Sosman & Landis – Page 22

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 846 – Sheehan and Beck, 1913

In 1913, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Sheehan and Beck dropped in with ‘Bohemian Girl.’ In other words, the two were in town with the production when they made a point of visiting Sosman & Landis about another project. The Sheehan English Opera Co. production of “The Bohemian Girl” was on tour of 1913.

Image published in the “Monroe Star News,” 18 March 1913, page 3.

Advertisement in the “Sheboygen Press,” 5 May 1913, page 6.

Interestingly, Sheehan initially performed with Henry W. Savage’s Grand Opera Company. Moses worked for Savage, designing many of his American Opera productions in New York, just prior to moving establishing the Moses & Hamilton Studio. The two would have met while each worked for Savage.

In 1913, Edward M. Beck was the General Director of Sheehan and Beck, with Sheehan starring in the lead roles. At the time, Sheehan was called “America’s Greatest Tenor.”

“The Bohemian Girl” was billed as “the most brilliant musical event of the season,” and toured with “60-trained Choral Voices” and “20-Special Grand Opera Orchestra” (Sheboygan Press, Wisconsin, 5 May 1913, page 6). Other performed by the company on the tour were “The Love Tales of Hoffman,” “Il Trovatore,” “Martha,” and “Chimes of Normandy.”

One Sheehan-Beck production that toured in 1913 was “Salome.” “Salome” was a second Sheehan-Beck production with scenery by Sosman & Landis. Of the production, Moses wrote, “We turned out a big production of ‘Salome’ for Sheehan and Beck – some very effective scenes. A good portion of the contract price never saw our office – one bad feature about shows that don’t go.” This was always the gamble. “Shows that don’t go” didn’t always pay their bills. At the scenic studio, a non-payment on a single project could not financially jeopardize a company, so there had to be dozens of projects occurring simultaneously to cover shortfalls.

In 1913, Sheehan and Beck also produced “The Girl From Mumms,” starring Miss Olive Vail, a comedienne who starred in the original Chicago productions of “A Modern Eve,” “A Stubborn Cinderella,” “The Girl Question” and “Miss Nobody from Starland.” “The Girl from Mumms” was advertised as “a Parisian musical novelty,” featuring sixteen musical hits. Based on the book by J. A. Lacy, the lyrics and music were by Fred A. Bohnhorst. Of the production, the “Calgary Herald” reported “Scenically and electrically, nothing has been left undone to make ‘The Girl From Mumms’ the most beautiful musical spectacle of the season”(8 Oct. 1913, page 7).

Advertisement in 4The Girl the “Santa Ana Register,” 20 Nov 1913, page 2.

Advertisement from the “Post Crescent,” 11 Sept. 1913, page 8.

An interesting article in the “Post-Crescent” goes into great detail about the costume designer for the production (Appleton, Wisconsin, 13 Sept 1913, page 6). It seems that Beck traveled to Paris in 1912 and met Mme. McGregor-Hull, a modiste in Paris whose creations were “the talk of the theatrical colony there.” The article reports, “Struck at once by with the originality of the woman and her genius for creating fashion instead of following it, Mr. Beck made her a proposition to manufacture the costumes for “ THE GIRL FROM MUMMS.” Of the scenic elements, advertisements promised, “scenically an environment of beauty;” that was it. No mention of scenic artist or studio. Chang is in the winds.

At this time, many newspaper articles shift focus from describing painted scenery and scenic effects in detail to costumes and lighting effects. I find this fascinating, as previous mentions of those who manufacture scenic illusion are no longer included in many reviews. There may still be a general description of the setting, but the names, backgrounds and experience of most scenic artists cease as being included to provide credibility to the production. In their stead are the names of costumers and lighting designers.

The story of creating three-dimensional stage elements replaces the story of creating two-dimensional ones. There are many other factors to consider when examining this shift: increased realism/naturalism on stage, the emergence of the modern scenic designer, electrical effects and lighting innovations, the increased popularity of moving pictures, and much more. Regardless, there is a definitive shift in how the press presents the production elements to the public in 1913.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 844 – McVicker’s Vaudeville Theatre, 1913

In 1913, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Started a lot of work for McVicker’s Theatre – that was in June. I did all the exterior drops.”

The venue had changed hands again, and Moses created a set of scenery for the new lessees of the new “McVicker’s Vaudeville Theatre.” The well-known Chicago establishment had just become a combination house. McVicker’s Theater, located on West Madison Street, near State, was once considered the oldest playhouse in Chicago.

From the “Chicago Tribune,” 27 Aug 1913, page 8.

On May 10, 1913, “The Lancaster Intelligencer” reported,

“OLD THEATRE IN FILM RANKS

Chicago’s Fire-Baptized McVickers Sold for $500,000.

McVicker’s Theatre, Chicago’s historic playhouse, which has passed through five fires, including the great fire of 1871, and which has been rebuilt or remodeled after each fire, passed from the ‘legitimate’ on Thursday when it was sold to a moving picture firm for $500,000.”

The Jones, Linick & Schaefer circuit began leasing McVicker’s Theatre in 1913, presenting “popularly priced” vaudeville acts along with motion pictures. The ticket prices were 10,15 and 25 cents, an affordable option when compared with legitimate theater and you could stay as long as you wanted from 1p.m. to 11p.m. (Post-Crescent, Appleton, Wisconsin, 9 May 1913, page 7).

From the “Inter Ocean,” 14 Sept 1913, page 32.

The firm’s partners were Aaron J. Jones, Adolph Linick and Peter J. Schaefer, They first established their firm in 1899, leasing Keebler & Co., a store on Clark Street just south of Madison Street, and establishing a penny arcade. As their operation grew, Jones, Linick & Schaefer became primarily interested in entertainment, running amusement parks and theaters. They eventually managed the Orpheum Theatre on State Street, opposite of the Palmer House (Chicago Tribune, 5 Jan. 1913). By 1913, the firm operated eight Chicago theaters.

On April 29, 1913, the “Chicago Tribune” announced, “All arrangements for the acquisition [of McVicker’s and the Colonial] have been made…The Jones, Linick & Schaefer people will open a vaudeville booking agency of their own on Thursday in offices in the Orpheum Theatre building in State street, in preparation for the increased business. They have been booking from the Western Vaudeville Managers’ association” (page 3).

From the “Chicago Tribune,” 1 Aug 1913, page 12.

On May 22, 1913, the “Washington Herald” reported, “Jones, Linick & Schaefer, Chicago’s new theatrical triumvirate, who practically dominate the popular vaudeville and moving picture field in the Windy City, have just signed a contract with the Kinemacolor Company of America to install the original nature-colored features of the vaudeville bills at the Colonial and McVicker’s Theatres, their latest acquisitions…Both are located in the heart of “The Loop,” and their cosmopolitan patronage demands the best and latest novelties. Kinemacolor scored such popular success at the Willard, Wilson, and other theaters of their circuit that Jones, Linick & Schaefer decided to make it a permanent feature of their vaudeville bills. In this they were following the example of F. F. Proctor, William Fix, Oswald Stoll, and other leading showmen of America and England” (page 11).

“Moving Picture World” published an article about Jones, Linick & Schaefer, commenting that moving pictures were replacing all other vaudeville at the Willard Theatre by 1914. The article, “Picture Programs Supplant Vaudeville in the Willard” noted, “Vaudeville has been withdrawn from another of the Jones, Linick & Schaefer houses – the Willard, at Fifty-first street and Calumet avenue. The Willard was closed Sunday night, Jan. 18 to make the necessary changes for straight picture programs. A $10,000 organ will be installed. It will be reopened Monday, Jan. 26. ‘There is no significance in this change, ‘said Mr. Linick. ‘Our patrons in that neighborhood prefer moving pictures to vaudeville, and we’re trying to give then what they want. The price will be ten cents, as against the ten-twenty-thirty we charged for vaudeville. Our downtown houses, the Orpheum, La Salle, Colonial and McVickers will go along just as they have been” (Sat. January 14, 1914, page 551).

Moses would also deliver scenery to the Colonial Theatre, also managed by Jones, Linick and Schaefer. In 1913, Moses wrote, “ “A good, big contract for the Colonial, city– a very complete set.” The addition of “city” means that it was a complete city setting for the theater, a perfect setting for many vaudeville acts.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 843 – Ambition and Hustle, 1913

In 1913, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “On the 20^th of May, I completed in less than eight hours, a dark wood drop, 24×40, without any help. That is something I never accomplished before – that much in that time. Sosman was pleased with it. I didn’t wait for anything to dry – worked in the wet.” We can get some sense of Moses’ woodland composition for the stage at the time. Many of his landscapes still hang in in Scottish Rite theaters across the country, including his 1912 setting for the Santa Fe Scottish Rite that Jo Whaley photographed for our book “The Santa Fe Scottish Rite Temple: Freemasonry, Architecture and Theatre” (Museum of New Mexico Press, 2018).

Scenic art by Thomas G. Moses for the Santa Fe Scottish Rite Theatre, 1912. Photograph by Jo Whaley.

Moses was 57 years old in 1913, with almost four decades of experience as a scenic artist behind him. His specialty remained landscapes, particularly picturesque woodland scenes with babbling brooks or small waterfalls running through the composition. He was very good and very fast by this point in his career.

Moses’ reputation was built on his speed, a skill set that he remained proud of until his passing. He was certainly a workhorse and asset to any project, or studio. As a young scenic artist he wrote, “I was full of ambition and hustle. If I had been endowed with a like amount of ability I would have set the world on fire… The others were able to draw more, because they were better in the artistic end, but I had it over them when it came to speed.”

In the end, it was a scenic artist’s speed that turned a profit at any studio. It was speed that initially secured Moses a position Sosman & Landis, and speed that elevated him to the position as Sosman’s right-hand man. Moses’ innate drive resulted in the rapid production of painted settings at Sosman & Landis throughout his duration there, amassing large profits for the stakeholders. This is one of the reasons that Sosman pleaded with Moses to return to the studio in 1904 and supervise all design, painting, construction and installation from that point on; his drive would ensure success. Moses left his growing business in New York City (Moses & Hamilton) and returned to Sosman & Landis’ main studio in Chicago.

In the end, Moses expected all of his colleagues to work at his same rapid pace. I completely understand where he is coming from as I also expect that of my fellow artists too. Moses’ impatience with slower co-workers is very apparent throughout his memoirs. For example, in 1907, he commented on the speed of fellow scenic artist Ansel Cook who was the shop manager at Sosman & Landis’ annex studio on 19th street. Moses wrote, “We opened our annex studio at 19 W. 20th Street in July, and Ansel Cook went there as a manager…He did some very good work but was a long time doing it, which, of course, didn’t pay us.” Moses divided his time between Sosman & Landis’ main and annex studios that year and after one extended absence wrote, “Took charge of the 20^th Street Studio on my return weeks. Cook did $750.00 of work in three weeks. My first three amounted to $3,500.00, some difference. I hustled while he talked art and what the firm ought to do to get business.” In Moses’ eyes, anyone that didn’t “hustle” couldn’t pull his full weight at the studio.

I too have built a reputation based on quick turn around times and high productivity. Much has to do with my individual drive and incentive; the other reason is that I don’t like stopping for breaks or slowing down. I hate sitting still and frequently forgo breaks or meals maintain my pace and productivity. I often don’t want to stop until the end of the day. For me it is difficult to watch any co-worker puddle around or stop mid-way in a project to take a fifteen-minute break.

I have also noticed that one slow person can drop the overall productivity in any shop, reducing any group speed to match that of the slowest worker. So, I sympathize with Moses, sharing his views of those who did not “hustle.” Any supervisor of a shop looks for an excuse to drop the dead weight, which Moses touched upon in 1913 when commenting on a Union strike.

Moses wrote, “The Union called a strike because Sosman refused to sign a new scale of wages. I prevailed upon Sosman to sign as I disliked any labor trouble. It only results in being obliged to weed out some of the non-producers.” Weed out some non-producers. That says a lot and may have been Sosman’s main goal. Sosman was also known for his speed, as were most of the top scenic artists of the day. An artist working at a snail’s pace gouged the profit margin of any project.

Moses also touches upon an interesting perspective regarding union strikes; providing an opportunity for a company to “weed out the non-producers.” As the vice-president of the company and supervisor of all Sosman & Landis activities, Moses was on the front line, not Sosman. Regardless of Moses’ desire to make peace with the staff, Sosman still controlled the administrative end of the business and held a tight fist on wages. In 1913, Moses was in charge of all design, construction, painting and installation at the main studio and annex studio in Chicago, but not the wages.

If the strike ended poorly, Moses was the one who would have to continue supervising a group of disgruntled workers, realizing the potential problems if a significant number of the scenic artists were to leave “en masse.” Moses would have been left holding the bag and scrambling for their replacements, all the while understanding the deep-seeded sentiment of his fellow artists. He was really caught in the middle during 1913, and his fear of a group of journeymen artists leaving the studio would happen seven years later. In 1920, six scenic artists left the Sosman & Landis studio to form Service Studios. This would have caused more than a ripple in the shop, especially is a large project was in the studio at the time. The former Sosman & Landis employees even marketed black and white photographs depicting Sosman & Landis designs as their own, carefully compiled in sales books. This is really the beginning of the end for Sosman & Landis. The shift in demand for painted scenery, the rise of the modern designer, the pressure of the union, and the desires of stock holders are just a few factors that are all at odds during this time. Sure, business will keep pouring in, but the challenges will continue to gain ground and suddenly seem insurmountable after Sosman’s death in 1915.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 842 – “The Bulgarian Romance,” 1913

In 1913, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “We had a road show called ‘The Bulgarian Romance.’ Rather a good opportunity for effects.”

The play was reported to be a version of the first act of “The Balkan Princess.” Both “The Balkan Princess” and “The Bulgarian Romance” starred the same leading lady, Julia Gifford, a vaudeville actress who later married Bob Fitzsimmons. The “Edmonton Journal” reported, “The one-act musical comedy was written especially for the ex-champion’s wife [Mrs. Bob Fitzsimmons], and after rehearsing in Chicago the company started for Edmonton, which is the first on the circuit” (Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 19 May 1913, page 2).

Advertisement for “A Bulgarian Romance,” in “The Vancouver Sun,” 28 July 1913, page 8

Fitzsimmons was formerly known to vaudeville and musical comedy fame as Julia May Gifford. The show was described as “Light, airy and witty, with well defined plot, with characters attired in the gay gowns of the ‘Near East’ and with graceful nymphs of dancing girls and well trained mail chorus…Pleasing and wholesome with plenty of adventure and fun, and with music of exquisite sweetness throughout, this operetta easily leads anything which has appeared at this popular theatre since it opened to the Eugene [Oregon] public” (The Eugene Guard, 14 July 1913, page 6).

The show ran approximately 50 minutes in lengths and was billed with other vaudeville acts. In Salt Lake City, acts that accompanied “The Bulgarian Romance,” included the Velde Trio and their trained dogs, Leonard and Drake, Lopez and Lopez, Edith Haney and company, and Courtney and Jeanette” (The Salt Lake Tribune, 21 Sept 1913, page 46).

“The Eugene Guard” described the play on 14 July 1913:

“The plot tells of a defiant prince, who reuses to yield to the invitation of a match making king, who wants the prince to meet and love his daughter. The princess appears incog. at a music hall, which the prince frequents, and wins his heart. When he makes love to her and is really smitten, she divulges her identity, and having in the meantime fallen in love with him herself, she accepts both his apology and proposal of marriage and the result that they ‘live happily ever after’” (page 6).

The show toured with a company of “fourteen splendid singing and dancing girls” “The San Francisco Examiner, 21 July 1913, page 5). The leading man was N. E. Dano, who “first won his laurels in Vienna and they showed with even brighter luster under the critical glare of the footlights of Paris, where critics bestowed unstinted praise” (The Eugene Guard, 14 July 1913, page 6).

Advertisement for “A Bulgarian Romance” with Sosman & Landis scenery in the background, from the “Eugene Guard,” Eugene, Oregon, 14 July 1913, page 6

Of scenery produced by Sosman & Landis, newspaper articles reported, “The stage setting is elaborate, artistic and beautiful” (The Eugene Guard, 14 July 1913, page 6). When the show toured Minnesota, the Bemidji “Pioneer” reported, “There is one great scene, that of a Bulgarian café and during the action of the beautiful musical skit there are six sweet musical numbers…there is a world of beautiful lighting, especially a stone bridge, which is lighted from the rear” (1 May 1913, page 3).

The mention of lighting is a marked departure from many newspapers reviews prior to this time. Lighting for any effect was seldom described in any detail. Once the scenic artist was recognized alongside the leading performer. By 1913 stage critiques take a new direction, emphasizing other technical aspects of the show.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 840 – Moss and Brill’s New Theatre, 1913

In 1913, Thomas G. Moses recorded that Sosman & Landis delivered scenery for Moss and Brills’ new theatre in New York. Moss & Brill had two theaters in New York, the Eighty-sixth Street and the DeKalb. The theatrical management firm also opened two theaters during January 1913. Both were combination houses, bringing the total number of theaters owned by Moss & Brill up to five, according to newspapers.

From the “New York Times,” 23 Jan 1913 page 22.

The Hamilton Theatre opened on January 23 and the Jefferson theatre opened on January 25. On January 24, 1913, the “Brooklyn Citizen” included an article about Moss & Brill’s new Hamilton Theatre:

“THE HAMILTON OPENS.

Moss and Brill’s new Hamilton Theatre, which is located at 146^th street and Broadway, Manhattan, had its opening last night. A fine program consisting of eight vaudeville numbers was presented. At the conclusion there were calls for the management, but the demands for a speech were not answered. The new institution is a handsome building, seating about two thousand persons, and will be devoted to vaudeville at popular prices. Friends of those interested in the new enterprise expressed their feelings by sending numerous large bouquets. A handsome souvenir programme was distributed.”

The second venue opened by Moss & Brill that January was the Jefferson Theatre. The Jefferson Theatre was slightly larger than the Hamilton Theatre, with a 3,000 seating capacity. It was located on the edge of what is now known as the East Village, at 214 E. 14^th Street. The narrow entrance was between two tenement buildings was the entrance, leading to the main auditorium in the back of the building, situated near E. 13^th Street. Over the years The Jefferson Theatre became known as the RKO Jefferson Theatre. It did not survive, however, and was demolished in 2000.

“The New York Times” announced the opening of the venue on 26 Jan. 1913: “The Jefferson Theatre, the second of the new houses to be opened by Moss & Brill vaudeville producers, was opened to the public last night. It is at Fourteenth Street and Third Avenue. George Kiester, architect of the Cohan, Belasco, Astor and Hamilton Theatres, designed the Jefferson. A feature in its construction is the span of 90 feet of balcony and orchestra entirely unobstructed by posts or pillars. The Hamilton Theatre at 146^th Street and Broadway were opened by the same firm on Thursday night. It is a marble building with a frontage of 100 feet on Broadway. It has only one balcony, but is equipped with twenty-four boxes, and will seat approximately 2,500. The color scheme is gold and brown. Both houses will resent continuous performances from 1 to 11 of vaudeville and moving pictures” (page 44):

Both the Hamilton and Jefferson theaters were completed at a cost of $1,000,000 and listed as “popular price” venues. The “Evening World” reported, “With the other Moss & Brill house, the Eighty-sixth Street Theatre, and the Cunningham & Fluegelman theatres, the McKinley Square, in the Bronx, and the DeKalb, in Brooklyn, seating capacity for more than 12,000 persons will be provided and an outlay in buildings and ground of more than $3,000,000 represented” (The Evening World, New York, 18 Jan. 1913, page 6).

The history of Moss & Brill is integral in the establishment of a new theatre circuit that appeared in 1912. That year newspapers announced the establishment of the Consolidated Booking Offices of America. The new company consolidated the interests of Moss & Brill and Fluegelmen & Cunningham, both of New York, with the Sheehan and Olympia circuits of New England, taking the title Sheedy and Affiliated Vaudeville Circuit. The company controlled about thirty weeks of vaudeville bookings from New York to Portland, Maine. Two weeks later, the newly formed Sheedy and Affiliated Vaudeville Circuit united their interests with the Theatre Booking Corporation, of Chicago; the Charles H. Miles Circuit of Detroit and Cincinnati, and the Klein & Crawford Circuit that extended from St. Louis to Omaha, to form the Consolidated Booking Offices of America. On August 16, 1912, the “Brooklyn Daily Eagle” reported, “Combination of Independent ‘Small-Time’ Vaudeville Gains Ground.” This consolidation of smaller circuits resulted in vaudeville artists being able to secure contracts for fifty-six weeks of solid bookings instead of only thirty, meaning “headliners” from previously bigger circuits, were able to appear for the first time at popular prices.

The Consolidated Booking Offices of America incorporation papers were filed in Albany, New York in 1912 and the new company had a suite of twelve offices in the George M. Cohan Theatre Building in New York City, on Broadway, near Forty-third street. They featured popular-priced vaudeville, thus necessitating the use of venues with large-seating capacities of 2,000 or more to generate significant profits.

The new circuit also landed a major deal with Kinemacolor in De Kalb that year (see past posts #822-823 about Kinemacolor movies). On Feb. 1, 1913, “The Chat” announced “By the purchase of rights in Greater New York to exhibit the kinemacolor photo plays and motion pictures, Messrs. Cunningham and Fluegelman, proprietors of the DeKalb [Theatre], with their partners in the Consolidated Booking Offices, Messrs. Moss and Brill, now own the rights in this city outside of a small strip on Broadway from 34^th street to Columbus Circle” (Brooklyn, New York, page 42). Instead of the current prices for Kinemacolor that ranged from $0.50 to $1.50, the prices at the DeKalb Theatre were $0.25.

Change was in the air for popular entertainment as the moving picture industry continued to gain ground, offering theatre managers with an opportunity.

“The Evening World” answered the question “Why new theatres of this type are needed on January 18, 1913 (page 6): “It is the general opinion that the metropolis is already overstocked with theatre, and just now Broadway and its adjacent territory has more than can be filled. And yet more are being built, while the dramatic field is overstocked. The same may be said of the popular-price houses. There are hundreds of these, including the ‘motion picture’ houses, and one would naturally infer that the field is over worked. But Mr. Moss and Mr. Brill were the first to see the possibilities of building modern fireproof theatres to supply the ever-increasing demand for popular amusement at popular prices.”

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 836 – The Arabian Nights Ball at the Armory, 1913

Program from the Arabian Nights Ball. Image from online auction of the item.

In 1913, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “We all went to Mamie’s for New Year’s dinner, and we started the ball rolling in good shape. One of our first big jobs was the “Arabian Nights Ball” at the Armory. It was very good.” Moses was referring to the annual dance for charity held in Chicago each January. The beneficiaries of the 1913 event were the Passavant hospital and the Chicago Lying-In hospital. 5,000 people attended the “Arabian Nights Ball,” raising $16,000 on January 10 that year.

Sosman & Landis scenery helped transform the armory into a Turkish courtyard. Hundreds of electrical lights were hung from the vaulted ceiling to suggest an exotic eastern sky. The “Inter Ocean” reported, “A Reinhardt effect, with all the mysticism and magic of ‘Sumurun’ and with just a touch of Oriental color and beauty which made ‘Kismet’ such a joy to the eye, is what is promised the onlookers at the Arabian Nights ball” (5 Jan 1913, page 5). The article described the sumptuous décor, elaborating, “Your first feeling is that you have entered a mosque. All around the edge of the big hall boxes have been built. Shoulder high in front of them runs a wall of pink and black horizontal stripes, deep black and bright, clear Oriental pink. Each box is framed in a dome shaped pink and black top and behind it the wall colored deep orange. Seated in the boxes will be men and women in costumes that suggest only the romantic and beautiful. It will be well nigh impossible to believe that they are really citizens of America.” Turquoise steps led up to the pink and black boxes. The lining of each box was white with lemon yellow draperies ornately framing each alcove. The “Inter Ocean” reported that the floors were strewn with magnificent cushions and oriental rugs, suggesting the palace of an Eastern potentate (11 Jan 1913, page 4). Opposite of the entrance were red lacquer pillars, framing famous socialites made up as Egyptian princesses.

Article about the Arabian Nights Ball in the “Chicago Tribune,” 9 Jan 1913, page 5.

Attendee at the Arabian Nights Ball, from he “Chicago Tribune,” 9 Jan 1913, page 5.

Of the decorations, the “Chicago Tribune” later noted “Its daring Moorish decorations, designed by Mrs. John Carpenter and carried out by her, with Hugh [G. M.] Gordon’s aid, were written up in London and Paris papers, and the famous Chelsea Art Club sent for pictures of the hall and the costumes when they planned an oriental fête. Mrs. John [Alden] Carpenter is to have charge of the ‘mis en scene’ of the artists’ ball, so original and wonderful things may well be expected” (23 Nov 1913, page 30). Carpenter (1876-1951) was a well-known American composer, educated at Harvard and studied under John Knowles Paine.

The next day, Chicago Tribune published “With the sounding of trumpets, the brilliancy of golden lights, the shimmer of satins and the dazzling splendor of priceless jewels, the Arabian Nights ball began in a blaze of glory at the First Regiment armory last evening. Society matrons and maids and the brave knights of today adorned in alluring and mysterious costumes of the Far East, danced till their feet were as heavy as their hearts were light” (Jan. 11, 1913page 4).

Rosina Gaill of the Chicago Opera Company reigned as queen of the event with Eleanora de Claneros serenading the crowds, singing selections from “Sampson and Delilah.” At the entrance to the courtyard, fifty musicians under the direction of Johnny hand played melodies for the guests.

Attendees at the Arabian Nights Ball from the “Chicago Tribune,” 9 Jan 1913, page 5.

The event began with a grand march, described as “a triumphal procession the beauty and wealth of which has never been seen in the festivities of the world. Following the trumpeters from ‘Aida’ came scores of torch bearers whose blazing torches threw a weird and flickering light over the gay throng.” (Inter Ocean, 11 Jan 1913, page 4).

Themed public events provided great opportunities for Sosman & Landis, affording the firm not only a stead income, but also public exposure.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 835 – “The Little Homestead,” 1912

Advertisement for “The Little Homestead” with Sosman & Landis scene pictured in the center. From the “Idaho Republican,” 12 Jan 1912, page 4

Detail of the scene pictured in the advertisement.

There were many projects completed at Sosman & Landis that were not mentioned by Thomas G. Moses in his memoirs. In 1912, Sosman & Landis delivered scenery for “The Little Homestead.” The “Idaho Republican” described, “The entire production is the work of those famous artists, Sosman & Landis of Chicago” (Blackfoot, Idaho, 12 Jan. 1912, page 8). “The electrical effects for the production were provided by the General Electric Co. of Pittsburg, Pa.”

From the “Daily Appeal,” 5 Feb 1912, page 4

As W. B. Patton’s play toured the United States, advertisements promised “A Big Scenic Production. SEE the Famous Old Southern Mansion. SEE the Black Gorge of Virginia. SEE the James River in Winter. See the Great Fields of Ice” (“Daily Appeal,” 5 Feb. 1912, page 4). The production was a southern play about old Virginia, staged in picturesque settings. The “Montpelier Examiner” reported, “There are four big acts in this production, showing some of the most beautiful scenery, such as Old Black top mountain of Virginia in winter; the famous James River as it flows down from the mountains with its great fields of ice; the great black gorge where lies “Little Homestead;” Colonel Fairfax’s grand old southern mansion near Richmond, Virginia; and the battlefields of old Virginia (12 Jan 1912, page 5).

From the “Oakdale Graphic” (Oakdale, CA), 14 feb 1912, page 6.

The “Oakdale Leader” commented, “This play has been the rage in the eastern states for the past three years and produced for the first time in the west by Messrs. Droffops & Jack. The management guarantees this to be a strictly first class production in every respect, a mammoth scenic production. The play ran for over 300 nights in Chicago and 200 nights in Boston”” (15 Feb 1912, page 1).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 834 – Lead, South Dakota, and “Milestones,” 1912

Advertisement from the “Chicago Tribune,” 19 Nov 1912 page 8.

There were many projects completed at Sosman & Landis that were not mentioned by Thomas G. Moses in his memoirs. In 1912, Sosman & Landis provided the scenery and stage effects for an amateur production of “Milestones” in Lead, South Dakota. “Milestones” was a play in three acts by Arnold Bennett and Edward Knoblock (Knoblauch). As a side note, Knoblauch’s name was Anglicized when he became a British citizen during WWI. He received a commission in the British Army and served in the Secret Service Bureau. Knoblock later wrote screen plays, including Douglas Fairbanks’ “Robin Hood.”

The immediate popularity of “Milestones” resulted in numerous productions appearing throughout North America. Of Sosman & Landis’ scenery for the small production in Lead, “The “Lead Daily Call” advertised, “One entirely new scene, built and painted by the Sosman Landis Co., of Chicago, has been purchased and will be seen by the public for the first time in ‘Milestones.’” (9 Dec. 1912, page 4). There was only one setting, as the entire play took place in an interior setting that was minimally altered for each era.

The history of “Milestones” is an interesting one. It became a hit at the Royalty Theatre in London, playing over 600 performances. On October 13, 1912, the “Inter Ocean” published the origin of the play. Here is the article:

“How ‘Milestones’ Originated.

Frank Vernon, under whose stage direction the Chicago production of ‘Milestones; at the Blackstone theater and the New York production of that play at the Liberty theater has been made, conceived the idea of the three generations – 1860, 1885 and 1912, which are the periods of years in ‘Milestones.’ Mr. Vernon suggested the idea to Edward Knoblauch [sic.] and introduced Mr. Knoblauch to Arnold Barrett [sic.] who previously had confined all his talents to literature.

Originally, the title selected for ‘Milestones’ was ‘The Family’ and such it was called until Mr. Vernon visited Arnold Bennett at Mr. Bennett’s home in Fountainbleau, France. One day while the two were driving along the road which was marked with milestones they stopped for direction. This suggested the idea of the title ‘Milestones,’ the milestones marking the different changes in life. Then they decided to call the play ‘The Milestones,’ but afterwards simplified it to ‘Milestones,’ which is the present title.

From one generation to another the march of time is noted in the story. The occurrence of a domestic crisis in each of the three generations reveals some remarkable character truths, and it also reveals the independence now felt by young folk of today when their future is at stake, this being shown in contrast to the former unquestioning of obedience of parents as to vital matters, whether the parents were right or wrong. Especially is the striking difference shown between women of the present and fifty years ago.

The novelty in ‘Milestones’ is the development of character through many years of living; the strife of the young generation with its predecessor over the same problems.

On one day three or four weeks ago five theatrical companies left London to act this play. One company came to Chicago, another went to New York, three to the English provinces. ‘Milestones marks a dramatic era. Although an English play, it is human. Therein is its appeal to America. And it is blessedly ‘untheatrical.’

When ‘Milestones’ was first produced last February in London the advance sale was $20. Since the opening night there has not been an empty seat. It is still running at the Royalty Theater, London, and the advance bookings are all filled until well after Easter.”

By 1923, ‘Milestone’ was commonly listed in the publication “Plays for High Schools and Colleges, Compiled by a Joint Committee National Council of Teachers of English and the Drama League of America” by Clarence Stratton, Chairman (Chicago, 1923, page 12). The entry for the work was brief and to the point:

“Milestones. Arnold Bennett and E. Knoblock. 3 acts; 1 interior, but with changes of furniture. 9 m., 6f. A serious play of excellent quality, rather difficult. Costumes change with each act. Doran.” The publication included a section on “Suggestions to Producers of Plays,” which was fascinating in itself. One section commented, “The stage is not life; it may be a room with one wall removed as some moderns teach, but the audience is not in that room and therefore views the action from a different angle and a much greater distance…Great as are the difference in theory of different producers and much as acting has changed in the last generation; it still remains that some of the older technique was based on sound psychological principles and should be part of the equipment of actors, though they know when to disregard it. To secure a natural effect under such unnatural conditions requires an artificial technique. Action and speech have to be modified to meet modified conditions. Audiences still like to hear. To make them see and hear and understand requires certain exaggerations and suppressions and selections” (page 2).

This particular project intrigued me overall, a public school in a small western town purchasing scenery from a top-notch studio hundreds of miles away for a smash hit still traveling the circuit. In regard to the studio, I could not help think of the advertising phrase: “No project too big or small.” This small project also hints at a shift within American theatre industry during the pre- WWI era. The scope of plays produced at academic institutions was broadening, as was the manufacture of theatrical goods for thousands of public schools throughout North America. Simultaneously, this new market drove the increased demand fabric draperies. Fabric draperies were not only used as stage masking, but also for actual sets, thus replacing many painted sets.

I am always intrigued by the scope of contracts secured by Sosman & Landis in Chicago. They delivered a variety of painted setting scenery to countless entertainment venues throughout North America. Projects included theater, opera, vaudeville, circus spectacles, tent shows, midway amusements, world fair attractions, panoramas, social halls, department store displays, commercial murals, fraternal scenery and a variety of academic institutions. They were never restricted to any region or venue. In a sense, diversity was their key to success. The continued to expand their operations until Joseph S. Sosman passed away in 1915. Without the drive of Sosman to constantly diversify, the firm began to solely focus on painted settings. As I complete the year 1912 in the life and times of Thomas G. Moses, keep in mind that great change is on the horizon; both for theatre industry, as well as Sosman & Landis.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 833 – “The C. W. Park Show,” 1912

C. W. Park Show advertisement published in the “Messenger Enquirer,” (Owensboro, KY), 10 Aug 1913, page 13.

Detail of advertisement in the “Messenger Enquirer,” (Owensboro, KY), 10 Aug 1913, page 13.

In 1912, Sosman & Landis delivered scenery for the C. W. Park Dramatic Co. The tent show was advertised as “the oldest, biggest, best and most perfectly equipped canvas covered theatre in existence” (“Messenger Enquirer,” Owensboro, KY, 10 Aug 1913, page 3). Playing weekly engagements that featured various vaudeville acts under a big top, the show came complete with a full stage, scenery, lights and even ushers. The “Decatur Daily” advertised, “Park’s Dramatic and Vaudeville Shows Coming. Will be here all next week – forty people and fine scenery” (Decatur, Alabama, 14 May 1912, page 2).

The history of the production company is quite interesting. In 1907, the C. W. Parks Show was reorganized due to some original members accepting other work (“The Gasden Times, “Gasden, Alabama, 22 Jan. 1907, page 2). Park began fine-tuning his acts, and by 1909 became the C. W. Park Big Stock Co. The “Roanoke Leader” reported that the C. W. Parks would return, appearing “under their mammoth water-proof canvas” (Roanoke, Alabama, 1 Sept 1909, page 8). The article continued, “The C. W. Park show is stronger than ever, having been enlarged in all departments, carrying all new plays…Mr. Park holds the territorial rights south of the Ohio River and east of the Mississippi, besides new plays. An entire new company has been engaged, and artists from the leading theatres in the north and east are engaged with the company…Special electrical effects, a car load of special scenery, and a host of high class vaudeville (especially engaged for this line of work only) makes the C. W. Park show larger, greater and grander than ever before.” By 1912, “The New York Dramatic Mirror” listed Park’s new company “UNDER CANVAS: C. W. Park Dramatic Co.” (page 26). The tent company was still billed as a vaudeville show; the touring production included a substantial company with impressive scenic effects.

In 1912, the “Decatur Daily” published, “The company is now composed of forty and requires two of the largest of the Southern baggage cars to carry scenery, which is all new and up-to-date, being from the famous studio of Sosman & Landis. This is the largest company of its kind in the business and carries a modern and fully equipped theater, all the ushers and attaches appear in uniform, and instructed to attend to the wants of the patrons. Several new faces appear among the acting forces, as well as in the vaudeville forces, of which there are eight acts. The plays will be changed nightly, as well as the vaudeville (Decatur, Alabama, 14 May 1912, page 2).

The 1912 production included “The Man Who Dared,” “Dolly and I,” “A Round Up,” “St. Elmo,” and “The Shepherd of the Hills” (The Commercial Dispatch, 22 Aug. 1912, page 1). The scenery for the acts was advertised as “new and up to date from the famous Studio of Sosman & Landis.” Of the production, the article continued, “This is the largest company of its kind in the business and carries a modern and fully equipped theatre, all the ushers and attaches appearing in uniform, and instructed to attend to the wants of the patrons” (The Huntsville Times, 9 May 1912, page 1).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 832 – “The Seven Aviator Girls,” 1912

From “The Evening Review,” 2 Dec. 1912, page 6

There were many projects completed by Sosman & Landis during 1912 that were not mentioned by Thomas G. Moses in his memoirs. Sosman & Landis provided the scenery and stage effects for a touring production called “The Seven Aviator Girls.” The “Quad-City Times” reported that Sosman & Landis provided scenery for “The Aviator Girls,” a musical act composed of “seven winsome women” (17 March 1912, page 12).

Scenic embellishments accompanied each song, to “make them all the more delightful.” The production was produced by Virgil Bennett and headed by Miss Carlie Lowe, who was accompanied by the seven aviator girls in what was billed as “a spectacular scenic and singing novelty.” The four scenes for the show included “Owl Land, “ “On the Beach,” “In the Surf,” and a Japanese Palm Garden.” Musical interludes (olios) between scenes included “The Boogie Boo Owls,” “Serenade Me Sadie,” “Spooning in My Aeroplane,” and other catchy numbers” (Los Angeles Times, 4 Aug. 1912, page 26).

“The Daily Gate” reported that the show was “a spectacular musical and scenic singing act that has been the sensation in all the big houses in the country where they have played. A carload of special scenery is carried with the act and is said to be one of the most beautiful stage settings found in vaudeville. A special property man and electrician are carried with the company, which numbers seven principles and two mechanics” (Keokuk, Iowa, 17 Oct, 1912, page 5). The “Davenport Times” described, “They have five different song numbers and each means a change of costumes and ‘back drops.’ As a result their tuneful efforts are accompanies by a spectacular display that induces the natives to applaud vigorously. The big number, ‘Spooning in My Aeroplane,’ presents Miss Carlie Lowe soaring up to the roof in a miniature machine, while her feminine mechanicians cut fancy ‘diddoes’ with their feet and join the chorus in song. It is a prettily staged and engaging act all the way” (Davenport, Iowa, 19 March 1912, page 8).

From “The Province,” 25 July 1912, page 16

To be continued…