‘The one who comes walking in is Chaplin, who brushes against the world
like a slow meteor …the imaginary landscape that he brings along is the
meteors aura…while he strolls on with the cane and hat that so become
him’
Charlie Chaplin is one of the most effervescent character-actors ever to grace
the silver screens in the history of filmmaking. Chaplin was a London born actor/director/songwriter/artist who had the pure magic of creating scenes that would direct
his audiences to feel welcome, a sense of belonging. His audiences both laughed
at him, as well as with him. Although the man behind the tramp rose to fame and
was then thrown off his pedestal during political events that would change the
way people looked at him forever, the messages that he portrayed via his camera
and characters would reveal the prominent and permanent position in which he
rested. Accusations of communism and attacking capitalism would not stop the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences
awarding him with an honorary award for his contribution to cinema. His most
well identified character of ‘The Tramp’ makes his debut in the
KeyStone Film Company titled ‘Kid Auto Races at Venice Beach’.
The Keystone Company had a reputation for their humorconsisting of violent acts
(pushing, hurting one another) and for the use of speed in their films. The
shots with a punch line increase in speed as the movie goes on, an idea that
assembles the audience’s reactions reflecting what is seen on screen.
The film begins with a shot of a crowd of people who are gathered to watch the
races. People watch as young men push carts to and from the wooden ramp in the
background. To our left we notice a man dressed in a black jacket, pants, a
bowler hat and a cane. This figure, which is now universally acclaimed at the
time, was virtually unknown. The arrival of this presence, of this cinematic body
that consumes the screen soon acknowledges the audience of the skit to be
revealed. The character of the Tramp ‘discovers’ that there is a
camera to which he then follows for his own pleasure, an idea that would later
reflect Charlie Chaplin’s movie career. With the different cuts that
ensue Chaplin carries himself over as a spectator of the race, the crowd looks
into the camera as it displays a faux-actualization to the audience itself. The
tramp character builds an interest with being in the perspective of the camera.
As the camera pans over the crowd it becomes more noticeable that he only just
wants to be seen, no real motive, no harassinggestures to suggest that he has
an obsession with sensationalism but instead he plays on a theme of curiosity,
one that at the time of filming would have been incredible as the cinema was
still young at age. The world famous Chaplin facial expressions come into play,
suggesting glances that are incredibly exaggerated and comical, relieving the
audience that the character means any harm, as this was the Tramps first
appearance onscreen. This idea can be confirmed with the aesthetic attraction,
as Chaplin’s gaze remains locked on the audience as if to constantly
remind us that he is there.
The film was made during a real life kid auto race where they placed Chaplin
and his co-stars amongst the crowd of people who were both aware of what was
happening and unsettled by the character of Chaplin. The doubling perspective
of reality that Chaplin creates almost parodies the films of Lumiere as they
reflect the idea of actualizations, turning them into a comedy as Chaplin
hoards the screen. The connection between these two films is the Sortie
D’Usines where people are filmed leaving a factory. There is the essence
of the actualization in Chaplin and the cemented idea of the actualization
being the cause for the Lumiere film. Actualization is mentioned in a
quasi-mode of term because of thecrowd who were watching the races and inn some
shots of the film they are noticeably aware that they are being filmed. Had
Chaplin chosen to obscurely reveal his character, or had revealed no character
at all, the two films could possibly be compared on a higher level.
The quote used in the beginning of the essay is taken from an essay written by
Theodor Adorno and also reflects incredibly the actions that he takes in the
film. The incredible self-awareness that is portrayed is an amazing concept in
such an early film. There is an aspect of intrusiveness on the camera and the
spectator. The feel of the film is evidently to watch the races and be
entertained, as such in a documentary but the familiarity of the Tramp reverses
the idea that the intrusion is not welcome. His comedy of being just another
spectator who obsesses with the camera creates a relationship with the viewer.
Where Chaplin is on screen, there is a mode of existence that institutionalizes
the audience into the film creating a science of viewing and attraction. The
very ontological texture of film that Chaplin creates has a high cathexis with
the audience, never once revealing at this point the idea of separation through
the lens. It’s almost like the audience were being interrupted by
Chaplin, the set up wasconvincingly about the races and the mannerisms that he
embodies creates the idea that he stumbled across any camera, across any time.
The idea that he is aware of the camera, or in other terms, us as an audience
controls and creates a narrative where there once was none or a small one. The
simple story of being at the races becomes the sub-plot towards the antics of
Chaplin where with his simple gestures and gimmicks he becomes central and the
viewer is engaged towards what is happening.
The perspective of the film changes in the scene titled “Setting the
camera at death curve” where it is revealed to the audience that they are
no longer the eye which has capture the Charlie Chaplin in Tramp form. From
here on in, the audience is now in a third room of viewing as they are watching
Charlie being filmed completely aware that they are
watching a recorded image of the same thing. This can go against Walter
Benjamin’s argument that ‘what distinguishes the shot in the film
studio, however, is that the camera is substituted for the audience. As a
result, the aura surrounding the actor is dispelled and with it, the aura of
the figure he portrays’ He argues that the audience has empathy with the
camera due to the notion that the actor has no personal experience with them.
In this film itcould be said that Chaplin reverses this idea, placing the
audience in the direct line of contact with Chaplin’s character as if he
didn’t even need the apparatus of the camera. In this short scene,
Chaplin has deconstructed the aspect of cinemagoers and creates an open doorway
to the thoughts and philosophies for audiences everywhere as an increase in the
conscious of the object that is in turn conscious of its audience. We are now
watching a movie about a movie being filmed and Charlie interrupting that
environment, not ours. This film can be seen as a meta-idea consisting of three
different notions: a film (semi actualization), character acknowledging that
there is a camera in the point of view of the audience, the turn around where
we realize that what we had seen before is still actually a film.
The conclusion of the film consists of Charlie, angry and annoyed that he
cannot intrude on the camera lens is kicked in the backside. What follows is a
series of close-ups of his face, distorted and crinkled with a fist to his
mouth. This final scene of crudeness that embodies the rage of not being able
to participate as a n object of motion and desire, to have their need to be
seen trampled on in favor of something else is just the smallest of metaphors
for the career that Chaplinwas to achieve. As mentioned before, Charlie Chaplin
brushed against the world like a slow meteor creating a long trail of cinema
history and triumph. Kid Auto Races at Venice Beach
was just a small player in the big game that was Chaplin’s life, yet it
still remains a visceral film that is more than just a Tramp playing up on
camera, it is a man making a statement on cinema functions.
References
Kierkegaard prophesies Chaplin, Frankfurter Zeitung, Theodor W. Adorno May 22,
1930. The Yale Journal of Criticism 9.1 (1996) 57-61
Sortie D’Usines , Lumiere, Paris 1895
The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility, p139, Selected
Writings, Walter Benjamin, vol 4, 1938-1940 Harvard U P 2003
Ontology of Film, costamoviejourney.com, Wednesday, September 16, 2009
https://costamoviejourney.blogspot.com/2009/09/ontology-of-film.html
An Aesthetic of Astonishment: Early Film and the (in)credulous Spectator, Tom
Gunning, Art & Text, No. 34, (1989)
-------- ----- ------ -----------
[ 1 ]. Kierkegaard prophesies Chaplin, Frankfurter Zeitung, Theodor
W. Adorno May 22, 1930.
]. Lumiere, Paris 1895
[ 3 ]. The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility, p139,
Selected Writings, Walter Benjamin, vol 4, 1938-1940 Harvard U P 2003
