Hooker Card Rise

Discuss the latest news and rumors in the magic world.
Mike Rozek
Posts: 58
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Whittier, CA

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Mike Rozek » November 20th, 2007, 3:13 pm

Joe and Scott - My wife and I were at the same performance. Scott, we sat in the 3rd and 4th seats from the left in the front row. My wife sat next to you. We saw you taking a ton of notes, and we were worried that you were going to miss something:)

Anyway, here's my contribution to the discussion. I've already shared quite a bit of this with Carlo privately, but I don't see any harm in mentioning some of the unique things that we saw that others might not have.

From some informal notes written after the performance:

- There was a black "wire" about 3-4 inches in length hanging down from the table, perpendicular to the floor, aligned perfectly with the left side of the Houlette in it's "first position" on the table. It was not a thread, as it didn't move at all during the performance, but it wasn't something that "belonged". To see it, we needed to move our view back and forth so that the busy backdrop pattern was disrupted. I mentioned it to my wife during the performance, and she saw it as well. I spoke with a friend who was there, and he saw it as well. He was sitting directly behind us. We were the 3rd and 4th seats from the audience left in the front row.

- In the wall pattern directly behind the card-rise table, there was a black "slot" about 8 inches in length, and 1/4 inch or so in height. It ran parallel to the floor directly behind and about an inch or so below the table-top level. It may have been "level" with the table top...it was difficult to tell at our angle the exact height, but it was there. My assumption is that this was the viewport for the backstage assistant. My wife and I both saw this, but no other attendee that we have spoken to since did. This same slot was not duplicated behind the bear head table.

- John Gaughan did not once walk directly behind the card-rise table. At one point a Jack flew out of the houlette and landed close to the rear of the table. Instead of bending down to the right to pick it up, John walked completely around the table (the absolute furthest distance one would have had to travel to get to the card from his starting position).

-This is something that was confirmed by others attending our performance: At one point John picked the houlette up from it's first position on the table, and "something" came up with it, attached to the bottom. My wife called it a "flap", but a friend and I thought it was a some kind of mechanism that the houlette was set into. It was clearly a mistake, as John paused a second, set the houlette back down, then lifted it once again, this time bringing the houlette up alone.

-Mike

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 371
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 20th, 2007, 3:42 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Carlo, trust me, it's the real houlette. When you get the December issue of MAGIC, you'll see a photo taken by Damon Webster of John holding the houlette in close up.
I assume you claim that the cover of Magic 94 (with the cards shooting up under the dome) is also the real thing?

Carlo

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25833
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 20th, 2007, 4:07 pm

Carlo, I haven't studied the photo on the cover of MAGIC's old article or seen it in years, so I can't say anything about the houlette shown in that photo.

What I can tell you is that the photo of the houlette in the link above, and the houlette you will see John Gaughan holding in the December issue of MAGIC, are the same houlette used in the performance you attended and the same houlette used by Dr. Hooker.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 371
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 20th, 2007, 5:51 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Carlo, I haven't studied the photo on the cover of MAGIC's old article or seen it in years, so I can't say anything about the houlette shown in that photo.
I was not really talking about the houlette, I was talking about whether or not the "shower" we see in the photo is the actual shower produced in the performance. Based purely on "common sense" I can offer quite reasonable arguments that the photo is a fake, from the point of view of "physical impossibilities" (not Hooker's).

Now, if we accept that there exist things depicted in photos that are very likely fakes or props, I see no reason not to believe that the houlette itself could be a fake or prop in such photos, i.e. a non-gimmicked duplicate of the actual houlette.

Carlo

PS. that photo is featured in the current recent program of the LA conference. I do not own the actual magazine, only a photocopy of the article.

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 20th, 2007, 6:06 pm

Originally posted by Carlo Morpurgo:
...
Now, if we accept that there exist things depicted in photos that are very likely fakes or props, I see no reason not to believe that the houlette itself could be a fake or prop in such photos, i.e. a non-gimmicked duplicate of the actual houlette....
Yes - that path next leads to having stooges here posting distractions to keep the mystery alive and the detective efforts of clever folks misdirected.

Or...

For the sake of this discussion for now how about presuming the pictures were of the legit props but may have been slightly retouched to coverup any accidental flashes of mechanicals.

Steve Cohen
Posts: 86
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Steve Cohen » November 20th, 2007, 7:40 pm

Brad, your experience was identical to mine. The reversed card rose out of my borrowed deck, and Johnny Gaughan handed me back my deck with the reversed card still in the same position where I had inserted it.

Then he retrieved the deck from me, and asked me to name a number - I named 11 - and then 11 cards rose. The eleventh card was my signed five of hearts.

The deck I lent was a Bicycle Fan Back deck - an unusual deck these days - and it was unquestionably the actual card from the actual deck that rose.

-Steve Cohen

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 371
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 20th, 2007, 8:03 pm

Originally posted by Steve Cohen:
Brad, your experience was identical to mine. The reversed card rose out of my borrowed deck, and Johnny Gaughan handed me back my deck with the reversed card still in the same position where I had inserted it.

Then he retrieved the deck from me, and asked me to name a number - I named 11 - and then 11 cards rose. The eleventh card was my signed five of hearts.
Do you recall whether the 10 cards that rose were removed one by one, stayed raised, or went back into the deck?

Carlo

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25833
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 20th, 2007, 8:22 pm

The 10 cards rose one by one.

The card fountain on the cover of MAGIC magazine looks to be a posed shot as far as the cards themselves. The card fountain that occurs in Hooker looks the same: all the cards shoot upward out of the houlette in a stream while under the bell jar.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 371
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 20th, 2007, 8:40 pm

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
The 10 cards rose one by one.
Got that, I was asking whether they stayed all raised, or rather went down (or removed one by one), so only one card would be up at a given time.

Carlo

PS: I do not actually recall this part, but I find this detail relevant, that is why I am asking.

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 21st, 2007, 7:35 am

The cards were removed one by one.

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 371
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 21st, 2007, 8:58 am

Originally posted by GaryPlants:
The cards were removed one by one.
That's what I thought. I would not be able to explain it with my setup if the cards were genuinely raised in 10 different positions, staying raised, with the 11th card being the signed card. But I can definitely explain it if the cards were removed, or even if they went back down into the deck.

For those who did not quite understand the setup I put forward, here's a summary. The main idea is NOT the use of rollers, but the use of GRAVITY: holding the deck together from the top sides and letting the cards drop down one by one from a small height, in an organized fashion. How to create the height, how to drop the cards, are next, but these are mainly details. To create a height the deck can be lifted, or more likely, room can be created underneath the deck by opening the houlette's bottom, so that the cards can be directly dropped a small distance inside the table.
Rollers come in very naturally as effective tools to achieve both the card drop, the card raise or the card shoot. Whether there are 2,4,6,15 rollers it's almost irrelevant. I originally proposed 6 just to show that the mechanism was not impossible to realize, but they could as well be 4.

Now, back to the effect. The card is signed and reversed, placed back into the deck somewhere in the middle third. Deck is placed in the houlette and clamped on top. Bottom is opened. Back roller(s) are rolling down the back cards one by one, releasing them from their grip and letting them drop down inside the table, still remaining organized say half way into the houlette, but definitely exposing the back of the next card, so that the assistant can see it from the houlette's back window. When the reversed card is seen the rollers are rolling the opposite way to raise it.

To remove the deck: right thumb in front, right middle finger in back, raising the whole package a little. Left hand moves in front, left middle finger shoved under the lower portion of the deck, the bottom halves are re-leveled under the cover of the left hand, which at the same time provides support so that the right hand can release the grip and pick up the deck from above, perfectly squared with the reversed card raised in the middle.

Next, the signed card is reversed back in the same direction as the rest of the deck, perhaps in its original position. Number 11 is called. Deck in the houlette is clamped, bottom opened, back card is raised, then removed. Another one is raised, then removed. So on until the tenth card. After that moment, the signed card is spotted in the same exact manner as before, this time looking at the *signature* in the back in order to identify it. Then the card is raised. In fact, if the card is in the same position as before it should be even easier for the assistant to spot it, provided he counted the cards previously.

Now, this may or may not be the actual method, but it certainly does make a lot of sense, to me at least.

Carlo

PS: Implicit in the setup is that there has to be a way of clamping/releasing the deck, either from the sides or from the front and back. Again, these are technical details. For example, when the deck is about to be removed from the houlette, the back rollers better not be on the way.

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 371
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 21st, 2007, 9:22 am

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Yes - that path next leads to having stooges here posting distractions to keep the mystery alive and the detective efforts of clever folks misdirected.
I accept the idea that props or fake fountains were used for display-only reasons, to me this is merely background noise.

Whether or not there actually is a conspiracy to preserve the Hooker mistery, or to help out good friends, by injecting false leads, I really am not interested in finding out, and I never suggested there might be one.

Carlo

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » November 23rd, 2007, 7:13 pm

I found some interesting photos and floor plans of Hooker's Remsen Street property. When Corcoran Group handled the listing a couple of years ago, they posted a lot of information about it on their website.

Original listing with image gallery and floor plans of carriage house:
Click here to see listing

It looks like the carriage house interior was completely remodeled in later years. The upper level bears no resemblance to descriptions in the old books.

Want a tour of Hooker's townhouse? Here's a WNYW "Livin' Large" segment where they take you inside his old 'crib'. More views of the carriage house appear near the end of the piece.

Click here to watch video

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25833
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » November 24th, 2007, 7:32 am

Carlo, I hear you've given all your false assumptions to Chris Wasshuber to add to his e-book full of false assumptions about Hooker.

Silly thing to do. Wasshuber's e-book is good only in the sense that virtualy everything in it is just plain wrong and misleading. Woe to those who waste their money on nonsense.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 371
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 24th, 2007, 8:32 am

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Carlo, I hear you've given all your false assumptions to Chris Wasshuber to add to his e-book full of false assumptions about Hooker.

Silly thing to do. Wasshuber's e-book is good only in the sense that virtualy everything in it is just plain wrong and misleading. Woe to those who waste their money on nonsense.
Let me be completely clear on this. Chris asked me if he could add my letter to his ebook, almost immediately after I made it public. I was not convinced yet, but I honestly had some fun discussing with him other ways to implement the system that I was proposing.

He then proposed to add a spinoff - more like a variation - of my "theory" in his book, with essentially little or no references to what I wrote. I found this unacceptable and therefore I preferred to have my letter in his own book, and I asked him if he could place clear references to my notes(*). This is due my academic background I guess, it's a matter of principle.

In his newsletter he talks about "collaboration" with me, however, I do not really endorse his variations, at least yet. In my opinion he came out too quickly with some other ways to devise the mechanics of the thing.

On the other hand, he did make an effort to write something on the subject, so I think he deserves credit for this, regardless of whether he is right or wrong.

I also don't care whether I am right or wrong. It started out as a fun exercise, and now this thing is taking a spin that I do not care much for. I wanted a break from my usual work, not another series of headaches to take care of.

So I rest my case. I set up a web page where you can find the original file, some comments, and perhaps in the future I will post other things there, if I ever want to come back to this.

http://tinyurl.com/37f6rb

Carlo

(*) and I should add that he was very willing to do so, something rare to see these days.

User avatar
Pete Biro
Posts: 7125
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Hollyweird
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Pete Biro » November 24th, 2007, 10:15 am

GEE $12 MILLION and he didn't leave the rising card gimmicks.
:D

I spent about three months living in that neighborhood working on a book project with the pulisher. :genii:
Stay tooned.

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 371
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » November 30th, 2007, 3:02 pm

I could not resist.... I had to try the damn thing out. Here's an improvised Hooker Card Rise with < $10 apparatus....just to show you one idea ..nothin' more...

http://tinyurl.com/2jdnry


Carlo

User avatar
Pete Biro
Posts: 7125
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Hollyweird
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Pete Biro » November 30th, 2007, 3:26 pm

looks good.
Stay tooned.

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » December 22nd, 2007, 10:31 pm

I just saw this LA Times article on the conference. Follow the links within to a nice gallery of pics.

HERE

Carlo Morpurgo
Posts: 371
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Carlo Morpurgo » January 2nd, 2008, 5:38 pm

Got my copy of Jan-08 Genii today. Overall I like the description of "Hooker Impossibilities", however I can't help commenting on a few points.

First, left column of page 84: "The owner of the deck is then asked to shuffle...and to name a number. The number of cards then rises from the deck one at the time, each in front of the last, the final card being the signed card."
This is the point I was asking about in this very thread a while back. It seems that the reality was that the cards were actually removed one by one. Reading the paragraph it seems that the cards were actually staying up (otherwise there would be no way of telling that they rose one in front of the previous). For those who are trying to figure out the method of the effect this should be an important detail.

Two minor points: the card under the dome does not go back into the deck, and the final fountain is not the entire deck flushing out from the houlette.

On a more serious note, from various sources (including the article) it looks like the following event was scripted: Gaughan names four cards then asks them to rise, but instead...the Jacks jump out. Well, I can right now assure you with 99.99% probability that when *I* saw the performance it was NOT scripted, it was a genuine(and understandable) mistake. John was preparing the wrong effect with the given deck. I was probably the only idiot in the audience that was taking a look at Jim Steinmeyer here and there, and he did not look happy in that circumstance.
John's reactions to the Jack jumping out (after he started setting up the three glasses) looked genuine. He apologized 3-4 times, saying "this must be the jumping DECK" (not Jumping Jack), and "I went ahead of myself".

After that evening, I am guessing, someone had the idea of reproducing the event in a more scripted-like fashion.


Carlo

User avatar
Pete Biro
Posts: 7125
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Hollyweird
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Pete Biro » January 2nd, 2008, 7:18 pm

Bill: Thanks for the LA TIMES link, somehow I missed it earlier. Well written piece.
Stay tooned.

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 5th, 2008, 2:46 pm

Any thoughts / correlations of the CW Nova Miraculous version inspired by the Hooker presentation?

I've been told that it doesn't work very well.

HP

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4270
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Brad Henderson » January 5th, 2008, 3:22 pm

Who has told you that?

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 5th, 2008, 5:07 pm

I haven't seen so much excitement about a trick, since somebody asked for an exposure of the Balducci Levitation on the Magic Cafe....

I think it is wonderful that those who do know are possibly shilling for those who do not and are about to cheer the sales price when it is posted for all the visiting Magic Cafe kids...

Hey, I paid a quarter for the Thurston Card Tricks book back in the early 50s. At that time, friends of mine were floating and rising a whole lot of things....

Let us not take advantage of the kids, folks...

opie

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 5th, 2008, 6:57 pm

I was told that the CW effect didn't work very well by a friend (who is a magic dealer) and saw it demonstrated.

That's all I know about the version. I haven't mortgaged the house yet to find out for myself...

HP

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4270
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Brad Henderson » January 5th, 2008, 8:49 pm

Opie,

The Hooker Card Rise is not for sale. No shilling going on.

Henningpaul,

There are only a handful of the Nova's in existence. I was curious who you would have seen do it.

I have seen the item in Nick's workshop. It is very clever. It can not replicate the entire Hooker presentation but it will allow for an unbelievable demonstration.

It is VERY expensive, but having seen the insides, I can tell you there is a lot of work going on. If you had a large magic collection or private home theater, it would make a great performance piece.

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 5th, 2008, 8:56 pm

Thanks, Brad, for another perspective on the prop.

Regards,

HP

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 6th, 2008, 5:05 pm

"It's VERY expensive..."

tsk tsk....How long before it goes on sale?

opie

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25833
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » January 6th, 2008, 5:31 pm

Opie, the version Brad is talking about, produced by Nick Ruggierio, has been on sale for quite a while. The Hooker Card Rise is not for sale. Or am I misunderstanding your misunderstanding?
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 6th, 2008, 6:14 pm

Richard,

I am not sure I understand your misunderstanding of my misunderstanding.....

I just want to know when it goes on sale and for how much?????????????

Can you assure me that nobody is playing the old "Bandwagon" sales pitch here? Not that I care...I think everybody should be able to make a living, but I do hate to see the little rich kids from the Cafe breaking out their future college funds to buy a.........RISING CARD TRICK!

Hey....I hope to see you at the Alexandria VA thing in a couple of months......but, as you know, I probably won't spend much money in the dealer room there...hehe....

...see ya.........opie

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25833
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » January 6th, 2008, 7:21 pm

Yes, it's for sale.
No, I don't know the cost.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 6th, 2008, 8:01 pm

Brad said it was not for sale.....and then he said it was VERY expensive....

Sorry Richard....I am old and confused....Perhaps you can figure out what this sales/non-sales pitch is about...I hate being confused....

opie

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4270
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Brad Henderson » January 6th, 2008, 9:28 pm

Nova is an item that was released many years ago by Collector's Workshop. Nick still makes them. It is a very clever method for an "any card called for card rise". It is, to put it mildly, a luxury item.

It is available for sale. However, young people would be wise to invest in other items - say the down payment on their first house.

For those with money to spend, it will be a great addition to your collection of unique mechanical apparatus.

The Hooker Card Rise, as anyone who has been in magic any length of time knows, is a collection of effects designed by Dr. Samuel Hooker and performed at his home during the early 20th century.

While we once thought the secrets to its mysteries were lost, Johnny Gaughan has recreated the performance (through agreement with the Hooker family) and has presented it at two L.A. Conferences on Magic History and a series of public shows leading up to the most recent.

The Hooker Card Rise is not for sale.

For those who are not familiar with it, it has been described in its original form in Pallbearer's Review and Greater Magic. Modern performances have been detailed in Magic and Genii Magazine. The L.A. Conference program also has a fascinating and detailed history of the effect. Anyone interested in the history of magic would benefit from adding that program to their library.

I hope that clears up any confusion for those who - deliberately or otherwise - remain confused.

Brad

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 6th, 2008, 10:33 pm

I was under the impression that Nick Ruggiero no longer builds any Collectors' Workshop item as he has his own Signature Pieces business to run (BTW, his "Perfect Card" is a beautiful apparatus).

George Robinson now owns CW and is still making Nova, though production is at a snail pace. I actually inquired about it back in late May and he told me that he had six people already lined up for one. Says it usually takes 3 months to handcraft a single unit.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4270
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Brad Henderson » January 6th, 2008, 10:35 pm

Nick has his own company but still builds the Nova.

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 7th, 2008, 7:40 am

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Carlo, I hear you've given all your false assumptions to Chris Wasshuber to add to his e-book full of false assumptions about Hooker.

Silly thing to do. Wasshuber's e-book is good only in the sense that virtualy everything in it is just plain wrong and misleading. Woe to those who waste their money on nonsense.
This thread is entertaining to read. I am always amazed how magicians are no better than lay people. If some do not know a secret, they HATE it and want to know how something worked. They do this,NEVER INTENDING to perform what they are deconstructing.

Many magicians hate when lay people or TV shows expose magic. I see those here who only want to deconstruct, just to KNOW.

We have had a long tradition of telling someone who wants to know:
1. That the secret is simpler than you think.
2. You will be disappointed when you learn the secret so just enjoy the show.

I guess some here now know the reaction to comments like that from us.

Too long have we been spoiled to think EVERY secret is available to us just because we are magicians too. Long ago not every trick was "for sale."

Secrets were sacred and top pros would protect their rare gems. Yes, there are stories of spies being sent to try to learn the secret of another or even stories of outright theft. Most would duplicate the "effect" and in many cases effects were improved over time.

However this is different than today where there always seems to bee the latest illusion like the ORIGAMI box that it seems just about every act has in there show if they could afford to buy it.

Mr. Kaufman, I quoted you since your quote is "dangerous" to magic secrets. I remind you that when you protest you inspire. You are telling Carlos he is wrong which is only fueling him. Tell him nothing and maybe he will not look as hard , satisfied with his conclusions. Maybe you are concerned the there will be a inaccurate method and history published in some ebook? I say, so what? When it comes to methods and tricks that maybe should be private, let them put out false claims.

The more magicians came out and protested the masked magician and also explained his methods were not what we used, the more they refined the show. If the magicians did not protest or explain, the show would not have had the life it did.

I do not blame Carlos for trying to work out the method. It is in all of our nature to want to feel in control by knowing the unknown. I recall many ENGINEERS who would get angry at magicians for not telling their methods. They say "I am an engineer, I get more enjoyment in knowing how things work than just sitting back. I can not believe it is magic so I will have more fun if you tell me how it works. "
I see the same pattern with magicians. Many feel they NEED to know since they think that they should not have another know more secrets then they. They will use the engineer excuse to pull apart another magicians secrets. Oh they will still pat them on the back saying "that is a clever method you had there" but also have a smirk as to say "well not clever enough since I figured it out but the lay people will be floored." I recall going to a few conventions in the 80's when a David Copperfield show would air and they would tape it for a late night screening. It was amazing to see the magicians just pull about the show, deconstructing it all for the sake, I guess, of feeling superior. "Who is he to be on TV when we figured out all his effects..."

How many times do you tell others that the secret is not the magic? If you are saying it is more fun to figure the Hooker rise out, then you can not really sell to a spectator the line that the secret would disappoint.

Do I want to know how the Hooker Rise show works?
Sure, that is human nature . Here is what I think I know about the methods in this performance.

1. It is a set "stage". Everything is controlled so this is not practical for ANY OF YOU to perform. There are plenty of "miracles" I can perform if I control everything you see.

2. You are looking to hard for complexity that might not be there. You need to think about THE TIMES and what was available when he created this show.. Yes there are mechanical elements and some may SEEM complex to us today. Do not forget that there are many complex clockworks in many props that were COMMON back then and today seem harder to create since it is not common.
I say you will be disappointed on how some of the methods work.

Oh there might be CLEVER mechanics but after you see them and appreciate the methods, you will say, oh that is all it was?

3. You are assuming the props are so special but they are limited and just about everything you saw needs to be controlled. Much like if you look at the COMPLEXITY of the Kellar Levitation. You can appreciate the wires and the under-stage set up and say "wow that is clever" However today it would be hard to use such a set up and today there are better methods. And no matter what you know about the workings it is less than if you saw the effect performed.

You guys only THINK the Hooker methods are better since you "do not know how". And I guess they are so impractical that if you are trying to find out so you can duplicate the effect, best you just create new versions of what you saw or read about the Hooker rise that WILL WORK in any room.


In Conclusion, I say if these ideas presented are wrong,(and you know 100% them to be) so be it. If you do not want the secret out do not let them know where they are wrong. If you are the ones hunting for the secret, ask why it bugs you so much not to know and then move on to creating modern versions.

My belief is that I do not pick other magicians brains for their secrets if I have no need for them. Let him or her have what they worked for. If I really would like to do perform a the effect, I will either ask for info and if not found, may work out my own method. However I do not add something just because it is the latest flavor of the month. Why do something others are doing if you can avoid it?

In the end, we have seen lay people deconstruct our secrets and be dead wrong. Maybe some of you have learned the hard way that if you start to defend that they are wrong you are going down a dead end street. If you are seasoned, you know it matters little how far off someone is.
If their method is pleasing to them and plausible, they will not believe that they are wrong. They feel happy they have the control that they felt YOU took away when you showed them something they did not understand.
So if I came up with methods for the entire Hooker show and they are NOT what is used, so WHAT? I still might think my methods are the way or better and if I get to the same effect, does it really matter how the Hooker card rises work?


The Hooker methods would not excite most after they learn the surface mechanics when they look back at it a second time. They will appreciate it but not be in awe.
The show is giving you guys a good work out since you were all well controlled to see and think what they wanted.

And it is a good lesson on how to set a stage and script so you are misdirected from the obvious answers.

The answer to the Hooker Show is not to over look the obvious and simple.

Have a happy Day

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 7th, 2008, 7:55 am

Originally posted by Whitelighter:
... [much text]The answer to the Hooker Show is not to over look the obvious and simple.

Have a happy Day
Who are "you". What do you mean by "us". What do you mean by "YOU"? So much to decode there.

Have you considered starting your studies of magic with some communications skills?

IMHO Hooker clearly expected and encouraged folks to talk about his performance and puzzle over the methods behind the animations. As he did not so much as care to properly dispose of the room (hut - setting) it is also fairly clear that he was not so concerned about maintaining any secrecy about his methods as a sort of legacy. Then again if it took a barn full of setting to make cards rise you might expect he'd use the full house to do a levitation. ;)

The secrecy being kept by the inheritors of his room and apparatus is theirs and I wish them the best. IMHO it would be much more useful to this community to get the data out and fully explain the what and how so folks who ARE interested in exploring such things can go on from what was done a century ago.

Then again we still have not recovered certain data about the author of the "erdnase" text, nor have we made the Hofzinser oeuvre required study in card magic - so not to worry - it looks like we have at least one more generation of this confusion before we get moving forward.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25833
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Richard Kaufman » January 7th, 2008, 8:07 am

I think you'll all enjoy our upcoming March cover story on The Hooker Card Rise by Jim Steinmeyer. :)
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 7th, 2008, 8:20 am

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Have you considered starting your studies of magic with some communications skills?
Oh, JT, why do you do this to yourself?

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
IMHO it would be much more useful to this community to get the data out and fully explain the what and how so folks who ARE interested in exploring such things can go on from what was done a century ago.
Uh, JT, are you suggesting that sharing information will contribute to the progress of magic? Wait, is there an echo on this board?

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Then again we still have not recovered certain data about the author of the "erdnase" text, nor have we made the Hofzinser oeuvre required study in card magic - so not to worry - it looks like we have at least one more generation of this confusion before we get moving forward.
Theory: magic is as confused and enlightened as it ever was. An argument can be made that Hookers Card Rise demonstrates that the essence of magic remains where it was a century ago.

Guest

Re: Hooker Card Rise

Postby Guest » January 7th, 2008, 8:34 am

Originally posted by Magicam:
..Oh, JT, why do you do this to yourself?

...Uh, JT, are you suggesting that sharing information will contribute to the progress of magic? ...
Yes Clay, let's begin studies of our craft with basic communication skills - so we don't have to do a meta-model dialog to find out what someone means when they write online.

And yes - I believe it would be better for interested parties to have access to a full and complete write up of the methods used so they can work from prior art rather than fuss over re-invented wheels.

Given what's available in our scholarly literature you'd think there were no card guys back when the "erdnase" text hit print and nobody in Vienna (or his circle of correspondants) who loved the Hofzinser stuff enough to properly document it as theatrical scripts-props etc the way Shakespeare's players preserved his plays.

Getting back to the Hooker programme - it seems rich in subtext. A disembodied bear's head that speaks yet is only heard by the performer... Cards which when put into context (the frame) animate... lots there to stir the imagination.


Return to “Buzz”