As a rule, I pretty much avoid all tricks that involve a key card. This is mostly because most beginner books focus heavily on that and as a result, any use of the mechanic will be quickly unmasked by a once-aspiring magician (though they have not been aspiring since they were 10 years old). I have just stumbled upon "Emotional Connection" in Vernon's Inner Secrets of Card Magic. It uses a key card but shifts the focus many times as to completely mislead anyone looking for its use. I plan to add this to my borrowed deck repertoire immediately.

Thoughts on this effect and anything that has been done to beef it up since Vernon's time?

Don't know "Emotional Connection", but Geoff Williams' "Devastation" is another great trick cleverly using a key.

Sorry, it is Emotional Reaction, not connection (I got it right in the title for some reason). Anyway, it basically involves two spectators, using their own packets, and a glimse at the key card that occurs a long time from the use of the key. The manner in which it is set up just struck me as a winner. I'm working my way through the rest of the book, so I'll update if I find anything else good!

I see that that can be gotten from his site (http://www.magician.org/member/geoffwilliams/order). Is that the best way or is there a more conventional way to learn the trick? I'm not gonna go out and do it now, but it's good to know how to access it.

Thanks for the suggestion, btw.

I really like the idea behind "Four of a Kind" in Inner Secrets, but for the life of me I can't figure out what "move" he's talking about doing in the overhand shuffle. The description just doesn't make any sense....it's clearly not a slight, but I can't figure it out...

Emotional Reaction is perfectly fine the way it is. Try it, you won't regret it.

Yes, that is the only legitimate way to get "Devastation" that I know of. It's a winner, along with other things in Geoff's notes including the "I Hate David Copperfield" trick. I believe "Devastation" can be seen on Youtube.

I just wanted to say I've made up a presentation for this trick where the whole time I say "and so Dai Vernon would say 'such and such'" instead of actually giving instructions. Basically I just describe the trick the whole time while going through the motions and then when I show that I found their card I don't even acknowledge that I performed a trick...i just say that when he did it everyone was really amazed and shake my head whistfully. Most people figure out the humor quickly and I seems to go over WAY better than just doing the trick outright.

If using patter where you describe what someone else did or how you were fooled then that's fine.
In a way it takes the heat off you as well.

I've been running with the "This is how 'The Professor' did it" spiel for a few days now (and several performances) and I've noticed a few things.

First off, I like saying "You've heard of Houdini, right? That's fine, but do you know who 'fooled Houdini?'" Because it connects this unknown figure in magic history with somebody they've heard about all their life but probably don't know too much about. Does anybody know any really interesting stuff about Dai Vernon that I can use in the opener? Assume I've read his bio on Wikipedia.

Next, at the end of the trick, I hold up the card and say "Then he would hold up one card from the pack and say 'Madam, please name your card.'" They say their card and I turn it over and then not even acknowledge that I did anything and just say what an amazing trick it was (that Vernon used to do).

I have gotten mixed responses from this last part...some people totally get the humor and some people don't seem as impressed. I have considered holding up the wrong card (after building up the anticipation) and then revealing it a different way, but I'm not sure how to do this. I have the ability to control the selection to the top after I pull out the supposed selection....would it be good to hand them the deck and have them turn it over?

I'd love any and all ideas!

I'm truly glad you've added "Emotional Reaction" to your arsenal. It is a beautiful, wisely constructed effect.

But before you start worrying too much about improving Vernon's presentation, I would suggest rehearsing it as already described in it's original form. Learn THAT presentation and study the reactions you get until you understand WHY you're getting them. There is great drama, theatre and conflict in the existing script already. Once you have experienced those elements for yourself then, and only then, seek to adjust it to fit your on-stage character. Sure, it's a lot more work, but it WILL pay off.

Also, I strongly disagree with your assumptions about the use of key-cards. I rely heavily on key-card principles (in several variations) in my professional work.

Want to have some fun? Go to http://www.stevebeam.com and purchase his "Multiple Impact" manuscript. It is a completely self-working, amazingly clean, very entertaining multiple-selection routine. Learn it and rehearse it well. Then try it out on the guys at your next club meeting and enjoy the standing ovation. I know several pro's who close their shows with it.

At the very least, Steve's routine will clear up your misconceptions about the value of clever key-card work.

Good luck and break a leg. I wish you all the best in your endeavor.

Best,
Mick Ayres

At one of Jeff McBride's Mystery School gatherings, Brad Henderson performed Emotional Reaction for a group of magicians one night -- and fooled most of the people in the room! Properly presented and in the right situation, Emotional Reaction has the potential to be a knock out.

This effect is a perfect example of how to make a secret action invisible by embedding it in a natural procedure. I'd also advise that before you try to make improvements to the effect, you should perform it exactly as described in the book for a few hundred audiences.

Then, as Vernon would advise, USE YOUR HEAD and BE NATURAL. Think -- how can you use necessary, innocent, natural actions to cover other secret actions?

Thanks to both recent posters...I will keep these things in mind and maybe get Multiple Impact while I'm at it.

My particular patter has been getting a bit tough to sell recently so it's in need of a revamp. My only problem is that for skeptical 20 year olds, it's hard to sell some of the lines by Vernon.

Loyaleagle,

That's certainly understandable. By suggesting that you follow the existing presentation doesn't mean you have to repeat Vernon's script word-for-word. Feel free to adjust it to fit your performance character...modernize it if you need to. Rewrite the script to fit your own persona--just don't lose sight of the original premise yet.

You'll do fine, bro.

Best,
Mick

Loyaleagle, please don't make a lousy story trick of it. This trick (and its subtext) is about emotion, communication and your ability to detect the real emotions of your (female) spectator, no matter how hard she tries to hide them from you. Consider the implications and the possibilities to dramatize the routine. There's also natural potential for situational humor.
Emotional Reaction is a performance piece and one of the Professor's best creations. A story presentation only ruins the trick. Try to understand it before you mess with it.

Well first off I don't think the trick I made it into was lousy, but that's another matter. My main problem with the original scripting is that it requires a pretty strong suspension of disbelief from the spectator. Maybe when the Professor was working people would give him more of a chance, but in my cynical college crowd, emphasizing "your ability to detect the real emotions of your (female) spectator" just isn't going to fly. Now one might say, "then don't do the trick at all," but the mechanic is so clever I want to find a way to use it.

Does anybody have maybe a video or something of somewhat presenting this trick? I feel like it is hard to understand the presentation from just the text alone (as it is a very presentation-heavy trick).

I didn't want to sound harsh. You know, I'm doing this trick for 20 years now. I had absolutely no problem to understand the thing and english is only my second language. Come on, this is not rocket science.
And please don't confuse the implications (they can't hide a personal secret from you) with the actual presentation. If you really have difficulties to understand, what this trick is really about, a video won't help you. Read more good magic books instead. Books about psychology and the human nature won't hurt either.

The presentation I use, which is based on really reading the reactions of people, has never been suspected as a false premise. In fact, people come to that conclusion themselves. These audiences are often the cynical college types.

B

Can you give us an example of how you set up the trick (presentation wise)? I'd like to know.

I will share that the process of revelation is more important to me than the set up of the presentation. I do very little set up, instead allowing to moment to become the effect's frame. The false solution of using the person's reaction is something the audience seemingly tumbles to on their own volition, so there are no claims for them to doubt. Again, I think it is my process of revealing the card that is more important than any set up.

Vague, I know. But I hope it gives you a new direction to consider.

Brad

I see, so you kind of imply what Vernon says directly in his patter. That seems like a fairly interesting take on it.