The legacy of Charlie Chaplin

The world knew him for his blackand-white silent films, but arguably Charlie Chaplin spoke volumes more about life (in all its Technicolor glory, ironically) than his counterparts did in talkies. Born on April 16, 1889, fans love to tell the story of how the star first stumbled onto the stage at the age of five to cover for his mother, who suddenly found herself unable to complete the show. But what he’s most loved for today is that he never failed to give his viewers every reason to smile.

We spoke to Kate Guyonvarch, managing director of the Chaplin Office – Roy Export SAS in Paris, about Chaplin’s penchant for perfectionism, his iconic Tramp character, and a legacy that shows no signs of slowing down, more than 130 years later.

Charlie Chaplin is credited with elevating the industry in a way few could have imagined. Was that something he himself dreamed of?

Chaplin was a perfectionist in his work, so he worked on a film until he felt it was how he wanted it to be. I don’t believe he did that to elevate the industry, even though that may have been one of the effects of such perfectionism. The Kid, for example, released in 1921, was arguably the first film ever to combine comedy and pathos — which seems extraordinary to us now. In those days, you either made comedy or tragedy/drama; you never mixed the two. Chaplin wanted his films to resemble real life.

At the height of his popularity, his persona as The Tramp was said to be the most recognisable image in the world. What was it about him that made him so iconic across all manner of cross-cultural boundaries?

There was nothing particularly original about a jacket, trousers, waistcoat, big shoes, hat and cane: theatre and music hall performers had worn similar costumes for decades. Yet, as Chaplin himself noted in his autobiography, the costume made the character many-sided: “a tramp, a gentleman, a poet, a dreamer, a lonely fellow, always hopeful of romance and adventure. He would have you believe he is a scientist, a musician, a duke, and a polo-player. However, he is not above picking up cigarette butts or robbing a baby of its candy.” This is the key to his universal appeal. Today, the Tramp has come to represent not only the ragged, mischievous, resilient character from his films, but also Charlie Chaplin’s own humanism, humour and modernism.

The great irony is how he was widely identified as an unhappy man who made millions smile. His films helped take his audience’s minds off their sorrows. Were they an escape for Chaplin too?

He was not particularly unhappy so, no, not an escape. Work was essential to him; it was impossible for him to live without working.

He was famous for his bumbling character on screen, but, behind the camera, he was the ultimate perfectionist — even famously doing 342 takes for a single scene in City Lights. Today, we consider that part and parcel of the genius he was, but did such a work ethic go down well with the cast of his films?

“Chaplin was a perfectionist, so he worked on a film until he felt it was how he wanted it to be. He wanted his films to resemble real life” — Kate

Actually, we now think, after research in the archives, that it was closer to 400 takes for that scene! Nevertheless, he had a team of actors on the payroll who’d worked for him for years, including Edna Purviance and Henry Bergman. His cameraman Rollie Totheroh started with him in 1915 and continued till 1952. I assume the actors understood what he was trying to achieve and, therefore, did what he asked of them. The only example of a real clash is with Marlon Brando in 1966 for The Countess from Hong Kong, as Brando did not appreciate Chaplin telling him how to act his part. Sophie Loren, on the other hand, co-star of the same film, adored Chaplin.

Did he really once enter and lose a Charlie Chaplin look-alike contest?

The only real reference I have seen to this story is in press clippings from 1918, when Mary Pickford was in London at an Anglo Saxon Club dinner, and told a story to Lord Desborough who repeated it to the press that Charles Chaplin entered a Chaplin walk contest at a fair in the US and came in 20th. This anecdote, told by Lord Desborough (whoever he may have been) was quite widely reported in the British press at the time.

There are no other references to such a competition in any other press clipping albums that I have seen, so I can only assume that this is the source of that rumour.

However, I believe it is also written in Charles Chaplin Jr’s book, My Father, that he entered a competition and came in third — and presumably his father would have told him that?

What would you say makes Charlie Chaplin different from all the other legendary film stars that followed?

I don’t know about the ones that followed, but the huge film stars of his time — Douglas Fairbanks or Mary Pickford, for example, who were greeted by enormous crowds when they travelled to Europe in the early 1920s, just like Chaplin was — are barely known today, except to silent film fans; neither are their films, whereas Chaplin is still recognised worldwide and his films are regularly screened. His appeal was and is timeless.