Faking the First Nations of the World

Published by


All Indigenous People were Scripted by the Reset Class and Displayed in the Human Zoo’s at the World Fair to Validate False Colonial Narrative History

Such an easy concept to comprehend, why does it take such a mouthful to sum up in a title? The Resetters held a series of industrial expositions which regulated the speed and direction of World civilization progression. At these expos certain inventions were given priority over others depending on its relative importance to establishing a centralized international power structure.

Such inventions would include the Combine Harvester, for controlling the world food supply; the sewing machine, for labor and economy, i.e., commerce and manufacturing; the camera, photography was imparative for propaganda reasons, same with the moving pictures. There are many more but you get the idea.

Another aspect of the World Fair phenomenon was inserting a fake history, part of the full-spectrum domination. Resetters scripted history to insert themselves as the self-appointed, self-confirming authority going back thousands of years. The human race is literally chained down by a series of fake documents, enslaved by forgeries and frauds such as the Magna Carta and innurmerable wills, deeds, charters, land trusts… These are binding-contracts that only have power bc people manifest simply by believing it is true, the same concept is what gives currency its value while the opposite is true, currency only creates debt, which further enslave humanity.

One of the biggest hurdles was to convince the world population that we are the first and only advanced culture to ever exist on the planet. This was accomplished in many facets, one of which was by first organizing the population geographically based on visual charateristics such as skin color, size, skeletal structure… Once grouped together a false history was invented for each group including customs, language, dress, construction methods

Speaking of construction methods, all the artifacts from the prior civilization were either destroyed or given a false history themselves, like the people. Some buildings were co-opted by the Resetter families where their own fake documents appear to prove the structure was built by their family centuries ago. In America we supposedly dont have an aristocrat class so all the relic buildings were claimed by the Government.

Map makers drew invisible boundries which are made real by the manifest-power ability of humans, the same as currency. Languages were made for each group, furthering the illusion that each group arose independently from the groups around them. Religions are the same, the proof is how close every religion is too each other, only minute details are different bc they are all pulled from the same script. The language makers use different degrees of complexity to appear to show the evolution of language, Chinese and Russian vs Spanish and Latin.

Latin is a little different bc it is an ancient “mother” language. This is the term for the languages that, like religions, are separated only by minor details, Puerto Rican and Italian for instance are so similar they would be hard to explain how they came up independent so the commonalities are dismissed by saying they all derived from the same ancient source. It was the same source alright, just not from thousands of years in the past.

Now to “sell” the fraud to the population comprized of immigrants and orphans with no true sense of self. First there was a flood of artists, painters and sculptors, they made the visuals to go along with the narrative. This is partially why the camera was so important, before that everything had to be painted. Some technology we were left with, like the printing press, the printing of mass propaganda has always been there, with the press given its own false history label.

The other inhabitants of the world with their scripted cultures were put on display just like any other zoo exhibit, only these exhibits weren’t meant to show the undeveloped man in all his glory, that thankfully the overlords had pulled the developed population out from, these exhibits were intended to deceive the people into believing each isolated group from all groups in the world had arisen without outside intervention. Seeing is believing, a photograph and written commentary, while better than a painting, is nowhere near effective as seeing with your own eyes. [*note to self: Alexander G. Bell was founder of Nat Geo magazine, also a notorious eugenicist and World Fair inventor of the telephone (wasn’t him), Nat Geo is a premiere publication featuring native tribal people and ancient ruins, geography itself is a branch of fraudulent science to cover-up evidence of a Reset Event (the Mudflood) add to AGB file]

The Repopulation of Earth started very close to the year we call 1800, maybe 1801. I say this not only because Aces and Eights are a signature tell 99% of the time but if you backtrace everything in important world events they all converge at this point. Bridges are made to connect the new Reset order to the scripted false history but once the spell is broken they cant use the deception any longer. Its like once you know the wand has a spring that ejects the floers with the push of a button the trick does’nt work ever again. This is our way out. The inheritors know this, thats why information is so tightly censored, they know once you wake up you arent going back and all you will do is wake the people up around you.

Starting at 1800 it will take time to get ready for the main event; things like the sewing machine and combine harvester have priority for obvious reasons, once those are winding down is when we start to see a shift in other area’s. Today we are talking about the so-called Native tribes of the world.

Elaborate rituals, fashion, marital customs, initiation rites… Every aspect on display has been carefully and thoughtfully inserted to support the narrative that we are the first and only. They can all be expanded on as time goes on, take the American Indian for example, the first images of indians were paintings done by Reset agents that made the natives appear very plain looking by later standards, they wore head gear and jewelry that looks more like India’s Indians. (I’m convinced India was repopulated first thats why all subsequent native people were called Indians, this was the archetype, or maybe it was bc Christopher Columbus got lost, who knows). Anyway as time went on we get into the westward expansion and by then the Indian narrative has morphed into the elaborate Eagle-feather head gear and chicken bone breast plates and beaded adornments of the Plains Indians that were a staple of the World Fairs and Human Zoo’s for decades.

This brings us to my next point; not only were the expos held to attract the people but it was taken a step farther by hiring silver-tongued showman to drive it home. People like PT Barnum and Buffalo Bill Cody were employed to sell the illusion as authentic history. Be assured it is just a parlor trick, the whole history of the world, including the First Nations tribes is nothing more than a carny scam.

It wasnt just the Indians of America that were faked, every culture in every country was a cookie cutter template and they all converged at the International Exposition tours originally, right alongside the enslavment inventions that only tighten the grip. Eventually these portions were so successful they branched off into a side-show devoted just for their own sake.

The dedicated Human Zoo

The human zoos, ethnological exhibitions or Negro villages remain complex subjects to tackle for countries which highlight the equality of all human beings. In fact, these zoos, where ”  exotic  ” individuals mingled with wild beasts were shown behind bars or enclosures to a public eager for entertainment, constitute the most obvious proof of the gap existing between discourse and practice at the time of building colonial empires.

“Male and female Australian cannibals. The one and only colony of this savage, strange, disfigured and most brutal race ever drawn from the interior of the wilderness. The lowest order of mankind.”

The idea of ​​promoting a zoological show featuring exotic populations appeared in parallel in several European countries during the 1870s. In Germany, first of all, where, from 1874, Karl Hagenbeck, dealer in wild animals and future promoter of the main European zoos, decides to exhibit Samoans and Lapps as ”  purely natural   populations to visitors eager for ”  sensations  “. The success of these first exhibitions led him, in 1876, to send one of his collaborators to the Egyptian Sudan with the aim of bringing back animals as well as Nubians to renew the ”  attraction “. The latter enjoyed immediate success throughout Europe, since they were presented successively in various capitals such as Paris, London or Berlin.

One million paid entries

Such a success undoubtedly influenced Geoffroy de Saint-Hilaire, director of the Jardin d’acclimatation, who was looking for attractions capable of redressing the delicate financial situation of the establishment. In 1877, he decided to organize two “  ethnological shows  ”, presenting Nubians and Eskimos to Parisians. The success is overwhelming. Attendance at the Garden doubled and reached, that year, one million paid admissions… Parisians flocked to discover what the major press then described as a ”  band of exotic animals, accompanied by no less singular individuals  ” . Between 1877 and 1912, around thirty “ ethnological exhibitions   of this type will thus be produced at the Jardin zoologique d’acclimatation, in Paris, with constant success.

Many other places will quickly present such ”  shows  ” or adapt them for more ”  political  ” purposes, like the Universal Exhibitions in Paris in 1878, 1889 (the ”  highlight  ” of which was the Eiffel Tower) – a ”  village nègre   and 400 ”  native  ” extras constituted one of the major attractions – and that of 1900, with its 50 million visitors and the famous ”  living  ” Diorama on Madagascar, or, later, the Colonial Exhibitions, in Marseille in 1906 and 1922, but also in Paris in 1907 and 1931.

Establishments specialize in the ”  fun  “, such as performances scheduled at the Champ-de-Mars, the Folies-Bergère or Magic City  ; and in the colonial reconstruction, with, for example, at the Théâtre de la Porte-Saint-Martin, the reconstruction of the defeat of the Dahomeans of Behanzin before the French army…

To respond to a more “  commercial  ” demand and to the call of the province, regional fairs and exhibitions very quickly became the places of promotion par excellence for these exhibitions.  It is in this dynamic that the itinerant ” troops ” are structured very quickly – passing from an exhibition to a regional fair – and that the famous ” black villages  (or ” Senegalese villages   ) become popular , as during the Lyon exhibition in 1894. There is therefore not a city, not an exhibition and not a Frenchman who does not discover, on the occasion of a sunny afternoon, an ” identical ” reconstruction      of these wild lands, populated by men and exotic animals, between an agricultural competition, Sunday mass and a walk on the lake.

It was then by the millions that the French, from 1877 to the beginning of the 1930s, went to meet the Other. An “  other  ” staged and caged. Whether they are “  strange  ” people from all over the world or indigenous to the Empire, they constitute, for the vast majority of metropolitans, the first contact with otherness. The social impact of these shows in the construction of the image of the Other is immense. Especially since they are then combined with an omnipresent colonial propaganda (by image and by text) which deeply permeates the imagination of the French. Yet these human zoos remain absent from collective memory.

The appearance, then the rise and the enthusiasm for human zoos result from the articulation of three concomitant phenomena: first, the construction of a social imaginary on the other (colonized or not)  ; then, the scientific theorization of the “  hierarchy of races   in the wake of advances in physical anthropology  ; and, finally, the construction of a colonial empire then in full construction.

Long before the great colonial expansion of the Third Republic of the years 1870-1910, which ended with the definitive drawing of the borders of the overseas Empire, a passion for exoticism was affirmed in metropolitan France and, in At the same time, a discourse on the so-called inferior “  races  ” is constructed at the crossroads of several sciences. Admittedly, the construction of the identity of any civilization is always built on representations of the other which make it possible — by mirror effect — to develop a self-representation, to situate oneself in the world.

As far as the West is concerned, we can detect the first manifestations of this in Antiquity (the categorization of the ”  barbarian  “, the ”  wog  ” and the citizen), an idea again carried by the Europe of the Crusades, then during of the first phase of colonial explorations and conquests of the 16th and 17th centuries. But, until the 19th century, these representations of otherness were only incidental, not necessarily negative, and did not seem to penetrate deeply into the social body.

With the establishment of colonial empires, the power of representations of the other imposed itself in a very different political context and in a movement of historical expansion on an unprecedented scale. The fundamental turning point remains colonization, because it imposes the need to dominate the other, to domesticate him and therefore to represent him.

The ambivalent images of the “  savage  ”, marked by a negative otherness but also by reminiscences of the Rousseauist “  good savage  ” myth, are replaced by a clearly stigmatizing vision of “  exotic ” populations. “. The colonial mechanism of inferiorization of the native by the image then sets in motion, and, in such a conquest of European imaginations, human zoos undoubtedly constitute the most flawed cog in the construction of prejudices about populations. colonized. The proof is there, before our eyes: they are savages, live like savages and think like savages. Ironically, these groups of natives who crossed Europe (and even the Atlantic) often stayed ten or fifteen years outside their country of origin and accepted this staging… for a fee. Such is the reverse of the scenery of the savagery put in the zoo, for the organizers of these exhibitions: the savage, at the turn of the century, asks for a salary!

At the same time, popular racism unfolds in the mainstream press and in public opinion, as a backdrop to the colonial conquest. All the major media, from the most popular illustrated newspapers – such as Le Petit Parisien or Le Petit Journal – to publications of a ”  scientific  ” nature – such as La Nature or La Science amusing -, via travel magazines and of exploration—such as Le Tour du monde or the Journal des voyages— present exotic populations—and particularly those subjected to conquest—as vestiges of the first states of humanity.

The vocabulary of stigmatization of savagery — bestiality, taste for blood, obscurantist fetishism, atavistic stupidity — is reinforced by an iconographic production of incredible violence, accrediting the idea of ​​a stagnant sub-humanity, humanity of the colonial borders, at the boundary between humanity and animality.

The naturally superior white race

Simultaneously, the inferiorization of “  exotics  ” is reinforced by the triple articulation of positivism, evolutionism and racism. The members of the Anthropology Society — created in 1859, on the same date as the Jardin d’Acclimatation in Paris — went several times to these exhibitions for the general public to carry out their research oriented towards physical anthropology. This science, obsessed with the differences between peoples and the establishment of hierarchies, gave the notion of “  race  ” a predominant character in the explanation schemes for human diversity. We are witnessing, through human zoos, the staging of the construction of a classification into ”  races human beings and the elaboration of a unilinear scale making it possible to prioritize them from the top to the bottom of the evolutionary ladder.

Thus, Count Joseph Arthur de Gobineau, in his Essay on the Inequality of Human Races (1853-1855), had established the original inequality of races by creating a typology based on largely subjective hierarchical criteria such as ”  beauty of forms, physical strength and intelligence  “, thus consecrating the notions of ”  superior races   and ”  inferior races  “. Like many others, he then postulated the original superiority of the ”  white race  “,who has, according to him, the monopoly of these three data and then serves as a standard allowing him to classify the Black in an irremediable inferiority at the bottom of the scale of humanity and the other “  races  ” as intermediate.

Such a classification is found in the Parisian programming of human zoos and largely conditions the underlying ideology of these shows. When the Cossacks were, for example, invited to the Zoological Garden of Acclimatization, the Russian Embassy insisted that they not be confused with the ”  negroes  ” from Africa, and when Buffalo Bill arrived with his troop he undoubtedly finds his place in the Garden thanks to the presence of “  Indians  ” in his show! Finally, when the Lilliputians are presented to the public, they enter without any problem into the same terminology of difference, monstrosity and bestiality as the exotic populations  !

From Social Darwinism to Colonialism

Social Darwinism, popularized and reinterpreted by Gustave Le Bon or Vacher de Lapouge at the turn of the century, finds its visual translation of the distinction between “  primitive races   and “  civilized races   in these exhibitions of an ethnological nature. These thinkers of inequality discover, through human zoos, a fabulous reservoir of specimens hitherto unthinkable in metropolitan France.

Physical anthropology, like the nascent anthropometry, which then constituted a grammar of the ”  somatic characters  ” of racial groups – systematized from 1867 by the Anthropology Society with the creation of a craniometry laboratory -, then the development of phrenology, legitimize the development of these exhibitions. They encourage scientists to actively support these programmes, for three pragmatic reasons: practical availability of exceptional human “  material  ” (variety, number and renewal of specimens, etc.)  ; an interest of the general public for their research, and therefore an opportunity to promote their work in the mainstream press ; finally, the most convincing demonstration of the validity of racist statements by the physical presence of these “  savages  ”.

Extra-European civilizations, in this linear perception of socio-cultural evolution and this staging of proximity to the animal world, are considered backward, but civilizable, therefore colonizable. Thus, the loop is closed. The coherence of such spectacles becomes scientific evidence, at the same time as a perfect demonstration of the nascent theories on the hierarchy of races and a perfect illustration in situ of the civilizing mission then underway overseas. Scientists, members of the colonial lobby or organizers of shows find their account there.

 Putting into practice the ” Darwinian ” anthropological foundations  of political science, illustrated and popularized by such exhibitions, very quickly gave resonance to the ”  eugenics  ” project of Georges Vacher de Lapouge and associates, whose program consisted of improving of the hereditary qualities of such and such a population by means of a systematic and voluntary selection. Very significantly, the exhibitions of ”  monsters  ” (dwarfs or Lilliputians as at the Zoological Garden of Acclimatization in 1909, hunchbacks or giants in the many itinerant fairgrounds, macrocephals or ”  negroes » albinos as in 1912 in Paris) experienced a very strong popularity at the turn of the century, which accompanied and interpenetrated the overwhelming success of human zoos. No doubt eugenics, social Darwinism and racial hierarchy respond to each other dialectically. No doubt they participate in the same anguish in the face of otherness, an anguish which then finds its outlet in an unequal rationalization of “  races  ”, in a common stigmatization of the “  crazy  ” and the “  native  ”.

“  Human zoos  ” thus find themselves at the confluence of popular racism and the scientific objectification of racial hierarchy, both driven by colonial expansion. A remarkable indication of this confluence, the “  ethnological exhibitions   of the Jardin zoologique d’acclimatation are legitimized, as we have seen, by the Société d’anthropologie and by almost the entire French scientific community. Even if, between 1890 and 1900, the Société d’anthropologie became much more circumspect about the ”  scientific  ” nature of such shows, it could only appreciate this influx of people who allowed it to deepen its research on the diversity of ”  species “. The rupture will finally be born from the growing importance given to these entertainments appreciated by the public, and especially to their increasingly popular and theatrical character.

It must be said that these shows – but also the exhibitions at the Champ-de-Mars and the Folies-Bergère – are structured around an increasingly elaborate staging of “  savagery  ”: baroque attire, frenetic dancing, simulation of “  bloody fights   or “  cannibal rites  ”, insistence of advertising programs on “  cruelty  ”, “  barbarism   and “  inhuman customs   ( human sacrifices, scarifications…).

Between “  them  ” and “  us  ”, an insurmountable barrier Everything converges so that between 1890 and the First World War a particularly bloodthirsty image of the savage imposes itself. These ”  shows  ” — constructed without any concern for ethnological truth, need it be specified — reflect, develop, update and legitimize the most unhealthy racist stereotypes that form the imagination about the ”  other  ” at the time of the conquest colonial. Indeed, it is essential to emphasize that the ”  supply of these natives closely follows the conquests of the Republic overseas, received the agreement (and the support) of the colonial administration and contributed to explicitly support the colonial enterprise of France.

Thus, Tuaregs were exhibited in Paris during the months following the French conquest of Timbuktu in 1894  ; similarly, Malagasy people appeared a year after the occupation of Madagascar  ; finally, the success of the famous amazons of the kingdom of Abomey follows the highly publicized defeat of Behanzin before the French army in Dahomey. The will to degrade, to humiliate, to animalize the other — but also to glorify France overseas through an ultranationalism at its height since the defeat of 1870 — is here fully assumed and relayed by the mainstream press, which shows, in the face of the colonizers, ”  indigenous raging, cruel, blinded by fetishism and bloodthirsty. The different exotic populations thus tend to all be shown in this unflattering light: there is a phenomenon of standardization through the caricature of all the “  races  ” presented, which tends to make them almost indistinct. Between “  them  ” and “  us  ”, an insurmountable barrier has now been erected.

Attractive, the ”  savages brought to the West undoubtedly are, but they arouse a sense of dread. Their actions and movements must be strictly controlled. They are presented as absolutely different, and the European staging obliges them to behave as such, since they are forbidden to show any sign of assimilation, of Westernization as long as they are shown. Thus, in most demonstrations, it is unthinkable that they mix with the visitors. Made up according to prevailing stereotypes, their attire is designed to be as unique as possible. Exhibitors must also remain within a precisely defined part of the exhibition space (under penalty of a fine deducted from their meager pay), marking the intangible boundary between their world and that of the citizens who visit and inspect them. A border scrupulously delimits savagery and civilization, nature and culture.

When the body of the “  savage  ” fascinates What is most striking in this brutal animalization of the other is the reaction of the public. During these years of daily exhibitions, very few journalists, politicians or scientists were moved by the sanitary and penning conditions – often catastrophic – of the “  natives  ”  ; without even mentioning the numerous deaths of populations as during the presence of the Kaliña Indians (Galibi) in 1892, in Paris, unaccustomed to the French climate.

A few stories nonetheless underline the dread of such sights. At the heart of these, the attitude of the public is not the least shocking subject: many visitors throw food or trinkets at the groups on display, comment on the faces by comparing them to primates (taking up one of the antiphons of physical anthropology, eager to flush out the ”  simian characters   of the natives), or laugh frankly at the vision of a sick and trembling African woman in her hut. These descriptions – certainly incomplete – sufficiently demonstrate the success of the ”  latent racialization of minds  among contemporaries. In such a context, the Empire could deploy itself in good conscience and establish within itself legal, political and economic inequality between Europeans and ”  natives  “, against a backdrop of endemic racism, since the proof was given in France that there there were only savages just out of the darkness.

Human zoos obviously tell us nothing about “  alien populations  ”. On the other hand, they are an extraordinary tool for analyzing mentalities from the end of the 19th century until the 1930s. Indeed, by essence, zoos, exhibitions and gardens were intended to show the rare, the curious, the strange , all expressions of the unusual and the different, as opposed to a rational construction of the world developed according to European standards.

Aren’t these furious masquerades ultimately the upside-down image of the ferocity—very real this one—of colonial conquest itself  ? Isn’t there the will—deliberate or unconscious—to legitimize the brutality of the conquerors by animalizing the conquered  ? In this animalization, the transgression of the values ​​and norms of what constitutes, for Europe, civilization is a driving force.

In the realm of the sacred, the sexual norm obviously comes first. Polygamy thus affects one of the socio-religious foundations of the Christian family. The fact that human zoos house entire families—with the head of the family’s various wives—is significant. We come to contemplate at best an incomprehensible oddity, at worst the manifestation of an animal lubricity. With, in the gaze, an unanswered question, the unfulfilled desire for a fantasy which, even in the West, is the reverse of the forbidden.

The theme of sexuality is particularly developed. For the “  Blacks  ”, the myth of a bestial, plural sexuality takes shape. In this myth, into which physical considerations enter (great vitality, as well as genital organs – in men and women – which are considered overdeveloped), crystallizes this fascinated ambivalence for beings boundary between animality and humanity. This sexual vitality itself refers to an overall bodily vitality – visible for example in a number of engravings in the major illustrated newspapers of the time evoking the vigorous combat of ”  tribes  ” almost naked against the colonial troops -, provoking a fascination for the body of the ”  savage “ “. This fascination is the product of the concern, alive at the end of the 19th century, of the “  biological degeneration   of the West  ( 6 ) .

After the conquest, the “  civilizing mission  ” In the register of the transgression of the sacred, the recurrence of the theme of cannibalism is revealing. While almost nothing is known at the end of the 19th century of a highly ritualized and in any case extremely limited social practice in sub-Saharan Africa, the images of ”  cannibalistic savages   invade all the media and are one of the most selling arguments of human zoos (until the International Colonial Exhibition of 1931 and the peripheral presence of Kanaks)  ( 7 ). Cannibalism indeed breaks a major taboo: the rapprochement with the animal world is obvious. The very evocative stagings on this subject in exhibitions or in the context of performance halls reveal the power of the theme.

From the Universal Exhibition of 1889 until the end of the inter-war period, exhibitions multiplied, especially colonial exhibitions. In almost all of them, a ”  Negro  “, ”  Indochinese  “, ”  Arab  ” or ”  Kanak  ” village is offered to the curiosity of visitors. Simultaneously, these ”  negro  ” and then ”  black  ” or ”  Senegalese  ” villages – a sign of a very interesting semantic evolution in the aftermath of the Great War – became autonomous attractions, itinerant and perfectly exploited in the provinces, but also in all Europe or the United States.

The presentations followed one another, year after year, through four or five distinct ”  troops  ” criss-crossing the major regional exhibitions, such as Amiens, Angers, Nantes, Reims, Le Mans, Nice, Clermont-Ferrand, Lyon, Lille, Nogent, Orléans … and major European cities (and zoos) such as Hamburg, Antwerp, Barcelona, ​​London, Berlin or Milan, all places where 200,000 to 300,000 visitors flocked to each exhibition.

The staging here is much more “  ethnographic  ”, and the “  villages  ” look like pasteboard sets worthy of Hollywood productions of the time on “  mysterious Africa”. We admire local productions and marketed ”  crafts  ” (probably one of the very first ”  black arts  ” intended for the general public  !), particular forms of social organization are gradually recognized, even if they are generally shown like the traces of a past that colonization must imperatively abolish. Fanciful reconstructions of “  indigenous dances or the famous historical episodes are spaced out and faded.

Another situation is taking shape: the “savage” (again) becomes gentle, cooperative, in the true image of an Empire that we want to make believe definitively pacified on the eve of the First World War. At that time, the territorial limits of the Empire were indeed drawn. The conquest was followed by the “  civilizing mission  ”, a discourse whose colonial exhibitions would be the ardent defenders. The military is succeeded by the administrator. Under the ”  beneficial  ” influence of the France of the Enlightenment, of the colonizing Republic, the ”  natives are placed at the bottom of the scale of civilizations, while the specifically racial theme tends to fade away. Negro villages replace human zoos. The native remains an inferior, of course, but he is “docilized”, domesticated, and we discover in him potentialities of evolution which justify the imperial gesture.

This new perception of the other-indigenous will find its greatest intensity during the International Colonial Exhibition of Vincennes in 1931, which, spread over hundreds of hectares, is the most successful mutation of the human zoo under the guise of a civilizing mission. , good colonial conscience and republican apostolate.

Human zoos thus constitute a fundamental cultural phenomenon – and hitherto totally overlooked – by its magnitude but also because it allows us to understand how the relationship that colonial France, but also Europe, was structured with the other. In fact, don’t most of the archetypes staged by human zoos draw the root of a collective unconscious which will take on many faces over the course of the century and which it is essential to deconstruct?


  •  Plakate, 1880-1914, Historiches Museum, Frankfurt.
  •  Not all ”  imported  ” groups had an exclusive and unique status. The Fuegians, for example, inhabitants of Tierra del Fuego, at the extreme south of the South American continent, seem to have been ”  transported  ” like zoological specimens properly speaking  ; while the gauchos, a sort of contracted artists, were fully aware of the masquerade they were putting on for visitors.
  • Nicolas Bancel, Pascal Blanchard and Laurent Gervereau, Images et colonies, Achac-BDIC, Paris, 1993.
  •   Gérard Collomb, “  Photography and its double. The Kaliñas and the “  right of scrutiny  ” of the West  ”, in The Other and Us, ed. Syros-Achac, 1995, pp. 151-157.
  •  Anne McClintock, Imperial Leather. Race, Gender and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest, Routledge, Londres, 1994.
  • Christian Pociellot and Daniel Denis (dir.), At the school of adventure, PUS, Voiron, 1999.
  • Didier Daeninckx, Cannibale, Gallimard (coll. «  Folio  »), éd. Verdier, red. 1998.
  • Name of a traveling troupe presented at the Jardin zoologique d’acclimatation.
  •  Nicolas Bancel and Pascal Blanchard, From native to immigrant, Gallimard, coll. ”  Discoveries  “, Paris, 1998.