The Reflection of Chaplin within The Circus

The Circus (1928), in its simplest form, is about a wandering man who accidentally becomes the celebrated star of a circus show. The film in itself provides the same humor one would expect of Chaplin’s films, dependent on exaggeration and slapstick humor. However, there is also a depth to the story that, to an extent, illustrates a sense of introspection by Charlie Chaplin himself, combining elements of fiction and abstract biographical reflections. Through descriptions found in the New York Times (1928) and the Times of London (1928) as well as the film itself, one could infer that The Circus is a representation of cinema, in which the circus is the cinema, the performances are the film, and the performers are the actors, all the while illustrating Chaplin’s own impact on the industry (and potential downfall) through the adventures of “The Tramp”.

The context of the movie, an impoverished man entering an entertainment industry, reflects Chaplin’s own introduction to cinema. The Tramp enters the circus in order to escape a misguided policeman, yet his reasons for staying are resemblant of Chaplin’s own words (and reasons for entering the cinematic industry), “Besides, it would mean a new life.” Driven by the prospect of having a life that is different to his unimpressive origin, the Tramp agrees to partake in this form of entertainment. As a result, he quickly catapults into success; the quirks of his character amusing the audience. As Mordaunt Hall puts it in “A Clown As An Artist”, the Tramp is “perceived as a woebegoneness spectacle at whom you look with mingled feelings of merriment and pity.” That perception from the spectators of cinema parallels that of the circus’ audience, who find pleasure in the Tramp’s misfortune, appreciating it as entertainment in itself. The circus reflects the early stages of cinema, in which the viewers seek to be mesmerized by the artful deception of each act, such as when the Tramp brings out the magician’s table, only to accidentally unveil the contraption behind the illusion. Charlie Chaplin (and within The Circus, the Tramp) defies this traditional form of entertainment by imbuing a sense of empathy into the audience, taking favor of emotionally-guided theatrics rather than deceptive tricks. It is in this new style, that Chaplin, and correspondingly the Tramp, develop a unique method that sets them apart from the expectations of their respective productions while also providing an outlook on their individual entertainment’s reliance on traditionalism.

By delving further into the milieu of the circus, the Tramp unveils another layer of cinema that reflects the individual circus acts as representations of the media of film. As the Times of London describes in their analysis of the film, “What a failure! But what a brilliant success,” in regards to the Tramp’s unintentional comedic performance. It is in the Tramp’s failure to conform to the expectations of circus acts, a parallel to Chaplin’s own stylized version of acting, do character and creator find success. Hall elaborates on this in his aforementioned article, with “Chaplin has the the brilliant idea of pitting his fun-making ability against that of average circus clowns,” illustrating a new form of entertainment that breaks the traditional values held by the respective productions (circus and cinema). The circus, at first, struggles to maintain the audience’s fascination, a parallel to the desires of cinematic spectators in which traditionalism has the capacity to lead to a loss of interest. The audience assumes change to be development, the latter of which they inherently crave. Thus, both Chaplin and the Tramp provide that through their emotionally-tied performances, further developing the format of entertainment into something that differs from expectation by allowing themselves to satirize the media they are dependent on. Chaplin and the Tramp do this through extravagant acting and characterization, all while remaining empathetic, countering the tired acts of performers before them, those who seemed to replicate rather than innovate. This innovation was done through the creation of a character, one that transcended films (and circus acts) and as result, established a distinguished identity of its own, allowing the performer to become more important than the performance.

In both reality, and The Circus, Chaplin seeks to create a character that transcends each individual performance, creating a sense of recognition that places more emphasis on the character itself rather than the act it partakes in. As Hall describes in his article, “Neither the lion stunt nor the tightrope sequence is new, but the way in which Chaplin depicts them is so well thought up that they are irresistible,” in that it is the redesigned depiction that leads to innovation. Rather than altering the form of entertainment, both Chaplin and the Tramp innovate by providing an alternate, slightly more self-aware spin on derivative tropes. The Tramp inadvertently reveals the ruse behind the tricks as Chaplin alters perceptions of vagrancy, both using their persona (the Tramp unintentionally) to illustrate this alternate take on established entertainment. Times of London illustrates the Tramp, “First you see the back — the slightly eccentric waist, the unmistakable trousers, the bowler hat, the cane,” with a sense of awareness based simply on his attire, highlighting the features that Chaplin maintains with the character in order to keep him recognizable through consistency (no matter the plot). The character is what the audience yearns for rather than the act, allowing the character/actor to redesign their respective entertainment while still retaining the attention of the spectators. Yet, both Chaplin and the Tramp realize that, as mentioned previously, the audience will eventually crave change as a form of development. The Tramp’s final act, walking on a tightrope to please the woman of his affection and the audience, can be seen as a metaphor to Chaplin’s own attempt to reach higher stakes in order to satisfy this demand (of change) which although successful, is a risky endeavor that nearly ends in catastrophe. The Tramp’s inability to conform to his values, as well as the entire tight-rope fiasco in order to compete with Rex (the newest development — a seasoned tight-rope walker) can be seen as a reflection of Chaplin’s own fears, in that one day he too will be superseded by someone who offers a change he simply cannot gravitate towards (which judging from the time period, could be the possible introduction of sound in film). Thus, the traveling circus leaves and the Tramp is left to himself, an ode to the difficulty of remaining relevant in an industry that is constantly evolving.

Through The Circus, Chaplin manages to incorporate several reflections of his own experience within the industry. The film can be seen as an illustration of his rise in cinema due his implementation of innovation that redesigned traditional expectations through the incorporation of a character that transcends the film (and circus act) and establishes that character as the source of attraction. Through this, the viewer is presented with an impression of the cinematic industry in the form of a circus (the cinema itself), the performances (the film), and the performers (the actor). However, it is the source of his rise that Chaplin illustrates will also be the reason behind his impending downfall, as change is necessary, yet impossible for him or the Tramp to consistently keep up with.

Bibliography

Chaplin, C. and Robinson, D. (2012). My Autobiography. Brooklyn, NY: Melville House Publishing, pp.138-139.

Hall, M. (1928). A Clown As An Artist. New York Times, p.111.

Times of London (1928). "The Circus." p.14.