|
|
Eric Fry Regular user 191 Posts |
I'm a Houdini buff, a card magician but not an escape artist, who has a question about how he (or other escape artists) learn how handcuff locks work. I seem to remember that books said he'd buy old ones and take them apart. I'm curious how a person can pry open a handcuff. Aren't the pieces soldered together?
|
Mick Hanzlik Special user Mick Hanzlik 588 Posts |
Not neccesarily. Older ones could have been rivetted together. Today it's easy. Go to www.cannonsgreatescapes and buy a ready made training handcuff!
|
Eric Fry Regular user 191 Posts |
Thanks. While I'm at it, let me ask whether it's essential for a handcuff artist of Houdini's time and circumstances (working in many countries) to see the inside of each model of cuffs he escapes from? Could he learn to open them just by working on the lock through the keyhole?
Also, am I right in thinking that when handcuff artists use picks (not shims) they are working the lock the same way a key would work it? |
Tony Chapparo Special user Albuquerque, NM 704 Posts |
Hi Eric,
Yes. If you are picking a cuff, you are going through the key way and essentially doing the same thing a key would do with the pick, wire, etc. My thinking on this, and I am not alone, is that if you have to hide a pick you may as well hide the correct key for the cuff. Underwater escapes are another issue altogether... Tony
Tony Chapparo
|
Eric Fry Regular user 191 Posts |
Thanks. I've asked this question in forums before, but I'd like to try it again. Is it your impression that audiences were completely mystified by Houdini's handcuff act, or did they think of it as skillful lock-picking? Did their views change over time?
Given that he escaped, in many instances, from the same models over and over again, in town after town, it surprises me that we was a highly paid headliner for years with handcuffs. You'd think he would have been a 90-day wonder like the Georgia Magnet. |
drwilson Inner circle Bar Harbor, ME 2191 Posts |
Lulu Hurst was more than a 90-day wonder.
Your remarks raise an interesting question. Magicians do not see things the way an audience of regular folks does. I will toss out a few examples to make my point. The Davenport Brothers did stage demonstrations of spiritualism, in which they were bound in a cabinet. Spirit manifestations would occur. When the cabinets were opened, they were still bound. Strangely, they sometimes did escapes on stage, which you might think would kill the cabinet act in the eyes of the public. It never did. The Great Lafayette (see Steinmeyer's "The Glorious Deception") performed an illusion act in which a couple of illusions took place in a ninety-minute play with a big cast and lots of costumes and scenery. Magicians were bored to tears. The public was enthralled. The Great Alexander ("The Man Who Knows") did a Q&A act for years, in which the same sorts of questions were answered over and over, town after town. The public could not get enough of this. In more modern times, John Edward has a TV show as a vague medium, pumping his audience for clues and saying the same vaguely reassuring things over and over and over. People love it. We can conclude from these examples, and many more that you might think of, that each of these performers has succeeded in addressing some need widely shared by the general public but poorly understood by most practitioners of our craft. Instead of condemning their narrow range and lack of sophistication, we should rather study their deep understanding of the needs of their audience. This is not an easy task. Yours, Paul |
Eric Fry Regular user 191 Posts |
Thanks. That was a very informative and thoughtful response.
By the way, I didn't mean the Georgia Magnet was literally a 90-day wonder, but my impression is that once her technique was understood by the public, her career was finished. Maybe I need to learn more about her. Anyway, my implication was that once audiences realized Houdini could pick or otherwise open all the models of regulation handcuffs, people would tire of it. Been there, done that, so to speak. I realize they didn't tire of it until the market was flooded with imitators. I was wondering how Houdini prolonged the interest. I'm sure he deserves his reputation. I just wonder how he achieved it. The answer may lie in his combination of showmanship, the intrinsic appeal of escape and defiance of authority, and the fact that he traveled a lot, so that people in a particular town saw him only once every two or three years. He may also have accepted enough truly difficult or apparently difficult challenges to maintain some suspense about whether he would escape. I think Houdini brilliantly did what magicians are supposed to do. But I've always been curious about how his audiences perceived the handcuff escapes: a deep mystery or lock-opening skill? |
Harry Murphy Inner circle Maryland 5444 Posts |
Man you are talking about a way different zeitgeist in eras! Expectations were different, knowledge base was way different, educational level in general was different, women didn’t have the right to vote in some states, and some races were kept from voting in other states. Not every town had all of their streets paved, or electric lights in every home. The telephone was not available to all and the automobile shared the unpaved roadways and city ways with horse drawn wagons and electric trams. Information was not readily available. In fact, Ph.D. dissertations often took years of serious library search in many different libraries in different cities.
The motion picture was a novelty at the start of Harry’s career and even by the end of his life they were not as established as just ten years later. The main source of information was the newspaper, and if you relied on certain newspapers for example the Hearst chain or “Pinky” (Police Gazette) your news was often simply made up. A performer like Harry Houdini could do the same act basically unchanged for a dozen years and it would still be fresh to audiences. The several vaudeville circuits required a performer to have a set act (often only 12 minutes) which was repeated several times a day into the evening. A comedy act could do an entire career using the same two dozen jokes and bits and never have to change one word. The thought of “gimmicked” handcuffs was far from most audiences minds. The typical escape artist of the day went to some lengths “proving” the genuineness of their restraints. The biggest thing that Houdini did was to clearly understand the media of the day and to fully exploit it. In that he was pure genius! He was a superior escape artiest of the day, a so-so magician, stupendous publicity hound! His act would be too slow paced and laughable by today’s standards. However for the time it was just right. The man was a true product of his time, understood it better than most, and exploited it well.
The artist formally known as Mumblepeas!
|
Eric Fry Regular user 191 Posts |
Thanks for the insights.
I knew that vaudeville performers often did the same act for years. The reason I didn't ask the same question about a conventional magic act is that the handcuff act was presented as a challenge, not a magic trick. If the audience felt they knew generally how it was done (that he's working the locks), and that Houdini always succeeded, would their interest fade? Obviously not, but why not? The reason I harp on the handcuff act is that it seems to fall into a vague area conceptually. That sounds pretentious, but let me explain. Some of Houdini's effects were stunts, not mysteries. They were feats of strength, endurance, daring and technique. I'm thinking of the outdoors straightjacket escape, whose method he explained in an illustrated article in the Ladies Home Journal in about 1915. So he made no mystery out of that. Other Houdini effects were presented as mysteries, akin to magic tricks. I'm thinking of the packing box escape or the milk can escape. He inexplicably gets out of those objects without apparently opening them or damaging them. But what of the handcuff act? Is it a stunt or a magic trick? Did the audience see it as a demonstration of lock-picking or as a complete mystery? Did the audience's understanding change over the years? I know that Houdini advertised his nude jail-and-manacle escapes as proof that he didn't use keys or other implements. So that lends support to the idea of the handcuff escape as a complete mystery. But on stage he was fully clothed and he escaped behind an enclosure. Cuffs were brought on stage by people who could be accomplices. All of that opens the door to the handcuff act as a demonstration of lock-opening skill. I'm not implying the handcuff act is better or worse if it's a stunt or a mystery. Nor do I think this is a particularly important question, although I've nattered on at length about it here. As a person who has read about 30 books on Houdini, it's just something I've wondered about. |
Wolflock Inner circle South Africa 2257 Posts |
I think the main thing that kept it alive is that people suspected that he picked the locks. They never actually saw it or could prove it, therefore the general lay person would go watch and try to find out but yet left without knowing. Remember that Many Magic effects we would not even TRY to attempt on todays children , leave alone audience, were miracles to the people of those eras.
Pepper's ghost was almost a true NECROMANCY to them. Now days it has been used sooo many times as an FX in Movies before computer gen'ing that people just shrug it off now. Take Nighmare before christmas - It makes use of a Pepper's Ghost of Sorts for the Ghost Dog. You would think that people would tire of David Copperfield making big things disappear and yet. The Shows are still packed. Houdini was a MASTER at Showmanship and Advertising which strengthened his performance 100 times. All in all. I think that many factors played a role. Not just the fact of Getting out of something. To me, my personal opinion is that TV and Movies Killed all live art off in a Horrid Massacre. If Houdini Were alive today, I think he would find it a HELL of a lot harder to make the publicity that he did in those days. Regards Wolflock
Wolflock
Pro Magician & Escapologist Member of JMC (Johannesburg Magic Circle) South Africa |
Harry Murphy Inner circle Maryland 5444 Posts |
I also believe that many people went to see the “challenge” hand-cuff act to watch the man fail. They bought into the drama of the act. That he didn’t fail but made it look difficult to almost impossible in the process helped make the act it all the more thrilling. Sure some people thought he was using hidden keys, picks, tools, super-human powers. Part of the challenge was to be searched to “prove” he had nothing hidden. Houdini even went to great lengths “proving” the difficulty of a lock especially if the lock was not difficult at all.
Again it is difficult to frame what he was doing by today’s standards. You are trying to describe the act in today’s mind set and terms. That it doesn’t fit neatly should not be a surprise. To know the brilliance of a magician/performer of any given age you must understand the age. Otherwise it often just does not make any sense at all.
The artist formally known as Mumblepeas!
|
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » All tied up! » » Just curious (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |