I performed the sucker torn and restored paper effect from Mark Wilson's CCIM last night. I don't think that it went over very well. For anyone who knows this effect, as it is written up in Mark Wilson's book, I'm wondering if I'm missing something, because I got, what I feel, was a poor reception to the trick. I think that the audience went along with everything up until I showed that the torn pieces had been restored. My wife was in the audience, and I asked her what she thought about this particular trick after the show. She saw right though it, and knew how the effect was accomplished. Someone else in the audience asked, "where did the torn pieces go?"; to which another person replied, "probably in his pocket where the coin came from".

I know that, since you didn't see me actually perform the effect, it's hard to know if I did something wrong, but it seems to me that this was an easy trick for people to figure out by retracing what happened in their minds. That trip to the pocket just kills the effect I think. I know that there are a few moments in the trick where you have some clean displays, but it didn't seem to help because my audience wasn't going to accept that I had actually restored the paper, and it appears that it's easy for them to conceive how you could hide a piece of paper. Even though I had a 'reason' for going to the pocket for the coin it seems that it was too obvious what happened.

I was quite disappointed because this trick is usually quite highly praised by others in the Café. In all honesty, I don't think that I could have done anything else differently technically.

Did I choose the wrong venue for this effect? I chose this as an opener to a short parlour show. I thought that it would be a humorous way to start things off, but something that also had a bit of magic. Is this meant to be more of an impromptu effect that you set up in a Café or restaurant? Did I choose the wrong age group? I was performing to people who ranged in age from about 30 to 70.

I tend to beat myself up a bit when a routine flops. I'm currently wondering how it would be possible to make this work as it is written in CCIM.

Thank you very much for any thoughts that you might have!

The best method for the Torn and Restored Paper Napkin effect , in my opinion, is the one Spellbinder and I learned from Ted Collins of Mecca Magic many years ago. It is described in Spellbinder's "Magical History: Torn & Restored Napkin" in The Wizards' Journal #8, along with a variety of variations. At first glance, you might think it is the same as the version Mark Wilson teaches in his Complete Course in Magic book, but there are subtle differences that "sell it" to an audience. One of them is to use two different color napkins in the "explanation" part of the effect. You can see an example of this in Qua-Fiki's variation with Super Hero themed napkins in his "Super Hero Magic" book video, but what Mark Wilson and Qua-Fiki BOTH miss is the brazen challenge that Ted Collins used when he "proves" that going to the pocket for Wuffle Dust or Pixie Dust (whichever you prefer) has nothing to do with the magic that happens in the hands.

I believe in later years Mark mentioned in his lectures that he had "improved" the handling of the Sucker T & R Napkin from that in his book, but I've forgotten the details...

Julie

Nothing wrong with the trick as it is in CCIM, I've done it thousands of times, even did it in my routine during my pro years. As with any trick it has more to do with your presentation than the trick. Always seek to entertain, not to amaze. The patter is a big part of this trick. How smoothly you do it and how natural you act when doing it is a huge part of making the effect work.

Hello

I didn't say there was anything wrong with the common handling of the Comedy Torn & Restored Napkin in the book.

I did say MARK WILSON mentioned and taught in his lecture a better handling that he preferred to the procedure printed in his book...

Julie

Thank you for the great comments everyone.

My impression was that the audience was entertained, but that they did not find it to be magical. I tried to present it in a tongue in cheek fashion, but I was still hoping to have a magical effect. In retrospect this had more of a 'gotcha' kind of effect on my audience. Judging by the reaction, they were surprised to see the restoration, but I think many of them were able to figure out what probably happened after the initial surprise.

Perhaps this effect is not supposed to have the kind of impact that I was assuming it was intended to make? Is this meant to be more of a fun bit where it doesn't necessarily matter if the audience catches on to what happened? In other words, what kind of impact would you expect this kind of effect to have on an audience, as opposed to, for example, a signed torn and restored paper which is really meant to convince the audience that something impossible has transpired.

If the audience was entertained, you can chalk that up as a "win"

But I see what you mean about the lack of magical impact. I personally think that the Mark Wilson version is a little lacking in that regard; but there's nothing wrong with doing a piece that emphasizes comedy and audience interaction, if that's your intent. If you're looking to make your act more about magical impact, this routine probably isn't your best choice as an opener, but it could make a great middle piece, to show some vulnerability and charm.

Two versions of the routine with strong magical impact that I've used are Jim Steinmeyer's "Napkins for Actors" (from "The Conjuring Anthology") and Bob White's version on his "Torn and Restored Tissue" DVD. Both offer handlings that avoid the coin/woofle dust dodge and are strong moments of magic.

You can always hang onto the torn pieces, hide them behind the restored napkin and get rid of them later. The dodge of going for the pocket, while traditional, is not mandatory. Same is true of silk to egg, or other effects that have traditionally been used with a pocket. Come up with an alternative that fits your style of performance and don't feel bound by tradition.

Sounds good to me, I personally would not open with it. I think it was Rick Maure who once told me you need a "handshake" opener, something that allows the audience to get to know you. Rewmember, the first 30 seconds to any performance is crucial.

Wasn't addressing your post, Julie, but the original poster. I know Mark had a different presentation he later did in lectures and its fine too.

I’m now looking for the best comedy sucker torn and restored tissue paper. But don’t want to buy a book just for this, I always prefer DVD’s, magicwalsh@gmail.com

Wally -where are you ? see my profile ?? -
'Sucker torn & restored ??" I used to do a,"I can-You can't", torn paper effect. Take a full sheet white of paper (or card stock) cover half of it with 'white' contact paper. Tear the paper in half - give contact covered piece to a Volunteer - tell them, we're going to have a race to see who can tear their paper the fastest- Who Won ???????? Ralph ROUSSEAU (Russo)

I’m in uk, is this on a dvd,or a download, ???

Neither - just something I made up and did. It was available years ago somewhere (I'm 84)LOL -the white 'contact paper'(I don't know what it's called in the UK) was vinyl. The white blended in with the white card/paper,and is unable to be torn. RR