Art of Charlie Chaplin: Aesthetics of Organic Dynamism Synopsis of the Thesis submitted to The University of Burdwan for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Arts (English) Debesh Thakur Department of English The University of Burdwan West Bengal, India January 2013
Film, like a literary work, is culture specific and both are integrally related to each other as art-forms. As every film has a script so every work of literature has a potential film in it. A film is not a play in a video cassette, for whatever material is there in the script is to be enlivened by the magic touch of a director s will and vision. Nor is a moving celluloid or digital representation of life just mechanical since confusion of angle and perspective may convert a cube into a square. Film is a collective art, for in it picture, sound, light, make-up, costume-designing, acting, editing, chemical or digital processing all are aesthetically arranged into an organic wholeness whose effect is the combined effect of all contributing factors yet surpasses these all. A great film maker is one who is well versed in the art of channelizing these tributaries towards a translation of his vision and interpretation of life. Charlie Chaplin is extraordinary in his aesthetics of organic dynamism which set him apart from his predecessors and contemporaries. Organic dynamism is the result of imaginative vision that assembles, arranges and organises several filmic tropes and devices into dynamic order. To Chaplin aesthetics is not merely a study of beauty. His concept of art evinces a major departure from common theories of art in so far as it strives after fusing entertainment with commitment. In the first chapter I have tried to consider some of the distinctive features of cinema as an art form, the interrelation of film and literature and the use of the tramp as persona for social criticism. My argument here is that cinema has a language of its own which draws upon yet surpasses the materials that go into its making. As regards the interrelation between film and literature I have tried to establish that a film becomes successful as a film when it outgrows its indebtedness to literature. Coming 1
to Chaplin I have shown that the master-creator excels others in fusing amusement and commitment which can be grasped from the use of the tramp as a mouthpiece for social criticism. Here I have also tracked down the origin of the Chaplinesque tramp to the clown of the stage and the contemporary comic strip. Although Chaplin had directed as many as thirty five films in a single year (1914), his genius found a conducive environment for its efflorescence ever since he associated himself with the United Artists Films. In the second Chapter, therefore, I have discussed the uniqueness of the first four films born out of this collaboration. I have tried to establish that the grain of Chaplin s film is the grain of comedy, a comedy which, paradoxically, is less exhilarating and may aptly be designated as the comedy of tears. The third chapter entitled Man, Machine and Moral shows how Chaplin criticizes the machine civilization and commodity culture in Modern Times. Here I have maintained that Chaplin uses the filmic language to project the machine as a monster posing serious threats to man. I have further argued that Chaplin s cinematic tirade upon the degenerate modern life is different from pamphleteering, for he has succeeded in translating the vision aesthetically. This endeavour becomes possible due to his supreme command over organic dynamism which orchestrates and harmonizes various aspects which often are found in conflicting relationship in life. The fourth chapter is an exploration of Chaplin s response to World War II. As a committed and conscious artist Chaplin could feel that fascism was a threat to humanity. So he used his film to appeal to human conscience and thus to register a human protest which is unambiguous about his sympathy yet which cannot be faulted 2
on grounds of partisanship. I have specially focussed on the technical aspects including the use of the sound track in The Great Dictator, especially the section of public speeches where Chaplin caricatures the megalomaniac dictator in his own inimitable style and also tries to build opinion in favour of democracy and liberty. Monsieur Verdoux, having a paradoxical subtitle, comedy of murder, is one of the rarest of experiments in the history of film. Here Chaplin is out to question the conventional yardstick for judging what is right and what is wrong. I have ventured to examine how Chaplin makes us sympathize with Verdoux who is believed to have an irredeemably criminal career. Besides, I have tried to give a new reading of the film by dwelling upon those aspects where Chaplin articulates the hollowness of the so called materially rich countries on both sides of the Atlantic. In the sixth chapter I have handled three films of Chaplin - Limelight, The King in New York and A Countess from Hong Kong produced in 1953, 1957 and 1970 respectively. Here my focus is mainly on how Chaplin has succeeded in creating art out of frustration, his disillusionment with a crassly materialist Western culture. In these works of fading glory Chaplin parts with the tramp-stereotype for recording his social criticism. He is more direct and often voices his protest against materialism, McCarthyism and post-war disintegration of life in a manner which is aesthetically less satisfying. These limitations notwithstanding, these films indicate the progressive maturity of Chaplin s art which now switches from the black and white to the colour film and ventures to experiment with the suggestive potentials of the poly-chromatic celluloid. 3
The logical conclusion of the whole is that Chaplin s distinction as a film maker as well as his undiminished popularity springs from a balance of the precept and practice of the aesthetics of organic dynamism without grasping which it becomes difficult for anybody to find access into the secret creative recesses of the master magician of the reels. 4