Freaks is a movie
I think of as a Voight-Kampff test. If you're not familiar with
Blade Runner or the Philip K. Dick novel 'Do Androids Dream of
Electric Sheep', I'll explain: administering a Voight-Kampff is how
you tell a human being from an android replica. The test consists of
a battery of questions and proposals designed to elicit an empathetic
response. The android will not have genuine emotional responses –
in theory, an android has no capacity for empathy.
On its original
theatrical run in 1932 and for decades after, audiences and critics
alike failed that test spectacularly.
Made and marketed
as a horror film, Freaks is a colorful tale of the life of a circus
troupe drawn from writer/director Tod Browning's personal
recollections. We see the performers' loves, their jealousies,
their rivalries and personal disputes, the bonds and the enmities
they form. The great bulk of the movie is light, jovial. Emphasis
is placed on the various romances (most of them frustrated in one way
or another) that occur within the troupe. Some of it is daring for
the era, including some risque dialog that caught the censors
unaware. Phroso the Clown and Venus are taken with each other, but
Venus is unable to elicit a warm physical response from Phroso (“You
shoulda seen me before my operation”, he says without further
elucidation). Strongman Hercules is a crude Alpha-male brute who
dallies with all the camp's women. He's attracted to the show's
hermaphrodite but can't admit it and so is often hostile. She seems
to be attracted to him as well, but never speaks it. The circus'
owner wants to marry Violet but can't get a moment alone with her,
being that she is a conjoined twin. Her sister Daisy and the owner
don't get along one bit. Frieda is devoted to Hans but Hans has
eyes only for trapeze artist Cleopatra. Cleopatra plays off Hans'
love in order to get closer to his money. Hans and Frieda are little people, whom Cleo
despises along with all other “freaks”.
Here is where
audiences freaked: the cast is an even mix of normal-bodied folk,
paraplegics and quadriplegics, gaffs (performers who fake physical
abnormality), little people, microcephalics (“pinheads”),
hermaphrodites, and others with genuine physical malformations of
many kinds from the incredibly thin to “bird people”. That alone
made “normal” audiences uncomfortable. Imagine their revulsion
when Browning upped the ante by presenting the “freaks” as not
only human beings but beings with sexual impulses.
This is what the
critics had to say when confronted by such humanity: Script opined
that the film could only appeal to “the morbidly curious and
psychically sick whose libidos are stimulated by contemplating the
sex lives of abnormalities and monsters”. According to the Boston
Herald, “Any who enjoy watching the pitiful grotesque mistakes of
nature may behold them in 'Freaks' (...) the sadistically cruel plot
savors nearly of perversion”. Time magazine deemed the sideshow
performers to be “subhuman animals”.
Isn't society
lovely? There is an instinct we all know for social survival that
could be summed up as “pick on the freak”. It works like this:
to be accepted by a dominant society and thus have their protection,
you must publicly hurt someone scorned by that group, someone deemed
lesser or undesirable. By doing so you demonstrate your own
worthiness to belong. It's ugly and cruel, and we all learn it at
school either by doing it or having it done to us. Pick on the
freak. Browning knows it well and cannily provides a stark example
in Freaks when Hercules (recently abandoned by Venus) now woos
Cleopatra. The two espy the hermaphrodite (she is never named)
looking on at Hercules with heartbroken eyes. Remember, Hercules is
attracted to her. In front of Cleo, though, he has to demonstrate
that he's 'normal' and so shows off his masculinity by delivering the
hermaphrodite a vicious black eye. Cleo responds with delighted
laughter.
Bringing out the
worst in each other, the pair get darker from there and so does the
film. Cleo marries Hans for his money. Actress Olga Baclanova
essays the role of Cleo with an air of undisguised loathing for her
circumstances, having to abide the presence of so many contemptible
colleagues. In the film's most celebrated scene, a wedding banquet is
held at which Cleo gets drunk, literally from champagne and
figuratively from her success in so easily fooling her little rube.
While the troupe celebrates, mostly oblivious to her as she is to
them, she proceeds to demean him openly, mocking him for his size and
condescending to his apparent stupidity. Watch the way she reacts
when Hercules points her attention to the sideshow performers
drinking a toast to her that they accept her: “One of us! One of
us!” The horror! The effrontery! The sheer, nasty insult –
Cleo accepted as equals by filth! Baclanova plays a beautiful
transition from boisterous hilarity to stuporous incomprehension to
outrage.
Further betrayals
sow an anger throughout the troupe, poisoning them all. Plans are
made, vigils are kept, until one night as the caravan makes it's way
through a stormy night (it has to be a storm at night, doesn't it?)
varying bands form and attack each other. The sequence is a
veritable lesson in filmcraft by Browning and his crew, as is the
wedding feast. I've hardly even mentioned the talent on
display...gloriously shot and lit, captured by a camera as fluid as
the ones in Dracula were not, and set in a studio-created circus
grounds that are not just convincing but inviting as a living
microcosm. It's easy to immerse and lose oneself here. The script
is sharp, perhaps even acidic given what's known of excised material
– the censors removed some thirty minutes of material, and more was
scripted but never shot. The finale involved a castration, no
longer extant.
Even today, some
are squeamish about that finale. Some find Browning's treatment of
the circus folk to be exploitative, ambivalent...they see the
sideshow people crawling beneath the carriages, wet with mud and shot
in the visual language of horror cinema, and they see Browning proposing
the circus folk as monstrous. In Tod Browning's reckoning, everyone ends up in the mire including the 'normals'. In 1932, Motion Picture Daily wrote that one can “not
simultaneously capitalize on human misfits and pretend to pity them”.
It is at least a recognition of basic human dignity, but still a
failure to comprehend what's right there on the screen. When the
hour of reckoning comes, it is the normal-bodied and “freak”
alike who attack, or act to defend others, their courses decided not by their
infirmities but by the strengths of their characters, side by side
as equals and companions. In Browning's reckoning, lack of human
empathy lowers us all into the mire.
No comments:
Post a Comment