Month: April 2018

 

Part 401: “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, fifth section 

The article “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” was published in “The Era” on February 4, 1866. Here is the fifth of five installments.

“The late David Roberts, who made his debut in London as a scene-painter at Drury-lane, where he commenced his career in 1822, was also famous for his dioramas, but he never produced works which equalled Stanfield’s moving diorama of Alpine scenery, or the memorable views of Windsor and the neighbourhood, which included the sparkling tableau of Virginia Water, wherein the real element was so effectively introduced.

The principal Covent-garden artists at this time (1828) were David Roberts and the famous scenic triumvirate, Messrs. Grieve, and T. and W. Grieve. Mr. Roberts, who only died recently, was a fine architectural scenic draughtsman, and the drop scene he painted for this Theatre, the Interior of a Temple to Shakespeare, consisting of fluted Corinthian Sienna columns, supporting a soffite dome, the perspective terminating with a monumental group introducing the immortal Bard, with St. Paul’s Cathedral in the distance, will be vividly remembered by the mature playgoer. The Grieves had long been famous for their Pantomime scenery, and in the brilliancy of their style, the strong feeling of reality which they communicated to the spectator, and in the taste and artistic beauty of their landscape compositions, they have since had few rivals, and have never been excelled. The Covent-garden Pantomime of Aladdin, this year, shows that Mr. T. Grieve has still the right to wear the laurelled crown. The last scene of The Master of Ravenswood, at the Lyceum with the storm effects introduced, may be cited as a fine specimen of this artist’s powers.

At the present time the stage is richly supplied with scenic artists whose reputation needs no better security than the productions they have this year given to the public. With a cherished remembrance of the old days of Tomkins and Pitt at the Adelphi, of Philip Phillips at the Surrey  and of the clever artist, Brunning, who died a mere youth, and yet figured conspicuously among the scenic corps of twenty years ago, we may pass confidently to the catalogue of our present distinguished representatives of the scenic art.

Mr. William Beverley, on his own ground at Drury is the unrivalled delineator of the fanciful region in which fairies may be imagined to dwell. Mr. William Galleon is a richly-endowed and skillful artist, whose “Transformation Scenes” have long won for him a special celebrity, and whose latest triumphs of pictorial ingenuity, as exhibited at the Alhambra, would suffice to establish his name as a highly-original producer of peculiar “effects.”

Mr. O’Connor at the Haymarket, Mr. Lloyd at the Princess’s, Mr. Charles James at the Prince of Wales’s Theatre, Mr. Hawes Craven at the Olympic, Messrs. Brew at Astley’s, Mr. Gates at the Surrey, Mr. Frederick Fenton at the Victoria, and his brother, Mr. Charles Fenton at the Strand, have severally produced works of Art which will long keep their names vividly impressed on the memory of the playgoer. Nor should those who have so successfully laboured for the Theatres we have not here named be passed over in silence. In the ample accounts we have rendered of the last Christmas novelties they will find, however, the fullest recognition of their respective merits. Mr. Marshall, though not now so much before the public as a scenic artist, is not likely to be forgotten by those who can appreciate the services he has rendered to this important department of the stage; and Mr. Telbin has so distinguished himself by the triumphs he has achieved in the highest region of the Scenic Art that it is only to be regretted, for the sake of playgoers, his pencil is not now as frequently employed as heretofore for their gratification.”

End of the article.

To be continued…

Part 400: “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, fourth section 

While researching the English scene painting families, I came across an interesting article from 1866. It seems an appropriate time to share this article, as my house is full of friends. It is the perfect time to examine how the history of scenic art was presented during the mid-nineteenth century in the United Kingdom.

The article “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” was published in “The Era” on February 4, 1866. Here is the fourth of five installments.

When John Kemble became Manager of Covent-garden Theatre  the accuracy of scenery and costume became more studied. One of the most eminent scene-painters of this period was Mr. William Capon, who died in September, 1827. He was born in 1757, and studied under Novosielski, the architect of the Italian Opera House, during which time he designed the Theatre and other buildings at Ranelagh Gardens, and painted several scenes for the Opera. On the completion of New Drury, in 1794, Kemble engaged Mr. Capon for the scenic department, by which means the Manager was greatly assisted in his reformation of the stage. The artist had a private painting room, to which Kemble used to invite his friends to witness the progress of this scenic reform. Among these specimens were a Chapel of the pointed style of architecture, which occupied the whole stage, and was used for the performance of oratorios; six chamber wings of the same order, for general use in our old English plays, and very elaborately studied from actual remains; a View of New Palace Yard, Westminster, as it was in 1793, forty-one feet wide, with corresponding wings; the Ancient Palace of Westminster, as it was three hundred years back, carefully painted from authorities, and forty-two feet wide and thirty-four feet to the top of the scene; six wings representing ancient English streets; the Tower of London, restored to its earlier state for the play of Richard the Third; and for Jane Shore was painted the Council Chamber of Crosby House. All these scenes were spoken of at the time as historical curiosities.

Capon painted for John Kemble two magnificent interior views of Drury-lane and Covent-garden, for which he received about two hundred guineas. Unfortunately all his scenes were destroyed by the fire at Drury-lane in 1809, but he afterwards painted many scenes for Covent-garden  which for several years must have completely satisfied the more critical eye of even a later generation, for several needed only a little re-touching to serve the Managements which preceded that of Mr. Macready.

In Elliston’s time Marinari and Stanton painted a beautiful drop scene for Drury-lane, which was substituted for the green curtain. It was a fine composition of Grecian ruins and figures within a splendidly-wrought frame, heightened with gold ornamentation. The figures were by Stanton, and the cost of the scene was nearly ‘£700.

In 1828  the principal scene-painters of Drury-lane  were Stanfield, Andrews, and Marinari. Stanfield’s panoramas, at this period introduced into each successive Pantomime, were triumphs of pictorial art. The two drop scene’s then used between the acts were much admired. One including the Coliseum, with other remains of classic architecture, was painted by Stanton. The other from a picture by Claude, was from Stanfield’s pencil. The Weight of each of these drops, with the roller and necessary adjuncts, was about 8001bs.

In marine scenery Clarkson Stanfield had never been surpassed. Born at Sunderland in 1798, he had commenced life as a sailor, and he had well profited by his early experience of the lights and shadows of the sea. For many years Mr. Stanfield taught the pit and gallery to admire landscape art, and the occupants of the boxes to become connoisseurs. He decorated Drury-lane Theatre  with works so beautiful that the public annually regretted the frail material of which they were composed, and the necessity for new and gorgeous effects, which caused this fine artist’s works to be successively obliterated. He created, and afterwards painted out with his own brush, more scenic masterpieces than any man, and in his time Clown and Pantaloon tumbled over and belaboured one another in front of the most beautiful and dazzling pictures which were ever presented to the eye of the play-goer.”

To be continued…

 

Part 399: “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, third section

While researching the English scene painting families, I came across an interesting article from 1866. It seems an appropriate time to share this article, as my house is full of friends for the Helios Masonic Symposium in St. Cloud today. It is the perfect time to examine how the history of scenic art was presented during the mid-nineteenth century in the United Kingdom.

The article “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” was published in “The Era” on February 4, 1866. Here is the third of five installments.

“Great improvements in the scenic department were made at the beginning of the last century, when Rich, who was Manager of the playhouse in Lincoln’s Inn-fields, denominated the new Theatre, and set up in rivalry, of Drury Lane, designed a series of spectacular entertainments, which drew the audiences from the old house, although it retained a strong company under the management of Wilkes, Booth, and Cibber. Italy had long been famous for its scene painters and the splendour of its Pantomimic representations. Canaletti, the great painter, designed the scenery for the Venetian stage. Some of these foreign artists were employed by Rich, and then it was the English first beheld the delightful effect of the picturesque as viewed through a splendid proscenium on a lengthened stage.

The Managers of Drury, in self defense, were compelled to attempt the same kind of entertainment, and they pressed into their service a celebrated scene-painter, named Devoto, and a ballet-master, Monsieur Thermond, who projected a Pantomime of which Jack Sheppard was the hero. This set the wits of the town on the Managers, who, with the scene-painter, were dragged to the satiric whipping-post. On these Pantomimic pieces they were lavish of expense, as the scenery and machinery were the principal attractions.

When Rich removed his dramatic corps from Lincoln’s Inn-fields to the newly-erected Theatre in Covent-garden, Hogarth caricatured the whole house moving in procession across the market-place in front of the piazza, not forgetting to have a hit at his friend George Lambert, whose scenes he piled in a wagon wherein the thunder and lightning were made conspicuous. Lambert, who had been joint scene-painter at Lincoln’s Inn, was appointed principal in that department at Covent-garden, and it was in the scene-room here that he founded the Beef-steak Club. Harvey, a landscape painter, and Amiconi, who painted the fine groups on the upper part of the staircase at old Buckingham House, executed the decorations of the proscenium, an allegory of Shakespeare, Apollo, and the Muses. John Laguerre, the historical painter, occasionally designed the scenes for Lincoln’s Inn stage, and the curious scene-cloth representing the Siege of Troy, depicted in Hogarth’s “Southwark Fair,” is from his design. Michael Angelo Rooker, whimsically Italianized himself into Signor Rookerini, and who was at once painter, Harlequin, Scaramouch, and engraver, was principal scene-painter to the elder Colman at his Theatre in the Haymarket.

John Richards, the old Secretary of the Royal Academy, painted many years for the stage. His rural scenery for “The Maid of the Mill” is perpetuated in two line engravings, which are in the portfolios of all our old-fashioned Collectors of English prints.

De Loutherbourg who for some time delighted and astonished the town by his interesting dioramic exhibition, which he called “The Eidophusikon,” was the first to increase the effect of scenery by lighting from above the proscenium, and using coloured glasses for the lamps. Many ingenious devices, now familiar, in their effects at least, to a playgoing public, owe their adoption to the dashing, vigorous Flemish battle-painter, whose appearance was as martial as his pictures, and whom Jack Bannister nicknamed “Field-Marshal Leatherbags.”

Another distinguished artist of this period was Mr. Greenwood, father of Mr. T. L. Greenwood, so long associated with the management of Sadler’s Well’s Theatre.

For many years the scenery of the Royal Circus (now the Surrey Theatre) was painted by Mr. Greenwood, who invested the ballets and senior musical spectacles brought out there by Mr. J. C. Cross with remarkable scenic attractions, and, when the artist was transferred to Drury-lane he became even more prominent. Byron, in his “English Bards and Scottish Reviewers,” speaks of “Greenwood’s gay designs” as being then the chief support of the Drama at that period.

To be continued…

Part 398: “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, second section 

While researching the English scene painting families, I came across an interesting article from 1866. It seems an appropriate time as we are preparing for a Masonic Symposium this weekend, allowing me to reunite with some of my favorite people in the world. My evenings will be occupied with other activities instead of preparing a post.

The article “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” was published in “The Era” on February 4, 1866. Here is the second of five installments.

“Classical scholars will readily understand the various opportunities for scenic effect afforded by the old Greek dramatists, and there is some reason for believing the illusions of the ancient stage were much more perfect than has been generally supposed. There were three entries in front, and two on the sides. The middle entry was always that of the principal actor; thus, in tragedy, it was commonly the gate of a palace. Those on the right and left were destined to the second-rate actors; and the two others on the sides, one to people from the country, the other to those from the harbour, or any other public place.

Sipareum was the signification of the tapestry curtain; it was let down, not raised, when the performance commenced, and at the beginning of new acts. The auleum was probably a drop scene or curtain, to draw before doors, and contract the stage. Choragium, property room, where were kept the dresses, scenes, and musical instruments, and here were sometimes disposed the choirs of musicians. In the Greek Theatre it was a place behind the scenes, used also for a dressing room. There was an inner dressing room named post-cenium. Thus even at a remote period we see that attention to the comforts of the performers was by no means overlooked by the theatrical architect of that period.

That the scene-painter’s accommodation has been, down to very recent times, completely lost sight of by those who have had the arrangement of our Theatres may be mentioned in curious contrast with the reliance now placed on the result of the artist’s powers.

According to Malone, moveable scenes were not in use in England till 1605, when three plays were performed at Oxford, before James I., thus described by a contemporary writer: “The stage was built at the upper end of the hall, as it seemed at the first sight, but, indeed, it was but a false wall, faire painted; which pillars would turn about, by reason whereof, with other painted clothes, the stage did vary three times in one tragedy.” It will be observed the writer was not acquainted with the word scene, but used “painted clothes” in that usage.

In the early part of Shakespeare’s time, as is well known, the want of scenery was supplied by writing the names of’ the different places of action on the boards, which were so placed as to be visible to the audience. Thus Davenant, in the introduction to The Siege of Rhodes, 1656, says, “In the middle of the freeze was a compartment wherein was written Rhodes.”

[George] Jameson, called the Scottish Vandyke, designed the scenery for the private theatricals at Holyrood House for his patron, King James VI. This monarch, when celled to the English throne, elected Inigo Jones, his renowned architect, to design the scenery for his Theatre at the palace of Whitehall. His successor, Charles I, and his tasteful Queen, Henrietta, during their happier days, gave a new character to the stage.

All was elegance at their youthful Court. There Ben Jonson presented his Masques, and Inigo Jones was still retained as scene painter and Machinist. Charles spared no expense in the decorations for these romantic pieces, in which himself and his Queen and the young lords and Ladies of the Court took an active part in the performance. The skill and ingenuity displayed in these scenic contrivances seem to have been remarkable. Streater, a painter of eminence and who sketched many views of old buildings for his royal patron, Charles II., designed the scenes for Dorset Gardens Theatre and the Phoenix. When this house fell under the management of Fleetwood he employed his gay friend, Frank Hayman, as principal scene-painter to the Theatre.”

To be continued…

Part 397: “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, first section

While researching the English scene painting families, I came across an interesting article from 1866. It seems an appropriate time to share this article, as my house will soon be full of friends. This means that I will become distracted by good conversations over glasses of wine. It is also a good time to look at how the history of scenic art was presented during the mid-nineteenth century in the United Kingdom.

The article “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” was published in “The Era” on February 4, 1866. The first issue of “The Era” was published in 1838. Here is the first of five installments from the 1866 article.

“At a season when thousands of spectators, not only in the Metropolis, but in the chief towns of the United Kingdom, are nightly calling into their presence the scenic artist, who has conjured up before them landscapes of surpassing beauty or fairy palaces of dazzling grandeur and apparently interminable development, it will be an appropriate time to look back on the early years of that art which in our own day has been recognized as so essential to modern Managerial prosperity. No more is here intended than a rapid summary of a few little-known facts and a revival of some pleasant recollections; but to those who may hereafter think fit to deal with the subject, at a length in accordance with its importance, we offer materials which may not be without interest.

No future writers on this theme should be left unacquainted with the circumstance, recently made known by that acute Shakespearian critic, Mr. Frederick Guest Tomkins, that the first painter of moveable scenery in England was [Robert] Aggas and at Painter Stainers’ Hall, Little Trinity-lane, may yet be seen a fine specimen of the artist’s work. Those who passed a pleasant evening last summer in the fine old Courtroom of this most interesting City Hall will long retain a lively memory of the genial gathering invited to hear the particulars of the discovery.

The ancient scenery employed for open-air representations at first consisted of mere boughs, but afterwards of tapestry, not painted canvas. The Greek stage consisted of three parts, the seena, across the Theatre, upon the line of the curtain in our Theatres; the proscenium, where the actors perform; and the postscenium, the part behind the house. To form parts of the scenes there were prisms of framework, turning upon pivots, upon each face of which was stained a distinct picture; one for tragedy, consisting of large buildings, with columns, statues, and other corresponding ornaments; a second face, with houses, windows, and balconies, for comedy; a third applied to farce, with cottages, grottoes, and rural scenes. These were the scenes versatiles of Servius. Besides these there were scena ductiles, which drew backwards and forwards, and opened a view of the house, which was built upon the stage, and contained apartments for machinery or retirement of actors.

As to the patterns of the scenes in comedy the most considerable building was in the centre, that on the right hand was a little less elevated, and that on the left generally represented an inn. In the satirical pieces they had always a cave in the middle, a wretched cabin on the right, and on the left an old ruined temple or a landscape. In these representations perspective was observed, for Vitruvius remarks that “the rules of it were invented and practiced from the time of Aeschylus by a painter named Agararchius, who has even left a treatise upon it.” After the downfall of the Roman Empire these decorations of the stage were neglected till Peruzzi, a Siennese, who died in 1536, revived them.”

To be continued…

Part 396: Francis Bedford, photographer

In 1863, William Telbin and his son Henry painted scenes for a panorama about the tour made in the East by the Prince of Wales. At that same time, Francis Bedford (1816-1894) created a photographic exhibition of the same tour. Bedford was a British artist, photographer, lithographer, and publisher.

Bedford was the son of a church architect,Francis Octavius Bedford,  following in his father’s footsteps and beginning his career as a draughtsman. He soon became well-known for his ecclesiastical architectural drawings. This skill facilitated additional projects that included “A Chart Illustrating the Architecture of Westminster Abbey (1840) and “A Chart of Anglican Church Architecture Arranged Chronologically with Examples of Different Styles” (1843). Other lithographic commissions included one hundred plates for Owen Jones’ “The Grammar of Ornament” (1856) and “The Treasury of Ornamental Art” (1858).

It was not until the 1850s that Bedford took up photography. He specialized in topographic and architectural views. In 1857 he joined the Photographic Society of London and was elected to the Council of the Photographic Society, later becoming the organization’s president in 1861.

By 1854 Queen Victoria commissioned him to photograph objects in the royal collection at Marlborough House. By the 1861 census, Bedford was listed as an “artist” in Peterborough, later becoming a “photographic artist” in London. He was the first photographer to accompany a royal tour, after successfully completing two royal commissions.

All parts of the group’s itinerary had already been explored by British travelers, authors, artists and photographers, including Rev. George Wilson Bridges (1846-1852), Maxim du Camp (1849-1851), Francis Frith (1856-1860), as well as the Cramb brothers and James Graham during the 1860s. Many published their photographs by subscription installments. This was similar to what David Roberts had done with his lithographs, resulting in a photographically-illustrated book once the series was complete. Others, such as Frith, issued their photographs as glass-plate stereographs that accompanied descriptive books. Many of Bedford’s photographs became carte-de-visite prints, all bearing the legend “F. Bedford Photographer to H. R. H. The Prince of Wales” over the Prince’s coat of arms. During the 1860s Bedford’s catalogue ran over 9000 images various formats, including multiple view carte-de-visite, copied from montages of large format views.

Here is an article about Bedford’s project that was published in Illustrated London News (13 Sept 1862, Vol. 41, No. 1164, page 283).

“Echoes of the Week, and the International Exhibition.”

“One of the most admirable and interesting exhibitions now open in London is that of the photographic pictures taken by Mr. Francis Bedford during his tour in the East, on which, by command, he accompanied his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, and which are now on view at the German Gallery in Old Bond-street. Panoramas, sketches, pictures, and photographs of the Holy Land are no novelties in this country, and are honourably connected with the names of Roberts, Bartlett, Bonomi, and others; but the circumstances under which Mr. Bedford’s tour was undertaken give additional interest to his collection of photographs. We may remark, en passant, that another artist of eminence, although in a widely-different style, is now occupying himself in Oriental fields. Mr. Buckstone, of the Haymarket, has commissioned the famous scene-painter, Mr. William Telbin, to proceed to the East to follow the scarcely-effaced footsteps of the Prince of Wales, for the purpose of making sketches illustrative of his Royal Highness’s tour in Syria and Palestine, which will be reproduced in a panorama for a grand spectacle founded on the Story of “Rasselas, Prince of Abyssinia.” Dr. Johnson will himself officiate as chorus, and, in his immortal snuff-coloured suit and bushy wig, deliver a sonorous commentary on the adventures of Rassolas, who, dramatically speaking, is to be taken in hand by Mr. William Brough.”

To be continued…

 

Part 395: William Telbin and Henry Telbin

In 1863, William Telbin and his son Henry painted scenes for a panorama about the tour made in the East by the Prince of Wales. At that same time, Francis Bedford created a photographic exhibition of the same tour. Here is an article about the Telbins’ project that was published in Art Journal (May 1863, Vol. 2, No. 5, page 101).

“Minor Topics of the Month. Panorama of the Prince of Wales’s Tour.”

“The Easter novelty at the Haymarket Theatre is the production of a series of panoramic views, illustrative of the tour made in the East by the Prince of Wales. To ensure the utmost accuracy, Mr. Buckstone sent his scene-painters—Mr. Telbin and his son—the same journey, and the result has been a series of pictures of singular fidelity and beauty. The series begins at Cairo and ends at Constantinople, including the sacred Island of Philae on the Nile, Jerusalem, the Jordan, the Dead Sea, Nazareth, Mount Hormon, Damascus, Beyrout, and other interesting localities. It is an especial merit in these pictures that they are quite free of all conventionalism, and the artist has boldly delineated the atmospheric and topographical peculiarities of the Holy Land.

The glaring sunlight, the arid desert, the deep green foliage, the gorgeously tinted sunsets, the brilliant moonlights, the sky studded with lamp-like stars, is all reproduced in these clever pictures. We may especially note the grand and comprehensive view of Cairo as an admirable day-scene, and that of the Dead Sea as an equally good picture of evening in the East The deep shadows and blood-red lights from the setting sun, the fleecy clouds of rosy hue in a sky of gold, could only be painted by an Eastern traveller, and certainly not appreciated by any one who knows no other than an English autumn evening.

The beauty of Mr. Telbin’s work will appeal to all, but his true critics must be few—the few who have travelled where he has travelled. In truth, to the large mass of theatre-goers the whole series may have little attraction; indeed the interest of many of these views depends on associations, which render them more fitted for a lecture-room, in which we some day hope to see them, with more views added, and a sensible description in place of the dramatic trash that now introduces them so unfitly. It is due, however, to the public to say, that they fully appreciated what they entirely understood; and the wonderful reality of the water in the scene on the river Jordon was rapturously applauded; it was almost impossible to divest the mind of the idea that the eye rested on glass.

The night entertainment in a Turkish kiosk on the banks of the river, near Damascus, was also a great popular success; here the combined effects of lamplight and moonlight were most happily given. It was a veritable Arabian night’s entertainment, and for the moment the spectator was fairly carried away by the illusion of the scene. The intended grand climax—the marriage scene at Windsor—was flat after all this; it was “of the stage—stagey,” and had not the truth and freshness of the Eastern series.”

To be continued…

 

Part 394: William Telbin: Artist in Tempera

In 1889 W. J. Lawrence listed some prominent English scene painting families – the Greenwoods, Grieves, Stanfields, Callcotts, Dansons, Fentons, Gordons, and Telbins. This installment looks at the Telbins (The Theatre Magazine, July 13, 1889). The most famous of the Telbin family was William (1815-1873).

William Telbin was a scene painter at Drury Lane Theatre, Covent Gardens and Lyceum Theatres. His scenic art was greatly influenced by the paintings of J. M. W. Turner. The following article about the artist was published in “The Magazine of Art” (January 1, 1902, page 371-376):

“In the records of scenic art no name is held in higher repute than that of Telbin. Since Clarkston Stanfield abandoned the painting-room of the theatre – nearly sixty years ago [1840s] – and was succeeded at Drury Lane by William Telbin the elder, much of the principal scene work for London, for provincial, and even some of the foreign theatres has been executed by painters of this name, the elder Telbin, the father of the subject of this sketch, was at one time scene painter for the four theatres in London then the most important – Her Majesty’s, the Lyceum, Drury Lane, and the Olympic; and in addition was frequently requisitioned for work at Covent Garden and the Haymarket. His elder son was principal assistant, and the younger one, William, drifted in to the same work. From childhood his mind was centered on artistic matters. Provided with models, and modeling tools as toys, he was encouraged in every possible way to develop his artistic tastes. The profession chosen for him when his school days were ended was that of architect, and with the view of training himself for it, he went through a course of sketching in Westminster Abbey, not wholly as a duty, but from an innate love of architecture. This was in 1862. In the following year he paid a visit of some months’ duration to Bonn, and spent the time sketching on the Rhine between that town and Coblentz. Thence he journeyed to Cologne, and worked for some time in the Cathedral. Upon his return home he entered the painting-room of the theatre as assistant to his father, where his brother was already engaged.

The first scene for which he received public credit was a vision of “Robinson Crusoe on the Raft,” painted for a pantomime produced at Covent Garden Theatre by Sir Augustus Harris’ father. Mr. Telbin confesses that, although he was mentioned on the programme as the author of the work, he “shrewdly suspected” his father of “tampering considerably: with t before it was placed on the stage. He was absent in Ireland for two months before Christmas, and when he saw the scene from the front of the house he recognized his father’s handiwork upon it – the brilliancy of color was mistakenly not his own.

Under the direction of Mr. Telbin the elder, the two younger painters were afforded many valuable opportunities of improving themselves in artistic work, for when sketches from nature were required for the work in hand, they were sent to make them. In the manner Mr. W. Telbin has become acquainted with the greater part of the Continent, his journeyings embracing the distances from Iceland to Tangiers, and Ireland to Vienna. Such experiences are invaluable to a scene-painted of the first rank, as well as to the general landscape painter.

From 1870 to 1873 Mr. Telbin’s work increased to an enormous extent, of, owning to the death of his brother, who fell from a cliff whilst sketching on the shores of Lake Lucerne, his father’s health broke down, and the responsibility of providing the family’s means fell upon Mr. Telbin. The many friends of his father showered do man commissions upon him, that he had a great difficulty in keeping pace with them. One instance alone may be given of his efforts to cope with the work: for when the manager of the Theatre Royal, Manchester, desired him to paint the complete scenery for the production of “Macbeth,” for a whole month Mr. Telbin worked twenty hours a day, reaching the theatre at 6 a.m., and leaving at 2 a.m. the following morning. Since then his work has been seen at all the principal theatres in London, and need not be referred to in detail here. He has latterly been engaged upon the scenery for the revival of “King John,” after having completed that for “Paolo and Francesca” for Mr. George Alexander. His scenes for “Faust,” executed for Sir Henry Irving some years ago, are seeing the light again in the revival of the piece at the Lyceum Theatre.

We desire now to call to attention to a branch of Mr. Telbin’s work which is not generally known to the public, but which, to our mind, is in its way as important and as beautiful as any of his stage productions. With tempera as his medium he has produced a series of black and white drawings which proclaim him a master in black and white art. For brilliancy of execution, for certainty of effect, sparkle of the touch, and beauty of presentation, these drawings are not easily surpassed. Some of them were reproduced in this magazine in two articles on “Scene Painters and their Work,” published in 1889, and others in a paper on “Iceland,” in 1893. Another series of views in the Mediterranean, more of which are to be published later, are admirable representations of the scenes to be witnessed during the season of the “bora” on the Mediterranean shores. They show Mr. Telbin was a careful and accurate student of nature, with an instinctive feeling for the picturesque allied to an inimitable power and facility of presentation and suggestion.”

The younger William Telbin, the principal scenic artist for Irving, believed that it was better “to work from the back of the stage to the front, since presumably the nearer the scene to the audience the more subtle and detailed its finishing”

To be continued…

 

Part 393: The Fenton Families

In 1889 W. J. Lawrence listed some prominent English scene painting families – the Greenwoods, Grieves, Stanfields, Callcotts, Dansons, Fentons, Gordons, and Telbins. This installment looks at the Fentons (The Theatre Magazine, July 13, 1889).

There were two sets of theatrical families with the last name of Fenton during the 19^th century; both families included performers, but one was distinguished for their scenic art contributions. It is the descendants of James Gill Fenton that W. J. Lawrence was referring to when discussing English scene painting family. James Gill Fenton was listed as a prompter and stage manager. He had four children Caroline (b. 1819), Frederick (b. 1820), Charles (b. 1822), and Charlotte (b. 1825). It would be the two boys who would continue as scenic artists and later be listed as well-known scene painters.

James Gill Fenton (1794-1877) was a scenic artist and stage director to Edmund Kean. He was also noted as prompter and stage manager. He passed away in 1877 at the age of 83.

Charles Gill Fenton (1822-1877) began his acting career during the 1830s playing small parts in pantomimes. From 1844-1859 he played principal roles and began performing in Shakespearean productions at Sadler’s Wells Theatre. Between 1863 and 1873, Charles was listed as an actor and scenic artist at the Strand Theatre. In 1866, Frederick Gill Fenton(1820-1898) was an actor and a scene painter. Frederick was working at the Victoria Theatre while his brother Charles Fenton was working at the Strand.

Charles then transitioned to working in Vaudeville from 1873 to 1874. Charles married Carloline Parkes (b. 1838), a dancer and an actress at Her Majesty’s, Sadler’s Wells, Marlebone, Surrey, and many other theatres, as well as, music halls for almost thirty years. She worked in the theatre from 1849-1973. Charles died the same year as his father, 1877, at the age of 56.

A few years later, an article titled “Art On The Stage” was published from the Building News and Engineering Journal, July 29th, 1881

“Scene Painting is an art by itself. There is no other branch of painting just like it, either in the variety of subjects embraced or in the methods employed. The thorough scenic artist must be equally at home in landscape or marine work, architectural or fresco. He is not permitted to cultivate any particular branch of his art, nor any favourite style. He must be able to produce, at any time, the wild mountainous passes of Switzerland or the flat meadows of Holland; the green lanes of homelike England, or the winding valleys of romantic Spain. In his architectural work he cannot devote himself to the Gothic or the Romanesque, but must be equally master of the Moorish, the Greek, and the Oriental. He may to-day be called upon to paint the Temple of Minerva, and to-morrow the Mosque of Omar; this week the Windsor Hotel, and next week the Palace of Versailles. His art knows no boundaries, and his scope is confined by no limits. The universe must be at his command, and things unseen must live in his imagination. The methods by which he works and many of the materials he employs are altogether different from those employed by the ordinary oil or water-colour painter. They approach more nearly to those of the latter, yet even here certain qualities of the colours used by the scene-painter constitute a sharp dividing line.”

To be continued…

 

 

Part 392: The Greenwood Family of Scenic Artists

In 1889 W. J. Lawrence listed some prominent English scene painting families – the Greenwoods, Grieves, Stanfields, Callcotts, Dansons, Fentons, Gordons, and Telbins. This installment looks at the Greenwoods (The Theatre Magazine, July 13, 1889).

In 1796, the scene painter “Tom Greenwood” was the painter at the Drury Lane Theatre. He who worked with Thomas Bank, and both painted for a “Harlequin” production (“Life of an Actor” by Pierce Egan and T. Greenwood, 1825, page 207). This was T. L. Greenwood’s father.

The obituary of Thomas Longdon Greenwood (1806-1879) reported that he was “a clever scene painter.” T. L. Greenwood came from a scene painting family. His father was the son of the scenic artist for Sadler’s Wells Theatre and Surrey Theatre (originally the Royal Circus), also painting settings for the ballet and other scenic attractions by J. C. Cross.

He later transferred to the Drury Lane Theatre and became an even more prominent artist there. T. L. Greenwood’s grandfather was the eminent scenic artist for the Drury-lane Theatre, working for David Garrick until the beginning of the nineteenth century. He was honorably commemorated by Lord Byron in his “English Bards and Scottish Reviewers.” Byron remarked about “Greenwood’s gay designs.”

T. L. Greenwoods obituary reported that he was “initiated behind the scenes of a Theatre at a very early period of his life.” Even though he was brought up to the study of medicine, which he followed so far as to open on his own account a druggist’s establishment in Clerkenwell, his inclinations were always toward a theatrical career. He was remembered for his “intimate knowledge of the Drama in all its varied forms, a practical acquaintance with every department of the Theatre and an administrative ability which was throughout his life associated with the most conscientious integrity, were rare acquirements, that he used to the advantage of others rather than himself.

When he was attached to the Olympic, Greenwood painted the original scenery for “Tom and Jerry” and Moncrieff’s extravaganza of “Giovanni in London.” He also wrote a series of pantomimes for the Surrey, Adelphi, and other theatres, “showing much originality of style and fanciful humour in treatment, and a number of melodramas and spectacles, popular at the time, proceeded from his always ready pen.”

In 1839, Greenwood joined Robert Honner in the management of Sadler Wells, when his adaptiation of “Jack Sheppard” and his melodramatic romance of “Paul, the Pilot; or, the Wreck of the Rover” obtained considerable popularity. In 1844, he was associated with Samuel Phelps in the lesseeship of the same theatre, and it took an active part in the direction of the legitimate campaign that did not end until 1860. Some years later, he accepted the direction of Astley’s for the Christmas period, and also accepted the position of Acting-Manager at the Princess’s during the early part of George Vining’s tenure. His obituary concluded with “Ever seeking out the means of rendering a kindly service to the deserving, and always prompt to assist those who could establish a fair claim to his generous remembrance, the announcement of the death of T. L. Greenwood will fall upon a large circle of the Profession like the tidings of the loss of a dear friend to whom they unfailingly turned for aid and advice in the hour of need. Those who knew him best will feel the deepest sorrow – for the loss of companionship, and hold his memory in highest esteem.”

To be continued…