This is the "Berglas Effect"?

[Richard Kaufman]

There's a short write-up in the Britland book, not a long one.

[NCMarsh]

The explanation of "The Berglas Effect" runs from page 527-541 in The Mind and Magic of David Berglas.

If a 14 page description of a card trick is "short," well...so be it...

I am delighted to hear that you'll be writing about Berglas' card work, and look forward to digging into your description.

[Richard Kaufman]

That actually is a short description of The Berglas Effect. My text is at 33 pages and still going!

[John Lovick]

Mike Close tells us that one should not release a variant trick unless it is an improvement in effect, method or presentation.

To set the record straight, he quotes Darwin Ortiz here from his excellent introduction in Cardshark.

And Stewart James expressed almost the exact same sentiment in print in 1938:
A trick is not a rehash if its entertainment value is improved, the method of working simplified, or the mystery deepened.

I propose we redub Darwins First Law as Jamess First Law.

[NCMarsh]

Richard,

Looking forward to it!

[Jonathan Townsend]

John, I have to applaud the efforts of folks willing to do what it takes to get magicians reading and fostering that critical dialog on distinguishing that which seems special to oneself in ones own context and that which adds to the sum of accessible knowledge for the serious student. The Darwinian perspective of tricks in a niche market ecology offers its own benefits IMHO.

I'll leave the topics of biodiversity and the magic shop as educational resource without getting into a discussion about "you are what you eat" and parochial perspectives.

Looking forward to exploring ACAAN here too,

Jon

[John Lovick]

Jonathan,

What's it like being trapped inside your brain?

[Jonathan Townsend]

Jonathan,

What's it like being trapped inside your brain?

How would I know? If you're asking about my mind - that's a tough one to answer as well. Maybe after we develop the technology to move minds between brains and to superimpose the sense of "me" onto other mental constructs I'd have a way to answer those questions.

I hope you're not attempting to offer insult.

I happen to like the model of natural selection and descent with modification used to explore tricks in the marketplace/literature in magic. Both Darwins have useful ideas IMHO. :)

[Jonathan Townsend]

Ok, back to ACAAN

Richard: maybe 2010 for release?

[Richard Kaufman]

I'm writing ...

[Jonathan Townsend]

The Britland book is a fun read. For a "how to make this trick work" type explanation I will sit back and wait for the new book. We have the reports of tabled deck/deck in drawer - no handling, so the "effect" is now waiting for a method.

[NCMarsh]

"Equivoque is not a method, it is a way of life" Eric Mead (para-phrased from memory...but the point is there)

[Jonathan Townsend]

"Equivoque is not a method, it is a way of life" Eric Mead (para-phrased from memory...but the point is there)

Or in plainspeak: Waffles, not just for breakfast.

Leggo my ego.

[PapaG]

For some reason this came to mind:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQoPcUXyf3g

[Jonathan Townsend]

For some reason this came to mind:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQoPcUXyf3g

For the benfit of those behind firewalls and who can't easily get to YouTube... just what came to mind?

http:\\www.pwnyoutube.com\not\watch=pointlesspostage

[Richard Kaufman]

PapaG, that is stunningly funny.

[Stan Willis]

Most so called improvements to an existing effect turn out to be technical variations of the original. With statements like you have made above it appears that you are not only challenging the Berglas Effect itself, but also challenging the authenticity of the forthcoming book by the Master Mentalist himself.

[Richard Kaufman]

That was the same nitwit from Italy as before using a different name. I'd appreciate it if someone would alert the minute he registers under a new name and starts posting again. I've deleted all his posts.

[Don Hendrix]

Is this the same guy who is selling something called "Destiny 2"?

[Jonathan Townsend]

I read the review of something online that could easily be done with a Five Star Prediction pack for the selection and something that offers one of two packs for the reveal. I have no qualms with a routine that demonstrates predestination using lots of props - it's just not the same as the legendary ACAAN where only one pack is introduced and both the card and the number are freely chosen from all values available in an ordinary pack of cards.

Yeah - okay the five of broccoli and the number is two times the cube root of pi. ;) Counting down three cards we find a postit with a message asking where they got a pack of cards with broccoli as a suit. Just another fret for those into outs and precautions - who already have a 3.5 of clubs, an ace of spades and a queen of hearts waiting just in case.

[Richard Kaufman]

Jonathan, you are a victim of hype.
Use your brain.

[Jonathan Townsend]

When it comes to doing tricks - total practical realist here. Recently posted praise for using a Five Star Prediction Deck to manage the start of what looks like ACAAN and a swap box to manage the setup for the countdown reveal at the end. Also praised Bob Farmer's version of the trick. Not so sure about the turntable card loader in a table version but I'm open minded.

I'm eager to hear how he managed the trick you and others reported. To understand how he approached the effect and what "triggers" he uses to know when it's doable.

[Richard Kaufman]

It's do-able pretty much all the time.
Jon, do you have the book The Mind and Magic of David Berglas? I suggest you read it again.

[Ryan Matney]

Not trying to be a smart ass-but I've never cared for the random nature of The Berglass Effect - in descriptions I have read. Mind you I have never seen the effect performed.

I don't really like tricks that are performed like:
Which color should I remove red or BLACK?
Now name a suit CLUBS or spades.
Call out a value limit: high or LOW.
Now name a number between 15 and 45 but not including 15 or 45...
now ...umm...walk into my bathroom and stick your arm into the back of my toilet bowl and inside will be a deck of cards...now count down to your number and bingo , there's your card.

I don't know, that doesn't really impress me that much.

I still think the svengali deck is the best, most direct and practical way to perform the effect any additions or switches is really just masterbation for the magician.

But, it is a dull and boring plot anyway. I can't be the only one who thinks so.

[Richard Kaufman]

You name a card.

You name a number.

You count down to that number and the thought-of card is at the named position in the deck.

That's all. No monkey business.

Having seen David Berglas do it half a dozen times, I can assure you that it is neither dull nor boring.

Just bring a diaper so you don't [censored] in your pants.

All that crap you talk about are what other people are doing to try and replicate what Berglas does.

[Chris Aguilar]

You name a card.

You name a number.

You count down to that number and the thought-of card is at the named position in the deck.

That's all. No monkey business.

After the release of your Berglas book, do you believe that many magicians out there will be able to replicate the effect (using the write up in your book) as you describe it here?

[Richard Kaufman]

I have no idea, but certainly some will.

That's like asking me how many people will be able to do one of the most difficult sleights ever created after a book comes out. Who knows?

I should also make it clear that we are not explaining every single thing David does because some of it makes sense ONLY for him. Each person who does it using the same technique is going to have to figure out certain things that suit them.

One of the main focuses of the book is personality and presentation, which are vital to the success of all of David's card magic, and certainly to the success of The Berglas Effect.

[Jonathan Townsend]

The Berglas Effect, the subject of chapter 60 of Britland's book, is clearly stated on page 528 and is ,IMHO, astonishing. I've been waiting to explore this item until Berglas chose to make his "how to" available. It's his legend and some of us don't go copying the works of living artists. As the reader will recall Britland makes it clear that the deconstruction of the method is beyond the scope of his book (see Revelations: page 529 pp 1 last sentence). I trust Richard has the go-ahead from Berglas to make complete and coherent instruction available to the reader.

I like the Britland book as an entertaining and inspiring read. If Berglas ever chooses to permit some NLP style modeling of his skills...

[NCMarsh]

The passage Jonathan refers to is:

It is so finely tailored to his own way of working that it is doubtful whether he could ever describe the method so completely that some other performer could make it work for them. Anyone looking for a simple description will not find it here. But if you are looking for miracles, you might want to stay awhile

Britland is certainly saying that there isn't a simple description, he is certainly not saying that "deconstruction of the method is beyond the scope of his book."

[Jonathan Townsend]

Nathan, the purpose of a method section in a magic text is to provide sufficient instruction "that some other performer could make it work for them" - as Britland puts it.

Anything less fails the what do you need to do in order to use procedure X, how could you know if X suffices to accomplish the task at hand? and how could you know when X does not suffice in a given curcumstance? type analysis.

Please, I'd rather praise a book for it's value than tunnel down into the mechanics of what it was not designed to offer.

[NCMarsh]

Jonathan,

I appreciate your insistence that written communication be clear ;)

There's nothing to suggest that the secret is not what the chapter is "designed to offer." And, while I understand that we're used to pieces that work by "do a triple, then an elmsley, then a...", the fact that there is magic that does not work this way -- magic that takes full advantage of the fact that we are the ones who define what the effect is and when it happens, and that the audience assumes that it is the same effect each time -- does not mean that there is a secret, single procedure that is being deliberately withheld

[Jonathan Townsend]

Jonathan,

I appreciate your insistence that written communication be clear ;)

There's nothing to suggest that ...is being deliberately withheld

Agreed. Britland makes his position on this clear and cites The Trick That Can't Be Explained in his discussion.

There are methods of describing such processes which elicit the strategies used and personal preferences of the artist. These methods can and do serve the student in learning such skills as were previously wont to be described as "knack" or suchlike. One name for the interview and dialog process is "modeling". By any name the process is about finding out when a procedure works and how to know when a different procedure is more likely to work.

The terms "knack", "jazz", "riff", "intuitive" may describe how an artist relates to doing a thing though are FAIL in discussing how to do a thing and how to know whether one is doing a thing correctly in context.

[Ryan Matney]

Richard,

If I were to run into you at a convention could you perform the effect for me? Then I could [censored] all over myself and the floor in front you.

Seriously, I'd like to experience it before I read it.

[Jonathan Townsend]

Richard,
...I could [censored] all over myself and the floor in front you.

Seriously, I'd like to experience it before I read it.

The smell of fooled?

[NCMarsh]

There are methods of describing such processes which elicit the strategies used and personal preferences of the artist.

You mean, like, the approach described in "A Foundation for Miracles" on p. 531?

[Jonathan Townsend]

Yes, that's a good start.