Monday Morning Wake Up: Why I Will Not Read Battle for the Big Top ...

 You could never guess. 

I've known about this book, have skidded through a stream of consumer raves, hoping the local library would eventually order a copy.  It sounded like maybe a Big One. Not big enough for Oakland, half the town still behind masks, some on a waiting list for mask implants.

 So, I broke down and ordered a copy from Amazon. The moment it arrived, I opened it to find a form of type face insultingly small,worse yet, not clear black but half-dead grey.  And this, from a major publisher?  Great cover,  frugal interior design on life support.

The experts say that the publishing world is having a hell of a time, many books selling 0 copies, the average new tome, in a swampland of  self-publishing, selling around 300 to 500 copies.

I read many books, but I did not relish the thought of fighting my way across a grainy grey typeface terrain. Not unless the book were about John Ringling North or Rodgers & Hammerstein.

Here comes yet a bigger shock, for anybody who has a basic knowledge of American circus history. While temporarily in possession of the orphan, I did a little checking to see how big a role Art Concello plays in the narrative.  So I looked for his name in the index.

Nothing!

Heck, he was only to John Ringling North what James. A Bailey had kind of been to P. To Barnum.  A big player.

Let's leave it at that.  other than to note that the book seems to cover a wider ground than what the title promises.

SUNDAY MORNING OUT OF THE PAST: What About Irving J. Polack? What About Louis Stern? How American Circus History is Not Written and Why ...

My little litmus test, whenever I pick up a new book about circus, is to look in the index for the names of Irving J. Polack or Louis Stern.

Almost always, they are missing. Almost always, once again ignored by those press agents or fans or operatives (as mostly they are) who write these books that are rarely questioned by the people who review them. Does it even matter, many will ask, yawning off. It’s only the circus. Well, if as they say the victors in war get to write their own history, what can we expect under tents of popular amusement so far removed from urgent matters of life and death — of stock market crashes and presidential elections? Not much. To me it matters, and so, buckle down and get ready for a little shock therapy over sawdust.

How are circus books written? Notwithstanding the scholarly treatments (although they too tend to distort issues in the heat of pc-induced epiphanies), usually they are penned in one of three manners: Author scratching backs of those who have either scratched his or will in return; Former press agent goes to work (like lobbyists are known to do) for ex-boss with puff prose, maybe getting something under the table or hoping for future employment.

Circus fans just can’t bring themselves to utter a down word. Or there’s the well-intentioned writer simply lacking in the basics of American circus history. It is not with relish but with a deference to respect for the neglected Mr. Polack and Mr. Stern, that I am about to step onto some tender toes. Somebody must. And If I am wrong, be my guest and step right back. But keep the expletives to yourself or you will be escorted into this midway's mandatory anger management course hosted in the big cage by Clyde Beatty.

Messrs. Polack and Stern have gotten shockingly little respect from libraryland. In John Culhane’s acclaimed The American Circus: An Illustrated History (that’s the one that reprints the Irvin Feld press kit by eliminating Art Concello from the picture), the name Polack Bros. Circus gets dropped a few times, but only in passing when a few of the acts who appeared with it are mentioned. In the cheerfully embracing, if not always reliable Step Right Up, by LaVahn G. Hoh and William H. Rough, whose text, claim the authors, was combed for accuracy by a brigade of historians, there is not a single reference to Polack or Stern or their circus. Ditto Ernest Albrecht’s seriously informative The New American Circus. And now we have The Circus: Garden of Eden-Pittsburgh (some of you, who have installed this magnificent piece of furniture in your home, will know it simply as The Circus: 1870-1950). This latter tome at least contains a few index entries for Polack Bros. Circus. Stern or Polack themselves? Nothing.


But, still, I keep looking. Out there in cyberspace, there is an ambitious new circus website that longs to be the end-all in on-line research for circus buffs and nerds, launched by Big Apple Circus. A lovely layout, it calls itself Circopedia. With promises to grow in coverage and scope, so far it is woefully incomplete and blatantly selective in who and what gets attention. And in predictably telling ways. No surprise that Paul Binder, who for many years employed the site’s principal contributor, Dominique Jando, merits a lush and adoring multi-paragraph tribute. We'll skip the glaring absence of John Ringling North, about which it's a given that Binder, no lover of three rings, would not have much to say. But nothing on Guy Laliberte? Now, this is tantamount to a ballet website failing to profile Sergei Diaghilev. In fact, Binder was a preservationist, not essentially an innovator.

Circopedia, (in which, presumably because it is cyber fluid, the names of Stern and Polack may one day yet appear) makes a rather bold claim that Mr. Binder’s show “reintroduced the one ring circus to America.” This is a little like the impression left in Mr. Albrecht's book, for it, too, seems curiously unaware of Polack Bros history, a subject most germane to Mr. Albrecht’s focus.

Let me tell you, if I must be the one, about the fine producing team of Polack and Stern. During the Great Depression, they operated essentially a carnie circus. Stern had a conscience attack and talked his partner into cleaning up their vision. Or getting one. They pioneered a then radically new concept and took the idea to Shrine Temples, seeking sponsorships: A one ring circus. They produced some of the best ring performances ever, signing a steady succession of ex-Ringling stars, who themselves had been imported from abroad. The great Barbette, a true visionary, directed some of the Polack shows. In his memorable 1953 opus, Barbette inserted an enchanting little ballet, Carnival in Spangleland. The show drew big crowds; In San Francisco, it played 10-day engagements at the Civic Auditorium. It covered the U.S. with two units, the Eastern and the Western, each one touring for ten to eleven months. Some circusgoers preferred it to the mighty Ringling.

And then came to these shores, in 1963, the even more mesmerizing example of a one ring powerhouse in the form of the Moscow Circus. Three seasons later, Famous Circus Bartok was born. Sarasota based, it patterned itself after European styles by, among other things, placing its band above the performer’s entrance. The Russians returned in 1967 and played to sold out crowds in Oakland. I should know; I was one of hundreds turned away. The stage was more than set for the likes of the Pickle Family Circus, which followed in 1974, and Big Apple's first date, three seasons later.

Will Irving J. Polack and Louis Stern ever receive their just due? Thanks to the internet, they surely will -- the moment I click "publish" on this post.  Oh, what wishful thinking.

[Polack Bros. Circus photos, from top: The 1955 program magazine cover; Irving J. Polack in a photo from the Showmen's League of America, for whom he served as president in 1947; Louis Stern in 1955; La Norma in 1953; Barbette's Carnival In Spangleland, 1953: Seen here are clowns Chester and Joe Sherman, dancer Marilyn Hightower, and Ronnie Johnarud; The Ward-Bell Flyers, 1953]

First published 2/27/09

Cirque du Desperate? Show Now Touts Story Line and Paper Animals, Leaves Critics in a Muddle ...

Oh, those glorious days gone by when Cirque du  Soleil  need only post its name in suave newspaper ads, and the world would storm the phones to secure the priciest tickets.

And..........................now ......ECHO.  You may clip a discount coupon from your local newspaper, if you still have one and are a subscriber. This oddly and  odorouslly unfaltering discovery I came upon  by accident, in the Sunday edition of our local rag. Notice how the Montreal monster is not pushing the predictable slate of familiar acts, but, instead, a story line that reaches in many directions and features "our main female heroine, Future."  Music by /Wagner?

The amateur-looking ad, if you can read it, promises "a tale of relations and evolution's ... combining poetry, stagecraft, daring acrobatics, and technology... exploring the delicate balance between people. animals, and the world we share."  And only one word about circus -- acrobatics.

Having examined a couple of reviews, a recurring theme bleeds distress over a hodgepodge of action. Both give high marks to some of the acts, and yet differ over story elements, one terming them "compelling" despite dolling out only two stars. Both end up in a  muddle of disappointment, unable to sing Cirque's praises. Here are excerpts from the notices:

Joshua Chong in a 2-star Toronto Star review: "Echo feels like a dull whimper, quite literally confined to a box [and ]is far from the glorious comeback that Cirque du Soleil intended. Despite some stunning individual routines and a compelling story line, Echo is torn by competing artistic visions that prevent the show, [which] never comes together as a thrilling whole."   

Aisling Murphy in  Intermission:  "An echo of circuses past. Two creative visions come to a head in ECHO, and they don’t gel particularly well. On one hand, you have the ultra-sleek box and the treasures inside; on the other, you have a mysterious world of paper animals infiltrated by a blue little girl and her blue dog. Most Cirque du Soleil shows tend to wield a thin story, but ECHO is close to non-existent beyond the initial offer of a girl and her pet on an odyssey of some sort."

The show seems to be doing better with consumer reviews, but here we might be traipsing through a minefield of shilling. Luckily for me and this post, I came upon a 34 minute You Tube sampler ...

"The Best of ECHO" from Cirque du Soleil 

So I had a chance to see for myself what they are up to, that is, with respect only to acts, for there is no trace of the story telling pushed in the grim, grainy newspaper graphic above    The acrobatic action, house acts I suppose, is more roughly athletic than finished.  Iron jaw and hair hang, webs and risley and casting,  with teeter boarders getting the longest workout, refreshing to a point of redundancy.  They are stressing large ensembles, though by far the biggest  hit of the clips shown were two clown-like fellows competing to build the tallest stack of cardboard boxes.  A four-star  hoot.  A great build that goes a bit weak when the stack falls but does not come apart.

If that's the best of ECHO, what is the rest of ECHO?  I have to assume Shakespeare over sawdust. 

Here is what stuck me the most about this leaden opus.  It is cold. It is dark, literally dark. It is abstract and alienating.  Most of the cast have painted faces or wear masks.  I can well understand why the two media reviewers filed acute reservations . One of the Yelper raves talked up never having felt so satisfyingly engulfed in the  atmosphere. It is heavy, yes, I can agree, except that, unlike him, I wanted out.  This was not the feeling I recently got when I  viewed parts of other CDS shows in a one hour You Tube sampler. It seems that their reigning esthetic of the moment is to feature many people doing similar things, rather then giving focus to well honed world class acts.  The enchanting sampler left me open to taking in another Cirque show.  After watching ECHO, that desire is gone.  In fact, I would sooner go to Ringling than to Cirque.

About that embarrassing ad.  What next?  Cirque du phone room calling? 

MORNING WAKE UP, CIRCUS VERSUS THEATER: "Love, sorrow, fear, triumph or revenge cannot be interpreted by purely acrobatic movements." -- Antony Hippisley Coxe, A Seat at the Circus

Further ...

 "After his first wild leap, the acrobat forgot the cause, and, impressed by its effect, became more interested  in evolving physical variations than in trying to express different feelings by similar movements."

And the Winners Are! ...

GOLD  Turkmenistan’s Djiguite riders, China’s National Acrobatic Troupe, and the gravity-defying Flying Caballeros.

SILVER The Scandinavian Boards and the Martini Family’s enchanting exotic animals brought awe to the ring. Pastelito and Junior also earned this distinction, proving their comedic brilliance to be world-class.

BRONZE The Triple Breath High Wire trio, with their serene mastery of the tightrope, joined Duo Acero and Wolfgang Lauenburger in this category.

The Rise and Fall of North and Royal on Kelly Miller

When I think of the circus they ran together. I think of a happier time in my circus-going  days. Three reasons made the show special:

It was  owned and produced  by the House of Ringling , in the figure of  John Ringling North II. During its better, early to middle years, the acts ranged from moderately pleasing to outstanding. Show was very attractively costumed, and well ringmastered by the strong, clean, concise intros from John Moss.  Musical scores were mostly good.  Occasional Imports from abroad  –  top of the pack, a ball bouncing ladder juggler from Etheopia, Abrham Gebre,  added gold to the mix.

Another Big Plus: During those days, we were luckily given a rare insider view by  blogger Steve Copeland, who with his partner Ryan Combs, zealously infused the programs with inventive clowning. Steve’s hopelessly honest postings (actual crowd sizes and audience response, etc.) were daily must-reads.  Was he revealing too much?  The House of Ringling said, no, this is a free country, let him blog.

Don Covington photo / Bandwagon

In the middle of all this stood the imperially tall James Royal, above, general manager. America born, Jim was stricken by the bug at the age of 12, blame it on Polack at Medina Shrine in Chicago.  And seduced by Henry Ringling North’s great book, Circus Kings.

A rarity it seems, Royal would spend his years under tops big and small on both sides of the big Pond. He worked for and with some of the UK’s top circus lords, in various configurations, co-owner to marketing man. Over here, he had started out the Hoxie show, transferred to  Kelly Miller, and then ringmastered for the five rings of Carson & Barnes. From there to production unit manager for Big Apple Circus. 

Just in time to be ready for a call from John Ringling North II, wanting to buy Kelly Miller Circus, up for sale, and asking Jim to become a virtual partner. The two had been friends for twenty years.  Royal was then as best employed as he would ever be, Big Apple Circus giving him a year around salary and benefits. It gave him grave pause—give up all that?  But when the House of Ringling calls, who can say no?  

The following is largely drawn from Lane Talburt’s excellent  two-part piece in Bandwagon.  In the article,  Talburt writes that during Jim’s last two years with Kelly Miller,  “fissures were developing between the owner and his general manager.” Royal specified “disagreements about routing and front end of the show.” He left the show at the end of the 2015 tour. The two have not spoken since.  

The exquisitely agile Mongolian Twins

Naturally, this revelation caught my attention, without which, this post might not be. Not spoken in ten years?  Thus was I stirred to  email Jim, asking him if he could elaborate on the issues separating them.  He declined to comment, except to correct the record, that, in fact, he had spoken briefly with John on the KM lot in Hugo at the opening of the 2018 season, and that, moreover “Ours was never an acrimonious relationship.”

Okay, to the ever-touchy subject of attendance,  rarely raised in circus circles unless conducting a formal interview while a lie detector test is running. I can only speculate, based on photos of people in the seats over time, that at some point, business began taking a rather ominous dive. This may have had something to do with an arguably diminishing quality of the later shows. I have the DVDs for all them from 2011 forward,  thanks to John for sending me one each year, along with a bag of, what? Yes, Peterson Peanuts! A humorous reference to my complaining about peanut pitches being crassly inserted between acts, rather than confined to intermission.

Of the first three shows, I saw one in person, in Brewster, New Jersey,  and  was left reasonably impressed. So Let’s argue that 2012 was the best show they put out.  Here in my view are indisputable highlights, acts I would very much welcome seeing again.

RYAN HOLDER TIGERS - Masterfully accomplished and  presented in a steady stream of maneuvers. A rarity.

FRIDMAN TORALES    Rolla bolla -- riveting

PIRATES OF THE KELLYBEAN Involving several acts, this work was  John's most enchanting production. 

CAROLYN RICE DOGS --  Flat out sensational. Damn, I haven't been this swept away since the Sephenson's dogs!

JUGGLER RAUL OLIVERAS -- Clubs, hoops, balls and hats in dazzling perfection.

ARMANDO  LOYAL ELEPHANTS -- Delightfully charming ... and, dare I say, cute?

STEVE AND RYAN CLOWNING, For creativity and dedication. My eyes brightened whenever they appeared, wondering what might come next.  And they didn't drag in the audience for hula hoops and pin the donkey.

MUSIC The two piece band of Marshall Eckelman and Michael Haerber was a marvel of sound and  contrast, delivering one of the best big top scores I’ve  heard in many years.  Bravo!

FINALE --  We are in darkness, illuminated objects are flying all around, when suddenly the lights come up and there stands the entire cast!  Bow wow showmanship of the highest order.

Okay, back to reality. After John Moss and Steve and Ryan left, what you got was a weakening product slowly slipping away.  

As recalled by Jim, the show had a "disappointing" 2016 season, and 2017 was "even worse." He lays the blame on "the lack of a good front end operation."  North closed the show at the end  2017, and in 2018, granted James Judkins the right to use the tile. Judkins recruited  Royal to the campaign.  Jim was now spreading his skills between a scaled down version of Kelly Miller and his regular position with Culpepper and Merriweather  The two hung in there for two hard years.  Business for 2018,  in Jim's words, was OK, but 2019  "wasn't good.”

Looking back on his days with John II, Jim shared this: “He is a gentleman and a very kind person ... When he was on the show, he would be in the tent watching the show at nearly every performance, and I do mean watching it. (that's him in the hat, below). This was something that the artists on the show appreciate ... He invited ideas from others for possible use in future shows. He defiantly has the ‘Ringling touch.'”
 

“John and I worked to make sure that everyone with Kelly Miller felt that what they did for the show was valued."  Which brings to mind an Al Ringling quote on the subject,  which I am paraphrasing, to wit, that nothing can so dispirit  a circus performer as a lack of appreciation.  Al had heart.  I think John II would have loved talking about the nuts and bolts of circus performance art with his great uncle Al Ringling, for whom the show itself was his greatest passion.

Most things in life come to an end.  Johnny the Sequel loved the  elephants, and, without them. hadn’t the will to go on.

Cry, Jumbo, Cry.

The Festival Begins Today

And I wish I could be there. I can feel a kind of rare excitement.  Even if all of the judging may not always make sense, this is still the biggest circus event in the world.

       SEASONAL CHEERS TO PRINCESS STEPHANIE!!!

It's incomprehensible and tears come to my eyes

Whole neighborhoods in L.A. razed.  One after another house, gone.  Most painfully, family mementos and scrapbooks lost.

My heart goes out to them all.