Drop Curtain – Page 12 – Drypigment.net

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 294 – The Native Sons of the Golden West’s Drop Curtain

Reed & Gross Panorama Company created large scale paintings for the California State Building with compositions that included: the harbor of San Francisco and the city, as viewed from Goat Island; Christmas in Pasadena; the Stanford Ranch in northern California; Leland Stanford’s Vineyard; Leland Stanford Jr. University in Palo Alto; New Years at Hotel del Monte in Monterey, Santa Barbara, and Fresno.

The California State Building at the 1893 Columbian Exposition.

Floor plan of the California State Building at the Columbian Exposition, 1893.

James D. Phelan was one of the California World’s Fair Commissioners in 1893. Later, he would become the mayor of San Francisco (1897-1902) and elected to the US Senate (1915-1921).

James Duval Phelan (1861-1930). Photograph from 1910.

He purchased a 20’ x 30’ painting from the California State Building after the fair. He intended to use it as the new drop curtain at the Native Sons of the Golden West’s Hall. They were constructing a new building in San Francisco and Phelan was the association’s president.

Unfortunately, the “handsome new building on Mason street, between Post and Geary” would never receive his donation.

NSGW Hall before the 1906 San Francisco earthquake.

NSGW Hall in San Francisco, California, constructed in 1911.

The new NSGW Hall was a four-story structure. The main meeting room was on the main floor and meeting rooms were situated on the other stories; fifteen rooms were used by the Native Sons and five rooms used by the Native Daughters. The Marine Engineers, Knights of the Golden Eagle and letter carriers also met in the building. The hall was intended for large meetings, as well as balls and entertainments. The stage in the main assembly room included “a handsome new drop-curtain and scenery for the entertainments,” according to the San Francisco Call (Volume 79, No. 71, 9 February 1896). But the drop curtain was not the one that Phelan originally intended for the opening of the building.

Interior of the California State Building at the Columbian Exposition. The mural that James D. Phelan purchased is likely the one immediately behind the statue.

Detail of the murals in the California State Building at the Columbian Exposition. The mural that James D. Phelan purchased is likely the one immediately behind the statue.

The San Francisco Call from January 10, 1896, included the article “A Fine Painting Spoiled” (page 8). The original mural measured 20’ high by 30’ wide and was produced by Thaddeau Welch, a California artist, for the California State Building at the Columbian Exposition. The article reported that the subject was “Golden Gate as Viewed from Goat Island” and had “attracted much attention at the World’s Fair,” costing Phelan $3,000 to procure.

The article continued, “On Tuesday it was found that the painting had been ruined by the careless persons who packed and shipped it two years ago. Instead of winding the canvas around a roller these bunglers wrapped it around a 4 by 4 inch scantling and every four inches the canvas is cracked so that it is doubtful if it can be used.” A scantling is a piece of timber of relatively slight width and thickness, such as a stud or rafter in a house frame.

I chuckled as I read this. The end results from the actions of ignorant people who don’t understand the proper handling techniques for a large painting. I suspect that, like many wall murals, it was constructed of oil paint and heavy canvas. This would have also been the common medium for panorama studio artists anyway. I doubt that they would have used the lighter weight distemper paint that was commonly used for theatre drops, especially as the painting wasn’t intended as a theatre backdrop.

That would also explain the excessive cost of the mural – $3,000! A drop curtain created with dry pigment and diluted hide glue in 1893 would have cost a fraction of that amount. At the beginning of the twentieth century, a backdrop typically ranged between $150 to $300. This makes me think that Phelan was paying for the artistic provenance of the piece.

I also believe that Phelan simply not understand the physical demands of a drop curtain, or how they were constructed. He probably thought – “Hey! That painting is about the same size as a theatre drop! We will need a new drop in the NSGW Hall and it even depicts San Francisco!” This is where I need to stop and explain something, a common assumption that continues until this day. Many people believe that historical drops are created with oil paints. It is a common misperception that I encounter quite often. It is understandable as these individuals simply don’t have the knowledge to understand that oil paint is often too thick and shiny for stage applications.

Oil paint for panoramas was different as they were lit with a diffused lighting source and not stage lights. Therefore panoramas were not subject to the same rules as theatre drops. The same principle works for the use of oils in fine art and murals; they are not subject to the harsh glare of stage lights. For this reason alone, the painting form the California State building that was purchased by Phelan would have been a disappointment.

Piles of dry pigment surrounding granulated hide glue.

It is also possible that the painting as a drop curtain would have also failed due to the thickness of oil paint if used as a roll drop. There is nothing to suggest that the four-story NSGW Hall had a fly system to raise and lower drops. Like most halls, the stage would have used roll drops. Roll drops really necessitate the use of dry pigment and diluted hide glue as the binder. This distemper paint, unlike oil paint, allows the fabric to remain flexible. The oil painting would crack. This also brings us to the article reporting that the painting cracked. This would not have been a disaster if the composition were produced with water-based paints, as they are easily reconstituted. With historical backdrops, cracked paint can easily be repaired with artful blending. That is not the case with cracks in oil paintings.

Then the article further reveals, “The package has been at Mr. Phelan’s home since its arrival two years ago. It was intended to open the building on the 26^th inst. And the loss of the drop curtain is a sad blow to those interested. Efforts will be made to see if it can artistically be retouched and pressed out smooth again.” It is unlikely that the oil painting was successfully “pressed” or “retouched.” The years in storage in possibly less-than-ideal conditions took its toll. Oil paintings don’t easily recover from creases and stretching. When wrinkles and cracks appear in distemper painting, such as theatre scenery, they are easily repaired and touched up.

The public perception is often that “anyone” can handle and move a big painting, such as a theatre backdrop. In reality, “anyone” can’t. You really have to know what you’re doing.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 293 – Painted Scenery for the State Buildings at the Columbian Exposition

Thomas G. Moses painted scenery for the Kansas State Building at the Columbian Exposition. He created a painted panorama scene depicting the state’s landscape that wrapped around the top of the rotunda.

Painted panorama in Kansas State Building by Thomas G. Moses in 1893 for the Columbian Exposition.

Interior photograph of Kansas State Building with top painted panorama by Thomas G. Moses in 1893 for the Columbian Exposition.

The world fair was open from May 1 to October 30, 1893; 179 days to the public, including all Sundays, except 4 that were reserved for special events (May 7, May 14, May 21, and July 23). 21,480,140 people were recorded to have attended the event over the course of six months. The fairgrounds covered 686.1 acres of what is now Chicago’s Jackson Park.

International participants included fifty nations and 26 colonies. In additional to international displays, there were buildings constructed to showcase the major resources of U. S. States and its joint territories, spending $6,200,000 on their exhibits, today’s equivalent of $160,685,377.00. The Kansas State Building was one of the first State Buildings to be completed, and the first to be dedicated.

Illustration of Kansas State Building at the 1893 World Fair.

Photograph of the Kansas State Building at the 1893 World Fair.

Stereoscope card of the 1893 Kansas State Building in Chicago for the Columbian Exposition.

Other State Buildings included Arkansas, Iowa, Ohio, California, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, South Dakota, Connecticut, Louisiana, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Texas, Delaware, Maryland, Utah, Michigan, Florida, Minnesota, Virginia, Missouri, West Virginia, Montana, Vermont, New York, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Washington, New Jersey, Idaho, Nebraska, Illinois, North Dakota, and Indiana.

Interior decoration in the Illinois State Building for the Columbian Exposition in 1893.

Seymour Davis, of Topeka, was the architect of the Kansas State Building, costing nearly $30,000 to construct. The structure was made entirely of materials from Kansas and decorated with the state’s native grains. The bas-reliefs on the exterior tower depicted scenes when the Kansas when admitted into the Union in 1861. The building used a cruciform plan, measuring 135 feet by 140 feet. There were four flights of stairs that lead to the second floor with rooms that included a woman’s exhibit, in addition to parlors for men and women. Various sources reported that the Kansas State Building stood out as “a wonderful shining example of progress and independence.”

Interestingly, Gene Meier recently sent information pertaining to the California State Building at the Columbian Exposition. It is also worthwhile to look at the painted decoration from another state building to provide context for Moses’ own painted project. The California State Building was massive compared to the Kansas State Building.

Meier’s research shows that Reed & Gross Panorama Company of Chicago created several large canvases for the exhibit building, located on the north and east walls of the gallery. Howard H. Gross had held business contacts in California since the 1880s and it was understandable that he would be a major contender for the contract. Gross also worked with many of the Moses’ contemporaries and close friends, such as scenic artists Peyraud and Vincent. Again, lots of work and artists that switched studios like their socks.

Howard H. Gross, as previously mentioned in installment #274, was the president of the Chicago Fire Cyclorama Company and managed the attraction that was on display during the world fair. He had also been involved in the Gettysburg Panorama. Reed & Gross Panorama Company created large scale paintings with compositions for the California State Building that included: the harbor of San Francisco and the city, as viewed from Goat Island; Christmas in Pasadena; the Stanford Ranch in northern California; Leland Stanford’s Vineyard; Leland Stanford Jr. University in Palo Alto; New Years at Hotel del Monte in Monterey, Santa Barbara, and Fresno.

What is interesting in the articles and summary that Meier sent mentioned that one of the painted panels was repurposed a few years after the fair. The plan was to install a painting from California Building into another venue. It gives us a glimpse into an ignorant investor’s idea to transfer a large-scale mural into a backdrop for the stage. J. D. Phelan was one of the California World’s Fair Commissioners in 1893. He purchased a painting from the California State Building after the fair that he intended to present as a drop curtain for the Native Sons of the Golden West. Their hall had a stage. This was another fraternity, like the Freemasons, or the National Grange of the Order of Patrons of Husbandry, who incorporated a stage into many of their meeting spaces. N.S.G.W. was founded on July 11, 1875 by Gen. A. M. Winn and others in San Francisco for the payment of sick and death benefits to its members. Limited to Californians, membership was recorded at 9,500 strong in 1899. It is still in existence today.

Native Sons of the Golden West Hall in Pescadero, California.

Native Sons of the Golden West had halls like the Freemasons, Odd Fellows and Grange. As many fraternal spaces, some NSGW Halls had theater stages in their meeting facilities.

I believe that Phelan’s basic intent was to transform a large-scale oil painting into a roll drop for the stage. This is a really bad idea for so many reasons, reasons that I will cover tomorrow. Even if the painting had not been ruined during transport and storage, it was unlikely that this would have been successful in its new locale. It might have seemed like a good idea at the time, but destined to fail as Phelan was unfamiliar with the differences between the two artistic mediums and what was either appropriate or successful for the stage.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 250 – Men Who Found Fame in the Wing and Drop Curtains, the Cost of Scenic Art

The same year that the Sosman & Landis Annex studio opened, an article appeared in the Chicago Sunday Tribune, “Paint Mimic Scenes, Men Who Have Found Fame in the Wing and Drop Curtains” (Dec, 18, 1892, page 41). Here is the continuation of that article started in installment #245.

The Chicago Opera House. Image published on Chicagology site. The building was demolished in 1913.

Main entrance to the Chicago Opera House. Image published on Chicagology site.

“The cost of painting scenery is usually exaggerated in the play-bills, nevertheless it is a heavy expense. Manager Henderson estimated the actual cost of scenery in the various burlesque productions at the Chicago Opera House as follows: “Arabian Nights,” $14,000; “Crystal Slipper,” $20,000; “Sinbad,” $20,000. In the last burlesque, “Ali Baba” the cost must have been heavier. The gold foil alone cost $800. One of the heaviest scenes ever set on the local stage was the rainbow palace in Duff’s production of “The Queen’s Mate.” This was largely due to the labyrinth of circular stairways that honeycombed the stage.

1890 Chicago Opera House program cover for the “Crystal Slipper.”

1890 “Crystal Slipper” program at the Chicago Opera House with scenery by Fred Dangerfield and William Voegtlin.

As for the cost of interiors, the second act of “Diplomacy,” presented last summer at the Columbia Theater, including furniture, made a bill of $2,600. The scenery for “The Ensign” cost over $10,000, and another earlier melodrama, “The Soudan,” represented over $12,000. Perhaps the finest series of classical stagings ever given Shakespearean productions in this country were furnished by Edwin Booth for the theatre bearing his name in New York. Probably the most expensive spectacle ever put on was “Jalma,” and the most expensive scenic production was that of “Saranapalus” at Booth’s Theater, New York, 1876. Few stages in the world ever had the curtain rise upon such wealth of scenery as that of our Auditorium. It had complete sets of scenes for forty standard operas, the equipment costing $50,000. All of the uncut drops weigh at least 300 pounds, are sixty-eight feet wide and thirty-eight feet high. The “horizon” that surrounds the stage is the largest piece of theatrical canvas in the world, being 300 feet in length and fifty-six in height.

Expense of scenic productions in the country is comparatively slight when contrasted with notable ones abroad. The cost of Boucicault’s “Balil and Bijou” at the Theatre Royal, Covent Garden, in 1867, was over $60,000. Blanchard’s “Puss in Boots,” at the same house two years later was equally expensive. “Excelsior,” when produced in Paris ten years ago, made an expensive bill that would have terrified our pioneers in spectacle who put on such large figures on the bills for the original “Black Crook” and “White Fawn.” Twelve years ago the paint bridge of Covent Garden was at times simultaneously occupied by Hawes Cravens, the Cuthberths, the Telbins, Matt Morgan, Graves, Hicks, Dangerfield, and oters at work on the mammoth drops, 50×75 feet. It is said that William Telbin, the favorite artist of Henry Irving, spends six weeks painting a small front cloth.

Image from 1892 Chicago Sunday Tribune article.

Little wonder that the productions under those conditions have so much genuine artistic merit and historic accuracy.”

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 249 – Men Who Found Fame in the Wing and Drop Curtains, the Scenic Artists

“H. J. Buhler is another artist whose interiors are excellent examples of careful drawing, in which projection and shadow are most skillfully handled. Still other rising lights in this circle are John Young and F. E. Gates. The latter averages two drop-curtains every week. He is a rapid worker and has been known to complete a curtain with forty-eight figures in three days. Such rushing gives small chance for detail. The latest addition to the scenic fold is Deneth [Oliver] Grover, formerly an instructor in the Art Institute and winner of the Yerkes prize in the last exhibition. Grover has no rivals in drawing the human figure and his work promises to make artistic sensation.

Fred Dangerfield, a new comer, has been talked of considerably, and his work as the artist at the Chicago Opera House burlesques the last two seasons variously estimated. Thanks to Martin Kruger, he has one of the best lighted stages in America, and light gives wonderful witchery to scenery. It would be interesting to know just how much of “Ali Baba” was painted by Dangerfield, and how much by Gates, Williams, and Burky, who are concealed in that vague word “assistants.”

Manager James Hutton of Havlin’s is the only person holding a similar position in this city who can paint scenery. He has painted the drop curtains for all of the Havlin theaters and is one of the best judges of this class of work in the city.”

Illustration of John H. Young painting in a scenic studio.

Looking at the artists above, I was very familiar with John H. Young’s work.He worked and went on sketching trips with Thomas G. Moses during the 1880s. Later, he found success as a Broadway designer (see past installments # 131, 140, 171-3, 181, 184, 186, 189, 192-3, 195-8, 202, 203, 205-11, and 215-16.) F. E. Gates was also a well-known persona. Like many, he would branch into other areas of painting and interior decoration. Gates came from a family of theatrical managers, musician, and actors and eventually partnered with E. A. Morange to form the studio Gates & Morange (see past installments #149, 171, and 189-91). Gates would also win the Medal of Honor as a painter in 1918 during the Architectural League of New York Exhibition, held in the Vanderbilt Gallery. This exhibition was unique, the idea of an architectural exhibition in collaboration with the building crafts.

F. E. Gates would won the Medal of Honor as a painter in the 1918 Architectural League of New York Exhibition. It was held in the Vanderbilt Gallery.

In “Real Estate Records and Builders Guide, Vol. 101,” the article covering this exhibition noted, “It may seem as though the scenic effect had been deliberately made to dominate over the more serious and ‘architectural’ quality of the exhibition. However, by looking beneath the surface, it will be noted that the exhibition represents the spirit of the times. We do not live with Greek simplicity. We are avid in our eagerness for progress.”

Many of these scenic artists became established and were recognized for work outside of the theatre. Whether fine art, interior design, or another visual entertainment, they continued to seek other artistic avenues. The impression that I am often left with after examining a late-nineteenth-century scenic artist’s career is their penchant for artistic growth. These men continually sought training in the arts, whether drawing or painting, and applied this knowledge to every upcoming project. So when I think about the article’s description of Moses as one “who has small opportunity to exercise his creative faculty,” there is an overwhelming sense of lost opportunities. I can’t help but feel sorry for him and share in his turmoil. He is too busy to really take time for sketching trips in 1892, such as those to Colorado and West Virginia a decade earlier. His primary travel is for the studio. It transports him all across the country, but his work continues at a manic pace. The long sketching trips with fellow artists are becoming less frequent. He might only get away for a day or so on location.

The Sosman & Landis studio is heading toward becoming a scenic factory; one that mass-produces stock scenery and drop curtains. This will remain true until the end, especially with Scottish Rite scenery entering the picture.

Even Moses’ speed is now overshadowed by potential attributed to the younger generation. F. E. Gates who is noted as averaging two drop curtains per week is heralded with completing a drop curtain with forty-eight figures in three days. In 1881, Moses had recorded, “The others were able to draw more, because they were better in the artistic end, but I had it over them when it came to speed.” He was losing his edge and others were already passing him by. In 1892 he was only thirty-six years old.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 248 – Men Who Found Fame in the Wing and Drop Curtains, the Scenic Artists

“Chicago has every reason to feel proud of her scenic coterie. Out of its hundred or more members but a few can be briefly noticed. There are memories of poor Minard Lewis, an artist essentially English in feeling, some of whose “drops” are still preserved in the Grand Opera House; Lewis [Louis] Malmsha, whose finished work graced the old McVicker stage; John Mazzanovitch, whose witchery in waters with reflected foliage and charm of middle distance in exteriors was also associated with this house. All of these are dead. Richard Halley, at present winning laurels as a painter in Europe, was the scenic artist for Kelly and Leon in the halcyon days of minstrelsy and painted marbles in distemper almost as well as Kilpatrick does them at present in oil. David Strong, “Old Trusty,” still at work in this city, is the only survivor of the good old Dusseldorf school. Everything that comes from his facile brush – and he could walk over miles of canvas of his own painting – has the quality of opaqueness peculiar to his school and seldom found nowadays.

Ernest Albert is undoubtedly the best student in architectural work in this country. Everything that his deft hand touches is full of authority and rich in color. That he is also an idealist has been demonstrated by his spectacular creations, the first at the Chicago Opera-House and Auditorium. In interior decoration, tapestries, etc., he has few equals, and follows the same medium in distemper as the aquarelists. One of the great giants of the scenic world was William Voegtlin, the greatest deceiver of transformation effects that ever walked the paint bridge. He had a style peculiarly his own and seemed to incorporate the stunning effects of all schools, but was not without artistic weakness and peculiarities. In some respects his drawing had the weakness of Morgan, but his color was wonderfully vivid, and he was a grand master with foil. In this latter respect he was only rivaled by Thomas Noxon of St. Louis, a remarkable artist in spectacle. Voegtlin often ate and slept on the paint frame for weeks at a time during the rush of a great production. Then followed a period of dissipation, when his painting was very “red.”

Walter Burridge is the best foliage painter in this country, and is in all respects as an artist of out door nature the equal of Richard Beverly, who holds the palm for the line of work in England. The leaves of his foliage appear to be agitated, and his atmospheric feeling is remarkable.

Thomas G. Moses is an artist of solid merit who does an immense amount of work, but who has small opportunity to exercise his creative faculty.”

This list of scenic artists presented in the article continues tomorrow, but I want to pause here about the entry concerning Thomas G. Moses. He would soon leave the Sosman & Landis studio again – this time for New York. I have to wonder if the article was a turning point for him. The description of Moses as a scenic artist “who has small opportunity to exercise his creative faculty” must have been quite a blown. There is nothing like reading a statement that basically says, “unable to achieve his full potential.” Moses’ creative wings were clipped by studio work. I think that this one sentence spoke to a much larger issue at hand and I doubt that Moses was ever really happy at the studio, even after he became the company’s president. He saw the money that could be made and how little profit he received in the end, especially after all of his hard work, “hustling,” and extended absences from his family.

Then there is the aspect of personal artistry and public acknowledgement of your work by colleagues. The article negates his overall contribution to scenic design and art for the stage in 1892. When you look at some the exciting theatrical effects being produced for the stage by close friends and past co-workers, it must have been frustrating. He was now reduced to standing on the sidelines. Were Sosman & Landis primarily seeking profit through numbers? The article mentioned 1300 jobs in a decade. In 1892, Moses’ life and work at the Sosman & Landis studio appears to have been reduced to primarily painting stock scenery and drop curtains. He had a steady salary, but knew that there were much more exciting projects out there.

To be continued…

For past installments on the scenic artists mentioned above, see: Ernest Albert (installment # 131, 133-139, 145, 154, and 179); Walter Burridge (installments 127, 128, 131-140, 155, 171, 179, 185, 217, 218, 225, 231, 244, and 248); David Strong (installment # 65, 123-131, 153-155, 167, 199, 215 and 248); William Voegtlin (installment # 248); Thomas Noxon (installment # 89, 92, and 136) and Louis Malmsha (installment # 123-4, 127, 131, 133, 165-66, 178 and 198).

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 247 – Men Who Found Fame in the Wing and Drop Curtains, the Scenic Artists

“Passing reference to some of the eminent American scenic artists and their work is appropriate in this connection. The late Matt Morgan was a genius, remarkable in everything, correct occasionally. His color was French, his tone exquisite, and he boasted of never using anything deeper than burnt sienna for his most profound shadows. Morgan was ambidextrous and worked with great rapidity. It is said that he could paint life-size figures in an hour, and he used a sponge with remarkable dexterity to make foliage. His “Chariot of the Sun” on a drop of the Olympic and “Birth of Drama” for the Academy are well remembered in this city.

Richard Marston, one of the pioneers of the modern school, for years painted the scenery at the Union Square in New York. His production gave vigorous incentive to rivals, for his work was remarkably accurate, and considering the fact that he painted for a stage only 28 feet deep his scenes were marvels in perspective.

Harley Merry 1886. Family photo provided by great granddaughter, Victoria Brittain. Private collection.

Harley Merry is another master I the same school in perpetuating the English ides of water-color. His dainty work is to be observed in the decoration and stock scenery of the opera house at Pullman. Merry is the greatest painter of monochromes and photographic backgrounds in the country. He has two sons who inherit his talent. Phillip Goatcher of New York, is a well-known artist of the old school, famous for his oriental color and tropical foliage.

Phillip Goatcher, scenic artist. Image from http://www.goacher.org/notables/phil

Boulder Opera House curtain by Phillip Goatcher. Kalgoorlie, Australia, 1908.

David Porter of San Francisco is another of the famous old scenic artists, whose Norman and Gothic architecture has seldom been surpassed. In the same class is Joseph Pigott of New Orleans, whose production of “Aida” at the French Opera House, in 1878, was recognized at the greatest operatic spectacle up to that time.

One of the foremost figures in the scenic world today is Henry Hoyt, an artist of remarkable power and versatility. In architecture he is a trifle irregular but always interesting, has a taste for the rococo, and in the duplication of plushes and velvet textures he is unequaled. That he is facile in clever conceits and delicate color is testified in his output of pink and green ball-rooms for the New York Casino. “The Isle of Champagne” produced here last summer was one of his hasty but brilliant ideas.

And the list in the article will continue in tomorrow’s post. I have covered some of these scenic artists in the past installments and examined their influence on scenic art and design. To see some of their contributions discussed in past posts, see: Richard Marston (installments #124, 127, 138, 140, 171, 179 and 215); Harley Merry (installments #127, 133, 136, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143); Henry Hoyt (installments #138, 140 and 179); and Phillip Goatcher (installments #133 and 217). At a later time, I will cover David Porter and his family.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 246 – Men Who Found Fame in the Wing and Drop Curtains, the Scenic Studio

Illustration of the paint bridge at the [Chicago] Auditorium. Published in a Chicago Sunday Tribune article, 1892.

“The scene bridge being the highest inhabited portion of the stage few people are familiar with its surroundings, or how the artist gets his effects. He paints primarily for location in a great “shadow box,” which is the stage, always making calculations for distances, angles, and the witchery of lights. Scenic art of high grade is, however, regarded today as only different from other studio art in its breadth – a mere question of scale. As to the quality of finish it may be remarked that when scenery is lacking in detail it is due to lack of knowledge in the painter, lack of time, certainly not in accord with any principle of stage painting. Formerly the theatrical painter was expected to be truly catholic in his accomplishments, and was called to attempt any subject that the playwright might designate. Now this work, as in other lines of art, is falling more to specialists, and with far better results in figure, drapery, landscape, or architectural design. In spite of many drawbacks in the past, scene painting as a school has been an excellent one. Witness many good men who have left it to win distinction in the galleries of Europe and America: De Loutherbourg, Porter, Boulet, Jacquet, Lavignoc, Leitch, Stanfield, Roberts, Allen, Cole, Detaille, Kingsbury, Potast, Rymnosky, Wets, Guetherz, Peigelheim, H. Fillaratta, Homer Emmons, Charles Graham, and J. Francis Murphy. It will be observed that this list has members of the English Royal Academy, some famous Germans and Frenchmen, and, too, America is ably represented.

Scenic painting is not necessarily a course art because one cannot read a square yard of a scene 70×40 feet at a distance of a few feet. To judge any picture one should be sufficient distance to allow the eye to take in the entire subject. On the basis of this test a well and carefully painted scene will be found to be as finished as the majority of pictures, or even more so.

Extending over the rear of the stage on a level with the “fly gallery” is the scene bridge. It is from six to eight feet in width, but this is the distance from which the artist must regulate his perspective and study his color effect. The canvas to be painted having been glued in its frames, and hung in position so that its top is level with the gallery, the great frame on either side of the bridge being raised or lowered as occasion requires, the canvas is treated to a coat of priming by an assistant. The artist then goes over this surface with a charcoal crayon enlarging the scale of design from a small model previously prepared. He may then outline detail in ink and dust off the charcoal. As the color work is all done in distemper and dries rapidly, the artist must not only be active but certain in the performance of his task. If the scene be an exterior, particular care must be observed in the blending of the sky, as laps of color will ruin atmospheric effect. In using distemper the artist must paint solidly, otherwise his work will take the dirty complexion of thin oil and be ruined. He must avoid powerful greens which become coarse; strong blues which grow black; exaggerate yellows which are robbed of strength by excessive light; and, if the management is economical, use carmine sparingly.

Limited space will not permit of any description of scenic work in interesting detail. It is a curious fact that in Europe scenery is painted on the floor instead of having the canvas stretched on a framework. The original outfit of the Auditorium was thus painted in Vienna. Long-handled brushes are used in this work and the artists perch high on stools to gain their idea of perspective.

Note: I was fascinated that the article mentioned the first scenery for the Chicago Auditorium was painted in the European style – on the floor and not on a vertical paint frame. Then there is the suggestion that this only pertained to the first set, not all other painted scenery produced for the venue. Furthermore, the article included an illustration of the Auditorium paint bridge.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 245 – Men Who Found Fame in the Wing and Drop Curtains, the History of Scenic Art

The same year that Sosman & Landis’ Annex studio opened on the West Side, an article appeared in the Chicago Sunday Tribune, “Paint Mimic Scenes, Men Who Have Found Fame in the Wing and Drop Curtains” (Dec, 18, 1892, page 41). The title was followed with a brief recap of what would be covered in the article – “Art Required to Produce the Gorgeous Stage Effects That Delight Modern Audiences – Cost of Setting an Elaborate Spectacular – How Scenery Designed for Theaters Is Painted – Chicago Is Universally Acknowledged as the World’s Greatest Scenic Center – Work That is Done.”

Article in the Chicago Sunday Tribune that looks at the history of scenic art and the men that produce painted scenery, 1892

I am posting portions of this article over the next few days due to its length and the information that is covered. Here is the first installment:

“The theatrical stage in China is the oldest in the world, yet it is barren of scenic investment today as it was in its most primitive period. In Elizabethan age, during the greatest epoch of dramatic achievement, no attempt was made at scenic illusion. The stage was almost bare; properties and costumes were few and simple; painted scenery was unknown; tapestry-covered scenes marked the entrances and exits; locality was indicated by a placard bearing the name: “The Forest of Arden,” “Rome,” or “Venice,” as the case might be; while the canopied seat, the rough couch,” or the table crowded with tankards served for the throne-room, the bed-chamber, or the wayside inn.

The past simplicity was natural to the stage, beauty and pageantry were integral parts of daily life, and the theatre needed only to suggest them. Today, less showy life has reversed conditions, leaving the citizen no longer an actor. As a mere spectator he demands the picturesque. Perhaps even the Puritans would wonder at the plainness of our daily attire. Processions have almost disappeared, court ceremonial has simplified, and color is a passing incident as far as its current influence in civil life is concerned. Taste, beauty, and historical accuracy together with most liberal and enlightened expenditures for their attachment appear to be the present characteristics of stage art. Realism undreamed of by our progenitors, and correctness that astonishes the precise student of the drama and art lovers have characterized the theatre this last quarter of the nineteenth century. Occasionally in time past ambitions and art-loving managers have made elaborate productions, rich in spectacular effects; but they were fitful and could not, in either ingenuity or point of finish, compare with the sustained scenic effect that now attends nearly all forms of theatrical entertainment.

The portentous and striking combination of play and spectacle is largely due to the influence of Henry Irving. Rare artistic discrimination and liberality have invariably given distinction to his productions. Alma Tadema, or Seymour Lucas, or other famous artists with antiquarian knowledge have furnished designs for costumes, while scenery came from master brushes of William Tellin [Telbin] or Hawes Cravens. The late Lawrence Barrett followed the precedent established by his distinguished brother actor from across the ocean in productions marked by scenic merit; and now the fashion has become universal from high tragedy down through the repertoire even to rollicking farce comedy. Occasionally the complaint is voiced that “the play was lost in the setting; the painter made the playwright indifferent.” This may be true in some cases, notably burlesque or melodrama, but fine scenic investiture cannot belittle good poetry.

Chicago is today the largest scenic supply center in the country. Of the eighteen theatres in this city the major portion have their own scenic artists. Three mammoth studios here send their art product as far east as Maine and all over the West to the shores of the Pacific. The oldest firm here in this line of work claims to have supplied nearly 1,300 opera houses, theatres, and halls with scenery during the last ten years, and of late business has increased enormously. All the scenic effects used in Modjeska’s recent picturesque revival of “Henry VIII” were painted in this city and used for the first time in New York. Many instances might be cited where productions of similar artistic value presented by the late Lawrence Barrett, Joseph Jefferson, William Crane, and others have been furnished in Chicago and presented for the first time in New York, Boston, or Philadelphia, winning recommendation in spite of sectional prejudice against Western art product.”

The illustration of a Chicago scenic studio that accompanied the 1892 article.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 242 – Thomas G. Moses and the Fisher Opera House

In November of 1891, Thomas G. Moses and Ed Loitz left for San Diego, California to paint scenery for the John C. Fisher Opera House. Moses wrote, ”Here was another fine job. The climate was great.” His heart would remain in California for the remainder of his career and he would seek out employment along the west coast many times.

The Fisher Opera House in San Diego where Thomas G. Moses painted the scenery in 1891. The venue opened in January of 1892.

Moses recorded that the supervising architect for the theater was Mr. Haupt, “a clever fellow” whom he became very “chummy” with throughout the duration of the project.

The opening show was performed by the William T. Calton Opera Company to a packed house in January 1892. Moses refers to this project as “the first real theatre build in San Diego.” He wrote “When I painted the curtain it was left wholly up to me to select the subject. I took a street scene in Verona, Italy. There was a life size figure on the very bottom of the curtain as there was no border or frame. The figure looked as if it was standing on the stage. One evening I was standing in the rear – the curtain was down. Two young men came up to it and one said, ‘Hurry up, the curtain is up.’ He had only glanced at the curtain and seeing the lower half thought my figure was a real one. Quite a compliment.”

Fisher opened his opera hose on January 11, 1892. The theater’s seating capacity for the space was 1400 (approximately 420 seats in the parquet and dress circle, 420 seats in the first balcony, and 70 seats in the twelve gallery boxes). The venue was promoted to be “one of the finest ever constructed in San Diego – probably the best theater on the West Coast in its time.” The building was situated on the entire block between Fourth and Fifth Streets for 200 feet. The entrance to the theater was Romanesque surmounted by a turret that rose 120 feet above the sidewalk. The first two stories were constructed of granite with the top three of pressed brick. The entrance was located on Fourth Street with the stage door on Fifth.

The Fisher Theater was also one of the first theaters in the country to use a complete electrical system. It is interesting to note, however, that space was also left for the use of gaslight on the stage. The inclusion this second system, although not practical at all, was intended as a precautionary measure. The electrical system consisted of 1,000 “sixteen-candle power” Edison incandescent lamps. This gave both the auditorium and the stage an illumination never encountered in a West Coast performance venue before this one.

John C. Fisher was described as “a rotund Kentuckian who came to town in 1887 as manager of a furniture store.” He was soon president of the Chamber of Commerce, an active in the cable-car company, and an owner of the Florence Hotel. Moses wrote that, “The Hotel Florence was on a high point overlooking the whole bay and the country was also fine. There were many ‘one lungers’ at the hotel, as the majority of guests were idlers. They had a lot of time to be very inquisitive as to my very active business and any of them called on me at the theatre. I more than enjoyed every moment that I was there. I met Miss Joy of Portland, Oregon, one evening in the hotel. I didn’t recognize her. Mr. Fisher called me to the veranda and she overheard it and spoke to me. She and her Mother were spending the winter in California. I didn’t have my overalls on and she had to remark at the difference it made in me.”

Moses continued, “I was strolling down town one December morning in my shirt sleeves – too warm for a coat. A battleship was coming into harbor, firing a salute. It was a fine sight. I afterwards went aboard the same ship. The last day of the year I finished the job and was forced to file a mechanics lien on the building to protect ourselves. I took a dip in the surf in December and enjoyed it. There was a good swimming pool at Coronado Beach Hotel, which was patronized quite often.” How very interesting. The mechanics lien was just tossed in there between leisure activities. I wonder what that was all about?

The Fisher Opera House changed hands in 1902 when it became the Isis Theatre. Later it was resold and renamed the Colonial Theatre as depicted in this photograph.

To be continued…

[Emphasis

Much of the history was from San Diego History online. Here is the http://www.sandiegohistory.org/collection/photographs/fisher/

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 234 – Thomas G. Moses and the Grand Opera House in Ogden, Utah

The Grand Opera House in Ogden, Utah. Scenery installation by Thomas G. Moses, assisted by Edward Loitz, with stage machinery by Joe Wikoff. Venue opened December 29, 1890. Illustration of the Ogden Grand Opera House floor plan from the December 30, 1890, in “The Standard” (No. 308, Vol. 3, front page)

The Ogden Grand Opera House was partially funded by the Browning Brothers and opened with Emma Abbot’s performance of “Carmen.” A full-page review about this new entertainment venue was published on the December 30, 1890, in “The Standard” (No. 308, Vol. 3, front page). Here are some details from the article pertaining to the stage space and painted front curtain by Thomas G. Moses:

Illustration of the Ogden Grand Opera House floor plan from the December 30, 1890, in “The Standard” (No. 308, Vol. 3, front page)

The auditorium was 65 feet between the walls in width and 72 feet in length. Seating accommodated 1700 people with was overflow available in the foyer and other rooms that could accommodate another 100 people. The first floor of the auditorium was divided into orchestra and orchestra circle, while the gallery was divided into a balcony and family circle with a second gallery above. The proscenium arch measured 32 feet in height by 38 feet in width. The distance between the curtain line to the footlights was five feet. The distance from the footlights to the back wall was 45 feet.

Illustration of the Ogden Grand Opera House from the December 30, 1890, in “The Standard” (No. 308, Vol. 3, front page). Scenery was contracted by Sosman & Landis and painted by Thomas G. Moses and Edward Loitz.

A sounding board with “artfully painted figures,” measuring 11 feet by 65 feet above the proscenium arch. This reminded me of the proscenium arch that I just saw at Matthews Opera House in Spearfish, South Dakota. In Spearfish, the painted figures above the sounding board by the Twin City Scenic Company depicted portraits of Shakespeare, Joseph Jefferson, and Edwin Booth.

Sound board with painted portraits of Edwin Booth, Shakespeare and Joseph Jefferson above the proscenium arch in Spearfish, South Dakota (Matthews Opera House, Twin City Scenic Co. , 1906). This is similar to what the article describes for the sounding board with “artfully painted figures” in Ogden, Utah, at the Grand Opera House.

Shakespeare painted on the sound board above the proscenium arch in Spearfish, South Dakota (Matthews Opera House, Twin City Scenic Co. , 1906). This is similar to what the article describes for the sounding board with “artfully painted figures” in Ogden, Utah, at the Grand Opera House.

Joseph Jefferson painted on the sound board above the proscenium arch in Spearfish, South Dakota (Matthews Opera House, Twin City Scenic Co. , 1906). This is similar to what the article describes for the sounding board with “artfully painted figures” in Ogden, Utah, at the Grand Opera House.

Edwin Booth painted on the sound board above the proscenium arch in Spearfish, South Dakota (Matthews Opera House, Twin City Scenic Co. , 1906). This is similar to what the article describes for the sounding board with “artfully painted figures” in Ogden, Utah, at the Grand Opera House.

Ogden’s stage measured forty-two feet in width by seventy feet in height. There were with four sets of “modern grooves hanging twenty-feet above the stage.” The height to the fly girder was twenty-seven feet and to the rigging loft fifty-six feet. At this same time, the proscenium arch would increase from 32 feet high by 38 feet wide to 36 feet high by 38 ½ feet wide in 1905, suggesting a renovation (Julius Cahn’s Theatrical Guide).

There was a paint bridge planked by two counterweighted paint frames, each measuring thirty feet by thirty-seven feet in size. This is where all of the scenery would have been painted onsite by Moses and Ed Loitz. In Fort Scott, Kansas, Moses had also constructed a paint frame on site to use for the drops. The wood was later incorporated into top battens, unlike in Ogden, Utah, where it was left to hang for future projects. The Ogden Grand Opera House also had two quarter traps, a center trap, and one thirty foot bridge. “The Standard” article printed that all of these features were “fitted in the most appropriate styles.”

The article also noted,“2,500 feet of rope used for hoisting and cording the counterweights and 12,000 yards of canvas used for scenery purposes.” Based on standard Sosman and Landis drop construction, 143 yards of fabric would have been used for a 33’ x 39’ drop (36” wide muslin with vertical seams). This would be enough fabric to create 83 full-size drops. Based on the inventory of past collections, I believe that there would have been approximately 50 drops with the remaining fabric being used for wings, borders, and flats that would lash together to form box sets.

For me, however, the most interesting aspect of the entire front-page article was the description of the scenic artists and the front curtain painted by Moses.

“The stage equipment will be equal in every respect to any metropolitan theatre in the country. Sosman & Landis, the scenic artists have been represented here by Thos. G. Moses, an artist of wide reputation and ability, who has fitted up some of the largest and finest theaters in the country for the firm he represents. His work reflects great credit on Sosman & Landis and himself.

The drop curtain is without doubt one of Mr. Moses best efforts. It is purely oriental in design and color, and represents a view in the Orient from the interior of a mosque. The delicate blue sky is softly blended to a warm grey of the hazy distant city, which is seen beyond the river. The greys and purples of the middle distance form a charming contrast between the extreme delicate distance and the warm supply foreground where the minarets and domes of the ruined mosque stand in bold relief against the clear sky, and fairly glitter in the strong sunlight. The cool green palms and delicate vines lend a very picturesque effect to the architecture, while the lazy natives and ungainly looking camels put life to the picture and give the landscape a most decided oriental feeling. A cool shadow is thrown across the immediate foreground which partially throws the arch of the interior in shadow, where the polished wood is thrown in strong relief against the landscape and is nicely draped with blue plush with a lining of ecru silk, which falls in soft folds on the polished floor, on which is spread an oriental rug, with a vase of flowers and gold and silver urns, etc., gives the whole finish which is artistic and homelike.

Mr. Thomas G. Moses has been assisted in his work by Mr. Edward Loitz, a rising young artist and Mr. Wikoff, the stage machinist. The combination is one that could only be created with much study and one gifted by nature for this special class of art. The picture sets well its beautiful frame, it’s coloring is rich, the distance is good and the foreground approaches near nature. The mechanical arrangements of this, as well as the asbestos curtain, are of the most approved description, being hung and counterweighted to hoist speedily. To the right and left are encore entrances, obviating the necessity of drawing the curtain aside when necessary for the performers to appear before it.”

To be continued…

Although very little is included of the Grand Opera House scenery or building, Beth Browning’s 1947 thesis Brigham Young University, “History of Drama in Ogden,” may be of interest to someone. Here is the link to her paper: http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi…She eyewitness accounts of family members and interesting stories surrounding the theatre community in Ogden.