The use of the roughing stick makes the steal and double lift very difficult to spot (it fooled me on first viewing). I also think the "magic convention" story is charming and provides an excuse to tell people about magic conventions (when I mention that magicians meet up and share tricks at events like this, people are always facinated).
I also dug up the Genii issue, which features "The Weird Inn Revisited", your earlier attempt at turning this poetic puzzle into a card trick. It was excellent, too. I've started playing around with a variation that uses the two Jokers, four Jacks, and four Kings as the "weary travellers".
While it may sound a little complex, the method is quite simple. It involves stealing back a King onto the deck, then performing an Elmsley Count to display three cards as four. You add up the cards (4 Kings + 4 Jack + 2 Jokers) to arrive at a pile of ten cards (actually nine). You then cut nine piles, putting the two Jokers face up on the first, then continue distributing one card to each "room" (no need for a double lift). You can then run through the poem, illustrating your words with actions and mentioning rooms A to I as you do so. I'm sure you get the basic idea. As a method designed to avoid the dread double lift, I think it works well!
Good essay Marty. Nice to see mention of John Cooper Clarke. I'm a fan of his early work and went to one of his concerts. I read his autobiography, I Wanna Be Yours, last year and enjoyed it. Re poetry and magic, well, aside from quote attributed to Hofzinser that card conjuring is the poetry of magic, we've probably had some very bad verse in magic, that's for sure. But no reason not to try for better. Even Vernon recited a merry verse while performing the Three Card Monte. AI services are very useful for making a start when constructing poetry. Here is a Poe parody I just made with the help of Claude AI:
THE POE-TRY OF MAGIC
Once while standing, smoothly fanning, every move and gesture planning,
As my deck of cards I shuffled, shuffled, culling aces four—
While the audience sat sighing, plainly, boredom multiplying,
All their patience now dying, dying just to see something more,
"Simple cards," they muttered, getting up and walking to the door—
"Just cards and nothing more."
Then with movements swift and fleeting, hearts were stopping, pulses beating,
As the first ace came floating, floating above the hardwood floor—
Not a whisper, not a sound, all thoughts grew quite profound,
Till the doubts were all but drowned, and the audience as one did implore,
They leapt up shouting, stamping, clapping, as they’d never done before—
I'd love to see John Cooper Clarke live. I'll have to read that autobiography of his. Thanks for mentioning it.
I understand why some creative people don't want to use AI in their workflow. However, you can get some excellent results with careful prompting and a lot of editing. Now, I just have to convince the people teaching literature at my University not to see it as an existential threat to their discipline!
Thanks Marty. I like impromptu handlings. Also like the spectators to count the cards at the beginning. Two packets, one, say, red for visitors. Black for rooms. It's easy enough to steal a red card away because the focus is on the rooms not the visitors. Do this while showing the spectator how to shuffle the black packet and remove one 'of the rooms. Now that both packets have 9 cards, you can recite the original rhyme and everything works out perfectly.
I thought that The Missing Dollar paradox would fit well with Nine Rooms Paradox. For example, the visitors pay $10 each. Total $100. At the last minute, because of the missing room, the manager offers a generous $15 refund. The Bell Boy takes the $15. But he only gives $1 back to each visitor. Visitors are happy. They paid $9 for their room. Total $90. The sneaky Bell Boy is happy because he stole $5. $90 plus $5 = $95. But the visitors handed over $100. $5 seems to have disappeared in the Weird Inn. :-)
Yes, using two packets offers more opportunities to ditch a card under strong misdirection. Using ten pairs is also a good idea because you don't need as much table space, making the trick more practical. A simple way to steal off one of the red cards would be to use a Gambler's Cop. Pick up the deck, secretly placing the card in cop on the bottom as you take one of the black cards from your participant to return to the deck. Of course, a classic palm or lapping a card would also work.
"The Nine Rooms Paradox" did remind me of "The Missing Dollar Paradox". I think your idea of combining the two is excellent. You could even write another poem based on this paradox. It might even be possible to modify Nick Einhorn's "The Mysterious Puzzle of the Missing Dollar" to work with a $5 bill rather than a $1 one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqnLYT2QGSM).
After writing up my handling of "Weird Inn", I actually decided that they trick would work better if you used ten pennies and nine paper cups. I'm still working on the write-up, but I decided to call it "The Lynn Inn"; I'm sure you know what trick it is based on. Using coins would then make the trick connect better with "The Missing Dollar Paradox".
Thanks David. Does seem like there is an endless reservoir of overlooked material to dive into. Every time you read a book or magazine, no matter how many times you've read it before, you discover something new to you.
I enjoyed his TV shows. You might recall that Romark once did a blindfold drive stunt that went wrong. He crashed into a police van! He was taken to court for reckless driving. David Berglas told me that Romark called him asking him to testify in the case that the stunt was safe. Berglas didn't take up the invitation. During the court case, Romark explained how the blindfold stunt worked but the jury found him guilty and he was fined and paid costs to the tune of several hundred pounds. The newspapers delighted in explaining the trick to their reader. And Romark said that now the secret was out he wouldn't be doing it again.
Another great read, as usual, Daivd. Thanks. I've been experimenting with rhyming patter recently, so really enjoyed the Nine Rooms Paradox (see Ruseletter Monthly Update #23: https://www.ruseletter.com/i/151161386/the-link-between-poetry-and-magic).
The use of the roughing stick makes the steal and double lift very difficult to spot (it fooled me on first viewing). I also think the "magic convention" story is charming and provides an excuse to tell people about magic conventions (when I mention that magicians meet up and share tricks at events like this, people are always facinated).
I also dug up the Genii issue, which features "The Weird Inn Revisited", your earlier attempt at turning this poetic puzzle into a card trick. It was excellent, too. I've started playing around with a variation that uses the two Jokers, four Jacks, and four Kings as the "weary travellers".
While it may sound a little complex, the method is quite simple. It involves stealing back a King onto the deck, then performing an Elmsley Count to display three cards as four. You add up the cards (4 Kings + 4 Jack + 2 Jokers) to arrive at a pile of ten cards (actually nine). You then cut nine piles, putting the two Jokers face up on the first, then continue distributing one card to each "room" (no need for a double lift). You can then run through the poem, illustrating your words with actions and mentioning rooms A to I as you do so. I'm sure you get the basic idea. As a method designed to avoid the dread double lift, I think it works well!
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year,
Marty
Good essay Marty. Nice to see mention of John Cooper Clarke. I'm a fan of his early work and went to one of his concerts. I read his autobiography, I Wanna Be Yours, last year and enjoyed it. Re poetry and magic, well, aside from quote attributed to Hofzinser that card conjuring is the poetry of magic, we've probably had some very bad verse in magic, that's for sure. But no reason not to try for better. Even Vernon recited a merry verse while performing the Three Card Monte. AI services are very useful for making a start when constructing poetry. Here is a Poe parody I just made with the help of Claude AI:
THE POE-TRY OF MAGIC
Once while standing, smoothly fanning, every move and gesture planning,
As my deck of cards I shuffled, shuffled, culling aces four—
While the audience sat sighing, plainly, boredom multiplying,
All their patience now dying, dying just to see something more,
"Simple cards," they muttered, getting up and walking to the door—
"Just cards and nothing more."
Then with movements swift and fleeting, hearts were stopping, pulses beating,
As the first ace came floating, floating above the hardwood floor—
Not a whisper, not a sound, all thoughts grew quite profound,
Till the doubts were all but drowned, and the audience as one did implore,
They leapt up shouting, stamping, clapping, as they’d never done before—
"Show us more! Yes, show us more!"
Ha, that's great, David.
I'd love to see John Cooper Clarke live. I'll have to read that autobiography of his. Thanks for mentioning it.
I understand why some creative people don't want to use AI in their workflow. However, you can get some excellent results with careful prompting and a lot of editing. Now, I just have to convince the people teaching literature at my University not to see it as an existential threat to their discipline!
Here's my write-up for a handling of the Nine Rooms Paradox that doesn't use a double lift or prepared card: https://www.martysbagoftricks.com/p/jjozfpbdqjr.html.
Marty
Thanks Marty. I like impromptu handlings. Also like the spectators to count the cards at the beginning. Two packets, one, say, red for visitors. Black for rooms. It's easy enough to steal a red card away because the focus is on the rooms not the visitors. Do this while showing the spectator how to shuffle the black packet and remove one 'of the rooms. Now that both packets have 9 cards, you can recite the original rhyme and everything works out perfectly.
I thought that The Missing Dollar paradox would fit well with Nine Rooms Paradox. For example, the visitors pay $10 each. Total $100. At the last minute, because of the missing room, the manager offers a generous $15 refund. The Bell Boy takes the $15. But he only gives $1 back to each visitor. Visitors are happy. They paid $9 for their room. Total $90. The sneaky Bell Boy is happy because he stole $5. $90 plus $5 = $95. But the visitors handed over $100. $5 seems to have disappeared in the Weird Inn. :-)
Yes, using two packets offers more opportunities to ditch a card under strong misdirection. Using ten pairs is also a good idea because you don't need as much table space, making the trick more practical. A simple way to steal off one of the red cards would be to use a Gambler's Cop. Pick up the deck, secretly placing the card in cop on the bottom as you take one of the black cards from your participant to return to the deck. Of course, a classic palm or lapping a card would also work.
"The Nine Rooms Paradox" did remind me of "The Missing Dollar Paradox". I think your idea of combining the two is excellent. You could even write another poem based on this paradox. It might even be possible to modify Nick Einhorn's "The Mysterious Puzzle of the Missing Dollar" to work with a $5 bill rather than a $1 one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqnLYT2QGSM).
After writing up my handling of "Weird Inn", I actually decided that they trick would work better if you used ten pennies and nine paper cups. I'm still working on the write-up, but I decided to call it "The Lynn Inn"; I'm sure you know what trick it is based on. Using coins would then make the trick connect better with "The Missing Dollar Paradox".
Thanks David. Does seem like there is an endless reservoir of overlooked material to dive into. Every time you read a book or magazine, no matter how many times you've read it before, you discover something new to you.
It's great to see you going over old magic, dealing with the nuances, updating the presentation and sharing it with the magic community. 👌
I enjoyed his TV shows. You might recall that Romark once did a blindfold drive stunt that went wrong. He crashed into a police van! He was taken to court for reckless driving. David Berglas told me that Romark called him asking him to testify in the case that the stunt was safe. Berglas didn't take up the invitation. During the court case, Romark explained how the blindfold stunt worked but the jury found him guilty and he was fined and paid costs to the tune of several hundred pounds. The newspapers delighted in explaining the trick to their reader. And Romark said that now the secret was out he wouldn't be doing it again.
Tremendous to see Romark again.