I see. You hold a grudge against me because a year ago I posted that you are always hawking your books here. Well, okay then. I'll remember that context. Perhaps you can just consider that you've bested me now. You've been clever and witty, and showed what a terrible person I am, and how much better you are. And then you can put my post from a year ago in the past.

Perhaps.

I like the Magic Square effect, but IMHO I think it looks and works best when you get the spectator to select a number in the 35 to 45 range. When you get numbers higher than 45 the numbers on the square start to look a little incongruent, i.e. you have a large set of small numbers then you have a second set of larger numbers that seem out of place with the rest. I think this discrepancy kind of starts to raise eyebrows. Whenever I’ve done a MS I’ve used a forcing method to get the number I want selected.

Personally, I think that was a superb performance by Harry. I take Dana's point that the magic square is mathematical but... look at the IMPACT on the spectators! To them it did not SEEM like a mathematical puzzle, to my eyes the routine to the audience seemed wondrous and amazing. To THEM it was magical. I might be wrong, but I think so! Perhaps in the hands of a lesser performer a magic square may look like a self-working mathematical puzzle. But to my eyes Harry has demonstrated that this can earn a rightful place in anyone's magic or mentalism (or memory) act if it is something that appeals to THEM and that they FEEL they can make something of in their own personal way.
We all have our personal tastes and we are entitled to like or dislike them for own our personal preferences. For example, book tests and reading or predicting serial numbers off banks notes leave me cold. Doesn't mean other people don't do well with it or get a good reaction from an audiece. Ditto Dana, you're entitled not to like this but you may have rather over-stepped the mark in calling it cr*p (or something like it). I know you were not referring to Harry's personal presentation but that description was inappropriate I feel.
In my opinion the magic square, in the hands of a great performer, rapidly had the audience enthralled and you could see the wonder in their eyes and faces increasing by the second. I think it showed that the routine in itself is NOT intrinsically flawed or weak or non-magical or cr*p. It can be great in the hands of a great performer!

Well said, mrsmiles. Now, after all this silliness (really silliness), this should get a rise out of some - made me laugh as I type, as I "hawk" (another nice word). If at all interested - and I know that some are from the phone calls I've received (one asked why I was bothering - he also said, "Typical of you, Harry; you like to make some feel "bigger" by responding to them")- I taught a few magic squares in REPUTATION-MAKERS way back in 1971 - The Memory Magic Square and The Instant Magic Square. Updated in LORAYNE: THE CLASSIC COLLECTION, Vol. 2 in the REPUTAIION-MAKERS section (along with the re-write and updating of RIM SHOTS and AFTERTHOUGHTS. Heck of a bargain!)

And in my book MATHEMATICAL WIZARDRY there's a Magic Squares section in which I teach the one I use plus Magic Square Breakthrough plus The To-And-Fro-Magic Square (which also appeared in Genii Magazine years ago).

MATHEMATICAL WIZARDRY is still available and it is also one of the books included in LORAYNE: THE CLASSIC COLLECTION, Vol. 5 (along with DOUG EDWARDS PACKS A WALLOP and THE HIMBER WALLET BOOK) - another heck of a bargain. You can learn more about all the above at harryloraynemagic.com.

How's that for "hawking"?!?! Seriously of course, what's important, relative to some of the lovely remarks made in this thread, is encased in part of mrsmiles's post: "...in the hands of a great performer, (it) rapidly had the audience enthralled and you could see the wonder in their eyes and faces increasing by the second.") Enough already, right?

I know I said "enough already" but gotta' stress another part of his post - 'cause I like it!:

"...the routine to the audience seemed wondrous and amazing. To THEM it was magical.
Dana, you're entitled not to like this but you may have rather over-stepped the mark in calling it cr*p (or something like it)."

I admire both Dana's and Harry's contributions, and have enjoyed their commentary here on The Café.

I think what we have here is more of a discussion about what is a magic effect verses what is a trick. I know Dick Oslund will probably chime in here, as I know he is passionate about the words we use to describe what we do. But this is my opinion...

Harry has performed both magic and tricks, both with fantastic and well-deserved praise. Much of his work with cards for instance, approaches miracle status and is undeniably magic...defying principals of physics as we know them. Yet, his work with memory demonstrations are just that...demonstrations. They are amazing feats without a doubt, and can keep an audience in total awe. They've taken years to master, and of course require much natural intellect. And Harry's humor, presentation skills, and audience management our uniquely his, and therefor make his acts unforgettable in their own right.

But for me, the Magic Square is a trick. A feat. A demonstration. And Harry presents it as such. And incredibly well. He doesn't say that he has special powers beyond what is possible for any human to acquire. He simply talks about his mastery of this singular demonstration, and proceeds to slay the audience with said demonstration.

So yes Dana, you are right in my opinion. This routine is not magic. It may be magical to some, but to most when seen performed well...it can be amazing. Stupendous. Incredible. But it is a feat of mental agility and memory training. Even for those not aware of the intricacies and subtleties of the ruse, they will think it a demonstration of uncanny memory.

And that's perfectly fine. Our craft walks this line often, between what is amazing magic, and what are amazing feats. Both have held equal regard, and should consider to do so.

Offer them something beyond ordinary, and leave them with the extraordinary.

Is it "magic" or isn't it?!! Who cares. You're all missing the one important word, the one important concept...I don't care if you do magic, hypnotism, mentalism, sing, ventriloquism, dance, memory work, tell jokes, mathematics, or if you flap your arms and fly around the room - if done right/well, if the people in the audience laugh are amazed - are "entertained" --- that one word covers all, the word or concept you're overlooking: ENTERTAINMENT!!!!!!

When I was in my mid-teens, 16 or so, I did what was called a "Lightning Calculation" act. All number stuff (a lot of that "stuff" is taught in MATHEMATICAL WIZARDRY). And - my audiences were amazed, they laughed, they applauded, they stood up, then cheered, they were ENTERTAINED --- that's what I'm talking about.

I've Written this often enough, so forgive the redundancy - over the decades soooo many have stolen my memory act, just about word for word. I've caught a few of them in my audiences, making notes! Sure, they could do the memory stuff - anyone can - I teach it in several books! But - they put their audiences to sleep!! That's the point - I've, again, said it often enough --- magic/memory are my "media" - the "basic" is: I'M AN ENTERTAINER.

So absolutely true. This demonstrates the difference in magicians, performers, and entertainers - 3 different things. I know we are in the beginner's section, but this is a lesson that is never to early to start understanding.

Absolutely, Mindpro. The person who started this "diatribe" obviously didn't/doesn't understand it at all. Thinks she does, but has no concept.

Evidently Harry Anderson loved the magic square, but didn’t like the presentations hed seen. So he came up with a typical Harry Anderson solution of combining a bunch of madcap ideas together. If I remember the routine correctly he starts by bringing out a book tricks called “Practical Magic” and explains how he’s mastered the tricks and he’ll do a random or for the audience. He explains the first sixteen pages are basic sleights and asks audiended member to choose a number between 16 and (I believe) 256. He opens the book to the page and it’s a card counting trick. He has another volunteer come up, select a card, and put it back the deck. He shuffles and begins going through the deck...making jokes, mumbling numbers, and throwing cards around. Every once in awhile he brings out a sheet of paper and writes a number down...explains he’s needes some help determine the values of the 51 cards not chosen, to help him figure out the chosen card. At last there’s one one face down card left. Before he reveals it he unfolds the paper and shows it to be a 4 by 4 table with numbers filled in during the course of his counting. He notices something...that the numbers up and down and diagonal add up to the randomly selected page number called out by first audience member. An amazing coincidence as it leads up to...the final card..which is the card selected by the second volunteer.

The prop book “Practiclal Magic” was printed in limited quantity and almost impossible to find. But love the madcap intertwining routine...

Now you're psychic?

I was talking about the magic square.

You know, I haven't said one negative thing about you in this thread, though you are taking all sorts of potshots at me. It's really kind of bizarre. I just think of all the hundreds of good and important comments you could have made (or made none at all concerning me, which might have been your better bet), but for some reason out of all those great possibilities, this is the one that made it up through all your filters and you thought, "Oh, I absolutely MUST post this one!" This potshot was the best you could do. I have to confess that I'm tempted to respond in kind when I read your insults, but out of respect I don't, and I try to keep in mind that they say more about you than they do about me.

If this is the best thing you have to do with your day, have at it. It doesn't really bother me, it just seems a little...I dunno, a little sad, maybe.

P.S. I still think the magic square is a crappy trick, no matter how many times you try to insult me over it. Whatever your goal is, here, you're doing nothing to change my mind about it.

P.P.S. I just read back through this thread to see if I said anything mean to you, and I didn't. But it occurs to me that maybe you're bent out of shape because you think I said I didn't like your presentation of the magic square. If that's what has you going, you should re-read my post and reassure yourself that I did not say that, at all. If that's it, you have misunderstood, completely, I'm afraid. I hope that's it, because following me around and humping my leg for a post I made a year ago where I said you plug your books here (which you do, constantly) is beneath you. I had tremendous respect for you. That has been tarnished a bit over this. I hope it's just a misunderstanding of my initial post.

I was introducing one of my friends to Derren Brown's shows. We watched a couple of shorts--paying with paper and reading the mind of car salesman--and then Svengali, one of his stage shows. I'm fascinated with Derren's performances. He really seems to embody the idea that there's more to magic than performing tricks.

At the end of the show, he has three people come up and he has each of them freely arrange the blocks in stacks of four. Together, the stacks of blocks have meaningful order in multiple directions.

If it doesn't give away a secret, can anyone tell me if this is this an example of a magic square?

No it's not. I'd be aware of the whole Derren thing as well. Things may not be as they seem.

Thanks.

I'm just learning, and part of that means putting effects and methods in the right categories.

A magic square is a magic square ON PAPER or on a BLACKBOARD.

Dana,
Ignoring all the bunny trails this thread took, I agree with you...I have never cared for the Magic Square. Anyone who can get a successful performance out of it, more power to them. I can simply do other material.

I kinda' do "other material" too!

I'm now also thinking about the Magic Square. I know the importance of presentation, but to me it seems correct that it is easy to detect with numbers higher than 60, for the difference to the other numbers is too big. So forcing a number seems a good way to escape this dilemma. Or is there another solution with the other numbers higher than 15 - 20 too?

Garyogden1957 A performer chooses a trick or effect to be added to their repertoire that is suitable and appropriate to his or her personal tastes and talents. Then the spectators will reward his or her repetition, showmanship and performance accordingly. Harry Lorayne’s audience seemed to really enjoy and reward his efforts very well and to them it appeared quite magical indeed. I’ve seen some do it in a very un-magical way too… It's not necessarily the 'thing'..... Learn how to do a 'thing' so that it is entertaining and fun. Sell the sizzle not the steak! That's what Harry did.