Hi gang,

I am looking for a clever way to have my neck rope (string)attached as a necklace and easily taken off for my routine. I have experimented with different knots but none yet that satisfy my need.

basically my ring hangs of my neklace.

I hope it makes sense.

thanks.

I have an eBook called RemCut that has numerous effects with a cord as a necklace.

Hi Funsway,

do you adress the actual way to attach the cord easily as the neclkace? if yes ill be interested to purchase. where can I find it.

The key is using the attachment as a means of performing magic effects, not to ignore the powerful combination of sting and ring

How about a square knot that you spill as in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reef_Knot#Misuse_as_a_bend

What an excellent idea!

But, that said (and picking up on Funsway's suggestions) it would be nice to be able to just incorporate the ring as tied on the necklace as your first effect. In that way, you just remove the ring AND necklace as a unit and "let the magic begin". Why so?

Well, if you are going to perform some ring off rope penetrations, thematically, why would you, only in the first instance, have to untie the rope to remove the ring when, for the routine itself, the ring "magically" (and repeatedly) penetrates and can be removed from the rope?

(Thinking out loud, perhaps the first removal (i.e., the untie) is required because the ring and rope are still ordinary objects. It is only after you imbue the items with magical properties (via a hidden funken ring, a touch of the magic wand or some shimmering sparkling pixie dust, etc.) that the ring and rope can now briefly temporarily be able to be "magically" removed. In this regard, I can envision a Jay Scott Berry-type performance. As I say, just thinking out loud--and, perhaps briefly, somewhat off the subject.)

That said, I still really like your square knot idea. Very Sly(dini-ish) of you. (grin)

Mike






Funsway,

Does your RemCut ebook have a means of satisfying iwillfoolyu's initial queary?

Mike

In that case, you wouldn't be borrowing the ring I assume. How about a dupe.

In my full routine I have a number of objects on the necklace, one of which can be a ring. The untying of the cord to remove the ring implies both the ring and cord are normal. The ring can be handled by a spectator to embue it with magic, whereby it vanishes and appears back on the tied necklace. To get around the magic you cut the cord to release all of the objects, then restore the cord and continue with other effects -- the cord handled by the spectator. Many other effects are possible with the methods involved.

So, to answer what I think the questiosn are: yes, you start with the ring tied on a cord as a necklace. Yes, there is a rational for untying the cord to release the ring. Yes, the ring is visibly removed from the cord that is then retied. Yes, the ring magically gets back on the necklace. No, the ring is not now magical and must be cut off to release it. In later effects the ring and cord are magic only because they are handled by a spectator -- the magic coming from them.

In other effects the flow can be different including taking a spectator's ring on and off of the tied necklace that can be examined. SInc eother effects are possible with other objects originally on the necklace you can have an entire act on a cord. This theme is similar to my "Necklacy" that is a "Routine on a Rope" except that the effects and methods are completely different.

I also have an unpublished effect in which a pendant on a chain can be examined. The chain is cut with wire cutters and then restored and re-examined.