Two distinct styles of painting were apparent during the development of scenic art in the United States. Over the past few weeks, I explored the English tradition of glazing. This artistic approach was widely accepted by American scenic artists who worked in cities along the Eastern seaboard. I examined articles from 1866, 1871 and 1881 that traced the artistic lineage of English scenic artists and the history of painted scenery for the London stage. Meanwhile in the Midwestern region of the United States, the European tradition of an opaque application of solid colors dominated the scenic art word in studios such as Sosman & Landis.
Thomas G. Moses was trained in the Midwestern tradition; the “slap dash” application of solid colors in an opaque manner, not the English glazing tradition. This gives some context when Moses decided to leave Chicago and live in New York. Remember that in 1899, Henry Savage, John C. Fisher, and Jacob Litt all wanted to hire Thomas G. Moses to be their scenic artist. Sosman & Landis also wanted Moses to work in their Chicago studio. Moses traveled to New York during August 1899 to work for Savage at the American Theatre in New York for $165 a week.
Savage contracted Moses to produce scenery for the Castle Square Opera Company’s third season. Moses’ first project for Savage was designing and painting “Die Meistersinger.” This was the show that would open the third season on October 2, 1899. Other notable scenic artists who had worked for Savage during the first two seasons were Walter Burridge, Frank King, H. Logan Reid, and John Clare. The increased volume of subscriptions during the first three seasons of the Castle Square Opera Company, supported Savage’s plan to establish a permanent home for opera in English at the American Theatre. The opera company also had branches in Chicago and St. Louis. By 1900, it was advertised as “the largest operatic company in the world,” having “gained a larger clientele than any other established musical organization.”
In early January 1900, Moses wrote, “I sent for Ella to come on and see if she would care to move to New York. We looked over the ground pretty thoroughly, and made up our minds to try it.” The couple secured a large house at Mt. Vernon on New Haven Road, approximately 13 miles outside of New York City. In the early 1900s Mount Vernon was experiencing significant development; it was an important stop on the Harlem Division and warranted a new, larger station.
Postcard depicting the Mt. Vernon depot. It was built in the early 1900s to accommodate the increased traffic from New York City.Map depicting the distance from New York City to Mt. Vernon, NY. Thomas G. Moses and Ella moved to Mt. Vernon in 1900.
After only a week’s visit in New York, Ella returned to Chicago, rented out their Oak Park home, packed up the furniture, and moved the family to New York. Ella’s capacity to do this all on her own while Moses remained working in New York demonstrates that she was quite a strong and capable woman.
The 1899-1900 season with Savage closed on June 1, and with it, Savages’ operatic company and business venture. The reason that Moses had moved his family to New York evaporated into thin air. Moses wrote, “Savage felt he was not making enough money.” So, a new firm took over the American Theatre and Moses was contracted to furnish all the necessary scenery at $150.00 per week. Moses was to have use of the paint frames and light. This meant that he could to paint any project during the upcoming season, if there was not a production on the stage. It was at this point that Moses decided to partner with William F. Hamilton.
In 1889 W. J. Lawrence listed some prominent English scene painting families – the Greenwoods, Grieves, Stanfields, Callcotts, Dansons, Fentons, Gordons, and Telbins. This installment looks at the Stanfields (The Theatre Magazine, July 13, 1889).
Clarkston Frederick Stanfield
Clarkston Frederick Stanfield was the youngest of five children born to James Stanfield and Mary Hoad. He is sometimes erroneously referred to as William Clarkston Stanfield. Like other scenic artists, he came from a theatrical family. Stanfield was born in Sunderland, County Durham, above a shop that was located at the intersection of Playhouse Lane (later known as Drury Lane) and Sunderland High Street. Behind their building was the local theatre.
His father was a merchant seaman who later became a provincial actor, traveling and playing in a variety of performance venues that included theatres, barns, and at race meetings. His appeared on stages from Edinburgh to Scarborough. Some suggest that that Clarkston was encouraged to try his hand at scene painting for his father’s shows, others suggested that it was his mother who encouraged his earliest artworks for the stage. While on the road with his father, he also performed in minor children’s roles. W. J Lawrence included an interesting tidbit in his 1889 article: “Very few people nowadays seem to have any knowledge of the fact that Clarkston Stanfield’s father was not only a capital scenic artist, but a man with some pretensions to literary fame. From his fluent pen came the popular Freemason’s song, “Friendship and Love.” That will be a tidbit tucked away for a future post!
Stanfield’s mother was both an actress and artist. She not only taught painting, but also published a children’s book. She passed away in 1801, when Clarkston was only eight years old. Soon after her death, his father remarried a much younger woman – one who had been his ward. The subsequent arrival of several additional children from the union are often attributed to the “farming out” of the older children for various trade apprenticeships. In 1806, Clarkston became apprenticed to a heraldic painter in Edinburgh. His mentor specialized in the decorative painting of coaches. This apprenticeship lasted approximately two years, until the living and working situation became unbearable for Clarkston. He ran away at the age of fifteen and left for sea on a merchant ship, later becoming pressed into service for the navy by the age of 19. Even on the seas, Stanfield continued to paint. Whether he worked on a small projects assigned by his captain or backings for amateur theatrics on board ship, he continued to hone his artistic skills while at sea. At one point he was even sent ashore to do some painting for an admiral’s ballroom.
Stanfield was discharged from the navy after an accident left him unfit to remain in service; this provided him with the opportunity to re-enter the theatre profession. From his father, he possessed many of the necessary contacts to obtain his first work at the East London Theatre (formerly the Royalty Theatre) in Wellclose Square. Although he did not have the benefit of a scenic art apprenticeship, his career soon flourished in both London and Edinburgh after he proved his worth.
It was rough in the beginning, as his colleagues often forced him to work apart – even banning access to the Scene Painting room where he could warm his size-kettle. However, Stanfield’s talent was recognized and he gradually earned the acceptance of his fellow artists. By 1817 he was earning a salary of £3 a week as a principal artist and had acquired an apprentice of his own – Robert Jones. Stanfield was well respected for the speed at which he painted, his endurance, and the quality of his work. To gain additional funds during this time, he continued to work as a decorative painter in the area.
His specialty was maritime scenes and soon met who would become his lifelong friend and fellow artist, David Roberts, R. A. (1796-1864). By 1822, both were both working as scenic artists for the Drury Lane theatre, a venue lit with the new medium of gas lighting.
An article in “The Times” (Dec. 28, 1828) commented on the stunning transformation of the painted settings and Stanfield’s contribution to Drury Lane. The article also mentioned that the prior to Stanfield’s arrival depicted “water as opaque as the surrounding rocks, and clouds;” it was “not a bit transparent.” Stanfield was credited with bringing “a knowledge of light and shade which enabled him to give his scenes great transparency.” In other words, Stanfield was employing the glazing technique as introduced by John Henderson Grieve during the first decade of the eighteenth century. Stanfield had figured out how to replicate the Grieve technique.
Stanfield married twice. His first marriage was to Mary Hutchinson in 1818, producing two children. Sadly, the marriage only lasted until 1821, when Mary died only a month after the birth of their second child. He remarried three years later, taking Rebecca Adcock as his second wife in 1824 and the couple had ten children; his second son, George Stanfield, followed in his father’s footsteps as an artist.
It was reported that the loss of his good friend Roberts in 1864 greatly affected the remainder of Stanfield’s life and his ten years were spent in poor health with rheumatism and a bad leg. He was housebound for long periods of time and unable to work. Stanfield passed away on May 18, 1867, at the age of 73.
To be continued…
There is an extremely well-written article on Stanfield by Dr. Peter van der Merwe, MBE, DL, General Editor and Greenwich Curator, Royal Museums Greenwich. Here is the link to his article: http://www.victorianweb.org/painting/stanfield/biography.html#5
“Come gather ’round people
wherever you roam,
and admit that the waters
around you have grown,
and accept it that soon
you’ll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you is worth savin’
then you better start swimmin’
or you’ll sink like a stone.
For the times they are a-changin’.”
Yesterday I quoted an author who used the term “patent medicine scenery.” He was referring to the painted product produced by scenic studios such as Sosman & Landis. The author went on to describe that studio drops were “produced almost entirely by mechanical means,” meaning a very specific formulaic approach to color application. During the late-nineteenth century, Chicago was a major manufacturing center for theatrical goods and Sosman & Landis Studio dominated the market. Their work was received with rave reviews and their marketing techniques remained unequalled. Soman & Landis represented the American school of scenic art that employed solid colors in an opaque manner. Their painted compositions were worked up from dark to light. At this time in America, there was a rivalry between two schools of scenic art. Scenic artists working along the eastern seaboard had a tendency to employ the English technique of glazing. Midwestern artists used a much more opaque application of colors.
Original 1890s Scottish Rite scene for the Little Rock Scottish Rite by Sosman & Landis Studio. The backdrop was enlarged in 1902 and later resold to the Pasadena Scottish Rite in the 1920s.Detail from same Little Rock scene depicting the brevity during paint application, hence the term “slapdash.”The minimal use of highlights on a dark background is very realsitic when viewed from a distance. It allows the eye to fill in the missing information. It is the dramatic separation of colors that allows this type of painting to work exceptionally well for the theatre.Detail from same scene that shows the rapid speed of the artist when painting the composition. Under the red tassel there are drips left from the “slapdash” method of marble painting.The application of light dark on paint that is stunning from a distance, yet the technique “falls apart” upon close inspection.Detail of backdrop that shows the rapid rate of the artist’s speed.
Thomas G. Moses gives us some insight into the rapid growth of Sosman & Landis and their techniques to quickly turn out scenery installations, describing that when he started with the company in 1880 he was always on the road. He and Sosman traveled a great deal in the beginning, rapidly filling orders immediately after Landis secured the work. It would take six months before Moses even meet Landis, as the company salesman was constantly crossing the country to drum up work. They had a great marketing formula – a salesman on the road with a crew who followed and completed the orders. Work was nonstop for the company.
At first, Moses was employed for a weekly rate of $18, knowing that he could make between $35.00 to $45.00 per week at other theaters. This situation directly contributed to the overall growth and success of Sosman & Landis; it meant that they were hiring an employee at half any competitor’s rate and maintaining a higher profit margin that would allow the company to remain solvent. This also enabled the studio to keep Landis on the road, securing even more work. Of their painting, Moses wrote, “My work might not have been as artistic as some I saw in the theatres, but it pleased the people who paid for it.” He was referring to the rapid painting technique employed by the Sosman & Landis studio and the application solid colors? Keep in mind that the “slapdash” technique mentioned in regard to the Sosman & Landis studio was still very effective from a distance, and that was all anyone really needed to make a sale.
The times were certainly changing for theatre manufacturers and supply companies during the second half of the nineteenth century. Product needed to be quickly produced and reach the appropriate venue. As W. J. Lawrence wrote in 1889 “it is not unusual for these firms to receive an order by telegraph in the morning for a scene…which will be completed dried, and sent on its way to the purchaser before nightfall” (The Theatre, July 13, 1889, page 371-374). This was a time when the Midwestern region of the United States was experiencing a period of unprecedented growth. The scenic artists and their solid colors were currently winning, but their success would not last.
“Come writers and critics
who prophesize with your pen,
and keep your eyes wide
the chance won’t come again.
And don’t speak too soon
for the wheel’s still in spin,
and there’s no tellin’ who
that it’s namin’.
For the loser now
will be later to win
for the times they are a-changin’. ”
Part 361:Thomas G. Moses at McVicker’s Theatre in 1897
In 1897, Thomas G. Moses was listed in “Julius Cahn’s Official Theatrical Guide” as the scenic artist responsible for producing stock scenery collections at the Alhambra Theatre (Chicago, Illinois); Valentine Theatre (Toledo, Ohio); Loring Opera House (Riverside, California); Marengo Opera House (Marengo, Illinois); and Steinburg’s Grand Opera House (Traverse City, Michigan). Many of these venues were not mentioned in his typed manuscript, but the work occurred during the first half of the year. The second half of 1897 found Moses back in Chicago, painting for one of his favorite venues – McVicker’s Theatre.
At the beginning of 1897 Moses wrote, “The New Year found me grinding out the weekly production. Business continued good. Sosman and Landis would drop down occasionally and always seemed pleased with my productions. Jacob Litt happened to be in Cincinnati and saw the last performance of “Held by the Enemy” and the 1st performance of “The Banker’s Daughter.” Both complete in every detail – he was so highly pleased that he inquired of [David] Hunt who his artist was.”
On Litt’s return to Chicago he wrote Moses, asking his terms to be the scenic artist for a year at McVickers. Moses was engaged for one year, starting June 1, 1897 and was compensated $3,500 for that year. Today’s equivalent is a scenic art salary of $100,000. Remember that Moses would continue to take outside projects, as was his practice. Before he began at McVicker’s, however, Moses had to complete his work at the Pike Theatre in Cincinnati. Fred McGreer, his assistant, remained at the Pike and became their official scenic artist. McGreer would remain there for the next few years, gaining popularity as one of the country’s top scenic artists. Loitz would remain with Moses, loyal as ever, also returning to Chicago.
Of the McVicker’s venue, Moses wrote, “This theatre I had always admired, and when [Lou] Malmsha was the artist I never missed seeing all his big shows, and had many times dreamed of the day that I could hold a position like it. And here I was after all those years, the artist of the theatre, where my first instructor Malmsha had made so many hits.”
McVicker’s Theatre in Chicago, Illinois, where Thomas G. Moses was the scenic artist during the 1897-1898 season.McVicker’s Theatre program seating charts from 1909.
There is something poetic about Moses’ position at McVicker’s theatre in 1897, over two decades after beginning his career as a scenic artist in Chicago. There is something even more wonderful that I would become the owner of a 1909 McVicker’s Theatre program while attending USITT, as one was tucked away in a book that I purchased auction and estate sale this year. Tomorrow, I will start examining the shows that Moses was responsible for while at McVicker’s Theatre.
McVicker’s Theatre program that was tucked in the 1890 copy of Joseph Jefferson’s Autobiography (1909). My surprise purchase at USITT this year!1909 McVicker’s Theatre Program of “The Great Divide.”McVicker’s Theatre staff in 1909, listed in program that I purchased at USITT.
Part 358: Thomas G. Moses and the English Opera House in Indianapolis
In 1897 Thomas G. Moses briefly left the Sosman & Landis annex studio. He journeyed to Indianapolis where he painted “a complete outfit” for a Valentine Theatre Company production at the English Opera House. Two years earlier, Moses painted a set of stock scenery for the company’s home, the new Valentine Theatre in Toledo, Ohio. For more information about his previous work at the Valentine Theatre, see installment #331.
Postcard of the English Hotel and Opera House in Indianapolis, Indiana.Photograph of the English Hotel and Opera House in Indianapolis, Indiana, where Thomas G. Moses painted scenery for the Valentine Theatre Company in 1897.
The English Hotel and Opera House in Indianapolis was expanded during 1896. The new venue was dedicated on October 26, 1897, and advertised as a “first-class theatre.” The price tag for the new theatre was $110,000, with the theatre block costing over $750,000. The New York Times reported, “The house, scenery, and curtain were painted by Thomas G. Moses of Chicago” (New York Times, 27 Oct. 1897, page 1). The venue’s stage was 35’ wide by 43’-6” deep. The proscenium was a series of receding arches, in ivory and gold. The stage was cut off from the auditorium with an asbestos curtain.
Proscenium arch and stage at the English Opera House in Indianapolis, Indiana.View of the auditorium from the stage at the English Opera House in Indianapolis, Indiana.
The English Opera House was another renovation project by J. B. McElfatrick & Sons during their prolific thirty-year period from 1880 to 1910. The firm designed, built, and renovated theaters across the country. McElfatrick also worked with George H. Ketcham for many of his venues that included the English Theatre, the Grand Opera House (Columbus) and the Valentine Theatre (Toledo). These three theaters all used stock scenery collections painted by Moses and his crew. At the English Theatre Moses painted the new scenery with his assistants Fred McGreer and Ed Loitz; he wrote, “I think we did some good work.”
Fred McGreer. From the Cincinnati Enquirer (15 April 1900, page 12)
While Moses was in Indianapolis, projects began rapidly coming into the Sosman & Landis shops; his absence was acutely felt in the studio. Of this time, Moses wrote, “Early fall found Mr. Landis and Mr. Hunt camped on my trail; offering me the Pike Theatre Stock Company work at Cincinnati for the season. They agreed to send down enough drops from the studio to complete my contract. I accepted $75.00 per week and went, taking McGreer and Loitz.” This was during the same time when David Hunt joined Joseph Sosman and Perry Landis to form Sosman, Landis & Hunt, a theatrical management firm. One of their venues was the Pike Theater.
Illustration of Fred McGreer supervising the painting of scenery at the Pike Theatre. Fred McGreer. From the Cincinnati Enquirer (15 April 1900, page 12)
Moses’ typed manuscript indicates that he never really got along with Hunt. In Indianapolis, Hunt took credit for a series of articles and illustrations that appeared about their shows at the Pike. In fact, Moses was submitting the illustrations and struck up a friendship with the well-known theatre critic Montgomery Phister (1853-1917). He wrote, “Hunt never knew that I did it – he flattered himself the paper was doing it.” Hunt was a big talker and disliked by many of the scenic artists.
James Montgomery Phister was engaged in newspaper work for more than 40 years as a writer, cartoonist, and dramatic critic. He was well known for a reputation of fairness and accuracy in his criticism. Born in Maysville, Kentucky, Phister graduated from Woodward High School and continued his education at Yale University. During the Spanish-American war he served as a war correspondent. Of his many tours through Europe he was the guest of the noted English actor Irving. When he passed away on July 9, 1917, The Cincinnati Enquirer reported, “Every doorman and every stagehand knew him and respected him. He enjoyed the friendship of such great figures of the stage as Sir Henry Irving, the Sotherns, Bernhardt, Duse, Alexander Herrmann, Dixey and all of the best in the profession of that in the mimic world. He was a thirty-second degree Mason and a life member of N. C. Harmony Blue Lodge of Cincinnati” (“Twenty Years Ago in Cincinnati,” 9 July 1937, page 4).
Obituary of James M. Phister in 1917, published in the Evening Star (Washington, D.C.) 10 July 1917, page 12.
Phister had also worked as a scenic artist early in his career and developed a fondness for Moses. One day, Moses and Phister decided to play a small joke on Hunt to put him in his place. Hunt insisted that he was an expert on everything, especially if he didn’t know what he was talking about. Phister told Hunt, “I think Moses uses too much raw umber.” Hunt later repeated this to Moses as his own idea. Moses responded, “Raw umber! What kind of color is that? I don’t use it at all.” Hunt was stumped and reported back to Phister. Moses wrote, “We had a hearty laugh over it.”
The colonial color dry pigment version of raw umber.
Part 341: Green Room Gossip From 1895, the Scenic Artist
Thomas G. Moses worked as the scenic artist at Chicago’s Schiller Theatre during 1895. He painted the settings for all of the productions on their paint frames. He also rented the old Waverly Theatre space as he had more work than could be completed at the Schiller.
I understand that it is hard to appreciate the complexity and demands of the painting process at the time that Moses was working, especially as I discuss the many projects that Moses’ was simultaneously completely during the late-nineteenth century.
Below is an informative article about the artistic process and the role of the scenic artist, published in the Times-Picayune (New Orleans, Louisiana) on February 10, 1895 (page 22). Here is a portion of the article from the “Green Room Gossip” section of the Times-Picayune. It provides additional context for Moses’ story as we move forward:
Heading from the Times-Picayune (New Orleans, Louisiana, February 10, 1895, page 22) that details activities related to the theatre.
“When a manager has finally decided to produce a new play, his troubles have just begun. One of the first things to demand is the proper pictorial equipment. Just as the editors of illustrated periodicals of to-day send their accepted articles to the artist for illustration, so the theatrical manager puts his play in the hands of the scenic artist. Sometimes periodical illustrations cause the reader to wonder whether the illustrator read the story before he made the drawing or whether the cuts got mixed in the composing-room. The play illustrator is too important a factor in the box-office success to admit of similar mistakes.
[The manager] sometimes employs a scenic artist by contract, but usually the necessary assistant rents the space he needs in the theatre and charges the manager for work done for him, just as he charges outside managers for work done for them. The scenic artist, then, receives the manuscript from the manager, reads it carefully, notes from the authors description of scenes whether the locality is special or general, and where the scenery must be “practical” – with real doors to open, trees which may be climbed, fences that may be jumped- and where it is possible to make it purely representative.
The locality is the first point, naturally. Even if none be mentioned, in these days of photography, it is far more satisfactory to find a real locality which would fit the play, and which would, therefore, be more likely to differ from a thousand and one other scenes which have already been used as backgrounds for other general plays. From photographs or sketches of real bits of scenery, the artist most often draws his ground plans for what he considers a good stage picture suited to the action of the play.
These models are then placed convenient to the eye and hand in his studio, the main feature of which is really the back wall of the theatre, with a great paint bridge running about 25 feet above the stage floor. There is a space about a foot wide between the bridge and the wall, and in the space hangs the paint frame. When the stage carpenter has built the scenes according to the artist’s model, the paint frame is lowered to the stage floor, a piece of scenery is attached to it by means of a narrow ledge at the bottom, drops are tacked on and set pieces fastened at convenient points, then the frame is raised until it is where the artist wants it as he stands upon the bridge. The frame can, or course, be moved up and down, at the painter’s need.
The prime coating of the canvas is made of a mixture composed of whiting, glue and water. The artist has several assistants, many of whom are virtually learning the trade, but in exterior scenes the scenic artist himself usually does all of the painting; in the interiors he makes the finishing touches. Of course the work is done by daylight, and it takes a very skillful worker in colors to know just what the effects the various kinds and degrees of artificial light will have upon the painted scenery.
And yet the scenic artist is not too highly valued from a financial point of view. It takes, usually, six or eight years to attain the necessary skill and an average income of $80 a week is considered very good. From the manager’s point of view there is a difference. The necessary scenery for a play will frequently cost $1500 for the carpenter work and twenty-five hundred dollars for the coloring, without taking into account the sums paid for costumes, properties and the innumerable other accessories to proper play-producing.
Until applause greets him on the momentous “first night” and large audiences greet him for many nights thereafter, the manager, be ever hardened, endures endless anxiety from the minute the new play is chosen. If one proves a failure, he will be out a considerable sum at the best, for critics will know if he attempts to use the same costumes and special properties later on, or if he saves the scenery until it can be worked in other plays, a piece at a time; and critics seldom keep anything to themselves. He may have a new scene painted on the back of the old and save a part of the carpenter’s bill, but this is frequently the best that can be done. With all his risks and frequent failures, the theatrical manager is usually the last one to complain. When a play does not go, he simply pays the piper and tries again.”
At the end of 1895, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “I made a total of $46,000.00 for the year. My expenses were very heavy and I had about $3,500.00 for my salary – pretty bad – I needed a good business partner, for I had much to look after.”
Thomas G. Moses painting on a drop curtain, date unknown. Image from the Thomas G. Moses scrapbook. Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas – Austin.
Moses knew that he needed someone else to help shoulder the burden of running a studio. That was one of the reasons why Sosman & Landis had done so well for almost two decades. Sosman was in the studio, or painting on location, while Landis focused on sales and negotiating new contracts. Landis marketed a product that Sosman and his crew produced. Moses was trying to do everything by himself. To succeed in the studio business, someone had to solely focus on increasing clientele and securing the jobs. No matter how talented you were, you needed a fantastic sales department and someone to negotiate the final contracts. Moses could not do all of the production and administrative duties by himself. He had tried and failed – twice.
Of 1895, Moses commented “Too much of my time was consumed in making models, and too much of the artists’ time was taken up with preliminaries before a production was actually under way.” He reflected that he funded a lot work completed by carpenters and helpers “always done to start the show on its way, and for which I never received a dollar in return.” He wrote that regardless of the loss, he had continued to make a name for himself. All he needed to do was manage another year, and hopefully he would be back on his feet again.
Moses was financially worse off than two years earlier when he wrote, “My expenses were very heavy this year, and I should have made a big profit, but the best I could do was $6,850.00.” He complained many times that he was not making enough money for the hours that he spent in the studio. Moses realized that there was no incentive for the profits to “trickle down” to any employee, no matter how valuable if he returned to Sosman & Landis too. The scenic artist was at the studio owner’s mercy; when times were plentiful, there was work and when times were slow, salaries were immediately slashed in half. Remember the scenic artists salaries plummeted at the close of the 1893 World Fair as studio owners redirected their massive profits toward other business ventures, or lined their own pockets and journeyed abroad.
I can only imagine Moses’ internal struggle during 1895 as he produced an astounding amount of work – much more than during the world fair – yet received a salary that was significantly smaller. By the beginning of 1896, Moses knew something had to change; he might have to return to Sosman & Landis, in order to keep his head above water. Throughout 1895, Moses continued to lose financial ground and had suffered an unbelievable series of set backs from 1894 throughout 1895. From the paint bridge collapse in Memphis, that injured seven of his crew, to the unpaid duties attached to each production. he was always losing ground
Moses was still traveling and apart from Ella and the kids. No matter how hard he worked, or how many connections he made, there was never any assurance of a secure future. He made a national name for himself, immediately gained the respect of theatre owners and touring stars, but continued in a downward spiral. At the age of forty, he was growing older and the work wasn’t going to get any easier. He could only look back and envision what should have happened.
“And the seasons they go round and round
And the painted ponies go up and down
We’re captive on the carousel of time
We can’t return, we can only look behind
From where we came
And go round and round and round
In the circle game.” (The Circle Game, Joni Mitchell)
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.
Thomas G. Moses traveled to New York while working for David H. Hunt in 1894. The touring show was a production that replicated parts of the Midway Plaisance from the Columbian Exposition. In New York Moses met up with the actor and producer William Haworth (1860-1920). Haworth needed a scenic artist to design and paint the scenery for his new production “On the Mississippi.” Two years earlier, Moses, A. J. Rupert, Harry Vincent and Frank Peyraud had all worked together to create the settings for Haworth’s production “A Flag of Truce.” Moses was a well know commodity to Haworth. He closed the contract for $3,000, today’s equivalent of $83,000.
Poster for “On the Mississippi” by William Haworth, 1894-1895.
This was NOT a job secured through Sosman & Landis. Moses wrote that on his return to Chicago, he leased the frames at the Schiller Theatre where he immediately went to work on the project. The show later opened at the People’s Theatre on February 4, 1895, in New York and immediately went on tour across the country. “On the Mississippi” was advertised with ”a wonderful panorama of gorgeous spectacular effects” (Quad City Times, 27, Dec 1895, Page 1).
Advertisement for William Haworth’s “On the Mississippi,” painted by Thomas G. Moses in 1894.
It was another perfect opportunity for Moses to paint what he did best – landscapes. The production was set in the Walden Mountains of Tennessee. The action took place during the “villainous Reconstruction” period after the Civil War. The plot involved the Ku-Klux Klan and their attempts to execute an innocent man. Haworth played the leading role.
During this same time, Moses made another contract with Thomas Prior in Chicago. Prior was now the manager of the Schiller theatre. He offered Moses the position of scenic artist at his theatre to paint the weekly opera sets for $50.00 per week, the equivalent of approximately $1400. This was in addition to working for Sosman & Landis and painting the Haworth scenery. Prior had worked for Dr. F. Ziegfeld as the assistant manager of the Trocadero, before the venue promoted vaudeville acts and Ziegfeld Jr. took over. Prior was familiar with Moses and his painting from when he created scenery for the Trocadero.
Postcard of the Schiller Theatre in Chicago. Moses worked as scenic artist there starting in 1894.Illustration of the Schiller Theatre in Chicago.Architectural detail from the Schiller Theatre in Chicago.Seating chart for the Schiller Theatre, later known as the Dearborn Theatre and Garrick Theatre, in Chicago.Interior of the Schiller Theatre in Chicago.
The Schiller Theatre was in a 17-story building that opened in 1892. It was originally funded by German investors to be used for German-language operas and cultural events. The building was designed by Louis Sullivan and Dankmar Adler of the firm Adler & Sullivan for the German Opera Company and had a 1,300 seat house. It was briefly known as the Dearborn Theater from 1898 to 1903, until finally settling on the name Garrick Theater. The building was demolished in 1960 and replaced with a parking structure.
Photographs of the Schiller Theatre during demolition in 1960.Link to image: http://flavorwire.com/340210/fascinating-vintage-photos-of-beautiful-buildings-being-demolished/2
And this was the turning point for everything. Moses wrote “Sosman and Landis did not think I had given them a square deal. They thought that I had made so much money during the summer that I didn’t care to do any more contracts. To show me they were game, they gave me a contract for $1,500.00 to fit up the Masonic Temple Roof Garden. They didn’t want to let me go entirely. I pleased them on this work.”
One of the electric scenic theaters created by Thomas G. Moses in 1894 for the Masonic Temple Roof Top Garden space.
So, Moses was drumming up enough business for himself that he was now competition for Sosman & Landis. He was an expensive employee, but they need to keep him close so they offered the two electric scenic theatres that would grace the top of the Masonic Temple on Randolph and State Streets (see past installment # 264).
Each electric scenic theater was designed with a seating capacity of 75. The first theatre replicated the Columbian Exposition’s “Court of Honor” as viewed from the agricultural building, looking northwest. The second theatre featured “A Day in the Alps” from the Columbian Exposition’s Midway Plaisance, presenting an alpine scene that transformed from dawn to dusk. Moses used the Academy of Music’s paint frames to create another “Day in the Alps” show (for more information on this production, see installments # 262-265).
Regardless of the Masonic roof top scenery offer, Moses was getting restless. Some of it was financially based, as he knew of potential profits just out of his reach. Until this point, he was working for Sosman & Landis, but also received much of their subcontracted work such as the Temple roof theaters. I think the creation of the west side studio, or Sosman & Landis annex studio, was to kill two birds with one stone.
The first was to ensure that Moses remained associated with Soman & Landis; having all work funnel through them. This prevented Moses from becoming even further competition. He worked only so many days on Sosman & Landis projects each week. The remainder of his time was spent on subcontracted projects in the annex studio or elsewhere. I believe that Moses began to realize this situation was much more beneficial to Sosman & Landis than himself. He would leave the studio by the end of 1894 and strike out on his own – again.
To be continued…
On a separate (and artistic) note:
The front curtain created for the Schiller Theatre used a unique design that I have only encountered for Scottish Rite theatre’s under Thomas G. Moses’ supervision as head of the paint studio. It used decorative slits, such as those still hanging at the Tucson and Grand Forks Scottish Rite Theaters, as well as the one remaining at the City of Winona’s Masonic Theatre.
Detail of the Schiller Theatre front curtain had a similar design to many front curtains used in Scottish Rite Theaters during the early-twentieth century.Front Curtain for the Winona Masonic Theatre, notice fabric slits and decoration that is similar to the Schiller Theatre.Front Curtain for the Tucson Scottish Rite Theatre, notice fabric slits and decoration that is similar to the Schiller Theatre.Front Curtain for the Grand Forks Scottish Rite Theatre, notice fabric slits and decoration that is similar to the Schiller Theatre.Detail from the front curtain at the Tucson Scottish Rite front curtain.Detail from the front curtain at the Grand Forks Scottish Rite front curtain.
Sosman, Landis & Hunt also managed the Grand Opera House in Indianapolis and the Grand Opera Stock Company there. This was at the same time that they ran the Pike Theater in Cincinnati. By 1900 the firm was contemplating a move to Detroit due to a noticeable reduction in patronage at their productions in Indianapolis. (Indianapolis News 21 Nov. 1900, page 8). The Indianapolis Journal commented on the characteristics of the Grand Stock Company (23 Nov. 1900, pg. 3) reporting that the Grand Opera House “had a fixed payroll of a very large aggregate amount, most of which is spent within the limits of Indianapolis.” In 1900 the Grand Opera Stock Company was getting ready to present a revival of “Trilby,” “Camille,” “The Social Highwayman,” and “The Girl With the Auburn Hair.”
Sosman, Landis & Hunt also managed the Grand Opera House in Indianapolis and the Grand Opera Stock Company. The Grand Opera House later became the New Grand, a vaudeville house.
The Grand Opera was initially under the management of “Dickson and Talbott.” George A. Dickson and Henry M. Talbott rented the playhouse to the new theatrical management company of Sosman, Landis & Hunt in 1896. This was two years after their theatrical management company began in Cincinnati. They would continue to manage the Grand Opera and stock company until 1901. From 1900-1902, weekly receipts began to plummet, forcing a new company to take over the venue. It became a vaudeville house under the next management team of Anderson and Ziegler in 1901. Anderson and Ziegler were credited with introducing vaudeville in Indianapolis during 1900, the same time that profits at the Grand Opera House started to diminish (Indianapolis Star 26 May 1916, page 11). The Grand Opera House would later be known as one of B. F. Keith’s venues too.
Fire map depicting where the Grand Opera House in Indianapolis was located, later Keith’s Grand Opera House.
What I find interesting about the Sosman, Landis & Hunt business venture is the timing. Business slows after the World Fair of 1893 and they are left with two studios and a huge staff of artists. They take elements of the Midway and produce a touring show that they manage. In addition to managing the Masonic Temple Roof scenic electric theaters, they also start to invest in stock companies. This is on top of their involvement with the American Reflector Company, the manufacture of theatrical rigging and stage hardware, as well other investments. It appears that the significant profits made during the fair were invested in other business ventures. None of the wealth amassed during 1893 trickled down to their employees and this caused many of the artists to leave the following year, including Thomas G. Moses. I am sure that after all of their had work, they felt slighted when asked to take a pay cut after such a successful year.
At the beginning of 1893, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “The big Fair progressing nicely and a world of work for us in sight.” That was not the case after the close of the fair. By the end of 1893, Moses wrote about business after returning from a trip to New York, “On my return home, I found business very bad, as we all thought it would be at the close of the Fair.” Moses further wrote about his situation, commenting, “There were no more contracts and all I could see was a salary of $10.00 per day.” That is today’s equivalent of approximately $250 a day.
$10.00 a day was the same amount offered to Moses by David Hunt to replicate a few scenes from the Columbian Exposition’s Midway Plaisance, including the electric theatre. Hunt also wanted him to paint at the Pike Theater. In 1894, Thomas G. Moses went to work for David H. Hunt as scenes from the Columbian Exposition’s Midway toured the country. Highlights from the fair were appearing all over in the comfort of local venues.
Scene of the Midway Plaisance at the Columbian Exposition.
Moses traveled to Philadelphia to install and open Hunt’s Midway show on February 15, 1894. The Buffalo Commercial (Buffalo, New York) reported “The Famous Midway” was in town. A “very realistic exhibition” was on display at the 74th regiment armory. Hunt was also the manager of the Midway Plaisance Company in addition to starting his business venture with Sosman & Landis. The article continued that those who went to the Columbian Exposition and attended the Midway “were pleased to note that an excellent reproduction on a much larger scale than might have been expected had been made, and they were well pleased with what they saw” on February 8, 1894 (page 10). Scenes included the Chinese Theatre, Dahomey village, Indian village, German village, the Turkish Theatre Hagenbeck’s animal show, the Streets of Cairo, and Old Vienna. Other scenes, such as the Ferris Wheel” were included in the distance. The article commented that the scenery was painted “so faithfully that you believe for a moment that it is the real thing. In short you have a picture of the Midway as you might have seen it in Chicago by looking through an inverted opera glass.”
Moses next traveled with the show to install it at the Madison Square Garden in March of 1894. Moses wrote, “We got the whole show up in a day, including the Electric Theatre.” He continued that they “opened to big business.” Yet he saw none of the profits and continued to work for $10 a day, while traveling with large expenses.
David H. Hunt of Sosman, Landis & Hunt, theatrical management company. Image from 1903.
Of his time spent away from Chicago with Hunt, Moses write, “Sosman and Landis didn’t like my being with Hunt as they felt I was slipping away again, which I did.” This was a turning point and we see things come full circle for Moses. Throughout his entire career he impressed people. He impressed them with his artistry, speed, and personality. Wherever he went, jobs magically appeared before him and whatever studio he was working for. It was as if Moses were one big magnet, constantly drawing future projects to his doorstep. Why not leave the studio and ensure himself a share of the profits?
