Production Cost – Page 6

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 331 – Thomas G. Moses and the Valentine Theatre in Toledo, Ohio

Part 331: Thomas G. Moses and the Valentine Theatre in Toledo, Ohio

For the year 1895, Thomas G. Moses recorded that he secured $46,000.00 of scenic work. Of that amount, he paid himself only $3,500. Moses commented that the necessary expenses were “very heavy” that year, resulting in such poor profits. In addition to touring shows and productions at the Schiller, Moses produced several stock scenery collections for theaters and halls across the country. One of the stock scenery installations was for Toledo, Ohio.

Moses wrote, “I closed up with the Valentine Theatre of Toledo for $5,300.00. We all got in our good work on this job.” In today’s dollars, it was almost a $150,000 job and one of many that he was juggling that fall.

Vintage postcard of the Valentine Theatre in Toledo, Ohio with stock scenery created by Thomas G. Moses in 1895.

Here is a little information about his Toledo project to create a little context for his story. The Valentine Theatre replaced a previous opera house, called the Wheeler Opera House that burned to the ground in 1893. The Wheeler had boasted a stage that measured 47 x 80’ with 15 sets of scenery (Harry Miner’s American Dramatic Directory, 1884-1885). When a new venue was contemplated, one of Toledo’s businessmen entered the picture as he was already leasing a few other performance venues in the region – George H. Ketcham. The Democratic Northwest and Henry County News reported that the Valentine Theatre was “built at enormous expense and under the personal supervision of its owner Mr. George H. Ketcham” (26 Dec. 1895, page 1). The newspaper reported Ketcham to be “one of Toledo’s wealthiest and most progressive capitalists, and whose enterprise has been a prominent factor in the phenomenal growth of Toledo and the development of its commercial interests.” The Valentine Theater was named after Ketcham’s father, Valentine Hicks Ketcham. The estimated cost of the project $300,000. Ketcham made himself president of the Valentine Company in Toledo, but he was already controlling the Grand and Great Southern theaters in Columbus, the Victoria Theatre at Dayton, and the English Opera House in Indianapolis (The Piqua Daily Call, 17 March 1902, page 1). Ketcham selected Lee M. Boda to be his manager in Toledo.

Interior Photograph of the Valentine Theatre with some scenery by Thomas G. Moses. Image from “The Book of Ohio” (1912)

The Valentine Theater was located on the ground floor at the corner of St. Clair and Adams as part of the Valentine block. The building was four stories and contained 200 offices (of which were included all of the city governmental offices), 15 stores, a private law library the Elks lodge room and a theater. The theater was a separate building with an entrance on St. Clair Street. Designed by Edward Oscar Fallis (1851-1927) in the “Sulivanesque style.” E. O. Fallis was a well-known architect who was also responsible for the several courthouses, a few public buildings, churches and residential homes in the region. Construction of the Valentine building began in 1894 and was completed in 1895.

Fallis’ theater design included an unusual cantilevered balcony and increased the theatre seating by arranging the chairs in straight rows instead of semi-circles. Some sources report this to be the first of its kind in the country. Unfortunately, his seating design created some areas with obstructed views. However, it greatly increased the number of chairs that could be crammed into the venue and increase the profit margin. According to Julius Cahns Official Theatrical Guide the seating capacity was 1,904. There were also twenty exists from the space in case of fire.

The building was illuminated with electric light and equipped with large dynamos in the basement that sent direct current to the incandescent lights, numbering approximately 2500. One newspaper article noted that the Mayhofer system was used at the Valentine Theatre and the lights could be manipulated to transform scenes from dawn to dusk. This would be similar to the electric scenic theater that was on display at the Columbian Exposition, featuring “A Day in the Alps.” There were also calcium lights and a “chaser” to spotlight people on stage and “produce brilliant effects of light and shade on the actress’ costume as she moves about the stage” (Blade, No. 131, 26 Dec. 1895).

The proscenium opening measured 39’-0” wide by 37’-0” high and depth from the footlights to the back wall was 62 feet. The distance between the girders was recorded 50 feet, with the stage to the rigging loft measuring 85 feet. There were nine bridges above the stage, located in three rows.

Interior Photograph of the Valentine Theatre with some scenery by Thomas G. Moses. Note the painted Austrian drape partially scene above the stage. Detail of image from “The Book of Ohio” (1912).

The Valentine Theater opened on December 25, 1895 with Joseph Jefferson’s famous “Rip Van Winkle.” The article, “The Opening of the Valentine Theatre,” described the space in detail, especially the area behind the stage with scenery produced by the studio of Thomas G. Moses. Here is a section from the article published in the Blade from December 26 and posted online as part of Dr. Timothy Messer-Kruse’s essay on the Valentine Theatre.”

“Back of the footlights, everything is as complete as human ingenuity and unstinted expense could make it. The dimensions of the stage are as follows: L Proscenium opening, 39 feet; depth of stage, 72 feet; width, 80 feet; height to rigging left, 84 feet. The scenery is all from the studio of Thomas G. Moses, of Chicago, and is complete in every detail. An asbestos curtain, absolutely fire proof, decorated, in the general style of the carpets of the house, with a peculiar green tint and golden fleur de lis, divides the auditorium from the stage. The act curtain, which was dropped for public inspection, the first time, last night, is a revelation of beauty. It is entitled “A Spanish Flower Festival,” and is a symphony in color. There is a freedom and grace about each fixture and a wealth of historic detail in the scene which makes it almost perfect as a work of art.” Here is another example where a front drop curtain replicates a well-known artwork.

Interior Photograph of the Valentine Theatre with some scenery by Thomas G. Moses. Note the interior box set and tormentors that would have been part of the stock scenery collection. Detail of image from “The Book of Ohio” (1912).

The same article also mentioned the stage machinery: “The stage, which is equipped with every essential in the scenic and mechanical line, is under the supervision of Robert H. Minis, than whom, Mr. Boda says there is no better stage carpenter in the country.”

By 1918, the venue was transformed into a cinema, effectively ending live theatre performances after a $50,000 renovation as it was transformed into a movie palace. In August of 1983, a task force was established by Mayor DeGood, who recommended the demolition of the Valentine Theatre at a cost of $217,000. Luckily, a group called “Friends of the Valentine” began a campaign to save the theater from the wrecking ball.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 327- The Frohman Brothers as Modern Theatrical Managers

Part 327: Modern Theatrical Managers

The Inter Ocean published an article on “Modern Theatrical Managers” (4 Aug. 1895, page 33). I am posting the article in its entirety, as it really gives wonderful insight into a shift that occurred in the American theatrical industry during the 1890s:

Illustration of Gustave Frohman from the New York Times (9 Aug 1908 page 37). Frohman took over the direction of the Schiller Theatre in 1895. Ira La Motte was the manager for the venue.

“The fact that the Schiller Theater, the newest house in Chicago, has again changed hands may give reason to pause and consider the drift of the day in theatrical management. There was a time not very remote when the manager of the theater was not a mere figurehead, or landlord, but an important factor in molding the drama as an artistic ideal. But this is the age in which money is playing a leading role, and the businessman is forging to the front in no uncertain fashion and dominating the destinies of the drama. The demands of a nervous and exhausting public idolizing the genius of change is primarily responsible for the new departure, which calls for business shrewdness rather than artistic acumen or studied experience in the old school, which led the manager to rely upon his own resources and his accurate knowledge of plays and stage-craft.

Theatrical management has simply developed on new lines to meet current conditions. The fact that there are perhaps not three managers in this city who understand the technic of the stage from “the vampire trap” to “grid-iron clamps,” from “ground rows” and “set raking pieces” to “cut borders, or can nominate the distinguishing features of the dramas from Moliere to Sundermann, does not argue any particular discredit, for he is engaged in speculative and not creative capacity. With one theater paying an annual ground rental of $25,000, another $35,000 (including heat), and the so-called “out-lying theaters” paying $10,000 to $15,000 per annum on long leases, the manager has other things to consider than technical details. The stock company that is his most solicitous care is one that erected the theater; in other words, his chief aim, according to the nature of the case, is to secure paying attractions, rather than to make artistic productions. With this end in view he becomes a spirited bidder in the market of amusement attractions, where the highest percentage knocks the choicest popular “persimmon.” Of course shrewdness and sagacity enter the competition, and this is why one of our younger managers has succeeded in sustaining the inherited prestige of his house in retaining attractions that have been claimed in the prospectus of new theaters as the basis for calculating prospective profits on stock.”

Why Chicago needs more new theaters is problematical in the practical sense, but it continues to be popular dissipation on paper. All managers will admit it is difficult to secure a clientele with the number now in the field. The multiplication of the so-called continuous theaters has a significance in the direction that appears to have passed comment. While their aim might appear to be merely to gratify transient trade, their stronghold is really the regular clientele. Their evident intent is to keep an even grade of entertainment, which is popular in the public eye. Many of our more pretentious theaters are apparently unable to do this owning to a lack of high-grade attractions. One week may see their stages occupied by the highest stars of the theatrical firmament, the next the most blatant display of farcical mediocrity, and there is no change in price indicative of the distinction as far as the theater is concerned. Of course there will some day be disastrous reaction in this drift in the clearing-house of popularity, and a fixed policy will necessarily prevail, all of which appears to indicate that Chicago must renew her prestige as a producing center is her theaters are to remain independent factors in the field of art.

New York claims five stock companies of the first rank. An insight into the workings of one of these organizations may be interesting in t his connection, and that of Augustin Daly may be cited as the first having “the traditions” and experiences of nearly thirty years incorporated in its warp. A New York exchange says: “He has a Broadway theater in a central location at a moderate rental. First of all, he must lay by for the landlord; then the insurance, whose rates are higher on theatrical than other property. These expenses provided for, the manager plunges into deep water. His productions are costly. On certain of his Shakesperean revivals, Mr. Daly has spent $10,000. It cost at least that amount to put on ‘A Midsummer Night’s Dream’ and ‘The Merry Wives’ and Tennyson’s ‘The Foresters,” and almost as much to stage ‘As You Like It.’ Then the salary list. Mr. Daly does not pay high salaries. With the exception of Miss Rehan the organization contains no high-priced member. Yet the Daly company is composed of many actors, and the aggregate sum paid for their services is heavy. It is rather below than above the exact figures to state the Daly’s Theater must take into its treasury $3,000 every week throughout the year in order to meet expenses. That means summer as well as winter. The season ends in May, and this year it will begin in September, much earlier than usual. The doors are closed, the investment is absolutely non-productive for four months; yet the rent must be paid, the insurance and repairs kept up. During the summer season the Daly company goes on the road, and a considerable part of the profits of the tour is used to defray expenses of idle property in New York. Of course Chicago is paying its share of these expenses, and will continue to do so willingly so ling as Mr. Daly continues to sustain the standard he has established.

Now Mr. Daly avoids an item of large expense that many of his brother managers incur in the payment of royalties, for he produces his own plays or revives classical comedies, the rights of which are not restricted. He prefers direct art investment rather than the hazard of spectacular fortune, sustaining ethics of tradition. But it is not the payment of direct royalties that the manger loses, for, generally speaking, the more he gives the author the more he earns for himself. The questions of advance payments to the authors of repute constitutes quite a serious question with speculative management. For he may advance $5,000 or double that amount with absolutely no guarantee of its return. Some statistician has computed 30,000 plays are written in this country every years. We take this to be a very theatrical estimate; at any rate, out of a vast number “Trilby” has been the only great moneymaker this season. Mr. Palmer, who has spent thirty years of studying the managerial business, pays 10 per cent royalties on this profitable property and is glad of it. Daniel Frohman annually pays out a great deal on royalties, and Charles Frohman is the most dashing and daring manager in the business in advancing on unwritten plays or buying them outright.

To return briefly to the Schiller Theatre. This house was created for a distinct art purpose as the home of the German drama is concerned. This may be a matter of keen regret for the projectors, but the property may possibly be advantageously developed in another direction. Gustave Frohman, who comes into possession of the beautiful house, is a manger of experience, and his business alliance with his brothers, the largest factors in the productive field, may succeed in building up the falling fortunes of this theater and make it conspicuous in another sense than merely being topped by the highest tower of any other theater in America. The nature of existing contracts will necessarily not permit of any immediate new departure, but the Schiller Theater may in time come to fill the higher sphere of dramatic production for which it was erected. C.E.N.

Illustration of Gustave Frohman’s office published in the New York Times (9 Aug 1908 page 37).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 260 – Thomas G. Moses Painting for Buffalo Bill’s “A Lady of Venice”

Thomas G. Moses created painted scenery for a variety of productions during the Columbian Exposition in 1893. One project was for Col. William F. “Buffalo Bill” Cody.

Buffalo Bill wanted his Wild West show to be part of the Columbian Exposition. The Committee of Ways and Means standard tariff for a concession was fifty percent of gross proceeds, not fifty-percent of the actual profits. Cody did not appreciate the high percentage and withdrew his request. He then forged ahead with his own plan and leased approximately fifteen acres of land adjacent to the fairgrounds and constructed an 18,000 seat coliseum.

Poster depicting the area adjacent to the Columbian Exposition fairgrounds leased by Cody for “Buffalo Bill’s Wild West and Congress of Rough Riders of the World.”

Flyers that William F. “Buffalo Bill” Cody sent ahead to Chicago, announcing the arrival of his show in 1893.

On March 20, 1893, “Buffalo Bill’s Wild West and Congress of Rough Riders of the World” arrived in Chicago. 100 former cavalry troops, 46 cowboys, 97 Cheyenne and Sioux Indians, 53 Cossacks and Hussars, and several herds of animals were unloaded from the cars at the railroad. In a bold move, Cody opened on April 3 – a full four weeks before the grand opening of the World Fair. This is especially ironic as the White City was behind schedule in the overall construction process.

Photograph depicting a portion of the cast for Buffalo Bill’s Wild West in Chicago during 1893.

His show included wild animals, bronco busters, a cowboy band, a choreographed Indian attack on the Deadwood stagecoach that was vanquished by mounted troopers, a realistic staging of Custer’s last stand, and Annie Oakley’s shooting at impossible targets.

Poster for “Buffalo Bill’s Wild West and Congress of Rough Riders of the World”

Cossacks featured in a poster for “Buffalo Bill’s Wild West and Congress of Rough Riders of the World”

Annie Oakley featured in poster for “Buffalo Bill’s Wild West and Congress of Rough Riders of the World,” performed in an arena adjacent to the Columbian Exposition fairgrounds in 1893.

Columbian Exposition officials were less than pleased with Cody’s presence. The relationship continued to head south throughout the duration of the fair. When fair officials refused Mayor Carter Harrison’s request for a day with free admittance to the poor children of Chicago, Cody immediately announced a “Waif’s Day” at the Wild West. He offered every child from Chicago free train tickets, free admission to his show, and all the ice cream and candy that they could eat.

1893 newspaper article noting “Waif’s day” in the weekly schedule for “Buffalo Bill’s Wild West and Congress of Rough Riders of the World.”

His show even closed one day AFTER the fair officially closed. During the fair, his show averaged 16,000 spectators for each of the 318 performances. His profits were estimated at one million dollars, today’s equivalent of approximately twenty-six million dollars.

During the Columbian Exposition, Cody also financed “A Lady of Venice,” starring Viola Katherine Clemmons (1870-1930).

Thomas G. Moses painted scenery for “A Lady of Venice,” starring Katherine Clemmons and produced by William F. “Buffalo Bill” Cody in 1893.

“Katherine” Clemmons was born in Palo Alto, California, and first appeared on the stage of McGuire’s Opera House in the mid-1880s. She was cast in a series of Shakespearean plays and traveled to England to study theatre. It was there that she met Cody after she attended one of his shows. Acting as Clemmons agent, he purchased and produced “A Lady of Venice” for her. He established a theatrical business (The Lady of Venice Company) and hired Sherman Canfield to function as her co-manager.

The production opened on September 4, 1893. Newspapers published that it would be “mounted in an extravagant fashion.” The scenes were placed in fifteenth-century Venice and Genoa. The plot dealt with Italian intrigues, politics, and love. Written entirely in blank verse, it was advertised as “a romantic story that admits picturesque accessories.” Clemmons played the character of Nina, an Italian princess and devoted wife who made many sacrifices for an unworthy husband. In the fourth act, Nina dons a man’s armor and attempts to save the city and her husband’s honor, battling her husband’s enemy to the death. She then seeks her Genoese prince, only to find him in the arms of a fair Florentine girl.

Four railroad cars were needed to transport the settings and properties for “A Lady in Venice.” Many newspapers commented on the wonderful mechanical and illumination effects for the stage. Settings included a moonlit masked Fete and Dance, a military encampment, water scenes and canal gondolas. The October 6, 1893 issue of the Buffalo Evening News reported, “The scenery is picturesque and realistic.” This was scenery by Thomas G. Moses.

1894 photograph depicting a scene from “A Lady of Venice,” with scenery painted by Thomas G. Moses. Image from The Museum of New York City collection. Here is the linkL http://collections.mcny.org/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=24UAYWLS9VABQ

Supporting roles were played by Effie Germon, Francis Carlyle, Clarence Handyside, Richard Ganthony, Erskine Lewis, Helen Russel, and Marion Bender. The show left Chicago for Albaugh’s Opera House in Washington D.C. where it opened on September 19. By September 25, the show was at the Broad Street Theatre in Philadelphia and performing for Buffalo audiences by October 6 (Star Theatre), moving onto the Duquesne Theatre on October 30. By November Clemmons was acting at Globe Theatre in Boston. After a whirlwind tour, the production arrived at Harry C. Miner’s Fifth Avenue Theatre in New York during 1894.

One of many newspaper articles announcing Katherine Clemmons as a “new star” in “A Lady of Venice.” Scenery was painted by Thomas G. Moses for this production.

Unfortunately, Boston and New York critics condemned Clemmons’ performance as “amateurish” and the delivery of her lines as “monotonous.” Cody had met the actress in London during 1887 when Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show was touring throughout Europe. The November 5, 1893, issue of the Quad City Times (Davenport, Iowa) published, “It was Buffalo Bill’s money that sent [Clemmons] to Europe for a stage education. It was his money which provided for her elaborate scenery, beautiful costumes, and enterprising manager and a good company.” The article continued to explain that he “spent something like $40,000 in putting this young star upon the road, and it is hoped that she is achieving a success that will in time enable her to return to her distinguished friend the large sum of money which his generosity led him to invest in her.” Cody later claimed to have lost $60,000 on Clemmons’ career during 1892, 1893 and 1894.

Photograph of Katherine Clemmons in “A Lady of Venice.”

Unlike Clemmons, the production was praised for its lavish expenditure on scenery and costumes. The cash outlay for scenery and stage effects was reported in excess of $25,000. The Boston Enquirer (7 Oct 1893, page 3) noted that, “the play was sumptuously staged” and “the scenery well painted.”

One of many newspaper advertisements for “A Lady of Venice,” starring Katherine Clemmons in 1893-1894. The “gorgeous scenery” was painted by Thomas G. Moses.

Cody hired Sosman & Landis to design and paint the scenery for the production. The Daily Inter Ocean (22 August 1893, page 6) published, “A great many managers are stocking with scenery just now in this city. Sosman & Landis have big contracts for stocking new opera houses at Ithaca, NY, and Scranton, Pa., then they are painting an original scenic outfit for “The Lady of Venice,” Effie Elishler’s “Doris,” Heywood’s “Edgwood Folks,” Spring & Welton’s “Black Crook,” and Cheeney’s new spectacular production of “Pharaoh.” Moses was in charge of “A Lady of Venice” and many other projects during 1893. This was just one small fraction of his work with a large profit going to the studio.

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…