I don’t want to be writing this post. The night before Like Cards In Rain was published I had an epiphany, realizing how relevant the recently released Evoke deck would be to the topic.

I intended to be lazy about it, to just include a quick addendum at the end, but then I fell asleep and the post went live. Oops.

So now I have to write an actual post about Evoke, which I didn’t want to do. Ripping on Craig Petty is getting old. We’ve already talked about EDCeipt (which, besides what we’ve said, comes with unusable Tyvek props only a professional could get away with, because nobody will think these came from a store), RED, his lazily edited overly long tutorial videos, and his shilling problem. Plus, there are lots of good reasons to like the thing.

But I do think I have a take that’s a bit unique, and focuses on something Andy of the Jerx only briefly mentioned. It helps that I actually own a copy of the product.

First, let’s talk about the relevancy to Like Cards In Rain. This will NOT fix the problem with memorability. At all. You can’t replace playing cards with other cards and magically make it more memorable. The post wasn’t called Like Playing Cards In Rain.

Okay, that’s enough about that. Let’s get into the thing Andy only briefly mentioned.

Here’s the thing. During “The Matt Test” for Evoke (a feature of Craig Petty’s Magic TV where he will test new magic tricks on someone named Matt, who is purportedly a magician but is blown away by Out Of This World) Matt actually identifies a problem with this deck without realizing it, and Craig nods and agrees, seeing it as a positive much like Matt.

Let’s observe.

“You’re going to be able to fucking destroy people with that.”

“Mm-hm.”

Let’s take The Web by Jim Pace, noted pedophile. (What a hell of a phrase.) This was a popular trick for a number of years and is still seen in a positive light by some.

I hope I don’t need to explain why scaring the shit out of the participant is a bad idea.

Evoke is a more subtle manifestation of this phenomenon of, well, evoking negative emotions in your audience and mistaking it for a good reaction, but it’s still a bad thing to do.

Imagine if an Arab person is watching you do a trick and the Xenophobia card is selected. That’s not going to make them feel great! A depressed person being asked to remember the last joyful moment they had? Come on…

I’m not saying this is what the Evoke deck relies on. I am saying it is a major oversight, and a weakness.

So, what would I use Evoke for?

I would focus on the spectator doing the magic, first off. Here’s the only trick I can imagine myself doing with Evoke at the moment. If I ever actually do this, I’ll update you all in an Odds and Ends post or something. Realistically, I don’t see it happening.

You pick out a card and challenge them to guess the emotion you’re thinking of. You maintain a poker face, or act out some nonsensical thing that suggests no particular emotion at all. They guess correctly.

Method? The cards are in stack order. You place a card they are likely to name on the table, like Joyful. If they do, you have a hit. Otherwise, you grab the named card and do your favorite tabled switch, then turn the card over to reveal they guessed correctly.

Advanced variation: You don’t let them familiarize themselves with the emotions first. You count “happy” or anything similar as a hit for Joyful, because they will. This should make it much more effective, but you’ll also have to think on the fly about which emotion is closest, all while still having to cut to it and switch it out afterwards.

That’s about the extent of what I want to say about this. It’s a shame how little discussion there is of this flaw, for how much hype there is about the actual project.

Do I think Evoke is bad? No. Do I think it’s cheesy? Well, again, Andy Jerxmann’s already said everything I want to say there. Do I think it’s a stupid idea to have a card labeled Xenophobia in a deck for magic? Very much so.

See you tomorrow. Peace.