Another Change in Personnel
Early in 1904 the Edison Manufacturing Company was forced to find yet another manager for its Kinetograph Department. Shortly after the release of The Great Train Robbery , William Markgraf went to England on motion picture business. Once there, he went on a month-long drunken binge. In the midst of his alcoholic haze, he bought at least 200,000 feet of Lumière film stock without proper authorization.[91] Gilmore was forced to call his brother-in-law back to the United States and ask for his resignation. Although Markgraf's salary was terminated in late March, he had been effectively removed from any position of responsibility somewhat earlier. Perhaps because Porter assumed extra responsibilities as a result—and could claim credit for The Great Train Robbery —the studio manager's salary, which had been raised to $25 per week in October, was increased again to $35 per week. Moreover, an M. Porter, undoubtedly Porter's youngest brother Everett Melbourne, was hired at $4 per week—an office boy's salary—early in the year.
Few promising candidates appeared to fill the position Markgraf was vacating. Alex T. Moore, who had known Gilmore since their mutual employment by Edison electric light companies, applied for the job sometime in January.
Gilmore, uncertain of Moore's qualifications, sent him to be interviewed by Percival Waters at the Kinetograph Company. As Waters later recalled,
Moore came into my office one day with a card of introduction from Mr. Gilmore. He stated to me that he had applied to Mr. Gilmore who was an old friend of his for a position with the Edison Manufacturing Company. Mr Gilmore said to him that he might have an opening in the film manufacturing department, but thought that he would require a man experienced in the moving picture business and suggested that he call upon me and talk over the requirements of that business. I told Moore that I would be very glad to give him any information which I had and went over my experience and what I thought would be required of a manager of such a department. He said that he believed he could easily pick up the details. He thanked me for the information I had given him and I told him that if he should secure the position he must feel that he could call upon me at any and all times and that I would do my best to acquaint him with the business. Afterwards, said Gilmore asked me if I had seen Moore and I told him that I had and that he seemed to have a good appearance and I didn't question but that he could operate the department satisfactorily.[92]
Waters' ties with the Edison Company had developed sufficiently for him to exercise an indirect veto over the hiring of key personnel. The exhibitor may have even been pleased at the prospect of working with an inexperienced manager, since the novice would frequently be dependent on him and his knowledge of the industry. Moore's assumption of the position in late March inevitably strengthened Waters' ability to make Edison's Kinetograph Department serve the interests of his Kinetograph Company.
Moore was conditionally hired at $50 per week. After a two-month trial, his salary was raised to $75 per week, including retroactive pay. One of Moore's first orders of business was to dispose of Markgraf's legacy of Lumière film, which had proved defective. When the stock was run through a projector, the emulsion stripped off the base. It could only be used as leader. (No wonder Eastman Kodak dominated the industry!) Joseph McCoy, Edison's undercover agent, later reminisced about the disposal of the unsatisfactory material:
Moore wanted to get clear of the Lumiere Company film. I was to sell the film to other manufacturers of films and the Edison Company was not to be known in the transaction.
I sold some of the film to the Edison Company at 4¢ a foot. Other manufacturers said if it was good enough for the Edison Company to use, they would buy some of the film.
I sold 160,000 feet of the Lumiere film. Geo Melier [sic ] of East 38th Street [sic ] bought 10,000 feet. Smith of the Vitagraph Company bought the film and Lubin of Philadelphia. They all had the same trouble with the film stripping from the celluloid base.[93]
McCoy's practical solution typified the business ethics often practiced by Edison, his associates, and American industry. Today it would be called fraud.
Although The Great Train Robbery caused Edison film sales to surge in December 1903, such "headliners" were still considered only one dimension of Porter's production responsibilities. The producer thus turned his attention to making short comedies, including the timely Christmas subject Under the Mistletoe , and filming winter scenery, for example Crossing Ice Bridge at Niagara Falls and Ice Skating in Central Park, N.Y . Multishot comedies like Casey's Frightful Dream (January 1904) and Little German Band (February 1904) were increasingly typical. The latter film required three different studio sets—one for each shot. A small band plays music outside a saloon, and the owner invites them inside, generously giving each a glass of beer. They drink up and after one musician surreptitiously fills his tuba with brew from a conveniently located keg, they depart. Outside the band share the spoils, using their instruments as drinking vessels. The suspicious saloon keeper, however, catches them in the act. If children can be naughty and escape retribution in most early films, men who act like boys are rarely so lucky. In these comedies, punishment of adults usually involves social or sexual humiliation.
During early 1904, Porter continued to work closely with G. M. Anderson who appeared in such productions as Wifey's Mistake and Halloween Night at the Seminary . In the latter film, Anderson spies on a group of young girls in pajamas who are dunking for apples and playing other Halloween games. When the girls discover the Peeping Tom, they dunk him in the tub of water, an overly large vagina-like container (the scene cries out for a simple psychoanalytic reading). The film's play with pleasure and voyeurism, transgression and punishment is similar to Two Chappies in a Box, The Gay Shoe Clerk , and other Edison comedies, suggesting both the popularity of this theme and the way repetition and slight, but clever, variation can be used to comic effect.
Anderson's contributions included the story idea for The Buster Brown Series , the first Edison "feature" to appear after The Great Train Robbery . Its seven scenes were taken in February and early March, except for Buster's Joke on Papa , which had been made and released as a separate short. These were listed as follows:
R. F. Outcault Making a Sketch of Buster and Tige
Buster's Revenge on the Tramp
Buster and the Dude
Buster Cleans a Bargain Counter
Buster's Joke on Papa
Tige to the Rescue
Buster and the Balloon Vender.[94]
This comedy was made with the assistance of the comic strip's creator, Richard F. Outcault, who had worked for Edison as a draftsman and made some early
sketches of the Black Maria before becoming a cartoonist. Eager to help his nephew Will Rising, who sometimes worked at the Edison studio as an actor, Outcault appeared in a scene making a lightning sketch of his cartoon characters. The cartoonist had sold the theatrical rights for his Buster Brown characters, however, and a musical based on the comic strip was then being previewed out of town.[95] Outcault's enthusiastic participation in the Edison film was halted when Mellville B. Raymond, who owned the theatrical rights, threatened to sue the sketch artist for violation of his contract. As a result, Outcault tried to get the film off the market and finally sued Waters and the Edison Company in the U.S. circuit court.[96] Edison sought to ease Outcault's embarrassment by delaying the picture's distribution; in mid May, however, the Buster Brown films were put on the market.[97]
The legal paperwork for the Outcault case reveals much about the production of The Buster Brown Series . A memo for Porter's deposition describes the film's evolution and suggests the ways in which their collaborative working method functioned (see document no. 15). Anderson suggested the original idea. Norman Mosher brought in "Mannie," the trained dog, and a group of scenes was made. Actor Will Rising, trying to better his position, suggested filming his uncle, the cartoonist. The picture evolved casually, through the collective effort of the studio staff. Porter may have supervised and shaped the process, but clearly he tended to think and operate in nonhierarchical terms.
Each scene in The Buster Brown Series was conceived separately and treated as the analogue of a cartoon strip. Each had its own title. Although, as was done with Buster's Joke on Papa , scenes could have been sold separately as shorts, The Buster Brown Series was offered for sale "in one length only." Yet unlike Jack and the Beanstalk or any of Porter's previous "feature"-length films, The Buster Brown Series lacks the narrative development and complexity that previously justified the producer's control of the editing process. In constructing his
subject, the studio manager assumed a responsibility that had once been the exhibitor's—as with the Happy Hooligan series of 1901-2.[98] Whereas the showman had formerly acquired individual scenes, Porter and his crew now created and combined these vignettes until the larger film contained the elements Porter desired. By 1904 the motion picture producer's editorial control had grown to the point where narrative continuity was no longer a necessary basis for his intervention. He now combined a series of potentially self-sufficient scenes that had only a main character in common. As with other Porter films, however, the influence of exhibitor-dominated cinema continued to be felt within the production house itself. The scene of Outcault doing his lightning sketch was placed at the head of the film when it was first released, but by 1906 it had been moved to the end.[99] This casual rearrangement of scenes reflected the influence of Porter's experiences as a showman in the 1890s.
DOCUMENT NO. 15 |
Memo for Affidavit of Mr. Porter |
The idea first originated by a man named [G.M.] Anderson suggesting a scene of a boy stealing jam (Buster not thought of). Then Mosier [Norman Mosher] came along with a trained dog; assembled boy and dog into jam scene. This led up to assembling a series of these pictures on different subjects. Dyer was consulted to see if there was any infringement in this. Advised later by Dyer that no infringement was made and they could even use the title. Porter had carefully abstained from copying any of the original "Buster Brown" cartoons in his subjects. About five subjects in the series up to that time. Some time the latter part of February or first of May [sic ; it was March], Rising said to Porter, "Dick Outcault is a nephew of mine, and I think I could get his permission to use the name 'Buster Brown' (This idea had never occurred to Porter before this time). I stated to Rising, 'All right' and that if he could secure permission from Outcault to use the title, I would make it worth his while. I gave him money to go to Flushing to pay car fare and expenses. Rising, I think went over that afternoon or the following day, returning with the letter of March 2nd from Outcault, and said everything was all right." This is the only letter Porter had ever received from Outcault. Porter knows writing to be Outcault's because he has compared it with Outcault's signature on his cartoons. |
"I told Rising I was very anxious to wind up a series of pictures and that waiting until the following Monday or Tuesday would delay getting them out and I suggested that I go to Flushing, take my camera and take the picture of Outcault making a sketch of 'Buster Brown,' Outcault himself having suggested that he pose for that, as stated by Rising." |
(Text box continued on next page)
Within a day or two Rising and Porter went over to Outcault's house and found he was very busy. "We had quite a chat with him in general and he spoke of the 'Buster Brown' show and Raymond, and that there was my first knowledge that there was a 'Buster Brown' show in existence. He spoke of the business they were doing, and during our conversation he said the great trouble with the show was there was not enough 'Buster' in it to please the children and ladies; that the success of the 'Foxy Grandpa' show was that it was confined to the boys and grandpa. He mentioned at the time a vaudeville turn that they used in the play, the six Cuttys; that they were paying $600 a week for, and it had no bearing on the 'Buster Brown' show. I suggested why wouldn't it be a good idea if the pictures were a success to have Mr. Raymond put a machine on showing 'Buster Brown.' He thought it was a very good idea and said he would suggest it to Mr. Raymond. He then said, 'I am very busy, there is a gentleman upstairs for whom I am making a sketch' and he suggested that I come up with him and wait for Rising who was talking to some member of the family; Outcault said he could not pose for us that day, but when Rising returned he said, 'Now, I have an engagement with Pach, the photographer on Broadway, to pose for a picture on Sunday morning; why can't I kill two birds with one stone and stop in your place Sunday?' The following Sunday he came there and posed for the picture. After securing his sanction for using the title, we thought it would be a good idea to put in one more scene, one of his own, the Bargain Counter. This is the reason the 'Bargain Counter' scene was added. At this time and at other times there were conversations with Outcault in which it was thoroughly understood that defendants were going to market these goods as they saw fit." |
"In talking about Rising on the day we called at Outcault's home, he said, 'Will is in hard luck' and that he was merely doing this for Will's benefit; that anything Will got out of it he would be satisfied with." Outcault made practically the same statement when he called on Mr. Waters. After the receipt of the first Sanger letter by the Edison Company, Outcault called at Waters office and Porter was present, and Outcault made, in effect, the same statement that he did this solely for Rising's benefit in the hope that he might get some benefit out of it. Only the three named were present at that time. |
SOURCE : Edwin S. Porter, memo for affidavit of Mr. Porter, n.d. [May 1904], NjWOE. Outcault's letter, addressed to "Mr. Ed Porter, Manager Kinetograph Co.," informed him: "You have my permission to use Buster Brown on the machine-and I will be in early next week and pose for you in the act of drawing Buster if you like" (R. F. Outcault, March 2, 1904, NjWOE). |