The Secret Life of Houdini

[sgf8]

Where to start? Firstly I love books with short chapters, makes for easier reading and forces you to read just a bit more then you find yourself reading a bit more and more next thing you know you have read 100 pages. This book seems very well researched, lots of pictures not only of Houdini but of people he knew, and places he went. That really helps with helping you see the world Houdini lived in, kinda sets the historical stage.

What makes this different than other Houdini biographies is the authors research into how Houdini helped out the secret service as well as the local police to fight crime. Houdini was able to travel to Russia and Germany as a magician carrying lock picks and other odd items without arousing undo suspicion. He ventured into police stations and prisons that the U.S. and England were unable to venture in. Apparently he was able to report on military conditions in these countries.

In California the authors recount stories where Houdini helped break up counterfeiting rings and bootleg operations. All the information seems well thought out and accurate. They use lots of primary sources for their research, diaries and letters of people he interacted with provide extra even more personal accounts with Houdini.

Houdini was an amazing man, truly a superhero. He guarded his reputation carefully, the authors tell one story where he sued a man in Germany who was impersonating him. I found it amusing that Houdini worked to have his name put in the dictionary.

The chapters I was most interested in were the later ones that concern Houdini's interest in the occult. The story of Houdini and Doyle has been told before, (Final Seance) Doyle saw Houdini as a genuine medium who would not admit his powers. "Doyle and the true believers despised him for standing in the way of the New Revelation." (p. 521) Houdini was very religious, he badly wanted to believe in spiritualism, he wanted to contact his mother whom he loved dearly. But every medium he encountered he felt were frauds, "Would the God that created the most breathtaking mountain ranges...stoop to manifest something as vile and base as ectoplasm?" (p. 496)

One ex-medium supposedly told Houdini about her change of heart, "I really believed in Spiritualism all the time I was practicing it...But I thought I was justified in helping the spirits out...through trickery I could get more converts....to a good and beautiful religion." (p. 490)

Houdini exposed hundreds(?) of mediums, he used plants inside spiritualist circles and exposed their tricks during his performances. His most famous nemesis was a medium called Margery who lived in Boston. Houdini exposed her on stage one night. Margery used as her spirit guide her older brother, Walter. Houdini used as part of a slate writing trick two pictures, one of Walter alive and healthy, and the second picture was of his mangled body after being hit by a train. Houdini's point was how could a sister use the death of her brother in this way.

The saddest part of the whole book was the betrayal of Houdini's wife Bess. But I don't want to ruin it for you, pick up this book (568 pages, hardcover) and you will see time fly.

Susan


<iframe src="http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=thejamesrandi-20&o=1&p=8&l=as1&asins=0743272072&fc1=000000&IS2=1&lt1=_blank&lc1=8B030A&bc1=000000&bg1=FFFFFF&f=ifr&nou=1" style="width:120px;height:240px;" scrolling="no" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" frameborder="0"></iframe>

[cj.23]

I was going to review this book myself, as I found it un-put downable. I finished it within 48 hours of purchase, and that included time cooking, working and ... well let's just say I did not sleep.

It's a superb book, and as I suppose there is not much point offering a second review, so I'll make a few comments only in addition to to the existing fine review.

Firtsly the selling point of the book was two new claims--

i) Houdini worked for the US and UK intelligence communities, and possibly others. I was not convinced. I felt the authors made a strong case he had friends in those agencies, but not that his career was particularly assisted or directed by such work, as appeared to be implied. Boringly, I think Houdini just got the breaks, worked incredibly hard and
was incredibly talented as a showman, a self promoter and a magician/escapologist. I can't see any great advantage to Scotland Yard or the Secret Service in knowing about the gaol cells of Europe, and any information Houdini could get a lower profile individual may have got too. That is not to say they did not monitor and use him in some minor way perhaps. He was a patriot. I did actually wonder if his Hungarian birth led them to suspect him.


ii) He may have been murdered by a "cult" - to use the blurb's term. The tabloid press made a big deal about this last year, and it was implied the Conan-Doyle's may have been involved. Nope - the possibility remains that Houdini was killed by a fake medium angered at exposure, but the connections between organised crime and the world of fake mediums suggested seem out of place in 1927 to me a least. Careful reading suggests poisoning while a faint possibility is not actually very likely - but a deliberate beating adding to existing medical problems and causing his death, by someone who may have been a spiritualist sympathiser? More likely.

All the facts are laid out, and the authors have made no strong claims - but this seems to have been a selling point for the book, which is a shame because it may cause people who might otherwise have read this excellent biography to ignore it as "sensationalist garbage" - which it is decidedly not.

It was a great pity that the epilogue does not tell us more, particularly about the subsequent career and unmasking fo Arthur Ford after his death. The book is also far more partisan against spychical researchers and mediums than Houdini himself. Allow me to explain briefly---

Firstly, psychical research comes over as rather monolithic. In fact so controversial was the alleged mediumship of Mina Margery Crandon that it split the American Psychical Researchers down the middle, and when the ASPR became dominated by her supporters the Boston Society for Psychical Research was established, and waged a campaign against her every bit as vehement as Houdinis. This is never mentioned once, which is surprising in the many chapters dedicated to the affair. Secondly, it is never noted what the sources are for the various accusations of sexual misconduct for the Scientific American team? I suspect many of these originated from the BSPR (who as you may have guessed I sympathize with). Similarly passing references to various other peripheral topics ar epoorly substantiated or hypotheses passed as solid fact - like the Crookes/Katie King affair. Finally, important evidence against Margery like the dentist thumbprint are mentioned only in passing - perhaps because the discoveries were not by Houdini but by psychical researchers? She had almost managed to convince the Scientific American committee -and the suggestion she was learning magic tricks, perhaps from Hereward Carrington is frankly rather odd. Carrington was a fierce sceptic, brought to psychical research because his skills as an accomplished magician were so useful. He was converted by the medium Eusapia Palladino to belief, but it should be noted that those who studied her in the Fielding Report were actually good magicians. People often assume the use of stage conjurers as experts in detecting fraudulent mediumship began with Houdini - the SPR had used them for thirty years by this time. So the presence of magicians in close proximity to Margery as investigators was far from unusual and liable proof of her fraud- it was standard practice, as it is today. (I have worked with several excellent magicians in investigations, and Richard Wiseman is quite gifted in this area as well to my certain knowledge.)

There is also a rather disturbing story about Dr Crandon - and I wish the authors told us more about investigations therein. It was new to me.

A second critique is that Houdini himself subscribed heavily to the William James "White Crow" theory of mediumship. He knew most were fakes, but believed there could theoretically be a real one, and kept looking, fairly and intelligently. He was not as was claimed a "debunker" - like most of us he would be delighted to find proof of life after death. He didn't. However the explanation that he rejected the message from his mother because a) it was written in English and b) it began with a cross 9and she was Jewish) was rather odd. Houdini would have been aware, and the authors already mentioned, that all Mrs Conan-Doyle's scripts began with her drawing a cross, to fend off "evil spirits and demonic influences." Despite having seen thsi claim in other books about Houdini, he would have known this was not part of the ostensible communication. If he claimed it was, he was lying or very forgetful, but I know of no primary source which said he did. Secondly, most mediums would claim the spirit spoke in the mediums tongue (there are exceptions) so this argument is not fatal. I however can find nothing whatsoever evidential in the platitudinous pap that was offered to Houdini as evidence, but the reasons cited for him being "angered" but it do not add up.

Next up, the authors depict Mrs Conan-Doyle as manipulative and a deceitful fake. I believe nothing can be further from the truth. She may well have used her writings as a way to control Arthur, but I see nothing to suggest she was anything other than deluded, but sincere. I would imagine this was the case with many others.

I could go on and on with minor objections - and I am sure many of those on this forum learned in the history of magic and life of Houdini could raise many many more problems. Still it is a very fine book, extremely readable, and i highly recommend it to anyone interested in Houdini or the Crandon controversy. Some topics, like his relationship with HP Lovecraft which interested me, and work in the Rationalist get only very passing mentions, while other parts of his life are chronicled in exhaustive detail, but this is definitely a book which I recommend almost unreservedly, despite my comments above.

cj x