In 1902, Thomas G. Moses recorded that he created settings for “Lights of Home,” “The Village Postmaster,” and “Shadows of a Great City.”
“Lights of Home” was a new play by Lottie Parker Blaire that did not open until the fall of 1903. The show was delayed due to the playwright being ill at the end of 1902. At the beginning of 1903, “The Dayton Herald” reported that the author had just recovered from a recent illness and was currently completing the final act of her play “Lights of Home” (10 January 1903 Page 6).
Article about “Lights of Home” from “The World,” 3 Nov 1903, page 7.
Blaire was also the author of “Under the Southern Skies” and “Way Down East.” “The Daily Arkansas Democrat” commented that Blaire “stands at the head of women dramatic writers in point of furnishing money-producing plays” (9 July 1903, page 6). The article continued, “It is claimed that the profits of ‘Under the Southern Skies’ and ‘Way Down East’ alone amount to more that the total profits on all other plays combined written by women.” Moses produced the scenery for Blaire’s productions of “Under Southern Skies” and “Lights of Home.”
“Lights of Home” was the season’s house production at Haverly’s 14th Street Theatre in New York during November 1903. This was the production that Moses mentions in his typed manuscript. The four-act play tells the story of a hero, who is cast off by his wealthy father for marrying a penniless girl. The hero’s half brother plays the villain, who accuses the hero of forgery. Fortunately the hero escapes to sea on a sailing vessel. The villain then attempts to murder the hero’s wife and child to gain the inheritance.
The Buffalo Express reported, “It is a thrilling melodrama of perilous situations and gratifying ways of getting the heroine and her child out of them. The poor girl who marries the rich man’s son suffers much through the intriguing of a band of rascals, male and female, headed by the husband’s stepbrother. The story lends itself to elaborate devices in the way of stage scenery, which heightens the effect of the soul-stirring situations” (New York 22 Nov 1904, page 7).
The stage settings included the recreation pier where the child is stolen; a river where an ocean liner almost runs over the child in an open boat; the smuggler’s bluff where the husband is imprisoned; and a cave where the wife is washed into it from sea, but is saved by men forming a human chain with their bodies. “The Anaconda Standard” reported, “One scene showing the rising tide in a cave was wonderfully realistic and thrilling” (Anaconda, Montana, 8 Nov. 1903, page 14). Of the stage action, an article in “The Evening World” questioned, “Why has the human chain been overlooked? Why is it that in the mad whirl of the buzz saw, the locomotive, and the mine explosion drama, nobody ever picked out the human chain as a vehicle of the most enthusiastic possibilities, that is, nobody until Lottie Blair Parker seized it and thrust it bodily into the fourth act of her play…And hurrah for the human chain! (3 Nov. 1903, page 7).
The plot was advertised to include “a knife, a gun, a real warship, a steam launch, a sea scene with a dark unfathomed cave in the background and a deep-dyed villain who talks like “Big Bill” Devery and really acts” (The Evening World, 3 Nov. 1903, page 7).
Forrest Robinson played the role of the hero, Jack Stanton, while Georgia Wells played the heroine Tress Purvis. George D. Parkes played the part of the villain – who could “really act.” Of the performance at Haverly’s Fourteenth Street Theatre, newspapers recorded, “The curtain was scarcely up two minutes when the gallery was whistling; in fifteen minutes it was y-a-a-hing, and in half an hour all the women in the house were enjoying a good social cry”(The Evening World, 3 Nov. 1903, page 7).
The song from the second scene, “On the Recreation Pier,” was a musical number that newspapers repeatedly commented as extremely popular. The “Evening World” noted, “The song will be all over the town in a week” (3 Nov. 1903, page 7).
Part 422: Coney Island – Thomas G. Moses and “The War of Worlds”
Postcard depicting the entrance of Luna Park
Amusement park attractions with massive spectacles provided a unique opportunity; new technology was integrated into established and successful scenic illusions. There were ample opportunities to experiment with visual spectacle. In some cases, already successful endeavors were tweaked, or revamped for even greater appeal. Luna Park showcased the work of many artisans, including the scenic art of Moses & Hamilton.
“A Trip to the Moon,” near the entrance of Luna Park.
Nearest the main entrance was Luna’s premiere attraction, “A Trip to the Moon.” The attraction was transported from Steeple Chase Park to Luna Park in 1902, then renovated and placed in a new building at the expense of $52,000. The new airship, Luna III, was also enlarged to accommodate more passengers. The show now ascended over a panorama of Coney Island, flying over Manhattan’s skyscrapers before continuing its journey to the moon, after rising into the clouds. Another change was that visitor’s would enter a moon dragon’s mouth, allowing them to walk into its stomach as the floor rocked to and fro as though alive. Descending to the dragon’s tail, visitor’s returned to earth, exiting safely on the streets of Luna Park.
Exterior of the building where the “War of Worlds” spectacle was located at Luna Park.
The building next to “A Trip to the Moon” was “War of the Worlds” and it resembled a monster submarine boat. The interior of the building depicted a small-scale version of Fort Hamilton and the New York Bay. This scenic spectacle depicted a naval attack on New York Harbor by foreign enemy invaders.
Painted scenery placed at the entrance of the “War of Worlds” show.
Moses and Hamilton also were hired by Fred Thompson to paint the scenery and engineer some of the scenic effects for “The War of Worlds” at Luna Park. For their services, they received $2,900.00. Moses noted that their final profit from Thompson’s project was $2,200.00, as they painted it in less that one half the time they thought it would take. Moses wrote, “It was all painted in oil as the scenes all worked through a tank of water. The attraction included battleships that were large enough to hold the “good-sized boy” who operated them during in battle scenes. Moses recalled this “big hit,” but one having “too much powder and noise.”
The audience was located in one of the batteries guarding New York Harbor, and watched forty ships sail toward Manhattan. The enemy fleet represented the combined navies of Germany, Britain, France and Spain. The ships appeared along a distant horizon, and slowly approached the audience, who were seated in one of Fort Hamilton’s turrets. As the enemy approached, battleships and destroyers fired their guns. An enormous shell blew up one of Fort Hamilton’s bastions. Then an enemy ship was blown into splinters. As the battle raged, the fort’s mighty guns shook the ground. Fortunately, Admiral Dewey’s American fleet sank the all of the foreign ship, before the enemy was able to lay siege to the city.
Historical accounts of the spectacle record that the show used a combination of electrically controlled models and small actors maneuvering the larger ships. The painted background by Moses & Hamilton was a huge canvas that depicted the harbor and Statue of Liberty.
Admission to every one of Luna’s attractions would cost just under two dollars. “A Trip to the Moon,” “War of the Worlds,” “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea,” Hagenbeck’s Trained Animals and the Infant Incubators were the most expensive attractions, priced at 25 cents each, today’s equivalent of $6.75. Dime attractions included “Shoot the Chutes,” “Wormwood’s Monkey Theater,” the Gondola Launches and the Japanese and Chinese Theaters. Rides on the miniature railroad called the Midnight Express or the Razzle Dazzle cost only a nickel.
Part 421: Coney Island – Thomas G. Moses and “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea”
A postcard depicting the entrance of Thompson and Dundy’s Luna Park on Coney Island.
In 1902, Thomas G. Moses recorded that Fred Thompson was building Luna Park, opposite Dreamland and Steeple Chase Park on Coney Island. Moses & Hamilton would paint several projects for Thompson at Luna Park.
Thompson and Dundy’s “Trip to the Moon” at Luna Park. This attraction was moved from Steeplechase Park in 1902 to be the premiere attraction at the new Luna Park.
Thompson and Dundy’s “A Trip to the Moon” was extremely successful at Steeplechase Park during 1901; over 850,000 people took a voyage on the airship Luna. Even though much of the summer was cold and rainy, the attraction greatly contributed to the overall success of Steeplechase Park. In fact, Steeplechase was the only park to turn a profit that summer. At the end of the season, however, the amusement park’s owner, George Tilyou, decided to increase his profits for the next season, offering Thompson and Dundy 40% of their profits instead of the customary 60%. Thompson and Dundy decided to take their attraction elsewhere and start their own park. They leased the nearby Sea Lion Park and an adjacent parcel of land on the seaward side, planning to build an new 22-acre park.
Luna Park at night
Luna Park opened during the spring of 1903, with a staggering price of $700,000 to construct. The grand opening for Luna Park was scheduled for May 16. For the dedication, 250,000 electric lights were switched on at 8PM and a five-lane gate opened to a stream of visitors. In two hours time, attendance had reached over 60,000 visitors, signaling Thomson and Dundy’s success. By mid-summer, all of their loans were repaid while the profits continued to roll in. Those who had helped out that first summer, struggling alongside Thompson and Dundy, were rewarded. For example, the head of publicity who had worked the entire first summer on a percentage basis with no salary, received a huge bonus. At the close of the season, Thompson and Dundy paid him $116,000.
Luna Park was named to honor Thompson & Dundy’s main attraction – “A Trip to the Moon.” In addition to this featured ride, Thompson designed two other massive attractions – “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea” and “The War of Worlds.” Although they were not ready for the opening, visitors came to the park in droves. Moses & Hamilton were hires to create the scenic illusion for both of these new rides.
A postcard depicting the ride at Luna Park – “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.”
In his typed manuscript, Moses wrote, “Our first big job for ‘Luna Park’ was ‘20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.’ It was a very unique show and kept us busy for several months. We had a real submarine boat in front of the show that actually sank with the passengers and was totally submerged. The passengers were then taken out of the boat through a passageway into another boat, a duplicate of the one they first entered. Then, the effect of under the sea was sprung on them and it worked perfectly. The illusion was very convincing.” The total cost to create this illusion was approximately $180,000.
A submarine took passengers on a realistic underwater journey to the North Pole, very much in the same way that the Luna airship took riders to the moon. The ride was in a building that covered 65,000 square feet. The entrance alone was 125 feet wide by 70 feet high, and 150 feet deep. Between 100 and 200 riders walked down a ramp and boarded a Holland-class submarine replica. They sat sit facing large portholes that presented a view of the ocean around them on the journey. After the hatch was latched shut, the submarine submerged under water in a 24-foot-deep pool.
Moses & Hamilton painted a panorama purportedly measuring 3 ½ miles long, depicting the underwater voyage from the Indian Sea to the North Sea. The canvas that was allegedly held on twenty-four spools with various underwater compositions depicting seaweed, coral reefs, schools of fish, sharks, sea monsters, a mermaid, and even the shipwreck of the Flying Dutchman.
The air inside the Nautilus submarine was cooled as the passengers traveled closer to the North Pole. It was an exciting journey as the submarine narrowly missed colliding with a ship passing overhead, and later struck then an iceberg when ascending to the surface.
At the North Pole, passengers exited the vessel and were greeted with a blast of cold Arctic air. Eskimos in fur skins emerged from their igloos, eager to meet the new arrivals. Real seals and polar bears also cooled themselves on nearby icebergs. Passengers were encouraged to take and ice chips as a temporary memento on each hot summer day. Before boarding the Nautilus for their return home, visitors were treated to a spectacular view of the Aurora Borealis in the night sky.
Entrance to “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea” (left).
Part 418: Thomas G. Moses’ Design for “Around the World in Eighty Days” – 1901
In 1900, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Moses and Hamilton’s business kept increasing. Prices were good; also our collections.”
In addition to “Floradora,” Moses & Hamilton secured the contract for Henry Greenwall’s Stock Company productions. Of this work, he wrote, “We had some heavy shows, ‘Around the World in Eighty Days,’ ‘Romeo and Juliet,’ ‘Hazel Kirke,’ ‘Prodigal Daughter,’ forty shows in all. I had to make ground plans and models. I found I had my hands full.” “The Prodigal Daughter” opened the Greenwall Stock Company’s season on September 16, 1901.
Henry Greenwall (1832-1913)
Henry Greenwall (1832-1913) was a theatrical manager who fought the Theatre Syndicate at the end of the nineteenth century. A German immigrant, Greenwall grew to adulthood in New Orleans. He started out in a New Orleans brokerage firm, and soon moved to Galveston, Texas where he organized his own brokerage firm with his brother Morris. When a successful actress became financially indebted to the Greenwall brothers, they took over her management and began a new business venture in theatrical management.
Henry Greewall developed a circuit of theaters throughout Texas, in Galveston, Houston, Fort Worth, and Waco.
The Greenwall Theatre in New Orleans, from the “Picayune” (December 22, 1903, page 3).
He then expanded his holdings to include theatres in New Orleans, Atlanta, Memphis, Nashville, Savannah and even New York. Greenwall established the American Theatrical Exchange in New York, in opposition to the Theatrical Syndicate; the Syndicate was attempting to monopolize theatre in America. It was during Greenwall’s time in New York that he hired Moses.
By 1900, Greenwall spent most of the summer in New York forming stock companies to perform at his independent theatres (“Daily Picayune, 29 July 1900). By mid-August, the New York Clipper reported, “The Greenwall Theatrical Circuit Company, the new managers of the American Theatre, have taken possession of the house, and artists are now at work redecorating the lobbies and offices, and when the theatre is reopened on Saturday, September 1, it will present a decidedly attractive appearance” (11 August 1900).
An advertisement for Greenwall’s Stock Company, from the “Picayune” (6 Nov 1898, Page 7).
The Greenwall Stock Company at the American Theatre in New York was under the management of J. J. Coleman. This venture was so successful that Henry Greenwall soon expanded his holdings to add the Columbia Theatre in Brooklyn for the 1901-1902 season. Greenwall hired Moses & Hamilton to produce scenery for his touring stock shows, including “Around the World in Eighty Days.”
The New York Times reported, “The Christmas attraction at the American Theatre will be the revival of “Around the World in Eighty Days.” This spectacle was last seen in new York at the Bowery Theatre – now the Thalia – some six or eight years ago, and was produced a number of years ago at Niblo’s Garden” (22 Dec. 1901, page 28). The article was referencing the 1877 spectacle by the Kiralfy Bros at Niblo’s.
The 1877 production of “Around the World in 80 Days” by the Kiralfy Bros. at Niblo’s Garden.
The article continued, “Many improvements in stage devices, and especially in electrical effects, have been made since then, and these, it is said, will be taken advantage of in adding brilliancy to the present production” (“The New York Times” 24 Dec 1901, page 7).
The show toured to the Columbia Theatre next where the it did not receive rave reviews. The Brooklyn Eagle reported, “The large audience last night was inclined to show displeasure at the unexpected departure from the recent presentation of successful plays to Jules Verne’s well known and oft repeated spectacle, but it was soon won over by the clever acting of John Daly Murpy as Passe Partout, Frank E. Camp as Phineas Fogg, Asa Willard as John Archibald, E. L. Snader as John Fix and Valerie Bergere and Lillian Kemble as Ouda and Ayesha. They saved the presentation from failure, as one of two of the lesser lights had to be prompted, and several of the realistic features worked badly. The good ship Henrietta in the sixth act refused to explode as scheduled, the passenger coach in the famous trip over the Rockies in the fifth act tried hard to get ahead of the engine and partially succeeded, and one or two other similar incidents marred the performance. The redeeming features, however, outnumbered these partial mishaps, for the scenery at times was really splendid and the indications are that the play will run more smoothly as the week progresses” (The Brooklyn Eagle, 31 Dec 1901, page 6).
Henry Greenwall’s initial success in New York, however, was not meant to last. When the 1903-1904 season opened, the New York Clipper reported that the American Theatre was under new management – “Klaw and Erlanger and Weis” (15 September 1902). Similarly, Greenwall’s Columbia Theatre in Brooklyn was said to have transferred to the management of Albert Weis and Company and Jake Weeks (New York Clipper, 5 September 1903). By this time, Greenwall was 72 years old, and his focus was narrowing down to his first holdings in the Texas Circuit.
Thomas G. Moses & William F. Hamilton established the scenic art firm of Moses & Hamilton during the spring of 1900. Their first production, “Quo Vadis,” was a project for the theatrical management firm of Sosman, Landis & Hunt – the same Sosman & Landis who owned the scenic studio in Chicago. Earlier that spring, the “New York Times” reported, “Manager David H. Hunt was one of the gentlemen interested in the production of the Jeanette Gilder’s version of Quo Vadis” (6 April 1900, page 2).
The Sosman, Landis & Hunt production of “Quo Vadis” used a script that was prepared by Jeanette Leonard Gilder (1849-1916). Gilder was a pioneer for United States women in journalism. She came from a family of distinguished journalists. By the age of ten, she had published her first story in the “New York Weekly,” – “Kate’s Escapade.” Later, she worked with her brother, Richard Watson Gilder, for “Scribner’s Monthly.” Gilder also worked for the New York Tribune as “J. L. Gilder,” and spent six years on the staff of the New York Herald as their literary, musical and dramatic critic. In 1881, she established “The Critic” (later “Putnam’s Magazine”) with another one of her brothers, Joseph B. Gilder, and was the co-editor of the magazine during her time there. Gilder also wrote several books of that included “Pen Portraits of Literary Women” in 1887. She was a friend of Robert Louis Stevenson and his family.
Jeanette L. Gilder
There were a few “Quo Vadis” productions that appeared alongside Gilder’s. Each production was an abstract of Henry Sienkiewicz’s historical and religious story; a love story set in imperial Rome. Sienkiewicz’s story was published in three installments in Polish; his novel told of a love that developed between a young Christian woman, Lycia (Ligia in Polish) and Marcus Vinicius, a Roman patrician. It takes place in the city of Rome under the rule of emperor Nero in 64AD.
“Quo Vadis” by Henry Sienkiewicz, 1896.
One “Quo Vadis” dramatization was written by Marie Doran for the Baker Stock Company, while another was written Stanislaus Stange. Stange’s version was produced by F. C. Whitney and Edwin Knowles, it opened at the New York Theatre. Many criticized that all versions of “Quo Vadis” too closely resembled Wilson Barrett’s 1895 production of “The Sign of the Cross,” that appeared prior to Sienkiewicz’s writings. Barrett explained that the Christian theme was an attempt to bridge the gap between the church and the stage.
The Herald Square Theatre, 1908.
Gilder’s production opened at the Herald Square Theatre – 1331 Broadway (the corner of 29th and 35th Street). The premiere was April 9, 1900, but it closed after only 32 performances. The competing Whitney and Knowles production at the New York Theatre ran for 96 performances. The “Buffalo Courier” later reported, “Mr. Whitney’s production forced Hunt out of the business in New York, where it was billed for an indefinite run, and compelled its withdrawal after a run of four weeks” (Buffalo, New York, 10 May 1900, page 9). Of the Herald Square production Moses wrote, “It was not a success, as another company with the same play got in a week ahead of this production at a better theatre, which naturally killed the Herald Square Show.” Regardless of their failure in New York, Sosman, Landis & Hunt toured their production to other cities.
The New York Theatre, 1900-1915Alice Fisher as the Empress Poppaea in “Quo Vadis” at the New York Theatre. This show opened at the same time as the “Quo Vadis” production that Thomas G. Moses worked on in 1900.
The “New York Tribune” characterized the New York Theatre production as “literary art” and labeled the Herald Square production as a “scenical picture,” commenting that each show included “considerable stage carpentry” (14 April 1900, page 9). The production was often credited solely to David Hunt, instead of the theatrical management firm of Sosman, Landis & Hunt. It would be Hunt’s name, and neither Sosman nor Landis, who would later be connected to the failed show – smart men.
Interestingly, the Sosman & Landis Scenic Studio did not produce the scenery for the production either; instead they secured a variety of scenic artists to produce individual scenes. Maybe they sensed that this production was a sinking ship. The use of multiple scenic artists, however, was a common practice throughout the nineteenth century, as individual artists were selected to be responsible for a single scene.
In addition to Moses & Hamilton, other scenes were created for the show by John H. Young, Gates and Morange, and Fred McGreer. From an April article in the “Cincinnati Enquirer” we know that McGreer designed and painted the setting for Nero’s banquet hall and the arena scene (15 April 1900, page 12). The show was reported to be “rich in scenic opportunities.” The article provided some details about the “Quo Vadis” banquet hall and arena settings:
“The entire scene was originally painted on one big drop and then after it was completed I ‘red lined’ the whole scene. This is to outline the columns and vases with a delicate red line, which the carpenter follows in sawing out these separate sections. They are then all placed in position on the stage and the stuff that has been cut out is fastened together with a delicate netting which is invisible to the audience. The perspective created the impression that they are standing alone though really the entire set is one big drop. Some idea of the work required can be gained from the explanation that a single drop of this description generally requires the efforts of the carpenter and four assistants an entire evening to fix up. On the drop for this garden scene we used 1080 feet of cloth and about 75 pounds of paint. In order to attach them to the rigging loft about 300 feet of rope is also used. Now another heavy scene is in the arena setting for the last act, in which over 700 feet of platform space is required, built up to a height running from two feet and reaching the topmost platform 15 feet above the stage. These platforms are all hinged and made so they will fold for shipment as the piece goes on the road after it is used here. In ‘Quo Vadis’ every scene is numbered and arranged so that it can be put together hurriedly and when brought into a theater is very much like the animal puzzles that are so popular with the Children at Christmas. Only the stagehands will just know where every piece goes without being puzzled.”
In addition to McGreer’s contribution to the production, Young painted two scenes, and Gates and Morange painted one scene. It is unknown which scenes Moses & Hamilton painted, but the “Buffalo Courier” reported, “The play was produced in seven acts and nine scenes” (22 May 1900, page 7). This meant that Moses & Hamiton would have created four of the nine scenes. One spectacular scenic effect was the burning of Rome.
But the trials and tribulations for the theatrical management firm of Sosman, Landis & Hunt did not end after the show’s short run. Two years later, “The New York Times” published an article, “Miss Gilder Goes to Law.” It reported a court case against Sosman, Landis & Hunt filed by Miss Gilder (Oct 19, 1902, page 1). The company failed to produce Gilder’s exact version of “Quo Vadis ” for five weeks each in two years at their various theatres, including the Pike Theatre Opera House in Cincinnati.” A legal battle with a member from a family of well-respected journalists must have been costly, and it could have contributed to the quick end of Sosman, Landis & Hunt around this same time.
“Quo Vadis” tableau, Act I, scene 2 – Departure of Lygia for Nero’s Palace. Image is from the article “The Adelphi Version of Quo Vadis” “Sketch: A Journal of Art Actuality, Vol. 30, Dec. 31, 1900 (pages 78-79). The Adelphi version was by well-known impresario, Messrs. A. H. Canby and F. C. Whitney. This is the same show that played at the New York Theatre when Moses’ show was at the Herald Square Theatre.“Quo Vadis” – Lygia rescued from the arena by Ursus. This photograph is from the article “The Adelphi Version of Quo Vadis” “Sketch: A Journal of Art Actuality, Vol. 30, Dec. 31, 1900 (pages 78-79).“Quo Vadis” Act 3 – Petronius Villa at Antium. Image is from the article “The Adelphi Version of Quo Vadis” “Sketch: A Journal of Art Actuality, Vol. 30, Dec. 31, 1900 (pages 78-79).
Part 410: “Art on the Stage” 1881, Other Materials Used
“The Building News and Engineering Journal” published an article on the art of scene painting in 1881. Here is the third, and final, part.
Bag of Van Dyke Brown pigment. Photograph by Marc D. Hill. He has some amazing pictures. Here is the link: https://hiveminer.com/Tags/old,powderUltramarine blue dry pigment. Photograph by Marc D. Hill. He has some amazing pictures. Here is the link: https://hiveminer.com/Tags/old,powderBag of turquoise b pigment. Photograph by Marc D. Hill. He has some amazing pictures. Here is the link: https://hiveminer.com/Tags/old,powder
“Other Materials Used
The scene-painter, however, is not confined to colours in producing his effects. There is a number of other materials of great importance in scene-painting. The gorgeous dashes of blue, crimson, yellow, and purple that make the resplendent fairy grotto are not alone sufficient. The glitter that is seen on the many-coloured stalagmites and stalactites is produced by ordinary gold and silver leaf. Sometimes it becomes necessary to produce upon the scene a smooth, glittering surface which shall be coloured. This is produced by foil papers. They are made of paper with a polished metallic surface, and are very effective in fairy scenes. What are known as bronze powders are made of all shades. They are metallic powders of gold, silver, bronze, steel, blue, red, purple, and other shades. A brush full of glue is drawn across the required surface, and the bronze is spread over it. The consequent appearance is that of a rough metallic surface similar to that frosted silver.
In some scenes it is necessary to represent precious stones. The jewels in the walls of some Eastern despot’s palace cannot be imitated by paint with a sufficient degree of realism to stand the glare of gas and calcium light. Hence, theatrical art resorts to what are called “logies.” These are made of zinc, in the shape of a large jewel, and are set in the canvas. They are made in all colours; and thus, by a very cheap and easy process, the barbaric splendour of Persia or of Turkey may be reproduced in all its original opulence. Sometimes it becomes necessary to represent that changing sheen that is visible upon highly-polished metals when exposed to the rays of the sun. This is done by means of coloured lacquers. The surface of the metal is painted, and a wash of those lacquers, blending from one tint into another, is put over it. The light reflected from these different coloured washes produces the desired effect, and gives a highly realistic representation of a surface of metal.
An ice scene is never complete without some thing to produce glitter and sparkle. This effect is produced by “frostings” of crushed glass, which are made to adhere to the canvas in the same manner as the bronze powders. The elaborate ornamental work of interior scenes is always done by means of stencils cut in pasteboard. There are books published on fresco painting which give large numbers of beautiful designs for panels, ceilings, mouldings, and other ornamental work. Every scene-painter has a collection of these works. The ingenious artist, however, is constantly combining the different designs, and often invents new ones. He is thus enabled to present to the public an ever-changing variety.
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.
Part 407: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, Fifth installment
E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871, reflecting on the history of English scenic artists. I divided this fifth and final section into two parts due the detail. This final installment describes the contributions of David Roberts, RA, and his contemporaries.
David Roberts, R.A.
“The late David Roberts, who died November 25, 1864, won his spurs by painting scenery for an al fresco theatre at Venice, and for years displayed his mastery of architectural perspective in the Rialtos, Piazzettis, and Grand Canals, which enriched the Italian pictures presented on the boards of both Drury Lane and Covent Garden. He made his metropolitan debut at the Drury Lane, where he commenced his career in 1822, in conjunction with his friend and brother academician, Clarkston Stanfield. David Roberts was also famous for his dioramas, but he never produced works which equaled Stanfield’s moving dioramas, he never produced works which equalle Stanfield’s moving diorama of Alpine scenery, or the memorable views of Windsor and the neighbourhood, which included the sparkling tableau of Virginia Water, wherin the real element was so effectively introduced.
Garrick’s Temple to Shakespeare at Hampton, by John Zoffany
In 1828, the principal Covent Garden artists were David Roberts, and the famous scenic triumvirate, Messrs. Grieve, and T. and W. Grieve. The drop scene painted by Roberts for this Theatre, the Interior of a Temple to Shakespeare, consisting of fluted Corinthian Sienna columns, supporting a soffite dome, the perspective terminating with a monumental group introducing the immortal Bard, with St. Paul’s Cathedral in the distance, will be vividly remembered by the mature playgoer. The Grieves had long been famous for their Pantomime scenery, and in the brilliancy of their style, the strong feeling of reality which they communicated to the spectator, and in the taste and artistic beauty of their landscape compositions, they have since had few rivals and never been excelled. To Mr. T. Grieve, and his son Mr. Walford Grieve, the modern stage has been largely indebted. Several drop scenes for the late Theatre known as Her Majesty’s, though coloured by the later William Grieve, were drawn by Pugin, the great restorer of ecclesiastical Gothic architecture in this country.
At the present time [1871] the stage is richly supplied with scenic artists whose reputation needs no better security than the production they are constantly giving to the public. With a remembrance of the old days of Tomkins and Pitt at the Adlephi, or Philip Phillips at the Surry, and of the clever artist, Brunning, who died a mere youth, and yet figured conspicuously among the scenic corps of twenty years ago, we may pass confidently to the catalogue of our present distinguished representatives of the scenic art.
Drop curtain by William R. Beverly for the Memorial Theatre, 1879. Here is the link to the image: The act drop curtain painted for the 1879 Shakespeare Memorial Theatre posted online at: http://theshakespeareblog.com/blog/page/8/Poster for the Christmas Annual with scenery by William R. Beverly. Here is a link to the image: The act drop curtain painted for the 1879 Shakespeare Memorial Theatre posted online at: http://theshakespeareblog.com/blog/page/8/
Mr. William Beverly, on his own ground at the Drury, is the unrivalled delineator of the fanciful region in which fairies may be imagined to dwell. Mr. William Callcott is a richly-endowed and skillful artist, whose “Transformation Scenes” have long won for him a special celebrity. Mr. John O’Connor, Mr. Lloyd, the late Mr. Charles James, Mr. Hawes Craven, Mr. J. Johnson, Mr. George Gordon. Messrs. Brew, Mr. Frederick Fenton, and his brother Mr. Charles Fenton, have severally produced works of art which will long keep their names vividly impressed on the memory of the playgoer.
Mr. Marshall, though not now before the public as a scenic artist, is not likely to be forgotten by those who can appreciate the services he has rendered to this important department of the stage; and Mr. Telbin has so distinguished himself by the triumphs he has achieved in the highest region of the Scenic Art that it is only to be regretted, for the sake of playgoers, his pencil is not now as frequently employed as heretofore for their own gratification.”
Part 406: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, Clarkston Frederick Stanfield
E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871 for “The Era Almanack.” This was to be the fifth and final section of the article. However, it describes in detail some of the designs by Clarkston Frederick Stanfield and David Roberts. I am going to split the last part of the article into two parts as there is just too much information to process at once.
Clarkston Frederick Stanfield by John Simpson, 1829
Here is fifth section, first part.
“Clarkston Stanfield, who died May 18, 1867, aged 73, first distinguished himself at Drury Lane by the scenic effects with which he illustrated the opera Der Freyschutz, produced on that stage in 1824. From that time he remained the chief of the Drury Lane painting-room; and the series of exquisite dioramic paintings he contributed to this theatre long gave special attraction to the pantomimes there produced. His earliest scenes of this kind were in “Harlequin and the Flying Chest,” and his Crystal Grotto in “Harlequin and the Talking Bird” created a marked sensation.
Then came his panoramic display under the title “Naumetaboia,” in Jack of all Trades (Christmas, 1825), showing the adventures of a man-of-war, from the launch at Dover, its encounter with a gale, the wreck, and the towing into a foreign port. In 1826, the “Man in the Moon” introduced further illustrations of his powers as a marine painter, in two remarkable scenes called “England’s Pride” and “England’s Glory.” In 1827, “Harlequin and Cock Robin” was enriched with a fine representation of “Portsmouth in a Gale of Wind.”
In 1828, Stanfield painted a moving diorama for “Harlequin and the Queen Bee,” representing Spithead at Sunrise, entrance to Portsmouth Harbour, the Dockyard, Gosport, Mother Bank, Isle of Wight with the Royal Yacht Club, Cowes Regatta, the Needles by Moonlight, the Ocean, and the Rock of Gibraltar. In 1829, the pantomime of “Jack in the Box “was distinguished by his diorama of the pass of the Simplon, the Valley of the Rhome, Domo D’Ossola, and Lago Maggiore, with the Boromean Islands. In 1831, was painted the diorama of Venice for “Harlequin and Little Thumb.” In 1832, “Harlequin Traveller” displayed a magnificent painting of the Falls of Niagara, seen from the approach to Buffalo on Lake Erie, and the Horse Shoe and Great American fall from Goat Island. The Christmas equestrian spectacle of 1833 (St. George and the Dragon) was rendered remarkable by his Egyptian diorama, commencing with the great cataracts and showing the ascent of a pyramid. The next year this accomplished scenic artist illustrated King Arthur with some admirable scenery, depicting Penrith and Carlisle in the days of yore.
When Mr. Macready became lessee of Covent Garden, and there produced (December 26, 1837) the pantomime of “Peeping Tom of Coventry,” Stanfield painted for it a beautiful diorama comprising a series of views in the north of Italy, Savoy, the Alps, and through “French Flanders” to the sea. A special paragraph in the play-bill recorded how the distinguished artist had, “as a sacrifice and in the kindest and most liberal manner, quitted for a short time his easel in order to present the Manager with his last work in that department of the art he has so conspicuously advanced to mark his interest in the success of the cause this Theatre labours to support.”
Stanfield, however, in June, 1839, once more complied with Mr. Macready’s request, and for the famous Shakspearian revival of “Henry the Fifth” he painted the panoramic illustrations of the Storming of Harfleur, the Battle of Aginciurt, and the view of Southhampton with the departure of the Fleet. When Mr. Macready resumed his exalted purpose as Manager of Drury Lane, Stanfield, for similar reasons, furnished the exquisite Sicilian views, illustrative of “Acis and Galatea,” and this was the last of the artist’s labours for the stage.
Part 405: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, fourth section
E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871 for “The Era Almanack.” Here is the fourth of five sections.
“John Richards, the old Secretary of the Royal Academy, painted many years for the stage. His rural scenery for The Maid of the Mill is perpetuated in two line engravings, which are in the portfolios of all our old-fashioned collectors of English prints.
The first scene of “The Maid of the Mill,” designed by John Inigo Richards. Painting by John Inigo Richards (1731-1810)Image: The first scene of “The Maid of the Mill,” designed by John Inigo Richards. Richards was a noted scenic artist, machinist and theatre designer. Engraving by William Woollett (1735-1785) after the painting by John Inigo Richards (1731-1810). 1768. Here is the link to the image: https://www.lubranomusic.com/pages/books/29668/samuel-arnold/the-first-scene-of-the-maid-of-the-mill-as-designed-by-mr-richards-fine-large-engraving-by-william
De Loutherbourg, who for some time delighted and astonished the town by his interesting dioramic exhibition, which he called “The Eidophusikon,” was the first to increase the effect of scenery by lighting from above the proscenium, and using colored glasses for the lamps.
De Loutherbourg’s “Eidophusikon.” Image from http://picturegoing.com/?p=4354The key to De Loutherbourg’s “Eidophusikon, or Moving Diorama of Venice” from https://www.rc.umd.edu/gallery/key-eidophusikon-or-moving-diorama-venicePhilip-Jacques de Loutherbourg, R.A. (1740 – 1812), became known for his large naval works, scenic designs, and mechanical theatre called the “Eidophusikon.”
“An Avalanche in the Alps,” 1803, Philip James De Loutherbourg (1740-1812). Presented by the Friends of the Tate Gallery, 1965. Image at http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artists/philip-james-de-loutherbourg-145
Many ingenious devices, now familiar, in their effects at least, to a playgoing public, owe their adoption to the dashing, vigorous Flemish battle-painter, whose appearance was as martial as his pictures, and who Jack Bannister nicknamed “Field-Marshal Leatherbags.”
Another distinguished artist of the period was Mr. Greenwood, the grandfather of Mr. T. L. Greenwood, so long associated with the management of Sadler’s Wells Theatre. For many years the scenery of the Royal Circus (now the Surrey Theatre) was painted by Mr. Greenwood, who invested the ballets and serious musical spectacles brought out there by Mr. J. C. Cross with remarkable scenic attractions, and, when the artist was transferred to Drury Lane, he became even more prominent. Byron, in his “English Bards and Scottish Reviewers,” speaks of “Greenwood’s gay designs” as being then the chief support of the Drama of that period.
When John Kemble became Manager of Covent Garden Theatre, the accuracy of scenery and costume became more studied. One of the most eminent scene-painters of this period was William Capon, who died in September, 1827. He was born in 1757, and studied under Novosielski, the architect of the Italian Opera House, during which time he designed the Theatre and other buildings at Ranelagh Gardens, and painted several scenes for the Opera.
On the completion of New Drury, in 1794, Kemble engaged Capon for the scenic department, by which means the Manager was greatly assisted in his reformation of the stage. The artist had a private painting room, to which Kemble used to invite his friends to witness the progress of this scenic reform. Among these specimens were a Chapel of the pointed style of architecture, which occupied the whole stage, and was used for the performance of oratorios; six chamber wings of the same order, for general use on our old English plays, and very elaborately studio from actual remains; a View of New Palace Yard, Westminster, as it was in 1793, forty-one feet wide, with corresponding wings; the Ancient Palace of Westminster, as it was three hundred years back, carefully painted from authorities, and forty-two feet wide and thirty-four feet to the top of the scene; six wings representing ancient English streets; the Tower of London, restored to its earlier state for the play of Richard the Third; and for Jane Shore was painted the Council Chamber of Crosby House. All these scenes were spoken as the time as historical curiosities. Capon painted for John Kemble two magnificent interior views of Drury Lane and Covent Garden, for which he received about two hundred guineas. Unfortunately all his scenes were destroyed by the fire at Drury Lane in 1809, but he afterwards painted many scenes for Covent Garden which for several years must have completely satisfied the more critical eye of even a later generation, for several needed only a little re-touching to serve the Managements which preceded that of Mr. Macready.
In Elliston’s time Marinari and Stanton painted a beautiful drop scene for Drury Lane which was substituted for the green curtain. It was a fine composition of Grecian ruins, and figures within a splendidly-wrought frame, heightened with gold ornamentation. The figures were by Stanton, and the cost of the scene was nearly 700L.
Clarkston Frederick Stanfield
In 1828 the principal scene-painters of Drury Lane were Stanfield, Andrews, and Marinari. Stanfield’s panoramas, at this period introduced into each successive pantomime, were triumphs of pictoral art. The two drop scenes then used between the acts were much admired. One, including the Coliseum, with other remains of classic architecture, was painted by Stanton; the other, from a picture by Claude, was from Stanfield’s pencil. The weight of each of these drops, with the roller and necessary adjuncts, was about 800lbs. In marine scenery Clarkston Stanfield had never been surpassed. Born at Sunderland in 1798, he had commenced life as a sailor, and he had well profited by his early experience of the lights and shadows of the seas. For many years Stanfield taught the pit and gallery to admire landscape art, and the occupants of the boxes to become connoisseurs. He decorated Drury Lane Theatre with works so beautiful that the public annually regretted the frail material of which they were composed, and the necessity for “new and gorgeous effects,” which caused this fine artist’s work to be successively obliterated. He create, and afterwards painted out with his own brush, more scenic masterpieces than any man, and in his time Clown and Pantaloon tumbled over and belabored one another in front of the most beautifully dazzling pictures which were ever presented to the eye of the playgoer.”
Part 404: “Scenery and Scene-Painters” 1871, third section
E. L. Blanchard wrote the article “Scenery and Scene-Painters” in 1871 for “The Era Almanack.” Here is the third section.
“Great improvements in the scenic department were made at the beginning of the last [18th] century, when Rich, who was Manager of the Playhouse in Lincoln’s Inn-fields, denominated the New Theatre, and set up in rivalry of Drury Lane, designed a series of spectacular entertainments, which drew the audiences from the old house, although it retained a strong company under the management of Wilkes, Booth, and Cibber.
Italy had long been famous for its scene-painters and the splendor of its pantomime representations. Canaletti, the great painter, designed the scenery for the Venetian stage. Some of these foreign artists were employed by Rich, and then it was the English first beheld the delightful effect of the picturesque as viewed through a splendid proscenium on a lengthened stage. The Managers of Drury, in self-defense, were compelled to attempt the same kind of entertainment, and they pressed into their service a celebrated scene-painter, named Devoto, and a ballet-master, Monsieur Thurmond, who projected a pantomime of which Jack Sheppard was the hero. This set the wits of the town on the managers, who, with the scene-painter, were dragged to the satiric whipping post. On these pantomimic pieces they were lavish of expense, as the scenery and machinery were the principal attractions.
When Rich removed his dramatic corps from Lincoln’s Inn-fields to the newly erected Theatre in Covent-garden, Hogarth caricatured the whole house moving in a procession across the market-place in front of the piazza, not forgetting to have a hit at his friend George Lambert, who scenes he piled in a wagon wherein the thunder and lightning were made conspicuous. Lambert, who had been joint scene-painter at Lincoln’s Inn, was appointed principal in that department at Covent-Garden, and it was in the scene-room here that he founded the Beef-steak Club. Harvey, a landscape painter, and Amiconi, who painted the fine groups on the upper part of the staircase at the old Buckingham House, executed the decorations of the proscenium, an allegory of Shakespeare, Apollo, and the Muses. John Laguerre, the historical painter, occasionally designed the scenes for Lincoln’s Inn stage, and the curious scene-cloth representing the Siege of Troy, depicted in Hogarths’ Southwark Fair, is from his design.
Michael Angelo Rooker, whimsically Italianized himself into Signor Rookerini, and who was at once painter, Harlequin, Scaramouch, and engraver, was principal scene-painter to the elder Colman at his Theatre in the Haymarket.”
Michael Angelo Rooker St. Mary’s Abbey, 1778, York, Google Art ProjectMichael Angelo Rooker, A.R.A., The_Gatehouse of Battle Abbey Sussex 1792, Pencil, Royal Academy of Arts, LondonThe Abbot’s Kitchen, Glastonbury c.1795 Michael Angelo Rooker 1746-1801 Presented by the Art Fund (Herbert Powell Bequest) 1967 http://www.tate.org.uk/art/work/T01013Michael Angelo Rooker, Part of North Wall of St. Joseph’s Chapel, Glastonbury Abbey, Somerset, Victoria and Albert Museum
