Hitler looks like a Jewish
barber—so much so that the two [quite literally] are interchangeable; and if
abstracting this simplicity in casting isn’t humorous in and of itself, then—at
the very least—it serves in this blog as the essence of satire: the perceived absurdity inherent in the logic of Nazi Germany. I speak, of
course, in reference to the dictator’s arrest [for appearing like the barber]
(1:50:51), and, subsequently, of the soft-spoken barber being tossed into the
role of Führer (1:58:00). Now, these alone—as plot points—are quite funny; they
possess, within them, comedic value to laugh at the
expense of. But be that as it may, the humor in the casting, the likeness
between anti-Semite and Semite, need be viewed as an artistic expression—as
satirical. As aforementioned, the essence of satire is to illuminate the absurdity of a position [this being that of Nazi
Germany]. Can it not be said, then, that the absurdity of their logic rests in
this emphasis on outward appearance? A “machine” which is hell-bent on the
propagation of blonde hair and blue eyes, is, at the same time, being driven by
a man with neither of the two qualifications—does this not appear [in its most
simplest of essences] as an 'inherent absurdity’? The Minister of Propaganda,
Garbitsch [garbage—propaganda/garbage], is guilty of being brunette all the
same. A sweet irony rests within the stormtroopers, and of the systematic witch-hunt
of a man who looks identical to their dictator.
As we know, Charlie Chaplin plays
both of the characters; in this sense, the two are [in fact] genetically
identical—and this is worth noting, in my opinion. For, perhaps, having the two
characters simply look similar [and be played by different actors] may have
sufficed; however, they are genetically identical. With that
being said, then, I’d like to refer to the barber’s plea for “humanity” and
“universal brotherhood” (~2:00:00). Now, this speech is overtly critiquing the
aggression of Germany and their differentiating of human species. The casting can be seen as an extension of this idea—as an avowal of this
“universal brotherhood,” as an ode to the fact that we all are, biologically
and genetically speaking, the same.
I watched the "Great Dictator" in a high school film class. I remember my teacher talking about how the perception Chaplin as Hitler helped people heal. By making fun of a vicious war lord it eased the pains of WWII and provided a wonderful sense of humor. Chaplin is considered on the best comedians of his time and is still wonderfully hilarious to this day.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, Michael! I haven't seen this film in many years, but I would recommend everyone look at some Chaplin films. I believe we own a box set in the library. He is the father of American comedy on screen, and his humor is trans-generational, not to mention that often times his films possess poignant cultural critiques.
ReplyDeleteI had the distinct pleasure of watching City Lights for Theology of the Film this semester, starring Chaplin. And I have to say, I was extremely taken back at how his films were able to warm the heart of not only myself, but the entire class - a vast number of years beyond its original release. And I can't deny it's becoming increasingly more interesting to compare and contrast the aesthetics of films now, and those of earlier times. For example, in many Westerns filmed years ago the cameras didn't have the ability to film at night - so to compensate you can see how the editors throw a filter over it to give off the impression of that time of day, despite seeing the sunlight back-lighting a character. A wonderful display of still making something work with what you've got.
ReplyDeleteI have a feeling the general public has become so used to the general scheme and portrayal of the world on screen today, that it's becoming increasingly difficult for someone to analyze - even moreso, to sit-the-hell-down and literally watch a film that was made before their time. Which to be honest, is rather sad.