Tuesday, April 8, 2008

Censorship or private agenda? Is there a difference? Buckles Blog-4/7/08 Circus # 2

Mr. Woodcock ran two picture today. One of the old Ringling, and one of the new, with the statement if you had a choice of a free ticket, which show would you choose to see? Below are the typical none constructive comments, yet the important issues, salary, generated revenue, being a few of the important ones, are shot down faster then a clay pigeon flung out of a launcher. The sad thing of it is, when you attempt to write personal history to meet your agenda, you damage an already shaky industry, that you profess to love.

Here are the posts to date, on the new Ringling picture and the one which was censored. You decide based on the fact's, should it have been censored.


8 comments:

Jim Z said...

How come they didnt finnish the outside of the GIANT 1/2 ring? Jim Zajicek

24-HOUR-MAN said...

Hey! Jim Z. You beat me to it, but here it is anyway.
"No wonder they don't use a ring curb, they didn't finish building it yet"!
Maybe someone should send them Jake Conover"s address.

Pat Cashin said...

I am not a fan of the New Cole-style ringless arena.

I wasn't when New Cole introduced it; I'm not now that Ringling has adopted it.

Better that they move the curtain to the halfway point in the arena and perform all three editions as high quality one-ring shows with some
top notch clowning to cover the set changes.

Bob Cline said...

You are so right. What in the world are they thinking presenting this anything more than the beginning of scaffolding? I now business is one thing, but is this being driven by a sense of greed instead? There's nothing being spent on making the show "The Greatest Show on Earth". I'm sorry but when their one ring "Gold Unit" is the best of the three, by far,.....
Bob

johnny said...

I wonder what the public thinks when the see that set up before the show starts. Maybe the truck hauling the rest of it broke down or someone in the last town forgot to load it. I assume the Felds are highly intelligent, well educated people, but that is rediculous no matter how you look at it. Rhodes scolar or Goof.Obviously thet got one a them globes. Every little circus, carnival and fair has one.

Anonymous said...

Strategy or what? Making the Gold the strongest might be a way to wean the public from a three ring to no ring to one ring circus format for all future editions of RBBB. Then all we will have are GOLD UNIT shows criss-crossing the country.

Anonymous said...

Anyone want to venture a guess at how much it costs to sit in a folding chair behind two other rows of folding chairs? Reminds me of a Christmas paegant at a church hall.

Eric said...

It gives one the impression that this show was conceived and produced by people who really don't like circuses but who know that they will be able to entice people to buy tickets, using the Ringling-Barnum name as the lure. (I wonder how much repeat business they get?) It's sad to think that the little kids who are taken to see this show will go home thinking that all circuses are like this.

Here is the censored post, and where it would have gone, had it not been deemed "unseemly:

Anonymous commenting after Johnny,
You should use a name, that we we would know who we were addressing. That said, you hit it aces with the marketing strategy statement. Research has shown that a "gradual weaning" is much less damaging to the psyche, then "cold turkey". Unless it is an addiction, then "cold turkey" is the best avenue.

Bob Cline,
"business is one thing, but this is being driven by a sense of greed? Are you suggesting that that is wrong? Are you suggesting also, that a performer needing more then a -35% basic cost of living increase is also greedy?

Eric,
"little kids who are taken to see this show, will go home thinking that all circus's are like this?" Which one isn't like this and which one hasn't downsized? And don't give me examples of shows which are government/state /funded/subsidized. Because the one ring tent show is not what we are morning here today.
Wade Burck
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You might all have your thoughts on why this mundane/done a 1000 times thread, was started and why this post was censored, but consider this in your judgment. I am assuming that Eric is Eric Jaeger, a friend of Mr. Woodcocks, and an associate of the Big Apple Circus, which gave Mr. Woodcock, as has been stated often, many years of wonderful employment. As opposed to Ringling, where you are supposed to be forever if you are the best, the Bastards!!!!!!! Just a thought, and I may be wrong, but consider it when you repeat circus history.
Wade Burck

4 comments:

B.E.Trumble said...

Wadem you and I probably disagree on this issue to the extent that I tend to see Feld Entertainment's motives in reimaging circus as purely economic, driven less by falling revenues and more by higher proft margins. That said, the Buckles Blog has never been a forum for rational discussion of the current RBBB shows. From the first time Buckles' dubbed them the Ken & Nicole shows it was clear that he has an agenda. I don't hold it against him in any way, I just find that as a result it's hard to discuss as positives on the Red or Blue on that particular blog...

My Dad loved circus and disliked Ringling, so we'd go to the show with my grandparents. For my Dad it didn't matter of the JRN shows of the early 1960's were good or bad... it wasn't the show he'd known in the tent. He would never forgive them for that. Now there are plenty of people who seemingly will never forgive them for not being the RBBB shows of 15 and 20 years ago. Personally I can't past the idea that the ringless format looks sparse. That has nothing to do with the quality of the acts...it just "seems" to be visually unexciting. I can't hate anybody for that. For me it's an aesthetic disagreement. Anyway, I think asking Buckles to be fair about the Feld shows is a bit like asking the Pope to be fair about casual sex. A reasonable request, but it isn't going to happen.

Ben

Wade G. Burck said...

Ben,
I don't think we really disagree. What in the world is wrong with "economic motives" and "higher profit margins?"
It is not the Feld's "hobby" this circus deal. They can't be expected to be "with it and for it", just because there is a circus in their portfolio.
When I raise the darkly hidden issue of salary/compensation it is purely economic, and driven by higher profit margins, that's a fact. As long as I am "with it, I want something for it." As much as I love it, it's not my hobby either. I fully understand the often used statement that Generationals use, "a way of life."
What kind of life do you want, and how much is to much/not too much, so that it becomes/doesn't become, purely economic driven by higher profit margins.
To criticize/complain or bring up issues in an effort to improve and make better is one thing Ben. And somebody has to have the courage to do that. But to criticize/censor just for the sake/entertainment of it without any solution, is destructive and of now use. It is no different then the twisted child pulling the wings off of a fly, or setting the cat on fire.
Any large building is going to look sparse when it is half empty. Even a tent can look like that. Culpepper looked a lot sparcer, last time I saw it, the most tent shows in Europe. And that brings us right back to how much is too much. If I am given a choice Ben of being on a small show for more money or a big show for less money, I know what direction I'm going. I have to admit, I am a capitalist bastard of the highest order. You know why? Because I want a "hell of a way of life."
The quote about the pope is priceless. May I reference it occasionally? I will of course give credit for it to myself. LOL
Be safe,
Wade Burck
P.S Ben you are not a Mud Show guy because you are still afraid of your father are you. LOL

Anonymous said...

Wade, strangely I'm far more afraid of my Dad's ghost than I was of him in real life...lol

Wade G. Burck said...

Ben,
It's not strange. I suffer from the same affliction. It is called respect. I lost my father in 1976, and every day at least once, I have asked myself, "what would Dad think/do?" I can only hope my sons will suffer the same affliction some day.
Regard,
Wade