Collected tricks of type X

Discuss your favorite close-up tricks and methods.
Andru Luvisi
Posts: 43
Joined: April 14th, 2008, 1:34 pm

Collected tricks of type X

Postby Andru Luvisi » November 7th, 2004, 9:47 am

It was mentioned on the SECOND DEAL thread that there is a current trend of packaging up a bunch of tricks of type X and selling them at once, rather than making a newcomer do the grunt work of finding the classics for themselves.

I've heard mention of this before, and I've heard people criticize it before. What I'm not clear on is why some people consider this a bad thing. So, if you're one of those people, why do you consider this a bad thing?

Andru

Ian Kendall
Posts: 2631
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Collected tricks of type X

Postby Ian Kendall » November 7th, 2004, 10:06 am

Get hold of the Magic magazine from a couple of months ago when Michael Close reviewed the ETM cards 7,8 and 9 (How did I know this?). It's pretty much summed up there.

Take care, Ian

Guest

Re: Collected tricks of type X

Postby Guest » November 7th, 2004, 10:45 am

Not often that I disagree with you, Ian, but there's gotta be a first for everything. :D

There are many excellent general magic books such as The Magic of Michael Ammar and The Books of Wonder.

And there are many excellent narrowly-focussed magic books, such as Expert Coin Magic, New Modern Coin Magic, Al Scheider on Coins, and Elastrix 2.

And I don't see why that's a bad thing. Were I to wish to concentrate on (say) elastic band magic, then turning to the works of Dan Harlan and Joe Rindfleisch is surely a good idea?

And should I wish to learn many matrix routines (say), then it can be expensive to buy numerous books simply on the grounds that they each include a matrix routine.

I'm not saying that "making it easier" is a good thing. I'm saying that centralising information is a good thing.

(You might think that the titles that I've cited aren't the best examples. That doesn't change the point that I'm intending to make. I merely glanced at my bookshelf for a few examples.)

Dave

Chris Aguilar
Posts: 2012
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Sacramento
Contact:

Re: Collected tricks of type X

Postby Chris Aguilar » November 7th, 2004, 11:04 am

I guess if compendiums were a bad thing, then we wouldn't be able to enjoy classic books like ECT or compendiums like Card College. While the marketing/audience/executions of compendiums vary, it seems silly to lump them together as one evil.

Andru Luvisi
Posts: 43
Joined: April 14th, 2008, 1:34 pm

Re: Collected tricks of type X

Postby Andru Luvisi » November 7th, 2004, 11:29 am

Originally posted by Ian Kendall:
Get hold of the Magic magazine from a couple of months ago when Michael Close reviewed the ETM cards 7,8 and 9 (How did I know this?). It's pretty much summed up there.

Take care, Ian
Cool. So now I know where to find why Michael Close thinks they're a bad idea. Why do you think they're a bad idea (assuming that you do)?

Andru

Ian Kendall
Posts: 2631
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Collected tricks of type X

Postby Ian Kendall » November 7th, 2004, 1:32 pm

Hi Andru,

I posted about the Magic article for a couple of reasons. First, Michael makes the points in a clear manner. Secondly, people are much more likely to listen to his point of view than mine and lastly, because his point of view and mine seem to be quite similar.

To answer Dave and Chris - I am not against compendia. Expert Card Technique and Coinmagic (two examples cited) were (to the best of my knowledge) collections of unpublished material - but I'll be happy to be corrected on that one. Similarly, the Card College series (although I've not read any of them) is a complete teaching course by Giobbi which starts from scratch. My understanding of these books is that they are not a collection of tricks.

Then we get the specialised books and series - Harlan's Band Shark video was his own material, Elastrix is largely Rindfleish's material, the Roth coin videos, LeClair's thread work and so it goes on. I have said nothing against these collections.

Then we come to the matter in hand, the Easy to Master Whatevers Made Easy. Series of DVDs that rake through the literature for a group of effects and then teach them to people who are hungry for a quick fix. There is no doubt that there are excellent routines on these tapes, but there is a feeling of being spoonfed which I dislike (and remember this is only my opinion. The reason I cited the Close article is because Michael is so much more articulate than I on this point).

When the first batch of tapes came out I remember wondering what exactly was the reason d'etre for these tapes. Was it a truely alturistic act on the part of Michael Ammar to help the hoards of magicians to learn some neat tricks, or was it a cynical marketing exercise (as alluded by Chris)? The answer came to me finally last year (and since this seems to be 'make-an-enemy' day I'll keep going).

As mentioned in another thread, for some reason I bought Ammar's ETM Business Card Miracles, and started to watch it on the train home. After about fifteen minutes of watching the effects I moved onto the bulk of the DVD, which was a series of trailers for other L&L DVDs. One of these was for the Thread DVDs, and in one segment Ammar was interviewing someone whom I took to be the inventor of the ITR. Ammar asked how many units they had sold, and the man said that they had sold however many thousands. At this, Ammar laughed and said, without a trace of irony, 'You're my hero'. Those three words stuck with me.

So I suppose my problem is with the ethos behind the ETM series. My original post was a dig at how the Easy part of the name is being stretched, but I've explained that there.

In yet another post I mentioned an interview that RK had made in Profile. For years I was aware of the quotes, but for a long time I had thought that they were from a Bull collumn. I spent a while a couple of years ago scanning the Almanac for it, but fell short. It was when I was digging out the Profiles for sale and had a look through them that I found it, but it's existance was always in the back of my mind. And so it is with tricks; I doubt I've learned one percent of all the tricks I've read over the years, but the way the human memory works they are all in there, to some extent. To that extent (for example), when the Wonderland Bill came out I could recognise it as Bob Neale's Trapdoor which I read in Lifesavers, or David Britland's version from the Magic Menu. If I had not read these books I would not have known that.

And now we have a generation of magicians who are either becoming clones of one another, or are being handed all they need to know in one convenient package. As I said in the other thread, I find this sad as, for me at least, the grunt work of reading these books is immensly enjoyable.

So there, albeit in a rather rambling diatribe, are my reasons for not liking the Easy to Master concept. I hope I have not come across as sermonising, or glub forgive, ranting. I know that the idea has advantages, too, but I feel that they are outweighed by the negatives. However, I am just the Forum [censored], so what does it all matter, anyway?

Take care, Ian


Return to “Close-Up Magic”