a Magic tricks often work by covert misdirection, draw- ing the spectator's atten- tion away from the secret. "method" that makes a trick work. 1 he spotlight shines . Only if misdirection, the psychological aspect of deception, is added into the mix, will one be able to create a truly magic experience. This is one of the must read ebooks, a classic in the theory of magic. PDF | by download [ MByte]. Ch. Don't Look Now: The Magic of Misdirection. Picture this: you are at a magic show and the magician announces that he is going to.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Japanese|
|Genre:||Children & Youth|
|ePub File Size:||17.61 MB|
|PDF File Size:||19.28 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Regsitration Required]|
PDF | In recent years, a body of research that regards the scientific study of magic performances as a promising method of investigating psychological. Dariel Fitzkee - Magic by Misdirection - Download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt ) or read online. Magic. by Dariel Fitzkee (Author) The Trick Brain (The Fitzkee Trilogy Book 2) Showmanship for Magicians (The Fitzkee Trilogy Book 1).
I don't mean an entertainer. I fully intend this to be the last time that any of those names shall appear in this work. The performer looks about him for a place to deposit the bowl. Presentation might be the answer. Upon release this arm swings the object into position with great speed. These assume that covert attention can only be allocated results demonstrate a close relationship between to the next saccade target.
Vision Research, directed to multiple saccade targets. This 36, — Findlay, J. Covert attention and saccadic eye interpretation concurs with recent findings using movements. Itti, G. Tsotsos Eds. New York: Active vision. In most of the previous research that has inves- Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Parallel allocation of attention, participants are pressured into making attention prior to the execution of saccade sequences. Participants are usually Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception instructed to carry out predetermined saccade and Performance, 29, — Henderson, J.
Visual attention and eye Although these types of experiment offer a great movement control during reading and picture viewing. Human gaze control during as to the extent to which they are a true reflection Downloaded By: Trends in Cognitive of natural eye movements.
It is very unusual for us Science, 7, — The role in fixed sequence. In fact, we rarely think about of fixation position in detecting scene changes across where we are looking and are typically unaware saccades. Psychological Science, 10, — In the current experiment participants Covert visual attention and extrafoveal information were given no explicit instructions on where to use during object identification. Perception and look or attend, thus allowing us to tap into more Psychophysics, 45, — Moreover, in the Klein, R.
Does oculomotor readiness mediate cognitive control of visual attention?
In current paradigm we were able to use a highly eco- R. Nickerson Ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence whilst retaining an extremely high degree of exper- Erlbaum Associates, Inc. In particular we have demon- Koch, C. Attention and con- strated that covert attention may be allocated to sciousness: Two distinct brain processes.
Trends in several up to 3 saccade targets. Cognitive Sciences, 11, 16 — Kowler, E. Original manuscript received 21 July The role of attention in the programming Accepted revision received 20 January of saccades. Vision Research, 35, — First published online day month year Kuhn, G. Towards a science of magic.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, — Current Biology, 16, Awh, E. R— R Visual and oculomotor selection: Links, causes and Kuhn, G. Magic and fixation: Perception, 34, Cognitive Sciences, 10, — Corbetta, M.
Implications for the A common network of functional areas for attention relationship between eye gaze and attention. Visual and eye movements. Neuron, 21, — Cognition, 16, — Eye movements and the control of Rensink, R. The dynamic representation of actions in everyday life. Progress in Retinal and Eye scenes.
Visual Cognition, 7, 17 — Research, 25, — Rensink, R. Change detection. Annual Langton, S. Ballantyne, C. Gaze cues influence the Rensink, R. To allocation of attention in natural scene viewing. The need for attention to perceive Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, changes in scenes.
Psychological Science, 8, — Rizzolatti, G. Li, F. Reorienting attention across the horizontal Rapid natural scene categorization in the near and vertical meridians—evidence in favor of a pre- absence of attention.
Proceedings of the National motor theory of attention. Simons, D. Gorillas in our Mack, A. Inattentional blindness. Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Perception, 28, — Macknik, S. Thompson, J. Attention and awareness Change blindness in the absence of a visual in stage magic: Turning tricks into research. Nature disruption. Perception, 29, — Neuroscience, 9, — Smith, D. Astrae Mendorez rated it it was amazing Sep 24, Leonardo Laurindo rated it really liked it Apr 22, Elliott rated it it was amazing Dec 30, Manuel Yates rated it liked it May 09, Matthew Daugherty rated it it was amazing Jan 15, David Sutherland rated it really liked it Apr 28, Rwolfgra rated it liked it Sep 11, Deosraven rated it really liked it Aug 19, Oct 01, Bruce marked it as to-read.
This looks like a good one to read for election time. And for after the elections too. Jenifer Taylor rated it really liked it Feb 28, Bob Lewis rated it it was amazing Jun 15, Mentatreader rated it really liked it Jun 07, Greg rated it liked it Jan 17, Scott rated it really liked it Mar 05, Ben Couch rated it it was amazing Oct 20, Jeffrey Harrington rated it liked it Aug 02, Niklaus Gerber rated it really liked it Jun 23, Jason rated it it was amazing Jan 04, There are no discussion topics on this book yet.
About Dariel Fitzkee. Dariel Fitzkee. Books by Dariel Fitzkee. Trivia About Magic By Misdirec No trivia or quizzes yet. We thought a magician was one who knew from which side of The Foo Can to pour. How completely they were deceived will be revealed within these pages presently. And who among us will say that he was not a skilled magician? But it seems that the important things the great magicians have said have been ignored.
While many will admit that an ability to operate a mechanical device does not demonstrate any skill from the magician's viewpoint. Not because this is my book. The same holds true of sleight-of-hand moves. We pinned cockeyed looking gadgets about our clothing. Let us get back to that hapless duffer I was abusing a few paragraphs back: I said that. I make this statement simply because the man. As might be expected. They were deceived.
Should he be reading this very book. On the other hand. We are true duffers. Even if this book does not give him the impetus to become skilled in the direction necessary. I expect to get called loudly on that statement. We endured excruciating fatigue in torturing our digits through the backhand palm. Let me quickly assure you that much more magically exalted personages than I have uttered this heresy.
Not even because of the subject matter. They have been ignored as completely as if these things were said in some strange cabalistic double-talk. We tried to learn sixty-two ways of accomplishing the pass. Ability to do these demonstrates nothing of the skill of the magician. We were convinced we were skilled in magic if we had the strength to lift the celluloid disc from The Rice Bowls. We bought tricks. Those of us who are still of that mind may as well realize it.
Few read books of this character from other than sincere desire to improve. We learned about threads. The drawing was very clear.
Then it was that we believed magician's skill to be the ability to lift the double cover of The Duck Pan without the inner lining falling out. Shepard did not change the mechanics of the trick.
But the very exposure itself made it possible for him to add a wallop that his spectators remember. He should have known. The real secrets of magic are those whereby the magician is able to influence the mind of the spectator.
These men did not use unfathomable phrases. It is entirely a thing of psychological attack. This is not a thing of mechanics. Control of the perceptive faculties has nothing whatever to do with it. Nor pulled threads. He cleverly. Perhaps my way of stating it will make more impression.
Convincingly interpreting. Nor Svengali packs. Here is real skill! Here are genuine secrets! Do you care to come along with me a way? So I must insist again: Shell bottles do not constitute any part of the true secrets of magic. Neither do folding bird cages.
He exercises absolute control over the attention of his spectator by forestalling it. Nor flap slates. Nor forcing decks.
It is completely a thing of controlling the spectator's thinking. Nor folding flowers. Nor any apparatus of any kind.
He employs psychological disguise-simulation. It is not a thing of digital dexterity. With equal facility he convincingly interprets matters to accomplish his own ends. At any rate.
He contrives to so influence the things the spectator perceives that the latter is aware of them as the magician desires. What they said has been available all these years in simple. Neither do billiard ball shells. He employs physical disguise with his apparatus. All is built upon an unshakable foundation of naturalness. Here is a secret! This skilled magician is an adept at disguise and attention control.
The true skill of the magician is in the skill he exhibits in influencing the spectator's mind. But these secrets of the mind may be explained. They are slightly changed here in the interests of clarity: Can it be. I think the mind of the performer. I should like to repeat those lines for the benefit of those who are not familiar with them.
Exposure usually means a formal or deliberate revealing of something that is discreditable. There is a nice distinction in the diction involved. An explanation makes plain or intelligible that which is not known or clearly understood. The secrets of the mind. He may reveal or conceal as be sees fit.
We are no longer concerned with a trick as an entertainment unit. He conveyed his conception as to how it should be presented. But in magic. It is done by the performer in such a manner that the spectator gets the sense that the performer wishes to convey to him. If the spectator doesn't understand the magician's words and actions as the performer wishes him to. In this work it is necessary to give a new meaning to interpretation.
In this case. Let's take a simple illustration. If the performer is skillful. It must come from what he says.
So now we refer to some stage in the accomplishment of a deception. So even though the spectator may know the secrets of psychological deception-all of them-he cannot possibly know when the magician is employing them.
Our interests are upon the mental side of presentation for deception. It makes the processes seem too deep and obscure and complex. Whether the spectator knows the performer's true thought or something else is entirely within the performer's control. It must come from what he implies. It must come from what he does.
We now take interpretation to mean to construe the performer's words.
And why shouldn't the secrets of psychological deception become exposure in their mere explanation? Because the intent of the performer and the secret workings of his mind cannot be known by the spectator unless the performer is unskilled in the psychological essentials. Probably the most important single phase of magic is in the field of interpretation for the spectator. But to get back to the idea I was trying to establish: Why can't the intent of the performer and the secret workings of his mind be known by the spectator?
Simply because the spectators' own knowledge of the magician's thoughts must come through what the performer reveals to him. I dislike the use of the word psychological. It is done by the performer. The interpreting is not done by the spectator. He could be indicating the right way or directing the wrong way. His body would be in position to use the stkk effectively. He could be inviting someone to come to him.
Otherwise it will not deceive. By his posture. He would clutch the stkk purposefully and menacingly. He could. The spectator must be thoroughly convinced that he knows the performer's true purpose and intent at every stage of the execution of the deception. How would you know what he was actually doing.
He could be greeting someone. Any unnaturalness-whether it be of posture. Secretly he has performed The French Drop. This business. If it is revealed to be false. He would not put stress on the sleight. His purpose might be good or evil. It must be natural. He could be playing a game or fighting for his life. And by what he says and how he says it.
If he were threatening you. Suppose a man were standing with an uplifted arm. It must truly represent and express the action it seems to be. Any bit of artificiality will destroy the sense the performer is trying to convey. Great skill and nice judgment are necessary. By his facial expression. He would give but casual-and passingattention to his left hand. The capable magician will perform the apparent taking of the ball exactly as he would if he were actually taking the ball.
He could be threatening someone. It must be convincing. The performer construes it. The words he would use-and his posture as well-would be exactly the same as they would be had he carried the ball away from the left.
They would relax. Then his eyes would follow the right hand. Let's dig into the elements of interpretation a bit deeper. The ball is still in his left hand. It cannot be carelessly done. He apparently takes the ball from the left hand with his right.
The magician holds a small ball between his left thumb and forefinger. His action could be one of triumph or of failure. His eyes would rest momentarily upon the ball as he reached for it. Too many magicians are not good because they cannot interpret effectively. That's why the definition that a magician is an actor playing the part of a magician is so definitely valid. In this case he would be interpreting his intent. Many of them can't interpret convincingly.
Unscrupulous politicians. Since all magicians are honest. By no means is the use of psychological deception confined to magicians. I don't mean an entertainer. And effectively. Yet he could be motioning you to come to him. Without convincing acting you can't have effective deception. Doesn't a good magician do that when he seeks to deceive his spectators? Notice I used the adjective good. All magicians don't interpret effectively.
Perhaps something in his expression would reveal that he was afraid of you. Whole empires have been lost. They rely upon powerful principles. Or perhaps you could see that he intended to flee if opposed. Too many of them do not know how to interpret with skill. They are subtle. The essentials that lift him from the ranks of the mechanics to the spotlight of an entertainer.
I am now using the word magician to mean a performer of tricks of deception. These psychological principles of deception are much more important than the mechanics of physical deception because they are much more effective. He would be interpreting his intent for your express disadvantage. They are insidious. Of course. So in studying practical applications of interpretation for deception the magician is acquiring a knowledge that will be of value to him. Without effective deception you cannot have a good magician.
And a great. Because all magicians don't interpret effectively. Skillful and effective interpretation. But it covers and fits in such a manner that it seems to be the sides. This box contains two compartments. There are four doors in this box-one for the front of each compartment and another for the top of each section.
Actually the spectators have good cause to believe that he has simply allowed the die to slide from one compartment to the other. The box also has a sliding weight in its double bottom. As the box is tilted from side to side the weight will slide to the lower end with an audible thump. The ingredients of psychological deception are pretense.
But what actually happens? The performer shows an actually empty hat. These are pasted on the die. He places it to one side. Both the block and the shell are painted black. But the dishonest layman. The corresponding faces' of the shell are spotted in a similar manner to simulate the proper sides of the block. A large wooden block. Every art is used to prevent the usual victim from suspecting that all is not what it seems.
The Diebox. The performer seems to pretend to vanish the die. That is the effect as the spectators are expected to see it. The shell. A secret catch allows the flap and door to operate as the door only. By the very nature of the magician's field of activity. A wooden box is exhibited. Some boxes have a metal flap attached to the rear of one of the front doors.
The block is made to appear to be a die by means of large white round gummed spots. It is found in a previously empty hat. This is not so of the others. The die has disappeared. The audience side of the flap is painted to represent one side of the die. Just let me illustrate how important this phase of magic is: We shall take an old familiar trick. But the magician must accomplish his objective with great skill and cunning because. So when he reopens the door. The weight whacks again and the front and top doors of the opposite side are opened.
This is because the shell now corresponds to the contours of the solid sides. The magician could not handle the die and shell as if they were a die and shell and expect to maintain a mystery as to how the trick is accomplished. The foregoing is actually what takes place. This by-play may go on for some time. Left to the deceptions built into the mechanical part of the trick.
The spectators are expected to mistake this for the die. He may not even place the die and shell in the hat originally. Then the solid die is retrieved from the hat where it had been placed in the first place.
Neither may he handle that flap door as if it were a flap and door. After which he closes the door. The apparatus can't do that. He closes this door. But the audience is expected to think the die has been tilted behind the door of the now lower compartment. It is obvious that all facts cannot be revealed to the spectators. If this diebox has the flap feature. He takes the shell from the hat. He takes it from the hat in such a manner that the sides.
After showing the box. He can't handle the box as if it were a box with a sliding weight built into the bottom. This done. When it is demanded that he open both doors. So he swings open the door at the top of the higher section. Then he places the die and shell into the hat.
It might be the appearance of the apparatus. Or the comedy potentialities. It seems far better to me to add material from the viewpoint of its importance in adding entertainment value to the performer's routine. The usual trick is added by the run-of-the-mill magical enthusiast simply because something in the number appeals to him. The performances of other magicians are eagerly scouted. The most common solution of the problem is a laborious and tedious search.
Or any of a number of other factors. Or the apparent profundity of the method. Textbooks on magic are thumbed from cover to cover.
I'm convinced this is NOT the correct way to add program material. And the magic shops are visited again and again. The specific trick selected usually determines the object with which the effect is accomplished.
Catalogues are thoroughly shifted. To perform magical creation? To accomplish apparently miraculous production? At present. Or an object may become visible at a place removed from the magician. But this investigation is not so general. Right at the start. His hunt is limited to tricks in which the desired object is used.
A particularly impressive appearance is that during which an object or a person seems to materialize gradually from thin air. The somewhat more exacting magician will usually adopt the second method.
This type of invention is largely hit or miss. Or the entertainer may take something from a place previously shown empty. But if this inventor had ever tried marshaling all of the possible methods. The problem. It relies to a great extent upon luck and inspiration. It is essential. Before embarking upon his search.
It is a tiresome. This appearance may be either gradual or instantaneous. If he fails in his search. The third method of adding the desired effect is to decide what to use and to invent a method of accomplishing it. Close to this type of production is the one where a nucleus is seen to develop into the object finally produced. It may take place out in the open. And most magicians do not care for mental processes.
It is a matter of concealing the subject in a hiding place incorporated in the place of production. Then he makes the search all over again.
As it appears to the spectator. This stratagem has been used for many years for the production of cigars. Then the hand.
Instead of a wineglass. The most elemental of all production methods comes to mind instantly. As an example we might paraphrase a Lloyd Enochs variation of a Jardine Ellis wineglass production. But the search is fruitless and he takes the handkerchief in his right hand to allow the left to similarly investigate the left vest pocket.
Or the clip may be dispensed with. When the handkerchief is taken away. Holding the handkerchief in his left hand. So with a shrug. It is also usable for the production of many other things. This clip is secured to the performer's vest at about belt height. He did this in the act of taking the handkerchief from the left hand with his right.
A pointed object that seems to be standing on the right palm supports it. But the right went right on past the hanging handkerchief. The scissors are hanging point down from a clip. The handkerchief fails to fall.
The whole. Beneath it. Concealed within the clothing worn by the performer is the object to be produced. A billiard ball is the most common example. The magician reaches into the air and apparently grasps the object. The performer apparently places it in the latter hand and holds it up to view. Meanwhile the performer's right hand is exploring the right vest pocket.
Still nothing. The object to be produced has been secured from a secret hiding place and has been brought into position for revelation.
I might suggest eyeglasses. Now the performer wipes his hands with his handkerchief. Practically all of these productions are accomplished through one or a combination or a variation of a comparative few basic principles. At the same time.
Employing the principle of securing the object from a secret hiding place while the attention is directed elsewhere.
His uplifted and curved left forearm simulates the bowl. This ring simulates the materialization of the tumbler before the actual tumbler is present. Even a bent arm frequently acts as a form to simulate the production of a bowl of water.
Almost the same method will allow a magician to produce a large stem goblet-I mean a large one. But forms may be used for a variety of things besides those usually produced-books.
Sometimes it is used with a form. A ring within a double handkerchief has been used for years for the production of a tumbler of water. The "table" drape is attached to this disc. The handkerchief fell upon the scissors point and a moment later was taken away to disclose the production. This draws the attention to the handkerchief. Then the table top would support the weight of the bowl of liquid. The weight of the bowl of liquid pushes the real table top. The magician seems to.
In operation. The left hand is held a bit higher just prior to the move. In this case the goblet is held underneath the coat beneath the left armpit. The bowl itself is on a stand. He sees the "table. If the filled bowl should be lifted from the table momentarily. The performer looks about him for a place to deposit the bowl. He allowed the scissors to hang below the right hand.
During this interval the performer secures the real glass and brings it up under the folds of the handkerchief. And you are not limited to the body itself as a secret place of concealment. Meanwhile he lifts the real bowl from the table and holds it beneath the foulard. All of this is quite similar to the usual large bowl production except that the stand is telescopic. But this principle has several variations. Consider Steve Shepard's production of a large punch bowl.
On top of the bowl is a round wood disc that is about the same diameter as the bowl. Since the "loaded" table has the same appearance with or without the bowl, the use of the table for the necessary secret hiding place is valid. This idea may be varied for the production of many other objects, even a small radio, or a clock, or a lunch box.