Hi,
Just saw JC Sum and Nings' latest show on the 5 Star Carnival.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JML0TGO1mmo...re=channel_page

Comparing it to the windshear illusion, here performed by primavera,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0PQSU9qrUc

I was dissapointed having heard about how JC walks through the fan. I felt that its not so much a passing through, because JC was no where seen on stage or even seen behind the Fan to begin with. Perhaps JC can show himself on stage before the the appearance infront of the Fan.

Credit still must go to JC and his team for having thinking and building this illusion. In all Honesty its still magical for lay people

Yes, by appearing out of nowhere, in and of itself, is no doubt an amazing feat. But the issue is, why a fan? It doesn't really add anything to the effect.... as in it doesn't make the thing look more difficult or what.

He could have easily appeared in a box or any other containers and it would still have achieved the same effect.

Saying it based on Magician feel or laymen feel?

I feel, to a laymen, appearing from a box and from a fan is different. Its just like eating apple or watermelon, both are fruits. But why watermelon and not orange, or pear?

The same goes to this Revollusion, the Fan is there to entrust the thought that there is no way to enter from behind, front and sides are all viewed, and bang, he appear. If want to make an appearance, why not think out of the box first. :)

Ah! That was what i thought too.Until i checked from Ning and JC Sums' Blogs

Very unfortunately, it was not meant to be an appearance act, but as a fan Penetration.

According to JC ,
"The other dangerous part is when I actually attempt to pass through the spinning blades of the fan."

Well, my gf (a layperson) shared my view. In fact, she pointed that out first.

If it was meant to be a penetration effect, it was not obvious.... at least to me and my gf.

If they wanted to show that the "dangerous part" is to go through the fan, then logically he should start from behind and ended in the front. That would make sense.

I may sound a bit picky, but I suppose you all would like some constructive feedback so as to improve too. No point just hearing all the good things.

Sorry that you misunderstood, I am representing myself as a magician's view. No more than that. Not defending anyone or anything.

Just want to pinpoint that, there are people that felt its an appearance, and there are people that felt its a penetration.

So in the end, let the audience decide, some might feel the first, some might feel the latter. It actually doesn't matter, what matter most is, the audience like it and was enjoying themselves throughout the show. I think that matters for all performers.

(Who really care if you can be a master of second and bottom deal, but when it comes to performing to audience, they don't even care about it. What they care, is the moment of magic)

Hey Larry, I don't really understand what you mean by some of your statements like:

I think you probably mean to say that in magic, the experience of the spectator is the most important and not on how the magic is accomplished.

But the phrasing of your sentence is slightly confusing and inexplicably leads one to think subconsciously that skill level does not matter to creating the moment of magic when in fact it does.

If I could draw a simple analogy regarding the illusion. Here's what I felt it seemed like:

A bottle is shown empty and solid to prove the point of the bottle being impenetrable. The bottle is then covered. A second later, when it is uncovered, a coin is shown to have appeared in the bottle.

To me, this seems pretty much like an appearance. If I were to perform the above and then tell my spectators that it's a penetration, I think there would be some confusion. Given that the original intention of the illusion was a penetration, there should be an initial pre-condition of the coin being shown outside the bottle, and then a simulated penetration which then shows the coin being found inside the bottle.

If Bluecowz statement is correct about JC's original intention of the illusion being a penetration, then it does not quite accomplish the objective satisfactorily as there is a lack of the pre-condition. (Of course, I might have an oversight and maybe someone could raise an example of a penetration without such a pre-condition if there is such an example.)

I think the issue about this thread is the presentation and structure of the illusion and not about how laypeople feel about it. In fact, I hope that laypeople see it as an appearance. Mainly because those who feel that it is a penetration will likely feel disappointed as it is not that convincing.

Also, spectators are able to tell and appreciate to a certain extent the conditions and impossibility of an illusion. That's why there are so many different versions of illusions being performed with some being more impressive than others. Spectators are able to appreciate this.

Sure. I have no doubt the audience enjoyed the magic. The question now is, to what extent? Did they experience a puzzle, a trick or a miracle? All 3 garners applause and entertainment, but there are still inherent differences. I think this question matters very much to the performer and helps the performer to gauge the strength of the illusion. Is this the reaction that the performer hopes to get from that particular illusion or effect?

To say that the magic is good just because the audience applauded and smiled is an oversimplification of matters.

I think the analogy would be to show a bottle, show a fifty cent, then cover the bottle and when it is uncovered once again, a morgan dollar has appeared inside.

Anyway there is no point debating about this. I doubt JC will change his act just because of what you said.


Zi An

I watched Ultimate Magic the last time, and if i actually remembered correctly, at no point in time did JC actually said that he passed through the fan - JC wasn't even on stage at the start of the act. At least that's what i remembered...

That seems to be the case for the Five Stars video BlueCowZ posted too. Ning did not say anything about anyone passing through the fan. Was there any show where they mentioned JC's passing through the fan?

In fact, i recalled reading about something JC wrote in his blog way before this thread was even started... (let me go dig it out)

Okay, here you go:

"Our team chuckles at magicians who just don’t get why “Revollusion” works. It amuses us when we hear comments from magicians who say, if you bring out a giant industrial fan… you have to walk through it. I guess when a magician shows a deck of cards, the spectator must choose a card so that the magician can find it… going by the same tunnel-minded logic.

But any theoretical debate on the strength of a magic effect for a lay audience, is ended when observing the reactions it gets from a ‘real-world’ audience. We are privileged to test our material in front paying audiences 6 days a week so we develop a very keen sense of what works and what does not for a commercial lay audience. One reason why we secured our 5-episode TV appearance with MediaCorp was because of “Revollusion”. The Hong Kong producer working on the show highlighted this illusion because it was dramatic, menacing and caught him by surprise - all elements which make for good TV."

http://backstagebusiness.wordpress.com/200...the-real-world/

In all honesty, just like BlueCowz said it's still extremely magical for laypeople (i did see the reactions myself too). It's original, the performers like it, their audience like it, and that's all that matters at the end of the day for all entertainers/performers. At least that's what i think...

I had no intention of making any criticism towards JC's illusions. My main contention was that I felt slightly uncomfortable with some of the things Larry said and I felt that it oversimplified magic a bit.

It matters, and I'm sure JC would mind, whether the audience thinks that the illusion is an appearance or penetration. It is important that the effect is clear. It'll not be good if half the audience thinks it's an appearance and the other half thinking it's a penetration.

Thanks to luneymooney for the clarification. Since the illusion is an appearance, there's really not much to debate on it since it accomplishes what it does. Except that some of us may probably feel unused to the idea that a fan is not used for a penetration effect.

Ok then, judging from the words from his blog, I guess I'm not "lay" (or laid? :P ) enough to appreciate the design of his illusions since he knows for sure "what works and what does not" for commercial audience.

If he is "the voice" for illusion designers in Asia, he should know better than me.... I am just a TBMIS.

http://www.magicboutique.sg/blog.php?paged=2

Quoted Ning.

Was it a penetration as described?
Where is the object to be penetrated? or double effects ie invisible man routine then into penetration and turns visible
Just my pov about the effect describtion, or what is it supposed to be.

Its certainly enjoyable to watch the great performance and really proud for asians for this mega illusions, breath taking.

Our team chuckles at magicians who just don’t get why “Revollusion” works. It amuses us when we hear comments from magicians who say, if you bring out a giant industrial fan… you have to walk through it.

From JC

So just how on earth does J C manage to pass his body through these lethal spinning blades of death?

From Ning

wow,i'm now very confused.
Perhaps there could be some official clarification to this perplexing befuddlement

and looney, please do not quote me wrongly, I said that it was magical because there was an element of magic in it. I would definitely not say the illusion was EXTREMELY magical.

Hi all,

This thread was brought to my attention by a couple of people. I'm actually honoured that an original creation of mine has sparked so much debate and become such a lively thread. So, thanks to all the people who have invested time and effort putting your thoughts down as well as to be people who have read this thread with interest.

I'm writing this not as a rebutal or clarification to anyone. I respect and believe everyone is entitled to their opinion. That is the point of a forum like this. But, unfortunately some points of view are not entirely sound because they are not founded on good logic.

I am writing this post because I think there is a small handful of people reading this who are looking for help in producing a show, choosing magic for their act or simply improving their craft. Sharing my thought process may help offer different points of views that you did not consider. This ultimately may help you achieve your personal goals in magic.

I'm going off on a tangent a bit so please bear with me. While my degree is in English Language and Sociology, my minor was Philosophy. I call it my major minor because I took philosophy only as my minor elective every single semester for 3 years. Most students will take a variety of minor electives. I enjoyed philosophy as it is all about intellectual exchange and abstract but logical thinking.

The study of philosophy helps hone one's logical thinking process to ensure arguments are objective and sound; and not clouded with subjective thought or personal bias. In fact, there are modules specifically on what is termed as 'logic', where you spend 10 weeks every year learning how to think logically, without fallacies. I bring this up only to offer insight into my thought process of illusion desiging and selection. Specific choices I have made are by design and with rationale thought applied in each case.

But back to this topic: The question some magicians seem to think is very important and need to know the answer to is: "Is "Revollusion" an appearance or a penetration?"

While I personally don't understand why this is a subject of debate, the answer is dependent on which 'me' you ask. Each 'me' will give you a different answer, based on that 'me's' different thought processes and needs. Some answers are identical but are arrived at completely differently.

So, if you are prepared, here are my answers:

The Artist

As an artist, the goal is to create a piece of work that is open to interpretation by the viewer. Everyone experiences a piece of art differently. Magic is difficult to be interpreted in different ways as it is hard to create magic that is vague yet clear in effect. After all, as Dai Vernon remarked: "confusion is not magic".

So, "Revollusion" is a fantastic illusion from this point of view because it apparently inspiries different interpretation, conflicting thoughts and healthy debate. Wow! A goal for many artists. This thread is proof of that.

Is "Revollusion" an appearance or a penetration? It is up to the spectator to decide for themselves. And no one can or should interpret that definition for them or influence them otherwise. But, in reality, experience and feedback, no lay audience even questions the differientiation of the effects. I'm not denying that there are exceptions. But, artists know they cannot please everyone.

The Magician

The magician's goal is to create wonder and the art of astonishment (Paul Harris's profund singular philosophy). Magical idealists perceive themselves as merchants of wonder (a term coined by the Princess of Monaco) and their only goal is to evoke that feeling of impossibility, amazement, and wonder in their audiences. To put simply, to make them go 'wow'.

When I see dozens of eyes (some days hundreds) open wide and several mouths open 6 days a week when I rip away to cloth the reveal myself at the climax of "Revollusion", I know I have achieved that magic goal.

Is "Revollusion" an appearance or a penetration? It is not important, The question the magician asks is - is it good magic? Which in the strictest fundamental sense means: does the illusion create an experience of wonder in the audience?

The litmus test to that question has got to be the reactions from the audience you are performing for. In my case, a lay paying audience. If the experience of wonder is not created, the reactions from the audience will be muted (polite applause at best). You will also catch audience members exchanging glances with each other with raised eyebrows of uncertainty. When you are greeted with a spontaneous ovation consistently, you know that the magic is good. And the job of the magician is done.

Can the magic be strengthened, improved etc? Of course, nothing is perfect. If it is perfect, it is not magic, it is a miracle. But the measurement of the strength of the illusion bears no context in this intellectual exchange.

The Illusion Designer

As a designer, my goal is to design original illusions that will work in real world conditions. I essentially design for my own shows although many of my illusions are described in my books for other illusionists to build and perform in their shows. The designer's goal is to try to create something new and unique. This, in turn, differientiates the illusions that we present in our show, which in turn helps us stand out in the industry.

The truth is, many illusionists perform the same illusions worldwide with the exact same props and presentations, many times pirated. Currently, I see John Taylor's "Suspended Animation", Mark Kalin/ Hans Klok "Fire Spiker", Jim Steinmeyer's "Origami" and Dan Summer's "Compressed" being performed in practically every illusion show. So, personally, as far as possible I try to avoid all these common illusions, especially at this stage of Ning & my careers.

There are very few fan illusions being performed. The most popular is “Windshear” created by Jim Steinmeyer/ Andre Koke and built by Magic Ventures. I think it is a sound illusion that can be very dramatic and exciting if presented well, but too many performers worldwide currently perform it, again many pirated.

Other proprietary fan illusions being performed include Andre Kole’s “Jet Turbine” that his son Tim performs, Steve Wyrick’s “Walking through a 747 Engine” (designed by Steinmeyer) and “Copperfield’s “The Fan” (designed by the in-house Copperfield team). Franz Harary has a brilliant rotating fan which he appears from. Andrew Mayne also described a fan illusion in his “Solo X” book.

So the design goal was to create a fan illusion, without reinventing the wheel. So, I created "Revollusion" - an illusion using a giant industrial fan but with a departure in the traditional effect/ presentation. It is designed as a penetration/ appearance; specifically described as the surprise appearance from a fan.

To find out what our audiences thought of "Revollusion", we conducted a survey several times with this specific question to the audience members. "If you were to describe the act with the giant fan to a friend, how would you describe it?" All the answers were along these lines "J C appeared from the fan", "J C came out from the fan", "The fan was inspected and turned on. Suddenly, J C appeared out from no where from the fan". This gave us quite an affirmative answer on what the general lay audience perceived the effect as.

For the record, only magicians or educated magic audiences have questioned whether the effect is a penetration or an appearance. And this is simply because this group of people has a preconceived notion that illusions with fans must be a walk-through, because all other illusionists who present such illusions do a walk-through. But, it is because ALL other illusionists do that, did I purposely design a fan illusion that did not have a traditional walk-through that is almost expected.

As the designer of an illusion for the target audience being a lay commerical crowd, my goal was achieved after learning the perceived effect from laymen. Of course, if my intention was to design the illusion for magicians at a magic convention, I would have failed miserably, as evidenced by feedback from magicians here.

Is "Revollusion" an appearance or a penetration? It is both.

The Show Producer

The job of the show producer is to weave all the different illusions and acts together, design the music, create the show order and basically create THE show as an entire full experience for the audience. All elements of the show must be viewed in the 'big picture' as they must fit together to create a good show.

"Revollusion" is great for the show in the context that it is fills the stage, looks impressive, is very dramatic and visually spectacular. It has audience interaction (as how we perform in in the live show, TV was choreographed just for TV), visual elements, and a strong magical effect. It is also very different from the other acts performed in the show and as a bonus is different from any other fan illusion that other magicians might be performing. This was also the perspective of the TV producer who watched "Ultimate Magic" which led to his decision of having us on "Five Stars Carnival".

Is "Revollusion" an appearance or a penetration? It is not important. What is important is that it fulfils its function in the show as a big highlight that gets strong reactions from the target audience and is talked about after the show.

The Business Manager

Show Business is two words. A professional illusionist who wants to earn a living doing magic has to be continually booked and paid to do shows. In other words, he has to pay attention to the business, as much as the show. While there are many reasons why some illusionists are more successful than others, two determiners are the scale of the show and the originality of the illusions.

"Revollusion" is not the biggest illusion around but is not considered small by any means. Its sheer size makes it impressive and a marketable highlight of the show. Once again, for bookers who have seen traditional fan illusions, this stands out as different. Although honestly, more than a handful of clients see all fan illusions as the same. Just as they see any illusion where a girl goes into a box as all the same. But I digress.

The fact is, an illusion like "Revollusion" gets bookings and draws people to the show.

Is "Revollusion" an appearance or a penetration? It is not important, as long as it brings in the $!

The Story Teller

I view myself as a story teller and try to have all my illlusions/ acts tell a story. Some may not be as apparent as others but all my routines tell a story. There is always a beginning, middle and end. Ning had the good fortune of attending Oscar-winning screenwriter Syd Field's master class last week. He stressed the exact same thing when writing a screenplay. He also stressed the importance of creating a dramatic premise. Many movies have same dramatic premises but are dressed differently, with different characters.

To give no-brainer clear cut examples:

Take a guy, put him in a building with bad guys & hostages and have him save the day - Die Hard (Bruce Willis).

Take a guy, put him in a ship with bad guys & hostages and have him save the day - Under Seige (Steven Siegal).

Take a guy, put him in an airport with bad guys & hostages and have him save the day - Die Hard 2 (Bruce Willis).

Take a guy, put him in a sports stadium with bad guys & hostages and have him save the day - Sudden Death (Jean Claude Van Damme).

Same dramatic premises, different characters (referring to both the human characters and locations)

So consider this: A magician shows a box (opening = introduction of characters). He then shows it empty and asks a spectator to examine it. (middle = occurences and incidents). He then makes a girl appear from the box (End = resolution and conclusion). Illusion? The Tip Over Trunk. Does that sound like a fundamentally sound illusion act? No doubt, most will say "yes".

Now, take the above dramatic premise and substitue the box for a giant industrial fan. A magician shows a giant fan (opening = introduction of characters). He then shows it all around and asks a spectator to examine it. (middle = occurences and incidents). He then makes a girl appear from the fan (End = resolution and conclusion). Illusion? Revollusion. Does that sound like a fundamentally sound illusion act. If you agreed to the above, your answer will have to be "yes".

Some magicians (and only magicians) ask a very strange question, why does it have to be a fan? Why not a wall of fire or a brick wall or a sheet of cloth? Because, as a story teller, I chose to use a fan. It is, afterall, my story. Another story teller may choose to use a brick wall. Questioning the reason of the use of a fan is like questioning why Die Hard was in a office building. Why not a condo? A school? An army camp?

Is "Revollusion" an appearance or a penetration? It is whatever the audience perceived it to be to enjoy the story. If I engaged them with the dramatic premise and execution of the story so that they were entertained, that is all that matters. The fan and effect are just vehicles to tell an interesting and memorable story.


If you have bothered to read this far, you would have gained some insight into how I think about magic and my show. You will also probably realize that in the case of "Revollusion", IMO it is not really important what the effect is defined as. Although, surveys showed what the lay audience thinks the effect is. And this serves as a non-absolute but general guide.

When I choose to put an illusion/ act in the show, whether it is an original design, marketed effect or licensed illusion from another creator, I wear all the above hats to achieve multiple goals with a singular act. In the case of "Revollusion", its existence in the show fulfils the objectives of all the different 'mes'.

This is NOT the right way or ONLY way to approach illusion/ act selection. It is is MY singular approach that I personally feel is as comprehensive and sophisticated as I can make it within my abilities and intellectual faculties. And, it has served me well and allows me to avoid being a starving professional illusionist.

Of course, I can't claim all the credit. The process is refined with feedback obtained from people I trust. By that, I mean, I only seek people who understand my goals, context of performance and are in a position to give constructive criticism. This is in no way suggesting that the people I do not ask for feedback from are inferior in any way. It simply means that that is not their area of expertise and experience.

For e.g., If I'm looking to build a plane, I will look for an aeronautical enginner; a baggage handler will not be of use, even though they are both in the aviation industry. Likewise, if I need flight information, I will seek a customer service officer from that airline; the most qualified or experienced engineer will do little to help. It is not expected or even reasonable to expect that someone not qualified in a particular field be able to give answers that they are not trained to answer.


If this post has been of value to you to improve your own show and magic routine selection - fantastic. Let me know!

If this post has no value to you, sorry to have taken up your time.

Firstly I would thank JC Sum for the indept reply to a simple discussion.

these are my final thoughts.

I would beg to differ on the point that revollusion is both a penetration and appearance effect. I guess if it is viewed in that way, then one can do it outside the great wall of china. For the audiences who view it as a penetration it would?equal or surpass David Copperfield's walking through illusion. And for those who view it as an appearance it would be an appearance in a grand location. Pretty much a win-win situation in my humble opinion.

Well, hindsight is always perfect eyesight.

Who cares what the intention of the trick was initially when JC first envisioned it, since audiences are cheering and clapping every day of the week.

So let's not waste more time arguing whether it is 'penatration' or 'appearance', and let JC do what he does best. We all know what that is.


Zi An