Mysterious book

[Guest]

Well, maybe I missed a point it wouldn't be the first time but my impression was that the "secret" was intended to stay a secret only until all the buyers have had time to receive and read their books. Once that happened, in my opinion, the secret SHOULD be told.

I won't do it myself, though. Max should be the one to do so. And if he doesn't want it done, I'm going to respect his wishes.

I will assert, though, that as long as the contents remain secret, the book is of little value (eBay aside). Without discussion, the book is only a joke. And the main punchline is that we all paid what we paid for it.

I think I can say without giving away too much that the book highlights certain facts. Yet, there is no conclusion drawn from those facts. And there are many which COULD be drawn. Several of those conclusions are very much at odds with each other.

We may all have an idea of what conclusions Max had in mind. But there are probably several differing opinions among the readers. And there is absolutely nothing in or connected with this book to give more credibility to any one conclusion over any other.

In fact, the meanings of many of the *individual* facts noted are highly debatable, let alone the meaning of the composite.

This book requires discussion, scholarship, analysis and debate to have a meaning of any depth. And none of that can happen while it remains a secret.

I'll be standing by to join in when the time comes for the conversation that will give this book real value. Till then, I guess the joke is on me. And about 495 others.

[Guest]

I can see only two reasons for asking buyers to keep the contents secret;
One is because there is an ingenious new magic trick in it, which it would benefit all buyers to keep to themselves to prevent it becoming over-exposed.
The second is because if people knew what the contents were, they wouldn't buy it.

And according to this thread there is no big magic secret involved.

[Bob Plaut]

The secret (and challenge) is how to use the book as it may not have been intended.

[Guest]

Mr. LeBlanc..
i'll wait for your email with trepidation.
Mr. Bobby Plaut..
what do you mean when you say there is a trick involved in the book?

[Jonathan Townsend]

Originally posted by crimsonking:
... i'll wait for your email with trepidation....

sent you an explanation

can you acknowledge?

[magicam]

Steve Glaser wrote:

I will assert, though, that as long as the contents remain secret, the book is of little value ... This book requires discussion ... and debate to have a meaning of any depth. And none of that can happen while it remains a secret.

Does Steve have a good point here?

Clay

[Jonathan Townsend]

Originally posted by Magicam:
...Does Steve have a good point here?

I don't know Clay. Standing by the sidelines waiting for others to get the ball rolling sounds like something less than noble to me.

It's much easier to bemoan X than to make it better or bring forth something new.

500 unopened books on the wall,
500 unopened books.

If one of those books should happen to be read
:D

[magicam]

Me, standing by the sidelines? Say it ain't so!

[David Ben]

I was fortunate enough to receive a copy of the book from Max and Stephen. I revealed the secret to Pay Lyons, a mutual friend and tendered my apology to Max. Here is his response.


Hi, David.

So glad you liked the book.

Regarding the "secret," the only reason for that was to enable the purchasers to experience the book in a fresh and unexpected way. I have
absolutely no problem with your telling Pat (or anyone else) about its contents, and of course I'm delighted to know that she is interested in
seeing it.

All for now,

Max

[Bob Farmer]

I would view with suspicion any posting by this "DBen." I know for a fact that my good friend, the real David Ben, eschews any and all technology and communicates solely by handwritten letters delivered by the post office. Email is simply not within his power.

There is no way to confirm that this "DBen" did indeed communicate with Max Maven and that Mr. Maven replied as claimed.

I know Max Maven and he is no Jack Kennedy. Neither am I for that matter, and therefore the secret should remain a secret. In fact, after reading the book, I had a partial lobotomy of that region of my brain containing that information and now I no longer know the secret (nor several members of my immediate family).

[Jonathan Townsend]

Originally posted by Bob Farmer:
...I know Max Maven and he is no Jack Kennedy. Neither am I for that matter, and therefore the secret should remain a secret...

Gotta love magician's logic.

[Bill Wells]

Doesn't having the words "magician" and "logic" in the same sentence constitute an oxymoron? ;)

[Brian Marks]

Maybee the secret is hidden at the Grassy Knoll! I am headed to Dallas to investigate!

[Guest]

Originally posted by Magicam:
Me, standing by the sidelines? Say it ain't so!

Actually , I think it was me that Jonathon was referring to. And he raises an interesting question -- is it more ethical to respect a creator's secret and thereby minimize the value of the creation, or to disregard secrecy and put the creation to full use?

Since secrets are kept so poorly in our community nowadays, I prefer to err on the side of keeping quiet unless the secret is mine to reveal. In this case, it ain't.

The reply dben claims to have received from Max sure sounds like Max, and is in line with my own understanding of what the secrecy was intended to be (ie, over and done with now).

I assume that Bob Farmer's reply caling that post's authenticity into question was a bit of joshing, but, considering the scrambled state of my brain after this very long and exhausting day, I wouldn't even trust my assumptions about which eating utensil is sharper (I don't think it's the spoon, but I'll know better in the morning).

So pardon me if I hold my tongue a while longer. At least until I'm able to post while sufficiently awake.

The nice thing about this book is that its contents are not going to go out of date. If an open discussion is delayed by a few days, weeks or months -- or even years -- it's value will not diminish.

Steve

[Kurt Ruckman]

Regarding dben, it is worth noting that he is member #58, so he's been registered on this board for a LONG time. Not the norm for an imposter.

[Matthew Field]

Originally posted by Bill Wells:
Doesn't having the words "magician" and "logic" in the same sentence constitute an oxymoron? ;)

"Oxymoron"? If you're referring to Farmer, you're half right.

And that bastard David Ben, spilling the secret to Pat Lyons. Next thing you know, he'll be spilling the beans about Dai Vernon.

Matt Field

[Guest]

Originally posted by Steve Glaser:

The reply dben claims to have received from Max sure sounds like Max, and is in line with my own understanding of what the secrecy was intended to be (ie, over and done with now).

Steve [/QB]

Steve,

I still have not received my Protocols.

I guess I must be the last one. I don't know what happens at the border. They must be checking to make sure the book does not talk about magic explosives for all I know.

So I guess you should keep the secret a little longer.

[Bob Farmer]

The previous 7 posts are all fake as is this one.

[Guest]

Bob,

My post was not fake.

I'm not too sure what you are talking about on this thread.

You seem to be posting a lot of disinformation.

Maybe that is part of the Protocols?

[Dustin Stinett]

Relax pierredan. Everything Bob Farmer does is fake. In fact, all posts that include his name are fake including this one.

Bob, I know this will take a great deal of thought on your part, but perhaps you can post for real so pierredan can compare it to all the fake posts youve made since joining the Forum.

But then again, theres really no way to be sure if the real post is real or fake, or if, in fact, the fake posts are fake or real, is there?

I suppose the same can be said for Protocols.

Dustin

[Andru Luvisi]

Originally posted by DustinStinett:
Relax pierredan. Everything Bob Farmer does is fake. In fact, all posts that include his name are fake including this one.

So assuming that you're telling the truth, since you say that the post is fake, that means you aren't telling the truth.

Wait.

Assuming that you are not telling the truth, and you say that you are not telling the truth, that means you are telling the truth. No...

Um...

Excuse me while I go rummage through my set of all sets that don't contain themselves...

Andru

[Bill Mullins]

This is not a fake post.

Signed,
Rene Magritte

[Guest]

Originally posted by DustinStinett:
Relax pierredan. Everything Bob Farmer does is fake. In fact, all posts that include his name are fake including this one.

Now I really have no clue what you guys are talking about :confused:

It must be some secret code based on the Protocols...

[magicam]

Steve Glaser wrote:

I will assert, though, that as long as the contents remain secret, the book is of little value ... This book requires discussion ... and debate to have a meaning of any depth. And none of that can happen while it remains a secret.

I think Steve has a good point here.

Clay

[Bob Farmer]

Andru's post is the only non-fake post in this forum.

[Guest]

Got it ;)

I think...

[Guest]

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:
This is not a fake post.

Signed,
Rene Magritte

Surely Magritte would have said "This is not a post".

Dave

[Cohiba]

Two thoughts:
Jonathan - I don't understand your criticism of desiring to keep secrets. Magic is an art based on secrets. If the effects we perform don't have a secret behind how they're accomplished, there is no illusion of magic. Therefore, the more people there are that know the secret, the fewer people there are that have that sense of wonder we strive to create. (And this has an exponential multiplying effect when the first blabbermouth starts spreading the news.) Because of this, the secrets in this field are what create it's value. I'm with Crimson on this one - I think our art would be better off with a greater respect for the secrets that make it.
Secondly - pertaining to the buying multiple copies issue. The publisher could have (tried) to limit the copies to 1 per person, but this was not done. Therefore, I don't understand how it can be unethical to buy more than 1 copy. A person could have purchased all 500 if they ordered first and were so inclined. It might not be "nice", but there's nothing unethical about that. It's free enterprise - what makes the U.S. tick. A person buying multiple copies takes a risk with the hope of making a profit. He may make a profit, or in this case, the secret could get out and he could get screwed. (I do not have the book, so don't infer anything here.) There will be people who miss out on deals like this regardless of who buys what. They will most likely later have a chance of getting the book at an inflated price. They then can decide if it's worth it (for them) or not. There is always a benefit and risk of being one of the lucky(?) few who get "first dibs".

[Jonathan Townsend]

Originally posted by Cohiba:
Two thoughts:
Jonathan - I don't understand your criticism of desiring to keep secrets. ...

Is this directed to me? If so, believe me I know from experience about secrets, blabbermouths, those who laud blabbermouths and those who publish things shown around by blabbermouths. Nah, your comment could not be directed to me. ;)

Funny thing. The book and its contents are NOT a secret. It's dealer item. As to WHY folks are discussing the thing as if it were a secret... that's interesting.

Book number 360 here.

[Guest]

I find this continuing non-discussion of the book quite tiresome.

Either the book had something to say to the magic community at large (whatever that may be), or it only had something to say to the 496 purchasers. (I have resisted a cynical urge to suggest a third alternative, that it had nothing to say to anybody.)

If the first alternative, then let's get on with a substantive discussion and all that implies (i.e., discussion of the choice of title, contents, conclusions, if any).

If the second alternative, then any discussion should be taken off line (perhaps a double-secret probation discussion group could be formed by the initiates to discuss it among themselves).

My apologies to pierredan, who probably has not received his copy yet.

[Jonathan Townsend]

Originally posted by 0pus:
I find this continuing non-discussion of the book quite tiresome.

Either the book had something to say to the magic community at large (whatever that may be), or it only had something to say to the 496 purchasers.

...My apologies to [b]pierredan, who probably has not received his copy yet. [/b]

There are many more than the proffered either or above.

Out of respect for pierredan I won't open a discussion of a sordid topic just yet. Shall we say Xmas and New Years for that then?

Perhaps Easter would be more appropriate?

[Guest]

Originally posted by 0pus:

My apologies to [b]pierredan, who probably has not received his copy yet. [/b]

No apologies necessary. I have given up on waiting for the secret. The Protocols will arrive in Ottawa when they arrive. If ever!

Do not hold back on my account.

From what I have heard, the only reason one should not know the secret beforehand is to not feel dissapointed before you get to read the book and form your own opinion.

[Guest]

pierredan,
Just wanted to let you know I received my copy in Toronto recently. So it shouldn't be much longer!
-Shane

[magicam]

I have not read the book, and with my reading wish list, it will be a long time before I get to it. But if what Ive heard is correct about its content, then thats why Ive been championing one of Steve Glasers sentiments. The book addresses one concept and maybe that concept deserves discussion. But I cant imagine how anyone (author, publisher, owner) could make a good argument for keeping it a secret, except in relation to some sort of a social experiment. The book is sold out. Disclosure of the contents cant hurt publisher sales. Nor can disclosure reduce a performers income. Disclosure can only hurt speculators. If I owned a copy at this point in time and if the content is as represented to me, Id comment on it here. If nobody here who owns the book has the huevos to discuss its concept explicitly, perhaps at least we can briefly depart from the tease element of this thread (in which, I confess, I participated) and we can hear some good reasons (other than those related to a social experiment aspect e.g., can magicians keep a secret?) from the books owners why its content should not be discussed.

Clay

[Matthew Field]

Clay -- If Max's contention in the book (the so-called "Secret") were revealed publicly, those of us who earn a living from magic might find ourselves destitute.

Matt Field

[Guest]

It finally arrived.

I have mixed emotions about this book. It's a big disappointment and somewhat brilliant at the same time.

All in all, the secret was of no use to me.

[Todd Karr]

I think the Protocols is a GREAT little book. Congratulations to Max and Stephen Minch!

[Guest]

Originally posted by Matthew Field:
Clay -- If Max's contention in the book (the so-called "Secret") were revealed publicly, those of us who earn a living from magic might find ourselves destitute.

Do you have an explanation or support for this comment? If so, why not state it?

[magicam]

Opus:

I may be wrong (in which case Matt mighr be willing to expand on his comment), but I strongly suspect that Matt's comment was made with tongue firmly in cheek.

Clay

[Andru Luvisi]

Originally posted by 0pus:

Originally posted by Matthew Field:
[b] Clay -- If Max's contention in the book (the so-called "Secret") were revealed publicly, those of us who earn a living from magic might find ourselves destitute.

Do you have an explanation or support for this comment? If so, why not state it? [/b]

Isn't it obvious?

The statement "If X then Y" means that X implies Y. This will be true if X is false or if Y is true.

Since the statement "those who earn a living from magic might find themselves destitute" is true, any implication of the form "If X then those who earn a living from magic might find themselves destitute" is true. Don't you see? It's really quite fun.

Here are a few more:

If people stop talking about this book, I might be sick.

If people keep talking about this book, I might be sick.

...both of which are entirely true, since I have a bit of a sore throat.

Andru