Conjuring Credits

The Origins of Wonder

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Last revisionBoth sides next revision
misc:glass_through_table_or_vanishing_glass [2017/06/28 16:58] – external edit 127.0.0.1misc:glass_through_table_or_vanishing_glass [2018/05/20 22:54] – Added Hilliard reference. tylerwilson
Line 7: Line 7:
 The version using the paper cover, though, was still being performed by professional magicians in the 1890s; e.g., see the //[[http://www.conjuringcredits.com/lib/tpl/credits/files/1891-02-07-Washington-Post.pdf|Washington Post]]// on February 7, 1891, p. 8, for the description of an unfortunate performance of it by Yank Hoe. The version using the paper cover, though, was still being performed by professional magicians in the 1890s; e.g., see the //[[http://www.conjuringcredits.com/lib/tpl/credits/files/1891-02-07-Washington-Post.pdf|Washington Post]]// on February 7, 1891, p. 8, for the description of an unfortunate performance of it by Yank Hoe.
  
-An interesting variant was marketed by Hamley Bros. in 1907, in which a coin and sugar cube are placed into the glass. When the paper is smashed down, the glass and coin are seen to have vanished, but the sugar cube remains on the table. (See the ad in //[[http://askalexander.org/display/38615/The+Sphinx/4|The Sphinx]]//, Vol. 5 No. 12, Feb. 1907, p. 136.)+An audio convincer was added by John Northern Hilliard in //[[https://askalexander.org/display/38603/The+Sphinx/8|The Sphinx]]//, Vol. 3 No. 12, Feb. 1905, p. 152. He suggested covering the glass with a newspaper that had been doubled over. Sandwiched between the sheets was a second, secreted half dollar. This allowed the magician to lap the glass, while still being able to later tap the top of the "glass" to hear a clinking sound, further preventing anyone from suspecting that the glass is already gone. Hilliard also includes a feint to create doubt that the coin is still under the glass, giving even more focus on the coin when the glass is raised to lap it.
  
-In the October 1919 issue of //[[http://askalexander.org/display/38787/The+Magic+wand+and+magical+review/206|The Magic Wand]]//, Vol. 8 No. 8, p. 160, Walter Gibson described the ploy of putting a coin under the inverted glass and pretending it is the coin, not the glass, that will vanish, thereby lending misdirection for the lapping of the glass. This ploy seems to be a near reinvention of that described in //The Art of Legerdemain Discovered//. Gibson does not claim the idea as original, but implies it may not be well known to his readers.+An interesting variant was marketed by Hamley Bros. in 1907, in which a coin and sugar cube are placed into the glass. When the paper is smashed down, the glass and coin are seen to have vanished, but the sugar cube remains on the table. (See the ad in //[[http://askalexander.org/display/38615/The+Sphinx/4|The Sphinx]]//, Vol. 5 No. 12, Feb. 1907, p. 136.)
  
 {{tag>effect}} {{tag>effect}}

Page Tools

Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Imprint & Privacy Policy