Chris Bliss created his 3-ball routine as an entertaining finale to his comedy routine.
Jason Garfield copied Chris' routine to show-off his technical ability and slam Chris Bliss.
Chris performed his routine in front of about a thousand enthusiastic audience members while wearing cool clothes.
Jason performed his in front of a couple or three cameras while wearing his sweats.
Chris received a standing ovation.
Jason took a bow.

There's a lesson here...somewhere...lemme see...

After reading Jason's book, I can understand better now why he did the Chris Bliss p!ss take.

Its not to slam Chris personally, but to show that it is possible to take something that is old and revamp it. Make it more difficult and therefore more impressive.

Jason has this thing about jugglers taking old routines and using them over and over. Not making any changes and selling it as their own routine.

Now I'm saying that Chris's routine isn't original. But, how many times have you seen a juggler make out that what he's doing is hard or dangerous, when really its nowhere near either.

I guess that's where Chris's routine falls.

The stuff he's doing isn't hard at all. Just a constant repeat of easy moves and a mild fit.

Before reading Jason's book I quite liked Chris's routine. Then I read the book and I thought, hmmm not so good.

Then I saw Jason's dvd and thought, actually its pretty naff.

Then I caught the trailer for the Galchenko's (spelt?) and thought, well this stuff is really dead easy and should this be the type of thing that jugglers are known for?

I'm still undecided.

But I have decided that Jason is right on one thing. And that's jugglers need to stop doing those old routines and start coming up with new material.

We should all start educating audiences that these old routines aren't what we've said they were after all. If we're going to do something dangerous, then DO IT.

If we're going to do something hard, then DO IT.

We should stop pretending (to ourselves and our audiences) that they are.

Why not make this stuff entertaining? Now that would be a lesson well learnt.

Then comes the question - what it difficult... And if you can answer that one, I am impressed. Because that IS difficult.

/Ark

Roslyn

I'm going to disagree with you.

1) If a routine works and entertains people why change it just for the sake of change? Very little that any juggler does is unique (even Jason Garfield), audiences don't change much over the years (if anything they are getting less sophisticated) As a working juggler you want to perform in a way that gets the best response for your personality. If your show is slick but full of simple (to a juggler) stuff who cares? It won't be the audience - just other (jealous) jugglers.

2) Audiences like to be fooled (otherwise there would be few magicians). They'd rather have the illusion of danger in an entertaining routine than real danger and a poor routine.

3) See the thread about juggling knives.

Nigel

Nigel,

I can understand where you're coming from. And I agree that entertaining the audience is first and foremost.

But, don't you think its lazy just to take an old routine, complete with old lines and jokes and keep on using it forever? No change, nothing. Just used straight from the box. Why not come up with something else?

I know my posts read like a letter from the Jason Garfield fan club, but the fact is he has come up with his own style and has created some awsome variations and combo moves of his own. One that springs to mind is his 5 club back crosses on doubles to a back cross flash with a 360 to 5 club back crosses on singles.

His lines are his own. His show is his own. I can't think of anyone before Jason that performed juggling like Jason.

There are a few other jugglers that also deserve this level of respect. Jugglers like Francis Brun, Viktor Kee and Popavich are three that spring to mind.

I'm not saying that simple is bad.

In fact it can be great. I've seen many juggling routines that weren't much more than a 3 ball cascade that were really funny and entertaining. But the performer didn't make out that the cascade was anything more than what it is.

What I am saying, is if you tell an audience you are doing something hard, then it should be hard. Why lie?

In escapology, I wouldn't say that a pair of handcuffs were real if they weren't. Nor would I say that a lock was genuine if it wasn't.

Ok, I wouldn't say it wasn't real either. I'd ask an audience member if they can see something unusual about it. They say no, and so they have confirmed the item is genuine without me saying that it is.

I haven't lied.

But if I do say a pair of cuffs or a lock is genuine, then they are.

Why not do this with juggling?

You say that it is best to have a well executed routine with percieved danger, rather than a dangerous routine that is rubbish.

I agree with you partly on this.

Yes you should have an entertaining routine above all else, but why pretend it is dangerous?

If the routine is that good you shouldn't have to pretend it is anything.

If you are pretending it is dangerous to make the routine seem better, then is the routine actually any good?

Take the old street stunt of walking over someone while juggling.

I've seen it done with fire, knives, chainsaws and 5 clubs.

The clubs got the better reaction.

I've been pondering on this since I got JGs book and I think with the clubs version the audience knows that 5 clubs is bloody hard, and that the chance of dropping one is much greater than dropping a torch or a saw juggled in a 3 object cascade.

And the thing is, its true! 5 clubs is harder than 3 torches. You do have a greater chance of dropping.

Therefore the danger is real.

I'm not too sure if you're right about audiences liking to be fooled.

If you go and see a magician, you know that what he/she is doing is fake. He/she's not really made that girl vanish, and the audience knows that.

When going to see a juggler, they don't expect the juggler to lie or fool them.

Jugglers do what they say they're doing. You can't fake a 5 ball shower.

So if a juggler says they'll do something dangerous then the audience thinks this must be true. If its not then that's no more right than a magician making out they can really read minds or bend spoons by the power of esp or psycokenisis.

Sorry for the essay,

Ros

Jason Garfield's "Chris Bliss Diss" was covered
on NBC's Dateline tonight!

Here's a link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11648306/

LOL I can see this turning into something big.

I disagree. I can see this turning into nothing and being forgotten within a few weeks.

In the Dateline piece, Penn Jillette got more camera time than
either Jason Garfield or Chris Bliss.

He is better known than Jason Garfield or Chris Bliss.
Steve V

I heard that Chris Bliss is a part of a magic team. Anyone know of this? Name, Web, Video etC?

I knew Chris a long time ago, he use to do the same 3 ball routine with day glo tennis balls in blacklight at nightclubs in the early 80's. He can do it blindfolded by now I'm guessing. I sort of doubt he's a magician...unless there's some money in it.
I'm glad to see him going strong, he's a good guy, he got me some gigs in the day. One was as the opening act for a local rock band called Chameleon, whose keyboard player was, get this...YANNI! Really!

We had Bliss at our WMS Convention in Las Vegas and he got a standing ovation. He gets a lot of them... because... he is very very entrtaining. And that, my friends, is what counts.

Whoops! There's the answer to my question.
What Pete said. He's entertaining.

That's the "why."