In the olde days Acetone was used to glue plastics via capillary action.

Just reviving the thread.

After all these years, I decided to revisit the 'Kuma Tubes'. After looking at all available videos, I ended up following the general sequence used by De yip Loo and Johnny Platt. I made my own vase and tubes! I'm rehearsing the trick now and it will be interesting to see how it plays for a modern (2023) audience! If it does well, I'll write the entire thing: construction and routine, and handling!

The last person I knew that was doing it regular was Jody Baron in Maui. I made two streamers 18" wide x 90'. One side started out blue and the other time yellow. Halfway through the colors switched sides. Basically, I took two 30 yard pieces of blue and yellow fabric. Split in half and hemmed it and then made the half color on each streamer. I spiced up an other wise boring production.

Richard, you've hit on it. It's not how much you produce, it's how much you can produce entertainingly! I just completed my Kuma tube routine and it moves like a rocket! I'll be trying it out at the Castle in a week or so and I'll report back. I've never seen Jody's routine , but it must be something special!!

Looking forward to seeing your version of the Kuma Tubes someday (in person or if you post a video).

With these type of effects I think it is both how much is produced and to produce it entertainingly. (for example: your routine for the Demon Wonder Box) It's always frustrating to see a performer haul out a square circle or other production box and then produce only a few silk scarves. If silk scarves or streamers are produced it has to give the impression of a deluge of fabric that would never have fit inside the apparatus, as well as producing solid items like bottles or bowls of water or fruit.

Yes, of course the production must be commensurate with the size of the producing device... it should ideally look like MORe than the device could ever contain. Another thing that bothers me is when a performer produces each silk as if he or she is mentally adding up how much each must have cost. That slow style of production died when Ade Duval did his silk production at such a rapid pace... as if he couldn't wait to get to the next silk and empty that d__n tube!

I've got an initial silk production (eight one yard squares) after completely showing both tubes empty, followed by a large brass bowl filled with water. Then the business about the tubes not fitting and then the bowl vanishes (?) Finally, a monstrously large production of silk streamers and 6 foot silk and both tubes are then once again shown completely empty.

It's based on John Platt and De Yip Loo's handlings and plays 4:45 to an uptempo latin flavored arrangement.

Well, 6 months since my last visit to this topic.. and I'm getting ready to write this up as a monograph/ manuscript. This would include a brief history, but mostly it will be about how to make your own set from scratch, and how to create a strong routine. It will take me about a month or so to get this done....

Count me in for that Jonathan!!!

Count me in also Jonathan!!!

Thanks, Guys! I'm about 1/3 the way into it!

In my opinion Arsene Lupin makes the best version of this.
Here's a video of it in action....
https://www.youtube.com/embed/I_evYWgHXIA

But I have a bug-bear that happens in many of the performances I see with this prop. (including this one I linked to!) It's a moment that is often included and I just don't get..... It's the pouring rice from the produced bowl as if doing so is an effect! Pouring rice, or anything, from a bowl is not an effect. So why is it given some grand moment? What does it matter if the bowl has rice in it or not? Even Paul Daniels did this when he did it in his TV series and it makes zero sense.

I think it's something someone probably did donkey's years ago and magicians have just blindly and unthinkingly followed suit ever since. (quel surprise)

I'm pleased to say when I was co-writing and co-creating a routine for this prop for my friend's Edinburgh Fringe theatre show, and which he then toured the country with, I managed to stop my friend from including this ridiculous moment in the routine... but it took a bit of convincing from me to get across that it made no sense. It was almost like because it was possible to do, and others had done it, why not do it? even if there's no reason or effect there!!!!

Anyway, within the routine we wrote together, I came up with a narrative that included a line that made sense of the production of the bowl, and then another line that gave the moment of pouring stuff from the bowl not only a rationale so it made sense, but it also created a big laugh moment, and it also tied up the narrative of the routine in a really satisfying way to make that moment act as an apparent end point in the routine. Job well done :cool

So by paying attention to the scripting the entire use of the props suddenly all made sense and that increased the overall impact of the routine hugely. Who's have thought? (You'll have to excuse that I'm writing this on 'Blow Your Own Trumpet' day)

Pouring something from the bowl in and of itself, is NOT an effect. Pouring something from the bowl is an embellishment of an effect. After showing two tubes as empty and producing silks.... is an effect. Then showing them empty again and producing a bowl is an effect. Showing that the bowl is filled with water (preferably) or sand is an embellishment! Wow... he made a bowl appear! WTF? that bowl is filled with water?!
How the hell could he manipulate those tubes if he was hiding a bowl filled with water.

The embellishment adds impact to an existing effect. Like dropping the bowling ball is the punch, the embellishment to Kevin James' trick.

Just my opinion!

I also use a table to bring in the load. I based it on the Westgate Bowl Production principle for those familiar with that trick.

For those interested, My monograph is nearly ready for the printer. It will be 40 pages, laser printed in a 8.5 x 7 inch format, like my other booklets. I'll post the cover and more details later!

I'm still in for a copy and looking forward to it.

Well, I'll keep you informed Harry! It should be in the 30-35 dollar range, depending on what the printer charges..

last time I visited them, they must have seen me coming!

Click here to view attached image.

Back cover

Click here to view attached image.

Same here. Clyde Hayre

Please put me down for one!

I have attached the one of set of Kuma Tubes that once belonged to Richard Himber. From the workmanship and materials, it is fairly safe to say they were made by Merv Taylor. The blue tubes are anodized colors not painted. Everything else is stainless steel.