The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Blatant exposure by Paul Nathan - Tradeshow magician » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next]
Harry Lorayne
View Profile
1926 - 2023
New York City
8558 Posts

Profile of Harry Lorayne
Scott: I wasn't pleased or thrilled with the exposure. It was unnecessary; Penn is good enough to do without it. But - I wrote a complete editorial about Penn & Teller's exposures many years ago, in APOCALYPSE, basically saying that it didn't much bother me. Anyway... HL

If the gag works for you, Rick, that's fine. I've written about this a few times, so forgive the redundancy - when I was doing card-magic gigs over half a century ago, part of my "deal" was always that they have two decks of their own cards at the venue. Those are the cards I'd use. I've also written, many times, that any time a magician uses his own deck he loses a large percentage of the effect (as against doing it with a borrowed deck). I believe that's true no matter what the laymen say. But, that's just my take on the subject. Best - HARRY L.
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]

http://www.harrylorayne.com
http://www.harryloraynemagic.com
stoneunhinged
View Profile
Inner circle
3068 Posts

Profile of stoneunhinged
Quote:
On 2008-05-10 12:31, Harry Lorayne wrote:
I'm against exposure, of course. But some of that can be used to make us better. I'll talk about that later. Here are three stories, which I've written about before so it may be a bit redundant to some. Anyhway, they seem to fit in this thread, so for what they're worth...

1. I was doing an impromptu (I do no other kind) ace assembly. I saw a woman in front get a gleam in her eye as she stared at the leader-ace packet. She had, obviously, some knowledge of the gaffs used in MacDonald's Aces. She whispered to her partner every once in a while, eyes still on that packet. I purposely ended the effect by turning over the 4-ace packet as you would when doing MacDonald's Aces. She, as expected, grabbed the aces as the eye-gleam got brighter. She was going to show the group how smart/knowledgeable she was. She started to exclaim as she spread the aces - "See, there's a differe..." Stop, mouth agape, she was looking at regular cards. Her embarrassment - as I stared at her expectantly - was very obvious. "But, but..." She didn't know what to say, so she shut up. But she looked at me with an awed expression on her face. I came across much stronger than ordinarily. No big thing - just wanted to mention it.

2. I was mc'ing a show at The Players (Club) in NYC. I introduced everyone in the audience to the acts they were about to see - by calling off everyone's name, and I did other memory pieces between the acts. Anyway, Penn & Teller were on the show. During one routine, Penn exposed a number of card things - a force, a break, and more. Part of my "deal" was to do some card stuff at the bar downstairs after the formal show. Everyone, including Penn & Teller came down to watch. I used every one of the things Penn had exposed. For example, I had a break over a selected card (and I "do" large breaks) and I pointed it out, as I said, "Now, Penn told you about magicians doing this - so I can't and I won't; I'll really shuffle the cards." Which, so far as they were concerned, I did. I was, obviously, "using" the break. Also, I said, "Penn told you about being able to force you to take a particular card - don't let me do that." And I forced the card!

I fooled everyone in that large, enthusiastic, crowd, including Penn & Teller! Alfred Drake (actor/singer of Broadway fame) was president of the club at the time. He sat right in front as I worked. I have a letter from him saying, "You were incredible. I'm still gasping for breath." The point? Obvious. I did/used everything Penn had exposed (including a palm)and fooled all.

3. Dr. Stanley Jaks was a good friend. Aside from his close-up work, he was a quite busy platform/stage performer. He did mentalism and about 85% (if not more) of his work was based around the nail ******. This is many years ago. There was a large exposure of the nail ****** in one of the current (at the time) popular magazines - about three or four pages of exposure, pictures, etc.
Stanley called me - in tears. He said that he was going to kill himself! I'm not making this up, nor am I exaggerating - he was, literally, crying and talking of suicide. He felt that his life was over - how could he possibly do his act now that everyone knew about the nail ******? I said, "Stanley, I understand. But do me a favor. Before you kill yourself, do your act at least one more time. Okay?
what have you got to lose? You're going to kill yourself anyway." I made him promise. He had a scheduled appearance the following week. He did it. He called me the next day, happy as a lark. He said, "Harry, I got a standing ovation; nobody said anything about the nail ******." He decided that he wouldn't kill himself! He continued to do the same act.

As I said, for what they're worth. And, it was because so many people knew about the setup for Out Of This World (way back all those years ago) that I devised Out Of This Universe, just to fool those "in the know."

Many knew about double lifts. So, if you check out REPUTATION-MAKERS, you'll see that I felt it necessary to devise a few ways of starting a double lift or double turnover with a SINGLE CARD. (Double-Lift Breakthrough and Evolution of a Sleight.) And, that also led to the my Ultra Move, which I gave away years later in AFTERTHOUGHTS. The original basic thought behind it and the others being that you could let the spectator handle the SINGLE CARD before it changed. Of course, I devised many more sophisticated effects utilizing it, but that was the basic reason for its evolution - fooling those who "thought they knew," who had been "exposed" to the concepts.

So, I'm against it of course, but any exposure can perhaps force you to think of ways of getting around that exposure. To repeat - for what it's worth. HARRY LORAYNE.


WHOA!

This post is a keeper, for MANY reasons.

Thanks Harry.
magician8
View Profile
Veteran user
383 Posts

Profile of magician8
Harry,
just a quick question, If you were actually doing Macdonald's aces, how would you have felt? I'm sure you would've worked it out but what about the situation? for a moment you would've lost control and mabe the lady could have grabbed the cards before you could react.
stupid question,



8
spatlind
View Profile
Special user
still moving
863 Posts

Profile of spatlind
Cheers Harry. I can't imagine I'd have been best pleased myself! I think Rick said there was another magician working down the hall who got called out on something that had been exposed a few minutes earlier.
Scott
Actions lie louder than words - Carolyn Wells

I believe in God, only I spell it Nature - Frank Lloyd Wright.
rick727
View Profile
Regular user
Houston, TX, USA
191 Posts

Profile of rick727
Unfortunately spectators usually don't arrive at my gigs with a deck of cards. If they did then I would use them regardless of the condition. If the condition were horrible, then I have a few tricks that do not require sleights. If the condition is good, then I too have been known to use them in performance. I was recently working a "Valentine's in Vegas" function at a local church. I did walk around magic before dinner and before the "fun gambling" started. An elder lady accused me of having a "trick" deck (of course, I did not), so I gave her my deck and picked up a fresh deck from one of the tables and did my set. I have a friend who is a member of that church and that lady still talks about me doing magic with a borrowed deck. I often ask the audience if anyone has a deck of cards, but they rarely do Smile



Quote:
On 2008-05-10 18:25, spatlind wrote:
Cheers Harry. I can't imagine I'd have been best pleased myself! I think Rick said there was another magician working down the hall who got called out on something that had been exposed a few minutes earlier.
Scott

Scott, yes another magician did get exposed. The other magician, Scott Wells, is a competent professional. I doubt he flashed the pinky break, but you never know. Of course, Scott could not be certain that the exposure in question led to him getting called out, but he suspected it might have something to do with it.

The general point is that this exposure is bad. Harry agreed, but said in the long run it did not really matter. I can't argue with that. That seems to be the prevailing opinion of many on this board. I am just glad that most people don't do surreptitious exposure. In fact, I signed a statement when I joined SAM that I would not do it. Maybe I was little naive when I started this thread.
-Rick
Practice what you present.

Present what you practice.
sparks
View Profile
New user
Charlottesville, Virginia
89 Posts

Profile of sparks
Harry, educational (and entertaining) insights for sure... thank you for sharing. Maybe it's says something about my personality, but I would have loved to have seen that lady's face after she spread the aces.

Tom
Sparks

It's kind of fun to do the impossible - Walt Disney
MagicKim
View Profile
Special user
Ã…land, Finland
621 Posts

Profile of MagicKim
I am totally against any kind of exposure. I feel, as some of you already stated, you can do a fake explanation and make it fun. It does not matter how big or small impact the explanation has, it still has some sort of impact and I don't like that. When I do a show, I want everybody to have a great time and be fooled, as that is a big part of the fun. If one of them knows but doesn't say anything, that still bothers me. I have read the entire thread and eventhough a lot of you have valid points, I will never agree with exposure of any kind.

Kim
Harry Lorayne
View Profile
1926 - 2023
New York City
8558 Posts

Profile of Harry Lorayne
Please don't misunderstand, folks. I've stated some of my feelings/observations, and so on. But I am deadset against exposure. Had I been working that trade show where Nathan was doing his exposing, I'd probably have been ready to kill! I've been fortunate, exposure never affected me, but I sure am aware as to how wrong it is and how harmful it can be. HL
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]

http://www.harrylorayne.com
http://www.harryloraynemagic.com
TomasB
View Profile
Inner circle
Sweden
1151 Posts

Profile of TomasB
Quote:
...I purposely ended the effect by turning over the 4-ace packet as you would when doing MacDonald's Aces. She, as expected, grabbed the aces as the eye-gleam got brighter. She was going to show the group how smart/knowledgeable she was. She started to exclaim as she spread the aces - "See, there's a differe..." Stop, mouth agape, she was looking at regular cards. Her embarrassment - as I stared at her expectantly - was very obvious.
I don't quite follow this. How would you turn the leader packet over in a MacDonald's routine specifically? In MacDonald's Aces the Leader Packet is clean as it has four ordinary Aces in it. What did she expect to find if she had any knowledge about the routine and gaffs? Wouldn't she dive for any of the other packets?

/Tomas
Harry Lorayne
View Profile
1926 - 2023
New York City
8558 Posts

Profile of Harry Lorayne
She dove for both, TomasB, I didn't realize that I had to take the space to get into specifics. I will, for you, in the future. Best - HL
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]

http://www.harrylorayne.com
http://www.harryloraynemagic.com
Tim Jahn
View Profile
Special user
South Florida
911 Posts

Profile of Tim Jahn
Thanks for a great post Harry.

Tim
Andrew, (ASW)
The effects on the DVD and lecture notes are far beyond your abilities. (They require mastery of the mechanic's grip.) It would only break your heart.
Sincerely,
Darwin Ortiz.......(This post has got to be in my top 5.)
loyaleagle
View Profile
Special user
Montgomery Village, Maryland
567 Posts

Profile of loyaleagle
I have to say that Mr. Nathan's exposure "trick," which I agree with most here is a very poor presentation style and unethical, is especially upsetting to me. I am a beginner in cards. I have learned about most of the tricks that regular card workers do, but I am just now getting comfortable with the techniques. I have a little work-out list that I try and practice every day.

When Rick posted the list that Nathan was exposing...well he basically just wrote down that little list of mine. I don't even know how to feel about it. The very things I'm working very hard to master are in one sense being taken away by another magician much more accomplished than I.

Of course, I will keep on working on those techniques because the magic really isn't in the slights themselves, but the performance. Also, I know it is certainly healthy to have an audience that at least thinks they know something about card magic. But Nathan's exposure goes overboard and while it might not hurt your normal knuckle-buster, it's hard for guys like me to change leads in mid stride like Harry described above.

Oh and one more thing. I'm pretty sure that all of the stuff that Paul Nathan exposed could probably be found exposed on Youtube. So which is worse? In my opinion, Nathan has done a worse thing because he is a "real" worker who should have a certain respect for all the years he's put into it. Youtubers shouldn't be exposing tricks, but to be honest, I've found some of the tutorials helpful and I feel like most of the people who watch those videos are interested in learning the basics like me.

Thoughts?
Visit my blog: ScienceIsMagic.com
Phil Pearce
View Profile
Loyal user
Dallas, GA
260 Posts

Profile of Phil Pearce
I think the most disturbing thing here is that Mr. Nathan, in spite of clear and irrefutable evidence to the contrary, repeatedly denies that he is exposing. His hubristic "you just don't get it" attitude coupled with his refusal to admit to what he admits to is troubling. I think he actually believes that although he admits to exposing, he is not actually exposing. Can't argue with that!
Phil
erlandish
View Profile
Inner circle
Vancouver, Canada
1254 Posts

Profile of erlandish
Nice stories, Harry. Thanks for taking the time to write them up here.
The Jester Extraordinaire : bderland.com
Ye Olde Magick Blogge : erlandish.blogspot.com
Tina I
View Profile
Regular user
Oslo/ Norway
194 Posts

Profile of Tina I
First: An apology for my outbreak earlier in this thread. I was way out of line. I lost my temper for some reason, I usually does not do that. I'm sorry.

Second: As for the topic of this thread I think Mr Lorayne said it all in the most beautiful way.

Third, in my own words: Exposure is not good. I'm not for it of course. But when it has happened it has happened and we all have to live with that. And one of the things we should take note of, which also is nicely pointed out in the aforementioned post, is that the actual impact on lay people is practically unnoticeable.

To laypeople magic is about secrets. They think that they can spot a 'trick' if they know a secret move or two. However, the truth is that they get so hung up on looking for 'the secret' that they go practically blind. It doesn't matter if someone know about the double lift if it's not possible to spot your double lift. And of course: you should learn a few different ways to do a DL and vary them through out. A spec that know about getting a break under the cards would be hopelessly lost if you do a pushover DL.
spatlind
View Profile
Special user
still moving
863 Posts

Profile of spatlind
You are dead right Tina. And for all the posts we have read over the years from the people who have stated that exposure has been something that they can just run with and often turn to their advantage, there are as many of us amateurs who wish that they would never have had to come up against such adversity. However, we should all have answers to these questions!!!
Scott
Actions lie louder than words - Carolyn Wells

I believe in God, only I spell it Nature - Frank Lloyd Wright.
Jordini
View Profile
Inner circle
2764 Posts

Profile of Jordini
On behalf of Paul Nathan (because 98% of people who posted here have no idea who he is), you can say anything you want about him, you can love him or hate him. The man is one heck of a performer. I've seen him many times and he is extremely good at what he does. Except for that one time he hit me in the face with a whip, but that's a completely different issue.
Magicmike1949
View Profile
Special user
643 Posts

Profile of Magicmike1949
I don't have to know Mr. Nathan to have an opinion about what he is doing. I don't love or hate him. But I wonder how he would feel if the next time he was performing his set, I was in the audience and when he finished performing his McDonald's aces routine I told the rest of the audience how he did it. I doubt he'd appreciate my exposure. It's simple:"Do unto others......."
kammagic
View Profile
Inner circle
1304 Posts

Profile of kammagic
The only effect I can think of that has lost its impact because of over exposure is the pulling your finger off trick that everyones grampa does. Untill EVERYONES grampa does Mcdonalds Aces I think we are safe.
Alewishus
View Profile
Inner circle
parts unknown
1230 Posts

Profile of Alewishus
I just realized something...

I love Mr. Nathan. There, I've said it.

Say what you will, but I love Mr. Nathan.

That wasn't so bad.

A.
Sack subs, ok Ross?
We miss you asper.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Blatant exposure by Paul Nathan - Tradeshow magician » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2026 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.06 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL