1 _ Introduction In Search of Freaks ~0t l('11 o )ff'&tu jJww:

H~~(' oJcL'fr&5 -for

~+ I o(V\ V\ lL ) fro f-I't. lA", vUr'r'+J 01 OTIS JORDAN, a man with poorly functioning and lIndelfornlPd limh~ who is helter known in tilt' carnival world as "Olisthe Frog Man." C ~\ LR-Y Pre) was banned in 1984 from appearing as part of the Sulton Side­ show at the New York State Fnir. A voral citizen had ohjecteo. calling the exhibition of people with deformities an "intolerable anachronism." The protester contendeothat handicapped people were being exploited and that tlw state's fair funos could he put to better lise by helping people with disahilities instead of nwking them freaks. As a result of the complaint. and in spilf' of .Ionian's ubjel'­ tions, Sulton's "Incredible Wanoprs of the World" was moved from the heart of the midway. wlwre husiness and visibility' were best, to the back of the fair. The showmen were asked not to use the terrn freak or allow perfonnances of I)('ople like Otis lorrlan.

people the puhlic would consider disabled (Kaleina 19841. I On September 8, 1984, the Associated Press released a story ("City to Cite" 1984) about a committee formed in Alton, illi­ nois, to erect a statue in honor of Robert Wadlow, a local boy who had reached the height uf eight f'<>ct eleven inches beforl:' his death in 1940 at the age of twenty-two. Wadlow had appeared in the circlIs in the 19:30s and. u;;ing Ihe novell)' of his height. had gotten a job promoting shoes at stores throughout the United Slales (Fadner 1944). But a committee spokesperson wanted to clarify: "He was not a circus freak as a lot of people might think. He was an intelligent. caring man." During the past twenty years numerous intellectuals and art­

ists have confronted us with freaks. l Yet the frequent mention and coffee-table display of art-photography books, which in­ '.;J clude pieturps taken at freak shows. are no indication that freak IJl shows are now accepted. Hat her. as tlw work of Diane Arbus personifies, "freak" has become a metaphor for estrangement, aliena­ show's famous manager, spotted Earle in the audience; after the show tion, marginality, the dark side of the human experience (Arbus 1972; he approached the young man to ask. "How would you like to be a Sontag 1977). Indeed, Arbus's biographer suggests that her flirtation giant?" (Fig. 1). with freaks was but one dimension of her odyssey through the bowels While it is uncertain how much of this story changed on becoming of society-her suicide being the last stop on the trip (Bosworth 1984). incorporated into circus lore, it clarifies a point that freak show per­ Otis Jordan and the spokesperson for Robert Wadlow's statue com­ sonnel understood but outside observers neglect: being extremely tall mittee remind us of what we all sense when we hear the word freak is a matter of physiology-being a giant involves something more. and think of "freak shows." Seen by many as crude, rude, and ex­ Similarly, being a freak is not a personal matter, a physical condition ploitive, the freak show is despicable, a practice on the margin, lim­ that some people have (Coffman 1963; Becker 1963). The onstage ited to a class with poor taste, representing, as one disability rights freak is something else off stage. "Freak" is a frame of mind, a set of activist put it, the "pornography of disability."3 practices, a way of thinking about and presenting people. 7 It is the Although freak shows are now on the contemptible fringe, from ap­ enactment of a tradition, the performance of a stylized presentation. proximately 1840 through 1940 the formally organized exhibition for While people called "freaks" will be included in this discussion, amusement and profit of people with physical, mental, or behavioral the people themselves are not of primary concern. Rather, the focus anomalies, both alleged and real, was an accepted part of American is on the social arrangements in which they found themselves, the life. Hundreds of freak shows traversed America in the last quarter of place and meaning of the freak show in the world of which they were a the nineteenth and first quarter of the twentieth centuries. Yet only part, and the way the resulting exhibits were presented to the public. five exist today,4 and their continued existence is precarious. Per­ The social construction-the manufacture of freaks-is the main sonnel, plagued by low-priced admissions, poor attendance, and at­ allraction. tacks from indignant activitisls, cannot tell from week to week whether But don't leave! There will be exhibits (and it will be okay to look!). they can last the season. Barely alive, the freak show is approaching For we need examples-flesh on the bones of institutional analysis. its finale. We need to understand what it was like to participate in the freak Given the tradition of the study of deviance and abnormality, one show and what meanings emerged to make the enterprise coherent to would expect a large body of social scientific literature on freak the exhibits, the promoters, and the audience alike. shows. There is none. S The low status of the convention, combined with the decline in the number of such businesses. llIay explain this VOCABULARY lack in part. In addition, until the relatively recent interest in the Many terms have been' used to refer to lhe practice of exhibiting natural history of social problems (Conrad and Schneider 1980: Spec­ people for money and to the various forms that such exhibits took. tor and Kitsuse 1977), social scientists interested in deviance seldom "Raree Show" and "Hall of Human Curiosities" were early-nineleenth­ turned to the past for their data (see Erikson 1966 and Mjzruchi 1983 century terms. "Sideshow," "Ten in One," "Kid Show," "Pitshow," cil~- for exceptionsl. Thus freak shows have remained in the hands of "'Odditorium,'" uConl';ress of Oddilies ...... HCongress of Human Won­ ellS buffs and afew nonconformists in the humanities. Ibelieve, how­ ders," "Museum of Nature's Mistakes," ''freak Show," and a host of ever, that these displays of human beings present an exciting op­ variations on these titles were late-nineteenth- and twentieth-century portunity to develop understanding of past practices and changing designations. conceptions of abnormality, as well as the beginnings of a grounded A broad range of terms were applied to the peopte exhibited, the theory in the management of human differences. freaks. Because natural scientists and physicians were interested in many exhibits, and because showmen exploited scientific interest in The Social Construction of Freaks constructing freaks, the lexicon is a complex hodgepodge of medical In the mid 1920s, Jack Earle, a very tall University of Texas student, terminology and show-world hype. The more recent proliferation of visited the Ringling Brothers circus sideshow. 6 Clyde Ingalls, the euphemisms generated by the freak show's decline in popularity and 'J-) 00 Q\ 2 INTRODUCTION IN SEARCH OF FREAKS .~ FIG. 1. Jack Earle in the Rin~ling Brolhers. Barnum and Bailey Sideshow. Earle is in the top row, third from the right, wearing atall hat and military outfit. Other well· known exhibits in lilt' picture include the Doll Family, Koo-Koo the Bird Girl, Clicko Ihe Bushman, and Ik" and Eko. Photo hy Cenlury, c. 19:H·. (Hertzberg Coil., Sail Antonio Public Libral")

,~ 00 4 INTRODUCTION s 'J IN SEARCH OF FREAKS the moral indignation surronnrling the exhibition of human anomalies ticular exhibit actually represented a new species or was simply a creates a long list of imprecise terms. 8 "Curiosities," "lusus naturae," Illsus naturae. "freaks of nature," "rarities," "oddities," "eccentrics," "wonders," In the last quarter of the ninet('enth century the blurr('d distinction "marvels," "nature's mistakes," "strange people," "prodigies," "mon­ between species and freaks of nature became moot: all human ex­ slers,"9 "very special people," and "freaks" form a partial list. The hibits, including tribal people of normal stature and body configura­ exact use and definition of these words varies from user to user and tion, as well as people who performed unusual feats ;;uch as swallow­ from time to time. They do not, however, all mean the same thing; ing swords, fell under the generic term freak. indeed, some have very exact meanings when used by particular Those twenlieth-century authors who have wrillen about the side­ peopJe. The terminology wi" be clarified as this discussion proceeds. show, mainly popular historians and humanities scholars. address the question "What were the various kinds of human freaks'?" by concen­ TYPES OF FREAKS trating on the physical characteristics of exhibits with anomalies What were the various kinds of human freaks? In discussions of hu­ (Drimmer 1973; Durant and Durant 1957; Fiedler 1978; Howard man oddities in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, there devel­ 1977). Their books and articles are organized like medical or special oped an important and revealing, albeit blurry and noninclnsive, education textbooks, with headings covering such topics as lillIe distinction between two types of exhibits. The distinction is revealing people (dwarfs and midgets), giants, hairy people, human skeletons. because it illustrates the connection between science and freak shows, armless and legless wonders, wild men, fat people, albinos. Siamese a connection that showmen profited by and tried to maintain well into twins, people with eXira limbs, half men/half women. people with the twentieth century. The distinction was between so-called ex­ skin disorders, and anatomical wonders. They are eager to provide

humans: not only non-Western people but also, fraudulently, as a pro­ oSlhes" "h'f SitS Ih C lOCUSr from "t hem ""10 US,".II aI so reI'fi es "frea k" by motional strategy, Americans with physical anomalies. taking "it" as a constant and inevitable outpouring of basic human The second major calegory of exhibit consisted of "monsters," the nature. Moreover. in his writing he slips back to treating the person medical term for people born with a demonstrable difference. Lusus exhibited as the subject of the study. His typology of human oddities naturae, or "freaks of nature," were of interest to physicians for whom does not stray from the traditional view of "freak" as a physiological the field of teratology, the study of these so-called monsters, had be­ condition, and il excludes exhibits with no physical anomalies. Thus, come a fad. To the joy (and often at the instigation) of showmen, de­ rather than penetrating the socially constructed dimension of the bates raged among scientists and laypersons alike as to whether a par­ freak show, he merely mystifies it.

'JJ DC DC 6 INTRODUCTION IN SEARCH OF FRE~KS 7 In answer to the question "What were the various kinds of freaks?" people who have been inside the exhibiting business use the physio­ ~~ logical categories as well, hut they also use the distinctions born freaks, madefreaks, and novelty acts (Gresham 1948; Kelly 1950). Ac­ 't.-'~ cording to this classification, "born freaks" are people with real physi­ cal anomalies who came by their condition naturally. While this cate­ gory in~ludes people who developed their uniqueness later in life, central are people who had an abnormality at birth: Siamese twins and armless and legless people are examples. "Made freaks" do some­ thing to themselves that make them unusual enough for exhibit, such as getting adorned with tattoos or growing their beards or hair excep­ tionally long. The "novelty act" (or "working act") does not rely on any physical characteristic but rather boasts an unusual performance or ability such as sword swallowing (the more contemporary versions used neon tubes) or snake charming. In addition to these three main "types," sideshow people refer to "gaffed freaks": the fakes, the phonies-the armless wonder whose anns are tucked under a tight fitting shirt, the four-legged woman

whose extra legs really belong to a person hidden from the audience, In or the Siamese twins who were in fact two (Fig. 2). When in public freak show personnel showed disdain for the gaff: their competitors might try to get away with it, bllt they would not. The "born freak" was publicly acknowledged as having esteem. This is the standard typology as those in the business prt.~ent it, and it has not changed over the last hundred and twenty years. More inclusive than other schemes, it is a good starting point for approach­ ing the subject of freaks. Yet even though the "insiders'" way of cate­ gorizing differentiates freak show exhibits in the abstract, even they had difficulty applying the distinctions. Non-Western people, for eX­ ample. were exhibited in freak shows on the basis of their cultural differences. Although showmen called them "freaks" and displayed

them on the same platform as people with physiological and mental disabilities, their place in the commonsense typology is unclear. The FIG. 2. Phony Siame8e twins. Adolph-Rudolph were gaffs: joined twins are always di~sin\iLII· "'-f'ndt~ categories did not. moreover, acknowledge the pervasive hype, fraud. identical. Note the facial fp.dlurt'f'. Photo hy Frank c. lR99. (Beeke-T ColI.. S)'I-aruse Univ(·rsily.) and deception that was characteristic of the whole freak show enter­ prise. If taken at face value, the insiders' typology veils more than it reveals. It interests us not because it clarifies the freak show or the scientific pursuit, was always first and foremost a for-profit activity. exhibits, but because it enlarges the subject and grounds us in the Presentors learned from the medicine shows that packaging of the commonsense notions of the amusement world. product was as important as what was inside. Thns, using information Exhibiting people, although often treated as an educational and from science, exploration, medicine, and current events, and appeal- \,;) 00 \0 9 R INTRODUCTION IN SEARCH OF FREAKS Significantly, once human exhibits became attached to organiza­ ing to popular images and symbols, promoters created a public con­ tions, distinct patterns of constructing and prest>nting freaks could be ception of the exhibit that would have the widest appeal, attract the institutionalized, conventions that endure to this day. The freak show most people, and collect the most dimes. Every exhibit was, in the thus joined the burgeoning popular amusement industry, and the orga­ strict use of the word, a fraud. This is not to say that many freaks did nizations tbat mad.' up that industry, housing as tlwy did an occupation not have profound physical, mental, and behavioral differences, for as with a special approach to the world, developed a particular way of life. we will see, many did; bUI, with very few exceptions, every pPl"son That culture is crucial to an understanding of the manufacture offreah. exhibited was misrepresented to the public. The gaff was only Ihe ex­ treme of this misrepresentation. In Search of Freaks! The major lesson to be learned from a study of the exhibition of How does one go about stndying frc,lk shows'? What types of material people as freaks is not about the cruelty of the exhibitors or I he are available? Although many of tlw "tandanl historical sources are na'ivete of the audience. How we view people who are different has useful (FI int 1972},12 cel1ain unu"twl sources deserve attention here less to do with what they are physiologically than with who we are because they help to introduce till' ('(lIll,tIl,tion (If fwaks and the place culturally (Sarason and Doris 1979). As with the tall Jack Earle, of freak shows in American life. having a disability or another difference did nol make the peopll> dis­ One kind of informatiun is found in abundance: the materials that cussed in this book freaks. "Freak" is a way of thinking, of presenl­ were used to publicize the exhibits-handbills, newspaper advertise­ ing, a set of practices, an institution-not a characteristic of an indi­ ments, canvas bannerline posters. and the promutional photographs vidual. Freak shows can teach us not to confuse the role a person and ad¥ertising booklets that exhibited people sold as a way uf sup­

plays with who that person really is. plementing their incomes. IJ At first glance these materials appear useless. They are so contrived, so obviously produced merely to win Why 1840? customers' attention that they can be easily dismissed as lies. But By "freak show" I mean the formally organized exhibition of people fraud is central to the freak show, and lies make good data-that is. if with alleged and real physical, mental, or behavioral anomalies for one knows that they are lies and if deception is the subject of inves­ amusement and profit. The "formally organized" part of the definilion tigatiOli. After all, misrepresentation is integral to tilt' manufactnre is important, for it distinguishes freak shows from early exhibitions of of freaks. single attractions that were not attached to organizations such as cir­

cuses and carnivals. \I FREAK PORTRAIT PHOTOGRAPHS In the nineteenth century the United States was moving from an If you visited a proper American household of the 18GOs to early agrarian, family- and community-based society to one in which formal 1900s, you would wind up sitting in an ornately decorated parlor organizations like schools, factories, businesses, hospitals, and gov­ (Seale 1981). There, often supported by their own stands, would be ernment agencies would dominate. During this time the organizations Ihick, elaborately crafted and lavishly decorated photograph alhums that would eventually house freak shows developed. It would be a dis­ containing formally posed, studio portraits (M. Mitchell 1979; Taft tortion to state that in 1840 human exhibits changed all at once from 1938). Pictures of family members filled most albums, but Victorian unattached attractions to freak shows, for the process was slow and and post-Victorian Americans collected pictures of other people as had been under way for half a century. But 1840 is significanl because well: stalesmen, generals, performers, and. interestingly, freaks. by that time the transition had progressed significantly and because, Nineteenth-century Americans suffered from "curlomania" (Bass­ close to that date, P. T. Barnum became the proprietor of an organiza­ ham 1978, 3; Darrah 1981; McCulJock 1981)-a compulsion to collect tion in New York City, the American Museum, that looms large in the photographs. They bought pictures to fill their albums, which they history of the American freak show. It was this establishment that spent hours looking over and showing to friends. The photo album was brought the freak show to prominence as a central part of what would the television of Victorian homes: what Victorians viewed, what they soon constitute the popular amusement industry. w .,0 o II IN SEARCH OF FREA"S 10 INTRODUCTION collected, reRected their intt>rests and tastes. Judging by tilt> lltllllher In the last thrt'l' decadl'~ of the nillt'tl'l'nth {'('ntUl"i, frt>ak shows and of freak images produced, it is safe to say that human oddities \\,t>rt> photographers t\omi~l1t>d (M. Mitdlt'll 19f(»). Particular photogra­ not only fascinating but quite acceptable as Victurian houseguests­ phers tuok up freak portrait~ a~ a ~pt'('ialty. Human odditie~ wOllld as long as they stayed in their albums. regularly climh the ~tair>, to their lop-Hoor stlldio~ (lighting wa~ pro­ Prior to 1850, technology limited imagery productioll to two basic vided by skyli{!;hts), carefully pose, and then they or their mana/?;er processes: one resulted in an image similar to the daguerreotype, the would pick the images 10 be duplicated. I, In ~()n)(' ('a~e~ thousands of other rendered the calotypc. Because glass negatives were not cm­ reproductions wuuld be ordered at one til1le. ployed (daguerreotypes used no negative and calotypes empluyed They posed in front of one of various painted backdrops depicting paper), the production of high-quality multiple copies, and thus wide­ scenes that ran/?;ed from jungle terrain to Victurian parlors. Props spread marketing of photographs, was impossible. In 1851, however, were selected, costumes worn, and the pose struck-all to reRect the the development of the collodion process, or "set-plate" technique, image that the manager and the subject wanted to promote. Some ex­ enabled photographers for the first time to make many prints from one hibits were presented in an exotic mode, others in a way that aggran­ exposure, and by the early 1860s the carte de visite (hence the word dized their status. Dwarfs were photographed in oversized chairs to cartomania) was all the rage (Darrah 1981), with annual sales of 400 appear smaller than life, and giants were shot in scaled-down chairs million in the peak years of their production (Mitchell 1979, 15). to appear larger. Fat people's garments were stuffed with rags to add to Drawings and prints provide the earliest visual record of human their size. In addition, negatives were doctored, with, for example, oddities. Some daguerreotype images of freaks have survived the additional hair added to exhibits whuse abundance of hair was their years-including Tom Thumb and the "Aztec children" (Harvard oddity (Figs. 3 and 4).16 Coll.)-but it was not until the mass-produced carte de visite that a Exhibits and managers would carefully review the proofs and give comprehensive record of human exhibits could be assembled. Popular printing instructions that would enhance the image, perhaps to em­ freak show attractions of the 1860s posed for photographers and sold phasize the oddity or to promote a particular presentation. On photo­ their carte de visite likenesses to Victorian Americans. Mathew Brady graphs in the Harvard Theater Collection, sume of the cabinet pic­ (Meredity 1970l, premier early photographer, famous for his Lincoln tures still bear the photographers' notes. On one photo of an albino portraits and his striking visual chronicle of the Civil War, made woman, the instructions read: '"Makt' half It'ngth and have the hair cartes de visite of Barnum's American Museum freak atlractions show as white as possible." On the hack of an 1880s picture of R. J. (Kunhardt and Kunhardt 1977). I~ In his studio on Broadway, across James, "The Ohio Fat Boy," the instructions call for a retake with from Barnum's landmark, he took pictures of popular authors, states­ looser clothing to make him look larger. men, dignitaries, and such freak show notables as Henry Johnson In some photos, the freaks' managers posed with their exhibits. In (What Is It? or Zip); Captain Bates and his wife Anna Swan, the mar­ others, the exhihit's family was included. Exhibited children often sat ried giants; Major Newell, the midget; Charles Tripp, thc armless with their parents, and older exhibits appeared with spouse and chil­ wonder; Admiral Dot; General Tom Thumb and his wife; Lavinia War­ dren. In the 18805 and 18905 major cities had photography studios

ren: Chang and Eng, the original Siamese twins; Annie Jones, the that catered to freak show clienteles. Because studios branded their bearded lady; the Lucasie alhino family; and the Fiji cannibals. The photocards with their logo, it is relatively easy to compile a list of stu­

Barnum freaks that Brady captured on film went on to be the proto­ dios-fl'Om Lonma in Eastporl, Maine, lo Rulofon in San Francisco. 17 types of laler freak exhibits. In post-Civil War America, New York Cily was lhe freak show By the late 1860s larger and clearer cabinet photographs wel:e capital of the country, and the Bowery was its center. Photographers being produced, which reignited the collecting craze. Although the had to work hard to keep up with the demand for freak portraits. With cabinet photo eventually replaced the carte de visite, enough of the thousands being sold, more New York photographers entered into the smaller images remained in circulation in the 1880s to warrant at least freak pOltrait business. IH Yet one person stands out, in both the quality a few pages for them in contemporary photograph albums. and the extent (If his effort moth and Cromie J980, 79; M. Mitchell v.> ...... \0 12 lNTRODlJCTlON IN SEARClI OF FREAKS 13 ~~~.,,?,~-",,,t,r;m: • '£~."';' ~.. ,'i.. ';': '~}{",_"-~l".j;;- .<\ .~- ~_. _ -'~_ "~ ... .;:- ~. ',t-l~~~f~_~. ",.

FtG. 5. Ella Harper, "Ihe Call1el GirL" Ph",,, bv Chari,·, Ei"'lIl11ann, IM(I. (Bel'kt'l" Coil.. Syrae-usc University. I

show's management and the allraction, although Ihe most popular ex­ FIGs. 3 AND 4. Two version8 of a hairy man. In producing the photo on the right extra hair was added 10 the exhihit. Photos by Charles Eisenmann, c. 1884. (Becker Coil., hibits negotiated to keep a higher percentage of the cash, The photos Syracuse University. provided beneftts to the show besides Ihe oirel't Aow of cash. however. Not only were they good publicity, but selling them also provided the 1979): Charles Eisenmann, whose photographic legacy is truly amaz­ attractions with a diversion from the tedious routine of sittin~ on the ing. 19 Every major freak show attraction sat for his Bowery studio cam­ stage. Photograph sales were also a tangihle measure of the exhibits' era during the 1880s and 1890s, and many made repeated appear­ popularity relative to others on the platform. ances. More photos hy Eisenmann are available for study than hy any The !!:reat hulk of sales of freak P9rtraits O('('lIl..-eo at the exhihition other photographer, and major circus and theater libraries are rich proper. In the nineteenth century. however. pi(·tures of particularly with his images. papillar exhibits, such as Tom Thumb, ('ould also be bought from the Showmen and exhihits cashed in on Ampriea's photo-collecting photographers and their t1{!:ents (Kunlwrdt allll Kllnlmrdt 1977\. La­ craze. Freaks placed photocards on the platform in front of them for vinia Warren, Tom Thumb's wife, was referred to as the most photo­ sale, which, if a patron requested, could be signed, dated, and even graphed woman in the world. She ordered hfty thousand pictures of inscribed with a personal message. The "armless wonder's" "footwrit­ herself at a time (Desmond 195<1., 222\ and these were widely avail­ ten" messages were in high demand. Ann Leak Thompson, the "arm­ able from photographv vendors. tess lady," was famous for her catchy phrases: "I write poetry and In some cases these f"eak portraits with their Ilc('asionat handwrit­ prose holding my pen between my toes" (Harvard Coli.), or "Hands ten messages are all that remains, the only communicalion left. The deprived" toes derived" (Becker CoIL). only evidence of Ella Harper, for example, is un Eisenmann cahillt'l Freaks sold Ihousands of these pictures, and because the markup porlrait of a prelly thirteen-year-old with severe orthopedic problems, was good, profits were high. The income was usually split between the on all fours (Fig. 5). On the back of the pi('lure is written: "I am called

W \0 t..l 14 INTRODUCTION IN SEARCH OF FREAKS 15 the camel girl because my knees turn backward. I can walk besl on my hands and feet as you see me in the picture. I have traveled ('on­ siderably in the show business for the past four years and now, thi.; is 1886, I now intend to quit the show business and go to school alld Iii myself for another occupation" (Becker Coll.). During the nineteenth century and into the twentieth, freak show patrons took their treasured photo souvenirs home and placed them in their albums. Often they wrote information on the back-tIll' name of the attraction, his or her age or birthdate, where and when the exhibit was seen-as a reminder. While the reliability of this in­ formation is never certain, notated pictures can be helpful in tracing exhibits' stories. This misspelled note for example, was written on the back of a cabinet photo showing a young family consisting 01' mother, father, a five-year-old, and infant Siamese twins (Fig. 6): "The Jones twins. Born in Russianville, Ind June 25, 1889. Joined at buttock, had there own normal lags, they had but one rectulll. They died while on tour with a carnival show when about ]5 montl,.; old" (Becker Coll.). By means of the photo and notation, the twill'; could be identified as those described in an 1880s medical jourrd (Huff 1889). Eisenmann and the other Victorian photographers left a rich collel'­ tion of clear and elegant images that help us to und('rstand freak shows and their place in nineteenth-century America. After the tum of the century, although lhe collecting craze declined, a market for freak photos persisted. The Barnum and Bailey Circus sideshow al­ tractions, for instance, continued to sell cabinet-style photocards un­ til at least 1916. With lhe invention of cheap, lower-quality processes to reprint pictures in a postcard format, howev(~r. and with tl1l' deditH'

of the studio photographer. freak portraits began to figure less impor­ FIc. 6. The Jones Siamese Iwins. Family porlrail, with the twins in the [c,reground. tantly in sideshow life. Nonetheless, well into tilt' 19405 freak postcard Photop;rapher unknown. 18H9. (Rpcker C"II., Syracuse University.) portraits were regularly sold to promote thl:' show and to suppleml:'nt income-and Otis Jordan, 'IThe Frog Man," was selling porlrails al the New York State Fair in the 1980s. Of course, most of lhe millions of freak portraits that werl:' crealI'd "TRUE LIFE" PAMPHLETS have been destroyed (some probably by appalled spring cleaners), bUl Although freak portraits capture the visual dimension of presentation, they occasionally turn up still in attics and old trunks. They can be they cannot convey the details of the stories constructed to explain the purchased at antique shops, estate sales, and through antique photo­ exhibits to the audience. Luckily, in addition to photos, exhibits sold graphic dealers. For the student of freak shows these are an important biographical pamphlets from their platforms (Fig. 7). These pam­ resource, our most complete record of the one hundred years of freak phlets are not, however, as plentiful as the portraits. for two reasons. show popularity. First, they were not as popular; while virtually every exhibit sold pic- '.;J '-D '.;J Ir'iTHOlJUCTlON 16 IN SEARCH OF FREAKS 17 ures, the sale of pamphlets was les" Iwrvasive. Second, unlike the Jhotos, which were printed and mounted on enduring materials, the booklets wel"e print(~d on ilH'xpensive p

'JJ \D "'" lB INTRODUCTION IN SEARCH or FRt;AKS 19 of the freak image which the managers, promoters, and freaks them­ In Part Two are presented profiles of freak presentation, with three selves wanled 10 promulgate. Some pamphlels were forty and more chapters devoted to presentations in the exotic mode and two in the pages long, going on in elaborate, fraudulenl delail about Ihe Irek aggrandized mode. While these chapters are mainly descriptive, cach Ihrough the jungle that resulted in finding the lost tribe of which Ihe is loosely lied to an issue of more general interest. In Chapter 9, for exhibit was a member-when in fact the person was born and raised example, "Self-Made Freaks," we see how competition affected the in New Jersey. shape the exhibils look. The "true life" pamphlets, like the freak portraits, changed uver The five chaplerfl of case studies are nol meant to be an all-inelusive the years. Their lenglh, Ihe detail, Ihe endorsements were greatesl biographical encyclopedia of past exhibits. Rather, they are intended and grandest in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. After to illustmte and discuss the conventions of presentation thai. put to­ 1920 they went the way of the photograph, and the quality and elabo­ gether, became the freak show. Because of this focus and the limila­ rate delail of the prose was curlailed. Pamphlets Ihal would once have tions of space, whole genres of freaks as well as particular exhibits hcen several dozen pages were reduced to sometimes only one folded have been left out. In addition, with exhibits that are discussed, only page. In some cases the portrait and the "true life" pamphlet merged the baresl details of Ihe nonpresentalion side of their lives are given. into a postcard format, with a picture of the freak on one side and a Chllpter 10, the conclusion, reviews major issues, for the most part few paragraphs of biography and description on the olher. The decline by means of stories of exhibits and who were engaged in struggles, in the quality and delail of both photo and booklets parallels the de­ both rcal and fahricated, abollt their presentations. cline of the freak show itself. I have drawn extensively on the freak portraits and "true life" stories in the pages that follow. When juxtaposed with candid memoirs, interviews, lellers, newspaper reports, and medical and scientific ar­ tides, the modes of presentation discussed in this book clnt'rge.

The rest of the book is divided into two parts. Part One looks at the freak show as an instilution, presenting a historical overview of its developmenl as well as a discussion of the slandard modes of present­ ing attractions. Chapter 2 chronicles the development of Ihe exhibilion of human oddities from single, haphazard lraveling exhibits to highly organized multi-attraction shows attached to such organizations as dime mu­ seums, circuses, world fairs, amusement parks, and carnivals­ which together formed the popular amusement industry. Chapter 3 deals with the culture of that industry: the development of the amuse­ ment world, tIle perspective of its members, and Iheir relalionship 10 the social construction of freaks. Chapter 4, which concludes Part One, is crucial to the rest of the book. There, in detail, the specific techniques and methods thai showmen evolved 10 manufacture freaks are discussed. Cenlral 10 their ploys were two major modes of presentation, the exotic and ag­ grandized. These are the foew; of the chapler and provide the organiz­ ing framework for Part Two. '.-J 1.0 lJl 20 INTRODUCTION IN SEARCII OF FHEAKS 21 396