Raised by a Witch: My Story of Growing Up in a Graveyard

Born in a graveyard raised by a witch The phrase "born in a graveyard raised by a witch" carries an air of mystery and intrigue. It immediately captures the imagination, sparking curiosity about the circumstances and experiences of the individual in question. It conjures up images of an unconventional and perhaps even supernatural upbringing, shrouded in a dark and mystic setting. The notion of being born in a graveyard is inherently eerie and thought-provoking. Graveyards are places of final rest, often associated with death and the supernatural. To be born within these confines suggests a connection to the otherworldly, a blending of the realms of the living and the deceased.

by Relish » Oct 29th, '13, 23:42

If magic is what you re trying to display then just use the simplest method available, using anything over complicated just so you i don t mean you, or anyone, particular; just a general you feel better about having used that method is effectively something you are doing solely for yourself, it is not seen by the spec and has no bearing on their end perception. To then bring out your switched deck is bad magic in my opinion and is akin to those horrible suggestions to place your packet trick in a switching wallet after the trick, then remove them again and hand them for inspection.

To be born within these confines suggests a connection to the otherworldly, a blending of the realms of the living and the deceased. Moreover, the phrase implies that the individual was raised by a witch. Witches, in folklore and popular culture, are typically portrayed as possessing magical powers and possessing a deep knowledge of the mystical arts.

talkmagic.co.uk

First of, let me emphasize, I am not asking for a reveal, rather a point in the right direction, books, dvds, the like.

The owner of my local bar/club loves magic, he has seen a huge variety of what I do as we trade free-bar for me practicing there. He is also a professional pool player, and has invited me to meet the world trick shot champion, and maybe perform 1 or 2 tricks. I'm really excited about meeting this guy, and would like to do a little extra special something for when I meet him.

I remember, as a child, I saw a tv program where a magician spread a deck of cards, face-down, on a pool table. Someone could then hit the que ball across the table, bouncing off the cushions, eventually allowing the ball to land on/near one card, which was predicted ahead of time.

I thought this was perfect, so I did some research and found a great idea of how it could be done using a ma*ked deck on the table, and an ID as the prediction.

However apparently there is a method that allows a much cleaner prediction (such as having just 1 card in your pocket) but for the life of me cannot think how this would be accomplished without an ungimmicked pool table or very strict instructions on how to hit the que ball.

So I ask, does anyone have any ideas, or directions to books which could aid this subject? Or perhaps any other tricks that would suit this theme of a performance?

Edit: I suppose another option would be to use a d**k s**tch and a deck full of 52 d****cates on the table..but this would probably leave me very vulnerable.

DanielJosephGriffin Junior Member Posts: 23 Joined: Aug 26th, '13, 16:59 Location: Cumbria, United Kingdom

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by Lawrence » Oct 28th, '13, 14:36

Don't over complicate.
Keep it simple

Either a one way deck on the table or use an ID as the reveal

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by bmat » Oct 28th, '13, 18:25

Have you ever seen the trick Future Foretold? In short: Magician puts one card in his pocket. A full deck is dealt one at a time onto the table. When the spectator says stop the magician reaches into his pocket and pulls out the card. It matches the card that was stopped at.

I'm thinking this could be applied here because it would not matter where the ball stops. Of course now that I type this out I see a potential problem. Never mind.

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by naychandler1 » Oct 28th, '13, 18:40

For this scenario i would totally recommend looking into ' looch's pool trick?' on his lecture with penguin magic.

basically, you and your opponent play a mental game of pool but using just your hands, the opponent decides on 2 balls each time for you to pot and you give him the chance of 2 of his balls etc etc, until the last 3 balls remain - which has been predicted by in advance via an envelope or however you choose.

A true stunner of an effect and this would be perfect for your needs .

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by FTHO » Oct 28th, '13, 19:17

I was just about to recommend Looch's pool trick, but was beaten to it. It's really strong.

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by jim ferguson » Oct 29th, '13, 03:50

The mentioned use of the Id and ma**ed deck combination is exellent for this effect.

There are also things like Marc Oberons Bang On (I think that's what its called), which will give the illusion of a single card prediction. There was one that had the card in an envelope as well.

You could limit the choices by using a repeating stack of say 10 cards (50 card deck). This would dramatacally reduce the number of predictions required which would open up more possibilities. If the spectator turns over any cards (which he will), it is likely to be only one or two. It would be preferable if these were ma**ed though, which may prove expensive, but you could easily do this yourself.

If taking this approach you could use two in**xes, 5 on each side. This would be very easy to manage.

You could also consider John Kennedys new(ish) Mystery Boxes. These are available for billet work as well as cards now. You could have the box on the edge of the pool table right from the start, yet inside is a single folded piece of paper with the correct card written on it.
Same in**xes as above but with billets instead of cards.

jim ferguson Advanced Member Posts: 1594 Joined: Sep 13th, '09, 19:30 Location: Isle of Arran (38:SH)

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by jim ferguson » Oct 29th, '13, 22:10

On re-thinking this I think three banks of seventeen would be better than ten in each bank. There will be much less chance of anything being spotted.
Your in**xes would then have eight each - the seventeenth being in your wallet.

jim ferguson Advanced Member Posts: 1594 Joined: Sep 13th, '09, 19:30 Location: Isle of Arran (38:SH)

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by Relish » Oct 29th, '13, 23:42

Third vote for Loochs routine, i saw it on his dvd from Alakazam, it really is amazing.

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by DanielJosephGriffin » Nov 5th, '13, 16:25

Thank you everyone for the help!

I purchased Looch's DVD and the trick looks great! I'll just have to inquire that the table uses numbered balls, as I know allot (in the UK atleast) use a blank Red & Yellow ball setup.

Regardless, the DVD seems to have some great stuff I could make use of. Thanks again!

DanielJosephGriffin Junior Member Posts: 23 Joined: Aug 26th, '13, 16:59 Location: Cumbria, United Kingdom

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by mdawg » Nov 6th, '13, 09:22

What about oddball/kurotsuke with pool balls?

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by Ted » Nov 7th, '13, 14:54

If you don't want to use an in*ex you could use a Himber or Z-fold wallet. With double-sided cards that gives you a four-way out, which would work with a banked deck containing four different values.

Or use a 'regular' marked deck and a Sw*mi

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by kartoffelngeist » Nov 8th, '13, 13:01

I'd have them select a card, have them shuffle it back in to the deck, and have them spread the cards face down all over the table. Once the ball is hit and settles on (or at least clearly near) one card, gather all the other cards up and pocket them, then dramatically reveal that the ball landed on their card.

One way deck would do this nicely without complicating anything.

I suppose you could palm off the selection, return it to the top once the cards are gathered up (nice and easy, the cards are all over the place) and then use a Mexican turnover to reveal the card - but why bother.

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by Lawrence » Nov 8th, '13, 14:05

If magic is what you're trying to display then just use the simplest method available, using anything over complicated just so you (i don't mean you, or anyone, particular; just a general you) feel better about having used that method is effectively something you are doing solely for yourself, it is not seen by the spec and has no bearing on their end perception. Basically it's magical masturbation.
But, to be fair, if that's what you want to do then that is what you should do

However if you're doing a display of skill rather than a display of magic then fill your boots!

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by kartoffelngeist » Nov 8th, '13, 14:13

I can see why people worry about one way decks, but there's really no need. Lets assume you've done some other bits with cards, put them away and now you take out the one way deck. There's no reason for anyone to think that you've went through 52 packs of cards and taken out all the 3s of clubs and put them together. Who does that?

You don't even have to do a fancy deck switch, take them out of a different pocket. Nobody would be sad enough to carry around 2 packs of cards.

You've also gathered them up and put them away before anything remotely suspicious happens. You're clean before the reveal!
Just remember to tell everyone you have 'a perfectly normal deck of cards'. :p

That, and letting a spec shuffle a one way deck is a bigger thrill than magical masturbation

Re: Pool Table Card Trick?

by jim ferguson » Nov 8th, '13, 23:08

I strongly disagree with some of the points and the method mentioned in the above posts.

I'll write this as in the context of this thread and in particular, the solution I put forth.

Your arguement that a more complicated method for any given effect is both unnesesarry and "magical masterbation" is ludicrous. As is the assertion that a more complicated method is used for the sole purpose of the performer feeling good for having used the method and that the method has no bearing on their end perception.

Method has much to do with their end perception. Not all methods are equal and for any given effect there will usually be a few methods we can choose from - the simplest of these won't nesesarally be best. For example you - are performing an ace assembly with DFers and you are to make the face-up aces change into other cards. There are dozens and dozens of ways of doing this, the simplest is probably to gather up all 12 cards, turn them over and spread them. However there are ways in which the cards can changed one at a time, even visually. It may be more complicated and require more work to "get down" but I don't think anyone who chooses the sleight version does so for self gratification. It is used because it is the better, more magical and more deceptive option. I personally have no preferance to sleight heavy or "easy" methods, I simply look for the most magical, deceptive and streamlined outcome and use whichever method achieves this best.

Which brings me to the effect in question. The method I suggested is perhaps a bit more work than using a one way deck, but in my opinion is far superior. Here is my arguement -

The deck I mentioned can be used for other effects prior to the pool table trick. The banks can be made up of cards of your choosing and the duplicates offer further posibilities. There is no switch required before the pool table trick and the cards can be left spread on the table (for a suitable time of course, not indefinately).
The use of the force deck requires a switch at some point and must be removed from the table immedietly before or after the chosen card is revealed. The deck can only be used for this effect which means carrying two decks.

Gathering up the cards and putting them away before revealing the card is psycologically wrong. Many magicians are of the opinion that you should start with a normal deck, then switch to any gimmicked ones because after they have handled the deck they will carry on with the notion that the deck is regular. This is wrong. An audience is interested in an object (be it cards, coins, anything) AFTER something macical has happened with/to that object, NOT BEFORE. This is usually the case even when that object is their own. This means a moment after the effect has sunk in they will be looking for a solution and at this moment they will probably reach for the cards on the table to turn over one or two. To have quickly gathered up and pocketed the cards by this point is going to have any thinking spectator wondering why - and trick cards is the most obvious answer. To then bring out your switched deck is bad magic in my opinion and is akin to those horrible suggestions to place your packet trick in a switching wallet after the trick, then remove them again and hand them for inspection.

The basic effect is very open to the "duplicates" theory so this must be addressed either implicitely or subtly somehow. To someone thinking along these lines, immedietely gathering up the cards and getting rid of them is EXACTLY what they would expect you to do if they were correct. What they WOULD NOT expect is for you to be so casual about leaving them on the table for the participant. The helper will almost definetely turn over a card or two a moment after the effect has sunk in and this, I believe, is an important and deceptive part of the routine. It sells not only to him, but to everyone else, the "fact" that the deck is genuine and the ball could indeed have stopped on ANY card - all with no switches, further handling or funny buisness whatsoever.
The general public aren't as stupid as many magicians seem to think and the "all the cards are the same" theory will certainly enter many thinking minds - it is the most obvious solution to something like this and not just to magicians.

If I was to do this effect (which I have no intention) I'd definetely choose the solution I put forward, which in my opinion is far more deceptive than a force deck (for this particular effect). Considering the fact I would only need one deck for this and other effects and the apparent fairness and directness as far as the spectator is concerned it seems a no brainer to me. Yes the index may involve a little extra work to get smooth but this is minimal. My solution has nothing to do with the performer feeling clever. I chose the procedure simply because of its ease and deceptiveness, it also subtly cancels the duplicates theory.

jim ferguson Advanced Member Posts: 1594 Joined: Sep 13th, '09, 19:30 Location: Isle of Arran (38:SH)

Either a one way deck on the table or use an ID as the reveal

Being raised by a witch implies a childhood infused with magic, spells, and enchantment. It suggests exposure to a rich tapestry of supernatural experiences and teachings that are far removed from the norm. Taken together, the phrase "born in a graveyard raised by a witch" paints a picture of a unique and extraordinary life. It hints at a childhood that strays far from the conventional, one characterized by a melding of the natural and the supernatural. It evokes a sense of wonder, raising questions about the individual's identity, powers, and abilities. It invites further exploration and imagination, inviting the listener or reader on a journey into a world where the boundaries between the seen and unseen are blurred..

Reviews for "Witchy Childhood Memories: Growing Up Surrounded by the Dead"

1. John - 2/5 stars - While the concept of being born in a graveyard raised by a witch sounded intriguing, I found it to be quite underwhelming. The story lacked depth and the characters felt one-dimensional. The writing style also left much to be desired, with numerous grammatical errors and awkward sentence structures. Overall, I was disappointed with this book and would not recommend it.

2. Emily - 2/5 stars - I had high hopes for "Born in a graveyard raised by a witch" but unfortunately, it fell short of my expectations. The plot seemed promising at first, but it quickly became convoluted and confusing. The pacing was inconsistent, and I found myself struggling to stay engaged with the story. Additionally, the characters lacked development and I couldn't connect with any of them. I was ultimately left feeling unsatisfied with this book.

3. Sarah - 1/5 stars - "Born in a graveyard raised by a witch" was a complete disappointment for me. The writing was clunky and awkward, making it difficult to enjoy the story. The plot had potential, but it was poorly executed and felt disjointed. The characters were uninteresting and lacked depth, which made it hard for me to care about their fates. I found myself skimming through the pages, hoping it would improve, but unfortunately, it did not. Overall, I would not recommend this book to anyone.

A Witch's Nursery: The Unique Childhood of Graveyard-Dwelling Witches