I have purchased some DVDs recently on manipulation magic of cards. It seems no one does their homework or bothers to ask about routines and tricks before making statements that sound like fact.

Does history of the world begin when a person is born? Seems that this is the new way history is being recognized today. I purchased the DVD The Evolution of Card Manipulation by Lee Hang Hsuan. It is all text on screen, but it mentions that the vanish of four individual and reproduction is credited to Lance Burton and another performer. I was surprised that it was thought that this effect was created by a recent magician. Most all Lance Burton's material is taken out of books and other magicians that use to hold to the old way of training. It was passed down from magician to student, if they deemed you worthy, or you paid them enough money to obtain the information.

I would just like the say, the vanish of 4 card using the back palm is published in The Modern Conjurer by C. Lang Neil. This is not a recognized bible, but it should be as a lot of classic magic is explained in those pages. It use to be the only source for the Chapeaugraphy and Trouble Wit. There are other classics tricks in it going back to the wrist pull for the Silk Vanish from glass or as they use to say or use a Lamp. (A lamp in this instance was the glass cover on open flame gas lamps that gave light before electricity. The book was published in 1937, ten years before I was born.

This was the 1st book I borrowed from the local library, and I learned on page 97, Back Palming and Recovery Of Four Cards. He took the cards from an upright rod that had four clips attached, instead of taking them from a fan of cards as Lance Burton did in his act.

So in the new Millennium history and credit for creation just apply to 'who you know did the trick within your lifetime'. From now on will history only be what a current generation knows or sees for themselves. Is research for the actual facts is thrown out, just because it is printed in a book on paper, and not in a live performance or in a video?

I am sure that my discovery is or was not the original effect, as it had to exist prior to publication in 1937, as the information had to be available to print it. I am not so apt to say that is the origin of the effect, but only that is the 1st place I read and learned the routine. I can only give them credit for publishing it, not creating it.

Bill, I think you are right about this tendency. Younger magicians tend to furnish only the name of the magician they saw performing the trick as the source, rather than the earliest reference they can find. They are lazy.

BTW, just for your own reference, The Modern Conjurer is actually older than you think. There have been four basic editions that I know of, and there may be a fifth. They are as follows:
1902 - Lippincott The first British edition has Lang Neil's last name misspelt as "Niel" on the spine.
1911 - second edition
1922 - third edition
1937 - David Kemp & Company (New York)

So your edition is the first American edition. And you are right that the vanish and reproduction of four cards goes back long before 1937.

I don't have access to my full library right now, because I'm in the process of packing things so I can move house. This also might be in Sachs' Sleight of Hand.

IMO most of the "new" magicians ignore Our Magic history completely. It seems they are too lazy to do thorough research and don't care about the ethics of crediting originators. I find they either "forget" to mention creators or they claim to invent EVERYTHING on their own; which is ludicrous. I also find these "hot dogs" don't respect the "old farts" (um, US) that truly care about the rich tradition of our Art and giving correct acknowledgement of the great creative minds that came before.

I really don't believe age has anything to do with it. I have books, remember those. Hard bound written by some magicians that were very young at the time. Yes some of them are on the Café today at different times, but their books always noted/credited, the material that sparked their emotions to change a trick to something better or totally different. Some books even have foot notes. One book even went to extreme and only mentioned the source material at every move used. Thus none of the tricks can be learned unless a library is started to assemble all the material in the hard bound book. Much of the material was hard to find, even when for me, as most were not advertised in any magic magazine I subscribed to years ago.

Old has little to do with great publishers like L&L publishing and Richard Kaufmann, these are modern day publishers, and some very talented individual writers of books. I believe more books have been published in the last 50 years then in the history of magic. And most of them were published by young authors and publishers.

Maybe it was Paul Harris who started this, I don't know and am not pointing figures, but as I learned a number of his tricks, I found that most of his routines are the taking of long published tricks and changing them to one or 2 simple sleights but was able to retain the effect, and mad it for most readers to be able to do.

Michael Ammar may be in the same situation. Take for instance his Topit Book, I don't remember any mention of Louis Davenport for converting the poacher's bag to a magical secret weapon.

I don't know, but I believe it must stop, taking full credit for magic effects they would have never thought of in a thousand years. Just my opinion of this "New Magician" in our society.

I saw this a few times before I invented it.

Bill, Very good points.

Peter, LOL!