Albert, Grover & Burridge – Drypigment.net

Travels of a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Walter W. Burridge and Forest Park Cemetery, July 19, 2019

Picture of Walter W. Burridge pasted in the scrapbook of Thomas G. Moses

After visiting the home of Thomas G. Moses, I ventured over to see the gravesite of another scenic art legend – Walter Wilcox Burridge (1857-1913). The day had turned into a scenic art pilgrimage, as both Moses and Burridge were incredibly significant within the framework of American scenic art.

Postcard depicting a painting by Walter W. Burridge mailed to Thomas G.Moses in 1908

On Saturday, June 28, 1913, the “Oak Leaves” reported, “The funeral of Walter W. Burridge, late of New York, took place this Saturday afternoon from Grace church. Mr. Burridge died in New Mexico and the funeral took place here because Oak Park has become the home of Mr. Burridge since he became ill. Interment will take place at Forest Home” (page 34).

Unfortunately for me, my visit coincided with an intense heat wave in the Midwest. It was far too hot to be traipsing about the Forest Home Cemetery, yet I persisted, realizing that this opportunity may not dome again. Moving the car from one shaded spot to another and donning my sunhat, I finally located the Burridge’s tombstone. Kneeling in the grass before his grave, I took a moment to contemplate the life of this extremely talented artist. Despite the heat, I thought about his many projects in a relatively short period of time. Burridge died from “heart disease” at the age fifty-six years old while on a sketching trip to Albuquerque. He was working on an upcoming project for the 1915 Panama-Pacific Exposition.

A line from the musical “Hamilton” popped into my head while kneeling in the warm grass, “I ask myself, what would you do if you had more time.” Moses included an article by T. D. Williams article about Burridge in his scrapbook. Here is the article, “Great Colorist Dead.”

“A number of Chicago gentlemen prominent in the paint business have been life long friends of Walter W. Burridge, an artist of national, and one might almost say, international repute, because he visited London several times in the interest of art, who just dies while at Albuquerque, N. M., where he had gone to make sketches for pictures to be exhibits at the Panama-Pacific Exposition. The pictures painted by Mr. Burridge of the Grand Canyon earned him great praise, while other well known works have brought him equal prominence. He studied color, as every artist must do, and he sought and obtained pleasing effects for his scenic work, and is probably best known for his wonderful production of stage scenery. Many leading theatrical managers, actors and authors engaged him to paint settings and illustration for their productions, and there are few men who in the present time have painted as many excellent scenic and studio pictures. His beautiful pictures of Yellowstone National Park scenery have never been surpassed, while his wonderful scheme of color, so true to nature, makes a living record of the beauty and grandeur of the Yosemite valley, cataracts, lakes, giant rocks, towering domes and all the beauty spots of the valley which he faithfully transferred to canvas. The studio pictures of Mr. Burridge have frequently been exhibits in the various art institutions and galleries of this country. Nature was his great teacher. His mastermind gave him supreme command of the scale of color, which is evidenced by the many beautiful works of art which he has left. Mr. Burridge came from New York and was a resident for many years in La Grange, Illinois, the beautiful suburb in Chicago, in which he had many friends.”

Although I have written extensively about Burridge in past installments of “Tales of a Scenic Artist and Scholar,” here is a brief recap of his career:

At a very early age, Burridge apprenticed himself to a sign painter from Hoboken, New Jersey. His talent and outgoing personality soon brought him in contact with key personalities who were connected with the old Park Theatre in Brooklyn. Burridge soon found himself engaged as a part-time scenic art assistant, and by the age of thirteen was working full-time for Harley Merry at his Brooklyn Studio. Merry was the “artistic alias” for English stage performer Ebenezer Brittain.

Burridge was only was thirteen tears old at the time. He accompanied Merry to complete distant projects in both Chicago and Philadelphia, making all of the necessary connections for his career to soar. Burridge’s early career included a series of mentors, such as Russell Smith, who took a great interest in shaping the career of this talented young artist, later recommending him for a series of projects. Burridge’s talent and magnetic personality drew people toward him, providing one opportunity after another. His network of support included well-known performers and producers, including actress Mrs. John Drew.

Burridge’s artistic endeavors throughout the duration of his career spanned all across the continental United States and Hawaii. I will include just a few of the more notable venues. In Philadelphia, Burridge did a considerable work at the Arch Street Theatre, Broad Street Theatre, Walnut Street Theater, and Academy of Music. He also painted scenery for the Academy of Music in Baltimore, before moving to New York City where he accepted an engagement under J. H. Haverly, painting for many of Haverly’s theaters from New York to California, including the Fifth Avenue, Fourteenth Street, Niblos’ Garden, and Chestnut Street theaters. Other artistic endeavors included panoramas. In 1876, Burridge painted the “Siege of Paris” for the Centennial and later the “Battle of Gettysburg.”

He moved to Chicago by 1882, settling in suburban La Grange with his wife and securing work at the Bijou, 14^th Street Theatre and Standard Theatre. Around this time, Burridge was also under contract with John A. Havlin from 1882 to 1885 for work at the Grand Theatre. He also worked for six years as the scenic artist at the Grand Opera House and at McVicker’s Theatre; the man seemed unstoppable and scenic art was a thriving business. From 1887 until 1882, Burridge partnered with Thomas Moses (1856-1934) and successful art dealer M. Louderback to found Burridge, Moses & Louderback, located at the Columbia Theatre in Chicago. During less than two busy years, Burridge, Moses & Louderback stocked six theatres with all of the necessary scenery – no small task. Unfortunately personality clashes between Burridge and Louderback ended the partnership; Louderback came from a “managing art” background while Burridge came from a “creating art” background.

It was only a few years later, Burridge partnered with Ernest Albert (1857-1946), and Oliver Dennett Grover (1861-1927), to form “Albert, Grover & Burridge, Scenic and Decorative Painters” by 1891. Ernest Albert. Albert and Burridge, both artists first worked for Harley Merry at the Park and Union Square Theatres in New York. Albert, Grover & Burridge had a studio with over 12,000 square feet of working area, and another 2,500 square feet devoted to storage and sewing rooms. They had twenty paint frames, ranging from 56 by 35 feet to 30 by 20 feet. The firm did a considerable amount of business for the World’s Columbian exposition of 1893, including the cyclorama, “Volcano of Kilauea.” Burridge traveled to the Hawaiian Islands, making a series of faithful reproductions to capture this natural phenomenon, with his final composition measured 54’ x 412’ and was also a major attraction at the Mid-winter Fair in Sacramento. Unfortunately for Albert, Grover & Burridge, their business venture went bankrupt in two years and Burridge was again on his own.

The scenic studio founded by Walter Burridge, Oliver D. Grover and Ernest Albert

By 1900, Burridge was the scenic artist for the Chicago Auditorium and the Great Northern Theatre. He was also engaged by Henry W. Savage to prepare the scenes for the Castle Square Opera Company at the Studebaker Music Hall. We also know that Burridge designed the scenery for the premiere of “The Wizard of Oz” at the Chicago Opera House.

In 1900, Horace Lewis recalled a visit with Burridge writing, “every object, from his devoted wife to the pictures upon the walls, and his den in the garret, is indicative of the genial, most modest nature and simple poetry of the man who finds his greatest wealth within that home.”

Burridge passed away during a trip to Albuquerque, New Mexico while visiting the area to sketches for the upcoming 1915 Panama-Pacific Exposition. His funeral was at Grace Episcopal Church in Oak Park, Illinois, although the family did not attend the church. One can only imagine the projects that Burridge could have accomplished had he lived beyond the age of fifty-six.

Know as “Wallie” to his close friends, he was laid to rest at Forest Home Cemetery on June 24, 1913. His son would join him at Forest Home Cemetery three years later after an accidental drowning at the age of 30. The family grave now contains Burridge, his son son Walter C. (1886-1916) and wife Jane Anne (1860-1938). After losing her husband and son in such a short span of time, Jane lived for another twenty-two years, passing away when she was of 78 years, 4 months, and 20 days old.

Backside of Burridge grave site with dates for his son Walter “Cyril” Burridge who died three years after Walter W. Burridge

Aerial view of Forest Home Cemetery near Oak Park, Illinois

To be continued…

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

Part 670: A Melting Pot of Ingenuity

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

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

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

David Austin Strong, scenic artist and stage mechanic

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

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

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

Advertisement for Albert, Grover & Burridge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 461- Changing Partners

Part 461: Changing Partners

In 1903, Moses was studying art with R. M. Shurtleff, preparing to join the Salmagundi Club, and working on a variety of both indoor and outdoor spectacles. He lived in Mount Vernon, New York, but still traveled quite when touring shows opened in other cities. During these travels, his business partner Hamilton “held down the fort” at their Broadway Theatre offices in New York.

Moses & Hamilton was Moses’ his third partnership and it would end in 1904. In 1887 Moses entered into business with a scenic artist and an art dealer to form Burridge, Moses & Louderback (see past installment 132). By 1895 Moses tried his hand at both theatrical management and a scenic studio, establishing the short-lived team of Moses & McDonald (see past installment 336). By 1901, Moses partnered with Hamilton, forming Moses & Hamilton. My research suggests that this “changing partners” was a common occurrence at the time. The country was large, but the word of successful scenic artists was relatively small and partnerships were necessary to attain larger and more profitable projects. This period of time and the world of scenic art made me think of the lyrics from Patti Page’s song “Changing Partners”

We were waltzing together to a dreamy melody
When they called out “change partners”
And you waltzed away from me

(Here is the link to the song, if you have no idea what I am talking about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARWBstJHBe8)

The scenic art scene during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was like one big dance; artists tried to successfully maneuver their way across the dance floor, always in search of the best partner. They were simply trying to find that perfect fit and who might ultimately increase their prospects. If they had found the perfect partner at one time, they would try to return; I think of Sosman & Landis repeatedly drawing Moses back into their studio.

Moses’ memoirs trace his interactions with scenic artists during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, including Patrick J. Toomey of Toomey & Volland scenic studio in St. Louis, Missouri. For years, Moses would always stop by the studio when he was in town and visit with his good friend “Toomey.” Likewise, Toomey would visit Moses and send him postcards from abroad. Scenic artists needed to maintain a close-knit network so that they could not only could keep tabs on their competition, but also maintain a talent pool for larger projects.

Postcard advertising the new Toomey & Volland studio in 1922

These connections were crucial, facilitating potential alliances for upcoming work. Regional alliances were also made, such as that between Sosman & Landis and their affiliate New York Studios. The stylistic interpretation could vary from artist to artist, but the overall approach to the production of painted scenery for the stage remained relatively consistent until approximately the 1920s. At the time the theatrical industry promoted an artistic standard that was founded on established painting techniques developed in the late 17^th and 18^th centuries. Scenic artists created paintings intended to be viewed from a distance, a unique skill that wasn’t intuitive to many fine artists. Scenic art was primarily an apprenticed trade, supported by an individual’s fine art training.

The first decade of the twentieth century is what I consider the golden age of American scenic art. Scenic artists produced successful illusions, just as their predecessors, but had the advantage of electricity. In other words, they had more to work with as technological innovation flooded the theater industry. This greatest strength would later become the scenic art’s greatest weakness. There is a notable shift in American scenic art as electricity, projections, and moving pictures continue to shape the artistic landscape of the entertainment industry. The studios were working with one foot on a firm foundation and another foot precariously placed on a slippery rock. Many studios would quickly ascend, such as Sosman and Landis, but only a few would last for more than a few years. One such company was Toomey & Volland of St. Louis.

Toomey & Volland evolved from an earlier scenic art partnership called Noxon & Toomey. Thomas C. Noxon and Patrick Joseph Toomey joined forces in approximately 1867. Noxon was the firm’s first president and senior partner in the company.

The firm expanded in 1881 and changed its name to Noxon, Albert & Toomey. The famed Ernest Albert was added to the company, while Toomey was reported to be “the itinerant member of the firm” (Richmond Dispatch, 24 Jan 1886, page 3). For more information about Albert, see past installments 131, 133-139, 145, 154, 179, 231, 244 and 248. The company ran regional offices with studios in St. Louis, Missouri, Chicago, Illinois & Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Noxon, Albert & Toomey lasted for almost a decade, but Albert eventually returned to Chicago to partner with Walter Burridge and Oliver Dennett Grover, forming Albert, Grover & Burridge. 1891, the three constructed an innovative scenic studio with twenty paint frames and a display area to fully light and stage completed sets for clients. Although there was much promise, the firm went bankrupt in two years.

Back to St. Louis and Toomey’s activities.

When Noxon, Albert & Toomey ended, Toomey formed another partnership in 1892 – the Knox & Toomey Scenic Art Company. Toomey partnered with George Knox, a stage carpenter; the two specialized in float construction and electric pageant wagons. Float for parades had remained a specialty of Toomey’s since 1878. In fact Toomey dominated the float market in St. Louis for the Veiled Profit Procession and ball. This event was St. Louis’ version of the Mardi Gras parade and will be covered in another installment.

By 1901, Toomey switched partners – again. However this would be for the last time. His new business partner was a scenic artist, one who had previously worked at Noxon & Toomey – Hugo R. Volland. Volland migrated from Grossbremback, Germany, and soon found work at Noxon & Toomey as the company’s secretary. He would be a major Masonic asset major contributor to the St. Louis Scottish Rite for both the 1902 and 1924 buildings.

Like Sosman & Landis, Toomey & Volland jumped on the Masonic scenery and stage machinery bandwagon. From 1901 to 1904 their production of Scottish Rite scenery installations included St. Louis, Missouri; Butte, Montana; Joplin, Missouri; Rochester, New York; and Toledo, Ohio. Likewise, Sosman & Landis created Scottish Rite collections for Salina, Kansas; Little Rock, Arkansas; Fort Scott, Kansas; Chicago, Illinois; and Duluth, Minnesota, during this same time. Just as the original 1902 Sosman & Landis scenery for Little Rock is still used in Pasadena, California, so is the original 1902 Toomey & Volland scenery for Joplin still used in Deadwood, South Dakota. These two collections extremely significant within the framework of Scottish Rite history for the Southern Jurisdiction.

Both scenic studios would remain major players in the scene painting industry for the first two decades of the twentieth-century, having a lasting impact on many future generations of artists. Tomorrow, I will star to look at the scenic artist, and good friend of Moses, Toomey.

To be continued…

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

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

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

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

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

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

Photograph of Kilauea’s Lake of Fire in 1893.

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

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

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

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

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

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 271 – From the Land Where Palm Trees Sway

The Volcano of Kilaueau cyclorama for the 1893 Columbian Exposition was designed and painted by Walter Wilcox Burridge, the previous business partner of Thomas G. Moses. Burridge was part of another scenic studio when he journeyed to Hawaii during October 1891. Earlier that year, “Albert, Grover & Burridge” established their studio at 3127 State Street in Chicago. Their establishment was a marked departure from previous scenic studios as they implemented advancements in the methods of mounting and presenting stage plays to their clients. Albert was the scenic artist for the Chicago Auditorium, Burridge was the scenic artist for the Grand Opera House and McVicker’s, and Oliver Grover was a well-known instructor at the Chicago Institute of Art.

On October 20, 1891, the “Hawaiian Gazette” reported, “Walter Burridge, the scenic artist who is engaged to paint the Volcano for the World’s Exposition, leaves for that point to-morrow to make his sketches. He will be accompanied by Mr. Webster, the Chicago journalist, who will send a number of letters to the Chicago Inter-Ocean” (page 7). Webster would submit his story as “Special Correspondences” by “Conflagration Jones.” His series began in November and included a comical character named “Burridge.”

One of the “Inter Ocean” articles about Conflagration Jones’ adventures in Hawaii with Burridge.

In addition to Webster, the photographer J. J. Williams also joined the group to document the landscape of Kiluaea. Williams would take a number of photographs to assist Walter Burridge in the final painting for this Midway Plaisance attraction.

On October 27, 1891, the “Hawaiian Gazette” published an article about the upcoming Columbian Exposition (page 2). The article reported, “It now looks as though our modest little country might furnish one of the chief attractions of the Columbian Exposition, viz., a panorama and the volcano.” Both Burridge and Webster were described in the article: “[Webster] is on staff of the Chicago Inter-Ocean, a daily with a circulation of about 80,000 and has been engaged by the Volcano House Co. to write for the Inter-Ocean a series of twelve articles on Hawaii” and Burridge was “a leading landscape artist of Chicago.” The formation of a panorama joint stock company, initially be called “The Kilauea Cyclorama Co.,” would carry the enterprise through to completion. The article continued, “The cost of the panorama will probably be $20,000 – though the amount cannot be ascertained at present with accuracy. The hope is that a suitable building can be obtained so that the company will not be put to the cost of erecting an edifice.”

In order to market this endeavor, however, the public needed to support the project and the large price tag. Hawaiians needed to see the value in participating in the 1893 World Fair. The “Hawaiian Gazette” promoted the endeavor, publishing, “The Columbian Exposition offers an opportunity to advertise this country and make its advantages known, which is simply unparalleled. It is safe to assume that no opportunity will offer itself on a similar scale within perhaps a generation to come. The Hawaiian Government and private individuals should strain every nerve to utilize the opportunity to the utmost. Hawaii must be properly represented. We have a full and fine exhibit – one which will illustrate with completeness the character, conditions and prospects of the country, which will give an adequate conception of its generous climate and unrivaled fertility of its soil. The Hawaiian Band should be sent there. In connection with the panorama, vast quantities of literature with reference to the Islands can be circulated in the shape of books, pamphlets and circulars.”

Excitement for the project continued to build throughout the remainder of fall as Burridge rapidly completed his sketches at the Volcano House. Both Hawaiian and Chicago newspapers began marketing the project and promoting this tropical location as an ideal destination for tourists.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 270 – A Volcanic Explosion of Information – Kilauea

My past few installments looked at Thomas G. Moses’ contribution to the Columbian Exposition Midway Plaisance in 1893. His good friend and colleague, Walter Wilcox Burridge (1857-1913), also created a spectacular exhibit for the Midway Plasiance – a cyclorama of Kilueau, complete with scenic effects. Moses initially left Sosman & Landis in the 1880s to start a business with Burridge called “Burridge Moses and Louderback.” Burridge and Moses were the artists and Louderback was the businessman who specialized in art. Although their company was short lived, the two artists remained friends for the rest of their lives until Burridge passed away in 1916.

Advertisement for the scenic studio of Ernest Albert, Oliver Grover, and Walter Burridge. Burridge’s previous partnership was with Thomas G. Moses.

The new studio constructed by Ernest Albert, Oliver Grover, and Walter Burridge.

Burridge left his business with Moses after experiencing a series of struggles with Louderback. He went back to his old scenic art position at the Chicago Opera, but soon formed another partnership – “Albert, Grover and Burridge.” This company with Ernest Albert and Oliver Grover built a new type of scenic studio, complete with a full-scale display area (see installments #134-137). Burridge was still working at “Albert, Grover, and Burridge” when he designed and created the cyclorama for the Columbian Exposition.

The cyclorama of Kilauea painted by Walter Burridge for the 1893 Columbian Exposition Midway Plaisance.

To provide a little context for Moses’ theatrical productions and scenic art at the Columbian Exposition, it seems an appropriate time to include the work of Burridge.

Some of the my information and images for the next few posts have been provided by Eugene “Gene” B. Meier, Jr., M.S. Ed. Our paths crossed during the summer of 2017 as I researched Walter Burridge and the projects that he worked on with Moses (see installments # 131-135). Meier’s name first popped up in a Google search that linked me to his writing for Askart.com. Just as I wrote the biographical information for Thomas G. Moses at Askart, Meier did the same for Walter W. Burridge. The next time I saw a Meier’s post was in a Chicagoloy comment. On January 18, 2016, Meier posted that here were six rotunda panoramas represented at World Columbian Exposition.

A 1912 photograph from Chicagology depicting the cyclorama buildings. Here is the link: https://chicagology.com/goldenage/goldenage049/ It was this post where I encountered Gene Meier’s comments.

I repeatedly stumbled across a series of public postings, all with Meier’s name attached to the information. He was studying the scenic artists and companies who painted nineteenth century panoramas and cycloramas. Meier was doing the exact same thing that I was doing – except I was focusing on Masonic Theaters as the end product. Meier was creating a spreadsheet from the American point of view about 19^th century panorama painting.

2004 advertisement about a lecture on the panorama painters by Gene Meier.

In one of his posts, he mentioned Walter Burridge and also commented about his examination of the scenic art diaries by F. W. Heine at the Milwaukee Historical Society. I had also looked at those same diaries during a United States Institute of Theatre Technology Conference when the convention was in Milwaukee! It was at this point that I decided to contact Meier. There were too many instances where our research was covering the same ground.

Now contacting another historian can be like crossing a tightrope over Niagara Falls; one misstep could end the whole stunt. It is understandable that they might not want to share too much, especially if they are preparing to publish their findings. However, scholars really needs to share some of their information because it typically leads to new discoveries and facts that may otherwise remain hidden. I decided to take a chance and put all of my cards on the table and waited for Meier to respond.

It is possible that I was the first person to really show a shared interest in his topic, or that he is a completely trusting soul and sees the importance of bringing this information to light. Like me, his actions suggested that it was more important to share his research instead of being recognized for his particular contribution. We immediately recognized each other as kindred spirits and fellow historians who were working toward a bigger picture. But there was something else propelling his search – family. Meier has a personal connection to the art form as his great aunt was a student of panorama artists Richard Lorenz and Otto v. Ernst. For me, THAT could be a story in itself – except that I am swimming in tales already.

I received a flood of emails with attachments during July 2017 as he sent a lot of his primary research. This is a perfect example of “be careful of what you wish for” as you might have every request fulfilled. I am still in the process of slowly filtering through Meier’s files. I have been waiting for an appropriate opportunity to introduce and promote both Meier and his project. With my recent trip to Hawaii to see Thomas G. Moses’ great-grandson and my current examination of Moses’ contribution to the 1893 Columbian Exposition, now seems the ideal time. Tomorrow we look at the Burridge’s design and painting for his spectacular attraction – the Cyclorama of Kilauea.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 244 – Thomas G. Moses and the Old Waverly Theatre

In 1892, the Sosman and Landis Company opened another studio space on the West Side of Chicago. They rented the “old Waverly theatre” and referred to this second space as “the Annex.” According to Thomas G. Moses, the studio measured 93 feet wide by 210 feet long and 40 feet high. It had four paint frames with plenty of floor space for all kinds of work. This space was specifically secured for Moses and his crew. By August 1892, Moses found the new Studio all finished and they moved in immediately. His arrangement with Sosman & Landis was to receive all of their sub-contracted work. This statement has always intrigued me as the majority of Masonic installations were subcontracted to Sosman & Landis by M.C. Lilley. When did the subcontracting begin, and if not Masonic, who else was subcontracting work to scenic studios – architectural firms?

Furthermore, he wrote that Sosman & Landis would supply all of the paint supplies for the Annex Studio at no charge. Moses records that his studio crew included A. J. Rupert, Frank Peyrand and Harry Vincent besides a number of assistants and paint boys. He wrote, “It was awfully hard to keep the building warm. It was so big we had to use stoves.” Even with his own studio, however, Moses was still constantly sent on the road to complete on site work for the company. During these extended absences, Ed Loitz took charge of the Annex studio.

A program from the Waverly Theatre before it became the Annex Studio for Sosman & Landis in 1892.

Very little is known of the first Waverly Theatre space in Chicago. It was advertised as “Chicago’s Parlor Theatre” in Chicago Tribune during 1888. “Jno. B. Jeffery’s Guide and Directory to the Opera Houses, Theatres, Public Halls, Bill Posters, Etc.” (1889) noted that the Waverly was “formerly Grenier’s Garden & Theatre” on West Madison, Throop and Ada Streets. The 1892 “World Almanac and Bureau of Information” published that the physical address of the old Waverly theater was 454 W. Madison St. This is not to be confused with a later Waverly Theatre constructed in 1913. The stage old Waverly’s stage measured 40’ x 60’ with a seating capacity of 1400. This would have made a sizable studio and been a particular challenge to heat in the winter, especially when trying to keep the size water for painting in a liquid state.

Chicago theaters listed in the 1892 “World Almanac and Bureau of Information.” The Waverly became a second scenic studio for Sosman & Landis by August 1892.

In 1888, the Waverly’s manager was Burr Robbins with Andy Mackay as the assistant manager. By 1889, W. H. Powell was listed as the new manager. On June 30, 1889, the Chicago Tribune announced, “The Waverly Theatre has lately changed hands and is now being run as a first-class family theatre. The audiences for the last two weeks have been largely made up of the leading people of the West side and the performances were worthy of patronage. The Gaiety Opera Company under the management of A. Mackay has been playing to large houses in “Fra Diavolo.” Next week there will be a revival of “H.M.S. Pinafore,” with Messrs. Alonzo Hatch and Mack Charles and Miss Golde in the leading roles. The theatre is admirably adapted and well located for a family theatre and under the new management ought to prosper” (page 15).”

Four years later in 1892, the theatre was transformed into the second studio for Sosman & Landis. Obviouosly the management fof the Waverly theatre had not been successful. I was intrigued with the reason for the reconfiguration of the space and started digging through newspapers. I wanted to see if there was any mention about the Waverly’s close or transformation into a scenic studio space. Just about the time I had exhausted all possibilities, I came across a phenomenal article that included the line, “Chicago is universally acknowledged as the World’s Greatest scenic center.” This caught my attention. As I read the article, another paragraph stood out:

“Chicago is today the largest scenic supply center in the country. Of the eighteen theatres in this city the major portion have their own scenic artists. Three mammoth studios here send their art product as far east as Maine and all over the west to the shores of the Pacific. The oldest firm here in this line of work claims to have supplied nearly 1,300 opera houses, theatres, and halls with scenery during the last ten years, and of late business has increased enormously.”

Image of “a Chicago Scenic Studio” published in the Chicago Sunday Tribune during 1892.

“Three mammoth studios” with one being noted as “the oldest firm.” The names of the studios were not provided, so I started thinking about who was in operation at this point in Chicago. By 1891, Walter Burridge had partnered with Ernest Albert and Oliver Grover to create Albert, Grover & Burridge. That had to be one of the three studios. The oldest firm also had to be Sosman & Landis. Who owned the third “mammoth studio” in Chicago that I had never stumbled across? What it an individual’s company that used an actual theater space?

The article was fascinating and read as a “Who’s Who” in scenic art by 1892. It is certainly worth posting in it’s entirety for historical record. Therefore, I have turned it into a word document. It will be the topic of my next few posts due to its length.

Another treasure! This article is a proverbial “holy grail” for the scenic art world.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 231 – Thomas G. Moses and the Broadway Theatre in Denver, Colorado

Moses returned to Chicago on April 20, 1890 after being away from for seven months. Moses wrote, “My little family was certainly glad to see me back, as I was to get back. Seven months is a long time to stay away – a big change in all of the children. I was strange to them for some-time.” The four children were still little and must have grown considerably during his absence. Seven years earlier Moses had already commented on his extended absences, writing in 1883, “It was hard on Ella and I felt I was neglecting her a good deal, but I couldn’t see any other way to progress.” At the time, he was referring to his working in the scenic studio, taking art classes, and leaving for sketching trips. I often wonder about his regrets later in life when he realized just how many moments he missed while his children were growing up.

Even after his seven-month absence, however, Moses could only remain in Chicago for a few days rest. Soon the studio sent him to Denver, Colorado. He was sent there to close a contract with the Broadway Theatre. The theatre was to be part of the new Metropole Hotel. Designed by Chicago architect Col. J. W. Wood, the hotel was one of the first “fireproof” hotels in the country, employing hollow clay fired tile units for all partition, floors, ceilings, and walls.

The Metropole Hotel and Broadway Theatre where Thomas G. Moses painted scenery in 1890. Photograph by Louis Charles McClure, Denver Public Library/Western History Collection, MCC-1055.

Part of the hotel included a performance venue. The Broadway Theater was also advertised as the first “fireproof theatre” in the West and opened on August 18. Look’s Opera Company performed the “Bohemian Girl.”

The Broadway Theatre where Thomas G. Moses painted scenery in 1890. Photograph by Louis Charles McClure, Denver Public Library/Western History Collection, MCC-6

The Broadway Theatre where Thomas G. Moses painted scenery during 1890. Photograph of interior from 1895.

When Thomas G. Moses later went to paint scenery for this theatre, he took his entire family along. Renting a furnished house with a big yard for $50.00 per month, they got settled in very quickly. Moses recounts a story about the transportation of his art and modeling supplies at the beginning of the journey. While packing for their departure in Chicago, Moses’ model trunk had fallen 54 feet from his paint room window when it was being hauled outside. It struck a pile of loose planks (as they were having some work done on their stairway) and only manage to break a hinge. That’s very little damage for such a substantial drop! Then I thought back to my trip last fall when I looked at his Masonic theatre model and traveling trunk in the Harry Ransom Center. I was impressed with its sturdy construction and now understand why it was built that way.

Thomas G. Moses trunk and designs for Masonic model theatre, 1931.

In his typed manuscript Moses commented that the Broadway Theatre project was “an ideal one” and they had “good facilities to work.” For this project he had made all new scenery models for a presentation. On of his designs the included a cyclorama drop that measured 36 feet high and 250 feet long. The large cyclorama curtain ran on a track and they could create three distinct backings; a plain sky, a cloudy sky and a moonlit sky. Moses wrote about the stage, commenting, “No borders. We trimmed the front stuff down to low enough to mask. All rows were profiled; very effective.”

For the Broadway Theatre project, Moses’ painting crew included Ed Loitz, William and Charlie Minor, and Billie Martin. Nearby in Pueblo, Colorado, Walter Burridge and Ernest Albert were also painting on a project and called on Moses while he was working at the Broadway. During the visit, all three all took a day off and enjoyed each other’s company and went on a sketching trip. Early in 1891, “Albert, Grover & Burridge” established their new studio at 3127 State Street in Chicago. Their establishment as a marked departure from previous studios as they implemented advancements in the methods of mounting and presenting stage plays. Just prior to founding their new business venture, Albert was the scenic artist for the Chicago Auditorium, Burridge was the scenic artist for the Grand Opera House and McVicker’s, and Oliver Grover was a professor Chicago’s Art Institute. I wonder if Albert and Burridge had approached Moses in Denver about being their third business partner before selecting an academician. Albert, Moses and Burridge would have made quite a painting team.

During Moses’ stay in Denver, he took his family on several trips into the mountains.

He recorded that on one trip they traveled fourteen miles from Denver to Manitou and enjoyed seeing the scenery at Ute Pass, Williams Canyon and Garden of the Gods. All three were already popular tourist destinations, drawing throngs of visitors in horse-drawn wagons.

Visitors on tour in Garden of the Gods, September 19, 1890.

Moses wrote, “We enjoyed these trips.” It had to have been one small way to make up for his seven-month absence. Sadly, a telegram soon called Moses back to the studio in Chicago for some special work. As it was nearing the time for school to start anyway, they decided to all head home at the same time. Moses wrote, “Ella packed up everyone in a day.” They gave up their Denver house and arrived in Chicago by early September.

Loitz and the Minor brothers remained in Denver to complete the painted interiors for the Broadway Theatre in Denver. Moses stayed in Chicago until November 4, and then returned to Denver to complete their contract. This means that scenic work had continued on the Broadway Theatre for three months after opening with “Bohemian Girl.”

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 137 – There’s No Business Like Show Business (Ernest Albert)

After Albert, Grover & Burridge closed their studio in 1894, Ernest Albert returned to New York where he opened up his own shop – Albert Studios. By 1896, he moved to New Rochelle and continued an active scenic art career, producing stage designs for Booth & Barrett, Helena Modjeska, Edward H. Sothern, Julia Marlowe, William H. Crane, Nat C. Goodwin, Maxine Elliot, Fanny Davenport, Ethel Barrymore, Minnie Maddern Fiske, Klaw & Erlanger, and for Charles Frohman.

Ernest Albert (1857-1946). Newspaper clipping in Thomas G. Moses scrapbook. Sosman & Landis collection, Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas, Austin.

He was a prolific artist who designed 113 shows for Broadway between 1895 and 1919. New York venues included the Fifth Street Theatre, Casino Theatre, New York Theatre, Greenwich Village Theatre, Cort Theatre, Booth Theatre, Globe Theatre, Hippodrome Theatre, 44th Street Theatre, New Amsterdam Theatre, Grand Opera House, Longacre Theatre, Knickerbocker Theatre, Moulin Rouge, Astor Theatre, Jardin de Paris, Maxine Elliot’s Theatre, Weber’s Music Hall, Herald Square Theatre, West End Theatre, Broadway Theatre, Wllack’s Theatre, American Theatre, Liberty Theatre, Bijou Theatre, Hudson Theatre, American Theatre, Liberty Theatre, Majestic Theatre, Murray Hill Theatre, Thalia Theatre, Academy of Music, Weber and Field’s Broadway Music Hall, Berkeley Lyceum Theatre, Manhattan Theatre, Lyric Theatre, Victoria Theatre, Harlem Theatre, Criterion Theatre, Daly’s Theatre, Hoyt’s Theatre, and Theatre Republic. He also created the scenery for Ziegfield Follies productions in 1911,1912, and 1913. At one point, Albert had eight productions running simultaneously with scenery that he had designed and painted. Some of his more famous designs include “Ben Hur,” “Kismet,” and “Herod.”

Scene from “Klaw & Erlanger’s stupendous production, Gen. Lew Wallace’s ‘Ben Hur’ produced at the Broadway Theatre, New York, Nov. 29th 1899” as pictured in Julius Cahn’s Theatrical Guide 1900-1901.

In a 1913 issue of “The New York Dramatic Mirror, ” Albert explained his own design process for the stage in an interview with Arthur Edwin Krows. He began a design after receiving “a commission for a scenic investiture in a play. ” The artist was first called into a meeting with the manger and author. He noted that the author usually knew what he wanted and would make a simple sketch “with some angles to represent the walls of a room perhaps, leaving open spaces for windows and doors, and if his artistic education has developed since his previous play, with some queer marks to represent tables and chairs.” Albert continued, “So the artist receives his instruction, act by act, for four or five acts.” He also added that it helped if the artist actually read the entire play manuscript as the author might overlook important details. This was not standard for the artist to read the play, but Albert insisted on it.

After the initial discussions, the artist would refer to his extensive library of clippings, plates and descriptions of every conceivable thing that was relevant to supply the correct details. As an example, he explained spending six months researching the particulars of “Ben Hur” stating, “When the production went on, I knew the exact height of every arch and gateway in Jerusalem.”

Souvenir program for “Ben-Hur” with designs by Ernest Albert.

Albert then explained that the artist made first sketches of the scene and then a half-inch scale model. The prevailing colors for the each setting were determined, specifically “the general tone of the act for which the set is used.” The completed model would be submitted to the manager and author for final approval. Adjustments were not made to the model, but careful notes were taken and filed away for the actual construction.

It was at this point that the carpenter was sent for to begin construction of the frames for various settings. He would take special care so that they could be readily handled when the set was struck for transportation, especially if the show went on the road. All scenery must be constructed to fit in a railroad car. Once the frames were constructed, the canvas was stretched over and sent to the paint studio. Typically, flats were designed to be folded, with the painted surface inward.

Albert explained that an artist’s function did not cease until the scenery was all installed and the lighting arrangements completed. He commented, “Lighting is within his province, just as groupings are in a measure. An unexpected orange light on violet, for instance, will produce a russet brown that will make everything look dirty. It is true that in the days of gas lighting much softer effects were possible, but I will sacrifice all of the advantages of mellow light for safety. I am a crank on fire regulation. It was very dangerous in the old days with the exposed rows of hot gas lights. It used to be amusing too, to see lights go out every once in a while when an actor would accidentally step on a soft gas pipe. Anyway, we are now avoiding many of the hard qualities of the electric light by greater use of ambers, straw colors, and pinks.” Wow. The artist controlled the lighting and this was still Albert’s standard practice in 1913.

Two years later, he designed a winter scene for the New York Hippodrome’s ice skating ballet under director Charles Dillingham. The painted composition was titled “Flirting at the Saint Moritz” and measured 243’ x 70’ for the attraction “Hip-Hip Hooray.”

Ernest Albert’s design for “Hip-Hip-Hooray” at the Hippodrome.

Interior view of the Hippodrome, New York.

Albert was the founder and the first president of the Allied Artists of America (1914-1920). By 1916, he moved to New Canaan, Connecticut, where he began to focus on fine art. His stage design output began to gradually decline. In terms of fine art, Albert initially specialized in autumnal and winter scenes, later focusing on still life subjects. He held exhibitions across the country in New York City, San Francisco, Chicago, and Los Angeles. Albert’s fine art credentials are quite impressive. He belonged to New York’s Salmagundi Club, the Player’s Club, the Paint and Clay Club, the Silvermine Guild of Artists (New Rochelle), the Connecticut Academy of Fine Arts (Lyme, Conn.), the National Academy of Design, the American Watercolor Society, the National Arts Club, and the Grand Central Galleries. He also belonged to the Chicago Art Association and the Chicago Society of Fine Artists, where he served as President.

Winter Sunset by Ernest Albert, date unknown.

The Day’s End by Ernest Albert, date unknown.

Winding Winter Stream by Ernest Albert, 1935.

Albert’s first wife Annie passed away in 1925, but he found love again and married Lissa Bell Walker two years later. He died in New Canaan, Connecticut, at the home of his daughter and is buried in Lakeview Cemetery (New Canaan).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 136 – “Supremacy of the Sun” and Ernest Albert

Thomas G. Moses partnered with a variety of scenic artists throughout the duration of his career from 1873 to 1934, including Ernest Albert. As with Walter Burridge, both artists first worked for Harley Merry at the Park and Union Square Theatres in New York. Much of what is known of Albert comes from an article in the New York Dramatic Mirror, Vol. LXX (Nov. 19, 1913). He explained in 1913 that he had avoided many interviews due to “frequent misquoting and misrepresentation.”

Ernest Albert Brown (1857-1946). Changed his name to Ernest Albert in 1882. Image from scrapbook of Thomas G. Moses, currently held in the Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas, with the Sosman & Landis collection.

Ernest Albert Brown (1857-1946) was born to Daniel Webster and Harriet Dunn (Smith) Brown in Brooklyn, New York. His father was a member of a clothing merchants firm, Whitman & Brown in New York City and Albert attended public schools. He later entered the Brooklyn Institute of Design, winning an award in 1873. During his time at the Institute, he also worked as a newspaper illustrator and later began painting for the theatre.

Albert started working for Harley Merry 1877, seven years after Burridge worked for Merry. In 1879 he painted the settings for the Wilcox Opera House in West Meriden, Connecticut and began to spread his wings a bit. By 1880, he was working as a scenic artist and art director at Pope’s Theater in St. Louis with his work attracting much attention. This became the springboard for Albert’s career and, like many of his contemporaries, he began to travel throughout the country, producing scenery for a variety of locales in St. Louis, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Boston.

Albert married Annie Elizabeth Bagwell (daughter of Edwin Bagwell of Brooklyn) on June 6, 1881 and officially changed his name to Ernest Albert the following year. They had four children: Ruby Frances, Elsie (M. Rodney Gibson); Edith Dorothy (m. Thaddeus A. V. Du Flon) and Ernest Albert. When first married, Albert worked in St. Louis and formed a partnership with Thomas C. Noxon and Patrick J. Toomey Noxon. Noxon & Toomey had started a studio in 1869. Noxon, Albert & Toomey expanded and ran studios in St. Louis, Missouri, Chicago, Illinois & Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

The partnership dissolved in 1885 and Albert moved to Chicago, furnishing the settings for Thomas W. Keene’s production of “Hamlet” at the new Chicago Opera. Between 1885 and 1890, he mounted Shakespearean productions for Edwin Booth and Lawrence Barrett that included “Julius Ceasar,” “The Merchant of Venice” and Midsummer Night’s Dream.” The Sunday, April 8, 1888, issue of the Inter Ocean newspaper noted “Noxon, Albert & Toomey have just completed the curtain for the Warder Grand Opera House in Kansas City. Their frames at the Haymarket are now burdened with the scenery for Booth & Barrett production of The Merchant of Venice for the next season.

Albert also created a transformation scene for “Babes in the Wood,” a Christmas Pantomime from Drury Lane Theatre in London, called “The Supremacy of the Sun.” The Chicago Tribune (Nov. 9, 1890, pg. 36) noted the producers of the scenery as Messrs. W. Telbin, T. E. Ryan, W. Perkins, E. J. Banks (all of London), Herr Kautsky (of the Imperial Opera-House, Vienna), John Buss and Ernest Albert of Chicago. On page 34 of the Sunday, Nov. 26, 1890 issue, the Chicago Tribune describes’ Albert’s transformation scene in great detail under the heading “It Appeals to the Eye. Babes in the Wood must be judged chiefly as spectacle.”

The Christmas pantomime ran at the Chicago Auditorium where Albert worked as the resident scenic artist. It presented “a series of magnificent stage pictures, testing for the first time the multitude of resources of the great stage, pictures sumptuous in quality, carefully toned in color, and singularly graceful in effect.” It continued to note that “These pictures have a certain marked advantage over any efforts of the painter’s brush; where his colors are stationary these are winged.” The final transformation scene, called “Supremacy of the Sun” was divided into five parts: Spirit of Snow, Ice Bound, Home of the North Wind, A Summer Idyll, and The Radiant Realm of the Sun God.

The transformation scene is described in great detail:

“The Supremacy of the Sun is proved by the disappearance of Arctic ice under its smile and the creation of a flowery golden world. Gradually through shifting scenes and lights the silver changes to gold, the cold greens and blues to warmer tones. A polar bear appears garlanded and driven by fairy-like children. Cupids descend from the golden skies, figures of nymphs and graces from below, and beyond a sunburst formed by the shimmer of brilliant lights on fluttering gold-leaf and pendent moving threads of gold. In the midst of this splendor rises a gay butterfly, and out of its wings the radiant Sun God himself, clad in shining garments and crowned with electric lights. In the meantime golden fans in the foreground have risen and collapsed, disclosing flowery groups of figures. The reducing curtain has disappeared, lending the full curve of the arch as a frame for the brilliant picture, whose gorgeous colors are shaded from the golden frieze down to the soft reds at the base. The color scheme of this last tableau is an effective completion of the house, the ivory and gold arches dotted with lights leading down with exquisite harmony to the stage indescribably radiant with iridescent gold and flowery colors. Ernest Albert, the talented scenic artist, is to be congratulated upon the beauty of this work. Certain of its effects would be unattainable on a stage of less elaborate mechanism.”

It was soon after this performance that the new studio of Albert, Grover & Burridge would be constructed with its twenty paint frames and display a display theatre to light completed scenes. The last line of the above article “certain effects would be unattainable on a stage of less elaborate mechanism” was one of the incentives for this innovate scenic studio and their subsequent participation in the Beckwith Memorial Theatre. The state-of-the art mechanism at the Chicago Civic Auditorium changed everything and set a new standard for scenic artists and stage machinists.

To be continued…