The freak show, the public showing of misfits or wonders of nature, as various people have claimed, disappeared in the 20th century due to a changing mentality and growing medicalization in western society. Based on Michel Foucault’s and Guy Debord’s theories, the argument of this article is that the freak show has never disappeared but has transformed into a medicalized-mediated spectacle. Medical documentaries featuring the surgical separation of Siamese twins constitute the diachronic focus of this essay. Ever since the invention of the movie camera, spectacular surgical interventions have been the subject of medical documentaries. Starting with the films of Doctor Doyen in early 20th century France and ending with recent American public broadcast documentaries, I will analyze the cinematic, spectatorial and contextual changes in the production of medical mediated spectacle.
Arnold, J.-M. (1995) ‘Le Grammaire Cinematographique: Un Invention des Scientifiques’, pp. 211-17 in A. Martinet (ed.) Le Cinéma et la Science. Paris: CNRS.
2.
Belling, C. (1998) ‘Reading The Operation: Television, Realism, and the Possession of Medical Knowledge’, Literature and Medicine17: 1-23.
3.
Bogdan, R. (1988) Freak Show: Presenting Human Oddities for Amusement and Profit. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Clark, D. L. and C. Myser (1996) ‘Being Humaned: Medical Documentaries and the Hyperrealization of Conjoined Twins’, pp. 338-355 in R. Garland Thomson (ed.) Freakery. Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York: New York University Press.
5.
Debord, G. (1977) The Society of the Spectacle. Detroit: Black and Red.
6.
De Vogel, W. and J.W. Varossieau (1954) ‘The Film of the Frisian Conjoined Twins’, Science and Film3: 20-25.
7.
Edelmann, C. (1994) ‘A la Découverte du Corps Humain’, pp. 174-181 in A. Martinet (ed.) Le Cinema et la Science. Paris: CSNR.
8.
Essex-Lopresti, M. (1997) ‘Centenary of the Medical Film’, The Lancet349 (22 March) 819-820.
9.
Essex-Lopresti, M. (1998) ‘The Medical Film 1897-1997: Part II’, Journal of Audiovisual Media in Medicine21: 48-55.
10.
Fiedler, L. (1978) Freaks. Myths and Images of the Secret Self. New York: Doubleday.
11.
Foucault, M. (1973) The Birth of the Clinic. An Archaeology of Medical Perception. London: Tavistock.
12.
Gerber, D. (1996) ‘The “Careers” of People Exhibited in Freak Shows: The Problem of Volition and Valorization’, pp. 38-54 in R. Garland Thomson (ed.) Freakery. Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York: New York University Press.
13.
Grosz, E. (1996) ‘Intolerable Ambiguity: Freaks as/at the Limit’, pp. 55-66 in R. Garland Thomson (ed.) Freakery. Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York: New York University Press.
14.
Hawkins, J. (1996) ‘One of Us: Tod Browning’s Freaks’, pp. 265-276 in R. Garland Thomson (ed.) Freakery. Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York: New York University Press.
15.
Léfèbvre, T. (1994) ‘La Collection des films du Dr Doyen’, in 1895 17: 100-114.
16.
Léfèbvre, T. (1995) ‘Le docteur Doyen, un précurseur’, pp. 70-7 in A. Martinet (ed.) Le Cinéma et la Science. Paris: CNRS.
17.
Lindfors, B. (1996) ‘Ethnological Show Business: Footlighting the Dark Continent’, pp. 207-218 in R. Garland Thomson (ed.) Freakery. Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York: New York University Press.
18.
Myser, C. and D. Clark (1998) ‘Fixing Katie and Eilish: Medical Documentaries and the Subjection of Conjoined Twins’, Literature and Medicine17: 45-67.
19.
O’Connor, E. (1999) ‘Camera Medica: Towards a Morbid History of Photography’, History of Photography23: 232-244.
20.
Ostman, R. E. (1996) ‘Photography and Persuasion: Farm Security Administration Photographs of Circus and Carnival Sideshows 1935-1942’, pp. 121-136 in R. Garland Thomson (ed.) Freakery. Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York: New York University Press.
21.
Park, K. and L. Daston (1981) ‘Unnatural Conceptions: The Study of Monsters in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century France and England’, Past and Present92: 3-26.
22.
Pingree, A. (1996) ‘America’s “United Siamese Brothers”: Chang and Eng and Nineteenth-Century Ideologies of Democracy and Domesticity’, in J.J. Cohen (ed.) Monster Theory. Reading Culture. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
23.
Schofield, S. and M. Essex-Lopresti (1954) ‘Filming the Surgical Separation of the Conjoined Twins of Kano’, Science and Film3: 19-23.
24.
Schwartz, H. (1996) The Culture of the Copy. Striking Likeness, Unreasonable Facsimiles. New York: Zone Books.
25.
Schwartz, V. (1995) ‘Cinematic Spectatorship before the Apparatus: The Public Taste for Reality in Fin-de-Siècle Paris’, pp. 87-113 in L. Williams (ed.) Viewing Positions. Ways of Seeing Film. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
26.
Thomasma, D. (1992) ‘The Ethics of Caring for Conjoined Twins: The Lakeberg Twins’, The Hastings Center Report26: 4-12.
27.
Thomson, R. G. (1996) Freakery. Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York: New York University Press.
28.
Vaughan, C. A. (1996) ‘Ogling Igorots: The Politics and Commerce of Exhibiting Cultural Otherness’, pp. 219-233 in R. Garland Thomson (ed.) Freakery. Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York: New York University Press.
29.
Wallace, I. and A. Wallace (1978) The Two. New York: Simon and Schuster.
30.
Warren, F. (1955) Television in Medical Education Handbook. Washington, DC: American Medical Association.
