It is difficult to compare Chaplin's and Keaton's gifts. Chaplin's fertile period lasted 38 years (some say even longer); Keaton's... lasted about ten. Chaplin's art depended upon a minute perfection and precision; Keaton's relied on speed and a tumult of imaginative, farfetched ideas. Although Chaplin the director was more an intellect than Keaton the director, Charlie the character was less an intellect than Buster the character. Although women were important metaphorically in Chaplin's films, sexual attraction and masculine virility were far more dominant in Keaton's pictures. The Chaplin films were smaller--centering on small facial gestures and objects; the Keaton films were larger--centering on human figures against a vast physical environment and huge, complicated objects. The Chaplin films moved slowly and quietly; the Keaton films with great pace and vigor. And yet Charlie was the character who laughed, smiled, and cried, whereas Buster was the one who rarely moved a facial muscle.LESSATTRIBUTION DETAIL »
Farm policy, although it's complex, can be explained. What it can't be is believed. No cheating spouse, no teen with a wrecked fam...ily car, no mayor of Washington, DC, videotaped in flagrante delicto has ever come up with anything as farfetched as U.S. farm policy.LESSATTRIBUTION DETAIL »
As long as atomic bomb manufacture remains a trade secret known to only one State, it will be the mainstay of Peace because all th...e States (including this one) will be afraid of it. When the secret is out atomic warfare will be barred as poison gas was in 1938-45; and war will be possible as before.LESSATTRIBUTION DETAIL »