S. Tauzier wrote: Erdnase was no amatuer - this we know.
Critically important to any discussion on either the book, or the author - is that we know nothing of the sort.
S. Tauzier wrote: Erdnase was no amatuer - this we know.
S. Tauzier wrote:One thing I know has misled the whole movement is the anagram sacred cow. That whole misguided mess needs to be led to pasture and slaughtered once and for all. Let go already- it doesnt make any sense!
When writers use a paeudonym- they never just simply scramble the letters of their real name. Dont they usually come up with something totally obscure that bears zero resemblance to their real name.
S. Tauzier wrote:Bill - did you read the book or Chris' posts? There is some info on him performing magic.
S. Tauzier wrote:please name me one author in the last 120 years that has simply scrambled the letters of his true name to arrive at a pseudonym so that I may humbly stand corrected.
S. Tauzier wrote:Name two non- magicians because most magicians are aware of this theory and they would be tempered to do the same thing. 'Normal' authors are not known to do this.
S. Tauzier wrote:Performer - why cant someone interested in magic, learn a bunch of card tricks and then at some point play cards, start using some slieght of hand to cheat, then start a deep study of cheating techniques, then become a cardsharp? That doesnt seem too far fetched for me.
S. Tauzier wrote:Leonard- to be exact, we should be looking at authors that would have set a precedent in the 1800's. Buckethead? Jim Morrison? That is hilarious.
performer wrote:S. Tauzier wrote:Performer - why cant someone interested in magic, learn a bunch of card tricks and then at some point play cards, start using some slieght of hand to cheat, then start a deep study of cheating techniques, then become a cardsharp? That doesnt seem too far fetched for me.
Because magicians have led sheltered lives and have little knowledge on how to lie, cheat and steal. Or have the mentality required. Except of course illusion makers that run off with your money. But then illusion makers generally do not know much about sleight of hand.
The book is too well written for it to be authored by someone terribly wicked. And magicians are far too boring to be terribly wicked. And it was obviously written by a magician. Card sharks know about 3 or 4 moves at the most. They don't know a fraction of what is in that book. There is a whole section in the back about magic because the author couldn't resist doing it. And in the supposed card sharping section there are clues in some of the words and expressions used which give the game away the author was a magician.
Magicians are mostly all talk about gambling and card cheating. Sure, they might be able to do the moves required but alas they don't have the mentality to risk having their hands broken if they get caught. This particular book reminds me of the myriad works by magicians on so called "cold reading" and other silliness when they have never done a paid psychic reading in their life.
Having said all that, I have cursorily read all the various theories on who Erdnase was. I shall merely say that as far as I am concerned Chris's theories have as much validity as anyone else's and I think I have indeed detected some mean spiritedness and lack of respect for them which for some reason other theorists don't seem to get to the same extent.
S. Tauzier wrote:Leonard- ok, you win.
lybrary wrote:Erdnase was in a precarious situation if detected being a cheat. We as magicians glorify advantage players, because we look at their awesome sleight-of-hand skills. But in reality they are crooks, cheats and thieves, because they steal money. If they are found out they will suffer serious consequences. In the times of Erdnase they might get beaten to a pulp, stabbed or perhaps even shot on the spot by the mark from whom they stole. At the very least they will be ostracized. Nobody will do business with them. This is the simple and obvious reason why Erdnase truly not only wanted to but needed to stay anonymous. Anything else is silly talk by magicians who have no idea what it meant to be found out a cheat during Erndase times.
The troubling weakness of the reverse spelling is that it is way too easy to figure out, and everybody knows that it is way to easy to figure out. That means for a cheat it is unacceptable as pseudonym. The easy spotting of the reverse spelling is also most likely the source of the rumor. There is no evidence that the reverse "Andrews' hint actually originated from Erdnase himself.
lybrary wrote: Nickname theory: I think the first who recognized that Erdnase can be understood as German word was Tom Sawyer.
My contribution was to establish that the word Erdnase was in use in German literature before Erdnase,
Bill Mullins wrote:The ebook says (wrongly) that Richard Hatch first discovered this.
Bill Mullins wrote:No, there were other people who noted this before you got interested in the subject.
Bill Mullins wrote:Chris has taken the work of others as his own.
Leonard Hevia wrote:Yes, the author of The Expert did indeed want to keep his identity a secret but not exactly for the reason you cited.
lybrary wrote:Leonard Hevia wrote:Yes, the author of The Expert did indeed want to keep his identity a secret but not exactly for the reason you cited.
Interesting. And how do you know the exact reasons of Erdnase?
lybrary wrote:The Comstock law simply adds to the fact that a cheat was in a precarious situation. But you do not need these laws to explain the need for anonymity. Common sense tells you that a cheat wants to stay hidden. Even a kid knows that. It is such an easy fact to grasp except for some folks posting here.
lybrary wrote:The Comstock law simply adds to the fact that a cheat was in a precarious situation. But you do not need these laws to explain the need for anonymity. Common sense tells you that a cheat wants to stay hidden. Even a kid knows that. It is such an easy fact to grasp except for some folks posting here.
Leonard Hevia wrote:You do need those laws if you want to stay anonymous when publishing a book such as The Expert. Erdnase could have walked into a pick up card game and not worry about being identified if he had used his true name for the book. There were no photos of him in the book. The other players would not have been able to identify him on sight.
Bill Mullins wrote:lybrary wrote: Nickname theory: I think the first who recognized that Erdnase can be understood as German word was Tom Sawyer.
The ebook says (wrongly) that Richard Hatch first discovered this.
Roger M. wrote:lybrary wrote:The Comstock law simply adds to the fact that a cheat was in a precarious situation. But you do not need these laws to explain the need for anonymity. Common sense tells you that a cheat wants to stay hidden. Even a kid knows that. It is such an easy fact to grasp except for some folks posting here.
You should read Forty Years a Gambler by George Devol.
Perhaps one of the most famous card cheats of all time, he hid from nobody, and plied his trade with a gun in his belt.
He was an actual card cheater, and he feared absolutely no one at all.
Your depiction of a card cheat in the late 1800's and early 1900's is terribly misinformed.
Indeed, Devol wrote a book about his experiences 10 years before Erdnase did ... and Devol used his own name contrary to your take on why an author might be afraid to use his own name as the author of a book on cheating at playing cards.
lybrary wrote:Bill Mullins wrote:The ebook says (wrongly) that Richard Hatch first discovered this.
Then you are reading an old edition. This has been corrected a while ago.
performer wrote:I really must try this anagram business the next time I go on the magic cafe.