ERDNASE

Discuss general aspects of Genii.
Leonard Hevia
Posts: 1895
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Dai Vernon, Frank Garcia, Slydini, Houdini,
Location: Gaithersburg, Md.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Leonard Hevia » April 1st, 2018, 2:50 pm

lybrary wrote:Let me put it this way. If tomorrow I find a similar stash of Gallaway's personal notebooks as we have for Sanders, and there is similarly very very little on magic and gambling in there, it would weaken the Gallaway case, not strengthen it.


It would not strengthen Gallaway's case but neither would it weaken it--than it already is. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. He could have chosen to keep the gambling and card material in a separate notebook and threw it in the fireplace when the end was near. Or perhaps a surviving family member noticed the incriminating material inside and kept it secret or destroyed it. Be that as it may, I have a difficulty reconciling that with virtually no writing evidence from the railroad E.S. Andrews.
Last edited by Leonard Hevia on April 1st, 2018, 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jkeyes1000
Posts: 483
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 3:12 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby jkeyes1000 » April 1st, 2018, 2:54 pm

Bob Coyne wrote:
jkeyes1000 wrote:Something really bothers me about the schism between the gambling and the legerdemain sections of EATCT.

Clearly, Erdnase's philosophy is that an advantage player ought never to hint that he is a skilled card manipulator. Are we then, to believe that he ever performed card magic before an audience of any kind? It doesn't make sense. He would have been publicly confessing his proficiency.

I like my theory, that the magic section of EATCT was either lifted from a performer he had seen frequently (in order to copy the patter), or essentially written by a co-author with stage experience.


Let's not forget that much of the Legerdemain/magic section is actually card sleights and very similar to the Card Table Artifice section. Are you referring to just the Card Tricks subsection?


I'm referring to the routines and the meticulously plotted patter. If the main objective of EATCT was to treat of cheating at cards, it is very odd that these tricks, which the author himself considers relatively trifling, should be more carefully rehearsed, more extravagantly described, than the merely methodical gambling moves. Why work so hard at these "little extras" at the end? It seems to me, they must have been conceived by someone else, someone with far more passion for magic than Erdnase himself had.

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 1st, 2018, 2:55 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:We find ourselves in disagreement (yet again).
Then you have a low bar. My bar is beyond a reasonable doubt as is necessary in criminal cases.

Bill Mullins wrote:Ownership of a copy of Expert (especially when that ownership can be explained for other reasons, such as keeping a souvenir) does not "reasonably well document" any experience with gambling or magic. Or do you believe that everyone who has a copy of 50 Shades of Grey is into S&M?
He also had several gambling books, which proves my point. The likelihood that he kept Expert for other reasons than interest is very small. People working in print shops see books everyday. They keep them if they have an interest in the subject. You are judging this from our today's point of view where Erdnase is this mythical figure and everybody wants a first edition. In the McKinney shop it was one of many many other books they printed. Those interested in cheating or magic would have kept a copy, those not interested would not have.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

Bob Coyne
Posts: 561
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » April 1st, 2018, 3:39 pm

jkeyes1000 wrote:
Bob Coyne wrote:
jkeyes1000 wrote:Something really bothers me about the schism between the gambling and the legerdemain sections of EATCT.

Clearly, Erdnase's philosophy is that an advantage player ought never to hint that he is a skilled card manipulator. Are we then, to believe that he ever performed card magic before an audience of any kind? It doesn't make sense. He would have been publicly confessing his proficiency.

I like my theory, that the magic section of EATCT was either lifted from a performer he had seen frequently (in order to copy the patter), or essentially written by a co-author with stage experience.


Let's not forget that much of the Legerdemain/magic section is actually card sleights and very similar to the Card Table Artifice section. Are you referring to just the Card Tricks subsection?


I'm referring to the routines and the meticulously plotted patter. If the main objective of EATCT was to treat of cheating at cards, it is very odd that these tricks, which the author himself considers relatively trifling, should be more carefully rehearsed, more extravagantly described, than the merely methodical gambling moves. Why work so hard at these "little extras" at the end? It seems to me, they must have been conceived by someone else, someone with far more passion for magic than Erdnase himself had.


I don't get the impression that more care has gone into the Card Tricks section than the others. In fact the opposite. Certainly there is more theatrical language used when describing the tricks, but that's just part and parcel of what's being described (patter and instructions for presentation). But in terms of importance and what the author cared most about about (and was proudest of), it seems to me that it's clearly in the sleight of hand sections. The sleights for both gambling and magic are described with great care and precision. The impact from the book has been in those sections and would be roughly the same even if the card tricks were all removed

He, himself, even devalues the actual tricks (vs the sleights he's taught):

However, the artist who has attained some degree of proficiency in manipulation as taught by this work, may by taxing his wits a little, devise no end of tricks for himself, with the advantage that they will not be shop worn articles.
Last edited by Bob Coyne on April 1st, 2018, 3:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 1st, 2018, 3:45 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:
lybrary wrote:[Olsson] is considered a pioneer and expert of authorship attribution.

This should be easy enough to verify. Of his eighteen publications, only six of them have been cited by other scholars. Compare this to the citations garnered by Patrick Juola, whose survey article was linked by Jack Shalom a few days ago. (For that matter, being a "pioneer", why is he not mentioned in Juola's article?) Compare to Frederick Mosteller, whose work with David Wallace on the Federalist Papers started all this. Other scholars in authorship attribution like David Holmes, David Hoover, and John Burrows all seem to be more widely cited and have greater Impact Factors than Olsson.
First of all, only journals have an 'impact factor'. Individuals don't have an impact factor, they have what is called an H-factor. So much to your understanding of how academic publications are evaluated.

Second, the H-factor is not necessarily a fair or good metric. Being cited depends for the most part on which journals published your articles. And which journals you get published in depends mostly on your connections and your supervisor's connections, not necessarily on how good or groundbreaking your work is. I have worked in this industry and know all the dirty secrets. The fact that Olsson is from the UK and not the US already means he is at a disadvantage. But I didn't say that he is the most cited author in this field. He has peer reviewed articles which are being cited, which is proof that he is not a quack. He wrote two wonderful books which show his knowledge and experience in this field. Olsson has chosen to do a lot of work for the police and appears as expert witness in court rather than spend all his time getting into the most highly cited journals, which is another reason why his H-factor is lower. For our task, to find Erdnase, and to work a real world case, having real world experience and not just academic citations is also important. Olsson is certainly an expert, both with academic and real world credentials and experience.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

User avatar
jkeyes1000
Posts: 483
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 3:12 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby jkeyes1000 » April 1st, 2018, 4:11 pm

Bob: Yes, Erdnase cared more about the gambling techniques than the magic. That is why it is hard to understand why he would have striven so diligently to perfect the patter and presentation. I get the distinct impressions that a) whoever wrote the routines was himself a theatrical performer, and very interested in magic, and b) that Erdnase, the advantage player, would never have exposed his talent for card wizardry in public, and (as you have concurred) had relatively little respect for magic. To him, it was a hobby, and perhaps a potential career, but not one I feel he had ever seriously pursued.

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 1st, 2018, 4:35 pm

jkeyes1000 wrote:That is why it is hard to understand why he would have striven so diligently to perfect the patter and presentation.
As a circus barker/orator Gallaway developed the ability to write such patter. He was described as ‘silver-tongued orator.’

jkeyes1000 wrote:...had relatively little respect for magic. To him, it was a hobby, and perhaps a potential career, but not one I feel he had ever seriously pursued.
I would not say 'little respect', but I agree magic was not a professional pursuit for him. He wrote:
There is no branch of conjuring that so fully repays the amateur for his labor and study as slight-of-hand with cards. The artist is always sure of a comprehensive and appreciative audience. There is no amusement or pastime in the civilized world so prevalent as card games, and almost everybody loves a good trick.
That doesn't sound like somebody without respect for magic.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

User avatar
jkeyes1000
Posts: 483
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 3:12 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby jkeyes1000 » April 1st, 2018, 5:37 pm

lybrary wrote:
jkeyes1000 wrote:That is why it is hard to understand why he would have striven so diligently to perfect the patter and presentation.
As a circus barker/orator Gallaway developed the ability to write such patter. He was described as ‘silver-tongued orator.’

jkeyes1000 wrote:...had relatively little respect for magic. To him, it was a hobby, and perhaps a potential career, but not one I feel he had ever seriously pursued.
I would not say 'little respect', but I agree magic was not a professional pursuit for him. He wrote:
There is no branch of conjuring that so fully repays the amateur for his labor and study as slight-of-hand with cards. The artist is always sure of a comprehensive and appreciative audience. There is no amusement or pastime in the civilized world so prevalent as card games, and almost everybody loves a good trick.
That doesn't sound like somebody without respect for magic.


What I meant by "relatively little respect" for magic is the fact that it was not the primary subject of the book. And, though Erdnase boasts of great experience at advantage playing, he does not claim to have spent much of his time or effort in studying the art of legerdemain, much less practicing it.

My opinion is, of course, subjective, but as I see it, the patter in the magic section is by far the best writing in the entire book. It is not merely the description of manual dexterity. It is the creative plotting of fiction, done with great care and consideration, and the verbiage is much richer than any of the passages in the first part of EATCT.

It is good story telling, and perfectly suited to the stage.

Erdnase (I suspect) wrote all he could on the subject of cheating, but the book wasn't big enough. I do not believe it was his intention from the start, to include the tricks. I think they were just "filler", so far as he was concerned. Somehow, he acquired these routines, perhaps from a friend or associate who was a magician. For that matter--a retired magician, who no longer needed to keep his secrets. This would fit well with the Benedict hypothesis.
Last edited by jkeyes1000 on April 1st, 2018, 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 561
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » April 1st, 2018, 5:43 pm

jkeyes1000 wrote:Bob: Yes, Erdnase cared more about the gambling techniques than the magic. That is why it is hard to understand why he would have striven so diligently to perfect the patter and presentation. I get the distinct impressions that a) whoever wrote the routines was himself a theatrical performer, and very interested in magic, and b) that Erdnase, the advantage player, would never have exposed his talent for card wizardry in public, and (as you have concurred) had relatively little respect for magic. To him, it was a hobby, and perhaps a potential career, but not one I feel he had ever seriously pursued.



It does seem that he'd have to be careful to whom he performed. So it would probably be impossible to be a professional performer in formal stage settings.

But I don't think that's necessary -- it's easy to believe that he enjoyed performing as an amateur and did so discretely and impromptu for friends/acquaintances in close-up or parlor settings. I don't see anything in the tricks section of the book that implies a stage or formal setting or other trappings of being a professional.

In addition, many of the tricks are close-up and require a table (hence unlikely to be used in professional settings). He also opens the legerdemain section talking about how having skill with the sleights allows doing impromptu with a "family deck". It seems likely that's how he performed. So none of that precludes him from developing his own polished patter and in presenting it the book as exemplars for the reader to then into their own.

performer
Posts: 3183
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 10:35 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby performer » April 1st, 2018, 6:35 pm

I neither know nor care who Erdnase was but one thing I can tell you. Card sharks generally speaking know very few sleights. Perhaps 3 at the most and even that is a stretch. They don't need to know any more than that. No card cheat would ever know let alone write up all those dozens and dozens of sleights. This was obviously written by a magician and a very knowledgeable one at that. And it wouldn't surprise me in the least if he had never played cards for money in his life. Or at least cheated anyway. Magicians generally don't have the mentality for that.

Somehow a book which is so well and intelligently written doesn't seem compatible with the unsavory types that cheat at cards. And I have met a tiny few of them in my time. And of course the second part of the book indicates a magician.

User avatar
jkeyes1000
Posts: 483
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 3:12 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby jkeyes1000 » April 1st, 2018, 7:00 pm

performer wrote:I neither know nor care who Erdnase was but one thing I can tell you. Card sharks generally speaking know very few sleights. Perhaps 3 at the most and even that is a stretch. They don't need to know any more than that. No card cheat would ever know let alone write up all those dozens and dozens of sleights. This was obviously written by a magician and a very knowledgeable one at that. And it wouldn't surprise me in the least if he had never played cards for money in his life. Or at least cheated anyway. Magicians generally don't have the mentality for that.

Somehow a book which is so well and intelligently written doesn't seem compatible with the unsavory types that cheat at cards. And I have met a tiny few of them in my time. And of course the second part of the book indicates a magician.


You could be right, Mark. In my mind, it is either a collaboration between Gallaway and Benedict, or just Benedict, the retired magician who became a book broker.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5206
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » April 1st, 2018, 7:37 pm

lybrary wrote: My bar is beyond a reasonable doubt as is necessary in criminal cases.


What have criminal cases got to do with this? If you are going to draw from the law, why not "preponderance of the evidence"? Why not "clear and convincing evidence"?
And there are many doubts associated with Gallaway, and some of them are far beyond "reasonable". I have significant and major doubts that anyone ever referred to him as "Erdnase" -- there is absolutely no evidence to support that, only your conjecture. I have significant and major doubts that he had any of the skills described in Expert. There is no evidence at all that he did.
If we were trying a criminal case in which the perpetrator had to have some unique skill -- say, at forging documents -- the prosecutor would have to show the defendant actually could forge a document. You would prosecute the case by saying the defendant owned a book that mentioned a forged document. And the jury would return a verdict of "Not Guilty".

He also had several gambling books, which proves my point.

If the books in question were any of these, it wouldn't prove your point:
Esther Waters by George Moore (1894) -- a novel about horse racing and betting
Jack Pots by Eugene Edwards (1900) -- gambling anecdotes cribbed from the newspapers
Monte Carlo Anecdotes and Systems of Play by Victor Bethell (1901) -- Casino anecdotes
The Theory of Chances or The Modern Development of The Rules Of Probability by James McGowan (1903) -- mathematical theory
I could list many more, but the point is that the majority, probably the vast majority, of gambling books don't have anything to do with cheating at cards. We don't know the books that Gallaway had, and the hearsay comment from Jay Marshall isn't solid enough to suggest anything conclusive about Gallaway's habits or interests (and as hearsay, this wouldn't be admissible in your "criminal case"). Further, you continually describe Gallaway has having had "magic and gambling books" -- with the exception of Expert, we don't know that he had any magic books. But you put magic into a plural phrase, which is intellectually dishonest. Any books he owned other than Expert do not advance his case.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5206
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » April 1st, 2018, 8:10 pm

lybrary wrote:
Bill Mullins wrote:
lybrary wrote:[Olsson] is considered a pioneer and expert of authorship attribution.

This should be easy enough to verify. Of his eighteen publications, only six of them have been cited by other scholars. Compare this to the citations garnered by Patrick Juola, whose survey article was linked by Jack Shalom a few days ago. (For that matter, being a "pioneer", why is he not mentioned in Juola's article?) Compare to Frederick Mosteller, whose work with David Wallace on the Federalist Papers started all this. Other scholars in authorship attribution like David Holmes, David Hoover, and John Burrows all seem to be more widely cited and have greater Impact Factors than Olsson.
First of all, only journals have an 'impact factor'. Individuals don't have an impact factor, they have what is called an H-factor. So much to your understanding of how academic publications are evaluated.

Second, the H-factor is not necessarily a fair or good metric. Being cited depends for the most part on which journals published your articles. And which journals you get published in depends mostly on your connections and your supervisor's connections, not necessarily on how good or groundbreaking your work is. I have worked in this industry and know all the dirty secrets. The fact that Olsson is from the UK and not the US already means he is at a disadvantage. But I didn't say that he is the most cited author in this field. He has peer reviewed articles which are being cited, which is proof that he is not a quack. He wrote two wonderful books which show his knowledge and experience in this field. Olsson has chosen to do a lot of work for the police and appears as expert witness in court rather than spend all his time getting into the most highly cited journals, which is another reason why his H-factor is lower. For our task, to find Erdnase, and to work a real world case, having real world experience and not just academic citations is also important. Olsson is certainly an expert, both with academic and real world credentials and experience.


So, to summarize. I, not being involved in academic publishing, misused the term "impact factor", but correctly determined that no one reads Olsson's papers. Olsson publishes in minor journals. You say he's a pioneer and considered to be an expert of authorship attribution, but no one else in the field says so (because they don't read his papers). He's a witness for hire. Does that about cover it?

Bob Coyne
Posts: 561
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » April 1st, 2018, 9:15 pm

Leonard Hevia wrote:
Bob Coyne wrote:While it's not conclusive, the similarities in the writing are numerous and striking (lexically, thematically, stylistically, and in the sense of the author's voice). That can't be explained away with facile statements like "it's a start". If you want to dispute the evidence, then you should come up with a large set of similarly compelling parallels for other candidates. i.e. who writes more like Erdnase than Sanders? We can then compare side-by-side.


Agreed Bob! The writing similarities are just too similar and compelling to be ignored and explained away. The answer to the mystery of Erdnase's true identity is in the writing--in the book. And yet there are those in the search for his identity who have paid lip service to this but stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the writing similarities between both authors.


I found a couple other really nice ones -- where a lexically distinct word or construct (in bold) is used to form the same overall thought (via the constellation of related words/meanings around it). These examples (and others like them) show not just same lexical choices but the same thought patterns.

---- FOREIGN TO the SUBJECT/PURPOSE but TOUCHED-UPON/CURSORY-REVIEW ------

Erdnase: The SUBJECT of prepared cards is almost as FOREIGN TO the MAIN PURPOSE OF THIS WORK as the preceding one of hold outs, but a CURSORY REVIEW of the commoner kinds and their uses may not be out of place.
Sanders: Nor is it intended to explain methods technically FOREIGN TO the SUBJECT, although such will be TOUCHED UPON.

---- ASSISTANCE/SIMPLEST-SYSTEM becomes CUMBERSOME and MENACE/EXPENSIVE ------

erdnase: the expert professional disdains THEIR ASSISTANCE. They are CUMBERSOME, unnecessary, and a constant MENACE to his reputation.
sanders: This system of shaft timbering is the SIMPLEST AND OFTEN THE CHEAPEST IN USE but it becomes CUMBERSOME and EXPENSIVE.

Leonard Hevia
Posts: 1895
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Dai Vernon, Frank Garcia, Slydini, Houdini,
Location: Gaithersburg, Md.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Leonard Hevia » April 1st, 2018, 9:25 pm

Good catch Bob!

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 1st, 2018, 9:51 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:So, to summarize. I, not being involved in academic publishing, misused the term "impact factor", but correctly determined that no one reads Olsson's papers. Olsson publishes in minor journals. You say he's a pioneer and considered to be an expert of authorship attribution, but no one else in the field says so (because they don't read his papers). He's a witness for hire. Does that about cover it?
You grand stand and lecture on a subject you know nothing about. You haven't written a single peer reviewed academic article, you have no idea what the impact factor is, but you lecture us about Olsson's academic credentials and what they mean. That's so funny, but isn't a whole lot different to the other ignorance oozing posts you have made on the Erdnase subject. Olsson's book "Forensic Linguistics" was cited 246 times. That is a respectable number for any academic writing, and means that many other researchers are reading and applying his methods and ideas. On top of it he practices in real life cases what he researches. You should really read his book "Wordcrime". It is a fantastic read and shows you the depth, breadth, and ingenuity Olsson brings to his work.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

User avatar
Zenner
Posts: 125
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 8:49 pm
Favorite Magician: Al Koran
Location: Derbyshire, England

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zenner » April 2nd, 2018, 6:20 am

jkeyes1000 wrote: Erdnase (I suspect) wrote all he could on the subject of cheating, but the book wasn't big enough. I do not believe it was his intention from the start, to include the tricks. I think they were just "filler", so far as he was concerned. Somehow, he acquired these routines, perhaps from a friend or associate who was a magician. For that matter--a retired magician, who no longer needed to keep his secrets. This would fit well with the Benedict hypothesis.


I believe that Erdnase's intention was to sell as many books as possible - he needed the money. So he covered everything he knew about card cheating AND card magic. Making it seem that a card cheat was exposing his secrets would be a selling point to some and the reason why he hid his name behind an obviously phoney one. And the inclusion of card tricks would be an attraction for magicians to buy it.

He knew how to market a book! And of all the candidates put forward so far, only Benedict would have that expertise. Add that to all the other clues and Bob's your uncle! ;)
Peter Zenner

Tom Gilbert
Posts: 797
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: NH
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Gilbert » April 2nd, 2018, 8:03 am

A few months ago Richard (K) wrote that a new candidate for Erdnase would be announced. Was that Peter's candidate or someone else?
If not Peter's, being this long, did the candidate fizzle?

User avatar
jkeyes1000
Posts: 483
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 3:12 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby jkeyes1000 » April 2nd, 2018, 9:18 am

Zenner wrote:
jkeyes1000 wrote: Erdnase (I suspect) wrote all he could on the subject of cheating, but the book wasn't big enough. I do not believe it was his intention from the start, to include the tricks. I think they were just "filler", so far as he was concerned. Somehow, he acquired these routines, perhaps from a friend or associate who was a magician. For that matter--a retired magician, who no longer needed to keep his secrets. This would fit well with the Benedict hypothesis.


I believe that Erdnase's intention was to sell as many books as possible - he needed the money. So he covered everything he knew about card cheating AND card magic. Making it seem that a card cheat was exposing his secrets would be a selling point to some and the reason why he hid his name behind an obviously phoney one. And the inclusion of card tricks would be an attraction for magicians to buy it.

He knew how to market a book! And of all the candidates put forward so far, only Benedict would have that expertise. Add that to all the other clues and Bob's your uncle! ;)


I still find it difficult to accept that Erdnase, who believed in distinguishing advantage players from ostentatious card manipulators (such as magicians), had any real experience in legerdemain.

I think it is possible, however, for someone like Benedict to have acquired the knowledge that went into the gambling portion of EATCT, while performing as a magician.

But this theory would require us to suppose that Benedict was less than candid in the suggestion that cheating at cards was his main purpose, and that the tricks were just for fun.

Certainly a shrewd business man would know that gambler's secrets had greater appeal to the general public, but most books by magicians that I have read, do the opposite. They put magic in first place, and "hustling" in second.

That Galloway had a copy of EATCT in his library is significant. I imagine that he, having worked at McKinney's, might have planned to publish a book of his own for some time. Lacking enough material for a decent sized volume, he might have asked Benedict to contribute to it and share in the profits.

User avatar
Zenner
Posts: 125
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 8:49 pm
Favorite Magician: Al Koran
Location: Derbyshire, England

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zenner » April 2nd, 2018, 9:39 am

jkeyes1000 wrote: That Galloway had a copy of EATCT in his library is significant. I imagine that he, having worked at McKinney's, might have planned to publish a book of his own for some time. Lacking enough material for a decent sized volume, he might have asked Benedict to contribute to it and share in the profits.


There are references to magic all through the gambling section. Erdnase told his readers that he had read every available book in the genre. Galloway supporters will have to show that he had read magic books (and practiced magic) BEFORE the publication of Expert. Having a copy of a book after publication is no evidence to show that a person had the knowledge and the ability to write it :lol:
Peter Zenner

User avatar
jkeyes1000
Posts: 483
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 3:12 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby jkeyes1000 » April 2nd, 2018, 9:53 am

Zenner wrote:
jkeyes1000 wrote: That Galloway had a copy of EATCT in his library is significant. I imagine that he, having worked at McKinney's, might have planned to publish a book of his own for some time. Lacking enough material for a decent sized volume, he might have asked Benedict to contribute to it and share in the profits.


There are references to magic all through the gambling section. Erdnase told his readers that he had read every available book in the genre. Galloway supporters will have to show that he had read magic books (and practiced magic) BEFORE the publication of Expert. Having a copy of a book after publication is no evidence to show that a person had the knowledge and the ability to write it :lol:


Well, "Erdnase" could have been telling the truth about studying "every available book" on magic, and yet, bring a gambler, dared not to demonstrate that knowledge. He might have read magic books solely for the sleights that would enable him to cheat at cards


In any case, the author appears to be contradicting himself. Either he was indeed a serious advantage player (in which case it is unlikely that he was also a magician), or he was a performer like Benedict, who merely pretended to the kind of gambling experience that his profession must have made virtually impossible.

User avatar
Zenner
Posts: 125
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 8:49 pm
Favorite Magician: Al Koran
Location: Derbyshire, England

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zenner » April 2nd, 2018, 10:22 am

jkeyes1000 wrote:
Zenner wrote:
jkeyes1000 wrote: That Galloway had a copy of EATCT in his library is significant. I imagine that he, having worked at McKinney's, might have planned to publish a book of his own for some time. Lacking enough material for a decent sized volume, he might have asked Benedict to contribute to it and share in the profits.


There are references to magic all through the gambling section. Erdnase told his readers that he had read every available book in the genre. Galloway supporters will have to show that he had read magic books (and practiced magic) BEFORE the publication of Expert. Having a copy of a book after publication is no evidence to show that a person had the knowledge and the ability to write it :lol:


Well, "Erdnase" could have been telling the truth about studying "every available book" on magic, and yet, bring a gambler, dared not to demonstrate that knowledge. He might have read magic books solely for the sleights that would enable him to cheat at cards

In any case, the author appears to be contradicting himself. Either he was indeed a serious advantage player (in which case it is unlikely that he was also a magician), or he was a performer like Benedict, who merely pretended to the kind of gambling experience that his profession must have made virtually impossible.


I don't believe that he was a gambler at all. He was a magician who had studied the methods of card manipulation and then poured all of his knowledge into a book aimed at the broadest possible readership. No gambler uses every sleight and every variation - The Expert is an encyclopedia based on a lot of research. Who would do such research? Only a magician...
Peter Zenner

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 2nd, 2018, 10:50 am

Zenner wrote:Having a copy of a book after publication is no evidence to show that a person had the knowledge and the ability to write it :lol:
That is not what I argue. I am saying that an author like Erdnase would keep a copy of his book. That's all. Gallaway's ability to write like Erdnase is manifested in the writings we have from him. The fact that he self-published, copyrighted, and put the price on the title page on books is evidence of his ability and willingness to do all these things.

What has Benedict written besides the couple of articles in the Sphinx? Has he ever self-published a book? Has he ever registered the copyright of a book? To self-publish a book like Expert requires not only the means to understand the contents, but also the means to do the writing and to do the self-publishing, two things that are not easy. Being a book salesman does not automatically mean he is a self-publisher. For Gallaway we have proof that he did self-publish some of his writings.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

Leonard Hevia
Posts: 1895
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Dai Vernon, Frank Garcia, Slydini, Houdini,
Location: Gaithersburg, Md.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Leonard Hevia » April 2nd, 2018, 11:13 am

lybrary wrote:Gallaway's ability to write like Erdnase is manifested in the writings we have from him. The fact that he self-published, copyrighted, and put the price on the title page on books is evidence of his ability and willingness to do all these things.


There are quite a few here who don't see anything of Erdnase in Gallway's writing. That he self-published, copyrighted, and put the price on the title page after the publication of The Expert in 1902 is more indicative that he followed the trail rather than blazed it.

lybrary wrote:To self-publish a book like Expert requires not only the means to understand the contents, but also the means to do the writing and to do the self-publishing, two things that are not easy.


No--not easy at all. It requires the ability to surmount difficult tasks like passing the German and French language requirements in addition to the heavy math and other rigors of a mining college entrance exam, and graduate as an engineer.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 561
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » April 2nd, 2018, 11:14 am

Zenner wrote:I don't believe that he was a gambler at all. He was a magician who had studied the methods of card manipulation and then poured all of his knowledge into a book aimed at the broadest possible readership. No gambler uses every sleight and every variation - The Expert is an encyclopedia based on a lot of research. Who would do such research? Only a magician...


I think he was above all an "Expert" (in sleight of hand with cards) as opposed to being primarily either a magician or gambler. His true love was in perfecting technique ("artistic card handling") that he applied to either. He looked at card sleights as artistry, so that defined his approach to both gambling and magic.

"the handling of the deck should be as open and ARTISTIC as possible. "
"A more ARTISTIC method of locating and securing cards"
"to throw them on the discard heap when making his own discard, is INARTISTIC, and risky, and unworthy of any but
a neophyte or a bungler"

etc

My sense, though, is that he had more experience at the card table than as a performing magician. It seems to me that as a magician he was an amateur in highest sense (like Dai Vernon). But unlike Vernon, he had a deep grounding in actual card cheating as a professional and probably thought of himself more as a card cheat than a magician.

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 2nd, 2018, 11:23 am

Leonard Hevia wrote:No--not easy at all. It requires the ability to surmount difficult tasks like passing the German and French language requirements in addition to the heavy math and other rigors of a mining college entrance exam, and graduate as an engineer.
What does a mining-engineer learn about book publishing? As a privileged kid he could have gotten into the school without passing all requirements. Happens all the time.

On top of this you have no evidence that he kept up his German. He graduated from the school of mines in 1885. The German magic books we are talking about were published 1895-1901, that is a decade or more later. What evidence do you have that Sanders kept up his German?
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

Bob Coyne
Posts: 561
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » April 2nd, 2018, 11:55 am

lybrary wrote:
Leonard Hevia wrote:No--not easy at all. It requires the ability to surmount difficult tasks like passing the German and French language requirements in addition to the heavy math and other rigors of a mining college entrance exam, and graduate as an engineer.
What does a mining-engineer learn about book publishing? As a privileged kid he could have gotten into the school without passing all requirements. Happens all the time.

On top of this you have no evidence that he kept up his German. He graduated from the school of mines in 1885. The German magic books we are talking about were published 1895-1901, that is a decade or more later. What evidence do you have that Sanders kept up his German?


He graduated with an engineering degree in mining and wrote articles on the subject. And then edited a book containing those articles and other articles. He also wrote a fairly scholarly article on the history and linguistic origins of Montana and its name. So he was no slacker on the academic end and had demonstrated interests in language/linguistics.

As for book publishing. How did he manage to publish Mine Timbering if he had no chance to learn about book publishing? In addition, Marty Demarest's Montana History magazine article mentions Sanders' other publishing experience (e.g. overseeing the Montana Historical Society's publications). Plus Wilbur's brother James apparently corresponded with him to seek his advice on the technicalities of self publishing. So there seems to be quite a bit of experience with publishing. That seems actually to be another point in his favor. But even if he had no prior experience with publishing, what's to have prevented him from learning?

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 2nd, 2018, 11:58 am

Bob Coyne wrote:As for book publishing. How did he manage to publish Mine Timbering if he had no chance to learn about book publishing?
He is not the publisher. He is the author of the article.
Bob Coyne wrote:But even if he had no prior experience with publishing, what's to have prevented him from learning?
Where is the evidence for that? A million and one things are possible. You need some evidence to support your argument.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

Leonard Hevia
Posts: 1895
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Dai Vernon, Frank Garcia, Slydini, Houdini,
Location: Gaithersburg, Md.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Leonard Hevia » April 2nd, 2018, 12:12 pm

lybrary wrote:
Bob Coyne wrote:As for book publishing. How did he manage to publish Mine Timbering if he had no chance to learn about book publishing?
He is not the publisher. He is the author of the article.


The author of an article or book does not have to be an actual publisher to say that he "published" the material. You know that. This is a continuation of your nonsense stating that Gallaway owned "magic and gambling" books in the plural to create the illusion he owned a quantity of magic books when in truth you cannot provide evidence for this.

Neither can you provide evidence that Gallaway read those German magic publications you have alluded to--and yet you ask for further evidence of Sanders' command of German. Evidently, that he passed the foreign language section of the mining college entrance exam did not impress you. Family wealth and privilege can only get you so far. Sanders had to do the required amount of work to graduate, and as you are aware, worked in the mines until his hands blistered. The man was capable of doing the "real" work in the classroom and out in the trenches with a shovel and wheelbarrow, which he called an instrument of torture.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 561
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » April 2nd, 2018, 12:21 pm

lybrary wrote:
Bob Coyne wrote:As for book publishing. How did he manage to publish Mine Timbering if he had no chance to learn about book publishing?
He is not the publisher. He is the author of the article.


ok fine. But it's related, and involves dealing with a publisher. And you ignored the other publishing-related activities I mentioned (from Marty's article). E.g. overseeing Montana Historical Society's publications and the fact that his brother sought his advice on self-publishing.

lybrary wrote:
Bob Coyne wrote:But even if he had no prior experience with publishing, what's to have prevented him from learning?
Where is the evidence for that? A million and one things are possible. You need some evidence to support your argument.


What's the big hurdle for that? It seems like the time required to garner the experience and skill to write the book is the real hurdle. Plus, if he had the skills and energy to get a degree in mining engineering, write articles, travel all around the country examining mines etc, I don't see why going through the process of publishing the book would be anything out of the ordinary. And even if it was, he had substantial involvement with getting stuff published, as mentioned already.

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 2nd, 2018, 12:31 pm

Leonard Hevia wrote:The author of an article or book does not have to be an actual publisher to say that he "published" the material.
Sorry, but your English is incorrect. The only thing you could say is that he 'had it published'. He certainly did not publish it. To have an academic article published simply means you submit it to a journal and hope they publish it. It has nothing to do with the knowledge of how to self-publish a book.
Leonard Hevia wrote:Neither can you provide evidence that Gallaway read those German magic publications you have alluded to--and yet you ask for further evidence of Sanders' command of German.
We do have hard documentary evidence that Gallaway was fluent in German into adulthood. For Sanders nothing equivalent exists.
Leonard Hevia wrote:Family wealth and privilege can only get you so far.
It can get you very far. Even the most prestigious universities, such as Harvard, admit people from rich and connected families who would not pass the academic requirements. You are a naive fellow.
Leonard Hevia wrote:...worked in the mines until his hands blistered. The man was capable of doing the "real" work in the classroom and out in the trenches with a shovel and wheelbarrow, which he called an instrument of torture.
His manual work is corroborated in his notebooks where he writes more about work outside than anything else. That is exactly what he is. He is not a bookish person, he likes to work and be outside. A strike against being Erdnase. And how exactly do go from 'until his hands blistered' to the hands softer than a woman? Another strike against Sanders. The more we know about him the less he looks like Erdnase.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 2nd, 2018, 12:40 pm

Bob Coyne wrote:ok fine. But it's related, and involves dealing with a publisher.
Dealing with a publisher and self-publishing a book are two completely different things. As I wrote above, having an academic article published in a journal means you send it in. You will then be notified one way or another. You do not learn how a book is published doing that.
Bob Coyne wrote:And you ignored the other publishing-related activities I mentioned (from Marty's article). E.g. overseeing Montana Historical Society's publications and the fact that his brother sought his advice on self-publishing.
'Overseeing' can mean hundreds of things. It does not mean he knew how to self-publish a book. You would need more specific information than 'overseeing'. Being asked advice on something doesn't mean advice was given. My brother asks me often about stuff I have no idea. If you have Sanders response and he lays out all the steps of how to go about self-publishing a book then you would have a good argument.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

Bob Coyne
Posts: 561
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » April 2nd, 2018, 1:20 pm

lybrary wrote:
Bob Coyne wrote:ok fine. But it's related, and involves dealing with a publisher.
Dealing with a publisher and self-publishing a book are two completely different things. As I wrote above, having an academic article published in a journal means you send it in. You will then be notified one way or another. You do not learn how a book is published doing that.
Bob Coyne wrote:And you ignored the other publishing-related activities I mentioned (from Marty's article). E.g. overseeing Montana Historical Society's publications and the fact that his brother sought his advice on self-publishing.
'Overseeing' can mean hundreds of things. It does not mean he knew how to self-publish a book. You would need more specific information than 'overseeing'. Being asked advice on something doesn't mean advice was given. My brother asks me often about stuff I have no idea. If you have Sanders response and he lays out all the steps of how to go about self-publishing a book then you would have a good argument.


We know he was involved in various ways in the broader publishing and book preparation pipeline (from authoring to editing to overseeing the publishing). And his brother evidently thought he had knowledge about self-publishing. Also, Marty's article also mentions that his father (the Senator) took it upon himself to publish The Complete Codes and Statutes of the State of Montana. And Wilbur clerked for his father when he prepared the final draft of the 1890 Copyright Act. So he seems to have been familiar with publishing in different aspects, and it just doesn't seem like a big leap to me that he'd self-publish EATCT.

But even if he didn't have that experience he could have learned what he needed. It seems minor compared to all the other stuff he did. The knowledge, skill, and time commitment required to write EATCT would dwarf what he'd need to know or do in order to publish it.

Leonard Hevia
Posts: 1895
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Dai Vernon, Frank Garcia, Slydini, Houdini,
Location: Gaithersburg, Md.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Leonard Hevia » April 2nd, 2018, 2:15 pm

lybrary wrote:
Leonard Hevia wrote:The author of an article or book does not have to be an actual publisher to say that he "published" the material.
Sorry, but your English is incorrect. The only thing you could say is that he 'had it published'. He certainly did not publish it. To have an academic article published simply means you submit it to a journal and hope they publish it. It has nothing to do with the knowledge of how to self-publish a book.


Quibbling over phrasing minutiae used in informal English--and yet you stretch the language quite a bit: "magic and gambling books."

lybrary" wrote:We do have hard documentary evidence that Gallaway was fluent in German into adulthood. For Sanders nothing equivalent exists.


And yet you have no documentary evidence that Gallaway read that German magic literature you have alluded to. Don't conflate your suspicions and suppositions with actual evidence.


lybrary wrote:Even the most prestigious universities, such as Harvard, admit people from rich and connected families who would not pass the academic requirements.


Even if Sanders bypassed that entrance exam, as you appear to suggest, he still had to complete his class work and continue to pass further exams within the curriculum. He also authored articles that he had published on timber mining. Or are you now suggesting that he did not author those works and perhaps someone else was paid to do all that?


lybrary wrote:And how exactly do go from 'until his hands blistered' to the hands softer than a woman? Another strike against Sanders. The more we know about him the less he looks like Erdnase.


Blisters heal fairly quickly and leave no scars. Smith could not have detected anything from a handshake or observing Erdnase's hands. Actually, the more we know about Sanders, such as the writing examples Bob has pointed out, the more he looks like Erdnase.

Frank Yuen
Posts: 569
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Winfield, IL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Frank Yuen » April 2nd, 2018, 2:20 pm

Self publishing back then did not mean the same as it does now in the age of computers. Nowadays, self publishing usually means that you do all the writing, layout and possibly the photos and or illustrations. It can also mean going to the copy shop and having copies of your document printed and bound or even doing that part yourself as Michael Close did with the original Workers books.

Back then, self publishing more than likely meant just the writing of the book and then finding someone to print it for you. The writer would be asking the printer questions all along the way, getting suggestions and making decisions based on what he was told. Perhaps the only layout input he would have would be designating where illustrations were needed.

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 2nd, 2018, 2:30 pm

Leonard Hevia wrote:Quibbling over phrasing minutiae used in informal English
The difference between writing and publishing is quite fundamental.
Leonard Hevia wrote:And yet you have no documentary evidence that Gallaway read that German magic literature you have alluded to.
We are not dealing in absolutes. There are degrees and levels of likelihood. The fact that Gallaway was fluent in German as an adult means he could have read them. It is true that I don't have evidence that he indeed read them. But with Sanders we don't even know he could read German to a sufficient level at the time these books were available. In other words, with Gallaway the likelihood is larger than with Sanders.

Leonard Hevia wrote:He also authored articles that he had published on timber mining. Or are you now suggesting that he did not author those works and perhaps someone else was paid to do all that?
You don't have a nuanced enough understanding of these things. I don't doubt that Sanders wrote the mine timbering article. One question would be why it was published. Was it a groundbreaking article? Or was the publisher compelled to publish his article because he was a privileged kid? That would be an interesting project for you Sanders guys. From Gallaway we know that he did new and groundbreaking things in the print and print estimating world.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

Leonard Hevia
Posts: 1895
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Dai Vernon, Frank Garcia, Slydini, Houdini,
Location: Gaithersburg, Md.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Leonard Hevia » April 2nd, 2018, 3:32 pm

lybrary wrote:We are not dealing in absolutes. There are degrees and levels of likelihood.


That is correct, we are not dealing with absolutes, only in degrees and likelihoods. Yet you conveniently throw this out when you switch gears from researcher to businessman in your website ad:

Every new piece of evidence found about Gallaway further confirmed that he was S. W. Erdnase.

A definitive statement based only on degrees and levels of likelihood. You don't have a nuanced understanding of the differences between a researcher and a businessman.

lybrary wrote:One question would be why it was published. Was it a groundbreaking article? Or was the publisher compelled to publish his article because he was a privileged kid?


A review by E.J. McCaustland from the 1907 Volume 57 Number 24 issue of Engineering News: A Journal of Civil, Mechanical, Mining, and Electrical Engineering:

"This paper, covering 52 pages, is the part of the book which will be of most value to the person seeking fundamental information, since here some of the general principles underlying the subject are considered..."

"...for the student, especially for the young engineer, a brief, concise, and clear statement of conditions involved in the problem under consideration is always an aid to the understanding when entering upon a new field."

"...the illustrations are well chosen, and all of the drawings are exceptionally clear and distinct."

"Altogether, Mr. Sanders' monograph is a valuable one, and the editor has shown good judgement in placing it as an introduction to this collection of articles."

Sanders was not a book person? Ridiculous!

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 2nd, 2018, 3:41 pm

Leonard Hevia wrote:A review by E.J. McCaustland from the 1907 Volume 57 Number 24 issue of Engineering News: A Journal of Civil, Mechanical, Mining, and Electrical Engineering:

"This paper, covering 52 pages, is the part of the book which will be of most value to the person seeking fundamental information, since here some of the general principles underlying the subject are considered..."

"...for the student, especially for the young engineer, a brief, concise, and clear statement of conditions involved in the problem under consideration is always an aid to the understanding when entering upon a new field."

"...the illustrations are well chosen, and all of the drawings are exceptionally clear and distinct."

"Altogether, Mr. Sanders' monograph is a valuable one, and the editor has shown good judgement in placing it as an introduction to this collection of articles."

Sanders was not a book person? Ridiculous!

What this describes is an introduction to the field not new or groundbreaking independent research. Where are the new concepts and ideas introduced? Erdnase was groundbreaking. He introduced new ideas and refined others. To say that Sanders' mine timbering article is on the level of Erdnase is silly. It is not on Erdnase's level in terms of its writing (linguistics) and not on the level of importance (contents).
Last edited by lybrary on April 2nd, 2018, 3:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time

Leonard Hevia
Posts: 1895
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Dai Vernon, Frank Garcia, Slydini, Houdini,
Location: Gaithersburg, Md.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Leonard Hevia » April 2nd, 2018, 3:46 pm

Please share Gallaway's new ideas, refinements and groundbreaking work that would mirror Erdnase in his field.

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 1169
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » April 2nd, 2018, 3:55 pm

Leonard Hevia wrote:Please share Gallaway's new ideas, refinements and groundbreaking work that would mirror Erdnase in his field.
It is in my ebook (I dedicate an entire chapter to this subject), and more is forthcoming.
Lybrary.com Magic & Gambling
preserving magic one book at a time


Return to “General”