Daniel Garcia's Torn and Yves Doumergue's Ripped & Restored

Discuss products and their reviews in Genii.

Postby walkinoats » 10/12/02 06:58 AM

I have a copy of Yves Doumergue's Ripped & Restored. When I was on www.magicsmith.com , I saw a video demo of Daniel Garcia's Torn video. The video demo performance of Daniel Garcia's Torn looked identical to Yves's Ripped and
Restored. How can this be ?
walkinoats
 
Posts: 138
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM

Postby Jon Racherbaumer » 10/12/02 09:22 AM

It is NOT identical. The devilitry is in the details. The video production, alas, is mediocre. The method, however,is first rate and perhaps the best of the recent batch.

Onward...
Jon Racherbaumer
 
Posts: 816
Joined: 01/22/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Orleans

Postby Steve Hook » 10/12/02 11:04 AM

There are similarities in the first couple of moves but, as Jon mentioned, the details are different. Daniel's ending is different, though Yves' is more angle-proof.

I can't believe that a layman wouldn't think the card had really been restored. Heck, most magicians think it was restored!
;)

Steve H
Steve Hook
 
Posts: 764
Joined: 10/21/08 11:50 AM
Location: North Carolina, USA

Postby Richard Kaufman » 10/12/02 11:39 AM

I don't see how anyone could make a statement about the method after seeing that dreadful fuzzy video. I could barely see his hands, forget the card, in anything other than the brief close-ups!
I don't know anything about this method other than it's obvious that a piece is being added at the beginning, and it's done poorly with no motivation or cover whatsoever ... I think I'll just cover the folded card for a moment for no reason whatsoever.
Gak!
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20431
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Steve Hook » 10/12/02 11:50 AM

Richard:

There has GOT to be a Starbucks close to you. GO GET SOME COFFEE! And a bagel if that will help! I'll buy! Hopefully that will clear that "Gak" from your throat. :)

Steve
Steve Hook
 
Posts: 764
Joined: 10/21/08 11:50 AM
Location: North Carolina, USA

Postby Richard Kaufman » 10/12/02 02:55 PM

I don't drink coffee.
I don't eat bagels.
I don't like versions of the "Torn and Restored Card" whose method is obvious. I didn't care for "Ripped and Restored," either.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20431
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby walkinoats » 10/12/02 05:11 PM

Mr. Kaufman, I can understand your reasons for not liking "torn" and "ripped and restored". Could you tell us then the version or method you do like in torn and restored card magic ?
walkinoats
 
Posts: 138
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM

Postby Richard Kaufman » 10/12/02 08:05 PM

Of all the recent versions, the two I like best are Bob Stencel's unpublished handling of the J.C.Wagner method (which had everyone enthralled one year at FFFF) and Guy's "Reformation." The latter (and all of the various methods which attempt to make it easier) suffers in one area, aside from the fact that it is hellishly difficult, and that is that there are points in the routine when the magician's hand or hands resemble one of those fake spirit hands on a cloth. There is nothing natural about that hand position: I call it "the spirit hand." Whenever I see someone doing magic and all of their fingers are pressed closely together when there is supposed to be an empty hand it makes me suspicious.
The Stencel handling of the Wagner routine really gave us the impression of having four separate pieces. It is so convincing that you would have to see it to believe it.
As far as published versions go, all have problems unless a duplicate card is used, and then you can't use a signature. If you can do a perfect Classic Force, then you don't need to have the card signed. Just tear it up and switch the pieces for a folded duplicate, then slowly unfold it as if you are healing the tears. The effect should be perfect (but not "too" perfect). :)
Failing that, the version in Paul LePaul's book has always been highly thought of by people I respect. It's pretty convincing. My handling from CardMagic adds a perhaps unnecessary touch, where the final corner is restored using a sticker with a little drawing on it that also restores, but it adds a nice magical final touch if you feel compelled to put the final corner back on (if you've given it out in the first place, that is).
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20431
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Lance Pierce » 10/12/02 08:38 PM

Hi, Richard,

Thanks for reminding me of the Stencel handling...I used to do that one (very convincing, it is). It is, though, an incomplete restoration, yes?

I saw Daniel Garcia do Torn several times last month. I have to admit I was badly fooled and didn't see too much about the handling that was overly suspect. I'm now wondering if perhaps there can be some kind of synthesis between Stencel's approach and Garcia's...

L-
User avatar
Lance Pierce
 
Posts: 397
Joined: 02/19/08 01:00 PM
Location: Oklahoma City

Postby Jon Racherbaumer » 10/12/02 08:46 PM

This topic may warrant a detailed, reasoned essay that truly examines the pros and cons of the Torn & Restored Card? In my brief post I wrote that the Garcia version was one of the best of the recent batch (post G.H.). Keep in mind that the Paul Harris version spurred lots of variations several years ago. Don England also had a version. Marlo's "Torn Joker" had a brief run. John Mendoza made some of us reexamine the Hull method. The two versions RK mentions are also good and worthy of performing.

I've played around with most versions that have been published and sold; however, the operative word here is "played." I've never been a big fan of the effect....simply because I could never cogently answer a seemingly rhetorical question: "Why tear up a playing card as the premise of a trick?" Besides, the foreshadowing is also spectacular. It may fascinate magicians because they are focused on methodology, not motivation and common-sense.

The first time I performed a version of this trick (1964), after I made the first tear, a spectator asked, "Whatcha do that for?"

When I didn't reply right away, he added, "Cards cost money, you know."

If that had happened yesterday, I guess I might have snappily said, "Whatever!"

Onward...
Jon Racherbaumer
 
Posts: 816
Joined: 01/22/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Orleans

Postby Lance Pierce » 10/12/02 09:12 PM

"Cards cost money, you know."

"For you, they cost. For me, they're an expense deduction."

Since Jon brought up rationale and Stencel's name came up earlier, it might be worth mentioning that in Richard's Almanac, Stencel had an effect called "Once Torn, Twice Restored." In this piece, the performer had a reason to tear up the card: he was duly frustrated with it for misbehaving so badly.

Sometimes, though, I suspect that we need no more rationalization to do an effect than to simply present the audience with a beautiful idea. "I'd like to show you something," you can say, "because I think it's very different and very special." And if you handle it as if it was, it probably will be, and no further plot or premise really seems needed.

Cheers,

Lance
User avatar
Lance Pierce
 
Posts: 397
Joined: 02/19/08 01:00 PM
Location: Oklahoma City

Postby Guest » 10/13/02 09:25 AM

Darwin Ortiz' "The Marker" provides a very good motivation/reason for the tearing as well as the restauration. In the story of this trick the card is an I.O.U. (signed by a spectator)worth 5000$, teared apart by the loser of a card game and magically restored by the winner.
Guest
 

Postby Craig Matsuoka » 10/13/02 12:15 PM

Rip up a card, and then put it back together. On the surface, its such an odd and illogical thing. But could there be more self-contained meaning in it than we think? I say self-contained in that the spectator, not the performer, supplies the meaning.

Why tear the card and restore it? We could ask the same question of other effects. Why saw the lady in half? Why smash the volunteers watch into little pieces? Why link and unlink the rings?

To wonder why during a piece-by-piece torn and restored trick is part of the drama. The resolution is the restoration phase where you, the performer, fulfill your role as healer. Indeed, you become more than physician. You wield power over destiny. You are the destroyer AND creator. Dare I say it? You are godlike.

Okay, maybe thats a little hyperbolic, but I hope you can see where Im going with this. The piece-by-piece torn and restored card has its own internal meaning, which is only strengthened by the human condition.

It wasnt until I added torn and restored card routines to my repertoire that I appreciated the highly commercial nature of this wonderful plot. Theres actually a surprising amount of emotion invested in the tearing of a playing card. Its really interesting to observe the impact this simple action can have on people. Jons "Whatcha do that for?" observation is an excellent example, one Ive experienced myself many times over.

But, back to the point, rather than ask why tear the card and restore it, a better question to ask is why is tearing a card so disturbing to the onlooker? Why the inherent drama? The answer is relative to the observer. We, as card enthusiasts, take these ubiquitous pasteboards for granted. After all, we're the ones who go through packs like a chain smoker, buying them by the wholesale dozen at Costco and Sams Club. We seem to forget about their value to lay people. We hold cards in our hands every day, and to us, theyre as cheap and disposable as notebook paper.

But to laymen, a deck of cards deserves to be treated as you would a book, since destroying just one of its pages decreases its usefulness and insults its owner. So there seems to be some strange psychological taboo to it. I suspect it stems from good upbringing. We are taught even as toddlers to respect other peoples property and take good care of the things we have. So whenever they see someone rip up a card or, worse yet, rip up SOMEONE ELSES cardthey cringe a little.

So this almost sacred status of cards is something we can really exploit to good effect. People will silently root for you to restore the card.

I know everyone's going to hate me for saying this, but at the end of a piece-by-piece torn and restored card routine, I don't think they really care as much about WHY you did it, than the simple fact that you DID it.
Craig Matsuoka
 
Posts: 195
Joined: 03/13/08 05:13 PM
Location: Kailua, Hawaii

Postby Jon Racherbaumer » 10/13/02 05:39 PM

Ah, yes...

Asking WHY when it comes to reasoning why we should perform hundreds of classic effects leads to interesting discussions and debates. Why saw a woman in half? Yeah. Why?

Example #647: I never liked the Torn & Restored Newspaper because of its foreshadowing. If the audience experiences any surprise it's based on the fact that they're SURPRISED YOU CAN ACTUALLY DO THE RESTORATION. In retrospect, it's puzzling.

The best version of the Torn and Restored Newspaper I ever saw was by Avner the Eccentric. He was playing a character walking in the park and he sees a damaged newspaper in the trash. He then begins to read torn fragments. He gets interested in the story and tries to awkwardly piece together the fragments. The motivation here is superb. Finally, he suddenly restores it. Bam! This not only makes perfect sense--it's a stunning surprise.

All this goes back to the philosophical question: If you truly had magical powers and wanted to share a demonstration, what kind of effect would you do?

Would you levitate?
Would you punch a pen through a bill and then restore the bill?
Would you make steel rings link together?
Would you read a mind?
Would you change water into wine?
Swallow lit cigarettes?
Pluck coins out of the air and toss them into a bucket?

Don't get me wrong. I think all kinds of rationales can be developed for these kind of feats...but we seldom talk about this aspect, opting to develop more and different methods for performing the same old effects.

Onward...
Jon Racherbaumer
 
Posts: 816
Joined: 01/22/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Orleans

Postby Pete Biro » 10/13/02 06:23 PM

Duh, Jon... if you can't tear and restore stuff, float, link, multiply stuff... then you ain't a magician... right ?

GO ANGELS! C'MON GIANTS! A Southwest Airlines World Series??????? :D :D
Stay tooned.
User avatar
Pete Biro
 
Posts: 7124
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Hollyweird

Postby Andrew Martin Portala » 10/14/02 03:46 AM

Don't forget Robert Harbin's T & R newspaper.
That had reasoning too.
Andrew Martin Portala
 
Posts: 321
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Toledo,Ohio

Postby Richard Kaufman » 10/14/02 05:13 PM

I think Jon is mis-remembering Avner's version (slightly), or else saw it at a different time than I did.
Avner actually comes onto the stage with a broom and begins sweeping up debris. The torn pieces of newspaper are part of the debris: the newspaper is torn BEFORE he even enters. The tearing is not part of the effect, only the restoration, and that's why there's no foreshadowing. The presentation is witty, and it's only after you see that he's become engaged in trying to read the newspaper do you, as a magician, think that he's going to restore it. Laymen don't figure that out until the pieces unfold and it's all one.
A lovely presentation.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20431
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Pete McCabe » 10/14/02 06:21 PM

I came up with the following idea a while back. Since there isn't anything original in it (beyond the combination of two other ideas) I thought I'd offer it up here.

Start with a business card. Secretly you have two, but the audience only knows of one. Fold both in half lengthwise, then unfold. Then fold widthwise but unfold only one, leave the other folded in half in finger palm.

Tear off one quarter and put it in your pocket, along with the fingerpalmed duplicate. In your pocket, leave the dupe and bring out the quarter in finger palm.

Perform Paul Harris's "Ultimate Rip Off". Don't forget Tommy Wonder's great work on the display and snap restoration.

Now wait for somebody to say something about that last piece.

Reach into your pocket for the last piece (which of course is actually in finger palm). Finger palm the duplicate and bring out the last quarter openly.

Restore the last quarter using the final move from The Reformation.

Voila -- a routine which can begin with you pulling a business card from your pocket (or if you can get a hold of the spectator's stack, just take two), is very clean, and has a truly sensational climax.

I have always considered this the perfect solution to the "problem" of restoring the final piece in Ultimate Rip-Off. The combined routine is very clean in appearance, since the duplicate is only in play for a very few seconds, after the singularity of the card has been thoroughly established and the audience believes the trick is over. Also this combined method, while not self-working, is considerably easier than Guy's entire routine.

Anybody who knows the Harris and Hollingworth tricks is welcome to use this idea.
Pete McCabe
 
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Postby Lance Pierce » 10/14/02 06:57 PM

"What's that rumbling sound? Why is the ground shaking? (Looking through binoculars) My God! It's magicians everywhere rushing to find copies of the Harris, Wonder and Hollingworth books!"
User avatar
Lance Pierce
 
Posts: 397
Joined: 02/19/08 01:00 PM
Location: Oklahoma City

Postby Guest » 10/15/02 09:31 AM

Pete,

That is great! Thank you for sharing.

Zech Johnson
Guest
 

Postby walkinoats » 10/23/02 11:20 AM

I just finished watching "torn," I highly recommend it. Clear explanations and an awesome opening video of Daniel Garcia performing other close up effects.
walkinoats
 
Posts: 138
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM

Postby Guest » 10/24/02 07:49 PM

I always thought it was funny, the way Guy Hollingworth addressed the logical problem in his patter "you might think it a bit foolish tearing it apart in the first place, but believe me if I didn't tear it up--putting it back together isn't so impressive," all done with that semi-formal British demeanor he carries.

That works great for him, but I do not wish to telegraph the plot so openly, which, as Jon said, is practically done in total by the very act of tearing it up.

I wonder what Eugene Burger has done with this thought?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 10/25/02 01:36 PM

I've always found the idea or concept of taking things apart and putting them back together as a very human thing to do. It's one of the fundamental tools we have for exploration, knowledge and insight. A deck of playing cards is universally recognized as an item in a magician's toolbox. So for the most part, in my experience, laymen will give the performer the benefit of the doubt that he or she can and would tear anything and put it back together - it just so happens to be a playing card this time around.

I find this thread very interesting - I wonder if some of the negative comments written here be as passionate, if say it were about the Gypsy Thread. It's a torn and restored effect and one could very easily apply the same, "Why" to it. And yet it is universally recognized as a classic of magic.

I happen to perform John Lovick's "Reparation" and a Gypsy Thread. In fact, those two effects are on my short list of personal favorites.

I'm not sure that I have a point to make other than I had something say and I wanted to share it. But, I will say this. “Nothing is good or bad, only thinking makes it so.”
Guest
 

Postby Doug Brewer » 10/28/02 05:31 PM

Hi Pete: While your business card idea sounds good, I believe there would a bit of "futzing" around with card to get it in position for the Reformation ending, which would kind of ruin the moment. You could simply do the Reformation with a business card. Here's an idea, which may give some meaning to the torn and restored thing. I've had some cards printed with a large, single red heart, printed right in the middle. I tear up the card, representing it as a "broken heart". Then I restore it via Hollingworth's Reformation. Doesn't this sound clever? Ironically, I found trying to add meaning to this effect (at least this way) took away some of it's strength. While this presentation was quaint, I found the original method, with a forced, signed card, stronger for my audiences. The idea of the card being a free choice, I think, really adds to its strength. I have performed The Reformation for real, paying audiences. It plays very strong.

I think some effects are in dire need of presentation to empower them further. For example, I love Peter Samuelson's Invasion of the Body Snatchers presentation for "wild card". Wild Card is a perfect example of an effect not making any sense by itself. It's pretty, but I don't understand its purpose. Many, many illusions don't make sense by themselves. I have never been a fan of the torture-type illusions (e.g sawing in half, sword basket, etc) which are usually presented in a passive woman/dominant magician type way. Even if you drape high-tech lighting and sound around these effects, they really are nothing more than puzzles. I think levitation, however, can be presented in a very sensual way (see Freud for answers here).

Anyway, just some thoughts. I'm veering away from the torn & restored card stuff, so I'll stop. I'll add, however, that I did like the Garcia idea for the first restoration (the first and second pieces fusing). After that, however, some of the handling gets less clean - especially going to the pocket (never one of my favorites).

Doug
Doug Brewer
 
Posts: 120
Joined: 01/25/08 01:00 PM
Location: San Diego, CA

Postby Pete McCabe » 10/28/02 06:41 PM

Doug:

It's pretty easy to do the original folds so that you end up with the duplicate folded in half, writing side out, in your pocket. If you remove this from your pocket with the crease at the top and place the 3/4 card directly over it, (which is pretty much what happens if the dupe is in finger palm and you take the 3/4 card in that hand) you are in position for the final reformation step with no futzing.

Next time we run into each other at the Castle remind me and I'll show you.

Pete
Pete McCabe
 
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Postby Guest » 12/02/02 03:47 PM

I admit to being fooled badly by Daniel. The first restoration is what got me.

I purchased the video, worked on the routine and finally decided on how I could best use this gem.

I couldn't figure out a logical reason for the routine. I now use it when someone asks me for a business card. I tell them that I'm sorry but I only have one left and it's torn. I take out the two pieces and use Daniel's first restoration to put them together and immediately hand them out. This will be apparent if you have the tape.

It is extremely strong in effect, it is to the point and gets rid of the angle problems. The best part is your new client will show your card to everybody.
Guest
 

Postby Danny Archer » 12/11/02 12:08 PM

I met Daniel at the Las Vegas Magic Invitational and saw his handling parts of which fooled me completly ... we traded contact information but I just moved and can't find ... does anyone know his e-mail address or phone number??

Thanks in advance ...
you can e-mail me at lecturenet@aol.com
Producer of MINDvention
mentalism convention
Danny Archer
 
Posts: 595
Joined: 02/29/08 01:00 PM
Location: Denver

Postby Danny Archer » 12/12/02 03:29 PM

Have the info now ... thanks anyway ...
Producer of MINDvention
mentalism convention
Danny Archer
 
Posts: 595
Joined: 02/29/08 01:00 PM
Location: Denver

Postby Guest » 12/18/02 01:11 AM

HI Folks

Motivation needs to be our goal when we try to find out a routine.
Yes the Doumergue's,Garcia's,..... are pretty well done but as said Jon whitout motivation.
Regarding the great idea from Bob Kohler I will probably doing it, in that way, if you don't mind Bob?
Of course not that's his idea,we need to find our motivation. BTW I love the David Williamson's version
Sorry for my english, I'm french
see ya
arthur
Guest
 


Return to Light From the Lamp

cron