• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

'What Is It?' & Other P. T. Barnum Sideshow Exhibits

Swifty

Swifty

doesn't negotiate with terriers
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
33,694
Hugh Jackman is playing P T Barnum in this new musical film, 'The Greatest Showman' ..

greatestshowmanew1_large.jpg


http://www.aintitcool.com/node/77865
 
The Greatest Showman: Interesting songs and good dancing but The Book (connecting pieces) is a bit weak. A section regarding Jenny Lynd could have been discarded to allow more time to develop the central story of the "freak show" or as Barnum called them: unique people. They include: Dog Boy, Bearded Lady, Irish Giant, Siamese Twins, Tom Thumb, Tattooed Man. Rebecca Ferguson is good as Lynd, The Swedish Nightingale but the structure of the film suffers from this aside.

Even though Barnum brings the unique people into the light, even he is a bit embarrassed by them when a "better class of punter" comes to see Lynd. In a wonderful song and dance number the performers refuse to be excluded and burst into a champagne reception. Perhaps the unique people are too forgiving too quickly of Barnum afterwards. Strains credibility a bit.

Hugh Jackman is impressive as Barnum and a good dancer but perhaps a body double was used for some of his high kicks. I have no such doubts about Zendaya who plays a trapeze artist, her dancing and rope acts look like her own work.

Good, but Barnum deserves a better musical biopic. 7/10
 
Last edited:
Just browsing through public domain images and came across this.

Doubtless well known here and be clarified swiftly, just wondered as I've never seen the article before and don't recollect the story behind it.

images (66).jpeg
 
oldrover said:
'It' is very difficult to read.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately its only the headline which is partially readable and seems to say (asterisks denoting words I can't make out):

'Be it an Animal? Be it Human? Be it an Extraordinary FREAK of NATURE or is it a Legitimate Member of Maleary's Works? Or is it the long sought for LINK between Man and OCHANG-OUTANG which * have for years * * * but has hitherto been undiscovered.?'

Then at the bottom:

'HOURS OF EXHIBITION'


I'm not certain 'Maleary's' is correct, although the first unintelligible word might be 'Malearists', as in 'which Malearists have for years...'

Although it looks like 'OCHANG-OUTANG', would that possibly be 'OURANG-OUTANG'?


There was no attribution to the image and hopefully this might help identity the background to that story.
 
I think the "missing" words are "Naturalists" and "decided does exist", if that helps.
 
Peripart said:
I think the "missing" words are "Naturalists" and "decided does exist", if that helps.
Click to expand...
...and then some!

So, that would read:

...'which Naturalists have for years decided does exist but has hitherto been undiscovered.?'

Presuming this is a copy of a genuine publication (a poster?), what might this refer to?:

'... or is it a Legitimate Member of Maleary's Works?'.

Obviously not certain it says 'Maleary's'.
 
Comfortably Numb said:
...and then some!

So, that would read:

...'which Naturalists have for years decided does exist but has hitherto been undiscovered.?'

Presuming this is a copy of a genuine publication (a poster?), what might this refer to?:

'... or is it a Legitimate Member of Maleary's Works?'.

Obviously not certain it says 'Maleary's'.
Click to expand...

Oh Comfortably Numb, for me this is the most interesting post for a good few years. Thank you for posting it. For starters, here's link to a much larger reproduction in which all the text is readable.

http://www.bl.uk/learning/images/bodies/large4806.html
 
A few points stand out, initially I took this as most likely to be a side show gaff or to the exhibiting of someone with hypertrichosis, now I'm not so sure.

The phrase 'Or is it the long sort for link between Man and the ORANG-OUTANG' seems to date this to after the publication of On the Origin of the Species... in 1859, but in my opinion the reference to the orang utan pushes it later again, as the idea of us being most closely related to the orang is a dateable theory, and I think to at least a decade or so later.

But then we have the capture located in California, and all that goes with that statement. So I wonder, is this really a Victorian poster, or a modern hoax of a hoax?
 
It's a poster for an early version of P. T. Barnum's 'What Is It?' human oddity / freak show exhibit at his Barnum's American Museum in New York City.

The earliest version of the exhibit involved a dwarf circus performer named Harvey Leech, and it began circa 1846.

In the 1870's a mentally challenged black man named William Henry Johnson took on the 'What Is It?' role and portrayed the wild man / missing link for decades thereafter. There are multiple photos of Johnson in the role to be found out on the 'Net.
 
EnolaGaia said:
It's a poster for an early version of P. T. Barnum's 'What Is It?' human oddity / freak show exhibit at his Barnum's American Museum in New York City.

The earliest version of the exhibit involved a dwarf circus performer named Harvey Leech, and it began circa 1846.

In the 1870's a mentally challenged black man named William Henry Johnson took on the 'What Is It?' role and portrayed the wild man / missing link for decades thereafter. There are multiple photos of Johnson in the role to be found out on the 'Net.
Click to expand...

So do we have a date for this version? It can't be much before about 1870 if it is genuine.
 
Check the British Library webpage at:

http://www.bl.uk/learning/timeline/item106349.html

‘What Is It’ was first exhibited as a 'human curiosity' on 29th August 1846. He was advertised as the “Wild Man of the Prairies”; ill-proportioned, intelligent, and hairy. In fact ‘What Is It’ was otherwise known as Harvey Leech, a skilled acrobat, dressed in a hair-suit with stained face and hands. Shortly after the advert, a tip-off to the newspapers proved that the exhibit was a scam and Leech was publicly outed as a fraud.
Click to expand...
 
Here's an (undated?) engraving of a dwarf named Harvey Leech from the Wellcome archives.


I doubt there were many celebrated dwarfs named Harvey Leech, so I'd say it's a very safe bet this is the same Harvey Leech.

Note his physical profile and short legs, which are consistent with the early 'What is It?' poster. Later posters during the era when Johnson was playing the role portray a taller, thinner black man.
 
oldrover said:
That's a catalouging error then. The phrases used in the poster relate to ideas from at least 25 years after that date.
Click to expand...

Barnum apparently recycled the 'What Is It?' concept for decades. One such revival - or maybe just a then-latest installment - occurred in 1860 (see BL entries for that specific period), and it was noted as playing on the tnen-new emergence of Darwin's book and theories.
 
So... would this still be a valid attribution? - thanks 'oldrover' for highlighting this:

'an act shown at The Royal Surrey Zoological Gardens, c.1846'.
 
EnolaGaia said:
Barnum apparently recycled the 'What Is It?' concept for decades. One such revival - or maybe just a then-latest installment - occurred in 1860 (see BL entries for that specific period), and it was noted as playing on the tnen-new emergence of Darwin's book and theories.
Click to expand...
Yeah I saw that, but isn't that to an African 'wildman', I think the orang reference tied as it us to Wallace, puts this later again.
Comfortably Numb said:
So... would this still be a valid attribution? - thanks 'oldrover' for highlighting this:

'an act shown at The Royal Surrey Zoological Gardens, c.1846'.
Click to expand...

Not at that date. Have to be about 20 years later.
 
Some interesting snippets from the William Henry Johnson, or Zip, story. From Here

One day when the circus was passing through Zainesville, Ohio, Zip bought a fiddle that was rumored to be the instrument that Daniel Boone fiddled on when he would get lost in the wilds of Kentucky. Zip began playing it immediately, and almost instantly started making money. Maybe Zip wasn’t the feeble-minded idiot he pretended to be after all. Soon, people offered to pay Zip to not play his beloved fiddle. Even the performers would pay him daily to keep silent. It was estimated that for the six years he played the violin, it netted him almost $14,000.
Click to expand...

In his eighties, Zip still performed at the Coney Island Freak Show, being easy to travel to from his Bound Brook, NJ home. One Sunday afternoon in 1925, during one of his strolls on the boardwalk, Zip heard a little girl cry out for help. He noticed the girl waving her arms in the ocean and swam out to rescue her. He instantly became a hero, being cheered by all those who had witnessed the event, but Zip shyly ran away from the attention of being a good Samaritan.
Click to expand...

His last words: “Well,” he said, “we fooled ’em for a long time.” Zip died on April 9, 1926.It was estimated that during his life, Zip was viewed by more than 100 million people.
Click to expand...
 
oldrover said:
Yeah I saw that, but isn't that to an African 'wildman', I think the orang reference tied as it us to Wallace, puts this later again. ...
Click to expand...

References to 'Ourang Outang' as early as 1840 are cited on this Yowie-related webpage:

http://home.yowieocalypse.com/Reports_of_the_Wild_Hairy_Man_2/

The term 'missing link' doesn't appear in the poster's text, but the phrase dates back into the 1840's in the geological literature:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_link_(human_evolution)

As noted in the Wikipedia article, the notion of interconnection among species within some overarching context pre-dates Darwin and extends back into the 18th century.
 
oldrover said:
Yeah I saw that, but isn't that to an African 'wildman', I think the orang reference tied as it us to Wallace, puts this later again.


Not at that date. Have to be about 20 years later.
Click to expand...

Seemingly no evidence otherwise... although they did have 'previous:...

'In 1834 a live female gorilla was added to this menagerie, and proved a great favourite of the Visitors. The collection here was not so extensive as that in the Regent's Park, but some of the animals were much finer, particularly one of the lions'.
 
The most solid clue to the poster's context is the title 'What Is It?' - a title specifically attributed to, and long associated with, Barnum.

There's always the possibility that Barnum adopted (i.e., ripped off) this title from some prior exhibit that's faded into historical obscurity.

There's even the possibility Barnum encountered the whole 'wild man' / whatever trope during his European tour (mid-1840's) and devised his own version upon returning to the States.

There's also the issue of how long Leech (and / or any other diminutive actor) played the role - meaning how long it was that a short stubby human figure on a poster reflected the exhibit being thus promoted.
 
I've been looking for data confirming the linkages among Barnum, Leech, Johnson, the 1846 hoax unmasking, etc.

According to this book:

Freak Show: Presenting Human Oddities for Amusement and Profit
Robert Bogdan

- There were in fact multiple actors (at least two: Leech and Johnson) who played 'What Is It?';

- It was indeed Barnum who'd exhibited Leech (described as an American actor; aka 'Hervio Nano' / 'The Gnome-Fly') in London in 1846; and

- It was Johnson who took on the role in its subsequent 're-boot' (?) in 1860.*

* NOTE: This conflicts with other accounts claiming Johnson didn't start playing 'What Is It?' until the 1870's.

SOURCE: https://books.google.com/books?id=hr-9GRxJfPEC&pg=PA135&lpg=PA135&dq="harvey leech" dwarf OR actor OR acrobat OR barnum&source=bl&ots=N5WLzoU91r&sig=Rh1Z159AUfqSMx69LzIyN7sfQ9g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwinlvGLxI3dAhVOM6wKHfb0CIgQ6AEwC3oECC0QAQ#v=onepage&q="harvey leech" dwarf OR actor OR acrobat OR barnum&f=false
 
EnolaGaia said:
References to 'Ourang Outang' as early as 1840 are cited on this Yowie-related webpage:

http://home.yowieocalypse.com/Reports_of_the_Wild_Hairy_Man_2/

The term 'missing link' doesn't appear in the poster's text, but the phrase dates back into the 1840's in the geological literature:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_link_(human_evolution)

As noted in the Wikipedia article, the notion of interconnection among species within some overarching context pre-dates Darwin and extends back into the 18th century.
Click to expand...

Yes, in a geological context, but as that article also says it wasn't until post 1859 it was used in evolutionary terms. And for Barnum to have been using it as a selling point it must have been something he expected his punters to be aware of. And the article specifically states the link between man and orang outang, why an Asian origin as per Wallace, and Haeckel, and not African as per Darwin.
 
oldrover said:
Yes, in a geological context, but as that article also says it wasn't until post 1859 it was used in evolutionary terms. And for Barnum to have been using it as a selling point it must have been something he expected his punters to be aware of. And the article specifically states the link between man and orang outang, why an Asian origin as per Wallace, and Haeckel, and not African as per Darwin.
Click to expand...

It seems to me you're projecting too much of an evolutionary spin onto this ...

There's nothing in the poster's text that clearly alludes to an evolutionary context.

The earlier, pre-Darwin, 'Great Chain of Being' motif was reflected in 'family tree'-type graphical representations by the early decades of the 19th century.

The key difference is that these 'Great Chain of Being' models were based solely on static taxonomic categorizations, and they didn't explicitly incorporate the theme of progressive evolutionary processes.

Phrased another way ... Both types of schemata show 'links', among which there may be some which are 'missing'. In the older Great Chain of Being context, these represent associations of classification between fixed slots on God's organization chart. In the later evolutionary context they represent lines of descent across time.
 
This Worthpoint item:

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/barnum-circus-freak-hervio-nano-dead-1871247078

... describes a vintage newspaper sheet advertised on eBay:

BARNUM CIRCUS FREAK HERVIO NANO DEAD 1847 HARVEY LEECH
Original May 8, 1847 The Spirit of the Times(weekly NY newspaper for "chronicle of the turf, agriculture, fild sports, literature and the stage." Sports and entertainment paper w some news). Brief mention that Hervio Nano, "personifier of the monkey race" had died. Nano performed as a circus freak for Barnum.
Click to expand...

This places Leech's death in 1847, and supports the idea that the 'stubby / dwarf' version of the 'What Is It?' poster most probably alludes to Leech's portrayal. However, there's always the chance Barnum continued the act with another diminutive actor until he transitioned to the Johnson version of the exhibit (and advertising).
 
EnolaGaia said:
It seems to me you're projecting too much of an evolutionary spin onto this ...

There's nothing in the poster's text that clearly alludes to an evolutionary context.

The earlier, pre-Darwin, 'Great Chain of Being' motif was reflected in 'family tree'-type graphical representations by the early decades of the 19th century.

The key difference is that these 'Great Chain of Being' models were based solely on static taxonomic categorizations, and they didn't explicitly incorporate the theme of progressive evolutionary processes.

Phrased another way ... Both types of schemata show 'links', among which there may be some which are 'missing'. In the older Great Chain of Being context, these represent associations of classification between fixed slots on God's organization chart. In the later evolutionary context they represent lines of descent across time.
Click to expand...


I'm certainly wrong about the orang utan dating it to a later point. For some reason Barnum seems to have picked on this species in 1860, well before Wallace and Haeckel publicly proposed S E Asian apes as our ancestors. Which I find interesting enough. But I'm don't agree that I'm putting to much emphasis on the evolutionary angle, that the point of the act as stated in the Routledge link you posted.

The Missing Link, also called What is it? or Nondescript was a particular play that focused on evolutionary themes'

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...esc=y#v=onepage&q="harvey leech" 1846&f=false

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~ma02/freed/barnum/whatisitessay.html

What confuses me is Leech's role. Apparently he was initially displayed as 'the Wild Man of the Prairies'(second link) which might fit with an earlier date, and with the capture location as California, but not at all with the rest of the text.

At both links above it seems to me that there's been some confusion between acts or at least their contexts, and this seems to be reflected in the OP's poster. I can't see this elating to anything pre-1859, and the texts at the link make it clear that is the context it was to be viewed in. But, I don't know, I have no idea how reliable these sources are, and we don't have anything like a reliable primary source for any of it.

EnolaGaia said:
This places Leech's death in 1847, and supports the idea that the 'stubby / dwarf' version of the 'What Is It?' poster most probably alludes to Leech's portrayal. However, there's always the chance Barnum continued the act with another diminutive actor until he transitioned to the Johnson version of the exhibit (and advertising).
Click to expand...

Johnson was under 5' apparently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top