ERDNASE

[Joe Pecore]

It was interesting to note a couple of addresses in the McKinney Bankruptcy Files. Frederick J. Drake's business was at 356 Dearborn Street and Harry S. Thompson was based at Philip Ruxton Inks of 357 Dearborn Street.

Could someone point me to where in the bankruptcy files we get this address? Because all other sources I've found (e.g. books published by Drake) places his business at Wabash Avenue.

I see it here: http://askalexander.org/display/66796/M ... esource/93

[Leonard Hevia]

E. S. Andrews and W. E. Sanders had cards in their hands. Sanders purchased a number of decks in bulk. Laymen don't purchase decks of cards in bulk unless they are serious card players and/or magicians.

Leonard, I could now use the same criticism that was rendered against my gambling book argument for Gallaway, to argue against this. So here it goes. Owning decks of cards doesn't mean Sanders was a gambler or magician. Maybe he was a card collector. Or maybe he bought them as a gift for somebody who liked to play cards. Or maybe he is like me and uses them as bookmarks. Or maybe his wife did decorations with them. Just owning them doesn't mean you use them to play or gamble or do magic. Right?

Precisely. And just owning books on gambling doesn't make Gallaway any closer to being Erdnase than either of these two gentlemen, as you stated earlier. On that note, I don't believe Sanders was married yet when he purchased those decks, so those decks were not for decorative purposes for a non existent wife. He purchased those decks prior to a trip where he would have some idle time in front of a campfire. A good time and place to practice cutting and shuffling a deck of cards.

[mam]

It was interesting to note a couple of addresses in the McKinney Bankruptcy Files. Frederick J. Drake's business was at 356 Dearborn Street and Harry S. Thompson was based at Philip Ruxton Inks of 357 Dearborn Street.

Could someone point me to where in the bankruptcy files we get this address? Because all other sources I've found (e.g. books published by Drake) places his business at Wabash Avenue.

I see it here: http://askalexander.org/display/66796/M ... esource/93

Great, thanks a lot!

[lybrary]

He purchased those decks prior to a trip where he would have some idle time in front of a campfire. A good time and place to practice cutting and shuffling a deck of cards.

Or for gifts to hand out. Many buy gifts before a trip.

[Jonathan Townsend]

... But mostly I love it because every post serves as a reminder that when it comes to the identity of Erdnase, everybody’s in the same boat. Nobody knows.

I like seeing the research efforts. Kudos to those who bring in the data. Be it maps, papers, books, snipits from magazines ... it helps!

[lybrary]

Precisely. And just owning books on gambling doesn't make Gallaway any closer to being Erdnase than either of these two gentlemen, as you stated earlier.

But many have argued that the fact that Sanders had the decks on his packing list makes him a stronger candidate. And that only makes him a card player. Half the nation played cards back then. Owning a book on card advantage play brings you much closer to being Erdnase than just playing cards. A lot fewer folks were card cheats or even just interested in cheating with cards than played cards.

[Jonathan Townsend]

@Chris, some may be making a case for a candidate. Not sure any are making a serious scholarly claim that would make it into history journals.

Owning a book or pack of cards in a town that had gaming clubs ... not so significant IMHO. Where anyone could have been the author it matters how much more likely one particular person seems. For example the writing style would also have to show as a closer match than random samples of ballyhoo and exposition written at the time.

In our craft we risk losing the distinction between selling a trick to audiences in a show and making a case or claim among peers - perhaps leading to unintentional comic results.

Today's Erdnase non-Clue: The illustrator did it in the hotel room with a mirror.

[lybrary]

Who thinks Erdnase is witty? Tom Sawyer addresses this subject in his latest blog post https://erdnasequest.wordpress.com/ So I wanted to pose that question to the readers of this thread.

[mam]

Definitely witty, in my opinion.

On something else, what do you think of the following passage, in regards to similarity with EATCT language:

In arranging this little volume the author has been prompted by gratitude for past favors, and a desire to fill a long felt want, without expectation, however, that these few leaves, penned with that which can be obtained in Terpsichore's vineyard, by penetrating every accessible recourse, and a compilation from the most able writers on the subject, together with original matter, can fill the entire niche in Terpsichore's temple.

At your feet, generous votaries of Terpsichore, is thrown the author's petit bouquet, many buds of which have been gathered through long years of unremitting toil in the chosen profession. If their tints have been blended not to harmonize at all times, your kind forbearance and pardon is asked.

[Richard Kaufman]

This book?
http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Quadrill ... 1330461479

Perhaps we have a square dancing card cheat?

[mam]

This book?
http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Quadrill ... 1330461479

Perhaps we have a square dancing card cheat?

Yes, that's right. It is another book published by Drake in 1902, I wanted to test it on the readers here. Because I find the tone similar to the intro of EATCT but that would for me not equal that they have the same author, but rather that this tone is more common than one would first think, meaning that similarity between "Estimating for printers" by Gallaway and EATCT might be equally coincidental.

At first I had hoped for A. C. Wirth to be a pseudonym as well, but it seems like that was the real name of the author and that he existed. That said, the traces of him are very few, and being member of the National Association of Teachers of Dancing in 1902 is odd since the organization was not founded until 1906. Can find no evidence that he was the president of the American National Association Masters of Dance either.

But these are probably flukes upon flukes.

[mam]

That, and of course that Erdnase violates many of the rules of "Etiquette for Ball and Drawing Room"!

Avoid slang phrases.

Do not contradict.

Give your opinions, but do not argue them.

[Richard Kaufman]

A fluke is a fish.

[mam]

A fluke is a fish.

I do not know what to make of this.

[Jonathan Townsend]

A fluke is a fish.

I do not know what to make of this.

Maybe it's like that pick a color trick?

Flatworm, part of an anchor, lucky stroke in billiards, tail of a whale...?

Pick one, remember it and put it back in the dictionary. Multiple outs after they say which one (envelope, pencil, wallet...)

[observer]

At first I had hoped for A. C. Wirth to be a pseudonym as well,

But these are probably flukes upon flukes.

Ira Cwth? Hey, it's possible - w is a vowel in Welsh.

And whales have flukes ....

[Roger M.]

As to buying decks of cards in bulk.

The concept of buying decks of cards in bulk is alien to all but gamblers and magicians.

Nobody here has any valid perspective on there being any other reason ... simply because this is the Genii Forum, and "you're" posting here

[Brad Jeffers]

I'm beginning to understand ...
It was Drake who started a rumor that S.W.Erdnase spelled backwards is E.S.Andrews.

This is not a "rumor". S. W. Erdnase does spell backwards to "E. S. Andrews". The rumor is that this has something to do with the author's identity.

I was being facetious.

The certitude that S.W.Erdnase spelled backward is E.S.Andrews is the single most intriguing fact in a case where speculations outnumber facts by a wide margin.

[Brad Jeffers]

This search for the identity of Erdnase is for sure my favorite parlor game.

I like it better than Pictionary.

[Leo Garet]

... But mostly I love it because every post serves as a reminder that when it comes to the identity of Erdnase, everybody’s in the same boat. Nobody knows.

I like seeing the research efforts. Kudos to those who bring in the data. Be it maps, papers, books, snipits from magazines ... it helps!

I’m not sure why you carved up (sorry, edited) my original very short post, but I did say there were “more than several reasons” why I love this thread. The bits and bobs you mention are among the “several”. Keep it coming.

[mam]

How common do you think the (mis)spelling "slight-of-hand" was in 1902?

I have not found this spelling in How Gamblers Win, Magic; stage illusions etc., New Era Card Tricks, Our Magic, or Sleight of Hand.

I have however found it in EATCT and in the weird quadrille book, in the advert for Roterberg's Card tricks and how to do them.

[Tom Sawyer]

I believe that Bill Mullins addressed that general topic in some depth in this post: Link.

[lybrary]

Could also be an error the typesetter introduced. I am counting 88 instances of slight, slightly, slightest, etc. With so many 'slight' word occurrences it is easily possible for a typesetter to make this kind of error.

My overall impression from these and other little errors here and there is that the book was not as thoroughly checked and proofed as other books. I therefore believe the assumption that somebody like Gallaway ran this book on the side through McKinney's print shop, rather than an official print job, is more likely.

[mam]

I believe that Bill Mullins addressed that general topic in some depth in this post: Link.

Thank you so much! You guys keep delivering useful answers to questions from a less well versed.

[lybrary]

Beyond simple linguistic metrics:

Here is an interesting comment from one of my email exchanges with Olsson. He writes:

"Estimating for Printers:
...not padded with ponderous editorial homilies...
...platitudinous dissertations...

"Expert at the Card Table":
...the writer uses no sophistry as an excuse for its existence...
...whining, mealy-mouthed pretensions of piety...

Note how both sets of phrases are about the plain practicalities of the respective art being described, yet do so in a fairly ornate way; that is a kind of extra-textual cohesiveness.

Yet another aspect how similar the writings of Erdnase and Gallaway are. We also noted that both Erdnase and Gallaway seem to like phrases with words that predominantly start with the same character. Gallaway: "...Padded with Ponderous...Platitudinous..." Erdnase: "...Mealy-Mouthed Pretensions of Piety..." Certainly aspects to explore in more depth.

[performer]

I'll tell you one thing about that book I am quite sure the author was not a card shark as he claimed. He was a magician pretending to be a card sharp.

I have come across many scoundrels in my time as, shall we say, part of the social circles I have moved in. Naturally I would come across REAL card sharps occasionally who did it for a living. They would only know one or two moves at the most and would do them quite crudely but enough to get away with it. And they would hardly be called literary giants.

Whoever wrote that book was NOT a gambler! Too many fancy moves and too much encyclopediac knowledge for that. All those moves would be quite unnecessary for a gambler. And too well written. I would have sworn Vernon had written it if he wasn't too young to have done so. I almost get a psychic vibe of him but of course it can't be. I can see it suiting his sense of humour though to have written it pretending it was written by someone else and keeping it secret all these years.

But of course I am talking nonsense. It can't be Vernon. Or can it?
Maybe a clever magician can make dates disappear. There. I always wanted to spread a conspiracy theory.

But to be serious I do think you should not be looking for a gambler or even a printer. You should be looking at those who were the skilled card magicians of the day. And I mean VERY skilled! Those moves were very advanced for the day. Very few people would have known all about them. That should narrow the search down.

Look for a skilled card magician, NOT a gambler.

[Jonathan Townsend]

Not sure what the author meant by post-graduate course when the basics and criteria for graduating are left unstated.

[lybrary]

Not sure what the author meant by post-graduate course when the basics and criteria for graduating are left unstated.

Jonathan, don't get me wrong, but some of your questions are utterly strange, perhaps even naive, or maybe I just don't get what you are asking. Why would somebody use a term like 'post-graduate'? Well, perhaps to express that it is more advanced than the average text. It doesn't require a definition by the author.

[Jonathan Townsend]

ah the calendar of slights ...

"... enable the skilled in deception to take a post-graduate course in the
highest and most artistic branches of his vocation."

Presupposing a Hogwarts diploma? It's not his opposition to the established approach of being prepared and rehearsed to suit the occasion but the claim of somehow advancing the art at the expense of so much of the craft. The audience is not supposed to see the methods. Consider that the one person using the palaver as provided for the queens trick also makes use of the technology previously demonstrated by Hofzinser.

Post-graduate of what? More winks to the reader.

Getting back to Galloway - how does his writing compare to other writing from that time in that area?

[Bill Mullins]

How common do you think the (mis)spelling "slight-of-hand" was in 1902?

I have not found this spelling in How Gamblers Win, Magic; stage illusions etc., New Era Card Tricks, Our Magic, or Sleight of Hand.

I have however found it in EATCT and in the weird quadrille book, in the advert for Roterberg's Card tricks and how to do them.

"Slight of hand" wasn't common by 1902, but neither was it completely unknown. You can find examples of it being used in Mahatma, Stanyon's Magic and the Sphinx.

We also noted that both Erdnase and Gallaway seem to like phrases with words that predominantly start with the same character. Gallaway: "...Padded with Ponderous...Platitudinous..." Erdnase: "...Mealy-Mouthed Pretensions of Piety..." Certainly aspects to explore in more depth.

The fact that two writers had certain stylistic devices in common doesn't really tell us much without some sort of context (the same argument I was making about four word phrases, and sure enough, analysis of other books showed that it wasn't really that distinctive). Alliteration is a fairly common linguistic tool (see: E. A. Poe, "The Raven," "The Bells," "Annabel Lee"; "Peter Piper picked . . . "; any junior high school English class) -- how much was it used by other authors of the time? Was it consistently used by Gallaway in his other books?

For example, Roterberg's Preface in New Era Card Tricks uses "fascinating field" and "special study," and his Introduction uses "conjurer with cards," "degree of dexterity," "technically termed". All that on the first two textual pages of the book.

[lybrary]

@Bill: And that is why I wrote "Certainly aspects to explore in more depth." Since you didn't criticize the other main part of my post, the extra-textual cohesiveness, I assume you agree with it.

[Jonathan Townsend]

Argue for measures - for example alterations per page or consistent use of a specific analogy ... which may form a distance metric and basis for arguing that two texts have the same author. Arguing by or from intuition is about like disputing tastes - obvious to one and meaningless to many. Folks are still arguing about whether Paine's words influenced our Declaration of Independence.

On the gossip side: we don't have a "he told us not to discuss his identity" or "we agreed not to discuss authorship of that book" type quote.. so far.

@Chris, I applaud your finding sample texts from another author which you find similar to the erdnase text. Writing takes practice. The guy who wrote the text must be out there somewhere in the literary record. Earlier texts from another field would weigh more strongly as they are less likely the post hoc of something proctored. (the author of the later work had read erdnase and was therefore more likely to use word constructions found in that text)

[Tom Sawyer]

Jonathan, true about intuition, but I think that for some people that intuition as to Erdnase is possibly something more -- it's potentially based on a deep familiarity with the Erdnase text and also with texts being compared to it.

But I am not sure that anyone has that kind of familiarity with the other texts. And even as to Erdnase, the kind of familiarity I am talking about requires more than having read Erdnase many times. Some people get A's in their English literature classes and others, C's and F's.

--Tom

[lybrary]

(the author of the later work had read erdnase and was therefore more likely to use word constructions found in that text)

Jonathan, so you agree that Gallaway read, studied and absorbed EATCT, and therefore had an interest in card advantage play?

[Bill Mullins]

Since you didn't criticize the other main part of my post, the extra-textual cohesiveness, I assume you agree with it.

Bad assumption. Not the first one you've made, lately.

[lybrary]

Since you didn't criticize the other main part of my post, the extra-textual cohesiveness, I assume you agree with it.

Bad assumption. Not the first one you've made, lately.

Then you are starting to get lazy. In the past you didn't miss such opportunities. BTW, are you one of those who think Erdnase is witty?

[Bob Coyne]

Beyond simple linguistic metrics:

Yet another aspect how similar the writings of Erdnase and Gallaway are. We also noted that both Erdnase and Gallaway seem to like phrases with words that predominantly start with the same character. Gallaway: "...Padded with Ponderous...Platitudinous..." Erdnase: "...Mealy-Mouthed Pretensions of Piety..." Certainly aspects to explore in more depth.

I've read a bit more of Gallaway and I keep tripping over very awkwardly composed sentences...sounds nothing like Erdnase (unlike Sanders who sounds exactly like him). Here's a sampling from Gallaway. Do you really think Erdnase writes this poorly?

- A careful study of the diagrams, supplemented with a little practice in folding sheets of paper, will soon master the difficulty of estimating work where the quantity on the job would warrant printing in gangs in order to cut labor costs in both pressroom and bindery.

- It contains 120 pages and every page is packed with information which is expressed in print-shop English and which will be of help to the printer who is endowed with good, common, every-day horse sense.

- the pertinency of this statement will be better understood when one appreciates that the very first problem...

- of course, it is always better to print sheetwise, the reasons for which will be given later on.

- the subject will be gone into thoroughly as it has a bearing on make-ready time, running time, ink, stock, and bindery work. It will be handled from the estimator's or printing engineer's point of view, rather than from that of the craftsman who locks up the forms for the press.

- the advantage which a knowledge of imposition gives the estimator not only asserts itself on book layout, but it is also evident on nearly all jobs which run into moderate quantities or which might be combined with other jobs of the same character.

- further, it keeps the estimator always on the alert for possibilities in the saving of paper stock by making other than straight cuts on the stock.

- merely to show how a saving in both stock and presswork can be effected on many jobs, a number of problems will be given and then worked out.

- by this proceeding he will better visualize just what he is doing.

[Bill Mullins]

BTW, are you one of those who think Erdnase is witty?

I'd say more that he was droll, or amusing; but I can see why others would say witty. The pun on p 111, the "needs the money" line, some of his imagery, the excesses of his patter, all indicate to me that he has a dry sense of humor.

[Jonathan Townsend]

You're on the way to making a good case. Looking for meaningful measures is a big step toward credible argument. It's like the mysteries where a set of footprints vanishes in the middle of a field. Look at the footprints - shoe sizes and shoes of the suspects

you agree that Gallaway read, studied and absorbed EATCT, and therefore had an interest in card advantage play?

A weak conditional on that - ie he may have read the erdnase text. Maybe he got it much later? Maybe it sat on the shelf unread? Are there marginalia in his handwriting? Studied - need evidence. Interest... also need evidence.

On the formal writing metrics you'd want to find writing published before 1901 with similar structures and phrasing. After 1901 and you get much more post hoc ergo proctor hoc noise in your statistics. If you find one author who is a close match - then you can expect time to factor into the ANOVA.

[lybrary]

You're on the way to making a good case. Looking for meaningful measures is a big step toward credible argument. It's like the mysteries where a set of footprints vanishes in the middle of a field. Look at the footprints - shoe sizes and shoes of the suspects

you agree that Gallaway read, studied and absorbed EATCT, and therefore had an interest in card advantage play?

A weak conditional on that - ie he may have read the erdnase text. Maybe he got it much later? Maybe it sat on the shelf unread? Are there marginalia in his handwriting? Studied - need evidence. Interest... also need evidence.

On the formal writing metrics you'd want to find writing published before 1901 with similar structures and phrasing. After 1901 and you get much more post hoc ergo proctor hoc noise in your statistics. If you find one author who is a close match - then you can expect time to factor into the ANOVA.

Jonathan, if you argue that Gallaway uses similar phrases from EATCT but he is not the author, then you would have to admit that he must have read it. And actually to absorb phrases to use 25 years later he must have almost religiously read and and studied the book. I am simply demonstrating that your argumentation is inconsistent. You can either explain the similarity with him being the author of both books. Or with him being the author of the later book and having absorbed, meaning read in detail, the earlier one. No?