Drypigment.net

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 408 – “Art on the Stage” 1881

Part 408: “Art on the Stage” 1881

Today’s installment begins the last of three articles about scenic art in the 19th century. For the past few weeks I presented information from two vintage articles about the history of scenic art in England, one from 1866 and another from 1871. Leap ahead one decade to 1881 when the theatrical trade of scene painting was presented in the article “Art of the Stage.” It was first published in New York, then later appeared in “The Building News and Engineering Journal” – a fascinating publication in its own right.

Some illustrations from “The Building News and Engineering Journal,” where “Art on the Stage” was published in 1881.

“The Building News and Engineering Journal” began as “The Building News” in 1854. It was renamed “The Building News and Architectural Review” by 1860, and then “The Building News and Engineering Journal” in 1863. It ran until 1926, when it merged with “The Architect” to form “The Architect and Building News.”

In 1881, Volume 41 of “The Building News and Engineering Journal” included an article titled, “Art on the Stage.” Other articles from this issue include “Water Supply and Sanitary Matters,” “Practical Notes on Plumbing,” “The Improvement of Artisans’ Dwellings,” “Bristol and Gloucestershire Archeological Society,” “Restoration of St. Alban’s Cathedral Since 1877,” “Calculator of Measurement of Packages and Timber,” “Building a House on a Sand Hill,” and “Ancient Wood and Ironwork in Cambridge.”

Here is the first of three parts.

“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 favorite 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.

In the first place, the ordinary water-colour painter works upon paper. The scene-painter uses canvas. He first makes a pasteboard model of his scene and gives it to the stage carpenter, who builds the frame-work and pastes the canvas upon it. It is then ready for the ‘paint frame.’ This is a huge wooden affair, hung upon ropes, with counterweights attached. It is usually placed against the wall at the back or side of the stage, and has a windlass attached by which it may be hoisted and lowered. The artist works upon a bridge built in front of this frame and at its top when the bottom is touching the stage. By hoisting or lowering the paint frame he is enabled to reach any part of his scene. He is provided with plenty of brushes, ranging from a heavy 2lb. brush such as is used by house-painters, to a small sharp one for drawing fine lines. In addition to these he has several whitewash brushes for laying in flat washes and skies.

His colours are kept in buckets, tin cans, and earthenware vessels. His palette is a long table with partitioned compartments on the top to hold small quantities of colour. Give him now his palette-knife, his rule, plenty of twine and sticks of charcoal, and he is ready to go to work. His first duty is to “prime” his scene. This is done with a plain coat of white. This colour and all others used by him are mixed with “sizing,” which is simply a weak solution of glue. Working with colours mixed in this way is called painting in distemper, and has certain advantages which will be spoken of further on. The priming coat is laid on with a heavy white wash brush, care being taken to drive the colour well into the canvas. Sometimes heavy unbleached muslin is used; but the usual material is duck.

After the canvas is primed and dry, the artist is ready to draw. Most scenic painters do their first drawing in a very sketchy manner. After the charcoal outline is finished, it is gone over carefully with an ink prepared especially for the purpose, and not used in any other branch of art. In architectural drawing this part of the work is necessarily done with the greatest care, as regularity of outline and accuracy of detail are absolutely necessary. A scene-painter’s outline for a landscape, however, looks very much like the off-hand outline productions hastily done by an old hand at sketching from nature. The scene-painter must be a master of perspective; for street scenes and palace corridors are frequently produced by him.

The method of drawing in perspective on a large scale is curious, though substantially the same as that usually employed. The artist selects his “vanishing point,” usually outside of his scene, and attaches to it by a pin a long piece of twine. Beginning at the top of the scene he marks off, in the foreground, the distances between his lines. He then blackens the twine with charcoal, and, laying the loose end on his first mark, draws it tight and snaps it upon the scene, making a line in the same manner as a carpenter does upon a long board. These lines are afterward gone over with ink and ruler. In this way he is able to produce a perfect perspective. Exterior scenes, in which a castle or other large building appears, often have the perspective increased in effect by continuing a wall or rampart down the stage upon a separate piece set exactly in the line of perspective.”

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 407 – “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, Fifth installment

Part 407: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, Fifth installment

E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871, reflecting on the history of English scenic artists. I divided this fifth and final section into two parts due the detail. This final installment describes the contributions of David Roberts, RA, and his contemporaries.

“The late David Roberts, who died November 25, 1864, won his spurs by painting scenery for an al fresco theatre at Venice, and for years displayed his mastery of architectural perspective in the Rialtos, Piazzettis, and Grand Canals, which enriched the Italian pictures presented on the boards of both Drury Lane and Covent Garden. He made his metropolitan debut at the Drury Lane, where he commenced his career in 1822, in conjunction with his friend and brother academician, Clarkston Stanfield. David Roberts was also famous for his dioramas, but he never produced works which equaled Stanfield’s moving dioramas, he never produced works which equalle Stanfield’s moving diorama of Alpine scenery, or the memorable views of Windsor and the neighbourhood, which included the sparkling tableau of Virginia Water, wherin the real element was so effectively introduced.

Garrick’s Temple to Shakespeare at Hampton, by John Zoffany

In 1828, the principal Covent Garden artists were David Roberts, and the famous scenic triumvirate, Messrs. Grieve, and T. and W. Grieve. The drop scene painted by Roberts 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 never been excelled. To Mr. T. Grieve, and his son Mr. Walford Grieve, the modern stage has been largely indebted. Several drop scenes for the late Theatre known as Her Majesty’s, though coloured by the later William Grieve, were drawn by Pugin, the great restorer of ecclesiastical Gothic architecture in this country.

At the present time [1871] the stage is richly supplied with scenic artists whose reputation needs no better security than the production they are constantly giving to the public. With a remembrance of the old days of Tomkins and Pitt at the Adlephi, or Philip Phillips at the Surry, 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.

Drop curtain by William R. Beverly for the Memorial Theatre, 1879. Here is the link to the image: The act drop curtain painted for the 1879 Shakespeare Memorial Theatre posted online at: http://theshakespeareblog.com/blog/page/8/

Poster for the Christmas Annual with scenery by William R. Beverly. Here is a link to the image: The act drop curtain painted for the 1879 Shakespeare Memorial Theatre posted online at: http://theshakespeareblog.com/blog/page/8/

Mr. William Beverly, on his own ground at the Drury, is the unrivalled delineator of the fanciful region in which fairies may be imagined to dwell. Mr. William Callcott is a richly-endowed and skillful artist, whose “Transformation Scenes” have long won for him a special celebrity. Mr. John O’Connor, Mr. Lloyd, the late Mr. Charles James, Mr. Hawes Craven, Mr. J. Johnson, Mr. George Gordon. Messrs. Brew, Mr. Frederick Fenton, and his brother Mr. Charles Fenton, have severally produced works of art which will long keep their names vividly impressed on the memory of the playgoer.

Mr. Marshall, though not now 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 own gratification.”

The end.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 406 – “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, Clarkston Frederick Stanfield

Part 406: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, Clarkston Frederick Stanfield

E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871 for “The Era Almanack.” This was to be the fifth and final section of the article. However, it describes in detail some of the designs by Clarkston Frederick Stanfield and David Roberts. I am going to split the last part of the article into two parts as there is just too much information to process at once.

Clarkston Frederick Stanfield by John Simpson, 1829

Here is fifth section, first part.

“Clarkston Stanfield, who died May 18, 1867, aged 73, first distinguished himself at Drury Lane by the scenic effects with which he illustrated the opera Der Freyschutz, produced on that stage in 1824. From that time he remained the chief of the Drury Lane painting-room; and the series of exquisite dioramic paintings he contributed to this theatre long gave special attraction to the pantomimes there produced. His earliest scenes of this kind were in “Harlequin and the Flying Chest,” and his Crystal Grotto in “Harlequin and the Talking Bird” created a marked sensation.

Then came his panoramic display under the title “Naumetaboia,” in Jack of all Trades (Christmas, 1825), showing the adventures of a man-of-war, from the launch at Dover, its encounter with a gale, the wreck, and the towing into a foreign port. In 1826, the “Man in the Moon” introduced further illustrations of his powers as a marine painter, in two remarkable scenes called “England’s Pride” and “England’s Glory.” In 1827, “Harlequin and Cock Robin” was enriched with a fine representation of “Portsmouth in a Gale of Wind.”

In 1828, Stanfield painted a moving diorama for “Harlequin and the Queen Bee,” representing Spithead at Sunrise, entrance to Portsmouth Harbour, the Dockyard, Gosport, Mother Bank, Isle of Wight with the Royal Yacht Club, Cowes Regatta, the Needles by Moonlight, the Ocean, and the Rock of Gibraltar. In 1829, the pantomime of “Jack in the Box “was distinguished by his diorama of the pass of the Simplon, the Valley of the Rhome, Domo D’Ossola, and Lago Maggiore, with the Boromean Islands. In 1831, was painted the diorama of Venice for “Harlequin and Little Thumb.” In 1832, “Harlequin Traveller” displayed a magnificent painting of the Falls of Niagara, seen from the approach to Buffalo on Lake Erie, and the Horse Shoe and Great American fall from Goat Island. The Christmas equestrian spectacle of 1833 (St. George and the Dragon) was rendered remarkable by his Egyptian diorama, commencing with the great cataracts and showing the ascent of a pyramid. The next year this accomplished scenic artist illustrated King Arthur with some admirable scenery, depicting Penrith and Carlisle in the days of yore.

When Mr. Macready became lessee of Covent Garden, and there produced (December 26, 1837) the pantomime of “Peeping Tom of Coventry,” Stanfield painted for it a beautiful diorama comprising a series of views in the north of Italy, Savoy, the Alps, and through “French Flanders” to the sea. A special paragraph in the play-bill recorded how the distinguished artist had, “as a sacrifice and in the kindest and most liberal manner, quitted for a short time his easel in order to present the Manager with his last work in that department of the art he has so conspicuously advanced to mark his interest in the success of the cause this Theatre labours to support.”

Stanfield, however, in June, 1839, once more complied with Mr. Macready’s request, and for the famous Shakspearian revival of “Henry the Fifth” he painted the panoramic illustrations of the Storming of Harfleur, the Battle of Aginciurt, and the view of Southhampton with the departure of the Fleet. When Mr. Macready resumed his exalted purpose as Manager of Drury Lane, Stanfield, for similar reasons, furnished the exquisite Sicilian views, illustrative of “Acis and Galatea,” and this was the last of the artist’s labours for the stage.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 405 – “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, fourth section

Part 405: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, fourth section

E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871 for “The Era Almanack.” Here is the fourth of five sections.

“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.

The first scene of “The Maid of the Mill,” designed by John Inigo Richards. Painting by John Inigo Richards (1731-1810)

Image: The first scene of “The Maid of the Mill,” designed by John Inigo Richards. Richards was a noted scenic artist, machinist and theatre designer. Engraving by William Woollett (1735-1785) after the painting by John Inigo Richards (1731-1810). 1768. Here is the link to the image: https://www.lubranomusic.com/pages/books/29668/samuel-arnold/the-first-scene-of-the-maid-of-the-mill-as-designed-by-mr-richards-fine-large-engraving-by-william

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 colored glasses for the lamps.

De Loutherbourg’s “Eidophusikon.” Image from http://picturegoing.com/?p=4354

The key to De Loutherbourg’s “Eidophusikon, or Moving Diorama of Venice” from https://www.rc.umd.edu/gallery/key-eidophusikon-or-moving-diorama-venice

Philip-Jacques de Loutherbourg, R.A. (1740 – 1812), became known for his large naval works, scenic designs, and mechanical theatre called the “Eidophusikon.”

“An Avalanche in the Alps,” 1803, Philip James De Loutherbourg (1740-1812). Presented by the Friends of the Tate Gallery, 1965. Image at http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artists/philip-james-de-loutherbourg-145

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 who Jack Bannister nicknamed “Field-Marshal Leatherbags.”

Another distinguished artist of the period was Mr. Greenwood, the grandfather of Mr. T. L. Greenwood, so long associated with the management of Sadler’s Wells Theatre. For many years the scenery of the Royal Circus (now the Surrey Theatre) was painted by Mr. Greenwood, who invested the ballets and serious 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 of that period.

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 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 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 on our old English plays, and very elaborately studio 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 as 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 700L.

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 pictoral art. The two drop scenes 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 800lbs. In marine scenery Clarkston 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 seas. For many years 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 work to be successively obliterated. He create, and afterwards painted out with his own brush, more scenic masterpieces than any man, and in his time Clown and Pantaloon tumbled over and belabored one another in front of the most beautifully dazzling pictures which were ever presented to the eye of the playgoer.”

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 404 – “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, third section

Part 404: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, third section

E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871 for “The Era Almanack.” Here is the third section.

“Great improvements in the scenic department were made at the beginning of the last [18th] 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 splendor of its pantomime 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 Thurmond, 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 a procession across the market-place in front of the piazza, not forgetting to have a hit at his friend George Lambert, who 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 the 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 Hogarths’ 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.”

Michael Angelo Rooker St. Mary’s Abbey, 1778, York, Google Art Project

Michael Angelo Rooker, A.R.A., The_Gatehouse of Battle Abbey Sussex 1792, Pencil, Royal Academy of Arts, London

The Abbot’s Kitchen, Glastonbury c.1795 Michael Angelo Rooker 1746-1801 Presented by the Art Fund (Herbert Powell Bequest) 1967 http://www.tate.org.uk/art/work/T01013

Michael Angelo Rooker, Part of North Wall of St. Joseph’s Chapel, Glastonbury Abbey, Somerset, Victoria and Albert Museum

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 403 – “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, second section

Part 403: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, second section

E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871 for “The Era Almanack.” Blanchard was an author of Drury Lane Pantomimes from 1852-1888. This article is one of three that I transcribed a few months ago as I examined a series of newspaper publications describing the scenic art and design process for the theatre. I just completed a five-section series titles “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters” that was published in “The Era” (February 4, 1866). This second article gives another viewpoint of scenic art five years later. Much of the information is the same about the history of theatre scenery and scenic artists as in the previous article – almost a little too similar, but it is a delightful addition for historical context. I am posting it in five parts; here is the beginning of the second part.

“Jameson, called the Scottish Van Dyke, designed the scenery for private theatricals at Holyrood House for his patron, King James VI.”

George Jameson (the Scottish Van Dyke, 1588-1644) was the son of Marjorey Anderson and Andrew Jamesone. The elder Jameson was a master mason and architect whose father (Deacon William Jamesone) apprenticed him in 1576 to Andrew Bethleam in Aberdeen for a period of seven years. As a noted mason, Andrew Jamesone rose to become a Burgess of Guild in the city and his work included Provost Ross’ House. George Jameson was sent to study under Peter Paul Rubens in Antwerp. In 1620, he returned to Aberdeen and established himself as a portrait painter.

George Jameson (1588-1644), known as the Scottish Van Dyke.

I’ll start the article again: “Jameson, called the Scottish Van Dyke, designed the scenery for private theatricals at Holyrood House for his patron, King James VI. This monarch [King James VI], when called to the English throne, selected 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 Johnson 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…

“Frank Hayman; a Tale” was intended for recitation at the Haymarket Theatre. The verse opens with a comment that Hayman would stop his art for any type of mischief. Here is the link to the British Museum: http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=1467004&partId=1&people=43101&peoA=43101-2-70&page=3

Francis Hayman (1708-1776) Illustration for a scene from “Hamlet.” Comments. Here is the link: https://www.themorgan.org/drawings/artist/hayman-francis

Francis Hayman, See-Saw, 1742. This is one of the few surviving panels painted by Francis Hayman and his assistants between 1738 and 1760. It was created as decoration for the supper boxes at Vauxhall Pleasure Gardens. Vauxhall’s proprietor, Jonathan Tyers, awarded Hogarth with free entry for the attraction for his work. Here is the link: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/hayman-see-saw-t00524

The painting is by Francis Hayman and illustrates a scene from “As You Like It” (1599) in Act I, Sc.vi. It depicts the moment when Orlando throws Charles, the Duke’s wrestler, to the ground, watched by Duke Frederick, Rosalind and Celia. The painting is based on a drawing made by Hayman for a six-volume quarto edition of Shakespeare’s works published in 1743-4 by Sir Thomas Hanmer (1677-1746). http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/hayman-the-wrestling-scene-from-as-you-like-it-n06206

Historic Stage Services LLC – Water Damage

Tackling Water Damage and Our Mission

Written by Wendy Waszut-Barrett, PhD

The mission of Historic Stage Services LLC is to help clients make informed decisions about their historic backstage area, especially when considering the repair and restoration of damaged scenery collections. Selecting an individual, or company, to restore water-damaged areas to their original brilliance necessitates decades of experience and an in-depth knowledge of historical scenic art techniques. It is crucial that the individual hired to restore water-damaged areas really understands the original dry pigment paint media and historical paint application techniques.

This article is intended as a resource to help you understand how historical scenery was manufactured, the precautionary measures to take when handling these large-scale artworks, and the various levels of restoration offered by Historic Stage Services LLC. Why? It may be one of the most important decisions that you will make in regards to your stage, as it will directly affect the health of your performers and audience members, in addition to the overall longevity of your scenery collection.

Water damage to roll drop at the Scottish Rite in Danville, Virginia.

Water damage is often perceived as a death sentence to any historical backdrop. Colors can dust or mold can form in damaged areas. Some may suggest that dry rot has set in and the scene is beyond repair. The damaged scenes are thrown out, or left unused high above the stage floor. Restoring a water-damaged drop is never simple, but it is always an option. Almost everything is reparable, no matter how unsightly and fragile it may appear. We have the techniques to restore severely water-damaged scenes.

The process to remove or conceal the water-damaged area is time consuming and complicated. This article is not intended as a do-it-yourself guide, or any instructional manual. It will give you a working knowledge of the process. If a proposed budget and timeline seem too good to be true, it may indicate that the individual or organization is inexperienced and will take short cuts. Restoring a water-damaged area to its original appearance takes time, talent, historical materials and years of training. We will provide you with options.

Distemper Painting

Most historical scenery collections were painted with a combination of dry pigment (powdered color) and size water (diluted animal hide glue). This process is also referred to as distemper painting. The powdered color was transformed into a paste and then mixed with size on the scenic artists’ palette before applying the mixture to a backdrop. It is a complicated process that demanded years of training.

The type of paint used by scenic artists to create stage settings included only three ingredients: color, water and binder. When a roof leaks or a pipe bursts above the stage, any backdrop below is in immediate peril – especially if it was created with distemper paint. If smoke doors accidentally open up above a stage during a rainstorm, historical backdrops can be destroyed in an instant. When water touches a painting produced with dry pigment and size, the colors are immediately reconstituted into a soft state. The painted surface can return to its liquid form rather quickly. We specialize in the use of dry pigment and size water. All of our repairs and restoration techniques use historical materials and paint mediums, don’t settle for anything less.

The Dye Line

There are only two ways to conceal the heavy concentration of color that is characteristic of a dye line resulting from water damage – removal or sealing. One method is to remove the line of consolidated pigment; this necessitates scraping it off of the fabric as depicted in the photograph below.

Another way to conceal a dye line is to apply a sealant on top of the concentrated pigment. This approach attempts to ensure that the color will not continue to permeate the top surface of any new painting. In other words the dye line will continue to reappear in the top layer of paint, even after dozens of coats, unless it is sealed or removed. Historic Stage Services LLC specializes in both methods after evaluating the condition of the fabric and severity of the dye ring.

Cleaning

Regardless of the water damage, the entire painted composition needs to be cleaned prior to any repair or restoration. If the dye line was scraped off, the surface must be cleaned a second time, as any loose paint particles will contaminate the surrounding areas. First, a low-suction dust extractor is used on both the painted surface and backside to remove most of the contaminants. This process necessitates using a HEPA filter in your dust extractor to prevent any potential toxins from becoming airborne. Particle masks must be worn during this entire process – not only by those working on the drop, but also by everyone in the room.

Removing loose surface contaminants with a low-suction dust extractor

It is imperative to understand that over time, a variety of pollutants have settled on the surface of both front and back of a painted drop. These contaminants range from mortar dust and flash powder to bat guano and pigeon excrement. The typical color of the dirt layer can range from a mid-tone grey to a soot black. This layer of filth darkens the light areas and lightens the dark areas, thus reducing the overall contrast of values in the composition. In addition to removing the loose surface contaminants, there is often a layer of deeply embedded dirt and grime that needs to be extracted prior to any repair. Simple dust extraction with a vacuum will not remove this embedded layer of filth.

It requires the use of additional cleaning methods, such as dry chemical sponges and archival putty. The appropriate product cannot be determined until after close inspection of the damage and evaluation of the painted surface. No color should ever come off of the drop while cleaning it, especially with a sponge. If color does come off, it indicates that the binder has failed and is indicative of a much larger problem.

Removing deeply-embedded contaminants with archival putty

Consolidating the Painted Surface

When the binder of distemper paint fails, the color begins to fall off of the fabric. Backdrops with this problem must have the loose particles consolidated to prevent further deterioration. In other words, the dusting colors need to be stabilized so that they will not flake off of the fabric. To stop the dusting of dry colors, an application of the original binder, or diluted hide glue called “size,” must be sprayed onto the painted surface.

Spraying the painted surface with a diluted hide glue solution to consolidate the loose dry pigment

If left untreated, the backdrop’s color and composition will lose all depth and vibrancy. The composition then takes on the appearance of stained fabric. In this situation, only the color absorbed into the fabric during initial paint application remains visible. All of the color on the surface falls to the stage floor or becomes airborne. Some colors are hazardous when they become airborne.

The inhalation or ingestion of dry pigment may carry toxins, posing a potential health threat to all who inhale it. The overall hazard is dependent on the specific color and its chemical properties. Some colors are primarily inert and pose no imminent health threat, while others may contain harmful ingredients such as lead, arsenic or cadmium. Only a scientific analysis of each color can verify the pigment’s origin and define its toxicity. All dusting pigments should be considered dangerous until proven otherwise.

Examples of Our Work

Below are before and after pictures of a severely damaged backdrop owned by the Church of St. Patrick in Shieldsville, Minnesota. Wendy Waszut-Barrett, president of Historic Stage Services LLC and former founder of Bella Scena LLC, completed the work during February 2018.

Before restoration by Historic Stage Services LLC

After restoration by Historic Stage Services LLC

Here is another example of restoring a scene and concealing water damage for the York Rite of Freemasonry in Duluth, Minnesota.

Damaged scene being prepared for restoration at Historic Stage Services Studio

Restored scene for Duluth York Rite degree production with new painted scrim insert in center of the drop

Restored scene placed in lodge room at Duluth Masonic Center, 2014.

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 402 – “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, first section

Part 402: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, first section

E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871 for “The Era Almanack.” Blanchard was an author of Drury Lane Pantomimes from 1852-1888. He established a style of rhyming verse and wit that was often topical. Contemporary pantomimes seldom have rhyming couplets beyond the prologue. I find it fascinating that he wrote a substantial article about the history of scenery and scene-painters in 1871 – right in the middle of his pantomime-writing career.

This article is one of three that I transcribed a few months ago as I examined a series of newspaper publications describing the scenic art and design process for the theatre. I just completed a five-section series titles “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters” that was published in “The Era” (February 4, 1866). This second article gives another viewpoint of scenic art five years later. Much of the information is the same about the history of theatre scenery and scenic artists as in the previous article – almost a little too similar, but it is a delightful addition for historical context. I am posting it in four sections, as there are lovey gems of information about our craft.

“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 scena, 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, statues, 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 and 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 satirical pieces they had always a cave in the middle, a wretched cabin on the right, and on the left and old ruined temple or landscape. In these representations perspective was observed, for Vitruvius remarks that “the rules of it were invented and practiced from the time of Æschylus by a painter names Agarachus, who has even left a treatise upon it.”

After the downfall of the Roman Empire these decorations for the stage were neglected till Peruzzi, a Siennese, who died in 1536, revived them. Classical scholars will readily understand the various opportunities for scenic effect afforded by the 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 principle 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, and other to those from the harbor, or any other public place.

Sipareum was the significance 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, the property room, where were kept the dresses, scenes, and musical instruments, and where were sometimes disposed the choir of musicians. In the Greek Theatre it was a place behind the scenes, used also for a dressing-room. This was an inner dressing-room named postsceniun. Thus even at a remote period we see that attention to the comforts of the performers was by no means overlooked by the theatrical architects of that period.

That the scene-painter’s accommodations 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 contracts 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 was observed the writer was not acquainted with the word scene, but used “painted clothes” in that sense. 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 [Sir William] Davenant, in the introduction to The Siege of Rhodes, 1656, says, “In the middle of the freeze was a compartment wherein was written Rhodes.” Movable scenes were first used in Rome in 1508. The first who painted moveable scenery in England was Richard Aggas, a specimen of whose work may be seen at Painter-Stainers’ Hall, in Little Trinity-lane.”

A few comments about Davenant’s production:

“The Siege of Rhodes” was actually titled, “The Siege of Rhodes Made a Representative by the Art in Prospective in Scenes, and the Story Sung in Recitative Musick.” The plot was based on the 1522 siege of Rhodes, when the island was taken by Suleiman the Magnificent’s Ottoman fleet. The score was by five composers; the vocal music by Henry Lawes, Matthew Locke and Captain Henry Cooke, with the instrumental music by Charles Coleman and George Hudson. Davenant is credited with the first attempt to revive English drama after Oliver Cromwell’s ban closed dramatic performances and closed public theaters.

He secured special permission from Cromwell for his production for his first dramatic work was “The First Day’s Entertainment,” a work disguised under the title “Declamations and Musik” and labeled the production as recitative music. He then created the first public opera in England, “The Siege of Rhodes” and is credited with introducing three innovations to the public stage: opera, painted stage sets, and a female actress singer.

The opera was first performed in a small private theatre constructed in the back portion of Davenant’s home at Rutland House in the upper end of Aldersgate-Street, London. The 1659 reprinting gives the location at the Cock-pit in Drury Lane. Although the score has been lost to time, the original designs by John Webb, a pupil of Inigo Jones are extant. They are available at https://restorationstaging.com/2014/01/26/john-webb-scene-designs-for-the-siege-of-rhodes/

‘The Siege of Rhodes’: shutter, prospect of Rhodes. Image from https://restorationstaging.com/2014/01/26/john-webb-scene-designs-for-the-siege-of-rhodes/

‘The Siege of Rhodes’: shutter, Rhodes besieged. Image from https://restorationstaging.com/2014/01/26/john-webb-scene-designs-for-the-siege-of-rhodes/

‘The Siege of Rhodes’: relieve, Solyman’s throne and camp. Image from https://restorationstaging.com/2014/01/26/john-webb-scene-designs-for-the-siege-of-rhodes/

‘The Siege of Rhodes’: relieve, Mt. Philermus. Image from https://restorationstaging.com/2014/01/26/john-webb-scene-designs-for-the-siege-of-rhodes/

‘The Siege of Rhodes;: shutter, the general assault. Image from https://restorationstaging.com/2014/01/26/john-webb-scene-designs-for-the-siege-of-rhodes/

‘The Siege of Rhodes’: frontispiece and wings. Image from https://restorationstaging.com/2014/01/26/john-webb-scene-designs-for-the-siege-of-rhodes/

For more information about Davenant, here is a link to the online “Encyclopædia Brittanica” https://www.britannica.com/biography/William-Davenant

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 401 – “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, fifth section

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…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 400 – “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, fourth section

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.

William Capon prints available at: https://www.magnoliabox.com/products/houses-on-the-corner-of-chancery-lane-and-fleet-street-city-of-london-1619094

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…