Tamariz's Cannibal Cards

[mrmagik68]

Happy Saturday All!

I was just watching this video of Juan Tamariz doing his version of Cannibal Cards on the Magicana website. Unfortunately, for my non Spanish speaking friends, it is in Spanish but I think if you watch the video closely you can still appreciate this presentational masterpiece.


https://www.magicana.com/video/juan-tamariz-cannibal-cards-0



Roberto

[chetday]

That was great fun to watch, but I sure wish I knew Spanish so I could also enjoy the story. I love his energy and interaction with his audience. Thanks for posting this video.

[MagicbyAlfred]

That was great fun to watch, but I sure wish I knew Spanish so I could also enjoy the story. I love his energy and interaction with his audience. Thanks for posting this video.

Hi Chet,

It is truly difficult to conceive of a more diametric opposite to Juan Tamariz than Michael Ammar. Nevertheless, I think Michael does a great job with the routine. I first saw this presentation in the 90's when I picked up (I believe it was volume 1 or 2 of) the Ammar "Easy to Master Card Miracles" DVDs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aK5K-zAsQM&t=212s

[Richard Kaufman]

That's a great lesson in why you should NEVER hold a break at the inner end with your right thumb. Use the Verdnase break instead.

[MagicbyAlfred]

That's a great lesson in why you should NEVER hold a break at the inner end with your right thumb. Use the Verdnase break instead.

Absolutely!

BTW, Now watching the routine again with a fresh eye, years later, I will say that I am not fond of Michael's patter concerning the Cannibals' favorite food being "Pygmies." I think "big game hunters" would be much better (and poetically just).

[Bill Mullins]

Tamariz's version is also on his "Lessons in Magic" videos, I believe.

[MagicbyAlfred]

Tamariz's version is also on his "Lessons in Magic" videos, I believe.

That's right, and its available as a download (along with 3 other routines contained in "part 2") for only 15 bucks!

What a deal!

https://www.vanishingincmagic.com/card- ... -download/

[Richard Kaufman]

Those eaten have always been referred to as "missionaries." The so-called pygmies are in fact the cannibals!

[MagicbyAlfred]

On Ammar's routine, he specifically refers to the cannibals' favorite food as being pygmies. Missionaries is better, and commonly used, but I think that might rub some people the wrong way too. I still like big game hunters as the food for the cannibals. I don't know of anyone else using that patter.

By the way, two cannibals were having dinner one night and one says to the other: "I hate my mother in law."
The other one says, "So try the potatoes."

[Bill Mullins]

If you're going to do a trick with cannibals, I don't see what the harm in including pygmies is.

[Chas Nigh]

Watching inappropriate touching will always turn me off. Enough said.

[Luigi Anzivino]

If you're going to do a trick with cannibals, I don't see what the harm in including pygmies is.

Yeah, maybe it’s time to retire presentations that use cannibalism as the plot device, considering how steeped in colonialist, imperialist, and religious oppression the term is. We can do better. The best reaction you can hope for when you bring up “cannibals” is polite chuckling, and that’s probably not what we should shoot for…

[Brad Henderson]

I provided the script which Ammar used for his Cannibal Card effect. You can see me listed in the credits as a contributor. This led to my involvement as writer and primary consultant to his Money videos.

Michael was teaching a different routine than the one I perform, though he liked the presentation and asked to use it.

I intentionally avoided missionaries for a few reasons. One - that theme ACTUALLY speaks to colonialism and the subjugation of one culture by another. Second, too many magicians make the stupid and obvious ‘missionary position’ joke and I didn’t want to encourage that. And third. in the end the missionaries survive and personally I find that a sad ending to the story.

I disagree that either cannibals or cannibalism is steeped in any of the issues raised. The fact is cannibalism was practiced in these cultures and any issue of colonialism and religious oppression was in attempting to eradicate it as a practice.

In point of fact cannibalism was not commonly practiced against white invaders but against other tribes so pygmies would be the more accurate narrative.

And in my version, not the classic presented by Ammar, the cannibals are the heroes. They are not condemned or belittled. They are celebrated and even presented with some multi dimensionally. They are more than just savage eating machines.

And most generally, cannibalism is the perfect metaphor for a trick where one thing is seen to consume itself.

Having presented a version of this trick for decades now I can assure you that it elicits far more than polite chuckles and is a highly requested feature routine. I have annual audiences remember and request it after having not seen it for over a year. I had someone request it after having not seen it for over three decades!!!!

Finally, while it is my experience that this piece can elicit far more than a polite chuckle - there is nothing wrong with conveying a variety of experiences through ones magical work and sometimes a polite chuckle is EXACTLY perfect for the moment.

If all we ever do is offer experiences ‘on 11’ then there is no where to go from that. As far as I understand, Amps don’t go up to ‘12’.

[Brad Henderson]

PS. Having said all that. I used to close with a line that I DID feel evoke concepts of colonialism and racial power dynamics. It never elicited any negative comments or reactions but I felt that it potentially injected some of these elements of concern into the routine - and at the end when it could potentially color everything that came before.

So to be clear, I think exploring and considering these issues is important - I disagree that ‘cannibal’ and ‘pygmy’ are - necessarily - problematic. Of course, that depends on exactly how the performer navigates those narrative devices.

[Jack Shalom]

I say it's spinach and the hell with it.

[PressureFan]

It's broccoli, dear.

[Luigi Anzivino]

I provided the script which Ammar used for his Cannibal Card effect. You can see me listed in the credits as a contributor. This led to my involvement as writer and primary consultant to his Money videos.

{snip}

I disagree that either cannibals or cannibalism is steeped in any of the issues raised. The fact is cannibalism was practiced in these cultures and any issue of colonialism and religious oppression was in attempting to eradicate it as a practice.

In point of fact cannibalism was not commonly practiced against white invaders but against other tribes so pygmies would be the more accurate narrative.

And in my version, not the classic presented by Ammar, the cannibals are the heroes. They are not condemned or belittled. They are celebrated and even presented with some multi dimensionally. They are more than just savage eating machines.

And most generally, cannibalism is the perfect metaphor for a trick where one thing is seen to consume itself.

Having presented a version of this trick for decades now I can assure you that it elicits far more than polite chuckles and is a highly requested feature routine. I have annual audiences remember and request it after having not seen it for over a year. I had someone request it after having not seen it for over three decades!!!!

Finally, while it is my experience that this piece can elicit far more than a polite chuckle - there is nothing wrong with conveying a variety of experiences through ones magical work and sometimes a polite chuckle is EXACTLY perfect for the moment.

If all we ever do is offer experiences ‘on 11’ then there is no where to go from that. As far as I understand, Amps don’t go up to ‘12’.

Thank you for engaging in dialogue and for explaining the reasoning that went into the scripting of the trick, I really appreciate the light you're shining on your choices and the intent for them, which is clearly not to belittle or, even worse, oppress others.

That being said, I would like to propose that centering a presentation around cannibalism is intrinsically problematic, as is any representation of a whole generalized population through the lens of a stereotyped characterization. What image of indigenous peoples does cannibalism bring forth? How are people imagining these cannibals in their minds, other than stereotypes of savage brutes? That's what I mean when I said the best reaction you can hope for is a polite chuckle: if you get a really big laugh at the premise of cannibals, is that a reaction you want? What is that person really laughing at?

Also, cannibalism has been historically used as a tool of oppression, by justifying colonization of the grounds of "saving the savages from themselves" or "bringing civilization to the savages," and in some cases even to justify enslavement, and claims of cannibalism have been greatly exaggerated in order to justify subjugating entire peoples. I have a very good friend who is from the Fiji islands, which were known for a long time as the Cannibal Isles; I think if she heard me start talking about cannibals in a cavalier jokey way, she might not feel very good about that. Who else in your audience might be turned off by that?

I believe the effect is a very strong one, and suspect that the people who have such strong memories of the routine are responding to that rather than the presentation. Would a different plot diminish the effect? Are there better alternatives that don't rely on damaging stereotypes? Can we find something else to talk about that consumes everything, eventually including itself?

[Paco Nagata]

I was 16 when I watched it on TV here in Spain!

Thanks to Youtube I can see it again!

I was delighted with the magical vanishing of the card inside the others, but, to tell you the truth, I disliked that metaphorical presentation.

I couldn't stop thinking about other different ways to represent metaphorically that routine.

At that time I had just learnt how to do the Ascanio Spread, so I could figure out the method and think about a different presentation.
Finally I came up with the "Black Hole" presentation:
An astronaut gets too close to a black hole...
Then the other... and the third one...
But, the third one carried a kind of x ray transmisor, so they could be seen going out of a "white hole"...
^_^

[MagicbyAlfred]

I like Paco's thinking and his plot. I think the use of "pygmies" as the food, in the paradigm of today's society, could be interpreted as racist. But, hey, use whatever patter you like. My girlfriend has a saying that has always resonated with me: "Everybody gets to do what they want."

[Jackpot]

Paco I appreciate your "Black Hole" presentation. Regarding "cannibal cards", I have always felt the theme dated like the cover of Walt Lee's book.
https://www.conjuringarchive.com/list/book/1730

[Paco Nagata]

Alfred, Jack, thanks a lot for your comments!

Alfred, your girlfriend saying expresses one of the most important thing for creativity

Jack, I didn't know about that book; thank for that information

[Ted M]

Cannibalism within western culture might provide some avenues for exploration:

- Franklin's expedition to the Arctic
- the Donner party
- Hannibal Lecter
- Capitalism will eat itself

[Jonathan Townsend]

Way too heavy for a cute card trick. Chronos Meh. Try something lighter like making the card vanish in a contradiction or pun.

If I could do the fancy card spin and packet flourishes it might be cute to play as local space-time distorted by an unlikely combination of cards.

It's a sandwich trick where you show them the method before you reveal the effect.

The version with selected cards is almost Jazz Aces gone wrong. (hint hint)

[Brad Henderson]

Luigi, a point we should remember is that we are discussing a card trick. I’m not doing a dissertation on the ethnologies of tribes and their cultures. It’s a card tricks about a captivating cultural phenomenon that occurs in many regions throughout the world, including western societies. I’m not invoking any tribal name or specific group association. It is a story about cannibals. Cannibals existed and exist. If someone chooses to project their identity into my story that is a foolish choice on their part. Unless they are cannibals and feel I have reduced them to merely their cannibalism, then there is grounds for offense.

I don't mean for that to sound dismissive. I've considered the issue carefully. If I painted an entire race or country of people as "cannibals" that WOULD be reductionist. But to tell a story about an actual phenomena which extends beyond a single culture strikes me as fair. As I said, it's a card trick about a single concept - not an academic piece on a people. We don't see people decrying Criminal Minds for being reductionist by including cannibalism in their line up of serial killing offenses.

And, to be clear, I believe the missionary/colonial work done in many of these places is abhorrent. I hate seeing these once unique cultures dismantled in the name of spreading silly fairy tales that are - at heart - no less evil and demeaning than the beliefs in the societies being repudiated.

FWIW, in my routine, this even gets a mention where the cannibals pick up on one of the western concepts shared by us, the visitors, and we see the results there of. So, while my mind remains open, I consider the question of cannibalism in relation to a story acted out by playing cards is something with which I have no problem.

Having said that - I've been considering a key point underlying your question about 'who else in my audience might be turned off' by a specific choice.

You are not the first to take this tact. I have read often that if anything in our shows might possibly offend one person we should take it out.

I have come to conclude that this is nonsense.

Let's consider the face of the argument literally: If you have a piece or line that thousands of people enjoy, but there is a chance that one person might be offended that we should deny the thousands of others? What if that person just doesn't understand it? Should we play to the slowest people in the room?

And To what end? This person is most likely someone who would not be a fan of our work - assuming our work is informed by our interests and values. What are they going to do, tell their friends who most likely wouldn't be fans anyway that they didn't enjoy the show? I don't think you build a fan base/client list by playing to those who don't like what you do, but in finding those who do. That's not to say I think it's wise to insult your audiences or strive to be offensive - but we have to be real, there are some people who simply seek offense. Any smart organization should be wise to this. To play to the most easily offended - especially when those who are get the attention they seek and only become more readily aggrieved- is a race to the bottom of any endeavor.

And this speaks to a certain position I see advocated that suggests that magic should appeal to all people - the highest and lowest denominators alike. Again, if you think about it, this too is nonsense. No other art takes this position. No one expects that everyone would like all types of music or all pieces of painting. Heck, we don't even expect people to like all types of food. In fact, many people find lots of music quite offensive. Many people will actually DIE from eating certain foods.

But we don't hear chefs preaching that everything they create should be loved by all people! In fact, the reason all the other arts are so engaging and fascinating is precisely because they encourage such great variety, that there are risk takers and extremes. There is Taco Bell AND Alinea. There is David Lynch AND Ace Ventura Pet Detective.

yet in magic we want to encourage people to play to the most sensitive and not the most adventurous. We are told this is good for business, but again, it's my experience that we build businesses on our fans - people who like what WE do. Who appreciate us for OUR vision. Not someone who offers a generic experience devoid of anything unique or provocative.

That's not to say that we should condone hateful speech and attacks on other human beings. Those issues extend beyond the boundaries of art and into what it means to be a decent person. And as artists we should be aware of how EVERY choice we make affects those who engage with us in our work. I am NOT advocating being sloppy! But I disagree that our standard should be "everyone needs to love me."

Nonsense

[AJM]

We’ll be right back after this music

https://youtu.be/kZnl0C-apf0

[MagicbyAlfred]

Intriguing discussion!

I think this excerpt from Brad's post above: "[people] Who appreciate us for OUR vision. Not someone who offers a generic experience devoid of anything unique or provocative," articulates quite well the dividing line between magic as a craft and magic as an art. (See, e.g., The Performance of Close-up Magic by Eugene Burger or any performance by Eugene).

In the link to the YouTube video of Michael Ammar performing the routine (which is actually his performance from his "Easy to Master Card Miracles"), he starts out by spreading the deck and asking people whether they have noticed that cards are frequently missing from a deck of cards and whether they have ever wondered what became of the cards? A nice way to engage interest. And of course, the answer is yes.

This might be a good set-up to talk about how hardly anyone knows this, but it's the kings that are the culprits - that they are the "cannibals" in a deck of playing cards. Their favorite food (even more than hot fudge sundaes) is other, unsuspecting playing cards, that they prey upon and love to eat. That way, there's no need say they are pygmies, or that they are cannibals that like to eat pygmies or missionaries (but if that’s really your thing – although it’s been presented that way a kajillion times - who am I to say, go for it). The kings (“cardibals”???) simply eat other playing cards. The cards themselves are the victims of these predators, and that’s why cards turn up missing.

Obviously, there are countless ways to go with almost any routine, and that's a big part of the fun and creativity of it all. I just thought I would throw this idea into the mix. As for me, I'm sticking with the patter/metaphor that the favorite food of the cannibals are big game hunters - cuz I just really don't like big game hunters (or, for that matter, small game hunters).

[Jonathan Townsend]

The trick is usually done as play and humor. The Lin Searles item is set up as humor.

If you want to introduce gravitas and get people to wail and bemoan the loss cards before you relieve the angst by showing their cards somewhere safe (come on - you know you want to produce them mulched from the cardcase ) that's up to you and perhaps that works for your audiences.

Cancel Culture Cards - same moves, just updated patter. What do you think?

[AJM]

Big (and small) game hunters have feelings too, Alfred.

Have you considered Unconscious Bias training?

[Jonathan Townsend]

...Have you considered Unconscious Bias training?

That would be Out Of This World.

[AJM]

Touché sir.

[MagicbyAlfred]

Big (and small) game hunters have feelings too, Alfred.

Not after the cannibals get done with'em...

[Chas Nigh]

And for your further entertainment...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48wHhW_dTMo

[Brad Henderson]

Cultural appropriation?

[Luigi Anzivino]

Luigi, a point we should remember is that we are discussing a card trick.

Brad, as you said, we are in the end discussing a card trick, but I am grateful for the fact that we have been able to elevate the conversation and consider a wider perspective over the choices we make when we present our material. Once again, I want to make clear that I appreciate the discussion and see your perspective, agree with a lot of it, and respect your ideas even when I don’t agree with them.

I very much agree with you that art, including magic, should not attempt to cater to the lowest common denominator in order to make sure “nobody gets offended.” I am with Mike Birbiglia: art must be about something, and there can always be someone who might find it offensive, in poor taste, or pointless. And so it is up to us as creators to make intentional choices as to what our art in about — and yes, once again, I am aware that in the end we’re talking about a fairly silly card trick about cards eating themselves!

So I am not asking “who else in your audience might be turned off” from the perspective of trying to appease everyone. But “cannibals” is not just a random premise, it is a trope, and as such it has cultural connotations and a history behind it. As I said, depicting indigenous populations as cannibals has been used as a tool of oppression, colonization, enslavement, and brutalization. The stereotyped image of African people with a bone through their nose tending a large pot (as evidenced by the Walt Lees cover linked above) has become so connected with racist depictions that it took down even a beloved icon like Dr. Seuss.

There are some things that are offensive not to a individual person because of their distinct sensibilities, but to a whole category of people because of a history of oppression and disenfranchisement, and there’s a big difference between the two, and that difference lies in power, historical and current. If you were to write and perform a theater piece in blackface, and people (rightly) gave you grief about it, I don’t think you could defend yourself by saying “well, I guess someone is bound to be offended by something…”

Now, maybe you can script a trick about cannibals such that it doesn’t fall into stereotype territory. I can imagine Paul Draper structuring a trick around his ethnographic studies of anthropophagy across different cultures that would steer well clear of that, for example. But for most magicians, talking about cannibals is just a quick way to get a chuckle and introduce a premise for a card trick. As someone famous once said: most magicians stop thinking too soon. Let’s think more about our art, intentions, and impact: why is it important to have “cannibals” as the protagonists of this particular trick? What does it add? What does it take away? Are we doing it because it’s the best or only way to engage our audience with the trick, or because that’s the way it’s been done? I think no matter your personal answers to those questions, our magic will be better for asking them.

[Brad Henderson]

I believe our point of contention is that cannibals as a concept is reductionist. I feel this is a case of taking a theory (and a valid one) and misapplying it in this case.

If I were doing a piece that attempted to be representative of say Figi and I represented them entirely with the trope of ‘savage cannibal you would be correct.

But this piece ISN’T about a particular culture but a phenomena which is cross cultural. Now if someone - an audience member - projects racist imagery into their mental imagining during the performance, that speaks to their reductionist mindset, not the performers.

We agree that the important thing is that we ask how these things affect our audiences - and in case anyone is reading this other than us - I want to clarify this has nothing to do with ‘being woke’ or political correctness but is the very essence of the artistic dynamic. We manipulate symbolic structures to convey a feelingful response to our audience. (Langer) and to that end we must always seek to understand how our choices impact those conveyed feelings

Asking these questions is one thing. Getting good answers is another. Theory tells us there is a risk in using the cannibalism premise. Practice - having actually performed this piece for decades now - indicates that the premise has more positive benefits than negative. Case in point - people ask for the effect and they ask for it by name DECADES after having seen it.

Why? Lots of reasons. The trick itself IS good. But there are lots of good tricks. I think it’s because the story engages the imagination in ways deeper than most tricks which are about just ‘cards’. The anthropomorphism of the cards transforms the trick beyond an act of cards appearing and disappearing and into one with conflict and resolution. More important that act of turning the cards into people - should the audiences imagination allow - is itself an act of symbolic transformation. A key element in n the aesthetic experience. (Also Langer)

And I think a lot of this stems from the power of the cannibalism concept - because cannibalism is a cross culturally triggering concept. Ever culture has taboos regarding it - even those that practice it.

It is precisely that - along with the violation of other cultural taboos beyond mere killing - that make characters such as Ed Gein and Jeffrey Dahmer so compelling. If not for cannibalism would anyone care about the Donner party? I’m sure many wagon train encountered wide spread death on the journeys - but can we name them.

In all the years I have performed the effect I have - not once - heard a single complaint or concerned expressed by any person, layman or magician. Admittedly times for change and it’s been a year since I’ve last performed it - but until I see reactions that indicate to me that the premise is becoming an obstacle to the magic moment as opposed to an asset, I contend it isn’t having the negative effect of which we are rightfully concerned.