Drypigment.net

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 720 – A Trip to Oconomowoc, Wisconsin, 1909

Part 720: A Trip to Oconomowoc, Wisconsin, 1909

Thomas G. Moses visited Oconomowoc (coo-no-mo-wauk), Wisconsin, after visiting Ellenville, New York, during 1909. Moses wrote, “On my return I took a trip to Oconomowoc to see Mr. Kohl about some work. I enjoyed the trip for I had the pleasure of seeing not only his fine home but several others that were palaces. A beautiful place to live.”

Moses was referring to theatrical manager Charles E. Kohl (1855-1910). Kohl was a partner of the firm Kohl & Castle Amusement Co., with offices in the Majestic theatre buiding in Chicago. The firm was identified with the Western Vaudeville Managers’ association in the Orpheum Circuit, controlling the Haymarket Theatre, Chicago opera house, Majestic and Olympic theaters in Chicago, as well as operating a chain of vaudeville houses throughout the Midwest.

Postcard of a scene from Oconomowoc, Wisconsin.

Like many wealthy Chicagoans, the Kohls owned a lake home. In 1892, C. E. Kohl and his wife Caroline Lewis Kohl (1863-1950) built “Brier Cottage,” their 45-room summer home at Lac La Belle. It was situated between the Schufeldt and Dupee estates. Lac La Belle, a body of water that covers approximately 1154 acres, with a maximum depth of 45 feet. Of their residence, the “Chicago Tribune” reported, “Charles E. Kohl, who, although unassuming to a degree, is the most influential personage in American vaudeville, has one of the show places in Lac La Belle, Oconomowoc, a place which twenty years of liberal expenditure and hard work have developed from the virgin forest into an ideal summer home” (June 13, 1909, page 22).

The summer home built by he Kohl’s in 1892.

The region around Oconomowoc, Wisconsin, was originally inhabited by Potawatomi people, descendents of Woodland Indians known as the mound builders. The name Oconomowoc described “falling waters” in the area.

The falling waters by Oconomowoc, Wisconsin.

European immigrants settled the area during late 1820s and 1830s, and by 1837, New York native Charles Sheldon staked a homestead claim on the eastern shore of Fowler Lake. Soon afterwards, H.W. Blanchard did the same on the other side of the lake. Oconomowoc was not incorporated as a town, until 1844. Soon, Watertown Plank Road connected Oconomowoc to the nearby towns of Milwaukee, Waukesha, Pewaukee, and Watertown.

By 1853 the town had grown to include 250 residents with ten stores, three hotels, a gristmill, a sawmill and a school house. The first passenger train arrived from Milwaukee in 1854, becoming a stop on the Milwaukee and Watertown Railroad Company’s Milwaukee & Mississippi line. The population of Oconomowoc grew so rapidly that the town incorporated as a city in 1865. By the 1870s, Oconomowoc became known as a summer resort for wealthy Midwestern families, such as the Kohls. These seasonal residents began constructing lake homes throughout the area, escaping from larger metropolitan for short respites throughout the year.

By the early twentieth century, seasonal residences were owned by P. A. Valentine, George A Seaverns, W. Vernon Booth, Garrad Wiston, P. D. De Coster, A. J. Earling, Lawrence Fitch, as well as C. E. Kohl. In addition to enjoying the summer at their lake homes, many returned to the area to celebrate the Christmas and New Year’s holidays too (Chicago Tribune, 24 Dec. 1909, page 9).

1909 was a dramatic year for the Kohl family when Moses visited Ocononomowoc. The couple had been married for twenty-four years and had raised four children – Charles, John P., Caroline and Dorothy (Inter Ocean, 28 June 1909, page 5). Although no strangers to challenges of raising a family, they were surprised by a June event. Their youngest son, John P., secretly married the vaudeville actress Vinie Daly in Philadelphia.

Daly’s birth name was Elvira Delehanty. She was the daughter of well-known actress Lizzie Daly and had been on stage since she was 20 months old. She performed in theaters throughout the United States, Canada and Europe, many venues controlled by Kohl’s father (Chicago Tribune, 11 Sept, 1909, page 5).

John P.’s adventure began on June 23, 1909, when he left his Oconomowoc residence and headed east on a train to Philadelphia. After Daly’s matinee performance at Keith’s Theatre, the couple obtained a marriage license and were married by 7:30pm that evening. According to the newspapers, it was a very brief marriage. Only three months later, the marriage was annulled, as John P. was a minor and did not have his parents’ consent at the time (Chicago Tribune, Sept 11, 1909, page 5). The younger Kohl was 20 years old, with a bride five years his senior. The court case for annulment was covered by newspapers across the country. The “Harrisburg Star-Independent” reported, “After the older Mr. Kohl had testified his son’s lack of experience and poor judgement young Kohl told the court how he happened to marry the actrress.

‘I met her in Chicago while she was filling an engagement,’ testified Kohl. ‘Vinie asked me to marry her and not to tell my parents until I was of age.’

‘Did she ask you many times to marry her’ asked Attorney Levi Manner, who represented the vaudeville man. ‘Oh, yes, on many occassions, but I always refused until the last time,’ he replied.

Young Kohl then told of running away from Oconomowoc, Wis., where he had been spending the summer, and on meeting the actress at Keith’s theatre in Philadelphia, and of the subsequent marriage.

‘After we were married,’ he said, ‘we returned at once to the theatre where she played her part. I waited for her, and after the show I told me bride I was sorry for what I had done. I left her and took that first train back to Chicago and told my mother all about it.’

I have to wonder if this was the watered-down story for the court to ensure an annulment.

Sadly, the 45-room summer home no longer exists, as it was torn down in 1935. A combination of Caroline Kohl’s deteriorating health and the Great Depression were the major contributing factors at the time. In 2016, however, a lovely photo of the original home was listed online with some history tidbits for Geocaching. Here is the link: https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC6NJY8_oaht-1624-kohl-family?guid=8dbfe302-ac55-4e60-ab10-f2402127ce77.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 719 – Ellenville, New York, 1909

Part 719: Ellenville, New York, 1909

In 1909, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “July 10^th, Mama, Mary and myself started for Ellenville, N.Y. where we met all the family, except Rupert. We had a fine vacation, which I have written in detail in my “Ellenville sketching trip of 1909.” Unfortunately, Moses’ travelogues have yet to be located for reference.

The first time that Moses mentioned Ellenville in his typed memoirs, however, was during 1903. At the time he wrote, “I also found time to take the family to Ellenville, N.Y. I made quite a number of sketches.” In many cases, family outings for the Moses family coincided with prime sketching locations. This often provided Moses with an opportunity to capture local scenes and gather resource material for future painting projects in the studio.

The region surrounding Ellenville had been drawing artists for quite a while when Moses first ventured to the picturesque area. Ellenville is located about 90 miles northwest of New York City and about ninety miles southwest of Albany. One of the oldest public roads in the United States also runs through Ellenville, “sanctioned” by the King and Queen of Holland. It was originally used by the Leni-Lenape Indians who traveled between the Hudson and Delaware valleys, later becoming known as the Minisink Road, the Old Mine Road and Kings Hoghway. It has since lost any historical character and is now known as simply Route 209.

Ellenville is located in the Rondout Valley, at the eastern base of the Catskill Mountains and the western base of the Shawanguk Ridge. Sandburg Creek and Beer Kill intersect in Ellenville to form the Rondout Creek, that then flows north to join the Hudson River near Kingston. The area is currently within the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Center.

In examining pictures of the area and the history of the town, I uncovered a few interesting tidbits about the area, the most interesting in how the village received its name. When the village constructed its first post office in 1823, it was known as Fairchild City. Named after a prominent landowner, it was during a meeting to discuss potential names for the village that Ellen Snyder queried, “Why not name if after me?” After prolonged discussions and the inability to select any other name, the residents decided to use the proposed name of Ellenville.

Another fun fact about the area is that on August 21, 1931, Franklin D. Roosevelt announced his run for presidency in Ellenville. His keynote speech began, “my friends and neighbors of Ellenville.” Roosevelt then touched upon his family’s connection with Ulster County, the significance of state parks, the beauty of the Catskills, and the challenges of progress. For more information about this beautiful area and its history, visit: https://findellenville.com/find-yourself-in-ellenville-ny/ellenvilles-historical-facts-and-figures/

To be continued…

Travels of a Scenic Artists and Scholar – The Boston Scottish Rite’s LED Wall

The Boston Scottish Rite primarily uses an LED wall for the degree production backings. I had the opportunity to examine the effect on April 12 before my afternoon flight. My host went out of his way to take time from his full schedule to share both the building and his work.

LED wall at the Boston Scottish Rite next to a historic dye drop

The Boston Scottish Rite has only a few historic backdrops, ranging from the early to mid-twentieth century. The later versions are fairly crude traditions of standard themes, done in brilliant dye work. It really is an odd mix of painted elements. The theatre is located on the seventh floor of a building with architecture that is reminiscent of many Northern Masonic Jurisdiction Scottish Rite theaters, Gothic in feel.

The Boston Scottish Rite stage and LED wall.

I was anxious to see how well an LED wall worked in a historic venue. There can be many short-term benefits to embracing digital scenery before the system becomes obsolete and/or irreparable. Scene changes require no stage crew and the subject matter is limitless, with endless possibilities for backings during degree productions.

However, I recognized that the use of digital images in lieu of historic scenery could result in an overall loss of scenic illusion on the stage. Until I saw the LED wall in Boston, I was unsure as to the extent. There is increased realism for the backing and more flexibility of subject matter, but there is something missing from the stage aesthetic. It is as if the soul of the stage has disappeared, with the space being transformed into something entirely different.

There are a few things to consider when contemplating a switch from traditional painted scenery to digital imagery for Scottish Rite degree productions.

LED walls are fantastic for many things, but the technology is racing so fast that they become obsolete in a relatively short period of time. This nuance of technology is frequently not fully understood by those purchasing a new system. Often the Masonic clients have lived with their historic scenery and stage machinery for decades, and they expect a new system to last just as long. This is especially pertinent if a substantial amount of money is being spent on an entirely new system.

A parallel could be made with much older adults who consider the purchase of a computer as an investment, not a short-term appliance that will soon have to be replaced as technology continues to advance. The same can be said with motorized line sets, lighting systems, and any other digital systems; at some point they will need to be replaced as they will not last for an extended period of time. Many modern components for the stage with computer systems and software cannot last for decades, as technology races forward, thus making replacement parts often unavailable when the need for a repair occurs a few years down the road. At some point the technology will need to be repaired or replaced. As we experience with many other appliances in our home, it may not be possible to get the necessary replacement parts if our specific the model is no longer being produced as better versions are available. Does the client realize that their new technology has a proverbial shelf life and that the entire system will soon need to be replaced?

Regardless of the ease of use, or anticipated life expectancy of an LED wall, its mere presence is incongruous with the visual aesthetic established by historic costumes and properties. What made the traditional painted illusion so successful was that the selection of scenery, props and costumes where selected as a part of a unified visual whole; one intended to be illuminated in a very specific way. To overcome the brilliancy of the LED screen as a backing, I would be curious to see how bright the front light needs to be during degree productions.

A few digital images that the Boston Scottish is using for their LED wall is identical to that used by the Fort Worth Scottish Rite. The photographs originated from a scenery collection produced by Don Carlos Du Bois, representing the Great Western Stage Equipment Co. of Kansas City. The stage compositions are vibrant and very characteristic of the mid-twentieth century. As projections, there is a tendency for fading and a loss of detail. I again noticed this on the USITT Expo floor when looking at a rear projections screen placed next an actual backdrop. The dark areas weren’t as dark as they needed to be. There is a lack of overall contrast, and everything seems to be a just little too light. At the time, I considered how well a rear projection screen would work for degree productions, with performers being placed in front of so much light.

Now the digital images of historic backdrops on an LED wall are even brighter. The spacing between individual LED lights is based on the viewing distance. Just as scenic art painting techniques fall apart as the viewer nears the backdrop, so do individual LED lights that relay the overall image; the farther away the audience is, the greater spacing between the lights. This is why they work so great for rock concerts in auditoriums that seat thousands of people. At the Boston Scottish Rite, the LED wall reads best from the back row of the auditorium, not from the first few rows. It is almost too much technology for the relatively intimate space as you near the stage, let alone step onto the stage.

Now, let’s consider the overall experience of degree participants, after all, that is a major consideration when altering degree work practices. An LED wall creates an entirely different environment for the stage performer. Stepping onto stage in the midst of a fully lit historic scene is magical. You are encompassed by brilliant color and detail, becoming part of the scenic illusion. In the short time that I stood next to the LED wall in Boston, my eyes hurt. The brilliancy for the screen overpowered the entire stage and was very distracting.

A scene on the LED wall at the Boston Scottish Rite

The same can be said for the audience experience as you are watching degree work in front of an LED wall. There is a distinct light spill from the image on the screen and I would be curious to see how much front light on the performers is necessary. Just as dimly lit stages cause visual fatigue for the audience, so do brilliantly lit compositions, especially if you are ten feet way.

I am curious to see how long this system will last in Boston and hear about the Scottish Rite degree participants’ experiences.

To be continued…

Travels of a Scenic Artists and Scholar: The Fifth Annual American Fraternalism Event at Boston University, April 10, 2019

Last summer, William D. Moore invited me to be the guest speaker at fifth annual American Fraternalism event at Boston University during spring 2019. Will is the Director of the American & New England Studies Program and an Associate Professor of Material Culture. Two of his past publications include “Masonic Temples: Freemasonry, Ritual Architecture, and Masculine Archetypes” (University of Tennessee Press, 2006) and “Secret Societies in America: Foundational Studies of Fraternalism,” co-authored with Mark Tabbert (Cornerstone Book Publishers, 2011). Will had been following my blog for some time, purchased “The Santa Fe Scottish Rite Temple: Freemasonry, Architecture and Theatre” book, and was intrigued with my current research posted to my blog.

Wendy Waszut-Barrett and William D. Moore after the 2019 American Fraternalism event at Boston University.

Several incidents shaped my topic, “A Masonic Legacy: Bestor G. Brown and Brown’s Special system,” and other articles that I was working on at the time.

Poster for the fifth American Fraternalism event at Boston University, 2019

Between November 2018 and February 2019, I wrote three articles: “Setting the Stage” (Theatre Historical Society of America’s fourth quarter issue of “Marquee”); “Brown’s Special System for Scottish Rite Theaters in North America” (TheatreInitiative Museum Berlin’s “Die Vierte Wand 009); and “Brown’s Special System: A Masonic Legacy,” (Scottish Rite Research Society’s spring newsletter “The Plumbline).” At the same time, I was still writing my blog and starting to make contact with the Valley of Portland in regard to Brown’s special system; they have the earliest example as originally installed in 1903, being manufactured in 1902. Then toss in work projects, conferences, family, the holidays, and other obligations; busy time at our house.

In regard to Boston, I was most excited to see Will. We first met during the planning stage for Lance Brockman’s touring museum exhibit, “Theatre of the Fraternity: Staging the Ritual Space of Freemasonry, 1896-1929.” The last time I saw Will and his wife was the Weisman Museum in 1996 when the exhibit opened. By the way, Lance’s catalogue still is available for sale on Amazon, here is the link: https://www.amazon.com/Theatre-Fraternity-Scottish-Freemasonry-1896-1929/dp/0878059474

I arrived in Boston on Tuesday, April 9, and spent a lovely afternoon chatting with Will about numerous fraternal subjects. We continued the conversation over dinner, adding his wife Charlotte to the mix. What a delightful arrival and evening spent with two extremely fun people. My presentation was not until 7:30PM the next day, so I was able to spend some time relaxing and writing in Brookline, New York. I am currently working on my next book about Sosman & Landis studio, so I treasure anytime that is devoid of distractions. Before my presentation, there was a group of us that went out to dinner, including friend and colleague Diane Fargo who teaches scene painting at BU; she is a remarkable artist in her own right.

Wendy Waszut-Barrett presenting at the fifth annual American Fraternalism event at Boston University

My presentation went extremely well, lasting 45 minutes with a 15-minute Q&A that followed. In attendance BU staff and students, as well as visiting Masons from Boston University Lodge, Harvard Lodge, the Lodge of St. Andrew and the Boston Scottish Rite. That evening, I was invited to tour the Scottish Rite stage before I left town the next day. On April 12, I visited the Boston Scottish Rite and the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts. I knew that there would very little scenery, as the hemp system was replaced and an LED wall added to the mix. I was very curious to see how well new technology replaced historic scenery.

The Grand Lodge of Massachusetts and the Boston Scottish Rite are in the same building.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 718 – The Scottish Rite in Memphis, Tennessee, 1909

Part 718: The Scottish Rite in Memphis, Tennessee, 1909

In 1909, Thomas G. Moses recorded that Sosman & Landis produced a scenery collection for the Scottish Rite in Memphis, Tennessee. The scenery is stunning, and some of the best that the studio produced during this period.

The first reunion in the Memphis Scottish Rite building was held from November 15-19, 1909. The “Dedicatory Class” purchased a grandfather clock as a commemorative gift for the building; it is still in use today. I learned about the clock while watching a 41-minute video posted to YouTube by the Memphis Scottish Rite. There have been 7,249 views and it certainly depicts local character.

The YouTube video is a pleasant peak inside the building and includes interviews with General Secretary, Glen Pitts; Director of the Work, Jerry Hanson; Organist, Mark Henderson; and Personal Representative, Joe Harrison. The credits note the producer that the producer is Gerald Leek and the host is James McCraw. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNm6G2OsDNA

Unfortunately, the host of the video incorrectly credited the scenery production to local students. Specifically, he explained, “a lot of art students came in and painted every single one of the 128 backdrops.” This is not unusual, as when I visited the Salina Scottish Rite, those in charge suggested a similar scenario, except the students came from a fine art college in the east. In many cases, the manufacture of Scottish Rite scenery is attributed to a group of wunderkind, and not experienced scenic artists associated with a scenic studio, such as Sosman & Landis.

Later, while standing in the Memphis Scottish Rite library, our host explains that he is the Masonic historian for the Valley. This bit of information caused my ears to perk up and reconsider his comments about the history of the scenery. Now, it is obvious that this is a well-meaning individual; one who is really trying to do his best to preserve and share Masonic history. However, this entire scenario is more common than one might think, and once again I contemplate my response.

Do I say anything at all? It is seldom beneficial for me to contact a Valley and explain that their perceived history about the stage and scenery is not reflective of the actual facts. Fortunately, over the years I have fine-tuned my approach, starting most conversations with, “That’s very interesting, however, I have some additional information that might help you tell your story…”

In 1980, Dr. John Rothgeb from the University of Texas (Austin) mailed a letter to the Memphis Scottish Rite, General Secretary G. E. Rothrock, inquiring about the scenery. Rothrock responded, “In searching back thru the minutes of these Bodies, I find that the scenery was purchased from M. C. Lilley, who in 1909 was located in Columbus, Ohio.” That means, M.C. Lilley subcontracted the work to Sosman & Landis. Rothrock further noted that the present building was contracted in 1906 and the scenery was purchased in 1909, adding, “There was a controversy and a lot of correspondence was exchanged between the supplier and the Memphis Bodies.” Previously in the letter, Rothrock explained that only the minutes of the Board Meeting pertaining to the purchase of the scenery were left and that all other correspondence had been “destroyed.” There was no note as to when, or how, the records were destroyed. Fire? So, between 1980 and today knowledge pertaining to the purchase of scenery from M. C. Lilley & Co. was replaced with the scenery being painted by local students.

At what point was the actual history lost? How does the delivery of scenery from a major scenic supplier become attributed to local students? If this major piece of information is wrong, what other aspects of Memphis’ Scottish Rite history have been forgotten?

My research suggests that Scottish Rite history in many Valleys began to disappear after WWII. It started with the elimination of paid Scottish Rite historians and archivists, as the jobs were no longer perceived as necessary or valuable. In addition to the elimination to many of the stewards of Scottish Rite history, the purchase of new acquisitions ceases. Simultaneously, the careful inventory of Masonic libraries and museums are suspended in many areas. Why?

Then consider that as Scottish Rite bodies begin to leave their historic building, the institutional knowledge is lost and discredited, sometimes actively erased. I wonder if the intentional burying of history and cultural significance of artifacts had anything to do with justifying the move? This is still happening across the country today as historic buildings are sold and the membership liquidates the contents of their buildings.

I repeatedly read about Valleys citing declining membership and funds as the sole reasons for the move. What is almost never addressed, however, are the intentions for the future, especially that of their material culture and artifacts. If there is no perceived value, legacy or history attached to the artifacts, it makes their abandonment easier.

It will be easy to walk away from a bunch of backings created by student and harder to walk away from large-scale artworks created by nationally recognized fine artists.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 717 – Walter C. Hartson (1866-1946 )

Part 717: Walter C. Hartson (1866-1946 )

In 1909, Thomas G. Moses wrote “Walter Hartson joined our force at 20^th Street in August and seemed to be satisfied with conditions.” That year same year, the “Chicago Tribune” reported, “Walter C. Hartson, of New York, N.Y., and Jane Mahon Stanley of Detroit, Mich,” exhibited some of their at the picture galleries of Marshall Field & Company in Chicago (29 March 1909, page 6). Hartson had sporadically worked for Moses over the years and the two remained friends for the decades to follow. In 1902, Hartson worked for Moses as part of the Moses & Hamilton staff in their annex studio at the 14^th Street Theatre in New York. While working for Moses that year, Hartson also won the Gold Medal of the American Art Society. Two years later he won the First Landscape Prize in the Osborne competition. By 1922, Moses would reflect, “I am drifting back to the days when some of the present day successful artists were working for me… As I look backward over the names of the successful ones, I wonder what I would have done had I been gifted with the same amount of talent.”

Walter C. Hartson watercolor currently for sale on Ebay

Oil painting by Walter C. Hartson recently listed online

Hartson was born in Wyoming, Iowa, on Oct. 27, 1866. He attended the Art Institute in Chicago, Illinois, and then continued his artistic studies in Holland, Belgium, France and England. Of his fine art, the “Chicago Tribune” described Hartson’s paintings as being “light and lively in color and effect” (Chicago Tribune, 26 June 1898, Page 33). Hartson was a member of the Chicago Society of Artists, the Salmagundi Club of New York, the Kit Kat club of New York, the New York Water Color club, and the Allied Artists of Ameirca (Poughkeepsie Journal, 4 January 1946, page 8). By the age of twenty-nine, Hartson was winning awards for his work.

In 1895, Hartson won the bronze medal at the Atlanta Exposition. By 1898 Hartson received an award for his “Fields of September” at the seventy-third annual exhibition of the National Academy of Design (Chicago Tribune, 26 March, 1898, page 1); the Third Hallgarten Prize. By 1900, Hartson exhibited in a watercolor exhibition at the Chicago Art Institute. The Chicago “Inter Ocean” commented on two of Hartson’s paintings in 1898: “Of course, the best may not have been in sight, but some signed by Walter C. Hartson, arrested me. It is in tone and treatment much like a McIlhenny that stood not far away. Both these are in treatment between Corot and George Inness, Sr., although not so rich in color as the later. They lay in color, and then wash it down until everything is blurred, enveloped, atmospheric and gray. Still there is sufficient firmness and purpose, good modeling and no muddiness. Only an experienced painter can do this difficult thing.”

Three months later during June1895, Hartson was again noted in the “Chicago Tribune,” for two of his paintings: “Two cleverly painted water-colors of Dutch scenes by Walter C. Hartson, a former Chicago artist are shown at Thayer & Chandler’s. Both are light and lively in color and effect, and consequently more interesting than much of his more serious work, in which he inclined to blackness and heaviness” (June 26, 1898, page 33). It was is his ability to capture light and atmospheric effects that translated so well to Hartson’s stage work. He continued to gain ground in the field of American fine art and became associated with a new movement. It is a 1913 article that places Hartson within this context of a shifting aesthetic.

On April 1, 1913, “The Brooklyn Daily Eagle” reported,“The remarkable advance that has been made in American art within the last few years is almost incomprehensible to the average layman, and something of a surprise as well as gratification to the student and connoisseur. Appreciation has kept pace with development. A few weeks ago a George Inness brought $24,000 at public sale. A few years ago this would have seemed almost incredible. The fact is however, that the brush work of “our men of America” has reached a degree of excellence that places many of them on the same plane with leading artists abroad in artistic merit, and the time appears to be not far distant when they wil rival the modern European painter in price getting. A real comprehensive school of art is being developed here – a definite, distinctive, ambitiously independent class of work which breaking away from the traditions of old, has mingled the best thought of the Old World with the ideas of the New – bringing an atmosphere unmistakenly American. We are showing some of the better work of Walter C. Hartson to illustrate the young school as demonstrated by one of the men rapidly coming to the fore with his exquisite color work.”

Hartson was associated with fellow landscape artists G. Glen Newell, Harry Franklin Waltman, and Arthur J.E. Powell. All four men were born in small rural towns, but sought their art careers in nearby metropolitan areas. Hartson, Waltman, and Newell studied extensively in Europe and each independently found their way to the art scene of New York. All three were accepted to the Salmagundi Club. Moses had also joined the club under the sponsorship of R. M. Shurtless when he lived in New York from 1900-1904.

Newell, Waltman and Hartson left the city about the same time to seek solace in the Dover Plains, each establishing a studio in the picturesque region. Hartman relocated around 1917 and worked from his studio in Wassaic, New York, following Newell with Waltman who slightly proceeded him. Later, Powell joined the trio. It was the rolling hills of the Harlem Valley that kept the four men occupied (Poughkeepsie Journal, 21 June 1953, page 6A).The artists captured scenes of Dutchess County and painted the area with great affection. Each artist became a member of the Duchess County Art Association. In 1977, a third exhibit of the four artists’ works was exhibited at the Thomas Barrett House. The local newspaper included a lovely article about the exhibit entitled, “Once Important, They’re Forgotten.” The author of the article commented, “They were very integrated with their community…Their paintings still hang in the libraries, in school, the bank. You get a very definite sense of place with these paintings. It is definitely the Harlem Valley” (Poughkeepsie Journal, 25 Feb. 1977, page 3). The work of the four continues to be part of the community’s heritage elsewhere too, as they also painted murals in a number of local churches.

Although I have not tracked all three in terms of theatrical work yet, Powell painted a decorative panel for the first scenic artists ball held in Chicago in 1927.

Of Walter Hartson, he died in 1946 at the age of 79.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 716 – Higgins and Puthuff

Part 716: Higgins and Puthuff

Victor Higgins, A.N.A. (1884-1949) and Hans Duvall Puthuff (1875-1972) created a unique work of art for Sosman & Landis shop foreman, Charles E. Boyer during the early twentieth century.

Thomas G. Moses mentioned Boyer’s departure from Sosman & Landis in 1909. Four years earlier, he mentioned Higgins’ first departure from the scenic studio. In 1905, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Victor Higgins, one of our promising young men, quit to take up picture painting and started with a strong determination to win, and I think he will.” He did succeed, yet returned to paint theatrical scenery, time and time again. Moses records one of the returns in 1909.

Higgins, was a close friend of Thomas G. Moses, remaining close until Moses’ death in 1934. Higgins was born in Shelbyville, Indiana, leaving home and entering the Chicago Art Institute at the age of fifteen. It was during his time in Chicago that Higgins also began painting for the theatre. Higgins worked at Sosman & Landis alongside well-known artists such as Art Oberbeck, Fred Scott, Edgar Payne, Ansel Cook,Walter C. Hartson, William Nutzhorn, David Austin Strong, and Hans Puthuff. Higgins also worked for New York Studios, the eastern affiliate of Sosman & Landis. In New York, he painted with William Smart, Art Rider, and Al Dutheridge. While in New York, he also studied with Robert Henri, a leading figure of the Ashcan school of art before heading to Europe for further artistic instruction in Paris and Munich.

While traveling abroad, he sent Moses several postcards at the studio. By 1909, however, Higgins briefly returned to work for Sosman & Landis, decorating the interior for the American Music Hall in Chicago. In 1912 Higgins was still spending significant time in Chicago, Higgins exhibited artwork with the Palette & Chisel Club, earning national recognition and the Gold Medal in 1913. Other artistic awards received by Higgins included the Municipal Art League (1915), the Logan Medal of the Art Institute of Chicago (1917), and the first Altman prize for the National Academy of Design (1918). His work eventually became part of permanent collections of the Art Institute in Chicago, the Corcoran Gallery in Washington, D.C., and the Los Angeles museum.

I am intrigued that Higgins, after all his fine art studies with various masters in Chicago, New York, Paris and Munich returned to periodically paint at Sosman & Landis. It says a lot about the camaraderie, especially in light of his traveling to California with fellow scenic artist for a sketching trip and their gifting a painting to the shop foreman.

Hanson Duvall Puthuff, Higgins’ co-worker and traveling companion, is nationally recognized for his paintings of Southern California deserts. Puthuff was considered as a member of the eucalyptus school of California landscape painters. Puthuff was a co-founder of the California Art Club and the Laguna Beach Art Association. An interesting side note is that Moses also belonged to the Laguna Beach Art Association.

Puthuff was born to Alonzo Augustus Duvall and Mary Anne Lee in 1875. At the age of only two years old, Puthuff’s birth mother died and he was passed into the care of a close family friend – Elizabeth Stadley Puthuff. Elizabeth was a seamstress and young Civil War widow who became surrogate to the young child. He remained in her care until 1889 when he moved to Chicago to study at the Art Institute of Chicago. While in the Midwest he worked in Peoria, Illinois, painting murals in the city hall and local churches, and later moving to Denver where he worked in a variety of capacities, including that of a sign painter. This trip west continued, and Puthuff was soon working in California periodically. His work in Los Angeles included a variety of projects, such as billboard painting for the Wilshire Advertising Firm. His later focus of artistic study became the La Crescenta area around his home, the Sierras, and Arizona. It is noted that Puthuff received his first solo exhibition in 1904, yet continued to return to the scenic studio and paint.

Puthuff won awards in 1909 from the Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition, the same year that he worked with Higgins at Soman & Landis. He was also awarded a bronze medal at the Paris Salon in 1914. By 1915 he received two silver medals from the Panarama-California Exposition. Puthuffs works are now part of collections in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Laguna Art Museum, Laguna Art Museum, and Bowers Museum, as well as being catalogued in the Smithsonian American Art inventory. In 1926, Puthuff devoted himself to easel art, dying in Corona del Mar on May 12, 1972.

There is something to be said about artists who willingly bridged the scenic art and fine art worlds, keeping one foot in each studio. Did both Higgins and Puthuff only return to the scenic studio for a paycheck, or was it something more? Possibly to share the camaraderie of his fellow artists, and working on a communal project. There is something to be said about collaboration and a combined group effort; the joking and laughter of working with and near your fellow artists. Fine art is fulfilling, but often a solitary endeavor. Painting alongside others is an entirely different experience. It is the chatter, as well as the sharing of your soul. Talking about families, or other issues at hand forms that common bond, and possibly life-long friendships.

It is that wonderful feeling of being a creator within a community, just like a musician who plays in a band or orchestra. As Moses suggests in his memoirs, it was always more than studio work – they were a family.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 715- Charles E. Boyer, Sosman & Landis Shop Foreman

Part 715: Charles E. Boyer, Sosman & Landis Shop Foreman

In 1909, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “After twenty years of good service, Charles Boyer, our foreman, quit us. We all regretted his going. Watt Williams came into the studio and worked as my assistant. Pretty good, but very careless.”

Moses was referring to the loss of Charles E. Boyer (1865-1935).

I have uncovered little about Boyer, but his name popped up in an interesting article that touches on another aspect of scenic studio life – the scenic artists’ sketching trips. Previously I have explored the sketching trips taken by Moses and other Sosman & Landis artists to gather information for scenery compositions and improve their skill.

A sketching trip taken by two Sosman & Landis artists was recorded in an article published in the La Cross Sunday Tribune on September 23, 1956 (page 13). The article provided the artistic provenance for quite an interesting oil painting.

The picture was a wedding present, given the Rev. and Mrs. Gustave Edwin Anderson, of 902 Avon St., as a wedding gift in 1921. The painting was a composite that combined two oil paintings, given by the bride’s father, Charles E. Boyer, noted as the “foreman of a studio in Chicago.” For me, this verified that it was the same individual that Moses mentioned in his diary, especially since the artists were noted as working for “Sosman-Landis Studio.” Boyer had received it as a gift from two young artists, H. Putoff and Victor Higgins, whom he befriended. This would be Hans Duvall Puthoff and Victor Higgins, who would later each become week known as nationally acclaimed fine artists.

Here is the article:

“Rev. And Mrs. Anderson Own Unusual Painting

Young Artists Unaware They Painted Twins

Some paintings are more than works of art; they are stories told in oils. The story of such an oil painting dates back to approximately to the summer of 1913 when two young artists, H. Puthuff and Victor Higgins began their career at Sosman-Landis Scenic Studio in Chicago.

Vacation had come and the two boys went out to California to visit one of their mothers. On leaving Chicago they promised the foreman, Charles E. Boyer, that each one of them would bring back and oil painting for him. Their vacation was a series of busy, happy days of painting. Soon the last days came and will them the question of what painting they were going to give the boss.

The mother suggested the twin pictures, but said, “We have no twin pictures. We have always worked separately and never conferred about our work.”

“Oh yes you have, boys. I’ll pick them out first. She did. Unknowingly each of the boys had painted different halves of the same foothill with canyon and Point Loma near San Diego, in the background. When placed together the sky matched perfectly and so did the contours of the hills, canyon and wheat field, although the wind had blown the grain in different circles because the boys had painted different days. And a tree in the foreground, with its slight irregularities, show signs of two different artists. Together the oils make a perfect whole.

Painting, with half by Victor Higgins and half by Hans D. Puthoff

Both men regretted giving their halves, but finally conceded that giving it to the boss was the best solution.

Although the date of 1913 does not agree with Moses’ entry, Boyer and Higgins did work at Sosman & Landis in 1909, the same year as Boyer’s departure. Moses wrote, “In 1909, Victor Higgins also returned to work at Sosman & Landis, completing the interior of the American Music Hall.”

Boyer died at the age of seventy in Chicago. His last residence was at 3512 Le Moyne street and was survived by his wife Retta, son Clermont daughter, Mrs. Ruth Boyer Anderson, and three grandchildren (Chicago Tribune, 26 June 1935, page 23).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 714 – The State of Scottish Rite Scenery at Sosman & Landis in 1909

Part 714: The State of Scottish Rite Scenery at Sosman & Landis in 1909

I return to the entries in Thomas Moses’ typed manuscript during the 1909. Over the course of the past three-month, almost 100 posts, I have rambled down side roads that provided insight into historical scenic art, stage lighting, counterweight systems, and the evolution of Masonic scenery. For quite a while, I focused on theatre installations secured by E. A. Armstrong Manufacturing Co. of Chicago and M. C. Lilley & Co. of Columbus, and subcontracted to Sosman & Landis under the guidance of Bestor G. Brown. I am trying to tie up loose ends that uncover interesting historical tidbits that never quite made it into the theatre history textbooks.

Moses returns to the Sosman & Landis main studio at the beginning of 1909, as he had been traveling quite extensively throughout all of 1908, although one could say this has remained his standard mode of operation since starting with the company in 1880. Moses explained the cause for his return to the main studio instead of the annex studio, writing, “Sosman seemed to think I was needed there more than at 20^th Street. Pausback took charge of the 20^th Street studio.”

Business was booming, and Sosman & Landis increased their forces. Of staffing at the two studios, Moses wrote, “We have quite a force now at Clinton Street. We have forty-eight on the payroll, which includes the sewing girls and foremen. At 20^th Street we have an average of twelve. I think we should turn out some work and we do. It is often a puzzle to me where it all goes, but the Masonic work requires a lot of time, and there is an average of eighty drops in each order so it makes plenty of work and is very interesting. The artists never grumble when they get it to do.”

Up to 1909, Sosman & Landis had delivered at least twenty-six Scottish Rite collections. In some cases more than one collection was delivered to the same location in less than a decade. The ones that I have verified include:

Chicago, Illinois (first, second and third installations)

Little Rock, Arkansas (first, second and third installations)

Oakland, California

Wichita, Kansas (first and second installations)

Guthrie, Oklahoma

Fargo, North Dakota

Salina, Kansas (first and second installations)

McAlester, Oklahoma (first and second installations)

Portland, Oregon

Duluth, Minnesota

Fort Scott, Kansas

Topeka, Kansas

Detroit. Michigan

San Francisco, California (first and second installations)

Fort Wayne, Indiana

Salt Lake City, Utah

Dubuque, Iowa

Yankton, South Dakota

Clarksburg, West Virginia

Wheeling, West Virginia

In 1909, I have verified that Sosman & Landis produced five Scottish Rite scenery collections: Dallas, TX, San Francisco, CA (second collection), Cleveland, OH, Kanas City, MO, Atlanta, GA, and Winona, MN. Even using Moses’ 1909 formula that Masonic installations averaged 80 drops per order, this would be 400 Masonic drops over the course of 365 days, not including the flats and other properties that would accompany the scenery collections.

According to scenic artist John Hanny who began with the studio in 1906, Masonic work only made up 24-30% of the studio’s entire output. This was also during the same time that Sosman & Landis had started creating scenery for the Ringling Brothers’ grand spectacles too.

We can therefore conservatively estimate that Sosman & Landis artists produced approximately 1200 drops during 1909. The output could have been more, but this likely means that the studio was producing approximately four drops every day of the week. Fortunately, they had a staff of forty-eight on payroll in the main studio and twelve in the annex to help with demand.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 713 – The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting, 1902

The following is the third in a series of posts pertaining to the article “The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting,” published in “Britain at Work. A Pictorial Description of Our National Industries” by W. Wheeler, during 1902. Here is the final of three posts:

“When a manager, sometimes with help from the author, has roughly indicated the kind of scene he requires, the scene- painter makes a sketch, and if that is approved he proceeds to construct of cardboard a complete model, on a scale, say, of half an inch to the foot. It is here that the resourcefulness and inventiveness of the scene-painter are able to make themselves felt. The model shows every thing, down to the smallest detail — not only the landscape, but door and windows, those which have to open in the actual scene being made ” practicable ” in the model.

Image from “The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting,” published in “Britain at Work. A Pictorial Description of Our National Industries” by W. Wheeler in 1902.

“Wings “and “top-cloths” [borders] are also shown, and even the pulley and ropes which will be used in the adjustment of the scene are indicated. This part of the work, as may be supposed, calls for abundant patience, but its importance is manifest, and no scene-painter begrudges the time he has to spend upon his model, even when he knows that he will have to toil early and late to get the work finished by the stipulated time.

The model, when at last it is completed, is submitted to the manager’s consideration. It may be that he or the author desires some alteration, generally an in considerable one. When the modification has been made, the model is handed over to the master carpenter, who constructs the framework which is to receive the canvas. Having been affixed to the frame, the canvas is prepared by the painter’s labourers, whose business also it is to mix the colours. These are ground in water, by means of such a machine as is figured in one of our illustrations. Now the artist draws the design in chalk or char coal, and then the colours are filled in, always, as I have said, with due regard to the artificial conditions under which the picture has to be viewed, certain colours, therefore, which appear very differently in artificial light as compared with natural light, being avoided al together, or modified, as the case may be.

That scene-painting, like most other modes of earning one’s daily bread, is not without drawbacks, I am not prepared to assert. Strange indeed would it be if this were not so. The work, as the reader will know for himself, has a plentiful lack of regularity, and while both master painters and assistants often have to toil under heavy pressure to get their scenes ready by the eventful night, the assistants, at any rate, sometimes have periods of enforced leisure.

The attractions of the vocation, however, to those to whom the work itself is congenial, far outweigh this disadvantage. If the practitioner of the art is clever and resourceful, if he can not only wield the brush swiftly and deftly, but is also facile in inventing a scene from the manager’s brief hints, which is a much rarer gift, he in no long time may rise to distinction, besides being liberally rewarded in a pecuniary sense for his industry and skill”.

To be continued…