Panorama – Page 3 – Drypigment.net

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 275 – Memories of Milwaukee

Lance Brockman and Wendy Waszut-Barrett as co-presenters for the 2013 USITT session, “Theatre of the Fraternity: Creating the World of Freemasonry” held at the Humphrey Scottish Rite Masonic Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

In 2013, I attended the United States Institute of Theatre Technology (USITT) Conference in Milwaukee. I was scheduled with Lance Brockman to present a session in a nearby Masonic venue- “Theatre of the Fraternity: Creating the World of Freemasonry.” On March 21, 2013, we each gave a presentation about historical scenic art and degree productions. Then we invited participants onto the stage to examine early-twentieth-century dry pigment painting techniques. At the beginning of the week, I spent two days cataloguing and evaluating the Milwaukee Scottish Rite scenery collection at the Humphrey Center so that we would know the best scenes to lower during the USITT session. I always try to visit a Scottish Rite theater during a USITT conference if there is one in the same city.

Wendy Waszut-Barrett as a presenters for the 2013 USITT session, “Theatre of the Fraternity: Creating the World of Freemasonry” held at the Humphrey Scottish Rite Masonic Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Group photo of attendees for the 2013 USITT session, “Theatre of the Fraternity: Creating the World of Freemasonry” held at the Humphrey Scottish Rite Masonic Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

I was also working on another theater project during the 2013 USITT conference at the Milwaukee Historical Society. It was a personal academic adventure to see a display about the Milwaukee panorama painters. The small exhibit was recommended by several of my colleagues. Over the course of two days I did much more that take a sneak peak at a display case. I examined the handwritten diaries of Friedrich W. Heine (1845-1921). It was in the day before my iPhone, but there was a copier and I left with a 1” pile of reproductions. My intention was that have my husband translate many of the entries that accompanied little drawings in the margin, especially pertaining to Masonic subject matter. Heine popped back up on my radar when Gene Meier forwarded on some of his own research about the Milwaukee panorama artists this past summer.

My 2013 photocopies of the F. W. Heine diaries.

A detail from one page of my photocopies purchased during my visit to Milwaukee in 2013.

For many theater technicians and historians, their academic education fails to include details about the incredibly complex stage machinery and scenic illusion from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. We receive minimal instruction pertaining to a variety of popular entertainments, including moving panoramas and cycloramas. In the classroom, it was occasionally referred to as a “low-brow” form of entertainment, not the work of the masters. As I have persisted in my research over the years, I have come to realize that many of the scenic artists and stage machinists who produced spectacles were the actual masters.

I might have a PhD in theatre, but all of my education pertaining to visual spectacle happened outside of my doctoral program, specifically in classes with MFA designers. It was one particular professor’s research interest and enthusiasm that provided me with an incentive to study historical scenic art and design. Lance Brockman at the University of Minnesota forever altered my perception as a theater historian and practitioner. Scenic illusion remained a vibrant art form with a beauty that would guide my career as an artist. Without his enthusiasm for the subject matter or his support of my own academic interests, I would not be writing this blog today or restoring historical scenery collections.

Now for those without years spent in a theater department or a performing arts archive, let’s start with the term panorama, specifically a moving panorama. These long canvases were advertised in feet, and sometimes miles. Visitor’s sat stationery in a theater while a very long canvas scrolled from one vertical roll to another. The painted landscape would pass by as if looking out the window of a train. This type of exhibit could easily travel to a variety of venues as the two rolls would be positioned within any proscenium.

Illustration depicting John Banvard’s 1848 moving panorama.

The appeal of moving panoramas extended to children’s toys. Here is a toy moving panorama from the Bill Douglas Cinema Museum. Here is the link to the artifact: http://www.bdcmuseum.org.uk/explore/item/69085/

Cycloramas were panoramic in nature and created for a specific type of building with a unique form of rigging. A rotunda building, octagonal or polygonal in shape, was necessary for this visual spectacle. Narrow passages brought visitors into the building where they emerged into the center of a scene. Some included impressive lighting and sound effects. Others included educational lectures. Whether it was a city on fire, a horrific scene at a battle, or bubbling volcanic crater in Hawaii, a realistic scene transported visitors to another time and place. A diorama began near the viewing platform and transitioned into a two-dimensional vista.

Section of the Rotunda, Leicester Square, 1801. Burford’s Panorama, Leicester Square: cross section(acquatint from Robert Mitchell’s Plans and Views in Perspective of Buildings Erected in England and Scotland, 1901). Stephen Oetermann, The Panorama History of Mass Media, N.Y. : Zone Books, 1997, p. 104. Digital image posted with a great article at: https://www.baruch.cuny.edu/library/alumni/online_exhibits/digital/2003/panorama/new_001.htm

The rise of the cyclorama studio occurred in the 1880s and coincided with the rise of the scenic studio. Utilizing an ever-expanding network of transportation, painted scenery was easily shipped from town to town. Tomorrow, I will begin a series on the stories of the artists who created these massive paintings. They were contemporaries of Thomas G. Moses.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 272 – Walter Burridge and The Volcano House

Theater history isn’t always recorded by those directly involved in the production. There are written accounts by individuals who were in the audience or reviewing the performance. The writings of Thomas G. Moses are unique as we see the world of theatre through the eyes of a scenic artist and designer. When perusing through all of the documents sent to me by Gene Meier, fellow historian who is tracing 19^th century panorama painting, something stuck out. It was the writings of Lorrin A. Thurston (1858-1931) connected to Meier’s findings pertaining to the Kilauea Volcano cyclorama. Thurston was a lawyer, politician and businessman raised in Hawaii. He was the grandson of one of the first missionaries sent to the Sandwich Islands. Thurston also played a prominent role in overthrowing the Kingdom of Hawai’i under the rule of Queen Lili’uokalani during 1893.

Thurston invested in the renovation and enlargement of the Volcano House during 1891 – the same year as Walter Burridge’s visit to create sketches for the cyclorama. The original Volcano House (a grass hut) was built on the northeastern side of the crater by Benjamin Pitman Sr., a Hilo businessman, in 1846. A second grass-thatched Volcano House was constructed in 1866, boasting four bedrooms, a parlor and a dining room. Mark Twain visited this particular structure. The 1866 house was torn down in 1877 and rebuilt with wood. By 1885, Wilder’s Steamship Company of Honolulu purchased the Volcano House and operated it until 1890. That same year, Thurston’s writings record his seeking out the owner of the site – Samuel G. Wilder and creating the Volcano House Company. At the same time, the company purchased the Punaluu Hotel from Peter Lee, who was then placed as the manager of both hotels. The Volcano House property was remodeled and enlarged to a two-story frame building with fourteen rooms and an observation deck for visitors to see the lava activity and the crater several hundred yards away.

The Volcano House in 1891 with Walter Burridge holding is palette in the top left window.

The Volcano House in 1891 with Walter Burridge holding is palette in the left window.

On November 10, 1891, the Hawaiian Gazette published “Latest From the Volcano,” reporting a number of visitors including Mrs. Senator Stewart, Mr. and Mrs. Hyman, Miss Hirschberg. Messrs. Morrell and Blue of Pensacola, High, Scott, Walter Burridge, and C. A. Webster, “returned Tuesday afternoon on the Hall, having enjoyed an exceptionally quiet passage down.” The article continued, “All are enthusiastic over accommodations afforded by the Volcano House and general improvements in transportation arrangements. The volcano is reported to be in a fairly active condition, and is gradually rising to its old level of last March. It is estimated that the lake is now within four or five hundred feet of the top, and is perhaps a quarter of a mile in diameter at its widest point. Liquid lava and cakes of half-frozen crust are thrown, in the centre of the lake, to a height of twenty or thirty feet. If the lake continues to rise at its present rate, there will be an overflow in about seven or eight months.”

Photograph of Kilauea’s Lake of Fire in 1893.

Thurston was also interested in bringing Hawaii into the American public’s eye and began an exciting marketing plan for the island. A railroad advertising agent was being hired to visit Hawaii, take pictures and print marketing brochures. Thurston and a few other investors were creating “Vistas of Hawaii, The Paradise of the Pacific and Inferno of the World.” In August 1891, approximately 10,000 large pamphlets and 50,000 smaller pamphlets were printed for distribution. But this was a small part of a much larger picture.

Thurston then traveled to Chicago and secured a concession for a cyclorama of Kilauea to be included in the Midway Plaisance for the 1893 Columbian Exposition. He had help from Michael H. De Young, owner of the San Francisco Chronicle and California commissioner for the World Fair. Thurston returned to Honolulu, organized “The Kilauea Cyclorama Co.” and became the company’s president. W. T. Sense was the company’s first manager. They arranged for Burridge to visit Hawaii from October 13 to November 11, 1891. Burridge would sketch Kilauea in action and reproduce a spectacle for the fairgrounds. He was representing the scenic studio of Albert, Grover & Burridge.

On September 9, 1891 (page 7) the Chicago Daily Tribune reported that there were at least thirty firms in Europe who wanted to include a panorama at the Columbian Exposition and that the Ways and Means Committee was not prepared to consider panoramas at the present time. The committee did state that if panoramas were included, it would ask for twenty-five percent of gross receipts. That was half less than the fifty percent asked of Buffalo Bill for his Wild West show! It might have also helped that Burridge’s business partner was also a chair for one of the Fair committees.

By 1898 Hawai’i became a U. S. Territory. Thurston also opened a newspaper that same year – “Pacific Commercial Advertiser.”

On December 3, 1891, the “Honolulu Adviser” reported “Walter Burridge, the scenic artist, had his sketches stopped by the Custom House authorities at San Francisco for duty. Some friends at that place saw the Collector and arranged the matter without cost to Mr. Burridge.” Good to have friends around in your time of need.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 215 – Thomas G. Moses and David A. Strong

In 1886, Sosman and Landis completed the construction of their scenic studio on Clinton Street in Chicago, Illinois. By this time, Moses had been working at Sosman & Landis for six years. The company knew what he was capable of and who were the best scenic artists to use on specialty projects. Moses’ typed manuscript records that he and David A. Strong started on a panorama of Grant’s trip around the world that year. Moses wrote, “We were alone in the big studio for some time before the whole force came over. We enjoyed painting the panorama as it was continuous. There was some careful blending to be done.” The remainder of the Sosman & Landis crew was still finishing projects in the old studio space.
Little is known about this panorama, but it was likely a moving panorama that documented General Grant’s worldwide tour. After leaving the office of the presidency in 1877, Ulysses S. Grant embarked on a journey around the world, visiting Europe, the Middle East and Asia over two and one-half years. The trip was first published in 1879 as “General Grant’s Tour Around the World: With a Sketch of His Life.” It provided an abundance of opportunities to paint visions of foreign lands and exotic scenery for American audiences. Sadly, nothing is known of the completed composition or where it toured across the country.

John Banvard’s panorama. Here is a great link for his story Banvard from the online site Atlas Obscura: http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/foer-files-banvard-s-folly

What is of interest to me, however, is Moses’ mention that he and Strong were the painting team for this project and the primary crew at the new Sosman & Landis studio before the arrival of the remaining crew. Strong was fifty-six years old and Moses was thirty years old in 1886. This was a perfect pairing of aged experience and youthful enthusiasm. We know that Moses was very fast and Strong was known for his production of visual spectacle. Working with Strong in any capacity must have been an asset in Moses’ career and training.

By this time, Moses had already made a name for himself and was well-respected as a scenic artist in many areas of the country. Working with Strong would have been the icing on the cake. They would have painted side-by-side, chatted about past projects, and anticipated each other’s approach to painting a large composition. It takes a very short time to recognize the skill and speed of a fellow artist when painting a backdrop together. A panorama would have provided ample opportunity for Moses to study Strong’s approach to scenic art and mirror it so the composition would have an overall unity. Strong would have set the tone of the entire piece, being the more experienced artist.

Let’s recall the significance of Strong (1830-1911) to appreciate this pairing. Strong was born in Connecticut where he became known as a decorative painter and scenic artist at an early age. By the age of thirty-four, he was working professionally at theatres in Washington, D.C. and New York, primarily staying on the East Coast. There, his contemporaries were Layfeyette W. Seavy, Richard Marston, Robert Smith, William Wallack and E. Hayes. At the age of forty-four, he moved to Chicago and painted for Crosby’s Opera House, Haverly’s Theatre, and McVicker’s Theatre. Strong was also a well-known stage machinist who specialized in burlesque pantomime, such as “The Black Crook” and “The White Fawn.” Well skilled in the creation of painted panoramas, he also was known for painting the 1871 “Panorama of Ireland.” Strong was affectionately referred to as “Old Trusty” by his fellow scenic artists and well-respected for his “facile brush,” and “the quality of opaqueness” in his painting, characteristic of the Dusseldorf School.” Moses wrote, “His color was deep and rich and his drawings very correct.”

Strong was not simply a scenic artist. As previously noted, he was also a member of the Theatrical Mechanics Association. Strong, Henry C. Tryon and Charles S. King would have been a powerful triumvirate of theatrical engineering at Sosman & Landis during this time, allowing the company to soar to the top of their industry. The construction of a new studio space was proof of their success.

By 1886, Sosman & Landis studio had contracted enough new business to justify the construction of a premiere studio space on Clinton Street. This would be their main studio until the 1920s when Chicago Studios would rent the facility. We also know that by this time, Henry C. Tryon, John H. Young, Hardesty Maratta, Ed Morange and Charles S. King were all part of the studio’s work force. I wish that I could have been there to see all of that talent under one roof.

To be continued…

Design and painting by Lance Brockman for an 1987 showboat production. He and Janey Ryger created an amazing painting of the Mississippi River for the University of Minnesota’s Centennial Showboat. This performance venue’s fate is uncertain as the University of Minnesota’s Department of Theatre and Dance abandoned this educational opportunity. It is currently the possession of the City of St. Paul.

View of a section of the panorama from the 1987 U of MN Showboat production.

View of the Mississippi panorama. This was from when I unrolled it for students at the U of MN – Twin Cities while teaching a scene painting course.

Painted detail from the moving panorama designed by Lance Brockman for the University of Minnesota Centennial Showboat in 1987.

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 139-Harley Merry and the Brooklyn Theatre

Both Ernest Albert and Walter Burridge worked for Harley Merry at his Brooklyn Studio. Burridge started in 1870, just prior to Merry’s involvement with the Brooklyn Theatre. Albert started in 1877, after Merry had been let go from his position at the Brooklyn Theatre.

Merry was well-known as both a performer and scenic artist in England and Scotland. His birth name was Ebenezer J. Britton, and he performed with his wife Louise M. R. Britton (1844-1914). There is some confusion about the spelling of their last name as historic records use both Britton or Brittain. Louise used the stage name of Adelaide Roselle, and also later Adele Roselle Merry. She was a fairly successful actress, having performed with many well-known personalities, including James O’Neil and William Crane. Merry first traveled to the United States in 1869, permanently moving his family by 1871. He initially worked in New Orleans and Chicago before settling in Brooklyn, New York, where he became associated with the Brooklyn Theatre and Academy of Music. He produced scenery for a variety of well-known actors and producers in New York, including Conway, Sothern and Marlowe.

Merry became known for his painted illusions and spectacular stage effects the included the 1872 production “The Son of the Night.” It was advertised as a “Grand Marine Panorama and Sea Fight between the Pirate and the Spanish Fleet, painted expressly by Harley Merry, covering 5,000 square feet of canvas” (The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Vol. 33, No. 287, pg. 1). He also provided all of the new scenery for “The Naiad Queen, or the Mysteries of the Lurleiburg,” a production that ended with “the grand transformation scene [that] designated the Silver Temple of Brilliant Plummage in the Elysium of Air Songstresses” (The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, vol. 33, No. 135, pg. 1). This design was dedicated to Conway “as a farewell souvenir” prior to Merry’s departure for London. He returned the following year and resumed both his acting and artistic career, performing as Mr. Barnaby Bibbs in the farce, “The Quiet Family.”

From 1871 until 1874, Merry designed for Conway at the Brooklyn Theatre. The company had initially performed at the Park Theatre, but early in 1870 Kingsley, Keeny and Judge McGue (who owned the property on the corner of Washington and Johnson Streets) decided to build a theatre.

The Brooklyn Theatre was designed by the architect T. M. Jackson and opened on October 2, 1871 with the comedy “Money.” We know much about the history of the theater from an article published after its fiery destruction in 1876. The Brooklyn Daily Eagle described the interior and those who contributed to the ornate structure during its 1871 opening (Dec. 7, 1876, pg. 2). Five years later, a horrific fire took the lives of 238 individuals when the scenery quickly ignited during a performance of “The Two Orphans.”

The paper recorded that “one of the pieces of canvas out of which trees and so forth are made was broken from its fastenings and hung from the flies immediately over the border lights near the center of the stage. The canvas had begun to smolder and the paint on it to crackle, and the carpenter was directed to ascend to one of the grooves and remove the dangerous object. He could barely reach it with his hand and he drew it hastily up. The rapid motion through the air of the half ignited and highly inflammable canvas, caused it to burst into flame which rapidly spread to the adjoining material, equally susceptible. All efforts to extinguish the flames were aborted, and the carpenter had to retire to save his own life.” Although the actors became aware of the fire, they continued to play their parts, hoping it would pass. This makes me wonder how many fires spontaneously occurred during performances at that time. History records that Mr. Studley, Mr. Farren and Miss Claxton went on with their parts even after flames became distinctly audible. However, sparks began to show overhead and the “unmistaken crackle of fire was heard. Then an ember dropped to the stage, and the canvas which formed the roof of the hut in which the scene was enacted burst into flames.”

Mr. Studley, Mr. Farren and Miss Claxton performing despite the flames overhead.

Miss Claxton was reported to have crawled over the heads of audience members to later escape. There were 1,200 people in the house before panic ruled and bodies became crushed in the corridors.

The charred remains of the Brooklyn Thearter after the 1876 fire.

Luckily for Merry, he was no longer painting for the venue. His position as scenic artist was terminated upon his return from London in 1874. This incident is an interesting story in itself, one that probably altered his perception of the industry, stage managers, and the artists’ need for representation. Merry brought action against the Brooklyn Theatre’s stage manager Edward F. Taylor. He was attempting to recover $5,000 in damages, stating that Taylor had procured his discharge by false representations that he made to Mrs. Conway of the Brooklyn Theatre. A February 19, 1875, article in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle reported, “Harley Merry, late scenic artist at the Brooklyn Theatre, has begun an action through Messrs. Carson & Hirsch, against Edward F. Taylor, stage manager for having procured his discharge by complaining to Mrs. Conway that he neglected his duties” (page 4).

I thought back to Merry’s involvement in establishing the Actors’ Order of Friendship and the American Society of Scene Painters, specifically their complaints against stage managers. Did his involvement all stem from this particular incident?

UPDATE: Since my initial posting, I have been in contact with Merry’s descendants. Here is a wonderful article about the the Merry’s stage name:

https://heritagefound.com/tag/http-heritagefound-com-harley-merry-lousia-rowe-merry-article-ancestors-with-multiple-names-a-case-study-of-an-19th-century-theatrical-family/

To be continued…