Copyright © 2023 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett
Some information about Sosman & Landis in 1880 comes from the personal memoirs of Thomas G. Moses (1856-1934). He was the first scenic artist hired by Joseph S. Sosman during the spring of that year.
Thomas G. Moses portrait in the Inter Ocean, 28 Feb. 1886.
When Moses met Sosman, he was 24 years old and had been working as a scenic and decorative painter for seven years. He had worked throughout the region after training at P. M. Almini’s and McVicker’s Theatre as Louis Malmsha’s assistant (1873-1874). Of his mentor, Moses remembered, “He was a very clever man. In all the years that have passed since then, I have never found a man that could do so little and get so much out of his work. Very simple in drawing and color, but very effective.” In many ways, working for Malmsha “set the stage” for Moses’ career. He learned both an economy of brushwork and speed. This skill set was an incredible asset to any employer, especially since studio profits increase as paint labor decreases.
Although Moses had started his painting career in Chicago, love brought him back to his hometown of Sterling, Illinois, in 1878. He married his childhood sweetheart and soon celebrated the birth of their first child. Between 1878 and 1879, Moses primarily worked in his hometown as a scenic artist, fresco artist, and decorative painter. In the beginning, work was plentiful. His name made frequent headlines. Their first home is is still standing! I had the pleasure of photographing the building on July 20, 2019, when I passed through town.
Thomas G. Moses’ home in Sterling, Illinois. Photograph by Wendy Waszut-Barrett, July 20, 2019.
Original photographs are part of the Illinois Digital archives.
n.a., Homes, Sterling, Illinois, Thomas G. Moses Residence, 508 East 7th Street, Sterling and Rock Falls Local History Collection (Illinois Digital Archives), 2023-12-05, http://www.idaillinois.org/digital/collection/stpl/id/1999.
n.a., Homes, Sterling, Illinois, Thomas G. Moses & Susan Ella Robbins Moses Residence, 508 East 7th Street, Sterling and Rock Falls Local History Collection (Illinois Digital Archives), 2023-12-05, http://www.idaillinois.org/digital/collection/stpl/id/1783.
On Nov. 30, 1878 the Sterling Gazette reported, “Ten full sets of scenery including parlor, chamber and kitchen scenes; a river, sea, street, woods, prison, landscape and garden scenes comprise list of scenery. Those were painted by our townsman, T. G. Moses, and we need not tell those familiar with his work that they are finely done. The work alone will give him a reputation as a scenic artist, everywhere that it is known” (page 8). His decorative painting for Sterling’s Commercial College was also praised in the Sterling Gazette that same day. The second article reported, “The first floor is divided into three parts, making three of the most elegant store-rooms in the city – two of them are fifty feet front, the third forty-three. They are beautifully paneled and frescoed by T G Moses.” The stream of initial projects soon slowed to a trickle. Moses began to look for work in neighboring towns. The distance that Moses had to travel for work continued to increase as the months passed.
Although he tried to remain in his hometown, there was not enough work to pay the bills. In his memoirs, Moses remembered, “The winter was coming on and the outlook was anything but bright. I was earning on an average about $75.00 per month.” He knew that he needed a stead paycheck from an employer, even if it was less than he could make on his own.
Moses did not relocate to Chicago until that spring. His last project in Sterling was completed in early February. On Feb. 7, 1880, the Sterling Gazette reported, “We called at the office of Pollock Bros. one day this week and was shown their rooms. They have added another operating room on the same floor, which has been recently painted and frescoed. Much credit is due to Thos. Moses, for the excellent taste displayed. The oil paintings on the ceiling are elegant showing skill rarely met with” (page 8).
His final project in the area was a Presbyterian Church in Dixon, about 12 miles away from Sterling. The job did not go well. Moses wrote, “The last job from Sterling I did was the Presbyterian Church in Dixon, and I did them a good job, but the chairman of the decorating committee was not a man of honest dealings, and I quit the whole Western part of the state in a ‘huff’ and went to Chicago, alone, to see if I could find anything.”
Moses started at the doorstep of a former employer, the decorating firm of P. M. AImini. Of the interaction, Moses wrote, “I had been away so long that my case didn’t interest them.” He then headed to the new scenic firm of Sosman & Landis. The decorative firm of P. M. Almini was located at 231 Wabash av., near Jackson. This means that the studio Sosman & Landis was only six blocks away. Moses wrote, “I had heard of Sosman and Landis and they knew of me. I called on them, met Mr. Sosman, and settled to go to work for them for $18.00 per week, rather small pay, but I could only get about $24.00 at Almini, and that was not steady. I had no alternative, so I settled to go to work at once.”
I need to provide some context for the weekly salary of $18 offered by Sosman in 1880. Six years earlier, Moses had earned $21 a week at Almini’s. He was 18 yrs. old at the time. His salary increase had been rapid at the decorating firm going from $4 a week had increased to $21 a week over the course of a year. This likely validated Moses’ belief that hard work and determination would be rewarded by an employer.
In the beginning, Moses boarded with his friend Will T. Fuller at 428 W. Van Buren. At the time, Fuller was working as a salesman at 103 State. Both lived above the jewelry store of Oresta W. Young and his family at 428 Van Buren. Oresta Woodworth Young (1847-1923) was a jeweler and watchmaker, living with his family. The 1880 Census report listed that the Young household included: O. W. (32), Jennie (wife, 27), Frank (son, 4), June (daughter, 1 mth.), Ida Berkley (sister-in-law, music teacher, 17), Mary Mastisen (servant, 19) and William Fuller (boarder, 21). Young was also listed at a second residence at 744 W. Vanburen.
Ella and baby Pitt remained in Sterling until the end of May when Moses relocated his family to Chicago, settling his family down the street from his previous boarding house. Their new home was 744 Van Buren, on the corner of Robey. The house next door was also occupied by Oresta Young. Interestingly, I located the rental listing for Moses’ hous. On April 18, 1880, the Chicago Tribune listed the following in the section “TO RENT – HOUSES. West Side-Continued”-
744 Van Buren-2-story brick, $30. Edward A. Trask, 181 West Madison-st” (page 14).
Advertisement that was published in the Chicago Tribune just before Thomas G. Moses rented the home.
I was surprised to discover the reason why the house was changing tenants. The previous owner, Frank Van Osdel, had been severely injured in a freak accident during Dec. 1879. Osdel and Frank Piercy, employees at Crane Bros., were boxing in an elevator shaft when the scaffolding failed, with each falling to the bottom. Piercy was killed instantaneously and Van Osdel was severely injured (Chicago Tribune 20 Dec. 1879, p.1). It was Van Osdel who resided at 744 West Van Buren.
Moses’ father (Lucius M. Moses), stepmother, sister, and two young step-brothers also moved to Chicago that year. They were listed at 331 Randolph Street in both the 1880 Lakeside Directory and the Census report. Lucius sold his tannery business in Sterling, but continued to work as a harness maker.
After starting with Sosman & Landis, Moses was immediately sent on the road to Kenosha, Wisconsin, to paint stock scenery for Kimball’s Opera House. He recorded that this project began on April 19, 1880.
Kenosha was a sizable town of 7,000 citizens, located approximately 35 miles from Milwaukee and 10 miles from Racine. On April 29, 1880, The Telegraph-Courtier of Kenosha, Wisconsin, reported, “Mr. Kimball is having six scene and a new drop curtain for his hall painted by two of the best scenic artists in Chicago, Messrs. Sosman & Landis.” It is understandable that Moses was mistaken for Landis, as he was working with Sosman on site. Over the years, this case of mistaken identity would repeat itself, fueling the myth that Landis was also an accomplished scenic artist.
Moses started the project alone, writing, “Sosman joined me in Kenosha after I had gotten started and painted the plain interior and kitchen and some set pieces. We were soon through and back in Chicago.” However, it wasn’t long until Moses was on the road again.
Projects that summer included an advertising curtain in Steven’s Point, Wisconsin. On June 12, 1880, Stevens Point Daily Journal reported, “H. D. McCulloch has decided to change his drop curtain in the hall to one of the elegant affairs gotten up by Messrs. Sosman & Landis, Chicgao, being a beautiful landscape with advertisement of the prominent business houses of the city” (p. 5).
Image of the opera house on H. D. McCulloch Block, later known as the Silvermint Arcade. Here is the link to the image: https://www.wisconsinhistory.org/Records/Property/HI72865
Advertising curtains were typically paid for by businesses and gifted to theaters. The spaces were either purchased outright or rented. This was a way to collect cash for a product before it was installed. These type of projects were a quick way to access cash, as a group was financing the project.
In Winona, Minnesota, the firm was credited with painting a new advertisement curtain for the Philharmonic Hall stage in July 1880. On August 2, 1880, the Winona Daily Republican reported,
“The new drop curtain which was mentioned some time since in THE REPUBLICAN has been completed and placed in Philharmonic Hall. It is the work of Messrs. Sosman & Landis, scenic artists of Chicago, and is a finely executed piece of work. The scene is a view of a city, the foreground consisting of a river with a large, fine bridge spanning it, upon which teams and carriages are crossing. Several boats are plying in various directions, as team tug towing a couple of barges being the central objects. Back from the rive fine blocks of buildings rise in a succession, the spires of churches and domes of public building adding a fine variety to the scene. In the distance a low range of hills are visible, while in various portions of the city fountains and columns are tastefully interspersed. As to the merit of the work the perspective is excellent, the colors good, and the production is certainly not the achievement of a novice. At the border of the curtain is a row of advertisements which are well arranged and indicate that the idea was well received by our prominent merchants. The curtain is not intended to take the place of the old one, but is simply another curtain if the same size hung back of the first one to be used between scenes and acts only” (p. 3).
That fall, the firm was also credited with stock scenery for the new Turner Hall in Menasha, Wisconsin. The theater opened on Oct. 14, with the New Orleans Minstrels as the first entertainment (The Saturday Evening Post, 14 Oct, 1880, p. 2). The firm’s new scenery was a grand success. On Oct. 28, 1880, The Saturday Evening Press reported, “The scenery, all that was exhibited was very fine, and in this connection, the Society wish to return thanks to the firm of Sosman & Landis, of a Chicago Scenic Studio, who painted the scenery, for the excellence of the work, and fairness of the prices, and the Society is ready at any time to recommend them as a first class firm in every respect” (p. 3).
Advertisement for the Philharmonic Hall on July 2, 1880, in the Winona Daily Republican.
This marks the standard operating procedure for the firm; one that would continue even after the passing of both partners. Sosman & Landis did not require payment for the scenery prior to installation. A portion was due upon installation, with the remainder in the form of a few scheduled payments. An announcement published in The Saturday Evening Press on Dec. 2, 1880, stated, “A grand leap year party is to come off at the Turner hall, Dec. 27th. The proceeds are to be applied to paying for our new scenery” (p. 3).
In the beginning, Moses and Sosman worked as a team, one step behind Landis as he contracted projects. Of this time, Moses wrote, “Sosman and I had to travel a good deal as Mr. Landis was on the road all the time securing orders for advertising curtains, and I didn’t see him until I had been there nearly six months. As the business increased, we put on a paint boy.”
This meant that Moses started out as a combination of scenic artist, assistant, and paint boy. Sosman & Landis were certainly getting their money’s worth in the beginning. However, as their workload increased, other scenic artists took notice.
Moses wrote, “Then the artists began to drop around. They all wanted $35.00 or $45.00 per week and told me I could get that much in the theatres. I began to think I was worth more as I had proven that I was a hustler. My work might not have been as artistic as some I saw in the theatres, but it pleased the people who paid for it.”
The seeds of discontent were sown. Moses knew that he should be making a much larger salary; one that was at least twice his current rate. Reflecting on 1880 in his memoirs, Moses wrote, “My career as a scenic artist starts from here. I was full of ambition and hustle. If I had been endowed with a like amount of ability, I would have set the world on fire. It was all hard work.” I find it interesting that although Moses had painted dozens of sets for the theater by this time in his career, starting with Sosman & Landis signaled something special. He remembers it as his beginning; a beginning that coincided with the first full year of the firm.
By the spring of 1881, Moses’ salary was increased by $2 a week, but it wasn’t enough. Moses began picking up extra work at the Academy of Music, working for Lemuel L. Graham. Sosman & Landis must have recognized that Moses was planning to leave, as he was offered $26.00 a week that fall with the idea that he would not take outside projects. Moses’ raise coincided with the birth of their second child.
The scenic art scene was rapidly changing in Chicago. New drop curtains by well-established artists that year included:
Matt Morgan, Academy of Music (Chicago Tribune, 21 Dec. 1880, p. 3)
Lou Malmsha and J. H. Rogers, McVicker’s Theatre (Chicago Tribune, 1 August 1880, p. 2)
Charles G. Petford, Hooley’s Theatre (Chicago Tribune, 8 Aug. 1880, p. 12)
George Dayton, Hamlin’s Grand Opera-House (Chicago Tribune 15 Aug. 1880, p. 12)
Not all were living in town, or being listed in the city directories. For many, Chicago was simply another stop in the region. They came, made headlines, and headed to the next project. Henry C. Tryon, another future employee at Sosman & Landis, also worked in a variety of cities at this time.
In 1880, however, he was in Chicago long enough to write a letter to the Chicago Tribune Editor. At the time, Tryon was associated with McVicker’s Theatre in Chicago, working as an assistant to both Malmsha and Rogers.
Here is Tryon’s article in its entirety, published on Dec. 19, 1880:
“SCENE PAINTING.
Some hints to the Public Regarding a Special Department of the Painters’ Art Not Well Understood.
To the Editor of The Chicago Tribune-
Chicago, Dec. 18.-
Theatrical scenery is painted in “distemper,” dry color being mixed with a vehicle consisting of glue and water, much the same as is used with whiting for calcimining rooms. Stage scenery and drop-curtains are never painted in oil colors. While the color is less brilliant than when mixed with oils (the artist being compelled to get his brilliancy by skillful arrangement of dull color), the glare of varnish and oil is avoided which would destroy the realism of the scene. Scenery, then, being painted in watercolors, the danger from fire is much less than popularly supposed; in fact, when it does take fire, it burns very slowly for a long time. The canvas is much less combustible than before being painted. Scenes painted on both sides are almost fireproof.
The qualities required of a first-class scenic-artist are of a much higher order than is generally supposed, and the technical difficulties to be overcome to produce any brilliant effect whatever for the stage are so numerous that, with a thorough knowledge of drawing, color, and composition, and the clearest possible idea on the part of the artist of what he desires to do, he will fail utterly, without great practice, to convey to the audience the effect that he may have already, in his brain, arranged in the clearest and most tangible shape. The artist in oil colors can produce any effect which his mind conceives. The scenic-artist must first overcome many very difficult obstacles. One of the chief difficulties arises from the fact that the colors dry out several shades lighter that they are when applied. (Throw a little water on the floor and the difference in color will illustrate this difficulty). The artist is compelled to paint with one color while thinking of another. He must think with every brush mark how the colors will “dry put.” The difficulty in doing this can be imagined when it is considered that all exterior scenes are painted from a pallet making a constant change of thousands of different tints. Then the effect of a night light is a serious drawback. Whoever has observed the changes in the colors of fabrics from the light of day to the artificial light of gas must have noticed how some colors are heightened and others dimmed by being brought under the yellow gaslight.
The scene-painter working in the broad glare of day must consider with every brush mark the effect of this gaslight on his color. A brilliant effect by daylight may, under an artificial light, be entirely destroyed, and also the reverse holds true; but must not be accident with the scenic-artist.
Do the audience in the theatre ever realize the immense difficulty of painting a scene while within three or at most four feet from the canvas, to produce the proper effect at a distance of fifty to 150 feet, the artist being compelled to see his work in his mind’s eye this distance, when his first opportunity to see his entire work is after it has been finished and on stage? The result of constant practice in this direction is, that, as he acquires knowledge, and consequently power and decision, he gradually choses larger brushes, until the skillful artist is enabled with the roughest and apparently most hideous “swashes” of the calcimining brush to produce effect as soft, tender, and full of appropriate meaning as is done by the most labored, painstaking care on smaller surfaces by many landscape painters. In scene-painting, as in all other art, it is only the novice who takes the life out of his work by petty, contemptible smoothing down with small brushes. “Pictures are made to be seen, not smelled,” said Reynolds. In decorative painting mechanical finish is the important requisite, but in scene-painting it is no more an excellence than is mechanical finish in any other art.
The popular impression is that because scenes are thus painted with broad, bold, rough marks it is scarcely more than a grade or so advanced beyond mere decorative painting; but think for a moment of the knowledge of drawing, perspective, composition, and color required to enable the artist to produce on these large surfaces a scene which to the audience must be realism, when he can only see at any time a limited portion (say ten feet square) of his work – on a “drop” say thirty feet by fifty – while working within three feet of his canvas, and to be seen across a large theatre. The fact is, that a scenic artist is able to paint a small picture with much greater ease and readiness that he can with his theatrical work, because he has the knowledge to paint the small subject without very great obstacles attending his work on the large canvas.
Another thing to be considered in this connection: The scenic-artist does not always – in fact, seldom- have the leisure to do work at his best. He has neither the time nor opportunity to correct his work. When a picture is finished in an artist’s studio the artist sees where a change here and there will enhance the value of his work and can perfect it. The scene-painter must call his work “a go” and start on the next scene. “We press your hat while you wait,” is the sentiment. The manager comes to the artist, and says we want a street – Paris, 1600 – to-night. He must have it then, though the heavens fall. “Time, tide, and managers wait for no man.” Many times in the experiences of all scenic-painters are they obliged to work thirty-six hours at a stretch, their meals brought to them, and stopping for nothing else, each of those hours working against time, with no sentiment other than to get through, get out of the theatre and to the rest that exhausted nature loudly demands. Still, he must be criticized on this very work. The audience doesn’t know anything about his having worked all day, and all night, and all day.
The great scenic-artists of the world are great artists, and so recognized in the world of art. Poor dead Minard Lewis was the very Prince of scenic artists, and his genius was the wonder and admiration of every artist of every department of art in New York. Yet the theatre-going public who for thirty or forty years had admired and applauded his beautiful work did not know or care to know his name.
The position of scenic-artist in a first-class theatre is one of great responsibility, which is properly recognized “behind the curtain line,” but the general public has no interest in the personality of the scenic artist, supposing in a vague sort of way that the manager paints the scenes. It is no unusual thing for scenery to be lavishly commended by the press and public, the manager receiving the press and praise for his “enterprise, taste and liberality,” while the artist whose brain and hand has created it all is never mentioned or even thought of. Scene-painters, like all other artists, have their ambitions, and are grateful for proper and honest appreciation. Much injustice has been done to them (perhaps through thoughtlessness) by the public press and this is strongly felt by every scenic-artist. If the newspaper dramatic critics would take the same interest in the scene-painters themselves that they do with other individual members of the theatrical business and that they do with other artists, and would find out under what adverse circumstances they generally labor, their sense of justice would cause them to be more discrimination in their reports. If a theatre during an extended period is uniformly negligent in the matter of scenic accessories, it would be but simple justice for the public critics to inquire whether it is due to the incompetency of the scenic-artist or to the economy of the manager. The truth in this matter can always be easily discovered, and when blame is laid, as it frequently is, it should not be done in loose and indiscriminate manner which injures most the artist who is frequently not to blame. If the dramatic critics would visit and become acquainted with the scenic-artists they would be welcomed, and would perhaps gain in the interest of dramatic art and progress some ideas from that unknown and unthought of portion of the theatre 9the paint gallery) that would be a revelation to them. The sooner the press and public recognize the scene-painters as artists and deal with them individually as with other artists – commending or condemn them on their own merits, – the better it will be for the elevation of scenic art.
-Henry C. Tryon”
This likely caught the eye of Sosman. By 1882, Tryon began working for the firm. This was immediately after he delivered scenery to the Salt Lake Theatre in 1882.
To be continued…
I always marvel at Moses self deprecating description of his own work, which is a marvel in and of itself.
I acquired a lovely painting by him, but I need to find someone in Southern California that can clean it. The piece is very dark, most likely from year of hanging on the wall of a smoker. If you can suggest someone in the Los Angeles area, I would be very grateful.