The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

25
The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin By Peter O’Brien

description

All in the title and all in relation to the entirety of Chaplin's career. This was awarded a very high first in the Film and Screen Studies course I originally orchestrated it for in 2011. It is still being used as an example presentation all these years on

Transcript of The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Page 1: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

The National Identity

of Charlie Chaplin

By

Peter O’Brien

Page 2: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Aims

• The presentation will examine what can be considered Charlie Chaplin’s national identity.

• As represented through his films, star image, perceived political beliefs and actual political beliefs.

• Using the example of Chaplin, the presentation will assert the complexities and, ultimately, question the validity of national identity as a concept in a world of multiculturalism.

Page 3: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Charles Spencer "Charlie" Chaplin (1889-1977)

The BFI describes Chaplin as: ‘one of the pivotal figures in film history. He was the first film star that appealed to both popular taste and high culture. He remains the most universally recognised personality in the history of entertainment’ (BFI).

Page 4: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

• Born in the East End of London, Chaplin experienced something of a Dickensian, impoverished upbringing.

• He came from a family of entertainers and was raised in the same profession.

• Appearing in music hall comedy sketches, throughout his youth and adolescence, he would eventually tour America.

• While in America he was recruited into the film industry – from which he never looked back.

• He became a worldwide icon through his persona of the Tramp.

• Eventually went on to act in, write, direct, produce, finance and compose the music for his films.

Charlie Chaplin (1889-1977)

Page 5: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

What is Chaplin’s National Identity?

• The easiest answer - he is British. – He was a British citizen by birth. – Both of his parents were British.

• ‘national identity is not biological but cultural, and to that

extent something that is learned, often subconsciously’ (Higson in Briggs and Cobley 1998: 354).

• Because Chaplin spent just under forty years living in the USA, defining his national identity according to his genetic heritage is no good!

• We have to go much deeper and include a wider cultural context…

Page 6: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

What is Chaplin’s National Identity? • ‘National Identity is about belonging – to a community, yes, but also to a

place, a homeland. And it is about recognising as familiar the established indigenous cultural traditions of that homeland and community’ (Higson in Briggs and Cobley 1998: 358).

• While in the USA Chaplin:

– Never applied for American citizenship – Remained a subject of the UK.

• However, Chaplin did have an enthusiasm for

embracing American culture and the opportunities it offered:

• ‘I was full of the idea of going to America, not alone for the thrill and adventure of it, but because it would mean renewed hope, a new beginning in a new world…’ (Chaplin in Weissman 2009: 168).

Page 7: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

The Immigrant (Dir. Charles Chaplin, USA, 1917)

Page 8: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Chaplin: The Immigrant

• Booting the immigration officer. – In 1917 it went relatively unnoticed

– Later, it would be cited repeatedly as showing a non-US citizen’s contempt and lack of respect for the USA!

• Criticizing what he saw as America’s failings would prove an ever increasing trend in Chaplin’s movies.

• So Chaplin was happy to be considered not fully American, as there were many things in America, particularly later on in his stay there, which he did not agree with…

Page 9: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Modern Times (Dir. Charles Chaplin, USA, 1936)

Page 10: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

The Tramp: A Silent Voice for the Oppressed

• Modern Times commented on the unemployment caused by the Great Depression. It was an attack on the dehumanisation of the American production line, as innovated by Henry Ford.

• “Machinery should benefit mankind. It should not spell tragedy and throw it out of work” (Chaplin in Robinson 2003).

• ‘Modern Times was about a Marxist concept: the dehumanization and the alienation of labour. No doubt about it, Chaplin was a leftist of a devoted and radical kind’ (Schickel 2003).

Page 11: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

The Tramp: A Silent Voice for the Oppressed

• “my radical views have been much misunderstood. I am not a Socialist, nor am I looking for a new order of things. But I do believe that conditions can be much improved” (Chaplin in Louvish 2009: 168).

• However, it was Chaplin’s perceived leanings towards socialism and the ability of his films to transmit their messages to a worldwide audience that caused him to become despised by one particular political regime…

• The waving of the flag! • Inciting the common man to unite

against ‘the dehumanised system’ • As well as socialist, it would also be cited

as having communist connotations. • Being a Socialist was something Chaplin

always denied:

Page 12: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

The Eternal Jew (Dir. Fritz Hippler, Germany, 1940)

Page 13: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

The Tramp vs. The Dictator

• ‘Chaplin was not a Jew, but he was reluctant to say so. He thought that would implicitly support the anti-Semites' (Schickel 2003).

• The Nazis banned Chaplin’s films because they did: ‘not coincide with [the] world philosophy of the present day in Germany’ (New York Times in Louvish 2009: 266).

• It was the plight of anti-Semitism, the link he had gained to it,

the fact the Nazi party had taken a dislike to him and the physical similarity his Tramp character shared with Adolf Hitler that brought about Chaplin’s next overtly political film…

Page 14: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

The Great Dictator (Dir. Charles Chaplin, USA, 1940)

Page 15: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Chaplin: Un-American? • While the film did gain support for anti-fascism, and was also

critically acclaimed, it put Chaplin into political hot water back in America.

• The film, particularly the end speech, helped to: ‘earn him, in the files of the FBI, the quant political epithet “premature antifascist.” In the terminology of the day, that was a euphemism for someone with strong left-wing leanings who was not officially a member of the Communist Party’ (Weissman 2009: 265).

• Indeed, when asked about his allegiances Chaplin stated: “Super-

patriotism leads to Hitlerism. I assume in a democracy one can have a private opinion” (Chaplin from Louvish 2009: 330).

• But private opinion in America was soon to become a very public thing…

Page 16: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

The Red Scare (1947 – 1957)

Page 17: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Chaplin: A Communist? • During the red scare, Chaplin was just one of many intellectuals and

radical thinkers who were accused of being communists by the House of Un-American Activities Committee.

• The argument against him cited: – The vocal support he had given the Russian Second Front during WW2. – As well as comments he had said around 1919: “I am an artist. I am

interested in life. Bolshevism is a new phase of life. I must be interested in it.” (Chaplin in Louvish 2009: 167).

– Kicking the immigration officer (The Immigrant). – Waving the red flag (Modern Times). – The ‘unite’ speech (The Great Dictator). – And many other instances in his films and private life…

• It was this harassment that caused Chaplin’s next political

commentary to be darker and much more cynical…

Page 18: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Monsieur Verdoux (Dir. Charles Chaplin, USA, 1947)

Page 19: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Better Dead Than Red! • Monsieur Verdoux didn’t do Chaplin any favours, being a film

that voiced the failings of Capitalism and WW2!

• In 1953, after leaving for a trip abroad, the immigration office refused Chaplin a re-entry permit – he was banned from the USA!

• It would be nineteen years before he would return.

• However, while in exile he made one last overtly political film. It can be seen as an ironic amalgamation of his political experiences and treatment in the USA…

Page 20: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

A King In New York (Dir. Charles Chaplin, UK, 1957)

Page 21: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

• The whole premise of Chaplin having a singular and fixed national identity is a reductio ad absurdum (in this case, something that is proved absurd through contradiction). Chaplin supports too many attributes of too many different conflicting ideologies to have one singular and fixed national identity.

• As Chaplin himself commented:

• “I am not a Jew; I am not a citizen of America; I am a citizen of the

world” (Chaplin from Louvish 2009: 332).

• He wanted to be a universal figure. This is why he never took up American citizenship - Chaplin liked the freedom of belonging to more than one culture; he liked being multicultural.

Conclusion 1/2: Chaplin: A Citizen of the World

Page 22: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Conclusion 1/2: Chaplin: A Citizen of the World

• Therefore, Chaplin as a multi cultural figure explains his dislike of a fixed and rigid national identity, such as Nazism and Americanism, which he lampoons in his films.

• Chaplin saw National Identity as being redundant In a world that was becoming more and more multicultural

• “The Aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in man, cries out for universal brotherhood, for the unity of us all” (Chaplin 1940).

• Being: “a citizen of the world,” it is quite clear Chaplin favoured an International Identity.

Page 23: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Conclusion 2/2:

• Of course it is still valid but only if it is seen in an international context.

• As Higson comments :

• ‘Nationality is not natural but contingent: it changes with historical circumstances. National cultural traditions too are always in flux, always subject to struggle for recognition over against other traditions’ (Higson in Briggs and Cobley 1998: 359).

• Therefore, ‘if cultural traditions too are always in flux’ (ibid), you can’t have an isolationist national identity in a world which due to advancements, such as the cinema and the internet etc, is becoming more and more linked together and multicultural.

• This is why the presentation has looked at Chaplin because his perceived national identity was always in state of ‘flux’. His national identity can only be understood when you extend beyond a singular national identity and look at it from an international, hybrid point of view.

National Identity: Is it still a valid theory?

Page 24: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Recap

• Using the figure of Charlie Chaplin, with reference to his films, star image and actual and perceived political beliefs this presentation has assessed his national identity. Concluding that he favoured an international identity as opposed to one country’s fixed national or political identity.

• The presentation has also used the figure of Chaplin to explore the theory of national identity and assessed whether it is still valid in today’s international world. Concluding that it is but only through an international context.

Page 25: The National Identity of Charlie Chaplin

Sources Filmography • The Immigrant (film); Charles Chaplin. 20

minutes. USA: Lone Star Corporation, 1917.

• Modern Times (film); Charles Chaplin. 87 minutes. USA: Charles Chaplin Productions, 1936.

• The Eternal Jew (film); Fritz Hippler. 62 minutes. Germany: Deutsche Filmherstellungs- und -Verwertungs- GmbH, Berlin (DFG), 1940.

• The Great Dictator (film); Charles Chaplin. 125 minutes. USA: Charles Chaplin Productions, 1940.

• Monsieur Verdoux (film); Charles Chaplin. 124 minutes. USA: Charles Chaplin Productions, 1947.

• A King In New York (film); Charles Chaplin. 110 minutes. UK: Charles Chaplin Productions, Attica Film Company, 1957.

• Introduction to Modern Times by David Robinson (DVD); Philippe Truffault. 6 minutes. USA: Roy Export Company Establishment (2003).

• Charlie: The Life and Art of Charles Chaplin (DVD); Richard Schickel. 132 minutes. USA: Warner Home Video (2003).

Bibliography • Higson, A (1998) ‘Nationality:

National Identity & the Media’ in Biggs A, Copley P. The Media: An Introduction. Longman.

• Louvish, Simon Chaplin: The Tramp’s Odyssey. London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 2009.

• Maland, Charles J. Chaplin and American Culture: The Evolution of a Star Image. Chichester: Princeton University Press, 1989.

• Weissman, Stephen Chaplin: A Life. London: JR Books, 2009.

• Chaplin, Charles My Autobiography. London: William Clowes & Sons Ltd, 1964.

• British Film Institute (BFI) [online] Available from: http://chaplin.bfi.org.uk/ [Accessed 10.05.2011].