Chaplin and World War I

On Feb 15, 1:22�am, "Feuillade" <Feuill... DeleteThis @aol.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 3:18 am, d... DeleteThis @FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > My husband recently asked me a question that I couldn't answer in any
> > detail.  We know what Chaplin thought about World War II, from _Dictator_,
> > his Second Front speeches, and many other sources.  But what did he think about
> > World War I?
>
> > Apart from _Shoulder Arms_, _The Bond_, and his personal appearances in
> > the Liberty Bonds drive, I can't think of any source of information. He
> > wrote a letter to Syd in 1914 in which he described the war as "terrible"
> > and hoped that Syd would not be drafted, but that doesn't tell us much.
> > One of the interviews in the _Chaplin Interviews_ book mentions that he
> > bought British war bonds as well as US bonds. He was criticized for not
> > enlisting, though he did register and was classified as underweight, which
> > probably means he weighed less than 120 pounds. He doesn't seem to have
> > made any effort to gain weight or bypass the requirement, as Jimmy
> > Stewart did during WWII.
>
> > Have I missed something?
>
> > And if _Shoulder Arms_, _The Bond_, and the Liberty Bonds appearances are
> > all we have, what do we make of them? Did Chaplin enthusiastically support
> > the war effort, or did he just hope the war would end as soon as
> > possible and do what he could to further that end?
>
> > When did he develop the idea he expressed in the 1930w that extreme
> > nationalism or "dangerous patriotism" was an attitude conducive to war?
>
> > Connie K.
>
> My guess is that Chaplin, like most people in America, was an
> enthusiastic supporter of America's war effort in WWI and then at some
> later date came to rethink his position.
>
> When he was giving speeches and touring the South hawking war bonds he
> always struck me as a true believer in the cause of the war.  It's
> interesting that he only showed the same kind of enthusiasm in the
> next war for a second front that would help the Soviet Union.
>
> By the way, there's a new book out on Orson Welles by Joseph McBride
> that claims that one of the reasons Welles left the U.S. in 1947 was
> his reaction to McCarthyism.  He also claims that Welles made the
> statement that his participation at a Carnegie Hall rally for a Second
> Front was because Chaplin misled him as to the nature of the rally.
>
> Tom Moran- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Chaplin personally bought $350,000 of Liberty Bonds during the first
three bond drives, according to Charles J. Maland in CHAPLIN AND
AMERICAN CULTURE.
By the time he wrote MY AUTOBIOGRAPHY half a century later, however,
he remembered the war as a time of "barbarism" in which a "religion of
war" brought "an avalanche of mad destruction and brutal slaughter."
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

Was it not true that Chaplin's patriotism was being sorely questioned
by the British press at that time? He was receiving white feathers
in
the mail and being pillaged by conservative columnists over not
caring that his country of orgin was at war.

When America entered the war he threw himself into war relief partly
to stem the tide over the same kind of criticism that he had received
from the British.

His feelings towards all wars was pretty well summed up in
"Monsieur Verdoux"

Gary
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

On Feb 15, 2:18 am, d....RemoveThis@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
wrote:
> My husband recently asked me a question that I couldn't answer in any
> detail. We know what Chaplin thought about World War II, from _Dictator_,
> his Second Front speeches, and many other sources. But what did he think about
> World War I?
>
> Apart from _Shoulder Arms_, _The Bond_, and his personal appearances in
> the Liberty Bonds drive, I can't think of any source of information. He
> wrote a letter to Syd in 1914 in which he described the war as "terrible"
> and hoped that Syd would not be drafted, but that doesn't tell us much.
> One of the interviews in the _Chaplin Interviews_ book mentions that he
> bought British war bonds as well as US bonds. He was criticized for not
> enlisting, though he did register and was classified as underweight, which
> probably means he weighed less than 120 pounds. He doesn't seem to have
> made any effort to gain weight or bypass the requirement, as Jimmy
> Stewart did during WWII.
>
> Have I missed something?
>
> And if _Shoulder Arms_, _The Bond_, and the Liberty Bonds appearances are
> all we have, what do we make of them? Did Chaplin enthusiastically support
> the war effort, or did he just hope the war would end as soon as
> possible and do what he could to further that end?
>
> When did he develop the idea he expressed in the 1930w that extreme
> nationalism or "dangerous patriotism" was an attitude conducive to war?
>
> Connie K.

Chaplin says pretty clearly in his Autobio that at outset of the
'Great War'
most people didn't expect it to last more than four months, as surely
humanity
wouldn't tolerate the 'ghastly toll' which would result from modern
warfare.

As the carnage went on uncontrollably, he says people in their
puzzlement wondered why - surely
not because of the assassination of the archduke that triggered it
all.

As the body count spiralled higher, he says that the idea that the war
was 'making the
world safe for democracy' was seized upon for the war's rationale.

He seems to have regarded this premise with some dubiety - if not
at the time of the war, then at the time of writing his Autobio.

This, along with the un-jingoistic depictment of the war in Shoulder
Arms
would suggest his desire to see the war end was more inspired by
wanting
the carnage to stop, rather than his own patriotic fervor.

It would seem that the arbitrary nature of the war's beginnings, it's
uncontrollable nature once begun, and its after-the-fact rationale
likely
influenced his later distrust of extreme nationalism and his self-
designation as
'peace-monger'.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

"Rollo" (garyjohnson321@hotmail.com) writes:
> Was it not true that Chaplin's patriotism was being sorely questioned
> by the British press at that time? He was receiving white feathers
> in
> the mail and being pillaged by conservative columnists over not
> caring that his country of orgin was at war.
>
> When America entered the war he threw himself into war relief partly
> to stem the tide over the same kind of criticism that he had received
> from the British.

No doubt he felt some pressure to defuse that kind of criticism. And
Fairbanks probably had some influence on him as well.

According to Carlyle Robinson, he threw himself into the bonds drive
enthusiastically at first, but abruptly cut his tour short, while Fairbanks
and Pickford continued to campaign.

> His feelings towards all wars was pretty well summed up in
> "Monsieur Verdoux"
>
> Gary
>

True, but that was his later view. How much that resembles his view
during WWI I don't know.

Connie K.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

"Richard Carnahan" (rfcsac627n@aol.com) writes:
> On Feb 15, 1:22=EF=BF=BDam, "Feuillade" <Feuill... DeleteThis @aol.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 15, 3:18 am, d... DeleteThis @FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > My husband recently asked me a question that I couldn't answer in any
>> > detail. =A0We know what Chaplin thought about World War II, from _Dicta=
> tor_,
>> > his Second Front speeches, and many other sources. =A0But what did he t=
> hink about
>> > World War I?
>>
>> > Apart from _Shoulder Arms_, _The Bond_, and his personal appearances in
>> > the Liberty Bonds drive, I can't think of any source of information. He
>> > wrote a letter to Syd in 1914 in which he described the war as "terribl=
> e"
>> > and hoped that Syd would not be drafted, but that doesn't tell us much.
>> > One of the interviews in the _Chaplin Interviews_ book mentions that he
>> > bought British war bonds as well as US bonds. He was criticized for not
>> > enlisting, though he did register and was classified as underweight, wh=
> ich
>> > probably means he weighed less than 120 pounds. He doesn't seem to have
>> > made any effort to gain weight or bypass the requirement, as Jimmy
>> > Stewart did during WWII.
>>
>> > Have I missed something?
>>
>> > And if _Shoulder Arms_, _The Bond_, and the Liberty Bonds appearances a=
> re
>> > all we have, what do we make of them? Did Chaplin enthusiastically supp=
> ort
>> > the war effort, or did he just hope the war would end as soon as
>> > possible and do what he could to further that end?
>>
>> > When did he develop the idea he expressed in the 1930w that extreme
>> > nationalism or "dangerous patriotism" was an attitude conducive to war?
>>
>> > Connie K.
>>
>> My guess is that Chaplin, like most people in America, was an
>> enthusiastic supporter of America's war effort in WWI and then at some
>> later date came to rethink his position.
>>
>> When he was giving speeches and touring the South hawking war bonds he
>> always struck me as a true believer in the cause of the war. =A0It's
>> interesting that he only showed the same kind of enthusiasm in the
>> next war for a second front that would help the Soviet Union.
>>
>> By the way, there's a new book out on Orson Welles by Joseph McBride
>> that claims that one of the reasons Welles left the U.S. in 1947 was
>> his reaction to McCarthyism. =A0He also claims that Welles made the
>> statement that his participation at a Carnegie Hall rally for a Second
>> Front was because Chaplin misled him as to the nature of the rally.
>>
>> Tom Moran- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Chaplin personally bought $350,000 of Liberty Bonds during the first
> three bond drives, according to Charles J. Maland in CHAPLIN AND
> AMERICAN CULTURE.
> By the time he wrote MY AUTOBIOGRAPHY half a century later, however,
> he remembered the war as a time of "barbarism" in which a "religion of
> war" brought "an avalanche of mad destruction and brutal slaughter."
>

Thanks. I'd forgotten to recheck Maland.

Connie K.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

On Feb 15, 10:01 pm, d....TakeThisOut@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
wrote:
> "Rollo" (garyjohnson...@hotmail.com) writes:
> > Was it not true that Chaplin's patriotism was being sorely questioned
> > by the British press at that time? He was receiving white feathers
> > in
> > the mail and being pillaged by conservative columnists over not
> > caring that his country of orgin was at war.
>
> > When America entered the war he threw himself into war relief partly
> > to stem the tide over the same kind of criticism that he had received
> > from the British.
>
> No doubt he felt some pressure to defuse that kind of criticism. And
> Fairbanks probably had some influence on him as well.

And the two mesh wonderfully. Have you read any of the religious/
motivational tracts Fairbanks wrote? They are the most gawdawful
things you can imagine, incredibly transparent PC statements made no
doubt to counter any negative PR reactions from the Pickford
relationship.

>
> According to Carlyle Robinson, he threw himself into the bonds drive
> enthusiastically at first, but abruptly cut his tour short, while Fairbanks
> and Pickford continued to campaign.
>
> > His feelings towards all wars was pretty well summed up in
> > "Monsieur Verdoux"
>
> > Gary
>
> True, but that was his later view. How much that resembles his view
> during WWI I don't know.
>
> Connie K.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

On Feb 16, 11:48 am, d....RemoveThis@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
wrote:
> "David Totheroh" (dtothe...@aol.com) writes:
> > On Feb 15, 10:01 pm, d....RemoveThis@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
> > wrote:
> >> "Rollo" (garyjohnson...@hotmail.com) writes:
> >> > Was it not true that Chaplin's patriotism was being sorely questioned
> >> > by the British press at that time? He was receiving white feathers
> >> > in
> >> > the mail and being pillaged by conservative columnists over not
> >> > caring that his country of orgin was at war.
>
> >> > When America entered the war he threw himself into war relief partly
> >> > to stem the tide over the same kind of criticism that he had received
> >> > from the British.
>
> >> No doubt he felt some pressure to defuse that kind of criticism. And
> >> Fairbanks probably had some influence on him as well.
>
> > And the two mesh wonderfully. Have you read any of the religious/
> > motivational tracts Fairbanks wrote? They are the most gawdawful
> > things you can imagine, incredibly transparent PC statements made no
> > doubt to counter any negative PR reactions from the Pickford
> > relationship.
>
> I've read enough about those tracts that I've been afraid to read them.
>
> I sometimes wonder what the attraction between Fairbanks and Chaplin
> might have been, but his buoyancy seems to have counteracted Chaplin's
> tendency to brood. Probably he was refreshing company.
>

I didn't mean to imply those tracts reflected who Fairbanks was, only
that they reflected what he, or his people, thought would be great for
his PR.

I might change my mind with a rereading of the early years in My
Autobiography or in Robinson, but I never got a sense from Grandpop's
stories that Chaplin in those pre-The Kid years was a brooder. Life
seemed really, genuinely FUN, and Doug was a big part of that fun.
There were hi-jinx and camraderie, and the serious work of making
'significant' movie star films (even comedies) was still in the future.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

Constance Kuriyama wrote:
> "David Totheroh" (dtotheroh@aol.com) writes:
> > On Feb 16, 11:48 am, d....DeleteThis@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
> > wrote:
> >> "David Totheroh" (dtothe...@aol.com) writes:
> >> > On Feb 15, 10:01 pm, d....DeleteThis@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> "Rollo" (garyjohnson...@hotmail.com) writes:
> >> >> > Was it not true that Chaplin's patriotism was being sorely questioned
> >> >> > by the British press at that time? He was receiving white feathers
> >> >> > in
> >> >> > the mail and being pillaged by conservative columnists over not
> >> >> > caring that his country of orgin was at war.
> >>
> >> >> > When America entered the war he threw himself into war relief partly
> >> >> > to stem the tide over the same kind of criticism that he had received
> >> >> > from the British.
> >>
> >> >> No doubt he felt some pressure to defuse that kind of criticism. And
> >> >> Fairbanks probably had some influence on him as well.
> >>
> >> > And the two mesh wonderfully. Have you read any of the religious/
> >> > motivational tracts Fairbanks wrote? They are the most gawdawful
> >> > things you can imagine, incredibly transparent PC statements made no
> >> > doubt to counter any negative PR reactions from the Pickford
> >> > relationship.
> >>
> >> I've read enough about those tracts that I've been afraid to read them.
> >>
> >> I sometimes wonder what the attraction between Fairbanks and Chaplin
> >> might have been, but his buoyancy seems to have counteracted Chaplin's
> >> tendency to brood. Probably he was refreshing company.
> >>
> >
> > I didn't mean to imply those tracts reflected who Fairbanks was, only
> > that they reflected what he, or his people, thought would be great for
> > his PR.
>
> I understand your point, but from what I've read about Fairbanks in his
> prime he was a positive thinker and a health cultist, so that the tracts
> just magnified (or caricatured) one facet of his personality to project
> a favorable public image.
>
> > I might change my mind with a rereading of the early years in My
> > Autobiography or in Robinson, but I never got a sense from Grandpop's
> > stories that Chaplin in those pre-The Kid years was a brooder. Life
> > seemed really, genuinely FUN, and Doug was a big part of that fun.
> > There were hi-jinx and camraderie, and the serious work of making
> > 'significant' movie star films (even comedies) was still in the future.
>
> I certainly get the impression from Chaplin's 1914 letter to Syd that I
> mentioned earlier that the war, while it concerned him, was far from
> uppermost in his mind then. The letter is full of enthusiasm for his
> success, for his growing wealth, and for the new life he was experiencing,
> while the war is only mentioned in passing.
>
> According to Stan Laurel and other reports of his Karno years he was
> already subject to fits of brooding then, but I don't doubt Rollie's
> recollections either. Chaplin himself recalled the Mutual period as
> perhaps the happiest of his life, so maybe he just did relatively
> little brooding during that period, and having Fairbanks around to add
> to the positive energy couldn't have hurt.
>
> But _Shoulder Arms_ does have elements of satire in it which Huff says
> caused some of Chaplin's associates to advise him not to release it while
> the war was still going on.
>
> Is that there just because the film is a comedy, and comedy is naturally
> inclined to ridicule, or does it reflect Chaplin's own attitudes, which
> he may ahve been better able to articulate in a film than in a literal
> statement because he had not yet contemplated them seriously?

It's a good question. I think my answer would be something like this:
Shoulder Arms is like Leno or Letterman, comedy based on current
events that's funny; Modern Times, The Great Dictator, Monsieur
Verdoux are like Jon Stewart or Steven Colbert, comedy based on
current events that's funny but but also done with a conscious purpose
to have a sociopolitical effect.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

(bachusio@rogers.com) writes:
> On Feb 15, 2:18 am, d....DeleteThis@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
> wrote:
>> My husband recently asked me a question that I couldn't answer in any
>> detail. We know what Chaplin thought about World War II, from _Dictator_,
>> his Second Front speeches, and many other sources. But what did he think about
>> World War I?
>>
>> Apart from _Shoulder Arms_, _The Bond_, and his personal appearances in
>> the Liberty Bonds drive, I can't think of any source of information. He
>> wrote a letter to Syd in 1914 in which he described the war as "terrible"
>> and hoped that Syd would not be drafted, but that doesn't tell us much.
>> One of the interviews in the _Chaplin Interviews_ book mentions that he
>> bought British war bonds as well as US bonds. He was criticized for not
>> enlisting, though he did register and was classified as underweight, which
>> probably means he weighed less than 120 pounds. He doesn't seem to have
>> made any effort to gain weight or bypass the requirement, as Jimmy
>> Stewart did during WWII.
>>
>> Have I missed something?
>>
>> And if _Shoulder Arms_, _The Bond_, and the Liberty Bonds appearances are
>> all we have, what do we make of them? Did Chaplin enthusiastically support
>> the war effort, or did he just hope the war would end as soon as
>> possible and do what he could to further that end?
>>
>> When did he develop the idea he expressed in the 1930w that extreme
>> nationalism or "dangerous patriotism" was an attitude conducive to war?
>>
>> Connie K.
>
> Chaplin says pretty clearly in his Autobio that at outset of the
> 'Great War'
> most people didn't expect it to last more than four months, as surely
> humanity
> wouldn't tolerate the 'ghastly toll' which would result from modern
> warfare.
>
> As the carnage went on uncontrollably, he says people in their
> puzzlement wondered why - surely
> not because of the assassination of the archduke that triggered it
> all.
>
> As the body count spiralled higher, he says that the idea that the war
> was 'making the
> world safe for democracy' was seized upon for the war's rationale.
>
> He seems to have regarded this premise with some dubiety - if not
> at the time of the war, then at the time of writing his Autobio.

It is interesting that he didn't say anything explicit in support of this
ex post facto rationale--at least as far as I know. It's too bad we don't
have the text of his Liberty Bonds speeches.

> This, along with the un-jingoistic depictment of the war in Shoulder
> Arms
> would suggest his desire to see the war end was more inspired by
> wanting
> the carnage to stop, rather than his own patriotic fervor.
>
> It would seem that the arbitrary nature of the war's beginnings, it's
> uncontrollable nature once begun, and its after-the-fact rationale
> likely
> influenced his later distrust of extreme nationalism and his self-
> designation as
> 'peace-monger'.

My husband thinks there is some continuity in his attitude toward war,
but it's hard to find direct evidence before the 1930s.

Connie K.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

"David Totheroh" (dtotheroh@aol.com) writes:
> On Feb 15, 10:01 pm, d... DeleteThis @FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
> wrote:
>> "Rollo" (garyjohnson...@hotmail.com) writes:
>> > Was it not true that Chaplin's patriotism was being sorely questioned
>> > by the British press at that time? He was receiving white feathers
>> > in
>> > the mail and being pillaged by conservative columnists over not
>> > caring that his country of orgin was at war.
>>
>> > When America entered the war he threw himself into war relief partly
>> > to stem the tide over the same kind of criticism that he had received
>> > from the British.
>>
>> No doubt he felt some pressure to defuse that kind of criticism. And
>> Fairbanks probably had some influence on him as well.
>
> And the two mesh wonderfully. Have you read any of the religious/
> motivational tracts Fairbanks wrote? They are the most gawdawful
> things you can imagine, incredibly transparent PC statements made no
> doubt to counter any negative PR reactions from the Pickford
> relationship.

I've read enough about those tracts that I've been afraid to read them.

I sometimes wonder what the attraction between Fairbanks and Chaplin
might have been, but his buoyancy seems to have counteracted Chaplin's
tendency to brood. Probably he was refreshing company.

Connie K.

>> According to Carlyle Robinson, he threw himself into the bonds drive
>> enthusiastically at first, but abruptly cut his tour short, while Fairbanks
>> and Pickford continued to campaign.
>>
>> > His feelings towards all wars was pretty well summed up in
>> > "Monsieur Verdoux"
>>
>> > Gary
>>
>> True, but that was his later view. How much that resembles his view
>> during WWI I don't know.
>>
>> Connie K.
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

"David Totheroh" (dtotheroh@aol.com) writes:
> On Feb 16, 11:48 am, d... RemoveThis @FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
> wrote:
>> "David Totheroh" (dtothe...@aol.com) writes:
>> > On Feb 15, 10:01 pm, d... RemoveThis @FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
>> > wrote:
>> >> "Rollo" (garyjohnson...@hotmail.com) writes:
>> >> > Was it not true that Chaplin's patriotism was being sorely questioned
>> >> > by the British press at that time? He was receiving white feathers
>> >> > in
>> >> > the mail and being pillaged by conservative columnists over not
>> >> > caring that his country of orgin was at war.
>>
>> >> > When America entered the war he threw himself into war relief partly
>> >> > to stem the tide over the same kind of criticism that he had received
>> >> > from the British.
>>
>> >> No doubt he felt some pressure to defuse that kind of criticism. And
>> >> Fairbanks probably had some influence on him as well.
>>
>> > And the two mesh wonderfully. Have you read any of the religious/
>> > motivational tracts Fairbanks wrote? They are the most gawdawful
>> > things you can imagine, incredibly transparent PC statements made no
>> > doubt to counter any negative PR reactions from the Pickford
>> > relationship.
>>
>> I've read enough about those tracts that I've been afraid to read them.
>>
>> I sometimes wonder what the attraction between Fairbanks and Chaplin
>> might have been, but his buoyancy seems to have counteracted Chaplin's
>> tendency to brood. Probably he was refreshing company.
>>
>
> I didn't mean to imply those tracts reflected who Fairbanks was, only
> that they reflected what he, or his people, thought would be great for
> his PR.

I understand your point, but from what I've read about Fairbanks in his
prime he was a positive thinker and a health cultist, so that the tracts
just magnified (or caricatured) one facet of his personality to project
a favorable public image.

> I might change my mind with a rereading of the early years in My
> Autobiography or in Robinson, but I never got a sense from Grandpop's
> stories that Chaplin in those pre-The Kid years was a brooder. Life
> seemed really, genuinely FUN, and Doug was a big part of that fun.
> There were hi-jinx and camraderie, and the serious work of making
> 'significant' movie star films (even comedies) was still in the future.

I certainly get the impression from Chaplin's 1914 letter to Syd that I
mentioned earlier that the war, while it concerned him, was far from
uppermost in his mind then. The letter is full of enthusiasm for his
success, for his growing wealth, and for the new life he was experiencing,
while the war is only mentioned in passing.

According to Stan Laurel and other reports of his Karno years he was
already subject to fits of brooding then, but I don't doubt Rollie's
recollections either. Chaplin himself recalled the Mutual period as
perhaps the happiest of his life, so maybe he just did relatively
little brooding during that period, and having Fairbanks around to add
to the positive energy couldn't have hurt.

But _Shoulder Arms_ does have elements of satire in it which Huff says
caused some of Chaplin's associates to advise him not to release it while
the war was still going on.

Is that there just because the film is a comedy, and comedy is naturally
inclined to ridicule, or does it reflect Chaplin's own attitudes, which
he may ahve been better able to articulate in a film than in a literal
statement because he had not yet contemplated them seriously?

Connie K.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

David Totheroh wrote:

> Have you read any of the religious/
> motivational tracts Fairbanks wrote? They are the most gawdawful
> things you can imagine, incredibly transparent PC statements made no
> doubt to counter any negative PR reactions from the Pickford
> relationship.


Oh, I don't know... LAUGH AND LIVE is the only one I've read, but
it really does summarize Fairbanks' personal philosophy: physical
vigor, cheerfulness and a positive outlook. I doubt that he actually
sat down and wrote the thing, but it does reflect his actual beliefs,
and it's a pretty constructive book. It reads like an old-fashioned
first draft of THE POWER OF POSITIVE THINKING, thirty years ahead of
Norman Vincent Peale.

There may have been a cynical motivation behind the books, but
I'd guess that it was cashing in on sudden fame, rather than anything
concerning Mary Pickford. Their relationship wasn't widely known in
1917; by the time it *was* widely known a couple years or so later,
books written under Doug's name were no longer appearing.

By the way, David, you woulda loved this first day of the Niles
comedy festival! Sprague Anderson was passing around a bunch of rare
silent cinematographer stills at dinner, and Richard has some
interesting info about Syd... good stuff.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I 

"David Totheroh" (dtotheroh@aol.com) writes:
> Constance Kuriyama wrote:
>> "David Totheroh" (dtotheroh@aol.com) writes:
>> > On Feb 16, 11:48 am, d....DeleteThis@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
>> > wrote:
>> >> "David Totheroh" (dtothe...@aol.com) writes:
>> >> > On Feb 15, 10:01 pm, d....DeleteThis@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Constance Kuriyama)
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> "Rollo" (garyjohnson...@hotmail.com) writes:
>> >> >> > Was it not true that Chaplin's patriotism was being sorely questioned
>> >> >> > by the British press at that time? He was receiving white feathers
>> >> >> > in
>> >> >> > the mail and being pillaged by conservative columnists over not
>> >> >> > caring that his country of orgin was at war.
>> >>
>> >> >> > When America entered the war he threw himself into war relief partly
>> >> >> > to stem the tide over the same kind of criticism that he had received
>> >> >> > from the British.
>> >>
>> >> >> No doubt he felt some pressure to defuse that kind of criticism. And
>> >> >> Fairbanks probably had some influence on him as well.
>> >>
>> >> > And the two mesh wonderfully. Have you read any of the religious/
>> >> > motivational tracts Fairbanks wrote? They are the most gawdawful
>> >> > things you can imagine, incredibly transparent PC statements made no
>> >> > doubt to counter any negative PR reactions from the Pickford
>> >> > relationship.
>> >>
>> >> I've read enough about those tracts that I've been afraid to read them.
>> >>
>> >> I sometimes wonder what the attraction between Fairbanks and Chaplin
>> >> might have been, but his buoyancy seems to have counteracted Chaplin's
>> >> tendency to brood. Probably he was refreshing company.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I didn't mean to imply those tracts reflected who Fairbanks was, only
>> > that they reflected what he, or his people, thought would be great for
>> > his PR.
>>
>> I understand your point, but from what I've read about Fairbanks in his
>> prime he was a positive thinker and a health cultist, so that the tracts
>> just magnified (or caricatured) one facet of his personality to project
>> a favorable public image.
>>
>> > I might change my mind with a rereading of the early years in My
>> > Autobiography or in Robinson, but I never got a sense from Grandpop's
>> > stories that Chaplin in those pre-The Kid years was a brooder. Life
>> > seemed really, genuinely FUN, and Doug was a big part of that fun.
>> > There were hi-jinx and camraderie, and the serious work of making
>> > 'significant' movie star films (even comedies) was still in the future.
>>
>> I certainly get the impression from Chaplin's 1914 letter to Syd that I
>> mentioned earlier that the war, while it concerned him, was far from
>> uppermost in his mind then. The letter is full of enthusiasm for his
>> success, for his growing wealth, and for the new life he was experiencing,
>> while the war is only mentioned in passing.
>>
>> According to Stan Laurel and other reports of his Karno years he was
>> already subject to fits of brooding then, but I don't doubt Rollie's
>> recollections either. Chaplin himself recalled the Mutual period as
>> perhaps the happiest of his life, so maybe he just did relatively
>> little brooding during that period, and having Fairbanks around to add
>> to the positive energy couldn't have hurt.
>>
>> But _Shoulder Arms_ does have elements of satire in it which Huff says
>> caused some of Chaplin's associates to advise him not to release it while
>> the war was still going on.
>>
>> Is that there just because the film is a comedy, and comedy is naturally
>> inclined to ridicule, or does it reflect Chaplin's own attitudes, which
>> he may ahve been better able to articulate in a film than in a literal
>> statement because he had not yet contemplated them seriously?
>
> It's a good question. I think my answer would be something like this:
> Shoulder Arms is like Leno or Letterman, comedy based on current
> events that's funny; Modern Times, The Great Dictator, Monsieur
> Verdoux are like Jon Stewart or Steven Colbert, comedy based on
> current events that's funny but but also done with a conscious purpose
> to have a sociopolitical effect.

I'd say Leno has a little more serious purpose behind a lot of his humor
than Letterman, though I doubt that he expects to reform American education
and eating habits.

Connie K.
 >> Stay informed about: Chaplin and World War I