On "Thanksgiving Dinner" in Charlie Chaplin's Gold Rush (1925)
30 October 2008
(EXCERPT)
The success of this sequence owes a great deal to the advancements of the film medium – notably in the use of montage when cutting-away to the Tramp’s stockinged foot. By this point, film audiences were being trained (whether they realized it or not) on how to read filmic structure, thanks largely to the narrative emphasis of the interlocutor. Therefore, the viewer made (and makes) the subconscious connection between the anonymous sock-shod foot, and the boot currently on the stove. This realization has two important functions. Firstly, the cut to his bare foot emphasizes that he is preparing a fully functional boot (as opposed to a boot-like object). This serves to further emphasize the difference between the object’s literal and metaphorical functions (36). It must be noted that this cut-away functions through the use of close-up, a technique impossible in live theatre where the same exact joke would have lost a small portion of its humor if the audience didn’t notice the detail. In addition, this film technique allows us to make assumptions that indicate a great deal about the character: he is not just cooking any boot – he is cooking his own boot! This could indicate a noble selflessness (risking frostbite in order to feed himself as well as Big Jim), or it could indicate ignorance and naivety. The Little Tramp seems to always straddle these distinguishing lines, and here it is impossible to tell whether his has the wisdom of an adult, or the imagination of a child (32).
Indeed, the Little Tramp - introverted and somewhat oblivious - is quite the unlikely hero. Yet while he saves the day, he simultaneously manages to victimize himself. Perhaps he has found a viable solution to starvation, but in the end it is he who is eating a boot, which is delightfully improper. Humor in the form of delight and intrigue derives from Chaplin's uncanny ability to create a character that is simultaneously a child and an adult, a perpetrator and a victim, a Tramp and a gentleman. In sharp contrast to the astonished and disgusted "straight man", Big Jim, the Tramp maintains his dignity (whether in oblivion or in stoicism we will never know) even as he stoops to the improper situation of eating a boot. Indeed, this character has great appeal to an America audience with severe anxiety over the breakdown of civility.
(EXCERPT)
The success of this sequence owes a great deal to the advancements of the film medium – notably in the use of montage when cutting-away to the Tramp’s stockinged foot. By this point, film audiences were being trained (whether they realized it or not) on how to read filmic structure, thanks largely to the narrative emphasis of the interlocutor. Therefore, the viewer made (and makes) the subconscious connection between the anonymous sock-shod foot, and the boot currently on the stove. This realization has two important functions. Firstly, the cut to his bare foot emphasizes that he is preparing a fully functional boot (as opposed to a boot-like object). This serves to further emphasize the difference between the object’s literal and metaphorical functions (36). It must be noted that this cut-away functions through the use of close-up, a technique impossible in live theatre where the same exact joke would have lost a small portion of its humor if the audience didn’t notice the detail. In addition, this film technique allows us to make assumptions that indicate a great deal about the character: he is not just cooking any boot – he is cooking his own boot! This could indicate a noble selflessness (risking frostbite in order to feed himself as well as Big Jim), or it could indicate ignorance and naivety. The Little Tramp seems to always straddle these distinguishing lines, and here it is impossible to tell whether his has the wisdom of an adult, or the imagination of a child (32).
Indeed, the Little Tramp - introverted and somewhat oblivious - is quite the unlikely hero. Yet while he saves the day, he simultaneously manages to victimize himself. Perhaps he has found a viable solution to starvation, but in the end it is he who is eating a boot, which is delightfully improper. Humor in the form of delight and intrigue derives from Chaplin's uncanny ability to create a character that is simultaneously a child and an adult, a perpetrator and a victim, a Tramp and a gentleman. In sharp contrast to the astonished and disgusted "straight man", Big Jim, the Tramp maintains his dignity (whether in oblivion or in stoicism we will never know) even as he stoops to the improper situation of eating a boot. Indeed, this character has great appeal to an America audience with severe anxiety over the breakdown of civility.
