In the Beginning Was the Word

A scholarly article about the earliest surviving American screenplays.
"In the Beginning Was the Word: Six Pre-Griffith Motion Picture Scenarios"
by PATRICK G. LOUGHNEY
First published in Iris vol. 2 no. 1, 1984.

There are many unquestioned assumptions about the origins of the American narrative film, but the most interesting and durable of these is the idea that its development was free of meaningful influence from popular entertainment forms in vogue at the end of the 19th century. A direct outgrowth of this is the belief that dramatic and comic motion pictures, of the period 1900 to 1915, were universally produced, with little or no prior planning, using story ideas improvised to accommodate available actors, locations and props.

The reasons for the persistence of this view are many. Most obvious is the scarcity of non-film records that document the first motion picture companies. While, at the opposite extreme, is the mountainous accumulation of conflicting 'history' that has been left to us by the first generations of participants in the industry. But most important, to those who take a scholarly interest, is the added factor of the prevailing academic adherence to an investigative methodology that relies primarily on historical proofs found exclusively in the internal or cinematographic' evidence of early films.

Recent years have produced some developments beyond this narrow methodological approach. But the fact remains that few important efforts have been made to place the general phenomenon of motion pictures within the spectrum of turn-of-the century American popular entertainment.1 And equally important, no extended writings have appeared which trace the relationship of well-known early narrative films to their direct antecedents in works of popular fiction, or other entertainments that first achieved popularity on dramatic and variety stages, in vaudeville and burlesque houses, and the many lesser forms of middle-class entertainment that have passed from the American scene.

One of the best ways to understand the development of the American narrative film prior to 1915 is to study the history of the American stage for the same period. To be more precise, it lies in knowing the 'theatrical writing' forms of the playscript and scenario that evolved as the organizational elements essential to the production of all performing media decades before the advent of motion pictures.2 Their importance cannot be overestimated for it is to these already established written forms that early film-makers turned as they developed production methods for narrative films longer than one or two minutes. It is also important to realize that they also provided, by their ubiquitous existence, the main source for the 'content' of narrative motion pictures until a large new group of writers could be trained for the industry. More than 60,000 of these non-film scripts and scenarios were copyrighted in the United States between the years 1870 and 1916 and many, legally or otherwise, found their way on to the screen in the years after 1900.3

It is disconcerting, perhaps, to think that the Edison and Biograph companies may have been using rudimentary screenplays as early as 1902. Or to discover that the simple chase comedies of 1904, which we now consider to have been completely improvisational, were, in fact, based on written forms quite similar to present-day motion picture source documents. These suggestions are not as far-fetched as they seem, especially if one considers a few of the many historiographic references that cite the early appearance of direct written sources for individual motion pictures.

Terry Ramsaye, in A Million and One Nights, reports that Edwin Porter made The Great Train Robbery from a scenario he wrote himself.4 He also records that one of the McCutcheons at Biograph (he does not say which) first created written versions of Personal and The Moonshiners that were subsequently filmed during June and July of 1904.5 An independent corroboration of this statement was recorded by Nicholas Vardac in a 1941 interview with Frank J. Marion, who worked at Biograph as a director and scenario writer through 1906. It was Marion's claim that Personal was made by Biograph from that company's 'earliest photoplay' and that its success inspired many chase comedies of a similar type.6

It should be noted, however, that Ramsaye's historical continuity is not without its flaws. After discussing McCutcheon's early work at Biograph he goes on to mention Kalem's copyright-infringing treatment of Ben Hur (1907), and the fact that it was made from a 'working synopsis' written earlier by Gene Gauntier.7 Later, however, in a summary statement on the first appearance of motion picture scenarios, he writes that 'the technique of scenario writing began to evolve parallel to Griffith's development of pictorial narration', and that Frank Woods was 'among the first and most famous' of scenario writers.8 He also adds that George Terwilliger, a colleague of Woods at the Dramatic Mirror, was among the first who recognized the coming craze in 1908.9

Benjamin Hampton, in his History of the American Film Industry, remembered the facts of a somewhat contradictory version. He declares that Henry Marvin of Biograph was the first 'to organize the writing of scenarios as a separate branch of production'.10 He further states that this took place 'early in 1900', and that newspaperman Roy McCardell soon began making $200 a week as a regular employee of Biograph.11 McCardell's success was so newsworthy, according to Hampton, that 'scribes of the press ... buzzed about the headquarters of film makers like flies around sugar barrels, and scenario writing soon became an occupation as definite as reporting'.12

It is also important to note that several first-hand sources report that Griffith's first contact with the film industry was his attempted sale of a scenario to Edwin Porter. The scenario was not purchased but Griffith was hired for an acting part in Rescued from an Eagle's Nest (1907) and, shortly thereafter, began his career at Biograph as an actor and scenario writer. Billy Bitzer recalled that it was 'Lee Dougherty, the Biograph scenario writer... to whom Griffith really owed the chance to become a director'.13 (It is interesting to remember, in this context, that Dougherty started working for Biograph in 1896. Though it is unclear when he began writing scenarios, it seems safe to assume that he was regularly employed in this capacity before the arrival of Griffith.) Bitzer, in the same source, also makes references to scenario writing by other members of the Biograph Company, such as Mary Pickford and Mack Sennett.

The earliest known specimens of the motion picture scenario/screenplay exist in the archives of the US Copyright Office, in the Library of Congress. These documents were found during a general search for copyright records of motion picture companies that registered works during the years 1893 to 1916. They were registered separately from the thousands of Paper Prints (legally defined as 'photographs') deposited during these years and were specifically categorized as 'dramatic compositions' in the copyright records. Only a few have been positively identified, but they are fascinating evidence of the complex origins of the narrative film.

The following is a title list of those documents including, for the Biograph materials, known production information preserved in the Biograph Camera Register, at the Museum of Modern Art.14

The Suburbanite
Filmed in Asbury Park, NJ, and the studio on 21 and 22 October 1904, by A. E. Weed. Biograph production no. 2975. Total footage exposed - 734 feet. 'Corrected length' - 690 feet.15 Paper Print copyrighted 11 November 1904.16 Copyrighted as a Dramatic Composition, on 25 November 1904, by the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company. Author: Frank J. Marion. Document actually received for registration was a copy of the Biograph advertising bulletin for the film.
The Chicken Thief
Filmed in Asbury Park, NJ, and the studio on 16 and 26 November 1904, by Billy Bitzer. Biograph production no. 2977. Total footage exposed 786 3/4 feet. 'Corrected length' - 763 1/2 feet. Paper Print not copyrighted despite claim printed in advertising bulletin no. 39, 27 December 1904.17 Copyrighted as a Dramatic Composition on 17 December 1904, by the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company. Authors: Frank J. Marion and Wallace McCutcheon.
Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son
Filmed in the studio on 12 February 1905 by Billy Bitzer. Biograph production no. 2987 Total footage exposed - 850 feet. 'Corrected length' - 506 feet. Paper Print copyrighted 9 March 1905. Copyrighted as a Dramatic Composition on 6 March 1905 by the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company. Authors: Frank J. Marion and Wallace McCutcheon. Copyright record bears the explanatory notation 'Scenario'.
The Nihilists
Filmed in Grantwood, NJ, and the studio on 28 February 1905 by Armitage. Biograph production no. 2992. Total footage exposed - not listed. 'Corrected length' 850 feet. Paper Print copyrighted on 28 March 1905. Copyrighted as a Dramatic Composition on 20 March 1905 by the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company. Authors: Frank J. Marion and Wallace McCutcheon. Copyright record bears the explanatory notation 'Scenario'.
Wanted, a Dog
Filmed in Deal Beach, NJ, and the studio on 22 and 28 March 1905, by Armitage and McCutcheon. Biograph production no. 2997. Total footage exposed - 786 3/4 feet. 'Corrected length' - 693 3/4 feet. Paper Print copyrighted on 7 April 1905. Copyrighted as a Dramatic Composition on 12 April 1905 by the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company. Authors: Frank J. Marion and Wallace McCutcheon.
The Wedding
Filmed in Brick Church, NJ, and the studio on 3, 4 and 5 May 1905, by Billy Bitzer. Biograph production no. 3005. Total footage exposed 524 1/4 ft. 'Corrected length' - 482 1/4 feet. Paper Print copyrighted on 19 May 1905. Copyrighted as a Dramatic Composition on 20 May 1905 by the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company. Authors: Frank J. Marion and Wallace McCutcheon.
The Serenade
'A Dramatic Composition in Four Scenes by W. N. Selig, 43 Peck Court, Chicago, Ill.' Copyrighted as a Dramatic Composition on 1 May 1905 by William N. Selig. No known print of this film survives. Page two of the document bears the following statement: 'Caution - Stage representation, Moving Pictures, etc. positively prohibited, without the written consent of the author'.

Six of the documents were copyrighted by the Biograph Company between November 1904 and May 1905, and another was registered by W. N. Selig, of Chicago, on 1 May 1905. All are for films that have been considered, until now, as unworthy of special notice. The authenticity of the Biograph materials is confirmed in several sources. First, the legal notice of copyright (the right to display the (C) mark in connection with the work) was issued to the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company, not the authors. This means that Biograph paid the 50 cent fee for registering the works on behalf of the acknowledged authors, Frank Marion and Wallace McCutcheon. That fact is confirmed on the title pages of the typewritten manuscripts that were received at the time of registration. Second, the corresponding Biograph advertising bulletins, issued in advance of the release of each title, specifically state that those films had been copyrighted 'both as a Picture and as a Play'.18

Proof of the direct relationship of these written materials to the films of the same title - other than the internal evidence of the extreme similarity of their narrative structures - has been lacking. That is, until the recent discovery of original correspondence between the Register of Copyrights and the law firm retained by Biograph, concerning the nature of The Suburbanite, the first of the scenarios to be copyrighted as dramatic compositions.

The exchange of letters was initiated by the Copyright Office because it did not understand the reason for Biograph's wanting to identify Marion's first work as a 'dramatic composition'. The confusion arose because the document registered was simply a copy of the regular Biograph bulletin for that title. Wrote the Registrar,

the article sent consists of a four-page folder describing a series of moving pictures. The term 'dramatic composition' as used in the copyright law has the originary meaning of that term, that is, a play consisting of dialogue and action. Your article is apparently not a dramatic composition as the term is used in the law, and it would not be permissible to make entry as a dramatic composition.

The reply, written by Drury B. Cooper of the firm of Kerr, Page and Cooper, on behalf of American Mutoscope and Biograph, contains a clear statement of the nature of the documents registered, and a defence of their claim for the registration of the work as a dramatic composition.

As we understand, your position is that the term 'dramatic composition' as used in the copyright law means a play consisting of dialogue and action, and that the composition in question is not dramatic in that it has no dialogue. [Legal citation follows.]
Referring to the composition in question, it is obviously within the definition of this case. It is a representation or exhibition consisting of 7 scenes and 16 characters. The action is to depict the story described in the composition itself. It is the sole purpose of the composition that this narrative or story shall be represented dramatically by action, posture and gesture. [Legal citation follows.]
Something of a novelty may be presented by the fact that this particular dramatic composition has been photographed in a series of living pictures, and is susceptible of being represented thereby. That, however, is true of substantially every drama, or at least of every drama which depends in larger part for its portrayal upon an appeal to the eye than to the ear ... [emphasis mine].19

Biograph won its argument with the Copyright Office but no longer submitted copies of their bulletins as documents of registration. Apparently hoping to avoid the confusion they had found with The Suburbanite, the company sent in typed manuscript copies of the actual dramatic compositions for the remaining five titles which they copyrighted in this manner.

There is no satisfactory answer, to date, as to why Biograph decided to copyright these particular compositions in two forms. The fact that they seem to boastfully mention the dual registration in the corresponding bulletins might mean that it was part of an effort to promote the narrative quality of their films. It is possible that these scenarios were created as part of a short-lived experiment in co-ordinating the schedules of several different production units. The Camera Register for the time shows that the film lab and studio were being kept quite busy. It is equally possible that the experiment was successful and permanent, but that Biograph simply decided, as a cost saving, to forgo the separate copyrighting of scenarios as unnecessary to the legal protection of their films.

No trace of The Serenade is known to this writer other than the document which Selig wrote and copyrighted. It does seem plain, however, from the cautionary statement, that Lubin intended it primarily as a 'screenplay' for a comedy film. This conclusion is reinforced by the fact that the scenario is less than thirteen pages in length, including dialogue and stage directions, but is divided into four full scenes. It is unlikely that any stage representation of this work, even a full vaudeville staging, would include four full scene changes. Especially for settings that call for: (1) garden scene - with balcony projecting from upper part of house; (2) street scene (with only six exchanges of dialogue); (3) exterior wood scene, and artificial lake, covering half of stage (scene contains only three exchanges of dialogue); (4) street scene, same as Scene 2 but with an automobile which arrives and departs in such a way as to be seen disappearing in the distance.20

The Serenade seems to have been written from the point of view of a live performance. It is a script with full dialogue and a minimum of stage directions. The bulk of Selig's creative effort was devoted to the one part of the performance (the dialogue) that would not have an effect on viewers of the film. The Biograph scenarios were constructed from an opposite point of view. They include no dialogue and are concerned almost exclusively with set descriptions and character actions. The impression one has after reading them is that they were conceived with a great deal more thought and experimentation than Selig's effort.

The arrangement of information, in the works by Marion and McCutcheon, reflect their logical approach to the problems that lay before them. Each of the scenarios is divided into sections which clearly address different elements of the film production. The first section, on page one of each document, is the 'Cast of Characters'. This is followed by general information for the scene painters and costumers. The next segment gives specific descriptions of the sets required for each scene in the film.

There is also a definite statement of the period of time which the production is meant to represent. Wanted, a Dog, for example, is a well-made comedy about the difficulties a young widow encounters while trying to buy a watch dog. The plot covers a complicated sequence of actions but the 'time' statement for that scenario reads, 'The action of the first three scenes occurs on the afternoon of one day, and the action of the remaining nine scenes, during the morning of the following day.'21 This is an essential piece of information about the production. It defines the chronology of the narrative and provides the necessary conceptual framework in which all the actions are to be performed. The narrative chronologies of the Biograph scenarios vary widely and indicate that complexity of narrative structure was not a principal concern. Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son covers the shortest narrative period: 'The action is continuous, taking place at consecutive periods on the afternoon of one day.'22 The most intricate is The Nihilists, in which the actions occur through seven scenes in eleven camera positions, and a time period of more than three months.

The preliminary segments of the scenarios deal exclusively with the sort of pre-production information that would have been essential to anyone charged with preparing for the production of a narrative film. Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son, for example, was filmed on Sunday 12 February 1905.23 It required 'Costumes, Properties, and Scenic Effects of about the time of Shakespeare' for sixteen actors and seven scenes.24 (About fifty chickens and geese were added to the atmosphere in the final barnyard scene alone.) If the Camera Register is accurate, all of these preparations were assembled and ready for the single day that it took to make the film. Logic suggests that some mechanism of regular coordination had to be in place that would provide for the hiring of actors, the construction and painting of flats, the measuring and assignment of costumes, the selection of a camera operator, the lighting of the studio, the rehearsal of the cast, and the completion of a split-reel film in one day. The starting point for that mechanism, regardless of the hierarchy of studio command, had to have been an idea or document capable of effectively co-ordinating the independent activities required in preparation for the completion of even the simplest narrative film in one day. The introductory portions of the Biograph scenarios were created to fill that function.

The remaining parts of the scenarios describe, in minute detail for each scene of each film, how the actors, costumes, sets and props were to be used in front of the camera. The following is the text for the first scene of Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son.

Scene 1. At Chatsworth Fair. At the opening of the scene, a typical English country fair of the Shakesperian [sic] period is in full swing. Booths are erected at the back of the stage offering various catch-penny attractions. A female tight rope walker is giving an exhibition of her skill. A buffoon juggler is attracting the crowd with his tricks, and a fakir with a shell and pea game is also bidding for attention. A crowd of rustics wander about amusing themselves with the various attractions of the fair.
Time: Early Afternoon.
The opening scene is laid in a typical old English Fair with a primitive 'midway' in full swing. There is a lady tight rope walker, a clown juggler, a fakir with a shell and pea game, a goose girl, and a great crowd of rustics. Among the latter appears Simple Simon trying to sample the pieman's wares, and at one side, the old blind piper is blowing merrily on his pipe while Tom, his son, is on the watch for pennies. A bumpkin strolls in, leading a small pig by a string. He stops to watch the shell game, over which a fight ensues. The village constable arrests the gambler and there is great excitement. The bumpkin has in the meanwhile handed his pig over to a small boy who also is greatly interested in the turmoil and drops the string. Tom seizes the opportunity, and catching the pig, darts away. The owner sets up a shout, and starts after him, followed by the entire crowd.25

The redundant style is characteristic of all of the Biograph scenarios. The action of each scene is always described on two levels. The first provides a general outline of the scene, followed, when necessary, by a specific statement of its 'time' relationship to other scenes. The second is devoted to an extended, more detailed narrative of actions to be portrayed. The first level 'sets' the scene and develops the atmosphere that the secondary characters are to create. The second descriptive level elaborates on that function, then quickly narrows to concentrate on the actions of the principal characters in the scene.

The division of narrative levels probably facilitated scene rehearsals. It is probable that these portions of the scenario were read aloud to the ensemble of actors to inform them of what the scene was about and to provide them with initial rehearsal directions. The close co-ordination of interior and exterior actions and the complexity of plots, as they appear in the films, argue strongly for the conclusion that rehearsal activity preceded the filming of every scene.

The future importance of the Biograph and Selig scenarios depends largely on the continuing search for a much wider sample of similar manuscripts, and their interpretative correlation with whatever archival materials already exist. But these few examples, particularly those from Biograph, provide valuable documentary evidence from the first crucial phase of motion picture history - the period when narrative motion pictures overtook the production of all other types of film. The Biograph documents, when analysed in conjunction with the Paper Print Collection and the Biograph Camera Register, reveal extremely important information about that company's first efforts to begin the regular production of split-reel length narrative films. The collation of this information has produced the first solid evidence of the appearance of several important innovations either invented or adopted by that company. For example, through a comparative study of these sources, it can now be determined:

a. when Biograph shifted to the weekly production of narrative films of more than one or two scenes, in a split-reel format of three to five minutes;

b. how, in 1904, Biograph directors were able to maintain visual and narrative 'continuity' between 'interior' scenes, shot in the New York City studio, and 'exterior' scenes filmed as much as a week later, in locations as far as 60 miles away;

c. who was involved in the writing of scenarios in 1904 and 1905, and who may have been the first film directors responsible for the sustained experimental use of scenarios in the making of narrative films.

d. when, in 1904, the practice of filming 'retakes' arose, and when the 'editing' of a 'release version' became a standard practice.

Elaboration of these points (and others) will have to wait for explanation in a longer format but one conclusion is certain. The future of scholarship in early narrative film is tied directly to the need for further documentary evidence of written sources. The many early references to their existence, and the examples presented above, clearly suggest that early film-makers relied on some basic types of theatrical scenario form to give organization to their longer productions. The first examples have been found and the job now is to look for more.