Hi folks,


Can anyone recommend easy tricks that have misdirection built into them? I figure that learning such tricks would be a good way to start practicing the art of misdirection.


An example (which I haven't yet tried, so I don't know if it's easy enough for me; it *looks* not too hard): Martin Gardner's Passe Passe, as presented by Daryl in his DVD, "Sponge Balls." The magician counts to ten, doing something with his hands on each beat, and by "ten" one of the sponge balls has invisibly moved from one hand to the other. It's a charming trick. The secret move occurs on one of the beats at the same moment that one of the balls is exposed, drawing the spectators' eyes to that ball and away from the behind-the-scenes maneuvering.


I'm looking for specific tricks, with, if possible, a synopsis of the effect as seen by the audience, and a source for learning the trick.


The Café has lots of interesting threads about misdirection -- about whether "misdirection" is an adequate term; about books and DVD's; but again, here I'm looking for specific tricks to practice with.


I've looked through a number of threads and have seen a few recommendations (e. g., the Don Alan chop cup, recommended by Lawrence O, I think, or Bill Palmer).


To give you an idea where I am: I've mostly been working with cards, and can do a pretty good lift overhand shuffle and a few real cuts (and I'm working on some false ones). I can do a couple of simple controls (double undercut and Gilles Couture, the latter described in Garry Ouelett's Close Up Illusions). I'm working on the Hindu Shuffle control and top retention. I'm working on a DL or two, but it will be a long time before they're showable. Outside of cards, I'm practicing the paddle move. I've performed very little, even for my family. I'm working on Color Monte (actually not so easy for me, but excellent practice), Trost's 8-card brainwave, and Jacks Be Nimble (in one of Bob Longe's books; a simplified handling of an effect due to Harry Loyrane under a different name).


Thanks for whatever help people can offer!


Regards,


Bob

I have used the "ten count" with various objects for years as an example of "directed focus" as move, and "misdirection" for the combination of timing, movement and rhythm.

It will be difficult to find another example as powerful.

However, consider presentation is which an object is found in plain sight where it has been unnoticed for some time (e.g. Wonder's C&B)

One of my RemCut effects accomplishes this -- a ring removed from a necklace reappears on the cord after vanishing later. It has been hanging form your neck for many minutes unnoticed. (PM me if desired)

I am also fond of using sound to create misdirection, i.e. a false expectation of an event. In this vein, a rattle box uses misdirection, as does any method for faking the drop of a coin in a Miser Dream.

The ultimate (perhaps) is a "Vanish to Empty" in a spectator's hand. They "know" the object is in their hand, only to find to gone later. Their reaction sells the effect. This is difficult to achieve, though, requiring a combination of
psychological ploys, tactile conditioning and false Pattern of Performance.

For simplicity, the "Never was" vanish of a coin should be considered as misdirection.

One of my favorites is the color changing silk, seen in this video by Frederick Goode. It is almost 100% "guided focus" (what you call "misdirection").
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxwhPIVUskU#t=20 Source for Learning the trick from Fred himself is on The Magic Nook : http://magicnook.com/dollarstoreMagic/DS02-04.htm A second video is available from Fred in which he explains each movement, how and why.

Jim's references to silks started me thinking about Sympathetic Silks and the misdirection involved. At the beginning three silks of one color are shown to be separate and placed on one chair. There silks of another color are shown to be separate and placed on another. These are then knotted together. There is now implication that the knots are important to the magic that will occur - and anticipation created. This misdirects attention away from any physical incorrectness with the knot tying. Also, the false count of the first silks is masked by the directed focus with the second set of silks. That is, the tying enforces the idea that the others are separate as shown.

These silks are lifted to reveal that one knot is gone. All eye snow fly to the other pile in anticipation. This is not "directed" except perhaps by a glance, but more by the implication. This misdirection (shift of attention) masks the undoing of the second knot. Now the other set is lifted to reveal the transportation of the knot. The implication changes to inference as the performer approaches the pile with some patter possible suggesting the flight. This is now confirmed as fact by the showing. I am going to suggest that the deliberate shifting from implication to inference is a form of misdirection.

When the performer returns to the first pile all eyes are focused on hands and movements suspiciously to "catch him" in some sneaky maneuver. This false expectation is another form of misdirection as it deflects for the idea that the dirty work has already been done. When the three separate silks are shown everyone "knows" there is a another know of the other set. All eyes jump the that chair in anticipation/confirmation and it is not noticed that the performer carries the entire first set with him.

The slow lifting of the second set provides confirmation and the "endorphin reward" for the observer for guessing correctly. This provides misdirection of a sort the masks the imperfection of the second knot. The waving of this set of linked silks provides directed focus that enables me to steal a load form the back of the chair into the bundle of silks in hand. With the new silks added I produce a cascade of silks that serves as misdirection from close analysis of the knots or the sequence of events. The introduction of "magic begets greater magic" is misdirection away from the knots into the mystery of transportation and multiplication.

One one occasion I "extracted" a second, prepared set of knotted silks to hand to a spectator for use in another effect. This unstated demonstration that the "knots are real" is a form of misdirection to "close the door" on any attempt to rewind events.

This old gag is what I like to show to after school magic classes to illustrate attention direction:

Quarter is in the face up palm, the pencil comes down three times, last time ditched behind the ear;

After a few beats, show the pencil behind the ear, but ditch the quarter. Now close the fist that should have the quarter, bring the pencil down and show the quarter has really vanished this time.

I perform/teach that routine (Ear It Is) on volume 2 of my "Best Ever" 4-volume DVD set. Except I do it with a folded piece of paper instead of a quarter - because it allows for an opening gag.

Thanks, everybody! These replies are really helpful. Jim, thanks for putting me onto the color changing silk (I've bought the download you recommended), and funsway, I appreciate your taking the time to make so many suggestions and to analyze the psychology of focus direction in the Sympathetic Silks.


Landmark, I can tell your example is really cute, but there's something I'm missing. I assume the quarter and pencil are in the same hand? But I'm visualizing that hand going back to get the pencil while it throws the quarter over your shoulder, and that can't be right -- everyone would see or hear the coin bouncing and rolling around. Can you clarify?


Harry, I'll look into your DVD. I own a number of your books -- mostly beyond my level! But The Magic Book is perfect for me. I really enjoy your informal but careful writing, and your touching stories about your boyhood.


Bob

Bob G, I haven't seen the trick but I'd imagine the quarter is in one hand and the pencil the other, and you say, "I'm going to make this quarter disappear using the pencil as a magic wand. One... two... three." But on three you've ditched the pencil behind your ear. Everyone laughs and as you turn to show them the pencil is behind your ear, you ditch the quarter into your pocket on the opposite side of your body.

Ah, thanks hollywoo! That makes sense.

... and that's excellent misdirection practice.

Always have your EYES follow the hand(empty)you want the audience to think has the coin/item- The audience will LOOK where you look.

The move accredited to Han Ping Chien demonstrates another focus guiding principle- that of the "greater motion covers the lesser motion," as demonstrated in "Talismania II" in The Wizards' Journal #1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Ping_Chien

I love the Han Ping Chien move. I do a coins across routine that relies on that move for the climax of the trick, and I cackle over how obvious, yet how deviously deceptive it is. I still can't believe it fools anyone, but it fools everyone because of how the attention is directed so subtly and beautifully, even when the "greater" motion isn't much more than the "lesser" motion.

OK, here is one you have to perform to convince yourself it works.

With both hands empty, pick up a copper and a silver coin in your right fingers and display on the open palm.
Reach over withe the left fingers and remove the copper coin, leaving the silver on the open palm while displaying the copper on the left fingers.
With the hands far apart, close both hands into fists. Then open theme again.
There is both the copper and silver in the right hand and nothing in the left.

what actually happens:

While the coins are being picked up and displayed in the right hand, the left steals a matching copper from the belt. (directed focus)
The left fingers pretends to take the copper form the right palm, but displays the extra one in hand instead. The left finger tip slides the silver ever the copper on the right palm.
The left fingers and coin move away. (inference of the pick because the hand was known to be empty earlier - misdirection; and now directed focus --
but, the partially exposed copped still in the right hand is NOT SEEN. It is psychologically invisible (inattention of vision and predictive vision), plus the copper is KNOWN to be in the left hand.
There is also no movement of the right hand. You also capture the eye contact as you lift the coin and follow the left coin with your gaze.)

The right hand opens to reveal both coin side by side - surprise and astonishment. You push that hand forward for view (directed focus) as the left fingers ditches its coin between the shirt buttons.
Your eyes shift to the closed left hand and every one follows with expectation of the coin being gone. You confirm this implication with the opening.
Your not opening the hand simultaneously might create a slight suspicion that there is an extra coin. You show that this is not the case and misdirect suspicion away from the right hand.

Of course, this will not work on video as a replay might show the copper in the right hand all the time. The copper is used as it is closer to flesh color than the silver,
and the contrast is important to the perceptual blindness, The weak of heart might wihg to partially cover the exposed copper with the thumb, but no movement is best.
.....

now, when you are confident on the psychological blindness a s misdirection, you do not heed the second copper at all.
Simple say you are removing the copper and go through the motions. Your control of the eye tracking and smooth actions,
plus the fully exposes silver coin will do the job. Also note that the observer does not know what is about to occur and will not doubt your word.
What they later remember happened is what you said happened and verified by the final results.

...

for the extremely confident you can move to the next misdirection level of placing the non-existent left copper in a spectator's hand for safe-keeping. (Takes tactile conditioning also)

I am not suggesting that anyone do this as a regular effect -- just to have it in the back of your mind when you know the audience engagement is full on.

The point is that there are many levels of misdirection not even included on your favorite DVD. Best misdirection is that if the audience expects magic to happen, it will.

Just for fun, I just now grabbed a couple people and tried Funsway's example, without making any attempt to cover the copper coin in the right hand. Sure enough, no one saw it, even though it was sticking out there for everyone to see. Such is the power of psychological management. The combination of the expectation that the copper coin in the left hand was taken from the right, along with directing attention to the left hand rendered the plainly visible copper coin in the right hand functionally invisible. Sweet.

I'm exceedingly impressed. Not sure I have the chutzpah to even try this.

That is a factor I did no mention - thanks. If you have any doubts, don't do it.

In a sense, you will them not to see it. Recall that Al Schneider talks about the importance of "knowing" the coin is in your hand after a drop vanish.

If you only "believe" they won't see the coin this will not always work.

You must "know" they will not see the copper coin. Is that misdirection? Is it directed non-focus? They will say it is magic. Why argue?

I'm going to play with that, Funsway. Thank you.

Back to the OP, one of the tricks I don't do (probably won't ever even buy it) that uses directed attention to a marvelous degree and really isn't hard at all is Jim Pace's The Web.

Here's a video link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_o-F6mBSj8

Available from just about any magic dealer. It isn't at all technically complicated. But the way the attention is kept off of where the spider is hiding is marvelous. And Lance Burton is just fun to watch in this clip.

-Patrick

Thanks for the suggestion, Patrick. I watched the video and it was hilarious. Primed by your comments, I watched carefully and was able to guess the moment when Burton attached the spider -- very clever.


Like you, I have no plans to buy this trick -- too scary for my main audience (my family). Too scary for *me* if I were the spectator.


But it got me thinking -- I don't see why the trick couldn't be done with, say, a ladybug sticker instead of a spider. Of course one would have to design one's own cards, and I don't know how the magician changed the blank cards into spider-web cards. Most important, the effect would be considerably weakened. Hmmm... Anyway, this was a nice lesson in misdirection.


Bob

Oh! And Jim, thanks for the Talismani II suggestion. I've bought that one too. I find Prof. Spellbinder's ebooks delightful.


You must stop posting -- I'm going broke $5 at a time. (Please imagine a smiley face here.)