Review of Heirloom by Danny Orleans

Discuss products and their reviews in Genii.

Postby Jamie Badman » 05/19/04 08:00 AM


In a recent issue of Genii, Danny Orleans reviewed a product by Colin Miller and myself called 'Heirloom'.

The review was overall very positive (albeit with a few errors) but I'm not here to quibble about the actual conclusions of the review...

What I don't understand is why it was deemed permissable for the review to:

(1) Explain the entire method of the effect
(2) Reproduce the actual text, word for word, from the letter in the effect.

With the information provided by the review, the entire secret was revealed.

I know that reviews sometimes need to tip a little in order to clue the potential buyer in on what they're money will buy... but I feel that this review crossed a line.

I'm interested in what others thought about that review in this context. I'm also interested in whether Richard Kaufman stands by the reviewer in this respect ?

I can imagine creators of magic feeling very reluctant to have their products reviewed by the magazine if the review is to so meticulously describe the method; surely a good review is possible without revealing so much ?


Jamie Badman.
Jamie Badman
Posts: 159
Joined: 02/29/08 01:00 PM
Location: London

Postby Guest » 05/19/04 08:12 AM

I agree with Jamie. I performed the trick for a local magician, he was fooled because he wasnt familar with the method used. I saw him a few weeks later and he told me he figured the trick out. I asked him how and he said he read it in the genii review. I couldn't believe the actually method was laid out right in the review. I think thats going a little to far.

Postby Tommy Brown » 05/19/04 08:41 AM

Yes, I think the review gave too much away and the method could easily be figured out. Neves 710, this "local magician" you speak of, do I know him? ;)
Tommy Brown
Posts: 86
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Chattanooga, TN

Postby Jamie Badman » 05/23/04 02:28 AM

Thanks for your support guys. It's a shame 'Genii' hasn't been able to make an 'official' response to this. I mailed Danny Orleans to see if he'd consider defending the exposure in his review but I don't hold out much hope - it's a pretty indefensible position, I think...

Jamie Badman
Posts: 159
Joined: 02/29/08 01:00 PM
Location: London

Postby Richard Kaufman » 05/23/04 11:00 AM

Jamie, you got a very good review.
Discussing exactly how a trick works is something we scrutinize closely when writing and editing reviews. We try very hard not to give too much away, yet engage in a valuable discussion of the item in question. There is a fine line and sometimes people feel we have crossed it, but we do try to be extremely careful.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 21942
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Jamie Badman » 05/23/04 12:19 PM


Thanks for responding. I know the review was very good; I'm more than pleased with that! It was simply the level of exposure within the review I was concerned about. I can see that sometimes, details of mechanics may need to be discussed in order to provide the potential purchaser with an informed review. I guess, on reading the review again, it's really that the Kolossal Killer principle is pretty much exposed within the detail of the review that concerned me. I think that could have been avoided. That is, of course, a matter of opinion.

In any case, regardless of whether or not there was too much exposure, thanks for a good review in your magazine. I guess in retrospect, that's a pretty good result!


Jamie Badman
Posts: 159
Joined: 02/29/08 01:00 PM
Location: London

Return to Light From the Lamp