Other Visions

What Can We Learn From Chan Canasta?
By Iain Dunford

Yes, yes... Even the title is wrong, really. It should read "What should we learn..." because, you fine ladies and gentlemen you, really should pay attention to the late, great Chan Canasta.

Polite, yet commanding.
Charming, but forthright.
Honesty within deception.
Explanations within framework.
Tell 'em what you're going to do, and do it.
Dare to be wrong.
Subtle psychology and risk and reward.

Yeah, some of them overlap, but they're what I get from Mr.Canasta everytime I watch his show or read the book(s).

Everything about Chan is a juxtaposition. Bold yet subtle, charming yet commanding. Honesty within deception.

"You want to know why you picked that card? It's because I made you..."

Oh what a beautiful double-barrelled lie.

"Here, take some cards...these will do..."

Free choice, versus...well...it's a classic I'm sure you know.

Magician versus Mental-Magician versus Mentalism.

Ah! The enternal struggle between entertainer versus entertainer versus entertainer...

See what I did there? No force involved.

Simplicity within duplicity: simple, humble, everyday looking cards. In my experience, the laypeople look at them and say, "Oh... cards..."

Chan used the simpliest of physical objects. I refuse to call them props. "Props" is a word that conjures up huge dragon monograms and ladies in tight and revealing costumes.

Hmm.... props...

Where was I?

Oh yeah: simplicity within duplicity. Chan's wonderful shotgun approach to the selection and shuffling of the cards. Normal, concise, to the point. Just like his explanations. All clearly explained, you really are in absolutely no doubt in what he wants to attempt to do.

"Please ladies and gentlemen, do not applaud because if the next experiment goes wrong, you shall have to boo..."

Honesty within deception and daring to be wrong...

Isn't it exciting to fly by the seat of your pants/skirts/shorts/tights/lycra catsuit? The sudden buzz of adrenelin as you may not quite hit, may not be 100% correct all the time. "Yeah, yeah...well done me...Next!"

Do you find it humbles you before your adoring crowd to miss just a tiny bit, to fly just a little too close to the sun once in a while? And when you fall, the crowds are there, willing you to get back up, dust yourself down and fly right up there again...

It suggests so much, on many levels, to both you as the performer, and to the audience.

His manner -- polite, measured, precise and adamant. His build -- a tall, slim gent with an excited grin and swept back hair. It all added to the air of control and power about him.

And what stood him apart from other mentalists and magicians was that he strode the scientific and psychological dressing and framework instead of the usual psychic entertainment. He stated very strongly that he didn't believe in telepathy, but his experiment would look very much like it.

"Whatever you say, it shall be so" is what he said to Ted Moult, after him picking two unseen cards, and placing them into his two pockets. Chan named the two cards, and then told Moult that whichever pocket he thought that the cards would be in, "they shall be!"... and he was right, too.

The use of psychology, to sum up a potentially disruptive person (sorry, Mr. Moult, but you were a little obnoxious), to be dared, live on TV. And it paid off.

The People newspaper would expose various mindreaders quite often those days and chased after Chan too, exposing some of his effects. However, Chan embraced that fact and was surprisingly quite open about how they "might" be done. Magicians and mentalists were often not impressed by him, except a few. Basil Horwitz loved him and, most importantly, the public did; they were mystified and entertained by this charming man with his clipped half-english/half-eastern-european accent.

His act used playing cards, books, people, letters and numbers to construct predicted sentences, words, actions and thoughts, using his very own self-labelled 'Psychomagic" (which, if you google that term nowadays, is something completely different!).

His fabled booktest which, once you read the wonderful book(s) of his work, is, to quote Mr. Maven, "a thing of terrifying beauty", and if you've ever had the brass ones to perform it you'll know how hard it can hit people. Especially if you throw the book at someone as they sit there stunned.

He didn't perform like a typical magician nor mentalist. To me, he truly embraced what he wanted and identified with in magic and mentalism, a stepping stone between true magic and psychology.and the acceptance that not everything would work: no tricks, but experiments, no rabbits or wands nor crystal ball and pentagram but pencils and paper and playing cards, no outs, no safe-bets, but excitement and wonder.

To top it all off, to show just how much self-belief the man had, to stop performing pretty much at the height of his fame (film/book of oopses and primetime BBC show) to go and do the things you love even more, that shows his true dedication and strength of character. To dare. To turn your back on it all, and paint, to enjoy casinos, to live your life the way that feels right to you...

I salute you, Mr. Canasta. You will remain a wonderful inspiration to me, and I can only hope I can contribute a fraction of the amount that you have to mentalism. If you look at some modern day performers, you can see echoes of Canasta reverberating through them. I hope to hear that echo for many years to come.

Chan Canasta - Chananel Mifelew, 1920 - 1999: Long may your memory remain.

Iain Dunford