Debating whether or not to show scenes from Freaks in a class I'm teaching on Thursday. We're doing a unit on the history of monsters, and we're kicking off with some talk of monsters as divine signs in the early modern (that was today). This segues into a discussion of circus freaks via an Arnold Davidson article, "The Horror of Monsters." The film is fascinating, but what bits to show? And what will it add to the article?
Really interesting to me is the depiction of the freaks as sympathetic characters--the emotional center of the movie, the heroes. But not just the simplistic heroes--they're complex characters who are by turns protective, deluded, loving, angry, jealous, bitter, vengeful. Within their own world, they are in no way objects of horror/fascination. Which was maybe the appeal of "sideshow" life for some folks? You had to perform, but you lived with people accepted you. One of the talking heads in the documentary on the DVD also made an interesting suggestion: all of show business is about selling what makes you different. Sideshow performers are no different from beautiful actresses are no different from jazz musicians. Which I'm not sure I agree with. Does it mean that none of show business is exploitative or that all of it is?
No comments:
Post a Comment