(Close Window)
Topic: Combining rings and strings
Message: Posted by: funsway (Oct 30, 2009 08:01AM)
I feel that the use of natural, everyday objects is more magical than using artificial props. For me, holding up a 2" harness ring is not natural and therefore makes the object suspect, whereas finger rings are natural, especially if borrowed. Holding up a piece of cord is not natural either. If I have a tied cord around my neck with a ring on it I have a necklace that might be natural in a 'hippi' sort of way. Now, I untie the knot and remove the ring. To me this action supports the idea the both the cord and ring are unprepared. What say you? Does it make a difference if a Chinese coin or medallion is used instead?
Message: Posted by: Christopher Rinaldi (Oct 30, 2009 08:31AM)
Shouldn't it be natural for a "magician" to carry around strange and unique objects?
Message: Posted by: KURT MOORE LARSON (Oct 30, 2009 10:18AM)
I support Christopfer on this count... wholeheartedly... as it would be to see "Merlin" and "Mandrake" with different items they might work with. Not all magicians are cut from the same cloth. Just my 2 cents again.
Message: Posted by: vinsmagic (Oct 30, 2009 11:06AM)
Funsway no need for a 2inch ring you could borrow a womans bracelet and perform the same effect. this is what I do
vinny
Message: Posted by: funsway (Oct 30, 2009 01:19PM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-30 09:31, Christopher Rinaldi wrote:
Shouldn't it be natural for a "magician" to carry around strange and unique objects?
[/quote]

Just my early training I suppose. If I had just held a piece of rope my mentors would have asked, "Why do you have a piece of rope? What does this have to do with your last effect? How does this fit into your routine." Of course it is OK to hold up something strange for the setting, but then the spectators will think it is gimmicked and want to examine it. Using items natural to the setting minimizes the need for inspection and (for me) increases the sense of magic.

but, either way, the question is whether having an object hanging on a cord gives it a greater sense of legitimacy. If Merlin takes a necklace from around his neck is that better than just holding up a rope and a medallion?
Message: Posted by: vinsmagic (Oct 30, 2009 02:37PM)
Take off your shoe lace and borrow a ring or bracelet and you did it
vinny
Message: Posted by: Scott Fridinger (Oct 30, 2009 03:40PM)
I hand out the rope/string. Done.

Wearing a ring on a string around your neck and doing magic with it still seems proppy to me. So to each his own.

I do use my own wedding ring, but it belongs there, more so than around my neck. Again, it is examinable.
Message: Posted by: Jaz (Oct 30, 2009 04:13PM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-30 15:37, vinsmagic wrote:
Take off your shoe lace and borrow a ring or bracelet and you did it
vinny
[/quote]

I actually did this at a bachelor party years ago. Had one guy remove his shoelace and another his wedding band.
Good time.
Message: Posted by: Christopher Rinaldi (Oct 30, 2009 05:37PM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-30 17:13, Jaz wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-10-30 15:37, vinsmagic wrote:
Take off your shoe lace and borrow a ring or bracelet and you did it
vinny
[/quote]

I actually did this at a bachelor party years ago. Had one guy remove his shoelace and another his wedding band.
Good time.
[/quote]

I've had to do this a few times out of neccesity, I was somewhere caught w/o a single trick on me, not even a T.T.

I had to use my trick brain.

There was this one time I was hired for $50 to do a a private party magic show at this couples house. I had hardly any magic props, I requested they buy two packes of playing cards and to make availabe their junk drawer.

With that junk drawer and it's contents I was able to do many magic tricks and performed for well over an hour.

Sadly, I had no mentors, just library books.
Message: Posted by: funsway (Oct 30, 2009 05:45PM)
Great answers guys -- related to some effect I am not planning to do. I don't want to get opinions on the best Ring on String approach -- just an answer to a question. So, I guess I am not asking it correctly.

you have objects XXX and YYY. You can hold XXX in your fingers and do a magic trick with it. Same for YYY. Or you can choose to start with YYY hanging on XXX and take it off -- then perform a trick with each separately, and maybe together but that is not important. Displaying the objects together says something about the objects: YYY actually has a hole in it. XXX is strong enough to hold YYY, etc. For me, displaying the two together proves the naturalness of both to some degree. Does anybody agree? Or have some experience as to the contrary?
Message: Posted by: magicians (Oct 30, 2009 09:24PM)
Rather cryptic, sounds like too much XXX.
Strangely enough I agree.
Now all you need is EV (entertainment value)

My opinion is that you have the objects you describe, and each have a classic routine, a proven routine. You've gotten applause, response, even laughter.

Theorizing and compiling does not get it done. The proof is in the performance.
-------------
Back to your original question as to whether some object you carry is natural or not. I say if the object is indeed everyday, it need not be something you might carry or have on you. It can be a finger ring, but a harness ring could add some spice to your story. The premise of a keepsake or an artifact justifies your having it. People go to flea markets, antique sales etc. Your story line of how you came to acquire the item more than justifies its use in a routine.
-------------------
A mysterious story line (look at Ron Daytons work of spooky or religious patter using rope) can justify any object you present to a spectator. If the objects you use are too "ordinary", than you need not carry them, you can borrow them.
------------
I find a Chinese coin is as effective as an amulet as both are equally out of place from normal pocket fare. The spectator will attribute anything you use as being gimmicked or suspicious if you do something unusual with it, so you can't win that arguement.
--------------
In the case of having several rings attached to a rope might seem as unnatural a group of props as you could want, but I wouldn't worry about it if you can carry off the entertainment level you want. If you do a lame routine, the props are not gonna matter anyway.
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Oct 31, 2009 01:45AM)
I tell I just came back from a Merry Go Round and grabbed the brass ring. Take out a cord from your pocket and say you tie it up for safety, or whatever you want... it doesn't matter.
Message: Posted by: funsway (Oct 31, 2009 04:47AM)
Well, the experience of the contibutors here certain supports that Ring on String effects are alive and well as a magical venue. Yet they do not seem to attract the interest of the younger set. Maybe because it is hard to make a good YouTube video of the audience interaction, though some of the available DVD's are great.

but, you'all have helped with my quandary,
thanks
Message: Posted by: magicians (Oct 31, 2009 06:19AM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-31 05:47, funsway wrote:
Well, the experience of the contibutors here certain supports that Ring on String effects are alive and well as a magical venue. Yet they do not seem to attract the interest of the younger set. Maybe because it is hard to make a good YouTube video of the audience interaction, though some of the available DVD's are great.

but, you'all have helped with my quandary,
thanks
[/quote]
The attention span of the "younger set", is problematic as they have either ATD or the attention span of a gnat. The girls, if you find them in a clutch are giddy or drunk, and the guys are in a pride with beers in one hand and glazed eyes. You can't get their undivided attention because you (and I) are not "hot". On the street, your approach to get the attention has to be fast like a pick up line. Your street story cannot be patter driven, the approach has to be a command otherwise you come across as an old man looking for a hand-out.
If you have a walk-around controlled room, and work on groups of four to 6 seated adults, you have to be invited to that table, have the chair ready for you, and their undivided attention. Snappy lines rather than patter are the name of the game, story lines are BS, props that you use should be as bizarre as possible and not normal unless you borrow them.
The routine has to be confident, so unless you already have the bollucks to jump in and perform a smart set, the themed routine will not play well.
Action is the name of the game, a preamble or setup to the effect will lose your young audience very fast. Your first startling effect must come within 10 seconds of your arrival and you must pick one participant in the group to "work on". They will watch you if you have captivated their friend.
----------
The older audience will respond to patter and story line, for the younger, its "watch this", and just do the magic in their hand.
------------
You probably knew all this, but I don't care if its a ring and spring, a sponge ball, or ring on rope. You must have all eyes on the object. If the magic is crisp and strong, you can attract the interest of the younger set. You can only do the ring and string once you have them captivated and
"with you".
Message: Posted by: funsway (Oct 31, 2009 07:49AM)
Right on, Ian -- but there is a sadness there for me. I can develop routines for audiences that don't exist, and create new effects that no one will see because they require practice and audience engagement. So, I read and participate in many threads, hoping to find what the magician of today wants. I find mostly confusion and fear, ego and a desire to contol and a desire to purchase trust/ability rather than earn it. Where is the magic in that?
Message: Posted by: magicians (Oct 31, 2009 11:09AM)
You are not alone, except that instead of asking questions you might want to put yourself out there. I use this forum for just that (so does Pete Biro and others).
I have literally woken up after a magic dream and put the raw attempt on video and shoot it out in a thread for approval (in my shorts and a tea shirt and a very sleepy face). At times, it might be a solution to someones request and other times, it will be a tutorial of what I think an effect should look like.
Dances with ropes was like that, I shot raw footage and put it in posts, then combined the solutions into one effect. This media lends itself to shut-ins like me to create effects and get the feedback I need without ever performing the effect live.
-------------------
Now, I do have a local club and one a little farther away to try these effects out. I have been also known for doing unproven material at the clubs annual stage shows. That is where you need thick skin and a set of bollucks to to just try and do the material out, and even ask your live magic audience how to improve or what to delete.
-------------
If you take even a bad video of your idea (print does not do it) and send it to me or post it for comment, you will get an idea of the marketability or whether your performance idea is worth pursuing.
---------------
In my case, I work out a method first, perform the method, and I never attach a patter or reason to perform it. The vast magic audience will do the performance, your job is to create the routine or suggestion. And I disagree with your mentor in that there does not have to be a reason for every object. The end justifies the effect and the props and later on you can work on why you used the odd object.
------------------
You seem to like to write those manuscripts and I just don't have the attention span to follow text so I need a visual.
-----------
You should also do a lecture, and during that, try out those moves you need feedback on.
Right now, I have new effects that I am convinced will be great lecture material, I will be throwing it out there in Daytona next week. Raw, unproven material for their yea or nay.
Message: Posted by: vinsmagic (Oct 31, 2009 11:30AM)
Doing a ring and string routine requires no patter at all the effect speaks for its self...unless you audience is 5years old or younger
Message: Posted by: funsway (Oct 31, 2009 02:33PM)
I value the input from both you sages and hope this discussion helps others also. To some extent I am imprisoned by the fact that I learned magic without video and have difficulty accepting that others need it, coupled with a lack of confidence that seeing a tiny window of an effect will help the viewer understand the broader elements that make and effect work. Yes, I could send a crummy video to either of you and get useful feedback on its 'workability', but can't see how to translate that into instructions that the masses of magicians can get excited about. Perhaps Ian is correct in that I just can't worry about how a trick will be presented -- just provide the technique and forget it.

I also cannot do as you suggest. As caregiver for both of my parents I am mostly housebound and have no one to shoot a video. Because of physical disabilties I cannot even properly perform many of the effects I can create or document from earlier presentations. The answer is patience, I guess, not something I am good at. I will take you up on your offer though, and rely on your experience to see the magic despite the presentation medium.

I did not do my mentors justice -- their point was that you can't just jump from trick to trick, holding up a shoelace one moment and a pitcher of milk in the next. The object doesn't need logic, but your routine does. I will just have to accept that proper routining doesn't apply to modern performance settings. This means I have to get down to producing magic tricks rather than effects that produce magic.
Message: Posted by: magicians (Oct 31, 2009 03:41PM)
The adage that the whole is equal to the sum of its parts.
As you develop one routine that is solid, you will see how a new object or move fits. Most magicians who aspire to create new routines and magic tend to want to re-invent what has already been done.
------------------
Your "necklacy" effect is an open book version of what other magicians carry in a close-up case. You, instead have everything on a necklace. And, for a Renaissance fair, I think ts perfect, or a clown that doesn't have pocket, its great.
------
So, as you are confident of each new additional object, add it to your necklace. I think it will be a versatile tool as long as what you do has entertainment value.
I think that you are lucky, not to have seen videos so that your approach is fresh.
Message: Posted by: funsway (Oct 31, 2009 05:13PM)
Thanks Ian, now and for the help you provided moths ago. I also have new effects for coins, cups and other venues -- and am faced by the same problems. Some represent a new approach to presenting certain effects that doesn't lend itself to video, so I write 60 pages of explanation that few will read. If I try and reduce it to simple trick the baby gets thrown out with the bath water.

It may be an unsolvable problem, but creating new magic effects is all that I have now -- or taking what I developed while performing years ago and trying to explain it. I don't want to waste time on re-inventing anything, or even "adding onto" something beaten to death. That is why I do run ideas past those "in the know." I find out that I do have something new. What then? I am currently working with Bill Palmer on some ideas that will take a whole series of lessons to master -- four months of work and still not done because I need photos and even video clips that I can't shoot. I am not complaing, of course -- just looking for soem priorites from those who have walked this path before.

and yes, I do have some new ring and Rope ideas that did not spring from NeckLacy, but wound up in the writing to seem similar. As a result I could wind up re-writing that routine. There is no end ;-)
Message: Posted by: Nala Nosmoht (Oct 31, 2009 06:26PM)
In my ring/rope routine I (at the start drop my 2" harness ring into my sleeve at the top) and at the point when I want to produce it,I approach a woman in the audience , drop my hand to my side were it drops into my palm ,and I reach into her hair and thank her for the use of her earring. Always gets a big laugh.
Sometimes we analyze too much. I don't think too many are going to question the prop itself
Message: Posted by: funsway (Oct 31, 2009 07:43PM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-31 19:26, Nala Nosmoht wrote:
Sometimes we analyze too much. I don't think too many are going to question the prop itself
[/quote]

unfortunately, magicians are the only ones I get to talk with ;-)
Message: Posted by: magicians (Oct 31, 2009 10:31PM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-31 20:43, funsway wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-10-31 19:26, Nala Nosmoht wrote:
Sometimes we analyze too much. I don't think too many are going to question the prop itself
[/quote]

unfortunately, magicians are the only ones I get to talk with ;-)
[/quote]
That's the problem, don't talk to magicians. As far as video clips, I was shooting some of my clips on a kodak still camera. It has movie

capability. Those still movie cams and even good video cams can be had for around $100. I have been video taping myself since 1983.
Message: Posted by: Christopher Rinaldi (Nov 1, 2009 09:33AM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-31 20:43, funsway wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-10-31 19:26, Nala Nosmoht wrote:
Sometimes we analyze too much. I don't think too many are going to question the prop itself
[/quote]

unfortunately, magicians are the only ones I get to talk with ;-)
[/quote]

Oh my! I'm so sorry to hear this.

:)
Message: Posted by: wcoach (Nov 1, 2009 01:16PM)
I am looking for a good ring and string video, and suggestions?
Message: Posted by: Jaz (Nov 1, 2009 03:32PM)
[quote]
On 2009-11-01 14:16, wcoach wrote:
I am looking for a good ring and string video, and suggestions?
[/quote]

If you're talking finger rings L&Ls "World's Greatest Magic-Finger Ring Magic" is a good place to start.
Message: Posted by: vinsmagic (Nov 1, 2009 06:12PM)
Jaz true but if your looking for ring and string then Bob Miller's "relentless ring and string "and Gregory Wilsons's "Ringleader" is the place to start