Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:38:36.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Scene Painters and their Work in America before 1800

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2009

John R. Wolcott
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

An inquiry into eighteenth-century American scene painting must draw upon sources other than painter's renderings, since few are known to survive. The most promising source other than printed descriptions, barren at best, are the non-theatrical landscape and topographical (view) paintings of America's early scenic artists. No employment of these materials is possible, however, until the parameters of the relationship between easel and scene painting have been established.

Type
Research Article
Information
Theatre Survey , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , May 1977 , pp. 57 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © American Society for Theatre Research 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Kernodle, George R., From Art to Theatre: Form and Convention in the Renaissance (Chicago, 1944)Google Scholar, and Jackson, Allan S., “The Perspective Landscape Scene in the English Theatre: 1660–1682” (unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1962)Google Scholar.

2 Joppien, Rudiger, Die Szenenbilder Philippe Jacques de Loutherbourgs Eine Untersuchung zu ihrer Stellung zwischen Maler und Theatre (Koln, 1972), pp. 18–32Google Scholar.

3 Ibid., p. 24.

4 A catalogue raisonné of the works of William Capon, and of John Inigo Richards, Nicholas Thomas Dall and the English scene painters whose settings may have been brought to America during the eighteenth century—de Loutherbourg, Emmanuel and Tobias Young—is given in Sybil Rosenfeld and Edward Croft-Murray, “A Checklist of Scene-Painters Working in Great Britain and Ireland in the 18th Century,” Theatre Notebook, XIX, No. 2 (Autumn, 1964Google Scholar) through XX, No. 2 (Winter, 1965/66). Of the British painters who made the journey from England to America, only John Joseph Holland (XIX, No. 2, 163) and C. Milbourne (XIX, No. 4, 136) are mentioned.

5 Joppien, loc. cit.

6 Loutherbourg, Philippe Jacques de, Scenès Romantiques et Pittoresques de L'Angleterre et du Pays de Walles (London, 1805)Google Scholar.

7 See for Canaletto, Plates 210 and 212, “Westminster Abbey with the Procession of Knights of the Order of the Bath”; for Belloto, Plates 193 and 194, “View of the Wilanow Palace from the Entrance”; and for William Marlow, Plate 106, “The Arno towards the Ponte alle Grazio,” in Briganti, Giuliano, The View Painters of Europe (New York, 1970)Google Scholar.

8 Views of Westminster, Sketched 1801–1815 and drawn in Watercolours by William Capon (London, 1923–1924)Google Scholar, plate 8. The backscene sketch may be seen in the Library of the Royal Shakespeare Theatre, Stratford-upon-Avon, England, and in the Magazine of Art (London, 1895), p. 291Google Scholar.

9 William Wollet's original engraving of the Maid of the Mill (the setting for I, i) is owned by the British Museum.

10 An account of “St. Mary Cray, Kent,” accompanied by a reproduction in color, is given in The Connoisseur, LXIX (05 1924), 41Google Scholar. While objection might be raised concerning the equating of techniques in works of different media, a study of eighteenth-century engravings, and comparison of these with the originals, suggests that although the methods of creating highlight and shadow might differ from one medium to another, and the tools for enscribing line might differ as well, the goal of the engraver was to render as accurately as possible the tonal values, preciseness of line and deliniation of detail to be found in the original.

11 Dunlap, William, History of the Rise and Progress of the Arts of Design in the United States (New York, 1965), III, 146Google Scholar. Dunlap's work, originally published in New York in 1834, was revised and enlarged in 1918 by Frank W. Bayley and Charles E. Goodspeed; the 1965 edition has been further revised, enlarged and edited by Alexander Wyckoff.

12 Duerr, Edwin, “Charles Ciceri and the Background of American Scene Design,” Theatre Arts Magazine (December 1932), 985Google Scholar. Regrettably, Duerr does not cite his source.

13 Durang, Charles, “History of the Philadelphia Stage,” in the Philadelphia Sunday Dispatch, published in three series, beginning with the issue of 7 May 1854Google Scholar; I, i, 2. Volume, chapter and page citations refer to the scrapbook collection of Durang's article in the University of Pennsylvania Rare Book Collection.

14 Cited in Rankin, Hugh F., The Theatre in Colonial America (Chapel Hill, 1965), pp. 50–51Google Scholar.

15 Cited in Odell, George, Annals of the New York Stage (New York, 1927–1949), I, 55Google Scholar.

16 Durang, I, y, 11.

17 See Dickason, David Howard, William Williams, Novelist and Painter of Colonial America (Bloomington, 1970Google Scholar). See also Dunlap, Arts of Design, I, 30.

18 Courtesy of the Henry Francis du Pont Winterthur Museum; reproduced in Dickason, p. 143. The attribution of this painting is in contention (see “William Williams—A Dissenting Opinion,” Richardson, E.P., The American Art Journal, vol. IV, no. 1, 1972Google Scholar) but the argument is not an issue here. Whether painted by William Williams, Sr., as Dickason asserts, or by William Williams Jr., the elder Williams' pupil, as Rilchardson argues, the method of composition in this work is identical with that of works to which the attribution is certain, and the validity of the example stands.

19 Owned by Mrs. John P. Gilbert, Carmel, California; reproduced in Dickason, p. 158.

20 See Larkin, Oliver W., Art and Life in America (New York, 1960), p. 50Google Scholar.

21 In discussing the painting of George Lambert, the eighteenth-century landscape and scene painter employed at Covent Garden between 1732 and 1765, Rudiger Joppien (p. 25) reaches a similar conclusion. “It is also imaginable, even though not compelling,—[consider Lambert's “Hilly Landscape with a Cornfield” (1733)] … as evidence—his painting was influenced by his stage works. The framing of small trees, which forms a dark foreground, and which sets off a broad well-lit landscape that stretches out behind, distinctly suggests a theatrical composition. However, this composition is to a great extent also characteristic of the [Claude] Lorrain ideal landscape, and in the first half of the eighteenth century this was the model for the entire English landscape school. Since most of the known English scenic artists up to de Loutherbourg were at the same time landscape painters, a coming together of landscape painting and scene painting, precisely in the area of landscape scenes, must have occurred. In this scene type the art of scene painting first came upon the kinship and transferability between painting and scene painting.”

22 The year in which Snyder joined the Douglass company is the subject of some contention. Charles Durang (I, xix, 24) asserts that “when the American Company first played at Providence, Rhode Island, in 1759, they found Mr. Snyder there. Mr. Douglass engaged him to paint scenery for the new Southwark theatre, which he did not complete until sometime afterward.” Downer, Alan S., in a footnote (fn. 34) to The Memoir of John Durang, American Actor, 1785–1816 (Pittsburgh, 1966) apparently followed Charles Durang's datingGoogle Scholar, stating that “Jacob Snyder joined the American Company during their performances in Providence, Rhode Island, 1759.” Both Willard, George O., in his History of the Providence Stage, 1762–1891 (Providence, 1891), p. 12Google Scholar, and Hugh Rankin (p. 99) place Douglass and company in Newport, Rhode Island, on 7 September 1761, according to Willard “the first dramatic performance given in New England by a regular company of professional actors.” Rankin's meticulous tracing of the American Company's travels during the years 1759–1762 (pp. 77–101), tends to rule out any question of error in the 1761 date.

23 Cited in Odell, I, 165–66.

24 South Carolina Gazette, 31 October 1765. Cited in Rankin, p. 103 and footnote 6, p. 216. It would seem that in addition to “entertaining the town” of Charleston, Douglass may have sought out these scenes with an eye to enhancing the soon-to-be opened second Southwark theatre, in Philadelphia. In later years, as scenic artists in America became more commonplace, this practice was only somewhat modified. Rather than sending entire settings, English painters now sent sketches or maquettes, small models of the setting, leaving the actual painting to their American cousins. (See John R. Wolcott, “A Case Study of American Production: English Source and American Practice,” The Ohio State University Theatre Collection Bulletin, No. 15, 9–19.) It was not so much that American scene painters were incompetent to produce elaborate settings: they often did. But in the arts, for many years following the War of Independence, America remained very much colonial in its ties with England. Not until the 1830s did a uniquely American school begin to emerge, both in easel painting and, to a far lesser degree, in scene painting.

25 Rankin, p. 161.

26 Dunlap, William, in his History of the American Theatre, 2nd edn., (New York, 1963), I, 59Google Scholar, is mistaken concerning Richards' scenes. “Scenery is for the first time particularly announced,” he wrote. “We have reason to believe that the department of the drama which depended upon the painter had not hitherto created much of illusion, or even sensation. On this occasion the bills say, ‘with a new set of SCENES, painted by Mr. Richards of London.’ It is reasonable to conclude that, as Annapolis saw the first theatre in America,”— by this he refers to the brick building used by the Hallam company in 1752—“she likewise saw displayed the first well painted set of scenery.”

27 Rankin, p. 167.

28 Ford, Worthington C. and others, eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (Washington, 1904–1934), I, 78Google Scholar.

29 Odell, I, 194.

30 Durang, I, x, 19.

31 David Hall, in the Henry Francis du Pont Winterthur Museum; Hotwells and Rownham Ferry, in the Bristol Art Gallery. Reproduced in Dickason, pp. 151 and 170, respectively.

32 Odell, I, 185.

33 Dunlap, , History of the American Theatre, I, 102Google Scholar; see also Dunlap, , Arts of Design, II, 157–158Google Scholar. Mr. Barrow, an Englishman, appears to have been more closely associated with the business management of the theatre than with the scenic department. The receipt-book of the Theatre Royal (the old John Street Theatre) bears testimony to this through Barrow's numerous signed entries regarding disbursement of funds and matters pertaining to the box-office. (The theatre's receipt-book is owned by The New York Historical Society.) See also Odell, I, 202ff.

34 Downer, p. 19.

35 Ibid., p. 34.

36 Ibid., p. 24.

37 Odell, I, 232.

38 This thesis is given support by the fact that the 1787–88 New York season ended on 31 May 1788, just six days before Snyder's advertisement appeared. The text of the advertisement provides an interesting insight into the versatility necessary to a painter's survival. “Ignatius Shnydore Respectfully informs the public, that he has declined the business he has lately been employed in, as Scene Painter to the Old American Company of Comedians [i.e., the Hallam-Henry Company]. Having his family in this city, he is desirous of becoming a Citizen, and to carry on the painting business in all its branches. Coach and Sign Painting, Ship and House Painting, Gilding and Glazing, Rooms Painted in the Italian mode, on canvas, Transparent Painting, &c. N.B. Mr. Shnydore flatters himself he will give general satisfaction to all those, who may honor him with their commands. No. 65, Maiden-Lane, next to the Corner of Nassau-street.”

39 Dunlap, , History of the American Theatre, I, 195–196Google Scholar.

40 Cowell, Joseph, Thirty Years Passed Among the Players (New York, 1844), p. 61Google Scholar.

40 Graves, Algernon, The Society of Artists of Great Britain, 1760–1791: A Complete Dictionary of Contributors (London, 1907), p. 165Google Scholar.

42 Fielding, Mantle, Dictionary of American Painters, Sculptors and Engravers (New York, 1965), p. 241Google Scholar.

43 Durang, , History, I, xxiv, 46Google Scholar.

44 View of Government House, New York City, 1798. M. C. Milbourne, artist. From a print in the collection of Mrs. Jean Burch Falls; published in Isaac Newton Phelps Stokes, Iconography of Manhattan Island: 1498 to 1909 (New York, 1928), I, plate 66Google Scholar.

45 Playbill for Mr. Bignall's benefit, 29 April 1793; cited in Willis, Eola, The Charleston Stage in the XVIII Century (Columbia, S.C., 1924), p. 173Google Scholar.

46 He continued to paint occasional scenes at the theatre until as late as 1805.

47 Dunlap, , Arts of Design, III, 318Google Scholar, and History of the American Theatre, I, 223Google Scholar. Although primarily of value to research on 19th century scene painters, see also Groce, George C. and Wallace, David H., The New-York Historical Society's Dictionary of Artists in America. 1564–1860 (New Haven, 1957Google Scholar). For reference to “C. Milbourne,” “Charles C. Milbourn” and “Cotton Milbourne,” see p. 443.

48 See Duerr, pp. 983–990; and Dunlap, , History of the American Theatre, I, 210–213Google Scholar.

49 Dunlap, , History of the American Theatre, I, 212Google Scholar.

50 Ibid., II, 12.

51 Dunlap, William, Diary of William Dunlap (New York, 1930), II, 404Google Scholar.

52 Possibly “Jemmy Stuart,” discussed in footnote 67 below.

53 Commercial Advertiser, 3 December 1798Google Scholar; cited in Odell, II, 41.

54 Diderot, Denis, Oeuvres Complete de Diderot, Revues Sur les Éditions Originates (Paris, 1876)Google Scholar, as cited in Lillian Elvira Preston, “Philippe Jacques de Loutherbourg: Eighteenth Century Romantic Artist and Scene Designer” (an unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, 1957), p. 102Google Scholar; and Horace Walpole's Correspondence, Yale, ed., (New Haven, 1939), VII, 339Google Scholar.

55 Wright, T., Some Account of the Life of Richard Wilson, Esq., RA (London, 1824), p. 152Google Scholar.

56 Quoted by Dunlap, , History of the American Theatre, I, 229–230Google Scholar.

57 Ibid., 231.

58 Wood, William B., Personal Recollections of the Stage (Philadelphia, 1855), p. 244Google Scholar.

59 Durang, , History, I, xxii, 41Google Scholar.

60 Dunlap, , Arts of Design, II, 284Google Scholar.

61 Dunlap, , Diary, II, 407Google Scholar.

62 “C. Gullager, Portrait & Theatrical Painter, No. 58 Maiden Lane, New York, Executes Portraits, from whole lengths to busts, on any scale; Decorations for public and private buildings. Frontispieces or Vionets [Vignettes], for publications on history, allegory or sentiment; Paintings on Silk, for military standards, or other ornamented purposes.” It is of no consequence, perhaps, but of interest to note that Gullager lived only a few houses from Jacob Snyder in Maiden Lane.

63 Willis, p. 169.

64 Ibid., p. 306.

65 Dunlap, , Arts of Design, II, 114Google Scholar.

66 Many members of the Sully family enjoyed the profession of the theatre, although Thomas Sully appears to have had only vicarious contact with it, largely through his wide circle of friends in Philadelphia. According to John Neagle, in a letter quoted by Dunlap in his Arts of Design (III, 166), “Mr. Sully then lived where the Athenaeum now is, in Fifth Street, and he had on his easel a study of the pro-scenium, or part over the stage, for the Chestnut Street Theatre.” This took place sometime between 1812 and 1817; there is no record of the painting having survived, or of why Sully was painting this subject.

67 The identity of Stuart has been all but impossible to establish, for the name commonly appears as Stuart, Stewart, Sturt and Steward. According to Charles Durang the 1799 production of Blue Beard was painted by “John Joseph Holland, Milbourne and Stuart.” William Warren's “Journal” for Monday, 6 August 1799, records “Easton [Maryland] Theatre—Jemmy Stuart, our painter.” On 24 April 1800, the Chestnut Street establishment presented an “apotheosis of the late illustrious Lt. General Washington designed by Mr. Holland and executed by Milbourne, Mr. Holland, Mr. Robbins, and Mr. Steward.” (Durang, I, xxi, 63.) As early as 1761 the Hallam company included a Mr. Sturt, and the Chestnut Street company, in the 1797–99 season, included a Mrs. Stuart. Whether Jemmy Stuart belongs with either is problematical.

68 Dunlap, , Arts of Design, II, 197Google Scholar. See also Groce and Wallace, p. 322, for information on Holland's non-theatrical work.

69 Dunlap, , Arts of Design, II, 198Google Scholar.

70 Broad Street and Federal Hall, New York City, 1797. The original is owned by the New York Historical Society. The present reproduction is from a print in the collection of Mrs. Jean Burch Falls. It is important to distinguish between the paintings of this period and those done in the latter part of Holland's life, about 1816, for considerable change is to be seen in this artist's late work. Holland's paintings of scenes of New York have been reproduced in Stakes' Iconography of Manhattan Island: 1498 to 1909.

71 Dunlap, , History of the American Theatre, I, 370Google Scholar.

72 Stokes, I, 446.

73 As early as 1633, on Inigo Jones' design for a relieve scene in The Shepherd's Paradise, for example, such grids are commonplace; they are to be found on the work of scenic artists to the present day.

74 This thesis is supported by a recently identified sketch for Adelmorn the Outlaw, executed by John Joseph Holland for the Baltimore Theatre (Chestnut Street Theatre Company) production in 1802. See Stoddard, Richard, “Notes on John Joseph Holland, with a Design for the Baltimore Theatre, 1802,” Theatre Survey, XII, No. 1 (05 1971), 58–66 and Figure 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.