The Art of Imposibility, Pt. 2

Lyle Borders

Elite Member
Aug 5, 2008
1,604
860
Seattle, WA
www.theory11.com
Next I move on to examine the thought process behind the illusions we create. Imagine the first time you saw some old uncle at a family reunion try to show you a card trick. Poorly rehearsed, sloppily performed, and all in all not very magical. This uncle claims that you just saw magic. What do you believe? First thing, your mind goes to the un-natural movements me made with his hands as he attempted each and every sleight. You think about the look on his face that just screams “Ha! I tricked you!” You think of what he said. “It’s magic.” You know better. There is no such thing as magic. He had to have tricked you. Unfortunately for your uncle, reverse psychology kicks in the door and casts doubts on his trick.

We claim magic and miracles. We do things that are impossible. When someone asks how we did something, we often respond with one word, “magic.” The only thing that we use to convince our spectators that we really are able to do the impossible is the actual appearance of the illusion. All of our performance and speech plays the reverse-psychology game against our work. What a wonder it would be to be able to turn the tables on this phenomenon and let reverse-psychology work FOR us instead of against us.

I recently stumbled across a sudden burst of success as a sleight of hand artist. Looking back, I think I have discovered the secret to my sudden popularity among the people in my small town. I tell the truth. At my first paid gig, right after my first trick, I told everyone something like this. “I am a magician, but more specifically a sleight of hand artist. The things you see me do seem impossible, but in reality all I am doing is fooling you. With my card tricks I do things in the background that you don’t know or see that allow for these impossible feats to become possible. If you want to know how magic is done, I dare you to catch me.” I carried into a Vegas Card Cheat routine. I showed them how a dodgy dealer will control any card however he wants. I told them I was cheating. But a funny thing happened. The tricks I performed were ones I have had loads of practice with and can do extremely smoothly and naturally. They also were tricks that were bafflingly impossible. People watched an ACR, and could not for their lives figure out how I got the card from the middle of the deck to the top. I would do next to nothing, yet the card found its way to the top. I began to subliminally cause my spectators to give up on catching me in my sleights. To them, there were no sleights. They knew that sleights were impossible. They watched everything I did with my hands. It was impossible. They gave up. Their brains gave up. They lost the desire to catch me, and began to find nothing other than enjoyment from seeing impossible things happen in impossible circumstances. They BELIEVED.

Let’s carry on with this idea. People will always be looking for an explanation. They thirst for it in all things in life. A magician is just a person who tries to fool people. Smoke and mirrors, invisible thread, trick cards, and tricks up the magician’s sleeves. This is what they expect. If you go into a gig and show the faintest bit of a lack of practice, people will see it. The convincing factor of your illusion, though you didn’t flash or blow the trick, just went down exponentially. People are looking for weakness. Now think of the most mystifying performer you have ever seen. How solid was their routine? Did you see weakness? Did you see a lack of practice? Of course not, that is exactly what sets them apart from us. They give the audience nothing to feed their thirst for answers with. When the spectators can’t find something to quench their thirst, they look harder in other places for answers. Soon, they have nothing left to go on. Now here is the small idea that I have been working with. When people have no idea how you are cheating them, when they are just starting to open up to the possibility that you really can do the impossible, you can do something very unconventional. Tell them that you are cheating them. Tell them that they are not seeing the impossible. Tell them it is all an illusion. They do not take statements like this the way they ought to. They don’t believe it. Your statement seems to be a statement to distract them from the truth. Maybe you really can do this, and you are just saying you have to cheat. The opposite seed of doubt is planted. This idea does not sit well with the spectator, it tears them apart inside. The specs get flustered. They become their own hecklers.

This idea is good in theory, but in practice, it is much different. You have to take A plus B to get C. If you want the result, there are two very specific things that you have to work into your routine. If you lack any part of this, the psychological effect is blown. You must be very thorough in your preparations.

Firstly, you have to have flawless routines. Once again, I do not say that you have to simply not flash. You have to understand the inner workings of your illusions. You have to understand the patter and showmanship. You have to have great confidence. You have to be smooth. You have to practice hundreds of times over to get to the point where you no longer put gas on a spectator’s fire of suspicion. Let’s analyze a simple sleight – The Double Lift. Where in the double lift does the real illusion happen? At the lift? When you set the double down? When you are being careful not to flash the second card while holding up the double? No. The illusion happens in the offbeat of turning the face of the double away from the spectator. They see the front. That really is the card that they think. The illusion is that moment when they first see the back of the double. They know that the back of that card is the back of the card they saw; hence it has to still be their card. Knowing this little tidbit about a double lift allows you to place more power into the real illusion. Everything else regarding a double lift is a mere technicality. Just tools to make the illusion more convincing. But to understand exactly what each illusion is allows you to modify your performance to play heavier on the parts of your illusions are the most important. Learn EVERYTHING about every illusion you perform and you will begin to become far greater of a performer.

Secondly, you must understand the idea of reverse-reverse-psychology. The spectators already know not to trust you and have that idea burned into their heads. Give them little reason to trust you. Cheat them. Let them know they have been had. Then, when trust is at an all time low, tell them the truth. You can’t do the impossible. Their brain doesn’t know what to do with this information, but it has to be a trick. The spectator will fool themselves into becoming a part of your grandest illusion, the psychological web of “knowledge” that the spectator believes that they have been weaving. Imagine a fly getting caught in a spider web, and thinking that they (the fly) spun the web. Poor fly. This is what we are trying to accomplish. Let the spectator come up with their own ideas, which are really yours.

This is our goal. Let’s look at the grandest illusion. The illusion that the magician is just a modest guy who doesn’t want to take full credit for all the cool things he does, the illusion that the spectator came to every conclusion on their own, the illusion that impossible things are happening in front of everyone’s eyes.
 
Mar 29, 2008
882
3
I enjoyed your essay for the most part – although, I am not sure I like the idea of stating, “This is skill, try to catch me”, as it sets up a challenge situation and if you are saying the audience job is to catch you and your job is to NOT let them catch you. The audience, when you do your job properly, are the loser’s and you are the winner.

I have stumbled on to a win-win situation, and agree with the message of having them give up and come to terms with what they see on their own, without me creating a label. You called it “believing”, but I see it more as them suspending their disbelief, as the coined phrase goes – like watching a movie and forgetting so much it is a movie that you cry when a character dies, or laugh when one falls...even though it was all scripted and they were actors paid to do it.

The concepts you are stating are not new, actually, many of them – including not giving them a mental out, are written about in many texts – including Darwin Ortiz’ “Strong Magic” and to a certain degree, “Designing Miracles”, but Ortiz as well. He concludes that when you give no outs, but strong technique and methods, then people have no choice but to see magic. However, he does not advocate reminding them that it is not real. You see, when you tell them it’s not real – it is as bad as telling them it is, in my mind. If magic is to be an art form, and we want people to experience what it is on their own, why label it. Real artists don’t label what you are supposed to see from their paintings.

After spending time with Jamy Ian Swiss, I decided to try his approach. I can’t hide skill...so I will tell them what they see is skill, great skill. People got their backs up, and I had to win them over by living up to it...which I did, but I could tell they would think, “who do you think you are” or “oh, great for you mr. Skilled at card tricks, I am a doctor”. It did get many interested, and I won them over either way, but I left the “I am mr. Perfect ideology” in telling them the truth – and decided to be more human, more connected. David Williamson talked about not being “so perfect”, as you come to the table as a superhuman – it can disconnect you from the audience, even if they enjoy you. I found it much better, on many levels, to not label it – call yourself a magician – but re-educate them on what it is to be a magician by being the example, the mould.

I understand that you have found success saying, “it’s just sleight of hand”, but I find that the equal to “this is just a movie” or “it’s only make believe” – which is true – but do you want to be reminded of those things when you start watching a movie? This is something our parents said to us a children to not take what we saw on TV or a movie to heart.

I think what you wrote about reverse-reverse-psychology (although, it is still reverse psychology you are applying, so you may want to rethink your terms), was interesting. It is an interesting approach to a modern day audience – I agree with all you said about learning to do magic very well – strong method, strong technique...I would even say, interesting presentations that connect with the human state. However, I think the step beyond saying, “I am cheating you, it’s just an illusion” OR “it’s magic, I have super natural abilities” – is not labelling it, put it in their court. You get the same results without forcing them to pick sides – “what do you think it is” or “I know, isn’t it amazing” – because, the truth is – they want to know how it’s done...as we all know there is a method, but we want you to fool us...we want you to make us experience magic. When you do, why do you take that away by telling me...remember dumb dumb, it is just sleight of hand. Let me enjoy the illusion, as it looked like magic...and the thought of magic is beautiful...even though I now it does not exist.

I think you are REALLY in the right direction with everything else you said, and if your magic is coming along so well that you understand how flawless, and natural one must be to convey magic...then I hope you are intelligent and open enough to see the benefits of NOT labelling yourself. When I see a movie, I want to enjoy the movie...not be sad at a character’s misfortunes and celebrate his victories, to have someone lean over and say...”psst, it’s a movie remember”? I know it is, but I watch because I want to experience “theatre of the mind”, and what we do is in that category.

You were close on "the goal", let the spectator come up with conclusions...but they are not based on your manipulations and labels, but the education of what magic is. They are taking the journey, you are the guide. A good guide educates, he doesn't label and decide how people should take in their experience...actually, that would be horrible.

I wonder why you think it is a positive that the participant heckles themselves - as I would rather no heckling occur at any level...it would be nicer to say metaphorically, "take my hand, we are about to experience something fun and memorable...and you may never see anything like this again. I can't tell you more about it, as you have to decide how it fits into your life...but I can tell you that it will allow you to experience feelings that have been dormant in you for a long time...and if you allow yourself to experience this tangible imagination, you will be reminded of all the cool things that we still don't understand...and be humbled by the experience...as we both know that I don't have magic powers...but if you believe, for only a few minutes...it will feel as what you are seeing IS real magic".

Can I fit all that into an introduction and not be taken as a flake? no. However, I prefer when people make comments on the "how" or "is this real", to say - the feeling is real. Does the how matter?

Don't turn magic into a skill, like juggling...or you take away from the beauty of what magic could be....NOT having magic powers, not what it really is...but somewhere in between...the grey...where the idea of magic allows me to feel wonder and astonishment, not admire the beholder of skill...that isn't all that skilled...as MOST anyone can do what we do, with sufficient practice.

Lastly, I want to say again, I understand where you are coming from, as I have tried this approach and see success, but I have also seen where else it leads. I am not saying you are wrong - but I hope pt 3 of your essay comes in a year or two, when you discover the limitations to your approach and what happens at times.

Please PM me if you want to discuss it further - great thinking - look forward to your reply.
 
Mar 29, 2008
882
3
I just skimmed, and will later re-read pt 1 - but I wanted to ask you one question?

Imagine that guy that pulled rope from your ear said, "It was sleight of hand" or one of your replies suggested in getting people on your side - how do you think that would have impacted you differently? Sure, you were just a kid...but really, we all are - and we all desire the same thing. That moment of inspiration.

I had an eye opening moment - Darren Hayes', from Savage Garden, partner has a video on Youtube where some card magic was done to his song Words - I watched the video and was SO amazed. I was looking for method...NONE...it made me feel inspired. However, I found out shortly after it was posted - it was all CGI...it broke my heart.

Here I thought I was watching "magic", but I was really watching a cartoon. I know magic isn't real...I AM A MAGICIAN, and a good one - yet, I was bothered that what I witnessed didn't mimic a miacle, just a camera trick. I realized that this is what exposure felt like to audiences that enjoy magic.

Why do I tell you this - because I think reminding people that a method EXISTS, is as bad as flashing. Vernon said, "If the audience thinks you did something, it is as bad as knowing EXACTLY what you did" - which is enough to destory the illusion.

So - FIRST essay - thumbs up. Second one - good writing, but I am certain over time you will rethink your words...although, it may be hard at first, as MANY of the things you say around your approach are BANG on...so, don't change those.

:)
 

Lyle Borders

Elite Member
Aug 5, 2008
1,604
860
Seattle, WA
www.theory11.com
The subject upon which I have been writing is by no means a method appropriate for all situations. All the articles in The Art of Impossibility are directed at ways we may be able to subtly suggest to a spectator the ideas we want them to believe. Yes, as a child watching a magician pull a piece or rope from my ear, this specific method would have been wasteful, even harmful, but applied in the correct situation with the correct subtleties, it can and will work miracles.

Let me go back to my first paid gig. I was nervous. Standing in the middle of the room with thirty or so people (I am not even sure of the number, to tell you the truth) I was very unsure of my abilities. I performed, to begin with, a simple card trick, which leaves spectators feeling for a moment as if I as a magician had drastically failed my trick. I played this feeling up until, at the last moment, I stood holding the selected card in my hand under impossible circumstances. I looked before the reveal like a nervous amateur. As soon as I rotated the card between my first and middle finger, extremely confidently and with a very smug look on my face, and the audience saw that I had done something impossible instead of messing up, they screamed. This is the point that I arrived at when I began to attempt this reverse psychology. I realized that people knew I used slight of hand, but NOBODY understood what sleight of hand was. I decided to try my hand at playing with their understanding.

"I hate to break it to you all, but most magic is all illusion. Magic is me trying to fool you. Sleight of hand. My hands are far quicker than your eyes could possibly be. I am a card cheat, and I dare you to catch me. But you won't." I opened a challenge to them. I placed a bet that I desperately hoped I could win. I then thought about what they may think sleight of hand was. I wasn't yet ready to do what I was doing, but attempted anyway. I realized that I had told them that the hand was quicker than the eye, so I decided to do anything and everything as slow as possible. I began to dish out some mathematical magic, something I never use. Because they were looking for quick sleight of hand, the audience was left helpless. There was no sleight of hand. I carried on into an ACR. Marlo tilt, VERY slow. I pushed the dummy card into the deck and let them watch for a moment before revealing their card on top. I repeated this. Eyes were huge because, once again, they were looking for some fast move, but I was not feeding their fire. I was doing things that were impossible when compared against their preconceived notions gained from my prior explanation of magic. I avoided the pass because it was a "move," the very kind of sleight they were looking for. After several more times, wandering around the room with all eyes on me, I finished with the pop-up card. There is something unsettling about magic that visual when you think the magician is cheating. My ACR broke the audience. After a few more cautions tricks, I was free to use all the "moves" in my repertoire. The audience gave up looking. They knew that I wasn't cheating. They just SAW a card placed in the middle of the deck rise up to the top and pop out. IN PLAIN VIEW. This led to every favorite illusion of mine, including my first performances of material from Surfaced, which had people screaming again.

I then tried something else. I went to do Liquid Metal by Morgan Strebler. This is one of only a handful of tricks I do aside from cards. I said something like "There are two kinds of magic. Magic TRICKS, like I just showed you, and MAGIC. This one falls under MAGIC. It is something that I do but don't understand. I know how to make it work, but I don't know why it does. I have been told it is an old Voodoo principal, but I don't believe any of that. It is just weird, and kinda creepy." After all of this sleight of hand stuff, I received the best reactions of my life to Liquid Metal. The audience knew there was no cheating, there couldn't be any. It was just not possible.

This is nothing more than a method to add to one's performance that briefly discredits you as a magician but leads the audience down a path from which they can't recover. They become truly fooled. You lead them to think of their old ideas of what a magician is and how a magician works, which is wrong. You let their incredible understanding of sleight of hand (yes, sarcasm) do the work for you. It is all about understanding the thought process the spectators go through. I cover this in a far more fun way in part 3, which I have had done for a while, and am working on another aspect of this idea in part 4 right now. Part 3 is probably the most practical and fun article of the set so far, and I will post it after this one has had a chance to brew a little bit here.
 
Mar 29, 2008
882
3
I feel cheated that you only reiterated your concepts, but dismissed mine, as I have also put much thought and effort into my magic. Moreover, I have tried your path while performing in restaurants and private parties during my University days (only a few years back) 4 nights a week. It was many experiences that lead me to stop this path of "what I do is skill" - as it is a common one used by many - including Jamy Ian Swiss and Johnny "Ace" Palmer - they have both experienced similar results. People don't believe them when they say they are using sleight of hand - equally to those that present it as real magic, "Eugene Burger...Jeff McBride".

I wondered if there was a different way - and like I suspected - your ability to do strong technique has lead you to believe the reason you are getting good responses is because you tell people it is sleight of hand. However, you really just give them a mental out.

What about NOT giving them a mental out, while not claiming it's real magic?

This is the path I have been trying for the past few years, to great success. As people start to consistently tell me how they see magic as, "something more than just tricks or sleight of hand" that they can "see the art behind it". When I focused on getting them to stop seeing it as sleight of hand, my success was having them stop focusing on "catching me", but I removed the "magic" part - as I was constantly taking credit.

I wondered if there was a way to get them to stop focusing on "catching me", without losing the magic. I discovered that if I made them want to suspend their disbelief, as I knew my technique was good enough, they wouldn't have a choice either way, that they would WANT to be fooled, want to experience the adult imagination "play room" of the mind that magic can offer. I realized that telling them what it was, even though honest and on board with their thoughts, was like submitting to their beliefs...rather than educating them on yours.

Imagine the experiences you would have in your life, if something you had a stereotype/preconceived notion did not surpass your expectations - but just met them. How can you improve upon their perceptions, when you just meet them? Your magic will make them see it differently, so have your words match.

I first saw this in play when a magician from the Ottawa area was speaking with me after the show - he does linking rings with hula hoops to represent what it was like for him as a child, when he learnt the effect. It is funny and connective. He represents his act, not as real magic, but a real experience where magic happens if you believe it to - as the old Dunniger saying goes, "for those that believe, no explanation is neccesary, for those that do not, none will suffice"...maybe your act can have an add on..."UNLESS you straight up tell them the explanation", haha, but this gentlemen let the world of play extend past his act...he welcomed those in.

I asked him about the constant, "Can you make my wife disappear" joke that we all get. He said this, it is funny as magicians we feel that we need to be so serious and straight forward. We are in the business of creating a feeling of magic, as we want people to believe for a moment, that magic exists, even if in their mind. Then when someone plays along as says "can you make my wife disappear", we get upset. His response, "Where do you want her to go? Won't you miss her"? He doesn't say he can or can't do it - just plays along - because as adults we ALL know there is a way, but if we don't know - this is the experience of magic. This has gone on since the dawn of time, where nature and unknown events were considered magic or god's.

I think the oddest part of your post is that you are sending mixed messages. You challenge people to catch your sleight of hand, but then do none...then dismiss that as a trick to do "magic", where you bend a fork when people aren't watching.

Let me ask you this? How do you present your ACR? As skill? Imagine giving it more meaning, something that meant something to a person - now you can create more than just, "look at my talent" - instead of presenting magic, you can have someone feel like they met you and you met them. Not the character that comes off as the cocky, "catch me if you can" character, but a real connected moment - the strength of close up.

I don't know about your last paragraph - my audience are truly fooled, and when you talk about their "understanding" of sleight of hand - they should have none...just like I have very little understanding on how to make a movie, but I don't want to think about that when I am watching it. I do understand the thought process that audiences take when watching magic, I even did a study on it in school while obtaining my Psychology degree.

I will end with this - I have tried it your way, but have you tried it mine? Can you consider, before you "educate" us with your 4 part magic series, that your recommendation may not be beneficial in the long run? I would also like to know if you have read "Strong Magic" and "Designing Miracles" by Darwin Ortiz. You agree with some of what he says, and I think those books could be great for you. I understand that you have found small successes in giving in to people's preconceived notions - but isn't that equally as bad as someone of a different race deciding they have to act upon their stereotypes? Why can't you choose the road less travelled and educate against the stereotype, rather than submitting to it? People will enjoy your "tricks", because that is what you are making them out to be - but I think you have the ability to make people experience magic...the feeling, as an adult, and not the child like rabbit out of the hat concepts they think...or perhaps I am wrong about you?
 

Lyle Borders

Elite Member
Aug 5, 2008
1,604
860
Seattle, WA
www.theory11.com
I will leave this as it is. You apparently grasp from this article a little offense and seem to miss completely the idea I present. I was not attempting to avoid any point, I merely tried to present my idea more clearly, but it did not answer the questions that you had.

The ONLY idea represented here is that we are able to walk in the unguarded back door of a spectators mind to create the magic. I do not say that the only way to do this is to convince people that magic does not exist. I am not thick enough to believe there is only one way to create magic. I show in my article a personal experience that has led to the confounding of many people.

Yes, in my ACR, I challenge them to catch me using sleight of hand, and then I do such basic and invisible sleight of hand that there is nothing to catch me on. I am very aware of that, it is for a purpose. Why would you perform a pass for someone you know is looking for it? If there is a way to achieve similar results using a different method, you would be crazy not to use it. Once an idea in a spectators head is disarmed, you are able to go back and use these techniques under the radar.

I have presented simply an idea, not my routine, not anything else. I presented ONE way to bring astonishment to the eyes of those who watch. I defend my part of this conversation because, well, it's my post. I would be happy to discuss other ideas, but here I discuss mine. I find it one of the downfalls of magic to see a "mentalist" perform an outstanding act, but then carry on as if he actually had power to do what everyone thinks he did. He creates an out, and a terrible lie at that, by just pretending. Instead, when a mentalists informs the audience that everything is just an illusion, people are left for themselves to wonder what happened. WONDER is the root of magic. If I tell people I use sleight of hand, but they see none, though they tried their hardest, they are left with the idea in their minds of "what if he didn't use sleight of hand?" When the audience is left with no real answers, they will search their minds for them after the performance. If the audience is convinced they saw real magic, that is it. Cool. The greatest feelings you can receive from magic come from not knowing.

These are my personal views, thrown together quickly, on this subject. By no means are they 100% correct, and on the same note, neither are those of any magician before or after me. As far as I am concerned, there is no correct, and I merely bring to the table something to think about.
 
Mar 29, 2008
882
3
Thanks for responding - however, in trying to strike up conversation...and talk to you about "the next step" you will be writing about in a years time...you have merely argued your concepts - so I did misjudge you. You just want to spout your theories, not discuss them...so don't let me stop you. The point of my responses was to discuss with you the errors in promoting (as your writing is authoritative, not suggestive) the weaknesses in this approach...as you did avoid those, or know nothing of them.

So let me get this straight...I read an entire article to tell me how great it would be to have my performance character take all the credit for the magic I do...and then people won't believe me...but they will believe in magic, as long as I use methods that lie about what I said?

So that entire thread could have been summed up by saying - do the opposite of what you are telling people you do - when they believe the opposite of what you want them to believe. Agree with them, then use that agreeing nature to take advantage of what they believe...so, they believe it is sleight of hand...you tell them it is (only serving to destroy the illusion of magic), but think you restore it by doing things that aren't sleight of hand or polished technique...so that tricks them into believing it is NOT sleight of hand anymore...but instead magic...because you didn't say it was magic, but it was sleight of hand...yep, brilliant thinking!

I was hoping we can discuss the things you left out of your concept - that you don't suggest as an idea, but tell me to do it - as it was the only way to create that willingness to suspend one's disbelief....I offer another way that doesn't undercut the idea of magic, that is all.

Yet, you don't want to discuss it - what was the point of your post if it was not to create discussion? Are you looking to educate? If so, realize that the same result would happen - your students would question your findings, equally, (I hope) if you were to say - this is ONE way of many...or the only way.

Again, you have not addressed any of my points in this discussion as your cup is TOO full to learn or discuss any points.

As you seem to know it all, I no longer have to take part in this one sided thread...that nobody is really interested in.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Lyle Borders

Elite Member
Aug 5, 2008
1,604
860
Seattle, WA
www.theory11.com
As you wish. Like I said, I merely put out there something for people to think about. From the beginning, there was nothing but disagreement in your words, and I attempted to not start an argument and clear up misconceptions. I would love to see from you a thought through statement on what YOUR idea is, but I have no interest in seeing a statement from anyone that carries with it nothing but argumentative feelings. If you wish to prove a point, don't argue, and write something productive.

As for the next article, who said anything about a years time? It's been done and put out there (if you knew where to look) for months now. I have just yet to release it to T11. If you want to read it, you will be able to find it if you use your brain. It will be here shortly. It is yet another concept, tested by others before me, that I have had great success with. Completely different aspect of magic. I would lay money that you will be far more agreeable to it, as this next article is far less something based off of opinion, but on hard facts.

If you would like to take your time and re-read things, actually attempt to understand my idea (which, as I said, is not perfect, but is one of MANY ways i often choose when performing to make certain ends meet) and will discuss it as an idea rather than my complete magical philosophy, then be my guest, make a point, and lets discuss it, but be reasonable with your discussions. An essay on your part saying that you disagree and it is a dead end in magic will accomplish nothing. If you are not willing to write out a short, thought out statement, then I will not reply to it.
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results