Phrenology

       Today I learned about phrenology. Phrenology is the, " meaning "mind", and λόγος (logos), meaning "knowledge") is a pseudomedicine primarily focused on measurements of the human skull, based on the concept that the brain is the organ of the mind, and that certain brain areas have localized, specific functions or modules." (Wikipedia) I looked mostly at the bust that was published/distributed by L.N. Fowler in the late 1800's and learned all about his exploration so that he could come to the conclusion of this bust that was so commonly accepted back in 1875. Phrenology and the L.N. Fowler bust were examples of innovation and early research and allowed people to make inferences about anything dealing with the brain, whether for entertainment or experiment, and it allowed one to basically become a self-taught phrenologist. The phrenology bust gave people the ability to point to a place on their head and explain whether they were more advanced in that subject because of the size of that place on their head, or if a place on their head hurt, whether from injury or "growth." Provenance is, "the place of origin or earliest known history of something." (dictionary.com)  

In-Class Write on Human Zoos and Ethnological Exhibits

In the late 19th century, the world thrived. After the boom of industrialization came urbanization, and with it came higher incomes, mass populations, new technology, and the growing ideas of citizenship. In the case of mass populations, people from all over the world flooded to big cities, largely in America in search of jobs and entertainment. The sudden culture shock that the previous American citizens faced was heavy and unknowing in the sense that they could cross the street and see hundreds of "exotic" or new cultures, races, and faces that they'd never before seen. 
The new races and ethnicities became segregated and divided and the idea of nationalism became stronger among the white Christian men who had previously lived in the less-populated cities. During the time period, the idea of "human zoos" and "ethnological exhibits" arose from the racial views of the white people and as they began to showcase and examine the diversity, mostly blacks, Indians, Asians, and Eskimos, feelings of racism, evolution, and the definition of slavery began to reveal itself in the truest way possible. Wealthy citizens and merchants like, Taylor Barnum, and even Queen Victoria, began to show off different races in cages, enclosures, or habitats, much like zoo animals, to show off their wealth, and to come across to the community that they were spreading the ideas of knowledge of people of different races, ethnicities, oddities, and even abnormalities, when really it was all for the money.
The showcasing of races came solely from urbanization. Many people wanted to research and explore the people around them and in the article, Ethnographic Exhibitions History I learned that, "these exhibitions were "the result of a conjunction of political, social, and economic factors... a period well known for its interest in distant lands, the discovery of the unknown, and the strange." (Blanchard, et al) It was clear to the public that the ranks of social classes and racial values were based on who was displayed in these exhibitions, and even today scholars and historians say that the exhibitions were for the money. According to Living Ethnological Exhibits, in 1886, London's government showcased a "worldy experience" where two Indian men were shown in their "natural habitat," weaving cloth and sitting in low wooded areas. The purpose of this exhibition was to show the craftsmanship and traditions of the Indians, a concept that Queen Victoria thought was lost in London at the time. The Prince of Wales was quoted saying, "[to] stimulate commerce and strengthen the bonds of union now existing in every portion of her Majersty's Empire," "her Majesty," being Queen Victoria. It was easy to see that the Indian men in the exhibition were made popular by Queen Victoria and that even the Prince of Wales was allured by the "oriental fantasy" of it all. However, all of this was still wildly racist and only for the commerce of it all. Lights were installed outdoors so that it was an attraction that could be seen at all hours, and the underground made a railway stop at the exhibit, which only further announced and marketed the exhibit, not to mention that Queen Victoria and the government of London were supporting it all. The glamour and excitement put the exhibition in a positive light so that others would be attracted to it and with the additions of new technology to the establishment it seemed to legitimize the racism and the caging of the Indians.
         Though the enclosing of Indians in 1866 was bad, it was only seen as a whimsical and light-hearted attraction, and as urbanization continued, and people lost interest in specific races, wealthy statesmen and workers tried harder to wow the people of the city, without concern as to the racism and cruelty of it all. People began to lean towards showing blacks in an even harsher light than before, they went from putting a black man behind bars, to putting him behind bars with his entire family and an elephant. This attracted plenty of people and continued the steady filling of the "zookeepers" pockets while still keeping the doors open year round. Business continued to boom and people thought nothing of the actual strangers and aliens inside the cages. There was no connection made between the people looking from the outside, to the people in enclosures, and because of that, people dehumanized one another and began to see the person in bars as an animal, not another human.
          Business again began to drop after seeing wild animals in the enclosures with the exhibits, and again, salesmen and wealthy businessmen began to think of more ways to showcase and grab the audience's attention. One of the most successful men to do this was, Taylor Barnum, who specialized in the showing off of "freaks" in his ethnological exhibits. He was in a sense a connoisseur, because with the use of marketing and broadcasting, he was able to keep his circuses and freak shows around for over fifty years and he completely revolutionized the meaning of entertainment. According to Ethnographic Exhibitions History, freak shows and the like gave human zoos the title of "ethnic shows with more content" instead of "ludric and standalone." As stated in a Jim Crow Interview, Barnums human zoos lead to, "[the] construction of an imaginary Other... the theorization of a "hiearchy of races"... [and] construction of colonial empires." Barnum brought a whole new meaning to entertainment, largely due to the fact that instead of seeing the different races and people behind glass, he brought out the life in them, they sang, danced, and preformed at his circuses, and instead of just showcasing different ethnicities and cultures, he showed the world freaks, human oddities, estranged people, and others with hidden and unnatural talents that were made to be seen by the people. Barnum marketed his freaks and aliens by giving them crazy names and having portraits done of them as to make them look weak or strong. In Barnum's posters and propaganda about his freaks, he would accentuate anything that would bring an audience, whether it be webbed feet, deformities, abnormalities, or the plain appearance of a character of his. One of his most important and showstopping characters, was "The What-Is-It," later to be named Zip the Pinhead. '
         Zip the Pinhead was a normal guy with a head shaped like an egg, and a large frame. Speculations had been made about Zip the Pinhead's personality and his mental capacity, but none had been proven. Barnum bought Zip at a young age, according to The What-Is-It Exhibiton, Barnum used Zip as a "pleasing" and "playful" exhibit that would welcome all families and audiences. Zip the Pinhead was said to be a creature from the depths of Africa, and it was inconclusive if Zip could speak, walk, or function in the civilization in the late 19th century because he was said to be half man, half animal. All of these theories were false, and Zip the Pinhead was actually just a man who preformed day and night for Mr. Barnum, and he did his job fantastically. Barnum, and many other circus leaders and freak show enthusiasts would embellish disabilities and oddities, and according to a Review of Freak Show: Oddities Amusement,  they would "juxtapose conventionality and extraordinary features" to the highest degree. All of these exhibits, personalities, and characters, were mostly self made freaks, who strived to be odd for the popularity, money, and acting aspect of it all.
         Whether glass, bars, cages, or enclosures, the showcasing of freaks and ethnicities was a sign of supply and demand and the urbanization of the late 19th century. Many people played a part in the showing and telling of different populations, however, according to the Review of Freak Show: Oddities Amusement, "some individuals appearing in "native villages" at the 1893 Chicago World's Fair were in fact recruited from local pool halls." So really, these circus managers and businessmen were pulling people off of the streets if they thought they saw promise or talent in any of them. The reputation of freak shows and circuses, ethnological exhibits, and human zoos were exemplified to show the new populations that came to great cities, and ideas of segregation and human division sprung forth. The urbanization and uses of technology, broadcasting, and heavy uses of marketing either made or broke an exhibit, and people developed ideas of race, citizenship, and social status because of it. 

Actual portrait of Zip the Pinhead by Mathew Brady

Strategic advertisement for Zip the Pinhead

Program for the Colombian and Indian Exhibition Supported by Queen Victoria

Little Girl in Ethonological Exhibit

Uncovered Photograph of Human Zoo in Paris

Sources

Mathur, Saloni. “Living Ethnological Exhibits: The Case of 1886”. Cultural Anthropology 15.4 (2000): 492–524. Web.   I used this source to learn about the segregation and the Colombian exhibition. 

"The Presentation of Freaks." Explanation of Freaks. Barnum American Museum, n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2015. I used this source as a viewpoint and backing for how freaks were only used for money even though they were objects of racism.

"What Is It? Essay." What Is It? Essay. Barnum American Museum, n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2015. I used this source to specifically exemplify a character, who was black, but who was also considered a freak and human oddity so I could explain that they were all objects of money.

Dubin, Steven C.. American Journal of Sociology 95.1 (1989): 268–269. Web. I used this source to look deeper into freak shows from the perspective of today and from a scholarly outlook.

Kruger, Loren. “"white Cities," "diamond Zulus," and the "african Contribution to Human Advancement": African Modernities and the World's Fairs”. TDR (1988-) 51.3 (2007): 19–45. Web.

I used this source to look at the racism at the World's Fairs among black people specifically. 

"The What Is It? Exhibit." What Is It? Exhibit. American Social History Productions, Inc., 2015. Web. 8 Dec. 2015. I used this source to add depth to my point about an example of a freak who was of a different race and was also considered a human oddity.

Schofield, Hugh. "Human Zoos: When Real People Were the Exhibits."Human Zoos: When Real People Were the Exhibits - BBC News. BBC News, 27 Dec. 2011. Web. 8 Dec. 2015.  I used this more current source to show that people today still think of this as a phenomenon and that there were exhibits and museums for human zoos additionally. 

Crow, Jim. "Human Zoos." Interview. Jim Crow Museum: Question of the Month. Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia, Oct. 2006. Web. 8 Dec. 2015. I used this source because it was an intelligent interview and mentioned the World's Fair and Taylor Barnum being one of the first to run a human zoo successfully.

Yang, Melissa. "Ethnographic Exhibitions: A Short History." Ethnographic Exhibitions. N.p., 2009. Web. 8 Dec. 2015. I used this source to further my research on human oddities and freak shows before looking into Zip the Pinhead more thoroughly.

"Colonial and Indian Exhibition, 1886 [microform] : Official Catalogue : Colonial and Indian Exhibition (1886 : London, England) : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive." Internet Archive. London : W. Clowes/ National Library of Canada, 1886. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.  I used this because it was a primary source and gave me an idea of what the Indian Exhibition was really about because it was a pamphlet from the actual event. 

Pictures

What Is It? 1860. National Portrait Gallery Smithsonian, Meserve Collection.WHAT IS IT? Portraits by Mathew Brady. By Mathew Brady. Web. 8 Dec. 2015.

African-girl-in-human-zoo. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2015.

"What Is It?" N.d. Shelburne Museum, Shelburne, VT. WHAT IS IT? -- Gallery of Wonders No. 12. Web. 8 Dec. 2015.

Official Catalogue. 1886. National Library of Canada, London. Colonial and Indian Exhibition, 1886. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.

1931. Paris. Deep Racism: The Forgotten History of Human Zoos. Web. 14 Dec. 2015. 

Migrations

     Most all of the largest migrations, human footprints, and industrializations of the Earth has been in the last few centuries. Lots of research has been done to shed light on the agriculture and links to race and the alteration of DNA. In my research today, I've come to the conclusion that most people start out in one place and always end up in another. Many people are capable of doing this because of their beginnings and opportunities given to them to prosper. People of all ages and wealth can strive to achieve greatness and success, and over the past two hundred years, they have. Thousands of people want to migrate to America, making it the #1 place to go and establish residency. Today I learned that no matter what your blood type, skin color, or fingerprint is, people always want to change themselves or work for more. In National Graphic it was explained that, "Shaping the land to serve human needs is a cornerstone of civilization," and I believe that, as well as the shaping of ourselves. People can change the land, water, and the entirety of the Earth to make it their own, as well as change their selves. Over the decades and centuries, the DNA of humans has morphed to suit their needs so to help them advance and grow immune to whatever difficulties and problems they face in their community. In reading about all of this today I didn't really have any questions, but I more or less came to the conclusion that the visualization of the charts and maps really helped me to see that migration has been happening, and will continue to happen for the rest of our lives. I've also come to the conclusion that in migrating, we change our surroundings, ourselves, and the land we live in.

Philanthropy Followup

Philanthropy is the act of giving. Almost always the giving leads to the foundation of an institute, foundation, company, or community, and the philanthropists receive credit for the new institute. Today in class I learned that philanthropy has more to do with money and a less hands-on theme, than charity, which I think focuses more on the giving of help and achieving hands-on tasks. Philanthropy is more of a desire to promote the welfare of others through money and donations while charity is the selfless act of volunteering. Philanthropy in my eyes is more of the giving and making sure others know that you are giving, while charity there is an aspect of anonymity. Most philanthropists help their causes and impact the problem they are trying to solve greatly, and many of todays issues are supported by philanthropic institutes. In today's society, philanthropy is greatly needed as it provides the finances, support, and the broadcasting of the topic that is needed for others, such as charity, to hear about the topic and get involved. Philanthropies and charities are great kickstarters in committing to the solving of an issue and promoting awareness, and with the help of money and volunteering, several issues and problems can be solved.

Follow Up Research on the Ball

Bradley Martin Ball

1. In the New York Times, it is considered that the Bradley Martin ball was, "the most unique and beautiful entertainment ever enjoyed." The entire front page of the New York Times is about the ball, they assume readers think they want to know about what people wore, ate, and everything they did. The New York Times covered the Bradley Martin ball so heavily because it was an extravagant event and their perspective was that it was important and exciting.
2. In The World of Society, the main perspective was about the guests. The article is all about who was there, how the hostess arrived, how people arrived, and the dances. The language is very formal in this article and it adds a hint of curiosity to the abundance of the ball, almost as if some of the excitement was "unnecessary".
3. In Dr. Rainford's Advice, the perspective on the party was that it was completely ostentatious and a useless display of wealth. The people interviewed and mentioned in Dr. Rainford's advice all have negative things to say about the Bradley Martin ball and they aren't afraid to show their dismay about the waste of money and the social upheaval it caused. The clergyman thinks that the costly manifestations and elaborate displays of wealth were unnecessary and that the money used for the ball could have just as easily helped a charity rather than just being used for a social event. The newspaper published his views because it was new and different news to hear from all the people who had only positive things to say about the event, and they published it because he was a minister, aka a reliable and reputable source of information. The clergyman saw the ball as a problem because it was a waste of money.
4. In the Echoes of the Big Ball article, society in that time period thought the Bradley Martin Ball was the biggest ball of all time and the article was written after the ball as to show that people still talked about the ball and would probably continue to talk about the ball for weeks on end because it was such an important event in that time period. Everyone wants to hear about the ball, whether they were there or not, and everybody is curious to hear and see people from the ball even hours afterwards.

Thinking About Success

1. Opportunity

2. Hard Work

3. Skill

4. Luck

I believe that in thinking about success, the four characteristics above are necessary, in that exact order. I feel that success comes greatly from the opportunities that are offered to you and that are at your disposal to take advantage of whenever necessary. What opportunities you choose to take advantage of, however, are your choice and has to be a commitment to yourself and to your community. With your choice of opportunities comes hard work and if you are willing to assert yourself in a hard working manor. It takes hard work to achieve anything which is why I placed it second. After working so hard and putting the opportunity first, you develop a skill. A skill only comes after strenuous activity and "hard work" which is why I placed it after hard work, because one comes right after the other and they are in direct correlation with each other. The last, and least important key to success, I believe, is luck. This is because luck only comes at spontaneous times and doesn't always help or hurt you. There is such thing as bad luck as well as good luck. Luck doesn't play a key role in the success of your life so I put it last as it is on a whim and not a dependable aspect, nor is it what you should base your thoughts of success on. I think opportunity can overall make or break your success in life, because whatever is at your complete and full disposal is what you will carry with you throughout life and you might not always have access to the same opportunities as others around you. 

Exploring Business / Clothing Industry / Business Innovation Research

Today in US History, I learned about the future of fashion retailing. Terms like, "supply chain", "distribution system", and "innovation" were littered among the three articles that I read. Most of those terms confused me, but it was intriguing to read about the hoops that stores have to jump through to get clothes on their racks. A supply chain is a business model that allows a store to continuously search for new clothes. In Zara's case, they are headquartered in Spain and this gives them a cultural advantage because they can filter through new clothes, pick and choose, and distribute them in a more timely manner than other franchised headquarters located elsewhere. The area of the headquarters gives Zara a "competitive advantage" as they can make quick changes to clothing and or split decisions about what to sell or whether to order more labor in Europe or in Asia. H&M, another well franchised store located in Sweden, is also considered innovative because they offer two main seasonal collections, and then smaller "sub-collections" at different times of the year. Much like Zara, H&M works greatly from their headquarters, but H&M's smaller factories and stores are all connected to their much larger headquarters in Stockholm. This allows H&M to individually notice clothing deficiencies or views of the customer from a larger number of stores and gives H&M time to react quickly in a bind. Although large franchises are leaning towards more innovative and fast paced ideas to stock their shelves, no one has found a clear answer of where the ideas came from, who started it, or what the companies will do next if and when the innovation comes to an end or fails. Those were all questions that went through my mind as I read these articles and apparently others have picked up on these questions as well. Dan Gilmore wonders the same thing and he hasn't been able to shed much light on those questions. Though the innovation seems shiny and new now, and is bringing the stores a lot of money, I want to know what they will do next in the fashion retailing business.