Drypigment.net

There were many projects completed at Sosman & Landis that were not mentioned by Thomas G. Moses in his memoirs. In 1912, Sosman & Landis provided the scenery and stage effects for an amateur production of “Milestones” in Lead, South Dakota. “Milestones” was a play in three acts by Arnold Bennett and Edward Knoblock (Knoblauch). As a side note, Knoblauch’s name was Anglicized when he became a British citizen during WWI. He received a commission in the British Army and served in the Secret Service Bureau. Knoblock later wrote screen plays, including Douglas Fairbanks’ “Robin Hood.”

The immediate popularity of “Milestones” resulted in numerous productions appearing throughout North America. Of Sosman & Landis’ scenery for the small production in Lead, “The “Lead Daily Call” advertised, “One entirely new scene, built and painted by the Sosman Landis Co., of Chicago, has been purchased and will be seen by the public for the first time in ‘Milestones.’” (9 Dec. 1912, page 4). There was only one setting, as the entire play took place in an interior setting that was minimally altered for each era.

The history of “Milestones” is an interesting one.  It became a hit at the Royalty Theatre in London, playing over 600 performances. On October 13, 1912, the “Inter Ocean” published the origin of the play.  Here is the article:

“How ‘Milestones’ Originated.

Frank Vernon, under whose stage direction the Chicago production of ‘Milestones; at the Blackstone theater and the New York production of that play at the Liberty theater has been made, conceived the idea of the three generations – 1860, 1885 and 1912, which are the periods of years in ‘Milestones.’ Mr. Vernon suggested the idea to Edward Knoblauch [sic.] and introduced Mr. Knoblauch to Arnold Barrett [sic.] who previously had confined all his talents to literature.

Originally, the title selected for ‘Milestones’ was ‘The Family’ and such it was called until Mr. Vernon visited Arnold Bennett at Mr. Bennett’s home in Fountainbleau, France. One day while the two were driving along the road which was marked with milestones they stopped for direction. This suggested the idea of the title ‘Milestones,’ the milestones marking the different changes in life. Then they decided to call the play ‘The Milestones,’ but afterwards simplified it to ‘Milestones,’ which is the present title.

From one generation to another the march of time is noted in the story. The occurrence of a domestic crisis in each of the three generations reveals some remarkable character truths, and it also reveals the independence now felt by young folk of today when their future is at stake, this being shown in contrast to the former unquestioning of obedience of parents as to vital matters, whether the parents were right or wrong. Especially is the striking difference shown between women of the present and fifty years ago.

The novelty in ‘Milestones’ is the development of character through many years of living; the strife of the young generation with its predecessor over the same problems.

On one day three or four weeks ago five theatrical companies left London to act this play. One company came to Chicago, another went to New York, three to the English provinces. ‘Milestones marks a dramatic era. Although an English play, it is human. Therein is its appeal to America. And it is blessedly ‘untheatrical.’

When ‘Milestones’ was first produced last February in London the advance sale was $20. Since the opening night there has not been an empty seat. It is still running at the Royalty Theater, London, and the advance bookings are all filled until well after Easter.”

By 1923, ‘Milestone’ was commonly listed in the publication “Plays for High Schools and Colleges, Compiled by a Joint Committee National Council of Teachers of English and the Drama League of America” by Clarence Stratton, Chairman (Chicago, 1923, page 12).  The entry for the work was brief and to the point:

“Milestones. Arnold Bennett and E. Knoblock. 3 acts; 1 interior, but with changes of furniture. 9 m., 6f. A serious play of excellent quality, rather difficult. Costumes change with each act. Doran.” The publication included a section on “Suggestions to Producers of Plays,” which was fascinating in itself. One section commented, “The stage is not life; it may be a room with one wall removed as some moderns teach, but the audience is not in that room and therefore views the action from a different angle and a much greater distance…Great as are the difference in theory of different producers and much as acting has changed in the last generation; it still remains that some of the older technique was based on sound psychological principles and should be part of the equipment of actors, though they know when to disregard it. To secure a natural effect under such unnatural conditions requires an artificial technique. Action and speech have to be modified to meet modified conditions. Audiences still like to hear. To make them see and hear and understand requires certain exaggerations and suppressions and selections” (page 2).

This particular project intrigued me overall, a public school in a small western town purchasing scenery from a top-notch studio hundreds of miles away for a smash hit still traveling the circuit. In regard to the studio, I could not help think of the advertising phrase: “No project too big or small.” This small project also hints at a shift within American theatre industry during the pre- WWI era. The scope of plays produced at academic institutions was broadening, as was the manufacture of theatrical goods for thousands of public schools throughout North America. Simultaneously, this new market drove the increased demand fabric draperies. Fabric draperies were not only used as stage masking, but also for actual sets, thus replacing many painted sets.

I am always intrigued by the scope of contracts secured by Sosman & Landis in Chicago.  They delivered a variety of painted setting scenery to countless entertainment venues throughout North America. Projects included theater, opera, vaudeville, circus spectacles, tent shows, midway amusements, world fair attractions, panoramas, social halls, department store displays, commercial murals, fraternal scenery and a variety of academic institutions. They were never restricted to any region or venue. In a sense, diversity was their key to success. The continued to expand their operations until Joseph S. Sosman passed away in 1915. Without the drive of Sosman to constantly diversify, the firm began to solely focus on painted settings.  As I complete the year 1912 in the life and times of Thomas G. Moses, keep in mind that great change is on the horizon; both for theatre industry, as well as Sosman & Landis.

To be continued…

In 1912, Sosman & Landis delivered scenery for the C. W. Park Dramatic Co. The tent show was advertised as “the oldest, biggest, best and most perfectly equipped canvas covered theatre in existence” (“Messenger Enquirer,” Owensboro, KY, 10 Aug 1913, page 3). Playing weekly engagements that featured various vaudeville acts under a big top, the show came complete with a full stage, scenery, lights and even ushers. The “Decatur Daily” advertised, “Park’s Dramatic and Vaudeville Shows Coming. Will be here all next week – forty people and fine scenery” (Decatur, Alabama, 14 May 1912, page 2).

The history of the production company is quite interesting. In 1907, the C. W. Parks Show was reorganized due to some original members accepting other work (“The Gasden Times, “Gasden, Alabama, 22 Jan. 1907, page 2). Park began fine-tuning his acts, and by 1909 became the C. W. Park Big Stock Co. The “Roanoke Leader” reported that the C. W. Parks would return, appearing “under their mammoth water-proof canvas” (Roanoke, Alabama, 1 Sept 1909, page 8).  The article continued, “The C. W. Park show is stronger than ever, having been enlarged in all departments, carrying all new plays…Mr. Park holds the territorial rights south of the Ohio River and east of the Mississippi, besides new plays. An entire new company has been engaged, and artists from the leading theatres in the north and east are engaged with the company…Special electrical effects, a car load of special scenery, and a host of high class vaudeville (especially engaged for this line of work only) makes the C. W. Park show larger, greater and grander than ever before.” By 1912, “The New York Dramatic Mirror” listed Park’s new company “UNDER CANVAS: C. W. Park Dramatic Co.” (page 26). The tent company was still billed as a vaudeville show; the touring production included a substantial company with impressive scenic effects.

In 1912, the “Decatur Daily” published, “The company is now composed of forty and requires two of the largest of the Southern baggage cars to carry scenery, which is all new and up-to-date, being from the famous studio of Sosman & Landis. This is the largest company of its kind in the business and carries a modern and fully equipped theater, all the ushers and attaches appear in uniform, and instructed to attend to the wants of the patrons. Several new faces appear among the acting forces, as well as in the vaudeville forces, of which there are eight acts. The plays will be changed nightly, as well as the vaudeville (Decatur, Alabama, 14 May 1912, page 2).

The 1912 production included “The Man Who Dared,” “Dolly and I,” “A Round Up,” “St. Elmo,” and “The Shepherd of the Hills” (The Commercial Dispatch, 22 Aug. 1912, page 1). The scenery for the acts was advertised as “new and up to date from the famous Studio of Sosman & Landis.” Of the production, the article continued, “This is the largest company of its kind in the business and carries a modern and fully equipped theatre, all the ushers and attaches appearing in uniform, and instructed to attend to the wants of the patrons” (The Huntsville Times, 9 May 1912, page 1).

To be continued…

There were many projects completed by Sosman & Landis during 1912 that were not mentioned by Thomas G. Moses in his memoirs. Sosman & Landis provided the scenery and stage effects for a touring production called “The Seven Aviator Girls.” The “Quad-City Times” reported that Sosman & Landis provided scenery for “The Aviator Girls,” a musical act composed of “seven winsome women” (17 March 1912, page 12).

Scenic embellishments accompanied each song, to “make them all the more delightful.” The production was produced by Virgil Bennett and headed by Miss Carlie Lowe, who was accompanied by the seven aviator girls in what was billed as “a spectacular scenic and singing novelty.” The four scenes for the show included “Owl Land, “ “On the Beach,” “In the Surf,” and a Japanese Palm Garden.” Musical interludes (olios) between scenes included “The Boogie Boo Owls,” “Serenade Me Sadie,” “Spooning in My Aeroplane,” and other catchy numbers” (Los Angeles Times, 4 Aug. 1912, page 26).

“The Daily Gate” reported that the show was “a spectacular musical and scenic singing act that has been the sensation in all the big houses in the country where they have played. A carload of special scenery is carried with the act and is said to be one of the most beautiful stage settings found in vaudeville. A special property man and electrician are carried with the company, which numbers seven principles and two mechanics” (Keokuk, Iowa, 17 Oct, 1912, page 5). The “Davenport Times” described, “They have five different song numbers and each means a change of costumes and ‘back drops.’ As a result their tuneful efforts are accompanies by a spectacular display that induces the natives to applaud vigorously. The big number, ‘Spooning in My Aeroplane,’ presents Miss Carlie Lowe soaring up to the roof in a miniature machine, while her feminine mechanicians cut fancy ‘diddoes’ with their feet and join the chorus in song. It is a prettily staged and engaging act all the way” (Davenport, Iowa, 19 March 1912, page 8).

To be continued…

In 1912, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “New York studios set in a new theatre in Philadelphia, the Globe.” He meant that Sosman & Landis painted scenery for a New York Studios’ project, one that was delivered to the Globe Theatre in Philadelphia. New York Studios was the eastern affiliate of Sosman & Landis, founded and run by a one-time employee David H. Hunt. Hunt was a theatrical manager, as well as scenic studio founder. In the 1890s he convinced Sosman and Landis to establish the theatrical management firm of Sosman, Landis & Hunt.  Later in 1910, Hunt convinced Sosman to invest in New York Studios, run by Hunt and his second wife, Adelaide.

Julius Cahn’s Official Theatrical Guide listed the Globe as a vaudeville theatre. With a seating capacity of 720, the venue was managed by Chas. Rappaport. To place the Globe within the context of the 1912 Philadelphia theatre scene, the city boasted 289 theaters at the time with a drawing population of 2,000,000. Located at 5901 Market Street, the Globe Theatre opened in 1910.

I was intrigued that Moses mentioned creating scenery for New York Studios that was ultimately delivered to the Globe Theatre in Philadelphia. This was certainly not the first or last time that Sosman & Landis provided scenery for a New York Studios project. Sosman & Landis worked in conjunction with New York Studios on many projects, but seldom were mentioned in a newspaper article at the same time.

Interestingly, both studios were mentioned in the same article in the “Star-Gazette” on March 4, 1913 (Elmira, New York). The newspaper article was about the W. P. Murphy’ new theater in Bath, New York:

“THURSDAY NIGHT

First production will be local talent minstrels, a testimonial to Bath man who promoted playhouse.

Bath, March 4 – (Special)- The Liberty Minstrels, a premiere aggregation of Bath talent, will hold the boards at the Murphy theater, Thursday evening; the production is under the direction of J. W. Lewis and is given as a testimonial benefit to the builder and owner of the theater, W. P. Murphy.

The benefit is designed as a means of expression on the part of the local public of its appreciation of Mr. Murphy’s efforts to supply the village a long needed modern playhouse as well as in a measure to reimburse him for the heavy expense he has incurred in building and equipping the house. Already every seat has been sold and the demand may be that the minstrels be repeated a second night.

The house is one of the finest to be found in any village of this size anywhere in the Southern Tier. It stands at the rear of the former site of the Nichols House, the once famous hostelry, facing Pulteney Square in the central part of the village. Entrance is gained from Steuben street through a long arcade or foyer, off from which are a box office, telephone booths and cloak room. At the rear of the house near the entrance is a smoking room. The auditorium is 50 feet in length by 40 feet width. The floor slopes, dropping about five feet from the rear to the orchestra circle. Surrounding three sides of the auditorium is a horseshoe gallery; the house is carpeted with rubber linoleum and supplied with opera chairs on both orchestra floor and galleries, the seating capacity being about 825 persons. 

The stage has an opening of 45 feet width, 17 feet height and 30 feet depth. It has an ample scene loft and is supplied with elaborate scenery, which is supplied by Sosman & Landis of Chicago. Beneath the stage is a musician’s waiting room, a property room, four dressing rooms, supplied with baths; above the stage are four other reserve dressing rooms for use when attractions with large casts play the house. The building is equipped with gas and electricity; has seven exits, is a fireproof building and heated by steam. The drop curtain, depicting a scene from Venice is from the New York Studio Company.

Charles H. Thomas will be manager and booking agent for the house and already many leading attractions are promised. As Bath has been without a theatre otherwise than the motion pictures for some time, undoubtedly the new theater will prove very popular” (Star-Gazette, Elmira, New York, 4 March 1913, page 9).

To be continued…

In 1912, Thomas G. Moses and his wife Ella stopped in Chattanooga on their way to Asheville, North Carolina. Moses was headed south on vacation to sketch and check in on some projects. In Chattanooga, he dropped off a panorama for the Chattanooga Manufacturer’s Association.

The painting was for a permanent display at the new Chattanooga Manufacturer’s Association. “The Chattanooga News” described his contribution on Jan. 1, 1913, in the article “Manufacturers Receiving in Their Commodious Home” (page 12).  Of Moses’ artwork, the article reported, “The panorama of Chattanooga and the miniature replica of the Cincinnati Southern railway attracted the greatest interest upon the top floor, crowds of amazed spectators standing around these exhibits throughout the morning and afternoon.”

On New Year’s Day, 1913, more than 15,000 people visited the permanent exhibit of the Chattanooga Manufacturer’s Association, far exceeding the expectation of the exhibit committee. From 10:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m., a steady stream of visitors poured into the building. The new home of the Chattanooga Manufacturers’ association home was a three-story building on Broad Street, where the products of various manufacturing plants of the city were permanently displayed.

Chattanooga had more than 300 manufacturing plants turning out 700 different products of common use by 1913 (“The Chattanooga News,” 12 March 1913, page 5). The annual value of manufactured exceeded $65,000,000. Today’s equivalent of that purchasing power is $1,685,791,414.14.

That fall “The Chattanooga News” included an article about Moses’ visit to Chattanooga, mentioning his panorama work and role in the Palette & Chisel Club  (Nov. 5, 1913, page 2). Moses was 57 years old at the time, well-respected as a fine artist, and in his artistic prime. Here is the article in its entirety:

“ARTISTS MAY CAMP HERE NEXT SUMMER.

Thomas F. [sic.] Moses Has Interested Palette and Chisel Club of Chicago in Chattanooga –

The genius of Thomas G. Moses, the artists who painted the panorama of Chattanooga, now at the Chattanooga Manufacturer’s association exhibit building, is at present being officially recognized in Chicago by the Palette and Chisel Club there, one of the most exclusive art clubs in America.

Nov. 2 to 14, the paintings of Mr. Moses are on display at the club apartments. This opportunity is an honor afforded only to the most prominent members. Invitations have been sent out to the most able of America’s painters. In the invitation the Palette and Chisel club says of this artist:

‘There is not one of our members of whom we are more proud. There is probably not another painter in Chicago who has sought out and painted so many of the beauty spots of our own country. From a thousand sketches and paintings sixty have been selected, and are hung in our club to give our members and their friends an opportunity of seeing a representative collection of the works of Thomas G. Moses.

It is customary for sketching parties of the Palette and Chisel Club to make excursions to locations of exceptional beauty over the continent of America. When in Chattanooga to deliver his painting of this city to the Manufacturer’s association Mr. Moses expressed his admiration for the scenic beauty of this section and stated that he hoped to bring a party of artists from Chicago art circles to establish a summer painting camp in this locality.”

To be continued…

In 1913 the art works of Thomas G. Moses were featured in a Palette & Chisel Club exhibition.

An invitation to Club members noted,

“There is not one of our members of whom we are more proud. There is probably not another painter in Chicago who has sought out and painted so many of the beauty spots of our country. From a thousand sketches and paintings sixty have been selected and are hung in our Club to give our members an opportunity of seeing a representative collection of the works of Thomas G. Moses. The exhibition will be open on weekdays from 10 to 7, and on Monday, Wednesday & Saturday evenings until 9.”

This is quite a statement. Moses had been a member of the Club since 1906. In addition to joining the Palette & Chisel Club, Moses was a member of the Laguna Beach Art Association and the Salmagundi Club in New York City. He sketched alongside those associated with other art movements, such prominent individuals who established art colonies in Taos and the Pacific Northwest.

In addition to being recognized in fine art circles, his skill as a scenic artist was also recognized by some of the greatest American stage personalities in the 19^th and 20^th centuries, including Joe Jefferson, Al Ringling, Buffalo Bill Cody, Frederick Thompson, Edwin Booth, Sarah Bernhardt, Julia Marlowe, Katherine Clemmons, Helena Modjeska, William Haworth, and the list goes on.  Many of Moses’ theater drops still remain, scattered across the United States in various theaters.  However, there are precious few scenery collections that were ever primarily painted by Moses; a studio setting prohibited this characteristic. Many of Moses’ premiere collections were created after the initial liquidation of Sosman & Moses. From the mid to late 1920s, Moses again found himself producing entire collections with one assistant, often on site. One example was for the Scottish Rite Theater in Fort Scott, Kansas, a scenery collection eventually purchased by the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center during 2015.

After I supervised the removal and transportation of the entire Fort Scott Scottish Rite scenery collection to a storage facility in Minnesota, the CEO of Minnesota Masonic Charities selected a team of individuals who were unfamiliar with the appropriate handling of historic backdrops. They were hired to restore the entire scenery collection in a compressed timeline, just about the same time I was my position as Curatorial Director for the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center was eliminated. Sadly, hot melt glue was used to attach new netting to the historic cut drops, irreparably damaging each piece. Original battens were removed, and leg drops cut apart. The quality of the restoration speaks for itself and I have written much in the past about the appropriate handling and repair of historic scenery.

The point of today’s post is to consider the extant works of Thomas G. Moses, both his fine art and scenic art. Internationally renowned artists held Moses in high regard. He was not merely a tradesman, producing picturesque backgrounds for the theater, but an artist who exhibited at some of the most respected art schools across the United States. His scenic work cannot be dismissed and devalued based on its exhibition space in an entertainment venue.

Fortunately, Lance Brockman, Larry Hill and Rhett Bryson documented many of these collections during the 1980s and 1990s, so we at least know what was lost. The Scottish Rite scenery in McAlester, Oklahoma, seems to be the sole survivor that is still owned by the Fraternity.

To be continued…

In 1912, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Ella and I started on our vacation November 9^th to Cincinnati and Asheville, N. Car., which is all written up in detail elsewhere.  Arrived home from our vacation December 8^th. Four good weeks.  Had a fine trip. Christmas day was a good one.  We had Frank with us, which made a big family reunion.  At the close of this year’s business, I have no kick to make.  I only regret not being able to do more sketching, as I found it too cold in North Carolina.  I am sorry that we did not go away down south to the Gulf.  I think we would have found it at least warm, if nothing else.”

One stop on his trip was in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Of his visit to the city, the “Chattanooga News” reported, “Chattanooga Catches the Eye of the Artist. Vice-President Moses, of Sosman & Landis Scenic Studios, delighted.”(15 Nov. 1912, page 2).

The article headline included “LIKES THE LOCAL SCENERY. Chooses Chattanooga Vicinity as a ‘Promised Land’ for Artists to Revel In.” The article continued:

 “Thomas G. Moses, vice-president of the Sosman & Landis scenic studios of Chicago, and one of America’s most distinguished artists, has spent several days in Chattanooga and the vicinity, with a view to establishing a post for the Palette and Chisel Art Club of Chicago. He has been sent out by the club in search of new fields, Sketch grounds all over Europe and America are discovered in this way. One or two men are sent out in advance, and they find ‘the promised land’ they herald the good tidings to the eager artists in waiting.

Mr. Moses is enthusiastic over the natural scenery of Chattanooga and its surroundings, and has made preliminary arrangements for the post.

In time of peace and plenty the greatest steps in art and science have been made. Midsummer Chattanooga, in all its glory, will be painted by American celebrities. The pictures will be done by the greatest artists, will be exhibited in the famous galleries, and will bring great prices.

So Palette and Chisel Club of Chicago will flock to Chattanooga and form a little colony. Artists are like gold-seekers; let one find a small pocket, and there will be a stampede.

The well-known Palette and Chisel club has furnished the art world many bright lights. They have secured the “Prix de Rom” plum, which carries with it three years in Rome and $3,000. The east winner was Mr. Savage, with E. Martin Hennings a close second.

Mr. Moses agrees that this is a ‘garden spot of America.’ He says:

‘We have painted much in the Rockies, but they are too large and the air is too clear. What we want is mist and a little smoke. They will be great factors in producing the poetical sketches we find here. The delicate opalescent coloring of the distant mountains is greatly enhanced by the drifting mists that float about your valleys.’

A magnificent view of Chattanooga 14×28, done by Moses, can be seen at the manufactures’ association headquarters on Market Street. It was taken from North tower on Missionary ridge, and has been presented to the association by Mr. Riffe.

Mr. Moses left Chattanooga Thursday morning on an early train for Asheville, where he may establish a second post. By his side is his charming and companionable wife, who is interested in all movements of art. In his baggage were many sketches of this location; in his mind were dreams of burnt sienna clay and opalescent coloring.

The sketches will be reproduced on large canvas and will be exhibited next spring to the Salmagundi Club, of New York City, of which Thomas Moses is a member. They consist largely of rustic scenes, rugged mountains, dense forests, falling waters and babbling brooks. These are the delightful avenues through which Mr. Moses walked to renown.

The exhibition of these scenes will be made with a view of inducing the members of the Salmagundi club to this ‘garden spot of America’ that is unlimited for the artist in scope and variety.

The Salmagundi Club is one of the most conservative in all Europe and America. No man enters uninvited; no man is invited under the age of fifty years. Some of the well-known artists are Charles Warren Eaton, R. M. Shurtleff, J. Francis Murphy, H. A. Vincent, George Innis, Jr., and Walter C. Hartson.

If this club, too, accepts the challenge next summer, Chattanooga, in all its glory, will indeed be painted.”

To be continued…

A year after Thomas G. Moses was invited to a stage party hosted by the Palette & Chisel Club, his son Rupert was invited to an informal stag. In 1913, Rupert Moses received an invitation to an informal stag party, sponsored by the Pallet & Chisel Club.  The letter was sent to Moses at the Sosman & Landis main studio address on 417 Clinton Street in Chicago. I encountered the invitation in the John H. Rothgeb papers at the Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas, Austin. It was part of the contents in an unlabeled file in an unprocessed collection.

The informal stag invitation announced, “Your presence is requested at the debut of Little Wayoff Saturday Eve, December Six Nineteen Thirteen” from “Gita Wayoff and husband.” The invitation included a ticket to admit “R. Moses” to “Little Wayoff” Palette & Chisel Club, 59 East Van Buren Street, Saturday, Dec. 6, 8:15 P.M.

“Little Wayoff” was billed as “an Eugenic Prodigy with Futuristic Tendencies,” sponsored by Gordon St. Clair.  The production was “dressed by Gustave Baumann & William Watkins” with “orchestra muffled by Carl Krafft, Properties and plumbing by R. McClure and reception by Theodore Gladhand Lely.”

The cast for the production included:

Hesa Wayoff – an husband – Glen Scheffer

Gita Wayoff – his wife interested in the vote – Alex Kleboa

Little Wayoff – their only child aged six – A. J. Anderson

An Ice Bandidt – Mr. Wayoff’s half brother – R. V. Brown

The Art Wife – R. J. Davieson

Promise Wood Shavings – R. McClure

Prof. Glow-Worm – Art Instructor – R. V. Brown

Young Lady Sketcherines – Violet (John E. Phillips), Fay (De Alton Valentine), Gladys (R. J. Davison), Pearl (J. Jeffrey Grant), and Maude (D. Gut Biggs).

Hanging Committee – Hi Kroma (John E. Phillips), Siam Blooey (J. J. Grant), Harrison Wredo (D. Guy Biggs), Strontian Pale (Glen Scheffer), Paris Green (D. Valentine) and Hugh Newtral (R. J. Davison).

Lem – a janitor – W. C. Yoemans and Genevieve.

The “s’nopsis” for the first picture was Mrs. Wayoff’s husband’s kitchen not far from the Palette  Chisel Club shortly after the great suffrage parade in the spring of 1913. The second picture was the sketch pasture of Prof. Glow-Worm’s class near the club’s summer camp at Fox Lake. The third picture was the hanging committee at play.

In 1908, newspapers reported that Ibsen’s Little Eyolf was sometimes referred to as “Little Way-off” (Star Tribune 26 Jan. 1908, page 19). However, “Little Wayoff” was also a parody of Ibsen’s work, included in “The Vassar Miscellany” (Vol. 24, 1894, page 227). Noted as “Life’s admirable paraody, wickedly entitled ‘Little Wayoff’ the book review commented the criticism was unjust. On June 17, 1895, the Baltimore Sun” mentioned “Little Wayoff” in the book review “Criticism – With Sugar”  (page 8). The article reported, “ ‘Suppressed Chapter and Other Bookishness.” By Robert Bridges, author of ‘Overheard in Arcady.’ New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, Cushing & Co. It is not necessary to be dull to be wise, nor is long wind one of the requirements of a critic. A glance is pleasant if the eye sparkles, and a touch and away may leave an impress, while a heavier stroke would induce the wearied reader to exercise that wise discretion which is known as skipping. Those who have read ‘Drock’ in ‘Overheard in Arcady’ will need no introduction to the ‘Suppressed Chapters,’ from the ‘Dolly Dialogues,’ will appreciate the belated ‘Trilby’s criticism of Trilby,” and the absurd parody on Ibsen, of “Little Wayoff,” or the happiness of title and contents of ‘Literary Partition of Scotland.” On March 28, 1896, the “Courier-Journal” mentioned “Little Way-Off, a variation of Little Eyolf, is a clever addition to the work of the Norwegian Dramatist” (Louisville, Kentucky, page 9).

To be continued…

In 1912, Thomas G. Moses received an invitation to a stag party, sponsored by the Pallet & Chisel Club.  I encountered the bright orange envelope in the John H. Rothgeb papers at the Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas, Austin. It was part of the contents in an unlabeled file in an unprocessed collection.

The back of Moses’ invitation noted, “Informal Stage. 8 p.m. This card admitting one only, must be present at the door.” It was a party hosted by the Palette & Chisel Club of Chicago. By 1911, the Palette & Chisel Club had one hundred members; we have no idea how many were invited to the party.

The Palette & Chisel Club was known for its remarkable parties.  On June 5, 1921, the “Chicago Tribune” reported, “Some of the original entertainments of the club, given during the past years, are amusing to recall. “Il Janitore,” by George Ade, afterward became known as “The Sultan of Sulu.” At the time when newspapers were bringing influence to bear upon the Illinois Central to get them to electrify the roads into Chicago, the club produced a burlesque, ‘The Hog in Chicago’s Front Yard.” It might well be given again now. The electrification of the road is as much needed today as ever. ‘Carmine,” a take-off of the opera ‘Carmen,” was a marvelous production. ‘The Shredded Vast” was a huge comedy success. “Le Cabaret du Howard Pourii’ was another famous bit of humor and sarcasm” (page 79).

In 1906, the Palette & Chisel Club hosted Bohemian Night for Alphonse Mucha on the seventh floor of the Athenaeum Building Athenaeum Building. Before moving to their later quarters at 1012 N. Dearborn Ave., the club rented studio space in the Anthenaeum building on Van Buren between Michigan and Wabash Ave.

The May 18, 1912 event was at the new location – 59 E. Van Buren St.  “The Shredded Vast” was designated “an operatic neoteric.” Musical selections by Offenbach, Bizet, Gounod, Donizetti, Planquette and Flowtow accompanied the book by Gordon St. Clair.  The “Palette & Chisel Club Augmented Symphony Orchestra” included Emil Biorn, director, and Martin Baer, F. Tollakson, Max Gundlach, R. F. Ingerle, Max Boldt, Watkins Williams, Willie Marsh, W. J. McBride, and W. C. Kintz.

Scenery for the production was designed by Gus Baumann and executed by Watkins Williams, Gus Baumann and E. R. Burggraf. The costumes were designed by Baumann and “executed by wives & sweethearts.” Production notes included “Shoes by McBride. Beer by the gallon.”

The Synopsis of Scenes described “Scene 1 – sunset in wood in kingdom of Glum-Glum,” “Scene 2 –  Twilight in studio of Artneo Teric. Elapse of one month,” and “Scene 3 – Throne-room of King Rum- Dum. Next day.”

The cast of characters included:

Rum-Dum [King of Glum-Glum] – R. F. Ingerle

Princess Palala [his daughter] – Holger W. Jensen

Artneo Teric [a futurist painter] – Ernest P. Thurn

Lord Beno [Vice reformer to the king] – Theo Lely

Chorus [woodsmen, soldiers, ballet, lords and ladies of the Court] – J. E. Phillips, George Ruckstaetter, B. A. Kleboe, Theo Lely, J. J. Grant

A final note stated, “Post-Ursine Vibrations by Fred S. Bersch and Glen C. Sheffer.”

Recognizing many of the artists, when I look at the list of names I am astounded at the room full of talent.

To be continued…

In 1912, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “The Palette and Chisel Club honored me by giving me a big dinner and named me ‘Uncle Tom’ of the Club.” I have explored Moses’ Palette & Chisel Club activities in the past, but will recap today. The next few posts will examine club events and some members.

Founded in 1895, the Palette & Chisel Club was an association of artists and craftsmen for the purpose of work and study. The organization’s members were reported to be “all wage-workers, busy during the week with pencil, brush or chisel, doing work to please other people” (Inland Printer, 1896). But on Sunday mornings, they assembled for five hours to paint for themselves.

In 1906, Thomas G. Moses joined the Palette and Chisel Club in Chicago. Moses wrote, “I don’t know why, as I had so little time to give to pictures, but I live in hopes of doing something some day, that is what I have lived on for years, Hope, and how little we realize from our dreams of hope.” That same year, the Palette & Chisel Club sponsored “Bohemian Night” in honor of Alphonse Mucha, as Mucha was in town teaching at the Art Institute of Chicago that fall. The group was a tightknit community of strong personalities boasting incredible artistic talents.

In 1905, members of the Palette and Chisel Club established a primitive camp at Fox Lake, Illinois. The Palette and Chisel Club camp drew a variety of artists during the summer months, including Moses by 1906.  This scenic retreat was formed along the shores of Fox Lake, providing a haven far away from the bustle of studio work in Chicago. There were many Sosman & Landis employees who also became members of the Palette & Chisel Club, strengthening the bonds of friendship during off hours.

In the beginning, the camp was quite rustic. Of the primitive camping experience, Moses wrote, “June 1^st, I made my first trip to the Palette and Chisel Club camp at Fox Lake, Ill.  Helped to put up the tent.  A new experience for me, but I enjoyed it.  I slept well on a cot.  Made a few sketches.  A very interesting place.  I don’t like the cooking in the tent and there should be a floor in the tent.  I saw a great many improvements that could be made in the outfit and I started something very soon.” Moses soon fixed most of these issues, donating a “portable house” to the camp two years later. In 1908, Moses wrote, “I bought the portable house that we built years ago and at that time we received $300.00 for it.  I finally got it for $50.00, some bargain.  It cost $25.00 to remove it and we will put it up at Fox Lake in the spring.  It has been used in Forest Park all summer to show ‘The Day in the Alps.’ The next year Moses wrote, “As we had put up the portable house in Fox Lake, I was better contented to go up.  I gave the camp a portable kitchen and it was some class.  I felt sure I would manage to get a camp outfit worth while and the boys all fell in line with me.”

His statement, “…and the boys all fell in line with me” is something to note. It was a common occurrence both in and out of the paint studio for Moses to lead the pack.  His charisma, charm and personality facilitated not only business dealings, but also other social activities, Fox Lake being one of the instances where Moses took charge of an artistic group. In 1910, Moses wrote, “Fox Lake appealed to me all summer.  I went up as much as possible and made good use of my time.  How I wished in vain for time and money to spend all summer sketching.  I know I could do something worthwhile.” Regardless of his own opinion, Moses continued to make progress in the eyes of Palette & Chisel Club members.

Although late to the game, he was their beloved leader. Therefore, I have to consider Moses’ earning the designation of “Uncle Tom” in the Palette & Chisel Club in 1912. Was it intended as a compliment or a slight?  Was it simply an endearing term given by a bunch of white men who didn’t really understand what “Uncle Tom” signified? Were they simply thinking of Moses as the self-sacrificing figure who put others before himself? By 1913, Moses wrote, “The Palette and Chisel Club boys wanted me to give an exhibit at the club.  I always refused, claiming that I am not in the picture game, and paint pictures for pleasure only.  September 3^rd, a committee came to the house and insisted on going to the studio, I had over three hundred pictures in the studio; some very good but the other 275 were not as good, but the boys seemed to think I had at least 250 good ones, which was quite flattering.” He was in good company, with many members becoming nationally recognized artists over the years. These successful artists maintained close ties, suggesting that they admired and respected him.

Now in regard to the title of “Uncle Tom” for Moses…

“Uncle Tom’s Cabin” was still playing theaters throughout the United States in 1912. On April 26, 1912, there was such great interest in Harriet Beecher Stowe’s work and the subsequent theatrical interpretations that the “Quad City Times” included an article entitled, “The Writing of Uncle Tom,” going into depth about the author (page 4). On October 9, 1912, the “Muncie Evening Press” interviewed the “Educated Drug Clerk” about the play (page 8). This individual seems to have offered his view on various topics of the day. The article quoted the Educated Drug Clerk as saying, “It wouldn’t seem right for a theatrical season to go around without one or two ‘Uncle Tom’ shows visiting every town in the circuit…I suppose it is too early yet to say whether or not ‘Uncle Tom’ is to become a classic. The era of slavery has gone and seems far away to some of us. Yet there are thousands of people who remember the dark days. Another century, perhaps, will determine Uncle Tom’s real place in literature. Now I gather from critics that the true work is shown when it has the faculty of living and playing on emotions of men long after the period which produced it has passed. In other words, the classic does not owe its power to the thought of any particular epoch, but must be filled with teachings of real truth which will not change as the centuries roll on.” Of the novel’s characters, the article noted that Uncle Tom was “representative of down trodden humanity.” This again made me ponder the Palette & Chisel Club’s designation of Moses as their “Uncle Tom.”

I cannot read Moses’ entry about his new title without cringing. To look at the group of artists using the term makes it offensive. I cannot think of a single artist in the Palette & Chisel Club at the time that wasn’t white. I cannot think of a single scenic artist mentioned by Moses in his memoirs who wasn’t white, all of which causes me great unease; the same that I felt when I first saw an image of white people in black face makeup. My relatives arrived on the shores of America long after the Civil War ended, yet some of them were racist; some of them still are – and that is a horrifying truth to admit. It was a controversial topic that we discussed in my youth, one that was addressed after many family gatherings. I did not fully understand the extent of racism in my family until during and after the 2016 election. My parents had disagreed with many of the extended family’s views regarding people of color and fought back in various ways over the decades. I was taught that all people are equal. Period. No discussion. I greatly admire my parent s for that, especially my mother, the history teacher, who was very clear about America’s history with slavery and Jim Crowe laws.

Regardless, I am the product of white privilege in the United States and am horrified to witness the current, continued and blatant racial discrimination by our president and some leaders. I am ashamed to realize how many of my family, in-laws, friends, and colleagues continue to discriminate against others based on the color of their skin.

In regard to Harriet Beecher Stowe’s 1851 novel, which humanized the suffering of slavery, a cruel master beat Tom to death because he refused to betray the whereabouts of other escaped slaves. The novel and subsequent stage productions have been repeatedly analyzed over the decades, with varying nuances in each interpretation. However, I have to wonder how the title was intended when gifted to Thomas G. Moses in 1912. Today, Wikipedia notes, “the term ‘Uncle Tom’ was also used as a derogatory epithet for an exceedingly subservient person, particularly when that person is aware of their own lower-class status based on race. The use of the epithet is the result of later works derived from the original novel.”

Was the title “Uncle Tom” intended as a compliment or slight for Tom Moses in 1912? We will never know.

To be continued…