Drypigment.net

Part 585: John J. Murdock and the Olympic Music Hall

In 1908, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “We did a show for Murdock at the Olympic – a failure, scenery and play.” He was referring to the newly opened Olympic Music Hall in Chicago. The venue was previously known as the Olympic Theatre before the purchase and renovation by J. J. Murdock in 1908. The Olympic Music Hall opened on November 2, 1908.

An article in the “Inter Ocean” reported, “The work of converting this famous landmark of amusement into a music hall is being carried on day and night, the men working in shifts of eight hours each. The playhouse is now under the control of J. J. Murdock, who successfully operated the Masonic Temple roof garden, and who had been at the head of the Western Vaudeville Managers’ Association. Mr. Murdock will adopt a policy along the lines of the Palace, or Tivoli, London, England, on a more elaborate scale” (Chicago, 25 Oct 1908, page 41). The mention of the Masonic Temple Roof Garden caught my eye.

The Masonic Temple roof garden and observatory was transformed into two electric theatres by Sosman & Landis in 1894. Advertised as Chicago’s first roof garn theatre, it included two electric scenic theatres that were design, constructed and operated by Sosman & Landis. An images of the Masonic Temple roof garden theatre was even pictured on an 1894 catalogue for Sosman & Moses. Although their control of this venue was short-lived, it provides an earlier connection between Murdock and Moses at Sosman & Landis. Murdock’s association with unique and innovative performance venues such as the roof top garden and music hall provides additional context.

High class vaudeville was to be the dominant feature at the Olympic. The “Inter Ocean” published an article on the new Olympic Music Hall (8 Nov 1908, page 30). In it, the question was asked, “When is a vaudeville theatre not a vaudeville theatre?” The response was “When smoking is permitted, then it is a music hall.” In Chicago, Murdock afforded patrons that privilege. The article continued, “Mr. Murdock is a connoisseur of everything pertaining to the entertainment of the public, and realizing that the great majority of men are addicted to the smoking habit, he conceived the happy idea of permitting the patrons of the Olympic Music hall to indulge in that pleasure.” The article noted, “The new Olympic will be different from other Chicago playhouses, in that smoking will be permitted. This innovation, new to Chicago, is familiar to London and Paris theater-goers, and Manager Murdock is convinced that this feature is destined to be as popular in Chicago as it is abroad.” Another “Inter Ocean” article described the smoked-filled music hall: “Blue smoke curled upward from full 500 cigars. Maybe 1,000 men lounged back comfortably in their theatre chairs. Beside almost blessed man of them sat his wife, or his sweetheart, or his dearest friend, or maybe only his sister. Toward a rose tinted ceiling smoke drifted cloudlike and then mysteriously, as an enchantment, suddenly disappeared.”

According to Julius Cahn’s Official theatrical guides, the original Olympic Theatre in Chicago had a seating capacity of 2,127, and new music hall had a seating capacity of 1584. The “inter Ocean” provided a further description of the Olympic Music Hall’s auditorium and stage:

“Immediately above the entrance to the auditorium a series of Swiss chalet windows, with stained glass and heavy stucco ornamentation, attract the eye. The theater proper also has undergone a thorough renovation. The color scheme is of gray damask, blending harmoniously with rose and old Roman gold. The ceiling and mural decorations consist of panels of exquisite design, bordered by stucco ornaments, tipped with gold and ivory. A massive new chandelier bearing hundreds of glistening prisms and scores of electric globes hangs just above the orchestra, while at the side of the boxes on both sides two tremendous light clusters have been placed. The balcony and gallery rails have been provided with strings of lights, so that the house is capable of illumination equal to the noonday sun.

The boxes, which formerly were most artistic, have come out of the hands of the decorators as veritable bowers of rich yet tasty beauty. They have been decorated with stucco ornaments, painted in consonance with the general color scheme and provided with heavy plush maroon curtains swinging on brass rods. The entrance to the boxes, above and below, are adorned with rich curtains, that insure at once privacy and real comfort. The proscenium has been decorated in Roman gold, the façade, doing away with the curtain drop, being especially tasty…the steel curtain has been repainted and a new olio drop provided.” The article continued, “The seating capacity of the theater has undergone no change, the safety of the patrons being Manager Murdock’s first consideration when this matter was taken up. The seats above and below have been provided with cushion seats and the framework of the chairs tinted in ivory and gold…More than $30,000 was spent by Manager Murdock in the beautification of the theater, and that the money has been expended to some purpose the admirable result are ample indication” (8 Nov 1908, page 30).

To be continued…

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…

Part 583: Background Painters, Luminous-Lint

Here is a little sidestep from the life and times of Thomas G. Moses. Occasionally while looking for information online, I discover a site, that takes me by surprise. Here was one that I uncovered while looking for information about advertising curtains by the Kansas City Scenic Co.

It was an advertisement for the Kansas City Scenic Co. that drew me into a series of photographs depicting scenic artists from the mid-nineteenth to mid-twentieth century. The images were part of an online collection called Luminous-Lint and the artists were categorized as “Painters of backgrounds.”

If you are unfamiliar with the Luminous-Lint, this is one site to bookmark. It contains 85,989 photographs from 3,278 different collections around the world. The creators mission is to create “detailed and well structured histories of photography.” The site includes “1,031 distinct, but interlinked, histories of photography that are evolving on a regular basis.” The creators report that their site is used worldwide by curators, educators, photo historians, collectors and photographers to better understand the many histories of photography.

My interest in the contents has little to do with the photographers or history of photography; I am interested in the subject matter. My interest lies with not only the scenic artists with paint palettes, buckets, and brushes, by also the performers and tradesmen.

One of the collections features David Knights-Whittome. Here is the information about the collection on Luminous-Lint: “About 1978 a collection of around 11,000 glass plate negatives was found in the basement of Linwood Strong’s shop (Optician) on the High Street in Sutton, a town in South London. The plates had been stored there in deteriorating conditions for over 60 years, they were saved and eventually became a part of Sutton Archives, South London, England. They were stored but not made available until 2014 when a preservation and digitization project commenced. The photographer was little-known David Knights-Whittome and the portraits provide a time capsule of Late Victorian and early Edwardian England.  The collection included images of studio backgrounds, a photograph of David Knights-Whittome standing on a step ladder and posed as if he was painting a backdrop, and a notebook with a sketch for a background that he had drawn as a teenager in the 1890s.”

Many of the photographers also worked as scenic artists, creating painted backings of various sizes and subjects.

Here is a link to the “background artists” category: http://www.luminous-lint.com/__phv_app.php?/f/_studios_backgrounds_painters_01/ I really recommend taking a peak at this site.

To be continued…

Part 582: Advertising Curtains and the Kansas City Scenic Company

I came across an interesting article when searching for information about advertising curtains during the early twentieth century. It presented some of the financial logistics and revenue generated by an ad spaces on a drop. The article concerned scenery for the new opera house in Perry, Iowa, located at 1314 Second St.

Fred R. Megan, representing the Kansas City Scenic Co., was negotiating the contract during August 1903. Kansas City Scenic was founded by former Sosman & Landis scenic artist, L. L. Graham.

Here is the article published in the “Perry Daily” on 26 Aug 1903:

“Mr. F. R. Megan, of Kansas City, was in Perry this week representing the Kansas City Scenic Co., which concern will paint the scenery for the new opera house. The directors selected the richest design of drop curtain that he had to offer and it is indeed a beauty. They also selected about eleven hundred dollars’ worth of scenery all told, including interiors, woods, garden, landscape, street scenes, etc. When the choice of the scenery was made it was found that there was a deficit of four hundred dollars in the appropriation that had been set apart for the item of scenery, and in order to procure the full amount that had been chosen it was decided to put on an ad curtain and sell limited number of ads. The main house curtain will be raised when the orchestra begins its overture and display this curtain. In seven hours time $375 worth of space on the ad curtain was sold Monday. $25 worth have been sold since and there are yet three spaces which an be taken by any parties who have not been solicited. It is probable that there will be no space for sale in a day or two” (The Perry Daily, 26 Aug 1903, page 3).

The Perry Opera House stage stage included a proscenium that measured 31 feet wide by 26 ½ feet high. The height to the rigging loft was 47 feet, and the height to the fly gallery was 23 ½ feet. There were no grooves to accommodate painted wings, just fly scenery. It was a sizable space, standard in many aspects for the time. Although there is not measurement provided for the ad curtain, it likely measured approximately 32 feet wide by 24 feet high. The number of ad spaces possibly ranged from 10 to 14 surrounding a central landscape.

The company providing scenery for the venue was Kansas City Scenic Co., a studio that I have explored in “Travel of a Scenic Artists and Scholar” posts. Let me briefly put Kansas City Scenic Company and Fred R. Megan in relation to Thomas G. Moses and Sosman & Landis studio.

Kansas City Scenic Co. was a competitor of Sosman and Landis, formed by one of their studio artists – Lemuel L Graham. It was in 1882, Moses would partner with Graham, after leaving Sosman & Landis for the first time. After Graham left Chicago, he would later found the Kansas City Scenic Co. The company grew to be a prominent studio and major player in the midwestern and western regions of the country. Many well-known scenic artists would later become associated with Kansas City Scenic Co, such as scenic artists and salesman Fred R. Megan.

The earliest mention of Megan’s association with the Kansas City Scenic Company is in 1901. Earlier, Megan had toured with the Barrett & Barrett Company (The Leonardville Monitor, Leonardville, Kansas, 2 Dec. 1897, page 8). By the early twentieth century, Megan was on staff at the Kansa City Scenic Co. studio, negotiating contracts across the country.

Later, Moses would contact Megan during 1923; the two would work together, purchasing the Sosman & Landis name after Hoyland and Lemle purchased the company contents at that same time. While they were negotiating the purchase of the Sosman & Landis name, Moses and Megan continued to work under their own names – Moses & Megan. They needed to wait for Sosman & Landis to liquidate, get their own charter, and then work as “Sosman & Landis.” During this time, they leased the old Fabric Studio in Chicago (that was an interesting tidbit for me). By 1924, Megan was on the road most of the time, with Moses making models in his studio.This is how Sosman & Lanids had most successfully operated – with Landis on the road and Sosman in the studio. The two would close the contract for the Salt Lake Consistory during 1926. The two would also provide the scenery for the Oakland Scottish Rite in 1927. Moses and Megan would continued working together until 1931.

To be continued…

Part 581: Deeds & Funk, the Ad Men

A number of studios specializing advertising curtains appeared during the first decade of the twentieth century. Many were short-lived, such as Deeds & Funk. Advertisements for available spaces were placed Deeds & Funk placed in local newspapers, noting various reasons to purchase an ad space. One included, “Because the rates are lower in proportion than any other advertising. It reaches more people than any other ad you can place.”

In 1904, the “Morning Register” included an interesting announcement by “Deeds & Funk, the Ad Men” (Eugene, Oregon, 3 July 1904, page 2):

“Two Classes of people who do not attend the theater. Those who do not believe in such a place of entertainment, and those who are physically incapacitated, aside from these two classes, upon some one occasion or another during the eighty times or more every year that this local opera house is used, nearly every man, woman, and child in this city, and surrounding community attend. At a cost of not exceeding 25 cents, nor less than 12 ½ cents each night, you can put an ad where they can not help but read it, namely on a new scenic ad curtain in a space of no less than eight and up to twenty square feet.

It is a straight, honest, publicity, recognized and used as such by leading merchants throughout the world. The curtains contain over six hundred square feet, and as two-fifths of it is devoted to scenery and draperies, it is a work of art as well as a splendid advertising medium.

There are about twenty-five spaces and each space is separate and by itself.

Ten of the leading business firms of Eugene have already engaged spaces, and their ads are now being artistically arranged and painted in their separated spaces.

Think it over. We’ll call on you if you don’t call on us.

It’s Good and it Catches the eye.

That’s the way it strikes us.

How does it strike you?

(signed) Deeds & Funk, the Ad Men”

Deeds & Funk of Los Angeles and Sacramento owned and operated over 40 advertising curtains in California and Oregon during 1904 (Rosenburg Review, 16 June 1904, page 2). In 1904, they created an advertising curtain for the theater in Eugene, Oregon. The Eugene “Morning Register” elaborated, “they have on their list 50 curtains they have designed between Eugene and their home city, the last one completed at Rosenburg” (Morning Register, Eugene, Oregon, 29 June 1904, page 8). The article’s heading noted that the new Eugene Theatre was “ready of the cards of Eugene business firms,” explaining “The curtain is now ready for the advertisements of representative business firms at a reasonable figure, putting the finishing to a drop curtain the equal for beauty of any found in the state.”

To be continued…

Part 580: Harry J. Kuckuck

In 1901, the Lee Lash was the head of two companies, one in Philadelphia and one in New York City. The Lee Lash Studio offices were located at 39^th and Broadway in New York City and 732 Drexel Building in Philadelphia.

Lash established the Philadelphia studio in 1892. From the very beginning of its founding, a local scenic artist found work there – Harry J. Kuckuck (1876-1945). He would ascend the studio ranks, just as Thomas Moses (1856-1934) did at the Sosman & Landis studio in Chicago. Similarly to Moses, Harry J. Kuckuck would attempt to purchase the studio in the 1920s, eventually purchasing the company from Lash during 1926. At this point, the studio name changed to H. J. Kuckkuck’s Lee Lash Studio. It remained in operation for another twenty years, until the time of his death in 1945.

Looking in a 1918-19 New York Corporation Directory, Harry J. Kuckuck was associated with two Lee Lash Companies – Lee Lash Co (NY) that specialized in advertising and Lee Lash Studios, Inc. (NY) that specialized in scenery. Each was listed in R. L. Polk & Co.’s 1918-19 Trow New York Co-partnership and Corporation Directory, Boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx (page 644).

In the directory, Lash was listed as president of Lee Lash Co (NY) and Harry J Kuckuck was listed as the treasurer. The capital for the company was $500,000, with the directors being Lee Lash and Harry Kuckuck. In the same directory, Lee Lash Studios Inc. (NY) also listed Lee Lash as president, Hugo Gerber as Secretary, and Harry J. Kuckuck as treasurer. The capital for this company was reported to be $100,000. The directors were Lee Lash, Hugo Gerber and Harry Kuckuck. Both companies were located in the same building at 1478 Broadway Road 724.

I have uncovered very little information about Harry J. Kuckuck’s personal life. Kuckuck was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania during 1876. He began working for Lee Lash at the age of 16 years old when Lash opened a studio in Philadelphia during 1892. That meant he was the same age as many other boys who entered the scenic art industry at the time, starting as pot boys and apprentices. For Lash, Kuckuck was a necessary addition to the new studio, providing cheap labor for the newly formed company. In 1894.

Kuckuck was still listed as living in Philadelphia at 1944 North Fourth Street That year his family hosted a birthday party for him and published it in the local paper (Philadelphia Enquirer, 9 Dec 1894, page 14). He was still in the city during 1897 when the “Times” reported, “On Wednesday evening, January 6, Mrs. Annie M. Kuckuck celebrated the twenty-first birthday of her son, Harry J. Kuckuck, at their home on North Fourth Street” (Philadelphia 10 Jan 1897, page 21).

Many years later, Kuckuck even mentioned as a New York artist who “paints on scenery and drapes” in a entertaining poem. It was published in the “Arizona Daily Star” during 1938. At the time, Kuckuck would have been working as a scenic artist for 46 years (8 Jan 1938, page 18). Here is the poem:

The “Sky” Line of New York

“Did you ever go a-messin’

Round the land of delicatessen

Way up in Harlem or the Bronx?

Where there’s Abe and Jake and

Izzy,

Whose last names would make you

Dizzy,

Like Tinskys and the Plotskys

And the Kronkes.

Ther’s Finifter and Dorshininsky,

Gronowitz and Sam Tuchinsky,

Manowitz and Katrowitz and Weiss.

Where the Haases and the Hesses

Handle cloaks and suits and dresses,

And the Wassermans are friends

Of Kalt and Heiss.

Wishnofsky and Wishnettsly,

Turkenvich and J. Pisetsky,

Dinerman who offers Kosher meat,

Rabbi Yarshun fixes marriages,

Hyman Zarchin, baby carriages,

While Suckerman the lawyer’s

‘cross the street.

Joseph Spitz sells atomizers,

Jacob Slutsky appetizers,

Harry Kuckuck paints on scenery

And drapes,

I Janowitz sells butter,

And so does Perlmutter,

Izzy Sklarsky deals in oranges, and

Grapes.

There is Yokel and there’s Yevel;

All these names are on the level.

I’m telling you the truth, I hope

To die,

If you doubt it have your own look

Thru the pages of your phone book.

For I’m sure the Book of Numbers

Doesn’t lie.

Now I’ve been a cheap ham actor,

Peddled books and run a tractor,

Around the honky-tonks;

I’d take any job you’d tell me,

But one job you couldn’t sell me-

That’s the guy who takes the census

In the Bronx.

-El Toro”

I have located little else about Kuckuck, other than in a 1940 census. Harry J. Kuckuck was listed in the 1940 census as a 64 year old man who was born in Pennsylvania during 1876. These dates match newspaper accounts mentioning his 21^st birthday in Philadelphia during 1897. The census also listed Kuckuck’s residence as being in Assembly District 21, Manhattan, New York City, New York. Other people in his household at the time were Leonora (age 55 yrs.) and Frederick (age 26 yrs.) His marital status was widowed.

To be continued…

Part 579: Lee Lash

Lee Lash (1864-1935) was a friend and colleague of Thomas G. Moses (1856-1934). They worked together when Moses was working in New York City and living in Mount Vernon, New York. Moses & Hamilton Studio operated in the area from 1900 to 1904. There is even a newspaper clipping that shows Moses painting in the Lee Lash studios, possibly next to his partner William F. Hamilton. Moses pasted this clipping in his scrapbook. Lash is quite an interesting artist and studio owner, especially in light of his exploits as told by William Chambliss in 1895 (see post 578).

Lash was born in Vancouver, British Columbia, during 1864. Isador Lash moved his family to San Francisco in the following year. There, Lee and his brother Sam attended public schools before focusing on art. In his early teens Lash was a pupil of artists Juan B. Wandesforde and Domenico Tojetti. He then journeyed to Europe for further artistic instruction. He traveled to Paris where he studied with artists Jules J. Lefebvre(1836-1911) and Gustave Boulanger (1824-1888) at the Académie Julian. Lash received a positive reception at the Paris Salons. After eight years of study from 1881 to 1889 in Europe, he returned to the United States.

An 1889 newspaper article reported, “Lee Lash, a San Franciscan whose work in France and abroad, and whose picture in the last Salon was praised by the French critics, has returned to this city. Eight years Mr. Lash spent in Europe. He brought with him many pictures of great merit, through which the terms of his apprenticeship and mastery may be noted” (San Francisco Chronicle, 27 Oct. 1889, page 12). Upon his return, Lash established a studio in San Francisco and taught at the School of Design from 1891-1893. It was during this time that he had the altercation with William H. Chabliss and “borrowed” Charles D. Smith’s idea for the development of American advertising curtains.

Lee Lash Studios opened in San Francisco during 1892, founded by himself and his brother, Samuel Lash. In 1893, the brothers moved their theatrical curtain company to Philadelphia, and a few years later established a second studio in New York City. By 1895 Lash’s two curtain advertising enterprises were continuing as successful endeavors. There is some debate as to when the New York Studio was establish; some records note 1895 and others 1898. At first their New York studio was located at Thirtieth Street and Broadway, but moved several times over the next decade. By 1910, Lash built a studio in Mount Vernon, N.Y. By now, the firm was doing much more than ad drops and drop curtains. They were also building scenery for shows designed by others, often featuring well-known scenic artists as “staff supervisors” for premiere productions. Lee Lash’s studio became heralded as one of the best in the country, a very large outfit that could produce up to thirty curtains at one time.

Lash was reported as having advertising curtains in 1700 American theatres that brought in more than $250,000 during the hey day of vaudeville (Star-Gazette, 4 March, 1973, page 7). One of Lash’s employees was Paul V. McTighe was tasked with visiting every playhouse on the Subway Circuit twice each month to make sure that the Lee Lash curtains were being displayed according to contract. McTighe also worked as a bell-captain at the Flanders Hotel.

Most of Lash’s curtains carried their own ad block:

“If in this world, you

Hope to rise,

By a balloon, or

advertise.” (Star-Gazette, 4 March, 1973, page 7).

The 1922 publication of American Elite and Sociologist Bluebook reported Lash to be “Business President and Director, of 1476 Broadway, New York City; and a member of various clubs and societies. He is president of the Lee Lash Studio of Mount Vernon, N. Y. He is chairman of the board of directors of the Hugo Gedro Studios; and the president of the Lee Lash Company, and of the Lee Lash Company, Incorporated. He resides at Mount Vernon, N.Y.” (page 319).

Harry J. Kuckuck, who had joined Lee Lash in 1892, eventually purchased the company by 1926. At that point, the studio name was changed to H. J. Kuckkuck’s Lee Lash Studio. It remained in operation for another twenty years, until the time of his death in 1945. A sign with that name was once attached to the Hershey Theatre fire curtain’s controlling mechanism and is now part of the Hershey Story Museum on Chocolate Avenue (Here is the link to the artifact: https://hersheystory.pastperfectonline.com/webobject/06263EA9-4F35-41C2-A565-438659853932).

Lee Lash retired after the stock market crash in 1929, but he continued to do fine art pieces. In 1935 he exhibited his paintings for a one-man show in New York. There are many Lee Lash artifacts, dating from 1912-1941, in the New York Public Library Archives & Manuscripts.http://archives.nypl.org/the/22147

Here is the overview for the NYPL Lee Lash Studio Designs collection: 11 boxes (ca. 381 drawings); 2 boxes (ca. 180 photographs). The collection is held in the Billy Rose Theatre Division and contains original designs for curtains, drops, olio curtains, nightclubs, set designs, parts of set models, and photographs of designs by Lee Lash Studios. Most designs are color on paper or board and are unidentified, although many are numbered. Identified set designs include the play “Bet Your Life” by Fritz Blocki and Willie Howard (John Golden Theatre, 1937), and designs for the motion picture “Everybody’s Girl” (ca. 1918).

To be continued…

Part 578: The Tale of Lee Lash and the Tivoli Advertising Curtain

For the next few posts, I will look at the life of Lee Lash and the origin of the advertising curtain. It is being included at this point in Thomas G. Moses’ story because in 1908 and 1909 some areas of the country were calling for the removal of advertising curtains. The origin of the American advertising curtain is an interesting tale, often crediting Lee Lash with the idea. This story even is included in the Cambridge Guide to American Theatre.

Here a brief summary of the tale: When Lee Lash was a young painter and working on an olio curtain in San Francisco, he conceived of the idea of incorporating the names of advertisers in natural places within a street scene (rather than the customary practice of painting the names in “patchwork style”). His idea worked so well that he founded Lee Lash Studios, soon expanding its operations to serve theaters across the country. Now, much could be said about the actual composition of Lee Lash’s curtain versus the supposed “patchwork quilt” one too. First of all, advertising curtains were around long before Lash.

There is a second version of the story, however; one that is told by William H. Chambliss in his memoirs. Chambliss blames Lash for stealing the advertising curtains idea from Charles D. Smith. I am starting with Chambliss’ version of events as they are a “first hand” account, and it is a far more entertaining tale. This is a novel length post today, but certainly worth it!

Chambliss’ story was part of “Chambliss’ Diary: Or, Society As It Really Is, 1895.” His account was fully illustrated with over fifty copper-plate half-tones and photo engravings, including twenty-five society pictures by Laura E. Foster. His account is available online as part of “California as I Saw It: First-Person Narratives of California’s Early Years, 1849-1900.”

Although it is very long, here is Chambliss’ account. It is really worth reading:

“I undertook to start a new line of advertising here, and made arrangements with the late Mr. Kreling to put an advertising curtain in the Tivoli Opera House; but a bum artist named Lee Lash, a member of the Bohemian Club, and a supposed friend, whom I employed to make a sample sketch of the Tivoli drop curtain to show the merchants how the signs were to be placed on it, appropriated the contract and the idea, together with sixty dollars in cash.

With the assistance of his father, and his brother Sam, and their attorney, Edward Lande of 405 California Street, Lee Lash developed the curtain scheme on the stolen idea. He made a good deal of money out of it, so I am told.

“I employed “Lawyer” W. M. Cannon to enjoin the Lashes from using the ideas, and have Lee arrested for obtaining money under false pretenses; but the shyster compromised with the knaves for the sixty dollars which Lee got from me. The shyster then charged me half of the amount for giving Lash a 336 receipt that left him in undisputable possession of the business.

This lesson taught me to steer clear of the society of sheenies and shysters. Creations like the Lashes, claiming to be Jews, are well calculated to get honest Jews a bad name.

“The chapter of the Lash history with which I am personally acquainted affords such a true picture of the real character of the particular class to which he belongs that it would be an injustice to my readers to omit a brief mention of it. I see no reason in the world why I should not give it to my readers; I certainly paid for it, and paid dearly, too.

“I met Mr. Lee Lash through some mutual acquaintances in January, 1891. I shall not give the names of those mutual acquaintances, for I esteem them very highly. They have expressed to me their regrets for ever having known Mr. Lash at all. At the time of my first chance meeting with Lash, I was an officer of the City of Peking, and Mr. Lash was introduced to me as the “talented young artist.” He had a studio in the back yard of his father’s house upon Post Street, but subsequently he moved out and set up in “business” in a little cottage at 2309 Bush Street, near Steiner, and right close to a big Catholic church.

“In April, 1892, while I was confined to my room at the Palace Hotel from the effects of a bullet of lead which Dr. McNutt had extracted from my right leg, some lady friends of mine called upon me one day, bringing Lee Lash along to carry some flowers which they had picked for me. Mr. Lash, in the kindness of his heart, called again. About this time, while waiting for my wounded leg to get well, Mr. Charles Duryea Smith of New York called in to talk over the proposition of going into business in San Francisco, mentioning the advertising business.

“Mr. Smith proposed to put advertisements on theater drop curtains, a scheme which was well known to everybody in New York and Paris. Mr. Smith said that if I would go into business with him he would secure a contract with Mr. Kreling to advertise on the Tivoli drop curtain. He went off and made arrangements with Kreling to that effect, and, while I was not enthused with his wild ideas of vast wealth to be made in that line, I agreed to go in with him as soon as I got well enough to walk out. The young man seemed highly pleased with the prospects, and left me on the evening of April 19 in high spirits.

“That night there was a violent earthquake which shook San Francisco from cellar to garret. The shocks kept coming at intervals for three days, and I think they shook my poor friend Smith’s mind all to pieces, for he came in to see me on the morning after the first shock, looking like a ghost. “My God, William,” said the poor boy, “do you have those things very often? If so, I will—” He did not finish his sentence, for just then a rumbling sound, like an approaching freight train, caught his ear. “Great Heavens, it’s another earthquake!” said he. In a second the giant caravansary began to rock and groan; windows rattled, doors flew open, and it looked for a few seconds as if we were going into the bowels of the earth. General T. B. Bunting of Santa Cruz and Mr. M. G. Coward, now of the Chicago Times-Herald, were in my room at the time, and they will remember this circumstance: “Good-by, gentlemen,” said Mr. Smith, “I am going to leave this rocky, shaky city.” So saying, he left the room, and hurried away to his own apartments.

The next day the bell boy handed me a note reading as follows:

PALACE HOTEL, Thursday, April 21, 1892.

MY DEAR WILLIAM: I am going home to-night. Would have gone last night, but could not secure a sleeper. Will drop in later to tell you good-by. If you wish to develop the curtain scheme go ahead and do so; I must get out of San Francisco. Sincerely yours, (Signed) CHAS. D. SMITH.

“I waited in hopes of seeing Mr. Smith before he left. I expected him to call, but he never came. The next day, Friday, April 22, my young friend William O. Warnock, a nephew of Mrs. Adam Forepaugh, of circus fame, called at the Palace and took me out for a drive, to give me a little fresh air. We drove down toward San Bruno and called on some young lady friends of ours living out in the country, the Misses Nellie and Kate Dowling. Miss Nellie ran down to the front gate to meet us.

“Just then a boy came along crying out: “Extra Report, all about the suicide!” Miss Nellie got a copy of the Report, and read: “Suicide at the Palace Hotel. Charles D. Smith ends his earthly troubles. Failing to hear from New York relatives, and becoming completely stranded, he puts a bullet in his heart.” The Report went on to explain that the poor fellow was dunned for a week’s board bill by Cashier Charles Clark of the hotel, and that having not the necessary funds with which to pay, had ended his life rather than ask anyone to help him out. Had he known Mr. Clark as well as I do, he would not have bothered his head about the propriety of asking that gentleman for a little time, or even a small loan. Mr. Clark is a very obliging cashier. I have had favors from him myself, which I am happy to mention in order to clear this good man of the awful charge of having driven a guest of his hotel to suicide.

“Subsequently I learned something more about poor Smith. He was the son of a wealthy New Yorker, who, like a great many other unjust fathers, as well as would-be adopted fathers,—like Captain R. R. Searle,—threw barriers in the way of the young man’s matrimonial inclinations. This sad case of young Smith, and other similar cases, justify the assertion that I made in the New York Herald, March 17, 1895: The parent or guardian who prevents a grown son or daughter from marrying is a worse enemy to society than a murderer, for he murders the spirit of the Goddess of Love, the highest redeeming spirit in mankind.

“It was on the next morning after the news of Smith’s suicide that Lee Lash called. During the discussion of the unfortunate affair I called Lash’s attention to the fact that it was strange that Smith should have considered himself hopelessly stranded when he had such a good money-making scheme under way. I also mentioned to Mr. Lash the fact that I intended to let Smith have some money with which to develop his scheme. At the same time I handed Lash Mr. Smith’s letter. Lash read the letter and then asked me all about the scheme. I told him the facts. In a minute Lash forgot all about the pathetic side of the story,—the suicide of the promoter of the scheme,—and began talking about my going ahead with it where Smith “left off.”

“Why! see here, my dear friend, Smith has willed you his scheme,” said Lash. “I am an artist,” continued Mr. Lash, “and I can paint the signs on the curtain; but you must remember that I am in a position which I cannot risk by going into trade. Sign painting is trade, you know, and I am an artist. But, since you are a friend of mine, I will do this work for you.” Mr. Lash seemed so enthusiastic, and was so persistent, that finally I told him to go ahead and make me a sketch of the Tivoli drop curtain, so that I could show it to the merchants. I gave Lash an idea of how many signs there should be, and also how big the sketch should be. “Good,” said Mr. Lash, “I will have it ready for you in twenty-four hours.” So saying he took his departure, after having explained to me that he was “hard up,” and did not propose to let his pride drive him to suicide, as in Smith’s case. “Would you let a man kill himself for a few paltry dollars?” asked Mr. Lash. “All that I want is ten dollars.” He got him the ten, and went his way rejoicing.*

*I did not know at the time that Lee Lash was the same “artist” who begged permission to paint a picture of the “Old People’s Home,” and subsequently tried to make that charitable institution pay two thousand dollars for his worthless daub.

“Mr. Lash did not complete the sketch in twenty-four hours, nor in a week. He kept running down to the Palace to tell me about some cigar signs or soap advertisements that he had seen on curtains in the demi-monde resorts of Paris where he had studied high art. I humored him in his nonsense, and told him to get me some sort of sketch finished, and improve it later. William Warnock asked me one day what Lash was doing around my room so much, and why he was in such a confidential mood with me all the time. I told Mr. Warnock the circumstances, and was somewhat surprised at his saying that he would bet me a French dinner that Lash was playing me some trick or other. I took the bet, and subsequently paid for the dinner.

“While keeping me waiting for the sketch, Mr. Lash went quietly to Mr. Kreling and, representing himself as the rightful owner of the scheme, secured a new contract with that man on his own behalf. The Mr. Lash wrote to his father, who was in some fake wine business in New Whatcom, Washington State, to hurry down to San Francisco and bring Sam Lash, the younger brother, with him.

“On the 10th of May Lee Lash made a demand on me to pay him $50 for the sketch, which was still unfinished. (An honest sign painter would have made the sketch in a few hours for $2.50, frame and all.) Mr. Lash then came right out and told me that if I did not wish to pay so much for the sketch, I could let him have a half interest in the enterprise. The talented artist subsequently assured me that if I did not care to accept either proposition, he would start an opposition business. Seeing that I had confided my “inherited” ideas to a false friend, having investigated the scheme and having found that there was money in it, I paid “the talented artist” $50 more, making $60 in all, and took the sketch, still only half finished.

“In the meantime old Isador Lash and Sam had arrived in the city. I took the $2.50 sketch, which had cost me $60, to Taber, the photographer, to have a copy made of it to send to Washington to have copyrighted. But the three Lashes, old man Isador, Lee, and Sam, got their heads together at the office of Edward Lande, an “attorney” of the Lash tribe, and together they went up to Mr. Taber and raised such a piteous howl about my having the sketch photographed, telling Mr. Taber that it was theirs, that the gullible old photographer gave the sketch to the little petty larceny Shylocks, who proceeded immediately to develop the business with the money that old Lash had made out of several well planned “failures” in trade. *

* New York, June 6, 1895. The subjects of the above biography are carrying on the drop curtain advertising enterprise in this city. Their office is at No. 25 West 30th Street. They have an office in Diamond Street, Philadelphia, also. They call it the “Lee Lash Company,” or the “Lee Lash Studios,” or some such Oscar Wilde name. I can recommend the “firm” from personal knowledge.

“After Sam Lash had secured some orders for advertisements, he and the old man and Lee opened up business in the old Merchants’ Exchange building, and called it the “Art Advertising Co.”

“The “talented young artist” abandoned his fastidious idea that an artist should not soil his artistic hands in vulgar trade, such as painting drop curtains. He of the artistic “tastes” (I don’t mean Oscar Wilde’s tastes) even got up on a scaffold to add some finishing touches to a bicycle “ad.”

“The artistic scaffold fell down and almost killed him. I am told that this accident crippled him in such a peculiar way as to constitute an impediment to matrimonial felicity. But of that I know nothing, never having studied surgery of that kind further than the lecture contained in Deuteronomy xxiii.

“The notoriety that I got through the papers over this affair brought me before the public in such a way that a great many other “business” men with schemes and ideas offered to let me go into partnership with them and invest various sums of money, which they assured me would “double in a little while.”

Giving credit to Chambliss’ account, the “San Francisco Examiner” reported that a letter was found in Smith’s belongings after his suicide stating, “Smith wrote that he had at last ‘found the road to fortune.’ But what the road was he failed to state” (23 April 1892. Page 3). It was the advertising curtain that Lee Lash would greatly benefit from. At one time, Lee Lash was reported as having advertising curtains in 1700 American theatres that brought him in more than $250,000 during the hey day of vaudeville – and that was just an annual curtain (Star-Gazette, 4 March, 1973, page 7). It really was the “road to fortune” that Charles D. Smith envisioned at the age of 32. Smith was from New York.

To be continued…

Here is the link to Chambliss’ tale: https://cdn.loc.gov//service/gdc/calbk/108.pdf

This may be more than you need to know about me, but here is a link for my interview with Ricard Bryant, founder of Facebook Group Archiving Technical Theatre History:

https://anchor.fm/…/Episode-4—Wendy-Waszut-Barre…/a-a1ptlh

 

Part 577: Resources Pertaining to the M. Armbruster & Sons Studio

The Ohio State University is a great place to start when looking for information pertaining to the Armbruster studio and family. In July 1965, Allan S. Jackson studied and photographed a number of extant drops by the Armbruster Studio. His findings were published in “The Ohio State University Theatre Collection Bulletin” (Vol. 12, July 1965). Five years later, a doctoral dissertation was written about the history of the Armbruster Studio. Here is a little information about what is available to artists and historians when examining the scenery work of M. Armbruster & Sons.

There are two primary sources that provide quite a bit of information about the Armbruster family and studio. One is a lovely paper about Mathias Armbruster written by Leeann Faust and the other is a doctoral dissertation by Robert Suddards Joyce “The History of the Armbruster Studio” (Ohio State University, 1970). I have had a copy of Studdard’s dissertation for years, unfortunately it is more of a descriptive work on extant scenery that an insight into the working of the studio and familial dynamics. Here is the link to a digital copy of Joyce’s dissertation: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=osu1486655760439351&disposition=inline

I was thrilled to finally find a digital copy available online. Unfortunately, the scanned images are very poor. I have yet to locate any recent publications about the collection, the historic scenery or the Armbruster Scenic Studio Collection.

The Armbruster Scenic Studio collection at Ohio State University consists of scenic design materials relating to Mathias Armbruster and his studio in Columbus, Ohio. It is at the Jermone Lawrence and Robert E. Lee Theatre Research Institute. It is part of the Ohio State University Libraries Special Collections. This collection includes set designs, paint stencils, minstrel shows, ad photographs of stage performances, as well as, inspirational source material clippings from illustrated journals, financial information, and other miscellaneous materials relating to the studio. The records, both in English and German. Some of the contents include designs for White Minstrels, Coburn’s Minstrels, Al G. Field Minstrels, Thurston the Magician, Masonic temples, Romeo and Juliet, King John, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, the Merchant of Venice and many other unidentified productions. This collection is a treasure trove, especially when looking for primary resources referenced by the studio artists for backdrop compositions.

Subject folders include clippings from magazines, journals, and photographs that depict exotic locales, woods and trees, gardens, courtyards, mountains, caverns, landscapes, waterways, shores, ships, trains, military and battle scenes, winter scenes, churches, monasteries and altars, angels and cherubs, female nudes, public structures, furniture and moldings, ornamental designs and patterns, residential interiors and exteriors, Medieval and Renaissance, historical antiquities, contemporary and historical portraits, and mythology and statuary. This is one scenery collections that really should be online and available in a scenery collection database.

During my search this past week, I also stumbled upon a wonderful video about the Armbruster Studio created by PBS. Here is the link to the short PBS video about the Armbruster collection: https://www.pbs.org/video/broad-and-high-mathias-armbruster-armbruster-scenic-studio-collection/

Finally, there are some wonderful images of designs by M. Armbruster & Sons Studio available online at Ohio Memory (http://www.ohiomemory.org/cdm/search/searchterm/armbruster/field/all/mode/all/conn/and). It is such a fantastic resource that goes far beyond theatre history. Ohio Memory’s mission is to help communities share, discover and connect to Ohio’s rich past through dynamic online resources. In terms of theatre history, there are some scans of M. Armbruster & Sons Studio scene designs. This may be cone of my favorite sites to explore.

Ohio Memory was established in 2000; a collaborative statewide digital library program of the Ohio History Connection and the State Library of Ohio containing over 700,000 digital images. The images are from a variety of primary source image types that include photographs, maps, drawings, paintings, manuscripts, letters, diaries and journals, archaeological, natural history and historical objects, newspapers, books and e-publications, videos and more. On this free website, you can explore digital content from over 360 cultural heritage institutions representing all 88 of Ohio’s counties!

To be continued…