|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next] | ||||||||||
mystre71 Inner circle martinsburg west virginia 1693 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-03-03 15:10, Hare wrote: I didn't mean to relight this thread. I see and understand some of Hare's points. I haven't read the booklet by Hugard yet. But, if I'm reading this correctly "The unspoken, logical next step of Hugard's shuttle pass would obviously be to remove the right two digits touching the coin sitting on the left's open fingers, and show or present the coin there using the fingers of the left- correct?" If these are in fact some of the improvements made by Roth, as well as adding some animation to the stagnate look of the Utility Move (for lack of a better word). Then I would agree these are improvements that warrant Mr Roth publishing his handling. I honestly do not think Mr. Roth would take credit for something he thought was published before him. Look at Edge grip he points out that this was a very old technique. His methods for getting into EG, is where he gets credit. I do agree sometimes there is a double standard. However I do think some of the problems with this, is when an unknown publishes something that has previously been published and when it's pointed out to them, they are (the unknown) to stubborn to give up the credit, that clearly doesn't belong to them. IF Hugard's book isn't clearly written and is open to one's own interpretation. Then that's a touchy issue. I'm not saying this is the case with this book. But, it could be. This could go back to that obscure reference. Mr. Roth IMO is a stand up guy. I'd love to hear how he feels about all of this.
Walk around coin box work check it out here https://www.magicalmystries.com/products
|
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
To add a float to Laurie’s parade I conducted a little test of what is natural for lay people in transferring an object from one hand to another. Above I suggested that a coin held in the right fingertips would be traced on the other palm or lower fingers rather than the finger tips.
I was wrong in an unexpected way. I had four different lay people, separate and on different occasions, perform a request. None know that I am a magician. They sat in a chair with a half dollar on the table to their right. They were to puck up the coin and place it a bowl on their left side without getting up. Thus, they would have to use their left hand to complete the action. How would they place the coin in their left hand was the pregnant question? They did not do that at all. Instead, each reached over ant took the coin from the right fingers with the fingers of the left hand – and then turned to drop the coin into the bowl. So, any of the moves labeled as a Shuttle Pass (Roth or otherwise) or Utility Switch are not natural for a lay person. If your objective is to appear natural in the move that is supposed to be “mundane,” then do not use the Shuttle Pass at all! Instead you can do a “Fake-Take” at the fingertips, alternately exposing and hiding the appropriate coin using Finger Palm/Ramsey Subtlety throughout. Since this will be done in front of your face it will be easier to Direct Focus with eye and head movement. You can even call it the Non-Shuttle version of the Roth Shuttle Pass if you need a name. Even if you feel compelled to use the Roth Shuttle Pass occasionally, the NSRSP will provide variety for repeat moves or repeat performances for the same audience. I am sure, however, that this sleight is not original with me even though I just created it with no prior reference except observation of real people. Perhaps someone can tell us of the person who first published it somewhere – that being the only proof of invention.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
Hare Veteran user 323 Posts |
Mystre71 posted- "I didn't mean to relight this thread.
I see and understand some of Hare's points. I haven't read the booklet by Hugard yet. But, if I'm reading this correctly "The unspoken, logical next step of Hugard's shuttle pass would obviously be to remove the right two digits touching the coin sitting on the left's open fingers, and show or present the coin there using the fingers of the left- correct?" If these are in fact some of the improvements made by Roth, as well as adding some animation to the stagnate look of the Utility Move (for lack of a better word). Then I would agree these are improvements that warrant Mr Roth publishing his handling. I honestly do not think Mr. Roth would take credit for something he thought was published before him. Look at Edge grip he points out that this was a very old technique. His methods for getting into EG, is where he gets credit. I do agree sometimes there is a double standard. However I do think some of the problems with this, is when an unknown publishes something that has previously been published and when it's pointed out to them, they are (the unknown) to stubborn to give up the credit, that clearly doesn't belong to them. IF Hugard's book isn't clearly written and is open to one's own interpretation. Then that's a touchy issue. I'm not saying this is the case with this book. But, it could be. This could go back to that obscure reference. Mr. Roth IMO is a stand up guy. I'd love to hear how he feels about all of this." *** You are absolutely right. Just as Mr. Roth pointed out that Edge Grip was a very old existing technique- he and Mr. Kaufman do the same with the shuttle pass in "Expert Coin Magic". He never takes claim for the move. The book is explicit and honest about Mr. Roth simply offering an alternative handling of an old, existing magician's move. It even defines a shuttle pass as a substitution. That's why the thread, when I came aboard it, was so perplexing to me. I knew I had read earlier books using a two coin 'shuttle pass' move with a different name, and I remembered David Roth crediting it's existance in his big book. Here is the relevant text, straight from the source- "The idea of the shuttle pass is very old. Simply substituting one coin for another as you apparently toss it from hand to hand is, in fact, a shuttle pass. David's handling is a very graceful and firmly convincing way of doing this move at the fingertips."- Expert Coin Magic, page 10.
"Better described in The Amateur Magician's Handbook"
|
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-03-03 17:45, mystre71 wrote: again, . I do think part of what warrants David's publishing is that his variation IS clearly written, and specific. His description states the concept is old. It doesn't preclude other shuttle passes. It states how David Roth performs it. edit- o.k, so Hare beat me to it. And funsway, it weren't my parade. See the voters. I also think that your study could use further analysis, especially if the request was to pick up the coin... the subjects might have felt picking up the coin was a requirement, and so did it each time they saw opportunity. |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
I agree it was a quick exploration -- and you may be correct in the bias. I am hoping others will explore on their own -- but doubt it as questing for "natural movements" is not a huge priority. As I do not see the Roth Shuttle Pass to be natural in movement I probably see what I desire to see. And that is the point. Each lay person may see something suspicious in a mundane move that is done "elegantly." Since to objective is to have the movement "pass" unnoticed, why risk it? Besides, perhaps one wishes to create some anticipation or foreshadowing and this works well to that end. Not saying the move is wrong, just not natural.
Interesting thought, though -- if a volunteer assistant can be conditioned so easily then there must be a way of taking advantage. "His description states the concept is old. It doesn't preclude other shuttle passes. It states how David Roth performs it. " No -- this all started when Doc stated that Roth had said the he had invented the sleight with no knowledge of it having been done before. Magic is about deception, but ...
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
J-Mac Inner circle Ridley Park, PA 5338 Posts |
My own "test" of how I personally move a coin or coins from my right hand to my left? The thousands of times I reached for coins in the coin tray in my vehicles with my right hand and then moved them to the left to drop into a toll booth basket. Of course this in no way equals a shuttle pass but it basically involved holding the coins mostly with my right fingers and tossing them into my left hand palm.
Just a comparison to Funsway's test above. Jim |
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
Ken,
You mentioned earlier that Jon had said David's presentation was in keeping with his character. His character is magical. His character is not a layman. We're talking David Roth magically enchanted charm, hello, to expand on my previous response to your objection. Michael has recanted his mistaken remarks, and clarified, and repeated he's all for the record being straight, that's worth repeating, too. I think this started a ways before, by the way, perhaps with something like this: Quote:
On 2013-02-05 04:50, funsway wrote: this, too: Quote: On 2013-02-05 08:40, funsway wrote: |
|||||||||
fonda57 Inner circle chicago 3078 Posts |
Along the lines of reinventing old moves and calling them yours, there is a coin book that came out within the last few years in which the author tells us he puts a coin in CP with another finger than is typically taught as the method, and goes on to call it his palm, attaching his name to it, same for a palm change. I was laughing while reading it.
In his notes Full Front Assault, Gary Kurtz has a fingertip shuttle pass which he refers to as his, the coin going from the fingertips of one hand to the fingertips of the other. Far be it from me to "diss" Kurtz, I love his work, but does that mean the move is original? Asking not as a smart ass, just a serious question. |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-03-03 22:25, magicalaurie wrote: Thanks for posting these as they support the theme that "how you learn a sleight" may influence its use and effectiveness -- even shape ones "character." I learned the moves/sleights now called Shuttle Pass and Utility Switch decades before ever seeing them in print and before DVD's were invented. Later people seeing them called them by those names with no reference to origin or "inventor." I was told in the late 50's by a mentor that "Shuttle moves" (hand to hand to mask sleights) was ancient and that refinements like apparently changing objects in the hands (Switches) came much later. Based on these ideas I have developed many sleights and moves through experimentation and observation of how lay people handle objects. These were non-derivitive of any information from Roth or anyone else -- but certainly based on "common knowledge" that the results of such moves had a magic impact on audiences. Whenever I observed or read of similar Moves by other performers I naturally labeled them as Shuttle or Utility -- again with no credit assigned nor taken. So, whom should I believe? I offer my opinions to balance the opinions offered by others. When Michael made statements that appeared to me to be factually incorrect I challenged them. Other joined in and Michael changed his tune. But he related what Roth said, and he has not denied that Roth told him these thing despite evidence that Roth has said other things in print. Whom to believe? "Does it matter?" Only in determining whose opinion should carry weight in deciding personal choices and actions. I have nothing but respect for how Roth performs and his contributions to performance magic. His opinions about the history of sleights now carry less confidence -- if Michael correctly quoted him. The value of Michael's opinions about the origin of sleights is certainly lessened. You may consider that my opinions about he origins of sleights is less than important. Your choice -- whom to believe and what weight to place on opinions. None of that has anything to do with how well a person performs, or his "magical character." Roth performs in certain way that works for him. He is a model to inspire others. But to attempt to be his clone won't work for most people, and performing sleights exactly as he does might not be "best practice" either. The question should not be "at the finger tips or in the palm," but what is most consistent with your character and other hand movements in other effects. Now voters are placing labels on "finger positions" rather than concepts and results with some need to place a person's name on them. Makes no sense to me at all beyond some possible clarification for future students. I have asked what is so special about Roth's handling from a spectator's point of view. No answers. I have asked why Roth chose the name "Shuttle Pass" when it is not a Shuttle at all (possibly because he learned than name from others?) Only a flippant answer was given. I have offered that one important factor is that your hand movements should be the same for a "Shuttle," "Utility Switch," "False Transfer," and real exchange of an object. No one has responded. I desire to lern from the experience of others. The focus should be on the "desired results" and how best to achieve them consistent with physical abilities, setting and character. Learning a particular sleight/move because it is demonstrated by a famous person is a good place to start -- it should never be the only sleight used not the end of one's personal creations and adaptations. All of these discussions on whose name to place on ANY sleight is minimal compared with the possible inspiration of some reader here to either do more coin magic effects or attempt effects previously thought possible. we study, we experiment, we learn and we share with others. If the goal is better magic that will happen. The creative process involved is its own reward -- no credit required. just an opinion, of course ...
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
Curtis Kam V.I.P. same as you, plus 3 and enough to make 3498 Posts |
I'm not sold on Patrick/Hare's reading of Hugard's Change 1. From the Palm Proper. I'm a big fan of Hugard's little booklet, too, and agree that if you read it closely, you can see hints that many of the techniques we consider modern were in use, in one way or another, in the mid 30's. For instance, the Ramsay subtlety is described quickly on 5. (although that's hardly the earliest description in English, see Sach's for instance) However, as I read the Change 1, it's pretty clear that the coin is apparently being placed on the left palm, not the fingers.
I think the is the more logical reading for the following reasons: 1. Change 1 appears on page 6, very early on in the book. At that point, the only "palm" that Hugard has described and named as such is "The Palm Proper". The only other concealments that he describes prior to page 6 are the finger palm, and the back finger clip. He does not give either of those concealments a name, and certainly does not call them "palms". Therefore, when on page 6, he tells the reader (who, it's fair to assume has been reading the pages in order, from 1 to 6) to "Palm in your left hand, a coin...." it's more likely that he means the classic palm, or "palm proper" than one of the other unnamed concealments. Since he does not describe moving the coin from the left palm, it's fair to assume that when he instructs the student to "Rest the tips of the right fingers on the coin in the left hand for a moment..." the coin is still on the palm of the left hand. 2. On page 3, Hugard uses "the Palm Proper" and "palming" interchangeably, making it more likely that when, on page 6, he simply said "Palm the coin" he meant classic palm. Here's what he said: "The student must set himself to the task of mastering the palm proper since by its use all kinds of small articles can be vanished. Indeed, it has been well said by a great authority that palming is the keystone of magic." 3. As Change 1 proceeds, he instructs the reader to, "Take the marked coin in your right hand, and, in apparently putting it in your left hand, execute the Palm Proper." Clearly, the reader is supposed to follow the earlier directions given for the Palm Proper. In those directions, the end of the action is a placement on the left palm: "Hold your left palm upwards, fingers half closed, and rest the tips of your right fingers on it for a moment, then close the left hand as if the coin had really been placed in it." (Obviously, the coin can't be placed on the left fingers if they're half-closed.)If you're going to refer to this description to determine the starting position of the coin, then it seems only fair to take the ending position from this description, as well. These being the case, I am not convinced that Hugard is describing an action where the coin ends up on the fingers, or at the fingertips. I believe he's describing a switch (rather than an acquitment) in which a coin starts at the fingertips and is deliberately placed on the palm of the other hand. David's shuttle pass is almost the opposite--a coin displayed on the fingers is dropped or tossed to the fingertips of the other hand. (And the move serves as a switch, or an acquitment, or both) As to the question just posed by Mike(fonda57), there's a lot going on in Kurtz's "Fingertip Drop Shuttle" that's not in David's original, not the least of which is the ability to switch in multiple coins sequentially. That's a more significant feature than the starting position, which is only slightly different. And, while a fingertip-to-fingertip shuttle is possibly sufficiently different to call it a different technique, it's not at all clear that Kurtz's was the first. Certainly Mike Gallo had work on this early on, and look at the open shuttle pass used by Fred Kaps in his Coins to Glass routine. (Routined Manipulations, Finale, Ganson)
Is THAT a PALMS OF STEEL 5 Banner I see? YARRRRGH! Please visit The Magic Bakery
|
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-03-04 05:56, funsway wrote: I've answered you twice on that. |
|||||||||
Hare Veteran user 323 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-03-04 06:03, Curtis Kam wrote: Hi Mr. Kam- thank you for responding to my thoughts on the matter of Hugard's version of the shuttle pass. I am an admirer of your work, and do possess your little pocketbook, which is my very favorite "modern" coin book. Hugard's work, in my estimation, is wildly underated. It's jam packed with material, and I think it has the most decently described material per-word of any work on coin magic. It's really, really spare and lean stuff- no fluff. Talk about your money's worth- this is the book. I began talking about Hugard's Coin Magic manual and it's presentation of it's move that is similar to Mr. Roth only after two careful re-reads. This was one of only two coin books I originally had as a young kid, that I nearly wore out with repeated readings, so I am pretty familiar with the contents...it's like an old, cherished friend I've got to revisit. As such, I'm pretty familiar with how the book is put together, and there is one thing in it that, in my opinion, takes apart the foundation of your argument that Hugard only introduces the "Palm Proper" formerly by name in chapter one, and thus, he is using it for the left hand, though he describes only "palming" on that hand and always "Palm Proper" for the right throughout the move. Here is the crux of where your stance is mistaken, as far as Hugard's intent and what he actually tries to deliver. 1. The Table of Contents. I think we can all agree that Hugard knew what was in his book. Chapter one is a scant 5 and one-third pages in length. The section on vital "palms", (holds), is confined to 4 pages. Each of them is accompanied with a "sleight" (a pass). The balance of the chapter than moves on the "changes", where our topic is introduced. The Table of Contents for Chapter One at the beginning of the book is listed unambiguously as: "Basic PALMS and Changes" (emphasis mine) That says it all. Not singular. Proving my point beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Hugard is discussing, describing and using MULTIPLE "palms", each of which is tied or associatated with as sort of pass, and called a "sleight". Yes? I'd appreciate a response to this point, especially. 2. Hugard makes the specific claim only 4 pages in that- "These five sleights may be regarded as the basis of coin magic and should be thoroughly understood and mastered before attempting any actual tricks with coins." Voila, he has introduced Fingerpalm, which will remain nameless, but obviously, part of the "basis of coin magic", which we all agree it is, right? Are you really going to try and base a case for FINGERPALM not being taught in these pages? Why? 3. FINGERPALM is the basis, clearly described, in not ONE, but TWO of the sleights presented in this short, short section. It is clearly ILLUSTRATED and described in the first "French Drop" sleight detailed. It is not named, and therefore could easily referred to as a "palm"- which it is in the chapter list. It is used again for the "Pinch" sleight. Isn't fingerpalm a DOMINANT palm in this tiny, vital chapter? Count the uses, and compare. It can hardly be said to be otherwise. 4. ALL of these critical, basic holds, including Palm Proper are here showcased here the SAME WAY, as part of a pass or "sleight", FINGERPALM is taught here in exactly the same manner as classic palm is. It isn't named, throughout the book it's described in a physical manner, IF it is critical to the moves of the "sleight" or trick. 5. Logic tells us that since "Palm Proper" is named in full when it is initially used, and fingerpalm remains unnamed throughout the book, but is included in the work as a "palm", Hugard may very well have used the word "palm" for fingerpalm in a situation where it was suitable. 6. Finally, the term "palm" is used NOT just for stuff happening in the palm, by Hugard. He even uses the somewhat wacky term for a hold on the back of the hand in the book thus- "BACK HAND PALM" on page 15. Are we seriously entertaining the notion that Hugard thinks people have palms on the backs of their hands for backpalming, or, does he use the convention of calling all holds "palms"? That example answers that clearly. I think that "palms" in the table of content for chaper one says it all. He is working with multiple palms, and establishes "Palm Proper" with it's own name, while interchanging the others freely, which is confusing. I am not claiming that the book is crystal clear on the matter without searching....it is very debatable on a casual read. But, the more times you read the entire book, and the more times you read how wildly common the terms "palm" was used to describe any hidden hold on any part of the hand, the more clear it appears that the likelihood for a fingerpalm here is logical and likely, following the chain of table of contents throughout the book. To me, anyways. And you can't accuse me for being sloppy about my research on this. *wink*
"Better described in The Amateur Magician's Handbook"
|
|||||||||
tomsk192 Inner circle 3894 Posts |
Not sloppy at all
|
|||||||||
Mb217 Inner circle 9520 Posts |
I agree, nothing sloppy about this or any such shooting from the hip here...Not in the least.
Actually the scholarship here has been irrefutable as to this work pointed out by Hare, even though it has been refuted by some that no much less of it as to real detail in stepping up to the big tables. An attention to deeper understanding and detail that I'm sure fine magical researchers like Curtis Kam and Lawrence O can see well enough from this continuously throbbing part from out-of-the-blue. Fascinating!
*Check out my latest: Gifts From The Old Country: A Mini-Magic Book, MBs Mini-Lecture on Coin Magic, The MB Tanspo PLUS, MB's Morgan, Copper Silver INC, Double Trouble, FlySki, Crimp Change - REDUX!, and other fine magic at gumroad.com/mb217magic
"Believe in YOU, and you will see the greatest magic that ever was." -Mb |
|||||||||
Curtis Kam V.I.P. same as you, plus 3 and enough to make 3498 Posts |
First of all, we in the "Coin Magic" fan club are such a small group that we should be on a first name basis.
Secondly, I didn't say that other concealments weren't described. In fact, I said just the opposite--that there were two other concealments described, the fingerpalm and the backpinch. What I did say is that neither of these are labeled as "palms" in the pages leading up to the moment when Hugard tells the student to "Palm the coin". Although the Table of Contents calls the Chapter "Basic Palms and Changes", the heading to the Chapter actually reads "Basic Sleights and Changes" so I find it hard to read much into the fact that Hugard refers to "Palms" in the Table of Contents. Besides, there are two concealments that he does call "palms" in that section, the Palm Proper and the Thumb Palm. I think what he actually says, "says it all", and if there are only two grips in the "Palms" section that he chose to call "palms", then there's no need to read any more into it. I realize that I may have missed the Thumb Palm in my earlier post, and this one, he actually does call a palm. If you're going to insist on a close reading of the text in order to determine what he meant, there's a better argument that when he said "palm" he meant Thumb palm instead of a grip that he did not call a "palm" at all. The "five sleights" he refers to are pretty clearly the ones named in the five headings leading up to that statement: to wit: 1) The Palm Proper, 2) The French Drop, 3) The Pinch, 4) The Thumb Palm, 5) The Pick Up. There are only two palms named in the "five essential sleights", and neither one of them is the fingerpalm. Obviously, the fingerpalm is taught, but that's not the question. The question is what did Hugard mean when he simply said "palm the coin"? I say, beyond all reasonable doubt, that he could have only meant that the student is to use one of the two positions that he previously called "palms", and in fact, meant the "palm proper". And since his meaning on page 6 is the question, whatever he might have said on page 15, or the rest of the book, is really of no nevermind. Hugard was a careful teacher, and would have written the book so that each lesson was based on the material taught BEFORE it. As far as "dominance" is concerned, fingerpalm is used twice. The Palm Proper is used just as many times. The Thumb Palm is explained very much like the Classic Palm, in that the grip and how to get into it are described first, then the application to the false transfer is discussed. It's the two "palms" that get the most attention. And if you're still asking what Hugard mean when he simply said "palm the coin" consider the opening sentence to the Chapter: "The fundamental basis of magic with coins is the art of palming, that is, of holding and concealing a coin or several coins, in the palm of one hand, while pretending to place them in the other. The first and most useful method by which this result is obtained is called The Palm Proper." (Emphasis mine) In other words, the first meaning of the word "palm", the general, default meaning, is, not surprisingly, to hold in one's palm. I hope I have specifically addressed all that you requested.
Is THAT a PALMS OF STEEL 5 Banner I see? YARRRRGH! Please visit The Magic Bakery
|
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
OK Laurie, I will ask the question in a different way so that "how wonderful Roth is as a performer" is not an answer.
You desire a specific result of having an extra and secret coin palmed in one hand while the audience is focusing on a coin in the other hand -- they believing that only one coin exists. You decide to mask this secret by apparently transferring the coin in your right hand to the left hand as naturally and non-suspiciously as possible. Upon seeing the coin there the audience will infer it is the same coin that was originally in the right hand. These are several ways to achieve this desired result. PLease explain why the Roth Shuttle Pass as described above is the best choice. 2nd scenario You wish to switch the coin in the right hand for a another coin in your left hand, masked by an apparent transfer of the coin from right to left. You are planning to place the left hand coin in a spectator's palm on your left side as justification for the transfer. You wish the moves to be as natural as possible so as not to raise any suspicion or detraction from the spectator's involvement. There are many ways to accomplish this result. Please explain why the Roth Shuttle Pass as described above is the best choice. More specifically, in either or both cases please describe the advantage of using the Roth Shuttle Pass over other methods from the point of view of the audience, i.e. not noticed as a memorable action at all.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
You're asking from a spectator's point of view and I answered his "character" is magical- ie. not a layman. It's natural for him to do mundane things in a sparkly, enchanted way. That's an answer and it's a valid one. I think you might be thinking like a magician here, maybe running when you're not being chased, too. As for your scenarios, I'm talking about David, not me. Did I say everyone must do the move David's way? I say if you can pull it off, more power to you. Advantages include great visibility- great entertaining visual, efficiency- economy of motion- grace. I think it can be said that performing boldly with the coin so close to the audience might in fact give weight to reducing suspicion. But if the style doesn't suit an individual performer, (s)he should find something that does.
|
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
Thanks for supporting my view in this way. I asked what makes the "Pass" special -- not what makes "David" special. You seem to think the two are inseparable.
The proposed vote was to have the term "Shuttle Pass" as the only term applied to the fake transfer of a single coin in which two coin are displayed as one. To do so kills the term in a practical sense unless one aspires to be a Roth clone. If a magician desires to achieve either result of what used to be a Shuttle Pass they must "find something that does." Yet, the proposed alternative is a ubiquitous "Utility Switch" that offers the student no directions at all. Its best feature is that no one is claiming to have invented it. So, I will change my limited support of the Vote. I will happily use the term "Roth Shuttle Pass" only for the move exactly as described and demonstrated by David to include any "fingertip to fingertips" apparent placement of a coin. I will use the term "Shuttle Pass" to cover all other transfers using any other finger positions or hand movements. I will use "Utility Switch" whenever more than one visible coin or object is used. I will also use "Shuttle Pass" whenever an object other than a coin is employed regardless of the finger position. These are all "sleights" meant to pass unnoticed by the audience. Thus, "Shuttle Pass" is a type of "Utility Switch" employing what appears to be a single small object. The "Roth Shuttle Pass" is a specific variation of the Shuttle Pass using coins made "fingertips to fingertips" in emulation of David Roth's style." All of these are sub-classification of "Shuttle Moves" covering all movements of small objects from one hand to another regardless of method. While this appears to be an inappropriate use of the term "shuttle" meaning "repeated back and forth motions," one must look at an entire performance in which a small object is transferred from hand to hand many times rather than any specific part of a single magic effect. The concept of "shuttle" is to make the repeated transfers seem natural or even a cause of the magic. The wise student of sleights and methods should study all of the known variations of Shuttle Moves in the forging of style, character and for avoidance of "stagnation" or risking exposure though repetition before the same audience. It is a personal opinion that the "best pass" is the one selected for the specific audience and setting -- making each presentation of an effect as unique experience. However, learning 2-3 variations of the Shuttle Pass should serve for most coin workers, with the Roth variation high on the list. .......................... in answer to several PM's -- my favorite Shuttle Pass is any performed where eye contact masks the transfer -- the finger positions directed by the object and timing, allowing inference to support the idea of "single coin" when it is now seen in the other hand supported by Inattention of Vision. The focus is on "single coin" rather than "how it got there." The continuity of hand/body movements with other Sleights and Moves will allow the spectator to create a memory of "He tossed the coin from his right hand to his left -- I saw it fly."
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
Quote:
On 2013-03-05 02:57, funsway wrote: I didn't say the two are inseparable. I don't think I seemingly appear to think that, either. I'm not sure why you ask others a question if you don't sincerely want to consider their answers. I said, essentially, the pass is consistent with a magical character. I didn't focus on myself because you wanted a spectator perspective, not a magician's, and because I don't yet perform David's Shuttle Pass. A spectator doesn't view only the moves, they view them in context with a performer. They assess whether action is consistent with character. The magical character moves like a magical character- he is not bound to performing mundane tasks the way a layman would. The magical character doesn't think like a magician, either. He's got his own script. Not sure what you all are voting on here or where you think the election results will lead, I don't think David's looking for credit for anything more than he's done. It's offensive to imply otherwise and I think your "voting" exercise does exactly that. I think perhaps you lot are overcompensating for dragging him through the mud in the first place, when you've got his input on the matter available in print. |
|||||||||
tomsk192 Inner circle 3894 Posts |
I vote that we all go to the pub, have a beer, and talk about something else.
What magicalaurie is saying seems crystal clear. To be fair, I hadn't noticed everyone trying to drag him through the mud. Although it would get a lot of hits on YouTube, I daresay. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Nothing up my sleeve... » » Shuttle Pass (1 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.24 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 < |