Hooker Card Rise

Discuss the latest news and rumors in the magic world.
Gordon Bean
Posts: 46
Joined: January 21st, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Niskayuna, NY
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Gordon Bean » November 13th, 2007, 12:26 pm

And so, inevitably, the bottom of a slippery slope appears. I imagine Im not alone in thinking that a public forum is not the appropriate venue for such a bull session regarding methods. (I was about to add a joke about the trained fleas, but...)

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 13th, 2007, 1:01 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Bean:
And so, inevitably, the bottom of a slippery slope appears. I imagine Im not alone in thinking that a public forum is not the appropriate venue for such a discussion of methods. (I was about to add a joke about the trained fleas, but...)
Not going with any method discussions here - only joking about the absurd ideas.

Gordon Bean
Posts: 46
Joined: January 21st, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Niskayuna, NY
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Gordon Bean » November 13th, 2007, 2:03 pm

Agreed. Both Silent Mora's letter and your comment pretty much reflect my own appreciative muddle upon seeing the routine. As long as nobody mentions that it apparently can't be performed below the equator, I'll be happy.

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

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 13th, 2007, 2:15 pm

I don't think this is the bottom of a slippery slope--and I certainly don't think there's anything wrong with people having a discussion of potential methodology here. I encourage it! That's what this board is about.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

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

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 13th, 2007, 2:25 pm

Carlo, I wish I could tell you that you were even close in your ideas about the methodolgies used--but from the little I know, you're not.

That's what will make Hooker's "Impossibilities" an undying mystery.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

User avatar
Pete Biro
Posts: 7124
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Hollyweird
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Pete Biro » November 13th, 2007, 2:26 pm

remember the cards were borrowed and I really do not believe any deck switches were made. That I was watching for like a hawk. And I do not think any stooges were in on it.

Don't forget CArlo, the houlette was looked into by those of us in the front rows.
Stay tooned.

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 13th, 2007, 2:37 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Carlo, I wish I could tell you that you were even close in your ideas about the methodolgies used--but from the little I know, you're not.

That's what will make Hooker's "Impossibilities" an undying mystery.
I was afraid of comments like that...not because I might be wrong, and I likely am, but because they are unsupported, neither by evidence nor by argument. I'd rather hear reasons or facts that could either dismiss what I wrote, and/or even better, improve it. I am all ears.

Carlo

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 13th, 2007, 2:51 pm

Originally posted by Pete Biro:
remember the cards were borrowed
For *some* effects yes, like the one with the houlette behind the booklet. The guy who took the deck out of the pocket was my neighbor, actually. So this is still consistent with what I said. In other effects the decks were not borrowed.

and I really do not believe any deck switches were made. That I was watching for like a hawk. And I do not think any stooges were in on it.
In the first effect when John reassembles the four packets he turned around sharply and the deck disappeared from view. All he needed to do was to add a few cards in the back, no deck switches needed.

Don't forget CArlo, the houlette was looked into by those of us in the front rows.
Well, again, I was not so lucky, so I theorized from what I had seen. I'd be curious to hear from other folks who sat in the front row if they were able to see clearly inside.

Carlo

Mike Rozek
Posts: 59
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Whittier, CA

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Mike Rozek » November 13th, 2007, 3:09 pm

My wife and I were in the front row. There was nothing of note to see in the second or so that we were able to "inspect" the houlette. Metal and glass...that was about it.

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 13th, 2007, 3:12 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Carlo, I wish I could tell you that you were even close in your ideas about the methodolgies used--but from the little I know, you're not.

Let me at least try to ask you to be more specific: which methodology is utterly away from the truth? The idea of finding the selected card by lifting the deck and then dropping the cards? The actual mechanism that would do that? Or other explanations? Or ALL the explanations?


Carlo

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 13th, 2007, 3:14 pm

Originally posted by Mike Rozek:
My wife and I were in the front row. There was nothing of note to see in the second or so that we were able to "inspect" the houlette. Metal and glass...that was about it.
Did you get a glimpse on the inside ?

Carlo

Roger M.
Posts: 1598
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Roger M. » November 13th, 2007, 3:25 pm

There's some excellent thinking in your .pdf report Carlo, I enjoyed reading it.

For those of us who couldn't attend, details of the evening are priceless to read.

Mike Rozek
Posts: 59
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Whittier, CA

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Mike Rozek » November 13th, 2007, 3:26 pm

Very quickly, and there was nothing of note.

One interesting quote from John Gaughan in the 1994 Magic Magazine article:

"Let's just say that he had an awfully interesting principle there in Brooklyn. No one's discovered it yet, or even accidentally used it, to my knowledge."

It's the closest thing I've seen to a hint in that it likely excludes most known methods of card rising, including the Neyhart houlette. That's assuming that the statement isn't meant as misdirection.

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 13th, 2007, 3:39 pm

Originally posted by Mike Rozek:
Very quickly, and there was nothing of note.

One interesting quote from John Gaughan in the 1994 Magic Magazine article:

"Let's just say that he had an awfully interesting principle there in Brooklyn. No one's discovered it yet, or even accidentally used it, to my knowledge."

It's the closest thing I've seen to a hint in that it likely excludes most known methods of card rising, including the Neyhart houlette. That's assuming that the statement isn't meant as misdirection.
I recall that sentence, and of course...
it can be interpreted many different ways.
I think it's mostly misdirection, as you said.

Also, the fact that the Neyhart houlette also has 2 rollers is really saying nothing. It's the whole concept of finding the cards (from an ungaffed deck) and raising them reliably that counts. The method I proposed is not really related to Neyhart....even if not the actual Hooker method.

Carlo

Mark Collier
Posts: 430
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Santa Barbara, Ca
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Mark Collier » November 13th, 2007, 3:50 pm

I didn't get to see it but is everyone convinced that the card that rises is indeed from the borrowed deck? I could imagine a gap in the borrowed deck that would allow a stranger card to be pushed up from below. If only the face showed...you get the idea.

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 13th, 2007, 4:00 pm

Originally posted by Mark Collier:
I didn't get to see it but is everyone convinced that the card that rises is indeed from the borrowed deck? I could imagine a gap in the borrowed deck that would allow a stranger card to be pushed up from below. If only the face showed...you get the idea.
Interesting... did anyone toss the gang an Uno or "old maid" deck? How about one of those clear decks?

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

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 13th, 2007, 4:15 pm

Only normal decks were borrowed.

No stooges are used.

The Neyhart Houlette was notoriously unreliable from the day it was sold. I have read letters from Carl Jones to Jean Hugard complaining about how often it didn't work even when new. I don't believe that the Hooker Rising cards has anything to do with the mechanics of a Neyhart Houlette.

I can't state which of your mechanics are wrong because that only leads you to the truth. In this case, all truth is subjective because everyone sees something different when watching the Hooker Rising Cards, and it is designed to evoke that psychological response.

The card that rises back outward is indeed the card from the borrowed deck. It remains upjogged, trapped in position and fully visible, as the deck is removed from the houlette and returned to the person from whom it was borrowed.

You must remember that the tabletop is thin--very thin. And the rod supporting it is very thing, and the legs are thin. The whole thing looks spindly. It's hard to imagine any substantial mechanism hidden inside it.

You might speculate about how the card rises under the bell jar and think that there is something clear and stiff attached to the lower end of the card that pushes it upward. Okay--where was that stiff support before it pushed the card upward over a foot? It's not in the table (it can't bend or curl), it's not under the table, it's not behind the table. Beats the crap out of me! And then you can try to figure out how the damn bear's head floats if you really want to make your head hurt.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 13th, 2007, 5:03 pm

And then when it is put on the ribbons an set to swinging it is nowhere near the table. The card still rises BIZZARE Let alone the head.........

Roger M.
Posts: 1598
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Roger M. » November 13th, 2007, 5:37 pm

Although the room (or "set" 'if you will) was nostalgic, perhaps it served a larger function than just trying to bring back the feeling of a living room parlor in Brooklyn in the 30's?

I'm kicking myself now for not flying down to see this.

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 13th, 2007, 6:25 pm

Originally posted by Brad Henderson:
There will never be another Hooker Rising Cards, but how wonderful would it be if each of us, in our own way, tried to engender that type of response with our own magic, for our own audiences, for our art. My own bar has been raised. ...
I really like the sentiments of Brads comment, and part of me is thus content with having blown off the second chance to see Hookers device, although another part will always regret that decision.

Its wonderful to hear that the experience matches the hype. And the experience probably compels those who experienced the modern version of the Hooker routine to propagate (or at least not to diminish) the hype. After all, how often do the magi get to wax misty-eye over a trick? This is a special effect and one can argue that there is a legitimate vested interest in keeping it so, IMHO, because of the feelings evoked by seeing it.

That means that misdirection as to methodology, invention and innovation will come from all directions and persons. Maybe a good thing.

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 13th, 2007, 6:29 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
I can't state which of your mechanics are wrong because that only leads you to the truth.
Richard, are you ready to claim right now that you actually know the truth?

Carlo

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

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 13th, 2007, 6:53 pm

No one knows the truth.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 13th, 2007, 7:01 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
No one knows the truth.
If you don't know the truth then you are not really in a position to say that I am wrong.

This is not precisely the type of discussion I was hoping to get involved into. I am glad to revise/reject my ideas, and at this level it seems that it can only be done by proving the unlikeliness based on actual facts or logical and/or physical inconsistencies. Hearing "this is just wrong" is not the kind of punch I was expecting.

Carlo

Michael Edwards
Posts: 516
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Michael Edwards » November 13th, 2007, 7:59 pm

Originally posted by Mark Collier:
I didn't get to see it but is everyone convinced that the card that rises is indeed from the borrowed deck? I could imagine a gap in the borrowed deck that would allow a stranger card to be pushed up from below. If only the face showed...you get the idea.
It was signed.

Larry Horowitz
Posts: 448
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: L.A.

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Larry Horowitz » November 13th, 2007, 8:13 pm

Dr. Hooker expressly encouraged speculation as to method. Therefore I do not believe that Jim Steinmeyer or John Gaughn are intentionally mis-directing with their comments. Of course I have no doubt they are mis-directing with their actions during the performance.

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 13th, 2007, 8:22 pm

Originally posted by Larry Horowitz:
Dr. Hooker expressly encouraged speculation as to method. Therefore I do not believe that Jim Steinmeyer or John Gaughn are intentionally mis-directing with their comments. Of course I have no doubt they are mis-directing with their actions during the performance.
You may be right....but let me ask you this, do you think there's misdirection in the photos of the apparatus?

Carlo

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

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 13th, 2007, 8:22 pm

Look, having seen it twice, I have some small idea of what's going on at certain points in the routine. I also have a lifetime of magical experience and plenty of common sense.

Common sense is what is missing in most people's speculation about the methods used.

And, yes, Hooker did encourage people to speculate, but he also didn't allow most people to see it twice unless a great deal of time had elapsed.

Now, if I tell you that something you've written about it is just plain wrong, you'll have to accept that because I'm certainly not going to explain why or explain any methodology. I'm not going to give you any information at all. You're all free to compare notes and speculate all you want.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 13th, 2007, 8:43 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:

Now, if I tell you that something you've written about it is just plain wrong, you'll have to accept that because I'm certainly not going to explain why or explain any methodology. I'm not going to give you any information at all. You're all free to compare notes and speculate all you want.
Noted. I accept you tell me it's all wrong, in the sense that I hear it, certainly not in the sense that it is useful or meaningful to me, as a critique. I am certainly not trying to fish information from you or anyone else, believe me...if it happens it happens. It was mostly FUN for me to make sense out of what I have seen, seeking the solution to a puzzle, not seeking the Holy Grail.

Carlo

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 14th, 2007, 7:38 am

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
You might speculate about how the card rises under the bell jar and think that there is something clear and stiff attached to the lower end of the card that pushes it upward. Okay--where was that stiff support before it pushed the card upward over a foot? It's not in the table (it can't bend or curl), it's not under the table, it's not behind the table. Beats the crap out of me!
If you read what I wrote in my notes, I think that the support lies within the table leg, which is aligned with one edge of the houlette.
The idea is that the stiff but yet narrow and transparent support (say glass) is lifted behind the back card, up to a certain height, somehow attached to it, then rolled up and down.

I am sure that you can figure out how to lift the strip by pulling, e.g. a wire or cable, to place it in the initial position behind the card. There are plenty of metal table supports going to the floor, I count 6, a wire can easily be fitted inside one of them.

I admit that I was in part trying to "retrofit" an explanation of this effect which was consistent with the roller system assumption. But now that I think about it it might just be an independent idea, that of a narrow transparent support inside the main table leg.

If I may add, I had a conversation last night, with someone (I leave it up to him to come out!) who witnessed the Nov 3rd. performance, and who observed that the card did not descend back into the deck, but rather got "stuck" and tilted a little toward the right (audience right). If this is true, then it kind of supports the support theory (forgive the pun), as the raising support would be on the right side, leaving room for the left lower corner to get possibily stuck on the left.

Unfortunately, I don't think there's any other way to try to "untangle the mistery", other than assuming that the table and the houlette are quite complex and extremely well crafted pieces of machinery, and to try to at least discover their most basic working principles.
It is not shocking me, especially if I think of a complicated Jaeger-LeCoultre timepiece of that period that fits in one small pocket.

Carlo

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 14th, 2007, 11:02 am

I always liked the non-standard methodology of Abbott's "Nu-Power Card Rise" (no threads, borrowed deck, rise fast or slow, magi can be across the room during the rise, etc).

Of course it's not a "name any card" rise, but I like it because of it's unique method...truly a breath of fresh AIR :-)

Wonder if Hooker involved anything similar?

User avatar
Steve Bryant
Posts: 1947
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Ballantine
Location: Bloomington IN
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Steve Bryant » November 14th, 2007, 12:03 pm

Would love to have seen this. I'll now make it obvious that I didn't: From the descriptions in Greater Magic and Pallbearer's Review, and of the special room, I always assumed there was some guy in the basement with a deck of cards shoving named cards up through a deceptive table and houlette.

User avatar
Pete Biro
Posts: 7124
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Hollyweird
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Pete Biro » November 14th, 2007, 1:11 pm

Steve, nice thought but table leg was about 1/2-in in diameter with spndly tripod legs at base..

Loyd Jones had such a table with a chute plenty big but no way to hide it.
Stay tooned.

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

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 14th, 2007, 1:11 pm

Steve: there's no way anyone is under the floor shoving cards upward into the houlette.

J Fox: What is the Abbott's "Nu-Power Card Rise"?

Carlo: Your methodology is incorrect.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 14th, 2007, 1:39 pm

Originally posted by Pete Biro:
Steve, nice thought but table leg was about 1/2-in in diameter with spndly tripod legs at base..
To me it looks more like one inch, perhaps a tad less. Certainly not enough to fit a card, but nonetheless...1/2 inch seems too narrow from the pictures I see.

Carlo

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 14th, 2007, 2:39 pm

Abbott's "NU-POWER" Rising Cards - in their catalog for years (the photo is on their website, but don't know how to get here).

--fellow JOLSON fan.
_______________________________________________

ABBOTT'S NU-POWER RISING CARDS---An entirely new concept in Magic's all-time classic--THE RISING CARDS. NU-POWER is a hidden power that causes card after card to rise out of a deck of cards.---What is it??? Methods used in the past--Swiss Motor--Watch Motor--Threads--Wires--Elastics--Catgut---Springs--Weights--Hairs--Moving Rollers--Faked Decks. NO! ITS NONE OF THESE. IT"S STARTLINGLY DIFFERENT! Created and made at the Abbott's Plant. The card holder is as illustrated, made entirely of brass, chrome plated. The holder for cards has no back or front, just a skeleton frame to hold a full ordinary deck of cards. YES, AN ORDINARY DECK IS USED. Here is the effect: Cards are shuffled by a member of the audience. Three or more cards are freely chosen--NO FORCE--and may be initialled--then replaced in the deck, which again is shuffled. Now, without adding or attaching anything or exchanging deck, it is placed in the skeleton frame holder. When YOU are ready, a chosen card rises slowly and gracefully up out of the deck. There's nothing to stop--leave the card in the'rise' position as long as you like. The card is removed and a second card will rise after a 30-second interval--or a five minute interval if you wish. ITS UNDER YOUR CONTROL ALL THE TIME. Two, three and more--10 cards if you wish--rise in the same way. Definitely this is a self-contained effect. Yes, and for those curious ones who ask questions after the show or who want to examine the apparatus with a microscope, this is for them. It can't go wrong on you. It's follproof. It's so clever, you'll love it. So the rest is up to you. Send your order today for Abbott's NU-POWER RISING CARDS. And for the collector--this is an Abbott's original--AND IT'S A BEAUTY.

Michael Edwards
Posts: 516
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Michael Edwards » November 14th, 2007, 5:08 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
What is the Abbott's "Nu-Power Card Rise"?
A clever approach using pneumatic power to cause the rear most card to rise from a houlette.

User avatar
Pete Biro
Posts: 7124
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Hollyweird
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Pete Biro » November 14th, 2007, 5:32 pm

Right, it pushed up a spring at the back as I recall.
I have an olde book, published in Belgium by Klingsor with hundrreds of methods for rising cards.

John Carney just told md it hs been reprinted and updated.
Stay tooned.

User avatar
Pete Biro
Posts: 7124
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Hollyweird
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Pete Biro » November 15th, 2007, 10:01 am

just to give you something else to think about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvLkjuYunRw
Stay tooned.

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 375
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 15th, 2007, 10:19 am

WOW! 22,000 raised cards! I bet Hooker could not do this ;)

Carlo

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 15th, 2007, 12:22 pm

Originally posted by Carlo Morpurgo:
WOW! 22,000 raised cards! I bet Hooker could not do this ;)

Carlo
Carlo;
He could have with bigger rollers! :eek:
Jim


Return to “Buzz”