Edward Victor

This forum is an ongoing, and evolving, discussion. Genii Forum members discuss opinions and trade notes on current and past magic books.
Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 12th, 2022, 12:38 pm

I am somewhat of a fan of Edward Victor's work and naturally I own the Rae Hammond book published by Richard. However, I came across a rather intriguing sentence on page 69 of the Ganson Book published by Supreme. It was actually the last sentence on the page. It was part of an article by Will Ayling It indicated that Ganson had also completed an entire book about Edward Victors work but had not yet been published, presumably by Supreme. The book never did get published possibly because the Rae Hammond book came out first.

However, if as was indicated it was actually completed I would be very eager to read it as I am also a fan of Ganson's writing and I suspect I l have learned more from his books than I have from anyone else's. I have often thought his contributions to magic have been seriously under appreciated. Anyway, if somehow this book was brought to fruition I would be eager to see it. The Rae Hammond book was excellent and I have met Mr Hammond in person. However, if Ganson had indeed written an entire book which has not been published I think it bloody well should be. I hope someone brings it to fruition.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 26525
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Richard Kaufman » September 12th, 2022, 4:20 pm

Ganson died long before Rae Hammond's book came out.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

User avatar
Brad Jeffers
Posts: 1166
Joined: April 11th, 2008, 5:52 pm
Location: Savannah, GA

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Brad Jeffers » September 12th, 2022, 5:21 pm

Tarotist wrote: ... if somehow this book was brought to fruition I would be eager to see it.

I share the same sentiment with regard to this unpublished book.

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 12th, 2022, 5:43 pm

I am surprised it is on Amazon if it is unpublished! Anyway with regard to the Victor book I suppose it must be lying in some dusty file somewhere in the Supreme (or whoever took them over) archives. I wonder what happened to the manuscript..................

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 12th, 2022, 5:46 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:Ganson died long before Rae Hammond's book came out.


Then perhaps his death had something to do with it. Or maybe Supreme went belly up around that time. However, it was not an unfinished book. By all accounts it was completed. I wonder what happened to it. I would love to see it resurrected even for historical purposes. Ganson was a wonderful writer

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 26525
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Richard Kaufman » September 12th, 2022, 7:11 pm

Brad Jeffers wrote:
Tarotist wrote: ... if somehow this book was brought to fruition I would be eager to see it.

I share the same sentiment with regard to this unpublished book.


Russell suffered from dementia in his final years and went quite off the rails. He was working on several books at the time but all are lost, I suppose.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

BarryAllen
Posts: 75
Joined: November 15th, 2009, 6:33 am
Favorite Magician: Joe Riding & Chan Cansta.
Location: Nuneaton England

Re: Edward Victor

Postby BarryAllen » September 13th, 2022, 3:58 pm

Supreme Magic is now trading as 'Magic Supreme' - owned by Paul Anthony.

https://magicsupreme.co.uk/

According to the website, he owns all publishing rights to the Supreme Magic Co.

As a fellow devotee of Edward Victor, I'm not too sure of what additional material of his hasn't already been released? The Magic of the Hands series of books contained, I would imagine, the bulk of his work. These booklets were released under the Davenports Demon banner of course. As an aside, I still can't believe that Davenports have ceased trading.

Dover Publishing released 'Edward Victor's Classic Card Tricks' some years back.

In 1995, Richard Kaufmann released The Magic of the Hands Trilogy by Edward Victor - written by Rae Hammond. I believe this had a handful of unpublished Edward Victor effects - but I don't have this book for reference. Maybe Richard can confirm?

Then a 'Magic of the Hands Trilogy by Edward Victor' appears - a reprint of Magic of the Hands (1937), More Magic of the Hands (1942), Further Magic of the Hands (1946). This again I think was via Richard's publishing company.

I'm not quite sure what the difference in these books actually is - I only have Dad's original Davenports booklets - Magic of the Hands/More Magic of the Hands. I think I've said on this forum before, the value I place upon the material within.

I also still perform E Y E - such an underrated packet trick, that Supreme Magic released, having bought it from Harry Stanley when they bought the publishing rights of the Unique Magic Studio upon its demise in 1972. The instructions are written by Ken Brooke - so they are the usual work of art.

As an aside, I bought this trick initially in 1978 as a 14yo kid, from your old mate Murray; when he was at 27 Cookson Street, Blackpool. Incidentally, this is now a knocking shop - so no doubt the tradition of chains and handcuffs still lives on!

Similar to yourself, I think Lewis Ganson was a superb author - and remember getting a bit annoyed actually when I heard some years back (possibly on the Revelations video tapes?) that Dai Vernon wasn't overly impressed with Lewis's efforts writing The Dai Vernon Book of Magic - even though Lewis wrote it entirely for free! Having studied this book initially as a teenager (as advised by Dad) I'm pretty certain that no chapter within was poorly written, nor instruction omitted, I remember thinking at the time (as I do now) - well Mr. Vernon, if you weren't so bone-idle, then why didn't you bloody write it yourself then? I greatly admire Dai Vernon for his contribution to the Art of Magic; but I've never exactly admired, nor aspired, to many of his attributes as a person. Nuff said.

To get back to your question, I'm not convinced that Lewis Ganson planned to produce an Edward Victor book for Supreme - because unless they sold them, the rights to the material would have been owned by Davenports.

Moreover, I don't know how much more material Edward Victor could have added to what was already published?

He did contribute an envelope switch to Lewis Ganson's Art of Close-up Magic Volume 1. Other than that, I don't remember reading anything of Edward's in The Demon Telegraph, Abra or Magigram.

Who knows - perhaps Richard can shed some light?

Joe Lyons
Posts: 720
Joined: November 13th, 2017, 8:27 am
Favorite Magician: Wonder
Location: Texas

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Joe Lyons » September 13th, 2022, 4:26 pm

There is a fifty page manuscript "With Magic Hands" by Edward Victor published in The Davenport Story - Volume Two.

Supposedly it was purchased in the early 60's but only published in the 2010 book.

Richard Kaufman 2
Posts: 3
Joined: March 9th, 2013, 8:12 pm

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Richard Kaufman 2 » September 13th, 2022, 4:30 pm

When a company in England goes bankrupt, I have heard that rights revert to the creators of the original item. So it’s possible that the rights to all of the books Supreme published would have reverted to the authors, or their estates and heirs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 13th, 2022, 5:16 pm

BarryAllen wrote:
Similar to yourself, I think Lewis Ganson was a superb author - and remember getting a bit annoyed actually when I heard some years back (possibly on the Revelations video tapes?) that Dai Vernon wasn't overly impressed with Lewis's efforts writing The Dai Vernon Book of Magic - even though Lewis wrote it entirely for free! Having studied this book initially as a teenager (as advised by Dad) I'm pretty certain that no chapter within was poorly written, nor instruction omitted, I remember thinking at the time (as I do now) - well Mr. Vernon, if you weren't so bone-idle, then why didn't you bloody write it yourself then? I greatly admire Dai Vernon for his contribution to the Art of Magic; but I've never exactly admired, nor aspired, to many of his attributes as a person. Nuff said.



I remember once Hubert Lambert saying to me "Vernon was a bum" while praising him to his face in public. Typically Irish. Mind you Canadians are like that too.

Coincidentally I had exactly the same feelings you had when I heard that Vernon said "Ganson missed the boat" regarding his authorship of the book. I thought to myself how ungrateful that remark was since although he was quite well known before the book was written it was the book that turned him into the legend he became, not to mention all the card books that Ganson wrote for him. If he wasn't satisfied with the main book then why the hell did he allow all the card books to be written? It ain't easy writing magic books especially material that you don't do yourself. As far as I am concerned I completely agree with what Ken Brooke said about Ganson's books. He said, "We will never see books like these again" Up to that point he had written the Vernon books, the Slydini book and all the Routined Manipulation books. And that was just a fraction of his ouput in the long run. All fantastic books.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 26525
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Richard Kaufman » September 13th, 2022, 9:02 pm

Ganson missed a lot of details when writing both the Vernon and Slydini books.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 13th, 2022, 10:20 pm

I think that is unavoidable especially when it is not your own material. However, he also filled in a lot of details too. From his descriptions I seem to have been able to learn a great deal of Vernon and Slydini material. Overall they are very great books that will go down in magical history. Having said that I have no idea if they are even in print now.

BarryAllen
Posts: 75
Joined: November 15th, 2009, 6:33 am
Favorite Magician: Joe Riding & Chan Cansta.
Location: Nuneaton England

Re: Edward Victor

Postby BarryAllen » September 14th, 2022, 4:24 am

I haven't got the Slydini book; but I'm not quite sure what details Lewis Ganson missed from The Dai Vernon Book? As I said above, I read it initially as a teenager; and fully understood the (detailed) instructions within.

From the Introduction of the book, Lewis Ganson said he had his friend (George Bartlett) travel down from Nottingham to London by train, with cameras and lighting equipment, to undertake the photography. I certainly can't imagine that being an easy chore back in the 1950's. Other friends (Bill Ellis in London and Ken Scholes from Nottingham) produced the tape recordings.

Thereafter, proofs of each chapter were posted across the Atlantic for Dai Vernon to peruse and correct if necessary.

To this end, if there are any details missing from the book, then I know who I would apportion the blame on - and it certainly isn't Lewis Ganson.

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 14th, 2022, 10:19 am

Damn difficult in those days before email to collaborate on a book when the authors are thousands of miles apart. I am amazed that Hugard and Braue managed to somehow do it. As for Ganson and Vernon I have a slight suspicion that Vernon was too lazy to proof and correct the chapters properly.

I suppose the missing details of the Slydini book were filled in properly in the new annotated version by Dr Gene Maatsura. However there may well be an argument for less detail anyway. I tend to prefer detail but sometimes you can get drowned in it. You have more room for improvisation and doing things your own way with a little less description. I do know that I found the descriptions of Slydini's work far easier in the Stars of Magic excerpts and the Slydini Encores book which had less excruciating detail that was in the Ganson and Fulves versions.

I do remember one writer (I wish I could remember his name) who once wrote that he favoured a less detailed description so as to allow the reader some spontaneity in his learning. In any event I was somehow able to learn quite difficult material from Ganson's Vernon books and have performed it for decades so as a writer he must have done something right.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 26525
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Richard Kaufman » September 14th, 2022, 12:00 pm

Just because the tricks "work," or you can do them from the written descriptions, doesn't mean the author understood and communicated all the subtleties involved, both physical and psychological.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

BarryAllen
Posts: 75
Joined: November 15th, 2009, 6:33 am
Favorite Magician: Joe Riding & Chan Cansta.
Location: Nuneaton England

Re: Edward Victor

Postby BarryAllen » September 14th, 2022, 12:24 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:Just because the tricks "work," or you can do them from the written descriptions, doesn't mean the author understood and communicated all the subtleties involved, both physical and psychological.

Eh?

In 1958, the chapter titled 'The Vernon Touch' possibly addressed every angle of performance, misdirection and subtlety more meaningfully than any magic book previously written.

Irrespective of this, a simple fact remains. If there were any omissions or errors, then Dai Vernon presumably had every opportunity to address this upon the arrival of each chapter for his proofreading?

Particularly when an author is writing the book gratis on your behalf; others are also freely giving their time; whilst no doubt Harry Stanley was funding it, with the assistance of the printer - Harry Clarke; then any decent individual would hopefully put some degree of effort into the project?

As Mark alludes to, he was probably too lazy and/or just couldn't be bothered.

User avatar
Q. Kumber
Posts: 1780
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Tom Whitestone

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Q. Kumber » September 14th, 2022, 1:30 pm

Perhaps some knowledgeable person would be kind enough to let us know what details that would have been explained to Lewis Ganson were left out.

I can add a detail courtesy of Howard Hamburg and I bet this reason wasn't explained to Ganson. In Twisting the Aces the fingers and thumbs are in the centre of the long edges and lead into the Elmsley Count. (This has led to thousands of magicians performing it this way, which is fine for this trick but not other tricks using the Elmsley). The reason for this way of counting is so after the Twist, the hands do not have to re-adjust for the count.

It's all very well for Vernon to say, decades later, that Ganson missed some of the details, which I suspect are more to do with Vernon's thinking than actual physical handlings. It is more than likely, at the time, that Vernon wasn't fully cognisant with those details himself. By that I mean he knew intuitively what was right but hadn't thought to fully articulate it.

How many of us have performed tricks and then tried to explain all the details to another magician? You can explain the moves, the physical handling, but how to explain the thinking, the why's and wherefore's? More often than not, it is when you teach a trick and get questioned about it, that you begin to consciously understand why you do what you do.

Lewis Ganson was the right man at the right time. Without him, many of those routines might never have seen print.

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 14th, 2022, 4:07 pm

I second Quentin's remarks.

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 14th, 2022, 4:12 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:Just because the tricks "work," or you can do them from the written descriptions, doesn't mean the author understood and communicated all the subtleties involved, both physical and psychological.


This is where good magicians are separated from bad ones. A really good experienced performer will figure out the subtleties involved and probably create some of his own. As Vernon famously said "Use your head"

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 26525
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Richard Kaufman » September 15th, 2022, 1:22 pm

I dislike books (and the writers of those books) where the reader is left to "figure stuff out" and "fill in the blanks." That's not the kind of book I write, and certainly not the kind I like to read.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 15th, 2022, 9:12 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:I dislike books (and the writers of those books) where the reader is left to "figure stuff out" and "fill in the blanks." That's not the kind of book I write, and certainly not the kind I like to read.


On balance I agree with that providing the "blanks" are valid ones. Sometimes the "blanks" can lead a student down the wrong path. A lot depends on the author of course. I wish I could remember the name of the writer who stated his reluctance to provide too much detail. It was someone terribly famous. If I can ever figure it out I will report back.

I was actually reading Hugard's card manipulation books today. Very detailed indeed. On the other hand I often read the classic Paul Le Paul book repeatedly and do have to say I think it could do with a bit more detail. One thing I do notice is that quite a few card books (and others too) say they are not going to give advice on presentation as that comes from experience. I think that is a major mistake since presentation is often more important than the tricks themselves. I have always suspected the reason presentation is not covered is because the author doesn't actually know much about it. Not that I am of a cynical nature of course...................

While on the subject I always thought the Francis Carlyle book by Roger Pierre was very badly written. Fantastic material but the bad writing spoiled it. I think Carlyle deserved better.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 26525
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Richard Kaufman » September 15th, 2022, 9:35 pm

You can get a lot out of the LePaul book by studying the photos closely, which somewhat makes up for the "lite" text.
The Carlyle book is a travesty.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 15th, 2022, 11:11 pm

Yes. I was thinking that about the photos.

I am a bit sad about the Carlyle book. Vernon would REALLY have had something to complain about if Pierre had done the writing instead of Ganson! I often think some experienced magic editor/writer should do some sort of deal and clean up the book from the beginning. It bothers me that Carlyle had such a mediocre legacy.

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 16th, 2022, 11:38 am

Something just dawned on me. I happen to know that one of Richard's favourite books is Classic Secrets of Magic. I have also gotten a lot out of it and use a LOT of the material therein! And yet I don't think the book was particularly well written and not as detailed as it could have been. However, somehow I still managed to master material which I am still performing decades after reading the book. I expect that is because I am not a beginner in magic. If someone is just starting they really need that detail.

Or do they? When I first started I was getting nowhere until I read Scarne's Magic Tricks which was full of material but very cursory instruction and explanations.

Oh, just thinking out loud. On balance I think detail is better than non detail.....................

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 26525
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Richard Kaufman » September 16th, 2022, 11:43 am

I think Bruce Elliott was astute at knowing exactly what to write.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 16th, 2022, 4:19 pm

I don't think he was. The very first book he wrote for the public was full of tricks full of props that nobody would have had in the house and were unobtainable unless you lived near a magic shop and even then it was doubtful if they had what you wanted. I am referring to Magic as a Hobby. It was the book that started me off and I couldn't do a single bloody trick in it. In fact I looked at it again the other day and STILL can't do a damn trick in the book. I think his best book was Magic--100 New Tricks. I do a whole bunch of stuff from Classic Secrets of Magic despite it being badly written and full of information, to quote you, "where the reader is left to "figure stuff out" and "fill in the blanks.". You also said those are certainly not the kind you like to read!
Methinks you must have made an exception there..............................

Incidentally here is one of the tricks I learned from Classic Secrets of Magic despite Elliott "not filling in the blanks"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRvT_6msjcs&t=13s

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 2061
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: Edward Victor

Postby MagicbyAlfred » September 16th, 2022, 6:57 pm

I have long had Elliot's The Best in Magic (1956 Harper & Row), and consider it a treasure. It's neither prop-heavy, nor does it require much DIY. The descriptions of the tricks and moves are relatively succinct, from less than a page in some cases, to one or two pages in others. But that's fine when, as Richard noted, you know exactly what to write.

Tarotist
Posts: 691
Joined: July 29th, 2021, 7:16 am
Favorite Magician: David Nixon

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Tarotist » September 17th, 2022, 12:26 am

I think The Best in Magic was another name for Magic---100 New Tricks. As I mentioned previously I think it was his best book. I am merely saying that Ganson had a lot more detail in his books than Bruce Elliott ever did. So I don't really know what he is supposed to have missed out in the Vernon books. I bet Bruce Elliott would have missed out more. There would have been more stuff to figure out and fill in the blanks!

User avatar
Q. Kumber
Posts: 1780
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Tom Whitestone

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Q. Kumber » September 17th, 2022, 2:16 am

Maybe I am mistaken but weren't the Elliot books compilations of tricks that had appeared in The Phoenix?

Philippe Billot
Posts: 1566
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: PARIS - FRANCE

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Philippe Billot » September 17th, 2022, 2:54 am

Yes, it is.

Philippe Billot
Posts: 1566
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: PARIS - FRANCE

Re: Edward Victor

Postby Philippe Billot » September 17th, 2022, 2:58 am

Except Classic Secrets of Magic (1953) in which there are only SIX tricks from The Phoenix.


Return to “Book of The Month Club”