Genealogy of Freak Discourse in Modernity By Rosemarie Garland Thomson

“People who are visually different have always provoked the imaginations of their fellow human beings.”
This article illustrates how throughout history, people compare themselves to others, in a way of making sense out of our differences. Visual differences are easily acknowledged and then dissected by others to confirm how the abnormalities of the “freaks” ensure that we, the majority, are the norm and the “freaks” are the outsiders. It is important to understand Thomson’s idea that “whether generating awe, delight, terror, or knowledge, the monstrous emerges from culture-bound expectations even as it violates them.” Historically, freak shows were a very common form of entertainment. Everyone from royalty having their special entertainers, to common people going to a dime theater, were intrigued by these “freaks” and wanted to catch a glimpse of a foreign understanding of life. Then, those with abnormalities were labeled as freaks, where as now they would be seen as “physically disabled” or “exotic looking.” Thomson writes of the four entwined narrative forms: Oral speil, the often fabricated textual accounts, staging, and drawings/photographs. Each of these narratives publicly showcased the “freak shows.” Many of the shows involved the performers doing everyday tasks in their “special” way, which is interesting to those who can perform those tasks without thought. Also many of the shows enhanced the “freakish” differences the performers had, by costumes, backgrounds, or in any way enhancing their differences or abnormalities. Going to these “freak shows,” Thompson writes, “turns America’s collective eyes more attentively on the extraordinary body for explanation, validation, or simply comfort.”

Terms:
Anomalous: deviating from or inconsistent with the common order, form, or rule; irregular
Aberrance: departing from the right, normal, or usual course
Bourgeois: a member of the middle class
Misogyny hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women
Monstra: meaning to warn, show, or sign

Questions:
-What does Thomson mean when saying, “This is not, however, the awe of divine warning, but rather an implication that the world exists increasingly not to glorify god, but to please man, who is destined to be its master.” (Bottom of P. 3)
-Why is a freak show described as a social ceremony?
-Were those with mental disabilities also included in the “freak shows”?
-How did those in the shows get picked and was there a criterion for them being in the show?
-Were the performers paid? Were they expected to stay for a certain amount of time?