Some time ago, I saw a TV special with a magician named David Blaine called “Street Magic.” The show consisted of a number of impressive card tricks, levitation, and mentalism. I subsequently heard an excerpt from an interview with James Randi in which the great skeptic said that everything he had seen Blaine do was easily duplicated by any competent magician. Blaine himself admitted in the show that nothing he did was “real” magic. While the card tricks and the levitation (funky camera work not withstanding) are well-known illusions, there was one illusion I was left struggling to exlpain: at one point, Blaine was standing around with three construction workers, and he told them all to pick a two-digit number (within certain odd parameters), hold it in their minds, and after five seconds of looking like he was constipated, Blaine guessed all three of the men’s numbers. The look of surprise on the workers’ faces would lead one to
believe the trick was genuine (that is, not staged so that Blaine already knew the numbers). I’ve heard of mentalists who use cues from sidekicks, but I was at a loss to see how one could possibly do this unless something happened off-camera that I couldn’t see. Can anyone explain how this illusion is done?
Without more information (what were the odd parameters?) it’s impossible to say.
In general, the way to figure out any illusion is assume it’s a trick and figure out how to duplicate it. Remember, the magician is counting on you ignoring “ordinary” details; he or she will carefully examine any assumptions you make to sneak in extra information.
You mentioned in passing that “certain odd parameters” restricted the available choices. My guess is that these parameters were more restrictive than you realized and Blaine combined this with a little common psychology to force the picks. Sort of a variation on the “orange kangaroo” trick.
Well, as I remember (it was a while ago), the workers had to pick a two-digit number ending in an odd number. There was no real exchange between Blaine and the workers. He said, “think of a two digit number ending in an odd number. Go it?” (brief pause) “35” (look of shock on worker’s face) And then he guessed the other two right away. It was an impressive trick in that I didn’t see how he had any clues.
Try this out. Start randomly asking people to pick a two-digit number that ends with an odd number. You’ll be surprised at how non-random the numbers picked will be. The fact is that a handful of numbers will be a clear majority of the picks.
Blaine’s tricks seem to get a lot of attention over at alt.magic.secrets when they appear on network TV. Most of the tricks are basic. Blaine has a different (read: drole) way of presenting them.
One of the things that upset the professionals at alt.magic are things you don’t see. Because you’re used to seeing presentations by Copperfield and others you may believe that with Blaine you are watching a complete performance. You are not. Scenes can start in the middle of tricks and you missed the setups. One or two edits like this might be explained as “editing for time.” But the pros seem to believe there are a lot more of those edits than can be explained away like that.
In the case of number guessing a couple of magicians pointed out that while the restrictions (the odd parameters) can help narrow down the choices of numbers, they believed the real clincher took place in the editing room. Their speculation: considering the way the rest of the show was put together what’s to stop the producer from only showing you reactions of people when Blaine got the number right?
I bet it was that prime number trick. Which is a two digit thing he brings up. 35% or so of the people in the world would choose the number 37.
So he asks the stupid question and gets it right that much time. They edit out those people who choose another number. This was all shown on tv one time under that magicians secrets exposed & also in a book I read. no magic, just common mass psychology sir.
Where are people getting the idea that Blaine is some “psychic” performer like say Uri Geller? Its performance magic, Blaine will slightly ham it up during the show but in interviews he’s very modest about what he does. Its one thing to suspend disbelief during the show for the “oooo’s” and the “ahhhh’s” and its another to walk away assuming he’s the second coming.
I don’t want to sound like I’m trashing the OP, as most of the time talking about “real magic” is a polite way to ask “how did he do all that stuff” without admitting they were tricked by simple mind games.
What gets me is do we really need the Amazing Randi to publicly decry another stage magician? Is his and CSICOP’s hysteria so overblown that everytime Pen and Teller come to town I can expect a full page spread in the local “Skeptic Tank” magazine? People, its stage magic, its as real as the WWF or WCW. There’s always an explanation, and if there isn’t its because the magician is pretty damn clever.
Randi himself was a B-level stage magician, and in all those years of working the circuit he never told anyone that he didn’t cut a girl in half in the middle of the act? Its part of the show. Randi did not explain the trick when he was done, but kept the mystique and mystery of the magician. He also wore some tacky turban too, much much more hammy than Blaine. Where were the geniuses of CSICOP then? No where, a condescending group of bitter magicians and humorless scientists didn’t exist then to rain on everyone’s parade and we certainly don’t need them now.
I’m half expecting for Randi to start debunking cinema “People its a projector these are just flickering images” and 25 cent love testers, “This test has nothing to do with love!” The ironic part is Randi’s hysteria just fuels the David Blaine PR machine.
A very good article on Blaine is here.
The trouble with Blaine is not that he hides his secrets, but that he uses camera and editing tricks to hide them even further for television. This is detrimental to close-up magicians who work live and don’t have the benefit of editing.
For instance, let’s say I want to do the Balducci levitation for some folks. I might do it as well as Blaine. But they probably saw Blaine do it, and mine doesn’t look as good, so the trick doesn’t go over. (Without getting into it, since I’m vehemently anti-exposure–he does the trick, and the reaction you saw was genuine, but the levitation you saw was not the real levitation.)
He is a fine magician, and I like his “street magic” premise. I just wish he would leave the editors out of it.
Dr. J
I have seen 2 of his tv shows. The way that I remember him doing the trick was: he said pick a number between 50 and 100, both #'s even, and no double #'s(66,88).
Of course he guessed the #. But,he had eliminated 42 of the 50 numbers by his parameters that he had set.
Also, if he missed anybody’s number, it was edited out.
Well, let me say there’s no doubt in my mind that the number guessing routine is a trick, as in an illusion, as in NOT mind-reading. I don’t need Blaine or Randi to tell me that. And as far as certain numbers being more commonly guessed than others, I completely agree, though I should say my own limited sampling of about a dozen people (yes, I asked them all separately) today did not bear this out. Everybody chose a different number, though three of them were in the 30’s, and one was 37. Still, I can agree with the premise. My problem is that this guy does this for a living, and if he’s not an apprentice, he can’t afford to guess wrong and wait for a TV special to edit the wrong ones out. That, to me, equates with being a fraud (even for an illusionist). Even if he could be sure people would guess only five or so numbers, let’s say, 80% of the time, I still don’t see how he does it. I’d have a hard enough time guessing a coin toss, much less a one-in-five shot. In the special I saw, he did three people in a row, got them all right. Thanks to dp for his/her post–I can say that the parameters he mentions sound more likely than what I mentioned, particularly the “no doubles” parameter. Certainly, giving the illusion that one is guessing from out of fifty numbers when one is really guessing out of eight is the best explanation. Still, I would like to know the idea of how one could be even 90% sure that he could guess the right number based on one’s knowledge of “mass psychology.” What’s the specific methodology? Anytime a magician uses a prop, be it a card deck, a quarter, the Statue of Liberty, I know it’s a trick because of the prop, even if I don’t know how it’s done. I don’t know much about professional magic, but it seems to me that in order to make a trick like this (no props, no clues) part of one’s act, you’d have to be able to establish a pretty high success rate, at least for all those times you don’t have a TV special.
I don’t all see why magicians should adhere to any special limitations for television. Television isn’t at all like stage magic and both the magician and the producers are under pressure to provide an interesting, good-looking, good-sounding, and well-paced show.
One poster actually accusses Blaine of fraud, which is pretty ludicrous. Magic is all fraud, if you don’t like magic that is some or even all editing techniques, then don’t watch the show, pay the ten bucks and catch them live. Its a pretty unrealistic expectation to have magicians not make use of the camera and its possibilities when their profession is all about engineering what you see and what you don’t see to create illusion.
I can see the merit of considering televised magicians who cannot do stage magic fraudulant, but I doubt any exist and if they did how could they convince producers to provide them with a special if they have no skills?
You may not like it but I don’t expect televised magic to change anytime soon for the sake of a few “purists.”
Actually the big deal for most magicians with David Blaine is that he’s a “fair to middlin’” magician that just happened to get his own show. Most magicians are a little hurt by the fact that he’s on TV and they are not (Whether or not they are actually better than him).
Personally, I’ve seen much better magicians than David who have never been on TV.
But I digress…
If I remember one routine he did correctly, he asked a spectator to pick a 2 digit number between 1 and 50, where both digits in the nubmer could not be the same number and they both had to be odd. The answer given by Blaine is the most common one because the two digits are the most commonly thought of odd numbers that people think of.
BTW, would anyone care to pick a card?
::Ducks after tomatoes and other vegetable matter is thrown::
Look, if I were going to put my magic act on TV, I would pay actors to say that they are construction workers and to pick the numbers I want them to.
Why not?
Why complicate the issue.
Hell, it’s just TV, right? You want to be impressed, see a magician live.
Except that doing as much pretty well indicates that you don’t have a magic act to put on television; what you have is an idea for a television show about a magic act. Most would agree that to stage magic (or “street” magic, for that matter), there’s an art. So much so that Blaine would be described as “fair to middlin’” by people who have seen a first-rate magician. Still, I wouldn’t disagree with you–it’s not as though I’m hoping to find some kind of refuge of truth on the tube. If I were going to put (ahem) my magic act on TV, I guess I would hire a real magician to use my name to at least cut some costs in the editing room. I don’t have a problem with excluding all negative footage and showing only that which paints one in a most positive light. It’s just that most people call them commercials. If some one tries to guess a number, and he’s wrong even just once out of five guesses, the trick is somehow less impressive, yes. So just edit it out? Anybody could do that. Even Geraldo gets his nose broken once in a while (…gasp…or does he?). You’re right about one thing: it’s TV–I should have known it’s BS.
Sequent - Look - you,re right, I suppose. If it’s fake, it’s not as neat as real (performed) magic. But, as Randi said, if they are really using mental powers, they’re over-complicating the trick.
That’s all.
I would like to add something that I didn’t mention in my earlier post. Using the parameters that I described above, most people on the street would eliminate the #'s 60 and 80 from use because they would consider the 0 as not a number odd or even. This brings the odds down to 1-6. Also 62 being the first # that fits the bill, people would think dont choose it, too obvious, now 1-5. The #'s in the eighties are not likely to be chosen because for most people they will decide on an earlier #, they are not going to take the time to think through all of the possibilities. Once they get to 64 or 68, they will choose 1 of them because they feel as though they need to make a quick decision. Eliminating the 80’s brings the odds down to 1-2.
Given the options that I described here and above, I would bet that the vast majority of people would choose either the numbers 64 or either 68.
I’ll tell you how he he did it.
The construction workers were PAID ACTORS.
That’s right PAID ACTORS.
Even if you did believe these outrageous claims that most ppl will pick 35 or 37, the chances of Blaine being able to guess ALL 3 is borderline impossible.
No tricks, no psychics, no illusions. PAID ACTORS.
I’m reviving this thread because I just saw a David Blaine TV show last night and I was going to post a question here about some of the things he did. I searched, read this thread, and am still not satisfied, so I’ve brought it back from the dead.
First of all, in “response” the post above, the people on the street were very clearly not paid actors. Anyone who insists so vehemently that they were did not see the show. If they were, then every single one of dozens of people are the best damn actors I ever saw.
I used to be a magic buff. In addition, I’m pretty confident of my powers of logic. I can almost always see a magic trick and come up with a way it might have been accomplished. A couple of Blaine’s have left me stumped.
Levitation. Slowly rises to about 8 inches off the ground: nothing visibly in contact. This is NOT the standard raised-on-toe-viewed-from-the-opposite-side trick: there’s light all the way under.
–Clue: camera and viewer are always behind him, and always at about the same distance. Anyone know of a rig delicate enough not to cast a discernible shadow, strong enough to raise a guy off his feet, concealable in his shoes or pants?
Card trick. Card ends up inside cop’s shoe, under his foot. Card ends up in kid’s back pocket. Blaine never anywhere near shoe or pocket.
I’m not particularly interested in hearing from people who didn’t see the show who only want to say “obviously he was in contact with the shoe.” Like I said, I have a little context for magic tricks and I was watching very, very closely. Anyone have any inside info?
The levitation trick is the one magicians are most upset about. The simple levitation trick is to use your lead foot to hide your back foot, which is still in contact with the ground. That’s what Blaine did for the crowd reaction shots.
Then, he lifted himself up with a crane for more impressive looking levitation (in full view of anyone around) and in the editing room he cut that into the shot. From a magic standpoint, it’s pure TV editing tricks. That’s why people are so upset, he presented that as if he really did something that he didn’t.