
Houdini was an inventor, but didn't want anybody to know - whatami
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/harry-houdini-ingenious-innovator-didnt-want-anybody-know-180961078/
======
saycheese
Maybe to the general public this is considered a secret, but not to
professionals, who even without proof would know that based on his style of
performance he had to be inventing "magic" to perform the tricks he did.

One of Houdini's best tricks was the volume of muscle he had, which was
intentionally larger than any bone mass that would obstruct the removal of any
constraint applied to him. He simply tense up as the constraint was applied,
then relax after he was hidden from the public's all seeing eye.

As Houdini said himself, "my brain is the key that sets me free."

~~~
tunesmith
Not that I know much about horses, but I took a western horseriding class as a
kid and they taught me that horses do the same thing when you saddle them -
expand their bellies so you can't tighten the saddles too much. The instructor
would give them a healthy slap in the ribcage to make them relax and then
cinch it up.

~~~
vanderZwan
Wouldn't that make it difficult for them to breathe, reducing their
performance?

------
libertymcateer
The interpretation of intellectual property law in this is completely wrong.

* Patents must have disclosure because the trade-off of monopoly rights is that you make your invention publicly available and _further the arts and sciences._

* Copyright doesn't cover functional elements - it didn't then, and it doesn't now.

* He simply kept things secret - we'd call them trade secrets today.

The description of intellectual property in this article is very misleading.
The Smithsonian should do better than this.

------
wazoox
Houdini's name is inspired by Robert-Houdin, who was himself a great inventor.
Back in the 1870, his electric chime that allowed people at the gate to ring a
bell far away in his home across the garden was considered magic; ditto the
"treasure chest" that stuck to the ground thanks to a big electromagnet.

His book "Comment on devient sorcier" ("How to be a sorcerer") explains many
of his tricks in detail.

Some are incredibly difficult though... to the point I wonder if he actually
gives the real explanation :)

------
todd8
Houdini performed at the Paramount theater in downtown Austin over 100 years
ago. If you visit that beautifully restored theater today for any performance
(I've seen Sheryl Crow and Penn and Teller there amongst others), look for a
hole in the decorated ceiling on the left side in the front. It is claimed
that Houdini put it there for a levitation illusion.

~~~
saycheese
There’s some debate how the "Houdini hole"[1] in the ceiling got there: “The
story that Charlie Root told me is a little different than what they say now.
There is a national organization of magicians who are sure it was Harry
Houdini who cut the hole in order to insert some sort of apparatus to levitate
a woman. But, Charlie, who in 1971 was one of the only living people who had
been in the theater during its glory days, told me it was Harry Blackstone, a
magician who was nowhere near as famous as Houdini. That’s all I know. I have
no idea if someone has been up there to see if there was something up
there.”[2]

[1] Photo of "Houdini Hole"
[http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iiUFWI6Wdlo/VM52B-US1lI/AAAAAAAAbk...](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iiUFWI6Wdlo/VM52B-US1lI/AAAAAAAAbkw/0BuDhROFUAI/s1600/HoudiniHole.jpg)

[2] [http://www.austinmonthly.com/Austin-
Amplified/September-2015...](http://www.austinmonthly.com/Austin-
Amplified/September-2015/10-Things-You-May-Not-Know-About-the-Paramount-
Theatre/)

------
bambax
> _The technology of a patent needs to be clearly explained so that other
> people can avoid infringing on it._

No, it's the opposite. It needs to be clearly explained so that other people
can imitate and _licence_ it.

Sure, it's very useless for a magician who needs to keep tricks hidden, but
the purpose of the patent system isn't to keep people from infringing, it's to
let inventors profit from their inventions (so that they invent more).

~~~
Zombieball
As a software engineer I (quite cynically) have viewed patents as a way to
protect IP and force people to pay you for using your solution.

Do people frequently use the patent system (either for software or product
design) as a catalogue of tools and building blocks they can use?

I imagine it must be quite time consuming and painful to go through the
licensing process. Would be cool if parents all had associated licensing terms
and costs declared up front!

~~~
alister
Nobody reads patents as a "catalogue of tools and building blocks they can
use". Nobody reads patents even to learn.

The only time anyone reads patents--at least computing patents--is if you're
preparing a new patent and need citations, or you plan to sue someone, or if
someone was suing you over a patent.

Current computing patents are written in such obtuse legal language and with
such generalities to make the claims as broad as possible, that they are
impossible to understand unless you already understand the invention. Also,
they tend to be incredibly long.

As someone who's had the displeasure of writing a couple patents and reading
many more, I can't imagine a worse way to learn about a subject than reading
patents. I'd rather read academic papers, study the object directly (take it
apart, read the source code), talk to experts, or attend conferences.

EDIT: I'm not talking about nice mechanical patents from 200 years ago like
the cotton gin. I'm talking about computing patents today.

~~~
Someone
_" Nobody reads patents even to learn."_

Even if patents were great learning sources, it would still be better not to
read them before they expire. Infringing on a patent you know of is more
expensive than infringing on one you don't know of, so, it's better to not
read patents at all so that, if it comes to that, you can confidently state
that you didn't know of the patent.

------
moomin
Amongst the odd little details about Houdini: he employed HP Lovecraft as a
ghostwriter.

~~~
saycheese
"Imprisoned with the Pharaohs" (1924), a short story ghost written by HP
Lovecraft:

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprisoned_with_the_Pharaohs](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprisoned_with_the_Pharaohs)

~~~
aptwebapps
You can read it here:
[http://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/texts/fiction/up.aspx](http://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/texts/fiction/up.aspx)

------
czbond
Fascinating article - I focused my magic learning as an escape artist magician
at 13. I remember going down long dark water slides in handcuffs trying to
"pick them" before I reached the bottom.

------
ThinkingGuy
Reading a biography of Houdini a few years ago, I realized how much of his
magic was based on what we would today call "hacking." For example: he studied
the various handcuff and lockmakers' pruducts, and would then determine ahead
of time which models were used by a particular police department. He then
would know exactly what kind master keys to hide on (or in) his body in order
to escape from any jail cell.

------
kevinwang
Did this article redirect anyone else to a bevy of mobile ads?

------
fortyseven
> Houdini was an inventor, but didn't want anybody to know

So you post it on here?! ;) (Kidding, this is neat.)

------
teddyh
> _The technology of a patent needs to be clearly explained so that other
> people can avoid infringing on it._

No. It needs to be clearly explained so that people can benefit from actually
_using_ the invention once the patent expires.

~~~
sparky_z
I realize you're trying to make a political point, but the article isn't
wrong.

Obviously both are legitimate considerations, but the quoted reason is why the
patent system isn't useful for magic tricks. If you were just worried about
public benefit, you could have the UPO seal the contents of such patents until
after expiration. That clearly wouldn't work for exactly the reason the
article gives.

~~~
kybernetikos
I believe he's trying to make an historical point for political purposes,
which isn't quite the same thing.

