|
|
|
|||
| Go to page 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
Gary Kosnitzky.jpg "View Profile") Elite user 409 Posts 
|
I just finished reading Harry Lorayne.
Mr. Lorayne's influence on how effects are written up is equivalent to Shakespeare's influence on the theatre. I could go on forever about the immense scope of valuable information this man has contributed and compiled for us. Where is his lifetime achievement award??? I will just leave it at that. |
|||||||||
Vlad_77 Inner circle The Netherlands 5829 Posts
|
Gary,
Either you have found the fountain of youth, or somehow you have caused a temporal rift to have been able to read the corpus of Harry Lorayne's work. He is one of my mentors, and I believe his lifetime achievement award is the hundreds of magicians he has guided through his career. He is a great magician and a great man. I am honored to have him as a teacher. Namaste, Vlad |
|||||||||
|
Gary Kosnitzky Elite user 409 Posts
|
Amen.
|
|||||||||
Larry Barnowsky Inner circle Cooperstown, NY where bats are made from 4770 Posts
|
Well put. I thoroughly agree. His contributions to the art and practice of magic have been enormous.
Larry |
|||||||||
David Eichler Grammar Host Durham, ME 1780 Posts
|
I have been working on Lorayne's texts now, for a couple of decades, and am only through *some* of his work...not that I have all of it...but certainly enough to last for much of my lifetime. So much wonder-full work to digest...
|
|||||||||
duanebarry Special user 883 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2010-09-02 02:34, Gary Kosnitzky wrote: Would anyone care to elaborate on this, in specific terms? - Are we talking about writing style, use of a casual writing voice? - Length of description? - Informational density of the writing? - Specificity of detail? - Clearly defined terms? (ex: Giobbi's "Map of the Hands" in Card College seemed a game-changer to me in clarity of definition) Comparative examples might help in making this case... |
|||||||||
|
chrismatt Special user Why would you read any of my 978 Posts
|
My Spidey Sense is telling me Harry is reviewing this thread, which is good because he will see how appreciative we all are for his tremendous output of high quality magic. His influence on the Art is as profound and ever-lasting as the written word itself.
The "Shakespeare of Magic" might not be too much of an exaggeration! Magically, CM
Details make perfection, but perfection is no detail.
|
|||||||||
|
Gary Kosnitzky Elite user 409 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2010-09-02 22:49, duanebarry wrote: I am not making a case. It is Magic 101. |
|||||||||
|
acesover Special user I believe I have 821 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2010-09-02 22:49, duanebarry wrote: All of the above. Read him and decide for yourself. I believe you will agree.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
|
|||||||||
|
duanebarry Special user 883 Posts
|
I'd like someone to actually present an analytical case rather than just making the grand claim without supporting detail. Certainly there's a huge difference between the style in, say, Encyclopedia of Card Tricks and today's books -- we've come a long way, but how exactly did we get here? Was it instant with Lorayne (or someone else) or gradual? Which elements were already being used by other writers, and which did Lorayne add? Many/all were likely already in play but perhaps not together as a package? What key elements are missing from Lorayne's writeup style that we are glad to have now?
Is there an analysis of this already in print somewhere? Old book reviews of Harry's early works might perform some of this analysis to give an idea of what he really brought to the table that was lacking before -- can anyone dig some up? |
|||||||||
|
slowkneenuh Regular user After 5,278+ posts, only credited with 133 Posts
|
Duanebarry,
I believe the posters, myself included, are telling you we do not need an analysis of Harry Lorayne's writing style and contributions. We are aware of his accomplishments and highly value them. Perhaps you should perform the analysis as you are the uncertain one. By the way, all of Harry's publications, no matter what format, have extensive reviews over the web and in all media.
John
"A poor workman always blames his tools" |
|||||||||
|
Mike M Loyal user 244 Posts
|
Afterthoughts anyone?
|
|||||||||
Harry Lorayne 1926 - 2023 New York City 8558 Posts
|
I do, of course, appreciate the very kind words. Thank you all. It's interesting - just the other day I read, in the current issue of Genii, a Jamy Ian Swiss review of the new Ganson book. I was pleasantly surprised at his one mention of me - something about me "exploding" way back in 1962. I don't have the issue here with me, but someone may want to check it out and post it here.
Has anyone asked Mr. Barry how many of my books he has? Utterly unimportant, but curious HARRY L.
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]
http://www.harrylorayne.com http://www.harryloraynemagic.com |
|||||||||
|
duanebarry Special user 883 Posts
|
When somebody claims that a writer changed the field (ie, "Mr. Lorayne's influence on how effects are written up is equivalent to Shakespeares influence on the theatre"), it is perfectly legitimate to ask that person to describe the state of the field before that writer arrived, and in what specific ways that writer influenced it.
It's a pretty reasonable question. Slowkneenuh, I'm interested in finding reviews written at the time when Harry's books were published, since they can provide historical context of how his writing/approach was seen as differing from the norms at the time. Quote:
On 2010-09-03 10:24, Harry Lorayne wrote: Right, that's a start, since at least Swiss speaks specifically to style: "These are the genuine classics of magic, explained in Ganson's clear, systematic, albeit workmanlike prose. Ganson was never much of a stylist -- not for him the conversational, lean-over-the-bar-stool-and-talk-in-your-ear prose that Harry Lorayne would explode onto the page with in 1962, and descriptive magic text would never be the same[...]" (Genii, Sept 2010, p.83) Can anybody dig up some reviews/discussion of Close-Up Card Magic from 1962? New Phoenix, Hugard's Magic Monthly, Genii, others? |
|||||||||
|
slowkneenuh Regular user After 5,278+ posts, only credited with 133 Posts
|
A review from 2004 about Close Up Card Magic on the UK website TalkMagic.
Review I was stunned that no-one has reviewed this book yet. It is a must have book. You can see from the contents that this book has a ton of material. Not just material though this is packed with reputation makers. Out of this universe, Vernon's Aces and the Apex Ace are worth the price of the book alone, and I could carry on picking out groups of tricks that are worth the price of the book several times over. The book is very well written and Harry's conversational style of writing makes this an enjoyable read and very easy to learn from. Even though the majority of the tricks are relatively simple to perform, this book is jam packed full of miracles. Overall Quite simply a must have book, and more than worth the asking price. In fact if I lost my copy and had to pay 3 times the price to replace it I would not feel ripped off. Don't be put off by the fact that the tricks do not need years of practice and personal sacrifice, this is full of real workable and practical material. If I could only keep one book on card magic ..... I'd be real pi**ed off at the money I spent on all the others But this is the one I'd keep without a second thought. Value 25:10 (yep worth more than double the price ) Tricks 10:10
John
"A poor workman always blames his tools" |
|||||||||
|
duanebarry Special user 883 Posts
|
Thanks slowkneenuh, but customer reviews from today aren't likely to provide the historical context that would help get a handle on in what manner and to what degree Lorayne's writing has influenced the way effects are written up by others in the field.
Older reviews may give us something to chew on in that area. Remember that the focus of the question isn't the quality of the tricks -- it's how they're written, and how that differs from others' writing at the time. |
|||||||||
|
Harry Lorayne 1926 - 2023 New York City 8558 Posts
|
Why in the world are you people taking the time to discuss/answer/reply to this guy? Why not let him do his own research? He hasn't yet said how many, if any, of my books he has. He obviously has a Giobbi book because he talks about his "clarity of definition." What?? Why do I suspect some "mysterious" inner goal to his posts? Don't know why, but I do - what other rationale can there be?
Oh well, at least it gives me the opportunity for a plug - thanks slowkneenuh, but it's important for all to know that Close-Up Card Magic has been re-written, updated, etc., along with FOUR OTHER EARLY BOOKS OF MINE, plus 16 brand-new routines. THAT'S a bargain. Want to learn more about it? Go to my magic website, third one listed under this post. And, I've written over 25 more books (in the magic area) since C-UCM (more in the memory area) and you'll see what's currently available at that website. Mr.Berry might want to see which books he'd like to purchase there so that he can do his own "comparison." No?
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]
http://www.harrylorayne.com http://www.harryloraynemagic.com |
|||||||||
|
pabloinus Inner circle 1681 Posts
|
English is not my first language and magic is just a hobby, therefore my magic skills are limited and something that is understood as a given by a more experience magician, could be something that I need more explanation. With that, I enjoy a lot the way Harry Lorayne writes, I find his explanations very clear, and complete, I don't need to go to a different book to get the sleights. I also like the comments beyond the particular trick, like in the Himber Wallet book the comments about Richard Himber, it give me a better context while educating me.
The afterthoughts is a nice way to add to the trick without disrupting the main instructions, I don't know if before Harry somebody else used this way of adding ideas, but it is a plus. I have some books from other authors and few are as detailed and enjoyable as the books I read from Harry. Of course like in any art (writing) everything is subjective ... Pablo |
|||||||||
|
Harry Lorayne 1926 - 2023 New York City 8558 Posts
|
"...the conversational, lean-over-the-bar-stool-and-talk-in-your-ear prose that Harry Lorayne would explode onto the page with in 1962, and descriptive magic text would never be the same[...]" (Genii, Sept 2010, p.83)
Seems to me that the Genii quote that you yourself posted would tell you all you need to know. Just in case you haven't read it clearly, it says, "...and descriptive magic text would never be the same" (Bold is mine. I'm not saying that that's good or bad; just, again, seems that that should tell you what it is that seems to be so terribly important to you. Thanks Pablo. Perhaps your post will help explain it all. HL.
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]
http://www.harrylorayne.com http://www.harryloraynemagic.com |
|||||||||
|
pabloinus Inner circle 1681 Posts
|
I would like to keep the discussion on you Harry, rather that somebody else.
Can you describe the method you used to write? and Why you added Afterthoughts to your explanations? and last which of your books is your best seller? |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Books, Pamphlets & Lecture Notes » » Harry Lorayne » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Sep 2, 2010 06:34 am 
X
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
|
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < 
|