eliminates that impossibility (saying it out loud).

Another issue is how the magician explains why the magic happens. For me, the spectator, with the help of the audience, does the magic through their imagination. That is, after the card is decided upon by the audience, the spectator imagines turning the card over in an imaginary deck (there is a bit more byplay but that is essentially what happens). The magic happens as a result of the spectator's actions (with some assistance from the magician). The situation makes it understood that the magic is part of the "play." Nobody is going to challenge the spectator who got credit for doing the magic. Contrast that with a magician that claims that they are able to have the card the person is thinking of magically turn over in the deck or they made a prediction ahead of time by turning the card the spectator will think of over in the deck. Exceptional claims require exceptional proof. Very few people in the audience will believe that the magician has special powers and some will challenge that claim. Often the performance of magic places the magician above the audience because they know the secret and the knowledge of the secret is portrayed as a special power. That often encourages a spectator to want to cut the magician down a notch by guessing the method.

You made multiple extremely important points, you basically changed the way I look at the invisible deck and possibly to magic in general, changing a simple thing in how the performance is portrayed is a game-changer.
When the audience pause for a second and say "Oh, he can't have superpowers" then they start looking for other possibilities, the effect should be played at a balance of impressive/impossible ratio.

 

[Theorist19]

So I was performing at a birthday party a few days ago, a show for about 20 people, it was not a gig I was invited and decided to entertain the crowd.

I was doing some routines, my go-to tricks, and then decided to perform the classic invisible deck routine and it went great but afterward, one of the people told me could you do it without me saying the card out loud?
"you just read my mind few tricks earlier," he said.

I took out my peeking device/notebook and told him to write it down for the audience's sake, and proceeded with the trick normally.

Don't get me wrong I know how to deal with hecklers I've been doing this for quite some time now, I think this situation is different, it is more of a challenge than someone heckling you.
My gut reaction is to immediately say "YES I can" because saying no will just ruin the fun and the spectator's theory about the secret will be confirmed.

Sometimes after I say yes I just try to move on to the next effect, but other times like the example above I took the challenge and tried to think fast.

I wanna hear about how do you deal with similar situations, and does this happen to you often?

When facing an unexpected challenge you can refer, as already stated, to the Card College 2.
If instead you want to prevent such situation, I highly suggest Pit Hartling’s essay “Inducing challenges”, which talks about satisfying the need of the spectator to challenge you by inducing them into challenging you in a moment where you can use said challenge to further demonstrate your abilities. You can find this essay at page 105 of the free Vanishing Inc pdf Magic In Mind.
Other two approaches that I really like are Dani DaOrtiz and Asi Wind’s ones when building routines. While they are not made directly for the purpose of avoiding challenges, I think that they prevent the problem in two interesting ways.
Many of Dani’s routines follow the principle of going past the spectator’s expectations by adding something that goes past the initial premise of the routine. His Torn and Restored Card to Any Number is a great example (you can find it for free with the Vanishing Inc ShareMagicLive download).
Regarding Asi Wind, his routines are extremely well-crafted and are built in a way that makes it almost impossible to backtrack the method or find logical fallacies in it, also thanks to a streamlined approach that is free of unnecessary parts. Getting some of his releases would definitely help understanding his approach.
I hope this will be able to help you

 

[Khaleel Olaiky]

When facing an unexpected challenge you can refer, as already stated, to the Card College 2.
If instead you want to prevent such situation, I highly suggest Pit Hartling’s essay “Inducing challenges”, which talks about satisfying the need of the spectator to challenge you by inducing them into challenging you in a moment where you can use said challenge to further demonstrate your abilities. You can find this essay at page 105 of the free Vanishing Inc pdf Magic In Mind.
Other two approaches that I really like are Dani DaOrtiz and Asi Wind’s ones when building routines. While they are not made directly for the purpose of avoiding challenges, I think that they prevent the problem in two interesting ways.
Many of Dani’s routines follow the principle of going past the spectator’s expectations by adding something that goes past the initial premise of the routine. His Torn and Restored Card to Any Number is a great example (you can find it for free with the Vanishing Inc ShareMagicLive download).
Regarding Asi Wind, his routines are extremely well-crafted and are built in a way that makes it almost impossible to backtrack the method or find logical fallacies in it, also thanks to a streamlined approach that is free of unnecessary parts. Getting some of his releases would definitely help understanding his approach.
I hope this will be able to help you

Wow, Thanks a lot I'm definitely checking these out. I am aware of Dani and Asi's work but I guess I never dug that deep into their routines, but now when you mentioned it I couldn't agree more, and I will revisit some of their stuff.