Goals in Chaplin's and Lloyd's Films

External Since: Jul 16, 2003 Posts: 671

What does the Tramp want? He wants food, shelter, love, and pleasure.
He wants to stay alive. Desires don't get any more basic than that,
or any more universally understandable.

What does Harold want? He has food and shelter. Most of the time he
prefers to stay alive. Often he wants to please and win over a women.
In fact, as has been observed of Lloyd himself, Harold has an enormous
desire to please others and win their approval.

In _Grandma's Boy_, Harold lacks backbone. In _Girl Shy_ he lacks confidence
with women. In _Safeth Last_ he lacks money and status. In _Freshman_ he
lacks popularity. In _Kid Brother_ the lacks the respect of his father and
brothes, All of these films are basically concerned with Harold's attempts to
overcome these deficiencies and gain respect, which he usually does by
performing some spectacular feat.

Does the Tramp want approval? Apparently not. For various reasons he
tries to pass himself off as something he's not, and usually he
succeeds up to a point, but his success only exposes the superficiality
of the way we categorize and judge people. These impersonations often seem
purely playful rather than goal-directed, especially in the earlier films.

The Tramp has a sense of dignity and self-worth which doesn't require the
approval of others. If people show congempt for him, he is defiant or
indifferent, because he accepts himself as he is--a mere mortal
with limited powers, who is content to survive, and occasionally do a
pretty girl a good turn.

Lloyd never seriously questions the standards his characters try to
meet, and of course many people don't either. But does one have to
physically subdue a bully in order to win respect? Win a football
game by dubious means? Show a reckless disregard for one's safety
by climbing a building or capturing a murderous hobo? Lloyd sees humor
in his characters' inadequate attempts to achive their goals, but not in
their ultimate triumph. Furthermore, he wants us to sympathize with their
painful sense of inadequacy and failure, which strikes me as a kind of
bourgeois sentimentality.

In other words, Lloyd tends to accept conventional values as a measure of
success. Chaplin exposes and rejects them.

I enjoy both Lloyd's and Chaplin's films. Lloyd's films are well made
and entertaining, and they have their ethos. But I find Chaplin's
unconventionality more interesting, and the Tramp's modest successes
(if they are successes) more realistic that Harold's sudden bursts of
heroism.

Connie K.

External Since: Jul 10, 2003 Posts: 886

Constance Kuiryama wrote:

>The Tramp has a sense of dignity and
>self-worth which doesn't require the
>approval of others.

He does seem to require their food and
their property...for his sense of "dignity."
("to each according to his need.")

> If people show congempt for him, he is
>defiant or indifferent, because he
>accepts himself as he is--a mere mortal
>with limited powers, who is content to
>survive, and occasionally do a pretty girl
>a good turn.

He is a tramp existing on the fringes
of society and unlike Harold's glass
character does not bear responsibility
for living with, and interacting with,
other people, or loving them in a
committed way.

>Lloyd never seriously questions the
>standards his characters try to meet,

Like romantic attachment and commitment? Is that something
you think should be questioned
as a serious option in life?

> and
>of course many people don't either. But
>does one have to physically subdue a
>bully in order to win respect? Win a
>football game by dubious means? Show
>a reckless disregard for one's safety by
>climbing a building or capturing a
>murderous hobo? Lloyd sees humor in
>his characters' inadequate attempts to
>achive their goals, but not in their
>ultimate triumph.

Harold always wins not just through his
own effort, but because of "luck," or,
as I would say, by being in tune with
the universe through the force of his
newfound personal integrity.

> Furthermore, he wants
>us to sympathize with their painful sense
>of inadequacy and failure, which strikes
>me as a kind of bourgeois sentimentality.

I knew you'd segue into Marxism soon.

Your basic objection to Harold is that
he embodies poetically an American
ethos and that he finds it heartbreaking
that he can't live up to his ideals.

I guess you don't care about living
up to your ideals, eh?

>In other words, Lloyd tends to accept
>conventional values as a measure of
>success. Chaplin exposes

"Exposes?" He's a tramp!

> and rejects them.

He's never in the game.

>I enjoy both Lloyd's and Chaplin's films.
>Lloyd's films are well made and
>entertaining, and they have their ethos.

>But I find Chaplin's unconventionality
>more interesting,

Simply because it reflects your values?

> and the Tramp's modest successes (if
>they are successes) more realistic that
>Harold's sudden bursts of heroism.

Harold's bursts of heroism are comically
exaggerated. These are comedies, remember?

The brilliance of Lloyd--which
Chaplin did not have--was to start
realistically and then seamlessly ramp
up to almost surreal slapstick and
return to realism, while maintaining
the "normalcy" of his "glass" character
all throughout.

Chaplin had other virtues, the Tramp
does seem to symbolize the underdog
side of human nature and the tragedy
of being trapped in an outsider role
that compels one to forgo many of
the basic consolations of human
existence.

The Tramp tries to break
free at times, but in the end accepts the
impossbility of joining society with a philosophical shrug, then seeking
of new horizons.

From stems both his comedy and his
pathos.

But I think the Tramp would have
preferred to be Harold---he just
doesn't have the choice.

++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentis."