Kuritz, Hyman. "The Popularization of Science in Nineteenth-Century America."History of Education Quarterly. 21 (1981): 259-274.

Article discusses the rise of science and modern technology in the late nineteenth century in the US and how this effects the class system and the crafts of individual artisans.  The rise of science was initially thought to help bridge the gap amongst the rich and poor.  It was even thought to help with the path to individuality since there would be more room for opportunity.  Seventeenth century beginnings of science knowledge and hope for the future was very different than how the knowledge of science and technology was given out to the public.  Instead of bridging the gap, this modern science only furthered the knowledge gap and created a "new professional elite" (Hyman 267).

This is important to my thesis because it shows how industrialization and the rise in technology backfired and instead brought less knowledge to the majority of the people.  The less knowledge they had about these machines, the more they were intimidated by and were willing to work in poor conditions as they nothing else.  Chaplin created Modern Times to, through satire, show what was essentially wrong with this way of thinking and the consquences of it.

Feldman, Stuart.  "At the Movies: Business Gets a Bad Rap." Management Review. 81 (1992): 49-54.

This article discusses Hollywood's portrayal of big businesses over time.  Generally Hollywood has portrayed big businesses in a negative light and Modern Times is no exception.  Scholars suggest that this may be the case due to the nature of filmmakers and more liberal and critical of big businesses.  This negative depiction portrays back to the 1930s with Chaplin's film.  The article describes scenes in which company tycoon interact with the workers.  He has a large screen that surveys them as they work and can easily make sure they stay in line.  Even when Chaplin's character is take a break in the bathroom, he is ordered (via gian screen) to get back to work.

This relates to my thesis because it helps to highlight why Chaplin and others would have this critical opinion on big businesses born out of the industrialization period.  The authority figure has complete control and domination over the workers every move.  There is no employee-employer relationship (other than through a large screen) and employees are thought of as numbers.  They are tolerated when they are working, but once they step out of line they are punished.  This punisment forces workers to stay in line with everyone else further perpetuating homogeneity.

Yellowitz, Irwin. Industrialization and the American labor movement, 1850-1900. New York: Kennikat Press Corp., 1977.

Chapter: Industrialization and the Status of Workers

One of the chapters in this book discusses the transition for workers from the pre-industrial period to the post.  The chapter discusses the notion of independence and entrepreneurship often associated with the United States.  Before industrialization, these achievements seemed much more tangible.  In the mid to late nineteenth century the idea of individual skill was diminished.  By the 1880s people began to recognize that industrialization had brought a complete end to the idea of moving up in the work field.  Wealth and prosperity was only allowed for an elite group.  Industrialization "fostered the division of labor and large-scale production, which ultimately destroyed the skill and independence of the worker" (Yellowitz 38).  The chapter goes on to describe the many social critics who recognized this transition from individuals to the masses (or herds of sheep as Chaplin would say) as disastrous and dentrimental to society.

This is important to my thesis because it shows what the conditions were like before industrialization; the opposite conditions of a homogenous society.  It was right of Chaplin and others to be concerned about the negative impact of the change.  We sympathize with the main character in Chaplin's films which helps us to see the problem with the factory system.  It is unfair for him to be punished and lose his job just because he does not behave exactly the same as the other workers in the factory.  A homogenous society only functions well for those few that our profiting.  For the majority of people in society, homogeneity only leads to dispair and in some cases, mental illness.

Stewart, Garrett.  "Modern Hard Times: Chaplin and the Cinema of Self Reflection." Critical Inquiry 3 (1976): 295-314.

This article compares the film Modern Times to the Dickens' novel Hard Times both acting a social satires on the pressures and challenges people faced in specific conditions and times.  The article mentions Chaplin's own personal life growing up in Britain may be one reason why these two authors are similar in subject nature of their works.  They both were against the factory system.  Chaplin learned of a true story of a workers going crazy after years working as part of an assembly line.  Chaplin's character during the factory sequence has becomed so accustomed to the 'bolt-tightening' behaviors, he literally cannot stop, even when he is forced away from the assembly line for disrupting the flow.  Comical? Yes.  However, it shows how dangerous this type of work can be on the psyche.

This article is important to my thesis because it specifically demonstrates how Chaplin critiques industrialization in his film scenes. "Charlie as robotized victim of the machine extends this into a frontal assault on industrialization" (Stewart 297-298).  Chaplin attacks industrialization by showing that workers become robot-like in their work.  This robotization extends from the workplace into the rest of their lives (and what little they have of it) creating a homogenized society.  The articles also discusses why Chaplin may have this critique of industrialization and the homogenized society.  The article also mentions that Chaplin's personal reasons may be an implication as to why he createad the film.  A story that he heard or workers in Detriot becoming 'nervous wrecks' after years at the mercy of large machines in factories.  These workers had been functioning individuals with unique personalities.  But after years at the mercy of the assembly line system, they became roboticized to perform, eventually forcing them to break down.

Harness, Kyp. The Art of Charlie Chaplin : A Film-by-Film Analysis. North Carolina: McFarland and Company Inc., 2008.

Chapter: Modern Times

The chapter in this book analyzes, in depth, the film Modern Times.  It first reviews how Chaplin’s alter ego, known as the Tramp, has evolved through film.  The Tramp is the character Chaplin takes in the films in which he stars.  The Tramp has been known as being frenetic with characteristics such as kicking, punching, and thumbing his nose at others.  Over time, in the films, the Tramp became more gentle and sympathetic with audiences.  The Tramp has most importantly remained constant in “stimulating societal upheaval in some form” (Harness 148).  Modern Times is no exception when it comes to the above mentioned characteristic.  Due to pressures from the industry and the rise of sound, the Tramp makes his final appearance in Modern Times.

The notion of the Tramp is important to my thesis because it is the medium through which the message of a homogenous society is carried.  Familiar to audiences by its mannerisms and humor, the Tramp was a powerful tool for Chaplin in sending out this message.  We see Chaplin’s critique of homogeneity as a result of industrialization through the behavior of the Tramp in the film. The Tramp, who is a worker on an assembly line in a large factory, constantly messes up and breaks from the other workers in line.  It is clear that his individuality is not appreciated by his employers.  Through comedy and familiarity, the audience sympathizes with the Tramp.  In sympathizing with the Tramp, we can understand the message Chaplin makes and, with him, critique the homogeneity of society. 

Chaplin had learned of unemployment strikes during this new age through his own experience as well as stories from others.  The unpleasant stories he became aware of inspired Chaplin to make this film. 

This relates to my thesis because the sole reason for making Modern Times was due to the effects of the industrializatiion period.  The dehumanizing labors of workers "to [Chaplin] it represented the dawn of a new 'modern' age, less hospitable to human individuality.  For as the assembly line presented a series of identical parts to be fastened in an identical fashion, it seemed to demand of its workers an identicality, a conformity of movement and mind which paralleled the uniformity of the products of mass production" (Harness 150). We see here that Chaplin believed that this type of labor could have severe consequences on workers' individuality, not just in the work place, but in their lives.  Having a homogenous society is, in fact, the opposite of progress and Chaplin was smart enough to see that and choose to use his notoriety and talent as a filmmaker to present this message to his audience.

Grace, Harry A. "Charlie Chaplin's Films and American Culture Patterns."  The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. 10 (1952): 353-363.

This article reviews several of Chaplin's films including Modern Times to show how they are relevant to the problems of society at the time.  The article reviews the film under the assumption that the major themes of his films are illustrations of American historical events/periods over time. Modern Times (1936) represents the effects of the industrialization period on men.  More specifically Modern Times portrays the job situation for men in the age of technological advancement.  Industrialization led to a different job experience for he working class man.  Large assembly lines became the norm for lower income workers in order to produce mass products by machinery.

This relates to my thesis because it highlights the problem of the job situation workers faced after industrialization.  Assembly lines in large factories lead to a loss of indivduality.  Everyone is doing the same work at the same time for the same amont of time everyday.  We see in the film that assembly lines are monotonous, repetitive, and can lead one to almost go insane (We see Chaplin's character act as though he is working in the assembly line even when he is on a lunch break).  Workers are no longer individuals; they are merely an extension of the machines solely there to create products for profit.