A circus fan's only outlet: Anonymous
From across the big pond, Douglas McPherson responds to a comment I recently made -- “If only circus fans would debate like sports/musical theater fans”
“But why don’t they?” he asks. “What’s your theory?”
Oh, my, where to begin. Monograph or sound bite?
“Circus fans” of the CFA kind are a breed unto themselves. The CFA was organized to “Fight anything that fights the circus.” That included by implication negative reviews. And the fans fell in line.
CFAers in the early days were about the only local contact that circuses had in many communities. When adversity struck, the owners were damn well grateful to have a tried and true circus fan around to help defend them. Some held respected professions. The last thing any circus needed was a bad review. Especially from an iron-clad supporter of big tops. Defending the circus to the point of holding back on publicly debating its artistic merit became a kind of religion.
No Stage Door to Crash
In return for their loyalty, circuses opened their backyards to the fans, and even issued passes to some. Come right in, knock directly on our doors, or tug at our tent flaps. We’d love to see you! In what other realm of show business can a customer walk right through to the backstage area and knock on a star’s dressing room door, in effect, inviting themselves into their privacy? You usually get as far as a security man at the Stage Door.
Naturally, in the backyards, enduing friendships formed, and thus the incestuous relationship between performer and full-access fan. What fan would dare turn out a negative notice on people whom they consider to be their friends? And if they did, it’s doubtful The White Tops would print it. For myself, a friend is too important a part of my life to risk losing over an honest review, and so I won’t review their work, but support them in private. Which is why I long ago stopped going into the backyard. This position became a mantra for me when I read of the great New York Times theater critic, Brooks Atkinson, revealing how he avoided socializing with people whose work he might be reviewing. What perfect sense it made.
Douglas: “I’ve noticed a distinct touchiness among circus owners, who will pick up on the slightest criticism, even within an otherwise positive review”
So have I, although not so much with the owners as with performers and fans. I could issue a strong positive review overall, but dare to criticize one or two of the acts, and I am Judas Iscariot A rare piece of hate mail gave me pause to ever consider showing my face anywhere on a certain lot.
The Value of Many Voices
Were there many reviews for a given show to draw from, any individual review would not be as offensive as it alone can be. A wide range of opinions is the healthiest option, and such is usually the case in other venues. Think Rotten Tomatoes. But not in the circus world.
Circus owners, I believe, are ill-served by the fans issuing non-stop, one way praise. Smaller shows can tour for years without ever facing an objective notice. And if they do face harsh criticism, it can be a tough experience to deal with.
Douglas: “I have been banned from reviewing a couple of circuses.”
Now, that's extreme. And I am rather smiling at the perverse honor! I do not know of that ever happening over here. I can recall the efforts of a fan, long ago, to get press passes from the Ringling show, who was refused. The reason given was negative coverage the show received from the same magazine, though not by the fan. Coverage that I myself was likely responsible for.
“I also wonder if circus fans are very small in number. By that, I mean maybe most circus goers don’t consider themselves to be ‘circus fans.’
Right. Beyond the few thousand hard core American fans out there who remain in lockstep, the public that will argue over a film, a play, a book, a ballet, rarely takes the time to view circuses critically. I think the kiddie factor is another softener --- just watching one’s child take such joy and delight over a mediocre act can win the heart away.
When Candor Crashes Through
So, the owners have been able to minimize critical scrutiny by their hold on the fan magazines. But not always. In his sharper moments, the late Ernest Albrecht turned out hard-hitting notices in his magazine, Spectacle. In the pages of Circus Report, I was refreshingly shocked to see Herb Ueckert now and than turning critical on a few artists for under-par work. One performer’s irate reaction to a Ueckert review was to claim that only a performer of the same skill was qualified to review another, i.e., jugglers reviewing jugglers!
Beyond all of this, American press agents loved casting circus day as another (sacred by implication) American holiday. They passed out hordes of free tickets to city editors, and the editors largely went along with the feel-good embracement of circus. And the ageless delight too often gets a pass when it might have been better served by the sting of honesty. As my friend Boyi Yuan once said, “a bad review is the best review.”
Carry on, Sir Douglas!
1 comment:
An excellent piece, Mr Showbiz, and one in which every word rings true! The circus business is lucky to have you as a fearlessly unsilent fan and critic.
Post a Comment