In the midst of both
global and personal strife, P. Dodd Ackerman explored a new stage aesthetic at
home and abroad. Newspapers would later
report, “Mr. Ackerman, as early
as 1912, saw the coming of the modern decorative art into the theater of this
country, an art that had been in vogue for some time in Germany, Austria,
Russia, and to a degree in France and Italy. Feeling that the time would come
when scenic painting and theater decorations would respond to the modernist
movement and, in order to be fully prepared when this movement came, he went
abroad to study” (New York Tribune, 27 March 1921, page 48).
By 1920 Ackerman remarried and was on a different trajectory with new wife
and young son in tow; he was becoming part of a theatre movement.
1921 Bauhaus Color Wheel
On May 1, 1921, the “New York Tribune” included an article about color
theory for the stage, interviewing P. Dodd Ackerman (page 4).
“Colors Vibrate Same as Music, Designer Says” was the heading for the
article.
Here is the article in its entirety:
“P. Dodd Ackerman Explains How Scenic Art is an Accessory to the Drama.
“There have been more radical changes in scenic painting for the stage in
the last three years than in fifty years previous,” says P. Dodd Ackerman, who
painted and designed scenery for “The Broken Wing,” now running at the
Forty-eighth Street Theater.
“Where in the past color was thrown indiscriminantly on canvas and shadow
lights were employed to give the outline of figure, all of which seemed to
produced the illusion of naturalness, this situation no longer holds.
Psychology, that science of mind which but a few years ago was understood by
only the elect but to-day is understood by millions, has exerted an influence
on the painting of scenery for theatrical use. It has brought about a realization
that color affects human beings and synchronizes with human emotions if
properly applied, and by this same token can create a disturbing element that
makes for discord.
“Colors vibrate the same as music tones. The effect of color on the
emotions of an audience is a subject that has long been a problem for serious
study by the producer of plays, the costumer and the scenic artist. Why red
should be the color to indicate danger or green safety no one knows, but still
the fact remains that such is the case. Whether red, with its suggestion of
fire, or green, of verdant fields, has anything to do with this still remains a
matter of speculation. The emotional vibration sent out by red of the prismic
ray is known to scientists to be the most powerful and excitiative, while the
blue and violet are the most sedative. Lumière, the greatest of all authorities
on color influence, after a series of tests covering many years, described the
effects of color as the engine that propelled the various phases of human emotion
to a perfect consummation of desired results.
“With the stage production reaching its present state of artistic
perfection, the scenic artist can no longer paint his scenery merely to
represent the outward appearance of the requirements in the manuscript. He must
read the manuscript as carefully as the producer, who determines on his reading
whether he is willing to make a presentation of it. The artist must make a
serious and analytical study of the script and determine the predominating
emotion of each act and choose his color scheme for the scenery in order to
attain a perfect synchronization of color and emotion. By this means alone can
a happy blending of scenery and dialogue, together with the acting of the
company, produce the effect hoped for by the author and the manager to obtain
complete success for their efforts.
“Speaking in an elementary way, for the purpose of providing simple
experiments of color influence, the reader can easily determine the effect of
amber in creating depression. By the use of pink exhilaration is promoted. A
room done entirely in green simulates morbidity, while on the other hand blue
is soothing. It has been discovered that the deeper and darker the tones of
blue used as a decorative color scheme the more soothing and peaceful and cam
is the influence on human emotion. Brown is a non-emotional color. It creates a
sense of firmness and solidity. These suggestions can be utilized to as good
advantage in home decoration as they have been in stage scenery. A sombre
setting, with a flash of color, upsets synchronization of emotion, with the
color scheme of a setting, just as awkward words clash in a musical score with
notes intended to be complementary thereto.
“Lighting is so closely allied with stage settings that if there is not a
unity of purpose between the two the audience gets the discord, which in this
instance is unpleasing to the eye. In consequence thereof the play fails to
satisfy and good acting is curtailed of effect.”
In 1920, Thomas G. Moses wrote,
“Binghamton, New York, work came in during February and proved to be a good
contract.” He was referring to the
Strand Theatre on Chenago street in Binghamton, New York. When the theater
opened that spring, the “Press and Sun-Bulletin” reported, “In the decorations some
of some of the best artists in the country have been employed…The asbestos curtain
is decorated to harmonize with the rest of the house. The drop curtain, of
blue, is hand-painted to correspond in tone with the draperies. The scenery is
all of the newest and latest design” (6 March 1920, page 12). A picture of the
asbestos curtain was pictured alongside the article about the new theater.
Asbestos curtain at the Strand Theater by Thomas G. Moses, 1920.The Strand Theater in Binghamton, New York, 1920.
Local headlines announced,
“Theater Built in Record Time Despite Delays. Contractor Badgley Erects Strand
in About Seven Months of Actual Work. Best Materials Are Used. Binghamton’s New
Playhouse Is Absolutely Fireproof, Declares Builder” (“Press and Sun-Bulletin,”
6 March 1920, page 13). The article continued, “Work on the Strand Theater,
Binghamton’s new playhouse, which will be opened on Monday, was begun on May
20, 1919, under the direction of A. E. Badgley, who has since had full charge
of its construction.
“Inasmuch as the [work] was
interrupted entirely for a month and partially for two weeks more by the
contractor’s inability to get deliveries of steel, the theater was actually
completed in approximately seven months’ working time. This constitutes a
record of which both Mr. Badgley and the members of the company are rather
proud.
“The celerity with which the
work was done becomes even more surprising when it is realized that a large
part of it had to be performed in the face of the most severe weather
conditions in many years. Cold wave followed cold wave, but the builders early
got the building enclosed and thereafter work proceeded almost as fast as it
would have in Summer.
“The long wait occasioned by
the none delivery of steel came in September and October and was due to
conditions prevalent throughout the country. The contractor obtained his steel
rather than more quickly than he had first expected, and the work thereafter
went with a rush. But for the unavoidable delay the theater could have been
opened by Christmas.
“Mr. Badgley said today that
none but the best materials, steel, brick and concrete, were used in the
building, and that it is absolutely fireproof.
An unusual feature is that no
posts have been used anywhere in the auditorium. The balcony is supported by
steel girders weighing18 and 20 tons, leaving a clear space everywhere in the
auditorium.
“The seating capacity is given
by the management as approximately 1,600.
“The ground dimensions of the
theater are 134 by 60 feet and the height from the floor to the dome is 50
feet. The stage opening is 32 feet and the height to the top of the proscenium
arch, 26 feet. The stage is ample in size for the most elaborate vaudeville
offerings.
“In the construction of the
building there was an unusual freedom from delays sometimes caused by error in
the plans and the things overlooked. Aside from the delay arising from the
difficulty in obtaining steel, everything went with great smoothness.
“Names of Builders. The
following men and concerns furnished materials and workmanship for the theater:
Contractor in charge of construction, A. E. Badgkey, Stone Opera House
building; plumbing, Robert J. Malane, State Street; heating plant, Runyan &
Ogden, Commericial Avenue; cement, J. W. Ballard company, Jarvis Street;
draperies, Sisson Brothers-Welden company, Court Street.”
I am pausing to comment on the
draperies credited to the Sisson Brother-Welden Company. The draperies mentioned
were for the rest of the building and not the stage. Sisson Brother-Welden
company was a local dry goods and supply store, not a theatrical manufacturing
firm.
Sisson Brothers Welden Company was a local store, not a theatrical manufacturing firm capable of producing painted scenes for the stage.
The article continued: “carpets
and furniture, Sanitary Bedding and Furniture company, Chenago Street; roofing,
Binghamton Slag Roofing company, State Street; signs, Georger F. Ullman
company, State Street; hardware, Crocker & Ogden, Court Street; tinning,
Sullivan & Brothers, State Street’ plaster work, Maltby & company,
Corning; X-Ray Reflector company, 31 West 46th street, New York
City; automatic ticket sellers and cash registers. Automatic Ticket Selling and
Cash Resgister company, 1737 Broadway, New York City; organ, Kimball Organ
Company, Chicago; decorating, Gustave Brandt company, Chicago.”
Interesting that there is no
individual note for the scenery and stage machinery, especially as the asbestos
curtain my Moses was pictured alongside the article. However, the Strand
primarily featured photoplays. The article concluded with, “The photoplays will
be supplied by the following companies, Goldwyn Distributing Company, 200 Peral
Street, Buffalo; Famous players-Laskey Corporation, 215 Franklin Street,
Buffalo; Select Pictures Corporation, Franklin street, Buffalo; United Artists,
29 Seventh Avenue, New York City; First National Exhibitors, Inc., Franklin
Street, Buffalo.”
Of particular interest to me
was the X-Ray lighting system. On March 6, the “Binghamton Press” reported, “The
lighting effect are obtained by means of the latest X-Ray system, used at
present in only a few theaters in the United States. All the lights are
concealed in ‘coves’ and are controlled by a dimming system so that they cannot
only be dimmed or made to blaze brilliantly at will, but also to shed light of
any color desired…On the ceiling are panels shaded in light fine delicate
colors, and reaching entirely across the theater, above the proscenium arch, is
a striking mural painting. This, like the other paintings, is lighted with
battery of X-Ray lights in front of the balcony rail, making it stand out
prominently. The dome, also beautifully decorated, is lighted with X-Ray lights
which many be manipulated to create any color effect desired.”
X-Ray lights in front of the balcony rail at the Strand Theater in Binghamton, New York, 1920.
For future film features, the
article continued, “The projection room is the back of the balcony and entirely
out of the way. It is equipped with two of the latest Simplex projecting
machines. These will be operated with direct current, which assures steady and
flickerless pictures.”
On June 14, 1919, the “Brooklyn
Citizen” reported that six well-known scenic artists were engaged at the
Metropolitan Opera for the coming season – Boris Anisfelt, Joseph Urban, Norman
Bell-Geddes, James Fox, Willy Pogany and Pieretto Bianco (page 10).
Two weeks earlier, Norman
Bell-Geddes was quoted as saying, “The painted scenery is the material, the
lighting is the spirit” (New York Tribune, June 1, 1919, page 37). It was now light
that gave spirit to the scene, no longer the skill of the scenic artist. This
is one of the moments highlighted in many theatre history books, a professed pinnacle
moment in American theatre. It signals a departure from the past and the continued
evolution of theatre based on a chronological depiction of historical events. What
it replaced is often dismissed; there may be only a paragraph or two written
about the prior century of American popular entertainment. The painted illusion
produced by generations of scenic artists is abandoned for the new stage art.
This is a significant moment, especially if we contemplate what was lost.
Norman Bell-Geddes
By 1919, Thomas G. Moses
(1856-1934) was sixty-two years old. He had been a scenic artist for over 45
years and founded three scenic studios.
In addition to working as his own boss, Moses had also worked for
Chicago Studios, New York Studios, and at Sosman & Landis. At Sosman &
Landis, he had transitioned from vice-president to president by 1915, first
starting with the company in 1880.
Now imagine, you are an extremely skilled and a well-known artist picking up a newspaper. You are reading about the up-and-coming generation of scenic artists. By this point you have trained at least three new generations of artists, possibly four. Many of your one-time paint boys are leading designers in the field. The article that you are reading signals the ending of your era and the demand for a new art form with a new set of scenic skills. You are now lumped in with the “past,” and this past needs to be completely destroyed for the new generation and new art to proceed. The older generation of scenic artists, like Moses, were part of the “establishment,” moreover part of the “problem.” Unlike the generation before you, whose passing was lamented and the skills of the artists fondly recalled, everything that you worked for is now a target. The American theatre industry splintered into factions, with one segment denouncing the significance of another. We no longer lifted each other up, supplementing established skill sets with new technology. Instead, we promoted new art forms by destroying the past, as well as anything perceived as accepted or traditional. This attitude helped usher out the romantic realism on the stage and use of painted illusion, severing connections to the past. It is a fascinating time and one where the new artists explain, ‘If managers would only realize that it is not necessary to spend such large sums on scenery.” This statement took shot at the scenic studios, such as Sosman & Landis. This statement threatened the living wages earned by those who spent decades perfecting their skills.
On June 1, 1919, an
article in the “New York Tribune” describes the “new art” in glowing terms and
as breaking through the “barbed wire of inertia and stupidity, which always
blocks the way of any innovator.” The article continued to explain that young
scenic artists are leaping the “trenches of opposition and safely passing
through the barrage of ridicule” (page 37). They are labeled the “soldiers of
the new art,” and all were “native born Americans.”
The article headline
stated, “Mr. Bell-Geddes and Others. The Young American Scene Painter Arrives –
Present Activity of the Younger Generation Made Possible by Work of Urban and
Anisfeld.” The article provides great
historical context for Moses’ career in the 1920s, as he continues to encounter
ever-increasing obstacles and the demand for painted scenery diminishes.
Here is the article in its
entirety:
“Our singers and actors
may not equal those of our past, our composers and dramatists may lack
inspiration and vitality, but at least we have our scene painters. In the
establishment of a national school of opera or drama this may be beginning hind
end foremost, but some beginning is better than none at all. The Metropolitan
Opera House, so long the abode of extreme conservatism, has of late years even
been taking the lead in the encouragement of what is new in the art of the
scenic artist. It has given us Urban, and Paquerau, and Pogany, and Boris
Anisfeld, and though we still have the glittering gullibilities of Mario Sala,
of Milan, Metropolitan audiences no longer believe that this painter’s ‘Aida’
is a masterpiece of scenic investiture. Whatever may have happened to our ears,
our eyes have been opened.
It undoubtedly is Josef
Urban to whom we owe managerial recognition of the new art. He broke through
the barbed wire of inertia and studpidity which always blocks the way of the
innovator, leaped the trenches of opposition, and passed safely through the
barrage of ridicule. Behind him came the others, younger men all, who dug in
and held their positions, where at last reports they were considering the offer
of an armistice. And happy we may be to realize that the youngest of these
soldiers of the new art are native born Americans. Robert Edmond Jones, Rollo
Peters and Norman Bell-Geddes, Granville parker, Arthur Hopkins and the Russian
Ballet have acquainted us with Mr. Jones’s work. Mr. Peters has painted sets
for Mrs. Fiske, for Henry Miller, and now for the Theatre Guild; Mr.
Bell-Geddes last season made fifteen Broadway theatre productions and one for
the Metropolitan. It is indeed these young artists who offer what is most vital
and significant in the American theatre to-day. Before them our actors and our
playwrights and our composers ought to hang their heads; they have technique,
but they also have courage and ideals. In short, they are real. When our
Broadway playwright begins to talk of the drama our yawns are uncontrollable;
when our actors, though here we will make a few blessed exceptions, speak of
acting, we remember we have an engagement at the dentist’s; but when our young
scene painters discuss scene painting we sit down and listen.
The career of Mr.
Bell-Geddes is of interest in this connection. It shows how these young men
originally were enthusiastic amateurs, whose interest gradually deepened until
they virtually were forced into the theatre. Mr. Geddes, whose painting of the
scenery of ‘Legend’ at the Metropolitan at once brought him into prominence,
was born in Detroit, and attended for a very short while art schools in
Cleveland and Chicago. He then took up the portrait painting and magazine
illustrating, in which work he was exceedingly successful. At that time,
however, he also wrote a play, but, finding it of a type unsuited to the
average theatre stage, her determined to make a study of the theatre. In
furtherance of this plan, he obtained access to the stage of one of the Detroit
theatre, where he studied all that went on, and where he studied all that went
on, and where he helped the stage hands and electricians. He also constructed
in his studio a stage of his own, on which he made experiments in all sorts of
appliances, especially in the matter of lighting. After leaving Detroit he
lived for two years in Los Angeles, where he designed the scenery for a stock
company and further improved his knowledge of practical stage conditions. His
first work in the East was in designing the last act set of ‘Shanewis’ at the
Metropolitan Opera House, after which the Broadway managers seized upon him. It
is only in his set of ‘The Legend’,’ however, that New York has as yet allowed
him even to moderately full sway, but in the coming production at the
Metropolitan of Henry Hadley’s new opera, ‘Cleopatra’s Night,’ he hopes to show
Metropolitan audiences what he is capable of accomplishing. Meanwhile he has
finished designs for settings of ‘Pelléas et Mélisande’ and of ‘King Lear,’ and
is about to set to work on another play. It is these settings and those which
he made for a stock company in Milwaukee last summer, of which he and Robert
Edmond Jones were directors, which he hopes will be considered his, rather than
the work he has done for Broadway managers.
‘We young chaps ought to
be tremendously grateful to such men as Josef Urban and Boris Anisfeld,’ said
Mr. Geddes recently. ‘These men with world-wide reputations have opened the
door through which we youngsters, who are in the developing stage, can pass.
Without them, our enthusiasm and whatever merit we may express probably would
have been powerless to break down the innate conservativism of the average
American manager. But those men have opened the eyes both of the public and of
the managers, and so we now are able to get an opportunity of being seen. Of
course, we often have to compromise, and of course the average Broadway show
gives little scope for imagination, but, at least, we get in our hand.’
Mr. Geddes believes that
lighting counts for more than painting in the modern history.
‘The painted scenery is
the material, the lighting is the spirit,’ is the way he puts it. ‘There is no
need of modern scenery being so horribly expensive. With proper lighting it is
possible to do almost anything, the only trouble being that the lights are no
only arranged scientifically in most of our theatres. With a triad of any color
or combination of colors can be obtained and extraordinary effects in
intensifying the mood can be produced be merely intensifying the lights.
‘The science of color is
definite, yet the average stage manager knows nothing of it, save in the barest
outline in Europe Adolph Appia has perhaps gone further in this respect that
any other manager, though Reinhardt has absorbed and applied the ideas of
others. Gordon Craig was of use as a path breaker, but he writes and talks
rather than carries out his ideas. In America Belasco makes the height of the
old idea, and because of his thoroughness and care he deserves high credit.
Arthur Hopkins has been extraordinarily open to the new art and other managers,
and, of course, Signor Gatti-Casazza, are showing increasing interest in it
all.
‘If managers would only
realize that it is not necessary to spend such large sums on scenery., the new
ideas would travel more quickly even then at present. Let me give an instance;
Edward Sheldon’s ‘Garden of Paradise,’ was only given several years ago at the
Century Theatre with scenery costing $54,000. The play was a failure. Last
summer we gave it is Milwaukee with the cheapest sort of scenery and yet, by
the use of proper lighting the settings were of a beauty, which, I believe, was
equal to the Urban sets at the Century. Moreover, our production was the
greatest success of what lighting can do. The scene in the foyer with the
Trilby singing in the theatre was accomplished by the simplest means, yet we
produced the atmosphere and by a gradual intensifying f the lights brought the
mood to such a vibrancy that the audience went wild.
‘I firmly believe that the
proscenium arch destroys much of the illusion of reality and have patented
plans for a theatre in which the present stage is replaced by a dome within
which sets may be placed and lowered into the basement, where they are run off
on a truck and another set immediately raised into its place. There is no
curtain, the scenes being totally obliterated by the use of lights. Moreover,
in this theatre I have produced three auditoriums, the largest of which seats
three hundred people more than the Century Theatre without the use of a
gallery, while the seat furthest in the van is the same distance from the stage
as the last row if the Metropolitan Opera House. In this theatre each row of
seats is an aisle, the auditorium entering and leaving parallel to the stage.
Indeed, the theatre has illimitable possibilities of improvement. Managers are
naturally conservative, but once they see the practicability of new ideas they
will adopt them. It simply takes time to make them see it.’
This tonic note of
restrained optimism is what the American theatre, be it dramatic or operatic,
sorely needs. Our young scenic artists are furnishing it. If only our
playwrights and our actors – well, our own Mr. Brown has referred to our ‘Ostermoor
school of drama.’ In opera we have had the ‘Pipe of Desire,’ ‘The Canternury
Pilgrims,’ ‘The Legend,’ and ‘The Temple Dancer,’ if only our composers – well,
as least we have our singers.”
Chicago’s Empress Theater opened
in 1913. The venue was located in the Englewood neighborhood of Chicago. Six
years later the building was renovated and purchased new scenery. The Chicago
Studio of Sosman & Landis was contracted to supply the new sets. This is
not to be confused with Chicago Studios, the company that Thomas G. Moses
worked for in 1919 after leaving New York Studios.
In 1919, Moses wrote, “A
new contract was entered into between the Chicago Studios and myself for one
year. I hope it will prove to be a paying one in which I participate in the
profits and a raise in salary, which means my old salary of $100.00 and a
bonus.” Chicago Studios was a competitor of Sosman & Landis. It was also
the same name as midwestern branch of Sosman & Landis Scene painting Studios,
making the history a bit complicated. On Nov. 1, 1919, Chicago Studios placed a
want ad in the “Chicago Tribune”:
“MEN-YOUNG, BETWEEN THE AGES OF
16 and 21 to learn to paint theatrical scenery; must start in as paint boy and
work up; salary to start $15 per week; an excellent opportunity for one who
wishes to learn the trade. Apply Chicago Studios 15 W. 20th-st”
(page 25).
This is from the same time when
Moses was working at Chicago Studios; he needed to expand the staff.
Of the Sosman & Landis’
Chicago Studio, the “Herald and Review” credited the firm with the new Empress
Theater sets in 1919 (Decatur, Illinois, 10 Aug 1919, page 18). The article
reported, “Empress Theater Opens Next Week. Interior has been redecorated and
new stage lighting system installed. After being closed for a period of six
weeks for redecorating, the Empress will open for its fall and winter seasons
next Sunday afternoon. Extensive improvements have been made during the closed
period, the interior being entirely newly decorated, new seat covers for the
orchestra chairs and the scenery department supplied with new sets from the
Chicago studio of Sosman & Landis. A new lighting system has been
installed, exactly like the one being used on the stage of the Great State-Lake
theater, Chicago. Twelve sets of lights, each containing a 500-watt nitrogen lamp,
set in a specially constructed reflector, will throw 6,000 watts of light on
the performers, making it one of the brightest stages in this art of the country.”
From the “Englewood Economist,” Chicago, 10 June 1920 page 4.
In the fall of 1919 Thomas G.
Moses wrote, “September found us all tied up with the big electrical show for
the Coliseum. We have to rent the
Alhambra stage and put Mr. Warren over there with a crew. I did two large drops, both on the Chinese
order. They were 38’ high and 125’
long. I had some work, but they proved
to be very effective.”
The Electrical Show, was actually
the Electrical Trades Exposition. The “Chicago Tribune” reported that it was “a
veritable exposition of the progress recently made in the adaptation of
electricity for light, heat and power” (9 Oct. 1919, page 7). The event at the
Coliseum included a Chinese village that housed exhibitors. The “Decatur Daily
Review” reported, “A Chinese design will be employed throughout, a pagoda rising
60 feet in the center of the hall and decorated with stained glass and 18,000 ‘Novagem’
jewels and Chinese lanterns, all brilliantly illuminated, being panned. The
decorations of the tower will be similar to those of the ‘Tower of Jewels’ at
the Pan-American Exposition at San Francisco” (28 Sept. 1919, page 5). The
elaborate decorative theme expenditure as estimated at $40,000 to $50,000.
From the “Herald and Review,” Decatur, IL, 10 Oct 1919, page 12.
The Electrical show at the
Coliseum ran from October 11-25, with an estimated five thousand electrical
dealers and contractors attending the Saturday night opening. Newspapers across
the country announced, “For the first time in nearly eight years the public in
Chicago will have an opportunity to witness the great strides made in the
electrical world” (Wilkes-Barre Times Leader, The Evening News, 19 Sept.1919,
page 18). The last electric show had been held in 1911. Articles noted, “Household
labor saving machinery is coming rapidly into common use, according to the
exposition management, and electricity is doing much to solve great servant
problem. Displays will include cooking apparatus of all kinds, electric stoves,
electric heating equipment, vacuum cleaners, refrigerating machinery, motors
for sewing machines, electrically operated machines for washing and ironing,
and electric fans for cooling and ventilating” (Decatur Daily Review, 28 Sept.
1919, page 5). There were electric potato peelers and electric trucks for
carrying food. Electric cooking was also a hot topic with manufacturers suggesting
that there was less shrinkage of food with electric cooking that with any other
cooking process. The “Decatur Review” reported, “There is every domestic reason
in favor of electric cooking – better food, greater cleanliness, less work and
more comfort – no ashes, no smoke, no dust” (28 Sept. 1919, page 5). As there
had just been a great coal shortage, electric ranges were intended to save fuel,
as well as time. At the time, the average family consumed 800 pounds of coal
for cooking, whereas the central electrical station only required 262.5 pounds
of coal monthly in order to supply the same family with ample cooking current.
The exposition included many
devices beyond those that would assist housewives and domestic help. Incandescent
lights were manufactured on site and before the eyes of visitors. Other featured exhibits included high powered
search lights, wireless telephones, and a self-printing telegraph apparatus. There
was also a focus on military advancements, such as electrical furnaces for
making the high-grade steel necessary for long range cannons. A working model
of the battleship New Mexico was also on display; at the time, the United States’
newest and largest dreadnaught propelled by electricity. Electric scrapers and
brushes for cleaning warship hulls were also on display. Formerly the task took
between 170 to 200 man-days to clean an 18,000-ton battleship, with electrically
driven machines, the cleaning of the ship now took only twelve hours.
A Commonwealth Edison Co.
advertisement announced, “Manufacturers especially will be interested in our
Industrial Lighting Exhibit. A typical machine floor, inadequately lighted, the
machines driven by overhead line shafts, pulleys, belting. Etc., is contrasted
with an installation of modern lighting and direct motor-driven machines. The
modernized factory will be exhibited in actual operation – manufacturing
souvenirs for distribution to visitors. Increased production, improved quality,
safety, economy of operation and contentment of employees – all these are
directly and intimately associated with modern lighting.”
The biggest hit of the show was
the wireless phone. On Oct. 13, 1919, the “Chicago Tribune” reported, “Wireless
Phone Stirs Crowd at Electric Show” (page 3). The article continued, “What was
declared one of the greatest feats of electrical science was demonstrated
yesterday at the electrical show in the Coliseum. A tune whistles into a
wireless telephone operated there was heard clearly by other operators in
Ludington, Mich., and Milwaukee. The stations at these two cities have
apparatus capable of receiving messages but are not able to send. The operator
at the Coliseum talked to the two stations during the entire afternoon and
answered his questions by wireless telegraphy, advising him whether or not they
were hearing him clearly. At the radio station in the Transportation building.
Lieut. Wells also talked to Capt. C. C. O’Leary at the Coliseum. The
demonstrations are being conducted in conjunction with a recruiting campaign
for the signal corps. An army plane is being made ready to make flights with
wireless phone set and beginning Tuesday visitors at the show will hear talks
from the airplane.”
Yesterday’s post explored the life of Harry J. Buhler. There was another scenic artist listed in nineteenth century newspapers with the last name of Buhler – Henry J. Buhler. Both a “Henry” J. Buhler and a “Harry” J. Buhler worked in Memphis, Tennessee; they were likely one and the same. 1870 US Federal Census listed Henry J. Buhler (18 yrs. old) living in Little Rock, Arkansas. He was living in a boarding house with several other people, including two fellow painters, Geo. W. Barry (32 yrs. old) and Arthur W. Drewry (20 yrs. old). He gained a reputation in Little Rock, as his work there was mentioned two years later in a Memphis newspaper.
In 1870, H. J. Buhler entered a painting for the country fair, entitled “The Stag at Bay” (Daily Arkansas Gazette, 12 Oct. 1870, page 4). The following year, the “Daily Arkansas Gazette” credited H. J. Buhler with painting the truck for the fire department in Little Rock(26 May 1871, page 4); Buhler was a member of Torrent Fire Co. 4 at this time (Daily Arkansas Gazette, 14 Jan 1871, page 4). Other painting projects for Buhler at this time included a city project, numbering houses (Daily Arkansas Gazette, 26 Sept. 1871, page 4). As with most artists at this time, Buhler supplemented any sporadic theater work with a combination of decorative and fine art projects. The first scenic art project by Buhler was an ad drop in Little Rock. Scenic artists Buhler and Akin placed an advertisement selling squares in an ad drop. The advertisement read, “MERCHANTS TAKE NOTICE – That there are only a few card spaces left on the curtain painted for the theatre hall. All wishing a card should apply, signed Buhler & Akin” (Arkansas Daily Gazette, 4 Nov 1870, page 4). Occasionally the local newspaper made note of his painting projects, such as “Mr. H. J. Buhler presents some fine specimens of painting. One article is a specimen of painting on silk – very pretty” (Arkansas Daily Gazette, 5 Oct 1871, page 1).
Memphis, Tennessee, pictured in 1870.
Buhler moved to Memphis, Tennessee, by the fall of 1872. The “Public Ledger” announced that the new scenery for the Olympic Theatre was “the product of the artistic labors of Mr. H. J. Buhler, the talented scenic artist of Little Rock” (Public Ledger, Memphis, Tennessee, 19 Sept 1872, page 2). The article continued, “It is unnecessary to say anything of the genius of Mr. Buhler as an artist. A glance at his work will establish his claims in that respect.” Buhler became associated with the venue as the “Public Ledge” later noted, “H. J. Buhler, Esq., the scenic artist of this establishment: (Public Ledger, 14 Oct 1872, page 3). Other production s with scenery by Buhler at the Olympic Theatre included “The Black Crook.” The “Public Ledger” reported, “the grotto and transformation scenes are especially brilliant and add much to the success of the Black Crook” (Public Ledger, 17 Oct 1872, page 2). In 1873, Buhler was listed as the scenic artist for the Memphis Theatre (Public Ledger, 18 Dec 1873, page 3).
When the Memphis Theatre was
renovated in 1873, Buhler was listed as the scenic artist responsible for touching
up the existing drop curtain. As with many articles of the time, the
description of the newly renovated theater was described in detail. The “Memphis
Daily Appeal” announced that the Memphis Theatre and the Greenlaw Opera House
had “grand improvements at Immense Cost” (3 Sept. 1873, page 4). Henry Buhler provided
painted the drop curtain. I am including the mention of the new lighting system
too, as it is quite informative:
“Among the other improvements
may be mentioned the addition of fifty gas-jets for the amphitheater, and a
large chandelier, of twelve globes, which is at the entrance hall. The chandelier
cost one-hundred and fifty dollars, and is also another evidence of the taste
the lessees display in every feature pertaining to the beautifying and
adornment of the Memphis Theatre, The gaslight will be increased by these addition
to forty per cent, and now number one hundred and fifty glob burners, the
footlights, numbering one hundred and thirteen, are hidden by means of a
permanent reflector, extending in front of the stage edge from the view of the
audience. The light given will be regular at all times, while lighting up the
stage will not cause any unpleasantness to those in the pit and dress-circle,
while witnessing the acting of looking upon the drop-curtain, which is one of
the most superb ever hung in any theater. This curtain is one of the celebrated
productions of the well-remembered Guilies, whose master brush gave living
beauty to the canvas. The picture represents the ‘Voyage of Life,’ and is that
one the four where ‘Youth’ is sailing in his proud boat down the stream of
time. The freshness of the picture was faded by lapse of years, but Mr. Henry
Buhler has revived the dimming beauty and repainted it in a most artistic
style, and now it is a most beautiful picture in all that appeals to the
aesthetics. In the wake of the gliding boat the silver-crested wavelets swell out
upon the surface of the green-shaded waters, and on the flower-spread bank an
angel is beckoning to ‘Youth,’ who looks afar down the stream, toward the
palace beyond the distant summits. And the artist’s hand has given these a sad,
calm beauty and moral quietude to the foliage, deep, still water and shadowy
forests. And in the far-away scope, how grandly rise the dimly-lit mountain-heights
even to the clouds. But we are moralizing too much; suffice to say, the
original freshness and ideal beauty of Giulick’s work are fully restored by
Buhler’s brush. And if, for a moment, the admirer of art forget the actual in
the contemplation of the soft dreamful distance of the landscape, momentarily
he is assured almost of the real presence of life, when beholding the two
angels that peer so naturally from the base of the picture to the facing, with
its inscription: “Voyage of Life and Youth,” repainted by Buhler. The old false
curtain from the archway has been taken away, and the top of the drop-curtain
is adorned with drapery of a very bright character. Two scenic artists, Mr.
Buhler and Mr. Adam Walthew, the latter of New York, have been engaged for the
season. The first gentleman is the head artist and Mr. Buhler assists.”
Buhler painted a new drop
curtain for the Memphis Theatre in 1879.
It was installed for a new production of “H. M. S. Pinafore.” The “Memphis
Evening Herald” reported, “New and elegant drop-curtain by Buhler. Magnificent
new scenery and appointments, properties, flags, etc., etc., painted expressly
for this opera by Buhler (18 April 1879, page 4). Other productions with
scenery by Buhler that year, included the John McCullough production of “Othello”
(Memphis Evening Herald 10 March 1879, page 4).
On July 12, 1879, “The Memphis
Herald” announced that a marriage license was issued to A. C. Garrett and Henry
J. Buhler page 4). Harry J. Buhler was married to Carrie A. Garrett.
I discovered
this fraternal connection while looking for information about Al C. Field’s
“The Land of the Midnight Sun” spectacle. A 1925 newspaper reported, “Frank
Bliss attended the annual theatre party and dance given by the Lincoln Lodge of
Masons at Hotel Astor, Tuesday evening. Mr. Bliss was the guest of Anton
Kliegl.” Lincoln Lodge of Masons
(Lincoln Lodge No. 3, F. & A.M.) was formed in 1792 and is located
in Wiscasset, Maine. Still an active lodge, the “Wiscasset Newspaper” reported,
“When the Lincoln Lodge of Masons formed in 1792, Maine was still part of
Massachusetts” (17 Dec 2014)
As I processed the following information, my first thought was, “Of course he was a Mason.” I
think back to the many other theatre personalities who belonged to the
fraternity, including Sosman, Volland, Noxon, and the list goes on. Of all the
big movers and shakers in early twentieth century technical theater, the
question should be: “Who wasn’t a Mason?” and not “Who was
a Mason?” Theatre manufacturers and
suppliers needed these fraternal connections to secure new contracts; the
Masons built some of the best theaters in the early twentieth century and appeared
to possess almost unlimited funds. Who would pass up that connection; a leg up
on the competition?
I decided to see if I could dig up a little more
information about the Kliegl’s Masonic affiliations and immediately hit the
jackpot. My “jackpot” was the form of a blog post.
On April 3,
2012, “Inside and Abandoned Masonic Hall in Tappan, NY” was posted to Scouting
New York. Photos attached to the article showed the decaying German
Masonic Home in Tappan. Nestled in a picturesque setting, it was located across
the road from the German Masonic Park. The park is still home to Traubenfest,
Tappan’s Oktoberfest. Yes, lots of German heritage in Tappan. Masonic artifacts
sometimes hold more value for those who are not members of the Fraternity. I
stumbled across the Scouting post because Anton Kliegl funded to construction of
the German Masonic Home chapel in Tappan, New York. After his passing in 1927,
stained glass windows with portraits of Anton and his widow were installed as a
memorial in 1928. In 1928,
Kliegl’s widow was the sole recipient of his estate, valued at $305,756.
Today’s equivalent purchasing power is approximately $4,600,000.
The stained glass windows have since been restored and
re-installed in the United Brothers Lodge #356 in Whitestone, New York, according
to “Masonic News, Ninth Manhattan District (Summer Issue 2014, page 2).
Interestingly, in 1914, the Masters Association (Stuhlmeister-Vereinigung) and
Charity Ball Journal were founded. By 1939, the Gala Charity Ball was held in
the Hotel Astor in New York and celebrated the “Silber-Jubiläum” (Silver
Anniversary). The 1939 issue of the Charity Ball Journal was co-dedicated to the
founding of the Master’s Association and to Anton Kliegl. This means that
Kliegl’s involvement with the Fraternity was not minimal, he was extremely
active.
The same Masonic building was also the featured in an episode
of “Abandoned,” available on YouTube. Here is the link as it says a lot about
the current state of many Masonic buildings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O1Lss9sUjE&feature=youtu.be
The general public is always intrigued with the Masons and their spaces, in
some ways more so that the members that abandon these grandiose facilities.
Watching this YouTube video reminds us of how much has been squandered; the
lost history.
The German Masonic Home in Tappan, New York, 1920.
Here’s a little background on Tappan, New York. It is
steeped in history, especially revolutionary events. As an interesting aside, on
October 2, 1780, British Major John André was captured by American soldiers,
tried, convicted and hanged as a spy in Tappan. André had plotted the surrender
of the American fortress at West Point with American General Benedict Arnold
and was capture while returning to British lines. André was also a scenic artist and I spent
countless hours as an undergraduate student tracking down his theatrical ties.
German Masons in Tappan purchased 20 acres in 1872 for approximately
$14,000. Although construction did not
commence until 1906, the complex was completed by 1909. This was at the same time that the Kliegl
Bros. were really making a name for themselves and achieving some financial
success and discretionary income for charitable endeavors. The facility closed in
1983, less than eight decades after it was opened. This structure, however, may have a second
lease on life. According to Steven T. Scwartz, president of Noble Ninth
Incorporated, a Manhattan-based Masonic company that owns the property now,
renovation work to transform the facility to serve community senior citizens
was in the works. After viewing photographs and video of the dilapidated
complex, it really is a long shot.
As with many fraternities, care for aged members, their
widows and children were once one of the many benefits to belonging to a
fraternity, hence the creation of Masonic Homes. This was not unique to
Freemasonry. It was an early form of insurance for members that guaranteed
their loved ones would be cared for after they passed away. Masonic homes were
never intended as profit making ventures. Times change.
In 1914, Thomas G. Moses wrote,
“Did a spectacle set for the Stanley, Philadelphia. I went with it, and spent a whole week with
it. Got some good lighting effects. Kleigel [sic.] came on from New York to do
it.”
In 1914, the “Kliegl Bros.” were advertised as “the greatest
experts in their line in this country” (The Indiana Gazette, 1 Dec. 1914, page
1). The brothers had worked their way up
from employees in a factory that manufactured electric arc lamps, to
establishing their own company in 1896 – Universal Electric Stage Lighting Co.
Much has been written about their early history, but here is a link to some of
their patents: https://klieglbros.com/patents/default.htm
In addition to being marketed as the famous duo, “Herr Kleigl” was mentioned in newspapers for his design of special effects for stage spectacles. It remains uncertain whether “Herr Kliegl” was Anton T. or his brother Johann “John” H. My gut instinct says it was Anton.
Anton Kliegl
Regardless, newspapers claimed that “Herr Kliegl” created a specific effect for Al G. Field’s Minstrel Show in 1914. That year Field’s touring production included “sumptuous stage pictures” and “mammoth pictorial presentations” featuring four unique spectacles (Pensacola News Journal, 18 Oct, 1914, page 12). The four spectacles were “The Birth of Minstrelsy,” “Minnie Ha Ha,” “The Land of the Midnight Sun” and the “Panama Pacific Exposition.” The lighting effects for “The Land of the Midnight Sun” were credited to Herr Kliegl and described in great detail.
Al G. Field’s Minstrel Show“The Land of the Midnight Sun” featured lighting effects designed by Herr Kliegl in 1914. From the “Port Star,” (Glen Falls, NY,) 13 Feb 1915, page 8.Advertisement noting the special effects designed by Kliegl for the 1914 show, from the “Jackson Daily News,” (Jackson, Mississippi) 26 Oct. 1914, page 80.
Alfred Griffin Hatfield was the namesake of the touring
minstrel show, going by both Al G. Field and Al G. Fields by the early
twentieth century. Hatfield was born in Leesburg, Virginia, between 1848 and
1850; surprisingly, the date varies in many historical records. The man led an
exciting life and traveled extensively as he made a name for himself in the
beginning. Hatfield first appeared on stage at Jeffries Hall in Brownsville,
Pennsylvania. It was early in 1871, and his black-face portrayal of “Handy
Andy” caught the attention of Sam Sharpley. Sharpley was a well-known member of
Sharpley, Sheridan, Mack and Day’s Minstrels. Hatfield began performing with
the group by the winter of 1871, and his career took off. Later shows included Bidwell
and McDonough’s “Black Crook” Company, Tony Denier’s “Humpty Dumpty,” Haverly’s
“Blackbird’s of a Nation,” the California Minstrels, and Simmon’s and Slocum’s
Minstrels, Duprez and Benedict’s Minstrels.
By 1884, he organized his own show in Peru, Indiana; a
popular company that became known as the Hagenbeck-Wallace Circus. He remained
with the group until 1886 when he established the Al G. Field’s Minstrels. Later
in life, Fields claimed that his minstrel show was the first to carry their
entire stage setting and scenery, as well as being the first to operate their
own special train of cars. For more information pertaining to Field, see “Monarch
of Minstrelsy, from “Daddy” Rice to Date” by Edward Le Roy Rice (1911). Here is
the link: https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=rRc5AAAAIAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PP10
By 1910, the Al C. Field
Minstrels company was incorporated and continued to expand their offerings,
producing increasingly elaborate shows each year. In 1914, the “Jackson Daily
News” advertised, “Al G. Field, the dean of minstrelsy, is the one minstrel
manager who dares invited the public to accept the past as a criterion of the
present, and hence the slogan of the Al G. Field Minstrels this season is
‘Twenty-ninth Successful Year.’ Likewise the annual guarantee is given
‘everything new this year.’(Jackson, Mississippi, 26 Oct, 1914, page 80).
The article continued to
describe “The Land of the Midnight Sun” reporting, “it is conceded to be the
most elaborate and impressive effort ever undertaken in a minstrel production.
The spectator beholds the Arctic north, with its seemingly boundless reaches of
ice, snow, and sea – all opalescent with every hue, color and tone from the
reflection of the sun, moon and stars. This evolves into the transformation
picture, ‘The Aurora Borealis,’ when this magnificent phenomenon of nature is
shown so realistically as to transport the audience. These wonderful scenes
accompany a travesty skit, which introduces old Doc Cook, the North Pole, a
Polar bear, cleverly acted by Henry Neiser, the Esquimaux, the seals, ice floes,
bottomless well, and other Arctic features that accentuate the comedy
situation.”
In 1914, the “Charlotte News” further
described the “Land of the Midnight Sun:” “The Arctic regions, with the sun
sinking behind the polar mountains of ice and snow, and yet illuminating all by
a reflected iridescence. Then is beheld the gorgeous phenomenon of the Aurora
Borealis with its irradiation of dazzling contrasted colors. Never before has
it been possible to project separate colors so as to give a representation of
this magnificent rainbow-like phenomenon. The device by which it is
accomplished is the invention of Herr Kliegl and he worked for over four years
before perfecting it. The exclusive rights to the stage use have been secured
by Al G. Field, and the spectacle can only be seen in connection with his
minstrel show. The scenery and effects employed in displaying this novelty are
of the most elaborate and expensive, and the combined results are among the
sensational surprises of the year. In starting work, Herr Kliegl had no
detailed scientific analysis of the real Aurora Borealis upon which to base his
experiments. Even today, the scientists have not fathomed the actual richness
by which the real Aurora Borealis is produced. They are all agreed that it is
caused by some kind of an electrical discharge in the atmosphere. This in turn
is brought about by a magnetic influence emanating from the sun. When the
particles of the earth’s atmosphere are thus charged magnetically, the
electrolyzation causes such an arrangement of the light rays that many of the
spectrum colors are visible. Thus it is that the crimson and gold, apple green,
sea blue, violet, purple haze, mellow yellow and azure blue, form magnificent
color arch, or band, or corona, or curtain that is known as Aurora Borealis. This
phenomenon is not visible to the people of this country very often. Here to see
it accurately reproduced in the theatre is a rare opportunity for the present
generation when it can acquaint itself with one of nature’s grandest and most
imposing spectacles” (10 Sept, 1914, page 7).
I would give anything for a time
machine right now and see the show.
The “Wilmington Morning Star” also
reported, “No invention of a mechanical device for realistic, beautiful stage
effects has aroused more interest and discussion than the one which creates the
awesome gorgeousness of the Aurora
Borealis, as pictured in the performance of The Al G. Field Minstrels. Just as
the tread mill device by Neil Borgess for the horse race in ‘The Country Fair’
made possible the one employed in ‘Ben Hur,’ so this new lighting contrivance
controlled exclusively by Al G. Filed, promises a revolution along lighting
lines. This is true because it enables the projectment [sic.] of separate
colors. The invention is the work of Herr Kliegl. Prior to his endeavor, little
had been done in trying to produce artificially the color sheen of the Aurora
Borealis. The most conspicuous experiment was that of German savant Kr
Birkland. [Dr. Kr Birkland was from Christiana, Norway, and he wrote about the
division of terrestrial magnetism, publishing his findings in 1911]. His
apparatus consisted of a vacuum vessel containing a magnetic atmosphere. A
partial Aurora Borealis effect was secured by sending electric currents through
the glass vessel to the magnetic sphere. With this elemental knowledge Herr
Kliegl evolved the present successful device. The Aurora Borealis is presented
in the number, “The Land of the Midnight Sun,” which shows the Arctic North,
with its sweep of ice and snow, indescribably brilliant from the reflection of
sun, moon and stars. This spectacle is only one of four, which the unrivaled
minstrel program of The Al G. Minstrels offers this season. The production is
at the Academy of Music tonight and seats are now selling at Woodall &
Sheppard’s” (28 Sept. 1914, page 6).
Other than one advertisement, I
have been unsuccessful in locating an image of the spectacle. However, the
Kliegl Bros. electrical effects called the “Aurora Borealis” in Julius Cahn’s
Official Theatrical Guide, 1912-1913 (page 38).
Note the “Aurora Borealis” effect offered in the ad. A year later, Kliegl designed an “Aurora Borealis” effect for Al G. Field’s Minstrel spectacle “The Land of the Midnight Sun.” Universal Electric Stage Lighting Co. advertisement in Cahn-Leighton’s Official Theatrical Guide, 1912-1913.
As for Field, he passed away in
1921, a victim of Bright’s disease. He bequeathed his show and a substantial
estate to brother Joseph E. Hatfield and relative Edward Conrad. Field was a
member of the Elks. Tomorrow I look at Kliegl’s Masonic affiliations.
The first Stanley Theatre in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
In 1914, Thomas G. Moses wrote,
“Did a spectacle set for the Stanley, Philadelphia. I went with it, and spent a whole week with
it. Got some good lighting effects. Kleigel [sic.] came on from New York to do
it.” Although the venue is primarily remembered as a movie house, the first
Stanley Theatre in Philadelphia was a combination house. Largely devoted to
short-reel pictures, ornate wings and a painted picture sheet created the
surround for any projection. There were other lines to accommodate touring acts
and spectacles, such as the one mentioned by Moses.
Picture sheet design by the Great Western Stage Equipment Company of Kansas City, Missouri.Picture sheet design by the Twin City Scenic Co.Partial picture sheet design by the Twin City Scenic Co.Twin City Scenic Co. picture sheet design model by Prof. Emeritus C. Lance Brockman.
The Stanley Theatre opened on 19
April 1914. The venue was named after Stanley Mastbaum, a remarkable man in his
own right who was directly responsible for the evolution of films in
Philadelphia (“Philadelphia Inquirer,” page 35). The story of Stanley V. Mastbaum
and his Philadelphia theaters is quite fascinating. The Stanley Theater in Philadelphia
was the flagship of Stanley’s theatre chain and managed the venue. Stanley co-founded
the Stanley Company with his brother Jules Mastbaum. Stanley Mastbaum also
managed the Stanley Booking Corporation, a company that supplied pictures to
several hundred theatres across the country. The Mastbaum brothers controlled
several of the Philadelphia’s movie houses, later expanding to become one of
the largest motion picture chains in the country in a relatively short period
of time.
Stanley V. Mastbaum, from the “Philadelphia Inquirer,” 24 Jun 1918, page 7.
Their reign in the film industry
was short-lived, however, as Stanley Mastbaum passed away in 1918 at the age of
37 yrs. old. The cause of his death was listed as blood poisoning, developing
from a sever case of tonsillitis. At the time of his passing, his obituary
reported, “After seven years’ effort in the motion picture business, Mr. Mastbaum
was part owner of seven big ‘movie’ houses in Philadelphia, and a score or more
in other cities. His interests were in every branch of the industry from
production of movies to the placing of finishing touches on the screen” (The
Morning Post, 7 March 1918, page 1). The article continued to state that the Philadelphia
theaters run by Stanley Mastbaum included, the Stanley (Sixteenth and Market
streets), the Palace (1214 Market street), the Globe (Juniper and Market
streets), the Arcade (Chestnut street, below Sixteenth), the Alhambra (Twelfth
and Morris), the Rialto (Germantown avenue and Tulpehocken street), and the
Broadway (Broad street and Snyder avenue). The Paramount acquiring his company
by 1919, and the firm was later acquired by Warner Bros. in 1928.
The first Stanley Theatre of
Philadelphia was located at 1616-20 Market Street, east of Seventeenth Street.
When the venue opened, the “Philadelphia Inquirer” announced, “The Stanley
contains every modern device in perfect theatre construction, and many
innovations exclusive in this temple of Thespia. The house will comfortably
seat 1700 persons and the decorations are of a quietly attractive quality.” The
house count was actually a little lower than that.
The policy of the Stanley was
the presentation of the “highest grade photo plays.” Photoplays and comic films
constituted the program at the Stanley Theatre with live musical accompaniment.
Designed by W. H. Hoffman, the venue was later renamed the Stanton Theatre and
later the Milgram by 1968. The building was demolished in 1968. Also, the first
Stanley Theatre is not to be confused with the second Stanley Theatre that
opened on the southwest corner of 19th and Market Street in 1921; it
was a much larger theater.
From the “Philadelphia Inquirer,” 23 April. 1914, page 16.From the “Evening Public Ledger,” 14 Dec. 1914, page 9.
Of the programming, the
“Philadelphia Inquirer” reported, “The subjects were well chosen and of varied
character, so that the serious blended excellently with the lighter vein of
motion picture. The list included The Dishonored Model, Martha’s Rebellion, A
Soul Astray and Our Mutual Girl. One of the pleasing features was the rendition
of selections by the orchestra during the exploiting of films and during
intermissions” (12 May 1914, page 7). In June, the “Philadelphia Inquirer” noted,
“As a forerunner to a series of feature photo-dramas which will be shown during
the remainder of the week, two interesting picture entertained audiences at the
Stanley Theatre yesterday. ‘Good for Nothing’ was the title of the headliner,
followed by ‘The Gem.” Both subjects were well acted by capable companies. The
special attraction for the week is a five-part dramatization of “Home Sweet
Home,” to be shown today and tomorrow. Selections on a new organ add to the
entertainment” (16 June 1914, page 7).
Musical selections that
accompanied the photo plays ranged from a full orchestra to the Doria Opera
Trio of the Metropolitan Opera Company. Of the trio, they toured with
photodrama productions, performing opera and other vocal selections each day
and evening to accompany select films (The Philadelphia Inquirer, 10 July 1914,
page 4). The Philadelphia Orchestra also furnished the incidental music for the
Stanley, with the “Philadelphia Inquirer” commenting that summer: “The Spitfire,” a nautical comedy drama, was
the chief attraction among the Stanley Theatre’s films yesterday. Written by Edward
Peple, acted by Daniel Frohman’s Company and starred by Carlyle Blackwell, the
intricate plat included a gem robbery, several fights, false correspondence,
two rescues, one at sea and the other in the Arabian desert, with a charming
love story woven through the whole. The latest and finest developments of
moving picture art were exhibited in this an other films, all as remarkable for
the clearness of their definition as for the quality of the stories, fantastic
and humorous, they presented. “The One Best Bet,” a comic story of the racetrack,
and “Tragic Trinkets,” a murder mystery film, in which an alchemist figured,
presented scenic features of an unusual character. Members of the Philadelphia
Orchestra furnished the incidental music” (7 July 1914, page 6).
From the “Chicago Tribune,” 17 March 1914, page 9.
In 1914, Thomas G. Moses wrote,
“One scene, 3rd Act, for Henry Miller in ‘Daddy Long Legs.’ It was a very delicate interior, real fabric
walls.” The first scene of the play is laid in the dining room in the John
Grier home, the second in the girl’s study at college, the third on a
picturesque New England farm and the fourth in a library in a New York home
(Hartford Courant, 28 September 1914, page 9). Moses painted the exterior
setting of a picturesque New England Farm.
From the “Chicago Tribune,” 9 August 1914, page 42.
“Daddy Longlegs” was a comedy written by Miss Jean
Webster (1876-1916) and first presented at Powers’ theater in Chicago on March
16, 1914. Based on the 1912 novel, the “Chicago Tribune” reported, “the love
story of a brilliant waif who falls happily in love with her affluent
benefactor” (Chicago Tribune, 7 June 1914, page 56). The story was first
published as a Ladies’ Home Journal serial (Inter Ocean, 17 March 1914, page
6).
From the “Chicago Tribune,” 18 March 1914, page 14.From the “Chicago Tribune,” 18 March 1914, page 14.
“Daddy Long Legs” centers around
orphan Judy Abbot, played by actress Ruth Chatterton. Judy is brought up in an
orphanage with a hundred little children. However, instead of being put out to
work when she turns fourteen, Judy is allowed to remain and attend high school
for four years. This was not a pure gesture of generosity, as Judy becomes the
maid, saving the orphanage the expense of having a servant. The head matron
berates her daily until Judy finally stands up for herself during a monthly
“Trustees Day.” A new, wealthy, and young trustee, Jervis Pendleton, discovered
that Judy was different from the other “ cowed, apathetic orphans” and sends
her to college (The Pittsburgh Press, 6 Dec. 1914, page 57). His identity
remains that of an anonymous benefactor, going by the name of John Smith, with
his becoming the “shadow of a father.” Judy is only allowed to see the shadow
of Jervis Pendleton, and Judy exclaims, “What funny long legs the shadow has!
He is like a spider. I’ll call him my dear old Daddy Long Legs.” As her anonymous
benefactor, Pendleton watches Judy grow, falling in love with her and becoming
jealous of her attentions toward another young man. At the same time, Judy unknowingly
meets her “Daddy Long Legs’ and falls in love, but is too embarrassed of her
past to proceed. Pendleton believes that he hesitation is due to her love for
another. It is only through a series of letters that Judy writes to Daddy Long
Legs that she reveals her true feelings, eventually finding her happy ending.
Ruth Chatterton as Judy Abbott in the 1914 play “Daddy Long Legs.”
An interesting article was
published in the “Inter Ocean” on 12 April 1914 titled “Accidental Art” (page
32). It described some of the lighting for the production: “When Henry Miller
was rehearsing ‘Daddy Long-legs,’ and while the play was in process of
formation (for many changes were made during the first rehearsals), he was very
anxious to show the shadow of Jervis Pendleton on the walls of the school room.
It was his idea that this shadow could be made to explain the reason why pretty
Judy nicknamed her benefactor Daddy Long-legs.
“Time after time Mr. Miller experimented with various lights and lighting effects to get the shadow on the wall, but he always found fault with the effect. Many sorts and kinds of automobile lights, spotlights and other devices were used to project the shadow into the room, and not one of them proved effective. In his mind Mr. Miller turned over the problems; thought of silhouettes. Lantern slides and dozens of other ideas, and turned them all down as impractical.
“Finally Miller and his
assistants were at their wits’ end. Nothing seemed to answer for the effect
desired. The company electrician had given up hope after exhausting all of his
ingenuity.
“While the final consultation
was ending, a house electrician was removing the various experimental
apparatus, and at the end he changed position of an ordinary spotlight used to
illuminate the stage for rehearsal. Across the stage swept a straight beam of
light, wavered on the side walls and left the stage.
“‘There! You’ve got it!’ cried
Mr. Miller. ‘There is the very thing we want! We can’t hope to make a Daddy
Long-legs shadow, but we can have a perfect effect of an automobile turning in
the drive outside and casting its lights through the window.’
“Since then the motor lights
have flashed through the asylum window nightly, a fine stage effect that des
not entail any expensive machinery and merely utilizes one of the usual
electrical effects with which every theatre is equipped.”
Under the direction of Henry
Miller, the 1914 cast included Frederick Truesdell (Jervis Pendleton), Charles
Trowbridge (James McBride), Mrs. Jacques Martin (Mrs. Semple), Mrs. Jennie A.
Eustace (Miss Prittchard), Miss Ethel Martin (Mrs. Pendleton), Miss Agnes Heron
Miller (Julia Pendleton), Miss Cora Witherspoon (Sallie McBride), Miss Margaret
Sayres (Mrs. Lippett) and Miss Ruth Chatterton (Judy).
Ruth Chatterton
In 1919, “Daddy Long Legs” was
made into a silent movie, starring Mary Pickford as Judy and Mahlon Hamilton as
Jervis Pendleton. Tomorrow, I will look at the production of Daddy Long Legs
dolls to help the war effort during 1914-1915.
1919 “Daddy Long Legs” movie with Mary Pickford as Judy.
