Last fall I evaluated the Scottish Rite scenery collection in Deadwood, South Dakota. On site findings suggested that the Deadwood Scottish Rite had purchased a new scenery collection from Twin City Scenic Co. around the turn of the century and two used scenery collections after that. The Deadwood Scottish Rite purchased one scenery collections from the Scottish Rite in Joplin, Missouri (1902) and another one from the Scottish Rite in Kansas City, Kansas (1904). There are many drops still waiting to be discovered, rolled up and stored above the stage. There were also a few other pieces added over time, including a set for the Shrine. Twin City Scenic records from the year 1940 also note that the studio did business with the Deadwood Scottish Rite that year too. Interestingly a fly loft and stage were not added to the building until 1961. Prior to that time, the Scottish Rite Masons temporarily hung the scenes, storing them in the basement.
1919 picture of 47 DeMolay members in Kansas City with the backdrop that is now in Deadwood, South Dakota.Backdrop at the Scottish Rite in Deadwood, South Dakota.Backdrop at the Scottish Rite in Deadwood, South Dakota.Backdrop at the Scottish Rite in Deadwood, South Dakota.Backdrop at the Scottish Rite in Deadwood, South Dakota.Backdrop at the Scottish Rite in Deadwood, South Dakota.Backdrop at the Scottish Rite in Deadwood, South Dakota.Backdrop at the Scottish Rite in Deadwood, South Dakota.
Fast forward to yesterday at Lance Brockman’s house. I was picking up a some files and books. As I started to merge our two records at home last night I made a startling discovery. In his materials, there was a 1927 program for DeMolay. I quickly paged through it before putting on an archival sleeve. Only a few pages into the program, I stopped in shock. I was looking at the same drop that now hangs in Deadwood!
1927 DeMolay Program with backdrop now at the Deadwood Scottish Rite.Here is a link to the full history of the Order of DeMolay: https://demolay.org/history/Book plate on the 1927 program with the Deadwood Scottish Rite drop, pictured in 1919 in Kansas City.
I immediately phoned my South Dakota Scottish Rite contact, Mike Rodman, sharing the exciting news. It was perfect timing. Tonight is the Deadwood Scottish Rite Quasquicentennial celebration. They are celebrating 125 years of building community partners and building Masonic Brothers. Activities start at 4:00 pm today! Rodman is planning to share my discovery tonight at the event.
Event in Deadwood tonight – November 3, 2018.
This backdrop was pictured in the 1927 program alongside the first forty-seven members to join DeMolay. From this youth order started in 1919, it grew to a membership of a quarter of a million young men by 1927.
However, this may not be a drop specifically created for DeMolay. Over the years, many class pictures were taken in front of Scottish Rite or York Rite scenery, wherever the boys met. It is possible that this backdrop was for a Masonic order other than DeMolay. Regardless, we know that the beautifully painted scene came from Kansas City and was hanging in 1919.
Part 541: Fifty Years of Freemasonry in Kansas, 1906
There were a few significant events that occurred during 1906; the same year that Sosman & Landis delivered new scenery and stage machinery to the Scottish Rite in Topeka, Kansas. 1906 marked the fiftieth anniversary of Freemasonry in the state of Kansas.
From the “Topeka Daily Capital,” 12 Feb 1906, page 6
The event was celebrated at the newly constructed Scottish Rite auditorium. The Scottish Rite bodies of Topeka spent over $20,000 furnishing their lodge room and stage. The stage measured thirty-five feet in depth and housed 110 new backdrops produced by Sosman & Landis (Topeka Daily Capital, 21 Feb. 1906, page 5).
“The Topeka Daily Capital” reported, “the fiftieth anniversary of the organization of the Most Worshipful grand lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of Kansas will be celebrated at the Auditorium February 22 during the session of the grand lodge in Topeka (The Topeka Daily Capital, 12 Feb. 1906, page 6). The article continued, “The semi-centennial celebration of the Masons will bring to the city the largest gathering of Masons that has been held and the Topeka bodies have prepared elaborate entertainment for the visitors. A. K. Wilson, grand secretary of the grand lodge, has secured the history of the first Masonic lodge in the state and relics of historical interest. The relics will be exhibited at the auditorium and will consist, among other things, the first Masonic seal used by the Kansas lodge. John W. Smith, who organized Smithton lodge No. 1 in Doniphan county and was the first master of the lodge in Kansas, made with his own hands the quaint seal, the square and compass and the candlestick, al made by Smith are now in the possession f Secretary Wilson and he also has three of the charters of the first five lodges organized in Kansas.
Smithton lodge No. 1 was organized in Doniphan county and met in six different places in the county and is now the lodge at Highland. When Mr. Smith organized Smithton lodge it met under a burr oak tree, east of Troy, on the Missouri river. A stump was used for the altar and the lodge was tiled by a man on horseback. A photograph of this tree has been secured and a complete history of the lodge from persons who knew about it. The veteran Kansas Mason who is to be present at the semi-centennial meeting is William Yates of Lawrence, the only living charter member of one of the first five lodges organized in Kansas. He belongs to the Lawrence lodge which was the fourth to be organized. The anniversary meeting at the Auditorium is open to the public. The main floor will be reserved for Masons and the gallery will be open to the public. The Art Music club, led by Prof. G. B. Penny, will furnish the music. Grand Master Samuel R. Peters of Newton will speak and Thomas E. Dewey will deliver the address of the evening. The week of February 19, will be devoted to the fiftieth communication of the grand lodge, the fifty-first convocation of the grand chapter and thirty-eighth assembly of the grand council.” The article included a schedule of events and officers for the semi-centennial celebration, school of instruction, chapter work, order of high priests, and council work.
Bestor G. Brown, from the “Topeka Daily Capital,” 14 February 1904, page 6Bestor G. Brown moved to Kansas City, Missouri, in 1904. He was the western sales manager for M. C. Lilley
Bestor G. Brown (1861-1917) led the special committee on history and museum. Brown was the western representative of M. C. Lilley. Brown worked for M. C. Lilley in Chicago from 1892 to 1898, and then in Topeka, Kansas, starting in 1899. Brown moved to Kansas City by 1904, continuing as the western sales manager of M. C. Lilley Company in their new offices. Brown was instrumental in promoting the staging of degree work and Scottish Rite theaters in Little Rock, Arkansas (1896), Wichita, Kansas (1898), Guthrie (1900), Salina, Kansas (1901), McAlester, Oklahoma (1901), Fort Scott, Kansas (1904), and many others.
By 1903 Brown was credited with the creation and development of “the application of modern scenic properties to the dramatic presentation of all Masonic degrees and in this work is almost invariably consulted everywhere throughout the United States.” He was also the Grand Master of Kansas in 1904, and had been extremely active since his admission to the Fraternity in 1884.
Brown was praised for his devotion of Masonry and the article reported, “Mr. Brown is called the only Masonic stage carpenter in the country” (Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 12 June 1903, page 3). Less than a decade later, the counterweight system installed in Scottish Rite theaters by M. C. Lilley subcontractors (Sosman & Landis) was referred to as “”Brown’s special system.”
The first year after Brown passed away, members of the Wichita Consistory organized an annual pilgrimage to Topeka, Kansas, to honor of his memory (The Kansas City Kansan, 11 July 1918, page 1). The paper reported that Brown was “one of the most scholarly and best loved Kansas Masons. All of the Scottish Rite bodies in the state were invited to join in the placing of a floral tribute on the grave of ‘their best loved brother.’” Brown remained incredibly close to all Masonic activities in Topeka, and in 1906 the Topeka Scottish Rite stage was the crown jewel of the Southern Jurisdiction.
There are two significant moments to consider when examining the construction of any early-twentieth century Scottish Rite stage, as the production of Masonic scenery escalates. The first is that Brown is a fabulous salesman and extremely active member of the Fraternity; many Masons help promote his vision work. The second is that SGIGs have a monetary incentive to help Brown with this vision; starting in 1905, SGIGs personally received a $2 payment per incoming 32nd degree Scottish Rite Mason. This practice lasted until 1909 when plans for the House of the Temple were implemented. Those lost funds were needed elsewhere. Setting the aesthetics and entertainment, there was already a dual incentive to build massive auditoriums that would accommodate ever-increasing candidate classes at Scottish Rite reunions.
Part 498: The Financing of Scottish Rite Theaters, 1905
In yesterday’s post, I talked about the financial incentive for Sovereign Grand Inspector General’s to increase the membership of 32nd degree Masons in their Orient (State); a 1905 resolution allowed them to received $2.00 per incoming 32nd degree Mason until its repeal in 1909. During that time, membership was skyrocketing. The situation was comparable to the goose that laid the golden egg. There was a belief that future dues from a continually increasing membership would support the construction and maintenance of ever-increasing Scottish Rite homes. The idea that membership would always increase was not a realistic scenario and no one anticipated any decline, stock market crash, or a world war. No one also realized that during times of plenty, many Masonic leaders would not invest the funds into the maintenance and repair of their buildings as they aged; deferred maintenance would become the norm and is now causing many insurmountable problems.
Laying the cornerstone for the Santa Fe Scottish Rite, completed in 1912. The Palace of the Governors in Santa Fe Scottish Rite has many images of the construction and opening of this Masonic building.
There was something else, however, that facilitated the growth of the Fraternity during this first “golden age” of Masonic construction – the financing!
While I was doing research at the University of Texas’ Harry Ransom Center during the fall of 2016, I came across an intriguing letter from the western sales representative of M. C. Lilley & Co. – Bestor G. Brown. Again, Brown was the Past Grand Master for the State of Kansas in 1903. Brown belonged to many other Masonic orders, and was known as the only “Masonic Stage Carpenter” in the country. He also was the stage director for the Scottish Rite in Wichita, Kansas. Brown moved to Kansas City in 1904 where the regional offices for M.C. Lilley were located and formed quite a financial enterprise. As I mentioned yesterday, for Scottish Rite scenery and stage machinery production, Brown – on behalf of M.C. Lilley – subcontracted all work to Sosman & Landis of Chicago. Brown’s employer, M. C. Lilley and Co. was an established business with deep pockets; they could wait a while for payment on goods. THAT is what was needed to push the Scottish Rite into outfitting their theaters, sometimes beyond their means, with state-of-the-art stage systems. Many Scottish Rite theaters rivaled any counterpart on Broadway, Chicago, or the West Coast. Everything was top of the line at the time.
In 1913, Brown was negotiating a sale of stage machinery and a used scenery collection with the Austin Scottish Rite Bodies. He used their standard financing formula, allowing the Austin Scottish Rite Bodies to purchase 64 of Guthrie’s drops for $1,650. The drops had been accepted on credit toward the purchase of a new scenery collection in Guthrie, their first scenery collection was only eleven years old. Here were the standard terms for the production of a painted scenery collection, the manufacture of props, construction of costumes, delivery of stage machinery, stage lighting and the completed installation- a third due upon installation (in cash), a third due the following year, and the final third due in two years.
This financing was standard for most Scottish Rite endeavors delivered by M.C. Lilley. I am unsure how many other scenic studios or regalia suppliers cold afford to carry the debt of Scottish Rites across the country at that time. Brown even wrote, “In fact, if we had not been able to carry the Bodies in the Southern Jurisdiction as we have, we believe that fully one half of the development of the past ten years would not have been possible.” It becomes understandable why M. C. Lilley and their subcontractors dominated the market. From 1900 to 1904 there were a total of seven Scottish Rite Theatres outfitted with scenery and stage machinery by Sosman & Landis. From 1905 to 1909, there were sixteen Scottish Rite Theatres outfitted with scenery and stage machinery by Sosman & Landis – almost double. Between 1910 and 1915, there were another eighteen Scottish Rite Theatres outfitted with scenery and stage machinery by Sosman & Landis. This was simply their share of the Masonic market and represented approximately one quarter of all incoming work.
I believe that the special financing for Scottish Rite Bodies was HUGE! It presents how Scottish Rites were able to purchase state-of-the-art scenery, props, lighting and costumes; they were buying everything on credit and only had to pay a third upon receipt of goods. To pay off the new building and theater simply meant increasing membership numbers to generate even more income. It appeared to be a win-win situation.
Was everyone on board with the construction of Scottish Rite theaters and the staging of degree work? No, for many it went against the teaching and guidance of long-time Grand Commander Pike who reigned over the Southern Jurisdiction from 1859 to 1891. Although the Supreme Council had other Grand Commanders, there was no longer a unified vision directing the Scottish Rite. There were those who understood Past Grand Commander Pike’s desire that all of the members should take their time with the degrees to fully understand the Masonic instruction. There were others who saw the massive infusion of wealth into the organization. In 1915 an argument was made for the use of staged degree work in “Transactions of the Supreme Council, Southern Jurisdiction” –
“The interpretation of a degree, either by picture or stage scenery or other adjuncts, and most frequently, is, allowable, because men may be taught through the eye and frequently with more ease and facility than through the ear” (page 84).
True, and the demographic had shifted over the past century to include those who were not the top intellectuals of the country. There were many farmers, ranchers, businessman, and others from the rising middle class of American Society. It was no longer a group of visionaries who supported public education, riding the crest of every social wave that washed over America.
The Fraternity had survived a period of anti-Masonic sentient during the nineteenth century. The few brilliant men who were prevalent in the order at the beginning of the 18th century were replaced with hoards of “good men” by then end of the nineteenth century. There were still brilliant intellectuals, but they no longer dominated the organization. For some, the Scottish Rite became a social organization, with the great potential for networking their business; others held onto the message and potential to better mankind. Membership growth and massive candidate classes and increased activities blurred the divide. During the early nineteenth century, the enormous infusion of cash allowed some to place the construction of massive stone monuments ahead of the Fraternity’s mission. These large buildings were perceived as the Fraternity’s crowning glory – look what we achieved! In some cases it was a competition to see who could build the biggest and best in their Orient. Sometimes it became more about the building than the everyday message that the Fraternity offered to better the world.
This illustration of the five Ringling Brothers appeared in The Arkansas Democrat, 2 Oct. 1891, page 8
In my last post, I explored staged spectacles depicting the reign of King Solomon, and their appeal to Freemasons. Today, I am examining the connection that linked the Ringling Brothers with Freemasonry. The Ringlings Masonic affiliation may have provided additional incentive to stage the grand circus spectacle “King Solomon” in 1914.
By 1914 dozens of Scottish Rite stages had been constructed and held massive scenery collections to stage Scottish Rite degree work. Masonic backdrops depicted the private apartments, throne room, courtyard and the Temple of King Solomon. Scottish Rite Bodies with scenery collections were located all across the country.
To look at the sixty-one scenery collections solely produced by Sosman & Landis (Chicago) and Toomey & Volland (St. Louis) from 1896-1914 puts it in perspective. These installations included painted scenery for Scottish Rite Theatres in Little Rock, Arkansas; Tucson, Arizona; San Francisco, Stockton and Los Angeles, California; Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Springfield, E. St. Louis, Quincy and Bloomington, Illinois; Davenport and Dubuque Iowa; Fort Wayne, Indianapolis, and Evansville, Indiana; Fort Scott, Fort Leavenworth, Wichita, Kansas City, Lawrence and Salina, Kansas; Louisville and Covington, Kentucky; Portland, Maine; Bay City, Michigan; Duluth and Winona, Minnesota; St Louis and Joplin, Missouri; Omaha, Nebraska; Butte and Helena, Montana; Clinton and Jersey City, New Jersey; Santa Fe, New Mexico; Rochester and Buffalo, New York; Charlotte and Asheville, North Carolina; Grand Forks, North Dakota; Toledo, Davenport, Youngstown and Canton, Ohio; McAlester and Guthrie, Oklahoma; Bloomsburg and Pittsburg, Pennsylvania; Yankton, South Dakota; Memphis, Tennessee; Dallas, El Paso and Austin, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; Danville, Virginia; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Wheeling, West Virginia; Tacoma, Washington; and Cheyenne, Wyoming. These are the collections that I have tracked, yet there were many, many more by 1914 and some Scottish Rite Valleys had purchased more than one collection by this point as membership dramatically increased during the first decade of the twentieth century.
Each of the seven Ringling brothers was a Scottish Rite Mason. They were members of the Scottish Rite Consistory in Milwaukee, a theater that boasted a Sosman & Landis scenery collection supervised by Thomas G. Moses during its production in 1913.
In fact, August Rüngeling and his seven sons all joined the Fraternity between January 1890 and August 1891. Each was raised in Baraboo Lodge No. 34 in Baraboo, Wisconsin, during that time. This is not unusual, when considering the percentage of men involved with some type of fraternity during the late 19th century, and how the Freemasonry could become a “family affair” for fathers and sons. Alf T. could be called the “ringleader” of the group as he was the first to become a Mason. Here is when each man became a Master Mason: Alf T. (January 22, 1890), John (March 1, 1890), Al (March 29, 1890), Charles (April 9, 1890), Otto (April 9, 1890), Gus (Feb. 4, 1891), Henry (March 18, 1891), August Rüngeling (August 9, 1891). However, it was their combined roles as Masonic officers during 1891 that caught my eye. Their Masonic roles were noted in the minutes of a meeting on April 8, 1891: Alf T. Ringling was Worshipful Master; August “Gus” Ringling was Senior Warden; Al Ringling was Junior Warden; Charles Ringling was Senior Deacon; Otto Ringling was Junior Deacon; Henry Ringling was Senior Steward.
In 1900, “The Buffalo Courier” included the story of the Ringling family in a section called “Travelers Toward the East” (9 Dec. 1900, page 25). The article reported, “A Masonic journal says that the Ringling brothers are known all over the country as the proprietors of the Ringling Circus. Seven of these brothers are members of Baraboo Lodge No. 34 of Wisconsin jurisdiction, and after the seven were all members of the lodge the petition of the father was received. The Ringling brothers qualified themselves to confer the degrees were assigned to the several positions in the lodge, received the father into the lodge and conferred the degrees upon him.” The Baraboo Lodge rooms were above McGann’s Furniture in the building at the Northwest corner of Oak and Second Avenue, but a new building was in the making. The same month that their father was raised, the “Wisconsin State Journal” reported that the corner stone for the Baraboo Masonic Temple was “to be laid with great ceremony” that Thursday (25 August 1891, page 1). A formal procession was formed and consisted of the Baraboo lodges, Eastern Star Chapter, Royal Arch Masons, Knights Templar, members of the Grand Lodge, the members of the city council, and lead by the Baraboo military band.
The Baraboo lodge No. 34 received its charter from the Grand Lodge of Wisconsin on June 8, 1852 and early meetings took place in the Lodge Room of Purdy’s building over at the Post Office (Sauk County Standard, Baraboo, Wisconsin, 29 March 1854, page 4). Stated meetings were the first Wednesday, on or before the full moon in each month).
Baraboo Lodge No. 34 was almost four decades old by the time the Ringlings became members. Besides belonging to Baraboo Lodge No. 34, the seven brothers also belonged to Baraboo Valley Chapter No. 49, R.A.M (Royal Arch Masons); St. John Commandery No. 21 K.T. (Knight Templars) of Baraboo, and the A.A.S.R. (Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite) in Milwaukee.
Brown’s Special Counterweighted System at the Scottish Rite in Santa Fe, New Mexico.
M. C. Lilley’s western sales representative, Bestor G. Brown, subcontracted Sosman & Landis for the painted scenery, props, and stage machinery for their large Scottish Rite Theatre contracts. By 1912, many of the counterweight rigging systems installed in Scottish Rite theaters by Sosman & Landis were referred to as “Brown’s Special Counterweighted,” such as the one at the Santa Fe Scottish Rite.
Brown’s Special Counterweighted System at the Scottish Rite in Santa Fe, New Mexico, 1912.
So what do we know of the system referred to as “Brown’s Special Counterweighted” style of installation and how many are left? There are still examples of Brown’s Special Counterweighted System, however, some are slowly being removed and replaced with other rigging system. I first came across the designation in a series of letters between Bestor G. Brown, and the Austin Scottish Rite representative of Austin William G. Bell. Brown used the Dallas Scottish Rite as one example.
Wooden arbor cage with counterweights. Brown’s Special Counterweighted System at the Scottish Rite in Pasadena, California. This system was originally manufactured for the Scottish Rite Little Rock, Arkansas, during 1901.
Let me provide a little context for why the counterweight system came up in their discussion. Brown was trying to explain the intricacies of the installation process to a client who was completely unfamiliar with theatre. The Austin Scottish Rite was in the process of purchasing some of the Guthrie Scottish Rite’s old drops. Guthrie had been returned the old drops for credit on the purchase of new scenery when their stage was enlarged in the first building. M. C. Lilley had approximately 70 used Guthrie drops on hand to sell to another venue; they measured 15 feet high by 30 feet wide. A $1400.00 credit was given for the return of their 1901 scenery. The scenery collection was originally purchased for $8,000; today’s monetary equivalent is approximately $250,000, a significant purchase at the time.
Looking up into the flies. Brown’s Special Counterweighted System at the Scottish Rite in Pasadena, California.
On January 23, 1913, Brown also reported, “The [used] scenery is in very good shape – infinitely better that the average theatrical scenery used on the road. The writer personally went over the scenery at the studio last week. While our contract does not contemplate it, we are touching up some of the scenery and if it be properly lighted, you will have a handsome set of scenery that we would not undertake to paint and install for less than, at least, $8,000.00.”
View from under the fly rail. Brown’s Special Counterweighted System at the Scottish Rite in Pasadena, California.
The Austin Scottish Rite was initially interested in purchasing fourteen of the used drops, but wanted a definitive price for installation before determining the final number. Reading several letters of correspondence between Brown and Bell, it is obvious that Brown’s patience was wearing very thin as he had to repeatedly explain the final installation cost was based on the number of drops purchased. The continued correspondence, however, provides a wealth of information pertaining to the manufacture and installation of Scottish Rite scenery.
Brown’s Special Counterweighted System at the Scottish Rite in Austin, Texas, 1914.Brown’s Special Counterweighted System at the Scottish Rite in Austin, Texas, 1914.
As Brown negotiated, the Valley of Austin was purchasing and renovating the old 1821 Turner Hall. Brown mailed a scene plat to the Austin Scottish Rite. This was to reference while determining the final arrangement of scenes. Of this process, Brown wrote, “The arrangement of drops is one of the most difficult things.” Brown further explained that they would arrange the used scenery so that it could be “properly adapted to the different Degrees and the sequence of Degrees.” However, he warned that even after careful preparation, some modifications would still need to occur once the scenery was hanging. This was all an art of the haggling between the Austin Scottish Rite and M. C. Lilley. Bell, representing Austin wanted to pay as little as possible for the used scenery. The process was taking longer than expected and Brown was trying to get the Austin Scottish Rite to contractually commit so that the project could be scheduled. Finally, the Austin Scottish Rite committed to the purchase, but wanted an unrealistic timeframe. At this time, a much larger project was driving M. C. Lilley’s installation schedule – the Santa Fe Scottish Rite. Santa Fe’s new building, stage and scenery were delaying all other installations, such as the Austin Scottish Rite
Brown’s Special Counterweighted System at the Scottish Rite in Austin, Texas, 1914.
Part of the initial delay was caused by the Austin Scottish Rite, not M. C. Lilley; this concerned the ongoing negotiation pertaining to the estimated expenses of the final installation. The Austin Scottish Rite wanted M. C. Lilley to provide a firm number for the installation cost without specifying the number of drops that they were purchasing from M. C. Lilley. Brown explained that the final expense was directly tied to the number of drops purchased to be installed. The carpenter’s expense of transportation and maintenance were figured from the time he left home until he returned. So, if he were to install only fourteen drops, that part of the expense would be proportionately greater than if he were to install twice that number of drops. Brown also explained that there was a difference in transportation charges directly relating to number of drops purchased and installed, either a full carload of scenery or less than a carload lot. Brown also explained that M. C. Lilley could also furnish the hardware, such as pulley blocks and counterweight frames if the Scottish Rite wanted the installation done locally; this was the salesman trying to be accommodating.
Brown’s Special Counterweighted System at the Scottish Rite in Salina, Texas.
There was another complication; Brown noted that they had only one specific carpenter who was sent to direct a Scottish Rite installation which was why multiple installations could not simultaneously occur; this individual was actually a Sosman & Landis employee as they installed their scenery. Brown commented that the one who would be “superintending the installation” for the Austin project was currently occupied in Santa Fe at the Scottish Rite, installing an entirely new stage there. This necessitated that their expert stay on site for approximately three weeks. Shortly after Brown’s correspondence with Bell, Brown wrote that their superintendent and installation expert had died from an accident, causing another delay. Brown explained that this employee was the “only one thoroughly familiar with the special method of installing Scottish Rite scenery.” Brown wrote, “We do not mean that it is impossible to follow the same methods as heretofore, but it will take a longer time to do it because of a lack of familiarity with the work.” Thomas G. Moses also mentions the death of their head stage carpenter, writing, “Mr. Brown, our foreman carpenter” died very suddenly.
As Brown later explained, M.C. Lilley used only one employee who specialized in Scottish Rite scenery installation. I believe that this individual was the stage carpenter who Thomas G. Moses referred to in his memoirs – Brown. In 1892, the “Carlisle Weekly” reported that a “Stage Carpenter Brown” worked for the Metropolitan Opera House at the time it burned (Carlisle, Pennsylvania, 1 Sept. 1892, page 4). This may have been the same individual before he became associated with Sosman & Landis, as this is the same time when additional staff was added to Sosman & Landis’ studio for Columbian Exposition and other large projects.
Stage carpenter Brown was likely the individual who developed the counterweight system, and that the salesman Brown was mistaken for the namesake of the design. Newspapers would therefore erroneously refer to Bestor G. Brown as a “Masonic stage Carpenter.” In 1903 one article noted that Brown “created and developed the application of modern scenic properties to the dramatic presentation of all Masonic degrees and in this work is almost invariably consulted everywhere throughout the United States.” My findings suggest that “Brown’s Special Counterweighted” was credited to the salesman of the product and not the actual designer; this is understandable if they both shared the same last name.
In the end, the Austin Scottish Rite Bodies purchased 64 drops, not 14, on February 25, 1913, from M. C. Lilley. Thomas G. Moses would list the Austin scenery as one of the collections that he supervised while working at Sosman & Landis. The price for these used drops and their later installation was $1,650. The contract specified that a third of the amount was due upon installation (cash), a third due the following year, and the final third due in two years. Surprisingly, this financing was standard for Scottish Rite Theaters. Brown wrote, “In fact, if we had not been able to carry the Bodies in the Southern Jurisdiction as we have, we believe that fully one half of the development of the past ten years would not have been possible.” This is big as it presents how Scottish Rites were able to purchase state-of-the-art scenery, props, lighting and costumes – they were buying everything on credit and only had to pay a third upon receipt of goods. To pay off the rest meant increasing membership numbers that would generate even more income.
Bestor G. Brown
Brown died in 1917 at the Battle Creek Sanitorium after a relapse following an operation for kidney complications. At the time Brown was 56 years old and survived by his daughter, Mrs. Dana L. Davis of Topeka. It is sad to think, that a mere 14 years earlier he was a soaring star in both the Fraternity and fraternal supply business. Change can come so quickly.
Thomas G. Moses thought very highly of Bestor G. Brown and his contribution to the development of Scottish Rite Degree Productions. He commented in his 1931 memoirs that Brown was one of the three key individuals responsible for its rapid spread throughout the Southern Jurisdiction.
Photograph of Bestor G. Brown, Grand Master of Kansas, from the “Topeka Daily Capital,” 14 February 1904, page 6.
For the past two days, I have explored the life of Bestor G. Brown, his Masonic activities, and the promotion of theatrically staged degree work. While reading numerous newspaper articles published about Brown between 1903 and 1904, I came across a wonderful article in the “Topeka Daily Capital,” on 14 February 1904, page 6. As very little information is available about Brown, I am including this article in its entirety as it provides a wonderful summary of his life up to 1904:
“Bestor G. Brown, the present grand master, is one of the most prominent men in the Masonic order. He was born November 22, 1861, at Bluffton, the county seat of Wells county, Indiana, “on the banks of the Wabash.” On his father’s side he is of Scotch ancestry. They were Quakers, and came to this country with the William Penn colony. At the time of settlement at Philadelphia the head of the then generation of the Brown family was a personal friend of William Penn, and the secretary of the colony. His maternal ancestry is German, the immigration thereof having been to Maryland in the early part of the eighteenth century.
Bestor G. Brown was educated in the public schools of Topeka, and later attended Washburn college. In 1878, at the age of 16, he was given a position on the Topeka Daily Commonwealth as reporter, subsequently having charge of the city, or local department of that paper. In 1879 he decided to accept his father’s offer of a college education, and entered the University of Michigan; here he remained until 1882, when through the influence of Andrew D. White, then president of Cornell University, and other personal friends in Ithica, he was transferred to Cornell University. In both universities he was prominent in athletics, and held many positions of honor in the student world. He was an active and prominent member of the Psi Upsilon college fraternity, one of the oldest of these organizations.
In 1882 his father died, and his return to college was prevented. For a time he had charge of a special department of dramatic and literary matters on the Topeka Capital; later accepted a position with the First National bank of Topeka, with which institution he remained for seven years, progressing from the lowest to the highest clerical position in the bank. He left the bank to engage in a financial business for himself, which proved highly profitable, but met the fate of all such enterprises, in the depression of 1892, resulting in the loss of a comfortable fortune. He then became associated with a large manufacturing concern in Chicago, as its western representative, in which capacity he is now employed.
He was very prominently connected with social, dramatic and literary affairs of Topeka; was married in 1885 to Emma J. Kellam, a beautiful, accomplished and extremely popular young lady in Topeka Society. Three years later death severed the union, leaving one child, a girl. Probably no man has ever lived more devoted to Masonry, and had it not been for his untiring efforts, his great intellectual and physical strength, used so generously for the benefit of the cause, Kansas would not hold its present high position in the Masonic world. He is spoken of today as one of the best ritualists in the United States, and his opinion is sought by the most distinguished Masons of the country.”
Travels of a Scenic Artist and Scholar: The Theater Ramble at the League of Historic American Theatres Conference, July 15
There is something wonderful about meeting people who are passionate about historic theaters. Whether they are executive directors, board members, architects, consultants, or technicians, this conference gathers a variety of people from different backgrounds and experiences. The League of Historic American Theatres (LHAT) national conference began on the morning of July 15 with a breakfast. I sat down at one of the large banquet tables and introduced myself to two gentlemen. Wouldn’t you know that they were from the Atlas Theatre in Cheyenne, Wyoming; the same theater that I visited just a few weeks ago on my way to the Santa Fe book release event. It was wonderful to discuss their accomplishments and challenges at their venue. They immediately had questions about the front curtain that I had documented while in their building and my experience with their tour. Small world.
This was the day that many of us were gathered for the LHAT Theatre Ramble. There were sixty of the League members who boarded a bus after breakfast to go on the pre-conference “ramble.” Over the next ten hours, we would visit six historic theaters in the area: the Austin Scottish Rite, the Gaslight Baker Theatre in Lockhart, the Brauntex Performing Arts Theater in New Braufels and the Majestic Theatre, Charline McCombs Empire Theatre and the Tobin Theatre in San Antonio.
The Scottish Rite Theatre in Austin, Texas.The Scottish Rite Theatre in Austin, Texas.The Scottish Rite Theatre in Austin, Texas.
The first stop was the Austin Scottish Rite where I had just spent the past two days. I was asked by our Masonic host, and current Theatre Board president for the venue, to say a few words about the stage and scenery collection. It is always humbling when I am presented as a “national expert” in Scottish Rite scenery and historical scenic art. It is hard to suppress any passion that I have for historical scenery collections and the stage machinery; my enthusiasm has a tendency to spill out with sheer joy about sharing what I love. People recognize this excitement and often express their appreciation, and in turn are excited about their own historic stages. The opportunity to speak about something that I am very passionate about provides one of the best introductions I could have ever to 60 LHAT members.
Many people approached me after my presentation to discuss scenery at their own venues, including one gentleman who showed me a picture of an 1858 Russell Smith curtain. This was a scenic artist from the generation before David Austin Strong and two generations before Thomas Gibbs Moses. I have been slowly plugging through a book about his unpublished manuscript. He was an amazing artist, yet I had only seen black and white photographs of his work To see color detail of this painting and technique in a drop curtain was magical.; a complete unexpected surprise.
The Gaslight Baker Theatre in Lockhart, TexasThe Gaslight Baker Theatre in Lockhart, TexasThe Gaslight Baker Theatre in Lockhart, Texas
After out tour of the Scottish Rite, we headed to the Gaslight Baker Theatre in Lockhart, Texas. This theater opened in 1920 and was proclaimed as the “most modern theatre in the state.” It was later renovated and much of the original grandeur changed as the interior of the auditorium was altered to suggest the interior of a steamship. Even the theatre doors include portholes. Across the street from the theater in Lockhart was a Masonic Temple – go figure. It was hard to ignore, but I hopped back on the bus and we headed to San Antonio where we would visit three more theaters.
The Tobin Center in San Antonio, TexasThe Tobin Center in San Antonio, TexasThe Tobin Center in San Antonio, TexasThe Tobin Center in San Antonio, Texas
In San Antonio we visited the Tobin Center for the Performing Arts; it is listed as a versatile and world-class performing arts facility. Behind a historic façade is a multipurpose performance hall with a mechanized seating system that can transform the space into a flat-floor configuration. This was fascinating to watch the rows of seat appear to unfurl and get placed on stage. There is also a smaller Studio Theatre, and an outdoor performance plaza along the lovely river walk area.
The Empire Theatre in San Antonio, TexasThe Empire Theatre in San Antonio, TexasThe Empire Theatre in San Antonio, TexasThe Empire Theatre in San Antonio, Texas
After the Tobin, we headed to the Empire and Majestic Theatres; two stages that share a common upstage wall. The Majestic is a 1929 theater designed in the Mediterranean style by John Eberson for Karl Hoblitzelle’s Interstate Theatres. The 2,264-seat Majestic Theatre was restored during the 1990s. Nextdoor, the 1913 Charline McCombs Empire Theatre sits on the site of the former Rische’s Opera House. The Empire originally operated as a vaudeville house, but then became a motion picture theater. It was redeveloped as part of the Majestic Theatre project after sitting vacant for years. Both were simply stunning.
The Majestic Theatre in San Antonio, TexasThe Majestic Theatre in San Antonio, TexasThe Majestic Theatre in San Antonio, TexasThe Majestic Theatre in San Antonio, Texas
Our final visit was to the Brauntex Performing Arts Theater, a 1942 movie theater that has survived despite the odds. It was this last stop on the LHAT Theatre Ramble that was the most welcoming. As we departed the bus and entered the theatre, each of us was met by board member who shook our hand and offered a bottle of water. The staff gave a lovely presentation about the history of the venue and its subsequent renovation finished, offering a departing gift as we left the building. It was such a warm and welcoming experience that it ended the tour on a sweet note – especially as each of our swag bags included a gingerbread cookie from the oldest bakery in Texas.
The Gaslight Baker Theatre in Ne Braunfels, TexasThe Gaslight Baker Theatre in Ne Braunfels, TexasThe Gaslight Baker Theatre in Ne Braunfels, Texas
We returned to Austin by 6PM, with just enough time to take a short break before heading back to the hotel for the opening night cocktail reception & welcome dinner. This is a remarkable group of people with a long history. LHAT is an incredible resource for historic theaters, whether they are in large metropolitan areas or small rural towns. As one historic theater owner from Ontario explained, “I like coming here because no one laughs at me for buying a theater, they all understand.” It is a wonderful group of kindred spirits, I am glad to be a member again.
Travels of a Scenic Artist and Scholar: The Austin Scottish Rite, a theatre within a theatre
Rick Boychuk and I met at the Austin Airport on Friday, June 13, 2018, for the League of Historic American Theatres national conference that would begin on Sunday, July 15. By that evening, Boychuk was streaming live on Facebook from the flies of the Austin Scottish Rite theater. He was accompanied by FB friend and local IATSE stagehand, another history buff who occasionally works for the Austin Scottish Rite – Frank Cortez. Braving excessive heat, the two navigated three galleries above the stage, two of which date from 1871. Fortunately, I wore completely inappropriate footwear and had to stay on stage level, conversing with the director of the space and looking for hidden treasures.
Frank Cortez and Rick Boychuk at the Austin Scottish Rite theatreThe Austin Scottish Rite theaterThe Austin Scottish Rite theater
The Austin Scottish Rite was originally constructed in 1871 and opened in 1872 as a Turner Hall for the German social organization Turn Verein (pronounced toorn –fair – ine). This group was similar to the SOKOL halls in America for the Czech-Slovaks; each organization provided a home for immigrants to socialize and celebrate old world traditions. The Turner Hall members congregated to study the German language, celebrate exercise and carry on a variety of revered German customs that included musical performances and theatrical productions.
The Scottish Rite in Austin has a very convoluted history that is intermingled with the Ben Hur Temple of the Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine; too complex to discuss at this time. What is significant about the Austin Scottish Rite theater is that in 1914 the Masons retrofitted the 1871 Turner Hall for their degrees productions. This was a common practice for Scottish Rite Masons throughout the late nineteenth century as the renovated cathedrals, synagogues, and even a previous pork slaughter house, included theatrical stages, auditoriums, dressing rooms, properties areas and other performance spaces to produce Masonic degree work. This historical practice of the Fraternity is covered in many of my past installments.
I previously visited the Austin Scottish Rite during the fall of 2016, after the photo shoot for the Santa Fe book. My desire to have Boychuk look at this particular venue was due to the artistic provenance and my understanding of used stage scenery in Masonic theaters. My research suggested that a portion of the Austin scenery collection, and possibly the accompanying stage machinery, was purchased used from Guthrie, Oklahoma, and installed in Austin during 1914 or 1915. However, early communications between a theatrical manufacturer and two Austin Scottish Rite Bodies commenced in 1912. So, lets look at some of the facts that surround the transformation of a German social space into a Masonic performance space.
In 1910, the Guthrie Scottish Rite bodies began enlarging their Scottish Rite stage in the original building. This is not the massive complex that is a popular travel destination today. The enlargement of an existing stage occurred in a variety of Southern Jurisdiction Valleys, including Little Rock, Arkansas; Wichita, Kansas; and McAlester, Oklahoma. The original 15’ x 30’ scenery for the Guthrie Scottish Rite was replaced with new scenery measuring 19’ x 36’ in 1911.
Although enlarging scenery was a commonplace practice for growing Scottish Rite Valleys, the regalia and paraphernalia supplier (M. C. Lilley) did not recommend an alteration of the original scenery due to the amount of fabric and labor needed to enlarge the entire collection. This was solely a sales tactic to sell new merchandise, as I own a Scottish Rite collection that was enlarged from 14’ x 28’ to 20’ x 40’; it was certainly possible to do without making it noticeable from the audience.
Going back to the Austin Scottish Rite story. The Guthrie Bodies acquired their 1900 Scottish Rite scenery collection for approximately $7,500. This same scenery was returned in 1910 to the same company that sold it to them – M. C. Lilley – for a $1,400 credit on their purchase of new scenery. Around this same time, negotiations with the Austin Scottish Rite began, even thought the final purchase of used Scottish Rite scenery would not occur for a few years. This is the same year that the Santa Fe Scottish Rite was being completed. Both projects were contracted by M. C. Lilley & Co. of Columbus, Ohio, and all scenery and stage machinery subcontracted to Sosman & Landis. This was a very solid partnership with the western sales representative for M. C. Lilley, Bestor G. Brown, and the president of Sosman & Landis, Joseph S. Sosman, being well-known Scottish Rite Masons.
Many of the technical specifications for the new Santa Fe Scottish Rite lighting system were recommended for the Austin Scottish Rite, carefully described in a series of letters exchanged between the Valley of Austin and M. C. Lilley. Tensions were high as the Valley of Austin did not understand the complexity or the skill required to produce and install a Scottish Rite scenery collection, complete with an entire counterweight rigging system. The negotiations for the used scenery and the communications with the architects could be a book in itself – or a fabulous doctoral dissertation.
Reflections about Scottish Rite Scenery, Spatter and Lighting
For some artists, the use of spatter is always the final step in painting every backdrop. Shaking a brush to scatter little dots of warm and cool colors throughout the painting completes the composition. This was not a common technique before the 1920s.
Spatter is used for a variety reasons. It can break up solid areas in a setting and provide texture. It can help shape and define objects such as tree trunks, interior walls, draperies, meadows and the exterior of buildings. It may suggest atmospheric conditions, such as rays of light emanating from clouds overhead or a hazy landscape.
Spatter used to enhance the distance of the landscape. Detail of Scottish Rite drop in Joplin, Missouri.Spatter used to enhance the distance of the landscape. Detail of Scottish Rite drop in Joplin, Missouri.Spatter used to create texture for painted drapery. Scene from the Joplin Scottish Rite.Spatter used to create texture on tree trunk. Scene from the Scottish Rite in Joplin, MissouriCool spatter used to reflect the cool lighting conditions in a crypt scene. Scene fromt the Joplin Scottish Rite.Orange and blue spatter used in forest scene at the Scottish Rite in Hastings, Nebraska.
Sometimes, it is intended to help the composition, anticipating the possibility of a poor lighting design. As many of us know, certain light colors can “kill” portions of a painted scene, sapping the life out of the color. Spatter is a way to resuscitate a scene when poorly lit with an inappropriate color choice. Some individuals in charge of lighting a historic scene may not be familiar with the demands of two-dimensional settings and let one color dominate their palette – green for forests, red for hades. Proper lighting that mixes a few colors can make backdrops appear as magical and transformative. Uninformed choices in regard to color and intensity will make a backdrop static and lifeless. I have walked into many Scottish Rite buildings where the lighting fails to show the potential of what is possible on stage; the backdrops are lit with whatever color is predominant in the scene. Lighting is an important aspect of Scottish Rite degree productions as the scenes were designed with specific scenic illusions in mind and specific lighting. Often the border lights are red, blue and white. When more colors have been added in contemporary systems, they are seldom balanced to enhance the painted settings.
The Masonic stage crew often does not realize that there are transparent and translucent sections in painted compositions, intended for surprise revelations or the magical appearance of a hidden object or message. In some instances beautiful woodland scenes have the ability to depict brilliant sunsets, and this scenic effect has been forgotten over the decades. Stained glass windows in cathedrals will glow, enhancing the setting for a degree. Many Scottish Rite stage crews no longer realize the potential for each painted setting as a lot of the backdrops are no longer used during a reunion. Declining membership, shrinking stage crews, and the loss of backstage “memory” are all factors that now conceal these popular visual effects.
As Scottish Rite theaters continue to upgrade their lighting systems, some theatre consultants and system installers fail to understand that potential of historical backdrops and their lighting needs for degree productions; borders lights are replaced with a few individual lighting instruments. Clients are promised that the actors will be more visible with modern lighting, yet the painted illusion becomes collateral damage. Some of the new lighting systems for Scottish Rite stages have destroyed the historical aesthetic of the venue when the primary focus is redirected to the sole illumination of the actor – not the stage picture. Instead of placing an character within a scene as part of a unified whole, the performer is now placed in the midst of unevenly lit stage pictures that appear flat and unrealistic. The magic is disappearing.
The Hastings Scottish Rite was one just example of how a new lighting system was designed and installed for a historic venue without taking into an account that the purpose of the stage and that majority of performances would use painted drops. Sadly, all of the painted scenery now shows a series of “hot spots” across the top, accentuating wrinkles and other flaws on the painted surface. The previous border lights that provided a general wash over the painted surface were replaced with instruments that were not intended to illuminate large-scale paintings.
Border lights at the Santa Fe Scottish Rite. The system originally included blue, red and white lights. When a new system was installed in the 1930s, the new lamp colors were red, green and white, making nighttime scenes difficult to stage. The lights now hav an haphazard mix of red, green, blue and white lights.Traditional border lights above a Scottish Rite stage in Madison, Wisconsin. These were the standard way to light painted scenery, providing a general wash over the painted backdrops. Sometimes, there were also strip lights placed along the bottom of each scene too.The new lighting system for the Scottish Rite stage in Hastings, Nebraska, that replaced the original border lights.The new lighting system at the Scottish Rite in Hastings, Nebraska, does not light painted scenery without throwing “hot spots” on the composition. They have seventy lines and over forty historic backdrops.Strip lights at the Santa Fe Scottish Rite. these were placed on the floor behind leg drops to illuminate the lower portion of painted backdrops upstage.
In terms of modern lighting systems in Scottish Rite theaters -the Scottish Rite scenes from the 1920s that incorporated spatter into the painting process do better than those without. However, there is only so much the scenic artist can do to protect a composition from poor lighting conditions.
We returned to Minnesota on July 2 at midnight after the long drive from Joplin, Missouri. Over the course of eighteen days, we visited ten historic theaters and I was able to document historic scenery at seven. The trip was intended not only for research, but also for the marketing of our new company Historic Stage Services, LLC (www.historicstageservices.com)
In addition to the book release event at the Santa Fe Scottish Rite theater, I photographed and catalogued entire Scottish Rite scenery collections in Omaha, Nebraska; Hastings, Nebraska; Cheyenne, Wyoming; Salina, Kansas; and Joplin, Missouri. I also photographed historic scenery at the Atlas Theatre in Cheyenne and the Tabor Theatre in Leadville, Colorado. The Tabor was especially exciting as I dug through wings, borders and roll drops that had been stored since the turn of the twentieth century.
As we drove home, I began the laborious task of labeling thousands of photographs. It is at this point that I am able to identify defining characteristics of specific collections, especially when examining images of painted details. Then I go through each historic venue and construct the current inventory and how it has been altered, added to, or shifted over the past decades. As I went through my pictures, I was able compare compositional layout, painting techniques, color palettes, and drop construction for a variety of scenic studios. My trip provided me with the opportunity to closely examine the work of competing studios over the course of decades in a very short period of time. This allows the visual aesthetic and construction information to remain fresh in my mind.
I am in the depths of examining the Fabric Studio of Chicago and its link to Toomey & Volland of St. Louis, Sosman & Landis of Chicago, Kansas City Scenic Co., and the Great Western Stage Equipment Co. of Kansas City. My last stop at the Joplin Scottish Rite confirmed a few of my suspicions in regard to a shift in scenic studio practices and art during the 1920s. A younger generation took over the innovation in stage design and technology. Men, and in some cases women, ascended to the top of their profession and eclipsed the previous generation of scenic artists. This does not mean that they were better or worse, just different. A shift was occurring in the field of scenic art. Seasoned artists left their positions with the “old guard” of scenic studios and began to create their own new studios, causing old alliances to crumble. This also market the collapse of a unifying aesthetic for the stage. Gentlemanly agreements between studios during the first two decades of twentieth century ceased and new fabrics were introduced as an alternative for the common cotton sheeting of backdrops.
Painted detail at the Joplin Scottish Rite created by an older scenic artist in the traditional style.Another example of a setting created in the traditional style of scenic art for the Joplin Scottish Rite.
At the Joplin Scottish Rite, it is apparent that some of the drops were created by an older scenic artist still working in the traditional style of scene painting, but the color palette shifts to the predominance of brighter colors. The use of horizontal seams for drop construction, jute webbing at the top and pipe pockets at the bottom began to appear across the country. This method of fabrication followed the construction of fabric draperies for the same venues.
In terms of netting, the individual drops of glue on knotted intersections were replaced with swathes of glue brushed along entire edges, forming a crusty perimeter that greatly reduced the necessary labor to create a cut drop. Similarly the painstaking placement of foils that allowed a scene to sparkle, or suggest a fiery reflection, begin to be replaced with a layer of metallic flakes and glitter-like product. This again saved the amount of later needed to create a similar effect.
Cut drop and backdrop at the Joplin Scottish Rite for the 18th degree.Detail of the Hades cut drop in Joplin, Missouri. Note that foil strips are no longer used to suggest the fiery reflections of the underworld.Paper-backed foil strips were attached to backdrops during the nineteenth and early-twentieth century to simulate fiery reflection and make the scene sparkle.
The Scottish Rite scenery in Joplin also depicts the use of spatter for a painted composition. Bright blue, mineral orange and other colors are spattered across the final painting. In some cases, the use of spatter subdues an earlier application of colors that are too bright to begin with, so another layer of paint must help recede into the background. In some of the Joplin scenery, spatter almost obliterates the detail, yet enforces depth in the painting.
A partial view of the leg drop and backdrop for the catacombs scene at the Joplin Scottish Rite. This scene is also titled “The Crypt” in some areas.Detail of painted spatter on a backdrop at the Scottish Rite in Joplin, Missouri.Detail of painted spatter on a backdrop at the Scottish Rite in Joplin, Missouri.
I regard these modern painting techniques that eventually shifted the evolution of scenic art with some bias; I prefer the older style. I associate traditional scenic art techniques with that of the Dusseldorf and Hudson River schools. There is a soft, but dramatic atmosphere that visually envelopes the painted composition. Although there are subtle differences in paint techniques, such as glazing or the opaque application of colors as I have previously examined, there is a uniformity of brush stroke and final aesthetic. The modern school of scenic art takes a subtle departure from this aesthetic. Not always visible from the audience, it becomes apparent as one approaches the scene. Both the traditional and modern fall apart into areas of separate color, as the painting should, there is a distinct difference to the educated eye.
Painting by Thomas Cole, 1847.Similar composition in painting by Thomas Kincaid, but distinctly different from the overall aesthetic of the Hudson River School artists
Here is the best parallel that I can think of, and it pertains to the work of fine art. If you take a landscape painting produced by a Hudson River School artist and compare it with the paintings of Thomas Kincaid (Painter of Light), you can see the shift. There is romanticism in each composition, an attempt to relay atmospheric conditions, a sense of beauty and an attention to detail. However, Kincaid’s paintings are distinctly contemporary. For me, they are slightly “off” and don’t capture what the nineteenth century artist conveyed to their audience.
This is what I see happening in the scenic studios during the 1920s, an approach that has its foundation in some traditional scenic art techniques, but the final product is slightly “off.” The modern scenic art compositions evolve in two distinct directions. One way is a final product that is too clean, crisp, and carefully blended; this is the direction of Hollywood and the creation of scenery for film settings. Beautiful techniques and lovely compositions, but a distinct departure from traditional stage painting. After all, it is creating scenic illusion for a new art form – one that needs greater detail for the camera and close-ups. The second direction is much less controlled. The technique isn’t quite there, so the composition is altered with layers of spatter over high contrast areas in order to unify the entire composition. This is not meant to say that either of these approaches is a lesser art form, but they are a distinct departure from a previous stage aesthetic.
Over the next week, I will start to compare various painting techniques and their characteristics before returning to the life and times of Thomas G. Moses in 1903. This helps me as I approach examining the “first golden age” of Scottish Rite scenery production. This is the surge that takes place just prior to WWI. The 1920s then usher in the “second golden age” of Scottish Rite scenery production before everything begins a slow descent.
