Chemical Paintings – Drypigment.net

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 868: The John Robinson’s Circus “King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba,”

In 1914 Sosman & Landis created scenery for the Ringling Bros. grand circus spectacle “Solomon and the Queen of Sheba.” Over a decade earlier, the John Robinson circus also included “King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba” at a circus spectacle. It provided a rich and popular subject for a variety of nineteenth-century and twentieth century entertainment venues.

King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba circus spectacle advertised in the “Wichita Beacon,” 18 Aug 1900, page 5.

John F. Robinson and his circus spectacle “King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba” from the “Knoxville Sentinel,” Oct 15, 1903.

The King Solomon story was also staged for Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry degree productions at this time. Masonic designs included a variety of settings from King Solomon’s reign, including the Temple, Sanctum Sanctorum, his private apartments, audience chambers, and the throne room. The story of the construction of King Solomon’s Temple was a subject dramatically presented in both Blue Lodge rooms and on Scottish Rite stages as part of their ceremonials. The construction of the Temple and the assassination of its chief architect Hiram, are a prominent topic in Masonic degree work. This story dramatically presented in lodge rooms was theatrically staged for Scottish Rite degree work. Never exclusive to the Fraternity, the reign of King Solomon was a popular subject for a variety of visual spectacles throughout the nineteenth century.

King Solomon degree setting for Scottish Rite degree work by Sosman & Landis Scene Painting Studio, ca. 1904.

In past posts, I have covered the subject of King Solomon on both public and private stages, including two 1840s touring show that featured “Chemical Paintings,” also known as “Magic Pictures.” These were small painted backdrops that transitioned from day to night as the composition was alternatively lit from both the front and back (see past installment #320). Newspapers at the time reported, “by modifying the light upon the picture, exhibits two entirely distinct representations upon the same canvas” (The Times-Picayune, 20 Dec. 1842, page 3). The “Inauguration of Solomon’s Temple” was one of four scenes that toured with the show.

Here is the 1842 description of “The Inauguration of Solomon’s Temple” as published in “The Times-Picayune:”

“This painting represents the magnificent Temple of Solomon, son of David, which he caused to be erected in Jerusalem. Seen in the daytime, it exhibits to the spectacular the richness and elegance of its exterior architecture. The same Painting soon after passes through all the modifications of light: then night comes on, (effects obtained by the decomposition of light, a new process of painting invented by Daguerre,) the Temple appears illuminated interiorly by degrees, reflecting a bright light exteriorly, which discovers a great multitude of people flocking to adore the Ark of the Covenant, which the High Priest has deposited in the Tabernacle” (New Orleans, December 29, 1842, page 3).

Any Mason who attended the 1842 exhibit might leave full of ideas that could make the degree work in my small lodge room better. The scenic effects exhibited at the end of a darkened room suggested the possibilities for dramatic effects during degree work. By the 1850s, the first Scottish Rite stages began to appear, with painted settings and costumed figures under stage lights. Fast-forward a few decades.

In 1891, a King Solomon spectacle was a feature for the Piedmont Exposition in Atlanta, with nightly performances from Tuesday until Saturday (Atlanta Constitution, 19 Oct 1891, page 6). Although met with some controversy from the conservative Christian faction of the time, a series of rebuttals supported the productions. It was a popular production. By 1899, the King Solomon story was picked up by the John Robinson Circus.

Newspapers in 1900 announced “a magnificence of a scenic spectacle of Solomon and Queen of Sheba” produced by the John Robinson Circus (Marshall County Independent, Plymouth, Indiana, 25 May 1900, page 8). It was one of ten big shows that toured with his circus Advertised as the oldest circus on the road in 1824; by 1900 the third generation of John Robinson descendants advertised it as the Robinson Show (Fort Scott Weekly, 9 Aug. 1900, page 8). The John Robinson Circus was one of the oldest running family circuses in the United States. The four generations that managed the circus were John Robinson I (1807 – 1888), John F. Robinson II (1843 – 1921), John G. Robinson III (1872 – 1935) and John G. Robinson IV (1893 – 1954). Here is a link to the circus’ history as it is quite fascinating: http://www.circusesandsideshows.com/circuses/johnrobinsoncircus.html

Three of the four Robinsons who would run the Robinson Circus.

John Robinson Circus advertisements promised, “Nothing Old But the Name” and the “Wichita Daily Eagle” reported, “The most interesting feature in the performance that the Robinson show has is the spectacular production of King Solomon, which was especially beautiful under the dazzling lights in the evening. This part of the show is gorgeously staged and in effect if like the great spectacle production in America of 1893. Triumphal marches, to the music of trumpets, and an acceptionally [sic.] good band, fifty or more girls attired in oriental costume, a hundred on horses representing various clans and allies, correctly costumes true to history, and later ballet and dancers, the story in pantomime of the judgment of King Solomon on the parable of the babe claimed by two women, and closing with the visit of the queen of Sheba, were all produced in magnificent manner. The regular circus performance which followed contained some old features always seen, but it also contained many new features and original idea which makes the show more interesting than the simple old fashioned circus” (Wichita Beacon, 18 Aug. 1900, page 5).

Advertisement for the John Robinson’s circus “King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba,” form From the “Ottawa Herald,” 5 Aug. 1900, page 5.

In 1900, Robinsons Circus advertisements noted that the production included 1,000 men and women, 500 horses, elephants, camels and 100 ballet dancers, transported across the country in several trains of cars. Furthermore, $2,000,000 was purportedly invested in the show. There were “20,000 seats for 20,000 people under an absolutely water-proof canvas,” “40 camels hitched to a $20,000 Golden Chariot,” and “Forty Soul Stirring, Fearless, Madly Ridden Hippodrome Races, Forty” (Wichita Beacon, 18 Aug. 1900, page 5).

John Robinson Circus advertisement from the “Kingman Journal,” 10 Aug. 1900, page 6

By 1902, the “Knoxville Sentinel” advertised the Robinson Circus, reporting, “The Bible contains within its covers no pages so attractive in interest, so impressive in description, so reverential and so expressive of divine devotion, so rand in developments, as those which relate to King Solomon and his reign. It was a felicitous thought, then of the celebrated artist, John Rettig, that led him to contemplate the reign of Solomon as the subject for a spectacle, and to select that period of Solomon’s administration when the king is visited by the Queen of Sheba, as the theme for his grand and all overshadowing masterpiece of vast spectacular presentations (15 Oct. 1902, page 2). A year later, the “Courier Journal” added, “It was a wise thought of the celebrated artist John Rettig, that led him to take the reign of Solomon as the subject for a spectacle” (23 April 1903, page 4). The Robinson Circus show was designed by Cincinnati scenic artist John Rettig and directed by Charles Constantine. Rettig (1858-1932) was a friend of Thomas G. Moses and the two traveled in the same circles.

John Rettig, scenic artist and design for the John Robinson Circus spectacle, “King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba.” From his obituary notice, May 2, 1932, page 2.

“The Oswego Independent” published, “The ‘Queen of Sheba’ was a sight to behold, Arrayed in circus tinsel, with cheap finery and frippery, supposed to represent the original in her journey to view the wonders and glories of King Solomon, she was a sight never to be forgotten, and was a libel on the original, as word painted in the scriptures” (Oswego, Kansas, 31 August 1900, page 3). The “Newton Kansan” added, “The spectacular representation of scenes in connection with the lives of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba was a novel feature and was one of the best things in the show, but would be vastly improved if shortened as it becomes tiresome” (17 Aug, 1900, page 1). Most reviews, however, were pleased with the presentation. The “McPherson Weekly Republican,” commented, “The presentation of King Solomon’s court, the temple and the amusements of the ancient Hebrew court were a big surprise in excellence and would have done credit to a large opera house performance” (24 Aug. 1900, page 7).

Of the production, an advertisement in the “Wichita Daily Beacon” stated, “King Solomon and Queen of Sheba. Dwarfing and overshadowing to comparative insignificance interior and out door spectacular events of the era. Replete in sacred realisms, historical accuracies, Biblical events, colossal processions, and introducing all the ceremonies with the original pomp and splendor of the Court of Solomon.” In 1929, the John Robinson Circus was still featuring “King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba.”

1929 photograph of the John Robinson Circus for sale online. Note the costumes for the King Solomon circus spectacle.

1929 photograph of Robinson’s Circus production “King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba” from the Library of Congress digital database. Here is the link: Circus tent pix source: https://www.wdl.org/en/
item/10696/view/1/1/

Detail of 1929 photograph of Robinson’s Circus production “King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba” from the Library of Congress digital database. Here is the link: Circus tent pix source: https://www.wdl.org/en/
item/10696/view/1/1/

By 1914, spectacles depicting King Solomon’s life were still a popular to many, including the thousands of men who continued to tell the story in Masonic ceremonials. The Ringling Brothers’ spectacle of “King Solomon,” however, was produced on a much grander scale than any other circuses or fraternity. The Masonic settings at Scottish Rite theaters paled in comparison with the grand spectacle at the circus, yet the same scenic artists were painting the sets for each venue.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 321: M.M. Maffey and the Spectacle du Petit Lazari

Part 321: M.M. Maffey and the Spectacle du Petit Lazari

I just had to dig a bit deeper about the first show with Daguerre’s paintings as I was really curious about M. M. Maffey. Why had Daguerre selected Maffey to market his dioramas in America? What skills did he bring to the table? How was Maffey an asset? After a bit of digging through French publications from the 1820s, I believe that it was his puppetry skills – the movement that occurred behind the translucent sections of the paintings, as they were backlit. They incorporated a type of shadow puppetry. I believe that the backlit figures were painted paper puppets where you could see the detail clearly in translucent sections. I had encountered similar transparencies used by Volland & Toomey for their Scottish Rite scenes. For example, Jesus was painted on paper and lightly glued to the back of a translucent sky section.

View of backside of Scottish Rite drop in Quincy, Illinois, with the front light bleeding through to the backside.

It’s just that some of the figures moved. In short, Maffey assisted backstage during the show, while Lonati worked the front lights. Plus, Lonati, would be in the house during the performance. Maffey was the perfect person to have on board and backstage.

You see, there was an “M. M. Maffey” associated with Spectacle du Petit Lazari in Paris on boulevard du Temple during the 1820s. In 1823, Journal De Paris et des Départmens Politique, Commercial et Littéraire published numerous shows at Spectacle du Petit Lazari de M. M. Maffey, every day from six to nine (Tous les jours, depuis six heures jusqu’a neuf).

Mention of M. M. Maffey and his connection with Theater de Petit Lazuri during the 1820s.

The following information was published in Journal De Paris et des Départmens Politique, Commercial et Littéraire – (three issues: 8 septembre, 13 septembre, et 24 octobre 1823):

1. Werewolf (Loup garou)

2. A Point of View of Naples (un point de Vue de Naples)

3. Harlequin King in the Moon (Arlequin roi dans la Lune)

4. A Point of View of Mexico (un point de vue de Mexico)

5. Pulcinella Vampire, or the Sybille de Balzora, parody (Polichiuelle Vampire, ou la Sybille de Balzora, parodie)

As I continued my search for Maffy, I stumbled across a wonderful book – John McCormick’s “Popular Theatres of Nineteenth-century France” (1993, page 42-43). Here is the paragraph in its entirety as it gives a little more context. McCormick wrote, “There is an interesting document of 1837 in the Archives Nationales from the Brothers Maffey, requesting permission to open ‘Gymnase maritime et pittoresque’ (presumably some form of panorama specializing in sea-scapes – the term Gymnase implies a vaguely educative function. In it Maffey mentions traveling in France and abroad, and then returning to Paris in 1820 and setting up in a little theatre on the boulevard du Temple, which they called the Petit Lazari. The document says: “the genre which we have been exploiting from father to son for fifty years is simply a fantoccini show [i.e.string marionettes] and mechanical views after the fashion of Citizen Pierre [proprietor of a famous ‘spectacle mécanique’ on the boulevard. They also described themselves, currently, as “artistes mécaniciens’, a common term to cover many sorts of showmen, including puppeteers. Other references to the Maffeys are few.”

McCormick writes that Maffey claimed to have a license in 1822 for their performances at the Petit Lazari, and by 1824, the performances at their Spectacle du Petit Lazari moved beyond puppet shows and into Acrobates and Funambules. So, the 1823 shows were likely titles for puppet shows. After a brief closure, McCormick noted that in 1825, the venue reopened as a puppet theatre and then disappeared from the “Almanach des Spectacles” until 1830 when it established a troupe of live actors playing parodies, farces and melodramas.

So Maffey, as a puppeteer, would have been a great asset to both the manufacture and tour of “Daguerre’s Dioramas” as they were backlit to reveal the second scene with movement. Maffey’s presence behind the scene would suggest the movement with opaque figures, or flat puppets. We know that applying a translucent section of a backdrop will reveal either painted images, or pasted prints/paintings. Backlighting the scene reveals the hidden subject on the backside. The same principle would be applied to flat printed, or painted, puppet that moved across a translucent section. This would explain the movement of high priests in the Temple of Solomon, or floating gondolas in the Venice compositions previously mentioned.

I thought back to my MA thesis that explored the Japanese Influence on French Symbolist Theatre. Twenty-five years ago, I was examining the work of the Nabis toward the end of the twentieth century, the Chat Noir Theatre, and some theatrical productions of shadow puppetry that appeared incredibly innovative for the time. However, the idea of shadow puppets in the nineteenth century was nothing new.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 320 – King Solomon’s Temple

Part 320: King Solomon’s Temple

First generation of Scottish Rite scenery for Cincinnati by E. T. Harvey in 1882. He painted the scenes at Heuck’s Opera House.

In New Orleans during 1842, there was an advertisement for Daguerre’s “Chemical Pictures…representing the wonderful effects of Day and Night – (Oil Painting) – and which, by modifying the light upon the picture, exhibits two entirely distinct representations upon the same canvas” (The Times-Picayune, 20 Dec. 1842, page 3). By this time there were four scenes touring with the exhibitions:

1. The Sicilian Vespers, or Palermo in 1292! – A Graphic Episode

2. The “charming” Valley of Goldau, in Switzerland

3. The “admired and unrivalled” Interior of the Church St. Etienne du Mont, at Paris representing a Midnight Mass

4. The “magnificent view” of the City of Venice on a Festival Night.

A few things are happening at the same time as M.M. Maffey & Lonati’s show of chemical paintings reaches New Orleans. First and foremost – their show is imitated and there are now two sets of exhibitions with competing proprietors. In the same 1842 New Orleans newspaper, there was another advertisement for a similar exhibition just below Daguerre’s Chemical Pictures. The competition advertised, “the beautiful and magnificent paintings copied from those of the celebrated Daguerre, whose illustrative, wonderful and magic powers have been subject of great admiration through all Europe.” There were extremely detailed descriptions of transformation scenes in the Times-Picayune (20 Dec. 1842, page 3) depicting:

1. The Inauguration of Solomon’s Temple

2. The Falling Down in the Valley of Goldau (Switzerland)

3. The Interior of St. Stephen’s Church

By 1843, the competitors added a fourth painting – “The Interior of the Monastery of Mount Serrat, in Catalonia” (The Times-Picayune 15 Jan 1843, page 3).

Scottish Rite backdrop depicting the interior of King Solomon’s Temple – the Holy of Holies, ca. 1902. By Toomey and Volland Studio.

Golden gates leading to sacred artifacts in the Holy or Holies, or Sanctum Sanctorum, in King Solomon’s Temple. Toomey & Volland backdrop for the Quincy Scottish Rite from the early twentieth century.

Scenic design by Don Carlos DuBois (Great Western Stage Equipment Co. employee) for the Scottish Rite.

I kept returning to the inauguration of Solomon’s Temple – what an appropriate introduction for New Orleans considering its Masonic lineage. It is important to remember that the construction of King Solomon’s Temple and the assassination of its chief architect Hiram, play a prominent role in the degree work in Freemasonry. This historical tale was reenacted and expanded with additional events surrounding King Solomon’s Temple on nineteenth-century Masonic stages.

Holy of Holies design for the Scottish Rite in Joplin, Missouri (1902) by Toomey & Volland. This backdrop is now part of the Deadwood Scottish Rite collection.

Keep in mind that membership in Freemasonry and other organizations perceived as “secret societies” greatly diminished after a period of anti-Masonic sentiment, commencing in the 1820s. The decline of membership and change in societal attitudes is often attributed to an event called the Morgan Affair. To very briefly explain this event, Morgan is abducted after planning to publish Masonic secrets. His disappearance and presumed death were attributed to the Freemasons. Not all areas of the country suffer a devastating membership loss. Some regions only were subject to a minor decline in membership. There are some Masonic lodges that remained open during this period as others are forced to close their doors. Eventually, the Fraternity began to resurge by the end of the 1840s.

The Times-Picayune (New Orleans) advertised the Inauguration of the King Solomon scene as one of four “Grand Diorama!” (December 29, 1842, page 3).

The Times-Picayune (New Orleans) advertised the King Solomon scene as one of four “Grand Diorama!” (December 29, 1842, page 3). “An Exhibition as yet never known in this city – This day, will be exhibited the beautiful and magnificent paintings, copied from those of the celebrated Daguerre, whose illusive, wonderful and magic powers have been subject to great admiration through all Europe.” The first painting in the set described in the advertisement was “The Inauguration of Solomon’s Temple.” Here is the description:

The same Painting soon after passes through all the modifications of light: then night comes on, (effects obtained by the decomposition of light, a new process of painting invented by Daguerre,) the Temple appears illuminated interiorly by degrees, reflecting a bright light exteriorly, which discovers a great multitude of people flocking to adore the Ark of the Covenant, which the High Priest has deposited in the Tabernacle.”

From December 1842 until March of 1843, there were twenty-seven advertisements for King Solomon’s Temple. If I were a Mason and witnessed the aforementioned scenic effects at the end of a room, I might envision the possibilities during degree work. Especially if the an exterior view of King Solomon’s Temple transformed into the interior and then revealed the Ark of the Covenant, I would want to share this vision with my fellow Masons. This was a group, after all, that was already familiar with lighting effects that revealed hidden symbols and objects painted on fabric and backlit, as described for the Rite of Perfection (the basis of the Scottish Rite that originated in France).

To be continued…

Another interior view of King Solomon’s Temple for the 6th and 9th degrees of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. This is scenery from Sosman & Landis studios for McAlester, Oklahoma. This used scenery collection was purchased by the Santa Fe Scottish Rite in 1908 to practice with while their new building was undergoing construction.

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 319 – M.M. Maffey & Lonati’s Show

Part 319: M.M. Maffey & Lonati’s Show

Robert Winter Jr. advertised that “Daguerre’s Grand Chemical Secret” was discovered and imitated in his own show of “Chemical Paintings” during 1843. In Cincinnati, Winter claimed that his exhibition not only imitated Daguerre’s originals, but also surpassed them. His backdrops were substantially bigger than their French counterparts, measuring 200 feet square each. I could envision a backdrop measuring approximately 10’-12’ in height by 16’-20’ in width– a good size for the end of a Concert Hall.

Winter’s advertisement also responded to M. M. Maffey’s proclamation that no one in American could imitate his exhibition of Daguerre’s magical paintings. Well, that certainly was drawing a line in the sand and challenging many American artist’s abilities. In general, I was curious about Maffey and Lonati’s management of Daguerre’s paintings, the tour of the show, and any technical information that might be gleamed from newspaper advertisements between 1840 and 1843. So I started to look for additional findings in newspapers and journals from the period.

Maffey and Lonati’s exhibition of Daguerre’s paintings first appeared in New York during 1840. It stayed in the city from October through December. From New York it went to Philadelphia where the proprietors explained that their compositions were true “dioramas.” On January 22, 1841, an advertisement appeared in the National Gazette for the exhibition of “Daguerre’s Dioramas from Paris” (page 3). The newspaper reported, “Among the many Exhibitions which have been seen in the United States up to the present time, several have taken the name Dioramas without being entitled to it. M. M. Maffey and Lonati respectfully inform the Ladies and Gentlemen of this city, that they have just arrived from Paris and New York with a Real Diorama, in every sense of the word, painted by Mons. Daguerre.” Their show included two tableaux depicting “the magnificent view of Venice, or a Festival Night,” and “the admired and unrivalled interior of the Church St. Etienne du Mont, at Paris, representing Midnight Mass!!” The exhibition was open from 11-2 and 5-9 daily. So this meant that they had multiple showings daily. It was obvioulsy a reversible effect with light that could be shown multiple times over the course of a day in specified time slots.

A possible validation of this appeared in the “Boston Weekly Magazine” further describing Maffey and Lonati’s exhibition (Vol. III, 1840-1841, page 263). An article reported “The reflection and refraction of light producing the most surprising effects in the picture, totally changing the scene.” Here is how I interpret this statement: The “reflection of light” on the surface means that front light is used on the painted scene – front light and there may also be some metallic areas or sections with “Dutch Metal” applied, such as in the water to create glistening areas of the Venice canals. The painted surface also reflects the light to make the canvas appear opaque – showing the first scene in daylight.

A scene that is partially backlit, allowing the translucent sky and lake to “glow” and create a picturesque realism on stage.

The “refraction of light” mentioned in the article means changing the direction of the light to illuminate the backside of the backdrop – showing the same scene at night. The gradual lowering of the front light and raising of the backlight would provide a smooth and picturesque transition for the audience. Bounce light would be used to illuminate broad areas on the backside of the drop – such as sunsets and seascapes. This means projecting light away from the drop and allowing the light to bounce back to the translucent area.

Concentrated light in light boxes for the backdrop reveals smaller sections of a translucency, such as the words pictured below or illuminated windows. This would also allow any transparent sections of a drop to become illuminated, thus altering the appearance of the painted composition on the front.

Backlit section of a drop where a light box placed on the backside of a scene will illuminate a specific portion to reveal hidden words, objects and figures.

Backside of the translucent section, with back-painting to define the shapes and concentrate the light for the translucency.

Same section that is under front light. From the audience it appears uniform to the rest of the backdrop.

By the spring of 1841, a third painting was added to the show – Constantinople. However, this backdrop did not depict any transformation, only the two original pieces went from day to night. The Boston Post reported that only two scenes were “painted in that peculiar manner which causes them to change light.” The article continued, “The Church is first seen at mid-day, empty, the light gradually fades to twilight, and the moonlight is seen shining through the windows, and is reflected from the pillars on the opposite side. Presently the candles around the altar are lighted up, and then the seats (before vacant) seem filled with worshippers – the mass proceeds and ends – the lights are extinguished – day is seen to dawn – the moonlight disappears before the light of the sun, and the canvass which seemed crowded with objects, again becomes vacant” (13 May 1841, page 2). I believe that the people are a scenic effect that is similar to shadow puppets (more on that in tomorrow’s post).

As a scenic artist, it is hard not to read that description and envision a painted composition of an empty church – lit from the front. The front light goes down and the lights behind the backdrop go up, illuminating the backside of the drop and revealing a combination of translucent sections and opaque painting of another scene. The scene for Venice also transitions from day to night, revealing gondolas and gay revelers at a hotel reception – all heading to a festival banquet at a hotel. Whenever, I have taken visitors into a historic auditorium and successfully backlit translucent drops that transform daylight scenes to color sunsets there is always that small gasp, followed by “Oh!” This transition never grows old, as even seasoned stagehands will stop to admire the stage effect; it is magical.

In Baltimore, Daguerre’s painted compositions started to add a new descriptor – “Magical Pictures.” Pretty smart as “magical pictures” are far more exciting and promise a surprise – the movement! The Baltimore Sun reported Daguerre’s Diorama’s represented “the wonderful effects of day and night” and were once again advertised to be “the only Original Dioramas ever presented to the American Public” (Baltimore Sun, 30 September 1841, page 3).

Notice the use of “Magical Pictures” for Daguerre’s dioramas. This is before the same show is advertised as “Chemical Paintings.” From the Madisonian (Washington, D.C.) 28 April 1842, page 2).

But wait, there’s more. After Baltimore, the show travels to Charleston and then Washington, D.C. By D.C. the “the charming Valley of Goldau (in Switzerland) and the crumbling of a mountain, a historical occurrence” replaced the static Constantinople scene. The crumbling mountain makes me think of the double-painted Scottish Rite drop where a temple crumbles. As the front panel is lowered to the floor, the back of it is revealed as temple ruins. What a thrilling and splendid effect! Then, a fourth scene is added – “the Remains of Napoleon in the Church des Invalides, Paris, on the 15^th December 1840” (The Daily Madisonian, 18 April 1842, page 2).

Double-painted panels on a backdrop. This is before the volcano explodes and the buildings crumble.

Double-painted panels on a backdrop. This is after the volcano explodes and the buildings crumble.

Double painted panel attached to the front of a drop, before it is lowered.

Same panel being partially lowered to reveal that a scene is painted behind it.

The show undergoes further “rebranding,” and it is advertised under a new heading by the end of 1842 – “Chemical Pictures.” This is also when the first competition appeared for the French proprietors! A second show appeared in New Orleans at the same time.

New branding of the M.M. Maffey and Lonati exhibition of Daguerre’s dioramas that were also called “magical paintings.” Here is a later ad for the same exhibition, but with the new title of “Chemical Pictures.” From The Times-Picayune (New Orleans, Louisiana) 29 Dec. 1842, page 3).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 318 – Descriptions Four Chemical Paintings in Cincinnati – 1843

Part 318: Descriptions Four Chemical Paintings in Cincinnati – 1843

Robert Winter Jr. was the proprietor of four “Chemical Paintings” that toured the country. Each of the four drops measured 200 square feet in size and depicted a transition from day to night. They were noted to be the American equivalent to original compositions painted by Daguerre and managed by M. M. Maffey and Lonati. Daguerre’s paintings were much smaller. And were initially advertised as “Daguerre’s Dioramas from Paris… tableaux being represented with modification of light, will produce the wonderful and magical effect of day to night” (Evening Post, New York, 29 Oct. 1840, page 3). Daguerre’s composition’s included the “interior of the Church St. Etienne du Mont, at Paris” and “the magnificent View of Venice, or a festival night of the Carnival.”

Almost three years later, Winter’s “chemical paintings show” appeared at a Concert Hall in Cincinnati. Articles reported that each painted backdrop “represented two distinct pictures, which form the peculiar style of execution, the varied nature and combination of the illuminating powers employed, produces changes the most astonishing, and at the same time the most natural, in the power of the artist, machinist or optician, to effect” (Cincinnati Enquirer, 14 Aug. 1843, page 3).
I am reminded the lengthy description of “A Day in the Alps” published for the Columbian Exposition of Thomas Moses’ painting. Fifty years earlier, here are the four descriptions of the compositions presented in 1843 in Cincinnati.

The following article described Winter’s compositions and was published in the Cincinnati Enquirer on 14 Aug 1843:
“Daguerre’s Grand Chemical Secret Discovered! To be exhibited at Concert Hall, over the Post Office, every evening, until further notice” (page 3).

No. 1 – View in the City of Milan
This picture represents the grand front of Milan Cathedral, which in gothic architecture, in fret work, in carving, and in statuary, surpasses all other buildings in the world. The building was commenced in 1306, and completed by order of Napoleon in 1805. It is adorned interiorly and exteriorly with four hundred statues in bas reliefs. The picture after passing thro’ all the gradations of light from day to night, will appear as though illuminated by the silvery beams of the rising moon, producing a surprising change in the sky. The several windows and lamps of the Cafes and Merchants Arcade will be lit, and discover numerous figures passing to, and entering the Cathedral, which will appear as when lit up for the celebration of Midnight Mass, displaying the gothic painted windows, and part of the interior.

No. 2 – View of the City Jerusalem and the Crucifixion
This picture is taken from the celebrated painting by Martin, represents a distant view of the far famed City; on the left will be perceived the three crosses erected on Mount Calvary; to the right, the gates of entrance through the walls to the City, which together with the Mount & the adjacent country, will appear buried in repose, no figures whatever at this time being seen. A gradual change will take place over the whole face of the picture, displaying the gorgeous tints of an Eastern sunset, until the sky assumes an awful and terrific aspect, occasionally illuminated by vivid flashes of lightning. The Heavens will now appear to burst with a lurid light, gradually displaying the figures on the crosses, and the various groups composing the subject of the crucifixion. After a while, all will seem to recede and die away, giving place to the beautifully calm and quiet appearance of the break of day, until the picture assumes the same image of coloring it had when first disclosed.

Details of a painted scene for the Scottish Rite in the late-nineteenth century. Currently the drop is at the Salina Scottish Rite Theatre in Kansas.

Looking through the cut drop at a crucifixion backdrop in Grand Forks, North Dakota at the Masonic Center.

No. 3 – Interior of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre
This is a view of the large rotunda, in the center of whose floor stands the Holy Sepulchre, surrounded by several large columns that supports the gallery, and ornamented by an immense number of silver lamps and candlesticks, presents Rome, and the courts and religious orders of Europe. The Church is illuminated by day from the light which falls from the lofty dome on the Holy Sepulchre, which is oblong form, and composed of stone which has the appearance of fine white marble. Darkness will gradually spread over the building, when the large wax candles and numerous lamps, will appear as though burning, and casting their mellow light on the groups of pilgrims beneath, at their devotions, and display the grand procession of the three orders around the Sepulchre. During the Easter ceremonies, on the right the Greek and Romish dignitaries, surrounded by their chief ecclesiastics; on the left, the Armenians, who being the most wealthy, wear on this occasion their most costly robes. Over the entrance to the Holy Sepulchre are suspended two pictures, presents from the Greek and Roman Churches, one representing the ascension our Saviour, the other, His appearance to Mary in the Garden.

No. 4 – The Feast of Belshazzar
This picture, copied form one by Martin, on a much larger scale that ever before attempted, discloses to the admiration of the beholder, the immense Court of the Palace of Babylon, once the pride and wonder of the world – adorned with a countless number of colored marble Pillars, and an infinite variety of Sepulchres. In the distance stands the Tower of Babel; also the Temple of Belus, built by Queen Semiramia in honor of King Belus, who was afterwards worshipped as a God.- In the foreground at the foot of the table, already prepared for the Banquet, on which is displayed the Holy vessels which Nebuchadnezer brought out of the spoils of the Temple. The shades of evening will gradually close upon this splendid specimen of ancient grandeur, until sufficiently dark, for the numerous fires and incense burners to cast light enough to display the figures of Belshazzar and all his Court, on the Dais, or Platform, at the Banquet, with immense Multitude, amounting to over one thousand figures, engaged in the worship of the various Deities and graven images. The magical appearance of the handwriting on the wall, coupled with the consternation of the idolatrous King and household, at the interpretation by Daniel the Prophet, forms at this moment a picture which can hardly be imagined, much less described, it being actually necessary to witness it, in order t form a just conception of the grand and soulstirring effect it has, when thus presented to the eye of the wrapt and admiring beholder.

The doors will be open at 7 ½ o’clock, and the exhibition will commence at 8 precisely. Single Tickets 50 cents. Tickets to admit a lady and a Gentleman 75 cents; do to admit two ladies and one Gentleman $1 – to be obtained at the principal Hotels and Music stores in the city. Aug 10.”
The show was still touring under R. Winter’s management in 1846 when it was in Richmond, Virginia (Richmond Enquirer 10 March 1846, page 2).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 317 – The Cincinnati Venue for the Chemical Paintings in 1843

Part 317: The Cincinnati Venue for the Chemical Paintings in 1843

Here is a description of the venue where Duncanson and Coate’s chemical paintings premiered in 1843. A Cincinnati Enquirer article describes in great detail the transformation for each visual spectacle: the Milan Cathedral, Jerusalem and the Crucifixion, the Interior of the Holy Sepulchre and Belshazzar’s Feast in 1843. This was the collaborative effort between African-Americans artist Robert S. Duncanson and the photographer Coates to create a unique form of visual spectacle. There are four descriptions will be posted tomorrow after examining the venue where the production was first presented in Cincinnati.

While researching the Cincinnati venue, however, I was surprised when I realized that the first performance actually took place in the same room where the Cincinnati Masons met. The advertised Concert Hall above the Cincinnati Post Office is also considered one of the first Masonic meeting spaces in the city.

White corner building (on right) was the first Masonic Hall (also used as a concert hall) above the post office in Cincinnati on Third Street. The second Masonic building (tan facade on right) building is depicted past the bank (building with the columns). This would be the same location as the third Masonic building too. Image from http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/where-in-cincinnati-was-the-third-edition-of-the-book-of-mormon-printed/

The two-story brick building was erected on the corner of Third Street and Bank Alley (now the corner of Third Street and Walnut).One of the men responsible for the construction of the building was Postmaster Elam Langdon. The Post Office was situated on the first floor of the building and the Masons used the second floor hall for their lodge room. The road called Bank Alley was also known to local citizens as either Post Office Alley or Masonic Alley. Interestingly, that same second-floor space was also advertised as a Concert Hall for musical performances during 1843. Newspaper advertisements for concerts, such as that by Max Bohrer, noted the 1843 venue as “the Concert Hall, over the Post Office” (Cincinnati Enquirer, 13 June 1843, page 3).

This is the same concert hall above the post office where the chemical paints were displayed in 1843. The Cincinnati Enquirer, 13 June 1843, page 3

“Masonic Review” describes the history of early Masonry in Cincinnati and the cooperation of the various Masonic bodies to construct a Masonic Hall in the city. The first committee was composed of David Brown, William Burker and Postmaster Elam Langdon, “men of executive ability” (Masonic Review and the Masonic Journal, 1892, Vol. 76, page 15). “Subscriptions and dues were paid in bricks, lumber, labor &c., and in March, 1824, the first Masonic hall built in this city was completed at a cost of $2,437.72. The hall was a frame building, and was erected on the Town Lot, now the northeast corner of Third and Walnut…It was not until 1843 that an active interest was taken to build a second building, and in 1845 plans were submitted for a new building and approved.” The Hall was enlarged during 1834 as membership dramatically increased. This was the transitional step between the first and second buildings in Cincinnati. The second building was located just down the block on Third Street from the original corner building.

The third building was located on the same spot as the second building, just down the street from the original Masonic Hall. Image from: http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/where-in-cincinnati-was-the-third-edition-of-the-book-of-mormon-printed/

The following article was in the Cincinnati Enquirer on 14 Aug 1843 and describes the premiere of the Chemical Paintings (page 3):

“Daguerre’s Grand Chemical Secret Discovered! To be exhibited at Concert Hall, over the Post Office, every evening, until further notice.”

“Robert Winter, Jr. respectfully informs his friends and the citizens of Cincinnati generally, that stimulated by the assertion of Mons. Maffy, the proprietor of Daguerre’s celebrated chemical paintings, that it was impossible for any one in this country to imitate them, he has succeeded in producing the undermentioned pictures, which he confidently places before the public for them to decide relative to the merits of his productions, and whether he has not completely nullified Mons. Maffy’s assertion, by imitating or surpassing those painted by Daguerre himself, and which have so justly gained the admiration of the patrons of the Fine Arts wherever they have been exhibited.”

Here is the “Maffy” who Winter is referring to:

The first set “chemical paintings” credited to Daguerre and managed by Mons. Maffy.Article from Commercial Advertiser and Journal (Buffalo, NY) 30 June 1842, page 2.

“Each painting covers a surface of nearly two hundred square feet of canvas, and represents two distinct pictures, which form the peculiar style of execution, the varied nature and combination of the illuminating powers employed, produces changes the most astonishing, and at the same time the most natural, in the power of the artist, machinist or optician, to effect.

Appropriate music, selected and arranged expressly for the occasion, will accompany each change; and the proprietor confidently anticipates the exhibition will form one of the most attractive, moral and pleasing entertainments, ever offered to a Cincinnati audience.”

From the National Gazette (Philadelphia) 25 Jan. 1841, page 3. Note that the venue was in New York’s Masonic Hall.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 316 – A Duncanson and Coates’ – Chemical Paintings

Part 316: A Duncanson and Coates’ – Chemical Paintings

While researching the life and times of Robert S. Duncanson, I repeatedly stumbled across the mention of his collaboration with an African-American photographer named “Coates.” They created a form of visual spectacle called “chemical paintings.”

Contemporary authors repeatedly cite the same article from March 19, 1844, advertising “Chemical Paintings…four splendid views after the singular style of Daguerre.” I located other newspaper advertisements for the same show that predate this one, however, none credit either Duncanson or Coates. Chemical paintings originate in Cincinnati during 1843 which coincides with Duncanson’s participation in the project. Some scholars purport that Duncanson was the artistic mind behind the images while Coates took care of the technical side.

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 11 Feb 1844, page 2.

Did “chemical paintings” refer to the paint or the process? In 1993, Joseph D. Ketner suggested that the compositions were created on light-sensitive surfaces and were allowed to develop under the auditorium lights with dramatic contrasts of lights and darks (“The Emergence of the African-American Artist: Robert S. Duncanson, 1871-1872”). They would have to be a reversible effect if they used the same canvases repeatedly. I discovered that they did use canvas, Ketner described, “With each of the images, the darkened auditorium was gradually illuminated, causing lighting effects in the pictures that thrilled the crowds.” So, front light on the composition caused the change? Ketner was much more fascinated with the collaborative aspect than the process, suggesting that was one of the earliest collaborations between a painter and a photographer in the United States.

I was intrigued with the actual process and theatrical venues for the presentation more than their collaborative effort. What Ketner, and all of the other authors failed to cite, was that the production actually opened in 1843 before touring under the proprietor’s name – Robert Winter Jr. “Chemical Paintings” opened during August of 1843 at the Concert Hall in Cincinnati and then went on tour for three years. The last advertisement that I found was when the show was in Richmond, Virginia.

The Cincinnati Enquirer, 4 Sept. 1843, page 3

The four scenes exhibited at the Concert Hall were listed as “the Milan Cathedral,” “City of Jerusalem and Crucifixion,” “Interior of the Holy Church of the Sepulchre,” and “Belshazzar’s Feast.” Newspaper advertisements promised, “Each painting possesses the peculiar properties of portraying two distinct Pictures on the same canvas” (The Cincinnati Enquirer, 4 Sept. 1843, page 3). I thought of the electric scenic theatres during the 1890s – FIFTY years later. Any scene lit by colored lights could alter the composition from day to night, especially if portions were backlit. Could it be that simple? I though of the colored panels on the back of a drop from 1867 to create a brilliant sunset.

Colored panels sewn to the back of a drop to create a brilliant sunset effect. The 1867 drop is one of many in storage at the Royal Swedish Workshop space.

Detail of colored panels sewn and glued to back of drop.

While on tour, three of the paintings were damaged during a fire and we learn a little more about their composition; portions of it were linen (Public Ledger 1 Dec. 1843, page 2). Obviously, the surfaces that were “light-sensitive” had to reverse for another performance the next day. Only one set of paintings toured. There was also no apparent competition, so they had the market on the secret. These were also not one-time-use, or disposable paintings on photographic paper as suggested by Ketner. I highly doubted that with the amount of detail described for the “reveal” in each scene that anything could be painted with fresh paint, or applied to the surface before another show. Maybe the “chemical picture” referred to the new and brilliant chemical-colors used to paint the linen backing – dyes. So what about Louis-Jacques-Mandé Daguerre’s process, other than it was introduced worldwide in 1839? Ten years earlier this French artist and chemist came into contact with Nicéphore Niépce when obtaining a camera obscura for his work on theatrical scene painting from the optican Chevalier. Niépce had already managed to make a record of an image from a camera obscura using a process he invented – heliography.

I thought of something that Gene Meier mentioned a month ago – many of the early Chicago and Milwaukee scene painters were also chemists. Daguerreotypes use a silver-plated copper plate that is first buffed and polished. Then the plate is sensitized to light with iodine and bromine in specialized, light-proof boxes. A light-proof holder exposures the plate to capture the image. Then the plate is developed (“brought out”) over hot mercury, fixed by immersion in a solution of sodium thiosulfate and then washed with distilled water. The final step was to tone or gild the plate with gold chloride. I was stumped and could not see how this could be anything other than the utilization of Daguerre’s “light-proof boxes” on the back of a dyed section of linen. The images created by Daguerre seemed to be permanent and not reversible.

But I was thinking of how this spoke to the public’s insatiable appetite for visual spectacle and curious about the compositions and touring productions venues. One of their shows opened at the City Hotel in Brooklyn on December 20, 1843. A later article (Brooklyn Daily Eagle 11 Feb, 1844, page 2) described the Chemical Paintings for the Milan Cathedral scene: “The first appearance of the picture – which represents a day scene – does not impress the beholder with anything like an adequate idea of the subject; but presently the gorgeous hues of an Italian sunset fall upon it, and the turrets, spires and statuary of the Cathedral, as well as neighboring café and exchange, are bathed in a ruddy glare of light. To this twilight succeeds, when the picture assumes a beautifully calm and soft aspect. Finally, the shades of night fall upon it, and the moon darts her beams upon the tall pinnacles – which appear to stand out in bold relief, while the sky gradually becomes enlightened. At this point of the exhibition, the spectator involuntarily breaks forth in applause. But its grandeur and artistical skill are not fully apparent until the illumination takes place. Then you see persons clustering about the café and exchange, or going to the midnight mass, while the solemn notes of the bell and organ seem to invest the multitude with life and motion. It is really a very splendid thing” (15 February 1844, page 2). Ads promised “A glance at the “Cathedral of Milan,” when illuminated for the midnight mass, is alone worth the price of admission” (Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 20 February 1844, page 2).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 315 – Robert S. Duncanson (1821-1872), African-American Landscape Artist

Part 315: Robert S. Duncanson (1821-1872), African-American Landscape Artist

There was something that I kept wondering while researching Solomon E. White; why did he keep returning to Cincinnati? What kept drawing him back to the city? Was it family, a supportive network of friends, a diverse community, or a vibrant artistic scene? I started to look at the demographics. First of all, Cincinnati was considered a “southern town on free soil.” It was a hub for many freed and escaped slaves. Between 1840 and 1850 the population expanded from 43,000 to 115,000, and the city hosted one of the largest African-American communities in the country. Cincinnati also had a strong arts community and was often referred to as “the Athens of the West.” Its African-American population encountered better opportunities to advance than in many other parts of antebellum America.

As I explored hundreds of online images, I became extremely enamored with the work of one landscape artist – Robert Seldon Duncanson (1821- 1872).

He was not only inspired by Thomas Cole and the Hudson River School, but also had a Cincinnati connection. Born to an African-American mother and a Scottish-Canadian father in Fayette (Seneca County) of New York, he moved with his mother to Mt. Healthy, Ohio, in 1841. They lived there with the Reuben Graham family, who were descendants of Virginia slaves. This particular community near Cincinnati had a substantial “free-black” population.

Robert S. Duncanson. “Vesuvius and Pompeii,” 1870

By 1842, Duncanson was exhibiting his art in Cincinnati. Typical artistic commissions for Duncanson included landscapes, portraiture and murals. The following year, he partnered with an African-American photographer to create a new form of visual spectacle called “chemical paintings.” They were large-scale compositions that depicted a metamorphosis on stage, transitioning many scenes from morning until evening with a Daguerreotype form of magic.

Murals by Robert S. Duncanson for the Belmont hall and reception room, now the Taft Museum.

In Cincinnati, Nicholas Longworth (abolitionist and political leader) also hired Duncanson to paint a series of murals in the Belmont hall and reception room from 1848 to 1851. There were eight murals that measured approximately 9 feet by 7 feet in size.

Detail of one of Robert S. Duncanson’s murals in the Taft Museum.

Detail of a Robert S. Duncanson mural commissioned by Nicholas Longworth for Belmont, now the Taft Museum.

The Longworth Mansion is now known as now the Taft Museum. His murals are still there.By 1849, Duncanson maitained an art studio in Detroit. Two years later, a Cincinnati patron funded a sketching trip for him to travel to New Hampshire and Vermont. During this period, Duncanson traveled widely throughout the region. The Anti-Slavery league funded a trip for his artistic study in Edinburgh, Scotland during 1853. On this trip he continued onto England, France, Germany and Italy.

The Smithsonian American Art Museum posted his words online from a letter to Junius R. Sloan on 22 Jan. 1854: “”English landscapes were better than any in Europe, and the English are great in water color while the French are better historical painters than the English. I am disgusted with our Artists in Europe. They are mean Copiests. My trip to Europe has to some extent enabled me to judge of my own talent. Of all the landscapes I saw in Europe (and I saw thousands) I do not feel discouraged” (Platt R. Spencer Collection, Newberry Library, Chicago, Ill.). During the 1850s, Duncanson went on sketching tours with Whittredge and William Sonntag. He would later travel with Sonntag to England, France and Italy. When he returned, he worked in J. P. Ball’s studio, retouching portraits, coloring prints, and exhibiting his paintings.

Robert S. Duncanson. “Minneopa Falls, Minnesota,” 1860s.

In the 1860s, Duncanson ventured north from Minnesota to Vermont and into Canada to Montreal, before leaving for Scotland again. Prior to his departure, he saw Frederic Edwin Church’s “Heart of Andes” (1859) on its national tour at Pike’s Opera House in Cincinnati. It greatly inspired him and he began his painting “The Land of Lotus Eaters.”

Thomas Cole, “The Heart of the Andes,” 1859.

Robert S. Duncanson, “The Lotus Eaters.”

From 1864 to 1866, his name is not listed in either Detroit or Cincinnati directories. By 1867, he returned to the United States, making one last trip to Scotland from 1870-1872. Upon his return, he exhibited his Scottish paintings and successfully sold many for handsome prices.

Unfortunately that same year, Duncanson also suffered from a seizure while arranging an exhibition of his work in Detroit. After being hospitalized for three month at the Michigan State Retreat, he died. He was only 51 years old.
One can only imagine the mental and emotional stress it took to encounter the problems facing a biracial artist in pre- and post-Civil War America on a daily basis. People of color experienced a period of increased discrimination throughout the country as there was a backlash from many; those seeking to place blame on others for so many issues. This candle of hate has yet to be snuffed out.

As I continue to witness the rise of the white supremacy movement and a continued racial inequality almost 150 years later, I cannot help but feel sorrow. I also feel inadequate when I consider the lack of obstacles that I face on a daily basis compared to people of color. Would I have the strength to survive as an African American artist in the nineteenth century? I have never had to struggle any insurmountable obstacles and honestly don’t know.

Looking at Duncanson’s work, however, helps me understand why Solomon E. White continued to return to Cincinnati and work as both a fresco and scenic artist. It was a community that provided a place for Duncanson’s art. I am sure that the display of Duncanson’s artwork provided hope for other aspiring African-American artists during that time. These were the individuals who made progress possible. We simply can’t go back, or loose even an inch of ground. Those who paved the path for future generations deserve our continued action toward equality and nothing less.

To be continued…

Robert S. Duncanson. “Waterfall on Mont Morency,” 1864

Robert S. Duncanson. Untitled landscape, ca. 1870s.

There is a great timeline for Robert S. Duncanson posted at : http://grahamarader.blogspot.com/2012/09/arader-galleries-exhibits-significant.html