Augmented by German inter-titles (the BFI's film print was once part of the Swiss Abbé Joye's extraordinary collection), the effect is not unlike a bleakly Expressionist reworking of 'Dumbo'.
The Bostock Circus was American, but toured Europe extensively during this period, including visits to Britain.
You can watch almost 1000 other complete films and TV programmes from the BFI National Archive free of charge at the new BFI Mediatheque - http://www.bfi.org.uk/mediatheque
Friday, January 2, 2009
Bostock Circus Farm(1911)
Posted by
Wade G. Burck
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
19 comments:
Wade, this is absolutely incredibly sad.
Mary Ann
Mary Ann,
Every animal industry has had a sad history. Zoos, race horse's, show horse's, animal trapping, animal dealers, animal trainers, bull fighters. We learn from history, and we move to a new and better place. History illustrates our wrongness and advancement. Like memorials to the Holocaust, to remind us never to go there again.
Wade
I liked the staged 'grief' sequence
Several significant errors to correct on this posting! First, the Bostock show was a menagerie and not a circus throughout its long existence. Second, it was a British enterprise though Frank Bostock did come to America to operate trained animal shows both independently and at various amusement parks during the first decade of the 20th century. Frank also operated big shows in Paris and elsewhere. The Bostock and Wombwell families operated several traveling menageries throughout the 19th century and until 1931. Wombwell’s began in 1805 and Bostock a few decades later. The families inter-married and often operated several menageries at the same time, sometimes under one family name or the other or as Bostock & Wombell’s. The show largely confined itself to Great Britain though did travel as far as Australia. E.H. Bostock, the last of the clan, wrote an enjoyable book shortly before his death in 1940, “Menageries, Circuses, and Theatres.” John Benson of the late Benson’s Animal Farm in New England and agent for Hagenbeck, traveled as a youth with Bostock and when E.H. sold the show in 1931, Benson bought two wagons at the sale that are now at the Circus World Museum—an attractive bandwagon and a rare living wagon. The latter is an important survival in need of restoration for it is the only example in America illustrating how showfolks lived on a horse-drawn wagon show, albeit English.
Finally, I might note that there are several accounts in 19th century American newspapers of the difficult problem of disposing of a dead elephant. Wahtever method was used, in short it stunk and often for days.
Dick Flint
Baltimore
This video generated few comments. I thought old things and old pictures was what everybody wanted? The one above is on fire, no pun intended, over whether unauthorized individuals should make false video's to count false video's. In all the world of the people who profess to love the circus less then a half dozen have an idea on false videos and nobody apparently thinks this video is relevant to the one above. This one wasn't staged. Were they not doing the elephants feet, showing their love and husbandry. The two were posted together to let us see what where the animal knowledge, concern is. We got two comments from outside and one mine from inside, and I defended the circus and every other animal industry I hold dear because I have studied it.
Where were the rest who profess to love. Or does your knowledge not permit you understand what you are looking at?
Wade
Wade
Dick,
Excuse me. A menagerie and not a circus. What would make the two different. I saw an elephant being trained, I saw monkeys riding a pony, etc. etc. Or does that mean this is zoo history? The fire was obvious a need. It would also be alright today for the same situation, except the smell would offend many.
As a Historian Richard, look at it deeper, look at it through an animal trainers historian eyes, and not a circus historians. Look at it again, watch the elephat walking. See if you don't note a problem. See if you don't note heavy jackets indicating cold weather, and then look at the barn the elephant was in during the cold weather. Note the dip or slope of the floor. That is where the feet came from, and if you look close at the gait you will also notice marks where they had "boots" on either in an effort to keep the fee warm, or as a poultice for an existing foot condition. Note the date Dick. 1911 suggests we still have a lot to learn about animals we meaning all animal industries, unless we have cleared up that foot deal of the 1911's. They are finally doing a study as of last year of elephants and how they regulate there body temp in cold weather at Audubon and a number of other zoo's. Don't you think it's about time. Menagerie, circus animals, zoo, wild life safari, they are one and the same Dick. They have exotic animal in there possession and care. It isn't an issue, but you could contact the BFI National Archive. They list it as Bostock Circus Farm, and it is not a farm either.
Thanks for the great information. I for one learned something and it is appreciated. There is nothing more interesting in the world then history. It's how we understand where we are today.
Wade
Dick,
As a favor to me, as these two clips were posted together for a purpose,one old and one new, now that you have pointed out the incorrect facts in this tape, point out the ones on the tape above. Thanks
Wade
Would this be the beginning of training the ground sit, based on the actions of the trainer and the "sloppiness" of the elephant's position?
And in the circus world, what would determine the decision of burying/incinerating a dead elephant?
Wade, when you first put this up I watched it and thought -- so they started with a dead elephant and decided to make a film around that, creating a "story" that included putting an elephant into the barn, grief, etc. The "conditions" of the elephant shed etc looked primitive even by the standards of the day, but that's in comparison to some of the big elephant barns built in zoos around that time. Weird subject, but no odder than the famous Edison film. What most interested me was the shot of the lash hook.
I have but little time today but want to respect your request because I respect your courage in conducting this blog. When I saw this posting, I first read the three or so postings with the expressions of how “sad” and your own noting “wrongness” so I was prepared to see some dastardly act. Instead, I saw care (the pedicure and statement of the farm as a retirement for old elephants) and affection (the sad keeper returning again and again to hug the deceased elephant). While the AR movement had already begun in England when the film was made, I’ve never seen evidence that animal owners were making statements of how close we are to our animals, how we love them, etc., that we hear today. Therefore, it might be possible to infer that the movie maker realized something was felt and tried to have it expressed in his moving picture. The lady with the pony also seems to express some kind of relationship. We should also remember, however, that animals were very familiar to all people and were generally considered as necessary for work, not as pets or toys. Think of a car today: most people see it as a utility item but some folks lavish great affection on special do-dads, paint schemes, and many people even give their vehicles names implying a relationship. As to calling it a farm, many shows wintered on their owner’s farm (and worked as such in the agricultural sense), hence the application of the term and I don’t think it was meant to imply an attraction for the public or where animals might have been bred or retired.
By definition, there is a difference between a circus and a menagerie but not worth arguing about. Certainly in Europe the public perceived a difference. Also, in Europe, they were clearly different shows and few show business families crossed back and forth. Chipperfield, for example, was a menagerie until the 1930s when they had so many trained animals they decided to take on a circus format—and the menagerie was a dying breed having been replaced by urban zoos. A menagerie is essentially an exhibit of animals, a few of which might be presented in a cage such as the fearless tamer entering the cage and demonstrating same control with a trick or two. Or a few other “tricks” shown in an open space such as the monkey riding a pony (a very old routine—some of these monkeys became well known, such as Dandy Jack about 1830 in the US as well as another monk of the same name in England slightly earlier). The setup of a menagerie in the US didn’t change much right through the disappearance of the menagerie tent by the 1950s (contrast the difference of the menagerie tent and what is presented in the circus big top replete with rings and seats). In Europe, many traveling menageries (since they frequently played fairs) simply arranged their wagons in a square with some sort of canopy often covering the central space; the fourth side constituted the elaborate show front wagons and entrance while the others were cages facing inward.
It’s good to learn of a study about animals and cold weather. Most elephants in the US in the 19th century spent their winters in the north. What I noted about the barn in the film was the low roof and its small size. That would be to keep the natural warmth generated by the animals, and perhaps a stove, within the confined space—the larger the space, the more heat required. A stone, brick, or masonry structure might have been better (and more common for Britain). Think of some of the animal barns in Baraboo, low and solid. I hadn’t noticed marks for the boots but boots were very common as many lead stock walked overland in the summer season. (Bostock is known, however, for hauling an elephant in a wagon but I don’t think this was typical and may have been only for a very young elephant.)
As to the other tape, I can’t say much other than it showed a lot of cute photos of the type that appear on Hallmark cards. If it was to cover circus trainers, it lost credibility for me with the first image as I know Paul and Diane and they are just like me: fans with friends who have animals who know we enjoy getting a cute picture of ourselves on occasion. I’ve appeared on another blog in a photo Randy Johnson took after he handed me a hose from which one of his elephants took a long drink. Fun time and a nice picture but not representative of a circus animal trainer! I learned some more that day from Randy but that’s only a few days compared to his years of living with animals night and day. I’ve traveled for weeks at a time with Ringling in recent years (always living on the train) but every time I return I learn how much I hadn’t discovered on previous trips. I do it because I hope it makes me a more literate historian, better able to understand and interpret subtleties when I write about circuses of the distant past that I can’t visit.
Hope this covers much of what has been asked. Again, I’ve long been eager to learn more about how to watch and better appreciate animals, acrobats, and aerialists and you and so many other show people who have conducted blogs have added immeasurably to my understanding and appreciation, sort of like sitting at the bar at Showfolks. There are books, courses, and programs of all kinds that enlighten those that love to go to the symphony or opera or ballet over and over again but with a smaller public for circuses, their just isn’t that much out there. Thanks to all those in the circus business who so love it that they have shared through the internet their enthusiasm with people like me who never had the guts to run away and join the show.
Dick Flint
Baltimore
Isn't it true that it is easier to keep elephants warm than cool? That they dissapait (sp?) heat through there backs, leading to one reason vaulted ceilings are necessary for barns, in addition to a cause of TB by lack of ventilation?
Dick,
Thank you. I think this may be one of the most "educational" threads we have ever done, and given the number of people who read it, "from the outside world" it may help everyone understand more, why we are a soft target.
Two people who are very familiar with elephants in a captive situation saw a barn that was inadequate. You by your own admission of "outside looking in" saw a barn that was not too bad, actually designed for the benefit of the animal.
I alluded to the "wrongness" of the past, and two people from inside thought the sadness was staged. You thought it showed validation to the "love them like my children" malarkey of today. I used it to illustrate the advances of today, and you attempted to justify it.
With respect Dick, as a historian of note which you are, and my self growing up in the home of an educator, my father always said a true historian must be impartial or unbiased to what he has found. If he does interpret he must be careful he doesn't see what he wants and what is not there. Is it healthy to forget history or never address it. Or to only look at the good history. A few days ago in regards to a cage act "historian" which two folks endorsed, when I asked for validation of his "printed" facts there was never a response.
To understand the depth of love that folks like Ben and I have for the Circus as our life, it needs to me compared to a love as a pastime.
Wade
Ryan,
How an elephant utilizes heat will be something that will be learned when this great study is completed. You are correct in the statements about barns/roof/ventilation, and TB. Hundreds of elephants were keep in what we are looking at in cold climates as Mr. Flint suggests might be good. What he didn't address was the 100's of elephants that have died for no apparent reason in the past, which may have had TB given the conditions, as there were no autopsies performed in the "good old days" of circus and zoo's. Theres the "wrongness" I alluded to as well the the advancements.
Wade
The whole cold climate issue as it relates to Asian elephants is pretty interesting, and I suspect something of a red herring when used to justify removing elephants from certain zoos etc. There was a great piece of science writing done a couple years ago called Retreat of the Elephants that looked at human environment impact in China. Modern elephants once ranged throughout China as far north as latitudes that include places like Wyoming and Michigan. Not exactly tropical....
Sorry folks but, to me, this elephant film is as phony as a two bob watch.
She looks to be in OK condition [apart from what looks like a couple of lesions on her tail], she has no hollow head, she can use her trunk, she walks fairly freely in to a little shed that has no straw or manure around the door indicating that it has not had much elephant use. Then she is "discovered" dead while the camera is in position and rolling? [Shades of Steve Irwin!!!] But the dead elephant has a chain around her neck already. And the human acting is among the worst I have ever seen.
I can't read German so I don't know if the headings give us any clues as to what this is all about.
From where I stand it is just a set up.
PS: Did nobody think to comment about the bear?
PPS: In England, winter quarters are traditionally referred to as farms or yards.
Having said all that, I should point out that, even in comparatively recent times, elephants have died of the cold in England through being kept in inadequate buildings. In some cases we haven't moved too far ahead from 1911.
Steve,
I noted the bear and most everything, although not the chain. It was posted with the above one to see who discredited whom. I really don't know if it had a purpose anymore then to film something old. I was also aware of the terms "yard" and "farm" as "farm" was used often here in America in the past. The rush to claim it as a menagerie and not a circus was a real hair split. The focus on the elephant and not the other animals was expected. Because of their focus by the "ar" the have become the "most" important subject, often times forgetting bears, cats, horses, camels, etc. etc.
I was mentioning this fact the other day to a young colleague with felines(in reference to why ECA was endorsing an elephant group and nothing else). Besides the fact Laura Van de Meer is in bed with both organizations, I told him, "you guy's better start looking out for your selfs, because nobody really gives a damn. The big money support to our " cause helpers" like OABA and ECA is from the elephant sectors. The day's of show owned animals is almost gone, the cats, and other animals are gone. Elephants are left because of there longevity, and that the circus, still has a financial interest in, so that will take precedent. Not quite as strong of an objection to feline sanctuaries as there is to elephant sanctuaries even.
Wade
Hey just realised there are translations available on the web. Here goes:(or should that be Herr goes?!! :0)
Plackerei Freude-Leid oder Licht und Schatten auf der Farm des Zirkus Bostock. Der Junge Bursche liebt die Pensionar. Eines Tages werden sie von Tausenden bewundert werden. Der Ungezogenste Pensionär auf der Farm. Der Sanfteste Insasse. Dieser wunderbare grosse liebevolle Bursche plackt sich den ganzen Tag. Er geht zu Ruhe. Der Wecker. Ach! Ewige Ruhe. Zu wahr.Die letzte Riese. Das Ende. TRANSLATION:
Drudgery, joy, grief; or light and shade on the farm of the circus Bostock. The young fellow loves the Pension Home (resthome). One day they will be admired of thousands. The most ill-behaved pensioner on the farm. The gentlest passenger. This miraculous big affectionate fellow slaves away the whole day. He goes to rest. The alarm clock. Oh! Everlasting rest. Too true. The last giant. The end.
Doesn't help much does it?
Don,
As I suspected, nothing more then an "Osa Johnson" type documentary on "a day in the life of a forest pygmy tribe" or other such historical documentation. "Heer goes!!!" You are a funny guy. LOL
Wade
As far as I have understood the enterprise started with George Wombwells who bought two snakes and displayed in Pubs. In 1805 his animal collections was so large he established George Wombwells Travelling Menagerie.
http://www.elephant.se/location2.php?location_id=1299
30 years later it was forked in sveral menageries and 15 wagons.
George Wombwells niece Emma married James Bostock, who later took charge of the menageries.
Their son 'Little' Frank Charles Bostock (1866-1912) went to America and made career http://www.elephant.se/location2.php?location_id=1028, while his brother Edward (E.H) Bostock baought his mothers menagerie and made it to Bostock & Wombwells Menagerie http://www.elephant.se/location2.php?location_id=1302 which went on tour until 1932, when after the last show in Glasgow most animals, including 2 elephants, were sold to London Zoos Whipsnade.
Post a Comment