In another thread Whit Haydn wrote,

"The closer the effect is to the stripped down basics, the stronger I think it is. I have not been too impressed by the use of figures. They are simply show-off flourishes that are asking for applause--juggling. If used, they should be really quick and not detract too much from the magic. Most audiences find them as boring as Chinese ribbon dancing."

No sir, I disagree.

I submit that Whit's approach to the linking rings is great. it is a very funny routine. However I do feel where the routine gains in humor, it looses in the mystery entertainment factor. It is more funny, and less magic.

The first two ring version I saw was Cellini's. I think it qualifies as a nice piece of magical entertainment. The magic is more of the focus than humor. A different approach. I was sitting in row 3, and I was fooled. As Whit suggested, this is a stripped down approach. 2 rings link...2 rings unlink. Repeat.

Then I saw McBride's version. It still blows me away but the first time I saw it I was speechless. It is a composition. It is a building symphony. The figures are not mere jugglery. They are wizardry. For me they have always been a ballet of the impossible. Jeff represents the potential of the figures. They are strong entertainment friends.

Now many linking rings entertainers do the figures boring like Whit said. "Here is Mickey Mouse, here is the Olympics" Ouch.

I feel it comes down to this...the figures are a tool. Some magicians can make it work, and they become miracles. Some can take the figures and make a painful performance. On the flip side this can be said for any effect, any routine, or any theatrical element a magi uses. The magician can make miracle, but alas many of us just ruin it.



My old version...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2coc6p5K0g


Walk In Peace,

Sensei Strange

I agree with the use of a few figures. I patterned my way after Jay Marshall's routine. After all it was good enough to get him on the Ed Sullivan TV show more than a dozen times. It got him around the world.

Sensei, I love your routine, but I wish you would slow down the "transitions" just a tad...

Lots of work there Sensei... Almost too much, but well done.

Sensei:

WOW! I am BLOWN AWAY!

Your technical work and the routine is absolutely stunning.

In my opinion, you're a "Natural" for a Lecturer spot for a Magician's Convention.

Also, in my opinion, many magicians who see you do your ring routine would buy your lecture notes, pamphlet, DVD or booklet, just for the chance to have documentation of the moves that you do.

A TON of work went into your MASTERFUL routine!

Congratulations on developing a thing of beauty!

Clinton,

Every time I perform this it is different. Here is a slower version like you requested. I just don't like the filming as much.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lo0rs0fATKM



Pete, your memory is slipping my friend! We have discussed this film several times in the past few years. Losing memory is great though. You can hide your own Easter eggs!



Rainbo guy....I appreciate the compliment. Current incarnations of my rings are even neater, but this is the best filmed version I have. I hope to lecture some day beyond the local clubs. Tis' a dream yet unfulfilled. Many thanks Rainboguy, artistic satisfaction has been met from your words alone.

But...

I do not wish to derail the thread from the topic of how cool figures are. They are fascinating, fun and entertaining. Keep playing with them ring workers, there are more patterns yet undiscovered.

I still haven't found all my Easter Eggs.

I enjoyed your Linking Ring Routine!

Great routine, it flowed very smoothly, the figures are a great touch, but not over done. I really enjoy a linking ring routine set to music. it takes it from being a trick to being a piece of artwork.
Well done
Mark

Dear Sensei
Really loved your routine – very magical and artistic. I also agree with your comments on Whit's routine. Just goes to show there are many ways to approach a routine. What works for one doesn't always work (or appeal) to another.
Keep up the great work!

I do what the audience likes. The audience always applauds when they see figures, so I make figures.

Not a fan of figures, myself, except as a gag. That's the only way I use them. Like many things, it boils down to personal preference. What suits me may not suit you and vice versa.

However, I totally disagree with Strange's statement: "...where the routine gains in humor, it looses in the mystery entertainment factor. It is more funny, and less magic." I have seen Whit perform this live a number of times. And while people laugh and the routine is funny, they also gasp in amazement--over and over and over. It is, indeed, a VERY magical routine. I would say it isn't an "elegant" routine. Richard Ross had a beautifully elegant routine and it was also very magical. But that doesn't mean that routines like Whit's or Aldo Colombini's, for example, aren't magical, just because they are flowing and elegant. To say that must be the case is to say that guys like Schulien, Fechter, Tullock, Del Ray, even Goshman must not be magical.

I've seen Jeff McBride's routine, too. Flowing, tightly choreographed, elegant--yes. But no more magical than Whit's in my opinion, and I find myself being far more entertained by Whit's. McBride's style just doesn't particularly appeal to me.

Again, it comes down to personal preference.

I don't do figures either. I have my own 8 ring routine.

Jim

Good Job Sensei!