The History of Freak Shows and Rejecting Others
American Horror Story, became a popular show when the first season Murder House aired in October of 2011. However, I enjoyed season four, Freak Show. I found it the most odd season to watch. While at the same time I had a hatred for how the producers made the towns-people act so nasty towards the show performers- something bad happens in the town, the “freaks” get blamed. The owner of the freak show seems to only care about herself while trying to seem like the nice caring mother towards her “freaks”. My research focuses on the history of the freak shows and the ways the owners of shows used the disabled “freaks” as they would call them to make a profit. I also focused on the ways the “freaks” were treated in history. In my project, I want to use this research to express how badly humans treated other humans because of their differences. I would also like to express how people used other peoples bodies to make a living. It was a cruel way to live and I want to express exactly how bad it was to live for the “freaks”, even though some of them seemed to like it, because they saw themselves not as freaks.
Annotated Bibliography
“Reclaiming “Freak” Discourses of Queer Desirability in Circus Amok”*
This article talks about the twentieth century circus (Circus Amok) and how the queer performers, like any old circus performers, try to make the audience feel uncomfortable. They are more focused on the queer aspect of “freaks”. Instead of having disabled people doing acts. The society used “freaks” as more of a way to make money, they never considered them as a normal human,
The history of disability and construction of “ freak” are closely tied to free market capitalism; the circus a microcosm in which economic and social systems of capital worked to value bodies as “desirable” and “undesirable”. While P.T. Barnum and other circus institutions exploited “freaks” for profit, the economic empowerment people with disabilities received through the sideshow was often preferable to other options: institutionalization, unemployment, and isolation (376).
This proof of how “freaks” were treated will be an example in my adaptation, because it is a big social disappointment in my eyes and I wanted it to be strongly exemplified. People believed that someone with a small deformity was a “freak” and they were discriminated against for something they couldn’t control.
“Freak Show (Book Review)”*
There’s a few paragraphs in this book review that focus on Robert Bogdan’s Freak Show: Presenting Human Oddities for Amusement and Profit. It talks about how Americans ignore the history of human oddities, which is important to the cultural values. “Freaks” were used to make profit for institutions, not all for amusement, “Beginning in the 1840’s and paralleling the development of institutions like factories and hospitals, freaks shows ceased being isolated attractions and became attached to dime museums, carnivals, and circuses (1494).” When the popularity of freak shows went down the owners of them turned to museums they could sell the “freaks” to, to make money for themselves. This will play a role in my adaptation to express how badly the “freaks” were treated.
“Freak Show: Presenting Human Oddities for Amusement and Profit”
In this book review, the reviewer talks about how in Bogdan’s book, he explains how freaks shows are an embarrassment to our history and how everyone wants to forget about them. The reviewer mentions how Bogdan explains the relationship between the “freaks”, show runners, and the people who paid to watch. Everyone came to see the “freaks”, that’s what they were called, “the “freaks” who appeared in such shows were more of a product of this relationship than a fluky product of nature”. I like the way Bogdan words this sentence because it is calling the “freaks” simply human. I want to present this in my work through because I want my “freaks” to still be “freaks” but at the same time still be considered human to the spectators.
“Dangerous Bodies: Freak Shows, Expression, and Exploitation”
This paper has a short piece of writing explaining freak shows in the legal way. It tells us about the laws the owners of the shows had to follow because, “such shows might exploit persons with unusual bodies, offend the public, stigmatize freak show performers and others with unusual bodies, and teach intolerance of physical difference” (224). I like how there were laws back then to keep the “different” people somewhat safe from all the bad people out there. I would like to express this in my work to show people now that there was some kind of “equal” law.
“In The Shadow of the Freakshow: The Impact of Freakshow Tradition on the Display and Understanding of Disability History in Museums”
In this research project it explains that public displays such as museums and galleries were used to show off the “freaks” to make money. The “freaks” basically sold themselves to surgeons of showgrounds to make money, “Owen Farrel, a strongman-dwarf, “sold his body to a Mr. Omrod, a surgeon, for a weekly allowance who, after his death, made a skeleton of his bones which… at present is preserved (in the museum) of the late Dr. William Hunter at the University of Glasgow”. Another big topic that I want to express in my work is again how the “freaks” were used to make money and basically how they had to use their uniqueness to make money for themselves.
“Interpreting the Freak Show and Freak Show”
In this article, they explain the sense of the history of the freak show. Freak shows were a thing before any disability acts were passed, meaning the “freaks” were an amusement and not a grotesque thing to look at, “begin by understanding that this history is constituted in the social oppression and immediate exploitation of a uniquely powerless minority” (435). The disabled people were used as entertainment and amusement and not frowned upon. When the disabled people acts came in people were more disgusted in the “freaks” I want to present this in my work, making people still amused by the freaks, while also making the spectators find them grotesque.
American Horror Story, became a popular show when the first season Murder House aired in October of 2011. However, I enjoyed season four, Freak Show. I found it the most odd season to watch. While at the same time I had a hatred for how the producers made the towns-people act so nasty towards the show performers- something bad happens in the town, the “freaks” get blamed. The owner of the freak show seems to only care about herself while trying to seem like the nice caring mother towards her “freaks”. My research focuses on the history of the freak shows and the ways the owners of shows used the disabled “freaks” as they would call them to make a profit. I also focused on the ways the “freaks” were treated in history. In my project, I want to use this research to express how badly humans treated other humans because of their differences. I would also like to express how people used other peoples bodies to make a living. It was a cruel way to live and I want to express exactly how bad it was to live for the “freaks”, even though some of them seemed to like it, because they saw themselves not as freaks.
Annotated Bibliography
“Reclaiming “Freak” Discourses of Queer Desirability in Circus Amok”*
This article talks about the twentieth century circus (Circus Amok) and how the queer performers, like any old circus performers, try to make the audience feel uncomfortable. They are more focused on the queer aspect of “freaks”. Instead of having disabled people doing acts. The society used “freaks” as more of a way to make money, they never considered them as a normal human,
The history of disability and construction of “ freak” are closely tied to free market capitalism; the circus a microcosm in which economic and social systems of capital worked to value bodies as “desirable” and “undesirable”. While P.T. Barnum and other circus institutions exploited “freaks” for profit, the economic empowerment people with disabilities received through the sideshow was often preferable to other options: institutionalization, unemployment, and isolation (376).
This proof of how “freaks” were treated will be an example in my adaptation, because it is a big social disappointment in my eyes and I wanted it to be strongly exemplified. People believed that someone with a small deformity was a “freak” and they were discriminated against for something they couldn’t control.
“Freak Show (Book Review)”*
There’s a few paragraphs in this book review that focus on Robert Bogdan’s Freak Show: Presenting Human Oddities for Amusement and Profit. It talks about how Americans ignore the history of human oddities, which is important to the cultural values. “Freaks” were used to make profit for institutions, not all for amusement, “Beginning in the 1840’s and paralleling the development of institutions like factories and hospitals, freaks shows ceased being isolated attractions and became attached to dime museums, carnivals, and circuses (1494).” When the popularity of freak shows went down the owners of them turned to museums they could sell the “freaks” to, to make money for themselves. This will play a role in my adaptation to express how badly the “freaks” were treated.
“Freak Show: Presenting Human Oddities for Amusement and Profit”
In this book review, the reviewer talks about how in Bogdan’s book, he explains how freaks shows are an embarrassment to our history and how everyone wants to forget about them. The reviewer mentions how Bogdan explains the relationship between the “freaks”, show runners, and the people who paid to watch. Everyone came to see the “freaks”, that’s what they were called, “the “freaks” who appeared in such shows were more of a product of this relationship than a fluky product of nature”. I like the way Bogdan words this sentence because it is calling the “freaks” simply human. I want to present this in my work through because I want my “freaks” to still be “freaks” but at the same time still be considered human to the spectators.
“Dangerous Bodies: Freak Shows, Expression, and Exploitation”
This paper has a short piece of writing explaining freak shows in the legal way. It tells us about the laws the owners of the shows had to follow because, “such shows might exploit persons with unusual bodies, offend the public, stigmatize freak show performers and others with unusual bodies, and teach intolerance of physical difference” (224). I like how there were laws back then to keep the “different” people somewhat safe from all the bad people out there. I would like to express this in my work to show people now that there was some kind of “equal” law.
“In The Shadow of the Freakshow: The Impact of Freakshow Tradition on the Display and Understanding of Disability History in Museums”
In this research project it explains that public displays such as museums and galleries were used to show off the “freaks” to make money. The “freaks” basically sold themselves to surgeons of showgrounds to make money, “Owen Farrel, a strongman-dwarf, “sold his body to a Mr. Omrod, a surgeon, for a weekly allowance who, after his death, made a skeleton of his bones which… at present is preserved (in the museum) of the late Dr. William Hunter at the University of Glasgow”. Another big topic that I want to express in my work is again how the “freaks” were used to make money and basically how they had to use their uniqueness to make money for themselves.
“Interpreting the Freak Show and Freak Show”
In this article, they explain the sense of the history of the freak show. Freak shows were a thing before any disability acts were passed, meaning the “freaks” were an amusement and not a grotesque thing to look at, “begin by understanding that this history is constituted in the social oppression and immediate exploitation of a uniquely powerless minority” (435). The disabled people were used as entertainment and amusement and not frowned upon. When the disabled people acts came in people were more disgusted in the “freaks” I want to present this in my work, making people still amused by the freaks, while also making the spectators find them grotesque.