#797) The Tramp and the Dog (1896)

#797) The Tramp and the Dog (1896)

OR “Sit! Stay! Cut! Print!”

Directed by William Selig

Class of 2025

The Plot: In its fleeting runtime, this cinematic offering addresses an agglomeration of contemporary issues: the unhoused situation, the famine crisis within urban metropolitan areas, societal ambivalence regarding free-ranging canines, and our human proclivity for…oh wait, never mind. It’s an 80 second short about a tramp who tries to steal a pie but then a dog bites him on the butt. That’s it.

Why It Matters: The NFR gives some historical context (this was apparently “the first commercial film made in Chicago”), and makes special mention of the film’s 2021 rediscovery.

But Does It Really?: When the Class of 2025 was announced, I was chatting with some of my fellow NFR enthusiasts about the selections, and the consensus was that while there were many fine choices, ultimately this was a safe list of movies. Nothing too controversial, nothing that’ll ruffle any feathers, just 25 movies we can all agree are good, or at the very least worthy of preservation. And that’s how I feel about “The Tramp and the Dog”. It’s not groundbreaking or entertaining, but it’s an early piece of film being rediscovered over 125 years after its creation, and that’s good enough for me. “Tramp” is the first film of the Class of 2025 for which I bestow the slightest of passes for its NFR inclusion.

Title Track: I’m confused, I thought the Tramp was the Dog. And when do they share a plate of spaghetti?

Other notes

I covered William Selig back in my “Something Good” post, but to recap: Selig was a vaudeville performer who became fascinated with film after seeing a demonstration of Edison’s Kinetoscope at the 1894 Texas State Fair. He founded the Selig Polyscope Company in Chicago in 1896, and filmed several local acts for his short films. Very little is known about the production of “The Tramp and the Dog” (there is no information about the creative team other than Selig), but we do know this was the Selig Polyscope Company’s first film, and that it was shot in the Rogers Park neighborhood on the North Side of Chicago.
The main thing I love about this film is how unpolished it is. For example, when the Tramp steals the pie, he mimes taking the pie and walking away, but then turns around and takes the pie for real. I can just imagine Selig shouting from behind the camera, “No, you fool, take the pie!”. I also love towards the end when the woman stops swatting the Tramp with her broom and stands there a second before looking at the camera as if to say “Are we still rolling?”
As the Tramp tries to jump over the fence and escape the dog, there’s a random guy in a bowler hat standing on the other side of the fence clapping his hands. I have no evidence to support this, but I bet you anything he’s the dog’s trainer. And all that clapping is definitely working because that dog is biting the hell out that Tramp’s ass and will not let go.
Due to its short runtime, this film left me with several unanswered questions, such as: Who’s a good boy? Who’s a good boy? Is it you? Yes it is, you’re a good boy. You’re such a good boy.

Legacy

According to the NFR write-up, “The Tramp and the Dog” began the film trend of “pants humor”, in which “a character loses (or almost loses) his pants during an altercation.” This is your reminder that a page on a US government website describes “pants humor”. It is speculated that “Tramp” also influenced future comedies centering around hobos and tramps. Is “The Tramp and the Dog” responsible for Chaplin’s Tramp? Probably not, but you can’t prove it wasn’t.
“The Tramp and the Dog” was presumed lost for many years after its initial run, and its rediscovery is connected to Selig’s other NFR title “Something Good”. In 2021, the National Library of Norway identified a film reel that had come into their possession in the early 1990s as an alternate version of “Something Good” with the same actors and costumes. “The Tramp and the Dog” was included on the same reel, and garnered some attention when mentioned in articles about the lost version of “Something Good”. I can’t think of another instance of a non-NFR movie benefiting from another movie’s NFR Bump, and then subsequently making the NFR itself.