|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
@funsway -- How do you store coffee cups, drinking glasses, etc.?
The position of the cups does not make any difference at all, if YOU as the magician cause it to make sense. You don't have to explain it. Just DO it. There is NO improvement at all to having the cups mouth upward. "Unsure of ability" can refer to new personal routines that you really don't know how they will play. If you keep thinking "these cups look odd, these cups look odd," the spectators will pick up on it. If you keep thinking "cups should be mouth up, cups should be mouth up," they will pick up on that, too, just like they do if you start thinking of a double card as two cards instead of one. If you wonder why more people don't do mouth down cups and balls routines, then write a few of them. @HerbLarry -- Why would it be more difficult from a spectator's point of view for a ball to get into a mouth up cup than a mouth down cup?
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
HerbLarry Special user Poof! 731 Posts |
@Bill--We have an Internet misunderstanding. My point is a mouth up cup is a receptacle, easy to get a ball in. A mouth down is a fortress, hard to get a ball under.
You know why don't act naive.
|
|||||||||
jmhall New user The Midwest 12 Posts |
I'm a new user here, so I hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes. I agree with HerbLarry that it would seem much less magical (from the spectator's point of view) to have a ball appear in a cup that is mouth up. What is the main reason for doing the routine in that fashion? Based on the thread it would seem that the goal is to appear less deceptive to the spectator. Has anyone here ever had a spectator question the fact that the cups are mouth down?
|
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-02-08 18:25, HerbLarry wrote: Thanks for clarifying that. We both agree on that. Quote:
On 2011-02-08 18:25, jmhall wrote: I never have. Not in 35 years of active performing.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
I thought that HerbLarry indicated there might be no difference in magic effect either way from a spectator's point of view -- and I have never seen any evidence that Down is seen as more magical than Up. It is all in how the performer presents the need for the cup to be in that position -- or to assume it to be natural as Bill suggests. I personally believe it is best to start with a(some)cups Up and then change them to Down for a described or obvious reason.
I one effect with tea cups and rose buds I had the cup Up and the Bud kept jumping out. I covered it with a saucer "to train it to behave." The buds would transport to other cups and jump out unless covered, so I turned some Down because I had only one saucer. I kept pouring extra Buds onto the saucer. Pouring several Buds from an Up-Cup is pretty. Having to pick them up after lifting a Down-Cup is clumsy. Afterwards a spectator said, "I finally realize why magicians always have their cups upside down." Also, when you visibly drop a ball into an Up-Cup from a height it is known to be there. When you apparently place a ball under a cup (fortress) there may be doubt. When the Ball later vanishes, which is more magical? The process of turning an Up-Cup over can mask a Load -- so can the reverse. Thus, having some up and some down adds new sleights to your repretoire.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
HerbLarry Special user Poof! 731 Posts |
@Funsway-- Since one can apparently put a ball under a cup and show the hand completly empty afterward I would say there would be no difference in percieved magic per your example. The visible ball going in as proof and the empty hand as proof cancell each other.
I like your bud process giving reason for the up cups and the use of the saucer. That being said I am not "swayed" from the notion that it is easier to get something in a up cup, and that finding whatever Under a cup that has apparently just been sitting there is the headsmackingest ending possible. Yes I said headsmackingest.
You know why don't act naive.
|
|||||||||
Pete Biro 1933 - 2018 18558 Posts |
After reading all this... I am not going to change what I do.
STAY TOONED... @ www.pete-biro.com
|
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
Ken:
If you really knew your cups and balls routines, you would realize that there are routines in which the cups are mouth-up sometimes and mouth-down sometimes. Take a look at Reed McClintock's routine sometime.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
RevJohn Inner circle Oregon City Oregon, Oregon 2473 Posts |
Didn't see it mentioned so thought I would highlight John Bannon's Cups and Ball routine found in Impossiblia.
Can't remember the entire routine but I know he starts with the cups opening facing in the upward direction. I think he keeps them that way throughout, but could be mistaken. RevJohn |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
Here is an effect from the eBook "Cup of T" that uses cups only in the Mouth-Up position, and it is difficult to imagine why one would want the cups turned over. I have not performed it enough times to attest to the creation of Whit's Dilemma, but it is fun and may start your own creative juices flowing. No offense meant for those prefering Traditional Cups & Balls.
Two Tea Cups and a Bowl are on the table, plus a small teapot. Each Cup is picked up by the handle and shown to be empty, then replaced. A teabag is taken from the bowl and dropped into the Right Cup, followed by one in the Left Cup. The performer starts to pour tea into the Left Cup, looks perplexed and tips the Cup to show it is empty. He then dumps out the Right Cup to show two Bags. Again he visibly drops a Bag into each Cup only to discover that both have collected in the Left Cup. With a shrug these two Bags are replaced in the Left Cup. Now it is revealed that each Cup holds but one Bag. Experimenting, the performer places one Bag in the Right Cup and returns the second bag to the Bowl. They both are found in the Right Cup. Both are placed back in the Right Cup. Changing his mind the Bags are poured into the Left Cup. Now a third Bag is dropped into the Right Cup. No one is surprised to learn that all three are in the Left Cup. One is placed in each Cup and the last returned to the Bowl. The audience is encouraged to guess where the Bags are. Both Cups are tipped to show that all of the Bags are gone. Frustrated, the performer places a Saucer over the Right Cup and places the Left Cup on top with a Bag in it. The Cup is shown empty, the Saucer lifted and the Bag dumped out of the lower Cup. The Bag is replaced in the lower Cup, the Saucer placed on. A Bag is placed in the second Cup that is placed on top. Now, both Bags are found in the Lower Cup. In exasperation the performer places the two Cups together, shakes them, and dumps out a dozen Bags onto the table. NOTE: The teapot can be used throughout as desired to build frustration.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts |
Random thoughts...
The thing about cups is that they are readily available covers. It's the fact that a space can be covered and things can appear, change, or disappear within that space that heightens the magic. Having a cup mouth-up might be using the cup as it's meant to be used, but if a magician makes magic happen with the cup mouth down, the audience is probably not going to be wondering "Why isn't he using the cup like a cup?", they're probably going to be wondering "How did that get back under there?" If the cup is used as a cup, the magician has obvious access to the space within, which can have a potential detrimental affect on the effect. As such, if you're worried that having a cup upside-down looks unnatural, the answer isn't to figure out routines that have the cup mouth-up, the answer is to find some sort of cover that doesn't look unnatural with its opening downwards. One thing about turning a cup mouth downwards -- or basically, covering up any space -- is that it can lead the audience to suspect that something's going to happen under there before you might want them to. One nice way to deal with this is to do what Benson did with his Benson Bowl routine, as pointed out by Roberto Giobbi: make sure that you're not covering up an empty space. The idea that taking a cup that's mouth up and turning it mouth down offers the opportunity to execute extra sleights might be accurate, but it's not worth much (if anything at all) if the audience senses that opportunity as well. If they think that an action you've taken gives you a chance to execute an additional secret action, you've got a problem. Frankly, I'd almost want to use that as a feint, rather than to carry out legitimate deception.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
Remember, the cups and balls came from the shell game.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
Andrew Zuber Inner circle Los Angeles, CA 3014 Posts |
As far as I'm concerned, a large number of the "cups" we're using may be cup shaped, but they sure don't look a whole lot like anything I've seen on the shelves at Crate and Barrel. I understand that not everyone uses the same style and there are many different varieties, but a lot of the traditional magic cups (with the mouth beads) don't look a whole lot like cups you would find in a kitchen. That's why to me, turning them mouth down doesn't seem unnatural. I also feel that having them mouth down, if the audience is thinking that hard about it, could be a less traditional use for a normal item you see in the house every day.
Reminds me in some ways of David Regal's Red Streamlined Convertible. He makes the point that when he turns the close up mat so he can work the routine vertically, it creates attention; he's doing something that goes against the grain and that draws the spectators in. Turning cups upside down could essentially do the same thing. Again, I think the audience would have to be thinking pretty hard about it for that thought to come to their mind. Considering the fact that the cups and balls is a pretty well known magic trick, I don't think it comes across as strange for too many people. If it does, all the better. Makes it even more interesting.
"I'm sorry - if you were right, I would agree with you." -Robin Williams, Awakenings
|
|||||||||
Bill Wilson Special user 536 Posts |
I find this subject of cups up or down very strange, not to mention pointless. Lay people in general do not care, but as Andrew Zuber mentions 'the cups and balls is a pretty well known magic trick' and it is. I recall seeing sketches of the cups and balls used in news papers, usually in political satire type cartoons. The cups were always shown mouth down. I'm sure people store this imagine in the back of their minds and when they actually see a presentation of the cups it all seems quit normal.
|
|||||||||
manal Inner circle York ,PA. 1412 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-02-04 22:00, lint wrote: Horace Bennet. |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
Both Bill's and Wandboy's suggest that a distiction should be made between tradional C&B and effects in which a container and small object is used. Does the original question imply, "When doing a traditional C&B routine, when is Mouth-Up useful? -- or "when doing a routine with a container and a small object does the position of the container's opening make a difference?"
Is the routine I offered above from "Cup of T" to be considered a C&B routine or something else? The Tarbell effect "Patriotic Chips" might be perceived by a spectator to be a C&B effect but to use the word "mouth" for a basket or bowl seems strange. A Chop Cup effect might be consider a C&B with one cup, but does a Benson Bowl really qualify. Many of you may say, "who cares?" Yet, we know that when the audience sees three brass cups on the table they have certain expectations. When they see two flower pots they might have others. I will readily that "mouth down" in the first case is "normal," but in the second case is not. For this I would prefer to have flowers sticking out -- dump them and then proceed with the effect -- the dumping out providing a rational for having a pot "mouth down." Terminology thus becomes a problem. It can be argued that any new effect or routine offered for Traditional C&B should use "time honored" terms for sleights and moves -- especially if this effect is "derivitive" in nature. If, however, a new effect is created using other types of containers and small objects, and is not derived from traditional C&B, then using the same terms might lead to confusion. For example, instead of using a "Cup" for a transportation effect of balls you use a napkin ring -- open on both ends but deep enough to conceal a ball(s). There is no "mouth" -- or there are "two mouths" depending on perception. What should these be called? Such an effect would meet the request of this Thread by not being a "Closed" container, but might not be considerd a C&B effect by others. The Ring could be placed over a Ball, or a Ball could be dropping into the Ring -- each perhaps leading to a different result. Likewise, switching the opening that is "down" could produce a different result. Thus, presentation approaches and required sleights are possible not available in Traditional C&B, and not necessarily derived from C&B. Should any new sleights be given new names or offered as modifications of old ones, even if that is not true? In a concern over exactness of effect description, what is the best approach?
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
Jaz Inner circle NJ, U.S. 6111 Posts |
||||||||||
kentfgunn Inner circle Merritt Island FL 1639 Posts |
Funsway,
Your publications reach a small audience. Referring to them, even if you make them available for free, as if they were in widespread distribution is a little unsettling. I too have a routine I do, peculiar to me. Neither of us is reaching a wide audience. We need to keep our odd little corner of the cups and balls universe in the rarefied dimension in which it belongs. Columbini, Vernon, Wonder, Ammar, Benetar, Read, Jay, Alan . . . these are gentlemen with routines, most here are familiar with. If we tout our own obscure references we do a disservice to those herein. I have some ideas I think work for me. I know, deep in the recesses of my soul, where reality hides out, my stuff ain't that darned important to anyone but me! Someone already listed the only routine that used mouth up cups I'd ever read through: Bannon's routine. It's from a well-known and respected magician. He may not be known specifically as a cups and balls maven, but his books are on most "Ever so Sleightly" guy's shelves. With Bannon's routine we can discuss the advantages of his thinking, because his stuff: 1. Is well thought-out 2. Has a well-earned reputation as a great thinker in magic. Looking again deep into the soul, I can easily say, "I ain't in Bannon's league, never will be." I'm glad you're developing your own stuff. I'm certain, in your own way, you are furthering the art. I wager if your routines are of great value, submitting them to Genii or Magic magazine for review may send your peculiar slant on Cups and Balls to a wider audience. Who knows, next year, with some marketing, perhaps we'll add Funsway's take on my favorite trick to the vernacular. At least find someone to perform your routines. Show us some video of your ideas. If they truly have great merit, all here will see it. If all we have are a collage of ideas, never performed for an adoring public we are simply fantasizing about what we could do. (This is aimed at myself more than anyone else!) KG |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
@Funsway: You don't actually understand anything I have posted. You really need to read it very carefully, because I'm not saying what you think I'm saying.
Nowhere in anything that I have written do I say that there is anything WRONG with a mouth up cup routine. What I have said, and I will repeat it, is that people who obsess over the position of the cups are missing the point of the cups and balls. When a performer obsesses over ANY trick or any particular facet of the trick, it inevitably calls attention to the very thing the performer obsesses about. @Andrew: You are right, up to a certain point. When I travel, I generally spend a day or two in each new city looking in their museums to see what kind of localized cup shapes are traditional to a given area. My trip to Budapest last May-June was particularly fruitful, because I found a set of cups in the National Museum that looked very much like a set of Porper cups. They had a mouth bead, an area similar to a shoulder bead, but not as pronounced, a short skirt, and were leather covered. In Vienna, I have seen cups in museums that were very similar in general shape to cups that were similar to Sherwood cups -- the bottoms were a bit different. They were generally used as punch cups. The cups used in Hocus Pocus Junior are the most simple of all. they have a rolled mouth bead, but that is really not an unusual feature of cups of that time.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
Andrew Zuber Inner circle Los Angeles, CA 3014 Posts |
Interesting thoughts, Bill. I'm headed over to the continent in the next couple of weeks and will pop into a few museums scattered throughout, so I will certainly keep an eye out for things of that nature and see what I can find!
"I'm sorry - if you were right, I would agree with you." -Robin Williams, Awakenings
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Ever so sleightly » » Mouth Up Routines? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.07 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 < |