Circus Animals?
I recent saw this thread on a forum on rec.juggling. It contains a link to a video of a bear involved in some jugglish activites.
It reminded me of a post I read on Juggling Talk (Anthony Gatto’s juggling forum) some months ago. The post was nestled in a long thread of comments on animals in the circus, and was authored by Brazilian juggler Caio Stevanovich, who was born and bred in the cirucus. In his family, he writes, he “growed [sic] up in different circuses, and was around animals all the time. My family has a long lifetime with animals. They had 5 or 6 elephants, 2 giraffes, a white rhino, a hippo, horses, and lots, lots of others.”
In his post, Stevanovich tells of recent, sweeping legal changes and swings of public opinion — changes which led to the loss of the animals which were in his family’s circus. In conjunction with tightening legal pressure, Stevanovich writes that “the tv started attacking the circus (which is curious, why just the circus? That’s curious, because, the police works with animals, the zoo, the labs, a lot of companies, there are trips with camels in here, but nobody will move a finger against those shakes, and there is also the rodeo, hn… of course, they are rich, with big farms, so nobody will ever move a finger against it).”
This is the only real mention of classism in Stevanovich’s account, although he does make an earlier reference to feeling as if the circus were a sort of scapegoat for the media.
“The tv enjoyed it, and created a lot of fake infos, showed images from different countries, started doing a bad job. They showed what they wanted to. I’m totally against the bad conditions for the animals, but I’m completelly against the people who doesn’t see the other side.”
With the full realization that anecdotal evidence is troublesome at best, Stevanovich’s “other side” is surprisingly compelling.
He writes that only the largest, most financially viable circuses can afford aniamls, which “need veterinarians, a lot of food, extra care, and a lot of attention.” Following this explanation, Stevanovich expresses a side of the circus animal debate which I found both moving and enlightening.
“If you bring an animal to you, you’ll do everything for him, trust me. If you are a juggler, and your rings are dirty, you will clean them before your act, won’t you? It’s the same with the animals. You’ll feed them, you’ll take care of them, you’ll want to be with them. First of all, that’s a lot of money, to just forget about it. And in second, you create a new family. Those animals are super affectionate, really smart. If you will peform with them, you will want them beautiful, healthy. It’s natural, if you are an artist.”
If that was touching, his conclusion was distressing.
“After that, the circus continued, without the animals. The animals went to different places, different zoos, and they all started having a different style of life. Less care, less food, less attention. In a month, some horses died. At the end of 6 months, a giraffe passed away. After that, the other giraffe passed away too. The elephants have marks in their bodys and are all skinny now. When the IBAMA took them, everybody said that “finally, those monsters won’t hurt the animals anymore”. Ok, but here is my question… who is the monster now? All the animals are having a terrible life now, the most of them already died. But, the tv didn’t showed that … they just showed the police as heroes rescuing animals. Nobody knows that those animals are dead now. Or, if they are not dead, they are in trouble.”
I’m sure there are a lot of sides to the issue, and I wonder how reresentitive Stevanovich and his family really are. Even so, it’s kind of a heart-breaking story.