The Five
Rings of William
After
a season of working the Rings "as written,"
I decided that the same effect could be obtained
with five rings as with eight or nine or any
greater number. Bob Harbin disagrees with me.
Even so!
For those
of you who are still interested, the rings required
are two singles, two linked and a key with a
diagonal opening. This is, I believe, the set
advocated by Jack Miller in his five-rings routine;
so at least, those who have read the routine
inform me -- I haven't read it. The suggestion
that a key-ring with two slits should be used
I discarded as it seemed to complicate matters.
The
Effect:
Five
rings are counted. Two of them are linked and
thrown out to be examined. These are the only
rings that are examined by the audience. I don't
like horsing around in the audience -- trotting
on and off the stage loses their attention.
Since I fling these two rings out, I use a 6"
set. You can throw out 12" rings if you like
and you can then bill the effect as a death-defying
feat.
The linked
pair outflung, the performer is left with three.
One ring is passed up each arm and the remaining
one is held in the right hand. A shake of the
right arm and the ring on it passes down over
the cuff, over the hand and into the ring which
the hand holds. This ring is passed to the left
hand and the move repeated. The rings are then
separated by a reverse action. One of the hanging
rings is taken by the free hand and drawn up
over the arm. The held ring changes hands and
the other ring finds its way onto the other
arm.
The linked
rings are taken back and the others are laid
aside while these are separated. Four rings
are then placed over one arm and the fifth held
in the hand. The four rings are shaken onto
this, linking through as soon as they touch
it. They are finally passed through the fifth
ring onto the arm again, leaving the performer
where he started, with five single rings. So
much for the effect.
The
How:
The rings
are held in the left hand at the outset in the
following arrangement from the thumb-crotch
outwards: Key, single, chain of two, single.
These are counted by the usual "drop-count"
from left hand to right.
You have
plenty of chance to separate your bands except
when counting the two. Don't, of course, make
this too obvious but let it be casual and natural.
Practice before a mirror the action you are
supposed to be doing and then try to duplicate
this exactly when doing the dirty work. That's
old advice too, but it's still good.
The rings
are returned to the left hand where they resume
their first position (Figure 1). The outer single
is taken in the right hand. This has apparently
to be linked with another ring in the left hand.
Push the left forefinger between the two rings
of the chain of two, supporting the outer ring
by the second finger only
Bring
the right hand single against the rings in the
left hand, counting 'one,' repeat 'two.' On
the third tap, leave this single on the left
forefinger and permit the ring on the left second
finger to fall. The effect is that the ring
that was held in the right hand has become linked
into the outermost of the rings held in the
left. These two rings are taken from the left
hand and handed out for examination.
You are
left with the three singles. Place one up each
arm and hold the key in the right hand with
the opening just behind the little finger and
hidden by it (Figure 3). Jerk the ring on the
right arm downwards and outwards so that it
strikes against the hand at the little finger.
The momentum will carry it through the gap in
the key (Figure 4). This sounds like a helluva
juggling feat but is really quite easy. You'll
have to play around with the move to get it
properly but it's worth it. I like it much more
than the old rubbing together move.
The key
is transferred to the left hand so that the
gap is now hidden by the left little finger
and the same move is repeated. The three are
then taken in the right hand and held up by
the left thumb. Passed to the left, they are
returned to the right again so that the slot
in the key comes back to its position behind
the little finger and the left, taking the outer
of the hanging rings, brings it up onto the
right arm again, guiding the ring through the
gap in the key.
Repeat
this with the other ring onto the left arm.
This done, shake the ring down from the left
hand into the curled fingers. Again, it links
into the key but, this time, the linking is
not disclosed, the two rings apparently simply
lying side by side in the left hand. The ring
on the right arm is shaken down into the hand
and transferred to the left.
Recover
the set of two, in folded condition, in the
right hand and apparently pass it to the left.
Actually, as the hands come together, take the
single from the left beside the pair in the
right and place these three on the table. These
will be taken for the three singles. The two
rings in the left hand, supposed by the spectators
to be the set of two just examined, are returned
to the right hand, the solid hanging from the
key. The unlinking is again done by passing
the hanging ring onto the arm. Leave it there.
Transfer
the key to the left hand and reach with the
right for the "three singles" on the table.
Using only the right hand, let them slide up
the arm to join the one already there. Then
take the key from the left again and shake all
of those on the right arm into it. Allowing
the key ring to be held in the right hand by
the crooked little finger only (thus concealing
the gap), spin the hanging rings with the left
hand. Then grab them at their lowermost point
as they hang and bring them up again, shaking
them through the gap as you do so until they
are all once more on the right arm.
Jerk
them all into the hand and transfer the bunch
to the left. Count them back into the right
hand as at the outset. Count more and more slowly
and more and more quietly until, at "five,"
your voice is almost a whisper. Look up at the
audience and smile. on the applause, hold up
the rings in the right hand and lift the left
hand to the same height.
This
makes a pleasant "showmanshippy" gesture on
which to finish the trick. The finish is always
important -- hence the detail.
Well,
there it is! Fiddle with it for a while and
I think you'll realize that it's got something.
My earliest memory of magic is of seeing a bloke
jangling a lot of rings as if he were berserk.
I remember asking, "What's he meant to be doing?"
It's enough to make even an Irishman say --
"Begorrah!"
|
