Gary is training a new act for Didier Prein. I raise issue/thoughts as a means of understanding and learning. Very few things in our profession have ever been discussed for knowledge, and are often used to criticize or cast aspersions on what someone else is doing. A very unique aspect of the circus animal business is the owner/trainer. Traditonally shows used to employ what was know as a "horse trainer," and the act were for the most part "house acts." The majority of acts are now private owned. There seems to be a general consensus that the quality of acts have decreased. Pinder and Zavatta have a house trainer, and I am sure there are show's in Europe that have the same that I am not aware of. There are two school's of thought. The owner does not have time to train as they are busy with other things, or the family presenter lacks the necessary skills to do the training themselves. In the profession horse world the owner doing the training is very, very rare. They(owners) have to have a great product because they sell it to the consumer. Falconry is similar to our profession the owner does the training. But it is a hobby, the product does not have to be anything other then what the individual want's. It is not sold to the consumer. In the Sea Mammal world the owner doing the training is very, very rare. They(owners) have to have a great product because they sell it to the consumer. Might there be a number of factors that has led to the decline/appreciation of animal training in the circus, other then "picked on as a soft target for the radicals? Are we like the falconers with a hobby trying to sell it to the consumers, without really understanding what the consummers want? And frustrated because they aren't buy what we want them to buy, instead of providing what they will buy? 
Monday, February 23, 2009
Gary Ambrose--Cirque Zavatta Prein with a champagne lion
Posted by
Wade G. Burck
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Horse racing -
the owner
the trainer
the jockey
3 distinct roles that yeilds the very best results because each contributes 100 per cent of their area of expertise-
Anonymous,
Good point. The reason for a trainer/jockey I think is the size individual needed to ride. Trainers can be fat, skinny, tall, short, bald, or long haired, as long as they have the necessary training skills. There are a number of Jockey who have been/become great trainers, and I am sure there are some great trainers, if the weighed a certain amount could be great Jockeys. An owner/Jockey or an owner/trainer is a rare, rare exception. Again a product has to be produced that the consumer will buy.
Wade
The horse ain't worth a damn if you don't have the most important person involved! One guess as to who is most important.
No Hoof No Horse, might give ya clue.:)
Gary,
You are absolutely correct. So if I have the money, and run out and buy a forge, anvil, and a box load of rasps, nails and nippers, does that make me a farrier, because I own the tools? Neither does buying a Thoroughbred, make me a trainer, a jockey, or a farrier. But then if the purpose is just to run horses in an oval, with no winner or looser, and no market for selling or breeding, I guess it wouldn't matter whether I owned it, trained it, rode it, or shod it. LOL
Wade
The expertise of race horse owners is in whatever they do to get the money to buy a race horse. Trainers and jockeys are professionals who usually work with the horses of more than one owner. The Circus has some similarity but each situation is its own case. Many European Circuses were started by trainers who needed some place to work, their own show. Later generations are circus owners who need animal trainers, sometimes themselves.
Mark Horton
Mark,
I would sure appreciate some vintage photos of Emil, how about it. LOL
I think the reason most show owners did the animals or it was a family thing was for economics. It was cheaper to have family members do the acts instead of hiring them in. Animal act were the most important thing on a show, so you could not, not hire one due to finances. You had to have them. They could not do trapeze, or other circus skills without training for a long time. With animals it was a matter of just buying them. With no standard and not looking for a market to sell them, they could do it and the public accepted because it wa animals. That's how the ar deal got so strong against us. There were off course exceptions like the Knies, and a couple of others, but for the most part each assumed they had a good act because it was theirs.
Wade
Post a Comment