This article surveys staging practices in a sample of films from Pathé-Frères featuring the comedian Max Linder. The examination concerns the distance between camera and actor, and particularly the tendency in cinema by 1910 to reduce the distance in ways that enable the naturalism of actors' performances. This tendency, which was a transnational development involving the main production companies in Europe and the U.S. at around the same time, is approached through a comparative framework, with a focus on similarities between staging in the Linder Films and in the films directed contemporaneously by D.W.Griffith (Biograph). The analysis employs statistical methods in combinationwith conventional practices of film-historical research to show that Linder's films devoted more running time to shots featuring a reduced camera distance than Griffith's, and that the difference can be explained with reference to Linder's persona as a comic performer.
application/pdf
2036-461X
16487
21
en
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Cinéma & Cie. Film and Media Studies Journal
Camera Distance and Max Linder at Pathé-Frères
Text.Serial.Journal
https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/cinemaetcie
13
Thematic issue / Section thématique
2013-10-01
2021-09-29
2013-10-01
2024-02-14
Cinéma & Cie
Charles O’Brien
2013/10/01
Carleton University
2036-461X
21
en
Camera Distance and Max Linder at Pathé-Frères
https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/cinemaetcie/article/download/16487/16858
13
CAMERA DISTANCE AND MAX LINDER AT PATHÉ-FRÈRES
Charles O’Brien, Carleton University




  Abstract
  !"#$% &'(#)*+% $,'-+.$% $(&/#0/% 1'&)(#)+$% #0% &% $&21*+% 34% 5*2$% 4'32% 6&("789':'+$% 4+&(,'#0/% ("+%
  comedian Max Linder. The examination concerns the distance between camera and actor, and
  particularly the tendency in cinema by 1910 to reduce the distance in ways that enable the
  naturalism of actors’ performances. This tendency, which was a transnational development
  involving the main production companies in Europe and the U.S. at around the same time, is
  approached through a comparative framework, with a focus on similarities between staging
  #0%("+%;#0<+'%5*2$%=6&("789':'+$>%&0<%#0%("+%5*2$%<#'+)(+<%)30(+213'&0+3,$*.%?.%@ABA%C'#4-
  5("%=D#3/'&1">A%!"+%&0&*.$#$%+21*3.$%$(&(#$(#)&*%2+("3<$%#0%)32?#0&(#30%E#("%)30-+0(#30&*%
  1'&)(#)+$%34%5*28"#$(3'#)&*%'+$+&')"%(3%$"3E%("&(%;#0<+'F$%5*2$%<+-3(+<%23'+%',00#0/%(#2+%
  (3%$"3($%4+&(,'#0/%&%'+<,)+<%)&2+'&%<#$(&0)+%("&0%C'#45("F$G%&0<%("&(%("+%<#44+'+0)+%)&0%?+%
  explained with reference to Linder’s persona as a comic performer.




    This article examines changes in staging in cinema over the late aughts/early teens through a
43),$%30%H&I%;#0<+'F$%E3'J%43'%6&("789':'+$A%!"+%&0&*.$#$%+21"&$#K+$%30+%)"&0/+%$1+)#5)&**.L%
the reduction in distance between camera and actor that became evident around 1909, when actors
increasingly appeared in framings too tight to capture their entire bodies.1 Until then, producers
#0%("+%23(#30%1#)(,'+%#0<,$('.%3'<#0&'#*.%'+M,#'+<%("&(%&)(3'$%&11+&'%4,**85/,'+G%&0<%&(%2#<8<+)&<+%
it was standard practice to place the camera far enough to ensure visibility of the actor’s whole
body. Distance was determined by physical barriers, with twelve feet the minimum for tall actors.
At the same time, actors occasionally crossed the so-called frontline to come closer to the camera,
and in 1909 a close camera placement – a camera positioned at nine feet rather than twelve, which
framed actors from the knees up, in the manner of what became known as the plan américain –
became common at Vitagraph and soon at Biograph, Pathé-Frères, and other companies.2
    !"#$% &'(#)*+% +I&2#0+$% ("+% 23-+% (3E&'<% ("+% '+<,)+<% )&2+'&% <#$(&0)+% '+*&(#-+% (3% ("+% 5*2$% 34%
screen comedian Max Linder. The method is comparative, with a focus on similarities between
$(&/#0/%1'&)(#)+%#0%("+%;#0<+'%5*2$%2&<+%&(%6&("789':'+$%-+'$,$%("&(%#0%("+%5*2$%<#'+)(+<%?.%@ABA%
C'#45("%)30(+213'&0+3,$*.%43'%D#3/'&1"A%!"+%)321&'#$30%#0-3*-+$%("+%,$+%34%$(&(#$(#)&*%2+("3<$%34%
5*2%&0&*.$#$G%E"#)"%&**3E%43'%$(.*#$(#)%)321&'#$30$%&)'3$$%&%*&'/+%?3<.%34%5*2$A%!"+%'+<,)+<%4'30(-
line was a transnational development involving the main production companies in Europe and the

CINÉMA & CIE, vol. XIII, no. 21, Fall 2013                                                               49
CHARLES O’BRIEN

U.S. at around the same time. Statistical methods, when supplementing conventional approaches to
!"#$%&%"'()(*$+,-.)/0$%$1%'$-2$3,)&4)&4$-56$670$6,%&(&%6)-&%"$/)#0&()-&$-2$(6%4)&4$6087&)950*$17)"0$
%"(-$%""-1)&4$2-,$,0"%6).0"'$+,08)(0$8-#+%,)(-&($-2$-&0$!"##%:0,;($(6%4)&4$+,%86)80$6-$%&-670,;(<$



The new frontline
    The widespread adoption by around 1910 of the nine-foot camera placement was crucial to
cinema’s evolving status as art and entertainment, enabling acting performances more scaled-
/-1&*$)&60,)-,)=0/$%&/$+('87-"-4)8%""'$)&>0860/$67%&$17%6$#-6)-&$+)865,0$.)010,($10,0$%885(-
tomed to. In 1911, Victorin Jasset, director of the Nick Carter series at Éclair, linked current in-
&-.%6)-&$)&$%86)&4$6-$%$&01$?@#0,)8%&$(87--"A$0B0#+")!0/$3'$C)6%4,%+7*$17-(0$!"#($-2$670$+%(6$
few years had drawn critical acclaim in Europe. In the Vitagraph productions, Jasset observed,
tight framings in which actors remained stationary allowed the actor’s physiognomy to become
an expressive resource:

  Les Américains avaient remarqué l’intérêt que pourrait donner le jeu de physionomie dans les premiers
  !"#$%&'()'*"%'%+($',)#*($)'%(-.*%&'%#/-*0#$)'"('1,/2-&'"+($%(34"('1('"#'%/5$('67#$1'*"'"('8#""#*)'!27-'!-,%($)-
  (-'#7'!74"*/'"(%'097-(%'1(%'!(-%2$$#9(%'67*'-(%)($)':'!(7'!-5%'*3324*"(;'<('=(7'-#!*1('"(%'#.#*)'(88-#>,%'
  et le jeu était absolument calme, d’un calme exagéré.3

    Jasset’s praise for American motion picture acting signaled a shift in the early 1910s in the direc-
6)-&$-2$)&>50&80$2-,$%,6)(6)8$)&&-.%6)-&$)&$8)&0#%<$D5,-+0%&$!"#($7%/$#%/0$5+$(-#0$(0.0&6'$+0,-
80&6$-2$670$!"#($(7-1&$)&$670$E&)60/$F6%60($/5,)&4$670$&)8:0"-/0-&$3--#$-2$670$"%60$%5476(*$170&$
!"#($2,-#$G,0&87$8-#+%&)0(*$%&/$H%67IJG,K,0($(+08)!8%""'*$+,-.0/$7)47"'$+-+5"%,$1)67$@#0,)8%&$
audiences.4 Routinely commended in The Moving Picture World and ?@('A(B'C2-D'E-#3#)*/'F*--2-
for their artistic quality, the Pathé pictures set a standard for artistic quality for American producers.
L'$MNMO*$7-10.0,*$670$3%"%&80$-2$+-10,$(7)260/*$%($H%67I;($(7%,0$-2$670$!"#$#%,:06$)&$670$E&)60/$
F6%60($304%&$/08")&)&4$%&/$8,)6)8($670,0$(6%,60/$8-#+%,)&4$@#0,)8%&$!"#($2%.-,%3"'$6-$+,0(6)4)-5($
D5,-+0%&$!"#($(587$%($670$H%67IJ(+-&(-,0/$G)"#$/;@,6$+,-/586)-&(<$@$#%P-,$!45,0$)&$67)($,04%,/$
1%($Q<R<$S,)2!67*$17-$304%&$0B+0,)#0&6)&4$1)67$&)&0J2--6$2,%#)&4($)&$MNOT*$1)67)&$#-&67($-2$30-
coming a director at Biograph.5 Here as at Vitagraph, the adoption of the close frontline boosted the
naturalism of the actors’ performances in ways that drew popular acceptance and critical acclaim.
U&$670$E&)60/$F6%60($3'$MNMO*$@#0,)8%&J#%/0$!"#($2,-#$L)-4,%+7*$C)6%4,%+7$%&/$-670,$8-#+%&)0($
had “displaced Pathé’s as exemplars of verisimilar acting,” reports Richard Abel.6



The case of Max Linder
    V%B$W)&/0,$XMTTYJMNZ[\*$670$(8,00&$8-#0/)%&*$)($%&$)&6,)45)&4$!45,0$)&$8-&&086)-&$1)67$670$
n01$ (6%4)&4$ +,%86)80(<$ W)&/0,$ 304%&$ %++0%,)&4$ )&$ !"#($ %($ 0%,"'$ %($ MNO[*$ 170&$ 70$ -88%()-&%""'$
played walk-on roles while also performing on stage.7 In 1907, Linder began featuring in lead roles
)&$8-#)8$!"#($2,-#$H%67IJG,K,0($/),0860/$3'$W-5)($S%(&)0,$%&/$-670,(*$%&/$70$308%#0$)&.-".0/$

50
                                                  CAMERA DISTANCE AND MAX LINDER AT PATHÉ-FRÈRES

!"#$%!&!"'#(")#)!%*+&!"',#&$-#(+&!.!&!*/#&0(&#0*#1")*%&--2#-34+!(556#!"#787798 By then Linder had
(+0!*.*)#$-%5)$!)*#3(:*#&0%-1'0#0!/#45:#%-5*/,#$0!+0#5*)#0!/&-%!("/#&-#)*+5(%*#0!:#&0*#$-%5);/#
4%/&#!"&*%"(&!-"(5#:-.!*#/&(%99#<!")*%;/#+-"&%!=1&!-"/#(/#(#)!%*+&-%#(")#45::(2*%#%*:(!"#1"+5*(%,#(")#
have been overshadowed by his status as a major star and his association with comedy, a low-pres-
&!'*#'*"%*9#>#31%&0*%#3(+&-%#=*0!")#&0*#+%!&!+(5#"*'5*+&#-3#&0*#/&65*#-3#<!")*%;/#45:/#:(6#=*#&0*#(?-
?(%*"&#/!:?5!+!&6#-3#<!")*%;/#45:#&*+0"!@1*9#A-&!.(&*)#=6#+-"/!)*%(&!-"/#-3#.!/1(5#!"&*55!'!=!5!&6#(")#
"(%%(&!.*#+5(%!&6,#<!")*%;/#45:/#$*%*#5*//#+-"/?!+1-1/56#B(%&!/&!+C#&0("#&0*#?%-)1+&!-"/#-3#D!5:#);>%&#
(")#B0!'0#+5(//C#45:/#3%-:#E!&('%(?0#(")#F!-'%(?09#G"#("6#+(/*,#3%-:#*(%56#!"#0!/#+(%**%#<!")*%#
had experimented with shots taken from a camera positioned at nine feet and less, with extra-tight
3%(:!"'/#(??*(%!"'#!"#0!/#45:/#(/#*(%56#(/#78HI#J#(/#!",#3-%#*K(:?5*,#Les Débuts d’un patineur.
Moreover, these framings imply purposes that were somewhat novel in cinema at the time.
     Linder’s recourse to the reduced camera distance can be seen as a function of the personali-
ty-based comedy that he had pioneered. While other comedians had appeared in recurring roles
!"# /*%!*/# -3# 45:/,# <!")*%;/# +0(%(+&*%# BA(KC# $(/# %*")*%*)# $!&0# 1"1/1(5# /-+!-5-'!+(5# ?%*+!/!-"9#
A “rentier,C#(/#L!+0(%)#>=*5#)*/+%!=*/#0!:,#A(K#$(/#(#/?*+!4+#/-+!(5#&6?*,#("#!)5*,#=-1%'*-!/#
dandy living off his family’s money, and perpetually searching for a wealthy woman to marry.10
Conforming to the social stereotype were the character’s personal traits. “A svelte and handsome
young boulevardier, with sleek hair, trimmed moustache, and impeccably shiny silk hat which sur-
vived all catastrophes,” as David Robinson puts it, 11 Max’s blend of social and personal character-
istics conditioned the nature of the comedy, shifting it away from the circus-clown acrobatics and
knock-about slapstick endemic to the early screen and toward the sentimentality of genteel drama.



Staging in cinema circa 1909
    Linder’s departure from the contemporaneous norm for motion picture comedy is said to have
anticipated Chaplin’s Tramp of the mid-1910s, an assessment endorsed by Chaplin himself.12
Linder’s status today as a precursor to Chaplin raises a familiar danger in the study of cinema
?%!-%#&-#787MN#&0*#("(+0%-"!/:#-3#)*4"!"'#&0*#*(%56#45:/#3%-:#&0*#/&(")?-!"&#-3#&0*#"(%%(&!.*#
+!"*:(#&0(&#)*.*5-?*)#5(&*%,#!"#&0*#:!)O787H/,#$!&0#&0*#%!/*#-3#&0*#3*(&1%*#45:#(")#P-556$--);/#
emergence as the world’s main motion-picture producer and distributor. In light of later develop-
:*"&/,#!&#+("#=*+-:*#)!34+15&#&-#/**#/&('!"'#?%(+&!+*/#!"#*(%56#+!"*:(#(/#("6&0!"'#=1&#(#?%!:!&!.*#
antecedent for the narrative cinema of the late-1910s. To counteract the tendency toward anach-
%-"!/:,#>")%Q#R(1)%*(15&#().!/*/#&0*#1/*#!"#45:O0!/&-%!+(5#("(56/!/#-3#&*%:!"-5-'6#+-"&*:?-%(-
neous with the period in question, which can reveal important aspects of the object of study that
might otherwise go unnoticed.13
    The relevance of questions of terminology to staging practice is suggested by the history of
the term “close-up,” whose meaning underwent a transformation in the early 1910s. Initially, from
1907 to around 1912 – the period of concern in this article – the close-up referred not to a shot
revealing a detail of the action but to cases in which an actor physically approached a stationary
camera.14 It was only later that the term acquired the meaning it retains today, as the designator
3-%#(#/0-&#!/-5(&!"'#(#/!'"!4+("&#"(%%(&!.*#*5*:*"&,#&6?!+(556#(#3(+*9#G"#(+2"-$5*)':*"&#-3#0-$#&0*#
+5-/*O1?#$(/#1")*%/&--)#+!%+(#787H,#:6#("(56/!/#-3#A(K#<!")*%;/#45:/#*:?5-6/#(#&*%:!"-5-'6#

                                                                                                      51
CHARLES O’BRIEN

based on camera distance. Thus, instead of designating the principal shot categories with the fa-
miliar labels of long shot, close-up, and medium shot, whose current meanings postdated Linder’s
tenure at Pathé, I instead use the terms “nine-foot” and “twelve-foot,” along with two variations
thereof, i.e., “less-than-nine-foot” and “more-than-twelve-foot.”15
    Why replace the familiar terms close-up, medium shot et al. with the old frontline vocabulary?
In some cases, the difference is unimportant, with the terminological change producing no effect
on the analysis. Put another way, in these instances, a “twelve-foot shot” corresponds to what
Richard Abel, in the analyses performed in The Ciné Goes to Town, calls a “full shot,” i.e., a “shot
of a person from the feet up,” and my “nine-foot shot” corresponds to his “American shot” or
“shot of a person from the knees up.”16 In other cases, however, the use of the camera-distance lan-
!"#!$%#&'$()%'*$%+#,%'*$%)*-')%#($%.#'$!-(/0$12%3*$%4(-5'&/5$%.-54(-5'$1%6&77#8$()%#)%#%7#'$(/#&%
($#&/',9%#%:*,)/.#&%;#((/$(9%)'#8$1%-"'%-5%'*$%<--(%-4%'*$%)$'9%#51%.-5)'(#/5/5!%'*$%#.'-()=%7-;/&/',2%
The material conditions of early staging practices ensure that the frontline had been in the minds
-4%6&77#8$()%#'%'*$%'/7$2%>(-"51%?@?A9%'*$%):#.$%-4%'*$%)*-'9%'*$%.*-($-!(#:*,%-4%'*$%#.'-()=%
7-B$7$5')9%+#)%-(!#5/0$1%#(-"51%'*$%4(-5'&/5$9%+/'*%7#5,%)*-')%/5%'*$%6&7)%-4%'*$%7/1C#"!*')%
.-5)'(".'$1%)-%'*#'%'*$%;"&8%-4%'*$%#.'/5!%D%'*$%7#/59%5#((#'/B$&,%)/!5/6.#5'%/5'$(#.'/-5%;$'+$$5%
the actors – ends up occurring there.
    The terms nine-foot and twelve-foot are not meant to imply that the camera is necessari-
&,%:&#.$1%#'%'*-)$%$E#.'%1/)'#5.$)9%)/5.$%($'#/5/5!%#5%#.'-(=)%4"&&%6!"($%1$:$51$1%-5%'*$%#.'-(=)%
height. More to the point is the difference between shots containing the actor’s entire body (which,
in my analysis, involve a twelve-foot or more-twelve-foot placement), versus shots that don’t,
+*/.*%F%.&#))/6$1%#)%$/'*$(%5/5$C4--'%)*-')%-(%&$))C'*#5C5/5$C4--'2%G,%:(#.'/.$%+#)%'-%.#'$!-(/0$%
shots according to the site of the principal narrative action, regardless of how deep the shot’s space
is, or where the actors enter or exit the frame. The common pattern circa 1910 is for the action
to start out on the twelve-foot line or further back, with the actors’ entire bodies visible, and then
move up to nine feet, where the main interaction happens in plan américain, from the knees on up.
In my system, such shots are counted as nine-foot shots rather than as long or full shots.
    >%)$5)$%-4%*-+%.&-)$%'*$%#.'-()%.-7$%'-%'*$%.#7$(#%/5%H/51$(=)%6&7)%($&#'/B$%'-%I(/46'*=)%/)%
)"!!$)'$1%/5%'*$%4-&&-+/5!%.*#('%J6!2%?K2%3*$%.*#('%($:-(')%'*$%651/5!)%-4%7,%")$%-4%'*$%./5$7$'-
rics interface to track the shift over 1908-191317 toward closer framings in samples taken from
'+-%;-1/$)%-4%6&7)L%'*$%G#E%H/51$(%6&7)%7#1$%4-(%M#'*NCO(P($)%#51%'*$%Q/-!(#:*%:(-1".'/-5)%
1/($.'$1%;,%R2S2%I(/46'*2%3-%)*#(:$5%'*$%.-7:#(/)-5%F%.-"5'$1%-5&,%'*$%H/51$(%6&7)%($&$#)$1%-B$(%
?@ATC?@?U9%'*$%,$#()%.-/5./1/5!%+/'*%I(/46'*=)%'$5"($%#'%Q/-!(#:*2%
    >%5-'#;&$%4$#'"($%-4%'*$%.*#('%/)%'*$%)#7$5$))%-4%'*$%:(-6&$%4-(%'*$%'+-%)#7:&$)9%$):$./#&&,%
for the nine-foot and twelve-foot shots. Despite the substantial differences between these two
6&77#8$()9%/5%;-'*%.#)$)9%(-"!*&,%*#&4%-4%'*$%("55/5!%'/7$%:$(%6&79%-5%#B$(#!$9%/)%#))/!5$1%'-%
shots whose main action is staged on the twelve-foot line and roughly one-fourth of the running
time goes to the nine-foot framings. Also striking is a difference between the two samples: the
:$(.$5'#!$%4-(%'*$%&$))C'*#5C5/5$C4--'%)*-')%/)%4#(%&-+$(%/5%'*$%I(/46'*%6&7)%'*#5%/5%'*$%H/51$(2%
I(/46'*%;$.#7$%4#7-")%4-(%;(/5!/5!%*/)%#.'-()%.&-)$%'-%'*$%.#7$(#9%4-(%/5B$5'/5!%'*$%.&-)$C":9%#)%
*$%*#1%;-#)'$1V%;"'%H/51$(%#51%*/)%.-C+-(8$()%#'%M#'*NCO(P($)9%6!2%?%)"!!$)')9%:")*$1%4"('*$(%/5%
'*/)%($):$.'%'*#5%*#1%I(/46'*9%1$B-'/5!9%-5%#B$(#!$9%7-($%'*#5%4-"(%'/7$)%'*$%).($$5%'/7$%'-%#.'/-5%
staged for an extra-short camera distance.18

52
                                                    CAMERA DISTANCE AND MAX LINDER AT PATHÉ-FRÈRES




   !"#$%&%'%()*%+*,-%./--"-#%0"+*%1*.2*-0,#*%3*450*3%05%6)506%"-4574"-#%61*2"82%2,+*.,%17,2*+*-06%95.%
                       :"-3*.;6%87+6%.*7,0"4*%05%<."980);6%95.%0)*%=*,.6%&>?@A&>&B

    ()*%60,0"60"26%5-%6)50%7*-#0)%3"617,=*3%"-%8#$%&%1.54"3*%,%6*-6*%59%0)*%.*7,0"4*%1.5+"-*-2*%59%
particular framings. But assessing the framings raises the question of the function they perform,
C)"2)%C,6%-50%-*2*66,."7=%0)*%6,+*%"-%:"-3*.%,6%"-%<."980)$%D%E*=%3"99*.*-2*%"6%0),0%"-%:"-3*.;6%
87+6% 0)*% 2756*60% 6)506% ,.*% 590*-% .*6*.4*3% 95.% 0)*% *-3F% C)*.*% 0)*=% ,775C% :"-3*.% 05% 3"617,=% )"6%
virtuosity as a performer through a series of facial expressions. Such shots function as what have
been called emblematic close-ups, in which an actor’s face is enlarged for expressive purposes
.*7,0*3%05%0)*%87+;6%605.=%G/0%"-%,%+,--*.%3"625--*20*3%9.5+%1750%2,/6,7"0=$%HIJK-0*-3*3%05%G*05E*-%
the gist of the story rather than to present a part of it,” as Yuri Tsivian explains,19 emblematic
close-ups introduce a level of abstraction, alluding to story events without fully belonging to them.
    L+G7*+,0"2% *-3"-#6% ,.*% 25++5-% "-% 0)*% 87+6% M,N% :"-3*.% +,3*% 95.% O,0)PA!.Q.*6$%()*% #,1%
between the narrative events of Max lance la mode (1912) and the concluding shot of the two
children provides a strong, if atypical example of an emblematic conclusion. More characteristic
of Linder’s oeuvre is Les Débuts d’un patineur (1907), which concludes with a very close, less-
than-nine-foot camera placement in which Max, facing the camera while sneezing and shuddering,
6/99*.6% 0)*% .*6/70% 59% )"6% C"-0*.% ,34*-0/.*$% :,0*.% 87+6% "-% 0)*% M,N% :"-3*.% 6*."*6% 9*,0/.*% 6"+"7,.%
concluding shots but typically with even tighter framings, as in Max ne se mariera pas%R&>&?S%R8#$%
2), which concludes with a super-close framing of Max struggling to remove glue from his face
but only aggravating the mess.




                       !"#$%T%'%D%9.,+*%9.5+%0)*%8-,7%6)50%59%Max ne se mariera pas

                                                                                                           53
CHARLES O’BRIEN

    In showcasing the actor’s repertoire of facial expressions, tight shots like these can be said to
offer an attraction in excess of the narration. Adding to the autonomy is the extent to which such
!"#$!%&'()**'+%)%,#,-*)&%')&*.%/*0%1'2&'3%$"'%45-22.%5)('6%/*0!%5')$-&721%8)-+'87**7)2!3%9"7("%
trace back to the earliest motion pictures, such as Edison’s The Sneeze (1894) and May Irwin Kiss
(1896).20 The composition from Le Premier Cigare d’un collégien%:;<=>?%&',&#+-('+%72%/1@%A%")!%
B''2%7+'2$7/'+%B.%C7(")&+%DB'*%)!%)%&'E(&')$7#2%#5%)%$)B*')-%5&#0%)2%')&*7'&%F)$"G%/*0%97$"%$"'%
same title (1903) starring music-hall comedian Félix Galipaux.21
    H-$%75%$"'%5)(7)*%+7!,*).!%72%I72+'&J!%/*0!%(#-2$%)!%)%8'!$71'%#5%')&*.%(72'0)%,&)($7('3%$"'.%)*!#3%
in certain cases, imply a more complex function. In depicting the consequences of Max’s latest
:07!?)+8'2$-&'3%(#2(*-+721%!"#$!%*7K'%$"'%#2'%72%/1@%L%'M"7B7$%)%+'1&''%#5%2)&&)$78'%72$'1&)$7#2%
that exceeds what the category of the emblematic shot requires. Adding to the story relevance of
these shots is the high degree of expressive coherence of the performance, the consistency of the
actor’s ensemble of “performance signs.”22 The facial contortions notwithstanding, Max remains
in character throughout, thus allowing the concluding shots of Max ne se mariera pas and other
I72+'&%/*0!%$#%(#0'%)(&#!!%)!%!'2$70'2$)*%72%$#2'%&)$"'&%$")2%5)&(7()*@%N"'%-2+'&!$)$'+%2)$-&)*7!0%
of Linder’s interaction with the dog in the concluding shot of Max et son chien Dick (1912) offers
a case in point. Such examples appear early in Linder’s work, as is the case in Le Premier Cigare
d’un collégien, which ends at nine feet with the pietà-like tableau of Max’s mother comforting
him on the sofa.
    Shots similar to the concluding, emblematic shots in Linder’s oeuvre also appear within the
B#+.%#5%$"'%/*0%&)$"'&%$")2%)$%$"'%'2+@%O2%Le Premier Cigare d’un collégien (1908), for instance,
*'!!E$")2E272'E5##$%5&)0721!%#((-&%$"&#-1"#-$%$"'%/*03%)2+%)&'%-!'+%72%9).!%$")$%)2$7(7,)$'%$"'%
close-up as understood later – a shot of an actor’s face or a detail in the action. The main example
#((-&!%)B#-$%")*59).%72$#%$"'%/*0J!%&-22721%$70'3%9"'2%P)M%),,&#)("'!%)%()5G%$#%!7$%)$%)2%#-$+##&%
table, the action staged on the twelve-foot line. Max’s act of taking out a cigar and lighting up
motivates the cut to the next shot, a one-minute take staged much closer to the camera, in which
Max reacts to the novelty of smoking.




                     Fig. 3 – A frame from Le Premier Cigare d’un collégien

    The blacked-out background in this less-than-nine-foot framing suggests the isolation of a
studio set, which is somewhat mitigated by the presence in the mise-en-scène of the table top,
the glass, and the bottle, which invoke the café setting of the preceding establishing shot. When
the shot concludes with Max becoming nauseous from the cigar, the scale of Linder’s acting, as
always, is matched to the camera placement, favoring facial expressions that are comic but not

54
                                                    CAMERA DISTANCE AND MAX LINDER AT PATHÉ-FRÈRES

manic or grotesque. The seamless transition from the tight framing to the next shot, a twelve-foot
framing in which Max, overdosed on tobacco, stumbles down the street in a stupor, makes the shot
seem less emblematic and more like a close-up in the sense understood today, as an enlargement
of an actor’s face for storytelling purposes.
    !"#$%&''()#*+,$(-(*#.#++$/0$1"#$#00#21+$/0$0*('3.4$3+$3'5&3231$3.$($06*1"#*$2&/+#765$+"/1$3.$Le
Premier Cigare d’un collégien, which occurs when Max, a moment later, returns home, enters his
"(&&-(89$(.:$%.:+$1"(1$"#$2(.,1$/5#.$1"#$://*;$<3+$1*3(&7(.:7#**/*$+1*644&#$1/$3.+#*1$234(*+$(.:$/1"#*$
objects into the key hole is captured in a lengthy take. Linder (or perhaps Gasnier or someone else)
seems to have regarded the manner in which the framing isolates the motion of hand and arm as
comedic in its own right. Here the comedy derives as much from the nature of the framing as from
the actor’s performance.23
    In comparison to the Linder comedies, the Film d’Art productions exhibit a more conservative
staging. In L’Assassinat du duc de Guise$ =>?@?A9$ 1"#$ %*+1$ (.:$ '/+1$ 0('/6+$ /0$ 1"#$ B3&'$ :,C*1$
%&'+9$(21/*+$5#*3/:32(&&8$0*##D#$3.1/$1(E&#(67&3)#$5/+#+$3.$1"#$'(..#*$/0$($"34"7#.:$+1(4#$5&(89$
with the camera positioned at more than twelve feet from the action. The one exception is the
1-#&F#70//1$'/'#.1$1"(1$"(55#.+$(*/6.:$1-/71"3*:+$/0$1"#$-(8$3.1/$1"#$%&'9$-"#.$1"#$G6)#9$H6+1$
prior to the assassination, enters the room of conspirators through the doorway at the rear and
then proceeds forward up to the twelve-foot frontline, the act underscored by the actor’s brief
look into the camera. The reliance in L’Assassinat du duc de Guise on a camera positioned at a
:3+1(.2#$ 4*#(1#*$ 1"(.$ 1-#&F#$ 0##1$ +631+$ 1"#$ %&',+$ 0*#I6#.1$ *#5&32(13/.$ /0$ "3+1/*32(&$ 1(E&#(6;$!"#$
5(3.1#*&8$+"/1$2/'5/+313/.+9$-31"$1"#3*$*#.:313/.$/0$1"#$(21/*+,$06&&$%46*#+9$+34.(&#:$(*13+132$I6(&318$
of a traditional sort, in line with the representational norms of bourgeois theatre. But narrative
technique in cinema was evolving quickly, and in ways divorced from stage-entertainment
precedent. My project here has been to outline the role played by Linder in this evolution.



Conclusion
    Linder’s exploration of the possibilities for motion picture acting enabled by the short frontline
-(+$3.+#5(*(E&#$0*/'$1"#$.(16*#$/0$"3+$2/'#:8;$J.$#+1(E&3+"3.4$K(L$(+$E/1"$($%213/.(&$2"(*(21#*$
and a star actor/personality, the reduced camera distance played an essential role. In this regard,
M3.:#*,+$%&'+$:300#*$0*/'$1"#$/61561$/0$N3/4*(5"$(.:$B3&'$:,C*19$.#31"#*$/0$-"32"$0/*#4*/6.:#:$
the performers’ personalities in the same way. The emphasis on personality in Linder’s work at
Pathé-Frères points to Linder’s status as a prototype for what American cinema would become in
1"#$&(1#$>?>@+9$-31"$1"#$#'#*4#.2#$/0$+1(*7/*3#.1#:$</&&8-//:$(+$1"#$-/*&:,+$'(H/*$%&'$5*/:62#*$
(.:$#L5/*1#*;$!"#$2"(*(21#*3D(13/.$/0$K(L$M3.:#*$(+$1"#$%*+1$'/F3#$+1(*$*(3+#+$1"#$:(.4#*$:3+26++#:$
earlier in this article of imposing on Linder’s body of work an anachronistic conceptual framework.
!/$2/6.1#*(21$1"3+$5/++3E3&3189$M3.:#*,+$%&'+$2(.$E#$#L('3.#:$3.$2/.1#L1+$2/.1#'5/*(.#/6+$-31"$
them, which I’ve tried to do in the preceding pages relative to questions of staging.




                                                                                                          55
CHARLES O’BRIEN

I wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers of this article for their helpful comments and criticisms. Any
!"#$%&'%()*%"+(&,-*%"+*%./%+*$01'$&2&-&(/%"-1'*3%

1     On staging practice in early cinema, see the valuable survey of period reports in Jean-Pierre Sirois-Tra-
      han, Le Passage de la barre: transformation de la mise en scène dans le cinéma des premiers temps, in
      Laura Vichi (ed.), L’uomo visibile/The Visible Man, Proceedings of VIII Convegno Internazionale di Stu-
      di sul Cinema/International Film Studies Conference (Udine, 21-24 March 2001), Forum, Udine 2002,
      pp. 33-40.
4%    5'%()*%&.01+("',*%16%()*%+*78,*7%6+1'(-&'*%(1%",(&'9%&'%:.*+&,"'%;-.$<%$**%=12*+("%>*"+$1'<%Eloquent
      !"#$%&"#'()*"()&+,#-.&/+$0.,(.-(1"&-.&/+,2"(3$45"(0,($*"(!&0-6$*(70.8&+9*(:05/#, University of Califor-
      nia Press, Berkeley-Los Angeles 1992, pp. 93-94, 126-127, 162n; and Barry Salt, Moving into Pictures.
      More on Film History, Style, and Analysis, Starword, London 2006, pp. 111-113.
3     Victorin Jasset, “Le cinéma contemporain,” in Ciné-Journal, 21 October 1911; quoted in Jean-Pierre
      Sirois-Trahan, Le Passage de la barre: Transformation de la mise en scène dans le cinéma des premiers
      temps, cit., p. 38.
?%    @**%()*%",,18'(%16%()*%&.01+("',*%16%>"()ABC+D+*$%(1%()*%E1+()%:.*+&,"'%;-.%."+F*(%&'%=&,)"+7%:2*-<%
      The Red Rooster Scare. Making Cinema American, 1900-1910, University of California Press, Berke-
      ley-Los Angeles 1999.
G%    H+&6;()I$%$("9&'9%&$%7&$,8$$*7%68+()*+%&'%./%0"0*+<%3$+80,8(+,;(<2$0,8(0,($*"(!&0-6$*(70.8&+9*#, in Frank
      Gray et al. (eds.), 1"&-.&/0,8(=">(?";0+(@ABCD@B@E, Domitor International Early Cinema Association,
      John Libbey Publishing, Eastleigh, forthcoming.
6     Richard Abel, The Red Rooster Scare. Making Cinema American, 1900-1910, cit., p. 137.
7     On Linder’s early career between stage and screen, see Frank Bren, “Ripple Effect: The Theatrical Life
      of Max Linder,” in =">()*"+$&"(F%+&$"&54, vol. 25, no. 3, August 2009, pp. 242, 253n.
8     On Linder’s evolving position at Pathé-Frères, see Laurent Le Forestier, Aux sources de l’industrie du
      cinéma. Le modèle Pathé, 1905-1908, L’Harmattan, Paris 2007, p. 208.
9     See Jack Spears, “Max Linder Was the Motion Picture’s First Truly International Star,” in Films in Re-
      view, vol. 16, no. 5, 1965, p. 272.
10    Richard Abel, The Ciné Goes to Town. French Cinema, 1896-1914, University of California Press,
      Berkeley-Los Angeles 1994, p. 237.
11    David Robinson, Max Linder, in Geoffrey Nowell-Smith (ed.), The Oxford History of World Cinema,
      Oxford University Press, Oxford-New York 1996, p. 117. See François de la Brétèque, Linder, Max, in
      Richard Abel (ed.), Encyclopedia of Early Cinema, Routledge, London-New York 2005, p. 390.
12    The key document regarding Chaplin was the widely reproduced photo, dated 12 May 1917, which is
      inscribed in Chaplin’s handwriting with a dedication in which Chaplin refers to himself as Linder’s “dis-
      ciple.”
13    André Gaudreault, Film and Attraction. From Kinematography to Cinema, University of Illinois Press,
      Champaign 2011, pp. 32-47.
14    On the history of the term “close-up,” see André Gaudreault, Film and Attraction. From Kinematogra-
      phy to Cinema, cit., p. 54; and David Bordwell, On the History of Film Style, Harvard University Press,
      Cambridge (MA)-London 1997, pp. 121-123.
15    Regarding the terms, see the discussion of staging practice in the unpublished memoirs of J. Stuart
      Blackton, quoted in Roberta Pearson, Eloquent Gestures. The Transformation of Performance Style in
      $*"(!&0-6$*(70.8&+9*(:05/#, cit.
16    Richard Abel, The Ciné Goes to Town. French Cinema, 1896-1914, cit., pp. xxiii.
17    An independent samples t-test performed with SPSS software revealed a statistically reliable difference
      between the mean percentage for the less-than-nine-foot shots in Linder (M = 11.85, SD = 15.82) and
      ()1$*%&'%H+&6;()%JK%L%43?M<%@N%L%G3MOPQ3RS<%t(92) = 2.73, p%L%3QO4<%T%L%3QG3%U)*%$".*%(*$(%7&7%'1(%+*V*"-%
      statistical reliability for the additional three shot categories; to achieve such reliability may require in-
      ,+*"$&'9%()*%'8.2*+%16%;-.$%&'%./%$".0-*3
OW%   5'%()*%&'V*'(&1'%16%()*%,-1$*B80<%$**<%61+%*X".0-*<%=12*+(%Y*-$)<%ZN"V&7%Y"+F%H+&6;()%@0*"F$<[%&'%=">(

56
                                                    CAMERA DISTANCE AND MAX LINDER AT PATHÉ-FRÈRES

     !"#$%&#'(')*+%,*##"#, 14 January 1914, reprinted in Anthony Slide (ed.), &-.-%/#*01)2%34)5#6*578, Uni-
     versity Press of Mississippi, Jackson 2012, p. 9.
19   Yuri Tsivian, Early Russian Cinema and Its Cultural Perception, Routledge, New York-London 1994, p.
     149.
20   Thanks to Frank Kessler for drawing my attention to the relevance of the funny face genre to Linder.
21   Richard Abel, The Ciné Goes to Town. French Cinema, 1896-1914, cit., pp. 220-221.
22   On expressive coherence as a dimension of acting performance in cinema, see Henry Jenkins, What
     ,'95%:*8)'+2*"%;<)8=%>'#?@%A"<49%B"(59@%'49%)25%C'<956*??5%D58)25)*+, Columbia University Press,
     New York 1992, pp. 130-131.
23   The self-consciousness regarding staging practice is made explicit in Mari jaloux (1914), one of Linder’s
     !"#$%&#'()*+,-,./%!$0/1%2(34(%5.634'/%#%!$0%/(77'%3"%2(34(%'(.%4,.2%3/%/.."%0#,83"9%7:'%'(.%'2.$;.*<77'%
     line in chalk. See the description in Richard Abel, The Ciné Goes to Town. French Cinema, 1896-1914,
     cit., pp. 417, 533n.




                                                                                                          57
