Here is something I came up with while watching a friend's magic show. You can probably translate it to ventriloquism.

Chances are that your 40-45 minute show(s) are made up of several shorter segments. Here is a way to critique the parts of your show, especially magic tricks, to try to come up with a better whole.

Make a chart with the following 6 columns across the top.
Trick name/ Looks magical/ Packs flat + plays big/ Audience Participation/ Audience appeal/ Total

In the first column, list all the tricks you do in the show or tricks you are considering adding. Each of the other columns will be rated 1 to 4 points. 1 means poor, 2 means average, 3 is above average, and 4 is excellent!

For example: Under "looks magical", do you get a 'wow' when you do it? Does some kid cry out 'That's magic!' If so, you give it a 4. But if you mainly use it for an object lesson and they often think they know how you do it give it a lower score. You will probably have very few 1's or you wouldn't have them in the show in the first place! Average response is polite attention. Above average is anticipation for the next trick.

Packs flat + Plays big: Some of your best tricks may score a poor in this category. I would give "sawing a lady in half" a 1 in this category. Yes, it plays big.. but it doesn't pack small. Producing a rabbit doesn't pack flat either, but kids sure love it.

Audience participation: Excellent is when EVERYONE in the audience is involved or you use more than one volunteer. (Everyone think of a number from this board.) etc. Above average uses a volunteer on stage. Average uses a volunteer as a prop only, or doesn't use anybody, but they watch. (Here, hold this, kid.)

Audience appeal: This is tough. If you do family shows you have to consider the kid appeal as well as the adult. If half your show is card tricks, you're not going to get a great kid appeal. If half your show is clowning you won't get the adults. Base it on the audience you plan to do the show for. I do kid shows, myself.

Then total the numbers in each column. You'll have a lot of ties. Start and end with your strongest material and throw the average things in the middle of your show. (Unless your library audiences are always late.) Try to end with your strongest.

For homework, look at each of the low scores and see if 1. there is another version of the trick or another trick that would be better for your show and
2. look at the lowest column for that trick and see if you can improve it. Example: Got a rope trick that you LOVE, but has no audience participation? Ask a volunteer to come up and examine the rope, cut the rope, ask them a couple of questions, "Have you ever been strung along? You're a real cut-up aren't you? A rope divided against itself cannot stand. Neither can a restored rope." etc.

Okay so I stole the title from the great song by the fabulous group of the sixties called the Paupers(att'n Californians..it's pronounced pow-purrs not poppers like, forget it!)See not even bordering on Canuck ire!
Now, for the record, Mr. Borders has again done an excellent job of pedagogically rating one's magic show. I must leaven this, however so that before one rushes off a letter of beatification to the Vatican, one must know the aforementioned Monsieur Frontiers back when he had a real job and was not just some kind of itinerant belly-talker was highly trained in these techniques. And so to the crux of this epistle.
I was somehow surprised when the aforementioned Senor Do-dah-do-dah did not rise in his usual fashion to react to Ari's recent comments on magic gimmicks. Ari wrote .."Those same kind people go to the magic shop, buy some tricks and then print a business card "I`m a Magician"
Mea culpa..I use the Magic Funnel( the old style)and Rocky Raccoon.
So esteemed illusionist, do you feel one is cheating if one uses pre-recorded vent voices or magic gimmicks one can buy out of the shop?
Have a Happy New Year, Tony.
With respect, Ron

First, I would like to confess that I have made a decent living as a person who buys a trick that works itself and yet I tell others that I am a magician. I don't practice magic, I practice deceipt, and therein lies the crux of the matter.

A ventriloquist cannot throw his voice, yet we buy a microphone so the sound comes out of a black box. I wish I could contribute this quote, "A magician is an actor pretending to be a magician." That is my favorite quote. I believe it can equally be said that a ventriloquist is an actor, pretending that an inanimate object is talking.

Is it important whether we make it speak? Surely, not to the audience. If a painter needs the color red in a painting, do they care whether he crushes his own iron ore to get it, or whether he buys it premade? The result to the viewer is the same.

I agree with Steve in that I think it often takes more effort to respond appropriately to a tape than it does to learn the skit ventriloquially.

Here are my pros:
Live: Allows more laughter from the audience
Allows more opportunities for adlib.
Allows opportunity to include specifics about that audience.
Easier to make material age appropriate

Memorex: Great for adding sound effects
Great for background music, fanfare
Allows two hands free (for remote puppet) for using visual aids
Allows for better voice distinction

I won't go into the cons, because I think the pros will cause people to decide which is better for their unique style. For example, Disney has live people who talk to a screen character in some of their theme park shows. The audience knows of course that the screened character is not live, but they don't seem to mind. The question is, "Would they like it better if they saw a costumed character live?" Probably not, because the voice would still be recorded.

Well said, Tony. I agree the end product is what is usually the point considered by most audiences. I realize that the delivery and appreciation by the audience or congregation is most important. I remember working for this mutherin' big( oft illegally over-powered)Gospel station. By then I had been on many boards, had not-bad pipes, and a realization of the mind-theatre aspect of commercial radio. So I would be cranking out these killer-southern Christian gospel groups while making sure I wasn't burying the level on the V.U. metre or popping my p's. Of course, the automatic voice-compressors helped as did the talent of talking over the instrumental and hitting the first bar of the vocal spot-on. I believe it's the same reading Old Testament, and the letters of Saul of Tarsus at church. Like it or not, even when I know I have the congregation waxed..I still have to remember to work left, centre, right and back(occasional face-check to choir loft), deeper voice for God-quotes and dramatic pauses to wake up the people on mind-excursions. Or what I really do not like ..playing music at services. Most of the time I'm thinking can I hit that F?,,did I remember to put new strings on..can I this time flawlessly go to that pesky B minor chord from G.And they eat it up!They don't care about the mixtures that produced the message. Yet sometimes I shudder when I think of how as a partying young disc jockey not liking to get a letter stating that my show had helped them accept The Other into their life or that I was blessed to be such a good Christian. I agree, Tony that folks don't care if the religion icon has iron ore in it, but I still am uncomfortable with the mix of show business and trusting faith. Ron

Actually, when you put religion into the mix you are talking about a completely different theme than when speaking of entertainment alone. I just finished being part of a variety show at a senior center. There was a talented Hawaiian style singer, then a quintet accompanied by some nice lively guitar, then ventriloquism and magic by yours truly, and then a dozen Brownies (branch of the girl scouts) who sang some carols. You can guess which went over the best. Thank you, but no it wasn't me.

The adults loved the sincerity of the Brownies over the professionalism of anyone else. If talent were more important than sincerity would Rod Stewart ever receive air time?

Imagine a Christmas tree. When you walk in you notice how beautiful it is, but the closer you get the more you start to see the sides and the back. Are they just as pretty, or were all the good ornaments put to the front? The longer the audience is with you the more they will see the sides and back of the tree, so those areas (sincerity) have to be good as well.

One last story: Bryan Duncan is one of the greatest singers I've ever heard and he strives to make his music perfect. One day he was listening to the group called "America" (from the U.S., not the other America) sing "A Horse With No Name". He realized that they were only using one chord through most of the song, but it was a huge hit. Why was he trying so hard?

P.S. One reason I quit learning how to juggle is that there is no satisfying the audience. If you can do 3, they want to see 4. Then 5, then 6. They don't realize that the jump from 3 to 4 is tenfold, and I can't even imagine beyond that. With magic they also don't realize that the difference between using a change bag and rolling a half dollar along your fingers is about 100 hours of practice. That's why I use the change bag. It gets a better reaction, by the way.