He claims to have been on Ringling in the late 50's or early 60's. I mentioned to Gary that the logo looks much newer then that and looks like it has been cut out and pasted on the picture before it was framed. Has anybody heard of him?
Courtesy of Gary Hill
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Does anybody have any information on this gentleman. His name is M.K.Grider.
Posted by
Wade G. Burck
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
13 comments:
lots of people were on ringling in that period -- what did he supposedly do?
Henry,
I am sorry I should have mentioned. He supposedly did a cat act. That's him in the picture he is holding. I suggested as I said to Gary that he may have done a cat act for some dink show out of Texas or someplace(the props and number of animals isn't much), again, as the logo looks added, and I don't recall publicity photos with a big logo on them. I also mentioned his right bicep looks like it has had a mangling injury. I a history was ever done, on the people who had worked/attempted to work animals, back in the day on every rag bag, fly by night, gypsy caravan that was around it would fill massive volumes.
And we ask, "what happened." What happened was we only worried about "today's show" and get out of town. Tomorrow's another world, and we can come up with something different. Look at the incredible spin to things in advertizing, Henry. It was the isolation and moving to a new location, new people, new story, that was to the industry's advantage. Mass communication kicked us right in the mouth. I think that's why the myriad of books written on the subject of circus are all so different. Most were written by folks outside of the industry, and even then didn't really realize how it operated. No knock, just an acceptance of the nature of that particular species.
Wade
wade - i agree. big logos on press photos were just not done even on the smaller shows-- cerrtainly not on ringling with all the expensive press people back when they had press agents who were real press agents. if you wanted to slide a logo in, you had to do it subtly, then, as now, if you wanted it published. but back to the subject. i am pretty sure this man was not a featured act on ringling in that period. in the late 50s, except for the garden when they booked in extras, cats were worked by treveor bale or hans naumann, as i remember. i don't remember names of the 60s but agin treveor bale comes to mind. then along came charley baumann and fromm there on, the star animal acts were baumann, gebel-williams and burck. once the larger shows found cat acts they liked, they rarely changed them. smaller shows, of course, took anything they could afford, good, bad or awful. dave hoover worked a lot, and for a wheile had a second act worked by johnny golden. the big indoor shows mostly looked for guy gossing, bob baudy, pat anthony, eloise bertchtold, tarzan zerbini or chet juszyk, occasially harriett beatty jr (as albina was billed) or evelyn currie. often it was herta klauser bears instead of a cat act.
there have never been many good cat acts at one time; i may have forgotten one or two -- but it's almost inconceivable that someone would have been with ringling in that time without anyone knowing about them.
after i got drafted into the army and defected into the outside world, i lost contact with most shows other than ringling and beatty so i don't know about the other acts that developed and came to prominence in the 70s and later.
Henry,
I think one of the reasons act's didn't change on large shows, was because a lot of act were show owned, especially cage and elephant acts, and if possible horse acts. You had to have those or you weren't a show.That made a number of the acts "the same" not necessarily because they liked them, it was financially cheaper then hiring an independent, and possibly not having a "feature" if none were available. How many people still think people like Charley and Gunther owned the animals they presented? How many act's may have been on a show a long time, and were "perceived" as privately owned? Maybe Dave didn't own them? Does Martin Lacey Jr. own them because he is with Krone a long time? This is a world full, full, full of mystery Henry. Todays environment changed that. Shows don't want the expense/grief of their own act. Let somebody else worry about USDA, Peta, etc. and the headaches associated. After the date/season get them out of here.
When I suggest that elephants, horses, and a cage act was a necessity to be a "real by God circus" and that other animal acts, like bears, chimps, etc. were good if you could afford them, but not really necessary folks get upset. Tell me how many show owned bear, chimp, sea lion etc. acts there have been after 1950. I use 1950 so you don't name some obscure use for a year or two act like the Polar bear act that Clyde worked, Henry. LOL
Wade
I have never heard of this guy. We had a guy named "Joe something" on Franzen when I was a kid, who had worked a lion act on Ringling for one season when he was young only because he looked like a little kid. He was 19 but they sold him as 15. He worked a small act that year, then in winter quarters they tried adding 5 more cats and he got mauled pretty good. Such ended his animal career. He did become a press agent though. He died in the late 80s at the age of 74 so his cat career was before the 50s.
Upon a closer look at the picture. The logo is cut off of something (program or poster maybe) because you can see the top of a bullet (circle with info inside it) bellow the name.
Also odd is that he is "stepping" into the tiger that is laying down, chair raised, arm back, hammer cocked, and the tiger could obviously care less. That is bad news for either reason. The animal has zero respect for where you are, or worse quit fighting back and is stargazing out of the arena deciding it doesn't care about anything anymore. The second scenario can turn very ugly very fast never keep pushing when they get to that point,,,lol
Casey,
Or crazy out of its mind in heat. That's a new behavior we have been made aware of, so you should consider it. Take my word for it. The longer you do this thing of ours, you are going to be offered many, many, many more of those "considerations." All due respect, I hope you can differentiate between Joe Montana and the parking lot attendant. It will depend on how many considerations go into your fact bag, and how many go into the jackpot bag.
Wade
Yeah but the in heat thing would have the cat laying flat on its belly with its legs out from under it, and hind quarters to the trainer (assuming he held dominate male position)
You are rite for sure on the "considerations" though. Just this year I have heard at least ten I had never heard before. My personal favorite so far is the "Pajama Theory" followed close second by "Trained to Stalk People Outside Arena Theory" Just can't beat the good old standard "In Heat Alibi" which I admittedly used this year, for a cat that was really in heat. I was rather disappointed in myself by that one because I had never had to use it before, yes the cat was in heat but if the foundation of her training had been properly installed, it wouldn't have mattered. Just as it hadn't mattered with any other cat I had. My own fault for rushing things I suppose.
Casey,
Did you discover that about the cat in heat on your own. Or did somebody tell you what was coming, if you continued on the path you were on? LOL Live and learn, youngster. The first patch was acceptable. Don't use it any more. Learn some of that "voodoo hex." Word is that's real effective. LOL
Wade
The "Dakotan Anti Hulligan Hex" is in third place for most entertaining, followed close by "Poster Tigers of Japan Distraction"
Yes someone did predict the problem before it happened (you @$$hole) lol. Worse then that, was that inside I knew it was gonna happen before it did also, and kept putzing rite along,,,knowing what the rite thing to do,,and actually "doing it rite" are two very different things sometimes
Casey,
Or just knowing you are onto something different, and I'll show you, so it can be my idea. LOL By the way, don't think I have not noted you setting the foundation for the classic standby "I didn't have a lot of time so I did it quick" by writing "My own fault for rushing things" LOL
Wade
It's funny, I was just thinking about how the majority of cat acts in the U.S. circus today are not owned by the people who present them. Take Adam, the Nergers or Taba's act, all of which are owned by others. Daniel Raffo, but are they his?(I don't know)Then comes Brunon, who's mother technically owns the cats right? Same with Clayton Rosaire. That leaves three
owner/presenters, Casey, Brian, and Vince.
Isn't it safe to say that all of the tigers on any show are worked as though the presenter owns them. Wade, is there any noticeable differences between an act presented by the owner, compared to an act presented by a hired on presenter. With all due respect, you have never owned a tiger, or a tiger act before, and I am curious, for the sake of knowing, if that affests your mindset in any aspect of working the cat act.
Does it make it easier or harder?
Just curious
DanTheBooker
Dan,
You are young and you are eager. That's why I try to be patient with you. No disrespect. Anybody under the age of 35 is going to be the life blood of this thing of mine. And if is paramount that they be informed so they can support the almost dead horse, and maybe get it back on it's feet.
The majority of all animal acts are privately owned today and not show owned. Owner or trainer who is better is moot if you ask yourself, "if I buy a space shuttle, does that make me an astronaut?
Show owned in the United States, none. Privately owned Nergers, Adam, Casey, Mcmillian, Von Duke, Vincencia, Colleen, Franzen, Bruno, Rosaire, Terrenova, Ramos, Raffo.
Show owned in Europe Morai Orfei, Pinder, Togni, etc. Privately owned, Dieck, Alex Lacey, Zander, Peters, Chipperfield, Mudarack, etc. Christiani and Martin Lacey Jr. are an open question.
Not necessary to give any kind of respect Dan. In all en devours of animal training owners own, and trainers train. In this profession owners present and train on occasion. In the horse training business they also do on occasion. In that world the owner presenter/trainer is known as an Amature, and the trainer/presenter is know as a Pro, and they don't compete against each other because it would be unfair to the owners. I don't take offense at all, just accept the circus as an aberration of the norm.
"tigers on any show are worked as though the presenter owns them", just accept Hawthorn as as aberration of the norm.
There's the answer to your last question. It is much easier an less dangerous if you are not contracted to Hawthorn or any other owner who thinks they are machines or people, who have to do what they/the owner wants.
Wade
Post a Comment