Chapter XXI--The Acceptable Year of the Lord. If I may be pardoned for

referring again to the same book, I assumed, in The Golden Book of

Springfield, Illinois, that the Acceptable Year of the Lord would come

for my city beginning November 1, 2018, and that up to that time, amid

much of joy, there would also be much of thwarting and tribulation. But

in the beginning of that mystic November, the Soul of My City, named

Avanel, would become as much a part of the city as Pallas Athena was

Athens, and indeed I wrote into the book much of the spirit of the

photoplay outlined, pages 147 through 150. But in The Golden Book I

changed the lady the city worshipped from a golden image into a living,

breathing young girl, descendant of that great American, Daniel Boone,

and her name, obviously, Avanel Boone. With her tribe she incarnates all

the mystic ideals of the Boones of Kentucky.

All this but a prelude to saying that I have just passed through the city

of Santa Fe, New Mexico. It is a Santa Fe full of the glory of the New

Architecture of which I have spoken, and the issuing of a book of cowboy

songs collected, and many of them written, by N. Howard Thorp, a citizen

of Santa Fe, and thrilling with the issuing of a book of poems about the

Glory of New Mexico. This book is called Red Earth. It is by Alice Corbin

Henderson. And Santa Fe is full of the glory of a magnificent State

Capitol that is an art gallery of the whole southwest, and the glories of

the studio of William Penhallow Henderson, who has painted our New Arabia

more splendidly than it was ever painted before, with the real character

thereof, and no theatricals. This is just the kind of a town I hoped for

when I wrote my first draft of The Art of the Moving Picture. Here now is

literature and art. When they become one art as of old in Egypt, we will

have New Mexico Hieroglyphics from the Hendersons and their kind, and

their surrounding Indian pupils, a basis for the American Motion Picture

more acceptable, and more patriotic, and more organic for us than the

Egyptian.

And I come the same month to Denver, and find a New Art Museum projected,

which I hope has much indeed to do with the Acceptable Year of the Lord,

when films as vital as the Santa Fe songs and pictures and architecture

can be made, and in common spirit with them, in this New Arabia. George

W. Eggers, the director of the newly projected Denver Art Museum, assures

me that a photoplay policy can be formulated, amid the problems of such

an all around undertaking as building a great Art Museum in Denver. He

expects to give the photoplay the attention a new art deserves,

especially when it affects almost every person in the whole country. So I

prophesy Denver to be the Museum and Art-school capital of New Arabia, as

Santa Fe is the artistic, architectural, and song capital at this hour.

And I hope it may become the motion picture capital of America from the

standpoint of pure art, not manufacture.

What do I mean by New Arabia?

When I was in London in the fall of 1920 the editor of The Landmark, the

organ of The English Speaking Union, asked me to draw my map of the

United States. I marked out the various regions under various names. For

instance I called the coast states, Washington, Oregon, and California,

New Italy. The reasons may be found in the chapter in this book on

California. Then I named the states just west of the Middle West, and

east of New Italy, New Arabia. These states are New Mexico, Arizona,

Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana. These are the states which

carry the Rocky Mountains north toward the Aurora Borealis, and south

toward the tropics. Here individualism, Andrew Jacksonism, will forever

prevail, and American standardization can never prevail. In cabins that

cannot be reached by automobile and deserts that cannot be crossed by

boulevards, the John the Baptists, the hermits and the prophets can

strengthen their souls. Here are lonely places as sweet for the spirit as

was little old New Salem, Illinois, one hundred years ago, or the

wilderness in which walked Johnny Appleseed.

Now it is the independence of Spirit of this New Arabia that I hope the

Denver Art Museum can interpret in its photoplay films, and send them on

circuits to the Art Museums springing up all over America, where

sculpture, architecture, and painting are now constantly sent on circuit.

Let that already established convention--the "circuit-exhibition"--be

applied to this new art.

And after Denver has shown the way, I devoutly hope that Great City of

Los Angeles may follow her example. Consider, O Great City of Los

Angeles, now almost the equal of New York in power and splendor,

consider what it would do for the souls of all your film artists if you

projected just such a museum as Denver is now projecting. Your fate is

coming toward you. Denver is halfway between Chicago, with the greatest

art institute in the country, and Los Angeles, the natural capital of the

photoplay. The art museums of America should rule the universities, and

the photoplay studios as well. In the art museums should be set the final

standards of civic life, rather than in any musty libraries or routine

classrooms. And the great weapon of the art museums of all the land

should be the hieroglyphic of the future, the truly artistic photoplay.

And now for book two, at length. It is a detailed analysis of the films,

first proclaimed in 1915, and never challenged or overthrown, and, for

the most part, accepted intact by the photoplay people, and the critics

and the theorists, as well.

BOOK II--THE UNCHALLENGED OUTLINE OF PHOTOPLAY CRITICAL METHOD

CHAPTER I

THE POINT OF VIEW

While there is a great deal of literary reference in all the following

argument, I realize, looking back over many attempts to paraphrase it for

various audiences, that its appeal is to those who spend the best part of

their student life in classifying, and judging, and producing works of

sculpture, painting, and architecture. I find the eyes of all others

wandering when I make talks upon the plastic artist's point of view.

This book tries to find that fourth dimension of architecture, painting,

and sculpture, which is the human soul in action, that arrow with wings

which is the flash of fire from the film, or the heart of man, or

Pygmalion's image, when it becomes a woman.

The 1915 edition was used by Victor O. Freeburg as one of the text-books

in the Columbia University School of Journalism, in his classes in

photoplay writing. I was invited several times to address those classes

on my yearly visits to New York. I have addressed many other academic

classes, the invitation being based on this book. Now I realize that

those who approach the theory from the general University standpoint, or

from the history of the drama, had best begin with Freeburg's book, for

he is not only learned in both matters, but presents the special

analogies with skill. Freeburg has an excellent education in the history

of music, and some of the happiest passages in his work relate the

photoplay to the musical theory of the world, as my book relates it to

the general Art Museum point of view of the world. Emphatically, my book

belongs in the Art Institutes as a beginning, or in such religious and

civic bodies as think architecturally. From there it must work its way

out. Of course those bodies touch on a thousand others.

The work is being used as one basis of the campaign for the New Denver

Art Museum, and I like to tell the story of how George W. Eggers of

Denver first began to apply the book when the Director of the Art

Institute, Chicago, that it may not seem to the merely University type of

mind a work of lost abstractions. One of the most gratifying recognitions

I ever received was the invitation to talk on the films in Fullerton

Hall, Chicago Art Institute. Then there came invitations to speak at

Chicago University, and before the Fortnightly Club, Chicago, all around

1916-17. One difficulty was getting the film to _prove_ my case from out

the commercial whirl. I talked at these three and other places, but

hardly knew how to go about crossing the commercial bridge. At last, with

the cooperation of Director Eggers, we staged, in the sacred precincts of

Fullerton Hall, Mae Marsh in The Wild Girl of the Sierras. The film was

in battered condition, and was turned so fast I could not talk with it

satisfactorily and fulfil the well-known principles of chapter fourteen.

But at least I had converted one Art Institute Director to the idea that

an ex-student of the Institute could not only write a book about

painting-in-motion, but the painting could be shown in an Art Museum as

promise of greater things in this world. It took a deal of will and

breaking of precedent, on the part of all concerned, to show this film,

The Wild Girl of the Sierras, and I retired from the field a long time.

But now this same Eggers is starting, in Denver, an Art Museum from its

very foundations, but on the same constructive scale. So this enterprise,

in my fond and fatuous fancy, is associated with the sweet Mae Marsh as

The Wild Girl of the Sierras--one of the loveliest bits of poetry ever

put into screen or fable.

For about one year, off and on, I had the honor to be the photoplay

critic of The New Republic, this invitation also based on the first

edition of this book. Looking back upon that experience I am delighted to

affirm that not only The New Republic constituency but the world of the

college and the university where I moved at that time, while at loss for

a policy, were not only willing but eager to take the films with

seriousness.

But when I was through with all these dashes into the field, and went

back to reciting verses again, no one had given me any light as to who

should make the disinterested, non-commercial film for these immediate

times, the film that would class, in our civilization, with The New

Republic or The Atlantic Monthly or the poems of Edwin Arlington

Robinson. That is, the production not for the trade, but for the soul.

Anita Loos, that good crusader, came out several years ago with the

flaming announcement that there was now hope, since a school of films had

been heavily endowed for the University of Rochester. The school was to

be largely devoted to producing music for the photoplay, in defiance of

chapter fourteen. But incidentally there were to be motion pictures made

to fit good music. Neither music nor films have as yet shaken the world.

I liked this Rochester idea. I felt that once it was started the films

would take their proper place and dominate the project, disinterested

non-commercial films to be classed with the dramas so well stimulated by

the great drama department under Professor Baker of Harvard.

As I look back over this history I see that the printed page had counted

too much, and the real forces of the visible arts in America had not been

definitely enlisted. They should take the lead. I would suggest as the

three people to interview first on building any Art Museum Photoplay

project: Victor Freeburg, with his long experience of teaching the

subject in Columbia, and John Emerson and Anita Loos, who are as brainy

as people dare to be and still remain in the department store film

business. No three people would more welcome opportunities to outline the

idealistic possibilities of this future art. And a well-known American

painter was talking to me of a midnight scolding Charlie Chaplin gave to

some Los Angeles producer, in a little restaurant, preaching the really

beautiful film, and denouncing commerce like a member of Coxey's

illustrious army. And I have heard rumors from all sides that Charlie

Chaplin has a soul. He is the comedian most often proclaimed an artist by

the fastidious, and most often forgiven for his slapstick. He is praised

for a kind of O. Henry double meaning to his antics. He is said to be

like one of O. Henry's misquotations of the classics. He looks to me like

that artist Edgar Poe, if Poe had been obliged to make millions laugh. I

do not like Chaplin's work, but I have to admit the good intentions and

the enviable laurels. Let all the Art Museums invite him in, as tentative

adviser, if not a chastened performer. Let him be given as good a chance

as Mae Marsh was given by Eggers in Fullerton Hall. Only let him come in

person, not in film, till we hear him speak, and consider his

suggestions, and make sure he has eaten of the mystic Amaranth Apples of

Johnny Appleseed.

CHAPTER II

THE PHOTOPLAY OF ACTION

Let us assume, friendly reader, that it is eight o'clock in the evening

when you make yourself comfortable in your den, to peruse this chapter. I

want to tell you about the Action Film, the simplest, the type most often

seen. In the mind of the habitué of the cheaper theatre it is the only

sort in existence. It dominates the slums, is announced there by red and

green posters of the melodrama sort, and retains its original elements,

more deftly handled, in places more expensive. The story goes at the

highest possible speed to be still credible. When it is a poor thing,

which is the case too often, the St. Vitus dance destroys the

pleasure-value. The rhythmic quality of the picture-motions is twitched

to death. In the bad photoplay even the picture of an express train more

than exaggerates itself. Yet when the photoplay chooses to behave it can

reproduce a race far more joyously than the stage. On that fact is based

the opportunity of this form. Many Action Pictures are indoors, but the

abstract theory of the Action Film is based on the out-of-door chase. You

remember the first one you saw where the policeman pursues the comical

tramp over hill and dale and across the town lots. You remember that

other where the cowboy follows the horse thief across the desert, spies

him at last and chases him faster, faster, faster, and faster, and

finally catches him. If the film was made in the days before the National

Board of Censorship, it ends with the cowboy cheerfully hanging the

villain; all details given to the last kick of the deceased.

One of the best Action Pictures is an old Griffith Biograph, recently

reissued, the story entitled "Man's Genesis." In the time when

cave-men-gorillas had no weapons, Weak-Hands (impersonated by Robert

Harron) invents the stone club. He vanquishes his gorilla-like rival,

Brute-Force (impersonated by Wilfred Lucas). Strange but credible manners

and customs of the cave-men are detailed. They live in picturesque caves.

Their half-monkey gestures are wonderful to see. But these things are

beheld on the fly. It is the chronicle of a race between the brain of

Weak-Hands and the body of the other, symbolized by the chasing of poor

Weak-Hands in and out among the rocks until the climax. Brain desperately

triumphs. Weak-Hands slays Brute-Force with the startling invention. He

wins back his stolen bride, Lily-White (impersonated by Mae Marsh). It is

a Griffith masterpiece, and every actor does sound work. The audience,

mechanical Americans, fond of crawling on their stomachs to tinker their

automobiles, are eager over the evolution of the first weapon from a

stick to a hammer. They are as full of curiosity as they could well be

over the history of Langley or the Wright brothers.

The dire perils of the motion pictures provoke the ingenuity of the

audience, not their passionate sympathy. When, in the minds of the

deluded producers, the beholders should be weeping or sighing with

desire, they are prophesying the next step to one another in worldly

George Ade slang. This is illustrated in another good Action Photoplay:

the dramatization of The Spoilers. The original novel was written by Rex

Beach. The gallant William Farnum as Glenister dominates the play. He has

excellent support. Their team-work makes them worthy of chronicle: Thomas

Santschi as McNamara, Kathlyn Williams as Cherry Malotte, Bessie Eyton

as Helen Chester, Frank Clark as Dextry, Wheeler Oakman as Bronco Kid,

and Jack McDonald as Slapjack.

There are, in The Spoilers, inspiriting ocean scenes and mountain views.

There are interesting sketches of mining-camp manners and customs. There

is a well-acted love-interest in it, and the element of the comradeship

of loyal pals. But the chase rushes past these things to the climax, as

in a policeman picture it whirls past blossoming gardens and front lawns

till the tramp is arrested. The difficulties are commented on by the

people in the audience as rah-rah boys on the side lines comment on

hurdles cleared or knocked over by the men running in college field-day.

The sudden cut-backs into side branches of the story are but hurdles

also, not plot complications in the stage sense. This is as it should be.

The pursuit progresses without St. Vitus dance or hysteria to the end of

the film. There the spoilers are discomfited, the gold mine is

recaptured, the incidental girls are won, in a flash, by the rightful

owners.

These shows work like the express elevators in the Metropolitan Tower.

The ideal is the maximum of speed in descending or ascending, not to be

jolted into insensibility. There are two girl parts as beautifully

thought out as the parts of ladies in love can be expected to be in

Action Films. But in the end the love is not much more romantic in the

eye of the spectator than it would be to behold a man on a motorcycle

with the girl of his choice riding on the same machine behind him. And

the highest type of Action Picture romance is not attained by having

Juliet triumph over the motorcycle handicap. It is not achieved by

weaving in a Sherlock Holmes plot. Action Picture romance comes when each

hurdle is a tableau, when there is indeed an art-gallery-beauty in each

one of these swift glimpses: when it is a race, but with a proper and

golden-linked grace from action to action, and the goal is the most

beautiful glimpse in the whole reel.

In the Action Picture there is no adequate means for the development of

any full grown personal passion. The distinguished character-study that

makes genuine the personal emotions in the legitimate drama, has no

chance. People are but types, swiftly moved chessmen. More elaborate

discourse on this subject may be found in chapter twelve on the

differences between the films and the stage. But here, briefly: the

Action Pictures are falsely advertised as having heart-interest, or

abounding in tragedy. But though the actors glower and wrestle and even

if they are the most skilful lambasters in the profession, the audience

gossips and chews gum.

Why does the audience keep coming to this type of photoplay if neither

lust, love, hate, nor hunger is adequately conveyed? Simply because such

spectacles gratify the incipient or rampant speed-mania in every

American.

To make the elevator go faster than the one in the Metropolitan Tower is

to destroy even this emotion. To elaborate unduly any of the agonies or

seductions in the hope of arousing lust, love, hate, or hunger, is to

produce on the screen a series of misplaced figures of the order

Frankenstein.

How often we have been horrified by these galvanized and ogling corpses.

These are the things that cause the outcry for more censors. It is not

that our moral codes are insulted, but what is far worse, our nervous

systems are temporarily racked to pieces. These wriggling half-dead men,

these over-bloody burglars, are public nuisances, no worse and no better

than dead cats being hurled about by street urchins.

The cry for more censors is but the cry for the man with the broom.

Sometimes it is a matter as simple as when a child is scratching with a

pin on a slate. While one would not have the child locked up by the chief

of police, after five minutes of it almost every one wants to smack him

till his little jaws ache. It is the very cold-bloodedness of the

proceeding that ruins our kindness of heart. And the best Action Film is

impersonal and unsympathetic even if it has no scratching pins. Because

it is cold-blooded it must take extra pains to be tactful. Cold-blooded

means that the hero as we see him on the screen is a variety of amiable

or violent ghost. Nothing makes his lack of human charm plainer than when

we as audience enter the theatre at the middle of what purports to be the

most passionate of scenes when the goal of the chase is unknown to us and

the alleged "situation" appeals on its magnetic merits. Here is neither

the psychic telepathy of Forbes Robertson's Cæsar, nor the fire-breath of

E.H. Sothern's Don Quixote. The audience is not worked up into the

deadly still mob-unity of the speaking theatre. We late comers wait for

the whole reel to start over and the goal to be indicated in the

preliminary, before we can get the least bit wrought up. The prize may

be a lady's heart, the restoration of a lost reputation, or the ownership

of the patent for a churn. In the more effective Action Plays it is often

what would be secondary on the stage, the recovery of a certain glove,

spade, bull-calf, or rock-quarry. And to begin, we are shown a clean-cut

picture of said glove, spade, bull-calf, or rock-quarry. Then when these

disappear from ownership or sight, the suspense continues till they are

again visible on the screen in the hands of the rightful owner.

In brief, the actors hurry through what would be tremendous passions on

the stage to recover something that can be really photographed. For

instance, there came to our town long ago a film of a fight between

Federals and Confederates, with the loss of many lives, all for the

recapture of a steam-engine that took on more personality in the end than

private or general on either side, alive or dead. It was based on the

history of the very engine photographed, or else that engine was given in

replica. The old locomotive was full of character and humor amidst the

tragedy, leaking steam at every orifice. The original is in one of the

Southern Civil War museums. This engine in its capacity as a principal

actor is going to be referred to more than several times in this work.

The highest type of Action Picture gives us neither the quality of

Macbeth or Henry Fifth, the Comedy of Errors, or the Taming of the Shrew.

It gives us rather that fine and special quality that was in the

ink-bottle of Robert Louis Stevenson, that brought about the limitations

and the nobility of the stories of Kidnapped, Treasure Island, and the

New Arabian Nights.

This discussion will be resumed on another plane in the eighth chapter:

Sculpture-in-Motion.

Having read thus far, why not close the book and go round the corner to a

photoplay theatre? Give the preference to the cheapest one. _The Action

Picture will be inevitable. Since this chapter was written, Charlie

Chaplin and Douglas Fairbanks have given complete department store

examples of the method, especially Chaplin in the brilliantly constructed

Shoulder Arms, and Fairbanks in his one great piece of acting, in The

Three Musketeers_.

CHAPTER III

THE INTIMATE PHOTOPLAY

Let us take for our platform this sentence: THE MOTION PICTURE ART IS A

GREAT HIGH ART, NOT A PROCESS OF COMMERCIAL MANUFACTURE. The people I

hope to convince of this are (1) The great art museums of America,

including the people who support them in any way, the people who give the

current exhibitions there or attend them, the art school students in the

corridors below coming on in the same field; (2) the departments of

English, of the history of the drama, of the practice of the drama, and

the history and practice of "art" in that amazingly long list of our

colleges and universities--to be found, for instance, in the World

Almanac; (3) the critical and literary world generally. Somewhere in this

enormous field, piled with endowments mountain high, it should be

possible to establish the theory and practice of the photoplay as a fine

art. Readers who do not care for the history of any art, readers who

have neither curiosity nor aspiration in regard to any of the ten or

eleven muses who now dance around Apollo, such shabby readers had best

lay the book down now. Shabby readers do not like great issues. My poor

little sermon is concerned with a great issue, the clearing of the way

for a critical standard, whereby the ultimate photoplay may be judged. I

cannot teach office-boys ways to make "quick money" in the "movies." That

seems to be the delicately implied purpose of the mass of books on the

photoplay subject. They are, indeed, a sickening array. Freeburg's book

is one of the noble exceptions. And I have paid tribute elsewhere to John

Emerson and Anita Loos. They have written a crusading book, and many

crusading articles.

After five years of exceedingly lonely art study, in which I had always

specialized in museum exhibits, prowling around like a lost dog, I began

to intensify my museum study, and at the same time shout about what I was

discovering. From nineteen hundred and five on I did orate my opinions to

a group of advanced students. We assembled weekly for several winters in

the Metropolitan Museum, New York, for the discussion of the

masterpieces in historic order, from Egypt to America. From that

standpoint, the work least often found, hardest to make, least popular in

the street, may be in the end the one most treasured in a world-museum as

a counsellor and stimulus of mankind. Throughout this book I try to bring

to bear the same simple standards of form, composition, mood, and motive

that we used in finding the fundamental exhibits; the standards which are

taken for granted in art histories and schools, radical or conservative,

anywhere.

Again we assume it is eight o'clock in the evening, friend reader, when

the chapter begins.

Just as the Action Picture has its photographic basis or fundamental

metaphor in the long chase down the highway, so the Intimate Film has its

photographic basis in the fact that any photoplay interior has a very

small ground plan, and the cosiest of enclosing walls. Many a worth-while

scene is acted out in a space no bigger than that which is occupied by an

office boy's stool and hat. If there is a table in this room, it is often

so near it is half out of the picture or perhaps it is against the front

line of the triangular ground-plan. Only the top of the table is seen,

and nothing close up to us is pictured below that. We in the audience are

privileged characters. Generally attending the show in bunches of two or

three, we are members of the household on the screen. Sometimes we are

sitting on the near side of the family board. Or we are gossiping

whispering neighbors, of the shoemaker, we will say, with our noses

pressed against the pane of a metaphoric window.

Take for contrast the old-fashioned stage production showing the room and

work table of a shoemaker. As it were the whole side of the house has

been removed. The shop is as big as a banquet hall. There is something

essentially false in what we see, no matter how the stage manager fills

in with old boxes, broken chairs, and the like. But the photoplay

interior is the size such a work-room should be. And there the awl and

pegs and bits of leather, speaking the silent language of picture

writing, can be clearly shown. They are sometimes like the engine in

chapter two, the principal actors.

Though the Intimate-and-friendly Photoplay may be carried out of doors to

the row of loafers in front of the country store, or the gossiping

streets of the village, it takes its origin and theory from the snugness

of the interior.

The restless reader replies that he has seen photoplays that showed

ballrooms that were grandiose, not the least cosy. These are to be

classed as out-of-door scenery so far as theory goes, and are to be

discussed under the head of Splendor Pictures. Masses of human beings

pour by like waves, the personalities of none made plain. The only

definite people are the hero and heroine in the foreground, and maybe one

other. Though these three be in ball-costume, the little triangle they

occupy next to the camera is in sort an interior, while the impersonal

guests behind them conform to the pageant principles of out-of-doors, and

the dancers are to the main actor as is the wind-shaken forest to the

charcoal-burner, or the bending grain to the reaper.

The Intimate Motion Picture is the world's new medium for studying, not

the great passions, such as black hate, transcendent love, devouring

ambition, but rather the half relaxed or gently restrained moods of human

creatures. It gives also our idiosyncrasies. It is gossip _in extremis_.

It is apt to chronicle our petty little skirmishes, rather than our

feuds. In it Colin Clout and his comrades return.

The Intimate Photoplay should not crowd its characters. It should not

choke itself trying to dramatize the whole big bloody plot of Lorna

Doone, or any other novel with a dozen leading people. Yet some gentle

episode from the John Ridd farm, some half-chapter when Lorna and the

Doones are almost forgotten, would be fitting. Let the duck-yard be

parading its best, and Annie among the milk-pails, her work for the

evening well nigh done. The Vicar of Wakefield has his place in this

form. The Intimate-and-friendly Motion Picture might very well give

humorous moments in the lives of the great, King Alfred burning the

cakes, and other legendary incidents of him. Plato's writings give us

glimpses of Socrates, in between the long dialogues. And there are

intimate scraps in Plutarch.

Prospective author-producer, do you remember Landor's Imaginary

Conversations, and Lang's Letters to Dead Authors? Can you not attain to

that informal understanding in pictorial delineations of such people?

The photoplay has been unjust to itself in comedies. The late John

Bunny's important place in my memory comes from the first picture in

which I saw him. It is a story of high life below stairs. The hero is the

butler at a governor's reception. John Bunny's work as this man is a

delightful piece of acting. The servants are growing tipsier downstairs,

but the more afraid of the chief functionary every time he appears,

frozen into sobriety by his glance. At the last moment this god of the

basement catches them at their worst and gives them a condescending but

forgiving smile. The lid comes off completely. He himself has been

imbibing. His surviving dignity in waiting on the governor's guests is

worthy of the stage of Goldsmith and Sheridan. This film should be

reissued in time as a Bunny memorial.

So far as my experience has gone, the best of the comedians is Sidney

Drew. He could shine in the atmosphere of Pride and Prejudice or

Cranford. But the best things I have seen of his are far from such. I beg

the pardon of Miss Jane Austen and Mrs. Gaskell while I mention Who's Who

in Hogg's Hollow, and A Regiment of Two. Over these I rejoiced like a

yokel with a pocketful of butterscotch and peanuts. The opportunities to

laugh on a higher plane than this, to laugh like Olympians, are seldom

given us in this world.

The most successful motion picture drama of the intimate type ever placed

before mine eyes was Enoch Arden, produced by Cabanne.

Lillian Gish takes the part of Annie, Alfred Paget impersonates Enoch

Arden, and Wallace Reid takes the part of Philip Ray. The play is in four

reels of twenty minutes each. It should have been made into three reels

by shortening every scene just a bit. Otherwise it is satisfying, and I

and my friends have watched it through many times as it has returned to

Springfield.

The mood of the original poem is approximated. The story is told with

fireside friendliness. The pale Lillian Gish surrounded by happy children

gives us many a genre painting on the theme of domesticity. It is a

photographic rendering in many ways as fastidious as Tennyson's

versification. The scenes on the desert island are some of them

commonplace. The shipwreck and the like remind one of other photoplays,

but the rest of the production has a mood of its own. Seen several months

ago it fills my eye-imagination and eye-memory more than that particular

piece of Tennyson's fills word-imagination and word-memory. Perhaps this

is because it is pleasing to me as a theorist. It is a sound example of

the type of film to which this chapter is devoted. If you cannot get your

local manager to bring Enoch Arden, reread that poem of Tennyson's and

translate it in your own mind's eye into a gallery of six hundred

delicately toned photographs hung in logical order, most of them cosy

interior scenes, some of the faces five feet from chin to forehead in the

more personal episodes, yet exquisitely fair. Fill in the out-of-door

scenes and general gatherings with the appointments of an idyllic English

fisher-village, and you will get an approximate conception of what we

mean by the Intimate-and-friendly Motion Picture, or the Intimate

Picture, as I generally call it, for convenience.

It is a quality, not a defect, of all photoplays that human beings tend

to become dolls and mechanisms, and dolls and mechanisms tend to become

human. But the haughty, who scorn the moving pictures, cannot rid

themselves of the feeling that they are being seduced into going into

some sort of a Punch-and-Judy show. And they think that of course one

should not take seriously anything so cheap in price and so appealing to

the cross-roads taste. But it is very well to begin in the

Punch-and-Judy-show state of mind, and reconcile ourselves to it, and

then like good democrats await discoveries. Punch and Judy is the

simplest form of marionette performance, and the marionette has a place

in every street in history just as the dolls' house has its corner in

every palace and cottage. The French in particular have had their great

periods of puppet shows; and the Italian tradition survived in America's

Little Italy, in New York for many a day; and I will mention in passing

that one of Pavlowa's unforgettable dance dramas is The Fairy Doll.

Prospective author-producer, why not spend a deal of energy on the

photoplay successors of the puppet-plays?

We have the queen of the marionettes already, without the play.

One description of the Intimate-and-friendly Comedy would be the Mary

Pickford kind of a story. None has as yet appeared. But we know the Mary

Pickford mood. When it is gentlest, most roguish, most exalted, it is a

prophecy of what this type should be, not only in the actress, but in the

scenario and setting.

Mary Pickford can be a doll, a village belle, or a church angel. Her

powers as a doll are hinted at in the title of the production: Such a

Little Queen. I remember her when she was a village belle in that film

that came out before producers or actors were known by name. It was

sugar-sweet. It was called: What the Daisy Said. If these productions had

conformed to their titles sincerely, with the highest photoplay art we

would have had two more examples for this chapter.

Why do the people love Mary? Not on account of the Daniel Frohman style

of handling her appearances. He presents her to us in what are almost the

old-fashioned stage terms: the productions energetic and full of

painstaking detail but dominated by a dream that is a theatrical hybrid.

It is neither good moving picture nor good stage play. Yet Mary could be

cast as a cloudy Olympian or a church angel if her managers wanted her to

be such. She herself was transfigured in the Dawn of Tomorrow, but the

film-version of that play was merely a well mounted melodrama.

Why do the people love Mary? Because of a certain aspect of her face in

her highest mood. Botticelli painted her portrait many centuries ago

when by some necromancy she appeared to him in this phase of herself.

There is in the Chicago Art Institute at the top of the stairs on the

north wall a noble copy of a fresco by that painter, the copy by Mrs.

MacMonnies. It is very near the Winged Victory of Samothrace. In the

picture the muses sit enthroned. The loveliest of them all is a startling

replica of Mary.

The people are hungry for this fine and spiritual thing that Botticelli

painted in the faces of his muses and heavenly creatures. Because the mob

catch the very glimpse of it in Mary's face, they follow her night after

night in the films. They are never quite satisfied with the plays,

because the managers are not artists enough to know they should sometimes

put her into sacred pictures and not have her always the village hoyden,

in plays not even hoydenish. But perhaps in this argument I have but

betrayed myself as Mary's infatuated partisan.

So let there be recorded here the name of another actress who is always

in the intimate-and-friendly mood and adapted to close-up interiors,

Marguerite Clark. She is endowed by nature to act, in the same film, the

eight-year-old village pet, the irrepressible sixteen-year-old, and

finally the shining bride of twenty. But no production in which she acts

that has happened to come under my eye has done justice to these

possibilities. The transitions from one of these stages to the other are

not marked by the producer with sufficient delicate graduation, emphasis,

and contrast. Her plots have been but sugared nonsense, or swashbuckling

ups and downs. She shines in a bevy of girls. She has sometimes been

given the bevy.

But it is easier to find performers who fit this chapter, than to find

films. Having read so far, it is probably not quite nine o'clock in the

evening. Go around the corner to the nearest theatre. You will not be apt

to find a pure example of the Intimate-and-friendly Moving Picture, but

some one or two scenes will make plain the intent of the phrase. Imagine

the most winsome tableau that passes before you, extended logically

through one or three reels, with no melodramatic interruptions or awful

smashes. For a further discussion of these smashes, and other items in

this chapter, read the ninth chapter, entitled "Painting-in-Motion."

CHAPTER IV

THE MOTION PICTURE OF FAIRY SPLENDOR

Again, kind reader, let us assume it is eight o'clock in the evening, for

purposes of future climax which you no doubt anticipate.

Just as the Action Motion Picture has its photographic basis in the race

down the high-road, just as the Intimate Motion Picture has its

photographic basis in the close-up interior scene, so the Photoplay of

Splendor, in its four forms, is based on the fact that the kinetoscope

can take in the most varied of out-of-door landscapes. It can reproduce

fairy dells. It can give every ripple of the lily-pond. It can show us

cathedrals within and without. It can take in the panorama of cyclopæan

cloud, bending forest, storm-hung mountain. In like manner it can put on

the screen great impersonal mobs of men. It can give us tremendous

armies, moving as oceans move. The pictures of Fairy Splendor, Crowd

Splendor, Patriotic Splendor, and Religious Splendor are but the

embodiments of these backgrounds.

And a photographic corollary quite useful in these four forms is that the

camera has a kind of Hallowe'en witch-power. This power is the subject of

this chapter.

The world-old legends and revelations of men in connection with the

lovely out of doors, or lonely shrines, or derived from inspired

crusading humanity moving in masses, can now be fitly retold. Also the

fairy wand can do its work, the little dryad can come from the tree. And

the spirits that guard the Republic can be seen walking on the clouds

above the harvest-fields.

But we are concerned with the humblest voodooism at present.

Perhaps the world's oldest motion picture plot is a tale in Mother Goose.

It ends somewhat in this fashion:--

The old lady said to the cat:--

"Cat, cat, kill rat.

Rat will not gnaw rope,

Rope will not hang butcher,

Butcher will not kill ox,

Ox will not drink water,

Water will not quench fire,

Fire will not burn stick,

Stick will not beat dog,

Dog will not bite pig,

Pig will not jump over the stile,

And I cannot get home to-night."

By some means the present writer does not remember, the cat was persuaded

to approach the rat. The rest was like a tale of European diplomacy:--

The rat began to gnaw the rope,

The rope began to hang the butcher,

The butcher began to kill the ox,

The ox began to drink the water,

The water began to quench the fire,

The fire began to burn the stick,

The stick began to beat the dog,

The dog began to bite the pig,

The frightened little pig jumped over the stile,

And the old lady was able to get home that night.

Put yourself back to the state of mind in which you enjoyed this bit of

verse.

Though the photoplay fairy-tale may rise to exquisite heights, it begins

with pictures akin to this rhyme. Mankind in his childhood has always

wanted his furniture to do such things. Arthur names his blade

Excalibur. It becomes a person. The man in the Arabian tale speaks to

the magic carpet. It carries him whithersoever he desires. This yearning

for personality in furniture begins to be crudely worked upon in the

so-called trick-scenes. The typical commercialized comedy of this sort is

Moving Day. Lyman H. Howe, among many excellent reels of a different

kind, has films allied to Moving Day.

But let us examine at this point, as even more typical, an old Pathé Film

from France. The representatives of the moving-firm are sent for. They

appear in the middle of the room with an astonishing jump. They are told

that this household desires to have its goods and hearthstone gods

transplanted two streets east. The agents salute. They disappear. Yet

their wireless orders are obeyed with a military crispness. The books and

newspapers climb out of the window. They go soberly down the street. In

their wake are the dishes from the table. Then the more delicate

porcelains climb down the shelves and follow. Then follow the

hobble-de-hoy kitchen dishes, then the chairs, then the clothing, and the

carpets from over the house. The most joyous and curious spectacle is to

behold the shoes walking down the boulevard, from father's large boots

to those of the youngest child. They form a complete satire of the

family, yet have a masterful air of their own, as though they were the

most important part of a human being.

The new apartment is shown. Everything enters in procession. In contrast

to the general certainty of the rest, one or two pieces of furniture grow

confused trying to find their places. A plate, in leaping upon a high

shelf, misses and falls broken. The broom and dustpan sweep up the

pieces, and consign them to the dustbin. Then the human family comes in,

delighted to find everything in order. The moving agents appear and

salute. They are paid their fee. They salute again and disappear with

another gigantic leap.

The ability to do this kind of a thing is fundamental in the destinies of

the art. Yet this resource is neglected because its special province is

not understood. "People do not like to be tricked," the manager says.

Certainly they become tired of mere contraptions. But they never grow

weary of imagination. There is possible many a highly imaginative

fairy-tale on this basis if we revert to the sound principles of the

story of the old lady and the pig.

Moving Day is at present too crassly material. It has not the touch of

the creative imagination. We are overwhelmed with a whole van of

furniture. Now the mechanical or non-human object, beginning with the

engine in the second chapter, is apt to be the hero in most any sort of

photoplay while the producer remains utterly unconscious of the fact. Why

not face this idiosyncrasy of the camera and make the non-human object

the hero indeed? Not by filling the story with ropes, buckets,

fire-brands, and sticks, but by having these four unique. Make the fire

the loveliest of torches, the water the most graceful of springs. Let the

rope be the humorist. Let the stick be the outstanding hero, the

D'Artagnan of the group, full of queer gestures and hoppings about. Let

him be both polite and obdurate. Finally let him beat the dog most

heroically.

* * * * *

Then, after the purely trick-picture is disciplined till it has fewer

tricks, and those more human and yet more fanciful, the producer can move

on up into the higher realms of the fairy-tale, carrying with him this

riper workmanship.

Mabel Taliaferro's Cinderella, seen long ago, is the best film

fairy-tale the present writer remembers. It has more of the fireside

wonder-spirit and Hallowe'en-witch-spirit than the Cinderella of Mary

Pickford.

There is a Japanese actor, Sessue Hayakawa, who takes the leading part

with Blanche Sweet in The Clew, and is the hero in the film version of

The Typhoon. He looks like all the actors in the old Japanese prints. He

has a general dramatic equipment which enables him to force through the

stubborn screen such stagy plays as these, that are more worth while in

the speaking theatre. But he has that atmosphere of pictorial romance

which would make him a valuable man for the retelling of the old Japanese

legends of Kwannon and other tales that are rich, unused moving picture

material, tales such as have been hinted at in the gleaming English of

Lafcadio Hearn. The Japanese genius is eminently pictorial. Rightly

viewed, every Japanese screen or bit of lacquer is from the Ancient Asia

Columbus set sail to find.

It would be a noble thing if American experts in the Japanese principles

of decoration, of the school of Arthur W. Dow, should tell stories of old

Japan with the assistance of such men as Sessue Hayakawa. Such things go

further than peace treaties. Dooming a talent like that of Mr. Hayakawa

to the task of interpreting the Japanese spy does not conduce to accord

with Japan, however the technique may move us to admiration. Let such of

us as are at peace get together, and tell the tales of our happy

childhood to one another.

This chapter is ended. You will of course expect to be exhorted to visit

some photoplay emporium. But you need not look for fairy-tales. They are

much harder to find than they should be. But you can observe even in the

advertisements and cartoons the technical elements of the story of the

old lady and the pig. And you can note several other things that show how

much more quickly than on the stage the borderline of All Saints' Day and

Hallowe'en can be crossed. Note how easily memories are called up, and

appear in the midst of the room. In any plays whatever, you will find

these apparitions and recollections. The dullest hero is given glorious

visualizing power. Note the "fadeaway" at the beginning and the end of

the reel, whereby all things emerge from the twilight and sink back into

the twilight at last. These are some of the indestructible least common

denominators of folk stories old and new. When skilfully used, they can

all exercise a power over the audience, such as the crystal has over the

crystal-gazer.

But this discussion will be resumed, on another plane, in the tenth

chapter: "Furniture, Trappings, and Inventions in Motion."

CHAPTER V

THE PICTURE OF CROWD SPLENDOR

Henceforth the reader will use his discretion as to when he will read the

chapter and when he will go to the picture show to verify it.

The shoddiest silent drama may contain noble views of the sea. This part

is almost sure to be good. It is a fundamental resource.

A special development of this aptitude in the hands of an expert gives

the sea of humanity, not metaphorically but literally: the whirling of

dancers in ballrooms, handkerchief-waving masses of people in balconies,

hat-waving political ratification meetings, ragged glowering strikers,

and gossiping, dickering people in the marketplace. Only Griffith and his

close disciples can do these as well as almost any manager can reproduce

the ocean. Yet the sea of humanity is dramatically blood-brother to the

Pacific, Atlantic, or Mediterranean. It takes this new invention, the

kinetoscope, to bring us these panoramic drama-elements. By the law of

compensation, while the motion picture is shallow in showing private

passion, it is powerful in conveying the passions of masses of men.

Bernard Shaw, in a recent number of the Metropolitan, answered several

questions in regard to the photoplay. Here are two bits from his

discourse:--

"Strike the dialogue from Molière's Tartuffe, and what audience would

bear its mere stage-business? Imagine the scene in which Iago poisons

Othello's mind against Desdemona, conveyed in dumb show. What becomes of

the difference between Shakespeare and Sheridan Knowles in the film? Or

between Shakespeare's Lear and any one else's Lear? No, it seems to me

that all the interest lies in the new opening for the mass of dramatic

talent formerly disabled by incidental deficiencies of one sort or

another that do not matter in the picture-theatre...."

"Failures of the spoken drama may become the stars of the picture palace.

And there are the authors with imagination, visualization and first-rate

verbal gifts who can write novels and epics, but cannot for the life of

them write plays. Well, the film lends itself admirably to the

succession of events proper to narrative and epic, but physically

impracticable on the stage. Paradise Lost would make a far better film

than Ibsen's John Gabriel Borkman, though Borkman is a dramatic

masterpiece, and Milton could not write an effective play."

Note in especial what Shaw says about narrative, epic, and Paradise Lost.

He has in mind, no doubt, the pouring hosts of demons and angels. This is

one kind of a Crowd Picture.

There is another sort to be seen where George Beban impersonates The

Italian in a film of that title, by Thomas H. Ince and G. Gardener

Sullivan. The first part, taken ostensibly in Venice, delineates the

festival spirit of the people on the bridges and in gondolas. It gives

out the atmosphere of town-crowd happiness. Then comes the vineyard, the

crowd sentiment of a merry grape-harvest, then the massed emotion of many

people embarking on an Atlantic liner telling good-by to their kindred on

the piers, then the drama of arrival in New York. The wonder of the

steerage people pouring down their proper gangway is contrasted with the

conventional at-home-ness of the first-class passengers above. Then we

behold the seething human cauldron of the East Side, then the jolly

little wedding-dance, then the life of the East Side, from the policeman

to the peanut-man, and including the bar tender, for the crowd is treated

on two separate occasions.

It is hot weather. The mobs of children follow the ice-wagon for chips of

ice. They besiege the fountain-end of the street-sprinkling wagon quite

closely, rejoicing to have their clothes soaked. They gather round the

fire-plug that is turned on for their benefit, and again become wet as

drowned rats.

Passing through these crowds are George Beban and Clara Williams as The

Italian and his sweetheart. They owe the force of their acting to the

fact that they express each mass of humanity in turn. Their child is

born. It does not flourish. It represents in an acuter way another phase

of the same child-struggle with the heat that the gamins indicate in

their pursuit of the water-cart.

Then a deeper matter. The hero represents in a fashion the adventures of

the whole Italian race coming to America: its natural southern gayety set

in contrast to the drab East Side. The gondolier becomes boot-black. The

grape-gathering peasant girl becomes the suffering slum mother. They are

not specialized characters like Pendennis or Becky Sharp in the Novels of

Thackeray.

Omitting the last episode, the entrance into the house of Corrigan, The

Italian is a strong piece of work.

Another kind of Crowd Picture is The Battle, an old Griffith Biograph,

first issued in 1911, before Griffith's name or that of any actor in

films was advertised. Blanche Sweet is the leading lady, and Charles H.

West the leading man. The psychology of a bevy of village lovers is

conveyed in a lively sweet-hearting dance. Then the boy and his comrades

go forth to war. The lines pass between hand-waving crowds of friends

from the entire neighborhood. These friends give the sense of patriotism

in mass. Then as the consequence of this feeling, as the special agents

to express it, the soldiers are in battle. By the fortunes of war the

onset is unexpectedly near to the house where once was the dance.

The boy is at first a coward. He enters the old familiar door. He appeals

to the girl to hide him, and for the time breaks her heart. He goes forth

a fugitive not only from battle, but from her terrible girlish anger.

But later he rallies. He brings a train of powder wagons through fires

built in his path by the enemy's scouts. He loses every one of his men,

and all but the last wagon, which he drives himself. His return with that

ammunition saves the hard-fought day.

And through all this, glimpses of the battle are given with a splendor

that only Griffith has attained.

Blanche Sweet stands as the representative of the bevy of girls in the

house of the dance, and the whole body social of the village. How the

costumes flash and the handkerchiefs wave around her! In the battle the

hero represents the cowardice that all the men are resisting within

themselves. When he returns, he is the incarnation of the hardihood they

have all hoped to display. Only the girl knows he was first a failure.

The wounded general honors him as the hero above all. Now she is radiant,

she cannot help but be triumphant, though the side of the house is blown

out by a shell and the dying are everywhere.

This one-reel work of art has been reissued of late by the Biograph

Company. It should be kept in the libraries of the Universities as a

standard. One-reel films are unfortunate in this sense that in order to

see a favorite the student must wait through five other reels of a mixed

programme that usually is bad. That is the reason one-reel masterpieces

seldom appear now. The producer in a mood to make a special effort wants

to feel that he has the entire evening, and that nothing before or after

is going to be a bore or destroy the impression. So at present the

painstaking films are apt to be five or six reels of twenty minutes each.

These have the advantage that if they please at all, one can see them

again at once without sitting through irrelevant slapstick work put there

to fill out the time. But now, having the whole evening to work in, the

producer takes too much time for his good ideas. I shall reiterate

throughout this work the necessity for restraint. A one hour programme is

long enough for any one. If the observer is pleased, he will sit it

through again and take another hour. There is not a good film in the

world but is the better for being seen in immediate succession to itself.

Six-reel programmes are a weariness to the flesh. The best of the old

one-reel Biographs of Griffith contained more in twenty minutes than

these ambitious incontinent six-reel displays give us in two hours. It

would pay a manager to hang out a sign: "This show is only twenty minutes

long, but it is Griffith's great film 'The Battle.'"

But I am digressing. To continue the contrast between private passion in

the theatre and crowd-passion in the photoplay, let us turn to Shaw

again. Consider his illustration of Iago, Othello, and Lear. These parts,

as he implies, would fall flat in motion pictures. The minor situations

of dramatic intensity might in many cases be built up. The crisis would

inevitably fail. Iago and Othello and Lear, whatever their offices in

their governments, are essentially private persons, individuals _in

extremis_. If you go to a motion picture and feel yourself suddenly

gripped by the highest dramatic tension, as on the old stage, and reflect

afterward that it was a fight between only two or three men in a room

otherwise empty, stop to analyze what they stood for. They were probably

representatives of groups or races that had been pursuing each other

earlier in the film. Otherwise the conflict, however violent, appealed

mainly to the sense of speed.

So, in The Birth of a Nation, which could better be called The Overthrow

of Negro Rule, the Ku Klux Klan dashes down the road as powerfully as

Niagara pours over the cliff. Finally the white girl Elsie Stoneman

(impersonated by Lillian Gish) is rescued by the Ku Klux Klan from the

mulatto politician, Silas Lynch (impersonated by George Seigmann). The

lady is brought forward as a typical helpless white maiden. The white

leader, Col. Ben Cameron (impersonated by Henry B. Walthall), enters not

as an individual, but as representing the whole Anglo-Saxon Niagara. He

has the mask of the Ku Klux Klan on his face till the crisis has passed.

The wrath of the Southerner against the blacks and their Northern

organizers has been piled up through many previous scenes. As a result

this rescue is a real climax, something the photoplays that trace

strictly personal hatreds cannot achieve.

The Birth of a Nation is a Crowd Picture in a triple sense. On the films,

as in the audience, it turns the crowd into a mob that is either for or

against the Reverend Thomas Dixon's poisonous hatred of the negro.

Griffith is a chameleon in interpreting his authors. Wherever the

scenario shows traces of The Clansman, the original book, by Thomas

Dixon, it is bad. Wherever it is unadulterated Griffith, which is half

the time, it is good. The Reverend Thomas Dixon is a rather stagy Simon

Legree: in his avowed views a deal like the gentleman with the spiritual

hydrophobia in the latter end of Uncle Tom's Cabin. Unconsciously Mr.

Dixon has done his best to prove that Legree was not a fictitious

character.

* * * * *

Joel Chandler Harris, Harry Stillwell Edwards, George W. Cable, Thomas

Nelson Page, James Lane Allen, and Mark Twain are Southern men in Mr.

Griffith's class. I recommend their works to him as a better basis for

future Southern scenarios.

The Birth of a Nation has been very properly denounced for its Simon

Legree qualities by Francis Hackett, Jane Addams, and others. But it is

still true that it is a wonder in its Griffith sections. In its handling

of masses of men it further illustrates the principles that made notable

the old one-reel Battle film described in the beginning of this chapter.

The Battle in the end is greater, because of its self-possession and

concentration: all packed into twenty minutes.

When, in The Birth of a Nation, Lincoln (impersonated by Joseph Henabery)

goes down before the assassin, it is a master-scene. He falls as the

representative of the government and a thousand high and noble crowd

aspirations. The mimic audience in the restored Ford's Theatre rises in

panic. This crowd is interpreted in especial for us by the two young

people in the seats nearest, and the freezing horror of the treason

sweeps from the Ford's Theatre audience to the real audience beyond them.

The real crowd touched with terror beholds its natural face in the glass.

Later come the pictures of the rioting negroes in the streets of the

Southern town, mobs splendidly handled, tossing wildly and rhythmically

like the sea. Then is delineated the rise of the Ku Klux Klan, of which

we have already spoken. For comment on the musical accompaniment to The

Birth of a Nation, read the fourteenth chapter entitled "The Orchestra,

Conversation and the Censorship."

In the future development of motion pictures mob-movements of anger and

joy will go through fanatical and provincial whirlwinds into great

national movements of anger and joy.

A book by Gerald Stanley Lee that has a score of future scenarios in it,

a book that might well be dipped into by the reader before he goes to

such a play as The Italian or The Battle, is the work which bears the

title of this chapter: "Crowds."

Mr. Lee is far from infallible in his remedies for factory and industrial

relations. But in sensitiveness to the flowing street of humanity he is

indeed a man. Listen to the names of some of the divisions of his book:

"Crowds and Machines; Letting the Crowds be Good; Letting the Crowds be

Beautiful; Crowds and Heroes; Where are we Going? The Crowd Scare; The

Strike, an Invention for making Crowds Think; The Crowd's Imagination

about People; Speaking as One of the Crowd; Touching the Imagination of

Crowds." Films in the spirit of these titles would help to make

world-voters of us all.

The World State is indeed far away. But as we peer into the Mirror Screen

some of us dare to look forward to the time when the pouring streets of

men will become sacred in each other's eyes, in pictures and in fact.

A further discussion of this theme on other planes will be found in the

eleventh chapter, entitled "Architecture-in-Motion," and the fifteenth

chapter, entitled "The Substitute for the Saloon."

CHAPTER VI

PATRIOTIC SPLENDOR

The Patriotic Picture need not necessarily be in terms of splendor. It

generally is. Beginning the chronicle is one that waves no banners.

The Typhoon, a film produced by Thomas H. Ince, is a story of the

Japanese love of Nippon in which a very little of the landscape of the

nation is shown, and that in the beginning. The hero (acted by Sessue

Hayakawa), living in the heart of Paris, represents the far-off Empire.

He is making a secret military report. He is a responsible member of a

colony of Japanese gentlemen. The bevy of them appear before or after his

every important action. He still represents this crowd when alone.

The unfortunate Parisian heroine, unable to fathom the mystery of the

fanatical hearts of the colony, ventures to think that her love for the

Japanese hero and his equally great devotion to her is the important

human relation on the horizon. She flouts his obscure work, pits her

charms against it. In the end there is a quarrel. The irresistible meets

the immovable, and in madness or half by accident, he kills the girl.

The youth is protected by the colony, for he alone can make the report.

He is the machine-like representative of the Japanese patriotic formula,

till the document is complete. A new arrival in the colony, who obviously

cannot write the book, confesses the murder and is executed. The other

high fanatic dies soon after, of a broken heart, with the completed

manuscript volume in his hand. The one impression of the play is that

Japanese patriotism is a peculiar and fearful thing. The particular

quality of the private romance is but vaguely given, for such things in

their rise and culmination can only be traced by the novelist, or by the

gentle alternations of silence and speech on the speaking stage, aided by

the hot blood of players actually before us.

Here, as in most photoplays, the attempted lover-conversations in

pantomime are but indifferent things. The details of the hero's last

quarrel with the heroine and the precise thoughts that went with it are

muffled by the inability to speak. The power of the play is in the

adequate style the man represents the colony. Sessue Hayakawa should give

us Japanese tales more adapted to the films. We should have stories of

Iyeyasu and Hideyoshi, written from the ground up for the photoplay

theatre. We should have the story of the Forty-seven Ronin, not a

Japanese stage version, but a work from the source-material. We should

have legends of the various clans, picturizations of the code of the

Samurai.

The Typhoon is largely indoors. But the Patriotic Motion Picture is

generally a landscape. This is for deeper reasons than that it requires

large fields in which to manoeuvre armies. Flags are shown for other

causes than that they are the nominal signs of a love of the native land.

In a comedy of the history of a newspaper, the very columns of the

publication are actors, and may be photographed oftener than the human

hero. And in the higher realms this same tendency gives particular power

to the panorama and trappings. It makes the natural and artificial

magnificence more than a narrative, more than a color-scheme, something

other than a drama. In a photoplay by a master, when the American flag is

shown, the thirteen stripes are columns of history and the stars are

headlines. The woods and the templed hills are their printing press,

almost in a literal sense.

Going back to the illustration of the engine, in chapter two, the

non-human thing is a personality, even if it is not beautiful. When it

takes on the ritual of decorative design, this new vitality is made

seductive, and when it is an object of nature, this seductive ritual

becomes a new pantheism. The armies upon the mountains they are defending

are rooted in the soil like trees. They resist invasion with the same

elementary stubbornness with which the oak resists the storm or the cliff

resists the wave.

* * * * *

Let the reader consider Antony and Cleopatra, the Cines film. It was

brought to America from Italy by George Klein. This and several ambitious

spectacles like it are direct violations of the foregoing principles.

True, it glorifies Rome. It is equivalent to waving the Italian above the

Egyptian flag, quite slowly for two hours. From the stage standpoint,

the magnificence is thoroughgoing. Viewed as a circus, the acting is

elephantine in its grandeur. All that is needed is pink lemonade sold in

the audience.

The famous Cabiria, a tale of war between Rome and Carthage, by

D'Annunzio, is a prime example of a success, where Antony and Cleopatra

and many European films founded upon the classics have been failures.

With obvious defects as a producer, D'Annunzio appreciates spectacular

symbolism. He has an instinct for the strange and the beautifully

infernal, as they are related to decorative design. Therefore he is able

to show us Carthage indeed. He has an Italian patriotism that amounts to

frenzy. So Rome emerges body and soul from the past, in this spectacle.

He gives us the cruelty of Baal, the intrepidity of the Roman legions.

Everything Punic or Italian in the middle distance or massed background

speaks of the very genius of the people concerned and actively generates

their kind of lightning.

The principals do not carry out the momentum of this immense resource.

The half a score of leading characters, with the costumes, gestures, and

aspects of gods, are after all works of the taxidermist. They are

stuffed gods. They conduct a silly nickelodeon romance while Carthage

rolls on toward her doom. They are like sparrows fighting for grain on

the edge of the battle.

The doings of his principals are sufficiently evident to be grasped with

a word or two of printed insert on the films. But he sentimentalizes

about them. He adds side-elaborations of the plot that would require much

time to make clear, and a hard working novelist to make interesting. We

are sentenced to stop and gaze long upon this array of printing in the

darkness, just at the moment the tenth wave of glory seems ready to sweep

in. But one hundred words cannot be a photoplay climax. The climax must

be in a tableau that is to the eye as the rising sun itself, that follows

the thousand flags of the dawn.

In the New York performance, and presumably in other large cities, there

was also an orchestra. Behold then, one layer of great photoplay, one

layer of bad melodrama, one layer of explanation, and a final cement of

music. It is as though in an art museum there should be a man at the door

selling would-be masterly short-stories about the paintings, and a man

with a violin playing the catalogue. But for further discourse on the

orchestra read the fourteenth chapter.

I left Cabiria with mixed emotions. And I had to forget the distressful

eye-strain. Few eyes submit without destruction to three hours of film.

But the mistakes of Cabiria are those of the pioneer work of genius. It

has in it twenty great productions. It abounds in suggestions. Once the

classic rules of this art-unit are established, men with equal genius

with D'Annunzio and no more devotion, will give us the world's

masterpieces. As it is, the background and mass-movements must stand as

monumental achievements in vital patriotic splendor.

D'Annunzio is Griffith's most inspired rival in these things. He lacks

Griffith's knowledge of what is photoplay and what is not. He lacks

Griffith's simplicity of hurdle-race plot. He lacks his avalanche-like

action. The Italian needs the American's health and clean winds. He needs

his foregrounds, leading actors, and types of plot. But the American has

never gone as deep as the Italian into landscapes that are their own

tragedians, and into Satanic and celestial ceremonials.

Judith of Bethulia and The Battle Hymn of the Republic have impressed me

as the two most significant photoplays I have ever encountered. They may

be classed with equal justice as religious or patriotic productions. But

for reasons which will appear, The Battle Hymn of the Republic will be

classed as a film of devotion and Judith as a patriotic one. The latter

was produced by D.W. Griffith, and released by the Biograph Company in

1914. The original stage drama was once played by the famous Boston

actress, Nance O'Neil. It is the work of Thomas Bailey Aldrich. The

motion picture scenario, when Griffith had done with it, had no especial

Aldrich flavor, though it contained several of the characters and events

as Aldrich conceived them. It was principally the old apocryphal story

plus the genius of Griffith and that inner circle of players whom he has

endowed with much of his point of view.

This is his cast of characters:--

Judith Blanche Sweet

Holofernes Henry Walthall

His servant J.J. Lance

Captain of the Guards H. Hyde

Judith's maid Miss Bruce

General of the Jews C.H. Mailes

Priests Messrs. Oppleman and Lestina

Nathan Robert Harron

Naomi Mae Marsh

Keeper of the slaves for Holofernes Alfred Paget

The Jewish mother Lillian Gish

The Biograph Company advertises the production with the following Barnum

and Bailey enumeration: "In four parts. Produced in California. Most

expensive Biograph ever produced. More than one thousand people and about

three hundred horsemen. The following were built expressly for the

production: a replica of the ancient city of Bethulia; the mammoth wall

that protected Bethulia; a faithful reproduction of the ancient army

camps, embodying all their barbaric splendor and dances; chariots,

battering rams, scaling ladders, archer towers, and other special war

paraphernalia of the period.

"The following spectacular effects: the storming of the walls of the

city of Bethulia; the hand-to-hand conflicts; the death-defying chariot

charges at break-neck speed; the rearing and plunging horses infuriated

by the din of battle; the wonderful camp of the terrible Holofernes,

equipped with rugs brought from the far East; the dancing girls in their

exhibition of the exquisite and peculiar dances of the period; the

routing of the command of the terrible Holofernes, and the destruction of

the camp by fire. And overshadowing all, the heroism of the beautiful

Judith."

This advertisement should be compared with the notice of Your Girl and

Mine transcribed in the seventeenth chapter.

But there is another point of view by which this Judith of Bethulia

production may be approached, however striking the advertising notice.

There are four sorts of scenes alternated: (1) the particular history of

Judith; (2) the gentle courtship of Nathan and Naomi, types of the

inhabitants of Bethulia; (3) pictures of the streets, with the population

flowing like a sluggish river; (4) scenes of raid, camp, and battle,

interpolated between these, tying the whole together. The real plot is

the balanced alternation of all the elements. So many minutes of one,

then so many minutes of another. As was proper, very little of the tale

was thrown on the screen in reading matter, and no climax was ever a

printed word, but always an enthralling tableau.

The particular history of Judith begins with the picture of her as the

devout widow. She is austerely garbed, at prayer for her city, in her own

quiet house. Then later she is shown decked for the eyes of man in the

camp of Holofernes, where all is Assyrian glory. Judith struggles between

her unexpected love for the dynamic general and the resolve to destroy

him that brought her there. In either type of scene, the first gray and

silver, the other painted with Paul Veronese splendor, Judith moves with

a delicate deliberation. Over her face the emotions play like winds on a

meadow lake. Holofernes is the composite picture of all the Biblical

heathen chieftains. His every action breathes power. He is an Assyrian

bull, a winged lion, and a god at the same time, and divine honors are

paid to him every moment.

Nathan and Naomi are two Arcadian lovers. In their shy meetings they

express the life of the normal Bethulia. They are seen among the reapers

outside the city or at the well near the wall, or on the streets of the

ancient town. They are generally doing the things the crowd behind them

is doing, meanwhile evolving their own little heart affair. Finally when

the Assyrian comes down like a wolf on the fold, the gentle Naomi becomes

a prisoner in Holofernes' camp. She is in the foreground, a

representative of the crowd of prisoners. Nathan is photographed on the

wall as the particular defender of the town in whom we are most

interested.

The pictures of the crowd's normal activities avoid jerkiness and haste.

They do not abound in the boresome self-conscious quietude that some

producers have substituted for the usual twitching. Each actor in the

assemblies has a refreshing equipment in gentle gesticulation; for the

manners and customs of Bethulia must needs be different from those of

America. Though the population moves together as a river, each citizen is

quite preoccupied. To the furthest corner of the picture, they are

egotistical as human beings. The elder goes by, in theological

conversation with his friend. He thinks his theology is important. The

mother goes by, all absorbed in her child. To her it is the only child in

the world.

Alternated with these scenes is the terrible rush of the Assyrian army,

on to exploration, battle, and glory. The speed of their setting out

becomes actual, because it is contrasted with the deliberation of the

Jewish town. At length the Assyrians are along those hills and valleys

and below the wall of defence. The population is on top of the

battlements, beating them back the more desperately because they are

separated from the water-supply, the wells in the fields where once the

lovers met. In a lull in the siege, by a connivance of the elders, Judith

is let out of a little door in the wall. And while the fortune of her

people is most desperate she is shown in the quiet shelter of the tent of

Holofernes. Sinuous in grace, tranced, passionately in love, she has

forgotten her peculiar task. She is in a sense Bethulia itself, the race

of Israel made over into a woman, while Holofernes is the embodiment of

the besieging army. Though in a quiet tent, and on the terms of love, it

is the essential warfare of the hot Assyrian blood and the pure and

peculiar Jewish thoroughbredness.

Blanche Sweet as Judith is indeed dignified and ensnaring, the more so

because in her abandoned quarter of an hour the Jewish sanctity does not

leave her. And her aged woman attendant, coming in and out, sentinel and

conscience, with austere face and lifted finger, symbolizes the fire of

Israel that shall yet awaken within her. When her love for her city and

God finally becomes paramount, she shakes off the spell of the divine

honors which she has followed all the camp in according to that living

heathen deity Holofernes, and by the very transfiguration of her figure

and countenance we know that the deliverance of Israel is at hand. She

beheads the dark Assyrian. Soon she is back in the city, by way of the

little gate by which she emerged. The elders receive her and her bloody

trophy.

The people who have been dying of thirst arise in a final whirlwind of

courage. Bereft of their military genius, the Assyrians flee from the

burning camp. Naomi is delivered by her lover Nathan. This act is taken

by the audience as a type of the setting free of all the captives. Then

we have the final return of the citizens to their town. As for Judith,

hers is no crass triumph. She is shown in her gray and silvery room in

her former widow's dress, but not the same woman. There is thwarted love

in her face. The sword of sorrow is there. But there is also the prayer

of thanksgiving. She goes forth. She is hailed as her city's deliverer.

She stands among the nobles like a holy candle.

Providing the picture may be preserved in its original delicacy, it has

every chance to retain a place in the affections of the wise, if a humble

pioneer of criticism may speak his honest mind.

Though in this story the archaic flavor is well-preserved, the way the

producer has pictured the population at peace, in battle, in despair, in

victory gives me hope that he or men like unto him will illustrate the

American patriotic crowd-prophecies. We must have Whitmanesque scenarios,

based on moods akin to that of the poem By Blue Ontario's Shore. The

possibility of showing the entire American population its own face in the

Mirror Screen has at last come. Whitman brought the idea of democracy to

our sophisticated literati, but did not persuade the democracy itself to

read his democratic poems. Sooner or later the kinetoscope will do what

he could not, bring the nobler side of the equality idea to the people

who are so crassly equal.

The photoplay penetrates in our land to the haunts of the wildest or the

dullest. The isolated prospector rides twenty miles to see the same film

that is displayed on Broadway. There is not a civilized or half-civilized

land but may read the Whitmanesque message in time, if once it is put on

the films with power. Photoplay theatres are set up in ports where

sailors revel, in heathen towns where gentlemen adventurers are willing

to make one last throw with fate.

On the other hand, as a recorder Whitman approaches the wildest, rawest

American material and conquers it, at the same time keeping his nerves in

the state in which Swinburne wrote Only the Song of Secret Bird, or

Lanier composed The Ballad of Trees and The Master. J.W. Alexander's

portrait of Whitman in the Metropolitan Museum, New York, is not too

sophisticated. The out-of-door profoundness of this poet is far richer

than one will realize unless he has just returned from some cross-country

adventure afoot. Then if one reads breathlessly by the page and the score

of pages, there is a glory transcendent. For films of American

patriotism to parallel the splendors of Cabiria and Judith of Bethulia,

and to excel them, let us have Whitmanesque scenarios based on moods like

that of By Blue Ontario's Shore, The Salute au Monde, and The Passage to

India. Then the people's message will reach the people at last.

The average Crowd Picture will cling close to the streets that are, and

the usual Patriotic Picture will but remind us of nationality as it is at

present conceived and aflame, and the Religious Picture will for the most

part be close to the standard orthodoxies. The final forms of these merge

into each other, though they approach the heights by different avenues.

We Americans should look for the great photoplay of to-morrow, that will

mark a decade or a century, that prophesies of the flags made one, the

crowds in brotherhood.

CHAPTER VII

RELIGIOUS SPLENDOR

As far as the photoplay is concerned, religious emotion is a form of

crowd-emotion. In the most conventional and rigid church sense this phase

can be conveyed more adequately by the motion picture than by the stage.

There is little, of course, for the anti-ritualist in the art-world

anywhere. The thing that makes cathedrals real shrines in the eye of the

reverent traveller makes them, with their religious processions and the

like, impressive in splendor-films.

For instance, I have long remembered the essentials of the film, The

Death of Thomas Becket. It may not compare in technique with some of our

present moving picture achievements, but the idea must have been

particularly adapted to the film medium. The story has stayed in my mind

with great persistence, not only as a narrative, but as the first hint to

me that orthodox religious feeling has here an undeveloped field.

Green tells the story in this way, in his History of the English

People:--

"Four knights of the King's court, stirred to outrage by a passionate

outburst of their master's wrath, crossed the sea and on the twenty-ninth

of December forced their way into the Archbishop's palace. After a stormy

parley with him in his chamber they withdrew to arm. Thomas was hurried

by his clerks into the cathedral, but as he reached the steps leading

from the transept into the choir his pursuers burst in from the

cloisters. 'Where,' cried Reginald Fitzurse, 'is the traitor, Thomas

Becket?' 'Here am I, no traitor, but a priest of God,' he replied. And

again descending the steps he placed himself with his back against a

pillar and fronted his foes.... The brutal murder was received with a

thrill of horror throughout Christendom. Miracles were wrought at the

martyr's tomb, etc...."

It is one of the few deaths in moving pictures that have given me the

sense that I was watching a tragedy. Most of them affect one, if they

have any effect, like exhibits in an art gallery, as does Josef Israels'

oil painting, Alone in the World. We admire the technique, and as for

emotion, we feel the picturesqueness only. But here the church

procession, the robes, the candles, the vaulting overhead, the whole

visualized cathedral mood has the power over the reverent eye it has in

life, and a touch more.

It is not a private citizen who is struck down. Such a taking off would

have been but nominally impressive, no matter how well acted. Private

deaths in the films, to put it another way, are but narrative statements.

It is not easy to convey their spiritual significance. Take, for

instance, the death of John Goderic, in the film version of Gilbert

Parker's The Seats of the Mighty. The major leaves this world in the

first third of the story. The photoplay use of his death is, that he may

whisper in the ear of Robert Moray to keep certain letters of La

Pompadour well hidden. The fact that it is the desire of a dying man

gives sharpness to his request. Later in the story Moray is hard-pressed

by the villain for those same papers. Then the scene of the death is

flashed for an instant on the screen, representing the hero's memory of

the event. It is as though he should recollect and renew a solemn oath.

The documents are more important than John Goderic. His departure is but

one of their attributes. So it is in any film. There is no emotional

stimulation in the final departure of a non-public character to bring

tears, such tears as have been provoked by the novel or the stage over

the death of Sidney Carton or Faust's Marguerite or the like.

All this, to make sharper the fact that the murder of Becket the

archbishop is a climax. The great Church and hierarchy are profaned. The

audience feels the same thrill of horror that went through Christendom.

We understand why miracles were wrought at the martyr's tomb.

In the motion pictures the entrance of a child into the world is a mere

family episode, not a climax, when it is the history of private people.

For instance, several little strangers come into the story of Enoch

Arden. They add beauty, and are links in the chain of events. Still they

are only one of many elements of idyllic charm in the village of Annie.

Something that in real life is less valuable than a child is the goal of

each tiny tableau, some coming or departure or the like that affects the

total plot. But let us imagine a production that would chronicle the

promise to Abraham, and the vision that came with it. Let the film show

the final gift of Isaac to the aged Sarah, even the boy who is the

beginning of a race that shall be as the stars of heaven and the sands of

the sea for multitude. This could be made a pageant of power and glory.

The crowd-emotions, patriotic fires, and religious exaltations on which

it turns could be given in noble procession and the tiny fellow on the

pillow made the mystic centre of the whole. The story of the coming of

Samuel, the dedicated little prophet, might be told on similar terms.

The real death in the photoplay is the ritualistic death, the real birth

is the ritualistic birth, and the cathedral mood of the motion picture

which goes with these and is close to these in many of its phases, is an

inexhaustible resource.

The film corporations fear religious questions, lest offence be given to

this sect or that. So let such denominations as are in the habit of

cooperating, themselves take over this medium, not gingerly, but

whole-heartedly, as in mediæval time the hierarchy strengthened its hold

on the people with the marvels of Romanesque and Gothic architecture.

This matter is further discussed in the seventeenth chapter, entitled

"Progress and Endowment."

But there is a field wherein the commercial man will not be accused of

heresy or sacrilege, which builds on ritualistic birth and death and

elements akin thereto. This the established producer may enter without

fear. Which brings us to The Battle Hymn of the Republic, issued by the

American Vitagraph Company in 1911. This film should be studied in the

High Schools and Universities till the canons of art for which it stands

are established in America. The director was Larry Trimble. All honor to

him.

The patriotism of The Battle Hymn of the Republic, if taken literally,

deals with certain aspects of the Civil War. But the picture is

transfigured by so marked a devotion, that it is the main illustration in

this work of the religious photoplay.

The beginning shows President Lincoln in the White House brooding over

the lack of response to his last call for troops. (He is impersonated by

Ralph Ince.) He and Julia Ward Howe are looking out of the window on a

recruiting headquarters that is not busy. (Mrs. Howe is impersonated by

Julia S. Gordon.) Another scene shows an old mother in the West refusing

to let her son enlist. (This woman is impersonated by Mrs. Maurice.) The

father has died in the war. The sword hangs on the wall. Later Julia Ward

Howe is shown in her room asleep at midnight, then rising in a trance and

writing the Battle Hymn at a table by the bed.

The pictures that might possibly have passed before her mind during the

trance are thrown upon the screen. The phrases they illustrate are not in

the final order of the poem, but in the possible sequence in which they

went on the paper in the first sketch. The dream panorama is not a

literal discussion of abolitionism or states' rights. It illustrates

rather the Hebraic exultation applied to all lands and times. "Mine eyes

have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord"; a gracious picture of the

nativity. (Edith Storey impersonates Mary the Virgin.) "I have seen him

in the watchfires of a hundred circling camps" and "They have builded him

an altar in the evening dews and damps"--for these are given symbolic

pageants of the Holy Sepulchre crusaders.

Then there is a visible parable, showing a marketplace in some wicked

capital, neither Babylon, Tyre, nor Nineveh, but all of them in essential

character. First come spectacles of rejoicing, cruelty, and waste. Then

from Heaven descend flood and fire, brimstone and lightning. It is like

the judgment of the Cities of the Plain. Just before the overthrow, the

line is projected upon the screen: "He hath loosed the fateful lightning

of his terrible swift sword." Then the heavenly host becomes gradually

visible upon the air, marching toward the audience, almost crossing the

footlights, and blowing their solemn trumpets. With this picture the line

is given us to read: "Our God is marching on." This host appears in the

photoplay as often as the refrain sweeps into the poem. The celestial

company, its imperceptible emergence, its spiritual power when in the

ascendant, is a thing never to be forgotten, a tableau that proves the

motion picture a great religious instrument.

Then comes a procession indeed. It is as though the audience were

standing at the side of the throne at Doomsday looking down the hill of

Zion toward the little earth. There is a line of those who are to be

judged, leaders from the beginning of history, barbarians with their

crude weapons, classic characters, Cæsar and his rivals for fame;

mediæval figures including Dante meditating; later figures, Richelieu,

Napoleon. Many people march toward the strange glorifying eye of the

camera, growing larger than men, filling the entire field of vision,

disappearing when they are almost upon us. The audience weighs the worth

of their work to the world as the men themselves with downcast eyes seem

to be doing also. The most thrilling figure is Tolstoi in his peasant

smock, coming after the bitter egotists and conquerors. (The

impersonation is by Edward Thomas.) I shall never forget that presence

marching up to the throne invisible with bowed head. This procession is

to illustrate the line: "He is sifting out the hearts of men before his

Judgment Seat." Later Lincoln is pictured on the steps of the White

House. It is a quaint tableau, in the spirit of the old-fashioned Rogers

group. Yet it is masterful for all that. Lincoln is taking the chains

from a cowering slave. This tableau is to illustrate the line: "Let the

hero born of woman crush the serpent with his heel." Now it is the end of

the series of visions. It is morning in Mrs. Howe's room. She rises. She

is filled with wonder to find the poem on her table.

Written to the rousing glory-tune of John Brown's Body the song goes over

the North like wildfire. The far-off home of the widow is shown. She and

the boy read the famous chant in the morning news column. She takes the

old sword from the wall. She gives it to her son and sends him to enlist

with her blessing. In the next picture Lincoln and Mrs. Howe are looking

out of the window where was once the idle recruiting tent. A new army is

pouring by, singing the words that have rallied the nation. Ritualistic

birth and death have been discussed. This film might be said to

illustrate ritualistic birth, death, and resurrection.

The writer has seen hundreds of productions since this one. He has

described it from memory. It came out in a time when the American people

paid no attention to the producer or the cast. It may have many technical

crudities by present-day standards. But the root of the matter is there.

And Springfield knew it. It was brought back to our town many times. It

was popular in both the fashionable picture show houses and the cheapest,

dirtiest hole in the town. It will soon be reissued by the Vitagraph

Company. Every student of American Art should see this film.

The same exultation that went into it, the faculty for commanding the

great spirits of history and making visible the unseen powers of the

air, should be applied to Crowd Pictures which interpret the

non-sectarian prayers of the broad human race.

The pageant of Religious Splendor is the final photoplay form in the

classification which this work seeks to establish. Much of what follows

will be to reënforce the heads of these first discourses. Further comment

on the Religious Photoplay may be found in the eleventh chapter, entitled

"Architecture-in-Motion."

CHAPTER VIII

SCULPTURE-IN-MOTION

The outline is complete. Now to reënforce it. Pictures of Action Intimacy

and Splendor are the foundation colors in the photoplay, as red, blue,

and yellow are the basis of the rainbow. Action Films might be called the

red section; Intimate Motion Pictures, being colder and quieter, might be

called blue; and Splendor Photoplays called yellow, since that is the hue

of pageants and sunshine.

Another way of showing the distinction is to review the types of gesture.

The Action Photoplay deals with generalized pantomime: the gesture of the

conventional policeman in contrast with the mannerism of the stereotyped

preacher. The Intimate Film gives us more elusive personal gestures: the

difference between the table manners of two preachers in the same

restaurant, or two policemen. A mark of the Fairy Play is the gesture of

incantation, the sweep of the arm whereby Mab would transform a prince

into a hawk. The other Splendor Films deal with the total gestures of

crowds: the pantomime of a torch-waving mass of men, the drill of an army

on the march, or the bending of the heads of a congregation receiving the

benediction.

Another way to demonstrate the thesis is to use the old classification of

poetry: dramatic, lyric, epic. The Action Play is a narrow form of the

dramatic. The Intimate Motion Picture is an equivalent of the lyric. In

the seventeenth chapter it is shown that one type of the Intimate might

be classed as imagist. And obviously the Splendor Pictures are the

equivalent of the epic.

But perhaps the most adequate way of showing the meaning of this outline

is to say that the Action Film is sculpture-in-motion, the Intimate

Photoplay is painting-in-motion, and the Fairy Pageant, along with the

rest of the Splendor Pictures, may be described as architecture-in-motion.

This chapter will discuss the bearing of the phrase sculpture-in-motion.

It will relate directly to chapter two.

First, gentle and kindly reader, let us discuss sculpture in its most

literal sense: after that, less realistically, but perhaps more

adequately. Let us begin with Annette Kellerman in Neptune's Daughter.

This film has a crude plot constructed to show off Annette's various

athletic resources. It is good photography, and a big idea so far as the

swimming episodes are concerned. An artist haunted by picture-conceptions

equivalent to the musical thoughts back of Wagner's Rhine-maidens could

have made of Annette, in her mermaid's dress, a notable figure. Or a

story akin to the mermaid tale of Hans Christian Andersen, or Matthew

Arnold's poem of the forsaken merman, could have made this picturesque

witch of the salt water truly significant, and still retained the most

beautiful parts of the photoplay as it was exhibited. It is an

exceedingly irrelevant imagination that shows her in other scenes as a

duellist, for instance, because forsooth she can fence. As a child of the

ocean, half fish, half woman, she is indeed convincing. Such mermaids as

this have haunted sailors, and lured them on the rocks to their doom,

from the day the siren sang till the hour the Lorelei sang no more. The

scene with the baby mermaid, when she swims with the pretty creature on

her back, is irresistible. Why are our managers so mechanical? Why do

they flatten out at the moment the fancy of the tiniest reader of

fairy-tales begins to be alive? Most of Annette's support were stage

dummies. Neptune was a lame Santa Claus with cotton whiskers.

But as for the bearing of the film on this chapter: the human figure is

within its rights whenever it is as free from self-consciousness as was

the life-radiating Annette in the heavenly clear waters of Bermuda. On

the other hand, Neptune and his pasteboard diadem and wooden-pointed

pitchfork, should have put on his dressing-gown and retired. As a toe

dancer in an alleged court scene, on land, Annette was a mere simperer.

Possibly Pavlowa as a swimmer in Bermuda waters would have been as much

of a mistake. Each queen to her kingdom.

For living, moving sculpture, the human eye requires a costume and a part

in unity with the meaning of that particular figure. There is the Greek

dress of Mordkin in the arrow dance. There is Annette's breast covering

of shells, and wonderful flowing mermaid hair, clothing her as the

midnight does the moon. The new costume freedom of the photoplay allows

such limitation of clothing as would be probable when one is honestly in

touch with wild nature and preoccupied with vigorous exercise. Thus the

cave-man and desert island narratives, though seldom well done, when

produced with verisimilitude, give an opportunity for the native human

frame in the logical wrappings of reeds and skins. But those who in a

silly hurry seek excuses, are generally merely ridiculous, like the

barefoot man who is terribly tender about walking on the pebbles, or the

wild man who is white as celery or grass under a board. There is no short

cut to vitality.

A successful literal use of sculpture is in the film Oil and Water.

Blanche Sweet is the leader of the play within a play which occupies the

first reel. Here the Olympians and the Muses, with a grace that we fancy

was Greek, lead a dance that traces the story of the spring, summer, and

autumn of life. Finally the supple dancers turn gray and old and die, but

not before they have given us a vision from the Ionian islands. The play

might have been inspired from reading Keats' Lamia, but is probably

derived from the work of Isadora Duncan. This chapter has hereafter only

a passing word or two on literal sculptural effects. It has more in mind

the carver's attitude toward all that passes before the eye.

The sculptor George Gray Barnard is responsible for none of the views in

this discourse, but he has talked to me at length about his sense of

discovery in watching the most ordinary motion pictures, and his delight

in following them with their endless combinations of masses and flowing

surfaces.

The little far-away people on the old-fashioned speaking stage do not

appeal to the plastic sense in this way. They are, by comparison, mere

bits of pasteboard with sweet voices, while, on the other hand, the

photoplay foreground is full of dumb giants. The bodies of these giants

are in high sculptural relief. Where the lights are quite glaring and the

photography is bad, many of the figures are as hard in their impact on

the eye as lime-white plaster-casts, no matter what the clothing. There

are several passages of this sort in the otherwise beautiful Enoch Arden,

where the shipwrecked sailor is depicted on his desert island in the

glaring sun.

What materials should the photoplay figures suggest? There are as many

possible materials as there are subjects for pictures and tone schemes

to be considered. But we will take for illustration wood, bronze, and

marble, since they have been used in the old sculptural art.

There is found in most art shows a type of carved wood gargoyle where the

work and the subject are at one, not only in the color of the wood, but

in the way the material masses itself, in bulk betrays its qualities. We

will suppose a moving picture humorist who is in the same mood as the

carver. He chooses a story of quaint old ladies, street gamins, and fat

aldermen. Imagine the figures with the same massing and interplay

suddenly invested with life, yet giving to the eye a pleasure kindred to

that which is found in carved wood, and bringing to the fancy a similar

humor.

Or there is a type of Action Story where the mood of the figures is that

of bronze, with the æsthetic resources of that metal: its elasticity; its

emphasis on the tendon, ligament, and bone, rather than on the muscle;

and an attribute that we will call the panther-like quality. Hermon A.

MacNeil has a memorable piece of work in the yard of the architect Shaw,

at Lake Forest, Illinois. It is called "The Sun Vow." A little Indian is

shooting toward the sun, while the old warrior, crouching immediately

behind him, follows with his eye the direction of the arrow. Few pieces

of sculpture come readily to mind that show more happily the qualities of

bronze as distinguished from other materials. To imagine such a group

done in marble, carved wood, or Della Robbia ware is to destroy the very

image in the fancy.

The photoplay of the American Indian should in most instances be planned

as bronze in action. The tribes should not move so rapidly that the

panther-like elasticity is lost in the riding, running, and scalping. On

the other hand, the aborigines should be far from the temperateness of

marble.

Mr. Edward S. Curtis, the super-photographer, has made an Ethnological

collection of photographs of our American Indians. This work of a

life-time, a supreme art achievement, shows the native as a figure in

bronze. Mr. Curtis' photoplay, The Land of the Head Hunters (World Film

Corporation), a romance of the Indians of the North-West, abounds in

noble bronzes.

I have gone through my old territories as an art student, in the Chicago

Art Institute and the Metropolitan Museum, of late, in special

excursions, looking for sculpture, painting, and architecture that might

be the basis for the photoplays of the future.

The Bacchante of Frederick MacMonnies is in bronze in the Metropolitan

Museum and in bronze replica in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. There is

probably no work that more rejoices the hearts of the young art students

in either city. The youthful creature illustrates a most joyous leap into

the air. She is high on one foot with the other knee lifted. She holds a

bunch of grapes full-arm's length. Her baby, clutched in the other hand,

is reaching up with greedy mouth toward the fruit. The bacchante body is

glistening in the light. This is joy-in-bronze as the Sun Vow is

power-in-bronze. This special story could not be told in another medium.

I have seen in Paris a marble copy of this Bacchante. It is as though it

were done in soap. On the other hand, many of the renaissance Italian

sculptors have given us children in marble in low relief, dancing like

lilies in the wind. They could not be put into bronze.

The plot of the Action Photoplay is literally or metaphorically a chase

down the road or a hurdle-race. It might be well to consider how typical

figures for such have been put into carved material. There are two bronze

statues that have their replicas in all museums. They are generally one

on either side of the main hall, towering above the second-story

balustrade. First, the statue of Gattamelata, a Venetian general, by

Donatello. The original is in Padua. Then there is the figure of

Bartolommeo Colleoni. The original is in Venice. It is by Verrocchio and

Leopardi. These equestrians radiate authority. There is more action in

them than in any cowboy hordes I have ever beheld zipping across the

screen. Look upon them and ponder long, prospective author-producer. Even

in a simple chase-picture, the speed must not destroy the chance to enjoy

the modelling. If you would give us mounted legions, destined to conquer,

let any one section of the film, if it is stopped and studied, be

grounded in the same bronze conception. The Assyrian commanders in

Griffith's Judith would, without great embarrassment, stand this test.

But it may not be the pursuit of an enemy we have in mind. It may be a

spring celebration, horsemen in Arcadia, going to some happy tournament.

Where will we find our precedents for such a cavalcade? Go to any museum.

Find the Parthenon room. High on the wall is the copy of the famous

marble frieze of the young citizens who are in the procession in praise

of Athena. Such a rhythm of bodies and heads and the feet of proud

steeds, and above all the profiles of thoroughbred youths, no city has

seen since that day. The delicate composition relations, ever varying,

ever refreshing, amid the seeming sameness of formula of rider behind

rider, have been the delight of art students the world over, and shall so

remain. No serious observer escapes the exhilaration of this company. Let

it be studied by the author-producer though it be but an idyl in disguise

that his scenario calls for: merry young farmers hurrying to the State

Fair parade, boys making all speed to the political rally.

Buy any three moving picture magazines you please. Mark the illustrations

that are massive, in high relief, with long lines in their edges. Cut out

and sort some of these. I have done it on the table where I write. After

throwing away all but the best specimens, I have four different kinds of

sculpture. First, behold the inevitable cowboy. He is on a ramping

horse, filling the entire outlook. The steed rears, while facing us. The

cowboy waves his hat. There is quite such an animal by Frederick

MacMonnies, wrought in bronze, set up on a gate to a park in Brooklyn. It

is not the identical color of the photoplay animal, but the bronze

elasticity is the joy in both.

Here is a scene of a masked monk, carrying off a fainting girl. The hero

intercepts him. The figures of the lady and the monk are in sufficient

sculptural harmony to make a formal sculptural group for an art

exhibition. The picture of the hero, strong, with well-massed surfaces,

is related to both. The fact that he is in evening dress does not alter

his monumental quality. All three are on a stone balcony that relates

itself to the general largeness of spirit in the group, and the

semi-classic dress of the maiden. No doubt the title is: The Morning

Following the Masquerade Ball. This group could be made in unglazed clay,

in four colors.

Here is an American lieutenant with two ladies. The three are suddenly

alert over the approach of the villain, who is not yet in the picture.

In costume it is an everyday group, but those three figures are related

to one another, and the trees behind them, in simple sculptural terms.

The lieutenant, as is to be expected, looks forth in fierce readiness.

One girl stands with clasped hands. The other points to the danger. The

relations of these people to one another may seem merely dramatic to the

superficial observer, but the power of the group is in the fact that it

is monumental. I could imagine it done in four different kinds of rare

tropical wood, carved unpolished.

Here is a scene of storm and stress in an office where the hero is caught

with seemingly incriminating papers. The table is in confusion. The room

is filling with people, led by one accusing woman. Is this also

sculpture? Yes. The figures are in high relief. Even the surfaces of the

chairs and the littered table are massive, and the eye travels without

weariness, as it should do in sculpture, from the hero to the furious

woman, then to the attorney behind her, then to the two other revilers,

then to the crowd in three loose rhythmic ranks. The eye makes this

journey, not from space to space, or fabric to fabric, but first of all

from mass to mass. It is sculpture, but it is the sort that can be done

in no medium but the moving picture itself, and therefore it is one goal

of this argument.

But there are several other goals. One of the sculpturesque resources of

the photoplay is that the human countenance can be magnified many times,

till it fills the entire screen. Some examples are in rather low relief,

portraits approximating certain painters. But if they are on sculptural

terms, and are studies of the faces of thinking men, let the producer

make a pilgrimage to Washington for his precedent. There, in the rotunda

of the capitol, is the face of Lincoln by Gutzon Borglum. It is one of

the eminently successful attempts to get at the secret of the countenance

by enlarging it much, and concentrating the whole consideration there.

The photoplay producer, seemingly without taking thought, is apt to show

a sculptural sense in giving us Newfoundland fishermen, clad in oilskins.

The background may have an unconscious Winslow Homer reminiscence. In the

foreground our hardy heroes fill the screen, and dripping with sea-water

become wave-beaten granite, yet living creatures none the less. Imagine

some one chapter from the story of Little Em'ly in David Copperfield,

retold in the films. Show us Ham Peggotty and old Mr. Peggotty in

colloquy over their nets. There are many powerful bronze groups to be had

from these two, on to the heroic and unselfish death of Ham, rescuing his

enemy in storm and lightning.

I have seen one rich picture of alleged cannibal tribes. It was a comedy

about a missionary. But the aborigines were like living ebony and silver.

That was long ago. Such things come too much by accident. The producer is

not sufficiently aware that any artistic element in his list of

productions that is allowed to go wild, that has not had full analysis,

reanalysis, and final conservation, wastes his chance to attain supreme

mastery.

Open your history of sculpture, and dwell upon those illustrations which

are not the normal, reposeful statues, but the exceptional, such as have

been listed for this chapter. Imagine that each dancing, galloping, or

fighting figure comes down into the room life-size. Watch it against a

dark curtain. Let it go through a series of gestures in harmony with the

spirit of the original conception, and as rapidly as possible, not to

lose nobility. If you have the necessary elasticity, imagine the figures

wearing the costumes of another period, yet retaining in their motions

the same essential spirit. Combine them in your mind with one or two

kindred figures, enlarged till they fill the end of the room. You have

now created the beginning of an Action Photoplay in your own fancy.

The Art of the Moving Picture · 第 14 / 16 章