Tom Stone wrote:Would it be reasonable to assume that the early routines relied on getting the extra sets from a servante, and that Ken Brooke should be credited for the idea to have all the sets already in the tubes from the beginning?
Also, the movement where one single tube is used to get the objects to change place, and is turned over in the process - is it reasonable to assume that belongs to Ken Brooke as well?
And also - there is a gambit where a silk is tied around the neck of the bottle. Might that belong to Marconick?
The LLoyd E. Jones article I mentioned previously in this thread even though appearing in Genii in 1978 is dated March 1960, and you can find references to him performing the multiplying bottles extending back to Genii vol 16 (1951).
Lloyd E. Jones credits his interest in the multiplying bottles in seing a performance by George Boston (assistant to Howard Thurston and Boston Coin Box inventor I guess): "The production of nine bottles from the two tubes seemed not only a novel trick but I made mental note that here was an item for future consideration." This performance presumably must have been in the late 1940's ?
In the act that Lloyd E. Jones describes in the Genii article the extra nested bottles are already hidden in the tubes from the beginning and does not come from a servante.
My feeling is that Ken Brookes contribution is to orchestrate the production of the bottles to perfection. Providing the optimal layout for the bottles such that discrepancies in size becomes almost invisible. And of course "just" doing/inventing an incredibly entertaining and funny routine/performance.