I've just made a new ebook, titled Fuzzy Logic.

This time I've done something different.
For some reason, people seem to have enjoyed my "padding" material in my previous ebooks.

So, this time, *all* the content is padding.
Notebook ideas and random half-baked thoughts.
And the ebook is badly illustrated as well.

And it is slightly over-priced at $10 USD.

Still... should this interest you, it can be found at:

http://shop.tomstone.se

I've made a mistake in the manuscript.
I refer an item by Jim Steinmeyer in "Wooden Sign", which I thought was published in Device and Illusion.

It was really published in his lecture notes, in the December 2002 issue of Magic, and in Conjuring Anthology.
Sorry.

Tom describes his latest offering, Fuzzy Logic, in his minimal ad copy as "100% padding, badly illustrated." Within the 12 page document, he calls it "a collection of notebook ideas, and loose thoughts" and "a bunch of...something." That is to say, don't get this looking for fully fleshed out routines. It's essentially a peek into Tom Stone's mind; we could do worse.

In all, there are twenty-eight items here, going from close up items with cards, coins and other objects, to more formal stage ideas. Also counted in that twenty-eight are six "essays", for lack of a better word. These essays range from a couple of short paragraphs to nearly a full page.

Of the "essays", I found the one entitled "Misunderstanding Meaningful Magic" to be most interesting. He seems to take a position opposite to the one taken by most who talk about "meaning". This also goes along with what he says in another of the essays, "Imaginary Spectator or Real Artist?"

Moving on to the "trick" items: There are two unique ideas for using Masuda's WOW that I found pretty clever, the first of which could be a pretty interesting effect once fleshed out.

"Orange Osmosis" is a good idea, but one I feel I've seen used or mentioned before, though to be honest I can't figure out where I may have come across it.

"Wooden Sign" is a very nice card transposition/to-impossible-location (sorry for trying to "classify" it, Tom) and is one of the more fully realized ideas in the ebook. So is "The Annoying Four", which gives some "meaning" to the 11 Card Trick.

I like "Open Cards to Pocket", which is a unique idea for Card to Pocket that's in search of a method. I may toss this one around in my brain to see what I can come up with.

Another idea that I really like is "Flying Fruit", though it's unfortunately not something I'd get to use in the types of performances I do. Someone should use this, though...it's good.

There was one item that fell flat for me, though was the "Knee Servante". I'm not certain how this would improve over other lapping/servante techniques, but perhaps I've missed something.

Tom ends with a funny gag with a camera, though as he notes, it'll be lost on younger audiences. Use it now, while you still can.

In all, I thought this was a good collection of ideas, and there's more in there that's worth checking out than what I described (such as "Prov.31.6"). I would definitely recommend picking this up if you're looking for some inspiration.

-Jim

October 2001 issue of Genii

"Too Perfect Imperfect"?

-Jim

Yes, I believe it also was used in that article.

I enjoyed this peek into Tom's notebook.

This is basically like sessioning with Tom....he is very straight-forward that that is what this is offered here. In a session, we often show half baked ideas that have a germ of intrique to them.....hoping to inspire others, as well as get feedback on how to flesh things out or fix them.

The critics might have missed the boat. Its not about selling you a "product"....its an interesting insight into Tom's creative process.

So, Twenty-eight incomplete, but quality thoughts ........or some $30 one-trick DVD of the latest rehashed-diluted-flavor-of-the-month-magic?

I think 10 bucks is a great price for a session with Tom.

Three cheers for Tom Stone!

"Fuzzy Logic" is like a shot of aquavit when you were expecting a glass of water. It's bracing.

The trick ideas will make you think more about the magic you do. His essays, though, are the real meat. "Magic for Magicians" will make you question how you analyze effects.

The real highlight for me is "Imaginary Spectator or Real Artist", which is about how you choose the effects you perform.

I discussed "White Death" last night with Angelo Carbone. The second method, for stage or platform use, had given me an idea regarding having a spectator predict colors using Tom's basic method and I wanted Angelo's take on it.

How much more do you want for ten dollars?

This is first-rate all the way.

Matt Field

Here's a short one that accidentally got lost:

50% Magician?
It seems that many of us are magicians only from the waist up.
What are your foot positions for "Twisting the Aces"?

When I saw Juan Tamariz lecture, I knew it was going to be a great experience when he started his explanation of a cards across trick by clearly detailing which way his feet were pointing.

Bob Read always said that magic begins with the feet.

Wesley James also goes into great detail on feet/body positioning in his discussion of the Side Steal in Enchantments.

-Jim

Does anyone do a top change sitting down? I don't think I could, and every discussion/explanation/instruction I've ever seen either presumes the magician is standing or directs him to do so.

If you are sitting, does the position of your feet matter as much? Or do you worry about your butt? (I can't help but think of Hank Hill, on "King of the Hill", when he was in the riding lawnmower race and injured his "pivot cheek".)

I do it sitting down. It feels more like a chop cup load than a top change.

Also, Johnny Paul did it sitting on the Steven's tapes and it looked great.

I used to practice my top change while walking my dog. After a few hundred reps that way, I did a trick that required it, and it was very awkward.

I found that while walking, I was always doing the move while my left foot was coming down, which is not the way my feet were moving during the trick. Since then I made sure that my walking practice included doing the move at a variety of different points in my stride.

Same thing happened when I learned the striking vanish. For some reason Topping the Deck did not give me the same trouble.

As a hobbyist I only perform sitting down and I do top changes regularly. Just did two in Everywhere and Nowhere a few days ago. But I should add that the spectators and myself are sitting around a coffee table. That means I have freedom to move my arms and my torso. I can't imagine doing it at a dinner table.

I prefer the method in which the left hand, holding the deck, passes in front of the right hand, which is holding the card stationary. The left hand moves as part of a gesture, such as to point to someone or something on the table or to touch something on the table.

The top change can be part of a body movement of leaning back and then leaning forward to make your gesture, so your left arm travels with your body and doesn't draw attention to itself as the only moving object.

So . . . . did it fool the dog?

Which is why every magician should read "The Five Points of Magic" by Tamariz.

Matt Field

On a related Tom Stone matter -- his article in the latest Genii is an amazing analysis of how we see and are seen. I've got a procedure I've used for years to check out how moves look -- I watch them out of the corner of my eye. Peripheral vision gives you a less-than detailed picture and, I think, it may be similar to what a spectator "sees" when he's looking directly at the move, but is misdirected (in various psychological and physical ways).

One time I did a magic trick on my dog. I held a treat, did a French drop, and held my hand out. My dog sniffed the hand and appeared distinctly confused when it turned out to be empty.

Proud day in the McCabe household.

One of the many quirks of our visual system is that your peripheral vision is more sensitive to movement than your main field of view. I've often wondered if this were related to the oft-told story that Larry Jennings would not do the pass if the spectator was looking away. Moves like the pass, where it is supposed to look like you are doing nothing (as opposed to a move where you are openly doing something but secretly doing something else -- say the paddle move) might be harder to conceal in the spectator's peripheral vision.

http://www.aip.org/isns/reports/2009/051309visualillusion.html

In application: What are you willing to do in order to make that blue dot important?

Explore the settings on that diagram to find out:

What settings do you need to make the ball appear to curve to the right?

What settings do you need to make the ball seem to move horizontally rather than vertically?

In application - find what compels them to cross their gaze and what permits you to move in one direction while being percieved as moving in another.

Back in the late Fifties or early Sixties the TV Show "Candid Camera" with host Alan Funt featured one of the funniest bits I've ever seen; (Set up) Funt is behind the counter of a full service camera shop, "customer comes in with some film to be developed, Funt says something to the effect, "if it isn't exposed we can't take it." He then popped open the roll and stretched it out saying; "Yep it's exposed, it'lll be ready next week." The looks were priceless! Nowdays you could get a similar effect with popping out the card from our digitals.

Had to share a really fond memory it's so funny...

GO