For some reason, I've always been interested in the "old school," P.T. Barnum-style side show. In fact, I really like the term "freak show," probably because I've always been morbidly fascinated by the 1930s film Freaks, which you, dear reader, should see if you've not already. But for better or worse, in our society, we seem to have decided that the freak show is no longer socially acceptable. And I do think this cultural movement is for the better: I cannot really at all justify the all-too-human tendancy to objectify and gawk at the disabled. And this is what the freak show (as opposed to the "geeks" in the sideshow) is really about.
Lately, I've found myself watching the Discovery Channel and its sister channels Discovery Health and The Learning Channel a little too frequently. The line-up includes such favorites as Jon and Kate Plus Eight and 17 Kids and Counting, which are interesting and seemingly-benign looks at families which by society's standards are extraordinarily large. But Little People, Big World, often follows Jon and Kate. LPBW follows the Roloff (spelling?) family, composed of two LP parents and their four children, only one of whom is a LP, or little person. In many ways, they are an average family, but isn't the whole selling point of the program that, at least in height, they are not at all average? I mean, don't we watch it as our great-grandparents might have gone to the freak show? In the end, the Roloffs do live much like an average, upper middle class family, however, and I don't think that we as viewers tune in just to gawk, although that's certainly part of the attraction. We might say some of the same things about the Style network's Ruby, which follows a morbidly obese woman as she both attempts to lose weight and negotiate a world not really suited to her current body. And on the one hand, the program is interesting in that rather than encouraging us to objectify Ruby, we are encouraged her to see her as fully human, with the struggles and emotions just like all the rest of us. And yet, she's only notable because she's the "fat lady."
I am much more concerned about an entirely different set of programs I've recently seen advertised as part of the Discovery / TLC lineup. Most of these seem to be one or two time "specials," as opposed to entire series, and even their titles are evocative of Barnum's side show, titles like Treeman and Mermaid Girl. In both cases, we are invited to gawk at people with conditions that lead to horrible disfigurement. I only saw a small portion of each of these, but it seems like the majority of each hour-long program is devoted to exploring the medical aspects--the various approaches to possible "cures," each individual's life-expectancy, how the condition has developed over time--of both individuals. But really, I don't see how this is much different from the early-twentieth century side show. We, as viewers, are still pointing and staring because of the disability. We may or may not feel some compassion, but compassion does not seem to be what motivates us to watch. And clearly, I'm not necessarily pointing the proverbial finger at all of you as viewers; I've watched too. I've seen various specials on types of dwarfism and how the individual is affected, the specials about conjoined twins, and notably the recent spectacle of the Indian girl with either six or eight arms (apparently, she's considered by some to be an incarnation of a particular deity.) I have to admit that I think documentaries about transsexuals are especially interesting. But the selling point, the attraction of each of this is that each is about a "freak," about someone who is not like the mainstream because of a pathology, a malady, a disability. We see these conditions as something to be corrected, and we treat these inidividuals as objects or stand-ins, not as inidivudals. I'm sure that Treeman and Mermaid Girl have actual names, but we're willing to reduce them to interesting and notable and valuable as nothing more than their freakishness.
But my question is this: are many of these programs different from the 1930s freak show? The medium is different in that instead of carnival barkers encouraging us to pay and extra nickel and step inside a tent, we simply flip to a particular channel on Sunday night. But aren't our motivations the same? Don't we tune in to see the physical deformities? to marvel at the freaks? to point and stare and feel both pity and terror? Isn't this the same as the now out-of -fashion freak show?
a president, a King
13 years ago
