Yes, Brad -- usually you posts make some sense, understandably with a different perspective because of your experience than mine,
but here seem to play with multiple equivocations and some silliness that is beneath you.

but, we can play this game -- though to what end I do not know.

ten people in the room as an audience (the performer's perspective and not necessarily that of the people involved.)

three of these folks are on an Iphone and miss part of what you are doing. One of them is scanning YouTube to find out how it is done.

one guy is more interested in his girlfriend's chest than what you are doing.

One woman was drug her by a friend and is in desperate need of a bathroom.

of the remaining five seemingly attentive folks, one find no astonishment in anything -- making a puzzle of your efforts.

two go through a Whit type dilemma and come up with "must be magic" and a smile

the other two just go straight to "wow, magic" at the orbital cortex level and file it away with other warm-fuzzy experience

.........

I would suggest that each of the persons will have a different story to tell friends tomorrow about the experience.

further, if your buddy Guido bars the door and asks each what they thought of the "effect," they will give a response based on what they think you want to hear,
that may have little to do with what they actually feel or will relate later on.

and, yup, one might even consider that you were vanishing and producing coins.

Bah! I took what seems to be a very straight forward sentence in context. It seems to say that we can't be sure that what we perform for folks will be interpreted generally the same. It's like a magic version of Literary Desconstruction: Every viewing of a trick is a false viewing of a trick.

I wasn't attempting to be snarky at all. I've read a ton of Dicks stuff and thought it was great. So, if that sentence does NOT mean what I am interpreting it to mean, then all you folks that got it down, explain. I'm not assuming a goofy explanation like, "Oh, some folks blinked at the wrong time or they are suffering from psychotic delusions in which coins do appear to be rabbits."

Ken, your explanation above, is fine. Maybe even the interpretation of the sentence that Dick hoped would come through. I hope not, frankly, he's a very good writer and I would prefer that the sentence was sufficient in itself and that he wrote what he believes and the sentence says: Performing magicians cannot trust that what they perform will basically come across the same to the same audience.

Now, as I write this it does occur to me that "Yikes! I am waaaaaay over thinking this thing!" "Rats, maybe I am being a putz about this." I mean it's one sentence to disagree with among hundreds I have found mostly entertaining and enlightening.

To quote a favorite SNL character: Nevermind....

Now that's more like the Brad we have come to appreciate and admire

Hi Brad! (and, anyone else on this "party line"). (HA! I bet that only a few us old geezers even know what a "party line" is/was!!!)

In my post of January 28, above, I said, "To be sure! No one, even in the same audience will see the same EFFECT, when you present a TRICK!!! --They all will see according to their own intelligence, and imagination."

I should have added "experience", and another sentence or two, to that last phrase! In trying to be as brief as possible, I omitted to say that the average spectator, in describing what he "saw" (or, THINKS he "saw") is quite subjective. In a court room, three different witnesses will positively describe what they saw, and, each will be truthful, (here comes the "but") >>Their statements are SUBJECTIVE! (They each saw the incident from a different viewpoint.)

In the case of a magic TRICK, it's exceptionally difficult for a (non-magician) spectator to accurately describe (in hindsight)what he "saw"!

I've listened to laymen who saw Harry Blackstone Senior, in their youth, do his "DUCK INN". The "DUCK INN" was one of the boldest uses of MISDIRECTION. that I have ever seen! (I've seen more than a "few"! I had to watch Mr.B. do it 4 times, before I "really saw"! Nick Ruggiero. who was the "chief misdirector" in the last season or two of the Blackstone "show of 1001 wonders", and I, discussed that "miraculous" duck disappearance, many years later. We agreed that the goose and burro production in the "DRUM" trick, used misdirection, but the "DUCK INN" was the "greatest" use of that principle.

Laymen described the "DUCK INN", and, it could not possibly be done, as they described it! The EFFECT was a vanish of a bunch or ducks, but the laymens' "story" of what happened, varied, from person to person. Their "hindsight" was affected by their memory, imagination, intelligence, experience, ETC! Their viewpoint (orchestra seating, left, center, or middle, balcony, or even gallery made a difference also!

So, Brad, communicating, with cold type, can be confusing! --and, I'll accept the blame for not saying "it" better! I do hope that I've done a better job this time!

P.S. I THINK that my definition of "EFFECT" is clear, correct, and concise. Jim Gerrish disagrees, and quotes a different "authority", but, has not yet, given me the name of the "authority". I aint mad at Jim, but, I wish he would credit the "quotation".

P.P.S. I still can't find that darn Abbott card "book"!

P.P.P.S. I think that Ken's point that the OP, a young teen, used "EFFECT", when he really should have used" "PRESENTATION", is a good point.

"OVER & OUT"!

Dear Dick:

O.k., see now we agree 100%. I knew it! You aren't one of the guys that simply tosses stuff out there with no context, no attribution to any kind of experience, no thought to the idea that maybe you contradicted yourself four posts earlier, etc. LOL

I think that what I was concerned with was that your statement (under review...lol) seemed to say that we can't trust our experience sans possible problems with brain/mind deterioration, consumption of wrong kind of mushrooms, etc. I disagree with this....obviously. Which is not the same as saying that our memory recall of events is not in many cases perfect or even close thereto. I have many times had the experience of folks telling me what I did in the past magically. Holy Moly, am I GOOD! I am convinced that the mind in relating experience works very much the same as ten people playing "telephone". As you repeat it it becomes different with each iteration.

Thanks for the explication. This was fun. Regards,