Performing Arts or Commercial Enterprise?

The performing arts are those forms of art which differ from the plastic arts insofar as the former uses the artist's own body, face, and presence as a medium, and the latter uses materials such as clay, metal, or paint which can be molded or transformed to create some physical art object. The term "performing arts" first appeared in the English language in the year 1711.

An adult thought this was a nice poster which covered everything in the circus, and a 9 year old found it confusing. I have noted an alaming tendency of late to stay as far away as possible from a highly charged political issue, that of animals in the circus. What was once one of the most important aspects of the circus, now apparently is almost ignored by the industry in it's advertising, almost as an afterthought. Are you afraid to touch it, or are the Radicals right? Many, many folks have suggested that to me given what has been produced as Circus in the past 20 0r so years. I suggest they have become very, very expensive and it is difficult to admit you can't afford what used to be a mainstay of your industry. I think the term "performing arts" has been adopted to "allude" to something other then what it is, and patch for no revenue for what made you what your are. I realize there are actually hillbillies that think if they drink wine, they are more sophisticated then the hillbilly who drinks Busch out of a can. Some of the female gender are comfortable climbing into the sack after a bottle of Champagne, but point a finger at their counter parts who ended up there after a 12 pack of Red, White, and Blue. Some of those same hillbillies, actually think they get sophisticated if they develop an accent. When you "host" an event each years adding hundreds of thousands of dollars to your coffers, producing stamps to sell to commemorate the event, it is even more commercial then a "hosted" Grand Prix car race. Yet by the definition of "Performing Arts" the Grand Prix car race meets the criteria. Whether it as in the Meadowlands or the streets of Detroit. Rodeos also meet the criteria of "Performing Art" yet there has not been a clamber to attach to it. They actually fit the criteria of "Competition" to a T also, and have chosen to stay with that definition and ride that golden "competition" horse to the bank. Vince McManns WWF and the defunct WCW also fit the criteria of "Performing Arts" as close as does the Circus. They went after the definition " Competition" in their earlier years, until competition/Sports fans said, not in your wildest dreams are you a competition. So they became World Wrestling Entertainment and rode that golden "entertainment" horse to the bank. All three of these industry's are commercially/revenue motivated. The Rodeo, the WWE and the Circus. All three meet the criteria of "Performing Arts", yet only one is trying to get it to stick like super glue. One rides a golden competition horse, one rides a golden entertainment horse. One important aspect of "Performing Arts" is subsidizing/sponsoring to keep it going day after day, show after show. Whether it be national, state, local or private, it has that help. Some are fortunate to have that aid. They are "Performing Arts." What is wrong with being what you are. Do you think the human race, the ones with the revenue to fuel these three industries, won't see through the charade. When that fails, what are we going to be next time?