raise rise

Discuss your favorite close-up tricks and methods.
Guest

Re: raise rise

Postby Guest » June 19th, 2006, 5:14 am

Thought this might interest someone. The reinsertion method used in shifty and the elevator card by Chris Kenner and Shigeo Futagawa seem to be small handling refinements on a force invented by Stanley Collins.

See 'Ajax' in Deceptive Conceptions in Magic. My copy isn't dated, but by the looks of it I'm guessing it was put out some time in the early thirties.

Euan

User avatar
Joe Pecore
Posts: 1914
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Paul Harris
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: raise rise

Postby Joe Pecore » June 19th, 2006, 5:54 am

The book "Stanley Collins: Conjurer, Collector, and Iconoclast" by Edwin Dawes has the "Deceptive Coneptions in Magic" listed with a copyright of 1920.
Share your knowledge on the MagicPedia wiki.

Guest

Re: raise rise

Postby Guest » June 19th, 2006, 5:55 am

I have that too.. Should have checked it :)

Oh well, only a decade out ;)

Euan

Guest

Re: raise rise

Postby Guest » June 19th, 2006, 12:39 pm

I don't know the method (although I have a pretty good guess), but I'd bet that you can't do raise rise with a face up card unless you have dupes. Signed card? Forget it. And without a signed card, I wouldn't bother doing an ambitious routine.

An ambitious card routine without a signed card is certainly undesirable. But the failure to use a face up card really isn't necessarily. This is a classic case of magicians going for something that laymen don't really care about. It's like the inability in most triumph handlings to ribbon spread the deck. While it's nice, particularly for magicians who are familiar with the technique, it doesn't actually improve the effect for laymen because they are convinced in the original that the cards are well mixed. It's the same thing here, so long as they believe the jogged card is in fact their card it doesn't matter whether it's face up or face down.

Heck, I've done ambitious card routines many times using simple moves and had people swear they saw something that quite frankly never occurred. For example, with the Braue pop-up move (which I personally think is stronger for less effort than Raise rise and many similar effects), I have people swear to me that they saw the crimped card riffle up through the other cards. In fact, I once explained it to a beginner magician and he was left asking me how I made it look like the card passed through the other cards. Other times I don't even need to do that, I can use a double lift, place the deck on the table, square the indifferent card into the center and make a motion of my hand and have the spectator swear they saw something. Does it matter that they didn't? Not at all, the effect occurs in their mind and we need to remember that.

In the original version, the spectator holds the signed, face-up card as it visibly melts up through the pack to the top. You pause a beat, lower the deck away from the card, and they are left holding their face-up card, signature staring them in the face. You can't do that with any of these methods.

That certainly sounds superior to the majority of methods. I personally think the original Raise Rise looks good. As Paul Wilson mentioned, it really doesn't come across as strong as some effects and possibly has other applications. I'd be concerned about handling and clarity for your method, particularly the last rise, the subtlety of having them hold the card is fantastic though.

You don't think that the ability to do the effect with a signed, face-up card is better than with an unknown, face-down card? I mean, if you could do either with the same amount of effort, which would you choose?

I'll answer that question like this. I don't think you'll get a stronger reaction from it...unless they aren't convinced with the original.

The point is, my original method (for, dare I say it, my original effect) has advantages that none of the later methods has, and has none of their disadvantages. so far, I haven't seen or heard anything that would dissuade me from that point of view.

It certainly sounds good, I'd be interested in seeing it performed in practice. I think personally, I'd employ some kind of subtlety that makes it seem quite visual, for example I'd probably riffle the cards (not sure if you do this). The one concern I'd have is the lack of the one-handed action. Also, how does it fit with the remainder of the ambitious card handling? Personally I use a particular handling in terms of the presentation around which I build all the sleights I use and I'd want to use a similar action.

There is a lot of talk these days about magic as an art and one must remember that a great deal of the art in magic lies in artistic presentation. You can perform a color change, but you can also make a color change visually beautiful, exact same mechanics, but different artistic action. I remember people praising Cardini in this regard on a few occassions, taking a simple vanish that others might do and making it look like magic.

In maner regards the same goes for what I was discussing above regarding spectator perception, teh perception comes largely not from the effect or handling, but the way you present the handling. For example, in the case of what you're talking about, how it melts through the cards is going to create a large impact on how the audience reacts and it will seem more magical if you present it so it's clear, fluid and apparently really melts as opposed to having a block missing above the card. I'm sure you understand what I'm saying.

Either way, thanks for the insights, your method sounds interesting.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27047
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: raise rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » June 19th, 2006, 2:19 pm

Sorry to disagree with my friend Geoff, but I don't use a signed card for Ambitious Card. If you sign it, then there's no illusion (or sucker effect) that you have many duplicates in the deck. There's lots of magical effect to be had from bringing a card to the top of the deck repeatedly even if it isn't signed. When you bring it out of your pocket at the end, or make it appear on your forehead, the real and natural climax after that is when they examine the deck (which is always in their hands at this point) and find no duplicates, and no trace of their card.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Guest

Re: raise rise

Postby Guest » June 20th, 2006, 3:36 am

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Sorry to disagree with my friend Geoff, but I don't use a signed card for Ambitious Card. If you sign it, then there's no illusion (or sucker effect) that you have many duplicates in the deck. There's lots of magical effect to be had from bringing a card to the top of the deck repeatedly even if it isn't signed. When you bring it out of your pocket at the end, or make it appear on your forehead, the real and natural climax after that is when they examine the deck (which is always in their hands at this point) and find no duplicates, and no trace of their card.
I find this odd, but many, many times when I do this routine (with a signed card) people STILL look through to find duplicates.

Also re: triumph. I still do The Tipsy Trick handling exactly as in RRTCM and find it absolutely slays a lay audience. No need for any proof moves at all. IMHO.

Damian

Guest

Re: raise rise

Postby Guest » June 29th, 2006, 5:40 pm

Raise Rise is such a cool sleight.
But, as most of you say, it's really difficult, and it takes some time to learn.

Kudos to Ray Kosby to invent such a clever move, when I saw his routine on his video, it really blew my mind away.

My question goes to Mr. Geoff Latta.
Where can I find a demo video with your own "rising card" move?? I'd love to see it :)

Guest

Re: raise rise

Postby Guest » June 29th, 2006, 7:43 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Sorry to disagree with my friend Geoff, but I don't use a signed card for Ambitious Card. If you sign it, then there's no illusion (or sucker effect) that you have many duplicates in the deck. There's lots of magical effect to be had from bringing a card to the top of the deck repeatedly even if it isn't signed. When you bring it out of your pocket at the end, or make it appear on your forehead, the real and natural climax after that is when they examine the deck (which is always in their hands at this point) and find no duplicates, and no trace of their card.
I read this, then I realized it was you posting it Richard. I am quite suprised by your opinion here. The thing I don't understand is why you would want an "illusion (or sucker effect) that you have many duplicates in the deck." I can see the sucker effect playing well, to start, but I think the point is that it IS the same card, not a duplicate." Am I misunderstanding what you were trying to say?

One way that this could play would be to not have the card signed at first, then do some of the routine, and have them sign it part way in. I still think if the card is unsigned they will believe there was a duplicate card, if you can keep making it come to the top, you can get rid of those cards right?


Return to “Close-Up Magic”