ERDNASE

Discuss general aspects of Genii.
Brad Henderson
Posts: 3565
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Henderson » December 4th, 2017, 11:33 pm

jkeyes1000 wrote:
observer wrote:
Brad Henderson wrote:<>but to your point, i have created at least two pieces which featured or were based on gorillas. one was a take off of an ernie kovacs bit <>
seems like chris is on a wild goose chase again



1) The Nairobi Trio?

2), excuse me, but that's "rrrild roose rase" ...


I think Mr. Henderson is inadvertently supporting his opponent's argument (again). All he demonstrates is that his interest in gorillas is greater than that of most of humanity. I have no books about primates in my collection, and this is the only time in my life I have written about them.


you have made MY point. chris's claim
is that a book indicated interest in a subject and that means the man could possible be an expert in that subject.

well, one would think an expert would have studied more than one book on the topic and i'm not sure how many card cheating and magic books gallway has. for some reason chris makes it sound like he had many

did he?

if he isn't worried about having his name in a book on the subject one should expect there to be many books on the subject - card cheating, not gambling in general

where there?

but thing is, even though i have done all these things, i don't have an interest in gorillas per se. i have an interest in 1) books on unusual subjects 2) haunted houses - love the gorilla room and 3) was friends with a man who did a version of the nairobi trio and i tracked down the original

so to conclude that the presence of 1 book indicates i'm a gorilla trainer
would be inaccurate.

to me, one book - with a name in it - assuming the author wanted to avoid discovery discounts the candidate

this is when chris makes up an imaginary scenario and then calls me names.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 4494
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 5th, 2017, 12:08 am

lybrary wrote:
Leonard Hevia wrote:
lybrary wrote:But if you add it to the magic and gambling books Gallaway had in his library it supports the notion that he was interested in that subject.


Chris--are you trying to sneak that by again? There is no evidence that Gallaway owned more than one magic book--The Expert.

The statement - "Edward Gallaway had magic and gambling books." - is both factually and grammatically correct. . . Please stop your silly and incorrect comments.


It's not the way you are currently phrasing it - "Edward Gallaway had magic and gambling books" -- that is so egregiously wrong. What you are saying now is only highly misleading. It's versions like this one -- "Add to this that Gallaway had magic books in his library. I don't know anybody who has magic books in their library but can't perform a couple of tricks."

Bill Mullins
Posts: 4494
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 5th, 2017, 1:25 am

lybrary wrote:I am not the only one to note that the high quality of Erdnase's writing requires practice. You don't just wake up one day and write like Erdnase. You need a good amount of writing experience to achieve that level.


If you looked at John Grisham at the end of 1989 believing the above, you'd have to conclude that his novel "A Time to Kill" must not be any good, since he hadn't written anything before it. But you'd be wrong. The inexperienced writer of the book went on to sell 2 million copies of his book.

See also, Tom Clancy (first book, Hunt for Red October, also 2 million + copies sold)

Some people are just naturally good writers, and don't require extensive practice to get good enough to be published.

performer
Posts: 2250
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 10:35 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby performer » December 5th, 2017, 9:40 am

I think this is true. People that read a lot tend to be good writers although I concede not in every case. It does come naturally to some people. I think Harry Lorayne's first book on memory became an immediate best seller. Of course in many cases people get to learn a bit about writing when they go to school.

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 843
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » December 5th, 2017, 1:25 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:If you looked at John Grisham at the end of 1989 believing the above, you'd have to conclude that his novel "A Time to Kill" must not be any good, since he hadn't written anything before it. But you'd be wrong.

So let's look at Grisham. From his Wikipedia page we learn: "...his mother encouraged him to read and prepare for college..." He then got a college education, studied law, practiced law, and even was an elected representative in the Mississippi House of Representatives. All of this education and work requires extensive reading and writing (thesis, papers, essays, opinions, new law proposals, ...)

Bill Mullins wrote:See also, Tom Clancy (first book, Hunt for Red October, also 2 million + copies sold)

From his Wikipedia page: "...private Catholic Loyola High School in Towson, Maryland, from which he graduated in 1965. He then attended Loyola College (now Loyola University) in Baltimore, graduating in 1969 with a bachelor's degree in English literature." Again a multiyear higher education. And he studied English literature! Lots of reading and writing. He then worked for insurance companies. Depending on what he did there this could again include lots of reading and writing.

None of these examples are counter examples. Both had lots of writing experience before they wrote their first novel. From E.S. Andrews we know nothing of that sorts.
Lybrary.com https://www.lybrary.com/s-w-erdnase-m-11.html
preserving magic one book at a time

Bill Mullins
Posts: 4494
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 5th, 2017, 2:18 pm

So you've changed your opinion from "A person can't write well unless he's written a lot before" to "A person can't write well unless he's written or edited a lot before" to "A person can't write well unless he's written or edited or read a lot before."

Once upon a time, you believed that genes could trump "thousands of hours of deliberate practice." What made you change your mind?

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 23854
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » December 5th, 2017, 2:22 pm

This thread has degenerated into nonsense.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Chris Aguilar
Posts: 1724
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Sacramento
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Chris Aguilar » December 5th, 2017, 3:28 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:This thread has degenerated into nonsense.

Yeah, it's been this for quite some time now:

Image

User avatar
lybrary
Posts: 843
Joined: March 31st, 2013, 4:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby lybrary » December 5th, 2017, 3:32 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:So you've changed your opinion from "A person can't write well unless he's written a lot before" to "A person can't write well unless he's written or edited a lot before" to "A person can't write well unless he's written or edited or read a lot before."

As I have demonstrated, all of your supposed counter examples wrote a lot one way or another. All show in their bio some evidence that suggests that they had writing experience before they wrote their debut novel. E.S. Andrews shows none. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Nothing. He can't be Erdnase.

Bill Mullins wrote:Once upon a time, you believed that genes could trump "thousands of hours of deliberate practice." What made you change your mind?

Even the most talented need to practice. It is true that they need less than others whose genetic blueprint is not that favorable, but they all need to practice. We aren't discussing how much writing experience would be necessary to reach Erdnase level. We are talking about 'SOME evidence'. E.S. Andrews has ZERO evidence.
Lybrary.com https://www.lybrary.com/s-w-erdnase-m-11.html
preserving magic one book at a time

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 23854
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » December 5th, 2017, 3:41 pm

Okay, I don't want to see a single new post in this thread unless someone has genuinely new information or research of demonstrable value to more than one person to share. Anything else will get deleted.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Bill Mullins
Posts: 4494
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 9th, 2017, 11:57 am

On p. 75 of most editions, Erdnase lists several games in which his method of stocking can be applied. One of them is "Penuckle", which is a non-standard way of spelling "pinochle".

The OED says about the game: "A card game for two or more players, played with a pack of forty-eight cards consisting of two of each card from nine to ace, the object being to score points for various combinations and to win tricks. Also: the combination of the queen of spades and the jack of diamonds in this game." It gives as variant spellings binocle, peanukle, penuchle, penuckle, pinochle, pinocle. And the first mention of the game that the OED found in print is as follows: "1864 W. B. Dick Amer. Hoyle 127 Bézique is fast becoming popular in the United States.‥ It is known among our German brethren as Peanukle."

If you look in the Chronicling America database of scanned newspapers between 1895 and 1905, you get the following counts for variations in spelling:

pinochle 1587
pinocle 148
penuchle 67
peanukle 21 (all of these appear to be OCR errors in Polish newspapers)
penuckle 20
peanuckle 10
penukle 1 (in a German newspaper)

In the 1909 edition of Foster's Complete Hoyle, he uses "binocle" as the preferred spelling, and lists "pinochle" and Erdnase's "penuckle" only as variant spellings, suggesting perhaps that Foster did not write Expert.

observer
Posts: 282
Joined: August 31st, 2014, 5:32 am
Favorite Magician: Harry Kellar - Charlie Miller - Paul Rosini - Jay Marshall
Location: Chicago

Re: ERDNASE

Postby observer » December 9th, 2017, 2:49 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:In the 1909 edition of Foster's Complete Hoyle, he uses "binocle" as the preferred spelling, and lists "pinochle" and Erdnase's "penuckle" only as variant spellings, suggesting perhaps that Foster did not write Expert.


That's exactly what Foster would have done if he were trying to throw people off the scent.

User avatar
Brad Jeffers
Posts: 830
Joined: April 11th, 2008, 5:52 pm
Location: Savannah, GA

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Jeffers » December 9th, 2017, 2:57 pm

In the 1909 edition of Foster's Complete Hoyle, he uses "binocle" as the preferred spelling, and lists "pinochle" and Erdnase's "penuckle" only as variant spellings, suggesting perhaps that Foster did not write Expert.
He does not characterize binocle as the preferred spelling, but as the correct spelling.

The preferred spelling, as borne out by your research, is pinochle.

In your search of variant spellings you should have included binocle, which I suspect will rank near the bottom.

I don't think anyone, including Foster, would have used that spelling.

However, why someone would use penuckle in preference to the more common pinochle is interesting and may prove to be yet another clue in the mystery.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 4494
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 9th, 2017, 3:34 pm

Brad Jeffers wrote: The preferred spelling, as borne out by your research, is pinochle.


For the purposes of his Hoyle book, Foster preferred "binocle". But his references included two books I haven't seen, that muddy the waters about any conclusions that one might make regarding Foster's preferences:
Foster's Complete Pinocle (1906)
Laws of Pinochle. R. F. Foster (1908)

In your search of variant spellings you should have included binocle, which I suspect will rank near the bottom.


Yes. The hit count was only 27, but most of these were not examples of the game (which is why I didn't include the information -- it mostly bad data, moreso than the others. "Binocle" also means opera-glasses. There were also OCR errors, and it was used in foreign language newspapers in which I couldn't determine what was being talked about.)

I don't think anyone, including Foster, would have used that spelling.

????
Foster did use that spelling in his Hoyle book, to the exclusion of other spellings that are far more prevalent otherwise.

User avatar
Brad Jeffers
Posts: 830
Joined: April 11th, 2008, 5:52 pm
Location: Savannah, GA

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Jeffers » December 9th, 2017, 4:46 pm

Yes, he would, and did, use it in the Hoyle book as would be expected.

But in other contexts, I think he would probably use the more common and familiar 'Pinochle'.

I don't see why he would ever use 'Penuckle', unless of course ...
observer wrote:That's exactly what Foster would have done if he were trying to throw people off the scent.
In which case, he is so diabolically clever, that we will never figure out who he is!

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 23854
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » December 10th, 2017, 12:35 am

If you were unfamiliar with a word other than hearing it spoken, "penuckle" is a result that's not out of the question.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Tom Sawyer
Posts: 306
Joined: January 7th, 2012, 6:44 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Sawyer » December 10th, 2017, 4:39 am

Hi All,

Another game that Erdnase mentions (page 75), namely “Coon Can,” may raise issues similar to those presented by Pinochle.

From what Foster says in his 1897 Foster’s Complete Hoyle, that work contains the game’s “first complete description,” though that was under the name “Conquian” (without calling the game by any other name, as far as I noticed).

Normally (not always) it was played with a 40-card pack, though the make-up of the pack tended to be different in the US from what it was in Mexico. Apparently at that time it was primarily a two-person game, and (consistent with what Erdnase says) the cards were dealt two at a time.

Later, Foster wrote Cooncan, a separate volume published in 1913. The game has a somewhat complex history, and Foster there describes multiple versions. The cards are dealt one at a time, or two at a time, depending on the nature of the specific version.

The foregoing is based on a rather quick examination of the two Foster books mentioned, on Google books.

Short version of this post:

In any event, I have not seen Foster refer to the game as “Coon Can,” and Foster's non-use of that name again tends to support the idea that Foster did not write the Erdnase book.

And Richard, good point re “penuckle.” (That same idea occurred to me as well!)

—Tom Sawyer

User avatar
jkeyes1000
Posts: 231
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 3:12 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby jkeyes1000 » December 10th, 2017, 11:05 am

Sorry if I'm missing something, but is there any reason to believe that BOTH Foster and "Erdnase" published their works without submitting them to an editor?

Even if a writer hired soneone to type his ms. (and to correct spelling and grammatical errors), this might account for the variations.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 23854
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » December 10th, 2017, 1:13 pm

Thanks, Tom!
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine


Return to “General”