Sneaky, sneaky...

[drop]

I've noticed a legitimate problem with street magic, one that continues to evolve. The problem is magicians thinking they must be totally sneaky. There are a few reasons why this is not at all true; first of all, laypeople do not know the sleights you are doing -- even if they are not perfect, most of the time they will not notice or care, secondly the idea of "hiding the big action through the smaller action" is a little bit backwards in some cases, and lastly remembering the differences of what magicians know and what laypeople know is very important. Yes, sneakiness is important, but can a magician be too sneaky? When do audiences wonder "what is he doing? I can't see it but I know something is up!"

Most sleights have some room for error, if they did not, then preforming would be impossible. The main example I would like to use is the pass, it is well known, and is a difficult technique -- I believe every magician can relate to it. Imagine this, you are in the middle of a pass, you do the move, square up the deck, and all in all, it looked almost flawless. But, what will the spectators think? They will not know the exact motion you did, or if done well, at all how you did the move. What they will know, however, is that you did something. I personally feel it is best to do everything with as little cover as possible, even if this means sacrificing sneakiness. If a pass is done openly, and you even let the cards gently fall on top of the deck, then what will the spectators think? They will see that you have done something, but they will not notice you did anything of importance. In their minds, the card went into the deck, then the cards were thrown on top. Rather then the cards went in the deck, and then the magician did something tricky. Granted, a huge part of this is showmanship, and if you are able to pull the sleights off without a hitch then being sneaky may be better, but that is something not many can do, and it certainly is situational.

Hiding a small action with a big action is a fundamental of magic. All magicians know of this idea, but is it really the best in all situations? Absolutely not all the time, but is it even best most of the time? That is highly debatable, and I believe it is something that each magician needs to figure out on their own. It is important to know, your audience is not dumb. They know magic does not exist. When they see a single big action, and no other moves, they will always know the moment of "magic" happened in that large action. On the other hand, when you openly do the move, if done correctly, they may not have any clue when the "magic" took place. This is something I would urge every magician to experiment with, and think when openly doing sleights is useful. Is being "sneaky" using cover and misdirection to hide you actions? Or is being sneaky openly doing those actions and not leaving a second thought about it. I feel that it is again, situational to the trick, situational to the audience, and dependent on the magicians skill.

Remember, laypeople will not see a "double lift", what they will see is the "top" card of the deck. This is the most powerful weapon a magician has, knowledge. If a magician is shown a pass he will catch it, almost always, there is no denying that. There is a secret, and he is in on it; you will not get the sleights past him. A layperson on the other hand, will usually not catch it. So, an invisible pass is no more effective to laymen then many other passes. As long as you have moved the cards without the audience knowing, you have done your job. Take it a step further, if magic was real, you would not need a "move" to get the card where you wanted it. This is the moment you want to create for your audience. A spectator will usually see something fishy, what they will not see is how that was done, but, if you are completely open in what you do, and they catch nothing -- what will they think you did do to move the cards? Magic is the only explanation

In sum, I feel the real topic is knowing what sneakiness means. Is it sneaky to pull off an invisible pass? Yes, of course... but is it not sneakier to openly move the cards and not be caught? Laypeople will not know what you are doing, and will not think you have moved the card. Laypeople will see you dribble the cards, referring back to my previous example, they will not see you move them. If, however, you try and hide that you are doing anything, that is nearly impossible, and although they will not know what you have done, they will know something has been done. So, what is sneakiness? This is the question all magicians must ask themselves.

-----

Just my 2 cents, and yes I know there are a lot of grammatical errors, I just typed it up and was a little distracted, but I feel thinking through things like these is good for your magic.

So, what are some other opinions? Agree/disagree? Why? I'd like to know what some others think.

 

[Randomwrath]

I agree, I've actually been thinking this a lot recently when watching performances of the pass and such like on youtube, I often think something along the lines of 'Well I didn't see it but you can tell he did something.'
Another similar example is vanishing a coin, showing one hand empty, switching hands then showing the other hand empty. They may not see the coin, there may be no flash as such, but why would you show one hand then the other? And why did they come together for a second? The spectator is instantly suspicious; whilst they didn't see the coin, they were able to follow it exactly. And there's the magician, thinking about how well he did not to flash...
So yeah, good thread.

 

[Zeedub81]

Interesting idea....I think that you should be able to nail your move (pass) right in front of your spectators eyes without them thinking twice. What I mean is that you usually have to use more misdirection *sneakiness* when you aren't as good at the sleight. So I think you should be able to do it so good to the extent that they won't even bother thinking it was a "move."
Z

 

[drop]

Interesting idea....I think that you should be able to nail your move (pass) right in front of your spectators eyes without them thinking twice. What I mean is that you usually have to use more misdirection *sneakiness* when you aren't as good at the sleight. So I think you should be able to do it so good to the extent that they won't even bother thinking it was a "move."
Z

That's pretty valid, and I had a similar thought. Maybe as a magician I'm over thinking a bit. Does being able to pull off a move without being caught make you a good magician, or does misdirection and sneakiness? I think it all depends on what the definitions off all of those words mean, and also how you feel about your magic. Is misdirection a short-cut, does it allow us to pull off sleights when we don't have the skill to otherwise? Or is being a master of misdirection a key trait of a magician? Or probably, is it a gray area between those two ideas?

 

[Sinful07]

i noticed this. i watched Generation Xtreme with Brian tudor, then watched Crash course by Brad christian.

There is a MASSIVE difference in the type of material shown and taught- but the tricks that get more reactions were the one from the crash course, Simple and hard hitting.

(Still dont like brad though. heh!)

 

[praetoritevong]

I think your post is very confused with a few interesting thoughts.

I've noticed a legitimate problem with street magic, one that continues to evolve. The problem is magicians thinking they must be totally sneaky. There are a few reasons why this is not at all true; first of all, laypeople do not know the sleights you are doing -- even if they are not perfect, most of the time they will not notice or care,

This in my opinion is a limiting way of phrasing this perspective. I understand your meaning - that if you screw something up, people might not notice. But to say that most of the time people do not notice or care I believe is not only incorrect, but very harmful to your magic. You say later in your post that audiences are not dumb - well, they're not. Just because they don't have the knowledge doesn't mean they can't put two and two together. Audiences can smell tension during a Gambler's Cop for example and catch people despite the magician not flashing at all. Furthermore, I feel that it is an excuse for bad sleight of hand - oh well they won't notice anyway - and I don't think it's a good attitude.

secondly the idea of "hiding the big action through the smaller action" is a little bit backwards in some cases, and lastly remembering the differences of what magicians know and what laypeople know is very important. Yes, sneakiness is important, but can a magician be too sneaky? When do audiences wonder "what is he doing? I can't see it but I know something is up!"

If you're being "too sneaky", sneaky enough that audiences wonder if something's up, then you're simply not being sneaky enough. If they realise something's up, you need to execute your sleights better - that's not being too sneaky, that's having poor (slow, obvious, tense, flashing or otherwise screwed up) sleight of hand. If they realise something's up, I would suggest looking at the presentation of your effect also, if it's not a sleight of hand issue.

Most sleights have some room for error, if they did not, then preforming would be impossible. The main example I would like to use is the pass, it is well known, and is a difficult technique -- I believe every magician can relate to it. Imagine this, you are in the middle of a pass, you do the move, square up the deck, and all in all, it looked almost flawless. But, what will the spectators think? They will not know the exact motion you did, or if done well, at all how you did the move. What they will know, however, is that you did something. I personally feel it is best to do everything with as little cover as possible, even if this means sacrificing sneakiness. If a pass is done openly, and you even let the cards gently fall on top of the deck, then what will the spectators think? They will see that you have done something, but they will not notice you did anything of importance. In their minds, the card went into the deck, then the cards were thrown on top. Rather then the cards went in the deck, and then the magician did something tricky. Granted, a huge part of this is showmanship, and if you are able to pull the sleights off without a hitch then being sneaky may be better, but that is something not many can do, and it certainly is situational.

This to me seems to be highly confused logic. You're essentially arguing that a pass with less cover, because it shows more to the audience, and lets them see more, creates less suspicion - and furthermore, you're advocating that the spectators will in fact see something. The paragraph above, you spoke about "hidden" moves - that they were bad because people knew something was going on. Well, firstly, I would say that if people realise that something went on during your pass - work on your pass more, it needs more practice. Simple as that. Some moves have leeway, yes, I agree with you there but if you're relying on leeway, you have a problem, and even so, the pass isn't really one of them.

Secondly onto the notion that if a move is more obvious, the audience will pay less attention to it - I don't buy it. It's not a substitute for practicing a routine until you can integrate the pass seamlessly into it. The problem with performing a pass openly is this - the motion is not casual! If you play poker, and you're asked to cut a shuffled deck of cards - do you take the deck into your hand and perform a pass? No, you take the top half, put it aside, put the bottom half on top. It's a totally unnatural way to throw cards on top - and you're right, audiences are not dumb.

Overall I think this is a "If you haven't practiced your sleights enough, then substitute this" approach. The only way it is "situational" is that it depends on how well you practice your sleights. It's not even about pulling off a sleight "invisibly" - you do not need to have the pass "invisible", in fact it is not a fantastic goal. But if it is integrated well within the routine, it does not have to be invisible. So, it sounds like you should (if this example comes from personal experience) work on the construction of your routine of effects.

Hiding a small action with a big action is a fundamental of magic. All magicians know of this idea, but is it really the best in all situations? Absolutely not all the time, but is it even best most of the time? That is highly debatable, and I believe it is something that each magician needs to figure out on their own. It is important to know, your audience is not dumb. They know magic does not exist. When they see a single big action, and no other moves, they will always know the moment of "magic" happened in that large action. On the other hand, when you openly do the move, if done correctly, they may not have any clue when the "magic" took place. This is something I would urge every magician to experiment with, and think when openly doing sleights is useful. Is being "sneaky" using cover and misdirection to hide you actions? Or is being sneaky openly doing those actions and not leaving a second thought about it. I feel that it is again, situational to the trick, situational to the audience, and dependent on the magicians skill.

Whilst there is some truth to this paragraph, these are I believe many fallacies as well. Firstly, the truths. "Situational to the audience." "Your audience is not dumb." "Openly doing those actions and not leaving a second thought about it." Except, in the latter, in a different context. See I think you have an exaggerated notion of what it means to have a big action. If you raise your hands from your side to chest height, does the audience then automatically assume you've performed a sleight? I don't know how you perform, but mine don't. The point of covering a small action with a big one is to make it seem like you're doing everything fairly without a second thought. And if you perform sleight of hand well, and it is integrated into your routine, this is how it will seem. Yes, this is the correct aim, but doing everything obviously and slowly isn't the answer in my opinion, at least the majority of the time - if you perform solid sleight of hand, it shouldn't look like anything's happened!

If you hide a small action in a large action, and your audience suspects something, I'm sorry, but you need to work on your performance skills. If they always know, you seriously need to work on it. Ultimately, I feel that being sneaky is about integrating sleight of hand into your routine so that you can perform your sleights, under misdirection and cover, and seem like you've done absolutely nothing with no cover at all. Done well, your audience should not suggest a thing.

Onto the notion that your audience does not believe in magic. This is a touchy issue. I've seen people declare magicians the spawn of the devil. Do they believe in magic? Yes. I've had spectators believe that I could perform magic. You're right about one thing though - in this context, it's situational. All I'm saying is, don't make a blanket statement about all spectators, some will believe in magic. And yet, even for those who don't. They can experience a magical moment. How? A notion in literature called the suspension of disbelief. That is, that when you create this performance for the audience by entering their world, they wipe their feet at the door, leave behind what they know to be true (that a card can't pass through the solid deck in an ACR for example) and are willing to be amazed. This is when you can create magic - even if the audience, once they get home that night and talk about you over dinner, don't believe in magic! This is an important concept, to get your audience into a world that you as the magician create, free from everything else, if only for a few minutes, as you perform the impossible. The suspension of disbelief is almost like a contract between audience and magician. They do this for you so that you can entertain them with magic. And in this sense, magic can exist for almost everyone regardless of beliefs. You just need to work on presenting it right.



This post is too long - it is continued in the next post.

 

[praetoritevong]

Remember, laypeople will not see a "double lift", what they will see is the "top" card of the deck. This is the most powerful weapon a magician has, knowledge. If a magician is shown a pass he will catch it, almost always, there is no denying that. There is a secret, and he is in on it; you will not get the sleights past him. A layperson on the other hand, will usually not catch it. So, an invisible pass is no more effective to laymen then many other passes. As long as you have moved the cards without the audience knowing, you have done your job. Take it a step further, if magic was real, you would not need a "move" to get the card where you wanted it. This is the moment you want to create for your audience. A spectator will usually see something fishy, what they will not see is how that was done, but, if you are completely open in what you do, and they catch nothing -- what will they think you did do to move the cards? Magic is the only explanation

See, I thought you didn't believe that audiences believe in magic? Whilst people might not believe in magic per se, you know in the back of your mind that you can make people believe it, proving my point above.

Now, to two points in this paragraph. Firstly, you are correct, whether you do a classic, an outjogged hermann, a dribble, an invisible, or any type of pass, if the audience do not see it - it makes no difference! For a laymen, it makes know difference because they do not have the means need or knowledge to differentiate. I feel that some magicians tend to go straight for "the hardest" - and for what? Now, there's a distinction to be made here. You have to know who you're performing for. That is, this is true of a laymen audience, and often, simple is best. If however you perform for magicians, and Derek Dingle amongst others for example has been argued to have written many effects for magicians, you may well want difficult/obscure sleights. It's all about who you perform for, but in this, you are correct.

Secondly, you said that in real magic you would not need any cover. This is correct. Rather than validate your approach however, I feel it simply reinforces the need to practice your sleights and your routining, everything I said above, to achieve that integration. What it needs to seem like and what needs to actually be done is two different things. It needs to seem like you're not doing anything with no cover. But you can perform sleights with a lot of cover and make them seel like you're not doing anything. I disagree with the approach however of simply saying, well there's a bit of room for error, so why don't we do it so slow they'll know something is up but they don't think we'll have performed a sleight cause it's so normal and obvious.

It is true that many magicians need to slow down. But as I have said in my post above, I feel that there are many flaws with your approach.

In sum, I feel the real topic is knowing what sneakiness means. Is it sneaky to pull off an invisible pass? Yes, of course... but is it not sneakier to openly move the cards and not be caught? Laypeople will not know what you are doing, and will not think you have moved the card. Laypeople will see you dribble the cards, referring back to my previous example, they will not see you move them. If, however, you try and hide that you are doing anything, that is nearly impossible, and although they will not know what you have done, they will know something has been done. So, what is sneakiness? This is the question all magicians must ask themselves.

This is a good question. I do not believe it is sneaky to pull of an invisible pass - but I believe you have somewhat mistaken views on sleights. You make the assumption that the audience will always know what is going on - in fact this is merely a fallacy which suggests you need to practice more. Sneakiness is pulling a sleight so well that your audience think that nothing has happened. See, here again you reveal a contradiction. You admitted that your approach in a previous paragraph would necessarily make laymen realise you have done something, but here you seem to assume that because the move was obvious, they won't catch it - well as you said, they're not dumb. The way to hide sleights is simply to perform them and routine them well enough that it seems like nothing has happened - not by making it so obvious that people think "that was so obvious it can't have happened, it was too open and slow." It is not nearly as impossible as you may think to hide the fact that you did something. I recently performed a 45 minute routine to a friend, and he did not catch a single move in the entire time. Not only that, he did not suspect a single move in the entire time. It's not difficult, it really just sounds like you need to practice more. Your assumption that this is difficult and furthermore that audiences will definitely know that something has gone on - I don't mean to be harsh, but that sounds like you seriously need to practice your sleights better if you're getting caught performing them, like honestly, they should not know if you're doing it right, and if they always know... Practice more. Then when you're done, practice some more. The some more, and then maybe you're ready to perform it. It is a good question to ask though.

-----

Just my 2 cents, and yes I know there are a lot of grammatical errors, I just typed it up and was a little distracted, but I feel thinking through things like these is good for your magic.

So, what are some other opinions? Agree/disagree? Why? I'd like to know what some others think.

Well as I think I've made clear I disagree with much of the post. Thank you for bringing this up, I agree that it is good for magic to think about these things. Again, it really just sounds like - if they're catching you or realise something's going on when you perform sleights, it sounds like you have one of two issues - a) you need to practice your sleights more b) you need to routine your effects better so that you're not performing sleights when people are burning your hands - and it sounds like you're trying to find a way around getting better at these two things.

I apologise if I have sounded harsh at any point in my post, I can assure you that no offense has ever been intended and that I post this with sincerity.

Peace

 

[Holyshnikes]

I agree with most of praetoritevong. I think that the slieghts/pass/steal and everything else we do in secret, shouldnt look like a secret at all. If you get good enough these "secret" moves will look natural to the point that the spectator has no idea what has or was going on. If it look smooth and natural and it has been practiced enough to look like a normal card move, that is where you get the big "wow"'s from. When the spectator watched your hands the whole time and didn't see anything funny and their card still wound up on top of the deck, or in your pocket or insert trick here.

I am not an expert at everything but I do understand that everything must be near perfect and natural.

 

[drop]

Thanks for that long response, it really made me rethink some points. I think a problem in my original post was clairity, but you pointed that out and stated some really strong facts in the first paragraph or two.

When I say hiding the big move with a small move, that was partial laziness in my post, but I think you adressed it pretty well. No, when I'm moving my arms towards my chest or, whatever, that audience does not see something fishy. I was talking about squaring a deck of cards randomly that don't need squared, but again, I think you disproved me. I guess as a magician I am overthinking a lot. The audience just sees the square, not something fishy.

As far as slightly messing up, and noone noticing goes, I think you misunderstood a bit. I was not talking blatently ruining a double lift. I think we've all had those moments of imperfection, where the slight doesn't go as well as when we normally do it and practice it, but it isn't ruined. It was a *little* sloppy, but not near enough to draw attention. I was trying to compare that to openly doing sleights normally done in cover.

I definitly did not express my ideas as well as I could have earlier, and you have a few more points I didn't respond to that I would have liked, but I'm a little pressed on time. I'll try to reread and rethink what you wrote later.

 

[praetoritevong]

Thanks for that long response, it really made me rethink some points. I think a problem in my original post was clairity, but you pointed that out and stated some really strong facts in the first paragraph or two.

When I say hiding the big move with a small move, that was partial laziness in my post, but I think you adressed it pretty well. No, when I'm moving my arms towards my chest or, whatever, that audience does not see something fishy. I was talking about squaring a deck of cards randomly that don't need squared, but again, I think you disproved me. I guess as a magician I am overthinking a lot. The audience just sees the square, not something fishy.

As far as slightly messing up, and noone noticing goes, I think you misunderstood a bit. I was not talking blatently ruining a double lift. I think we've all had those moments of imperfection, where the slight doesn't go as well as when we normally do it and practice it, but it isn't ruined. It was a *little* sloppy, but not near enough to draw attention. I was trying to compare that to openly doing sleights normally done in cover.

I definitly did not express my ideas as well as I could have earlier, and you have a few more points I didn't respond to that I would have liked, but I'm a little pressed on time. I'll try to reread and rethink what you wrote later.

Hey mate,

I understand what you mean now by the big action/small action thing, and you're actually right in the sense that, of course, you shouldn't be endlessly squaring cards for no reason - only where it makes sense, for example once closing up a spread pass. I don't think you're overthinking at all - it's definitely good to think about these things. The thing is, even if people don't realise the subtleties in what you're doing, it still affects them subconsciously. Hence old magician's rules like showing your hands are empty rather than saying so, stuff along mentalism lines like psychologically forcing. Various elements and nuances are always in play - 2 Card Monte is another one that comes to mind where the physical actions you do can help greatly in preventing them from turning over the cards too early, without expressly prohibiting them to do so. So thinking in my book is good - the laymen won't think about it on this level, nowhere near, but that in part contributes to their deception.

I do understand your comparison now though, that makes more sense.

Thanks for the reply, and I hope to get this going again later when you have the time