Folks, I would have gone to suggest the original Mora vanish without the spin, though as Josh pointed out a above, the striking vanish might be suitable and add to the general look of the routine.

What, in your mind, would be an unnatural way of spinning the wand?

Anything awkward, any pauses, or any movements that didn't seem to be nessesary in order to spin it.

So, as long as you perform the spin skillfully, you’re doing it naturally. If you perform it the way the average person would (pauses, etc.), you’re doing it unnaturally?

I certainly agree that, if you’re going to perform a flourish, you should perform it skillfully. But I don’t see that as a viable basis for distinguishing between what is natural and what is unnatural. Certainly, I can’t believe that, when Vernon advocated handling cards in a natural way, he meant: Feel free to do any flourishes you want as long as you do them skillfully and without unnecessary actions.

If someone did one of the many very flourishy double turnovers out there, would you consider that he had turned the card over “naturally” as long as he did the move in a skillful, unhesitating manner?

Perhaps my comment wasn't clear. I meant it to read:

Anything awkward, that didn't seem to be necessary in order to spin it.
Any pauses, that didn't seem to be necessary in order to spin it.
Any movements, that didn't seem to be necessary in order to spin it.


I never mentioned "skillfully". For naturalness there has to be motivation. In this case, the magic wand works by spinning it around the hand. If clumsy handling fits your persona, by all means fumble with it. Just don't include any movements that a clumsy person fumbling with a wand wouldn't do.

If you were to use use it to vanish an item, and the way to do this was by spinning the wand around it, (most likely) your hands wouldn't touch, you wouldn't pause halfway through, and your last 3 fingers wouldn't snap closed and hold clenched. A natural handling does take skill to do, but the spectators should think the spinning of a wand is the only skill displayed.

As for the card flourishes: If you were the victim of a haunted deck that kept bringing your card to the top, a one-handed turnover might diminish the effect. If you were a card sharp and had the ability to pull a card from anywhere in the deck as if it were on top, a one-handed turnover is perfectly natural.


Posted: Jan 5, 2006 4:36pm
---------------------------------------------
A strange question along these lines is, "Why, at even the later stage of his life, did Vernon do back and forth shuttling?". That only seems "natural" if he was using hot coals for balls.

Not to discount his presentation, which was amazing.

RE: History of the Wand Spin

LINKING RING MAGAZINE
JULY, 1958
VOLUME 38, #5
PAGES 18-19


LOUIS McCORD (Silent Mora) writes:

"I have wanted to write about John Van Camp, a very original ma­gician who, in 1902, gave a magical performance at Carnegie Hall, Alle­gheny, Pa. Allegheny is now called North Side, Pittsburgh.
"Van Camp was so original in his magic and style that he had a great influence in my later life, though I didn't meet him until 1905 when he came backstage at Tony Pastor's Theatre in New York City to see me.
"He asked me where I got the Twirling Wand I was using at that time (1905). 1 told him, 'I got it from you, Van, when I saw you in 1902 at Carnegie Hall, Allegheny. You did the Wand Twirl and then put a dove on each end of the wand, and an as­sistant carried the doves off stage.'
"Van Camp then replied, 'I had for­gotten about the Twirl. But you've really made a trick of it, vanishing the ball. It looks impossible.' That conversation took place in 1905.
"Some of the New York magicians called on me back stage at Pastor's and watched my 12-minute act from the wings. Several of them, including Frank Ducrot, asked about the Twirl­ing Wand and Ball, for even from the wings they couldn't be certain where the ball went.
"One magician had seen this NEW move from the front several times, and then came backstage and gave me $10. He said, 'I've seen that move several times and I don't know it. I like it. I want a LESSON on that sleight alone'. That man was Adrian Plate, New York's Society Magician, and he gave me the $10 at once.
"In a few minutes he had master­ed the Twirl, but had difficulty in letting the ball drop from the left hand into the right at JUST THE RIGHT SECOND. The TIMING is so exact that Mr. Plate could not do it without long hours of practice!
"Danny Dew, of Phoenix, Arizona, was the first person to show me he could do it. He never took a lesson. Only a person who has great patience can master it.
"If any other person puts in a claim for having invented this ORIGINAL SLEIGHT, he must have whispered the secret of it to me while he was still unborn! And that is the com­plete story of the TWIRLING WAND AND VANISHING BALL. Now to get on with the story of Van Camp. You will notice that this story has a cou­ple of actual dates in it - 1902 and 1905. 1 will add another date - 1912, when I was playing the Orpheum Theatre in Ottawa, Canada. That date, 1912, may have some import­ance, for the Twirling Wand and Ball Vanish has been a part of my act for some 56 or 57 years!
"John Van Camp certainly started people inventing magic. He lived in New Brighton, Pa., in 1902. He was the elevator starter at Horne's De­partment Store. His magic, even in 1902, was worthy of a place on any vaudeville circuit. He was a hand­some man - medium height, weighed about 135 pounds, immaculate in dress, and always presented a fine, clean-looking appearance - always dressed in the latest in men's styles.
"In later years he invented the 'Pig Slide,' an outdoor amusement de­vice that was very comical to watch. In this, there were several separate cages, each being a compartment for a pig. You would buy three balls and throw them at a certain spot on each cage or compartment. If you were fortunate enough to hit the spot on the cage, the door of the cage would fly open, the little pig would slide down a copper trough or slide, land on the ground and make a bee-line to the unseen food supply in the back. His antics were very laughable.
"What has become of John Van Camp? He seems to have dropped in­visibly, into Somewhere! I really have no idea how such a prominent man could vanish and leave not a trace!
"Here is a sample of a Van Camp magical program, but with the pass­ing of the years, memory is often at. fault, so I'll give what I can remember:

1. Produces Fire Bowl from fou­lard (opaque square cloth).
2. Produces two doves from same foulard. Places doves on chair back.
3. Egg Bag routine (comedy).
4. Egg dropped into bag. Bag turn­ed upside down - little peep - chick falls out.
5. Twirling Wand, then puts dove on each end of wand and assistant takes them off stage, perched on wand.
6. Yards of paper ribbon taken from a farmer's straw hat. He car­ries this bushel of paper to the RIGHT WING, then moves again to stage center. Small (baby) pig emerg­es from the paper ribbons.
7. Van Camp feeds bottle of milk to pig.
8. Van Camp walks off stage, the pig running between Van's legs as each step is taken!"

(EDITOR'S NOTE: Louis McCord is now at Long Island Hospital, Bos­ton 69, Massachusetts. He will ap­preciate your cards and letters. Ma­gicians all over the world are in­debted to him for many wonderful tricks and sleights, and cards and letters will do SO MUCH to cheer him, and keep him in contact with the only world there is for him - the world of MAGIC!)

That was cool, thanks.

Ron

Check out my thread on this subject in Food For Thought entitled, "Years ago I Made a Huge Mistake"

No

Is it "natural" for a grown man to play with a magic wand? Depends on the man.
Since Vernon wrote many rules, he has the right to bend them when his wisdom and experience guide him.

There are no rules, only guidelines.

Danny, I have a post in Food for thought that talks about this. Believe me....

There are many layman who truly believe that things may be able to materialize- check it out.
Magicfish

I agree !!

Williamson doesn't use the strike vanish with the wand anymore. He says everyone, including him, flashes.

That's intersting. Does he have a suggestion for a vanish using a wand?

Mike Ammar uses vernon's wand spin to vanich balls imperceptibly. it's awesome... and it's Vernon's.

On Ammars Cup & Balls video, he shows of a bit and does the wand spin with a tomato, quite a bit larger than the standard balls, and it still looks good!

I do think it's a great vanish. I like the striking vanish, I think in a cups and balls routine, you need to go somewhere (reveal ball under cup) to take the heat off the move. Off course there are loads of ways to use it, like making a coin penertrate a glass, which looks cool.

Darius

..I must admit I'm shocked that with magicians from around the world commenting on this topic , everyone seemed to focus on the move as effective , (which no one disagree's with),but were unable to logically postulate how this particular move was consistent with Vernons admonition to be natural ( wand spin couldn't be more unnatural as it's a flourish which is tantamount to juggling) and to always perform a sleight on the off-beat which the spin doesn't do but quite the contrary forces onlookers eye's upon it during the move taking place.Can you still execute it it? Yes. The question was why draw the heat?

I was hoping for some good old fashioned philosophical examination and instead got people assuming I was attacking Vernon. I simply wanted to find anyone who observed the discrepency instead of dogmatic apologists who fear finding a flaw in Vernon to be tantamount to heresy. Vernon himself was always evolving and had no problem with flaws being pointed out and even encouraged them.

Interesting to note that the source of this patter is Robert-Houdin's Secrets of Conjuring and Magic, which Hoffmann translated.

It actually was relevant in context and was done tongue in cheek.

But it would be completely out of place in a modern setting, unless it were being done as an historical re-creation.

Regarding the seeming inconsistency of Vernon's using the wand spin vanish -- his admonition to be natural was directed more at doing moves in such a way that they fit the performer. He often said, "Be natural, be yourself. Don't try to be Mark Wilson or Doug Henning, because you will never be as good at being them as they are. But they will never be as good at being you as you are."

To me, something is unnatural if it abruptly stands out from the rest of the piece. I never felt this move did that. I saw Vernon do this live several times. The wand spin never bothered me. But I've seen a lot of people do it in such a way that it looks terribly unnatural, even though it is smooth and not awkward.

I will repeat what I said before on this subject: I was lucky enough to be slightly acquainted with Vernon and I got to spend a precious few hours with him on a couple of occasions, jamming and gabbing.

I have always believed that his "be natural" philosophy has been taken out of context and and taken to extremes that he never intended. You have to remember that Dai was born in 1895, a very different world...an era when magic,along with theater and juggling, was performed with greatly exaggerated movements and overly dramatic gestures. Vernon's "natural" handling was a reaction against this tradition. I don't think that he meant to eradicate all flourishes in the way that some present day followers believe. Vernon loved to play with cards for hours at a time and although he wouldn't be interested in the elaborate virtuoso cuts that some young guys are into, he certainly did some flourishes on occasion. I saw him do some.

Lennart Green also spent time with Vernon and he mentioned that Vernon was more flourishy than people think....Green agrees that Vernon's "be natural" comments did not mean "eliminate flourishes". It meant, as Bill Palmer says, to be true to your innate personality.

Best regards,
Glenn Godsey