If I ask you, "Who is the man pictured in the above photo?" what will be your reply?
"Charlie Chaplin," you say, right?
"Nope," I reply. "It's definitely NOT Charlie Chaplin!"
"Okay," you say, "So maybe it's one of the many Chaplin 'wannabes' who sprang up in silent films after Chaplin -- and his famous "Little Tramp" character -- had burst upon the scene (such as the gent pictured in the following stereographic photo, issued circa 1925)?" (Please excuse the "eBay" text partially obscuring this and some of the other scans in this post, by the way. I'll explain about that later!)
"Nope!" I reply again.
"Okay, Mr. Fox! Maybe you did a little bit of computer voodoo with a still pic of Robert Downey, Jr. portraying Chaplin in the 1992 eponymous biopic? Or maybe you did that with a shot of someone else playing the role of Chaplin?"
Nope! (I'm enjoying this far too much, by the way.)
Here's a little background, fellow babies:
Charles Spencer Chaplin (1889-1977) had barely begun his film career when his second film premiered in early 1914. This film was the very first to introduce the character known as the Little Tramp.
Here's Chaplin's own tale of how the look of the character came to be: "[On] the way to the wardrobe I thought I would dress in baggy pants, big shoes, a cane and a derby hat. I wanted everything to be a contradiction: the pants baggy, the coat tight, the hat small and the shoes large. I was undecided whether to look old or young, but remembering Sennett had expected me to be a much older man, I added a small moustache, which I reasoned, would add age without hiding my expression."
The use of this superb illustration of Charlie Chaplin's Little Tramp
has been graciously permitted by its artist, Jason Pruett.
Yep. That's how Chaplin himself explained the look of the character, and its origins.
"Fine. Whatever!" you say. "So who is the guy on the freakin' postcard?"
Postcard? Yes, it's a postcard. I actually own it. And the reason that the stereographic photo of the Chaplin impostor above and two of the scans below have "eBay" superimposed on 'em is because I (unsuccessfully) tried selling them as a pair several years ago, on eBay. That's when I made the scans. I would have made new scans for this post, but I'll be damned if I know where the freakin' postcard is right now!
Okay, let's take a look at the entire front view of the card (and note that the hat is normal-sized, and that the coat is somewhat baggy, not tight, and also note the absence of a cane)...
And a close-up of the front view (Sure looks like ol' Charlie, dunnit? But it isn't!)...
And now, the back view...
And a close-up of the back view...
And...
"Wait a minute, Foxy!" you say. "1909? WTF?!?" (Or maybe you say "WTH," if you're so inclined. Heh.)
Yeah, 1909. Five years before the Little Tramp showed up on-screen, and one year before Chaplin ever set foot in the USA!
So, is this a remarkable coincidence? Maybe. Or did Chaplin see this outfit on the very same postcard -- well, another one just like it, I mean -- and decide to improve upon it? Maybe.
And is this li'l ole century-old postcard a one-of-a-kind, mouth-watering collector's item? Maybe.
It's also for sale... if and when I can ever find the damned thing, that is!
By the way... I hope you're not too disappointed by the fact that after all of my exposition, I've only told you "what" it is, and not who it is.
I really don't know who it is, y'see... just that it's not Charlie Chaplin!
Thanks for your time.
P.S. ~~ COMING SOON! (Watch for it!) A Re-Posting of One of the Best (and Longest) Stories I Ever Posted on This Blog!
Weird. I would have guessed it was him on first look too. Maybe he time traveled. Or more likely he saw it and decided to "borrow" from it, despite what he claims. I don't know why, but after you said it wasn't him, Jack the Ripper jumped to mind. A few years late.
ReplyDeleteIf you find out who it is, could be worth millions. Just share with the cat lol
Well, it could be Jack the Ripper. They never caught him, so maybe he moved to America, and here he is twenty years or so later...
DeleteNow that was fascinating to read. Hope you find the postcard one of these days!
ReplyDeleteSusan A Eames at
Travel, Fiction and Photos
I've seen it once since I originally posted this article, and I misplaced it again!
DeleteWell.. but who is this guy David ? I would love to know !
ReplyDeleteSo would I!
Deleteah nope, you come with this storiy and picture and we dont know !
DeleteWell, I can't tell you something I don't know myself, right? Ha.
Deletehmm - My mind is wandering down so many different roads. Seems like more than a coincidence going on here. I would say some sychroncity is at play. Perhaps, the universe paved the way or it was a version of Chaplin in a parallel world. Who really knows? I guess you would have to put on a detective hat and find the originator of the photo on the postcard.
ReplyDeleteLet's see. Let's assume the photographer was at least 18 when he took the photo, and it's 109 years later... He' (or she) would be at least 127 years old. There shouldn't be too many 127-year-old photographers around, so he should be really easy to find.
Deleteha - Well, Good Luck with that Silver! I guess I am just imaginative and tend to ponder about stranger things.
DeleteHow are you? Cold enough for you?
Actually, I've been rather sick the past few days. Nothing serious. But that, and the fact that I've been pretty busy as well, is why I haven't posted in a week.
DeleteHe looks a bit shorter and more slovenly to be Chaplin, I was thinking. Now, though, I have a full story in retort for when people call me a little tramp. They always do. I'm kidding. I wish they always did.
ReplyDeleteWell, Robyn, ordinarily I'd offer to call you that if you wanted, but if I let that carry over onto your blog, your other readers would wonder why the hell I was doing that.
DeleteThat is REALLY cool! I love that it has such a readable postmark. Interesting to find out his outfit choice, too. I'd never noticed the large/small aspects of his outfit, and now that will be something I pay attention to. I love the little details that make such a difference.
ReplyDeleteI think I just stumbled across it in a batch of magazines and other paper stuff I picked up years ago. My first reaction was "Hey, that's Charlie Chaplin!" and then I took a second look and thought, "Whoa, wait a minute..."
DeleteThat's uncanny. Unless somehow we've just stumbled into a Charlie Chaplin/Time Traveler theory ... *cue X-Files theme* :)
ReplyDeleteAh, you see that? Your comment shows that we're products of a different generation. I would have written *cue Twilight Zone theme*!
Delete