Drypigment.net

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Rae Waszut-Barrett

Here is a backdrop designed and painted by Toomey & Volland scenic studio of St. Louis, Missouri, ca. 1920. Last month I visited the Richmond Scottish Rite and documented the historic scenery collection, dating from 1900-1920.

Here is a link to my past post about my visit to the Richmond Scottish Rite this fall:

Richard Finkelstein also made a lovely video of this scene with changing light:

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1921 Thomas G. Moses wrote, “The zoning question in Oak Park came up at home and we are going to have a restricted district on Euclid Avenue between South Boulevard and Madison Street.” Oak park residents were trying to save its residential districts from large apartment complexes that year. Local contractors were putting pressure to build a fifty-two-unit apartment complex and took their case to court

Newspaper headlines that spring reported, “Oak Park’s War on Huge Flats Reached Courts” as builders sought legal aid to get their permit (Chicago Tribune, May 8, 1921, page 137). Mills & Sons, Chicago builders, tried to pressure Charles E. White Jr., the Commissioner of Public Works, approve their building at the northeast corner of Euclid Avenue and Pleasant Street. The area was strictly residential district. Mills & Sons were also proposing another massive structure on the southwest corner of Randolph and Oak Park Avenue.

Moses lived at 233 S. Euclid Avenue, halfway between Randolph Avenue and Pleasant Street.

Neighbors rallied to prevent the construction of the large complex in their quiet neighborhood By April 17, 1921, the “Chicago Tribune” reported, “Oak Parkers Win Battle in War on Big Flat Buildings” (page 137). Village ordinances were implemented to prevent the construction of massive complexes in primarily residential areas.

On May 19, 1921, a special meeting of the zoning committee further banned future apartment buildings on Euclid Avenue between South boulevard and Randolph street in Oak Park. Specifically, the village ordinance prohibited the construction of any building beyond a residential home in the two-block stretch (Forest Park Review, 21 May 1921, page 6).

Chicago was expanding, however, and land was often a good investment. Later that year, Moses wrote,  “The Madam and I went to Elmhurst August 14^th and bought a 100 foot lot for $1,600.00.  We might build on it sometime.”). Elmhurst was another western suburb of Chicago, located due north of Oak Park.

The next year Moses looked at the prospects of building on their lot. In 1922, he wrote, “building material has been so high that no one has ventured to build.  Only six houses have been built.  Our lot is very high and a fine location.”

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1921 Thomas Gibbs Moses wrote: “White City work starts early in May and we had plenty of it.” Chicago’s White City Amusement Park was located at 63rd Street and South Parkway. In many ways it was Chicago’s answer to New York’s Coney Island. Named after the white lights that lined many of its buildings, there were other White Cities built across the country during the first two decades of the twentieth century.

Each amusement park offered ample opportunities for scenic artists and studios. Imitations of popular attractions, were repeated over, and over again, mainstays at each venue.  For example, Luna Park’s “A Trip to the Moon” became White City’s “A Trip to Mars.” Most attractions and rides relied heavily upon scenic illusion and scene painting. Every year, Sosman & Landis completed projects for White City attractions across the country. Like grand circus spectacles, it was work that the studio depended upon.

Popular features at Chicago’s White City included “A Trip to Mars,” “Fire and Flames (the Chicago Fire),” “The Johnstown Flood,” “the Canals of Venice,” “Temple of Palmistry,” “Catacombs,” “The Third Degree,” “Infant Incubators,” “Midget City,” “Jewell’s Manikins,” and a whole host of other attractions and activities.

There was also a vaudeville theater on the grounds, stocked with scenery for vaudeville acts and concerts. Since the park’s opening in 1905, Sosman & Landis produced scenic elements for dozens of projects at the venue, most under the direction of Moses.  During the park’s second season in 1906, an open-air amphitheater was erected with a seating capacity of 12,000. That year Soman & Landis delivered scenery for the outdoor spectacle, “The Last Days of Pompeii.” In 1909 Moses again recorded delivering scenery for another massive White City spectacle, “The Fall of Messiah.” From simple signs to outdoor displays, painted elements were in constant demand at White City.

Scenic studios accepted all kinds of projects to keep the shop doors open. They relied heavily upon a diverse clientele and a range of projects. In short, this diversification meant they could weather many storms, and survive economic downturns. War, pandemics, and other disasters may postpone theatre projects, but it did not necessary leave scenic artists without work. Legitimate theater was just one of many clients for a scenic artist. Amusement park attractions, charity balls, and other non-theatrical projects also required painted panoramas, platforms, props and scenic elements. Scenic studios were uniquely positioned to deliver themed environments for a variety of uses. In some ways, scenic studios followed the itinerant artist approach; accept any painting work that you can gets your hands on. Whether carriage painting, sign painting, ornamental painting, house painting, or drop curtains, all painting was good work.

In regard to White City projects in 1921, it is difficult to determine the exact work that Moses mentions in his memoirs. That year, there were many events held at the amusement park, including a series of professional ball games. However, White City advertisements during the spring of 1921 included a big entertainment at the Terrace Garden.  On May 25, 1921, the “Chicago Tribune” published a notice in the Amusements section for “The Garden Follies.” This “Edition De Luxe” was called the “Spring Frolics, a riot of color and flash, beauty, fashion, song and dance” (Chicago Tribune, 25 May 1921, page 19). Advertised as a “a big outdoor feature” it was free to the public. There were both afternoon and evening performances on Saturday, Sunday and Decoration Day. Even Frederick Do Bell was part of the event with advertisements stating, “He’ll Make You Gasp!”  Do Bell was a high wire artist, marketed as the “electronic wizard of the high wire.”

Variety acts in an outdoor setting suggest that vaudeville was adapting to the times too, taking their acts to a new level.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

The Tabor Opera House was purchased by the Leadville Elks in 1901 and renovated in 1902. Renamed the Elks Opera House, new scenery was purchased for the enlarged stage. Old shutters, wings, borders and roll drops were stored in the attic.

While examining the scenery in the attic this fall, I documented three textile mill stamps. In past posts, I explored the history of Stark Mills (https://drypigment.net2020/11/07/travels-of-a-scenic-artist-and-scholar-stark-mills-and-drillings-for-scenery-at-the-tabor-opera-house/) and the history of Boott Mills (https://drypigment.net2020/11/04/travels-of-a-scenic-artist-and-scholar-boott-mills-standard-sheeting-for-stage-scenery-at-the-tabor-opera-house-in-leadville-colorado/). The third textile mill with fabric that made its way to the Tabor Opera House attic is the New Vaucluse Mills. Fabric manufactured at the New Vaucluse Mill in South Carolina was wrapped around a drop roller.

This small piece of cotton fabric connectsthe history of a Colorado opera house with that of the southern textile industry.

In Dec. 1833, the General Assembly of South Carolina granted Shultz Breithaupt and his associates a charter for the Vaucluse Manufacturing Company. This was only the second charter of incorporation granted to a textile factory in South Carolina. By 1834 operations commenced, and by 1836, the new mill was producing from $250 to $300 worth of goods daily. That is today’s equivalent of $7,000-$8400 worth of goods daily, or 2.5-3 million annually.

For me, it is difficult to explore the history of nineteenth-century textile mills without contemplating the poor working conditions and reliance upon child labor.  Nineteenth-century textile mills are one example of an American industry that did not always prioritize the safety of their workers over profits. Without local, regional and national oversight, many factories considered their employees dispensable, and treated them as such. If ever there was a reason to support American labor unions, we just need to look at history of mill workers; so many were lives were sacrificed for the profits of a few.

The drop roller with the New Vaucluse Mill stamp at the Tabor Opera House likely dates from 1879 to 1882, indicating that this may be some of the earliest scenery delivered to the Tabor Opera House.  This lone roller connects a small western opera house to the South Carolina textile industry. Vaucluse was located near the small towns of Graniteville and Aitken in South Carolina. Now, there are many histories written about the Graniteville Manufacturing Co. and Vaucluse Mills as well as the rise of capitalism in the south. Some historians describe the works of visionaries; rags to riches tales of white men developing manufacturing industries. Others explain that their initial success was a direct result of slave labor; they were only paying for materials in the manufacturing process. This initial jumpstart gave them an immediate advantage over their northern counterparts.

As I read the history, I was reminded of one line from the musical “Hamilton.” It is from an I am exchange between Hamilton and Jefferson in Cabinet Battle #1 . Hamilton says:

A civics lesson from a slaver. Hey neighbor
Your debts are paid cuz you don’t pay for labor

All stories that revolve around the Vaucluse Mills include William Gregg (1800-1867), founder of the Graniteville Manufacturing Company and investor in Vaucluse Mills in the Edgefield District. Vaucluse was a mill town, one of many in the area. The first large-scale cotton mill was constructed in nearby Graniteville by Gregg in 1845, immediately after his return from touring the northern textile mills the year before.  Many consider Gregg to be the father of the textile industry in the South. After he returned for his 1844 trip,  Gregg wrote a series of articles about his visit, calling upon southern investors in to support southern industrialization. In short, Gregg believed that southern mills could effectively compete with their northern counterparts, citing labor was cheaper in the south. Well, in some cases it was slave labor, so free. The Graniteville Manufacturing Co. was organized in 1855, situated on Horse Creek in the town of Graniteville (Keowee Courier, Pickens, SC, 26 June 1879, page 2). In 1869, a larger mill was proposed on the Vaucluse site. An article about the  Vaucluse Manufacturing company asked, “It becomes the citizens of the State, therefore, to take hold upon this enterprise. Into what can our planters better put their surplus funds, the safe investment of which is to so many of them so great a puzzle? In what way can any citizen do more for the general interest of the State?” (The Charleston Daily News, 26 March 1869, page 1). Graniteville mills and Vaucluse mill later became part of the Graniteville Manufacturing Co. Graniteville was the home office and central location to a collection of textile plants in South Carolina and Georgia.

The new Vaucluse mills complex continued to grow and integrate new technology for an ever-increasing output of products. Even after a Vaucluse Mill waterpower burned in 1874, it was soon replaced with a new mill of granite and brick. By 1877, Vaucluse Mill completed the completed the construction of a 342-foor long dam (Keowee Courier, 26 June 1879, page 2). In 1880, Vaucluse Mill even generated 197,000 yards of cloth over a two-week period (Austin American-Statesman, 3 Oct 1880, page 2). By 1884, Vaucluse mill processed 70,738 pounds of cotton that produced 1,423,926 pounds of cloth, or 5,264,500 yards, consuming 1,675,211 pounds of cloth, or about 3,723 bales (Montgomery Adviser, 29 April 1884, page 2).

Buildings from the Vaucluse mills are now part of the Vaucluse historic district, but little is left of textile legacy in terms of products. No handy dishtowels in a museum gift shop as at Boott Mills in Lowell, Massachusetts.

The Vaucluse Historic District was listed in the National Register of Historic Places on May 7, 1996, and includes an 1832 granite wheel house and foundation, the 1877 mill complex (main mill, tower, connecting building, and picker house), 83 former company dwellings the 1952 northside expansion, and the 1955 warehouse. The New Vaucluse mill complex from 1877 was designed by architect Amos D. Lockwood. His design was one of the earliest examples of a New England prototype mill to be built in South Carolina. Lockwood’s later firm, Lockwood, Greene & Co. later designed approximately fifty of South Carolina’s textile manufacturing facilities.

Much of the New Vaucluse Mill history is included in “Planting a Capitalist South: Masters, Merchants, and Manufacturers in the Southern Interior, 1790–1860” by Tom Downey (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2005).

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Rae Waszut-Barrett

Here is a backdrop designed and painted by Toomey & Volland scenic studio of St. Louis, Missouri, ca. 1920. Last month I visited the Richmond Scottish Rite and documented the historic scenery collection, dating from 1900-1920. Here is a link to my past post:

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

William C. Morris first popped onto my radar after my trip to the Tabor Opera House in Leadville, Colorado, last spring. While documenting the historic scenery collection, I encountered a tree profile painted by Frank Cox in 1888. Cox painted his initials on the set piece, as if they were carved into the trunk. In addition to his initials (“TFC” for Tignal Frank Cox), he painted the initials “WM” and “JC” below. Although it was a long shot, I decided to see who was working as a scenic artist in the west at the time, with the initials W. M. My search resulted in five possibilities, with William Morris as one of the options. Regardless of whether the painted initials “W.M.” were for William Morris or not, Morris entered into the Henry C. Tryon storyline by 1882. Both painted for the Salt Lake Theatre. Let me provide a bit of context first.

On September 14, 1882, the “Salt Lake Herald” reported, “Mr. Henry C. Tryon, a well-known scenic artist, is en route for San Francisco, on pleasure. Mr. Tryon is the scenic artist of the Tabor Grand Opera House in Denver”  (page 5). Regardless if the intent were pleasure or work prospects, a few month later the San Francisco Opera Tryon a position as their scenic artist. He published this offer in January 1883, using it to pressure the Salt Lake Theatre into also offering him a position; a smart move that worked.

In the spring of 1883, Tryon again headed west to the coast, this time bringing a friend and fellow scenic artist, William Clyde Morris. At the time, Morris was a thirty-nine yrs. old Salt Lake City Mormon. On March 12, 1883, the “Deseret News” announced, “Back from the Coast.-To-day Mr. Henry C. Tryon and Mr. W. C. Morris, returned from their trip to California. They took in all the sights anywhere near San Francisco and had a very enjoyable time. They received marked courtesy everywhere and had freedom of all the theatres at all hours.” (Deseret News, 12 March 1883, page 3).

After painting scenery for the Tabor Grand Opera House and Tivoli Theatre in Denver, Tryon working in Utah alongside many locals, such as William Clyde Morris and Alfred Lambourne. William Clyde Morris’ father, William V. Morris, was primarily a decorative artist, but also painted scenery for the Salt Lake Theatre until the time of his passing in 1878. His death was possibly why the Salt Lake Theatre sought out Tryon, another experienced scenic artist from the region. In 1882, Henry C. Tryon and his little brother Spencer were working at the Tabor Grand Opera House in Denver. Both the Tabor Grand Opera House and the Salt Lake Theatre were located on the same circuit for many touring productions, the venues also shared artists.

From the fall of 1882 until the fall of 1883, Morris worked alongside the Tryon brothers at the Salt Lake Theatre. Morris and Spencer Tryon were credited with a railroad scene for the production of “Forbidden Fruit.” On January 30, 1883, the “Salt Lake Herald” reported that the scene “was displayed last night for the first time in “Forbidden Fruit.” The article announced that their scene, “called forth a well-deserved round of applause,” elaborating, “It was excellently painted, being full of character, and although (from the nature of the subject without any pretense to color, was beautiful owning to its truth and solidity.” The article’s author congratulated each artist, noting, “Mr. Spencer Tryon is a brother and pupil of Henry C. Tryon, the artist of the Salt Lake Theatre, He is very talented and although scarcely more than a boy in years, has produced some very fine work here and at the Tabor Grand Opera House, Denver. We congratulate Mr. Morris upon the opportunities for the display of his recognized ability, which the scenery at the Salt Lake Theatre has given him, and which will give him in the future, as he has been engaged to assist the artist upon all work done.” This presents Morris as the assistant to the Tryon Brothers.

Morris’ father was a well-known decorative artist the Salt Lake area.  William V. Morris (1821-1878), William Clyde Morris (1844-1889), and William Charles Morris (1871-1853) all worked as painters, specializing in the decorative artists. It is difficult to juggle all of the details surrounding the Morris family due to multiple marriages and dozens of off spring.  I’ll try to stay on task, so here goes…

William Clyde Morris (1844-1889) was the son of William Vaughan Morris (1821-1878) and Sarah Isabelle Gwilt (1826-1851). Morris was born on July 15, 1844 in Liverpool, England, the only child born to the couple. His mother died in Liverpool when Morris was only six years old. Father and son migrated to America sometime after that and joined a Mormon wagon train by 1855. They are recorded as participating in Mormon Pioneer Overland Travel’s Company 11. Their wagon train departed at the end of July in 1855 and arrived at the beginning of November of that same year.  61 individuals and approximately 34-38 wagons departed the outfitting post at Mormon Grove in Kansas (near Atchison), bound for the Salt Lake Valley. Mormon Grove was really a temporary village, a rallying point where members from the Church of Latter-Day Saints gathered prior to emigrating west. In 1855, nearly 2,000 Latter-Day Saints with 337 wagons left Mormon Grove for Salt Lake. Here’s the link to “The Mormon Trail: A Photographic Exhibit,” as it is a fascinating story- https://historytogo.utah.gov/mormon-trail-exhibit/

On the trail, William married his second wife, Hanna Hinchliffe Midgley (1928-1892); their marriage date is recorded as September 5, 1855. The couple celebrated the birth of two sons, Thomas Conway Morris in 1858 and Brigham Morris in 1862, half-brothers to William Clyde Morris. Only Thomas survived to adulthood. William V. Morris also married Nancy Cook (1833-1909) and the couple celebrated the birth of Hanna Barbara (1866-1931) and Eli Elias (1873-1940). There is no record of divorce and Hannah did not pass away until 1928. So, it appears that William V. was married to both Hannah and Nancy at the same time, fathering nine children between the two. Also, in 1861 Morris was naturalized, becoming a citizen of the United States of America (“Deseret News,” 11 Sept. 1861, page 5).

William Clyde Morris on seems to have married only once. On June 21, 1868, he married Diantha Empey (1848-1928). The couple celebrated the birth of  five daughters and two sons: Mary Ann (1871-1927), Diantha Isabelle (1873-1940), William Charles  (1874-1940) and Price LeRoy (1877-1958), Cora Conway (1881-1893), Minevia Morgan (1883-1904), and Klea Vaugh (1888-1972). His son, William Charles Morris, also became an artist. This muddies the waters, as they both went by William C. Morris.

In 1870, William V. and Willian Clyde ran the painting firm of Morris & Son in Salt Lake City. Posted notices in the “Deseret News” advertised, “Painting in all its branches by Morris & Son. We beg to offer our services to the public at large in our line of business on a reasonable term as any other form. Plain House painting; glazing and paper hanging; carriages, signs, both plain and fancy; ornamental decorations and gilding; graining and marbling of all kinds; and theatrical decorations and sceneries” (18 Jan 1870, page 1). Their shop was in the Alley on Main Street, rear of E. Martin’s Photograph Gallery. In 1873, William Clyde designed the new diploma for the Agricultural and Manufacturing Society of Utah (Deseret News, 26 Nov. 1873, page 9).

Morris & Son were also mentioned in 1874, when they directed the decorations for the Sunday School Jamboree, a big event in Salt Lake. Little is mentioned in regard to the firm after that, and by 1878, William V. passed away.

William Clyde continued work as a decorator. In January 1888, he became part of the art committee with George M. Ottinger, Henry Squires and Mrs. Reading for a benefit art drawing for Harry Brown of Logan. By the way, Ottinger also worked as a scenic artist for the Salt Lake Theatre.

By fall 1888, Morris was primarily producing signage for the Utah Exposition building, constructed by the Deseret Agricultural and Manufacturing Society on the Tenth Ward Square in Salt Lake City. On September 29, 1888, Morris placed the following advertisement:

“W. C. Morris, the Decorator is still in the front! Notice! Notice! W. C. Morris, having secured the privilege of introducing Pictorial Signs to advertise the Prominent Business Firms of this city in the Utah Exposition Building, is now running his force to the fullest extent, and as the line is limited, parties interested will please bring in their orders immediately. Size of panels 8 x 14 ft. Painted and Lettered in the Highest Style of Art. For further particulars see W. C. Morris.” (page 3). Many events surrounded the opening of the building, including an art exhibition. On Oct 5, 1888, the “Salt Lake Herald” reported that W. C. Morris’ entry in the art department for the Utah Exposition. He was awarded best ornamental painting, silver medal, and best display pastel work, vegetables. Morris continued to focus on decorative work for the remainder of his career.

William Clyde Morris and William V. Morris were remembered in an article published in the “Ogden Standard-Examiner” on Feb. 3, 1924 (page 5). The article reported, “In 1861, George M. Ottinger arrived in Salt Lake City and permanently established himself in his profession. At this time the people of Utah had somewhat emerged from the straightened circumstances of earlier days and buildings were being erected with some pretentions toward ornamentation. The Salt Lake Theatre was shortly completed and Ottinger, the painter, and William V. Morris, the decorator, found employment in painting the scenery and decorations. It was later carried to completion by William Morris’ son, William C. Morris on whose shoulders the mantle of his fathers’ talents seems to have fallen.” This article also indicates why Tryon was hired at the Salt Lake Theatre in 1883 when it was renovated. Tryon brought the theatrical experience necessary for the successful completion of the project, as he specialized in stage art.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

A cathedral setting designed and painted by Toomey & Volland scenic studio of St. Louis, Missouri, ca. 1920. Last month I visited the Richmond Scottish Rite and documented the historic scenery collection, dating from 1900-1920. Here is a link to my past post:

While on site, I was assisted by Michael Powers and Richard Finkelstein to set and light each scene during the cataloguing process. Here are a few images that I took of the scene:

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

On Christmas Day in 1880, the “New York Clipper” included an advertisement for the sale of scenery painted by Henry C. Tryon: “SCENERY for a tropical transformation , properties, dresses , etc… and the manuscript and music or The Tale of Enchantment are offered for sale by Henry C . Tryon , who advertises.” (New York Clipper, 25 Dec 1880). 1879 advertisements  in Baltimore marketed “A Tale of Enchantment and the Grand Transformation Scene” (Baltimore Sun, 1 March 1879, page 1).

It was the inclusion of  “tropical transportation” that caught my eye, and I immediately thought of the tropical wings painted for the Tabor Opera House by Henry E. Burcky in 1890.  Burcky and Tryon had worked together in 1881, painting scenes for the Opera Festival in Cincinnati. Both worked for the Tabor Grand Opera House in the 1880s. Burcky’s extant jungle wings at the Tabor may be our closest visual example for Tryon’s tropical transformation, both in period and technique.

Based on “The Black Crook,” the Tryon Brothers presented a “grand spectacular romance in four acts” (Baltimore Sun, 24 Feb 1879. Page 1). It was first performed at Baltimore’s Front Street Theatre in 1879.

The Tryon Brothers presented this advertisement promised, “Replete with all the elements of the most wildly romantic interest, produced at an actual cost of three thousand dollars. 100 superb and costly dresses, rich appointments, and glittering paraphernalia.” Ethe advertisement went onto describe the inclusion of eighteen members from the “Great Vienna Ballet Troupe,” under the direction of  “well-known Maître de Ballet, Mons. A. Blandowski.” In all, there were one-hundred member’s in the company. The “Baltimore Sun,” reported the inclusion of a “beautiful and charming transformation scene – Fairy Palace of Pleasure – Dazzling and Glittering Dresses and Gorgeous Lovely Cupids” (“Baltimore Sun,” 27 Feb 1879, page 1).

Although it had been thirteen years since the premiere of “The Black Crook,” the current owners of the show filed objected to the close imitation, again. A legal notice was also posted on February 24, 1879 in the “Cincinnati Daily Star” –  “The injunction against the Front-street theater for presenting “A Tale of Enchantment,” is threatened by owners of the “Black Crook, which is claimed to be the same play” (Cincinnati Daily Star, 24 Feb 1879, page 1).  This legal notice became a great marketing devise for the Tryon Bros. show; two days later, only standing room was left to see the show at the Fourteenth Street Theatre in Baltimore. This also did not stop the show from completing the Baltimore run or touring that year. If anything, “A Tale of Enchantment now embraced its similarities to the “Black Crook.”

Litigation issues, citing “The Black Crook” imitations, were not new. On November 30, 1867, the “New York Clipper” included an article entitled, “The ‘Black Crook’ in Court” (page 270). The article noted “On the 16th inst. an injunction was issued in Memphis, Tenn., enjoining George Deagle from performing the spectacle of a ‘Tale of Enchantment’ at the Greenlaw Opera House. The injunction was granted at the instance of J.H. Vicker, who appeared as ‘attorney in fact’ of  John E. McDonough, who purchased the right to produce the spectacle entitled ‘The Black Crook’ from the author, C.M. Barras, in Memphis and several other prominent cities of the country. The injunction was granted on the grounds that the ‘Tale of Enchantment,’ as produced by Mr. Deagle, was ‘a colorable imitation of the ‘Black Crook’,’ and hence there was an alleged infringement of the rights of Mr. McDonough in the premises.”

Despite legal concerns in 1879, the Tryon Bros. took their show on the road. On May 26, 1879, a “Hartford Courant” advertised the show at the New National Theatre, announcing, “A Tale of Enchantment. Producing fac similes of all the dazzling effect of the Black Crook. New music – new ballets – new effects in illuminations – new properties – new and beautiful scenery – new costumes etc., etc.” (Hartford Connecticut, page 1). The tropical transformation scene was now referred to as, “Grand Manœuvre de Amazon.” It featured, “twenty-four young ladies of the Ballet, led by  Stilecta. Grand Transformation Scene, introducing the Enchanted Home of the Fairies.”

The production did not always receive positive feedback from theatre critics in newspapers. When it was performed at Hamlin’s Theatre in Chicago, the “Inter Ocean” published a scathing review. Keep in mind that at least two of the original scenic artists for the original 1866 production of the “Black Crook” were living and working in Chicago during 1879.  The Aug. 20 “Inter Ocean” article reported, “That old and much-abused spectacular drama, “The Black Crook,” is being presented at this place, under the precautionary title “A Tale of Enchantment.” It is  not being severe to say that it is badly presented, at that. It is wanting in the two primary elements of success, the scenic gorgeousness and ballet effects.( The display of the latter respect is rather inadequate, to put it mildly. Imagine, moreover, 200 pounds of embonpoint as Queen of Flowers, and a corresponding obesity as the heroine of the mortal story! And the fairies correspond to all possible shapes from their queen down to the diminutive proportions of May Treat. Inasmuch as there is no call for good acting, that feature is not to be expected, and in the failure of all other traditionary features, the piece fails sadly into inferiority in every department. To somewhat atone for this, an olio is interspersed through the fete scene, made up of the Hamilton sisters, Fredericks, and Gloss Brothers, Forman and Butler, John Welch and Harry Stanly, who succeed in the duty of propitiation. Success would be more assured for the week is an addition was made of the limbistic attractions. The concluding or transformation scene is good” (Inter Ocean, page 7).

Regardless, the show was still touring at the end of the year. On Dec. 3, 1879, the “St. Louis Globe-Democrat” included an advertisement for “The Tale of Enchantment” at the Globe Theatre, noting that it had proven to be “a mine of popularity and patronage to this theater, and the specialties which are introduced and greatly to the interest of the spectacular show” (page 3).

By 1880, the Tryon Brothers production was soon faced with competition when the Kiralfy Brothers decided to produce the exact same show, but better. The Kiralfy’s version of “A Tale of Enchantment” advertised “On a scale of magnificence and grandeur surpassing anything ever seen in America. Entirely new and novel costumes. Brilliant and glittering armors and jewels, marvelous mechanical effects. Full corps de ballet, Grand cosmopolitan ballet of fifty ladies in glittering armor. Immense demon ballet. The world’s greatest premiere De Rose, Mlle. Pagaleri and Mons. Arnold Kiralfy introducing the following great European Specialty artists: Les Fantochs Valotte; the famous Ulm Sister in their eccentric Styrian Songs; the Three Ronaldos;  Master Carling, the extraordinary Caricaturist; Grand Amazon March, and led by beautiful and charmingly formed young lady.” In regard the scenery, the advertisement noted, “A few of the numerous Stage Pictures are Village in Harz Mountains, a Wild Cross Path in Brocken, the Grotto of Stalacta, Palace of Lace, Laboratory, Pandemonium, Subterranean Vaults, the Grand Staircase of the Golden Terrace, Burning Forest, and the Grand Transformation Scene – the Homes of the Fairies.”

At the end of the first successful year for the Kiralfy’s production, Henry C. Tryon posted notice for sale of his scenery, indicating that the run of his production was over. By the summer of 1881, however, a new production of “A Tale of Enchantment” was advertised in Cincinnati. It is possible that this new production used Tryon’s scenic investitures. By August 31, 1881, the “Cincinnati Enquirer” reported  “Vine-Street Opera-House now open with the TALE OF ENCHANTMENT, superior in every way to the renowned BLACK CROOK. New scenery and gorgeous costumes, with Signor Novissimo and his magnificent Spanish Ballet of 24 young ladies. Also, a number of America’s best specialty artists” (page 5).

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

The story of the Tabor Opera House in Leadville, Colorado, is interwoven with that of Gov. H. A. W. Tabor, Augusta Tabor, and Baby Doe Tabor. The 1932 film was based on David Karsner’s book, “Silver Dollar,” tracing the ups and downs of this one-time silver magnate and his two wives.

On Dec. 1, 1932, the world premiere of “Silver Dollar” was held at the Denver Theatre, previously known as  the Tabor Grand Opera House. Prior to the premiere, movie representatives scoured Leadville for artifacts to display at the upcoming event. They visited Baby Doe in Leadville and searched throughout the opera house for remnants from Tabor’s glory days.

On Dec. 9, 1932, “Steamboat Pilot” announced, “Leadville Relics Taken to Denver for ‘Silver Dollar.’ The article reported, “The theater men also went to the Elks, once the famous Tabor opera house of Leadville, seeking relics of the olden days. They secured a stage drop and four magnificent velvet drapes of the ornate Tabor days. Both drop and drapes are said to be older than the curtain at the old Tabor Grand theater in Denver” (page 3). Note the article did not state that the men secured the original drop curtain, or any painted front curtain from the Tabor Opera House in Leadville,

For additional context, the original drop curtain for the Tabor Grand Opera House in Denver was painted by Robert Hopkin in 1881, two years after the Tabor Opera House in Denver opened. It was an impressive scene of ancient ruins and the Charles Kinsley quote: “So fleet the works of men, back to their earth again; Ancient and holy things fade like a dream.” How apropos.

After the drop from the Tabor Opera House was used for the 1932 premiere, it seems to have disappeared from sight and institutional memory. For decades, many believed that the movie representatives failed to return the drop; some even believed that it was the original 1879 front curtain. At the time that it went out on loan, there was no loan agreement, or any description of what was being lent out for display at the movie premier. Others hoped that somewhere, amidst the piles of the scenery in the Tabor Opera House attic, the missing drop was carefully tucked away, awaiting discovery.

In February 2020, a missing roll drop was discovered at the Tabor Opera House, hiding on stage in plain sight. At the time, I was leading a group of local volunteers to document the scenery on stage. Near the end of the documentation process, we spotted something suspended just below the pin rail. We lowered the piece and unrolled the scene. It was roll drop with a palace arch composition. This piece was possibly the same drop lent out for the movie premiere and returned to a secure place.

It was certainly not the original drop curtain for the Tabor Opera House in 1879; wrong composition. The original front curtain was described in an article for the “Leadville Weekly Herald” on November 15, 1879 (page 3 ): “The drop curtain is a masterpiece from the brush of Mr. Lamphere, and represents a glorious mountain scene, at the base of which is a fine old castle, with a stream running at the foot; alongside of the water is a rugged road, which ends in the winding of  canyon.”  The size also indicates that it could not fill the proscenium opening, suggesting that the roll drop was some type of backing piece. Furthermore, the proportions and forced perspective suggest a far upstage placement near the back wall, almost as a masking flat. A few years later, the stage and scenery were refurbished, and a new drop curtain was painted.

The small size of the extant roll drop likely made it into a perfect artifact to put on display for the 1932 premier; small, compact, and easily transportable. The wings or shutters in the Tabor Opera House attic would have been too difficult to remove, transport and display in winter. The roll drop also exhibits all of the characteristics of having been partially “touch-up” for the movie premiere. Interestingly, only a portion was refurbished, and not the entire composition; the top quarter of the scene was left “as is.”  The refurbished section suggest that the piece was partially exhibited in a nearby lobby or a reception room. This top portion of the drop was possibly rolled, or draped over a bar, unseen. It was refurbished to fit in a shorter venue. Keep in mind that none of the original scenery would have worked well at the Tabor Grand Opera House, as it was simply too small for the proscenium opening.

Furthermore, the roll drop that we discovered last February was actually documented in 1933 as part of a Scenery Project led by Muriel Sibell Wolle (1898-1977).  In December 1933, Wolle led a group to of students, a former Tabor stage manager, and professors set up and photograph many of the scenes on stage at the Tabor House. This documentation did not include the wings and shutters that were stored in the attic. Wolle also sketched each set and made color notes, later making watercolor paintings for each piece. For more images from the 1933 Scenery Project, visit: https://digital.denverlibrary.org/digital/collection/p15330coll22/search/searchterm/1933%20Scenery%20project

There is a historic photograph of the curtain in the Denver Public Library digital collections database. Although the exact date remains unknown, the roll drop is visible as a backing piece for an interior setting, dated prior to the stage renovation by the Elks.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

Nineteenth-century “stage trimmings” referred to painted settings that included drops, wings, shutters, and borders. Stage trimmings also included the proscenium border and wings, both painted elements that accompanied most stage settings regardless of their composition. The proscenium border and proscenium wings were later known as the grand teaser and grand tormentors, or grand tormentor wings. Newspaper descriptions of nineteenth-century proscenium drapery frequently credited the skills of a scenic artist, verifying that theses were painted elements. Often permanently positioned immediately upstage of the proscenium opening, they were only removed for larger spectacles that necessitated the entire stage space, such as acrobatic acts, tightrope walkers, and the like. Otherwise, the proscenium side wings and proscenium borders remained in place for most productions.

Once the drop curtain was raised for a performance, proscenium wings and borders provided the first layer of masking for any scene. These stage elements also provided a visual transition from painted decor and architectural ornamentation in the auditorium to painted illusion on the stage. They unified the auditorium and stage in historic performance venues. Of all the painted pieces delivered by a scenic artist, these elements were the most viewed by any audience member.
Over time, proscenium wings and borders were replaced with ornate or plain fabric versions, forever altering the audience expectations and the framed presentation of painted illusion. Fabric valances, grand borders, drapes and close-in curtains became standard masking for proscenium openings by 1930; their initial popularity beginning over a decade earlier.
From 1881 to 1883, Tryon delivered new stock scenery for the Tabor Grand Opera House and Tivoli Theatre in Denver, Colorado, as well as the Springville Theatre Hall and Salt Lake Theatre in Utah. These were just four examples of the hundreds of theatres stocked with scenery painted by Tryon throughout the duration of his career. The stock scenery collections were produced over time, with each piece being unveiled to the public as part of a setting for a touring show or local production.
On May 21, 1882, the “Colorado Daily Chieftain” credited Tryon with the new scenery for the Tivoli Theatre in Denver. Of the scenic appointments, the article reported, “The stage trimmings will be of the most handsome and costly character. Mr. Henry C. Tryon, scenic artist of the Tabor Grand Opera house, Denver, having charge of the work, which will be finished in good season for the grand opening Monday evening” (page 3). Advertisements promised “Complete set of new scenery! From the brush of Henry C. Tryon, scenic artist of the Tabor Grand” (“Colorado Daily Chieftain,” May 24, 1882). By June 1, 1882, the “Colorado Daily Chieftain” announced, “Henry C. Tryon, the scenic artist, is making constant additions to the Tivoli scenery. The gentleman has few superiors in his line” (page 3).
Immediately after this project, Tryon headed west to paint new scenery for the Salt Lake Theatre and Springville Theatre Hall in Utah. For the Salt Lake Theatre, Tryon painted one scene after another, used by touring troops and the Salt Lake Theatre Dramatic Combination company. His work was featured in “Old Shipmates,” “Not Guilty,” and “Under the Gaslight,” to name a few that fall. For “Under the Gaslight,” “The Salt Lake Herald” reported, “This piece has been thoroughly rehearsed, and the new scenes by Mr. Tryon will be used and assist materially in the effectiveness of the production. The piece will be well given and draw a good house.”
In a review of Tryon’s new ship scene used in “Old Shipmates” that fall, the “Deseret News” also discussed other scenic pieces painted by the popular artist. The article reported, “The new drapery and proscenium wings and borders painted by the same and talented artist, will be exhibited that evening for the first time” (October 24, 1883).
An article entitled “Theatre Improvements” in the “Deseret News” described his new proscenium wings and borders (18 Oct 1882, page 3):“Two heavy white marble columns placed on each side of the proscenium opening, surrounding and partly covered by rich crimson drapery, support a continuation of the same drapery, arched in Pompeian form, and with details carried out in a similar style. Immediately behind the arched opening formed the front drapery border, hangs a simple lambrequin of white satin, with a gold medallion fastened to the center of the principal festoon, in which is graven the beehive of Utah; surrounding the medallion are thistles on one side and roses on the other. The prevailing colors of the arch border are rich crimson and gold, the heaviest lightened up with black. The corners of the arches are weighted down by medallions of gold, varied by reliefs in white marble. The whole combination includes richness contrasted by extreme delicacy, and care has been taken that each, while harmonizing with the other, shall be separated by graceful continuous masses. Masking the top of the leading drapery hangs close to the proscenium another maroon ‘border’ with a medallion and drapery surrounding it, looped closely. The medallion in the centre is placed there as the response to those at the extreme ends of the drapery. This last border is hung in front of the drop curtain. The others about six feet back form the proscenium.”

Each piece of Tryon’s stock scenery was gradually unveiled to the public from the fall of 1882 through the spring of 1883. Tryon initially painted a ship setting and a steamboat setting. His work was congratulated, and newspapers reported, “the new ship scene recently painted by Mr. Henry C. Tryon, of the Tabor Grand Opera House is acknowledged to be one of the most realistic sets ever put upon the stage” (Ogden Standard, 30 Sept, 1882, page 3). On Nov. 25, 1882, the “Salt Lake City Herald” reported that new scenes painted by Tryon included a snow scene, woods scene, street scene, and prison setting (page 8). By the end of May 1883, the “Deseret News” reported “The forest scene, painted by Henry C. Tryon, introduced last night and this afternoon in ‘The Serf,’ is a masterpiece. The foliage borders transform the stage into the appearance of a dense wood with actual timber, over hanging and spreading branches and leaves. It is the nearest approach to nature in the department of scene painting we have ever seen” (May 26, 1883, page 5).

Tryon’s stage trimmings, like those of many scenic artists, made news throughout the second half of the nineteenth century in America. The works of scenic artists were advertised, reviewed and applauded. Painted scenery by well-known artists drew crowds and added to the credibility of each performance. By the onset of the twentieth century, the listing of specific scenic artists in newspaper reviews began to diminish. The detailed descriptions of stage settings were gradually replaced with articles about other technological advancements in stage machinery and lighting. The presence of scenic artists, once celebrated in newspapers, began to fade; their identities hidden backstage at many venues.

To be continued…