Part 584: Advertising Curtains
Here is one last installment on advertising curtains. It gives information pertaining to the revenue collected for advertising curtains in 1909 and the decision of Martin Beck to remove advertising curtains in Orpheum Theatres. President Meyerfeld and General Manager Martin Beck ran the Orpheum Company. The “Lincoln Star” summarized Beck’s position in the company. It is well worth including as it provides the scope of the Orpheum company.
“Mr. Meyerfeld was in his San Francisco office exercising general control over all the big Orpheum company. Around him are able lieutenants, who assist him in his executive work. At the other end of the line in New York is Mr. Beck, with his big offices and a small army of men who are lieutenants. Over in London is another group of expert vaudeville booking agents, all busy as bees under the guidance of Mr. Meyefeld and Mr. Beck, and in Berlin is still another group of booking men who report to Mr. Meyerfeld and Mr. Beck. In Chicago is still another big Orpheum office in the Majestic Theatre building, with a corps of vaudeville agents who do nothing but canvas the field searching for the very cream of vaudeville and submitting it for Mr. Meyefeld and Mr. Beck’s approval” (The Lincoln Star, 21 May 1911, page 19).
In 1909, the “Los Angeles Times” quoted General Manager Martin Beck: “Never again will an advertising curtain be permitted in one of our theaters” (3 Oct. 1909, page 28). The Times noted that the loss of revenue to art for the local house would be slightly in excess of 500 dollars per month. Today’s equivalent purchasing power is just shy of $14,000 per month. This provides us with a little information; many advertising curtains had approximately ten to twelve spaces, so each space could generate approximately $1000 each month.
Beck argued that there was a “gain to the sensibilities of the patrons in many fold” with the removal of advertising curtains, but he did not elaborate. In the Los Angeles article, Beck noted that the new screen for the front of the theater was being painted in Chicago.; this replaced the advertising curtain. I found the terminology for the replacement piece interesting – “screen,” instead of front curtain or drop curtain. It is possible that he was referring to a picture sheet, with a central screen surrounded by an elaborate and painted frame. Is it possible that the progression in some theaters went from painted front curtain to advertising curtain to picture sheet?
At the same time, the advertising curtain had also gained prominence by 1909, having moved from a position behind the front curtain to replacing it. This means that the advertising curtain had moved from being dropped during intermission to taking the prominent spot behind the proscenium, being on permanent displayed in the theatre. During the 1890s, there are many articles that support the advertising curtain was lowered for a specific period of time and was not on permanent display as the front curtain for all who entered the theatre. At the time, advertising companies even hired individuals to attend various productions at theatres to make sure that their ad drops were being displayed as promised. This was similar to making sure that television commercials appear in the specific time slots.
An article titled “Curtain Fight” was published in the “Buffalo Commercial” during 1897 (18 Oct 1897, page 15). It discussed a legal battle that ensued after the proprietor refused to allow the placement of an advertising curtain as contracted with a scenic studio. In May of 1896, John Laughlin became the manager of the Lyceum theatre and he refused to allow the New York Curtain Company to place an advertising curtain in his theatre on the ground that it would be a detriment to the house. The curtain company alleged that the contract had been broken and that it had suffered damages to the amount of $500.”
There was a shift from advertising curtains being displayed at certain times, to replacing the front curtain. My research suggests that it occurred around 1900. It was during this period when the placement of an advertising curtain also began suggesting that the venue was suffering and needed extra income. An article in the “Cincinnati Enquirer” commented that the need to place an advertising curtain could indicate the proprietor’s precarious financial state. The article reported, “The stage 12 x 14, with an ‘ad’ curtain which when it went up bespoke more plainly than words the nervous condition of the manager’s hand” (The Cincinnati Enquirer, 16 Dec 1900, page 36).
To be continued…
