Rigging – Page 4 – Drypigment.net

Travels of a Scenic Artist and Scholar. TempleLive and the Cleveland Scottish Rite July 18, 2019

Update: TempleLive, a network of historic entertainment venues abruptly closed all location in September 2025. Owned by Beaty Capital Group, the venues often included Masonic structures such as Scottish Rite Temples.

The Cleveland Masonic Temple, once home to the Scottish Rite, is now owned by TempleLive.

I stopped by the Cleveland Scottish Rite building on my return trip from the League of Historic American Theatre’s national conference in Philadelphia. The venue has recently changed hands over the past two years and is under the operation of TempleLive, a group that is buying historic properties and using them as event centers. (https://www.templelive.com/). TempleLive is the subsidiary of the Beaty Capital Group, an investment firm with an interesting past. TempleLive’s most recent purchase was the Scottish Rite in Wichita, a significant loss for the Fraternity in terms of historical artifacts and material culture.

The Scottish Rite in Wichita, Kansas, was recently purchased by TempleLive.

The Cleveland Scottish Rite has popped up on my radar multiple times over the past years, in both personal research and blog posts. It represents a single square in the quilt of American theatre history, as well as the life and times of Thomas G. Moses (1856-1934). I first made contact with Cleveland’s Scottish Rite secretary on my way to Cleveland. He was a very pleasant fellow. Although happy to meet with me, he could no longer show me the stage area, as the entire building was under the management of TempleLive.

The Scottish Rite Secretary shared the telephone number for the local TempleLive representative, urging me to schedule an appointment that day for a tour with her. She was very accommodating and graciously set a time to meet. In addition to daily administrative duties, the local TempleLive manager is also part of the overhaul team, even painting walls and cabinets as part of the ongoing renovation work. In addition to implementing new color schemes, she negotiates the contracts with the Fraternity and is their key contact. Her immediate supervisor specializes in managing entertainment venues, the two previously working together on at separate venue in Cleveland. She explained that the TempleLive protocol is hiring local individuals and maintaining a congenial relationship with the previous owner, now a dedicated renter.

Both the Scottish Rite representative and TempleLive host could not have been more gracious or accommodating during my visit. They each spent an ample amount of time explaining the transfer of the building from the Fraternity to a private investor and the necessary renovations that needed to occur prior to using the facility for public events, particularly Live Nation events. Live Nation Entertainment advertises as a “Global Leader in Live Entertainment. Artist Powered. Fan Driven” with over 200 venues, 35,000 annual concerts, 4,000 touring artists, and 93 million fans in 40 countries (https://www.livenationentertainment.com/). They boast, “On average every 16 minutes there is a live Nation event starting somewhere in the world.”

Scottish Rite stage in Cleveland with some new lighting instruments for Live Nation.

It is my understanding that Live Nation is solely involved with the stage entertainment only and not the rest of the building. Live Nation recently installed new trusses for the secondary lighting system on the main stage. The old lighting system is still in place, but Masonic Bodies can use the new system for a substantial fee. With the continued flickering and blackouts during my stage visit, however, it is possible that the new system has problems. My TempleLive host explained that the light issues had been a problem since the new system was recently installed. Hmmm.

Lighting instruments for Live Nation shows.

Both of my hosts adamantly stressed the beneficial relationship between the Fraternity and TempleLive’s management, especially the generosity of the new owner allowing the previous owner to rent space in the building. I could not help think that the arrangement may be most beneficial to the new owner as there is no preparation for a new tenant, or any period of vacancy waiting for rental income. Yet the spin is more of generous landlord helping out struggling tenant.

My hosts were friendly, inquisitive, and sharing, yet something seemed off. In fact, as I walked through the building, I continued to experience a sinking sense of dread. It was the same feeling that I felt when the last painted setting left the Scottish Rite building in Fort Scott, Kansas; the soul of the space was gone. Interestingly, by the end of my two-hour visit, I still had no idea what happened to the historic scenery collection, who had removed the drops from the main theater or where they were currently stored. The backdrops went from “rolled up” to “in storage,” to “there may be a few still hanging.” The cathedral scene may be hanging – smart move for weddings on TempleLive’s part. There was a framed photograph of the scene that the Scottish Rite Secretary shared during my visit and both hosts stressed the beauty of the painting.

Framed picture of one Scottish Rite setting manufactured by Toomey & Volland scenic studio of St. Louis, Missouri, 1919.

To put this all in context, however, here is my current understanding of what TempleLive does when investing in a Masonic property. First of all, they target historic venues because of the construction quality and layout, an aspect stressed by my Cleveland host noting, “buildings just aren’t made like that anymore.” Paying a fraction of the building’s market value, the new owner ensures that the various Masonic orders meeting in the space still have access as renters. In the case of Cleveland, that the Masonic bodies have a base rental fee and are up-charged for a variety of services, such as using the “new” lights on stage. This is brilliant, because you not only get a good deal on real estate, but you immediately have dedicated renters who have no incentive to find another location. They are not going anywhere anytime soon as securing another location and moving all of the ritual paraphernalia is a deterrent.

So let’s start from the beginning as explained by my host… the building changes hands and TempleLive focuses on getting the stage/auditorium ready to sell seats for touring and local performers. This makes sense as it provides an additional revenue stream beyond the Masonic orders. TempleLive invests in the theater areas first. In the case of Cleveland, the $725,000 is paid for the building and 5 million was solely sunk into theater renovations, making it immediately ready for performances and additional revenue. Again, the price was $750,000 for a historic building with 102,000 sq. ft. in a prime downtown location. Keep in mind, similar transactions have repeatedly occurred during the past decade, with Scottish Rite buildings changing hands to private investors for next to nothing, in some cases only $1. Yet almost all have the agreement that the Masonic orders can still meet in the building, often for a fee. After the theater is up and running, TempleLive focuses on renovating the remainder of the building. That is where Cleveland is at right now, moving onto the remainder of the building.

One of many ornate halls in the Cleveland Masonic Temple

One of many meeting spaces in the Cleveland Masonic Temple

A lodge room still used by Masons at the Cleveland Masonic Temple, now owned by TempleLive.

Now there is a second theatre space in the Cleveland Masonic building that has yet to be renovated. Some of the original scenery is still hanging. We did not lower the historic scenes, so I have no idea if they were manufactured by Sosman & Landis in 1909 or Toomey & Volland in 1919. I took as many pictures of the stage machinery as possible. Sadly, I doubt that retaining any historic scenery directly benefits TempleLive. If anything, it is likely to be an impediment to their standard protocol in creating spaces for touring productions.

The second stage at the Cleveland Masonic Temple

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 742 – Drop Curtains in Philadelphia, 1894 – Gilmore’s Auditorium and H. J. Overpeck

Gilmore’s Auditorium constructed at 807 Walnut Street in Philadelphia, just one in a series of popular nineteenth-century theaters located at the same address. Welch’s National Amphitheatre and Circus, the Continental Theatre, the American Variety Theatre, Fox’s New American Theatre, the Grand Central Theatre, and Gilmore’s Auditorium. The tale of four fires is presented in an interesting post by Harry Kyyriakodis about about the various entertainment venues at this address. Here is the link: https://hiddencityphila.org/2013/05/blazing-ballerinas-and-a-rampaging-elephant-at-807-walnut-street/

Photograph of Gilmore’s Auditorium, Philadelphia, from the “Official Building Directory and Architectural Handbook of Philadelphia,” 1899, p 257.

The theater’s proprietor, William J. Gilmore, had made a career in theater management by the time Gilmore’s Auditorium was constructed. He had successfully managed several Philadelphia theaters as well as others across the country.

“The Times” included an article on Gilmore’s Auditorium rising from the site of the burned Central theatre on June 4, 1893 (page 15). The article reported, “From the ruins of the New Central Theatre is rapidly rising a new building that will be, when completed, one of the finest playhouses in America. The new theatre will be known as ‘Gilmore’s Auditorium,’ and built in the Moorish style of architecture, from brownstone, terra cotta and light buff brick, beautifully embellished with colored glass and new electric lights. Architect John D. Allen, under whose direct supervision the house is being erected, has provided every device known to modern science that contributes to the safety and comfort and convenience of the prospective patrons, resulting in a building that is practically fireproof. One of the chief factors contributing to this end of the building is the proscenium wall, having no opening between the stage and auditorium except the arch, which is protected by a heavy asbestos curtain, while the stage roof is fitted with an automatic ventilator, so adjusted that a rise of a few degrees in temperature will at once open it and form an excellent flue by means of which any flames that might possibly break out in the stage or among the scenery, would be diverted from the building proper. The system of heating and ventilating adopted has been proved absolutely effective, thus insuring a cool house in summer and a warm one in winter. The colors selected for all interior decorations are such that everything harmonizes in the manner, forming a perfect rest for the eyes, which is not destroyed even when the full glare of the innumerable electric lights is turned on. So rapidly has the work of construction progressed that although the ground was broken only on February 8 last, it is expected to throw open the building for inspection early in August. Taking into consideration that only thirty-two clear working days were available since the beginning of the work the progress has been wonderfully rapid, although everything has been done in the most careful and workmanlike manner.”

Image of Gilmore’s Auditorium during construction from “The Times,” (Philadelphia) 4 June 1893, page 15

Gilmore’s Auditorium was illuminated by electricity and boasted a seating capacity of 3,076. John R. Wilkins was listed as the scenic artist in Julius Chan’s Official Theatrical Guide, 1896. With the theatre on the ground floor, the proscenium measured 33 feet wide by 34 feet high, with the distance from the footlights to the back wall being 30 ½ feet. The distance between the side walls was 75 ½ feet and the distance between the girders measured 42 feet. It was 60 feet from the stage to the rigging loft, with the depth under the stage measuring 9 feet. There were three traps and one bridge along the back wall. By 1905, Gilmore’s Auditorium became the Casino Theatre, soon gaining a reputation as a popular burlesque venue.

The Gilmore’s Auditorium asbestos curtain was mentioned in “Well-known Drop Curtains in Philadelphia Theatres,” published in “The Philadelphia Inquirer on Dec. 18, 1894. Instead of listing the scenic artist, the article highlighted the stage carpenter for his innovative stage machinery- hydraulic engine was used to lift the asbestos curtain.

“The asbestos curtain in Gilmore’s Auditorium is a model of its kind. The curtain is thirty-four feet wide by thirty-six feet high, and is lifted and lowered by means of a one-half inch steel wire cable over a drain in the flies. The curtain, which is nearly one-half an inch thick, is not rolled up, but lifted bodily, away up in the flies by a small hydraulic engine. It is painted a creamy buff in harmony with the other decorations, but is devoid of any ornament save the single word “Asbestos” painted in the center. All of the act and scene “drops” in this popular amusement temple, like the asbestos drop, are made to lift bodily, the system, which is new, being devised and put in by Mr. Gilmore’s stage carpenter, H. J. Overpeck.”

. The only information that I have uncovered pertaining to anyone named Overpeck in the theatrical profession is an A. J. Overpeck who was listed as a stage machinist with Baitley Campbell’s Siberia in Harry Miner’s Professional Directory (1884). By 1896, Julius Cahn’s Official Theatrical Guide would list Harry Spillman as the stage carpenter and electrician.

Of asbestos curtains, however, an interesting article was published the same year in the “Boston Globe” (23 Feb. 1894, page 8).

“Asbestos Curtain at the Boston.

It is the duty of every theatrical manager to provide his patrons with the best protection possible against fire. No means has yet been discovered equal to a fireproof curtain, and such a one as the Boston Theater has just been put in place is the best of its kind. The curtain is 52 by 50 feet and is made entirely of asbestos. It is hung by wire rope which runs through iron chives [sheaves] fastened into the brick wall over the proscenium, and as all the battens are of iron piping, there is not a bit of woodwork or anything combustible about the entire construction.

The curtain was put in place by Mr. W. P. Prescott, the theater’s machinist, who also made all of the machinery. Last week a test was made before the insurance commissioner, and he pronounced it a splendid piece of mechanism and an ample protection.

By pulling a small wire rope at the prompt stand the curtain can be lowered in three seconds, so that in case of fire not an instant will be lost in shutting off the auditorium from the stage by an asbestos wall through which no flames could penetrate.”

Furthermore, an article in the “Democrat and Chronicle” (Rochester, New York) on Dec. 6, 1894, was entitled “Theater Fires” (page 6). It reported, “Statistic of theater fires from 1751 to the present year have been compiled by the Scientific American, and the figures show a total of 460 theaters destroyed in all countries during the period covered. There were 31 of these disasters in London, 29 in Paris and 29 in New York. The number of victims was great, but as separate lists of the killed and wounded are not given, no accurate statement of the loss of life can be made. It was, however, appalling.” The article later commented, “We believe that most of the modern theaters in this country afford fair protection of their patrons, by means of asbestos curtains, which can be lowered quickly, separating the stage from the auditorium, and by reasonably ample facilities for exit.”

Finally, as asbestos curtains gained prominence by the end of the 19^th century, a funny article came out that reminded me of the plain asbestos curtain hanging at Gilmore’s Auditorium. It was published in the “Philadelphia Inquirer” on Feb. 7, 1897, page 20: “I has an afternoon off this week,” said a well-known comedian to me last evening, “and as I had nothing else to do I wandered into a theatre where a matinee was being given. Directly in front of me sat two stylishly-gowned girls, and they wore hats that were veritable flower gardens. Of course, I could se very little of the stage, but I was repaid by the charming conversation I was forced to overhear. It was just previous to the opening overture and the fair maids were discussing the asbestos curtain.

“That curtain is not half as pretty as the one they used to have here,” said one.

“No indeed it is not, chimed in the other.

“By the way, Marie, who was Asbestos?”

“Asbestos?” queried her friend.

“Why Asbestos was a Roman general, wasn’t he?”

“Was he?”

“No. Laura; let me think – Oh, I remember now; he was a mythological character.”

“Why to be sure he was,” acquiesced Laura.

“How foolish of me not to have thought of it.”

“And they resumed munching caramels.”

To be continued…

Die Vierte Wand #009 Article by Dr. Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In addition to writing my daily blog, I have a published a few article this spring. One is “Brown’s Special System for Scottish Rite Theaters in North America” for Die Vierte Wand #009. Past articles for this journal also appear in issues #007 and #008. Die Vierte Wand is a wonderful publication by Stefan Graebner, Director of the Initiative Theatre Museum in Berlin. with articles in German and English.

Here is the link for issue #008: https://issuu.com/itheam/docs/itheam_d4w-008

Here is the link for issue #007: https://issuu.com/itheam/docs/itheam_d4w-007

Here is the link for Die Vierte Wand (The Fourth Wall) #009: https://archive.org/details/iTheaM_d4W-009/page/n3

The issue is free online, with the print price being € 10,- + shipping.

Travels of a Scenic Artists and Scholar: The Fifth Annual American Fraternalism Event at Boston University, April 10, 2019

Last summer, William D. Moore invited me to be the guest speaker at fifth annual American Fraternalism event at Boston University during spring 2019. Will is the Director of the American & New England Studies Program and an Associate Professor of Material Culture. Two of his past publications include “Masonic Temples: Freemasonry, Ritual Architecture, and Masculine Archetypes” (University of Tennessee Press, 2006) and “Secret Societies in America: Foundational Studies of Fraternalism,” co-authored with Mark Tabbert (Cornerstone Book Publishers, 2011). Will had been following my blog for some time, purchased “The Santa Fe Scottish Rite Temple: Freemasonry, Architecture and Theatre” book, and was intrigued with my current research posted to my blog.

Wendy Waszut-Barrett and William D. Moore after the 2019 American Fraternalism event at Boston University.

Several incidents shaped my topic, “A Masonic Legacy: Bestor G. Brown and Brown’s Special system,” and other articles that I was working on at the time.

Poster for the fifth American Fraternalism event at Boston University, 2019

Between November 2018 and February 2019, I wrote three articles: “Setting the Stage” (Theatre Historical Society of America’s fourth quarter issue of “Marquee”); “Brown’s Special System for Scottish Rite Theaters in North America” (TheatreInitiative Museum Berlin’s “Die Vierte Wand 009); and “Brown’s Special System: A Masonic Legacy,” (Scottish Rite Research Society’s spring newsletter “The Plumbline).” At the same time, I was still writing my blog and starting to make contact with the Valley of Portland in regard to Brown’s special system; they have the earliest example as originally installed in 1903, being manufactured in 1902. Then toss in work projects, conferences, family, the holidays, and other obligations; busy time at our house.

In regard to Boston, I was most excited to see Will. We first met during the planning stage for Lance Brockman’s touring museum exhibit, “Theatre of the Fraternity: Staging the Ritual Space of Freemasonry, 1896-1929.” The last time I saw Will and his wife was the Weisman Museum in 1996 when the exhibit opened. By the way, Lance’s catalogue still is available for sale on Amazon, here is the link: https://www.amazon.com/Theatre-Fraternity-Scottish-Freemasonry-1896-1929/dp/0878059474

I arrived in Boston on Tuesday, April 9, and spent a lovely afternoon chatting with Will about numerous fraternal subjects. We continued the conversation over dinner, adding his wife Charlotte to the mix. What a delightful arrival and evening spent with two extremely fun people. My presentation was not until 7:30PM the next day, so I was able to spend some time relaxing and writing in Brookline, New York. I am currently working on my next book about Sosman & Landis studio, so I treasure anytime that is devoid of distractions. Before my presentation, there was a group of us that went out to dinner, including friend and colleague Diane Fargo who teaches scene painting at BU; she is a remarkable artist in her own right.

Wendy Waszut-Barrett presenting at the fifth annual American Fraternalism event at Boston University

My presentation went extremely well, lasting 45 minutes with a 15-minute Q&A that followed. In attendance BU staff and students, as well as visiting Masons from Boston University Lodge, Harvard Lodge, the Lodge of St. Andrew and the Boston Scottish Rite. That evening, I was invited to tour the Scottish Rite stage before I left town the next day. On April 12, I visited the Boston Scottish Rite and the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts. I knew that there would very little scenery, as the hemp system was replaced and an LED wall added to the mix. I was very curious to see how well new technology replaced historic scenery.

The Grand Lodge of Massachusetts and the Boston Scottish Rite are in the same building.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 709 – “Installation Shall be Under the Direction of Bestor G. Brown”

Part 709: “Installation Shall be Under the Direction of Bestor G. Brown”

By 1910, the process of manufacturing and installing Scottish Rite scenery collections operated by Brown’s special system was running like a well-oiled machine. M. C. Lilley & Co. landed the work and subcontracted the scenery, stage machinery and lighting portion to Sosman & Landis. M. C. Lilley & Co. provided the costumes, regalia and other necessary paraphernalia.

Up to this point, I have discussed the scenery produced for Little Rock, Oakland, Wichita, Guthrie, Fargo, Salina, Portland and others at the turn of the twentieth century. Let’s jump ahead a decade at the peak production of Scottish Rite scenery in the Sosman & Landis studio, 1909-1910. During that two-year period, Sosman & Landis produced scenery and stage machinery for Kansas City, Kansas; Winona, Minnesota; Dallas, Texas; Atlanta, Georgia; Memphis, Tennessee; Guthrie, Oklahoma (second installation); St. Paul, Minnesota; Denver, Co; and Indianapolis, Indiana. Keep in mind that at this time the studio also refurbished the Wichita scenery from 1898 and delivered it to Yankton, South Dakota. There are other collections from this period that remain unidentified at this time.

I have also looked in detail at the promotion of Brown’s special system, a method of counterweighting the scenery, that was marketed by well known Mason, Bestor G. Brown. For Masonic context, Brown was a Past Grand Mater of the Grand Lodge of Kansas (1903) and a member of numerous Masonic orders, including the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry in both the Northern and Southern Jurisdiction. Brown also belonged to the Odd Fellows, Knights of Pythias and Improved Order of Redmen. His profession was that of western sales manager for M. C. Lilley & Co., a supplier of fraternal, military and band goods. He was also considered the only Masonic Stage carpenter in the United States.

There is an interesting section in the 1910 contract between M. C. Lilley & Co., represented by Brown, and the Guthrie Scottish Rite:

“The installation shall be under the direction of Bestor G. Brown who will take charge of and handle the stage during the first reunion, without compensation or expense of any kind, provided of course, sickness or other preventing circumstances shall not operate and abridgement of any in terms of this contract or the pecuniary liability expressed therein.”

This is big, and I doubt that this is an unusual occurrence. It also explains why Brown was considered the Masonic stage carpenter, ruler of the realm behind the footlights. This single sentence in the contract places Brown on site during the first Scottish Rite Reunion that uses the new stage machinery and scenery. It means that at the completion of each Scottish Rite project there is an individual on site to supervise the initial operation of the system, keeping an eye on Masonic stagehands that are unfamiliar with the backstage aspects of a theatrical production.

There are two significant things to consider:

First of all, after most Sosman & Landis theater installations, the company representative superintending the site work remained on site as the theater opened, or at least operated the system to familiarize the client with the new products. In fact, Sosman & Landis had several employees who traveled from location, to location, installing scenery and stage machinery. The supervisor of each installation worked with a crew of carpenters and then operated the system for the client upon completion. Often after an installation – the superintendent of the work would show how everything worked upon completion. In 1887, newspapers reported that Sosman & Landis would, “complete everything, ready for the rise of the curtain, and will run the stage for the first performance.”

We also know that certain that at least one Sosman & Landis stage carpenter traveled without drawings. In the case of Charles S. King and the Crump Theatre project during the late nineteenth century, he was the only individual who was personally held the knowledge pertaining to the carpentry work and installation of the stage machinery and scenery. to install the stage systems. This was a smart move and may have prevented information from being shared with Sosman & Landis’ competitors, keeping new innovations safeguarded, just as guilds protected trade secrets. The knowledge of a new method for installing counterweight systems placed Sosman & Landis ahead of their competitors to deliver more scenery, as Brown’s special system placed the rigging lines close together.

As the scenery and stage machinery were subcontracted Sosman & Landis, it also makes sense that Brown would be on site, representing M. C. Lilley & Co. and directly communicating with the client. After all, the one installing the scenery may not be a Mason or hold that necessary “charm” when the client became a challenge. Also, keep in mind that it was M. C. Lilley & Co. who directly contracted the entire theatre portion of the project with each Scottish Rite.

The second article of note in this clause is that Brown would “take charge of and handle the stage during the first reunion.” He had to, especially if the Sosman & Landis stage carpenter was not a Mason. Fortunately for M. C. Lilley & Co. Brown was a Scottish Rite member in the Northern and Southern Jurisdiction, as well as a fraternal salesman. An active Scottish Rite Mason had to be the onsite eyes during that first reunion; and that was Brown, ensuring that everything operated as promised.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 690 – Proper Lighting for Scottish Rite Stages

Part 690: Proper Lighting for Scottish Rite Stages

In 1881, The Building News included the article “Art on the Stage.” A small section addressed the scenic artist’s involvement with lighting at the time:

“The last thing that the scene-painter does before the production of a new play is to have his scenes set upon the stage at night in order that he can arrange the lighting of them. The “gas-man” of a theatre is the artist’s mainstay. It lies in his power to ruin the finest scene that was ever painted. Ground lights turned too high upon a moonlight scene, calciums with glass not properly tinted, or the shadow of a straight edged border-drop thrown across a delicate sky – all these things are ruin to the artist’s most careful work. The proper lighting of a scene is, therefore, a matter that requires the most careful study. The artist sits in the centre of the auditorium and minutely observes every nook and comer of his scene under the glare of gas. Here a light is turned up and there one is lowered until the proper effect is secured. The gas-man takes careful note of his directions, and the stage-manager oversees everything. Long after the audience has left the theatre on the night before the production of a new play, the stage-hands, the artist, and the stage manager are at work, and the public sees only the charming result of their labours when the curtain rises on the next night.”

Over three decades later, electric border lights and other lighting instruments replaced their gas predecessors. In 1913, Bestor G. Brown, western sales manager for M. C. Lieelley & Co., wrote a letter to William G. Bell at the Austin Scottish Rite about the proper way to light a Scottish Rite stage. He cited the recently installed lighting system at the Santa Fe Scottish Rite installed the year before. Brown described the electric border lights:

“Each border ought to be hung the same way as we hang our scenery, on counterweighted cable; it requires a little larger counterweight frame for these border rows on account of the weight. We ordinarily install the border rows where we furnish the fixtures, at the time we install the scenery.”

A stage lighting pamphlet was created by M. C. Lilley during the early twentieth century to identify the recommended lighting equipment for Scottish Rite stages. The equipment for a Scottish Rite stage was classified as border lights, ground rows, floor pockets, strip lights, bunch lights, arc lights, dimmer plant and switch board. M. C. Lilley & Co. offered either three-color or four-color options for border, strip lights and ground rows.

Of the colors, a three-color system for the Scottish stages recommended by M. C. Lilley & Co. included white, red and green. In the case of their four-color systems, the company recommended white, red, blue and amber. Around this same time, the increased use of amber was noted by scenic artist Ernest Albert. In 1913, Albert addressed appropriate lighting colors for the stage. It was in an interview with “The New York Dramatic Mirror,” He commented, “we are now avoiding many of the hard qualities of the electric light by greater use of ambers, straw colors, and pinks.”

Border lights at the Yankon Scottish RIte

Border lights at the Yankton Scottish Rite

Border lights at the Austin Scottish Rite

Border lights at the Deadwood Scottish Rite

Border lights at the Grand Forks Scottish Rite

The M. C. Lilley pamphlet also noted the additional expense incurred by a four-color light system

noting, “The incorporation of the fourth color not only increases the size of the fixtures, but materially increases the expense. For the majority of Masonic stages, the three color lights are found to be ample.” That being said, the three-color systems of white, red and blue appear to be visually more successful, for the night scenes.

For a stage depth of thirty feet, six border rows were recommended, with each border measuring the same length as the proscenium width. Similarly, there would be a minimum of six ground rows, each measuring four feet long.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 670 – A Melting Pot of Ingenuity

Part 670: A Melting Pot of Ingenuity

There are four things to consider when examining the development of Brown’s Special System – the Chicago Auditorium, the Beckwith Memorial Auditorium, the scenic studio of Albert, Grover & Burridge, and Sosman & Landis. There is no linear progression of events and Chicago is a melting pot of ingenuity.

I’ll start with what Rick Boychuk wrote in “Nobody Looks Up: The History of the Counterweight Rigging System,1500-1925.” Boychuk contends that Chicago Auditorium of 1889 is a game changer in the future of American counterweight rigging. Of the endeavor, he writes, “The first counterweight rigging system in American was state-of-the-art technology when it was installed in 1889 in the Auditorium Building in Chicago – commonly referred to as the Chicago Auditorium” (page 167). Boychuk explains how Ferdinand Peck, the visionary for the Chicago auditorium, traveled to Europe to examine opera houses, later joined by architect Dankmar Adler (Adler & Sullivan) and Chicago stage carpenter John Bairstow. Boychuk states, “Chicago borrowed the sheave design and configuration from Budapest and the balance of the counterweight system from Vienna” (page 172). Read his book.

Things to think about as we contemplate the evolution of Brown’s special system: the Chicago Auditorium stage carpenter, Bairstow, was one of the charter members who founded Chicago’s Theatrical Mechanics Association. In fact, he was the organization’s first president in Chicago. Bairstow was a member of TMA Chicago Lodge No. 4. David Austin Strong was also a Member of Chicago Lodge. No. 4. At the time they were both members in 1891, Strong was an employee of Sosman & Landis, and was also credited as being the “Daddy of Masonic Design.”

David Austin Strong, scenic artist and stage mechanic

This title was given to him by Thomas Gibbs Moses in his 1931 memoirs; Moses became the president of Sosman & Landis in 1915. Before Chicago, Strong enjoyed a successful career in New York as both a scenic artist and stage carpenter. Strong even provided one of the scenes for the 1866 production of “The Black Crook” at Niblo’s Garden Theatre. At this same time, the Theatrical Mechanics Association was founded in New York (1866). During the 1870s Strong relocated to Chicago, the hub of theatrical construction and activities after the great fire of 1871. Joseph S. Sosman moved to Chicago in 1874, with the Sosman & Landis studio being established by 1877. Sosman & Landis was the primary manufacturer and installer of Brown’s special system in Scottish Rite theaters across the country.

At Sosman & Landis, Strong, Moses, and another stage carpenter by the name of Charles S. King were part of a special group; this group could be considered scenic artists with a thorough understanding of stage machinery, or stage carpenters who paint extremely well. Each had a specific task that he gravitated toward, but their job title by no means limited their abilities and contributions to one task or a single skill. Others in this group included Walter Burridge and Ernest Albert. Albert and Burridge were two of three founders who established another Chicago scenic studio in 1891 – Albert, Grover, and Burridge. One of their largest projects would be the manufacture and delivery of scenery and stage machinery for the Beckwith Memorial Theatre in Dowagiac, Michigan. This theater is significant within the framework of American theatre history.

Here is a refresher of the Albert, Grover & Burridge before revisiting the Beckwith Memorial Theatre and its link to the Chicago Auditorium. Ernest Albert (1857-1946), Oliver Dennett Grover (1861-1927) and Walter Burridge (1857-1913) founded “Albert, Grover & Burridge.” Their studio was located at 3127-33 State Street, Chicago, covering an area of 100×125 feet. Two of the founders had a significant tie to stage carpenter Bairstow: Albert worked as a scenic artist for the Chicago Auditorium and Chicago Opera House, while Walter Burridge was the scenic artist for both the Grand Opera House and McVicker’s. Keep in mind that John Bairstow worked as a stage carpenter at McVickers, the Grand Opera and the Chicago Auditorium. Grover was an art instructor at the Chicago Art Institute and linked to the planning of the Columbian Exposition. Albert and Burridge both worked with Thomas G. Moses at Sosman & Landis during the 1880s. Each would have known the long-time Sosman & Landis stage carpenter, Charles S. King. King is also a possible contender for the conception and development of Brown’s special system.

Advertisement for Albert, Grover & Burridge

The scenic studio of Albert, Grover & Burridge is described in “Chicago and its Resources Twenty Years After, 1871-1891: A Commercial History Showing the Progress and Growth of Two Decades from the Great Fire to the Present Time.” The studio was mentioned as implementing advancements in the methods of mounting and presentation of stage plays. Albert, Grover & Burridge leased the old Casino building on State Street, just south of 31^st street, and renovated it. Their space included 12,000 square feet of working area, and another 2,500 square feet devoted to storage and sewing room. There were twenty paint frames, ranging from 56 by 35 feet to 30 by 20 feet. This was a sizable complex.

A unique feature implemented by Albert, Grover & Burridge was that it included a staging area for scenic effects and innovations. The abovementioned publication reports, “The studio is so large that it permits the artists to introduce a novel feature in the art of painting scenery, which has been in their thoughts for some years. That is after a scene is painted, it can be hung, set and lighted in an open space the full size of any stage in the country, so that a manager can not only inspect it as an entirety, and thus suggest alterations, but he can bring his company to the studio and rehearse with the new scenery.” This idea had already been partially implemented by the Hanlon brothers at their private theater and workspace in Cohasset, where their master mechanic William Knox Brown tested new stage machinery and effects. Albert, Grover & Burridge went beyond the manufacture of scenery – they were the visionaries who combined painted illusion, lighting innovations, and new stage machinery. They were no different from other scenic studios in Chicago, they just had the space to expand and add a staging area. Scenic studios, with their staff of stage carpenters and scenic artists remained at the forefront of technological advancements, integrating old techniques with new technology. Unfortunately for Albert, Grover & Burridge, their business venture went bankrupt in two years, so they were not around when E. A. Armstrong and Bestor G. Brown were looking for a scenic studio to subcontract for Scottish Rite work. Sosman & Landis were waiting in the wings. However, their contributions can not be discounted when looking at the circle of innovators who helped disseminate the new counterweight technology.

By 1901, a Minneapolis “Star Tribune” article notes new settings at the Bijou Theatre in the article “Experts Behind the Scenes” (January 13). This provides a little context into the shifting staging techniques for commercial theater productions: “The stage proper was divided by the old system of grooves, which were used to hold up the scenery into divisions, one, two, three and four, where the stage was extra deep, sometimes five and six. Grooves are a mechanical contrivance in which the scenes slide back and forth. This method of stage setting is very seldom employed at the present time, the more modern arrangements of setting scenes in a box shape, supporting them with braces and connecting them by lash lines, being more common use.” At the same time box sets became more standard leg drops and fly scenery replaced wings, shutters, and roll drops.

In 1899 the fly scenery at the Beckwith Memorial Theatre is examined in “W.A. Norton’s Directory of Dowagiac, Cassopolis and La Grange, Pokagon, Silver Creek and Wayne Townships” (1899). The publication reports, “The scenery is designed for the cyclorama effect which has been found so effective, and which was first used in the Auditorium in Chicago. By this arrangement a scene can be set as a street or garden by simply moving the scenes which are profiled on both sides and top, anywhere desired. Every set of scenery is a finished piece of art. It is, after the latest fashion, lashed together with ropes and is capable of being made into seventy-five distinct stage dressings” (page 159). Earlier newspapers described the thirty-six hanging drops that could be combined in various combinations for seventy-six set possibilities.

Drop curtain by Albert, Grover, & Burridge for the Beckwith Memorial Theatre

The Dowagiac “Republican” from January 18, 1893 described the new building as “The finest theater in America,” elaborating on the painted scenery: “It is the fitting and arrangement of the stage in the Beckwith Memorial Theatre, that the greatest care has been exercised to obtain the best possible results, and a great degree of success has been obtained. To go into technicalities and the use of stage terms would not be perhaps intelligible to our readers generally, so we will note only the main points. The stage is fifty by thirty-eight feet. Up to the gridiron, from which is suspended by an elaborate system of lines and pulleys all of the stage settings it is possible to use in the form of drop curtains, is fifty feet, allowing ample room for hoisting out of sight a whole screen in a few seconds, and allowing rapid changing of scenes so necessary to the continuing of the action of a play and effects are made possible that were unknown in the old days of sliding flats. To those acquainted with and interested in things theatrical and matters pertaining to proper stage fitting we think it is sufficient guarantee of the success of the stage to say that Albert, Grover & Burridge, of Chicago, had the direction of the stage fittings and the wall decorations of the auditorium and the entire building. Ernest Albert, of A., G., & B., under whose direction the art glass, colorings, the selection of draperies, and the furnishings of the theater were made, had succeeded admirably in producing the most beautiful and harmonious whole.”

The Beckwith Memorial Theatre of Dowagiac, Michigan, was built in 1892 for the cost of one hundred thousand dollars. Albert, Grover & Burridge directed the plan and installation of all stage fittings, the wall decorations of the auditorium, and painted décor throughout the entire building. This was a major extravagance for a small town that numbered less than seven thousand people. For more information pertaining to this theater, see past installment 134.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 639 – Operating Means for Curtain Drops, Victor H. Volland in 1926

A little more than a decade after Seth G. Bailey invented an electrical mechanism for handling hanging scenery, Victor H. Volland came up with another option to handle scenery. In 1930, the United States Patent Office published an application filed on August 23, 1926 for operating curtain drops.

*Victor H. Volland filed a patent in 1926 to operate scenery. Here are the drawings.*

*Victor H. Volland filed a patent in 1926 to operate scenery. Here is a detail.*

Victor H. Volland of Clayton Missouri, assignor to Volland Scenic Studio, Inc. of St. Louis Missouri, a corporation of Missouri submitted an application for a patent pertaining to the “Operating Means of Curtain Drops.” Victor wrote, “My invention related to improvements in means for operating curtain drops, in which each curtain drop together with hoisting mechanism and other accessories are combined into a single unit.”

Victor H. Volland was Hugo R. Volland’s son. Hugo R. Volland (1866-1921) founded a scenic studio in St. Louis, Missouri with Patrick J. Toomey (1861-1922) called Toomey & Volland at the turn of the twentieth century. Here’s little background about the inventor of the patent’s family.

Hugo R. Volland was born on May 6, 1866 in Großenbach, Germany. He was first listed as a St. Louis resident in 1888, living with his brother Otto and advertising as a painter. He worked for Noxon & Toomey as a studio as a scenic artist and secretary for the firm in 1892. By 1901, Hugo R. became vice-president of Noxon & Toomey. In 1902, the firm’s name was changed to Toomey & Volland. Toomey remained president of the company until 1919 when he retired. Hugo R. then became president, with his youngest son being vice-president.

Hugo R. and his wife Laura had three children – Louis J. (1897-1973), Victor H. (1899-1964) and Rose M. daughter, Rose (married name was Rose du Mosch). We are going to focus on the sons for now.

Even though Victor H. was the youngest son, he would be the first successor of Hugo R after his passing in 1921. Victor H. joined the United states Army during July 1918 (Private, 332nd Battalion, Company A). He entered the Tank Corps and sailed Sept. 29, 1918, landing at Bordeaux where he was stationed at Langres, France.

He safely returned home from military service and married by 1920. Victor became the secretary for Toomey & Volland and continued in this position until his father’s death in 1921. At this point the company began to change, as Toomey had already retired three years prior to Victor taking the reign from his father. When Victor became president of the company, his older brother Louis became the vice-president. At this time there was a notable shift in the tenor of the company.

There was also a shift in studio locations. In 1900, Toomey & Volland studio was located at 2312-14-16 Market Street, just outside the downtown theatre district. This lot was owned by Toomey. In 1922, Toomey & Volland scenic studios moved to a new location at 3731-33-35-37 Cass Avenue. Hugo R. never saw the completion of the new building as he died of heart disease before its completion. His wife Laura also passed away from heart disease, just a few months later; she died in a theater.

Patrick Toomey died from a heart attack in 1922 only a year after Volland passing. His passing was the same month that the studio was anticipated to open – March. Toomey’s only son followed a different path in life and the scenic studio was under the complete control of the Volland family. To lose the two founders within a year, caused major changes in the company’s focus. The production of painted scenery at the studio began to take a back seat, and the manufacture theatrical equipment assumed a more dominant role. Furthermore, the name of Toomey was removed from the firm, beginning the age of Volland Scenic Studios, Inc.

Imagine my surprise yesterday evening, to see a detail photo of a fly rail with lights that looked like Volland’s drawing from his patent on FB Group Archiving Technical Theatre History. On February 7, 2019, Robert Bob Foreman posted a photograph with “Has anyone ever seen one of these? Mounted to the flyrail of the 1927 (Kalamazoo) State Theatre, it appears to be a series of cue lights, with switches operated by the cue-ee! System installer unknown.”

*1927 State Theatre in Kalamazoo, Michigan*

*Drawing from Victor H. Volland’s patent, filed in 1926*

In all appearances, it looked like a part of what Volland invented in 1926. Attached is the 1926 patent with images. Volland’s patent described, “Mounted in the guard box 18 is an incandescent lamp 19 provided with a switch 20, said guard box being secured to a forwardly projecting end of the top member 11. At a particular time during a theatrical performance the map 19 may be caused to light, indicating to an attendant that a certain curtain is wanted, and by opening the lock 12 and pulling the rope 7, the curtain is raised or lowered as desired. Prior to this invention such devices were without individual locking devices and signal lamps.”

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 638 – Electrical Mechanism for Handling Hanging Scenery, 1910

Part 638: Electrical Mechanism for Handling Hanging Scenery, 1910

The best and worst part about writing my blog is I can go off on little tangents. There is no looming deadline, direction, or moment when all research needs to cease and I aim for a publication date. I try very hard not to get lost in the details, staying on track with a specific year in the life and times of Thomas G. Moses (1856-1934). However, the beauty of slowly meandering through history is that I get to fix incorrect information that I previously stated, or expand on something from an earlier post. Occasionally, I find a newspaper article and tuck it away for a specific year. Such is the case for the subject of today’s post, as it connects to the development of stage machinery during the first decade of the twentieth century. It aims at a stage improvement for operating scenery, similar to the idea that prompted the development of Brown’s special system. Electrical appliances to handle scenery was cutting-edge innovation in 1910.

I approach this information as a scenic artist and designer with some knowledge of stage machinery. I am not an expert in theater rigging or the history of counterweight systems. Luckily I have friends who are the experts in this field. It is wonderful to be able to throw out an idea without fear, or any thought that I may be reprimanded for my lack of knowledge. I may hear, “Didn’t you read my book?” or “I don’t think so.” But occasionally there will be a “That’s a remarkable discovery,” and “I hadn’t thought about that.” It reminds me of brainstorming for any project. It is only through continued discussions about discoveries with experts that new information comes to light. They bring additional information to the table, information that only can come through age and experience.

Here is a mind blowing article that I stumbled across well over a year ago. It was published in the “Lincoln Star” on Dec. 18, 1910. Keep that date in mind – 1910. I came across the article while I was looking for information pertaining to David H. Hunt, the Sosman & Landis salesman who was a founder of New York Studios, a scenic firm) and Sosman, Landis, & Hunt, a theatrical management company. New York Studios was advertised as the eastern affiliate of the Sosman & Landis, similar to many regional offices established by scenic studios during this time.

Here is the article in its entirety:

“A bas the stage hands,” exclaimed Mr. Martin Beck, general manager of the Orpheum circuit, today, says the Denver Times. Mr. Beck came to Denver to meet M. Meyerfield, Jr., president of the Orpheum circuit company. Together they are going to Oklahoma City to arrange for the building of an Orpheum theatre there, but that isn’t the cause of Mr. Beck’s breaking into French regarding the stage hands.

When confronted by an interviewer, Mr. Beck, with David H. Hunt of Chicago, a theatrical producer, and Frank W. Vincent of the New York booking offices were standing in front of the Orpheum theater. Mr. Beck was doing a juggling act with three solver dollars and Mr. Vincent was picking the currency out of the gutter, for Mr. Beck didn’t have the act down pat.

“I have just inspected the invention of Seth Bailey, stage manager of the Orpheum in Denver,” said Mr. Beck. “He has devised an electrical appliance which makes it possible for one man to handle sixty-five drops. It operates everything from the stage curtain to the back, gives absolute fire protection and does the work of an average of twenty stage hands. One man can operate it. It looks good to me, and if further tests prove it as successful as the indications are here we will install in all the Orpheum Theatres.

“The apparatus for handling drops, consisting of ropes and counterweights, has been the same for 200 years,” said A. C. Carson, manager of the Denver Orpheum house. “Mr. Bailey has perfected, the first invention, bringing the stage mechanism up to date. It has been a field neglected by inventors.”

“It is currently reported that you are now the kingpin in vaudeville controlling the entire situation,” was a suggestion o Mr. Beck.

The general manager of the Orpheum circuit gravely pocketed the dollars which were props in his juggling act. “That’s what they say?” he said, “but I am a modest man.”

“This is your first adventure into the southwest in the way of building theaters?” Mr. Beck was asked.

“Yes, but it will not be the last,” he replied. “We have no theatres in Pueblo or Colorado Springs.” “Are you going to build in either of those towns?”

“That would be telling,” smiled Mr. Beck, giving his interviewer a friendly tap with the ornate head of his ebony cane.”

A year later in 1912, newspapers reported, “Theatrical men and others in Denver have organized a $500,000 corporation to manufacture a mechanical device, which, it claimed, will reduce the number of stage hands needed in a theatre by three-fourths, at least. The new corporation is called the Bailey Fly Rail Machine Company. It is incorporated under the laws of Colorado. Seth Bailey, stage carpenter at the Denver Orpheum, is the inventor of the device. He worked on it several years before he announced that it was successful. About two months ago Martin Beck, M. Meyerfeld Jr., John W. Considine and other vaudeville managers, met in Denver and saw a demonstration of the apparatus. They appeared to be highly pleased with it. The names of A. C. Carson, manager of the Denver Orpheum; Fred W. Feldwich and Frank Bancroft appear at the prime movers in the matter of incorporation. Mr. Bancroft is an attorney. The device is operated by electricity (Wiles-Barre Times Leader, 18 Feb 1911, page 11). Other than patents, the stage carpenter and company never appear to depart from print. Here is information about the patents that were registered by Bailey at a little later.

Bailey obtained patent 1.027.027 Mechanism for Handling Hanging Scenery in Theater. Seth G. Bailey, Denver, Colo., assignor of one-forth to Martin Beck, New York, New York, and one fourth to Andrew C. Carson, Denver, Colo., Filed Nov. 28, 1910, Serial No. 594.466.

A second patent by Bailey was filed on Dec. 2, 1911. In the Official Gazette o the United States Patent Office, Vol. 200, published on Dec. 31, 1914, we find the following:

“Seth G. Bailey, assignor to The Bailey Theater Fly-Rail Machine Company, Denver, Colo. Scenery handling apparatus. No. 1,091,109; March 24; Gaz. Vol. 200, p. 958.”

One of two patents for the stage by Seth G. Bailey, stage carpenter

The second of two patents for the stage by Seth G. Bailey, stage carpenter

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 636 – John Bairstow and the Chicago Auditorium

Part 636: John Bairstow and the Chicago Auditorium

I have repeatedly mentioned the Chicago Auditorium in the past few posts. Here is a lengthy article about the theater that may help clarify its international significance. Tomorrow I will focus on the Chicago Auditorium’s stage carpenter, John H. Bairstow.

Interior of the Chicago Auditorium, 1890

On 7 December 1899, the “Chicago Tribune” published the article “The Auditorium Stage. A Revolution in Scenic Apparatus and General Equipment” (page 12). It is packed of absolutely wonderful details about the stage machinery and scenery. This is the theater that every single college student should encounter in theater history class. Unfortunately, this space was never discussed in any of my theater history throughout my BA, MA and PhD studies. Here is the 1899 article in its entirety:

THE AUDITORIUM STAGE.

A Revolution in Scenic Apparatus and General Equipment.

Twenty Hydraulic Rams by Which the Floor Can Be Raised of Lowered-Innovations Art All Old Idea-As Absolutely Fire-Proof as Anything Can Be Made-The Electrician’s Room a Study-Eleven Miles of Steel Wire Cloth-An Iron Curtain That Weighs 9,000 Pounds.

There are twenty hydraulic rams by which the entire floor of the Auditorium can be raised or lowered at will. There are fifteen traps, large and small, some extending over the entire width of the stage, which can be raised to represent elevations of be dropped to allow spirits to disappear. A goblin or fiend may shoot up as quick as lightning, or a ghost rise slowly into view. No need any longer to depend on the effects of an imperfect perspective and the occasional rock to represent the valley in which old Rip Van Winkle appears. A real valley can be produced on the stage by some ne on the stage floor touching a few brass handles and knobs, when the traps will rise or drop and give the desired elevations and depression. No need of any makeshifts to produce the impression of a ship at sea. H.M.S. Pinafore can appear rocked by waves, life size almost, and make the huge hydraulic rams oscillate to produce this motion it will take only the moving of some more brass handles on the stage floor.

What produces the remarkable stage effect in the background? It is no longer a level canvas on which perspective compels the painter to have a view toward the horizon narrowed. On the contrary, true to nature, the view expands as you look farther towards the horizon. The horizon consists of a semi-circular piece covering the background and running forward on the sides halfway to the curtain. The effect produced is as in a panorama. The painted part gradually approaches, and merges into, the adjacent parts of the real ground and objects. This horizon works a wonderful change in the appearance of the stage. It is movable. It runs on a track and is rolled around a perpendicular cylinder at the other end. It contains four kinds of weather so that be setting the rollers in motion a perfect effect of a change from fair weather to a dark, threatening sky, and finally the heavy clouds of a storm, can be produced. Transparent clouds will permit the effects of light, be it sun, or moon, or lightning, to be made from behind this horizon. The horizon looks pretty and airy, but weighs 5,800 pounds, including the counterweights.

AS COMPARED WITH OTHER STAGES

The trap arrangements, the movability of the entire stage, and the horizon are probably the most remarkable improvements that distinguish the Auditorium from all other stages, not only in this country but in Europe. It is to be the most completely equipped stage in the world, and will be in every respect, except size, the most perfect. There are only three other stages containing all the improvement that the Auditorium will have – namely: at Budapest, Prague, and the old German University Halle. Most of these innovations are the patents of the Asphaleia company of Vienna, or the firm of Kautsky & Sons, one of whom, Fritz Kautsky, has been here for a month superintending the construction. This system was selected by Architect Adler and Mr. John Bairstow after a careful examination of the systems of the principal European stages, and it is safe to say that the introduction of it by the Auditorium will cause a revolution in the scenic apparatus and general equipment of American theaters.

If there ever will be an absolutely fire-proof stage this one is probably the ideal. Everything is of iron and steel. There are no wings, the horizon makes them superfluous. There are no grooved running crosswise, suspended from the flies; the horizon dispenses with them. Side pieces of which there are an immense number, thirty-five to forty feet high are let down on stout wire ropes and pulled up again with ease. Everything, including the large cylinders and pistons for lifting the stage is moved by hydraulic power, the water being stored in huge tanks above the fifteenth story. The properties are stored away from the busy stage in large, convenient storerooms, There is no other than electric light. Rows of 990 colored globes run along the flies across the stage, forming the border lights, and by a touch of a little handle the most startling effects of light can be produced. The clumsy old calcium light process is at last completely wiped out. The electrician’s room is a study in itself. As it will require a most expert engineer and one of the highest ability to mange the apparently inextricable network of pipes, rods, rams, cylinders, pistons, and cables, so the electrician must be of the highest order obtainable in order to find his way through the wilderness of handles, knobs, and buttons in the little room on the stage floor behind the reducing curtain. He has to control 5,000 lights on the stage and in the house. In the like manner the engineer has to control eleven miles of steel wire cable and any number of rams, beside the iron curtain which weighs 9,000 pounds. But everything is so perfectly balanced by counterweights, and the hydraulic motors so admirably arranged, that a mere touch of the hand is sufficient to set in motion many thousands of pounds.

NO FLIES ON THIS STAGE

During the performance nobody will have to be in the flies. In fact there are no flies on the Auditorium stage. The side pieces – Mr. Kautsky calls them “walls” to avoid the term “wings” – are held up by steel ropes and propped up from behind. Almost 100 feet above the stage floor these “walls” are suspended ready for use. The artistic finish of all these pieces makes them worth looking at on their own account. Ordinary stage decorations are coarse when looked at closely, but in this case each piece is a picture in itself, so perfect that one might hang it in a parlor alongside a good oil painting.

About eight feet below the stage floor is another floor, which is in every particular an exact duplicate of the one above, each trap is raised on the stage floor to be used as an elevation of some sort, its place can be filled by the trap from the lower floor, s as to close up the stage floor. Beneath this lower floor is the basement, containing the hydraulic machinery, with a total pressure of six atmospheres. All scenery is operated from the stage floor.

Along the sides strong iron stairways lead to the top. An iron bridge extends across the proscenium just above the curtain, and along the background is the painter’s frame with two platforms, all suspended in steel wire cables. Near the top in the property room there is a force of artists at work now preparing the properties. Fawcett Robinson and his brother who used to be Henry Irving’s property artist are constructing the articles of papier-maché in such close resemblance of the genuine articles that at a distance of five feet one would take the tables and bookcases to be made of antique oak, and his copy of Thorwoldsen’s Venus looks at a distance of about ten feet like a perfect plaster cast. Mr. Robinson is an enthusiast in his work and his room alone is worth more than one visit to the Auditorium stage.

Not only is the apparatus for producing artistic effect so complete and varied that it will create an almost perfect illusion, but the convenience of the actors. Musicians, and workmen has been consulted to a hitherto unheard-of degree. The Diva need no longer receive callers on the stage.

MILWARD ADAMS’ NEAT IDEA.

A beautiful little reception-room has been provided-Milward Adams’ idea. The dressing rooms are comparatively large and commodious and provided with all conveniences. They are thirty in number, comparable of accommodating 300 people without crowding. The largest and best are on the stage floor, the others open off the landings along the iron stairways at the sides. The room where the musicians can be during the intervals of their work is as large as the orchestra pit, the prompter’s box commodious without being offensively conspicuous. A large covered court adjoins the rear of the stage for the reception of the actors and actresses in carriages or on foot. The stage manager has a convenient little room adjoining that of the electrician.

A magnificent plush curtain is covered by an iron curtain with a coat of plaster. The side borders are simply but tastefully decorated and display in letters of gold the names of a number of leading composers, classical and modern. The list comprises the names of Bach, Beethoven, Berlioz, Haydn, Schumann, Rossini, Mozart, Verdi, Gounod, and Glück.

Composers names are still visible at the Chicago Auditorium

FIGURES OF THE SCENIC APPARATUS

A few figures may assist in forming an estimate of the larger proportions and perfect construction of these scenic apparatus. The iron curtain weighs 9,000 pounds, exclusive of counter-weights; the reducing curtain, covered with plaster, weighs 23,000 pounds. The horizon is forty-eight feet high by 300 long. The contract for the iron work on the stage footed up $110,000, and the total equipment of the stage exceeds $200,000.”

[$200,000 in 1889 is equivalent in purchasing power to $7,388,771.25 in 2019. The cost of the entire building was $3,200,00.00]

The article concluded, “In the hall is to be used for other than theater purposes a level floor can easily be placed on the stage level, and the ceiling has a piece fastened by iron chains to windlasses which are hidden from view so that it can be lowered and shut the gallery out of sight.”

From the opening of the auditorium until after his partial retirement in 1905, John Bairstow would be in charge of raising the auditorium floor for special events. In 1910, the “Chicago Tribune” reported, “ John Bairstow is getting in trim for the one effort which claims his attention from year to year. Who is John Bairstow? Well, John Bairstow is the first stage carpenter, and from the beginning of the charity ball as an Auditorium function John Bairstow has laid the great dancing floor for the event. He has been doing this for twenty years and in the mind of John Bairstow no other carpenter, not even his own son William Bairstow, who has succeeded him as stage carpenter, may be entrusted with the duty. He retired from active work five years ago and this year he is far from the best of health, but already he is getting the numbered sections of the ballroom floor carefully arranged, mentally – as it will appear the night of Jan. 31 – for after every ball the floor – built originally at a cost of $10,000 – is taken up, its sections numbered carefully and stored away. This year thirty-seven boxes will be erected to add to the forty-five permanent stalls. The new boxes will be arranged four on either side beneath the organ grills, eight on each side of the stage proper, five around the rear wall of the stage, and eight at the west end of the ballroom. To get the theater in readiness a force of seventy-five carpenters and assistants will work two days and nights to complete the work” (22 Dec 1910, page 8).

I will continue with the life of stage carpenter John Bairstow tomorrow.

To be continued…