What do you about, using the state department what you think about communists in the state darent . I think the comtts in congress on the house side and senate side should investigate the ars of communism within the state department and that the president shouldoorate■ with them by turning over information regarding the loyalty checks that have been ma by thatranch of the government. They should take that initiative and not refused to do is they have done in the pasor turnover the information to congress so congress can investigate and present the facts to the american people. Peter scott eyman, that was gossip columnist and then representative Richard Dixon on the head hopper show, talking about communists. You opened yourook Charlie Chaplin vs. America by saying, personally, i hope he goes is as bad a citizen as we have in this country, as you well know. Why was she writing to a■g. S. Senator about Charlie Chaplin . Scott she wrote a lot of letters to richard nixon. There are a number of files in the Nixon Library that contain nothing but mrs. To inform her. They had an interesting supporter. She was constantly haranguing him via email about one problem or another that she saw was crucial to the survival of the republic. Generally he would write back asserting he agreed with everything she said and wished there were more citizens like her but then he would do absolutely nothing about what she wanted him to do. He treated her basically like an annoying aunt at thanksgiving who tells you how to dress and vote and what shows to watch and rather than get into aong conversation that will only end with bad feelings, you acquiesce to her and then go about your business because she will no woe absolutely right, and the nothing would happen. And she seems to not notice that often. On the other hand, heot really want to antagonize her because she had a vast readership through the l. A. Times syndicate and radio and Television Appearances so he had to keep her on his side, as it were, and he did. She never really waveredher support for him publicly. Privately, she would complain mightily when her letters and concerns were not dealt with. But it was an interesting relationship for the way he adeptly handled a teer you desce chaplin is the most prominent victim of the red scare. Why do you say . T tt . Most of tho got blacklisted were screenwriters, a few producers, and occasional director. No one in hollywood has ever cared about screenwriters. Producers and direct theres more so because they make more money. But Charlie Chaplin was more than a producer, screenwriter, or director, he was all three and also autonomous filmmaker who produced his own films and financed his own films and directed and compose the music scores for his own films. A one man picture. He did not produce a lot, one picture every four or five yeara very peculiar denizen of hollood in that he was not part of the studio system, he was part of a Charlie Chaplin system which was a factory of one. He was outside and inside the system. He was highly respected but no one really knew him, he did not go to a lot of parties, he was extraordinarily shy all his life, and he warmed up to very few people and needed few■i people so he was simultaneously part of the mill should pick sure industry Motion Picture industry and part he left the u0 years. Set the stage for us. What was going on in the world in 1952 . Scot in retrospect, it was the height of the blacklisting e, which began in 1947 with the coressional hearing into a Hollywood Group of screenwriters , directors, producers. Congress call to constitute it because the fbi had the roster of the communist party. So they ew the people who were components of the hollywood 10 were all currently in the party as 1947 or had been in the party and later resigned. So they could easily spring on them the question, are you now or have you ever been, when they knew the question in advance. By 1952 most of the people who had beenpersecuted were either unemployed in new york city, mexico, some had goneive. But they were not working in the hollywood film industry. Charlie chlis still working on his own picture and they had not been able to touch him politically because they had knew he had never been a member of the communist party and was not in fact a communist. That they still regarded him as a threat to the republic so in 1952 he applied for a reentry permit because he was not aident alien. Whenever he left the country he had to apply for reentry permits. 9 given the reentry permit by the ins and he and his wife and their children not on board the Queen Elizabeth in 1952 to go to loonhe had not been out oe country in 20 years and never really had a vacation in 20 years and he had a film opening, the last one he made in america, and he wanted to take his wife had grown up in the 1890s and early 1900s. After the opening of the show in london they were going t openinn take one or two months to sightsee around europe and then returned to america. They got on board the queen 195e day out of new york he got a telegram informing him his reentry permit had been if you t back into the united states, he would have two face an investigation upon return in new york city. This was a shock he did not see everything he owned was in america, california, his stocks and bonds, studio, his film library, which was the most valuable thing he owned, his house, eveing. And he was in the middle of the atlantic. So it was a logistical crisis, crisis for chaplin. So that basically is what haed. It took 10 years to come to fruition for the precedent that wa before they finally made a move to revoke reentry. Peter we will get into details in a minute the fbi had opened a file on him 30 years earlier, in 1922. Why . Scott he was regarded as insufficiently friendly, he had attended socialist meetings and i and was vends with an excellent writer, max eastman who was a socialist. He gradually migrated to the center and then write right s so partially it was guilt by association, partly it was chaplin h insufficient enthusiasm for the first production czar hollywood made sense and ship censorship difficult. In the early 1920s there was a series of scandals in hollywood. The arbuckle case, taylor murder , drug issues, drug addiction issues, so the industry felt they had to clean house and what could be better than to bring on a public figure of great hired m at six figures a year at a time when no one was making six figures a year, he was a figure of clean up your act and censuxorship and chaplin did not make films that generally required sensors, they■g were beyond reproach, but he did not like the idea of a government or corporate mandated censorshiptrd mself an artist and felt ar should be free. Peter you write that he would frequently claim tbe in an archivist, not in the bomb throwing sense, but in a dislike of rules and preference for as much liberty as the law allowed, and maybe just a bit more. Scott emphatically. Emphatically, yes. He to undee chaplin you have to understand his childhood, which took place in london in abackground. His father was a singer who drank himself to death that 37. Renowned performer diagnosed with synthesis syphilis and chaplin and his halfbrother sidney were brought up essentially in e workhouses and taught to read and write their. He had the equivalent of a fourthgrade education and by and by that time he lived on the streets essentially chaplin had come to the heart knowledge that he could not depend on anyone other than mself an his brother. He did not trust a lot of people. He was not emotionally close with a lot of people. He simply held himself aloof from the normal camaraderie that took place in shows circles in england or america. He did not really trust a lot of people. You could count on one hand the number of people who trusted. Peter scott eyman, throughout your book Charlie Chaplin vs. America you reference how the poverty of his youth affected him throughout his life. Scott as i said, you cannot understand is an incredibly complex human being. 6nhis vision of his lost paradie with his childhood with his mother. His father was gone very early. ■ adored. Everything about her. Even the truth about her. He knew she was schizophrenic, had syphilis, none of it made any difference, whether she ther husband, we have no way of knowing. But to her, he was the ballast, gravity. That by her madness was a terribly destructive act and as a result, he■y was in a sense, s emotional maturation was cut off very early and he held himself aloof from what would be regarded as normal friendships and relationships. Peter you quote chaplin is saying to judge the morals of all thedards would be as errones as putting a thermometer in boiling water. Scott eyman come out when he ard in 1910, he was the most stunning rise of any 20thcentury performer. Success so early . Scott i do not know that he ever fully understood it time h, he was very successful in theater, but his mental image of d focus of his emotional life was about the deprivation of his childhood. So he had this weird duality about consciousness. On the one hand he became extraordinarily famous and wealthy. On the other, he thought of himself as a deprivedi am sure d nod their head and say that is exactly what happens with someone who has that kind of childhood and uses it as fuel and motivation to achieve, to get out ofbut i do not know thar had the distance a professional psychologist would. To him, he struggled with it bacally the first of his life, i think, until his last and successful marriage. Which gave him the security and Emotional Foundation that he had always needed and desperately wanted. Chaplin. Nd that was how did the little trap character evolves and what did it represe little tramp character evolves and what did it represent . Scott he made a goode theater d played basically a comic drunk in theater, was his most famous act and he was extremely successful. Stan laurel was his understudy. S. And laurel said people thought he was strange later on. He was strange then. He did not really mingle with the other actors, the other comedians. He was off by himself reading books. He would not show up for the half hour before performance and 10 minutes before the curtain when they realized chaplins not here, where is charlie, stan, put on your makeup and a couple minutesn before curtain, chaplin would saunter in without a care in the rl his makeup, take his position, the curtain would rise. He had absolute selfconfidence in his professional skills. He did not going to be good tonight, will they love me . He did not have the usual performers anxiety. He understood that on some level he had access to the audience in a way most doctors dont. Most actors do not. Vaudeville. On stage and thought he was hilarious and made a mental note that the next time he needed a lead comedian, he would hire chaplin and the next year he did■i for 475 a month, really good money in 1930. Initially the contract 1913. Initially the contract on offer was for a year but with a preview so that he could be let go with two weeks notice. Peer c rejected that contract and held out for a one year and no cut contract which begrudgingly signed. So even at age 23, he was very sure of himself, his skill set, of what earn him as a professional. He went to work for senate and he stunned because i stage he because on stage he played much older than he was. He walked on studio, he was young and quite handsome. He was told to put on plenty of makeup and throw something together. As chaplin stole ent into ther room and put together a costume for the tramp the derby hat, a little mustache, to make him look older. Oversized shoes. He made everything a contradiction. The coat was too tight, the shoes were too large, the hat almost, he just sort of threw it together and went on stage and they were shooting the film and people started to laugh and that was it. He stuck with the character for the next 30 years. Peter hisame sst he was able during world wa i to tists with dou f mary pickfo. You many movies had he made at that point . Scott made several movies but they were shorts. Just shorts until 1921. Made the kid, his first feature, in 1921. Everyone told him not to do it, you can make a couple of shorts a year but a feature will take you much longer and there is much more weight placed on it and what if it flops, you will go to a crashing heart. But he always followed his instincts. He placed great trust in instinct. To grow and he could not wear the character without deepening the narrave dn which the tramp is placed. In the kid he basically put him with a small child and gave him responsibility for raising the small child. It is the key transitional film of his career because up until then the is kind of a two legged to society in general. He is not above pinching girls, aggression, damage, kind of the creature from the it, actuay. Kd to care for a human being, when he cares about me than himself, the character enters a transition and there is a huge difference between the post kid tramp and pred tramp. Post kid is much more concerned about saving other people that he is saving himselfprek had, d about saving himself. Peter in 1940, the great dictator movie came. High watermark for Charlie Chaplin. For your book, for years, chaplin had r newsreels about hi wondering about the resemblance. They were the same size, had the same mustache, and lets face it, a similar world power. Besides that, they were born only four days apa. And antinazi film . Scott overtly from the moment he considered it. He would not have made it otherw was an act of great polil and psychological courage on his part. No one what the film made. Hollywood did not want it made. They started filming in september 1939. Hollywood did not start producing antinazi films for another year. The American Public was isionist in 1939, as was congress, and they would continue to be isolationist until the japanese in december. So he was swimming against the tide. Ign office did not want it made. Neville chamberlain inhe placate hitler politically and psychologically. It was not working. Chaplin believed that you cannot negotiate with an authoritarian psychotic, you can only defeat them or put them down with a bte to use. Peter at the end of the film Charlie Chaplin broke character and gave a little speech. Charlie chaplin i am sorry. I do not want to rule or conquer i shall like to help everyone if possible, black men, whites. We all want to help one another. We■;l want to live by happiness, not misery. We do not want to hate and despise one another. In this room there is everyone in the good earth is rich. The way of life can be free and beautiful. And yet greed has poisoned men souls, filled the world with hate, step doesnt to misery and peter scott eyman, what was the impact of that moment in the film . Scott it was the first time the audience had heard charl silent, and everyone thought he was crazy, because it was 10 years after silent films were dead. ■h of the movie, modern times, but no one had heard him speak. In the great dictator there was a great deal of public fascination with what Charlie Chaplin sounded like. He got over it very quickly the fm, a leader and a jewish barber. As the jewish barber he on in monosyllables. He does not really articulate. As theder, it is babbling and doubletalk all the time, dramatic doubletalk. So at the end of the movie when he drops the veil and steps basically out of character as the jewish barber and speaks as Charlie Chaplin, it was a moment of thunderous drama because he was speaking not as an after, he was speaking as a universally ofal and he labeled over the speech. It was always going to end with a speech and he had been working on that speech basically since eohe worked on the film. He put it off and put it off, shooting his speech, until very close to the end of production. And he shot it quickly, at six or eight takes over two days an. Peter fdr reached out to him after the film, right . Scott fdr reached out to him before the■o■r film. Because there was a great deal of back and forth about should chaplin make the film, would he, etc. A letter in the book from jack warner to chaplin. Warner had just come out of a meeting in the oval office with had brought up chaplins film about dictators. Because there was publicity in the papers about if or not he would make it, should he make it or not. The president told jack warner he certainly hoped the film was made and that he believed it would do a great deal of good and warner in the letter rights chaplin and tells him,t is a gd idea, i certainly hope you go ahead with the movie. He did not offer to finance it or distribute it, but the warner bros. Were there this time one of the few companies that were actively engaged in making antifascist, so for a brief moment in hollywood, they were on the same page as chaplain. Hence the support of letter. Peter scott eyman was the great dictator a commercial success . Scott a great commercial success all over the world, remaably so, because most of europe was already fastest at that point. France was gone, italy, austria, germany of course. All that was left of europe was england. The film was extraordinarily successful in america and england. Peter was Charlie Chaplin jewish . Scott no, but he was often accused of being jewish by antisemite and he never denied it because he thought that by denying it, he would be giving aid and comfort to the enemy by the application that it was something not to embrace. Would simply let the charges pass. But no. Peter the subtitle of your book is when arts, sex, and politics collide. It was in the 1940s that he met a woman named joan barry. Who was she . She was 823yearold who was previously a mistress and she got it into her head that she should be in movie so she got a letter of introduction, went to hollywood, met a few people, one of them was Charlie Chaplin, they struck up a relationship. It lasted slightly more than a year. Chaplin thought she had dramatic possibilities and her to a contract. Her behavior became increasingly erratic. She did no acting lessons, he had signed her up for drama school in hollywood and she began cutting class. Chaplin was very serious about you had to do the job. You had to learn your trade. That put him as well as some of her erratic behavior. They split up once, twice, finally she went back to oklahoma for a time and then came back to hollywood and said she was pregnant and he was the father. Chaplin did the math. He could not possibly be the father. So he refused to make a settlement on her. She wentstory wide open, basicay treating the pregnancy as a state a complete for chaplin. Chaplin knew it was not true. The government began a prosecution based on a law passed in the early part of the century banning taken women across state lines for immoral purposes, basically to stamp out prussic illegal prostitution. Then came the paternity trial. Heat proved he was not the father and the jury found against him. The reason was at point in california, 1943, a blood test■[ not dispositive. Fivecn the case would have been dismissed but in 1943 the jury found against him largely because of the portrayal of chaplin in the media by people like hopper and ed sullivan and other conservative columnists as an outofcontrol libertine. So he lost the case. He appealed and the appeal was turned down. So for the next 18 years he had to pay Child Support for a child that was not his. At the same time undere married the daughter of eugene oneill. She was 18, he was 54. They had eight children together. At the time it seemed to be unspoken■i confirmation of him s a libertine and it probably worked against him in terms of the jurys decision to make him the father of that child. Peter barry reportedly had two abortions as the diminishment of hisole reputation . Scott it was not widely printed. It never came up in the trial because for it to come up in the trial it wouldve opened up sexual history and her lawyers did not want her sexual history so it did not come up in the trial. It did come up in terms of the fbis examination of her and she claimed she had two abortions that chaplin paid for but they never prosecuted her on that for reasons i can only guess. It simply did not come up at the trial. I have no doubt it was a factor in the delat what to do with Charlie Chaplin because they took her at her word, even though she later recanted all most all of her latermony, all of her testimony 5, 6, 7 years later. Hooverwas j edgar following Charlie Chaplins reputation and progress . Scott like a bloodhound. Hoover had obsession is too strong a word but lets say he had a very refined interest in his mo regarding chaplin would f telegrams from hoover to the l. A. Fbi office, please check out charlie. And l. A. Office was basically duet would basically do what they asked him to do and then it would be quiet for a year and then it would start all over and l. A. Office check Charlie Chaplin again. After world war ii the l. A. Office started dragging their feet because they had, b 1947, basically the entire Security Apparatus of the u. S. Had at gone to Charlie Chaplin. His mail was open, surveillance on his house, employees both corporate and personal had been gone over, basically looking for anything they could get him for and they did not find ath he paid more than his fair share. Any flaming radicals to the house, or very few nothing. So the office began dragging their heels because here we go again. And then hoover would snap the leash. Richard hood ran the office and was very good and well connected with the movie industry. His main source was settled be of hoods special informants within hollywood. And he had been quizzed about chaplin and the interesting thing about demilles comments is an artist, regarded as cheap, he is not part of the hollywood community, he is off by himselft ale but he and chaplin were not friends■k parties together or anything like that, but demille had lent to chaplin his Weekend Getaway place, outside of l. A. On a couple of they clearly knew eacr and were friendly and demille did not tell hood this. Interesting. But hood basically began paying less and■■; less attentto Charlie Chaplin because there were all of these other authentic communists in california they could ea on. Chaplin essentially was not a communist, which at that point was the focus of hoovers ve so hopper, ed sullivan, american legion, cardilspellmano impact Charlie Chaplins commercial success and reputation . Scott without question. When you are looking at 10 of disinformation, misinformation on a weekly or monthly basis, and most of which chaplin did not respond, could not have responded to because it was a ploy, he was pilloried for not being a citizen . Were not citizens living in new york, los angeles, especially in the movie industry. A lot of them were successful, they were pilloried them. He was convenient because he was regarded as politically dicey, sexually dangerous, so he was singled out for the fact that he never became a citizenothers knd about them. Peter you quote chaplin in your book, i just likeeing told who to kill and what to die fornd all in the name of patriot. Not for moral or intellectual reasons alone, but because i have no feeling r it. Hocan one tolerate patriotism when 6 million jews were murdered in s name . Some might say that was in germany, nevertheless, murderous cells lie dormant in every nation. Scott yes. His friend max eastman very good point. He said, chaplin was born in england and became rich and famous in america. And he never became a citizen. The people who hated him did not understand was that if he had been born in america and become rich and famous in england, he would not have taken english citizenship, either. As far as he was concerned, nation of origin just happens to be where you are when your mother gives birth. Atmosphere of the land he grew up, he was sentimental about certain kind of things butnmonat from the word go. He talked about once when he was a child he could not street becn in a carriage was driving by so they were holding all the pedestrian he talked about how that enraged him, that someone would have the right of way on ordinary people were not able to walk across the street. That carried over. He was antimonarchist in england and antikneejerk patriotism in america. That is just the way he was constructed psychologically. Peter lets return t 1952. A quote, trumans attorney general james the granarie o action was a culmination of years of a Concerted Campaign targeting the private sexual behavior and public political sympathies of th dangerous brand of dissident, a beloved, popular artist. Whatid the attorney general do . Scott it was hoovers support [inaudible] zf■q chaplin did not know at the time was he was in the middle of the atlantic after he had the telegram was that a week after the reentry permit was canceled the ins had a meeting and came to the firm conclusion that if chaplin came back and contested, they would have to let because r been convicted of a misdemeanor, nothing. Generally that was the vehicle by which the fbi would get rof , they had to convict al capone od support them but they had to be convicted of a felony. Chaplin had never been convicted of anything. So they did not have legal ation, forget moral justification, they had no legal justification to kick him ou the country and if he had come back and forced a hearing, they would have had to let him back in. But chaplin was furious. He was livid for years about the banishment. The last thi■■ he was knock on d asked to be invited back to a party he had been thrown out of. So he got to england,ba ■ film that was a enormous hit all over europe and had to figure out what to do with the restno e 63 years old. He probably figured he had another 10 or so years to go. As it happened, she live to age 88. Hehought about moving to italy, he thought about england, and his brother sidney who he adored and trusted, he was only close to two men in his life, Sidney Douglas fairbanks nior, who had died young in 1939 andlly had a best friend after Doug Fairbanks died, his closest male friend was his brother sidney had sidney suggested switzerland or france. Sidney lived in nice. He said switzerland for tax reasons paranoid about money at always coming up with wild schemes to avoid paying taxes. He suggested switzerland and chaplin had not really thought about it. Slightly but he had never given any serious thought to moving anywhere other than hollywood. So he thought abou mt it and thought about it and five months after theanishment, he bought a manor house and lived there for the rest of his life with his family. Peter after he left the u. S. ■oand 1952, what happened to his studio and holdings . Scott his money, tax, bonds, one of the things i love to find by research in the chaplin archives was a roster of his investmentsn 1952, his stock and bond portfolio. It confirmed my suspicions it was the stock and bond portfolio walltreet trader would have had in 1952. Peter stops at at t, kodak, bank of america, woolworths, etc. Scott yes. Trueblue patriotic portfolio that would kick up 3 or 4 a professionally assembled portfolio. And tobacco companies, and chaplin did not smoke. [laughter] the idea of him as a radical leftist with a stock portfolio with that is hilarious. Anyway, everything he owned was in california. Luckily his wife was a native born american so she went back and closed out the investment account and brought them back with her, some of the mo could be wired, some could be wired to europe. His brother basically handled the sale of the studio and the hardware within the studio, the cameras, all the hardware you need to make movies, sidney handled that. Would live sometimes in palm springs, sometimes in florida, he had a trailer and would travel around to wherever it was sunny. Nd ardent nudist. A genuine eccentric. By comparison, charlie was straight down the middle. Sidney was a fringe character in many respects. It was a process that took some years. In 1955, the irs came after him for back taxes based on earnings. He had been kicked out of the country and september 1952 and they taxed him for money through 1954 which i think takes a certain amount of gall. [laughter] settled. He wrote a check for the taxes because he did not want it hanging over him. L this is going on while he is resettling in switzerland. The propaganda, the antichaplain propaganda mcontinued and lies were published. Astonishing stories. Myorconspiring palestine with te jewish radicals helping to found israel, to british soldiers in palestinethe most insane oner he was after he left the country after it wa claimed he was going to adopt the children of a couple who had been put to death for spying for russia. There was another story, typical examples of propaganda, antichaplain propaganda, another story was printed in a sunday magazine nationally that she that he fired all the employees of his without severance. It was not true. He put out 80,000 in severance. It was like being caught in a hurricane and being transported to oz. The propaganda had very little relation to who he was as a man or artist. Peter at the height of the cold world cold war, he toured russia. Scott he never went to russia in his life. He met khrushchev, but never went to rush and his life. Peter you quote him as saying i am not a communi but i feel proud to say i feel procommunist. I do not want radical change, i want evolutionary change. I do not want to go back to the days of 1929 or a sick and crazy world like the one we had and which produced hitler and hitler him. ■ kittler scott in 1939 he o promote the city lights and then he was gone for 18on world sevel times, places he had never been and would never go again, he went to, outoftheway places, and it was a transcendent experience for him because heufferent populations , totally different cultures, but almost everywhere he went he saw the results of the deprivation of the depression, which was two and three years old, he did not come back until 19 33, he was gone for 18 months ip the depression was well under way at this point and it was not close to coming out of it, the depressi did not start easing until 1935. He saw it at its worst and he turned up his feelings about nationalism and economies and what ppl have in times of deprivation. Essentially he had a kind of utopian socialisbehe thought poe able to walk into a store, pick and walk out. After he left the country he would stop in england to visit frndevery once in a while and graham gree, a vest who reviewed his films, they knew each other slightly■ and green, whose politics were fairly left, would walk out because he could not stando ridiculous utopian rubbish. It would never happen on the face of the earth where poor people can walk and disc stes and walked out with what they want and he felt chaplin was being naive, which he was, but that is what i get returning to chaplains childhood, that was what his grudge against the english social welfare system had led him. Peter after he left america, he returned. Here he is april 10, 1972. Fb thank you for the honor of inviting me here. You are wonderful, sweeteothank. [applause] peter scott eyman what are we seeing . Scot that is his acceptance speech for his Honorary Academy award when he was kicked out of the country in 1952, three people stood up to stood up for him publicly. Wilde, cary grant were the only three people sam wilder, william wilde, cary grant were the only ones. No one else wanted to be associated with him or stand up for him so essentially it was a time of great moral cowardice be printed as being sympathetic to someone who was regarded as unamerican in 1952. Peter 2years late when it was safe, they all realize, we made a slight err judgment. So thegave him an Honorary Academy award because basically it was a way of saying we it. He named his son sidney after his brother. Hisney told me he did not care about awards. He never had. Awards meant nothing to him. He cared about working on a script until it was as good as you can possibly make it, working on a scene until it was as goodcan possibly make it, working on a film until it was as good as you can possibly make it. It was all about being a good worker bee, that was his identity. Mountaintop dispensing wisdom. It was the deadliness of being a good worker and he said he did not really care about awards. But the ovation, the fact that years andk to california that was a huge change, it was nothing butpeter in 1972, richn was the president of the united states. Scott hopper was dead by then and he did not have to worry about being harangued by her. Peter how long did chaplain stay in the one week. He came to new york, first he came to the bahamas to get used to the time change because at this point he is 84 years old and old age is beginning to have its effect on him. He is the same person he was in 1952. He has slowed down consirably carefully, they went to the bahamas for a couple days to get used to the time change and then new york for a couple of days and then l. A. For the oscar ceremony. Then he went back home and never came back to america. ■epeter partial filmography of night of Charlie Chaplin, the trailp the trail t ramp. If you were to recommend one of the movies to get a sense of Charlie Chaplin, which one . Scott one movie . Modern times. The essence of chaplain is his connection to the real world. There are a lot of comedians who want to take the audience away from the real world. Especially in that time. But he was connected to the real world that people saw walking to the theater. They sell poor people, stores, factories they sawoo stores,. Modern times is his take on that reality that was pandemic in the 1930s and it has not changed and he accepted his more so now than it was in 1936 so it is a film that is eternally relevant, peter you have written about cary grant, it says will wayne, mary pickford, and others. It sounds like you got pretty good cooperation from the chaplin family. Scott they gave me free reign. They asked for no permissions. They never saw the manuscript. I wrote based on what i found. I was p i expected them to hover more than they did. There was no hovering whatsoever. They gave me permission to do my research in their archives without Holding Anything back and to write what i chose. Peter scott eyman, thank you for spending an hour discussing it with us. Scott thank you. Take care now. All q a programs are avaible on a podcast on cspan now. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2024] cspan is your unfiltered view of government. Television companies and more including comcast. It is more than a community center. Comcast is partnering with 1000 Community Centers to create wifi enabled so students can t the for anything. Comcast supportcspan as a Public Service along with these other providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. This week on the cspan networks, the house and senate are in early in the week. The house will consider legislation to force tiktoks Parent Company bytedance to divest from the app. They will also consider before leavinfor t policy retreat. Avril haines, william burns, and Christophe Wray and others will testify on capitol hill and monday before the Senate Select committee on intelligence regarding the Global Security thres cing the u. S. They will also testify tuesday before theou committee for the 2024 annual threat assessment. Also tuesday, special counsel robert hurt is scheduled to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on his reportn president bidens handling of classified documents. The Senate Budget committee will hear testimony from the director of office of management and budget on president bidens 2025 proposed budget. Watch live on the cspan networksr on cspan now, our free mobile video app. Had to cspan. Org for scheduling information or to watch live or ondemand any time. Cspan, your unfiltered view of government. British Prime Minister rishi sunak fielded questions from house of commons on a range of issues including the u. K. s loss for police vetting and Sexual Violence against women. Mr. Sunak andr starmer debated these issues on the anniversary of the killing of a woman by a police officer