University of Iowa
Iowa Research Online
Theses and Dissertations
Spring 2011
Same place next summer: permanent chautauquas
and the performance of middle-class identity
Elizabeth Loyd Harvey
University of Iowa
Copyright 2011 Elizabeth Loyd Harvey
This dissertation is available at Iowa Research Online: http://ir.uiowa.edu/etd/979
Recommended Citation
Harvey, Elizabeth Loyd. "Same place next summer: permanent chautauquas and the performance of middle-class identity." PhD
(Doctor of Philosophy) thesis, University of Iowa, 2011.
http://ir.uiowa.edu/etd/979.
Follow this and additional works at: http://ir.uiowa.edu/etd
Part of the American Studies Commons
SAME PLACE NEXT SUMMER:
PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS AND THE PERFORMANCE OF
MIDDLE-CLASS IDENTITY
by
Elizabeth Loyd Harvey
An Abstract
Of a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree
in American Studies in
the Graduate College of
The University of Iowa
May 2011
Thesis Supervisor: Professor Kim Marra
1
ABSTRACT
This dissertation explores the impact of the permanent chautauqua movement in
American culture, especially in the period from 1874 to 1935. It argues that chautauquas
served as sites for the production of middle-class culture and the renegotiation of
relationships among class, gender, race, and religion.
Permanent chautauquas were popular vacation resorts throughout the United
States, beginning with the founding of the Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly in
upstate New York and increasing in number to about two hundred in 1900. They were
associations of cottages offering community programs that were educational, religious,
and entertaining. This dissertation examines the programs that the chautauquas planned,
arguing that they espoused a burgeoning form of culture, one that supported a perceived
morality and middle-class values like dedication to family, temperance, education,
patriotism, piety, and fighting against temptation to sin.
Particular emphasis is placed on how performance at permanent chautauquas led
to new expectations of gender, class, race, and religion. Women had opportunities for
leadership, were able to blur lines between public and private spheres, and could act out
different expectations of their gender while on the grounds. While most chautauquans
were middle class, attending a chautauqua meant that one’s class was not important and
all could enjoy a middle-class vacation. While the line between whites and non-whites
remained stable, non-whites were granted performance opportunities at chautauquas that
they might not have had; other non-whites participated as members of the work force that
allowed white chautauquans the leisure they expected. Because chautauquas were
Protestant communities, religion underlaid all activities on the grounds, redefining
2
expectations of how religion and entertainment could be combined. Taken together,
these renegotiations of identity at chautauquas impacted a broader American culture.
This dissertation examines the performances at chautauqua, in particular the
Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle and their Recognition Day graduation
ceremony; historical pageantry; professional performers who visited as part of the circuit
chautauquas; and early film exhibition. It places them in a broader American
performance context and argues that permanent chautauquas played a role in their
development and popularity.
It draws upon archival records from the chautauquas to outline the kinds of
programming presented. Additionally, the research is supported by anecdotal evidence
from a series of oral history interviews conducted with individuals who recall their
childhoods at permanent chautauquas.
Abstract Approved:
______________________________________________________
Thesis Supervisor
______________________________________________________
Title and Department
______________________________________________________
Date
SAME PLACE NEXT SUMMER:
PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS AND THE PERFORMANCE OF
MIDDLE-CLASS IDENTITY
by
Elizabeth Loyd Harvey
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree
in American Studies in
the Graduate College of
The University of Iowa
May 2011
Thesis Supervisor: Professor Kim Marra
Copyright by
ELIZABETH LOYD HARVEY
2011
All Rights Reserved
Graduate College
The University of Iowa
Iowa City, Iowa
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
___________________________
PH. D. THESIS
_____________
This is to certify that the Ph. D. thesis of
Elizabeth Loyd Harvey
has been approved by the Examining Committee
for the thesis requirement for the Doctor of
Philosophy degree in American Studies
at the May 2011 graduation.
Thesis Committee:
______________________________________________
Kim Marra, Thesis Supervisor
______________________________________________
Bluford Adams
______________________________________________
Rick Altman
______________________________________________
Shelton Stromquist
______________________________________________
John Raeburn
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The best part of writing this dissertation was experiencing chautauquas as they
exist today, and as they have been preserved in the memories of those who have spent the
summers of their lives at them. I am most indebted to those who have shared their stories
with me: Jane Curry, Jonathan Amy, John Weeks, Bets Shier, Tom Child, Barbara
McLaughlin Brown, and Anne Child Sheaffer in Bay View; Baker Duncan, Bob Greer,
and Barbara Sublett Guthery at the Colorado Chautauqua; Doris Bright and Mary Stewart
at Lakeside; the late Fran Reynolds and Walter and Julia Pulliam in Monteagle; Martha
Rakita and Marilyn Shotwell in Ocean Grove; and Douglas and Beth Keene in Ocean
Park.
Many other conversations have shaped my understanding of chautauquas in
various eras. Thanks to Ric Loyd, John Loyd, Marion Caveny, Tom and Bibby Terry,
David Bieber, Sophie McGee, Ralph and Peg Keene, Harriet and Jack Jackson, Todd
Whitney, John Shaw, Catherine Long Gates, Bert Farin, Trude Fitelson, Sharon Nelson,
Nellie Taylor, and Kevin Sibbring.
My research visits could not have happened without the generous people who lent
me cottage bedrooms or other accommodation. These friends include Frank Gwalthney,
Jack and Jane Anderson, Henry and Nancy Crais, George and Pat McCormick, Rebecca
and Steve Stage, Gyorgy Toth, Jennifer Ambrose, and Lynn Stinson.
Several organizations have supported the development of my ideas in the seven
years I have spent working on this subject. The Theatre History Museum in Mt. Pleasant,
Iowa and its membership have supported me from the beginning. The Chautauqua
Network, especially Myra Peterson, Frank Gwalthney, and Kathy Snavely, helped in
ii
myriad ways, from organizing interviews and accommodation to being a sounding board
for ideas. The Bay View Historic Awareness Committee showed constant interest in my
research and provided me with a public forum to share it. Opportunities at the Legacy
Oral History Workshop in San Francisco and the Futures of American Studies Institute at
Dartmouth College have honed my focus. The Bay View Association and the University
of Iowa Graduate College sponsored trips for further research.
Research librarians at the various chautauquas and at the University of Iowa
Special Collections have guided me in my work, and helped to fill in holes once I began
writing this dissertation while in Europe. I appreciate the assistance of John and Ginny
Weeks, Janet Stephenson, Kathy Hodson, Gyorgy Toth, Jane Mauer, Fred Buch, David
Bell, Morgan Merrill, Bill Darr, and Jon Schmitz.
My dissertation committee has offered advice throughout the process. I am
grateful for the support of Bluford Adams, Rick Altman, John Raeburn, Shel Stromquist,
and especially my dissertation advisor, Kim Marra. Several other readers have offered
invaluable advice, including Kathy Hodson, Mary Jane Doerr, Donald Loyd, John
Weeks, Gyorgy Toth, and Jennifer Ambrose.
I am thankful for the loving support of my family: Loyds, Huffmans, Shahs,
Childs, Harveys, and Biddles. Without the support of my parents, Ric and Lisa Loyd, I
could not have completed this dissertation thousands of miles from the nearest
chautauqua. Besides their unending friendship and parental support, they found
themselves processing oral histories, digging through dusty diaries, and asking questions
about a place they dearly love. They provided me with a great gift by first taking me to
iii
Bay View at the age of six weeks and, even when I was a child, they made sure I
appreciated its special history.
Finally, I am grateful for the support of my husband, Kol Harvey. Through the
end of dating, an engagement of several years and in several states, and our first year and
a half of marriage in three countries, my dissertation has been our constant companion.
Summers together, vacations, and weekends have been sacrificed in the name of research.
Kol, it has all been easier and so much more fun with your loving support and knowing
that we are under the same moon.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
viii
CHAPTER
1. ENTERING THE GATES: PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS’ PLACE
IN AMERICAN CULTURE
1
2. IN THE GROVES: THE CHAUTAUQUA LITERARY AND
SCIENTIFIC CIRCLE’S RECOGNITION DAY
31
3. ON THE STAGE: PAGEANTRY AT PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS
77
4. IN THE AUDITORIUMS AND IN THE TENTS: PROFESSIONAL
CHAUTAUQUA PERFORMANCES
122
5. IN THE DARK: MOVIES AT PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS
187
CONCLUSION
222
APPENDIX
A. PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUA PROGRAM ANALYSES
230
B. FILM INDICES
250
BIBLIOGRAPHY
270
v
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE A1.
Lakeside Program Analysis
232
TABLE A2.
Ocean Park Program Analysis
234
TABLE A3.
Chautauqua Institution Program Analysis
236
TABLE A4
Bay View Program Analysis
238
TABLE A5
Monteagle Program Analysis
240
TABLE A6.
Winona Lake Program Analysis
242
TABLE A7.
Colorado Chautauqua Program Analysis
244
TABLE A8.
Pennsylvania Chautauqua (Mt. Gretna) Program Analysis
246
TABLE A9.
Fountain Park Program Analysis
248
TABLE B1.
Traveling Film Companies at Chautauquas
251
TABLE B2.
Some Films Shown at Permanent Chautauquas
252
TABLE B3.
Some Short Subject Films Shown at Chautauquas
258
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1.
Postcard of the 1911 Recognition Day Procession at
Chautauqua.
FIGURE 2.
Photograph of the Circus at Chautauqua, circa 1911-1920.
FIGURE 3.
A group of performers from one of the three-part pageant
series at Lakeside in 1923.
100
Redpath Chautauqua leadership at Harry P. Harrison’s
Michigan farm (Amy Weiskopf was not included).
143
FIGURE 5.
Our Uncle Sam sketch, Marion Ballou Fisk.
149
FIGURE 6.
“My Country ‘tis of thee, Sweet Land of Liberty, To Thee we
sing,” Marion Ballou Fisk.
149
FIGURE 7.
Drawing from J. Smith Damron talent brochure, 1918.
153
FIGURE 8.
Costumed contrast in a 1914 talent brochure for the Southern
Jubilee Singers and Players.
159
FIGURE 9.
Dr. Charles Eastman in Sioux chief full-dress when “especially
invited to do so.”
159
FIGURE 10.
Image of Hiawatha pageant grounds, from Katharine ErtzBowden and Charles L. Bowden talent brochure.
199
FIGURE 4.
vii
50
91
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Bay View: Bay View Association Archives, Bay View, Michigan.
Colorado: Colorado Chautauqua Association Archives, Boulder, Colorado.
Carnegie: A. A. Paddock Collection, Colorado Chautauqua Association Records, Boulder
Historical Society, Carnegie Library for Local History, Boulder, Colorado.
Chautauqua: Chautauqua Institution Archives, Chautauqua, New York.
Fisk: Marion Ballou Fisk Papers, Special Collections Department, University of Iowa,
Iowa City, Iowa.
Lakeside: Lakeside Heritage Society, Lakeside, Ohio.
Monteagle: Monteagle Sunday School Assembly Archives, Monteagle, Tennessee.
Mt. Gretna: Mount Gretna Historical Society, Mount Gretna, Pennsylvania.
Ocean Grove: Historical Society of Ocean Grove, Ocean Grove, New Jersey.
Ocean Park: Ocean Park Association Archives, Ocean Park, Maine.
Worrell: Ruth Mougey Worrell Family Papers, Ohio Historical Society, Columbus, Ohio.
Redpath: Redpath Chautauqua Collection, Special Collections Department, University of
Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.
viii
1
CHAPTER 1
ENTERING THE GATES:
PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS’ PLACE IN AMERICAN CULTURE
My great-grandmother, Anna Blackford Child, wrote in her journal late in her life,
“To us [it] was and is, not only a place, but ‘a way of life.’”1 American novelist
Charlotte Perkins Gilman wrote in 1904, “That is what Chautauqua is – a great feeding
place for mind and heart and soul; and not the least of the nourishment is in the free
contact of so many nice people – quite aside from the courses of instruction.”2 In 1928, a
club woman from Wichita Falls, Texas, wrote,
The charm of Chautauqua must be felt, it cannot be described. The setting at the
foot of the Flat Irons on Bluebell Canyon is ideal: Towering mountain, broadspreading plains, prattling brooks, murmuring canyons, melting snows, silvery
lakes, afternoon showers, the call of the woodchucks, the scream of the mountainjay and the chatter of the magpie. Added to this are friends and folk of kindred
spirit, steak-frys and hikes, mountain trips, camping-out, frosty nights, mountain
bonfires, craggy peaks, the return to Chautauqua, the evening entertainment at the
Auditorium, the lyceum lectures and shows. All these blend into a picture of
sweet memory that calls for a migration back to Boulder when winter gives way
to spring.3
Each of these women described a permanent chautauqua, a summer resort where people
went not only to enjoy recreation on their vacations, but also to participate in educational
courses, to attend lectures, musical concerts, and dramatic performances, and to deepen
their Protestant faith through Bible study and sermons.4 Yet each of these women was
1
Anna Blackford Child, “Stops on Our Way North by Car” journal entry, “Diaries and Personal Journals,
1913-1976,” Author’s collection.
2
Charlotte Perkins Gilman, “From Chautauqua,” The Woman’s Column, September 3, 1904, 2.
3
“(Mrs. J. W.) Ada W. Cantwell, Vice President of Woman’s Forum, Wichita Falls, Texas,” Colorado
Chautauqua Bulletin, April 1928, 5, Carnegie.
4
Permanent chautauquas are sometimes referred to as independent chautauquas or resort chautauquas; they
are related to, but different from, community chautauquas and circuit chautauquas (also known as tent
2
familiar with a different resort within the chautauqua movement. My great-grandmother
spent most of the summers of her adult life in Bay View, Michigan. Gilman spent time at
the Chautauqua Institution, in western New York State. The woman from Texas
recounted her experiences at the Colorado Chautauqua in Boulder. Despite the different
locales, these women experienced similar deep attachments to a place, brought about by
the unique mixture of opportunities that chautauquas offered.
Permanent chautauquas were popular throughout the United States beginning in
the mid-1870s. They appealed to middle-class desires to go on vacation, but also to
remain protected from sin and other distractions. In addition, vacationing at a chautauqua
was a way to improve one’s self through religious study and secular education in addition
to recreation. This self-improvement offered a way to keep “working” and not feel guilty
about vacation idleness. According to historian Cindy S. Aron, middle-class people had a
variety of choices in where and how to spend vacation time, as “the last half of the
nineteenth century witnessed a virtual explosion of resorts of all types in all regions of
the country.”5 Attending a chautauqua, then, was a conscious decision to eliminate the
temptation and distractions of alcohol, gambling, and sex that some other resorts
supplied. Aron asserts,
chautauquas or chain chautauquas). The Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly, later renamed the
Chautauqua Assembly and then the Chautauqua Institution, was the first chautauqua and remains the best
known; its development led to the rise of many other permanent chautauquas. To distinguish between the
Chautauqua Institution in particular and permanent chautauquas in general, I choose to capitalize the word
“chautauqua” when referring to the Chautauqua Institution in Chautauqua, New York and use the lowercase version when discussing permanent chautauquas within the larger movement. Several sources
capitalize any use of the word, and I have maintained their choice when quoting.
5
Cindy S. Aron, Working at Play: A History of Vacations in the United States (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1999), 110-111. Also on the history of vacationing, see Marguerite S. Shaffer, See
America First: Tourism and National Identity, 1880-1940 (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution
Press, 2001.
3
Religious resorts provided a solution, a way to help keep vacationers on the
straight and narrow. The rules and regulations of most such places kept the
resorts safe. In addition, religious resorts offered visitors the opportunity to use
their vacations in a worthwhile pursuit. Vacationers could renew their faith as
they enjoyed fresh air, mountains or seaside, and a respite from work and
domestic responsibilities. Middle-class people could rest assured that, at the very
minimum, vacationing at a religious resort would do no harm and might even do
some good.6
John Heyl Vincent and Lewis Miller had in mind this idea of a religious resort when they
founded the Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly in upstate New York in 1874. Using
the model of the camp meeting as its basis, both in idea and in actual physical space (they
leased the grounds of the Fair Point Camp Meeting), Vincent and Miller created
something new in their combination of religious and secular education.7
This dissertation examines what followed Vincent and Miller’s founding of the
Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly, which was the creation of an entire movement of
over two hundred permanent chautauquas across the United States. Chautauquas
operated as sites for the renegotiation of gender, religion, race, and class. Through
religious, educational, and entertainment programming, permanent chautauquas
contributed to the production of a middle-class culture. By middle-class culture, I mean
cultural forms that were targeted specifically to the middle class and those who aspired to
be middle class. These cultural forms aimed to attract audiences through a perceived
6
7
Ibid., 111.
Among the literature on camp meetings, Roger Robin’s discussion of social dynamics at camp meetings is
especially useful; Roger Robins, “Vernacular American Landscape: Methodists, Camp Meetings, and
Social Respectability,” Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation 4, no. 2 (Summer
1994): 165-191. See also Steven D. Cooley, “Manna and the Manual: Sacramental and Instrumental
Constructions of the Victorian Methodist Camp Meeting during the Mid-Nineteenth Century,” Religion and
American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation 6, no. 2 (Summer 1996): 131-159; Charles Lippy, “The
Camp Meeting in Transition: The Character and Legacy of the Late Nineteenth Century,” Methodist
History 34, no. 1 (1995): 3-17.
4
morality, rooted in generally Protestant values like dedication to family, temperance,
education, patriotism, piety, and fighting against temptation to sin.
To see the ways in which chautauquas helped to expand existing notions of class,
race, gender, and religion in middle-class culture, it is necessary to examine those
embodied representations of the middle class. Andrea Volpe has argued that middleclass identity can be seen through representation and cultural forms; she uses carte de
visite photography as her entrée into what it meant to be middle class:
Cartes de visite complicate and enrich historians’ accounts of the mid-nineteenth
century by suggesting that middle-class formation ought to be as much a question
of representation as of narration. For it is only by exploring the interior workings
of cultural forms and bodies of thought that we will begin to see how a middleclass identity was ‘made real.’”8
In this same way, permanent chautauquas can be interpreted as sites in which middleclass identity and middle-class culture were “made real.” The programming that the
permanent chautauquas offered over the course of their first sixty years were a
representation of the culture that a broader American middle class enjoyed.
The middle-class culture to which chautauquas contributed was not static, but
changed over the course of its first sixty years. Lawrence W. Levine argued that “culture
is a process, not a fixed condition.”9 Taking that approach, this dissertation examines
those representations, those productions of middle-class culture that chautauquans
supported, in a loosely chronological, but always overlapping, manner. Each chapter
takes up a different kind of performance at chautauquas in the first sixty years of their
8
Andrea Volpe, “Cartes de Visite Portrait Photographs and the Culture of Class Formation,” in The
Middling Sorts: Explorations in the History of the American Middle Class, ed. Burton J. Bledstein and
Robert D. Johnston (New York: Routledge, 2001), 169.
9
Lawrence W. Levine, Highbrow Lowbrow: The Emergence of Cultural Hierarchy in America
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988), 33.
5
history. Each of these performances was designated as a “red letter day” or the most
exciting day of the season. Chapter Two looks at the rise of the Chautauqua Literary and
Scientific Circle and other similar directed reading programs, and suggests that their
Recognition Day commencement ceremonies served to highlight the centrality of
education in middle-class culture. Chapter Three examines chautauquans’ interest in
performing in historical pageants, actively participating in the production of middle-class
culture. Chapter Four focuses on professional performers who visited permanent
chautauquas through a mutually-beneficial relationship with circuit chautauquas, a model
developed in the early twentieth century that consisted of setting up a tent in a town for a
short period of time and offering similar programming to what the permanent
chautauquas presented. Chapter Five takes up the role of movies as a middle-class
cultural form that was supported and changed because of chautauquans’ consumption of
it. Finally, the Conclusion discusses the impact of chautauquas’ production of middleclass cultural forms on the few chautauquas that remain in the twenty-first century.
Each of these chapters examines various aspects of performance. In this
dissertation, the term performance usually means a rehearsed and staged program. It is
often on a stage, but sometimes presented in an open area where a space has been
designated for it. However, performances can also mean the way that people present
themselves in a society. In The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life, Erving
Goffman argued that stage terminology can inflect how everyday actions are
understood.10 These acts of personal definition and social interaction are repeated over
and over again, and the actors perfect the “impressions” that they offer the audience. At
10
Erving Goffman, The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life (Garden City, NJ: Doubleday Anchor
Books, 1959).
6
the same time, the audience members perform in response, becoming actors themselves.
In this way, attending a chautauqua is a performance. What a person preferred to wear,
how she decided to act, what she chose to attend, even how she responded to a program –
all were performances of the everyday self in Goffman’s view.
Judith Butler has taken Goffman’s framework one step further, applying
performance studies to basic concepts of identity. In “Performative Acts and Gender
Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory,” she asserts that gender
is the performance of masculinity or femininity, the conscious choice of a person to
perform in a variety of ways to a variety of audiences.11 Identifying as a particular kind
of gender requires the repeated decision to perform it. Butler’s approach opens
opportunities to apply everyday performance to other identity types. At chautauquas,
people performed kinds of middle-classness and whiteness. Once they gained access to
the grounds (often with the purchase of a gate pass), people acted as though one’s class
did not matter and a middle-class identity was assumed. Racial identities remained rigid;
if a person was white, she was a chautauquan, but if she was non-white, she was most
likely a servant and sometimes an entertainer, but not a chautauquan.
If race, class, and gender are performed acts, then, permanent chautauquas offered
an opportunity to redefine the rules for those performances. A short background on the
history of the chautauqua movement is helpful in contextualizing the performance of
middle-class identity on their grounds.
John Heyl Vincent was a Methodist minister originally from Tuscaloosa,
Alabama. Lewis Miller had been a teacher as a young man, but became a farm
11
Judith Butler, “Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist
Theory,” Theatre Journal 40, no. 4 (December 1988): 519-531.
7
equipment inventor and distributor. Vincent and Miller were both committed to the
improvement of Sunday school education, and determined that to do so required more
advanced training of Sunday school teachers, in both religious and secular subjects.
Miller was aware of a Methodist camp meeting held at Fair Point, New York, and
became one of its trustees. When he and Vincent visited the site in 1873, they decided to
lease the land on the shores of Lake Chautauqua for a Sunday school teachers’ assembly
the following August.12
The next summer, they held the Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly, combining
Bible study with what was known as Normal school, a general secular teacher training
program. It was organized under the auspices of the Methodist Sunday School Union,
but advertising encouraged Sunday school teachers from all Protestant denominations to
attend. That first year, Miller and Vincent were careful to structure the program
differently from a camp meeting. Vincent wrote twelve years later, “It was called by
some a ‘camp-meeting.’ But a ‘camp-meeting’ it was not, in any sense, except that most
of us lived in tents. There were few sermons preached, and no so-called ‘evangelistic’
services held. … the Assembly was totally unlike the camp-meeting. We did our best to
make it so.”13 The program was formally scheduled with religious and other activities,
but there were no opportunities for evangelizing participants to speak. Jesse Lyman
Hurlbut, a friend of Vincent’s and an active Chautauquan, once recalled coming upon a
12
Vincent and Miller called their assembly the Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly because it was
situated on the shores of Lake Chautauqua. Historians have identified a variety of etymologies of the word
“Chautauqua”; it is generally understood to be an American Indian word that refers to the shape or
usefulness of the lake – bag tied in the middle, two moccasins tied together, or place of the big fish. Its
exact origin has not been adequately attributed to one tribal language.
13
John H. Vincent, The Chautauqua Movement (Boston: Chautauqua Press, 1886; repr., Charleston, SC:
BiblioLife, 2009), 16-17.
8
“prominent Sunday School talker” leaving the grounds; he complained to Hurlbut, “This
is no place for me. They have a cut-and-dried program, and a fellow can’t get a word in
anywhere. I’m going home. Give me the convention where a man can speak if he wants
to.”14
Over the next few years, the Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly attracted not
only Sunday school teachers but also others interested in this unique combination of
education and religion. They were drawn to the variety of lectures in addition to the
formal classes. Vincent and Miller encouraged this second population at their assembly.
According to Vincent, “Popular education through the Chautauqua scheme increases the
value of the pulpit by putting more knowledge, thoughtfulness, and appreciation into the
pew, and encouraging the preacher to give his best thought in his best way.”15 This
general education focus brought speakers as renowned as President Ulysses S. Grant in
1875. Other lecturers and performers who visited Chautauqua had previous experience in
the more urban American Lyceum movement, which was similar to what Miller and
Vincent aimed to do, but it was an entirely educational series of events over a longer
period of time than the Chautauqua season.16
Early audience members quickly learned that attention was required at
Chautauqua. American Reformer Ida Tarbell spent time there, and recalled Vincent’s
lessons in audience decorum:
14
Theodore Morrison, Chautauqua: A Center for Education, Religion, and the Arts in America
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 33.
15
16
Vincent, 8.
For more on the Lyceum movement, see Angela G. Ray, The Lyceum and Public Culture in the
Nineteenth-Century United States (East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 2005).
9
He [Vincent] pricked bubbles, disciplined his audience. The Chautauqua
audience came to be one of the best behaved out-of-doors audiences in the
country. The fact that we were out of doors had persuaded us that we were free to
leave meetings if we were bored or suddenly remembered that we had left bread
in the oven, or that the baby must have wakened. When the performance had
been stopped once or twice to “give that lady a chance to go out without further
disturbing the speaker” we learned to stay at home or to sit out the lecture.17
Tarbell’s comments about the “disciplining” of Chautauqua audiences fits with Levine’s
observations regarding the development of a refined audience around the turn of the
twentieth century. He asserted that cultural leaders had to discipline and train audiences
to behave with decorum rather than with “spontaneous expressions of pleasure and
disapproval.”18 This audience training was necessary in maintaining chautauqua
programming as middle-class.
Adding to the challenge of maintaining decorum was the admissions structure for
Chautauqua events. Chautauquans did not have to pay admission to each program, but
were instead charged a gate fee at the entrance to the property, and as a result, some
thought that they could come and go as they pleased. The first year, in 1874, the fees did
not draw in enough money to support the program, and Miller and a few friends that he
called upon made up the difference. By the third year the assembly became selfsupporting and continued to expand, both in physical landscape and in the program. By
1878, with the addition of the Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle guided reading
program, the assembly was well established and was already having an impact on middleclass culture throughout the United States.
17
Ida M. Tarbell, All the Day’s Work (1939; repr., Henry Ford Museum & Greenfield Village Herald 13,
no. 2 (1984)), 14.
18
Levine, 184-198.
10
As news of the Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly spread, other assemblies
came into being. Lakeside, on the shores of Lake Erie near Port Clinton, Ohio, was
already a camp meeting, but adopted a chautauqua program for part of the summer in
1879. Two organizations had been founded in 1873: the Lakeside Company to manage
and maintain the grounds of the camp meeting, to sell lots, and to construct public
infrastructure, and the Lakeside Camp Meeting Association to plan the camp meetings
and other services on the grounds. The Lakeside Camp Meeting Association was given
permission by the Central Ohio Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church to hold its
first camp meeting in the summer of 1873. In 1877, Rev. James A. Worden came from
Chautauqua to be the Superintendent at Lakeside and to incorporate a course of study and
day and evening programs like those offered at the Chautauqua Sunday School
Assembly. Although the connection was unofficial, it was the beginning of a loose
coalition of permanent chautauquas with the original in New York. The same year, a
gate fee was added at Lakeside because Sunday collections alone could not support the
growing assembly program. In its second year as a chautauqua, not one but two
auditoriums were built – one for general programming and one for the large population of
German-speaking camp meeting participants (the association was permitted to use the
German auditorium when not in use). Religious services and other programs were
conducted in both English and German until 1933.
The chautauqua program at Lakeside was successful for several years – largely
due to the leadership of John Heyl Vincent’s brother, B. T. Vincent – but by 1892, the
Lakeside Company had accumulated $72,000 in debt. In the late 1890s, the company’s
trustees were directed by a court to sell the land at public auction. In 1902, the Lakeside
11
Camp Meeting Association bought the land as the sole bidder for $34,080. In 1906,
Lakeside held its final camp meeting, and thereafter had entirely integrated chautauqua
programming.
The Bay View Association, on the shores of Lake Michigan in Petoskey,
Michigan, developed in a similar way to Lakeside; it began as a camp meeting in 1875,
was also founded by Methodists, and did not adopt a chautauqua program until 1886. It
was actually the Grand Rapids and Indiana Railroad and a group of Petoskey
businessmen who purchased the land from the Ottawa Indians.19 They gave the land to
the camp meeting with the understanding that $10,000 would be spent on improvements
within five years and that the meeting would be held for fifteen years. In organizing Bay
View, planners hoped to make it financially feasible for middle-class people to attend.
According to an 1876 brochure, Bay View was “a resort, which it is believed, cannot be
surpassed in healthfulness, accessibility, picturesqueness of scenery and
inexpensiveness.”20 In 1877, the name was changed to the Bay View Camp Meeting.
In 1885, Bay View planned a Normal department and Chautauqua Literary and
Scientific Circle programming (C.L.S.C. activities were later canceled because of budget
restrictions). The following year, John Manley Hall was brought to Bay View to manage
the C.L.S.C. events and to initiate the Chautauqua Educational Department with a full
assembly program. Hall had been active in the C.L.S.C. throughout Michigan for several
years, and his résumé tightened the link with Chautauqua. This new assembly program
19
This tribe now refers to itself with the spelling Odawa, and is part of the Anisinaabe peoples. I have
chosen to use the English version of the word, Ottawa, especially because that was the term used
historically.
20
Unknown Bay View publicity brochure, 1876, quoted in Keith J. Fennimore, The Heritage of Bay View,
1875-1975 (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1975), 26; emphasis added.
12
brought in elements popular at the Chautauqua Assembly,21 including schools in music,
elocution, cooking, and art. Hall’s efforts were successful through the turn of the
century, but when he left to focus on his own reading program, the Bay View Reading
Circle, Bay View struggled without his leadership. Very little programming was offered
from 1905 to 1908. However, with Hall’s return after the 1908 season, the leadership
was able to right itself and the assembly moved forward with success.
One aspect that set Bay View apart from other assemblies was that it chose to
keep the association open entirely to the public; it had neither a gate nor a gate fee. Hall
wrote to Amy Weiskopf, booking agent for the Redpath Chautauqua bureau in Chicago,
“We have the finest audience in the country, but we have no gates, as do most of the
Assemblies, and our receipts are low accordingly. As I have written you, I am willing to
pay talent all that we get in, but no more.”22 Hall took a salary only when there was an
excess of funds, and donated the money for a new auditorium that was completed in
1914, just months after his death. Because of Hall’s direction, Bay View was firmly
established and could survive with a new generation of leadership well into the twentieth
century.
While many chautauquas were like Lakeside and Bay View, beginning as tent
meetings and then adding chautauqua programming, others were initially founded as
permanent chautauquas. Ocean Park, on the Maine coast at Old Orchard Beach, was
started by a group of Free Will Baptists in 1881. Free Will Baptists were an especially
21
Chautauqua has been known by three names in its history. It was established in 1874 as the Chautauqua
Sunday School Assembly; in 1883, it was changed to the Chautauqua Assembly; and in 1902, it was
renamed the Chautauqua Institution.
22
John M. Hall to A. M. Weiskoff, December 27, 1910, Redpath.
13
inclusive branch of Protestantism, and they made no mention of denomination in their
regulations, or of race or creed. Throughout the 1880s, Ocean Park added affiliated
organizations that did much of the educational programming, like the Young People’s
Social and Literary Guild and the Woman’s Bureau of the Ocean Park Association
(which later became the Educational Bureau). In 1891, the Ocean Park branch of the
C.L.S.C. was founded. Many Ocean Parkers came up from Massachusetts and
throughout New England. Because of its proximity to the amusement park area of Old
Orchard Beach, Ocean Park chose to distance itself in customs and performance genres.
Even as late as 1925, Ocean Park did not allow ocean bathing on Sundays. According to
the assembly program,
Usually strangers and new comers who are unfamiliar with our customs are glad
to cooperate when they become informed. Some few, however, who count their
own selfish pleasure more essential than a courteous and generous consideration
for established custom, continue to utterly disregard this reasonable rule. We
wish such to know that they are unwelcome guests on the grounds of Ocean Park
so long as they refuse to respect what to us, is a vital custom.23
In this way, religion was kept at the center of activities on Sundays, but the rule also set
Ocean Park apart as a different kind of community, not just a neighborhood of Old
Orchard Beach.
The year after Ocean Park began, Monteagle Sunday School Assembly was
founded on the top of the Cumberland Plateau in southeastern Tennessee. It was
established by the interdenominational Tennessee State Sunday School Convention,
which encouraged members from other Southern states to participate. As the convention
searched for a site for the assembly, the town of Monteagle offered 100 acres of land, and
23
Ocean Park Assembly Program 1925, Ocean Park.
14
temperance lecturer John Moffat provided a $5,000 start-up bonus if it chose the site.
Historian Curt Porter has written about the selection of the Monteagle grounds:
A successful Chautauqua assembly needed to be located far enough away from
cities for its participants to feel a sense of escape. A Chautauqua, usually located
near a forest or a body of water, or both, formed an association in the public mind
with a retreat-like atmosphere, and the cool mountain air and virgin pines of
Monteagle furnished that. At the same time, it was helpful for Monteagle to be
located near the main line of a railroad, affording easy transportation for assembly
guests.24
Indeed, situating a chautauqua on a body of water or in a forest far enough away from
major cities, but still accessible by train, seemed to be the key to success. While other
chautauquas were ecumenical in allowing people from various Protestant denominations
to participate in the programming, Monteagle took this a step further. The actual
governing framework of the assembly was ecumenical. Whereas Bay View and Lakeside
had a mix of Methodist ministers and lay people, with non-Methodists included at
different times in their histories, Monteagle organized a board in which members
represented each of the major denominations practiced.25
Monteagle’s programming was typical of activities at chautauquas. A 1910
Monteagle bulletin described a four-part structure:
The first, the AUDITORIUM PROGRAM, 8.15 P.M., each day, includes
popular lectures, serious and humorous; readers; musicians; impersonators;
moving pictures and a variety of other pleasing and instructive attractions – free
to the Assembly’s guests.
The second, the WARREN HALL PROGRAM, 9-10 A.M. and 11:30
A.M. each day, includes lectures on Literature, Science, Art, Biblical Topics,
Foods, and Dress Reform; Missionary, Temperance and School Problems – free
to the Assembly’s guests.
24
Curt Porter, “Chautauqua and Tennessee: Monteagle and the Independent Assemblies,” Tennessee
Historical Quarterly 22 no. 4 (December 1963): 351.
25
This type of governance continues today at Monteagle. The current caucuses are Baptist, Methodist,
Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Consolidated (all other denominations).
15
The third, the SUMMER SCHOOL PROGRAM, includes the Schools of
Physical Culture, Domestic Science, Art, English Literature, French, the
Assembly’s School of College Preparation and Private Study, Elocution, Music,
and the Kindergarten – to matriculate in any one of which, fees must be paid.
The fourth, the SUNDAY PROGRAM, embracing the Sunday School
work, morning preaching and evening song service.26
This program encompassed secular education, religious programming, and entertainment,
all on a variety of different levels. The combining of these elements within a resort
community was what made it a true permanent chautauqua.
The chautauqua in Boulder, Colorado was one of the last major chautauquas to be
started, established in 1898 at the base of the Flatiron rock cliffs. Unlike most previous
chautauquas, it was founded by a group of public school teachers, not by a religious
organization. These Texas school teachers wanted their own retreat far from the summer
heat in their own state, and looked throughout Colorado for a suitable site. Upon
choosing Boulder, they asked the town to build a park of more than 80 acres and allow
railroad access to it. In exchange, the group would provide a complete education and
entertainment program at no cost to Boulder. The first summer, the chautauqua hosted
thirty-three major evening events, despite the fact that the railroad was not completed and
visitors had to go by wagon or walk the mile and a half uphill on dusty dirt roads from
the center of town. In addition to educational and recreational programming, five
different religious services were held each Sunday.
In 1898, the Texas-Colorado Chautauqua had excellent talent, but finished the
season with $18,000 of unpaid bills. The following year, the additional deficit was only
$2,000, but at the end of the 1900 season, the association owed $32,000. It was the Gulf
and Southern Railroad that bailed the association out of debt. Like other railroads, the G
26
Monteagle Assembly and Summer Schools, [1910], 5, Monteagle.
16
& S saw chautauquans as a regular source of income throughout the summer. As part of
the bailout, the association was required to keep up the summer schools and platform,
therefore supplying paying train customers from Texas and throughout Colorado. In
exchange, the G & S covered the debt, provided free travel to performers, and offered
free advertising for the chautauqua. In 1901, the name was changed to the Colorado
Chautauqua, and by 1902 more than fifty cottages were built, almost all owned by
Coloradoans and rented to families or groups through the assembly. Finally, by 1916, the
chautauqua had enough financial stability that it eliminated gate fees.
The Chautauqua Institution, Lakeside, Bay View, Ocean Park, Monteagle, and the
Colorado Chautauqua are just a few of the more than two hundred permanent
chautauquas active around the turn of the century.27 Wherever middle-class people lived
in the United States, and in some places in Canada, they could reach a chautauqua within
a few hours by train. Some came just for the day, but many brought trunks for the entire
summer.
Later incarnations of chautauquas were organized by and for local residents, but
permanent chautauquas were supported by and primarily catered to resorters. Their
relationships with local people were not always amicable. In Bay View, “townies” were
dismissed as being backward and uneducated. In Monteagle, locals were called
“Mountain Sweats” and were not always welcomed on the grounds. Glennie Schaerer
27
David Glick, a lifelong resident of Lakeside and formerly of Greenfield Village at the Henry Ford
Museum, has compiled a list of all chautauquas referenced in the Chautauquan; David Glick, “Independent
Chautauquas Mentioned in the Chautauquan Magazine 1881-1913,” Lakeside. My research in this
dissertation draws most significantly from the chautauquas that remain active, namely Ocean Park, Maine;
Mount Gretna, Pennsylvania; Monteagle, Tennessee; the Chautauqua Institution in Chautauqua, New York;
Lakeside, Ohio; Fountain Park in Remington, Indiana; Bay View, Michigan; and the Colorado Chautauqua
in Boulder, Colorado.
17
Thomas described the strained relationship:
There was a time when members of the Assembly didn’t want workers on the
Assembly to come to the movies – called them “Mountain Sweats,” because most
of them didn’t have running water in their homes where they could take baths
whenever they liked, just to come to the movies. Not that the workers went
unclean – they just didn’t have the time or the facilities to clean up, right after
getting off the job, in time to get to the movies.28
When chautauquas had gates, the gate fees often made participation unaffordable for
local people. At the Pennsylvania Chautauqua in Mount Gretna, admissions were 25
cents for adults and 15 cents for children in 1892.29 In Monteagle, tickets were 25 cents
for the day, and an additional 25 cents at night in 1899.30 Local communities benefited
only tangentially from having permanent chautauquas near them, through increased
activity at local businesses. Some chautauquas eventually relied on local communities
for basic services like water and sewers; in those instances, local communities profited
from taxes that chautauquans paid on their cottages.31
While most chautauquans traveled to permanent chautauquas within a few hours
of their homes, others came longer distances, often to be with extended family. In 1901,
Bay View drew from around the country:
While there are twenty-five states represented at Bay View from Massachusetts to
Wyoming, certain towns have considerable colonies as Albion, Mich., Evansville,
Ind., Chicago, Ill., Louisville, Ky., Cincinnati, Ohio, Memphis, Tenn., and others.
28
Glennie Schaerer Thomas, oral history interview by unknown interviewer, Monteagle, TN, n.d.,
transcript, Monteagle.
29
Programme and Guide Book, 1892 [Pennsylvania Chautauqua], Mt. Gretna.
30
Programs – Monteagle Assembly, 1899, Monteagle.
31
At most chautauquas, the term cottage was used to refer to summer residences. They often began as one
or two room dwellings, without a kitchen or running water, but most eventually expanded to much larger
constructions. Many remain unwinterized and a bit rustic, though others have been quite modernized
inside.
18
A large proportion of the resorters come from the central and southern states,
Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Tennessee and Texas leading.32
This geographical diversity was not unique to Bay View. In 1914, Ocean Park had about
1,400 people on the grounds; performers and visitors were “from Toronto to Alabama to
Iowa to Prince Edward Island, India, China, Japan, the Philippines, Turkey, Africa,
Canada, Great Britain and representatives from twenty-three states and provinces.”33 The
Colorado Chautauqua catalogued their visitors in 1916: 97 people were from 17 different
towns in Texas; 79 people were from 10 towns in Colorado; there were 26 Oklahomans,
19 from Kansas, 14 Nebraskans, 10 from Illinois, 6 from Indiana, 5 from Iowa, 4 from
Missouri, 3 Californians, 2 from Arkansas, and one visitor each from Virginia,
Washington, and Michigan.34
These people populated tents and then cottages and rooming houses on the
grounds of the permanent chautauquas. Jeanne Halgren Kilde has described the tight
quarters that chautauquans usually occupied; the housing density at Chautauqua
“approximated that of working- rather than middle-class neighborhoods.”35 Especially
because of the dense population, chautauquas were sites in which rules of class, but also
notions of gender, race, and religion, were redefined. They became places that fostered
the development of a burgeoning middle-class culture.
32
“Breezy Bay View,” Albion Recorder, August 1, 1901, College Archives, Stockwell-Mudd Libraries,
Albion College, Albion, MI.
33
Chautauqua-by-the-Sea for Eastern New England – 1915 Bulletin, 4, Ocean Park.
34
“Every Chautauqua Cottage Is Occupied; Assembly Biggest Tourist Attraction,” Boulder Camera, July
23, 1916, Cottagers Club Collection, Colorado.
35
Jeanne Halgren Kilde, “The ‘Predominance of the Feminine’ at Chautauqua: Rethinking the GenderSpace Relationship in Victorian America,” Signs 24, no. 2 (Winter 1999): 449-486,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3175649 (accessed November 11, 2008).
19
When Vincent described the project of the Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly
ten years after it began, he wrote of a world of two classes: “I shall make no effort to
excite the pity of the wealthy and the learned for the poor and the illiterate, -- class for
class, upper for lower.”36 Yet, an American middle class had been slowly coalescing, and
Vincent and Miller’s idea struck this group, more than any other, as valuable. It was a
real vacation that they had earned and could now afford, yet it was self-improving and it
was religiously rooted.
Later advertising material for permanent chautauquas emphasized their
affordability. A pamphlet from around 1900 stated that the Chautauqua Assembly was
“easily within the reach of the average family which spends its summers away from
home.” A gate fee was $5 for the entire season of eight weeks, $1.50 a week, or 40 cents
a day. Housing was from $5 a week in a boarding house to $28 a week in a hotel, and
cottage rentals were $75 to $350 per season.37 A family of five, then, could have paid
about $100 to spend the summer in a cottage at Chautauqua. At the same time, though,
the average American worker earned $438 per year, so a summer at a permanent
chautauqua was not affordable for all families.38
Some people were more well-off than others at chautauquas, but if one could
afford access to permanent chautauquas, financial status mattered less on the grounds. A
1926 description of the Bay View Men’s Club explained, “In this wonderful campus,
millionaires and others mingle in true fraternal spirit. Not what you have, but what you
36
Vincent, 1.
37
Chautauqua, pamphlet, [1900], Chautauqua.
38
U.S. Diplomatic Mission to Germany, “Facts & Figures: Income and Prices 1900-1999,” About the USA,
http://usa.usembassy.de/etexts/his/e_prices1.htm (accessed March 1, 2011).
20
are is the slogan that prevails.”39 The situation was similar at the Colorado Chautauqua.
Bob Greer first visited the Colorado Chautauqua in 1944, but his description holds true
much earlier. He states, “It’s a unique mixture, obviously. There are people that have a
lot of money that don’t have to work. Their kids don’t have to work but do. And you
have some people that are comfortable, but watch what they spend. And then you
probably have some that are really scraping to come out here for a week. But really,
nobody has much idea of others’ comfort. … they’re all pretty much one out here.”40
Unlike more urban social scenes, permanent chautauquas were not the place to
impress. The Texas-Colorado chautauqua advertised that “one of the charming features
of the Texas-Colorado Chautauqua Assembly is the freedom from fashionable dressing.
If there is a place on earth where one can be comfortable and free from care, it is at a well
equipped assembly.” It suggested that appropriate attire would include both warm and
cool clothing, old shoes, and short dresses for mountain tramps.41 Monteagle offered
similar etiquette in its 1905 program:
Considerations of dress are not paramount at Monteagle; people dress as they
please. If one cares to make a special toilet now and then, an appropriate time
would be Saturday afternoons and evenings, as this is the gala time of the week.
39
Bay View Bulletin, May 1926, 33; Jonathan Amy confirmed that there really was a millionaire in the
Men’s Club in the 1930s: “Mr. Davis was a great bowler. He came down and spent a lot of time at the
bowling courts. And one day, he came down and said, “Jon, did you ever see a million dollars?” And, of
course, I had no idea what he was talking about. That was a mythical type of currency. He said, “Well, I’ll
show you a million dollars.” And he had a check, and apparently he had sold some land that had petroleum
on it or wells or gas wells or oil wells or land for exploration or something in Louisiana. And he had this
check from … it was what we knew as Texaco, and I think it was the Texas Oil Company, for a million
dollars. And he was showing it to everybody that day. I often wondered if it ever got cashed, actually. It
sounded like he was going to frame it and hang it up on the wall or something”; Jonathan Amy, oral history
interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI, August 4 and 6, 2008, recording and transcript,
Bay View.
40
Bob Greer, oral history interview by author, Colorado Chautauqua, Boulder, CO, June 10, 2009,
recording and partial transcript, Colorado.
41
The Texas-Colorado Chautauqua, June 1898, 25, Printed Materials Collection, Colorado.
21
… The Saturday Evening concerts are “full dress,” as far as the “troupe” is
concerned, and it would be a pretty compliment to those who entertain us for the
audience to don something a little more elaborate than usual; however, this is only
a suggestion, as Monteagle is one place where people make these questions a
secondary consideration.42
Though Monteagle activities were written up in the Nashville society pages in the midtwentieth century, the income level of individuals did not have a significant impact on
relationships on the grounds.43 Once a person gained access to the grounds, others
assumed that they were middle-class.
While most people at chautauquas were middle-class, a few were not, and
chautauquas served as sites to level these differences. Especially because almost all
events on the grounds were included in gate fees, everyone could participate once they
had gained access to the grounds. In this way, then, permanent chautauquas could offer
high-quality and “moral” programming without the need to socially impress. They
encouraged new types of technologies like radio and film. They hosted reformers whose
ideas were not yet universally accepted. They incorporated pageantry and other forms of
theater even though some Americans still associated the theater with sin. Middle-class
culture could be redefined at chautauquas, always moral but pushing the limits of what it
meant to be middle class and who ought to be included in that class. Because of the
pervasiveness of permanent chautauquas, this middle-class cultural formation was able to
impact the larger American society, especially in the period from 1874 to the early 1930s.
In addition to blurring class lines, permanent chautauquas were places where age
took on less meaning. Households were multigenerational and activities were available
42
43
Monteagle Assembly and Sunday Schools, 1905, Monteagle; emphasis added.
Walter and Julia Pulliam, oral history interview by author, Monteagle Sunday School Assembly,
Monteagle, TN, July 14, 2009, recording and partial transcript, Monteagle.
22
for all different ages in one place. A 1900 pamphlet describes the benefits of bringing
one’s family to Chautauqua:
It is quite possible to find resorts where the young men and young women may
enjoy themselves, but there the young children are too often neglected. Or, on the
other hand, there are places where the little people and young folk find
satisfaction, but where the older members of the family are uninterested, or
actually bored. Chautauqua excels in this, that it can provide something to
interest every member of the family group, from the three-year-old tot in the
kindergarten and the children of seven or ten in the Vacation School, up to the
young woman and young man in the clubs. Parents, too, whether they are seeking
merely rest and recreation, or enjoy listening to noted men and women of the
times, find at Chautauqua something to amuse or instruct or inspire. Chautauqua
has never been, and never will be, a place where children “need not apply.”44
Activities were available for individual age groups, and many appealed to multiple ages
at the same time. Lucy Howorth was born in 1895 and attended a variety of Monteagle
programs when she was young. She remembered, “I went to practically everything from
a very early age, and I was not alone. Now not all children went; the boys went less than
the girls did and when the girls got into their teens, they began to be a bit self-conscious
about such things and not going as much. But I was not alone in going to practically
everything on the program.”45
In addition to organized programs, socializing happened among people of
different ages. Barbara Sublett Guthery’s family has been at the Colorado Chautauqua
for generations of Fourth of July picnics. She recalls,
Even in the Twenties, they’d say, “Okay, let’s go to Fourth of July mine [at my
house] and we’ll have a picnic.” And there would be thirty or fifty people, and
they would be eight months old and eighty years old. It’s always been
intergenerational, which is not true of a lot of places. And I think that’s one of the
44
45
Chautauqua, pamphlet; the reference to anti-Irish sentiment is obvious.
Judge Lucy Howorth, oral history interview by Edith Provost, Monteagle, TN, n.d., transcript,
Monteagle.
23
things that’s kept it special, because the building of that family feeling. Even if
it’s not your family by blood, it’s your family by Chautauqua.46
Unlike most American communities, permanent chautauquas were not divided along age
lines but united across them. As a result, the middle-class culture that the chautauquas
created was one that appealed to many different audiences simultaneously. The C.L.S.C.
advertised to those young enough to have not yet completed high school and those old
enough with extra time in retirement. Pageants brought children and adults onto the same
stages for performances. Even many early films, targeted to children, had audiences
packed with adults as well.
Though chautauquas leveled divisions in class and age, race was another matter.
In their founding documents, a few chautauquas began as places that also included racial
diversity. Ocean Park was founded by Free Will Baptists, who were active in the
Abolitionist Movement. As a result, the community was open to anyone regardless of
race or creed, but Ocean Park was exceptional.
Actually, there were many people at chautauquas who were not white, but they
were not there on vacation. Many white families were able to enjoy their holidays
because they had brought their maids and chauffeurs with them to perform necessary
housekeeping tasks.47 This practice was especially popular in Monteagle and with the
Texans who visited the Colorado Chautauqua, but also occurred in the other permanent
chautauquas. Julia Pulliam’s grandparents bought their cottage in 1922, and in it were
46
Barbara Sublett Guthery, oral history interview by author, Colorado Chautauqua, Boulder, CO, June 10,
2009, recording and partial transcript, Colorado.
47
Employers did have to pay gate fees for servants. In Monteagle, the regular gate fee was $6 a season in
1910, and servants were $2.50. At the Pennsylvania Chautauqua, servants were half of the regular price,
which was $3.50 in 1911. Monteagle Assembly and Summer Schools, 1910, Monteagle; [Pennsylvania
Chautauqua Bulletin], 1911, Mt. Gretna.
24
rooms for servants. She recalls growing up in the 1930s: “And the blacks, there were
many, many black servants. Never has there been a black otherwise, well, there may be
one now … we’ve never had a problem with that – whether it’s a problem or what – but I
mean, many, many houses had servants, and it was so nice.”48
African American servants were therefore not attending chautauquas for a
vacation, but to work. There were a few accommodations made for their leisure,
however. Monteagle held a Sunday school for African Americans on the Mall, the open
space in the center of the grounds. Monteagle resident Mary Churchill Gary remembered
that “during the week, the nurses would bring the little children and babies in carriages
down to the Mall in the afternoon and sit on the park benches that are closest to the street,
and visit with each other.” 49 Bay View similarly included Native Americans in their Big
Sunday religious meetings and later held a separate “Colored People’s Church.”50 In the
1930s, non-white servants could even attend the movies, but in a segregated way; “they
always sat in the movie at the right rear,” according to Gary.51
However, if given the option, servants often took their night off to go away from
the segregated chautauqua grounds. Because Bay View was situated among several
resorts, the area was able to support a small, vibrant nightlife for African American
servants. Bets Shier recalls that, though most servants gathered together on their nights
off, her maid chose not to do so; “They had – and I don’t know where it was, but it was
48
Pulliams, interview.
49
Mary Churchill Gary, oral history interview by Sandra Polk, Monteagle, TN, Summer 1980, transcript,
Monteagle.
50
Mary Jane Doerr, Bay View: An American Idea (Allegan Forest, MI: Priscilla Press, 2010), 34.
51
Gary, interview.
25
somewhere out in Emmet County – there was sort of a nightclub, and all the black people
who were here, and in Harbor Springs, Weque [Wequetonsing, another neighboring
resort]. They all had the same day off, or night off. Pearl didn’t want to do that. She
was so shy, so she chose a different day off.”52 Despite the story of Shier’s maid, in
general it is clear that servants chose to socialize outside the chautauqua grounds during
their breaks from work. In fact, there was even an African American organization active
in the area known as the Black Swans, which hosted an annual Chauffeur’s Ball.53
Divisions along race lines remained mostly the same in chautauquas as in the
larger American society. For non-white performers, however, race separation became
more complicated. White chautauquas paid considerable money to bring groups like the
Fisk Jubilee Singers or American Indian Charles Eastman to chautauquas, yet these
performers often endured second-class travel and had difficulty finding
accommodation.54 Chautauquans did support non-white performers, especially during
the period in which booking agencies facilitated a much more diverse performance base.
Their support continued the American tradition of seeing non-whites as excellent
entertainers, but did not significantly change white societal attitudes about race.
52
Elizabeth “Bets” Shier, oral history interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI, July 28,
2008, recording and transcript, Bay View. Though Shier was born in 1939, there is evidence of this
African American nightlife earlier in the century.
53
Donald Loyd, telephone interview by author, March 7, 2011, notes in possession of the author. My uncle
recalls this information from a conversation with his uncle, Hal Child. The Black Swans were active at
least when Child was growing up in Bay View in the 1920s and ‘30s, and the Chauffeur’s Ball was an
important annual event even later. Apparently, white kids enjoyed trying to sneak into the ball.
54
African American performers did not always have difficulty with accommodation on or off the
chautauqua grounds. The Fisk Jubilee Singers registered for the season at the Bay View House on the
grounds of Bay View and Booker T. Washington checked in at the Oriental Hotel in Petoskey, just outside
of Bay View. Obviously, attitudes changed as performers moved further south. (Petoskey) Daily Resorter,
July 24, 1890 and August 1, 1894, quoted in Mary Jane Doerr, e-mail message to author, February 12,
2011.
26
Though racial lines remained generally the same inside and outside the
chautauqua grounds, chautauquas did facilitate significant changes in gender dynamics.
Religious historian Jeanne Halgren Kilde has argued that the Chautauqua Institution was
a space for gender to be performed; it was a space marked as predominantly feminine, but
allowed women to perform in new “unfeminine” ways. She asserts, “What women did at
Chautauqua … was profoundly ‘unfeminine.’ Their actions and behaviors … challenged
the boundaries of gender norms and ultimately redefined appropriate female behavior, at
least for Chautauqua life. … Gender itself was altered at Chautauqua.”55
Indeed, much of the renegotiating of gender at chautauquas was because men
were unable to be away from work for the summer, unlike non-working women and
children. My great-grandfather ran an agricultural drain tile business in Findlay, Ohio,
but traveled overnight by train to Bay View to be with his family as often as he could; he
described this pull of returning to work in his diary:
I expect to start home tonight as I am badly needed there. But the urge to stay on
with my good wife and children is great.
This afternoon while taking a nap I promised Anna that I would remain
until Monday or Tuesday and go home with the Hemingers who will be here on
Tuesday.
Then after getting up, I could not help but think of the great number of
things I needed to do at the factory, so after talking the matter over with Anna, she
decided she could get along without me and I left at 7:55 in the evening.
I could scarcely keep back the tears as the train pulled out and Anna
looked the same.56
Anna saw her husband’s decision to return to Ohio while the family remained in Bay
View as one that greatly benefited the family; she wrote, “He, so unselfishly, wished his
55
56
Kilde, 464.
D Earl Child journal, July 27, 1932 journal entry, “Diaries and Personal Journals, 1913-1976,” ed. Anna
Blackford Child, Author’s collection.
27
growing family to have the benefit of the wonderful northern Michigan climate ... How
thrilled we were whenever Earl wired he would be up for a few days!”57
Chautauquas were very much what Jonathan Amy has described as a
predominantly female community; husbands “may have brought them and come and
gotten them, but basically it was a matriarchal-run group.”58 This was another reason that
many people chose to attend chautauquas: they were safe for women and children beyond
the watchful eye of men. The Colorado Chautauqua highlighted this aspect in its
promotional material: “The object of this movement is to provide a place where men can
send their sons, their daughters, or their families for a few weeks’ outing where they can,
secure from harm, enjoy the advantages of a mountain climate and return at the close of
the season refreshed, invigorated and altogether benefited both mentally and
physically.”59 Likewise, the 1905 Monteagle program proclaimed, “Husbands can leave
their families on the grounds with perfect security. Ladies come alone.”60
While chautauquas provided husbands and fathers with assurances of safety from
outsiders and outside influences, women chose to come to chautauqua for other reasons.
Because this was a predominantly female society, women had different responsibilities
than they did at home. They were the family disciplinarians, for instance. Women’s
organizations, like the Lakeside Women’s Club or the Women’s Council in Bay View,
played an active role in leadership and programming at the chautauquas.
57
Anna Blackford Child, “Family Tale, 1924-1927” journal entry, “Diaries and Personal Journals, 19131976,” Author’s collection.
58
Amy, interview.
59
A Great Western Chautauqua, 3, Printed Materials Collection, Colorado.
60
Monteagle Assembly and Sunday Schools, 1905, Monteagle.
28
Women also had the freedom to blur divisions between public and private space
in their own cottages. Colorado Chautauqua resident Theodosia Ammons was a pioneer
in “domestic science.” In addition to establishing the Department of Domestic Economy
at Colorado State University, she designed her cottage to model ideas in domestic
efficiency. Included in her design were pass-throughs for food prepared inside and eaten
on the porch, as well as a side porch with curtains that rolled down for sleeping outside.
Household tasks like eating meals and sleeping were normally assigned to the private
sphere, but at chautauquas, they were often completed in public. Kilde argues that this
redefining of gendered space was one of the greatest attractions for female chautauquans.
She asserts, “In this liminal landscape, women’s behaviors, informality, and release from
some domestic work invested the place with meanings quite different from those
prominent in most comparable spaces in the ‘outside’ world.”61
Because of this different structuring of gender at chautauquas, women were
granted more opportunities – to make their own money as performers or professors, to
seek further education, to serve in leadership roles, to transgress traditional female
spheres. As permanent chautauquas created their middle-class culture, women were
afforded these opportunities in the broader American society with less criticism.
Even the most central part of the realm of chautauquas, religion, was redefined on
the grounds. Miller began his introduction to Vincent’s The Chautauqua Movement,
“Chautauqua was founded for an enlarged recognition of the Word.”62 Yet, much of
chautauqua programming was not what was normally categorized as religious. How
61
62
Kilde, 471.
Lewis Miller, introduction to The Chautauqua Movement, by John H. Vincent, The Chautauqua
Movement (Boston: Chautauqua Press, 1886; repr., Charleston, SC: BiblioLife, 2009), v.
29
were watching a magic show, learning about radios or modern German culture, or
performing as a Greek goddess onstage religious? The accepted divide between church
and governance was even redrawn at some chautauquas; Monteagle used denomination to
determine representation on the board of trustees. Andrew Chamberlin Reiser has argued
that the boundaries between the secular and sacred were redrawn at the Chautauqua
Institution, saying, “As the example of Chautauqua suggests, the erasure and redrawing
of boundaries separating the sacred and secular realms – and not simply the absorption of
the one into the other – help shaped what it meant to be middle class between 1880 and
1920.”63 Reiser asserts that it was not a secularizing of middle-class culture, but rather a
combining of sacred and secular, that Chautauqua espoused. In this way, all aspects of
life at permanent chautauquas became imbued with religiosity. Through their production
of middle-class culture, chautauquans were able to insert those same basic religious
values into a mainstream American culture in forms like inspirational lectures and films
with moral messages.
Reiser focuses on the Chautauqua Institution in his book, The Chautauqua
Moment: Protestants, Progressives, and the Culture of Modern Liberalism, but he does
offer some insight into permanent chautauquas.64 Other contemporary scholars, John E.
Tapia and Charlotte Canning mention permanent chautauquas mostly in passing, keeping
63
Andrew Chamberlin Reiser, “Secularization Reconsidered: Chautauqua and the De-Christianization of
Middle-Class Authority, 1880-1920,” in The Middling Sorts: Explorations in the History of the American
Middle Class, ed. Burton J. Bledstein and Robert D. Johnston (New York: Routledge, 2001), 140. Alan
Trachtenberg also argues that Chautauqua institutionalized a process of “the sacralization of culture”; Alan
Trachtenberg, “‘We Study the Word and Works of God’: Chautauqua and the Sacralization of Culture in
America, Henry Ford Museum & Greenfield Village Herald 13, no. 2 (1984): 4.
64
Andrew C. Reiser, The Chautauqua Moment: Protestants, Progressives, and the Culture of Modern
Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003).
30
their lens on later temporary circuit chautauquas.65 Several local historians have written
manuscripts about individual chautauquas.66 However, no other researcher has examined
the permanent chautauquas as one cohesive movement; this dissertation is intended to fill
that gap.
As individual communities, permanent chautauquas served as sites to renegotiate
rules and boundaries of race, class, gender, and religion. In their programming,
chautauquas produced middle-class culture and encouraged its development throughout
American society. As a mass culture coalesced, chautauquas played a role in ensuring
that it reinforced middle-class values. One of the first kinds of culture that chautauquas
supported in broad fashion was the rise of reading programs like the Chautauqua Literary
and Scientific Circle. Their Recognition Day graduation ceremonies were the first “red
letter days” at permanent chautauquas.
65
John E. Tapia, Circuit Chautauqua: From Rural Education to Popular Entertainment in Early Twentieth
Century America (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 1997); Charlotte B. Canning, The Most American Thing in
America: Circuit Chautauqua as Performance (Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press, 2003).
66
Robert J. Carter, “Forum on the Bay: Oral Communication Aspects of the Bay View Association, 18751965” (PhD diss, Michigan State University, 1966); Mary Jane Doerr, Bay View: An American Idea
(Allegan Forest, MI: Priscilla Press, 2010); Keith J. Fennimore, The Heritage of Bay View 1875-1975
(Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1975); Vincent H. Gaddis and Jasper A. Huffman, The Story of
Winona Lake: A Memory and a Vision (Butler, IN: Higley Huffman Press, 1960); Mary Galey, The Grand
Assembly: The Story of Life at the Colorado Chautauqua ([Boulder, CO]: First Flatiron Press, 1981); Jesse
L. Hurlbut, The Story of Chautauqua (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1921); James Allen Kestle, This is
Lakeside, 1873-1973: Ohio’s Chautauqua of the Great Lakes, The Centennial History (N.p., 1973);
Theodore Morrison, Chautauqua: A Center for Education, Religion and the Arts in America (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1974); Sylvia Pettem, Chautauqua Centennial, Boulder, Colorado: A
Hundred Years of Programs (Boulder, CO: Book Lode, 1998); Frank C. Waldrop, ed., Mountain Voices:
The Centennial History of the Monteagle Sunday School Assembly (Monteagle, TN: Monteagle Sunday
School Assembly, 1982); John A. Weeks, Beneath the Beaches: The Story of Bay View, Michigan (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000); Clark S. Wheeler, Bay View (Bay View, MI: Bay View Association of the
United Methodist Church, 1950).
31
CHAPTER 2
IN THE GROVES:
THE CHAUTAUQUA LITERARY AND SCIENTIFIC CIRCLE’S
RECOGNITION DAY
A group of men and women in their best finery waited anxiously in a grove of
trees to pass through a gate. Passing through the gate was a symbolic act, one that would
solidify for them the four years of study that they were completing. Later in the day, they
would receive diplomas and would be fêted for their efforts, as friends and families
looked on. Yet, this celebration was not a college graduation; it was a Recognition Day
ceremony for the Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle. The participants had spent
four years studying in small groups or on their own through correspondence attempting to
expand their knowledge and better themselves. They were all ages, professionally
diverse, and came from many different cities and towns to be there that day. Most had
never been to Chautauqua, New York before this special event; some members of the
class were not even able to make it to the Chautauqua ceremony and had their day at
another assembly or with their own C.L.S.C. circle.
The first C.L.S.C. Recognition Day took place on August 12, 1882, at the
Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly. Though the Class of 1882 was comprised of
8,437 readers, only about 1,700 had completed the necessary readings and examinations,
and about eight hundred of those members of the “Pioneers” class were able to travel to
Chautauqua to attend the first ceremony.1 According to the C.L.S.C. monthly magazine,
the Chautauquan, it was “the largest class that ever graduated from any institution in one
1
Theodore Morrison, Chautauqua: A Center for Education, Religion, and the Arts in America (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1974), 59.
32
year on this continent.”2 John Heyl Vincent, the organizer of the C.L.S.C., wrote of the
first ceremony, “It was a day of the greatest enthusiasm that had ever been witnessed at
Chautauqua.”3 The first Recognition Day was initially referred to as Commencement Day
in publicity in the Chautauquan, but by the time the big day arrived, it had become
known as Recognition Day. According to Chautauqua historian Jesse Lyman Hurlbut,
Vincent “chose to call it not a Commencement, but a Recognition, the members of the
Circle being recognized on that day as having completed the course and entitled to
membership in the Society of the Hall in the Grove, the Alumni Association of the
C.L.S.C.”4 This first Recognition Day was the result of years of work on the part of
Vincent and other C.L.S.C. leaders, efforts in developing the reading program, and the
deliberate choosing of rituals to be associated with this particular commencement
ceremony.
The C.L.S.C. espoused an adult educational system that was open to anyone – no
matter class, race, or ethnicity. In actuality, though, it was supported almost entirely by
white students already in the middle class. In its heyday from its founding in 1878 until
the early part of the twentieth century, the C.L.S.C. served as the driving force behind
education at the permanent chautauquas and worked to unite them into one movement. It
also inspired spin-off programs, like the Bay View Reading Circle. Each year, C.L.S.C.
study culminated in a Recognition Day, a ritualized quasi-graduation and a celebration of
a supposedly open-access education. Ultimately, Recognition Days were “red letter
2
Editor’s Notebook, Chautauquan, June 1882, 558.
3
John H. Vincent, The Chautauqua Movement (Boston: Chautauqua Press, 1886; repr., Charleston, SC:
BiblioLife, 2009), 226.
4
Jesse L. Hurlbut, The Story of Chautauqua (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1921), 198.
33
days,” celebrated as the most important event of the season, which acted as a site of
cultural work signifying the middle-class concept of access to continuing education.
Vincent founded the Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle just four years
after he and Lewis Miller established the Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly. In his
formal announcement of the new organization at Chautauqua on August 12, 1878, the
then-Doctor Vincent (he was made Methodist Episcopal bishop in 1888) stated,
The organization which I have now to present for your consideration aims to
reach, uplift, inspire, and stimulate that large class of the community which needs
culture, but for which no provision is made anywhere or by any educational
institution. The name of our proposed institution is the “Chautauqua Literary and
Scientific Circle,” which aims to give the college student’s outlook upon the
world of thought, by the studies of primers of literature and science, by the
reading of books, by the preparation of syllabi of books read, by written reports of
progress, and by correspondence with professors of the several departments, who
shall consent to occupy the chairs to which we shall invite them.5
Vincent had long been a supporter of lifelong learning and a Christian-based education
for all. He spent significant time developing his home-study idea, and consulted
ministers, educators, and other learned men about how to proceed with his plan.
This plan was to have participants read a series of books over the course of a year
and discuss the work in local study circles; they would also pay a small membership fee
and receive the Chautauquan magazine. The work was set to average forty minutes a day
for ten months of the year. Eventually, the reading was organized into an English year, an
American year, a European year, and a Classical year; other years, like a Russian year
and a Chinese year, as well as readings in the sciences, were also tried. Vincent’s
approach of studying these great societies was a western European model of greatness
rather than an attempt at incorporating a diversity of opinions. Books could be shared
5
Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 85-86.
34
among the circle, and questions were printed in the Chautauquan to aid in study and
discussion. Initially, Vincent hoped to require correspondence between readers and
college professors, and also to have students sit for final examinations; as registration
numbers grew, these plans were dropped as being too complicated.6
The idea was that the C.L.S.C. could help structure reading and discussion
through the choice of appropriate and varied books and the inclusion of articles on a
range of subjects in the Chautauquan. A review of the material in the Chautauquan
suggests the kinds of subjects studied in C.L.S.C. circle meetings. October 1883
occurred in a Greek year in the cycle of study, and the Chautauquan included a
travelogue from the Baltic to the Adriatic and background on sculpture as an art form. It
also offered articles about many general interest subjects: German history, political
economic theory about wealth, a physical science explanation of water vapor, and
excerpts from American ministers Cotton Mather and Jonathan Edwards. It provided a
roundup of the 1883 Recognition Day at Chautauqua, including the full text of speeches
by commencement speaker Lyman Abbott and Chautauqua president Lewis Miller. The
volume also printed regular features for the magazine: reports from other assemblies; an
outline of studies; study questions and answers; an Editor’s Outlook column; an Editor’s
Note-Book of short comments and announcements; an Editor’s Table section, where
Vincent responded to students’ questions; and notes about the required reading, including
definitions and pronunciation for difficult words.7 These articles and supporting
6
7
Morrison, 61-61.
Chautauquan, October 1883, http://books.google.com/books?id=tHkAAAAAYAAJ (accessed February
2, 2011).
35
materials provided circles with fodder for group discussion and developed general
knowledge in the readers.
When Vincent first presented this concept of guided reading at Chautauqua, he
brought several of his supporters with him, including Rev. L. H. Bugbee, President of
Allegheny College, who would be the first to sign up for the C.L.S.C. Other backers sent
letters that were read at the first meeting. Theologian and editor Lyman Abbott wrote,
“If you can lay out such plans of study, particularly … in practical science, as will fit our
boys and young men … to become, in a true though not ambitious sense … scientific and
intelligent miners, mechanics, and farmers, you will have done more to put down strikes
and labor-riots than any army could.”8 Abbott became a strong booster of Vincent’s idea
and spoke as part of the first Recognition Day ceremonies. He understood that the
C.L.S.C. concept was an integration of secular and sacred education. In Vincent’s public
introduction to the idea, he called upon the audience to “Look through microscopes, but
find God. Look through telescopes, but find God. Look for him [sic] revealed in the
throbbing life about you, in the palpitating stars above, in the marvellous [sic] records of
the earth beneath you, and in your own souls.”9 To achieve this goal, Vincent hoped to
facilitate access to education for all kinds of people, to conduct “a ‘college’ for one’s own
house.”10
American architect Arthur Gilman also offered his assurance to the audience at
the first C.L.S.C. organizing meeting. His response reflects Vincent’s own anxiety about
8
Lyman Abbott to John H. Vincent, July 25, 1878, quoted in John H. Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 98.
9
Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 91.
10
Ibid., 98.
36
how the C.L.S.C. might be perceived; Gilman wrote, “Your fears of ‘superficiality’ do
not trouble me. For your course will probably aim rather to direct the mind toward the
way in which you wish it to develop, than store it with the details of knowledge. You
wish to awaken rather than cultivate; to show what can be done to create curiosity to
know and an ambition to do.”11 Indeed, Vincent was rightly concerned that others would
see his scheme as being superficial, of offering a lower-quality alternative to college or
university study.
Most, though, saw the idea as instrumental in expanding popular education
throughout the United States and in several other countries. American Studies scholar
Alan Trachtenberg argues that the significant impact that Vincent hoped to make was not
just on individual readers, but on all of America:
The rhetorical goal was far more ambitious [than creating a college student’s
outlook], nothing short of a transformation of everyday life, a personal conversion
to culture through faithful reading of assigned books, and thereby, in a process of
social regeneration which Vincent and others saw flowing from Chautauqua, a
revitalization of America itself.12
Vincent may not have set out to change the framework of American culture, but he
certainly did so by encouraging the proliferation of education as a core pillar of middleclass culture. Additionally, the C.L.S.C. supported open access to a middle-class cultural
education. Many Americans did not have the time, motivation, or money to participate in
the C.L.S.C., but the missions of broadening an educated adult population and
encouraging belief in education as an access point into the middle class did have
significant impacts on American society.
11
12
Arthur Gilman to John H. Vincent, July 25 1878, quoted in Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 100-101.
Alan Trachtenberg, “‘We Study the Word and Works of God’: Chautauqua and the Sacralization of
Culture in America, Henry Ford Museum & Greenfield Village Herald 13, no. 2 (1984): 9.
37
When Vincent announced his idea, he hoped that perhaps a thousand would join
the circle, but stated cautiously that if ten registered, he would be satisfied.13 Over eight
thousand four hundred people signed up in the first year, and 1,718 members completed
their four years of study in the first class, known as the “Pioneers.” Forty years after its
founding, the C.L.S.C. had enrolled more than three hundred thousand members.14
Most of these members never set foot on the Chautauqua grounds. Unlike
traditional educational systems, participants were not required to be physically present at
a campus to study. No longer was it necessary to pack one’s trunk for four years in New
Haven or South Hadley to become an educated adult. Instead, people could become
students in “a ‘college’ for one’s own house.”15 As a result, it was possible for working
people of all ages, men and women, to study. It was, indeed, the case that the C.L.S.C.
made study accessible to many people who would not have otherwise had the
opportunity, but this idea served as rhetoric for a C.L.S.C. that actually was supported
much more by a middle-class audience than a working-class one. By arguing for an
accessible education for all, the C.L.S.C. was made more appealing to middle-class
people with a Progressive agenda.
One of Vincent’s goals for the C.L.S.C. was to reach a group of people who had
not historically had access to education. In introducing the concept to the Chautauqua
assembly in 1878, he argued that the reading program would help people born without
advantages, “who need help and stimulus in the acquisition of personal culture.” Vincent
13
Morrison, 56.
14
Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 112; Morrison, 65.
15
Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 75.
38
continued, “They go into a trade early in life. They early go into family life, and find it
too late to go back from business into school. But these need culture as parents, as
citizens, as members of the church.”16 His goal for these people was clarified in his 1886
book, The Chautauqua Movement. Vincent asserted:
I hope that we shall educate the people, and all the people, -- the poorest and the
meanest of them, -- until in lordly way, worthy of royal blood, they refuse to be
trodden upon or ordered about by the impertinent and arrogant pretenders of
modern society.
I hope that we shall educate the people until the cultivated poor have more
power than the ignorant rich.17
Central to Vincent’s plan was an education and empowerment through God’s
works and grace. This God was a Protestant God. Vincent’s desire to educate the poor to
become people who “refuse to be trodden upon or ordered about” was, in part, an antiCatholic sentiment prevalent at the time. This assertion was made transparent in an 1883
Chautauquan column. It argued that America needed an educated population, not like
previous generations when “the masses of men were not required to act with intelligence
of their own, but to follow the decree of the privileged few or obey the behest of the
autocratic individual. … Hence, [the Catholic Church’s] ambition has been absolute
power, … that favorite motto of the Romish church, ‘keep the people in ignorance,’ [is] a
motto which she has done her best to put into practice.”18 Thus, while the Roman
Catholic Church produced an unthinking hierarchy, the C.L.S.C. aimed to educate people
for thinking on their own. However, the C.L.S.C. did not prohibit non-Protestants from
16
Ibid., 84.
17
Ibid., 226-227.
18
“The C.L.S.C. An Educational Necessity of the Times,” Chautauquan, October 1883, 53.
39
participating in the reading course. The first graduating class included thirteen Roman
Catholics and four Jews.19
The Chautauquan described all kinds of hard working people who wrote in as
testament to the power of the C.L.S.C. In 1883, a New York housewife wrote, “I do it a
great deal for my children, hoping I may be a better mother, and train their minds so that
they will make better men and women than they would have been had I not become a
member of the C.L.S.C.”20 An Ohio shopkeeper explained his predicament:
I am confined to my place at the cashier’s desk in a large retail dry goods store.
No chance to read, and not much to think of anything except my work. I go home
at night too weary in body and brain to do anything but rest up for next day’s
work. Then again, during the dull season there are times when I can have a book
or paper at the store, and occasionally read a few pages, consequently my
progress is rather irregular.21
Despite his difficult work life, the shopkeeper was devoted to the work of the C.L.S.C.
and was attempting to make progress. A lumberjack from “the Great North Woods of
Michigan” often received his Chautauquan crumpled and wet after it was toted twentyfour miles from the nearest town. He wrote in to the magazine, “In a few weeks I shall
leave the forest, as lumbering has commenced to wane for this year, but when I shall
think of my life in the wilderness among bears, deer and wolves, I shall be reminded of
the C.L.S.C. as the oasis in the path of my living in the woods.”22 In all of these
instances, a working class person struggled in life but managed to make time for the
19
“Statistics of the Class of 1882,” Pioneer Hall Collection, Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle,
Chautauqua, NY.
20
C.L.S.C. Testimony, Chautauquan, November 1883,103.
21
Local Circles, Chautauquan, May 1884, 478.
22
Ibid., 479.
40
C.L.S.C., and that had made all the difference. The C.L.S.C. told this story over and over
again. People held up as examples were almost exclusively white and Protestant.
In actuality, the C.L.S.C. was supported much more by members of the upper and
middle classes, people who had time on their hands to devote to the practice of reading.23
The statistics of the Pioneer Class of 1882 show that women who did not work outside
the home (housekeepers, no occupation, or ministers’ wives) made up almost 60% of the
female registrants (and 22% of the entire class). Of the men, 23% had more upper class
occupations (ministers, lawyers, doctors, dentists, and bankers). Only four factory
employees were listed in the entire class of 8,437 students. Additionally, though the
C.L.S.C. also argued that one was never too old for education and encouraged older
people in its advertising material, only 54 readers were over the age of 60 (less than half
of one percent).24
The rhetoric that the C.L.S.C. presented about the geographical makeup of the
circle was also skewed. The working-class letter writers described above were typical of
those represented in the Chautauquan: people on farms or from small towns. In actuality,
the C.L.S.C. was quite popular in large cities. According to C.L.S.C. historian Charles
Robert Knicker:
[C.L.S.C. Secretary] Kate Kimball’s statistics [were] published in the 1903
anniversary issue of The Chautauquan, which indicated that twenty-five percent
of the circles were in villages of less than 500 population, and fifty percent of the
circles were in communities of 500 to 3,500 population. What some scholars
have neglected to consider are some of the other statistics presented in the same
23
For a further discussion of this dichotomy of advertising itself as a “People’s College” but really
appealing to upper and middle classes, see Charles Robert Knicker, “1978 – Centennial of a Forgotten
Giant: The Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle,” in C.L.S.C. History and Book List 1878-1985, ed.
Nately Ronsheim (Chautauqua, NY: Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle, Chautauqua Institution,
[1985]), 4-5.
24
“Statistics of the Class of 1882.”
41
article which describe circles in large cities. Philadelphia, Chicago, Brooklyn,
and New York recorded 100 or more circles. Altogether, twelve cities contributed
almost 900 circles. Other evidence suggests that these urban circles had larger
membership than small town circles. … In short, it appears that the rural image of
Chautauqua and the Circle is only partially true.25
The idea that small-town merchants and factory workers were using their only
leisure hours to better themselves through the C.L.S.C. was a pervasive trope, and it
appealed greatly to those who actually took advantage of the program. In fact, it seems
that members of the middle class were even more likely to participate because they
expected that their participation was tacit support for a project to increase educational
opportunities for all. As long as everyone had access to the education, it was acceptable
for middle-class people to enjoy it; it was bottom-up education rather than the traditional
upper-class-initiated educational hierarchy. It is unclear whether Vincent consciously
created a rhetoric that would appeal to a more Progressive middle-class audience, but he
must have been aware that his efforts were working as the membership among this group
grew so quickly.
The C.L.S.C. membership grew, in large part, because of the support of
permanent chautauqua communities that were developing throughout the U.S., but
especially in the Midwest and East. By supporting C.L.S.C. programming, permanent
chautauquas were organized into one more cohesive movement. Individual chautauquas
gained popularity and credibility through their hosting of C.L.S.C. events. Even when
assemblies started their own reading programs, like the Bay View Reading Circle and the
Winona Reading Circle, they were always discussed in relation to the C.L.S.C. This
25
Kniker, 10.
42
organizational structure among the assemblies paved the way for the International
Chautauqua Alliance, to be discussed in Chapter 4.26
The work of the C.L.S.C. was often one of several educational programs at the
individual permanent chautauquas. In addition to C.L.S.C. roundtables and a variety of
educational lectures, many chautauquas organized Normal school programs and summer
schools as formal education. Some developed out of the C.L.S.C., whereas others grew
in concert with it. Monteagle opened a free Normal school for teachers in 1883, offering
New Testament Greek, Hebrew, French, German, English Literature and Language, and
Vocal and Instrumental Music.27 Bay View added C.L.S.C. roundtables in 1886, at the
same time as it organized schools in Music, Elocution, Cooking, and Art.28 These
programs quickly blossomed and eventually became the Bay View Summer College of
Liberal Arts, which lasted until 1969. The Colorado Chautauqua in Boulder was
established so that school teachers could continue their education; the Collegiate
Department was a central aspect of its programming from its first year in 1898. The
Winona Lake Assembly education program was organized into different colleges; this
program eventually became Grace College and Theological Seminary.29
26
A modern iteration of this kind of collaboration among individual assemblies is the Chautauqua Network,
founded in 1983 to facilitate “interaction and communication among its members to further their
preservation, growth and development;” “Chautauqua Network,” Chautauqua Institution,
http://www.ciweb.org/chautauqua-network/ (accessed October 11, 2010).
27
Frank C. Waldrop, ed., Mountain Voices: The Centennial History of Monteagle Sunday School Assembly
(Monteagle, TN: Monteagle Sunday School Assembly, 1982), 174.
28
Keith J. Fennimore, The Heritage of Bay View, 1875-1975 (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans,
1975), 99-100.
29
Winona Assembly Daily Review, May 1900, quoted in Jennifer Triggs, ed., Winona Revisited: 18991900: Capturing the History of Winona Lake, Indiana Utilizing Programs and Other Printed Materials
(Winona Lake, IN: Grace College and Theological Seminary, 2005), 36-56.
43
Even the Chautauqua Assembly attempted a university program. In 1883, with
the help of University of Chicago’s William Rainey Harper, Chautauqua gained a
university charter from the State of New York to award a baccalaureate degree. It
became too expensive to manage, and in 1888, was reorganized to run as a university
extension program that could be organized by community associations, lyceums,
C.L.S.C. circles, and universities around the country. It remained unsuccessful, though,
because it was forced to compete with other university extension programs that began in
earnest in the 1890s.30
All of these education programs – reading circles, Normal and summer schools,
and university extension programs – were popularized with the help of the C.L.S.C., and
they offered the opportunity for more advanced and formalized study for C.L.S.C.
readers. The summer school programs outlasted the C.L.S.C., except at Chautauqua,
where the C.L.S.C. has remained active to this day. Both the C.L.S.C. and the summer
schools served to make formal education more accessible and more democratic. The
success of this idea further strengthened accessible university education and extension
programs; these concepts became so prevalent in American society that they competed
with, and eventually overshadowed, the C.L.S.C. and assembly Normal and summer
schools.
30
Andrew C. Reiser, The Chautauqua Moment: Protestants, Progressives, and the Culture of Modern
Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 212-213; Morrison, 49. An article in the
Chautauquan describes the plans for the Chautauqua University: “There is a university charter in the hands
of the Chautauqua management – a university to be. In this university there will be non-resident courses of
study, with a rigid annual examination, to be followed by degrees and diplomas. There may sometime in
the future be a permanent Chautauqua University at Chautauqua. Further than this I can say nothing now.
It is to be hoped the Chautauqua University will never confer honorary degrees”; C.L.S.C. Work,
Chautauquan (November 1883), 102.
44
The C.L.S.C. operated as the motivating force for education at chautauquas, but it
served a second purpose of working to unite the permanent chautauquas in a way that
they had not been previously. The Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly was founded in
1874 and other assemblies quickly followed, and though they were not directly
connected, they all looked to Chautauqua for guidance. The C.L.S.C. filled the need of
communication between assemblies. The Chautauquan reported on events at other
permanent chautauquas, and when readers could not get to Chautauqua, the C.L.S.C.
encouraged Recognition Day ceremonies at other sites. For example, a reader from
Colorado might have been unaware of the chautauqua at Boulder, but upon reading about
it in the magazine, could have chosen to graduate there among other C.L.S.C. members.
Historian Harrison John Thornton asserted:
The nearest substitute for a journey to Chautauqua for the great occasion was to
receive the diplomas on Recognition Day from one of the many chautauquas that
sprang up in imitation of the institution at Lake Chautauqua. This practice was
made as conformable to the procedure at Chautauqua as possible, and, for many
years, received the close cooperation of the Chautauqua Literary and Scientific
Circle officials.31
Through the marketing of the C.L.S.C., many more people were made aware of other
assemblies, and participation increased. According to Thornton, twenty-five assemblies
hosted Recognition Day exercises in 1886, and ten years later, they were held in more
than fifty assemblies.32 At the 1904 C.L.S.C. rally at the Pennsylvania Chautauqua in Mt.
Gretna, the speaker summed up the connection; “The Doctor emphasized the thought that
after all none should lose sight of the fact that the reading course is the one link that binds
31
Harrison John Thornton, “An Adventure in Popular Education, ca. 1952, manuscript, 315, Thornton
Collection, Chautauqua.
32
Ibid.
45
together all Chautauquans everywhere.”33 In this way, the C.L.S.C. became an
“imagined community” among the middle class.34
Most permanent chautauquas had C.L.S.C. circles, but some later developed their
own reading programs. These reading schemes were not a significant threat to the
C.L.S.C. Vincent even encouraged the founding of the Home Reading Union in England
during a visit there in 1887.35 Because they were familiar with the C.L.S.C.,
chautauquans were quick to accept these various reading programs. In 1888, the Winona
Reading Circle was founded at the Winona Lake Assembly; it eventually merged with the
C.L.S.C. in 1901.36 In 1893, John M. Hall, the Michigan coordinator of the C.L.S.C. for
the previous thirteen years, founded his own Bay View Reading Circle. As late as 1912,
new reading circles were founded; that year, the Colorado Chautauqua in Boulder
advertised the 20th Century Reading Club as part of its program.37
The Bay View Reading Circle was closely modeled on the C.L.S.C. It required
that students read, discuss, and submit examinations on the material. It published
textbooks and a monthly magazine. In the inaugural issue of the Bay View Magazine,
Hall described it:
33
“C.L.S.C. Rally,” Pennsylvania Chautauquan, July 21, 1904.
34
Benedict Anderson has theorized that nations act as “imagined communities” of people who do not know
one another but are united into one community through nationalism and a belief in a “horizontal
comradeship” of equality. His concept has been applied to other types of large-scale communities and is
appropriate here in discussing the uniting bond of the C.L.S.C.; Benedict Anderson, Imagined
Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (New York: Verso, 1983).
35
T. C. Mendenhall, Monographs on Education in the United States (Albany, NY: J. B. Lyon Co., 1899),
863, http://books.google.com/books?id=-OK-_G01XR4C (accessed October 10, 2010).
36
37
C.L.S.C. Round Table, Chautauquan, January 1907, 248.
F. A. Boggess to members on the Colorado Chautauqua grounds in 1911, October 10, 1912, Executive
Director Collection, Colorado.
46
The Bay View Reading Circle aims to provide and direct at the lowest possible
expense, a choice course of systematic reading, made up after an approved
educational plan, and to promote habits of home study. It is for people of too
limited time for elaborate courses, and who are yet ambitious to advance in
intelligence, and would like to turn their spare moments to good account. It is
neither sectarian nor sectional, and no one is too old to join it. It has a four years’
course, with an examination each year and a diploma at the end.38
This description sounds remarkably like the C.L.S.C.’s advertising material. Hall’s
primary aim was to offer a similar course, but to be less expensive. In 1893, when the
B.V.R.C. was founded, membership was $2.50 including one textbook, and a
subscription to the Bay View Magazine cost 50 cents. Hall made sure that his course was
always cheaper than the C.L.S.C.39 While some believed that Hall created the B.V.R.C.
for his own monetary gain, he actually made only about ten cents’ profit on each
membership.40
Though it was cheaper, the B.V.R.C. was not real competition to the C.L.S.C. Dr.
Theodore L. Flood, the editor of the Chautauquan, sent an agent to the Midwest to gain
further information on the B.V.R.C. In an 1897 letter, he wrote, “As to John Hall and his
7,000 members, I do not believe he has any such number enrolled. I sent an agent into
that territory myself within nine months and his report was that John Hall’s could not
exist a great while.”41 Despite Flood’s nonchalance, the B.V.R.C. managed to last almost
25 more years. In the beginning Bay View hosted both the C.L.S.C. and the B.V.R.C.
simultaneously, and then Bay Viewers became so enamored with the B.V.R.C. that
C.L.S.C. programming ceased.
38
The Bay View Reading Circle, Bay View Magazine, December 1893, 1.
39
Mary Jane Doerr, Bay View: An American Idea (Allegan Forest, MI: Priscilla Press, 2010), 58.
40
Ibid.
41
Ibid., 57.
47
The popularity of the C.L.S.C. and its spin-off groups were emblematic of the
growing middle-class cultural value of education. Their annual culminating events –
Recognition Day for the C.L.S.C. and Processional Day for the B.V.R.C. – were grand
celebrations of educational achievement. These ceremonies bear further analysis as
rituals of cultural work.
The first C.L.S.C. Commencement Day in 1882 was an all-day affair and set the
precedent for future Recognition Day ceremonies. The day began with an 8 a.m. lecture
by Lyman Abbott, who had become a counselor of the C.L.S.C. The class gathered at the
gate of St. Paul’s Grove and then began the formal activities. Greeting them at the gate
were young girls in white bearing baskets of flowers. Vincent described these girls in
this way a few years later:
There is a touch of pathos in that part of the Chautauqua “Recognition”
programme when three score or more little girls in white, standing before the
“Hall of Philosophy,” fling flowers in the pathway of those thousand or more men
and women who have in middle or later life, attempted and completed a course of
reading – a work begun for the sake of their children and for the brightening of
their own lives.42
Certainly, Vincent was understating the intended pull on emotions when he said that the
flower girls added a touch of pathos to the event. They embodied a feminized innocence,
but at the same time offered a kind of fertility by tossing their flowers. As Vincent
argued, they were meant to represent a future educated world for the participants. Just
like children in a wedding, the young girls’ presence served as a reminder that graduates
42
John H. Vincent, “Chautauqua, A Popular University,” Contemporary Review 51 (1887): 734,
http://books.google.com/books?id=cb8CAAAAIAAJ (accessed October 19, 2010).
48
were intended to mate and multiply – only in this case, they were meant to share ideas
and multiply their knowledge.43
At Chautauqua, official graduates were invited to move beyond the flower girls
and through the gate, which became known as the Golden Gate. As they entered, they
passed under four arches representing Faith, Science, Literature, and Art. Thornton
stressed the importance of keeping this tradition for only those who had completed their
studies; he wrote, “It stands in position on Recognition Day only, and care is taken that
none but those about to graduate, or previous graduates who had not enjoyed this honor,
ever use it as an entrance to the Grove.”44
Once all members of the class passed through the Golden Gate, they were
officially members of the Society of the Hall in the Grove, the alumni organization that
supported further academic endeavor and held alumni events. The proclamation of
acceptance into the Society clarifies the significance of the moment to the graduates. The
Superintendent of Instruction (Vincent at the 1882 ceremony) stated:
You have finished the appointed and accepted course of reading; you have
been admitted to this sacred Grove; you have passed the arches dedicated to Faith,
Science, Literature and Art; you have entered in due form this Hall; – the center
of the Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle.
And now, as Superintendent of Instruction, with these my associates, the
Counselors of our fraternity, I greet you and hereby announce that you, and your
brethren and sisters absent from us this day, who have completed with you the
prescribed course of reading, are accepted and approved graduates of the
Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle, and that you are entitled to
membership in the Society of the Hall in the Grove.45
43
For a discussion of children in weddings, see Barbara Jo Chesser, “Analysis of Wedding Rituals: An
Attempt to Make Weddings More Meaningful,” Family Relations 29, no. 2 (April 1980): 204-209,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/584073 (accessed October 5, 2010).
44
Thornton, 308.
45
Ibid., 310.
49
With this proclamation, readers became graduates. They were accepted into a
“fraternity” of learners not only through the process of study, but through the components
of Recognition Day itself. The choice of calling the C.L.S.C. a fraternity was a doubleedged one. It was obviously a reference to collegiate life, but it was also a gendered
term, and more than 37% of the 1882 graduating class were women.46
After acceptance into the Hall in the Grove, graduates then organized for a
procession around the Chautauqua grounds to the amphitheater for the actual
commencement. Leaders of the class carried a banner that had been created for the
occasion. The first year, the gold banner proclaimed “C.L.S.C. Organized, August A.D.
1878.” It had C.L.S.C. logos in all four corners in a brighter gold. In the center, within a
purple square, were a cross and a book. On the reverse, the banner featured an image of
the original Hall of Philosophy at Chautauqua, as well as the C.L.S.C. mottoes. The
entire banner was framed in gold, with fringe on the bottom and tassels on the side.47
After the first year, each alumni class marched ahead of the graduating class with its
banner; in this way, the banner took on significant importance as a symbol of the class.
Figure 1 is a postcard depicting the parade of alumni with their banners.
Upon entering the Amphitheater, the 1882 class heard speeches from Vincent,
Miller, Abbott, and other counselors of the C.L.S.C. Bishop Henry W. Warren gave the
commencement oration on “Brain and Heart.” Then diplomas were presented to the
graduating class. These diplomas were designed with beautiful etchings and included the
46
47
“Statistics of the Class of 1882.”
For an image of the first class banner and many others, see John Burton Clark, ed. The Banners and
Mosaics of Chautauqua 1882-1992 (Chautauqua, NY: Alumni Association of the C.L.S.C., [1992]).
50
Figure 1. Postcard of the 1911 Recognition Day Procession at Chautauqua. The sender
wrote, “This is what we will see tomorrow. Old people as well as young can ‘graduate.’”
Used with permission, Chautauqua.
graduates’ names. Although they looked just like college or university diplomas, they
were proof of no official degree.
Later in the evening, the Society of the Hall in the Grove was formally organized
and the “Order of the White Seal” was created. In one day, students became graduates,
then alumni, and then students again. The Order of the White Seal was designed to
encourage C.L.S.C. members to become lifelong learners; rather than studying for four
years and then entirely stopping academic pursuits, readers could complete further
directed study.48 Even the design of the diploma left space for students to earn other
48
To join the “Order of the White Seals,” one had to complete four additional studies. Other levels were
developed, but eventually dropped. “The League of the Round Table” required three more seals. “The
Guild of the Seven Seals” was earned after seven more. Vincent hoped that this hierarchical structure
would offer “a perpetual incentive to diligence.” This structure was eliminated because, according to
51
seals; it contained a pyramid with blank space on the steps and base to hold thirty-one
additional seals.49 Harrison has described Vincent’s emphasis on further study, saying
that graduation was not a cul de sac, but a departure for more advanced study: “He
[Vincent] made good use of the word Commencement, urging them to continue reading
and work for the graduate seals. It would require many years, he pointed out, to adorn all
the spaces on their diplomas with these further attestations of perseverance and merit.
Thus, as distinct from most diplomas, theirs pointed forward, not backward.”50 Unlike
other diplomas, then, C.L.S.C. diplomas served as a mediated document, both
recognizing work accomplished and requiring more effort for full completion.
At the same time, the diplomas were not proof of an actual degree, but of four
years of reading and basic examinations. While this graduation may have led to a
perceived change in cultural status, it did not evoke a formal change in the cultural
hierarchy; though readers may have felt different about themselves, their C.L.S.C.
diplomas did not necessarily entitle them to a change in occupation or social strata as a
college diploma might.
The 1882 Recognition Day concluded with a campfire by the lake, emphasizing
the roots of the C.L.S.C. in the Chautauqua Sunday School Assembly. C.L.S.C. readers
had done their studying in circles all over the country and indeed, the world (registrants
of the first class included sixty graduates from Canada and one from Japan). Yet, they
gathered at Chautauqua for their commencement, and even though some had never before
George Vincent (John Heyl Vincent’s son and President of the Chautauqua Institution from 1907-1915),
“the C.L.S.C. is in danger of losing caste through pretentious titles.” Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 22122; George E. Vincent to Kate F. Kimball, November 18, 1887, quoted in Thornton, 331-331a.
49
Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 221.
50
Thornton, 313.
52
visited, these readers were integral to Vincent’s plan for Chautauqua. He saw the
C.L.S.C. as a means of secular and sacred education for the population, and Chautauqua
as a community made up of educated individuals. In his eyes, Recognition Day became a
celebration of all that was best about both the C.L.S.C. and Chautauqua.
Not all C.L.S.C. readers were able to make the journey to Chautauqua, however.
Some graduates experienced a type of commencement within their circles; Chautauqua
provided the diplomas and circle members organized the rest. Others were able to
graduate at permanent chautauqua assemblies that were closer to their homes. Some
permanent chautauquas had more formal Recognition Day proceedings, complete with
Golden Gates and girls in white; others were more simple affairs. Several sites fully
embraced the C.L.S.C. idea, offering roundtable discussions, book reviews, and outings
in addition to holding the annual Recognition Day. The assemblies thus served as microChautauquas, encouraging more careful summer study that could be continued later in the
year in their home circles. This idea also brought new people to the permanent
chautauquas, people already interested in education.
The Monteagle Assembly became the C.L.S.C.’s Southern headquarters after it
was established there in 1883. A comparison of Recognition Day programs at Monteagle
shows relatively little change over several years. For example, the twelfth Recognition
Day in 1893 was almost identical to the fifth Recognition Day in 1886.51
51
“Monteagle Assembly C.L.S.C. Recognition Day, Saturday, Aug. 5, 1893,” (Meadville, PA: Flood &
Vincent, The Chautauqua-Century Press, 1893), Monteagle; “Monteagle Assembly C.L.S.C. Recognition
Day, Friday, July 30, 1886,” (Boston: Chautauqua Press, 1886), Monteagle. Because the same program
was printed for all C.L.S.C. ceremonies each year, the Monteagle programs did not reflect the annual
numbers in Monteagle; the fifth annual program was really held after Monteagle had only hosted the
C.L.S.C. for three years.
53
Both the 1886 and 1893 programs were printed by a Chautauqua press; in 1886, it
was the Chautauqua Press in Boston, but most C.L.S.C. materials were printed by the
Chautauqua-Century Press in Meadville, Pennsylvania.52 By 1886, the C.L.S.C. had
become big business and a publishing house was necessary to print the Chautauquan
magazine and books, as well as the Recognition Day materials. By publishing one
Recognition Day program each year, the Chautauqua press created continuity across
assemblies and other commencement sites. At the same time, though, the Monteagle
programs included the Monteagle Assembly name and the specific dates of their
ceremonies; this personalization helped to create a unique moment for graduates and
diminished the commercial feel of the mass-produced programs.
Both Monteagle ceremonies began with a call and response; in the 1886 version, a
superintendent spoke and graduates responded, and in the 1893 text, the class was
divided into two sections that read to one another. Some of the actual text was the same,
and both had the same message: that God was the source of all knowledge and
understanding. The majority of the remaining spoken text was identical in both
ceremonies, with a discussion of the three mottoes (“We Study the Word and the Works
of God,” “Let us keep our Heavenly Father in the midst,” and “Never be Discouraged”).
With each, a leader read one part and members responded with another.
The only difference between the readings in the two programs is that in 1886, a
letter written by William Cullen Bryant was also read. The letter was the one Bryant had
52
For more on the works printed by the Chautauqua Century-Press, see Mary Lee Talbot, “A School at
Home: The Contribution of the Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle to Women’s Education
Opportunities in the Gilded Age, 1874-1900” (PhD diss., Columbia University, 1997), 157-158, in
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses,
http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/pqdweb?index=0&did=739850981&SrchMode=2&sid=4&F
mt=2&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1297598865&clientId=29945
(accessed October 10, 2010).
54
written to Vincent in 1878 in support of the C.L.S.C. concept. In the final paragraph,
Bryant wrote, “I shall be interested to watch, during the little space of life which may yet
remain to me, the progress and results of the plan which has drawn from me this letter”;
Bryant died less than a month after posting the letter. That this letter was not included in
the 1893 program was telling. By then, Bryant’s name as editor of the New York
Evening Post and man of letters did not elicit the same kind of respect because he had
passed away fifteen years earlier. Secondly, it also showed that the C.L.S.C. no longer
needed to prove its credibility by invoking Bryant. In its place in the 1893 program was a
letter from Vincent himself, explaining the history of the C.L.S.C., its benefits, and the
course for the following year. It read more as an advertisement than a letter of inspiration
to graduates.
The music in the two programs is also quite similar, all hymns, including the
“Gloria Patri” and songs of evening praise and prayer. Many of these hymns would have
been easily recognizable from church and vespers services. Other songs were C.L.S.C.specific. The 1886 program included an “1886 Class Song,” an “Alumni Song,” and a
second “Alumni Song of the New England Assembly.”53 By 1893, songs
commemorating other class years were incorporated.
Basically, very little about the Recognition Day festivities changed, even across
time and space. The leaders of the C.L.S.C. worked to ensure uniformity by printing one
program to be used at all locations. That continuity was necessary as the C.L.S.C.
53
According to Vincent’s summary of independent chautauquas in The Chautauqua Movement, the New
England Assembly was held in Lakeview, Massachusetts, near Framingham, beginning in 1880. It had “a
‘C.L.S.C.’ enthusiasm quite equaling that of Chautauqua itself”; Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 298.
55
quickly grew. In 1883, 50,000 were registered.54 By 1891, 180,000 readers had enrolled
in the 13 years that the C.L.S.C. had existed; approximately twelve percent of those
actually received their diplomas.55
The Processional Days for the Bay View Reading Circle were very much like the
C.L.S.C. Recognition Days. The Bay View Magazine described the passing of the four
gates during the processional:
Members will be interested in a description of the four gates, symbolical of the
four courses passed through to graduate, through which the graduates pass, and
around which programs of stately music and responsive readings occur – all
members participating. No matter in how many countries we make reading
journeys, we shall always again and again revisit the four great countries –
Germany, France, England, and America. There is a gateway for each land.56
These gates sound much like the Golden Gate and the four arches at Chautauqua. A June
1900 article in the Bay View Magazine featured a photograph of young girls “Winding
the Class Colors” on Processional Day. Like the flower girls at Chautauqua, these girls
from the kindergarten training class wore white dresses and black tights, and had their
hair in braids; in their innocence, they represented the future possibility of a better world
through education.
While the processional and the graduation ceremony included mostly hymns and
prayers, the B.V.R.C. Processional Day also contained more patriotic music; the 1897
program incorporated the singing of “My Country ‘Tis of Thee.” C.L.S.C. programs
often featured some kind of patriotism, but in a different manner. The 1887 Lakeside
54
Editor’s Outlook, Chautauquan, October 1883, 52,
http://books.google.com/books?id=ZycZAAAAYAAJ (accessed October 9, 2010).
55
Julie R. Nelson, “A Subtle Revolution: The Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle in Rural
Midwestern Towns, 1878-1900,” Agricultural History 70, no. 4 (Autumn 1996): 653-671.
56
“The Circle’s Summer Meetings,” Bay View Magazine, June 1900, 411.
56
ceremony involved a band that marched from the dock in Lake Erie.57 In 1920, Ocean
Park encouraged cottagers to “make Recognition Day a day for expressing patriotism by
decorating with bunting and flags”; it also staged American history tableaux vivants.58
These additional programs celebrated America in a general communal way, which was
different from the singing of “My Country ‘Tis of Thee” in the organized program.
While all of the others in the program were religious hymns, “My Country ‘Tis of Thee”
stood out as something different. Certainly it is a hymn, and has the structure of a hymn,
but it celebrates the power of a country for three stanzas before God even enters into the
discussion, not until:
Our fathers’ God, to thee,
Author of liberty, to thee we sing.
Most of the song celebrates the heritage of the place, of American forebears, of the
landscape. In the years following Samuel Francis Smith’s penning of the lyrics in 1831,
the song was popularized and used in a variety of venues. Its inclusion in the B.V.R.C.
program in 1897 signaled a shift in the bearer of abundant gifts; America, not just God,
provided for those who sang it.59 It celebrated the middle-class virtue of citizenship.
Hall wrote of the first Processional Day, “The one who writes this report viewed
the exercises of the day with extreme interest, because they marked the culmination of
four long years’ devotion to a purpose.”60 Certainly, members of the first graduating
57
“Lakeside’s Gala Day,” Cleveland Leader, July 28, 1887, Lakeside.
58
Ocean Park Assembly Program, 1920, 12, 22, Ocean Park.
59
For more information on “My Country Tis of Thee” as a cultural production, see Robert James Branham
and Stephen J. Hartnett, Sweet Freedom’s Song: “My Country ‘Tis of Thee” and Democracy in America
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2002).
60
“The Circle at the Assembly,” Bay View Magazine, November 1897, 39-40.
57
class understood his comment to be about their four years’ devotion to studying. At the
same time, though, Hall was describing his own devotion. Though he based his B.V.R.C.
upon his experiences working with the C.L.S.C., launching his program required
significant effort. His dedication to the program was evident not only in choosing the
reading material, organizing advertising, and managing the readership, but also in
creating the rituals of the Processional Day.
These decisions that Hall and Vincent made in organizing their first graduation
ceremonies were made with significant thought, and were not accidental. The remainder
of this chapter will examine the ways that Vincent and Hall structured these performative
ceremonies to convey particular meanings to participants, to the audience, and to
American society at large.
From the first Recognition Day, organizers understood that certain rituals were
needed to make the event significant in the lives of the participants. Some rituals were
drawn from college graduation ceremonies, and others were new with the C.L.S.C.
Vincent was conscious of his decisions in creating the first event that would serve as a
model for future Recognition Days. Reflecting on the organization of the ceremony, he
wrote:
The appeal to sentiment was an experiment. If it did not meet with a response
from the mature men and women in our circle … it would prove both ridiculous
and disastrous.
… The experiment was made, and was crowned with success. Heartily
have our members indorsed [sic] the plans adopted. Memorial Days were
appointed, commemorating distinguished characters in literature and history;
significant mottoes selected; songs written and set to music; badges prepared;
diplomas promised; class gatherings, alumni re-unions, round-tables held, and
campfires lighted. All these provisions of the C.L.S.C. have contributed to its
power.61
61
Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 75.
58
Vincent pointed out that all aspects of the ceremony were structured to appeal to the
emotions of the graduates. He used rituals to cultivate this particular pathos for the
participants.
This concept of creating rituals has been explored in a variety of scholarly
disciplines – from anthropology to dance – since C.L.S.C. Recognition Day was
established, but it was commonly understood at the time that staging the same events and
activities over and over would lead to heightened emotion. At Oberlin College in Ohio,
graduation rituals were hotly contested on campus in the early twentieth century; some
wanted to maintain widely-used rituals like graduation gowns, whereas others argued that
Oberlin should create its own set of graduation practices. The college newspaper
weighed in on the issue and offered this definition:
[Graduation] Rituals serve a double purpose. They express the sentiments and
emotions of the earnest and the sentimental. And they serve to impress a
realization of the significance of the time upon those who would otherwise not
feel it. And if any season is worthy of symbolical expression and emphasis, it is
the Commencement season, the initiation of new members into the international
fraternity of educated men; the ‘now get busy,’ after the issuing of workinstructions; the ‘Bon Voyage’ of youth to manhood; the substance also of things
hoped for, the culmination of effort. Viewed in this light all the formalism of
college life assumes significance.62
For this author, the graduation rituals express the sentiment and the significance of both
the culmination of serious study and the embarkation upon new adventures in life and
learning.63 This definition can be applied not only to college graduation rituals but also
to the rituals of Recognition Day. Indeed, since Vincent was trying to cultivate a
62
Editorial, Oberlin Review, June 21, 1906, quoted in S. E. Plank, “Academic Regalia at Oberlin: the
Establishment and Dissolution of a Tradition,” Northeast Ohio Journal of History 1 no. 2 (April 2003): 61.
63
The writer also sees commencement as an “initiation … into the international fraternity of educated
men.” How would the women of the first Oberlin class of 1833 have felt about joining this fraternity?
59
“college outlook” for his readers, it makes sense that rituals similar to ones at college
graduations would be selected.
The moment of graduation, even from a reading course, serves as a liminal state,
or a state of being “in between”: participants are not yet alumni, but nor are they only
students.64 The ritual of graduation serves as a rite of passage, from reader to graduate,
and as all participants go through the process together, it creates a sense of community.
Organizers certainly worked to instill a kind of community togetherness in their
Recognition Day. On that day, the relationships among those readers who had not yet
completed the course, the graduating, and the alumni were leveled; though each walked
in separate groups in the processional, they all worked together to celebrate the
achievements of the graduates. That community spirit imbued the celebration with
significance slightly different from a college graduation; it placed even more emphasis on
continuity through the bodily presence of C.L.S.C. members at all levels.
Contemporary theorists’ work on rituals deepens the ways in which Recognition
Day ceremonies can be understood. Victor Turner has proven to be the most influential
theorist discussing the significance of rituals in the second half of the twentieth century,
changing how later generations of academics view them. One contribution Turner has
made is in unpacking the complexity of the symbols involved in rituals, arguing that one
part of a ritual can be understood in several ways at the same time. In each ritual, then,
64
Arnold Van Gennep first coined the term “liminality” in his 1909 work Rites de Passage. Victor Turner
expanded upon his idea in a 1967 essay, “Betwixt and Between: The Liminal Period in Rites of Passage.”
In this instance, C.L.S.C. participants were not yet fully graduated alumni, nor did they remain mere
students in the C.L.S.C. program; they were something “in between” and as such, they did not quite fit
either place. See Arnold van Gennep, Rites de Passage, 1906, trans. Monika B. Vizedom and Gabrielle L.
Caffee as Rites of Passage (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960); Victor Turner, “Betwixt and
Between: The Liminal Period in Rites of Passage,” in The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1967), 93-111, http://books.google.com/books?id=62bKQB5xEo0C
(accessed March 3, 2011).
60
there is a “polysemic and multivocal character of symbolic structure. That is, there may
be more than one meaning attached to any activity or object, at the same moment in time
and for the same audience.”65
Applying this to Recognition Day, then, a moment like the unfurling of the class
banner symbolizes multiple meanings simultaneously. The members of the class who
decided upon the design understood it as a representation of their class’s ethos. Other
members of the class may have been more disconnected from the actual textile artifact,
but saw it as an overarching symbol for their class. Later viewers could understand it as a
work of art produced during a particular time and place. For example, class banners in
the late 1880s and until the mid-1890s celebrated Greece and Rome; classes were the
“Olympians,” the “Athenians,” the “Piereans,” the “Philomatheans.” From this, it is
evident that class leaders valued these ancient cultures and actually saw their C.L.S.C.
work as relating to a classical education. After the turn of the century, the banners
showed a renewed interest in a more contemporary Europe and a broader world-view.
The 1905 banner for the “Cosmopolitans” featured a world map with the motto “A man’s
reach should exceed his grasp.” Banner construction, too, was a sign of the popularity of
craft techniques, like embroidery, oil painting, and appliqué.66 This one ritual artifact, the
class banner, is polysemic, offering different symbols to different audiences, and also
multivocal, producing different kinds of meaning.
65
Gusfield and Michalowicz summarize Turner’s 1967 work; Joseph R. Gusfield and Jerzy Michalowicz,
“Secular Symbolism: Studies of Ritual, Ceremony, and the Symbolic Order in Modern Life,” Annual
Review of Sociology 10 (1984), 422; Victor Turner, The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1967).
66
Isabel B. Pederson, “Banners as Folk Art,” in The Banners and Mosaics of Chautauqua 1882-1992, ed.
John Burton Clark (Chautauqua, NY: Alumni Association of the C.L.S.C., [1992]).
61
Turner’s work encouraged other scholars to reexamine various kinds of rituals;
Robert J. Smith’s study of festivals is particularly relevant here. Recognition Days and
similar events served as a gathering of community members – of both C.L.S.C. members
and chautauquans in general. This coming together, Smith argues, allows opportunities
for individual catharsis. Festivals provide “occasions for the individuals of the
community to ‘get their lives together,’ to mutually and periodically restore the sense that
their lives are coherent, significant, and satisfying.”67 So a graduation ceremony or, by
extension, a Recognition Day, served as a unifying moment for the larger community, but
was also an occasion for individuals to reorganize their own lives. This moment was
unique, and participants were different in that moment from what they were before and
would be after.
Because the “festival” of graduation is one emphasizing individual achievement
through education, it makes sense that the celebration itself provided opportunities for
reflecting upon how these four years of education had reorganized participants’ lives.
Walking under the four arches of the Golden Gate was a significant symbol of this
reorganization. As participants entered the gates of Faith, Science, Literature, and Art,
they recognized their own achievements in these areas. Music incorporated into the
ceremonies solidified this “getting it together,” often reminding participants that they had
gotten it together through God’s grace. The lyrics of “A Song of Today,” included in
many Recognition Day programs, emphasize this point:
67
Robert J. Smith, Art of the Festival, Publications in Anthropology 6 (Lawrence, KS: Department of
Anthropology, University of Kansas, 1975), 5, quoted in Lin T. Humphrey and Theodore C. Humphrey,
“The High School Reunion: A Traditional Festival?” Journal of Popular Culture 19, no. 1 (Summer 1985):
99-106.
62
Fare-well, fare-well to the Old!
Beneath the arches, and one by one,
From the sun to shade and from shade to sun
We pass, and the years are told.
Fare-well, fare-well to the Old.
And hail, all hail to the New!
The future lies to a world new born,
All steeped in sunshine and mists of morn,
And arche’d with a cloud-less blue.
All hail, all hail to the New!68
It was in the liminal moment of graduation that readers said farewell to the Old – old
habits, old beliefs, old knowledge – and confirmed the significance of their lives “steeped
in sunshine” after four years of study.
Among the scholars examining ritual, Barbara G. Myerhoff’s work in the mid1970s is most applicable in making sense of the rituals of Recognition Day, even though
her research is rooted in Jewish heritage and Recognition Day was overtly Protestant. In
“We Don’t Wrap Herring in a Printed Page: Fusions, Functions, and Continuity in
Secular Ritual,” Myerhoff examines a graduation-siyum at a Jewish senior citizens’
center in California in the 1970s.69 Participants in the ceremony had completed a study
of Jewish sacred texts. Traditionally this completion would have been celebrated after
Saturday morning services with a short party called a siyum, but these first-generation
Jewish Americans wanted a more formal graduation ceremony like their children and
grandchildren earned at the end of high school or college. The ceremony, then, became a
mixing of two traditions, and new rituals were created. Like the C.L.S.C. and other
68
69
“Monteagle Assembly C.L.S.C. Recognition Day, Friday, July 30, 1886.”
Barbara G. Myerhoff, “We Don’t Wrap Herring in a Printed Page: Fusions, Functions, and Continuity in
Secular Ritual,” in Secular Ritual, ed. Barbara Myerhoff and Sally Falk Moore (Assen, The Netherlands:
Van Gorcum, 1977), 199-224.
63
reading circle ceremonies, this event was not an actual graduation, but a celebration of
significant effort in the form of a graduation ceremony. Much of Myerhoff’s astute
analysis of the event can be applied to Recognition Day.
Myerhoff labels the graduation-siyum a nonce ritual, a non-repeating event or the
first of a series that may or may not become a regular event. She defines a nonce ritual:
A common form in Western, urban, mobile societies. It is a complex ceremony
parts of which are sacred and parts secular, parts unique improvisations
(openings) and parts stable, recurrent and fixed (closed). This arrangement is
very characteristic of rituals among strangers and acquaintances gathered together
on an ad hoc basis for the nonce, once only bringing with them diverse experience
and personal histories.70
Certainly, the first Recognition Day in 1882 and the first Processional Day in 1897 were
nonce rituals, and fit Myerhoff’s definition. Actually, for many of the participants in any
other Recognition Day or Processional Day, it was also a nonce ritual; they attended their
own graduation but it was likely the first time that they had attended the event.
Vincent and Hall were cognizant of the fact that they were creating the first in
what they hoped would be a long series of graduation events. Even the name of the event
needed to be decided. An announcement to the membership of the first C.L.S.C.
graduation appeared in the Chautauquan a month before the event, describing
“Commencement Day C.L.S.C.,”71 but when the day came, it was renamed Recognition
Day. The B.V.R.C. announced “Graduation Day” in the June 1897 Bay View Magazine;
in November of the same year, it reported on the event and referred to it as “Processional
70
Ibid., 201.
71
“Commencement Day C.L.S.C.,” Chautauquan, July 1882, 617.
64
Day.”72 As plans for their first events came together, Vincent and Hall were optimistic
that they would succeed. According to the Bay View Magazine in June 1897, “The first
exercises occur in the shady park where grounds have been already prepared to be forever
used on this anniversary.”73 They expected their organization of the initial occurrence to
be long lasting, or perhaps, for forever.
In establishing the nonce ritual, Vincent and Hall were careful in selecting
symbols for the event. They wanted to make sure that the participants and audience
understood the moment as a significant one, the culmination of effort; they took those in
attendance out of their routine to create an emotionally significant moment. Myerhoff
argues that rituals can be especially effective in using symbols. She asserts that these
symbols “have significance far beyond the information transmitted. They may
accomplish tasks, accompany routine and instrumental procedures, but they always go
beyond them, endowing some larger meaning to activities they are associated with.”74
For example, the organizers of the C.L.S.C. decided that the processional would be
organized by class, with each class designated by a banner. The banner served an
organizational function, making sure that class members were in the right place and that
classes were in correct order. But the decision to designate a class by a banner allowed
the class to take it on as its symbol. The banners worked not only to organize the
processional but also to express much larger meanings about the class’s outlook and
context.
72
“Graduation Day,” Bay View Magazine, June 1897, 347; “The Circle at the Assembly,” Bay View
Magazine, November 1897, 39-40.
73
“Graduation Day,” 347; emphasis added.
74
Myerhoff, 200.
65
In addition to the banners, organizers of the first event made other significant
incorporations of symbols. Girls in white from the kindergarten training were brought to
throw flowers at the feet of graduates, and at some C.L.S.C. ceremonies and the B.V.R.C.
Processional Days, to weave a may pole. In the report on the first Processional Day, Hall
described it as “one of the prettiest of all exercises, -- the winding of the May Pole with
the class colors, by sixteen young women in white, from the kindergarten training
school.”75 In this instance, the symbol of the may pole was chosen because it was already
recognizable to participants. Americans in the late nineteenth century were familiar with
may poles, especially those that were created by school groups and younger children at
festivals. By the time may poles became an integral part of the American Playground
Movement at the turn of the twentieth century, may poles were an accepted form of
children’s play. A 1913 text encouraging the may pole’s inclusion in festivals describes
the act of weaving it:
The May-pole may be so simple in its preparation, and at the same time so
charming, that it appeals to everyone, howsoever untrained in dancing, games,
and pageantry. Its very rusticity adds to its ease, simplicity, and general effect. It
is a most attractive and refined entertainment, full of essential child spirit and
animation, and young and old in any number, in field or park, in the school-room,
church, or parlor, may erect a pole of suitable size, with a convenient number of
streamers of selected color, and to an appropriate ‘catchy’ air plait and unplait the
ribbons while dancing through the figures, varying the step with the time of the
music, making merry with laughter, while drinking in new life in high glee as in
the old days of “Merrie England.”76
The author explains the ease with which a may pole can be erected but, significantly,
does little to explain the symbolism. Though may poles had initially been used in
75
76
“The Circle at the Assembly,” 40.
Jennette Emeline Carpenter Lincoln, The Festival Book: May-day Pastime and the May-Pole (New York:
A. S. Barnes, 1913), vii, http://books.google.com/books?id=2hBbAAAAMAAJ (accessed October 3,
2010).
66
western European spring festivals of fertility, and have obvious phallic connotations, by
the time they were included in graduation ceremonies and even into play, they had lost
their initial symbolism. Instead, they were understood as beautiful mixings of color
through dancing in a child-like way, and represented happiest times in “Merrie England.”
In the Processional Days, they took on an added significance because class colors were
used for the streamers.
These symbols in the nonce ritual operated in a top-down fashion; organizers of
the event selected certain elements with care. There was no guarantee that participants
would understand and accept these symbols. As Vincent said of the first event, “the
appeal to sentiment was an experiment. If it did not meet with a response from the
mature men and women in our circle … it would prove both ridiculous and disastrous.”77
Vincent knew full well that anything planned had the potential to be a failure.
Other elements of the nonce ritual were chosen by members of the first class
itself, in a bottom-up way, and were accepted by each following class. The class chose a
motto, designed its banner, and decided on a class gift. C.L.S.C. classes gave a name to
their class: the “Pioneers” (1882), the “Irrepressibles” (1884), the “Jane Addams Class”
(1915). They chose these names as a sign of the times in which they were graduating, to
honor someone they admired, or to otherwise represent what they valued as a class.
Classes also chose to have a class photograph taken.78 Thirty-five members of the first
B.V.R.C. class posed in the grove of trees behind the Chautauqua Cottage at the center of
the Assembly; five were men and the rest were women. They appeared dressed in their
77
78
Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 75.
The class photos may have been organized by the C.L.S.C. and B.V.R.C. leadership, but they were not
listed on the formal program.
67
best finery, wearing ruffled blouses with leg of mutton sleeves or suits with floppy bow
ties. Each proudly displayed his or her rolled-up diploma for the camera. They were an
austere bunch. Lin T. Humphrey and Theodore C. Humphrey have written about group
photographs at high school reunions. They suggest that the posing for the photo serves as
a unifying moment, giving “concrete proof that we were there, that we are a part of the
class.”79 The class photo on Recognition Day or Processional Day operated in the same
way; it united the class and left evidence, in one picture, of the participants and their
actual degrees.
Readers in the C.L.S.C. and the B.V.R.C. also determined the level of
involvement of undergraduates and alumni at Recognition Day and Processional Day.
Vincent and Hall hoped that readers outside the graduating class would participate – Hall
wrote before the first Processional Day that “the attendance of undergraduates is going to
be large”80 – but the readers as a group decided that their supportive presence was
necessary. Undergraduates’ active participation, combined with a growing number of
alumni classes, turned the processional into a physically embodied display of the heritage
of the circle. Undergraduates and alumni presence at the event came to represent the
dedication to and lasting impact of the reading course.
Aside from the events surrounding the graduation, the commencement ceremony
itself involved a series of rituals. In her examination of the graduation-siyum, Myerhoff
identifies characteristics of the graduation ceremony. She argues that the nonce ritual
mixes secular and sacred elements in the ceremony, and that it combines improvisation
79
Humphrey and Humphrey, 103.
80
“Graduation Day,” 347.
68
(open space) with carefully scripted moments (closed or fixed space). These terms help
explain the organization of the C.L.S.C. and B.V.R.C. graduation programs, even from
their first iteration.
Myerhoff clarifies the combination of secular and sacred, writing, “The secular
elements – usually quite particular and unique – are juxtaposed with those regarded as
unquestionable and permanent. By this juxtaposition, particulars are painted with the
colors of the sacred, so to speak, borrowing the latter’s sense of specialness and
significance.”81 In the case of Recognition Day and Processional Day, the organized
program was mostly sacred. The readings and hymns all made references to God and
used the Protestant Bible as their basis. The changing parts of the program, though, were
opportunities for secular elements to enter. Commencement addresses were often given
by academic leaders and were usually more secular in nature.82 Most discussed the
importance of education, and the great lengths to which the day’s graduates had gone in
the previous four years. Alice Freeman Palmer, former president of Wellesley College,
praised the 1890 participants for their endeavor, saying, “Not one of you could earn your
bread because of what you have learned in your homes and in your books. … [But] every
mouthful you eat ought to be sweeter because of the work you have done together.”83
Palmer’s presence as an early C.L.S.C. commencement speaker is especially significant
because she was the first female president of a nationally recognized American college,
81
Myerhoff, 201.
82
Thornton, 316-327. According to Thornton, among the presidents of colleges and universities who gave
early Recognition Day addresses were James H. Carlisle of Wofford College, Alice Freeman Parker,
former president of Wellesley College, Charles W. Eliot of Harvard University, Henry C. King of Oberlin
College, W. H. P. Faunce of Brown University, J. F. Goucher of Baltimore Woman’s College, A. V.
Raymond of Union College, and E. B. Andrews of the University of Nebraska.
83
Thornton, 320.
69
serving as a role model for the large female membership in the C.L.S.C. Also, her
attendance legitimized the C.L.S.C., as she was a well-known educational pioneer who
highly praised the efforts of the C.L.S.C. in their own public forum. Other speakers took
the opportunity to speak on a broader subject. When Charles W. Eliot, president of
Harvard, spoke for Chautauqua’s Recognition Day in 1896, for example, he discussed
“America’s Contributions to Civilization” and incorporated religion only in relation to
the advances America offered in religious tolerance.
These commencement addresses were what Myerhoff would term “open” parts of
the ritual. They are the moments that change over time, whereas the fixed sections
remain the same. Fixed parts include the hymns sung year after year and the call-andresponse readings that were repeated annually. Certainly, the fixed segments were
important, especially as they established a heritage for the event; Myerhoff calls them
“traditionalizing ingredients in a complex ritual.”84 By contrast, the open sections
“provide opportunities for participants to establish their individual emotions, identities,
motives and needs, and allow the ritual masters-of-ceremony to convey the specific,
idiosyncratic messages which are unique to the occasion at hand.”85 Addresses as well as
the less-scripted parts of the processional are considered open segments and offered, as
Smith states, other opportunities to “get their lives together.”
Myerhoff argues that it is the balance of the secular and sacred and of the open
and fixed that creates a meaningful nonce ritual for the participants. Certainly, the
Recognition Day and Processional Day ceremonies fit this definition. These rituals,
84
Myerhoff, 202.
85
Ibid.
70
according to Myerhoff, are “dramas of persuasion,” by which she means, “They are
didactic, enacted pronouncements concerning the meaning of the occasion, and the nature
and the worth of the people involved in the occasion.”86 Recognition Days were indeed
dramas of persuasion. In their construction as ritual they were instructive, and they
certainly affirmed the value of the participants as being more educated through their
careful reading. They defined the organization of the C.L.S.C., stressing both secular and
religious education; the structure of the program emphasized this balance further by
incorporating both secular and sacred parts to the service. In readings and in the choice
of speakers, the event argued for the importance of access to education. By holding the
events at Chautauqua and at other assemblies, these locations were confirmed as centers
of this knowledge production. Finally, the event structure that appeared similar to a
college graduation supported Vincent’s concept of providing a “college outlook” for
readers.
In fact, whether or not the C.L.S.C. and Recognition Day offered a college-like
experience has been one of the most discussed aspects of the organization. Scholars like
Thornton saw that it supported Vincent’s “college outlook” without ever claiming to be a
college. Others criticize it for organizing a celebration of nothing legitimate.
Trachtenberg captures this sentiment when he argues:
What accounts for such theatrics, such bizarre ritualizing of what was no more
than a quasi-legitimate moment of passage within a wholly voluntaristic
substructure of civil society? Bad taste might seem the readiest answer. … The
extremity of the event may well be the best clue as to the extremity of the need.
Certainly to some extent all this play-acting and … pageantry can be explained as
a means to the utopian goal Reverend Vincent described again and again, of
cultivating what he called the “college outlook … especially among those whose
86
Ibid., 222.
71
educational advantages have been limited.” The elaborateness of the ritual of
“recognition” proves the authenticity of that diploma.87
Trachtenberg at first describes the event in a critical tone – “bizarre ritualizing” and a
“quasi-legitimate moment” – but ultimately recognizes a benefit in the accomplishments
of the C.L.S.C. and Chautauqua. This polyvalence is actually inherent in the event itself.
Vincent aimed to create a “college outlook” for the readers through four years of study,
but at the same time, recognized that the course was different from a college experience.
As a result, the final celebration of Recognition Day was both similar to and different
from a college graduation, a quasi-graduation if you will.
The organizers and graduates worked to make it feel like a college graduation in
some aspects, especially in the “fun” of graduation. Each class held events leading up to
the final event, including bonfires and roundtable discussions. The Bay View Reading
Circle hosted “parties, moonlight rides, picnics, and excursions, when the [class] badge
alone admitted the wearer to all that was pleasant.”88 These events were part of the
student-organized tradition surrounding graduation. Indeed, much of the C.L.S.C. was
social, even in regular circle meetings. Henry Ford actually met his wife at a C.L.S.C.
meeting.89
Admittance to graduation events, as the Bay View Magazine described, was a
badge or pin. Both C.L.S.C. and B.V.R.C. classes designed pins that designated
membership; this custom was prevalent in colleges at the same time. Oberlin
contemplated a college pin in 1890. According to an editorial in the college newspaper,
87
Trachtenberg, “‘We Study the Word and Works of God,’” 8.
88
“The Circle at the Assembly,” 39.
89
Doerr, 42.
72
The next step in the line of college distinction should be a pin with appropriate
device or a button in the college colors. In several weeks the students will scatter
widely for the Christmas holidays. It would be pleasant to carry around with
them some badge or emblem of the college they represent, so that a discriminating
public may distinguish them from “the fast set” at Harvard: [sic] or from the
glittering youth of the agricultural colleges.90
Adopting a pin and planning excursions were part of the college fun that many circle
members wanted to enjoy, despite the fact that they were not on a college campus.91
The conferring of a diploma upon the members was a step that the organizers took
to make the reading course more legitimate. Yet, it was a diploma not of a degree, but of
completion. Critics at the time, as well as contemporary historians, have taken issue with
this aspect of Recognition Day. Trachtenberg has gone so far as to argue that “the
elaborateness of the ritual of ‘recognition’ proves the authenticity of that diploma.”92 In
other words, without the ritual of Recognition Day, the diploma might mean nothing.
Hall worked to convince critics that the B.V.R.C. diploma had merit, which was part of
the reason that he stressed the need for examinations. He wrote in 1894:
It [the B.V.R.C.] was recently asked, What is the value of a diploma? This is not
easy to show but try to buy one that has been honestly won. Its rightful owner
would not exchange it for ten times its weight in gold. We had recently sat at the
table of a physician of standing, who had lost a home by fire. Above all the losses
of the home the diploma, won through privations and industry, was most
90
Editorial, Oberlin Review, December 9, 1890, quoted in S. E. Plank, 57.
91
Another kind of “fun” created was a mock graduation following Recognition Day. This tradition
eventually morphed into the Chautauqua Circus described in Chapter 3. Chautauqua historian Jesse L.
Hurlbut described the event this way: “After a year or two it [Recognition Day] entered the facetious minds
of Mr. and Mrs. Beard to originate a comic travesty on the Recognition service, which was presented on the
evening after the formal exercises, when everybody was weary and was ready to descend from the serious
heights. This grew into quite an institution and was continued for a number of years – a sort of mockcommencement, making fun of the prominent figures and features of the day. Almost as large an audience
was wont to assemble for this evening of mirth and jollity, as was seen at the stately service in the morning.
This in turn had its day and finally grew in to [sic] the Chautauqua Circus, an amateur performance which
is still continued every year under one name or another.” Hurlbut, 206.
92
Trachtenberg, “‘We Study the Word and Works of God,’” 8.
73
lamented. In after life the Bay View diploma will be sacredly preserved in
memory of the pleasures and victories of other days.93
The rhetoric Hall used is reminiscent of first-generation college graduates, whose family
celebrates the gaining of the paper that proves an education. Ironically, though, the story
that Hall tells of the doctor with his diploma must be a college or medical school
diploma, as B.V.R.C. diplomas were not granted until 1897. Even Hall conflated the
two. In essence, part of the appeal that the C.L.S.C. and the B.V.R.C. used to attract new
readers was the resulting diploma, and the questionable legitimacy of that diploma was
often understated.
At other times, though, organizers worked hard to state that the courses were
different, perhaps even better, than traditional college study. A 1902 description of the
Chautauqua Institution (including the C.L.S.C.) states its educational impact on society at
large:
Ordinary classification of educational institutions does not include Chautauqua; it
occupies a field not covered by any institution. While it does not profess to
compete with or substitute itself for the college and university on the one hand,
neither does it fall into the same class as the public school, high school, or normal
school on the other hand. But it deals with the substance of things hoped for and
achieved along the lines of higher education. Because of the number of persons it
reaches Chautauqua is the largest institution for higher education in the world.94
Vincent organized his “unclassifiable” program for adults and attempted to maintain a
high level of quality in his materials; he often contracted academic experts in their field
to write textbooks and articles for the Chautauquan. At the same time, his concept was
to make the reading accessible to a general population. In her Recognition Day address,
Alice Freeman Palmer referred to the C.L.S.C. as the “People’s College,” with work to be
93
“Reading Circle Interests,” Bay View Magazine, April 1894, 162.
94
Chautauqua: The Largest Institution for Higher Education in the World, 1902, Lakeside.
74
completed at home or in down time on the job.95 “Never has it been pretended that the
scheme is a substitute for college either in substance or method,” wrote Thornton.96
Vincent saw the results of his program as being different from college. The
“college outlook” opened opportunities for further study. He wrote that graduation from
the C.L.S.C. was not a kind of cul de sac of study,97 but the beginning of an adventure in
learning. He contrasted that with the college student who completed his studies upon
graduation: “He who drops his books when he gains his parchment might almost as well
never have started in his educational course.”98
The C.L.S.C. scheme was also different from college study because it could be
conducted completely at home, rather than on a campus. Edward Everett Hale expressed
this as a significant benefit to graduates in his 1885 Recognition Day address; rather than
being tempted by the new environments that college graduates often faced, C.L.S.C.
graduates were able to return to their environment of study. “We have not finished our
education: our education has just begun … Thus it is that almost all the ordinary
precedents of a college commencement are reversed,” he argued.99 By reading with the
C.L.S.C., then, one learned how to study in one’s own environment, rather than specific
content within a cloistered college campus. The ritual of the quasi-graduation ceremony
affirmed to participants that they had achieved four years of study not unlike college
students, yet they could take their knowledge and practice even further.
95
Thornton, 322.
96
Ibid., 314.
97
Ibid., 328.
98
Vincent, Chautauqua Movement, 77.
99
Thornton, 317.
75
If Recognition Day served as the C.L.S.C.’s “drama of persuasion,” it affirmed to
participants and the audience that open access to education was necessary, especially
access to a Protestant-inspired education. At graduations from both elite colleges and the
C.L.S.C., it was required to complete the course of study and pay for tuition and
materials. In 1900, the average yearly expenses for C.L.S.C. reading were $5; for
studying at Yale, they were $545.100 Even if the C.L.S.C. was less than entirely
successful in reaching rural and small-town working class uneducated people or other
marginalized groups, it was remarkably effective in perpetuating a middle-class belief
that education should be accessible to all. This mindset was perhaps the greatest
contribution that the C.L.S.C. made in the development of a middle-class culture, and
certainly established Chautauqua as a voice in its production.
Permanent chautauquas continued to hold Recognition Day until as late as about
1920; the Chautauqua Institution maintains the tradition to this day and each year about a
hundred readers graduate during the Recognition Day festivities. In the forty years when
it was at its zenith, the C.L.S.C. had a powerful impact on American society, especially in
encouraging new opportunities for learning outside of traditional colleges and
universities. The performance of Recognition Day served as an annual ritual confirming
the permanent chautauquas’ commitment to education at a time when education was the
primary component for access to the middle class. The C.L.S.C. and similar
organizations, through facilitating the study of topics valued by middle-class culture
(literature, history, and science), empowered individuals to move into the middle class in
100
George W. Pierson, A Yale Book of Numbers: Historical Statistics of the College and University 1701 –
1976 (New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1983), 578, http://www.yale.edu/oir/pierson_original.htm#F
(accessed October 17, 2010).
76
a way that was not previously financially feasible. Though the majority of C.L.S.C.
participants were themselves middle class, Recognition Day operated as an outward
symbol that, with careful study, anyone had the ability and the right to move into an
educated middle class.
The pomp and circumstance of Recognition Day involved a large number of
chautauquans, as participants and as audience members. They enjoyed the banners, the
music, the may poles, the speeches, and all that made up the celebration. These annual
rituals exposed them to a theatricality that helped enable the development of historical
pageantry at permanent chautauquas only a few years later.
77
CHAPTER 3
ON THE STAGE:
PAGEANTRY AT PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS
It was “an epoch in the history” of the community, “the most outstanding feature
of the season’s program,” “beautiful and artistic in every detail, enjoyable to anyone
appreciating esthetic productions of its kind.”1 When permanent chautauquas staged a
historical pageant, it was the most important event of the summer – for both the
participants and for the audience. In communities used to a variety of more staid
programming, historical pageants were a time of exciting music, poetic dancing, beautiful
backdrops, fantastic costumes, and the recounting of community history. For many of the
middle-class people who participated in the productions, it was the first time that they
had ever been on stage. It was an opportunity for them to actively participate in their
own programming, and to produce their own middle-class culture.
The historical pageant as a theatrical genre was developed around the turn of the
twentieth century in England before it migrated to North America.2 Infusing the older
British pageants with new ideas about how theater could work for the good – noncommercial theater, theater as play, theater for education, theater for Progressive social
change – American pageants began around 1908 and were organized by cities and towns,
playground groups, progressive educators, patriotic and hereditary societies, and other
1
“Historical Pageant of Lake Chautauqua,” Chautauquan Daily, August 20, 1910; “Golden Jubilee
Celebration at Lakeside,” Western Christian Advocate, August 22, 1923, 6-7, quoted in “The Pageant of
1923,” Lakeside Heritage Manifest, November 1992, 1; “Pageant Marks Close Bay View’s Golden
Jubilee,” Petoskey Evening News, August 8, 1925.
2
Only a few scholars have discussed pageantry in detail; see David Glassberg, American Historical
Pageantry (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1990); Naima Prevots, American Pageantry: A
Movement for Art & Democracy (Ann Arbor: U.M.I. Research Press, 1990).
78
community associations. Pageants were identified specifically with vast spectacles
involving large numbers of people. At the same time, pageant directors (called pageant
masters) were careful to keep high theatrical standards. Henry B. Roney was a prolific
pageant master, directing pageants at the Winona Lake, Indiana chautauqua among other
places. He defined two types of pageants:
One is a procession of horses, riders, floats, tableaux, vehicles, and footmen,
appropriately decorated and costumed, representing incidents, stories, and
characters in history, fiction, or allegory. The other is the community drama,
enacted in the open by dialogue, pantomime, or both, depicting chronologically
actual events in the history of a city or locality, or the story of incidents or
characters in mythology, tradition, or fiction with or without allegory and
symbolism, with a great number of participants drawn up from the community.3
By Roney’s definition, almost any kind of open-air performance involving the telling of a
story could be a pageant. Indeed, as pageantry developed in the U.S., the term was used
for all kinds of performances. In chautauquas, they included historical spectacles,
fundraising performances for missions work, and Mother Goose pageants and other
children’s shows.
The new idea in pageantry was to bring together a community in organized play
and celebration, offering a group consensus of common history. Through participation, a
primary goal of the pageant movement was to unite people and groups not just for the
performance but to effect a tightening and reorganization of the community. This
concept fit with other attempts by Progressives to encourage people across lines of race,
class, and gender to care for the community in which they lived.
Though it was not at a chautauqua, the pageant at Thetford, Vermont in 1911 was
a prime early example of this type of pageant. Organized by William Chauncey
Langdon, community workers hoped that the Pageant of Thetford would bring disparate
3
Henry B. Roney, “Pageantry, A Civic Pastime,” Popular Mechanics, March 1917, 337.
79
groups together to reinvigorate the town. The pageant told the story of the six villages
that made up Thetford; they were great farming communities until their sons began
leaving for the city. In the pageant plot, the people bound together to fight this challenge
and in the process, found new value in their agrarian heritage, saving the community
economically and socially. Langdon used the opportunity of the pageant to introduce
Thetford citizens to the Country Life movement, which supported rural culture
throughout the United States, and encouraged new civic programs like scouting
programs. The occasion of the pageant united people across geographic borders between
villages and unseen borders of gender, class, and ethnicity. The pageant did successfully
reinvigorate a declining community. Stories like the Thetford example served as models
for other towns and cities to produce pageants, using theater to promote a Progressive
agenda.
In the most significant study of American pageantry to date, David Glassberg
asserts that the historical pageant was a Progressive project to bring together disparate
groups within a community or region. He argues that historical pageantry, especially
before World War I, was based upon “the belief that history could be made into a
dramatic public ritual through which the residents of a town, by acting out the right
version of their past, could bring about some kind of future social and political
transformation.”4 Ruth Mougey Worrell, a pageant master at several chautauquas, argued
for this bonding within a community; she and Lydia Glover Deseo wrote:
Of course one of the great values growing out of any pageant is that often, to an
almost unbelievable degree, it unites a community. And communities need
uniting! In how many cases the town is divided by railroad tracks, or river, or less
obvious but more deadly barriers, prejudice or snobbery, or an old but unforgotten
4
Glassberg, 4.
80
feud. But real or imaginary differences will often fall away with the enthusiasm
born of a common civic interest.5
While this argument for community unity held true for most American historical
pageants, it did not do so for the pageants at permanent chautauquas.
Unlike most communities, the residents at chautauquas were already a selfselected group. As discussed in Chapter 1, chautauquans were almost universally white,
middle-class, and Protestant; as associations, permanent chautauquas maintained control
over who could and could not participate in their community. Because they had a selfselected common identity, chautauquans did not need historical pageantry to act as a
unifying force within their community. At chautauquas, pageants served different
purposes. They were a chance for bottom-up participative entertainment, they helped
chautauquans become more comfortable with theater, and they were a site for
renegotiation of gender, class, and race; in this, chautauqua pageants had an impact on
the production of American middle-class culture.
The first chautauqua pageant, the Pageant of Chautauqua Lake, was held at the
Chautauqua Institution in 1910, only a few years after the genre was brought to the U.S.
and a year prior to the Thetford pageant. It offered a history of the discovery of the Lake
Chautauqua area and the founding of Chautauqua; its content served as a model for
pageants at other chautauquas. Many chautauquas held their pageants on the occasion of
an anniversary of their founding: Winona Lake in 1918, Lakeside, Ohio in 1923, Bay
View, Michigan in 1925, and Ocean Park, Maine in 1931. These pageants were a
5
Lydia Glover Deseo [and Ruth Mougey Worrell], “Pageantry at its Best,” Chicago: World Services
Agencies of the Methodist Episcopal Church, ca. 1929, 7, Worrell.
81
celebration of community history, but did not aim to reinvigorate or unify the
community.
Two important pageants did call for unification as a primary theme, but for a
unification beyond the gates of the chautauquas. To Arms For Liberty, the 1918 pageant
in Chautauqua, New York, promoted a national patriotism in support of the Allies. The
1919 Pageant of Three Cities in Bay View was a way of bringing together people from
three surrounding towns in regional unity; though it was staged in Bay View, it involved
citizens from nearby Petoskey, Charlevoix, and Harbor Springs. These two pageants
worked to unify between chautauquans and other groups, not among the chautauquans
themselves.
As a whole, the chautauqua pageants did not incorporate the Progressive thread of
American pageantry; they did not call chautauquans to care for their community and each
other in the same way that pageants produced in other cities and towns did. In removing
this element, chautauquans promoted a different kind of pageantry. This pageantry
became a mainstay in middle-class culture while the Progressive version was short-lived.
Pageants like those that developed in chautauquas could be performed anywhere and with
less monetary investment; pageants staged by school groups, churches, and social
organizations fit this other model. In effect, through performances in chautauquas, the
Progressive concept of pageantry was simplified and stripped of its sociological work,
turned into a genre more akin to a depoliticized form of community theater.
At the same time, the production of pageants helped shape chautauquans. They
had an opportunity to participate in their own entertainment: instead of sitting in the
audience, many were on stage. The pageants also challenged the negative opinions that
82
many chautauquans held about theater. In 1910, when the first chautauqua pageant was
produced, some chautauquans were still reticent to include theater in their program. For
the bulk of the history of the American stage, theater was associated with urban
environments, rowdies and prostitutes, and nothing at all moral. Around 1850, it was
estimated that over seventy percent of Americans disapproved of the theater and probably
had never attended a performance.6 Theaters and performers recognized this stigma, and
in the antebellum years worked to change opinions. Urban theater managers appealed to
a middle-class female audience in an effort to gain respectability, and once it had become
fashionable, these women made up the majority of the audiences for theaters in larger
cities.7 Still, as late as 1904, the Methodist Church warned its members to avoid the sin
of attending theater performances as a “first easy step … to the total loss of character.”8
Urban audiences accepted theater earlier than their small-town counterparts;
permanent chautauquas began including drama in their programming in 1897, and the
circuit chautauquas did not add staged theater to their repertoire until 1913.9 In both the
circuits and the permanent chautauquas, theater was adopted slowly and methodically. In
6
Albert Auster, Actresses and Suffragists: Women in the American Theater, 1890-1920 (New York:
Praeger, 1984), 18.
7
For a discussion of the feminization of American theater audiences, see Richard Butsch, The Making of
American Audiences: From Stage to Television, 1750-1990 (New York: Cambridge University Press,
2000), 66-80.
8
Edward G. Andrews, ed., The Doctrines and Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church (Cincinnati,
OH: Jenkins and Graham, 1904), 56,
http://www.archive.org/stream/doctrinesanddis17churgoog/doctrinesanddis17churgoog_djvu.txt (accessed
December 2, 2009). This warning is quoted at more length in Chapter 5.
9
“The Tompkins Family” comedy was presented at the Monteagle Sunday School Assembly in 1897; Curt
Porter, “Chautauqua and Tennessee: Monteagle and the Independent Assemblies, Tennessee Historical
Quarterly 22 no. 4 (December 1963): 356.
83
1900, Chautauqua had one play, and none of the other major assemblies had one. By
1910, Chautauqua, Bay View, and Winona Lake each scheduled four plays.
Circuit chautauqua scholar Charlotte Canning asserts that an antitheatrical bias
persisted into the 1910s, especially outside of major metropolitan areas. She suggests
that circuit managers argued that theater in itself was not evil, but had been associated
with immoral environments for so long that it appeared to be evil. By providing a
different context, managers argued, theater could become safe for audiences. “Audiences
who were still wary of theater’s power to deceive often focused on production values
such as costumes, scenery, lighting effects, and makeup as marks of the iniquity of
theater,” describes Canning, so chautauqua performers stripped productions of these
theatrical elements and highlighted their literary and educational qualities.10 Instead of
presenting theater, chautauquas accentuated the possibility of hearing and appreciating
classical literature; it remained educational rather than purely for entertainment purposes.
Chautauqua historians Victoria Case and Robert Ormond Case described the
incorporation of theater in this way:
First came the impersonators and the dramatic readers. Who could object to
them? Then came lecturers reading extracts from great plays in resounding,
musical, frightening voices. This was still above reproach, but with each passing
season the dramatic offering—always reflecting an increasing public demand—
came closer to the crumbling walls of prejudice. Soon there were bits of opera
and Shakespearean excerpts; and finally, without squirming, Chautauqua
audiences were sitting through a real play in which up to a dozen actors appeared,
and the curtain actually rose and fell between acts.11
10
Charlotte Canning, “The Platform Versus the Stage: Circuit Chautauqua’s Antitheatrical Theatre,”
Theatre Journal 50, no. 3 (1998): 303; Charlotte B. Canning, The Most American Thing in America:
Circuit Chautauqua as Performance (Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press, 2003), 198-201
11
Victoria Case and Robert Ormond Case, We Called it Culture: The Story of Chautauqua (Garden City,
NY: Doubleday, 1948), 52.
84
Even before 1900, readers were accepted visitors to chautauqua platforms. Mostly
women, they were trained in elocution and read Biblical and classical literature, and
eventually they ventured into more modern works. While some readers just read from
the page, others impersonated characters onstage. In this way, they served as one-woman
or one-man shows. But because they were not interacting with others on the stage, their
performances were not deemed to be theater, and thus were morally more appropriate.
One reader who attempted to bridge the gap between reader and impersonator was
Gay Zenola MacLaren. In her autobiography, Morally We Roll Along, she wrote about
the confusion that her especially expressive performances caused when she was a young
woman. Her mother had enrolled her in an elocution course and made the headmistress
promise that she would not be trained as an actress. Once she began performing in
chautauquas, though, organizers thought that she was too theatrical:
I was told in no uncertain terms that I was nothing but an actress – that I knew
nothing of the reader’s art of suggestion. I had better go to New York and ‘join a
theatrical troupe’ – there was no place for such a performance on the Chautauqua
platform.
Completely crushed, we left for New York. I couldn’t ‘join a theatrical
troupe’ because of Mrs. Manning’s promise to my mother. I couldn’t go on
Chautauqua because I was an ‘actress.’ How in the world was I ever going to
have a career?12
This fine line that MacLaren walked between reader and actress shifted as
attitudes changed about theater, she was able to benefit from this change with a long
career as an impersonator on chautauqua stages. When the 1910 Chautauqua pageant
was staged, very many readers like MacLaren were performing at the permanent
chautauquas. Over ten percent of all performances at Chautauqua that year were readers;
in Bay View, it was over twenty percent. One way to see the bridging of readers to
12
Gay MacLaren, Morally We Roll Along (Boston: Little, Brown, 1938), 52.
85
theater is through the role of the narrator in the pageants. In most of the productions, one
person told the story while the rest of the performers acted it out and said only a few
lines. This narrator character performed in much the same way that many of the readers
did, as storyteller more than as actor.
Almost always, this narrator was female. In fact, pageantry allowed women to
break out of stereotypical roles of mother and homemaker, especially in chautauqua
performances. Glassberg describes the role of women in pageants as “represent[ing] the
emotional essence of the community.”13 In chautauqua pageants, they did so in
characters like The Spirit of Northern Michigan and The Spirit of Jubilee. Additionally,
women found opportunities to act in leadership roles; several of the major pageants at
chautauquas were written or directed by female pageant masters.
These opportunities to perform in major roles challenged the accepted norms of
American women, but they are not surprising in the chautauqua context. As outlined in
Chapter 1, Jeanne Halgren Kilde has argued that the lines between private and public
spheres were blurred at the Chautauqua Institution; cottage porches, for example, were
both domestic space and public sites of meetings and entertainment. As a result, women
at Chautauqua were able to transgress the usual societal limits of femininity.14 Women
who participated in pageants at chautauquas – as opposed to elsewhere – were afforded
more opportunities in the productions.
13
14
Glassberg, 136.
Jeanne Halgren Kilde, “The ‘Predominance of the Feminine’ at Chautauqua: Rethinking the GenderSpace Relationship in Victorian America,” Signs 24, no. 2 (Winter 1999): 449-486,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3175649 (accessed November 11, 2008).
86
Elizabeth Holmes Hoffman set the precedent for the centrality of female
involvement in chautauqua pageants; she wrote the script for the Pageant of Chautauqua
Lake: A Succession of Historical Scenes on the Lake Front for the 1910 season. For two
evenings, thousands of people gathered at the lakeshore to witness Indian braves paddling
along their trade routes, Frenchmen discovering the area and then dancing the minuet
with their wives to celebrate, young women frolicking in Grecian gowns, a poet reading
about the “spirit of the lake,” a chorus singing on an island, and a full orchestra playing
“Hiawatha” music.
The Pageant of Chautauqua Lake was an attempt to tell the history of the area
and define the community within a particular history and physical landscape. It involved
the participation of two hundred Chautauquans, young and old, in acting, dancing,
singing, and orchestral accompaniment. 15 The Chautauquan Daily described it as
“tableaux on the lake [that] will represent mythological and historical scenes connected
with early life of Chautauqua Lake. There will be representative pictures of Indian life,
their songs, dances and pastimes, and a brilliant scene representing the coming of the
French, with their gorgeous costumes, court manners and a minuet.”16 It was a complex
production, directed by Hoffman, and rehearsals lasted for over a month. Through their
regular reporting, the Chautauquan Daily and Chautauquan Weekly helped increase the
enthusiasm for the performance.
The pageant was billed as a “modern popular form of education” in the
Chautauquan Daily a month before its production, setting up an expectation for the
15
“Revival of Pageantry,” Chautauquan Weekly, August 18, 1910, 8.
16
“Pageant Plans,” Chautauquan Daily, July 29, 1910.
87
community that the pageant was doing serious work.17 The inclusion of local history,
whether accurate or not, aided in the educative nature of the performance. The
Chautauquan Weekly carried an article just prior to the pageant about the history of
exploration in the area, and used photographs from the pageant to illustrate the important
historical events. In this way, the pageant scenes operated as ostensibly accurate
reenactments of the events rather than as dramatized representations.18
The day before opening night, the Chautauquan Weekly reiterated the pageant’s
wholesome nature, saying, “We owe it to our British cousins that there has been an
awakened interest in pageantry as a means both of education and diversion. … The
pageant, as a historical and educational display, is popular and has come to stay.”19 The
framing of the pageant as historical and educational was offered as a nod to prospective
audience members that the event was to be much more than mere entertainment, but
supported the middle-class desire for self-education, a reason these people came to
Chautauqua in the first place. Through participating or observing the pageant, then, one
hoped to gain a better sense of the shared history of Chautauqua.
The staging of the pageant out-of-doors added a perceived wholesomeness to the
performance, and followed in the tradition of several troupes of sylvan players who
performed at permanent chautauquas. In 1910, for example, the Nicholson Sylvan
Players performed at Chautauqua, presenting The Taming of the Shrew and two Molière
17
Ibid.
18
In actuality, the pageant’s history was inaccurate in several places. Chautauqua historian Jon Schmitz
argues that dates cited in the pageant are incorrect, as well as the routes of French explorers; Jon Schmitz,
interview by the author, October 16, 2008, Chautauqua Institution Archives, Chautauqua, New York, notes
in possession of the author.
19
“Revival of Pageantry: Origin and Present Interest in England – Successful Pageants in This Country –
The Chautauqua Lake Pageant,” Chautauquan Weekly, August 18, 1910, 8.
88
plays. This group performed in Chautauqua’s open-sided amphitheater and the stage
“was artistic and furnished the expected ‘sylvan’ atmosphere.”20 Because these plays
were staged in a natural environment, they differed greatly from the worldly urban
entertainments from which middle-class chautauquans were so careful to distance
themselves.
Like the traveling sylvan players, Chautauqua pageant organizers recognized the
need to stage the production away from anything construed as a theater. Instead, it was
presented at the shores of Lake Chautauqua, with much of the activity taking place on an
island just offshore. The Chautauquan Daily described the scene, “The Island will be
lighted by footlights, searchlights and (we hope) the full moon.”21 Setting it in a natural
environment not only worked for the plot of the pageant, describing events that took
place on the same Lake Chautauqua, but also helped to calm the audience’s reticence of
staged performances as corrupting.22
Setting the pageant on the island also made it less likely, in the time before voice
amplification, that the audience could hear much of the dialogue. Pageant writer Thomas
Wood Stevens maintained that dialogue was actually more beneficial in keeping the
actors on track than it was for audience appreciation and understanding.23 The question
20
“Nicholson Sylvan Players to Present ‘The Taming of the Shrew,’” Chautauquan Daily, August 6, 1910.
21
“Historical Pageant Notes,” Chautauquan Daily, August 16, 1910.
22
The pageant was further separated as not-theater because it was followed later in the evening with a
production of a play entitled The Little Father in the Wilderness. It was very loosely connected with the
pageant, using a few of the same actors. Staged in the amphitheater, the production had “temporary …
settings and lighting effects.” Advertising and newspaper coverage highlighted the pageant and mentioned
the play as an afterthought. The play was described as “exquisite,” but people who had not yet seen the
play were encouraged to attend with special reserved seats. While audiences flocked to the pageant, they
were more reticent to attend the play following; “Second Night of Pageant Went Smoothly and was Better
Understood than on the First Night,” Chautauquan Daily, August 22, 1910.
23
Glassberg, 118.
89
of how to balance dialogue and pantomime was regularly debated in pageantry circles.
The 1910 Chautauqua pageant likely relied more heavily on pantomime, but later
pageants incorporated more dialogue. Symbolic interpretive dance and large-scale
spectacle involving hundreds of people told a story without the need for microphones.
The 1910 Chautauqua pageant must be contextualized by two other community
performances in the same month. On August 4, the Summer School of Missions
presented a Pageant of Missions. The performance was mentioned once in the
Chautauquan Daily, two days before the event. Like the historical pageant, this one was
staged outside, on the lawn of the Athenaeum Hotel. However, it was not at all a
performance with significant community involvement. The Daily noted that, “This
pageant was given a week ago at Northfield, Mass[achusetts]. The costumes have been
sent on for our performance here.”24 This appears to be a prepackaged, more commercial
pageant; a group could buy a few scripts, complete with suggestions for how to stage it,
and rent the costumes. Missions groups found this a popular way to earn a bit of money
for charity without significant investment of time or money, and this concept gained in
popularity as the pageantry era progressed.
Certainly, this type of commercial pageant was different from the historical
pageant. The missions pageant could be presented with little preparation; in fact, the
Daily ran the story only two days before the performance because the School of Missions
had “suddenly announced” its pageantry plans.25 The women (and perhaps a few
children) involved in the performance would have been given short instructions for how
24
“Missions Pageant,” Chautauquan Daily, August 2, 1910.
25
Ibid.
90
to act and dance on stage, and likely rehearsed only a few times before the actual
performance. Those participating were from one specific organization of the Institution
rather than cutting across groups. The reference to the same performance being given in
Northfield, Massachusetts added a certain caché, as this would have been recognized as a
well-heeled New England town, but it also suggested that the performance would be not
at all unique to Chautauqua. While both were called pageants, the Missions Pageant and
the historical pageant were remarkably different endeavors.
A more complex performance that shared the same season and preparation time
was an annual event only a week earlier called “De Soikus.” De Soikus (the circus)
involved a parade around the grounds and then two minstrelsy performances at the
athletic field (see fig. 2). A fundraising event for the Chautauqua Athletic Club, groups
and individuals performed within the formal structure of a minstrel show, with characters
acting as interlocutor and end men, and presenting shorter variety acts. The show was
not like a traveling circus because, according to a 1911 headline describing the event,
“Say, Kid, Dere’s No Ellefunt to Tote Water For.”26 It was more like a burlesque that
served to poke fun at the people and activities of Chautauqua.
Describing the 1909 show, the Chautauquan Daily reported a few days before the
performance that some of the participants were “Reluctant to Obscure Lights of
Countenances for Minstrelsy,” but by the time of the show, “the members of the minstrel
troupe have overcome their objection to blacking up.”27 These participants were
26
27
“Dat Soikus: Say Kid, Dere’s No Ellefunt to Tote Water For,” Chautauquan Daily, August 16, 1911.
“Rebel at Burnt Cork: Chautauquans Reluctant to Obscure Light of Countenances for Minstrelsy,”
Chautauquan Daily, August 6, 1909; “Watch for the Circus: Great Parade Today of Chautauqua
Celebrities,” Chautauquan Daily, August 7, 1909.
91
Figure 2. Photograph of the Circus at Chautauqua, circa 1911-1920. Used with
permission, Chautauqua.
reluctant to black up in 1909, which is surprising because minstrelsy continued to be an
accepted genre at chautauquas into the 1950s. The reluctance was not likely motivated
by concern for offending African American servants and other non-white workers on the
grounds. Instead, blacking up operated as a way to make fun of aspects of the
community while maintaining the propriety of the actors. Community leaders could
perform as others, pushing the bounds of what they would usually say and do, because
they were in blackface. One other way to understand this contestation is that minstrelsy
was read as a working-class performance. Eric Lott argues that minstrelsy is the playing
92
out of working-class “panic, anxiety, terror, and pleasure.”28 So the reluctance to black
up may be read as a desire to maintain one’s middle-classness as well as one’s whiteness,
rather than asserting one’s objection to racism.
The historical pageant also included representations of racialized others, with
“brawny ‘big Injuns’” and “small fry who are giving exhibitions of the small Indian’s
prowess in swimming, running, fishing and canoeing.”29 No concern about “redding up,”
or to use Philip J. Deloria’s term, “playing Indian,” was ever expressed in the coverage of
the pageant’s preparations.30 While telling the story of the American Indians who lived
in the area before the French “discovery” of it, they represented their “prowess.”
Certainly “playing Indian” by white Chautauqua performers is offensive by contemporary
standards, but it was different from the “blacking up” in the circus. The circus
participants blacked up as a form of parody, of comedic mockery; their performance was
immediately read as poking fun at their subjects because they were in blackface. In
contrast, “playing Indian” was, in this instance, an attempt at historical accuracy –
because they had no “real” Indians at Chautauqua to perform, white actors had to stand in
for them. It appeared to be done with an eye toward realism rather than with ridicule.31
28
Eric Lott, Love & Theft: Blackface Minstrelsy and the American Working Class (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1993), 6.
29
“Historical Pageant Notes,” Chautauquan Daily, August 5, 1910.
30
Philip J. Deloria, Playing Indian (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998).
31
Native Americans would not have been included as members of the Chautauqua community. However,
the Chautauqua Institution is situated within forty miles of two Seneca reservations. Had they wished,
Chautauquans could have brought in Native Americans to perform these historical parts. While such an
attempt at inclusivity would be better than whites “playing Indian,” adding token red men to the pageant
would have its own set of ethical challenges. Should a need have risen for African American characters,
Chautauqua did have plenty of maids, chauffeurs, and hotel workers, but they would not have been called
upon to perform onstage; instead, white Chautauquans chose to perform in blackface.
93
The use of Samuel Coleridge-Taylor’s Hiawatha’s Wedding Feast cantata in the
pageant complicated these racial representations. Based upon a mixed bag of Indian
legends set to verse by a white American using a Finnish poetic form, the musical
composition was written by an Afro-British composer and, in this pageant, used to
accompany the story of the French’s exploration of western New York. The music was
popular in 1910, written only a decade earlier. To audiences, and to the pageant’s
organizers, it symbolized the triumph of the white man over the noble savage; to
Coleridge-Taylor, it was perhaps a tribute to a fellow oppressed people.32 This
dichotomy operated in the same way as “honoring” the traditions of Native Americans by
redding up – representing Indians using white bodies or through music based on whites’
assumptions of Indian lore (even if written by a black man).
Through contemporary eyes, these representations of racial others are clearly
offensive, but at the time, people generally accepted these techniques of blacking up and
redding up. Because it was done either as humor or in an attempt at historical accuracy,
very little was at stake for white audiences; it certainly did not stop people from attending
such productions. According to a review of the circus in 1909, a thousand people
attended the afternoon performance and even more saw the evening show.33 At the 1910
historical pageant, “several thousands of people” attended, but the reviews do not give a
32
Among Coleridge-Taylor’s other work was Twenty-four Negro Melodies, for which he was
commissioned to arrange African American spirituals; though he was British, he was well aware of the
situation of American blacks and performed in the U.S.; for more on Coleridge-Taylor and his American
connections, see Neil A. Wynn, Cross the Water Blues: African American Music in Europe (Jackson, MS:
University Press of Mississippi, 2007), 56-58, http://books.google.com/books?id=PMaszIALuVYC
(accessed March 1, 2011).
33
“Circus Sets New Mark,” Chautauquan Daily, August 9, 1909.
94
more accurate count.34 Certainly both were popular events involving a large percentage
of the community, either on stage or in the audience.
What is less clear, however, is the legitimacy of the circus in the eyes of
Chautauquans. The circus was not listed in the annual program bulletin, which set out all
of the events organized by the association at the beginning of the season. The description
of the 1909 Circus is especially puzzling; it mentioned the Chautauqua Minstrels as
“Interlocutor, Mr. Arthur E. Bestor; End Men, Messrs. H. B. Vincent, Monahan, Sharpe,
Croxton, Washburn and Waterous.”35 Bestor was then director of Chautauqua and the
other men mentioned were instrumental leaders at the time. What is unclear is whether or
not these men were actually involved in the performance. Because it was set up as a
minstrel show and a burlesque, it is possible that others were dressing up as these men to
poke fun at them. However, often when celebrities were portrayed in minstrelsy or in
burlesque, their names were slightly changed, and here they were not. The Daily called it
a “Great Parade Today of Chautauqua Celebrities.”36 If it was the case that these men
actually participated (with the protection of blackface), then they lent their legitimacy to
the performance. If they did not, the burlesquing of them made the entire performance a
more bawdy amusement.
In either case, the circus appeared to be an entertaining performance that may not
have been sanctioned by the Institution, but was accepted by its members. Certainly,
though, the circus and the historical pageant were understood as being different types of
34
“Historical Pageant of Lake Chautauqua,” Chautauquan Daily, August 20, 1910.
35
“Watch for the Circus: Great Parade Today of Chautauqua Celebrities,” Chautauquan Daily, August 7,
1909.
36
Ibid.
95
performances. Even the language that the Daily used to describe them was entirely
different. The pageant was depicted in sweeping terms, emphasizing the educational and
historical impact of the performance. By comparison, the language used to describe the
circus highlighted the lightheartedness of the event: “We couldn’t give you an inkling,
not even much of an inkslinging, of the terrible, terrific, turbulent, tumultuous blow-up
that is slated to be pulled off on Saturday.”37 Both were middle-class performances, but
audiences saw the circus as entertaining fun, and understood the pageant as doing the
significant cultural work of retelling the community’s history.
The 1910 Pageant of Chautauqua Lake was significant because it was the first of
its kind at a permanent chautauqua. Though the history told was not entirely accurate and
the performers were community members rather than professional actors, the pageant
paved the way for other similar performances at chautauquas. After the first night of the
pageant, the Daily wrote, “Now that the pageant has been introduced at Chautauqua there
is no reason why some part of history may not be illustrated every year. The Reading
Course of the C.L.S.C. is full of leads in the way of pageantry that would cover the
historical events of all time.”38 While Chautauqua did not attempt pageants every year,
this genre became an accepted form of telling and celebrating the history of permanent
chautauquas.
The Pageant of Chautauqua Lake was a watershed event in a number of other
ways. It brought the community of Chautauqua together, similarly to the annual circus,
but more formally. The pageant was in the printed program, had regular practices, and
37
“De Soikus: Yes, and de Minstrels too,” Chautauquan Daily, August 12, 1910.
38
“Historical Pageant of Lake Chautauqua,” Chautauquan Daily, August 20, 1910.
96
had significant coverage in the Chautauqua publications; it was a momentous event of the
season. Perhaps more importantly, it involved a considerable portion of the community,
likely people who had never participated in a dramatic performance before, and may have
even previously been uncomfortable as audience members. This participation is
significant in two ways, because Chautauquans were active in creating their own
entertainment and because they developed a new familiarity with theater. Benjamin
DeMott has criticized chautauquas, arguing, “What is lacking in the Chautauqua model is
a feeling for the possibility that culture rises from below, from the whole way of life, and
that culture must incarnate and embody the whole life of the tribe if it is to be vital.”39
However, pageants were one opportunity for chautauquans to take a very active role in
producing their own culture in bottom-up fashion. Through their participation,
chautauquans also came to recognize that theater might not have been as morally suspect
as they expected. The number of plays produced at Chautauqua increased significantly
during the following years, and the community’s training through the pageant likely
played an important role in creating future audience members.
The pageant also had an impact outside of the Chautauqua grounds. Other
chautauquas carefully followed events at the original chautauqua, and when they
considered the idea of holding pageants of their own, the Pageant of Chautauqua Lake
served as a model in both the content of the performance and the approach to involve
large groups of people.
Shortly after the first Chautauqua pageant, the pageantry movement became more
organized on a national scale. The American Pageantry Association, the most significant
39
Benjamin DeMott, “American Culture and the Chautauqua Era,” Henry Ford Museum & Greenfield
Village Herald 13, no. 2 (1984), 78.
97
booster group in the movement, was organized in 1913. Founded in an attempt to define
and restrict the usage of the term pageantry, the APA worked to encourage pageantry for
community purposes rather than for commercial interests. Though members could never
actually agree on a definition of the word pageant, the APA did publish a list of all of the
American productions that it saw as pageants. The group also certified individuals as
pageant masters, and kept their contacts in hopes that communities searching for people
to organize their pageants might choose one of these professionals.40
Books like Ralph Davol’s 1914 work A Handbook of American Pageantry and
other how-to books soon appeared on the market. Prepackaged kits, with scripts and
production instructions, became available. Pageants were held in large cities and in small
towns, for anniversaries, holiday celebrations, school events, heritage society meetings,
to tell community and national histories, to share literature and mythology, and to honor
nature. Davol argued that pageantry was a way for citizens “to participate in their own
entertainment, not merely pay to see professional actors.”41 This proactive understanding
of entertainment was one especially important for chautauquans. Most chautauqua
programming was brought in from the outside; pageantry offered a new opportunity to
more actively engage with the program, in fact, to become the program. People in
Chautauqua saw the benefits of participating in their 1910 program and when the
opportunity arose for another pageant in 1918, many were eager to participate.
The 1918 pageant at Chautauqua, To Arms for Liberty, used a script written for a
general American audience, not specifically for Chautauqua. Authored by Catherine T.
40
For more information on the APA, see Prevots, 2; Glassberg, 107-117.
41
Ralph Davol, A Handbook of American Pageantry (Taunton, MA: Davol Publishing Co., 1914), 17.
98
Bryce as a way to garner support for American troops in Europe, the pageant in
Chautauqua was like several others produced around the country. The Chautauqua
production, staged by Louis Weinberg and Alfred Hallen, was one of the wartime
pageants that were distinctly different from pre-war predecessors.
First, the war pageant suggested a very different relationship with the past.
Instead of telling a long-ago history of the community, it recounted events that were
barely history (the U.S. had joined the war sixteen months earlier) and expressed the
importance of a national history. Rather than pride in the community of Chautauqua, the
pageant evoked patriotic zeal; it worked to create a history of America as one
community. The plot compared the recent history of the American military’s coming to
the aid of Europe with the American public’s support for the war effort. It offered the
audience an opportunity to effect change through their support. The Chautauquan Daily
described the heavy-handed plot:
The pageant opened with an idyllic scene, the Valley of Peace. Belgian
children playing in perfect peace and happiness. … In the midst of a sweet childsong the storm of war burst upon the group … indicated by the crashing music of
the Orchestra with the wild beating of the cymbals and the drums. The children
gathered in terror about their mother, and when they finally retired a huddled
figure in black was left lying on the stage. This was stricken Belgium.
… At this point in the pageant France, together with Britain and her
colonies, came to the aid of Belgium.
Prolonged applause greeted the appearance of the American Red Cross
nurses as they marched in to the music of “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” and
saved the little Belgians from Death.
All the other allies then made entrances with the exception of the United
States.
At last the Allied nations spoke in one voice, “America, we need you,”
and the notes of a bugle were heard in the distance. The black robe of Belgium
fell from her shoulders, and she appeared in pure white. The sound of distant
drums and marching feet came again … and two score of Khaki-clad Yanks
marched down the aisles of the choir to the stage as Columbia entered. Everyone
99
in the Amphitheater joined in the singing of the Star Spangled Banner, and the
Allied Nations cried, “On to Victory.”42
The Daily’s description painted a vivid picture of the performance. It highlighted
allegorical characters, attractive combinations of colors and music, audience
involvement, and a different kind of urgency and scale of collectivism.
Depicting war-torn Belgium as a mother was typical of pageantry, as actresses
were regularly used throughout its history to portray large-scale concepts: elements of
nature, spirits of the past and future, youth, home, towns, states, countries, even the spirit
of pageantry itself.43 Their portrayal of these spirits often hinged upon their use of
modern dance, like that pioneered by Löie Fuller, Isadora Duncan, and Ruth St. Denis.
First used in the 1911 pageant in Thetford, Vermont, modern dance was chosen because
of its ability to tell stories and express emotion through symbolism. In Thetford, pageant
master William Chauncey Langdon hired Virginia Tanner to lead the dancing in this new
style. Langdon was familiar with Duncan’s work and he instructed Tanner to use Duncan
as a model for her dances, according to Glassberg, “in order to reinforce the emotional
power of pageant scenes and to carry the story line smoothly between historical episodes.
Symbolic dance imparted to Langdon’s Thetford pageant a thematic continuity lacking in
previous historical pageants.”44 The use of modern dance also allowed women to
perform in different ways; no longer did they need to present themselves as either staid
and corseted Victorian women or as sexualized burlesque dancers or ballerinas. Modern
42
“To Arms for Liberty,” Chautauquan Daily, August 16, 1918; also reprinted in Theodore Morrison,
Chautauqua: A Center for Education, Religion and the Arts in America (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1974), 97-98.
43
In the 1911 pageant in Thetford, Vermont, Virginia Tanner danced as the Spirit of Pageantry, embodying
the impact that the pageant could have on the town; see Glassberg, 83-91.
44
Glassberg, 84.
100
Figure 3. A group of performers from one of the three-part pageant series at Lakeside in
1923. Used with permission, Lakeside.
dance enabled women to present their bodies as very feminine, but transgressing
expected norms of femininity (see fig. 3).
Martha Banta has written about the representation of female bodies on stage, in
photographs, in advertising, and in a number of other forms. She argues that in the 1890s
and 1900s, women used costuming to push those expected boundaries of femininity:
“what could a woman gain from appearing before one sort of audience or another as a
Type expressive of an Emotion? There were three possibilities: she could act out her
dreams; she could order her inner life; she could demonstrate a deeply held principle or
101
make a political statement.”45 While certainly maintaining a continuous storyline was
important, especially as pageants moved between time periods, even more significant was
the expressive capacity that modern dance had in demonstrating these large principles or
concepts in new ways.
In the Chautauqua pageant, the scene in which children of Belgium reacted to the
“storm of war” and eventually left the stage to the “huddled figure in black … left lying
on the stage” who represented “stricken Belgium” could have been especially enriched
through modern dance. While the descriptions of the pageant did not articulate the kinds
of movements used, by 1918 most pageants incorporated modern dance. Imagine the
flowing gestures of the children as they clung to their Belgian mother, and the wounded
movements of “stricken Belgium,” which the Daily described as being performed
“sympathetically and with great artistry.”46 In this instance, a woman performed in a
more traditional character: a mother asking help for her children.
Also accentuating the symbolism of the character-countries was the use of color.
Belgium was first clad in black, but when the other Allied nations removed her dark
cloak, she “appeared in pure white.”47 This reversal from dark to light fits one of
Weinberg and Hallam’s aims of the pageant: “Instead of building a pageant on intricate
and elaborately rehearsed material, it is necessary to conceive of it in terms of strong
contrasts and mass effects.”48 The mass effect of the dark cloak removed from Belgium’s
45
Martha Banta, Imagining American Women: Idea and Ideals in Cultural History (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1987), 641.
46
“To Arms for Liberty,” Chautauquan Daily, August 16, 1918.
47
Ibid.
48
“The Pageant ‘To Arms for Liberty,’” Chautauquan Daily, August 10, 1918.
102
shoulders by the Allied nations was certainly not lost on the audience. To make the
Allies readily apparent, country colors were likely used. And the contrast between the
singular huddled Belgium and the forty khaki-clad American troops marching through
the choir aisles to come to the aid of the Allies was meant to evoke a strong sense of
patriotism in the audience.
One of the differences between pre-war and interwar pageants that Glassberg
notes is the incorporation of interactive music. While both the 1910 and 1918
Chautauqua pageants used relatively contemporary music, To Arms for Liberty had songs
with which the audience could and did sing along. The 1918 pageant included such
patriotic songs as “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” and the “Star-Spangled Banner,”
and ended with the 1917 song “Over There.” The Chautauquan Daily specifically
mentioned that “Everyone in the Amphitheater joined in the singing” of the “StarSpangled Banner.” Audience members might have toe-tapped along to the Hiawatha
cantata in the first pageant, but they certainly did not join in with the singing, as they did
in this second pageant. To Arms for Liberty was staged to instill the middle-class value
of patriotism and served as a call to action in support of the troops. Embodied
involvement through the sing-along offered an immediate form of action for the
audience: it could affirm its support right in the amphitheater by singing American songs.
Music was also used to represent the various Allied countries. The musical score
called for songs recognizable to American audiences: “The Marseillaise” for France,
“Rule Britannia” for England, and “The Maple Leaf For Ever” for Canada. Other
countries were introduced by music that audiences would think was representative, but
which was not necessarily accurate. For example, the “Japanese Hymn” relied upon a
103
stereotypical Japanese pleasure of nature. Some were actually songs from the countries
they represented, but with English words; “Hymn to New Russia” was attributed to
Russian composer Alexander Gretchaninov, with words by David Stevens.49
The penultimate scene, the coming of the Red Cross, was articulated through a
song put to the tune of the “Battle Hymn of the Republic.” Instead of the coming of the
Lord, mine eyes have seen:
the glory of the Red Cross on the white,
it carries ease and comfort to the soldiers in the fight;
It strengthens their endeavors in the battle for the right,
Its mercy never fails!”50
The Red Cross nurses, stereotypically female, offered comfort and aid to the masculine
soldiers. Unlike the injured Belgium, these women showed strength, but to the benefit of
their male counterparts.
“Over There” was a fitting end to the pageant and a further call to action. As the
American soldiers onstage walked off to support the Allies, the orchestra played the 1917
song used to encourage young men to sign up. The song began,
Johnny, get your gun, get your gun, get your gun.
Take it on the run, on the run, on the run.
Hear them calling you and me,
Every Son of Liberty.
Hurry right away, no delay, go today.
Make your Daddy glad to have had such a lad.
Tell your sweetheart not to pine,
To be proud her boy's in line.51
49
Catherine T. Bryce, To Arms for Liberty: A Pageant of the War; Choruses and Incidental Music (Boston:
C. C. Birchard, 1918).
50
51
Ibid., 30.
George M. Cohan, “Over There,” 1917, in “Vintage Audio: Over There,” mp3 file, 3:36,
http://www.firstworldwar.com/audio/Billy_Murray_-_Over_There.mp3 (accessed January 19, 2010).
104
Just like “Johnny,” any young men still left in the amphitheater should have signed up
immediately. The participation of Company E, 65th Infantry, New York National Guard
members from Jamestown in the pageant highlighted the fact that this was a real call to
arms, not just a pageant. The presence of the troops onstage was a reminder that although
the war was being fought in Europe, soldiers were preparing for it in Chautauqua’s
immediate surroundings, and that all U.S. military personnel needed support.
Through the pageant, both audience and performers participated in a new kind of
collectivism. Rather than telling a common community history, which was a goal of the
1910 pageant, this performance promoted a coming together as a country. In fact, it
urgently demanded a coming together as a necessity. To win the war, the Allies needed
America, and America, in turn, needed the support of its people. According to the
message of the pageant, individuals could provide support as Red Cross nurses or as
soldiers, by letting their loved ones go off to war, and by participating in pro-American
activities like singing the “Star-Spangled Banner.”
In fact, attending a chautauqua was deemed to be a patriotic act in itself. During
the war, the U.S. government recognized the International Lyceum and Chautauqua
Association as instrumental in the war effort. Performers and other workers on the
chautauqua circuits were given a draft exemption and many were trained in Washington
on how to carry a patriotic message.52 President Woodrow Wilson recognized
chautauqua as “an integral part of the national defense” in a letter to Montaville Flowers,
a lecturer and president of the ILCA. Wilson thanked the ILCA for
52
Russell L. Johnson, “‘Dancing Mothers’: The Chautauqua Movement in Twentieth-Century American
Popular Culture,” American Studies International 39 no. 2 (June 2001): 53-70; 1918 Program [Fountain
Park Assembly], Fountain Park Museum, Remington, Indiana.
105
the very real help it has given to America in the struggle that is concerned with
every fundamental element of national life. Your speakers … have been effective
messengers for the delivery and interpretation of democracy’s meaning and
imperative needs. The work that the Chautauqua is doing has not lost importance
because of the war, but rather has gained new opportunities for service.53
Programs like the pageant aided in the recognition that chautauquas were doing important
educational work for the war effort. Through their participation and presence at the
event, Chautauquans were part of the patriotic collective.
The coverage in the Chautauquan Daily did not mention whether the pageant
encouraged monetary support for the war. Liberty Bonds were available for purchase at
that time and the U.S. government oversaw a massive marketing campaign for their sale,
but the pageant, at least, did not promote support through bonds. The pageant also did
not mention the fact that women were actually training at Chautauqua to enter the
Women’s Land Army. While boys in khaki were training as close as Jamestown, women
donned overalls and were learning to become “farmerettes” to support American
agriculture while the farmers were off fighting.54 This is a case in which, because the
pageant script was one commercially available and not written exclusively for
Chautauqua, an opportunity that would have resonated with the audience was missed.
Had someone written a pageant about how Chautauqua could help in the war effort, the
Women’s Land Army might have been incorporated into the narrative, encouraging other
women to transgress the boundaries of femininity. However, its exclusion from the text
53
Woodrow Wilson to Montaville Flowers, December 14, 1917, reprinted in The Winona Herald, May
1918, reprinted in Winona Revisited, 1916-24: Capturing the History of Winona Lake, Indiana, Utilizing
Programs and Other Printed Materials, ed. Jennifer Triggs (Winona Lake, Indiana: Morgan Library, Grace
College and Theological Seminary), 2005.
54
For an in-depth discussion of the Women’s Land Army, especially at the Chautauqua Institution, see
Elaine F. Weiss, Fruits of Victory: The Women’s Land Army of America in the Great War (Washington,
D.C.: Potomac Books, 1998).
106
allowed for girls to be nurses and boys to be soldiers; the Women’s Land Army was
difficult to fit into this easy dichotomy.
One other way that the pageant supported the war effort was through encouraging
and practicing economy. Weinberg and Hallam produced the pageant in such a way that
it could serve as an example of frugal pageantry. The Chautauquan Daily wrote that the
pageant “is aiming to demonstrate that in an ideally organized community where
everybody gets together, a very effective pageant can be staged with a minimum of
expense.”55 The production therefore encouraged the pageantry movement during
wartime despite necessary cost-saving measures. In turn, then, they supported a general
economy for individuals participating in and observing the performance.
To Arms for Liberty was typical of the kinds of pageants presented during World
War I. In staging the pageant, Chautauqua offered its participants an opportunity to aid
the war effort and encourage others to do so. With its standard commercially-sold script,
it was a sign of things to come in the world of pageantry. As more towns produced them,
prepackaged scripts became even more popular and thus, pageants became less original
to their place of production.
David Glassberg has argued that the pageants after the war were very different
from the ones before the war. He suggests that the post-war pageants were more episodic
rather than telling a continuous story. History remained in the past, Glassberg says,
something to be learned from but not directly connected to the present or the future.
55
“The Pageant ‘To Arms for Liberty.’”
107
Pageants after the war tended to be more commercialized and, like the wartime pageants,
were less directly related to the history of a particular site of production.56
Chautauqua pageants generally follow Glassberg’s model, but not as quickly after
the war as he describes. Though staged in 1919, the Pageant of Three Cities in Bay View
was much more of a pre-war pageant by Glassberg’s definition. In addition to Bay View,
this pageant involved the three nearby towns of Petoskey, Charlevoix, and Harbor
Springs. Each of the four sections told the history of one town, and was performed by its
inhabitants. The sections certainly had discrete scenes, but they were connected by
seasonal interludes and the performers worked together to tell the history of the region.
The Pageant of Three Cities was also more like Glassberg’s pre-war model
because the sections reached into the present. For example, the Bay View segment
included both past and present activities. In the Religious Life subsection, the Camp
Meeting of 1876 was followed by the 1919 Beach Service. In the Physical Life of Bay
View subsection, highlighted elements of 1876 included fresh air, pure water, and cool
breezes; 1919 incorporated tennis, baseball, basketball, bowling, swimming, canoeing,
and golf. In this way, the past and the present were thematically linked. The natural
landscape and history of the place directly benefited the experiences in the present. This
linkage was most obvious in the Bay View section, but was evident in the others as well.
Petoskey’s section began with “Indians carrying the lumber” but ended with the crowning
of the Snow Queen, skaters, and a snowball fight. The past continued into the present in
this pageant and was celebrated in much the same way as the 1910 Chautauqua pageant
and other communities’ pre-war pageants.
56
Glassberg, 203-231.
108
This Pageant of Three Cities was definitively a Progressive project, certainly
more so than either of the Chautauqua pageants. Instead of uniting within one
community, it worked to bring people together from four different communities, offering
a kind of regional unity. The pageant structure attempted to gather people with different
experiences; Petoskey and Charlevoix were more year-round communities whereas Bay
View was entirely a summer resort and the Harbor Springs population was divided
between summer people and year-round residents. Bay View’s participants were
generally middle class whereas Petoskey and Charlevoix included more of a range of
classes. Harbor Springs was made up of a combination of working-class Ottawa Indians,
a few middle-class people, and summer people wealthier than those in Bay View. This
mixing of disparate groups to form one pageant must certainly have been a challenge. By
persevering through this challenge of production, organizers hoped that participants
would find commonality and support one another across the region beyond the context of
the pageant.
This performance is reminiscent of the Thetford, Vermont pageant that Langdon
produced. Each of the six villages of Thetford designed and performed its own discrete
part of the pageant and they were brought together for the final production. Similarly, in
the Northern Michigan pageant, people from each town represented their own
community, and then came together bodily and artistically for the final production.
The woman behind the Pageant of Three Cities was Esther Bloomfield Merriman.
Merriman was from Chicago and performed in some theater there.57 She had spent the
57
Merriman performed for the West End Women’s Club in Chicago in 1914. She was in Bay View for at
least three years, from 1918-1920, directing and teaching. In 1924, she married J. B. Cogswell. In 1928,
an Esther M. Cogswell was listed as performing in O’Neill’s Lazarus Laughed for the Pasadena
Community Playhouse. It is unclear whether she continued in theater elsewhere. “‘Illustrations’ in Club
109
previous summer in Bay View and saw the opportunity for a pageant uniting the various
communities of Northern Michigan. Merriman wrote, directed, and starred as the Spirit
of Northern Michigan in the Pageant of Three Cities. This pageant was so successful that
she returned the following year to direct a pageant based on literary tales called Ye Olde
Story Booke; again Merriman wrote, directed, and starred.
Also while in Bay View, Merriman taught a course on pageantry for the Bay
View Summer University. An accredited summer school, the Bay View Summer
University catered especially to aspiring and active teachers who needed additional
college credits. Merriman was among several women on the faculty at that time,
especially in the arts. The 1920 Bay View Bulletin described Merriman’s class:
A two semester hour course will be given in Pageantry, designed for teachers and
others who desire instruction which will assist them in directing the presentation
of pageants in their schools or home communities. An analysis of the technique
and practice in presentation will be given. Excellent opportunity will be given for
observation of the training for and rendition of the Annual Bay View Pageant,
which is annually one of the outstanding features of the Assembly program.58
The pageant in Bay View thus became a learning laboratory for how to conduct a
pageant. Not only was the content educational but the construction of the pageant itself
led to a new kind of knowledge. Because Bay View Summer University courses
appealed specifically to teachers, offering a course in pageantry almost certainly led to
Women’s ‘Living Magazine,’” Chicago Daily Tribune, March 7, 1914,
http://proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/pqdweb?did=383086451
&sid=1&Fmt=1&clientId=29945&RQT=309&VName=HNP (accessed January 13, 2010); “Miss Esther
Merriman,” Chicago Daily Tribune, June 29, 1924,
http://proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/pqdweb?did=432137632
&sid=8&Fmt=10&clientId=29945&RQT=309&VName=HNP (accessed January 13, 2010); Travis
Bogard, “Appendix II: The Casts of O’Neill’s Plays,” Contour in Time, 2d ed. (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1988), http://www.eoneill.com/library/contour/appendix_II.html (accessed January 13,
2010).
58
Bay View Bulletin, March 1920, Bay View.
110
other pageants in the teachers’ home communities. Thus, the Bay View pageant further
popularized and made accessible the concept of pageantry, and through instruction,
multiplied it in other communities. Merriman recognized the powerful combination of
performance and self-reflexivity about that performance to promote lasting change. Her
roles as both professor and director were also prime examples of the ways in which
gender roles were reorganized at permanent chautauquas, and directly affected nonchautauquans’ expectations of gender.
Though Merriman was the first to bring pageantry to Bay View, residents there
and in the surrounding area would have been familiar with another type of pageant, the
Hiawatha pageant. Beginning in 1905, a group of Ottawa Indians staged a loose
rendition of Longfellow’s Song of Hiawatha on a lake about two miles outside of Bay
View. Bay View historian Clark S. Wheeler called this pageant a “Bay View Institution”
because so many people from the community attended the performances each summer.
Wheeler described the event:
Crowds attended the Hiawatha Indian Play at Wa-Ya-Ga-Mug on Round Lake,
presented twice daily. 50 Ojibway Indians were in the cast, and lived in wigwams
during the season. Facilities included a hotel and souvenir shop, and an immense
covered grandstand. An inlet from the lake was between the spectators and the
stage. Water sports preceded the drama, which concluded with Hiawatha being
mysteriously drawn cross a corner of the lake while standing in his canoe.59
This Hiawatha pageant sounds like one of the pageants held at the chautauquas, but it was
heavily commercialized. This same company had performed for several years at
Kensington Point, near Desbarats, Ontario, and actually moved to Petoskey because it
59
Clark S. Wheeler, Bay View (Bay View, MI.: Bay View Association of the Methodist Church, 1950),
118.
111
was closer to a large ticket-buying public.60 The performance in Petoskey was an even
greater opportunity to sell trinkets and to get visitors to stay at the hotel. In fact, the
Grand Rapids and Indiana Railroad was responsible for advertising for the pageants: a
larger audience meant more train riders.61
Rather than offering an authentic look at Ottawa Indian life, the performance was
based upon Longfellow’s white interpretation, and therefore a white construction of
various Indian stories. The Ottawa in Northern Michigan worked mainly as manual
laborers in the lumber industry, but for the pageant, they were trained in “forgotten skills
in the art of porcupine quill and bead embroidery” using examples from the Smithsonian
Institution. The pageant was staged to be more like a living museum and commercial
spectacle, but was actually not at all a representation of the lives of the participants.62
The stakes were quite different for train riders than for local members of the audiences;
for visitors from far away, the pageant was an intriguing anthropological and literary
story, but for locals, these same Indians represented a possible menace within their whitecentric communities.
It remains unclear whether Northern Michigan Ottawa Indians represented their
forebears in the Pageant of Three Cities. The Harbor Springs and Petoskey sections both
portrayed Indians, according the program. They also had French Traders and Jesuit
60
The original performing company in Ontario was featured in a series of short films and a lecture by
Katharine Ertz-Bowden and Charles L. Bowden; this performance is discussed in detail in Chapter 5.
61
It was the same Grand Rapids and Indiana Railroad that was responsible for procuring the land for the
Bay View Association. Across the country, railroads encouraged the concept of permanent chautauquas,
offering financing, real estate assistance, discounted fares, and advertising to encourage people to ride their
train to the chautauquas.
62
Alan Trachtenberg, Shades of Hiawatha: Staging Indians, Making Americans, 1880-1930 (New York:
Hill and Wang, 2004), 93.
112
priests, who surely were not performed by French and Jesuit actors. Only a few years
later, in Bay View’s 1925 jubilee pageant, Ottawa actors were definitely used. According
to the coverage in the Petoskey Evening News, “Unusually well received was the Indian
village scene, with its chief, its old men and women, its young men and maidens and
even the children, tiny ones and half-grown, gathered about in true Indian style. This
scene consists of northern Michigan Indians entirely, in the neighborhood of 40 taking
part.”63 If the residents of the four communities in Northern Michigan chose to include
the Native Americans living among them in their pageant, it would have shown even
more dramatic efforts at reaching across differences, perhaps one these citizens were not
yet ready to make.
The combination of the Hiawatha pageant and several years of visiting theater
groups to Bay View helped prepare the chautauquans for participation in the Pageant of
Three Cities. According to the Bulletin the following year, more people wanted to
participate in the 1919 cast than were spots available; the 1920 pageant was larger
“owing to the great demand for parts in last year’s Pageant of Three Cities.”64 The
pageant was a successful uniting of the four communities, and Bay View provided the
impetus to do so. While the effect of bringing the communities together may not have
been long lasting, the pageant was able to do so that summer.
Pageantry became more widespread throughout American culture and in
chautauquas in the 1910s and ‘20s, partly as a result of education programs like
Merriman’s and because chautauquans took the concept to their hometowns. Henry B.
63
“Pageant Marks Close Bay View’s Golden Jubilee,” Petoskey Evening News, August 8, 1925.
64
Bay View Bulletin, March 1920, 9.
113
Roney estimated in 1917 that “probably 250 real pageants have been given in this
country.”65 Pageantry became an accepted middle-class performance form, especially in
celebrating an event or anniversary. Among the pageants throughout the U.S. to
celebrate the tercentenary of the Pilgrims’ landing at Plymouth Rock were Ocean Park’s
in 1920 and Bay View’s in 1921. Lakeside began the chautauqua tradition of using
pageants to celebrate anniversaries of chautauquas’ founding; it staged a three-part
pageant in 1923 for its 50th birthday. Bay View followed suit in 1925 and Ocean Park in
1931.
The communities saw the pageants as a way to come together, but unlike pageants
in other cities and towns, chautauqua pageants did not include the same communitybuilding activities. Instead, the pageants were a way to showcase the various groups in
the chautauqua. In essence, this became a watering-down of the concept of pageantry;
because chautauquans already shared a self-selected common identity, there was no need
for the pageant to unite the community and bridge between disparate identity groups.
These chautauqua pageants, in effect, helped to simplify the concept of pageantry to a
community play and aided in the stripping away of the Progressive concepts that
attempted to build community engagement. Two important changes in chautauqua
pageants after the war expedited this process of simplifying pageantry toward community
theater: commercializing of pageants and a change in structure that relied more on
dialogue and less on pantomime.
As pageantry became more popular, people began to understand that pageants
could make money – in both the selling of pageant “kits” and in producing “short and
65
Roney, 337.
114
quick” pageants that would bring in more money than was spent. Ruth Mougey
Worrell’s career was emblematic of both.
Worrell began her career as a reader, but eventually became pageant director for
the American Red Cross and the National Board of the Methodist Church. Though these
organizations did have significant female involvement, Worrell rose especially high in
these national groups, well beyond what was expected for her gender.66 She wrote and
directed anniversary pageants for Lakeside in 1923 and Bay View in 1925.67 In addition,
she wrote a number of pageants available for purchase to help raise awareness of Home
(U.S.) and Foreign Missions. In 1925, she produced a Home Missions pageant at
Chautauqua. In this instance, she actually produced the pageant, but generally her scripts
were purchased and produced without her assistance. A copy of the Chautauqua Home
Missions script could be purchased at the bookstore on the grounds for 20 cents and
could then be mounted in Chautauquans’ hometowns.68 Many of Worrell’s other
religious pageants like Thy Kingdom Come and The Way of Peace could be purchased
from the Women’s Home Missionary Society. Her crowning achievement was the
Golden Bowl, a “commanding spectacle” that was performed in Methodist churches in at
least nine major cities. It involved “Magnificent Stage Settings With Elaborate Colorful
Lighting Effects,” “500 Participants in Native Costume,” and “costumes including India,
66
Though Worrell’s career went well beyond the usual expectation of a housewife, late in life she was
honored with a Mother of the Year award by the State of Ohio. Apparently, she gained the award by
leaving her family at home while making a name for herself in the pageantry industry. This, in spite of her
husband’s query of “Is your American family of three good affectionate daughters and a loving husband
not entitled to a little humility?” Mother of the Year Award Scrapbook, Worrell; Charles Worrell to Ruth
Mougey Worrell, October 31, 1920, Worrell.
67
Worrell returned to both Lakeside and Bay View to direct later pageants. In God’s Out-of-Doors was
presented in Lakeside in 1940 and Bay View’s 75th anniversary program, The Power and the Glory, was in
1950.
68
“Who’s Who: Ruth Mougey Worrell,” Chautauquan Daily, August 21, 1925.
115
China, Algeria, Syria, Latin America, and Congo.”69 Despite its magnificence, the
Golden Bowl could be staged by city Methodist churches in a short time and raise
considerable money for missions. At the same time, though, the churches offered false
depictions of the people they were ostensibly helping. Again, costumed white bodies
performed as ethnic and racial others to create a spectacle, doing more to elevate
themselves than to actually experience cultures and customs. These productions did not
really fit the cultural definition of a pageant, but certainly helped Americans to become
familiar with a looser iteration of the concept.
Worrell’s pageants in Lakeside and Bay View were much closer to pageants, but
were still somewhat commercial. The two pageants were quite similar and actually used
the same dialogue in several places. The Pageant of Bay View 1875-1925 had an added
short prologue, but then both the Herald in the Bay View pageant and the Hidden Voice
in the Temple in the Grove began with the same lines:
Blow, golden trumpets, blow;
Proclaim through all the land
The triumph of this fifty years;
Spirit of Jubilee, come forth
And wave o’er all your magic wand;
Call here before us peoples that have gone
And let them tell in story and song
Our Camp Ground’s [or Bay View] history.70
In this most poignant of moments, when the forebears of the community were called
upon to bless the 50th anniversary proceedings, the words were unoriginal. A later scene
showed the founding of the Michigan and Ohio Methodist Conferences, respectively, and
69
70
Ruth Mougey Worrell, Golden Bowl publicity materials, Worrell.
Ruth Mougey Worrell, Pageant of Bay View 1875-1925, Worrell; Ruth Mougey Worrell, The Temple in
the Grove –Part One, Worrell.
116
used the same word-for-word text. Because they were performed in permanent
chautauquas, where the same people returned year after year, it is doubtful that someone
would have seen both pageants. But that Worrell chose to present parts of the same
pageant twice shows that her words were not unique to the celebration of one community.
No longer was the pageant particular to just one place, as the earliest chautauqua
pageants were.
Another change emblematic of later pageants is that they became more like a play
and less like a grand spectacle, especially in their use of dialogue. In earlier pageants,
dialogue was difficult because of issues with voice amplification. Because the 1910
Pageant of Chautauqua Lake was staged on an island off the shore, hearing much
dialogue would have been difficult. In fact, the Chautauquan Daily noted that “the
reading of the lines [of ]‘The Spirit of the Lake’ by Mr. Barrett Clark of Chicago was
well done, and was distinctly heard by all who were not prevented from hearing by some
local conversation in the audience.”71 Since the Daily called out Clark as exceptional, it
is likely that not all of the audience heard all of the actors. Henry B. Roney incorporated
much more pantomime in his productions in Winona Lake and elsewhere because of the
challenge of projection. He wrote, “Nearly every pageant I have witnessed had one great
weakness – too much dialogue impossible for the multitude to hear, especially if the wind
was blowing. When most of the actors are unaccustomed to public speaking, as is
usually the case, the inability to understand always stimulates talking and confusion.”72
71
“Pageant Notes,” Chautauquan Daily, August 20, 1910.
72
Roney, 339-340.
117
If dialogue was difficult to understand, why then the change to more dialogue in the
pageant scripts?
Pageants moved inside. As chautauquans became more comfortable with theater
being presented on their grounds, they recognized their auditoriums and amphitheaters as
the place for plays. A sylvan environment was no longer necessary to put the audience at
ease, and as most other programming was in the auditorium or amphitheater, it made
sense to stage the pageants there as well. Certainly, the challenges of amplifying sound
from an offshore island would have been made easier with an interior stage. While
microphone amplification did not come until later, the interior structures of the
auditoriums and amphitheaters did much to improve acoustical clarity for the audience.73
David Glassberg argues that pageants after World War I underwent an additional
change, that they saw a different relationship between the past and the present. He
asserts that Americans were entirely focused on the present during the war, as is seen in
the 1918 To Arms for Liberty, but after the war, pageants showed a more distant
connection between past and present. The past became something from which to learn
and less of something that might shape the present and the future. The past was back
then and the present was a new modern moment. However, in chautauquas, Glassberg’s
assertion about the relationship between past and present was not always so clear-cut.
For example, in the Bay View anniversary pageant, the Spirit of Jubilee stated,
“Fifty years of service past; Bay View has marched onward and upward until tonight she
73
Even in the 1950 Bay View pageant, microphones were not used. My great-aunt, Anne Sheaffer, had a
leading role, and she recalls, “We didn’t have any microphones, but we stood up – there were two of us on
either side of the stage in the balcony – and projected all over that auditorium”; Anne Child Sheaffer, oral
history interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI, August 8, 2008, recording and
transcript, Bay View.
118
stands upon the mountain peak of Glory and gazes in triumph at what the years have
brought.”74 Bay View had moved on from its meager beginnings to become the
developed triumphal community at the moment of its Jubilee. The storyline of the
pageant suggested that the entire history of the community was positive and without
strife, and the resort could now celebrate all of its success.
At the same time, the pageant also challenged Bay View of the future, the
audience. The Chanter asked, “Will you accept this heritage [of service]? Will you be
true to this sacred trust?” The Spirit of Jubilee responded, “Bay View accepts the
challenge!”75 The phrasing that Worrell used in the writing framed this challenge as a
religious pledge, a promise to a church or to God. As Worrell’s works were thickly
religious, this cannot be a coincidence. The concept of continuing a religious call to
service bridged the past to the future, making a continuous connection. In this and other
anniversary pageants, the past was celebrated as a moment of community beginning, but
at the same time was why the community was celebrating in the first place. Calls toward
the future directly reflected the past. Through pageantry, then, the past legitimized and
offered further direction to the chautauqua of the present and the future.
Chautauquas continued to present pageants at least until the 1950s, but their
heyday was over by the early 1930s.76 The permanent chautauquas were instrumental in
74
Worrell, Pageant of Bay View 1875-1925, 14.
75
Ibid.
76
In researching pageants at chautauquas, I questioned whether pageants remained a valid performance
genre. Working with the Bay View Historic Awareness Committee, I suggested that a pageant about the
history of performance in Bay View be staged. Paul Nelson, director of Theatre Arts, wrote and directed
Discovering Nana’s Treasures as the annual Appreciation Night fundraiser for Bay View on July 17, 2009.
Many residents participated and raised more money than previous years, but the performance was more of a
variety show than a pageant.
119
helping to popularize pageants as a form, with most of the major chautauquas producing
one or more. As a result, chautauquans became more comfortable both on stage and as
audience members. Educational programs like Esther Bloomfield Merriman’s pageantry
course and lectures about pageantry helped participants and audience members to
understand the methodology behind the performances, and certainly led to pageants in
chautauquans’ hometowns.
Chautauqua pageants were a chance for community members to redefine lines of
race, class, gender, and even age. At times, race divisions were literally covered up,
using blackface or redface; later pageants facilitated interactions between whites and nonwhites in a more meaningful way. Class divisions were most obviously leveled in the
Pageant of Three Cities. All major pageants included both children and adults. For
women, pageants offered opportunities for leadership in a number of ways, transgressing
cultural norms about where a woman should be and how she should comport herself in
public. Even religion was renegotiated in pageants: whereas the Methodists had rejected
theater only a few years earlier, now groups of Methodists were using pageants to
celebrate their religious heritage.
Over the course of the production history of the pageants at chautauquas, the
theatrical form became simplified. The pageants were less about uniting the community,
because chautauquans were already a self-selected group.77 As pageantry became a
commercial industry, pageants became uprooted from particular places and also could be
used for a diversity of purposes – Mother Goose pageants, missions pageants, school
pageants, and a variety of other forms. Through their development at chautauquas, they
77
The only exception to this, as outlined previously, is the Pageant of Three Cities, held in Bay View but
produced jointly with the towns of Charlevoix, Petoskey, and Harbor Springs.
120
eventually became limited to a kind of community theater. This performance genre was
not necessarily about one particular community nor was it necessarily focused on a larger
political framework of community unity for which pageants were originally known.78
Stripped of their original Progressive concept of performance for change, pageants were
much easier to produce and became a staple in schools and middle-class social
organizations across the United States.
The pageantry movement also helped theater to become an everyday experience
for chautauquans. Beginning in the 1920s, permanent chautauquas developed theater arts
and opera programs, bringing more traveling theater troupes to their grounds and also
providing opportunities for community members to perform. Directly related to the
success of the pageants was the founding of programs in the 1930s like the Chautauqua
Repertory Theater from the Cleveland Play House, the Ocean Park Players theater group,
and the drama courses for the Bay View Summer University that incorporated local
chautauquans.
Over the period of years when pageants were popular in chautauquas, they
became a mass cultural phenomenon throughout American society. They were no longer
“epoch[s] in the history” of the chautauquas but were community programs for one or
two evenings in which chautauquans could participate as well as observe. Pageants
eventually became “annual pageants” and were treated as traditions rather than something
new and exciting. At permanent chautauquas, pageantry became a repeatable form of
middle-class culture, eventually something that could be seen in a number of
78
I use the phrase “not necessarily” here in an attempt to clarify that some community theater can be both
political and about the community that produces it. See Sonja Kuftinec, Staging America: Cornerstone and
Community-Based Theater (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2005).
121
communities around the U.S. While pageants were not always immediately accepted by
middle-class sensibilities, both the pageants and the sensibilities changed to
accommodate one another.
122
CHAPTER 4
IN THE AUDITORIUMS AND IN THE TENTS:
PROFESSIONAL CHAUTAUQUA PERFORMERS AT
PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS
Bay View’s 1914 program offered a wide range of performers: the Williams
Jubilee Singers; reformer Ida M. Tarbell; a troupe of singing and dancing Killarney Girls;
the United States Vice President Thomas R. Marshall; prison reformer Maud Ballington
Booth; and musicians and impersonators Mr. and Mrs. Wilbur Starr.1 In 1916, the
Colorado Chautauqua hosted a singing band called the White Hussars; a husband-andwife team of musicians, impersonators, and magicians named the Dietrics; Lorado Taft, a
lecturer on sculpture; a theater company; and a dramatic reader.2 The following year,
Lakeside’s program included a “Mammy” impersonator; Juliet V. Strauss, who was the
country editor at Ladies’ Home Journal; a character artist who performed “Great Literary
Men;” a theater troupe; the “Wizard of Electricity,” Louis Williams; reader Gay Zenola
McLaren; and humorist Ralph Parlette.3
This great diversity of programming was not unique to these chautauquas during
this time period. These slates of performers would have been almost impossible to book
by individual chautauqua schedulers; instead, they relied on booking agencies like the
Redpath Chautauqua agency, headquartered in Chicago.4 Particularly in the period from
1
Bay View Assembly Program, 1915, Bay View.
2
Colorado Chautauqua Bulletin, Program Number, 1916, Carnegie.
3
Lakeside on Lake Erie, 1917, Lakeside.
4
Much of the information in this chapter is drawn from the Redpath Chautauqua Collection at the
University of Iowa. Chautauqua historian and University of Iowa history professor Harrison John Thornton
was instrumental in the donation of Keith Vawter’s personal papers and the Redpath-Chautauqua bureau’s
office files. It remains the most expansive collection relating to circuit chautauqua.
123
about 1910 to 1930, permanent chautauqua programming was enriched by a mutually
beneficial relationship with circuit chautauqua booking agencies. The agencies supplied
the permanent chautauquas with more diverse programming, and at much cheaper costs.
Some historians have understood the sometimes antagonistic relationship between the
reputation of the circuits and the moral high ground of the permanent chautauquas as
murderous, suggesting that the circuits put the assemblies out of business. One scholar
has even referred to the circuits as the “toxic children” of chautauqua.5 Instead, I would
argue that the circuits and the permanent chautauquas had a mutually beneficial
relationship, and as a result, middle-class culture benefited from a network of highquality entertainment.
The permanent chautauquas were enriched by programming organized for them
by the circuit chautauqua booking agencies, and at much lower costs than if they had
organized it themselves. Programming from the booking agencies helped to broaden
permanent chautauqua audiences’ tastes. While it remained mostly lectures and music,
the lectures and music that the agencies offered incorporated more entertainment than
chautauquans had previously enjoyed. Through their collaboration with the chautauqua
circuits, the permanent chautauquas were able to improve their programming by
diversifying the genres offered, incorporating the performances of more women and
people of different races, and introducing new technologies. Through the consumption of
new kinds of performance, chautauqua audiences helped to create a new balance of
5
Andrew C. Reiser, The Chautauqua Moment: Protestants, Progressives, and the Culture of Modern
Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 284.
124
entertainment and education, one that further developed middle-class entertainment as
culture.
However, it is necessary to understand the nature of programming at permanent
chautauquas prior to the development of circuit chautauquas. Permanent chautauquas had
developed a strong reputation for quality educational and religious programming in their
twenty-five years prior to the turn of the twentieth century. Of the major chautauquas for
which bulletins from 1900 remain, almost 74 percent of all of the programs were lectures
and over 13 percent were music events.6 From the onset, though, the permanent
chautauquas also presented programs that were primarily entertainment. Some scholars
have argued that entertainment became a part of chautauqua with the development of
circuit chautauqua, but by 1900, entertainment acts were a small but regular part of
programming. Entertainment came in its purest form with magicians; in 1900, Bay View
and Winona Lake both hosted Carter the Magician’s “Marvelous Illusions” and the
Chautauqua Institution had Albini the Magician.7 In 1901, Fountain Park Assembly
hosted Prof. Karl Germaine, with his “Magic and Slight of Hand.”8 Other events were
meant to be very entertaining, yet still offer some kind of educational or religious quality.
Ocean Grove’s 1897 program included Rev. L. H. Bradford, who offered “rapid
humorous and artistic crayon sketches.”9 Ferrer Martin, an Indian body builder, was
6
Permanent chautauquas included in this calculation are Lakeside, Ocean Park, Chautauqua Institution,
Bay View, and Winona Lake.
7
Bay View Assembly Program, 1900, Bay View; Chautauqua: A System of Popular Education, 1900,
Chautauqua.
8
9
Seventh Annual Season of the Fountain Park Assembly, 1901, Fountain Park Museum, Remington, IN.
Thirteenth Annual Session of the Ocean Grove Sunday School and Chautauqua Assembly, [1897], Ocean
Grove.
125
featured at the Monteagle Sunday School Assembly in 1899; he gave “a novel
entertainment illustrated by feats of strength. The demonstration of a remarkable
development from a puny weakling to a champion strong man, by an Indian Method of
Body Building.”10
In practice, entertainment acts were an early part of the permanent chautauquas’
programming, but they were not a planned element of chautauqua as John Heyl Vincent
and Lewis Miller first conceived it. When Vincent wrote his treatise laying out the
Chautauqua concept in 1886, he left little room for entertainment. The cornerstones of
his project were education and religion: “The true basis of education is religious. The
fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”11 Vincent did stress the inclusion of
“culture,” but warned that it was too often put on a pedestal: “Early lack of culture, felt
by full-grown people, begets a certain exaltation of its value and desirability, and a
craving for its possession. This craving creates intellectual susceptibility and
receptivity.”12 A goal, then, of the Chautauqua regimen was to guide the less-educated
person to both acceptable and accessible culture.
Vincent saw the everyday activities at Chautauqua as necessary in attracting
people to the assembly, but cautioned that true Chautauquans moved beyond the
enjoyment of entertainment. He described an outer court of most people at Chautauqua,
but also an inner court of individuals who had a complete understanding of the
Chautauqua ideals through their work with the Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle.
10
Programs – Monteagle Assembly, [1899], Monteagle.
11
John H. Vincent, The Chautauqua Movement (Boston: Chautauqua University Press, 1886; repr.,
Charleston, SC: BiblioLife, 2009), 13.
12
Ibid., 14.
126
Vincent explained all of the major activities of Chautauqua, like lectures, sermons,
fireworks, and processionals:
These are the features of the outer court of Chautauqua, for the entertainment,
awakening, and broadening of people who come with no far-reaching or serious
purpose, but who come to “hear” and “see” and “have a good time.” They are
simply recipients. The will-power lies dormant, save as some stirring statement
of lecture or sermon, or some unsyllabled passage in music, opens the soul to the
worlds all about it replete with marvel, beauty, and power. So much for the outer
Chautauqua. There are those who see this, – only this and nothing more. They
come and go. They wonder why they and others come, and yet they think they
may come again – but are not sure. They do not forget Chautauqua, and they do
not “go wild” over it. They smile at other people, whom they call “fanatics”
because they are full of it, and “bound to come again,” and “come every year,”
and always, and “would be willing to live there.”13
In Vincent’s understanding, then, the entertaining activities at Chautauqua were fine in
that they drew possible future members of the inner court of Chautauqua, but “hav[ing] a
good time” was not connected to the serious work that made Chautauqua unique. Yet, at
the same time, entertaining Chautauqua programming was required to encourage people
to attend; Vincent’s ideals alone were not enough.
By around 1900, Chautauqua was highlighting its entertainment offerings in
promotional materials. One tourist pamphlet described the variety of programming:
There are … popular concerts, readings, entertainments in great number. There
are illuminations and fire works and fetes; tableaux in the great Amphitheater,
French and German plays given by the students of the Modern Language
departments. In short, for the pleasure-seeker Chautauqua is an interesting place.
Every day, and often more than once a day, something is provided which proves
attractive to those who are seeking only the lighter forms of entertainment.14
By encouraging “those who are seeking only the lighter forms of entertainment” to
attend, Chautauqua appealed to those people in Vincent’s outer court. As an institution,
13
Ibid., 54.
14
Chautauqua, pamphlet, [1900], Chautauqua.
127
Chautauqua had become interested in attracting people who might come only for
entertainment purposes. Certainly, it was possible that, once on the grounds, these people
might have become enamored with the Chautauqua concept and eventually “‘go wild’
over it.”
Other chautauquas also stressed culture and entertainment in their promotional
materials. In defining itself in the 1892 Programme and Guide Book, the Pennsylvania
Chautauqua in Mt. Gretna described its object as “the promotion of higher popular
education and broader Christian culture among the people.”15 This concept of a Christian
culture is crucial in understanding the chautauquas’ rationale for including more
entertaining programming.16 Cultural studies theorist Raymond Williams has argued that
the word culture must be seen with two definitions: “to mean a whole way of life – the
common meanings; to mean the arts and learning – the special processes of discovery and
creative effort.”17 In this reference in the Mt. Gretna program, then, it is necessary to
recognize a Christian culture in both senses of the word, as both a way of living and as
the performances presented. The two work to support one another. Certainly, at the
time, Mt. Gretnans would have understood that the kinds of programming they saw
affected the kinds of lives they lived. Even when programs were entertaining, they
loosely supported Christian ideals and certainly were not judged as morally offensive at
the time, in the way that vaudeville, burlesque, amusement parks, and other attractions
were criticized. Permanent chautauquas could claim, then, that they offered a Christian
15
1892 Programme and Guide Book, 21, Mt. Gretna.
16
This Christian culture celebrated a Protestant God and did not incorporate Catholicism.
17
Raymond Williams, “Culture is Ordinary,” in Convictions, ed. N. McKenzie, 1958; repr. in Studying
Culture, ed. Ann Gray and Jim McGuigan (New York: Arnold, 1997), 6 (page citation is to the reprint
edition).
128
culture of living and a Christian program of culture, even when not every program was
overtly religious.
This Christian cultural program began with the Chautauqua Sunday School
Assembly and was a central feature in the permanent chautauquas that followed. The
idea was further popularized by a third iteration of chautauqua, the community
chautauqua, made popular right around the turn of the twentieth century. Community
chautauquas were a program of events organized within a year-round community. Small
towns across the U.S. drew from their own talent and used lyceum booking agencies to
staff these events, which usually lasted from a few days to a week each year. These
chautauquas drew audiences only from the surrounding area and did not maintain
infrastructure to handle visitors from further afield. As a result, the audiences were quite
different. While both were on vacation when attending the events, permanent
chautauquans had traveled quite a distance from their hometowns rather than just walking
down the street to the local high school gymnasium or opera house. Permanent
chautauquans generally had the financial ability to take longer vacations and to travel;
community chautauquas attracted a broader cross-section of the town’s residents.
At the same time, these community chautauquas did offer some competition for
the permanent chautauquas. Instead of having to go to resort communities for such
opportunities, chautauquans could stay at home. An article in the Boulder Camera
described the supposed threat of these “gatherings”:
Prof. Fracker, who has just arrived from the East believes that better days are
coming for the Chautauqua. He has made quite a little study of the situation and
finds that the many gatherings that have sprung up all over the country and have
posed as Chautauquas are rapidly dying out while interest is centerink [sic]
around the few assemblies which have retained the real Chautauqua ideals and at
129
the same time have something in the way of natural attractiveness to draw and
retain patronage.18
Founded in 1898, the Chautauqua in Boulder, Colorado was one of the last chautauquas
built as a resort assembly. By 1900, most new chautauquas were community
chautauquas. That these community chautauquas would be described as “pos[ing] as
Chautauquas” foreshadows the kinds of criticism aimed at circuit chautauquas, the fourth
version of chautauqua that became prevalent. In fact, the community chautauqua
movement morphed into the circuit chautauquas. The community chautauquas inspired
the creation of the circuit concept and many of the community chautauquas became
circuit chautauquas.19 Historian David T. Glick has written, “As my research has moved
past the 1900 mark I find more and more that the new independents are community
chautauquas rather than chautauqua communities and I can see that transition to tents is
all set to happen.”20
In hindsight, Glick can see the preparation for this transition to a more mobile
chautauqua structure, but before 1904 chautauquas were always tied to one particular
place, either a resort or a space within a town. Lyceum booking agent Keith Vawter
recognized an efficiency (and hopes of personal profit) in bringing an established slate of
professional talent to the community chautauquas in a circuit. Working with the already
successful Redpath Lyceum Bureau in Chicago, Vawter organized a series of performers
18
“Chautauqua Notes,” Boulder Camera, June 7, 1905, Carnegie.
19
The contemporary chautauqua at Fountain Park, in Remington, Indiana, is a close remaining example of
the community chautauqua. While cottages have been built at the site, almost all participants (residents and
performers) are from the surrounding areas. It currently has a two-week season of lectures, entertainment,
kids’ recreation, art programs, and religious teaching. More recently, series organized by state humanities
councils have begun calling themselves chautauquas and operate at the community and state level over
days or weeks. The role these chautauquas perform is similar to that of community chautauquas.
20
David T. Glick to Harry S. McClarran, March 6, 1984, McClarran Collection, Chautauqua.
130
who traveled to fifteen towns in Nebraska and Iowa in 1904, several of which were
already established community chautauquas. Initially the idea was a flop, losing several
thousand dollars the first year. Performers’ schedules included long hauls between
venues and many open days when no performance occurred. Railroad travel was
expensive when schedules required talent to bounce back and forth across two states all
summer, therefore reducing the profitability of the concept.
Vawter revamped his model so that talent was high quality, performers were less
exhausted with shorter hauls, and costs were kept to a minimum. By 1910, he had
perfected these circuits. Performers were assigned to a particular time slot for each
chautauqua program; for example, chalk talker Marion Ballou Fisk was affectionately
called “the fourth day cartoonist” by one of her colleagues.21 At each town she visited,
then, the audience was in its fourth day of the chautauqua program. Another performer
might be the second evening performer, and so on. As soon as one performance was
completed, talent was on the train headed to the next town in preparation for the next
show. Vawter’s system was efficient, profitable, and quickly copied.
Circuit chautauquas worked to establish their reputation as being different from
other traveling shows. Vawter’s choice of housing circuit chautauquas in brown tents
was an attempt to distinguish chautauqua above circuses. Circuit chautauquas also
distanced themselves from traveling medicine shows, which combined music and
comedy with sales pitches for elixirs, salves, and other “medicines.”22 In an early article
outlining her research, Charlotte Canning writes of the struggles that chautauquas had in
21
22
Untitled poem in personal scrapbook, Fisk.
For a history of the medicine show, see Brooks McNamara, Step Right Up (Garden City, NY:
Doubleday, 1976).
131
separating themselves; she argues that they “emphasized their pubic-spirited mission and
Christian origins.”23 They presented a Christian “culture” (in both senses of the word), at
least for the time that the audience was under the brown tents.
At the same time, the already established permanent chautauquas had to be
careful that the circuits did not taint their reputation. Circuit chautauquas were not all
created equal, and did not always espouse the same values as permanent chautauquas.
Sinclair Lewis satirized circuit chautauquas when one visited Gopher Prairie in his 1920
novel, Main Street: “from the Chautauqua itself [Carol] got nothing but wind and chaff
and heavy laughter, the laughter of yokels at old jokes, a mirthless and primitive sound
like the cries of beasts on a farm. … After it, the town felt proud and educated.”24
While the circuit organizers were happy to take the chautauqua name for their
programs, not all permanent chautauquans felt the same way. E. H. Blichfeldt wrote
“What a Chautauqua Is Not” for a 1912 Chautauquan magazine.25 In it, he argued that
chautauquas were permanent, “satisfy[ed] innocent desires,” and were not “money
making enterprise[s].” By stating what permanent chautauquas were, he inherently
criticized the circuit chautauquas:
23
Charlotte Canning, “The Platform Versus the Stage: Circuit Chautauqua’s Antitheatrical Theatre,”
Theatre Journal 50, no. 3 (1998), 305. Canning makes a similar argument in The Most American Thing in
America, when she describes the need to differentiate between chautauqua tents and circus tents: “For
smaller communities, ones likely to have Chautauquas and unlikely to attract the larger circuses of the
highest quality, being able to tell the difference at a glance between circus and Chautauqua was an
important and reassuring aspect of the Circuits’ identity and an inoculation against ‘evil ways.’” Charlotte
B. Canning, The Most American Thing in America: Circuit Chautauqua as Performance (Iowa City, IA:
University of Iowa Press, 2003).
24
25
Sinclair Lewis, Main Street (1920; repr. New York: Barnes and Noble Classics, 2003), 45-46.
E. H. Blichfeldt, “What a Chautauqua is Not,” Chautauquan, August 1912, 194-198,
http://proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/pqdweb?did=433675192
&sid=1&Fmt=10&clientId=29945&RQT=309&VName=HNP (accessed February 26, 2010).
132
The Chautauquas that are permanent are not merely ‘talent’ exhibits. In so far as
summer gatherings in the woods are a response to men and bureaus who have
‘stunts’ to do and who clamor for an audience, they are artificial things, and
passing. They have their day and cease to be. But the true Chautauqua is an
embodiment of things which the people have desired and will still desire.26
The original Chautauqua Institution was particularly vocal in separating itself from the
burgeoning circuit chautauquas, but not unique in its arguments. The 1913 bulletin for
the Colorado Chautauqua in Boulder devoted an entire page to why “Our Chautauqua is
Independent.” It argued that the circuit plan worked well for places looking to save
money, but explained that the aims in Boulder were different:
We buy our own talent, selected with care to meet our particular needs, wherever
it can be obtained. The list of every bureau is scanned as well as all the talent
which books independently and contracts are negotiated only for that which we
want. We do not buy a whole program from any one person or agency. The
tastes of the audience, the high educational ideals of our assembly, and the
reputation our programs have sustained in the past are all considered and enter
into the selection process.27
This process of selection was much the same in the other permanent chautauquas: they
used talent from the booking agencies but rarely bought their entire program as one
block.
Chautauqua historians have examined negative opinions that permanent
chautauquans expressed regarding the rise of the circuits and have used them to argue
that circuit chautauquas had a detrimental effect on the permanent chautauqua
movement. They suggest that people were more likely to get their “culture” in their
home communities rather than traveling to resort chautauquas. They also assert that the
chautauqua name was tarnished by the circuits, especially as they became more
26
Ibid., 195.
27
Colorado Chautauqua Bulletin, December 1, 1913, Carnegie.
133
entertaining and less educational. However, these scholars have not recognized that
permanent chautauquas also regularly used booking agencies, and in so doing, they
helped to significantly improve the quality of performances that circuits offered. Both
groups benefited tremendously from the arrangement, and as a result, the middle class
had easier access to more diverse cultural forms.
Three scholars have examined the entire chautauqua movement in book-length
detail, all in the last fifteen years. John E. Tapia and Charlotte M. Canning focus on
circuit chautauqua and discuss Chautauqua, New York and the permanent chautauquas as
a context for understanding the circuits.28 Andrew C. Reiser’s book, The Chautauqua
Moment: Protestants, Progressives, and the Culture of Modern Liberalism, uses the
Chautauqua Institution as the origin for the larger movement, in which he includes the
Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle, the independent assemblies, and eventually the
circuits.29 All three historians have significantly broadened academics’ understanding of
the importance of the chautauqua movement in American culture. As these three scholars
make their own unique arguments, they construct a relationship between the permanent
chautauquas and the circuits.
Tapia discusses permanent chautauquas mostly in passing, using it as a context
for the circuits, where his particular interest lies. As context, he includes a five-page
section entitled “Permanent Chautauqua,” in which most of the discussion revolves
around the Chautauqua Institution. The remainder of the section examines community
chautauquas, in which he mistakenly includes Ocean Park, Maine. Ocean Park is actually
28
John E. Tapia, Circuit Chautauqua: From Rural Education to Popular Entertainment in Early Twentieth
Century America (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 1997); Canning, The Most American Thing.
29
Reiser, The Chautauqua Moment.
134
a permanent chautauqua because it was not organized by locals in Old Orchard Beach,
but rather catered to resorters from further distances. No other mention of resort-based
permanent chautauquas is made. Tapia’s focus remains almost exclusively on the
circuits, but background on the interrelationship between the permanent chautauquas and
the circuits would further support his arguments.
Canning’s analysis is more nuanced, but a clarification of the permanent
chautauqua–circuit relationship would support her argument as well. Because her focus
remains on the circuits, and she discusses independent chautauquas in passing, Canning
simplifies the description by making little distinction between the resort-based permanent
chautauquas and the community chautauquas. In introducing the assemblies, Canning
writes:
Mimicking the original, these independent assemblies, as they were called to
distinguish them from the ‘Mother’ Chautauqua, followed the Chautauqua ideal,
defined as ‘education for everybody, everywhere in every department, inspired by
a Christian faith.’ No matter how sincerely adhered to and believed in by those of
the independent assemblies, the ideal was becoming formulaic, and it was only a
short jump from the formulaic to the commercial.30
Canning acknowledges the connection between the permanent chautauquas and the
Chautauqua Institution. And, indeed, as the concept of chautauqua was repeated, it was
becoming formulaic. Permanent chautauquas benefited from its predictability. Visitors
knew they could expect certain attributes from any chautauqua: a safe and healthy
vacation environment, quality educational and entertainment programming suitable for all
ages, and a strong Christian basis for the community. This “short jump from the
formulaic to the commercial” that Canning describes as negative could also be interpreted
as a process that helped chautauquas to improve the quality and consistency of their
30
Canning, The Most American Thing, 8.
135
programs.
Canning also argues that the circuits were an insurmountable competition to the
permanent chautauquas, writing, “The independents were the ones chiefly affected by the
rise of the Circuits. They found it difficult to compete with both the Circuits and one
another for resources, and too few people in their communities were interested in
providing labor necessary to operate them.”31 This statement rings true for the
community chautauquas about which Canning was likely thinking, but it does not apply
as clearly to the resort-based permanent chautauquas. Even at their height, permanent
chautauquas were far enough apart that they did not compete for patronage. Permanent
chautauqua advertising focused on what made a chautauqua, why to vacation in this
particular place, or the special programming that the permanent chautauquas offered;
competition with other chautauquas was not an issue. Furthermore, permanent
chautauquas were successfully run with very few paid employees and were able to rely
on volunteers within their resort community to provide almost all labor to operate the
resorts.32 While the circuits certainly had an impact on the permanent chautauquas, they
did not necessarily hasten their downfall.
Andrew C. Reiser examines the chautauqua movement with the Chautauqua
Institution as his primary focus, but he devotes a chapter to the permanent chautauquas
and to community chautauquas. Of the three historians, Reiser provides the most detailed
analysis of the movement and carefully situates it within discussions of class, gender,
31
32
Ibid., 19.
The most recent generation of volunteers at chautauquas has begun to wane. As families become dualincome households and work longer hours, adults look to their often-reduced time at chautauquas as an
opportunity for relaxation, not for volunteering. As a result, the employed staffs at chautauquas have
grown. For example, the 1980 Bay View Bulletin listed seven paid staff members; in 2010, that number had
grown to thirteen; private collection of Lisa Loyd, Petoskey, MI.
136
religion, and ethnicity. However, he offers contradictory descriptions of the relationships
between the circuits and permanent chautauquas are contradictory. At times, Reiser
refers to the circuits “the enemy” and the “toxic children” of the Chautauqua Institution.33
In his actual analysis of the situation, though, Reiser astutely reexamines their
relationship, worth quoting in full:
The declension narrative of noble assemblies giving way to vulgar circuits was, in
part, the imposition of critics (like [Frank W.] Gunsaulus) and historians (like
[Howard Mumford] Jones) who sympathized with the humanistic goals of the
original movement and viewed the circuits as symbols of cultural decline. Hence,
before we blame the circuits for ‘cheapening Chautauqua,’ we should first
consider the extent to which they perpetuated trends already under way in the
assemblies. The circuits were often accused of commercialism; but capitalist
motives had always coexisted with high ideals at the assembly. The circuits were
often accused of forsaking education for entertainment; but many assemblies
adopted Lyceum entertainment in the late 1890s. Some say the circuits killed off
the assemblies. That is largely true; but the independent assemblies were already
facing financial difficulties. Few Midwesterners objected when the Redpath
Company took ‘Chautauqua’ as the title for their ersatz variant of Victorian selfculture in 1904. For most, the traveling tent show was a continuation of, not a
departure from, a process of institutional evolution.34
Rather than dismissing the circuits entirely, Reiser suggests that changes seen in
permanent chautauquas were already beginning to happen by the time the circuits came
along.
Managers of permanent chautauquas had always been looking at the bottom line.
While many assemblies did fold in the period in which the circuits were being organized,
this was more a result of the retirements and deaths of the first generation of chautauqua
leaders. With a lack of solid leadership, chautauqua grounds fell into disrepair and
programs were often poor. In fact, the rise of the circuits helped to alleviate this problem,
33
Reiser, 268, 284.
34
Ibid., 270.
137
making it easier for assembly organizers to put together a varied program. So while
many permanent chautauquas did decline over this period, the direct causal link that other
historians have made is tenuous at best. Despite the rhetoric that the permanent
chautauquas used to attack the circuits, the actual programming at permanent
chautauquas illuminates a distinct connection between an increase in quantity and quality
of permanent chautauqua programming and the formulation of the circuits.
Building on the excellent research of Tapia, Canning, and Reiser, I see the
relationship between the permanent chautauquas and the circuits as one that was mutually
beneficial. The permanent chautauquas were able to gain a wider variety in their
programming at a lower cost. An examination of the kinds of programs at permanent
chautauquas suggests that they had the highest quality performers that the agencies
offered. Fred A. Boggess was the secretary for the Colorado Chautauqua for many years,
mostly during the circuit chautauqua period. In choosing programs, he used his “Three
Questions Test”: “Do you regard the entertainment as appealing to the very best of
people? Does it in any sense approach the vaudeville attraction, and if not, what
distinguishes it from it? Does it in any sense smack of the cheap and gaudy?”35 If a
program did appeal to the very best of people, and was not vaudevillian, cheap, or gaudy,
Boggess was willing to consider booking it. For Boggess, these qualities signified that a
program would appeal to his middle-class audience: it was actually high-class culture that
was accessible, and had not a hint of working-class humor or entertainment. Because
they knew that chautauquas catered to this kind of an audience, booking agencies were
able to provide considerable information about performers to ensure that they passed tests
35
Mary Galey, The Grand Assembly: The Story of Life at the Colorado Chautauqua ([Boulder, CO]: First
Flatiron Press, 1981), 73.
138
like Boggess’s.
The agencies could book their best performers at the permanent chautauquas most
of the time, but also at the circuit chautauquas some of the time, thereby elevating their
talent as well. In this way, the permanent chautauquas actually supported the
development of middle-class culture outside their borders; by demanding high-quality
entertainment for their assemblies, they also improved the programming that the circuits
could offer to the more rural circuit chautauquas. As a group, the permanent chautauquas
wielded enough power to get the kinds of programs that they wanted from the booking
agencies rather than merely accepting what the bookers had available. In this way,
permanent chautauquas could cater to their own local audiences instead of accepting a
top-down national cultural structure.
Many performers benefited from this arrangement and appreciated the balance of
permanent chautauqua and circuit work. It meant that they did not have as many breaks
in their schedules and they often did not have to travel as far. There was also a different
appreciation for the permanent chautauqua audiences. Impersonator and reader Gay
Zenola MacLaren wrote in her memoirs,
The older lecturers looked upon the tents with disdain. They felt that the real
Chautauqua Spirit could not be truly expressed rolling around the country in a
tent.
Said one of them: ‘At an Independent, they pick you out themselves and
put you on the programme because they want you – they don’t have you thrust on
them like a club breakfast.’
And of course it was true – if you could stand the pace.36
Tapping the circuit bureaus for talent was a successful way to improve the quality of
programming, lower costs, and bring performers who were content to perform at
36
Gay MacLaren, Morally We Roll Along (Boston: Little, Brown, 1938), 111-112.
139
permanent chautauquas.
In fact, the booking agencies were not the first attempt to improve permanent
chautauqua programs through networking. As early as 1897, permanent chautauquas
began organizing to share talent and to discuss other chautauqua-related matters. The
Western Federation of Chautauquas was organized by members of the chautauquas in
Clarinda, Iowa, Winfield, Kansas, and Boulder, Colorado, and included other
chautauquas from the Midwest. Though it lasted only three years, the group negotiated
contracts with talent and helped member chautauquas economize while still offering
high-quality entertainment.
In 1899, the International Chautauqua Alliance was formed to centralize the
management of talent scheduling, while giving rational railroad timetables and
competitive salaries. It also hoped to institute high standards for running the individual
chautauqua institutions. Though it attempted to include all permanent chautauquas, five
years after it began barely ten percent of chautauquas belonged.37 Still, it was a strong
organizing force and found itself in competition with the lyceum booking agencies that
had morphed into circuit chautauqua bookers. Because of this competition, the
International Chautauqua Alliance unanimously voted to boycott all talent that used
Redpath “because some of the Redpath managers were interested in conducting ‘railroad
chautauquas’” that were very temporary, rather than supporting permanent chautauqua
communities.38 Redpath and other agencies proved lasting, though, and a few years later,
the Alliance decided to work with rather than against them. At the 1909 International
37
Hugh A. Orchard, Fifty Years of Chautauqua (Cedar Rapids, IA: The Torch Press, 1923), 95.
38
Ibid, 100.
140
Chautauqua Alliance meeting, the Alliance successfully gained group discounts from the
bureaus. According to a report of the meeting for the Chautauquan Weekly:
The most important work done at the meeting was the successful booking of a
large number of Chautauqua attractions. For several years the Alliance has been
endeavoring to get reductions on lecturers, entertainers, and musical companies in
view of the large numbers of engagements which can be guaranteed and a cutting
of the railroad journies [sic]. For the first time this year the attempt may be said
to have been very successful. All the important bureaus in the country had their
representatives at the Alliance Meeting and substantial reductions were secured
by a large number of the assemblies.39
As the chautauquas began collaborating with the booking agencies for the circuits, they
could be more selective in their programming. Rather than buying a complete program
as individual towns on the circuits did, permanent chautauquas gained the ability to pick
and choose from the best. For example, Bay View used Redpath to augment its
programming at least in the years 1910, 1913, and 1922 to ‘26, bringing between four and
eight performers in each of these seasons. Organizers used these performances to
augment their program rather than to provide a backbone for the season; programming
remained under local control instead of being dictated by the agencies. Other
chautauquas had weeks presented by a booking agency. Winona Lake hosted a Redpath
circuit for a week in July of 1915, for example. A few used agencies for their entire
programming. Fountain Park, in Remington, Indiana, had an especially commercial
program in 1912; in fact, because the performer photos supplied by the agency were not
quite the right size, they were printed sideways in the bulletin.40 By contrast, particularly
in the early days of the agencies, some chautauquas advertised that they did not use any
39
40
“International Chautauqua Alliance,” Chautauquan Weekly, 2, October 21, 1909.
The Eighteenth Annual Session of the Fountain Park Assembly, [1912], Fountain Park Museum,
Remington, Indiana.
141
agencies; the Chautauqua Institution was particular about not using the booking agencies,
but even it eventually used some.
One reason Bay View and others began using Redpath more in 1922 was the
establishment of a Redpath department dedicated solely to permanent chautauquas.
Veteran agent A. M. [Amy] Weiskopf was made the head of the new division when it
was founded in 1922.41 Weiskopf worked for the Redpath office in Chicago. By the time
she was chosen to head up its Independent Chautauqua division in 1922, she was well
known in both circuit and permanent chautauqua circles. Very little remains known
about Weiskopf, but she serves as a symbol of the intricate relationship between the
circuits and the permanent chautauquas. Like Weiskopf, this relationship was a bit
misunderstood at the time, and remains hidden to most historians today.
Weiskopf was working for Redpath as early as 1910.42 Tellingly, her stationery
read “A. M. Weiskopf” and she signed her correspondence in the same way. As the
most senior female in the Redpath office, and perhaps in all of the chautauqua agencies,
Weiskopf chose to obscure her gender in order to further her career. Most of her work
was conducted through correspondence, and her letters do not suggest much face-to-face
contact with the talent.
Weiskopf was unique among the leadership of Redpath as the sole woman. She
gained the position as manager of the new Independent Chautauqua department after
spending at least twelve years courting permanent chautauqua business. A few years
after her promotion, Lyceum Magazine, the trade journal for the booking agencies, made
41
Announcement, Lyceum Magazine, August 1922, 37.
42
A. M. W. [Amy M. Weiskopf] to Maud Ballington Booth, July 11, 1910, Redpath.
142
much of her qualifications, saying “She has a large personal acquaintance among the
Independent Chautauqua Committeemen gained through her years of experience in the
work, and she knows all the needs of a program committee to make an Independent
Chautauqua program complete.”43
Weiskopf’s job was to make sure that the permanent chautauquas were happy
with their programs, which meant she also had to ensure that performers were content.
This was not always an easy task. Trains were late, car tires blew, accommodations were
bad, performers were just plain tired. It was necessary for Weiskopf to boost the morale
of the talent, and for them to be confident in her management. This was increasingly
difficult as the circuits began to decline in the late 1920s, but permanent chautauqua
performers were in a better position because they continued past the demise of the
circuits. Reader and comedienne Edna Means wrote to Weiskopf in 1929,
I wrote Mr. Erickson and Mr. Rupe but got no encouragement from them
– so you may as well go ahead and get all the Independents you can for me, I
guess.
I can’t seem to get enthused to write to any other Bureaus about a season.
If you get an opportunity to book me for several weeks with some other
office or Circuit, I shall appreciate it. Everything seems so mixed up now, one
scarcely knows what to do.
I know that you are pretty well in touch with the Chautauqua situation,
however, and that you will do what you can for me.44
This letter is but one example of the confidence that performers placed in Weiskopf,
especially during challenging times. She was lauded for her work by performers,
permanent chautauqua program organizers, even by Lyceum Magazine: “Amy Weiskopf
– An outstanding example of the fact that a woman can achieve a marked success in the
43
“Among the Independents,” Lyceum Magazine, June 1927, 13-14.
44
Edna Means to A. M. Weiskopf, October 29, 1929, Redpath.
143
Figure 4. Redpath Chautauqua leadership at Harry P. Harrison’s Michigan farm (Amy
Weiskopf is not included). Used with permission, Redpath.
business world and still be – a charming woman.”45
Yet, Weiskopf must have felt herself to be on the margins of the Redpath
leadership as the only woman. An article in the following month’s Lyceum Magazine
outlined a trip that Redpath leaders took to the Michigan cottage of Harry P. Harrison, the
manager of Redpath’s Chicago office. It described the gentlemen’s outing and offered
pictures of all of the male leadership. Even though her business position would have
warranted her inclusion, Amy Weiskopf was conspicuously absent (see fig. 4).46 Like the
permanent chautauquas she booked, she was not the primary focus of the chautauqua
45
Harold Morton Kramer, “Around the Convention,” Lyceum Magazine, October 1927, 22.
46
“Redpath Outing at Harrison Michigan Farm,” Lyceum Magazine, November 1927, 10.
144
industry at the time; however, as the circuit chautauquas declined dramatically as the
1920s came to a close, the remaining permanent chautauquas continued to drive her
revenues.
Amy Weiskopf and other bookers from the agencies offered a wide variety of
programming to the permanent chautauquas, bringing much more diversity of
performances than the assemblies would have had on their own. The remainder of this
chapter will take up the kinds of diversity that the circuit chautauqua booking agencies
provided to the permanent chautauquas. Because of their relationship with the agencies,
permanent chautauquas were able to present a much wider range of genres of
performance, not just lectures, music, and a few theatrical presentations. Through this
process, entertainment was blended with other elements, producing such combinations as
entertaining educational talks, artistic entertainments, and entertaining musical features.
The talent agencies also broadened the platform racially, including the performances of
African Americans and American Indians. Finally, the talent agencies exposed
chautauquans to new technologies through the visits of science demonstrators. The
permanent chautauquas’ support of such a wide range of programming encouraged the
booking agencies to offer this variety to the circuits as well; thus, it helped produce a
varied middle-class culture.
While chautauqua was widely associated with the academic lecture, cooperation
with booking agencies significantly impacted the variety of programming available at
permanent chautauquas. Russell L. Johnson has suggested that lectures were reduced in
popularity on chautauqua circuits particularly after 1921; he writes that on the RedpathVawter circuit, “lecturers never exceeded 39 percent of the program [after 1921] and
145
dropped as low as 22 percent in 1928.”47 Part of this may be connected to the permanent
chautauquas’ wider use of agencies with departments that catered especially to the
assemblies’ needs.
My analysis of the diversity of programming genres at major permanent
chautauquas is less conclusive. Over the period from 1900 to 1930, lectures were slightly
less popular, but not significantly so. This is mostly due to the regular religious lectures
– weekly sermons, daily religious devotionals, and other regularly scheduled religious
talks. Discounting religious lectures in the analysis does show a more significant trend.
In the 1900 to 1930 period, non-religious lectures were far less popular, but not steadily
so. For example, Lakeside’s programming was almost 44 percent non-religious lectures
in 1900 and only 5.53 percent in 1930. However, there were small increases in the 1910
and 1920 seasons from percentages five years prior. One reason that lectures maintained
some popularity at the permanent chautauquas relates to a larger trend in chautauqua
performances. Rather than expecting only to learn or appreciate the art of music or
elocution, audiences more and more expected to also be entertained. As a result, lectures
might be partly educative, political, or religious, but they were also humorous. Often,
performances were a mix of genres, combining lectures with art, music with dance, and a
vaguely Protestant “culture” sprinkled throughout.
As described earlier, magicians were a prime example of entertainment that was
adopted shortly after the establishment of permanent chautauquas. They continued to be
popular at least through the 1930s, especially because they catered to the entire family.
Often the programs were given during the day for the children and in the evening for
47
Russell L. Johnson, “‘Dancing Mothers’: The Chautauqua Movement in Twentieth-Century American
Popular Culture,” American Studies International 39, no. 2 (June 2001), 58.
146
adults. Sometimes, they combined magic with other skills. Hal Merton was a magician
and ventriloquist who appeared in a Fourth of July program in Mt. Gretna, Pennsylvania
in 1905, and was later represented by Redpath.48 The Dietrics combined music,
impersonations, and magic as “novelty entertainers” in their shows, including one at the
Colorado Chautauqua in 1916.49 Brown and Boggs were a popular duo who appeared in
Bay View in the 1925 season. Lapert Boggs was a ten-year-old comedian and Brown
was a magician, composer, and accordionist. The popularity of magic at chautauquas can
be connected with a larger American fascination with sleight of hand. Well-known
performers like Harry Houdini encouraged an enjoyment of magic across class lines. At
the same time, magic is an almost exclusively masculine performance and a very physical
one at that.50 Magic acts in this period were about crossing borders of assumed
behaviors: audiences assumed the woman could not be cut in half, that the man could not
escape the chains, that the bunny was not under the hat. These performances appealed to
a varied audience through their display of the unexpected.
Another entertainment featuring the unexpected was Professor Pamahasika’s
Marvelous Bird and Dog Show, performing as early as 1905 in Fountain Park and
Winona Lake, and continuing at least until 1921 (also in Winona Lake). The act was
quite popular on the Redpath circuit in the 1920s. Pamahasika’s talent brochures claim
that he trained animals through kindness rather than fear, actually educating them to do
their tricks. One brochure described the activities in this way:
48
Pennsylvania Chautauquan, July 3, 1905, Mt. Gretna.
49
Program Number of the Colorado Chautauqua Bulletin, June 1916, Carnegie.
50
For an in-depth discussion of Houdini and excellent analysis of the physicality of magic performance as a
kind of metamorphosis, see John F. Kasson, Houdini, Tarzan, and the Perfect Man: The White Male Body
and the Challenge of Modernity in America (New York: Hill and Wang, 2001).
147
The troupe consists of more than (50) birds, dogs, cats, monkeys, who
seem to possess unlimited intelligence. One of these birds carries an American
Flag in his bill and marches in correct time while the orchestra plays Yankee
Doodle. A number of birds are seated in a ferris wheel while another bird turns
the wheel.
A bird sits in a baby buggy while one wheels him around. A bird pushes a
Merry-go-round, on which a number of birds are mounted, another plays the
organ.
A miniature battle scene, taken from the late Spanish-American War.
During the action of this battle: the birds shoot cannon, the fort catches fire, the
fire company responds and raise the ladders, turn the tank over and put the fire
out. Then comes the victory. The Spanish Flag is pulled down and the American
Flag is raised.51
Theoretically, one could argue that this group offered a glimpse into American history,
but in actuality, they were much more entertaining than educational. In this performance,
we see a blurring of education and training. Were Pamahasika’s pets really “educated” to
perform these tricks? If extrapolated to humans, this program might have called into
question whether the chautauquas themselves offered a real education or mere training.
The incorporation of the Spanish-American War was also a significant choice. Through
the use of birds, nations and militaries were represented in a farcical manner. This
concept of using animals to comically resolve human anxieties was further popularized in
early cinema; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer produced a series of Dogville Comedies in movies
like Dogway Melody (1930), a short film mimicking early musicals but using canine
characters in human costumes and with human voiceover.
While some performances were entirely entertaining, most chautauqua performers
combined entertainment with education, religion, or music. Marion Ballou Fisk was an
excellent example of a performer who mixed entertainment with art and a general moral
message. Traveling between 1908 and 1926, Fisk was a “chalk talker”; she combined
51
“Pamahasika’s Pets,” 1920s talent brochure, Redpath.
148
stories with on-stage sketching, supporting the middle-class ideals of patriotism,
opportunity, and moral purity. She was one of several chalk talkers who visited
permanent chautauquas and other stops on the circuits; among the stops Fisk made were
Lakeside in 1915 and Winona Lake in 1916. While the content of Fisk’s talks was rather
conservative, her personal lifestyle contrasted with these middle-class notions. When
Fisk’s husband could not work to support the family, she left him and her young children
and used chautauqua as an accepted form of performance to become the primary
breadwinner. Fisk’s daughter recalled the process:
My father, overworked, had a physical collapse in which he was allowed by the
physician to preach on Sundays, but other activity must be curtailed. Not
knowing whether improvement would be soon or whether he’d have to have
complete rest created crisis: What can we do for a living if the healing takes too
long? Finally, the suggestion, “Marion, you have to become the breadwinner.”
“I? What could I do.” From my worried mother.
“You can draw, and you are an able speaker.”
Both of these things were true my mother had been drawing from the time
she was a child.52
Fisk had previous experience using drawing to illustrate Bible stories when teaching
Sunday school. Before becoming a preacher, her husband Charles Leon Fisk had been a
chautauqua performer in the Hesperian Quartet and also a female impersonator; perhaps
it was because of his experience that Marion chose to turn to chautauqua as a
moneymaking venture.
The content of Fisk’s talks exemplified a careful weaving together of entertaining
stories with messages that were acceptable to her middle-class audiences. Much of her
work stressed American patriotism, individual opportunity, and temperance. Over the
course of each talk, she sketched perhaps ten pictures using colored chalk and large easel
52
Marion Fisk Griersbach, “Memories of Chautauqua,” manuscript, Fisk.
149
Figure 5. Our Uncle Sam sketch, Marion Ballou Fisk. Used with permission, Fisk.
Figure 6. “My Country ‘tis of thee, Sweet Land of Liberty, To Thee we sing,” Marion
Ballou Fisk. Used with permission, Fisk.
150
paper. She combined humorous stories and cartoons with some serious arguments. For
example, in her lecture entitled, “Kweer Karacters I’ve Known,” Fisk argued that
Americans needed to come together in devotion to country. She asserted:
Today we stand at the most critical period of all our national history, more critical
by far than that which faced the colonies so long ago, for while they were a very
little people, yet they were one people, of one blood, and with one ideal, but today
America has become the melting pot of all the nations. Two scores of bloods
flow in our veins, and where the old days had but one arch traitor, today America
is beset by traitors a hundred fold. … one of the greatest dangers now lies in the
unconscious and unwitting traitors, even, it may be you and I. Not traitors to the
physical America, but to her new-found soul. The war has taught us lessons we
never knew, or if we knew, had half forgot, lessons of thrift and economy, of
unselfishness, and sympathy and fellowship. These are the lessons the war has
taught us. Have we learned them? These are the things that come to a nation only
through the efforts of its individual citizens. … And if we fail in thought or ideal
or act to be one hundred percent her true American, then we have betrayed her
soul.”53
Likely, Fisk combined this patriotic rhetoric with drawings of Uncle Sam or ones that
highlighted American songs and places (see figs. 5 and 6). These ideals were easily
swallowed by the white middle-class permanent chautauqua audiences; they felt that they
were one people, of one blood, because they were of the right blood.
Fisk also stressed the need to support young people in pursuing opportunity,
another middle-class virtue. In the same lecture, “Kweer Karacters I’ve Known,” she
suggested that her talk would lead to an entire community of budding young artists. She
asked parents in her audience to be supportive of them, though they may be terrible, and
encouraged youngsters to strive for the success they saw in their minds. She argued:
Some of you fathers and mothers are going to have a perfectly terrible time! And
some of you boys and girls are going to have a terrible time, too, because things
just won’t look the way you want them to. So I’m going to give you one of the
first lessons that was given to me by my teacher, who was not only a very good
teacher, but something in a life’s philosopher as well, and it was like this: “When
53
Marion Ballou Fisk, “Kweer Karacters I’ve Known,” collection of speeches, 59-60, Fisk.
151
you begin a picture have in mind exactly what you are going to draw, – and draw
it. Don’t be in any uncertainty about it, for if you are, your hand will waver, and
you’ll make a smudge on your paper. And a smudge on your paper is like a
smudge on your life; you may be able to work it over, but you can never, never
rub it out.”54
Surely, this advice was in response to youngsters asking Fisk for drawing lessons; it
highlighted that her audience was of all ages, as she appealed to both adults and children.
Her advice also assumed, though, that the children in the audience would have access to
and money for such educational enrichment. In addition, these drawings served as
metaphors for moral action in life; Fisk encouraged her young audience to be careful not
to get a “smudge on your life [because]… you can never, never rub it out.”
A third concept apparent in Fisk’s lectures was the support of temperance and
bodily health. One of her talent brochures included a review that described “the drawing
illustrating the change that comes over the intemperate young man who indulges in the
cigaret, and drinks intoxicating liquors. No one could listen to her for an evening and
not feel an inspiration for better things.”55 That Fisk included this comment in her talent
brochure suggests the importance both she and her audience placed on this moral element
of her performance. This temperance argument would have been especially appealing at
the several permanent chautauquas that served as summer homes for the Women’s
Christian Temperance Union.
These expressions of American patriotism, individual perseverance, and
temperance would have been well received by Fisk’s audience. All three are classic
54
55
Ibid., 51.
Review from the Daily Independent-Times, Streator, Ill., n.d., quoted in “Marion Ballou Fisk, Cartoonist
– Lecturer,” undated talent brochure, Fisk.
152
middle-class values that 1910s and 1920s audiences would have recognized and
supported.
Another chalk talker, Pitt Parker, performed at Lakeside and Ocean Park. The
1910 Ocean Park bulletin quoted an assembly committee member, “I have seen and heard
Pitt Parker, and he is the finest that I have ever seen in his line. He is bright and refined
in his fun, and is evidently a thorough gentleman. All, young and old, I am sure would
enjoy, while the most critical of our audiences would approve.”56 Regularly, the
performers’ intelligence and high moral character were emphasized in publicity. A
comment in the diary of teenager Eleanor Durr about Parker’s 1919 visit to Lakeside may
have been a more accurate depiction:
Janette, Helen F. and I [went] to see and hear Pitt Parker, the Cartoonist. Oh yes!
Pitt dear I could do better than the first 2 pictures you drew. The rest were fine.
There was a beautiful scene in colored chalk and another followed later. We
decided to go up and ask for some after the thing was over. We did … but the
stingy pig would not give us any.57
Durr commented on the beauty of Parker’s drawings; for her, Parker’s art ability (or lack
thereof) was how she judged the quality of his performance. While entertaining, it was
Parker’s artistry that was most important in Durr’s analysis.
Another artist who displayed his ability on the chautauqua circuits was J. Smith Damron,
a potter who presented an “Entertainment-Demonstration” in 1925 at both the
Chautauqua Institution and Lakeside. The Lakeside bulletin described him as a “potter –
craftsman … not only a molder of clay, but a molder of character. Much wit, humor, and
56
Chautauqua-by-the-Sea for Eastern New England, [1910], 9, Ocean Park.
57
Eleanor Durr, August 6, 1919 journal entry, Eleanor Durr Collection, Lakeside.
153
Figure 7. Drawing from J. Smith Damron talent brochure, 1918. Used with permission,
Redpath.
philosophy will be found in this entertainment.”58 Damron created pottery on stage, but
also used it as a metaphor for human creation and re-creation.59 For many years, Potter’s
talent brochure asked “What Kind of Pottery Is Your Community?” In the 1918 version,
this question was accompanied by a cartoon, shown in figure 7. On one side of the
image, the devil in an apron is at the potter’s wheel, molding heads from the “community
clay.” In the center is “Mr. Goodcitizen Communityman,” one hand wrenching the collar
58
59
Lakeside 1925 Program, Lakeside.
“The Potter and the Clay” title of his presentation is an allusion to Jeremiah 18:1-6: The word which
came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, Arise, and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause
thee to hear my words. Then I went down to the potter’s house, and behold, he wrought a work on the
wheels. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again
another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make. Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying, O
house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay in the potter’s hand,
so ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.
154
of the devil and the other beckoning to “Lyceum and Chautauqua Master Potter.” As the
potter rolls up his shirtsleeves and strides into the scene, he will save the community from
the current evil shaper of men.60 Damron was one of several performers who purported
to directly improve the communities they visited, but he accompanied his critiques with
art; like a wedge of clay, the communities could be reshaped with better character just by
his visit.
Performers like Fisk, Parker, and Damron used storytelling and humor to augment
their art. As chautauqua circuits progressed, audiences expected more and more to be
entertained. This was slightly less true of permanent chautauqua audiences, and booking
agents for the assemblies supported this trend by continuing to offer more educational or
artistic talent. At the same time, though, chautauqua acts had to become more about fun;
audiences wanted to enjoy what they saw, not just learn from it.
Music was often a genre combined with other types of performing. Mr. and Mrs.
Wilbur Starr performed music and impersonation in Bay View in 1914.61 According to a
sample program in their talent brochure, the Starrs were multitalented, combining
singing, cello and mandolin playing, make-uped impersonations, chalk songs and stories,
and elocutionary readings. The brochure highlighted both their formal operatic training
and their versatile entertaining skills. From publicity photographs, Mr. Starr’s
impersonations appeared to have been quite lively. His brochure included pictures of him
performing as Deacon Ephraim Dean, Uncle Billy Wilkins – Referee, Pat Magee, Figaro,
60
61
“J. Smith Damron, The Potter and the Clay,” 1918 talent brochure, Redpath.
The Starrs did travel to other chautauquas as well, but made Bay View their summer home; their cottage:
“The Music Box”; Mary Jane Doerr, Bay View: An American Idea (Allegan Forest, MI: Priscilla Press,
2010), 140.
155
and Poo Bah (shown in a kimono).62 This set-up of a duo or small group performing a
variety of acts was often repeated. The Ward Waters Company performed in 1922 in
Fountain Park, Indiana. This trio included Miss Jackson as vocalist, Mr. Ward as a
character make-up artist, and Mr. and Mrs. Ward performing whistling duets.63
While the Ward Waters Company strived for more artistic music, Charles C.
Gorst’s whistling was more educational. Known as “The Bird-Man,” Gorst was a
whistler, storyteller, and bird imitator. According to his brochure, as a young man Gorst
“often entertained with birdcalls.” The brochure then immediately highlighted his
university study, as if to point out that he was now a scholar of birds rather than an
entertainer. It stated that he was a member of the American Ornithologists’ Union, and
that his songs were accompanied by large-scale paintings that Gorst painted himself.
Although Gorst presented himself as a scholar first, even he commented on his use of
humor; he described his performance in his brochure:
Using songs and pictures to illustrate and frequent apt humor to enliven, I talk of
the astonishing things birds do when imitated, of their interesting words to each
other, of the varied and beautiful forms of their songs, of their amusing and
pathetic home-life, of their immeasurable service in fields and gardens, and
finally of the peace of mind and the spiritual joy that Nature can bestow.64
Presenting himself as both scholar and entertainer offered a prime example of the larger
challenge of chautauqua performers; they needed to balance being at once informative
and entertaining.
Another area of music where this combination of education and entertainment
62
“The Starrs, Musical Entertainers,” undated talent brochure, Redpath.
63
“The Ward Waters Company, 1909 talent brochure, Redpath.
64
“Charles Crawford Gorst, ‘The Bird-Man,’” 1920s talent brochure, Redpath.
156
was most prevalent was in jubilee and plantation singers. Jubilee singing groups were
popularized after the Civil War when a singing troupe was sent out to raise funds for the
newly established all-black Fisk College. Rather than singing in blackface and with
stereotypical minstrel acts, the Fisk Jubilee Singers chose to perform spirituals. Their
success in the 1870s led to the rise of many similar jubilee groups, and the genre
continued to be popular throughout the circuit chautauqua era. At least eight groups
visited the major permanent chautauquas.65 However, by the time these groups traveled
the circuits, the jubilee programs incorporated elements of minstrelsy and other racial
mockery. A talent brochure for the Southern Jubilee Singers in 1914 described their
program:
Jubilees, New and Old. Plantation Songs. Negro Melodies. Camp Meetin’
Songs. Comic Darky Songs. Negro Lullabies. Vocal Darky Mimicry. Sweet
Sentiment Songs. Home, Cabin and River Songs of the Old Slavery Days.
Comic, Classic, Sentiment Songs of the Southland. Violin Solos. Mandolins,
Guitars, Violins, Cello and Piano Combinations. Old Plantation Sketches.
Humorous Monologues and Sketches.66
Like Bird-Man Gorst’s, this brochure mixed high and low art. Gorst combined an
educational approach to ornithology and singing with entertaining birdcalls. Similarly,
the Southern Jubilee Singers offered a mix of Violin Solos and Negro Melodies with
Vocal Darky Mimicry and Comic Darky Songs.
It should not be at all surprising that these middle-class audiences enjoyed
blackface minstrelsy in their programs; in fact, chautauquans in Bay View staged their
65
Mt. Gretna hosted the Southern Jubilee Singers in 1905; Fountain Park hosted the same in 1912. The
Williams Jubilee Singers visited Bay View in 1914. The Fisk Jubilee Singers visited Winona Lake in 1921
(note, this group was not necessarily still connected with Fisk University and like many other groups, may
have just co-opted the name). In 1930, the Carolina Jubilee Singers performed in Winona Lake and
Jackson’s Plantation Singers visited the Colorado Chautauqua in Boulder. Winona Lake hosted both the
Deep River Jubilee Singers and the Eureka Jubilee Company in 1935.
66
“The Southern Jubilee Singers & Players,” 1914 talent brochure, Redpath.
157
own minstrel shows as late as the 1950s. For the whites in the audience, minstrelsy had
been a pervasive part of their culture for generations. For the African American
performers, though, performing as minstrels was a double-edged sword; certainly they
recognized that they perpetuated stereotypes detrimental to their own race, but
performing as minstrels allowed them a kind of personal agency. Their jubilee acts
provided them with access to a whole circuit of traveling performance that they could not
have gained playing “straight” – there were no African Americans performing only violin
solos, cello, and piano combinations on chautauqua stages. While the comedy of
minstrels’ work was drawn directly from the racialized performance of connecting
bumbling with blackness, theater historians have argued that performing minstrelsy
allowed for transgression. Thomas Postlewait argues that “Black performers could
transgress the racial codes by acts of parody, irony, subversion, and reversal” in their
minstrel acts.67 While these performers did not necessarily don blackface, they
constructed their performance in a similar way, separating their on-stage racialized
personas from their real lives. Actually, the talent brochures showed the performers with
two different onstage personas, depicting them in both their Southern “darky” costumes
and their formal concert dress. The cover of the 1914 Southern Jubilee Singers and
Players brochure (see fig. 8) featured two half-page photographs, above in formal attire
and below in “slave” outfits with guitars, mandolins, and (surprisingly) a violin. It is
constructed as if to suggest that audiences had the option of understanding them as either
classically trained musicians dressed just like their white counterparts or as silly darkies
67
Thomas Postlewait, “The Hieroglyphic Stage: American Theatre and Society, Post-Civil War to 1945,”
in The Cambridge History of American Theatre, 1870-1945, ed. Don B. Wilmeth and Christopher Bigsby
(New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 187. See also Arthur Knight, Disintegrating the Musical:
Black Performance and American Musical Film (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002).
158
playing around. Their dark skin, shown in contrast to their white concert dress or
highlighted by their plantation costumes, allowed audiences to dismiss them as nonthreatening.
Though these jubilee singers were often the only African Americans seen on
chautauqua programs, they were certainly not the only ones at chautauqua. As mentioned
in Chapter 1, African Americans often made up the work force that allowed white
chautauquans to enjoy their vacations. But their work was segregated from the platform
performances; chautauquans attended excellent jubilee productions and heralded the
talent of the performers, and then returned to their households run by black cooks, child
minders, and chauffeurs. Those same performers sometimes had their own difficulties in
finding housing for the night. On the chautauqua stage, African Americans were
accepted as performers, but they were not always shown that same racial inclusion offstage.
Another disconnect between the stage and the chautauqua surroundings occurred
with the performances of American Indians. Though other permanent chautauquas had
Native American performers, Bay View, Michigan offers a unique case-study because a
significant American Indian population remained in the area.68
When it was founded as a camp meeting in 1875, the land for Bay View was
purchased from the Ottawa Indians. In its early days, Bay View hosted the local chief,
68
Other Native American performers at permanent chautauquas include “Tahan” [Joseph K. Griffis], a
white man who had been in Indian captivity, who performed at Winona Lake in 1910; Captain Dick
Craine’s troupe of Ojibway Indians at Fountain Park in 1918; South American Indian vocalist and
entertainer Chief Caupolican in Winona Lake in 1925; Harold Loring, a recorder of Indian song who
brought two Indians with him, in the Colorado Chautauqua in 1926; Chief William Red Fox, a movie star,
at Lakeside in 1930; Princess Atola, musician, in Chautauqua in 1930; and Tsianina, a Cherokee-Greek
mezzo soprano at the Colorado Chautauqua in 1930. In addition, Bay View saw Indian dancer and
“interpreter of Indian life” Charles Eagle Plume in 1935.
159
Figure 8. Costumed contrast in a 1914 talent brochure for the Southern Jubilee Singers
and Players. Used with permission, Redpath.
Figure 9. Dr. Charles Eastman in Sioux chief full-dress when “especially invited to do
so.” Used with permission, Redpath.
160
Ignatius Petosega, and Native Americans were invited to attend the programming,
especially the Methodist church services. As time went on, however, the image that Bay
Viewers had of the local Indians changed significantly. E. Tom Child, who grew up in
Bay View in the 1920s and ‘30s, remembers local Ottawa as “kind of loners. … I don’t
think we ever, as a group, felt any ill will toward the Indians. But I don’t recall that we
ever saw more than one Indian at a time.”69 Though white-Native interactions rarely
resulted in violence at this time, they were in stark contrast to the collaboration and
cohesiveness apparent only a few decades earlier. It is difficult to say what changed in
those decades, but one way to make sense of the transformation is to understand how Bay
View residents defined “Indian” in the intervening years.
In the period from 1900 to 1930, Bay View saw four American Indian performers.
All were brought from outside the local area, and none were Ottawa. Two were Sioux,
one was Cherokee, and one was a white woman who had permission from the Iroquois to
perform under their auspices. All four were performers; they had honed their acts to be
entertaining, educational, and to further their own agendas. They had constructed stage
personas for themselves, and were therefore seen as quite different from the Ottawa
living near Bay View.
Dr. Charles Eastman spoke in Bay View in 1904, two years after his first
autobiography, Soul of the Indian, was released. The author was a lecturer, incorporating
much more than traditional Indian storytelling. In his later 1916 book entitled From the
Deep Woods to Civilization, he described his purpose in public speaking:
69
E. Tom Child, oral history interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI, July 27, 2008,
recording and transcript, Bay View.
161
My chief object has been, not to entertain, but to present the American
Indian in his true character before Americans. The barbarous and atrocious
character commonly attributed to him has dated from the transition period, when
the strong drink, powerful temptations, and commercialization of the white man
led to deep demoralization. Really it was a campaign of education on the Indian
and his true place in American history.
I have been on the whole, happily surprised to meet with so cordial a
response. Again and again I have been told by recognized thinkers, “You present
an entirely new viewpoint. We can never again think of the Indian as we have
done before.”70
Eastman lectured on a number of topics, but in Bay View his lecture was entitled “The
Real Indian.” Eastman grew up in his Sioux community, but at the age of fifteen went to
live with his mixed-blood father in white society, and eventually graduated from
Dartmouth College. According to the Bay View Bulletin, Eastman “stands as the first
competent interpreter between the aboriginal American and the American people.”71
Ostensibly, this competence stemmed from his opportunity for a white education rather
than his experiences living as an American Indian. In his 1910s talent brochure from the
Redpath Lyceum Bureau, he was described as “appear[ing] upon the platform, when
especially invited to do so, in the full-dress costume of a Sioux chief, beautifully made in
the old style of beaded, Indian-tanned deerskin with war-bonnet of eagle feathers” (see
fig. 9).72
Eastman’s use of costuming is key to understanding how his performance might
have been read by his audience. Like the Southern Jubilee Singers and Players, he was
comfortable either in his “white” attire or in his Indian costuming; it was up to
chautauqua hosts whether he was invited to dress as an Indian. Additionally, his
70
Charles A. Eastman, From The Deep Woods to Civilization (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press,
1916), 187.
71
Bay View Bulletin, [1904], 16, Bay View.
72
“Dr. Charles A. Eastman,” 1910s talent brochure, Redpath.
162
costuming set him up as an exotic figure, very different from the white audiences who
consumed his performance. His Indian garb was also distinctly different from the
traditional Ottawa attire with which Bay View audiences would have been familiar.
In Playing Indian, historian Philip Deloria presents a specific reading of Eastman,
drawing from Eastman’s later work with the Boy Scouts.73 His argument can be applied
to Eastman’s and other American Indian performances in Bay View. Deloria writes:
When Eastman donned an Indian headdress, he was connecting himself to his
Dakota roots. But he was also – perhaps more compellingly – imitating nonIndian imitations of Indians. As he reflected an American image back at
American youth, he simultaneously challenged and redirected other, negative
stereotypes about Indians. But Eastman’s Indian mimicry invariably transformed
his construction of his own identity – both as a Dakota and as an American. He
lived out a hybrid life, distinct in its Indianness but also cross-cultural and
assimilatory. By challenging both a Dakota past and an American constructed
Indian Other through his material body – from mind to pen to paper to book to
Boy Scout – Eastman made it ever more difficult to pinpoint the cultural locations
of Dakotas and Americans, reality and mimetic reality, authenticity and
inauthenticity.74
Though Deloria is specifically responding to Eastman’s writings for young Boy Scouts,
his interpretation can be expanded to see that Eastman used his material body – from
mind to body to staged performance to audience – in constructing his image of the Indian.
Deloria’s understanding of Eastman is that he bridged two worlds, not just of native and
non-native, but of native and white-constructed native. He wore his Indian costuming
because that is what the audience expected (or as his Redpath brochure described, “when
[he is] especially invited to do so”).75 This placed control over racial representations in
73
Philip J. Deloria, Playing Indian (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998), 122-24.
74
Ibid., 123-24.
75
The Redpath brochure also shows an image of Eastman in a coat and tie, very much like the audience
would have dressed. It is unclear whether Eastman appeared in Bay View in Indian costuming or in
Western dress, but in either case, he was bridging the two worlds of white and white-constructed native.
163
the hands of his hosts, assuring his middle-class audience that he posed no racial threat to
them.
Deloria continues, “Although they might alter Indian stereotypes, native people
playing Indian might also reaffirm them for a stubborn white audience, making
Indianness an even more powerful construct and creating a circular, reinforcing catch-22
of meaning that would prove difficult to circumvent.”76 In his writing and lecturing,
Eastman’s work fell into three categories: “autobiography; information concerning Indian
life, customs, and religion; and information dealing with Indian and White relations …
the granting of citizenship to Indians continued to be, in Eastman’s opinion, the most
pressing need.”77 Placing Deloria’s argument upon Eastman’s experiences at
chautauquas illuminates the catch-22: Eastman fought for whites to see Indians as regular
citizens, but by acting in the white-constructed image of the Indian, he perpetuated his
difference. His approach of using performance for social change instead locked in the
stereotype even as he fought against it.
It is difficult to say how much of an impact Eastman’s visit had upon the
particular white audience in Bay View. They would have recognized this kind of Indian,
not as one of their neighbors but as one of the performed Indian archetypes that were
beginning to appear in American culture around the turn of the twentieth century.78
Importantly, Bay View audiences did not see another American Indian performer
until 1925. Despite the fact that there was very little assembly programming from 1905
76
Deloria, 126.
77
Raymond Wilson, Ohiyesa: Charles Eastman, Santee Sioux (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1983),
131, 140.
78
For a broader analysis of the performed Indian, see Alan Trachtenberg, Shades of Hiawatha: Staging
Indians, Making Americans, 1880-1930 (New York: Hill and Wang, 2004).
164
to 1908, this is a significantly long period of time for not including a Native speaker on
the schedule. One factor may be the popularity of the nearby Hiawatha pageants,
discussed in Chapter 3. However, no serious rhetorical attempt was made to better
understand the nature of Indian life until Princess Chinquilla’s visit in 1925.79
Princess Chinquilla was a native performer and activist who got her stage start as
a tight-rope walker with Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show in the 1880s. She helped
establish the American Indian Club in 1926 and was known as “The Mother of Indian
Day,” a holiday with festivities that often included Chinquilla’s own lectures. 80
One of the most fascinating artifacts from Chinquilla’s life is her Old Indian’s
Almanac, of which she wrote several editions. The 1938 edition contained a list of
atrocities that the U.S. Government had committed against Indians, strangely combined
with advertisements for native craft shops and summer camps that incorporated aspects of
Indian life.81 An American Indian again attempted to stop the wrongs against her people,
but at the same time, she presented Indian life and work in such a way that it would be
consumed in the white market economy. Indeed, as she asked for fair treatment, she also
reinforced the white-constructed stereotype of the Indian.
Chinquilla’s Bay View performance was advertised as a lecture, yet “her scene is
always the teepee which symbolizes the Indian camp; before it she makes to pass the
79
Chinquilla was also expected to perform in 1928, but according to the Petoskey Evening News, “Because
of failure in train connections … [she] will be unable to arrive here for her Bay View engagement tonight.
She was coming direct from New York to fill the Bay View engagement.” “Dramatic Recitalist is Coming
to Bay View for Tonight’s Concert,” Petoskey Evening News, August 6, 1928.
80
“Mrs. Mary Newell, Leader of Indians,” New York Times, October 29, 1938,
http://proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/pqdweb?did=98204714
&sid=1&Fmt=10&clientId=29945&RQT=309&VName=HNP (accessed December 10, 2004); “Women in
the Public Eye,” Woman Citizen, May 16, 1925, 4.
81
Chinquilla, The Old Indian’s Almanac (Jamaica, NY: Indian Craft Museum, 1938).
165
whole procession of Indian life. Intertwined, it vividly reveals the very soul of this
primitive people.”82 Her time with Buffalo Bill’s company would have definitely been a
factor in how she constructed her performance. Indeed, in her Old Indian Almanac, she
included an advertisement that appeared as a letter from Buffalo Bill, which stated:
New York City, May 3rd, 1902.
This will serve to introduce Chinquilla, who is a full
blooded Indian and a real Princess of the Cheyenne Nation.
Princess Chinquilla is a lady honorable, deserving, and
capable and any favors shown her will be appreciated by
Very sincerely yours,
Wm. Cody
“Buffalo Bill”83
The fact that Chinquilla still invoked Buffalo Bill’s 1902 reference in 1938 shows that
she continued to define her performance in ways that Cody would have approved, and
that his support would have appealed to her potential audiences.
A brief discussion of Cody’s use of Indian maidens is useful in framing
Chinquilla’s performance, as it would have been familiar to Bay View audiences. In
examining Buffalo Bill advertising posters, it is apparent that Indian women served two
purposes. First, they were depicted as mothers caring for their young while the Indian
braves were off in the action. One telling poster showed “Peace Meeting, Pine Ridge
1891, Gen. Miles & Staff.”84 In the center of the action was a group of Indian men
performing a dance. In the foreground were Indian families, including women, children
and the elderly, watching the performance. In the background were white soldiers, also
watching. Again, whites made up the audience, and saw the Indian performance, but not
82
Bay View Bulletin, [1928], 19, Bay View.
83
Chinquilla, 16.
84
Jack Rennert, 100 Posters of Buffalo Bill’s Wild West (London: Hart-Davis, MacGibbon, 1976), 59.
166
the Indian families. In putting the viewer of the poster closest to the families, though,
Cody subtly claimed that his audiences would get a glimpse of the true, the authentic.
The other image that the Wild West Shows constructed was that of the Indian
woman as exotic maiden. Two examples of this construction were posters advertising
He-Nu-Kaw (The first born) and “Arrow-head, the Belle of the Tribe.”85 Both
emphasized the beauty of the actresses, adorned with jewelry and headbands with
feathers. The advertising made a distinction between male and female Indian performers.
Text accompanying the “Arrow-head” poster in a 1909 flier made this difference explicit:
No matter what may be one’s opinion of the Indian warrior, no matter what his
barbaric instincts and warlike disposition may have aroused of resentment and
bitterness in the hearts of his white brother, no one can read the beautiful poem of
“Hiawatha,” in which Longfellow immortalized the Indian woman, without at
least partially exempting her from the sweeping denunciations which may be
hurled at the head of “the noble redman.”86
In this description, the American Indian woman was constructed to be less dangerous and
safer than her male counterpart. The images in the posters did not necessarily construct
the women as sexualized beasts, but they were distinctly separate from the male images,
and white audiences were expected to make that distinction.
Bay View audiences at the time would certainly have been familiar with the Wild
West Show version of Indians, and would have likely understood Chinquilla’s
performance within that context. In her work and her almanac, she set out broad social
change, but at the same time she continued the cycle of white-constructed native.
Significantly, Chinquilla was the first Indian performer brought to Bay View in twenty-
85
Ibid., 78-79.
86
Ibid., 12.
167
one years; one measure of her success was the fact that Indian talent was featured in the
program in each of the next three summers.
Mabel Powers spoke in Bay View the following season, on July 30, 1926.
Powers was an “adopted Indian,” described in an advertisement for her book Around an
Iroquois Story Fire as “Yehsennohwehs, the chosen pale-face story-teller of the
Iroquois.”87 In a review of her second book, The Indian As Peacemaker, Randolph C.
Downes explained that her Indian name meant “a voice that speaks for us.”88 Powers was
adopted by the Iroquois and they sanctioned her voice to represent them in both her
writing and her presence at events such as the world congress of the Women’s
International League for Peace and Freedom. Most likely, Powers was not actually
adopted as a child, but asked or was asked to be a representative of the Iroquois as an
adult, which, in itself, is controversial.
In either case, Deloria would have much to say about Powers. She was a white
woman adopting the Indian costume in an effort to work for better understanding of
Indian life, especially lore and woodcraft. She then is even more caught up in Deloria’s
catch-22 of playing Indian to improve, but ultimately perpetuating, the conditions of the
American Indians. Powers continued to do so for many years even after she stopped
touring among chautauquas. She then went on to become resident storyteller at the
87
Fredrick A. Stokes Company, Advertisement for “November 11-17 – Children’s Book Week,” New York
Times, November 11, 1923,
http://proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/pqdweb?did=105935102
&sid=5&Fmt=10&clientId=29945&RQT=309&VName=HNP (accessed October 7, 2004).
88
Randolph C. Downes, review of The Indian as Peacemaker, by Mabel Powers, Mississippi Valley
Historical Review 20, no. 1 (June 1933): 154-55, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1902379 (accessed October 7,
2004).
168
Chautauqua Institution, often telling stories in the woods to embellish the “natural”
characteristics of her performance.
Though the concept of speaking for another race seems strange, Powers was not
the only white woman to perform as Indian at the permanent chautauquas. Albert A. and
Martha Brockway Gale visited Fountain Park in 1912 and Bay View in 1920, offering
“Indian Entertainment” one night and “Breton Entertainment” another.89 That they could
so easily interchange American Indian with Western French is striking; a new outfit and a
new set of songs apparently facilitated the change. According to another talent brochure,
they could also present a Japanese evening. This performance group made Mabel Powers
seem much more like an Indian; at least she had Iroquois approval and some Native input
on her performances.
Powers spoke in Bay View about “What the Indian has given us.” Somehow she
remained straddling the white and white-constructed Indian world. She was adopted by
the Iroquois and they approved of her voice, and she even appeared in stereotypical
Indian costume. Yet she continued to speak about what the Indian (an other) has given
“us.” In her performances, she utilized the persona of performed Indian but, at the same
time, separated herself as white.
It is not clear how Bay View received Powers, but in an advertisement in the Bay
View Bulletin, Dr. Bestor, President of the Chautauqua Institution, was quoted as writing
to Powers: “I can not refrain from telling you how successful I felt your work was last
night. I have rarely seen such enthusiasm in the Amphitheater as greeted you at the close
89
Eighteenth Annual Session of the Fountain Park Assembly, 1912, Fountain Park Museum, Remington,
IN; Bay View University Summer School and Assembly Bulletin, June 1920, Bay View.
169
of your evening (6,000).”90 The Bay View audience would have been considerably
smaller than Chautauqua’s six thousand, but may have had a similar reception. For them,
Powers translated the Iroquois world into a white world in which they could feel
comfortable.
The following year, A. T. Freeman lectured and sang. The Bay View Bulletin
described his performance:
Mr. A. T. Freeman (Gai-i-wah-go-wah), an educated American Indian, … equally
at home on the platform or stalking wild animals in the wood. A gifted tenor
singer who interprets with rare understanding the songs of his people. An
entertainer who is resourceful, dynamic, versatile. An eloquent, forceful advocate
of justice and fair play for his race.”91
Here again is the duality of white and white-constructed native. Freeman was “at home
on the platform,” “resourceful,” and “eloquent,” but also “at home … stalking wild
animals in the wood.” Audiences once more came to see the performed Indian.
Freeman’s correspondence with Redpath is useful in understanding how he
functioned as a performer. In 1925, he wrote asking to be considered for their circuit. He
suggested that the Redpath Brockway Lyceum in Pittsburgh “urged me to communicate
with you, as they felt that I had a program which would go fine either on the Lyceum or
Summer Chautauqua [circuit], since it is distinctly different from the usual lecture
program.” He continued by describing his performance: “I appear in full dress Indian
costume and sing in native tongue just as my folks did before the white man came. I
keep my program spiced with a wit and humor most of which has never before been used
in public.” He even quoted a booking agent from an auditorium in Coatesville,
90
Bay View Bulletin, [1926], 14, Bay View.
91
Bay View Bulletin, [1927], 13, Bay View.
170
Pennsylvania as saying that he “sings during his address some of the prayers and songs of
his people. We had them standing and everybody was enthusiastic.”92
Freeman was picked up by Redpath and toured extensively. His brochures asked
“What do you know about the American Indian, the most interesting race whose fate rests
in the hands of the American people?” and answered, “Let the Indian Speak for
Himself.”93 This raises another point of commonality among the Indian performers who
visited Bay View. They all represented “The Indian,” some lumped-together ethnicity
that no longer had distinct tribes, but was instead one that white audiences could easily
identify and define.
According to the Petoskey Evening News review of Freeman’s performance at the
Petoskey Rotary Club the day after performing in Bay View, he had an answer for how
Americans should affect Indians’ fate: “Declaring that the United States had freed the
colored man, but forces the Indian to live on a reservation, Mr. Freeman made a dramatic
plea for better treatment for his people. He stated that in his opinion much could be
accomplished if politics could be taken out of the administration of Indian affairs. He
was roundly applauded as he finished.”94 This review suggested that Freeman’s
performance had a clear effect on the audience at the time. He was indeed advocating
“justice and fair play for his race,” a change in federal Indian policy. Whether or not his
performance had the lasting impact that he intended is unclear, but it would have been
92
A. T. Freeman to Redpath Chautauquas, February 16, 1925, Redpath.
93
“The American Indian,” 1920s talent brochure, Redpath.
94
“Indian Pleads for his People,” Petoskey Evening News, August 4, 1927.
171
recognizably Indian to the audience, the kind of “good” performed Indian with which the
audience was familiar.
Each of these Native performers used chautauqua to highlight their specific
political and social agendas. Eastman wanted to see full citizenship for Indians.
Chinquilla wanted to increase respect for Indian life, from both the government and those
who might purchase Indian goods. Powers wanted to foster opportunities for
international peace, holding up the Indian way as an example. Freeman wanted to
depoliticize the administration of Indian affairs. All of the performers seem to have been
widely well received, if you believe their advertising. But as they worked for progress,
they remained stuck in Deloria’s catch-22: though their efforts may have educated Bay
View audiences, they also perpetuated the standard “good” Indian image.
Though permanent chautauquas were able to add a racial diversity to their
performances because of their collaboration with the circuit chautauqua talent agencies, it
is unclear that chautauquans’ opinions about race were actually changed by the
experience. As is evidenced by the case of Bay View, Indian performers were certainly
intriguing to the chautauqua audiences, but did not significantly impact prevailing social
practices, especially towards local Indians. The image of the “good Indian” constructed
by the staged Indian performances endured, and the American Indians from the
surrounding environs could not measure up. Similarly, stereotypes of African Americans
as Southern darkies were necessary to make palatable the spirituals and classic
performances by blacks. Mere exposure to African Americans and Native Americans
was not enough; it would take a major societal shift in the mid-twentieth century to make
possible any mainstream performances by non-whites at chautauquas.
172
A third kind of diversity that the talent agencies brought to permanent
chautauquas was a sharing of new technologies. Early cinema technology was further
popularized by chautauquas, and is a subject for the next chapter. In addition, the new
technologies themselves became the focus of performances in this period. Demonstrating
everything from the X-ray to electronic welding, these performers showed how science
and technology were changing the world. With amazing displays of electricity, voicethrowing, and even radio-operated explosions, early radio demonstrators were especially
successful at chautauquas. In addition to being entertaining, they offered a middle-class
audience the opportunity to learn the science behind the technology, and later, an
opportunity for personal involvement and consumption.
As early as 1892, chautauqua science demonstrators began to include radiorelated topics like electricity, wireless telegraphy, and a cloudlike concept of the ether
through which radio waves could be transmitted. Dr. John Demotte presented two talks
in 1892 in Mt. Gretna, Pennsylvania on “Visible Sound” and “Modern Electricity.”95
These early concepts of radio were so new that Mt. Gretna audiences would likely not
have been exposed to these terms. Such groundbreaking science led to the popularity of
chautauqua science lecturers, including Louis Favour in Lakeside and Prof. A. E. Dolbear
at the Chautauqua Institution, both in 1900, and Prof. J. Ernest Woodland in Fountain
Park in 1905.96
95
96
Programme and Guide Book, 1892 [Pennsylvania Chautauqua], Mt. Gretna.
Lakeside Assembly Program, 1900, Lakeside; Chautauqua: A System of Popular Education, 1900,
Chautauqua; Program of the Eleventh Annual Session of the Fountain Park Assembly, 1905, Fountain Park
Museum, Remington, IN.
173
All of the radio demonstrators prior to 1920 were interested in explaining the
science of radio, attempting to demonstrate how it actually worked. In his study of this
period of very early radio, Hugh G. J. Aitken argues that radio can be situated at the
intersection of science, technology, and the economy. His differentiation between
science and technology is especially useful to understanding the popular science
lecturers. Aitken asserts that radio developed as a science, and as such, it produced “not
things that people can touch, smell, and taste, but systems of ideas: generalized
conceptual schemes that are valued partly for the range of their explanatory power but
partly also for their elegance and beauty. These idea-systems are pure science’s only
product; but they are not a product that nonscientists are competent to appraise.”97
Aitken distinguishes between science as an idea-system and technology as a byproduct of
that science. This technology is a commodity in a way that science is not; though science
cannot enter the economy, technology can. At this early moment in chautauqua radio
demonstrations, performers attempted to show how the science worked, rather than
demonstrating the technology. Early in radio’s evolution, laypeople were not actually
interacting with the technology yet, so for them it existed as just science. It makes sense,
then, that people like Professor Dolbear, Professor Woodland, and Dr. Demotte used
titles to accentuate their credentials as scientific experts.
By the 1920s, radio had become accessible to mainstream Americans, and a new
generation of chautauqua lecturers stressed both the new technology’s cultural
significance and the opportunities for entertainment that it provided. Some audience
97
Hugh G. J. Aitkin, Syntony and Spark: The Origins of Radio (New York: Wiley, 1976), 12.
174
members had begun experimenting with radio, through DXing98 or early music listening,
and desired a greater understanding of how to improve their listening experiences.
Others were not yet involved but intrigued by the hobby of radio. Performers like Glenn
L. Morris and R. B. “Army” Ambrose demonstrated not only the science of radio, but
encouraged the audience to utilize the technology of radio.
Ambrose’s early 1920s talent brochure claimed that he preferred to think of his
presentation not as a lecture, but instead “as gripping in interest and thrills as any drama
of the stage.”99 A later brochure described his flair for the dramatic:
When “Army” is introduced to his audience he will not step out upon the
platform, after the usual fashion, but will enter from the rear of the auditorium.
Strapped over his shoulders will be a miniature broadcasting outfit into which he
will whisper his greeting to the audience. His words will be picked up by a
receiving set placed on the speaker’s platform, and amplified by a loud speaker.
He will then explain the broadcasting system employed by the great radio
stations.100
Ambrose and Morris were not scientific experts in the field of radio; in fact, radio
was often only one of a number of scientific demonstrations they offered, sometimes
even in the same program. They recognized that they could attract new practitioners of
radio, and as such, were careful to explain the science without heavy technical jargon.
Aitkin argues that one of the ways that radio shifted from a science to a technology was
through the translating of jargon into common language. He asserts that radio was
supported by the translation of technological language for the layperson, through
technical magazines, the work of organizations and associations, personal relationships,
98
With DXing, individuals tuned their radios to see how long of a distance their radio could reach. It was
not the content that mattered but from what faraway city or town they could bring in a signal.
99
“R. B. (“Army”) Ambrose – An Electrical Entertainment,” 1920s talent brochure, Redpath.
100
“R. B. (Army) Ambrose: Popularizing Modern Science,” 1927 talent brochure, Redpath.
175
and the public lecture. Aiken’s arguments about the development of radio highlight the
ways in which these lecturers furthered the economic development of the technology of
radio; they participated in the process of helping laypeople understand the medium.101
It makes sense, then, that later radio demonstrators dispensed with the Professor
and Doctor titles. They wanted to show that any person could participate in radio.
However, the booking agents wanted to make sure that their performers appealed to their
educated chautauqua audiences. As soon as Redpath hired Glenn Morris for the 1923
season, the management began questioning his academic credentials. William A.
Colledge, the director of the Redpath Education Department, apparently sent out several
letters in early 1923 asking for more information about Morris’s background. Charles F.
Horner, general manager of the Redpath-Horner Lyceum and Chautauquas from Kansas
City, responded to Colledge:
I can tell you only that when we found Glenn Morris, he was teaching in the
Edmond, Oklahoma State Normal in the science department. How long he taught
there I don’t know, nor did I ever find out what his educational equipment is. We
booked him entirely on the showing he made before our agents, and that was so
good that it never occurred to any of us to make further inquiries.102
While Horner suggested that he booked Morris on the basis of his performance rather
than his background, Colledge was clearly concerned about how well an uneducated
scientist would play on the chautauqua platform. Morris recognized Colledge’s
frustration in a letter to him, writing, “I realize the embarrassment an agent may have in
not having more to refer to the [programming] committees, but I assure you it is even
101
Aitkin, 331.
102
Charles F. Horner to William A. Colledge, January 6, 1923, Redpath.
176
more embarrassing to me.”103 Morris’s suggestion for getting around the problem was
that his background not be publicly discussed in brochures and at chautauqua events. He
wrote to Horner in a telegram,
PREFER THAT YOU NOT ADVERTISE EDUCATIONAL WORK AS I HAVE
ALWAYS CONSIDERED COLLEGE MERELY AS A CONVENIENT PLACE
TO LEARN. MY PROGRAM HAS BEEN DEVELOPED OUTSIDE OF
SCHOOLS ENTIRELY WITH THE AIM TO MAKE IT DIFFERENT
ENOUGH TO GO EVEN BEFORE COLLEGES.104
Morris worked to show himself as an everyman, which furthered his argument that
special credentials were not necessary to enjoy the technology of radio.
Both Morris and Ambrose spoke to mixed-gender audiences, but their primary
targets were boys and men who enjoyed tinkering with radio. In Inventing American
Broadcasting, 1899-1922, Susan J. Douglas asserts that males used radio to “cope with
the pressures of modernization” and to process anxieties about bureaucracy. Tinkering
offered these men an opportunity to control their surroundings when they felt that they
were losing their grip: “For certain upwardly mobile men, a sense of control came from
mastering a particular technology rather than succumbing to the routinization and deskilling of the factory system.”105
Radio operated in a similarly therapeutic way for boys. Douglas describes how
tinkering helped these boys to navigate the changing landscape of culture: “For a growing
subgroup of American middle-class boys, these tensions were resolved in mechanical and
electrical tinkering. Trapped between the legacy of genteel culture and the pull of the
103
Glenn L. Morris to William A. Colledge, February 22, 1923, Redpath.
104
Glenn L. Morris to Charles F. Horner, telegram, January 6, 1923, Redpath.
105
Susan J. Douglas, Inventing American Broadcasting, 1899-1922 (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins
University, 1987), xxii.
177
new primitivism of mass culture, many boys reclaimed a sense of mastery, indeed
masculinity itself, through the control of technology.”106 Though Douglas describes
culture as something that the boy mastered, she also argues that popular culture had a
significant impact on the popularizing and romanticizing of radio. She uses newspaper
accounts of real boy-inventors and dime novels describing radio-boys to show how the
tinkerer developed a romantic image. She writes that in this literature, “The man who
was befuddled by all this machinery was a clown, emasculated; the man who made
technology his slave, a genius newly empowered.”107 As masters of technology, the
chautauqua lecturers surely utilized that romantic persona for their own gain. In fact,
Glenn Morris made this argument explicit in his 1924 talent brochure for the Capital City
Lyceum Bureau; one of the “Purposes of the Program” listed included:
To organize boys into science and wireless clubs. “Keep ‘em busy!” Not only to
furnish valuable instruction, but an all-absorbing activity during the treacherous
adolescent period. A central wireless station is to be installed, powerful enough
to communicate with the amateurs within the State. Schools or individuals
wishing assistance in the proper installation of apparatus may apply to the
management. We shall be pleased to co-operate with you.108
Science demonstrator lecturers recognized that they were role models when they visited
permanent chautauquas and used their status as an opportunity to encourage the
enjoyment of radio among other romantic tinkerers, especially young potential
troublemakers.
Permanent chautauquas and the chautauqua circuits were an especially ripe
ground for harvesting would-be radio operators because burgeoning radio stations
106
Ibid., 191.
107
Ibid., 194.
108
“Glenn L. Morris: Scientific Inventor,” 1927 talent brochure, Redpath.
178
worked very hard to pull in middle-class listeners. In her 2003 dissertation, Elena
Razlogova takes up this theme of the middle-class interest in early radio in the 1920s.109
She argues that radio’s initial listeners “thought of radio as a bastion of high culture and
scientific ‘standards of usefulness,’ as an alternative to commercial working-class
attractions such as spectator sports, amusement parks, and the movies.”110 Razlogova
supports this analysis by showing not only how middle-class male radio hobbyists used
DXing, but also by examining programming and advertising. She shows that images of
elites were used in early radio marketing, attempting to separate radio as a high-class
technology.111 Roland Marchand analyzes the ways in which advertising of radios
structured the medium as an “agency of uplift” and argues that direct advertising on the
radio was frowned upon in industry magazines through 1927. In this way, radio was
protected from marketplace control, and was able to maintain a combined middle-class
and upper-class elite audience.112
As radio became more commercialized and began to attract audiences beyond the
middle class, the gender of its listeners also changed. Since its inception, radio had been
primarily a male hobby, which is why chautauqua popular science lecturers like Ambrose
and Morris were successful in directing their talks to boys and men. But as the radio
109
Elena Razlogova, “The Voice of the Listener: Americans and the Radio Industry, 1920-1950” (Ph.D.
diss., George Mason University, 2003). Razlogova’s work is primarily an examination of listeners’ letters
about radio broadcasting, and her scope is from 1920 to 1950. However, her discussion of radio from 1920
until the acceptance of broadcasting at the end of that decade is useful here. Her forthcoming book with
University of Pennsylvania Press is based on her dissertation and entitled The Listener’s Voice: The
Cultural Economy of Radio, from the Jazz Age to the Cold War.
110
Ibid., 24.
111
Ibid., 46-47. Razlogova also argues that elites were upset that any person now had access to music on
the radio, including symphony and opera.
112
Roland Marchand, Advertising the American Dream: Making Way for Modernity, 1920-1940 (Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press, 1985), 89-92.
179
programming featured more music, women were also attracted to it. Douglas argues that
the combination of music and radio allowed both genders to enjoy the programming;
while music used to be considered feminine and radio masculine, the combination of the
two allowed for a safe space for both men and women. Douglas continues, “Radio, by
initially linking technical mastery with music listening, helped make the enjoyment of
music more legitimate for men. Increasingly, men felt they had permission to intertwine
their personal histories, their emotions, their identities as men with song. Studies in the
1930s documented this change and showed that men welcomed it.”113 This gendered
shift in radio listening made it more difficult for Ambrose and Morris to present radio as
a technology for boys and men. People no longer required information about how to
make radio sets and how to tinker to get the best and furthest reception. With the
development of network programming, radio became a device for information and
entertainment, rather than a technology needing perfecting.
The lecturing careers of Ambrose and Morris moved elsewhere, and scientific
lectures about radio were no longer profitable for Redpath and other circuit
chautauquas.114 In fact, radio became competition for the circuits. Though radio did not
113
Susan J. Douglas, Listening In: Radio and the American Imagination (Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press, 2004), 89.
114
“Army” Ambrose left the chautauqua circuit at the end of the 1927 season, and returned to school to
study refrigeration with Frigidaire. Ambrose’s cutting-edge demonstrations of radio were now less cuttingedge to his audience. It makes sense that he might move into refrigeration, a technology developing in new
ways, thanks to the emergence of Freon in the late 1920s; “Army” Ambrose to Carl Backman, January 31,
1928, Redpath. Morris was able to maintain his livelihood through public speaking, but his program
changed considerably. In the 1930s, he was a lecturer for the School Assembly Service. Morris moved
from a popular education movement to one rooted in schools. His demonstrations still mixed science and
entertainment; his brochure claimed that “the truth in science can be more fascinating than trickery.” By
this point, Morris and radio technology had moved on to “radio control: the unseen force guiding missiles
of the future.” Radio as an auditory technology was no longer exciting enough to hold his audience’s
attention, and so his innovative technology changed with the times; “Glenn L. Morris in his Latest
Production of Modern Miracles of Science: On the Beam, Electrons at Work and Play,” 1930s talent
brochure, Redpath.
180
have a direct impact on the health of permanent chautauquas, per se, the demise of the
circuits did negatively impact the permanent assemblies. Historians have not yet taken
up the study of radio and chautauqua on a broad scale, but chautauqua histories feature a
particular kind of demonizing of radio as the killer of the chautauqua circuits.
For example, Harry P. Harrison, the manager of Redpath’s Chicago office, wrote
in his own history of circuit chautauqua, “The causes [of chautauqua’s decline] were
many, and few stemmed directly either from the character of chautauqua itself or from
the changing character of the people. Distractions were going on outside the tents, and
not even the best oratory or the sweetest melody could compete with them.” The first
distraction that Harrison points to is radio. Though he offers several other rationales for
the demise of chautauqua, his first thought that radio was the cause shows a particular
antipathy towards wireless technology.115
John E. Tapia and Charlotte M. Canning both mention radio as a suspect in the
death of circuit chautauqua. Like Harrison, Tapia includes radio as his first of several
possible causes: “A novel and inexpensive way to amuse friends and family, radio hurt
chautauqua attendance.”116 Canning argues that radio had a particular impact on
chautauqua, not only on audience attendance, but also on the role of news service.
Though her argument is subtle, she suggests that radio took over as providing regular
news in a kind of way with which chautauqua could not compete. She writes,
“Chautauqua’s boast [about being democratic] was not idle, and certainly millions of
115
Harry P. Harrison and Karl Detzer, Culture Under Canvas: The Story of Tent Chautauqua (New York:
Hastings House, 1958), 258.
116
Tapia, 185.
181
Americans heard ideas and news they would not have otherwise (particularly before the
advent of radio).”117 Though she does not explicitly address what effect this
transformation of news service had, clearly radio is labeled as a cause of circuit
chautauqua’s declining popularity within rural communities.
Lyceum Magazine makes several references to radio and its competition with the
circuits. An April 1928 article states,
You can get as much out of a Lyceum or Chautauqua program with your eyes
shut as you can get from a radio program with all the lights turned on. …
You can’t get a magician’s entertainment by radio. Nor have you ever yet
sat around at home and tuned in on any costumes or stage-settings or wig-andgrease-paint impersonations or crayon drawings or smiles or hand-shakes.118
The circuit chautauquas sensed that radio might be the sign of things to come for rural
audiences, and worked unsuccessfully to fight it.
At times, though, the circuits did try to incorporate radio. The popular science
lectures were one way, and bringing radio stars to the chautauqua stage was another. A
few times, chautauquas actually used radio for their programs. Harrison described one
experiment on the chautauqua circuit:
Radio was still new when Redpath tried to take advantage of it. That was
the day of the crystal set and the homemade receiver. We employed a “wireless
expert,” with five small transmitters, capable of pushing out signals over a radius
of twenty-five miles.
Before Chautauqua reached a town, a truck, with a crew boy as announcer,
began to broadcast news of the seven exciting days ahead. Local talent lined up
immediately to give a hand. Church choirs, music teachers with classes of future
Carusos, and American Legion drum and bugle corps all wanted a chance to be
heard and soon there was hardly time to get in our announcements. The opening
day, and the second, we broadcast the program from the tent.
It was expensive advertising and did not attract many paid admissions.
After six weeks we gave it up. Potential customers were sitting at home, listening
117
Canning, The Most American Thing, 161.
118
Ned Woodman, “Just for Fun: Tuning out Competition,” Lyceum Magazine, April 1928, 13.
182
to the new marvel, instead of buying tickets. We were competing with
ourselves.119
Ocean Park employed a similar approach in 1925, when it used radio to spice up its
Annual Novelty Entertainment. It hosted “‘An Evening With The Radio.’ (Something
very unusual). All stations on the air and something worthwhile from them all.” This
event cost 40 cents per adult and 20 cents per child, pointing to the fact that it was indeed
considered “something very unusual.”120
While the circuit chautauqua managers initially saw radio as an advertising tool,
they quickly learned that it was stiff competition for chautauqua programming. The radio
broadcast became the product, not the means of selling the product; community members
wanted to participate in the broadcast in a way that they didn’t in chautauquas, and
audience members became comfortable listening to the chautauqua programs in their own
homes (for free!). This example of how circuit chautauqua used radio highlights the
conflict that developed between the two media by the end of the 1920s.
Radio was one of many factors in the decline of the circuits. In the period from
1926 to 1928, Lyceum Magazine became more and more pessimistic about the prospect
of the chautauqua circuits. A July 1926 report of the current season attempted to be
positive, stating that the year was “an unusually successful one in the point of towns
recontracted. As a matter of fact, in the great majority of communities it is looked upon
as an accepted fact that Redpath will be asked to come again next year.”121 Yet, in the
119
Harrison, 206.
120
Ocean Park Assembly Program, [1925], Ocean Park.
121
Ford Hicks, “The 1926 Redpath Chautauqua Season,” Lyceum Magazine, July 1926, 10.
183
same issue, concern about the future surfaced:
Here is a pretty sad letter from a man who has lectured for years and now has no
job and he must make a living. We spend a good many hours wondering what to
do for cases like this. And we get surer that if this worried man and all the rest of
us will quit worrying about things that we CAN’T do, and get busy doing the
things that we CAN do, pretty soon we’ll not have anything to worry about.122
Though the author tried to put a positive spin on the situation, the article also pointed to
the fact that many people in chautauqua were losing their jobs.
In their rhetoric, the editors of the Lyceum Magazine worked diligently in the next
several issues to encourage their subscribers. “The day of the chautauqua isn’t past. The
one who says it, or the community that says it is merely getting old or dull-eyed. Just as
well say the day of corn has passed when you see an uncultivated field of weeds,” argued
the August 1926 issue. A June 1927 article tried to reassure the industry: “Some splendid
Chautauqua programs have been built for this 1927 season in the very face of much
discouraging talk from every source.” But at the end of the season, it reported that “the
lyceum and chautauqua have not experienced a banner year financially.”123 By that time,
rather than reassuring its audience that this moment would pass as long as they “quit
worrying about things that we CAN’T do, and get busy doing the things that we CAN
do,”124 the magazine pointed to reasons why the circuits were in decline. While
historians have identified radio, movies, and even the popularity of the automobile, this
Lyceum Magazine article suggested the strongest culprit:
The movement seems to be suffering at the hands of a public that has been
122
“There’s a Job for Everybody,” Lyceum Magazine, July 1926, 20.
123
“Bicknell Calls of Merom Chautauqua’s Funeral,” Lyceum Magazine, August 1926, 21; “The 1927
Chautauqua,” Lyceum Magazine, June 1927, 20; “Harness Power and Put It To Work,” Lyceum Magazine,
September 1927), 19.
124
“There’s a Job for Everybody,” 20.
184
spending beyond its means. The income of the average citizen is mortgaged so far ahead
that the installment collector is going to be a familiar figure for a long time to come. In
the olden days the piano had a clear tack in the ‘easy payment’ field. Later came
furniture, houses, automobiles, clothing, and now even the tire that carries the mortgaged
car. All of which we believe has a direct bearing on chautauqua and lyceum receipts, for
season tickets and single admissions are bought with ready cash and not from a rainy day
fund or on time. It is this fringe of floating patronage that seems to account for
chautauqua’s diminishing gate.125
More than anything else, it was economics that sounded the death knell for the
chautauqua circuits. While the Wall Street crash didn’t occur until October of 1929, even
a source like Lyceum Magazine could see a crisis coming in 1927. Rural areas to which
the circuits catered were hit harder earlier due to declining land values, plummeting
prices for grain and other commodities, and foreclosures in farming communities.126
Farmers hoped that purchases like the new row-crop tractor would get them out of their
debt; mortgaging and overspending became a way out of a difficult situation. Middleclass desires for newer and better luxuries like refrigerators and automobiles also had to
come on credit. Small purchases and trips into town to see the circuit chautauqua
therefore had to be limited, and admissions required ready cash.
As the Depression deepened, the permanent chautauquas were affected as well,
but most managed to survive. In 1933, the Chautauqua Institution decided to reduce gate
125
126
“Harness Power,” 19.
Gene Smiley, Rethinking the Great Depression (Lanham, MD: Ivan R. Dee Publishing, 2003), 7-13;
David M. Kennedy, Freedom From Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945 (New
York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 17-18.
185
fees by 20 percent and many activity fees by a third.127 Winona Lake attempted to
salvage regular daily attendance by cooperating with the Chamber of Commerce and
eliminating fees entirely. “The Chautauqua that had been such a boon to the area lost
many of its regular supports. People simply could not afford the admission of an
evening’s entertainment,” wrote the daughter of Winona’s platform manager, James
Heaton.128
Despite these cost-saving measures, it was still difficult for many chautauquans to
vacation at their cottages. Jane Curry, who grew up in Bay View, remembers, “There
were lots of closed cottages. Nobody could keep their cottages open or could spend the
money for gasoline. … There were many cottages [that] exchanged hands right after the
Depression, as some people began to have money again.”129 At Monteagle Sunday
School Assembly, the situation was the same. Ruth Crais Utley recalled, “I can
remember it was a very difficult time. … I can remember how depressing it was walking
up the hill and seeing all these cottages closed. Each year there would be a few more
cottages closed. It finally came to the point where we did not know whether Monteagle
would survive. It became so terribly rundown.”130 Both Monteagle and Bay View
suffered difficult times during the Depression, but both maintained a program and survive
to this day. However, Winona Lake and several other chautauquas were forced to close,
mostly because of the difficult economic conditions brought by the late ‘20s.
127
Some Important Attractions, pamphlet, 1933, Chautauqua.
128
Frances Parks Heaton, All in the Life Time of Mr. James Heaton, Winona Lake’s Mr. Chautauqua (n.p.,
1979), 30.
129
Jane Curry, oral history interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI, July 30, 2008,
recording and transcript, Bay View.
130
Ruth Crais Utley, oral history interview by Pat Bates, [Monteagle, TN], N.d., transcript, Monteagle.
186
For the chautauquas that remained, programming changed significantly with the
end of the chautauqua circuits. A few booking agencies like Redpath continued to offer
talent; they generally booked performers for club meetings and school groups during the
rest of the year, so they could suggest some programs for the permanent chautauquas but
no longer had a diverse pool of talent to sell. For the most part, the close relationship
between the circuits and the permanent chautauquas was over. For the permanent
chautauquas, the popularity of talking movies allowed an inexpensive alternative. In fact,
movies quickly replaced the bulk of non-lecture programming at the chautauquas, to be
further discussed in Chapter 5.
When the relationship between the chautauqua circuits and the permanent
chautauquas was strong, both the chautauqua circuits and the permanent chautauquas
benefited. The permanent chautauquas gained a more diverse array of talent in terms of
genre, ethnicity, and technology. In exchange, the permanent chautauquas demanded and
helped support a higher quality of programs, which benefited the circuit chautauquas and
others who enjoyed middle-class culture.
187
CHAPTER 5
IN THE DARK:
MOVIES AT PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS
By 1930, movies had filled the void left by circuit programming and had
solidified as the primary entertainment at permanent chautauquas. In Bay View, this
represented almost 24% of the program, at Lakeside it was over 37%, and at the
Chautauqua Institution movies totaled over 40% of the 1930 program. Baker Duncan,
who grew up in the Colorado Chautauqua in the 1930s, recalls,
We were very highly disciplined. Mother wouldn’t let us go but to two movies a
week. Everybody else got to go every day. … in those days, things were
extremely simple, and that’s why they just had the movies. They didn’t have the
programs. … In those days, you just, they were movies. I mean, there wasn’t a lot
of choice, you just went to a movie.1
Talking films appeared at the same time that the chautauqua circuits declined. Rather
than struggling to fill the program with live acts, chautauquas banked on the growing
popularity of film, and they were successful. Duncan’s childhood recollection that there
were only movies at the Colorado Chautauqua is not entirely accurate, but for many,
movies were the only organized program that they attended.
This change from live performance to literally “canned” performance seemed to
be a break with the previous fifty years of chautauqua live programming, but actually, it
was not. Very early on in its development, film became a part of chautauqua programs.
By adopting film so quickly, chautauquas had a significant impact on the popularizing of
early film. This, in turn, supported the availability of film for a broader middle-class
American audience.
1
Baker Duncan, oral history interview by author, Colorado Chautauqua, Boulder, CO, June 5, 2009,
recording and partial transcript, Colorado.
188
The first films shown at a chautauqua were screened in 1897. That summer,
Ocean Grove, New Jersey hosted the Edison Photoscope, with “moving pictures of
Bathing Scenes, Military Movements, Mounted Police charge, etc., etc.”2 In addition to
showing these moving pictures, this Grand Combination Entertainment also featured a
violinist. This combination was typical of early film presentations; moving pictures were
one short part of a much longer program. According to film historian Rick Altman,
“During cinema’s formative years, films often existed only to the extent that they could
be included in a live performance. Edited or combined to suit the situation, moving
pictures long remained subservient to existing forms of entertainment and the performers
who provided them.”3 Films were very short and could not sustain an entire program, but
in their early days, audiences had no expectation that they could. Instead, moving
pictures were used to entice the audience and were mixed with a number of live
performance acts. Moving pictures, then, fit well into the variety of programs offered at
chautauquas.
Even before film became a regular part of programming at chautauqua, traveling
film presenters performed throughout the permanent chautauquas. At least twelve
different companies were active in the period from 1900 to 1910. The three main
companies to travel to permanent chautauquas in the first decade of the twentieth century
2
Thirteenth Annual Session of the Ocean Grove Sunday School and Chautauqua Assembly, [1897], Ocean
Grove. It is unclear which film exhibitor used the name Edison Photoscope. Charles Musser and Carol
Nelson suggest that Charles H. Oxenham briefly called his machine “Edison’s Photoscope”; Charles
Musser and Carol Nelson, High-Class Moving Pictures: Lyman H. Howe and the Forgotten Era of
Traveling Exhibition, 1880-1920 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991), 78.
3
Rick Altman, “From Lecturer’s Prop to Industrial Product: The Early History of Travel Films,” in Virtual
Voyages: Cinema and Travel, ed. Jeffrey Ruoff (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006), 61.
189
were D. W. Robertson’s Moving Pictures, Lyman H. Howe’s Moving Pictures, and
American Vitagraph.
D. W. Robertson began exhibiting moving pictures in the 1897-1898 season, after
performing for several years as a musician. During his first summer as a motion picture
exhibitor he visited chautauquas throughout the Midwest, New York, and Maryland,
including a stop at the Chautauqua Assembly. His performances combined short films
with illustrated music and comedy acts.4 As moving pictures became more popular,
Robertson split his operations into several units so they could perform in more places; as
a result, he was no longer personally active in the projection and presentation of the
films.5 His companies, of varying names at different times, performed at the Colorado
Chautauqua in 1911, and visited Winona Lake several times. In the Winona Lake 1910
Yearbook, Robertson’s program was highlighted:
Nothing on the Assembly program from year to year overshadows in popularity
the Robertson pictures. The audiences overflow the Auditorium and fill all the
space within even partial view of what he offers. The reason is Mr. Robertson
always brings to Winona the choicest pictures to be seen here, and his views are
always new and intensely interesting. He promises to outdo his former efforts for
two evenings this season.6
From this description, the people of the Winona Lake Assembly clearly anticipated
Robertson’s annual visit and by 1910, expected the highest quality pictures from him.
Certainly, their yearly enlistment of his services also supported Robertson’s ability to
return regularly to his other middle-class venues.
4
Musser and Nelson, 77.
5
Ibid., 147.
6
“D. W. Robertson’s Moving Pictures,” 1910 Yearbook, 11, reprinted in Winona Revisited, 1907-1911:
Capturing the History of Winona Lake, Indiana Utilizing Programs and Other Printed Materials, ed.
Jennifer Triggs (Winona Lake, IN: Morgan Library, Grace College and Theological Seminary), 2005.
190
Lyman Howe’s motion picture companies were very similar to Robertson’s.
Howe got his start giving phonograph concerts in Pennsylvania in the early 1890s, and
learned the importance of showmanship from this experience. In their work on Howe,
film historians Charles Musser and Carol Nelson stress the importance of the phonograph
exhibitor (and then the film exhibitor) as the performer; though the music or film was
pre-recorded, it was the job of the exhibitor to make it come to life. They cite an 1893
article giving advice on how to exhibit the phonograph:
The entire exhibition should be an animated, shifting kaleidoscope, presenting
new features at every turn … Not only should the above apply to the selections,
but the exhibitor in his own act and manipulation, should aim to follow out the
same law, and every move that he makes should be finished and complete. It is
not to be supposed that the man who exhibits the phonograph is a finished actor;
on the other hand, the more he can learn as to effective stage presence the greater
his success will be.7
Howe was quite successful in developing his stage presence as a phonograph exhibitor.
In 1893, he gave an Independence Day concert at the Pennsylvania Chautauqua in Mt.
Gretna, claiming it was “the largest phonographic concert ever given in America.”8
Howe relied on churches as a mainstay of his phonographic concert business, and when
he added moving pictures, churches and chautauquas continued to play an important role
in his success. Though Howe’s pictures were not religious, per se, churches and
chautauquas saw his programs as a much more moral use of the medium than those
growing in popularity in urban areas.
Howe’s projection companies visited the Colorado Chautauqua, Winona Lake,
Bay View, and the Chautauqua Institution (twice). His programs were varied, from
7
The Phonogram, February 1893, 324-26, quoted in Musser and Nelson, 34.
8
Assembly Daily, July 5, 1893, quoted in Musser and Nelson, 42.
191
historical reenactment to story comedy to war reports. A later 1915 program from
Winona Lake described “marvelous war pictures, presenting a stirring, inspiring official
reproduction of the U.S. Navy of 1915. Absorbing animated scenes of our gigantic
floating fortresses, surpassing anything of its kind ever before shown.”9 In addition to
honing skills of showmanship, Howe’s experiences in exhibiting phonographs helped
him to understand the importance of realistic sound effects to interest multiple senses at
once; he at first used recorded effects, but later employed a team of live sound effects
personnel to make them even more realistic.10
Howe and Robertson likely purchased many of their films directly from the
American Vitagraph company, but Vitagraph also had its own traveling exhibition
companies that visited chautauquas. They were most popular in 1904 and1905, when
they visited Monteagle, Fountain Park, and Mt. Gretna (both years). Announcements in
both Monteagle and Mt. Gretna stated that “The Greatest Moving Picture Exhibition on
Earth” would feature films about “History, Literature, Science, Travel, Sport, Pastime,
Comedy, Pathos, Drama, Mystery, and Romance.”11 While these descriptions printed
before the exhibitions were obviously standard marketing, the Pennsylvania
Chautauquan’s review of the event after the fact presented a more animated description:
Last night we had the American Vitagraph Company. The auditorium was full.
The children were happy; they did not have to keep quiet while a lecturer talked;
9
Winona Quarterly, April 1915, 5, reprinted in Winona Revisited, 1914-1916: Capturing the History of
Winona Lake, Indiana Utilizing Programs and other Printed Materials, ed. Jennifer Triggs (Winona Lake,
IN: Morgan Library, Grace College and Theological Seminary), 2005.
10
For an excellent discussion of Howe’s contribution to sound effects in traveling film exhibitions, see
Rick Altman, Silent Film Sound (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004), 145-149.
11
“To-night in the Assembly Auditorium Mount Gretna – American Vitagraph Company,” Pennsylvania
Chautauquan, July 26, 1904, Mt. Gretna; “The American Vitagraph,” Monteagle Assembly and Sunday
Schools, [1905], Monteagle.
192
they applauded, cheered, whistled, roared with laughter, and it must be confessed,
that certain adults we know of were much the same as the children. The pictures
were fine; some of them suited the most grave, others tickled those whose
mirthful propensities are in the ascent. What a magnificent panorama that was of
the ride over the Canadian Pacific Railway! That was sufficient return for the
expense of a trip to Mount Gretna – that is if one didn’t have to go too far – then
the real thing would have been better. The auditorium should overflow tonight
when an entire change of program will be given.12
As this review stated, early films at chautauquas were regularly marketed as children’s
activities, but audiences were always mixed ages. Chautauqua programming organizers
expected that the combination of quick images and thrills that early film offered would
most appeal to children, but they soon learned that their parents and other adults enjoyed
them just as much. Often, orchestras accompanied American Vitagraph exhibitions,
again combining live and filmed performances, and targeting an audience of mixed ages.
Robertson, Howe, and American Vitagraph did compete among one another for
some business, but usually there was plenty of work to go around. In fact, according to
Musser and Nelson, when travel became difficult and one exhibitor could not make an
engagement, another would step in.13 The business of exhibiting was not always easy.
One exhibitor couldn’t show at Ocean Grove in 1900 because his trunk was lost.
According to the local newspaper:
The vitagraph pictures didn’t turn up Tuesday night. The Auditorium held a big
audience and it was Bishop FitzGerald’s task to tell them why the pictures would
not be exhibited. Said the Bishop: “The Auditorium is here, the audience is here,
the curtain is here, and the gentlemen to conduct the performance are here, yet the
trunk containing the apparatus is lost somewhere between here and New York, so
that the performance will have to be postponed.”
Dr. Loomis sent somebody next morning to the railroad station to look for
the trunk. It was found among a lot of the other baggage where it had been
deposited the day before.
12
“The Days as They Pass,” Pennsylvanian Chautauquan, July 27, 1904, Mt. Gretna.
13
Musser and Nelson, 101.
193
A double performance took place Wednesday evening. And the holders of
tickets were doubly satisfied.14
As other chautauqua performers understood, just getting to the performances sometimes
required considerable effort.
Once the equipment arrived at a chautauqua, a second concern, and a very
legitimate one, was fire. Exhibitors had to assure chautauqua committees that they would
not put audiences or auditorium buildings in any danger. When a Professor Decker
visited Ocean Park in 1905 to show The Life and Times of Jesus and A Tour through
Ireland, the bulletin included a note about safety in the advertising material. It stated,
“The cameragraph machine is equipped with the latest safety devices eliminating entirely
the faintest possibility of danger. The films are enclosed in metal boxes, which form of
construction has been approved by the board of fire underwriters in New York City, and
other large cities.”15
This danger of fire was a real one and could ruin a film exhibitor’s career. Lyman
Howe’s reputation and his collection of films were significantly damaged in 1899 when
several of his films caught fire at the Wilson Opera House in Oswego, New York.
Nitrate films continued to be used for decades, and when chautauquas added permanent
film projection equipment to their auditoriums, they planned for fire safety. The second
auditorium at the Monteagle Sunday School Assembly burned in 1926, ironically when
the evening’s film was A Still Alarm, about a fire. Monteagle historian Walter Pulliam
describes the resulting mayhem, “All this ‘fire, fire, get out!’ It was a silent movie, they
14
“Couldn’t Find the Trunk,” Ocean Grove Times, July 21, 1900.
15
Chautauqua-By-The-Sea for Eastern New England, [Ocean Park, 1905], Ocean Park.
194
thought it was part of the sound effects. They didn’t get out until they saw the flames and
smoke.”16
Despite travel challenges and dangers of fire, Robertson, Howe, and American
Vitagraph managed to find success among middle-class audiences, in large part because
of their work with chautauquas. They chose to exhibit a variety of film genres rather than
sticking with just one type of film; this also contributed to their success, and their ability
to gain multiple traveling exhibition companies. However, most of the chautauqua
exhibitors were much smaller operations, focusing on one genre of work. These
presentations fell into three general categories: technology demonstrations, travelogues,
and narrative films.
Charles H. Oxenham exhibited at several chautauquas; he showed mostly war
films, but his biggest claim to fame was a demonstration of his own projection
innovations. According to Musser and Nelson, “Oxenham’s greatest strength lay in his
technological expertise rather than creative organization of materials or ballyhoo.”17
Oxenham’s Famous Moving Pictures visited the Colorado Chautauqua in 1907. The
promotional materials touted Oxenham’s invention of an anti-flicker attachment. It also
described his use of color photography: “He was the first to introduce colored
photography in moving pictures in this country … The pictures to be shown include
moving pictures in colors, subjects collected from the most remote regions of the world
as well as recent American events of note.”18 Oxenham’s films were not so different
16
Walter and Julia Pulliam, oral history interview by author, Monteagle Sunday School Assembly,
Monteagle, TN, July 14, 2009, recording and partial transcript, Monteagle; see also Walter T. Pulliam, ed.,
“The Fires of Monteagle” ([Knoxville, TN]: Walter T. Pulliam, 2005).
17
Musser and Nelson, 78.
18
Official Daily Program, [Colorado Chautauqua, 1907], 6, Colorado.
195
from Robertson’s or Howe’s, but he stressed the technological side of his projection.
Exhibitions became more than entertainment, and were a demonstration of all that his
equipment could achieve. His work was more along the lines of the electricity and radio
demonstrators that would become popular a few years later.
In 1905, another kind of demonstration appeared at the Colorado Chautauqua. H.
H. Buckwalter, a Colorado photojournalist and filmmaker for Selig Polyscope, filmed
several scenes at the chautauqua, and then displayed them later in the season. A note in
the local newspaper described the films:
Mr. H. H. Buckwalter, the polyscope artist, phoned to Eben Fine [a local
newspaper photographer] today that the films of moving pictures of Boulder and
of the Chautauqua showing prominent buildings and personages of town, are fine.
He has brought them over to Denver and will exhibit them tonight. They show
Chautauqua girls in many humorous attitudes and will provoke no end of fun.19
Buckwalter filmed throughout Colorado, especially at special events, for the Selig
Polyscope company.20 The concept of seeing oneself in a film, or even people or places
one knew, was appealing to early filmgoers. It was not unlike the technique that Howe
used in his phonograph days, when he would record an audience singing, and then play it
back. This demonstration helped to make film seem more accessible to an average
viewer – anyone could be in the moving pictures! This desire to see oneself on screen
was not limited to the early days of motion pictures. Films of the 1914 Recognition Day
were shown at Chautauqua the following summer.21 Lakeside had filmmakers on the
19
“Boulder Pictures. Buckwalter Will Show Them at the Chautauqua Tonight” Boulder Camera, August 7,
1905, Carnegie.
20
Carl Ubbelohde, Duane A. Smith, and Maxine Benson, A Colorado History, 9th ed. (Boulder, CO: Pruett
Publishing, 2006), 449, http://books.google.com/books?id=RRZKwjiPJZoC (accessed December 21,
2010).
21
Chautauquan Daily, Summer 1915.
196
grounds in 1931, and used the resulting film to advertise Lakeside in Methodist churches
throughout Ohio.22
All of the exhibitors discussed had honed their skills in other milieux. Howe
started out by exhibiting phonographs; Buckwalter began as a photographer. They used
their talents in other fields and brought them to their exhibition of film. It makes sense,
then, that some travelogue lecturers and literary readers would have made that same leap
into the genre of film.
In his book Silent Film Sound, Rick Altman discusses travelogue lecturers on the
chautauqua circuit and argues for a difference between exhibitors who showed their own
films and those who used purchased films created by others. “The best travel lecturer is
the man with the most knowledge, whereas the nickelodeon lecturer is faced with images
that are not his own, but which he must nevertheless explain,” Altman asserts.23 He uses
two French terms to make the difference more concrete. A conférencier creates and
chooses films to compliment his or her own lecture, whereas a bonimenteur narrates an
already created series of films; “Whereas a conférencier is a quasi-academic figure,
inspired by scientists and explorers, the term bonimenteur originally meant “barker” and
implies a slightly seedy carnival atmosphere.”24 The larger exhibition companies
discussed earlier fit the bonimenteur model, especially as Robinson and Howe moved
away from actual exhibiting. Instead, series of films, and sometimes slides and music,
were put together and it was the responsibility of the lecturer to create meaning from the
22
“Lakeside Movies Please Audience,” Lakeside Bulletin, January 1931, 3.
23
Altman, Silent Film Sound, 141.
24
Ibid.
197
parts. By contrast, a conférencier first created meaning and then chose images that would
support that argument.
Katharine Ertz-Bowden was one such conférencière. She and her husband
traveled together showing films, most famously of the Oberammergau Passion Play and
the Canadian Song of Hiawatha pageant. Many chautauqua lecturers took the passion
play at Oberammergau as their subject, a way to connect the Bible, foreign lands, and
performance. As Oberammergau did not allow photography, action had to be reenacted
for slides and films.25 According to Ertz-Bowden’s talent brochure, she had gone beyond
what most exhibitors had done: “In preparing the ‘Trip to Oberammergau’ for the public
she made the trip herself and studied the peasants of the Bavarian Alps, and brought back
the most artistic story of the ‘Passion Play’ America has ever heard.”26 Instead of actual
film footage, then, Ertz-Bowden had to either create her own reenactments to film or
purchase stock footage of others’ reenactments.
Ertz-Bowden’s Song of Hiawatha lecture was definitely her own. She and her
husband Charles L. Bowden (who was reportedly raised among the Ojibway) shot a
series of short films in 1903 at Kensington Point on the Garden River near Desbarats,
Ontario and began exhibiting them in March 1904.27 Katharine wrote the lectures and
performed them, while Charles created the films and was the projectionist when they
visited chautauquas. These films were created a year before this same company moved
25
Ibid., 136.
26
“A Pictorial Story of Hiawatha by Katharine Ertz-Bowden,” 1903 talent brochure, Redpath.
27
Andy Uhrich, interview by the author, Chicago Film Archives, Chicago, IL, August 5, 2010, notes in
possession of the author. Uhrich’s research on Katharine Ertz Bowden is extensive, but currently
unpublished.
198
to Petoskey, Michigan, near Bay View (that iteration of the pageant was discussed in
Chapter 3).
The Bowdens’ original lecture included 159 “views.” Many were slides, some of
which have been identified as purchased photographs; others were taken by Charles.
Several short films, ranging from just a few moments to minutes, were interspersed with
these still images. The exhibition was divided into sections, with at least one moving
picture in each. In 2010, seven rolls of film and many slides were restored by the
Chicago Film Archives and Valparaiso University’s Christopher Center Library.
Katharine Ertz-Bowden’s lecture notes were not found, but the order of the program has
been pieced together.
The series began with the history of the region and the process of traveling to the
play site at Kensington Point. It then showed clips and stills of the actual play that the
Ojibway staged. Sometimes the images depicted different actors portraying the same
characters. No audience appeared in the motion pictures, but the Bowdens did provide an
overview of the performing area, including an island offshore (see fig. 10). Not showing
an audience allowed the lecture audience to imagine that they were actually seeing the
action, not watching someone else seeing the action. At times, the actors looked into the
camera, breaking the narrative space. According to the talent brochure for the lecture, the
Bowdens spent two summers at Kensington Point, attended many performances, and
became very familiar with the Indians, which allowed them such unlimited access.28 The
28
“A Pictorial Story of Hiawatha.”
199
Figure 10. Image of Hiawatha pageant grounds, from Katharine Ertz-Bowden and
Charles L. Bowden talent brochure. Used with permission, Redpath.
films do not appear to all be from one performance, but are a mélange of multiple
performances.29
The extant stills and films elicit several interpretations. First, they act as a record
of the Hiawatha pageants held from 1900 to 1904 on Kensington Point.30 They show the
performing “stage,” but present a private performance for the film-viewing audience.
Next, when they are put together, they are an example of the type of slide/film mixing
29
Eight motion picture views of the film remain extant, on seven rolls (13:30 at 16fps). Remaining slides
include 139 hand-colored and black and white stereopticon slides. A Pictorial Story of Hiawatha: 19001904 was transferred on 35mm through Black and White Preservation, in a joint project by the Chicago
Film Archives and Valparaiso University; A Pictorial Story of Hiawatha: 1900-1904, Charles L. Bowden
and Katharine Ertz-Bowden, Chicago Film Archives.
30
Following its four year run at Kensington Point, the Grand Rapids and Indiana Railroad suggested to
pageant organizer L.O. Armstrong that business would be better if the pageant were closer to cities (and on
their rail line). The new site chosen was in Petoskey, Michigan, less than two miles from Bay View. For a
discussion of the live performances, see Alan Trachtenberg, Shades of Hiawatha: Staging Indians, Making
Americans, 1880-1930 (New York: Hill and Wang, 2004), 91-95; Michael David McNally, “The Indian
Passion Play: Contesting the Real Indian in Song and Hiawatha Pageants, 1901-1965,” American Quarterly
58, no. 1 (March 2006): 105-136,
http://muse.jhu.edu.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/journals/american_quarterly/v058/58.1mcnally.html (accessed
December 21, 2010).
200
that was regularly used during chautauqua lectures. In a review of Howe’s exhibition,
one newspaper commented on his mixing of moving pictures and phonograph records,
saying that the use of phonographs “rests the eye.”31 Similarly, the stills allow the
audience to rest for a few moments before the excitement of the next moving picture.
They also advance the plot by setting the scene from an American perspective, showing
locks at the border in Sault Ste. Marie, and by introducing primary characters in the
pageant. Many of these purchased stills showed the performers in costume in a
photography studio. Photographs of the Hiawatha stars were regularly available at
performances so audience members could take home remembrances of their time; in this
way the actors, at least in image, became bought and sold commodities. These stills also
show that the same actors were not always used throughout the four years of performing;
actors portraying Hiawatha and Nakomis were usually the same, but minor roles changed.
These purchased photographs thus represent a commercialization of the performances.
The Bowdens’ lecture and films further popularized Hiawatha as the image of all
American Indians. Popular in literature, in song, on stage, and now in film, Hiawatha
perpetuated the concept of Indian as noble savage; at the end of the pageant, Hiawatha
acknowledged the white missionaries that had come to his territory and then headed
West. Because Katharine Ertz-Bowden narrated the experience for the audience, she
could also keep the image of the Indian safely separate from the white audiences.
Katharine Ertz-Bowden and Charles L. Bowden were white, but like the Indian
performers discussed in Chapter Four, the Bowdens found it necessary to identify
themselves as being sanctioned by the American Indian tribe that they depicted. Their
31
Wilkes-Barre Record, October 29, 1897, quoted in Musser and Nelson, 65.
201
1903 talent brochure named Charles as Nahquegezhik, and stated that he “was brought up
among the Ojibways, and has known their country, customs and chiefs all his life”;
Katharine was referred to as Netagegedoqua.32 Aside from the fact that the actors were
portraying a white interpretation of Indian stories taken from several Native American
cultures, the films themselves were quite respectful. They depicted human activities that
would have been especially palatable to white middle-class audiences: family gatherings,
developing love, and even humor. Obviously, the films did not show an accurate picture
of how the Ojibway lived at the turn of the twentieth century, projecting middle-class
notions of behavior upon these Indian bodies, but they gave a much more personal
portrayal than many in the Bowdens’ audiences would have previously seen.
The Bowdens were very successful in their exhibition of their Song of Hiawatha
lecture. Among the chautauquas they visited in 1904 and 1905 were the Florida
Chautauqua, Mountain Lake Park, MD, Rock River Assembly, IL, Grimsby Park,
Ontario, and Fountain Park, IN. According to researcher Andy Uhrich, the Bowdens
took the film to twenty states and two provinces, mostly in the middle of the U.S. and
Canada. Most in these audiences wouldn’t have otherwise made the long trip to
Desbarats, or later, to Petoskey, so the films acted as their only exposure to the pageant.
The Bowdens were common among travelogue lecturers. Katharine had a written
script that described the setting as well as the characters and the plot of the Hiawatha
play. It was structured in such a way that the audience experienced the entire journey,
even seeing the great locks at Sault Ste. Marie. The story was presented almost as an
adventure travel story. In fact, the presentation began and ended with images of the
32
“A Pictorial Story of Hiawatha.”
202
opening and closing of a book, ostensibly Longfellow’s Song of Hiawatha. However, the
still and moving images themselves could not explain the entire story; an interpreter of
sorts was required to make the images understandable and Katharine served that purpose.
In her live lecture, she clarified the story of Hiawatha – both the pageant and
Longfellow’s original, as, according to Michael David McNally, Longfellow’s plot was
pared down in the pageant because it was assumed that the audience would be familiar
with the story.33 Katharine did not read the whole poem, but in explaining the context,
likely shared information about Louis Olivier Armstrong’s process of writing the libretto
and producing the pageant. She may have even sung songs by Fredrick Burton that were
added to the production around the time that the Bowdens made their films.34
All of these parts made up the lecture: traveling to Kensington Point and setting
the stage there, explaining the plot of the pageant, describing the production history,
showing the actors and the action, and giving a taste of the accompanying music. The
still and moving images were only one illustrative aspect of the lecture that the Bowdens
presented. The films and slides that remain offer a remarkable glimpse into the world of
chautauqua lecturing using early film because so few artifacts from actual performances
remain.
Anna Delony Martin offered chautauquas a similar presentation around the same
period, sharing the story and images of Richard Wagner’s opera Parsifal. However,
Martin presented it as a reading rather than as a lecture. Promotional material relied on
Martin’s reputation as a reader and highlighted the story of Parsifal. Parsifal was an
33
McNally, 112.
34
Uhrich, interview.
203
excellent choice for this type of religious audience because its plot centered upon a quest
for the Holy Grail.
In her performances, Martin did a reading from Parsifal and then shared moving
pictures of the opera as it was staged by the Metropolitan Opera in New York in 1903.
Her brochure did not state that she created the films herself, so it is likely that she
purchased them commercially. She took this program to the Pennsylvania Chautauqua in
1905 and to the Chautauqua Institution in 1906. The Pennsylvania Chautauquan review
described the event:
The auditorium was filled on Saturday evening with an audience intent on hearing
and seeing Parsifal, and they were not disappointed. Miss Martin is an artist and
an original one at that. She first gave the story of Wagner’s great musical drama,
Parsifal, then by a series of remarkable moving pictures accompanied by music
from the opera, playing very skillfully by Miss Aikin and a running monolog by
herself, Miss Martin conveyed very effectively by song and story and picture, an
excellent idea of the opera as reproduced in New York. The moving pictures
were excellent. Assuredly the performance was the best thing to seeing and
hearing the play as brought out by Herr Conreid of the Metropolitan, New York.35
Like the Bowdens, Martin utilized moving pictures as an illustration to the words
she used to describe the performance of Parsifal, not as the central element to her telling
of the story. Altman asserts that this inclusion of moving images in small pieces was
common practice, as if they were a replacement for lantern slides: “In a sense, these films
were still defined as ‘views’ according to the era’s conception of still photographs. They
did not yet constitute the stand-alone object that would later be understood by the term
‘motion picture’ (in the singular).”36 The Bowdens did not show one film of Hiawatha,
but many; Martin did not show one film of Parsifal, but many. They pieced together
35
“As the Days Pass,” Pennsylvania Chautauquan, July 31, 1905, Mt. Gretna.
36
Altman, “From Lecturer’s Prop,” 69. Extant notes from the Bowdens’ lecture also refers to “views.”
204
meaning for their audiences; using their own narrative and lecture techniques, they served
as interpreters of these unfamiliar people, languages, and stories. Though middle-class
chautauqua audiences may have been unaware of how Native American peoples lived or
how the upper-class art of opera could be understood, these presenters were the experts
who could assist them in appreciating the literary and artistic value.
According to Altman, it was not until the 1910s that the exhibitor was separated
from the films themselves. Through the use of intertitles and longer film lengths,
meaning could be made in the actual films, a shift to what Altman calls an industrial
product instead of a prop. The film became the focus rather than the illustration of the
focus.
This paradigm shift in the way that film was used and understood precipitated a
change in how films were exhibited at chautauquas. Rather than being a part of a lecturer
or reader’s presentation, films themselves became the evening’s entertainment. In 1915,
the Chautauqua Institution adopted daily features in its program. Supplied by the
Community Motion Picture Bureau of Boston, the films were meant to support and
augment the Chautauqua Institution program. According to an advertisement in the
Chautauquan Daily, the Community Motion Picture Bureau asked the audience to
“Cooperate with us in your town in using the motion picture for wholesome recreation,
teaching, preaching. … Our film service is complete, established, self-supporting,
efficient.”37 This advertisement stressed that the films were now “self-supporting” and
no longer required assistance from a lecturer or reader. Additionally, they provided
“wholesome recreation, teaching, preaching.” These were motion pictures with middle-
37
“For Community Service: The Motion Picture,” Chautauquan Daily, August 28, 1915.
205
class lessons appropriate for the whole family. According to the Chautauquan Weekly,
“In introducing a daily program of motion pictures at Chautauqua, officers of the
Institution feel they are filling a long felt want on the part of many persons and placing
Chautauqua in line with other institutions in recognizing the possibility and opportunity
motion pictures present.”38
It was necessary for Chautauqua and other assemblies to stress that the motion
pictures they showed were “wholesome” by middle-class standards, and an alternative to
movies offered by commercial movie houses. In fact, when moving pictures were first
available, they were not immediately accepted as presentable, especially in a churchrelated environment. As late as 1904, the Methodist Episcopal Church declared that its
members should not enjoy theater and other amusements:
Improper amusements and excessive indulgence in innocent amusements are
serious barriers to the beginning of the religious life and fruitful causes of
spiritual decline. Some amusements in common use are also positively
demoralizing and furnish the first easy steps to the total loss of character. We
therefore look with deep concern on the great increase of amusements and on the
general prevalence of harmful amusements, and lift up a solemn note of warning
and entreaty particularly against theater-going, dancing, and such games of
chance as are frequently associated with gambling; all of which have been found
to be antagonistic to vital piety, promotive of worldliness, and especially
pernicious to youth.39
Methodists saw common amusements as dangerous because they often led to other poor
behaviors. The Methodists were not alone in their concerns about the theater, as
previously discussed in Chapter 3. Significantly, though, they did not mention moving
pictures by name in their 1904 declaration. Chautauqua Institution historian Jon Schmitz
38
39
Jon Schmitz, “Motion Pictures at Chautauqua,” manuscript, 2009, 1, Chautauqua.
Edward G. Andrews, ed., The Doctrines and Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church (Cincinnati,
OH: Jenkins and Graham, 1904), 56,
http://www.archive.org/stream/doctrinesanddis17churgoog/doctrinesanddis17churgoog_djvu.txt (accessed
December 2, 2009).
206
has argued that film was seen as less of a threat because it could be more tightly
controlled as an entirely new genre.40 As early as 1904, though, moving pictures were
being used for so many different purposes – to illustrate lectures, to offer short
entertainments among live performance acts, to show boxing matches, even for short
recorded peep shows. Certainly, if asked, the writers of the Methodist Doctrines and
Disciplines would have stated that their declaration applied to moving pictures. For
many, it was a question not of the medium itself, but of the content shown on film; this
was especially important as film became more independent and less reliant on a lecturer
to interpret meaning for the audience.41
In 1908 the Motion Picture Patents Company was founded. Though its primary
concern was to act as a trust in protecting Thomas Edison’s patents within the film
industry, the MPPC was also a significant development in the control of content in
moving pictures. It was the first attempt at self-regulation within the film industry; in
providing films that were “Moral, Educational and Cleanly Amusing,” it appealed to all
classes of people, and in turn, provided economic stability for the trust. The MPPC
paved the way for the National Board of Censorship, later renamed the National Board of
Review, which stopped the release of films it deemed inappropriate and also was
involved with cuts or edits to some films.42 It served as an answer to those who called for
40
Schmitz, 2.
41
For more on the relationship between churches and film, see Vincent Thomas Rosini, “Sanctuary
Cinema: The Rise and Fall of Protestant Churches as Film Exhibition Sites, 1910-1930” (PhD diss., Regent
University, 1998).
42
Tom Gunning, “From the Opium Den to the Theatre of Morality: Moral discourse and the film process in
early American cinema,” in The Silent Film Reader, ed. Lee Grieveson and Peter Krämer (New York:
Routledge, 2004), 145-154, http://books.google.com/books?id=apqZd0uY9mYC (accessed January 4,
2011).
207
tighter controls within the film industry, like Miss Lillian M. Phelps, who argued at a
lecture at the Chautauqua Institution in 1912,
The question as to the kind of ideals which will be shaped [by the moving picture
show] depends upon the kind of pictures which are shown. … In the different
cities and towns of the country, more than a million people in the aggregate attend
the moving picture shows every evening. If the censorship over the pictures
which are shown is lax, there will be the germs of immoral ideals implanted in the
minds of these people.43
By 1912, Phelps and others recognized that “the moving picture has come to stay.”44 The
question remained, then, how to shape the motion picture industry so that it could have a
positive influence. Censorship was just one technique. Educational film companies
worked to create movies for use in schools. A Christian film industry also developed.45
Within just a few years, it became common practice for churches to show movies,
even among Methodists. Dr. Sidney D. Eva was an active encourager of churchsupported film exhibition, and brought regular movies to Bay View in 1918. His
sentiment was that movies should not be controlled by commercial interests, and instead,
“the moving picture show is doing something for the people that the church ought to do”:
show films that are appropriate for families. In 1920, Eva claimed that he had “obtained
enough reels of films of wholesome plays to last the church for three years.”46 Churches
were instrumental in getting the National Board of Review organized, and in providing a
43
“Woman’s Club: Moving Picture Shows and Low Theaters Receive Attention,” Chautauquan Daily, July
26, 1912.
44
Ibid.
45
“Motion Pictures in Chautauqua,” Chautauquan Daily, July 17, 1915. On the rise of Christian films, see
Terry Lindvall, Sanctuary Cinema: Origins of the Christian Film Industry (New York: New York
University Press, 2007).
46
“Motion Picture Activities in the Country’s Churches,” Educational Film Magazine 3, no. 4 (April
1920), 16, http://www.archive.org/stream/edu1920cationalfilmmwhitrich (accessed January 4, 2011).
208
market for films with content that supported middle-class values like piety, restraint, hard
work, and education. Since most chautauquas were church-affiliated, they were a prime
summer exhibition space for these more moral films, and as a result, chautauquas could
exert control over what films found success in middle-class culture.
One of the strongest reasons for presenting films with moral messages was that
they could reach young people. Eva argued that movies were a way of encouraging
youngsters to lead a religious life: “The church must make provision to operate all its
activity in the interests of young life. The church that fails to do so will lose its place. …
One of the great forces of today is play life. Play has greater evangelistic opportunities
than anything we have ever thought of. You are wise in this church and have made
provision for your play life.”47 Not only were films targeted to children, but church
leaders recognized that church-based play could teach children middle-class values and
tighten familial ties to a particular church. At chautauquas, too, early motion pictures
were thought of as being mostly for children; Monteagle began showing stereopticon and
moving pictures twice a week in 1910 “for the benefit of the children.”48 In 1926, the
Colorado Chautauqua provided a similar rationale for their movie programming: “There
are so many young people on the Chautauqua grounds and the program for the most part
is very heavy, so that we have found the motion picture programs to offer the best
possible balance.”49 Most of the films scheduled were not children’s movies, but were
movies that people of all ages could enjoy; program organizers had a variety of choice
47
Ibid.
48
Monteagle Assembly and Summer Schools, [1910], Monteagle.
49
Colorado Bulletin, Program Number, 1926, 13, Carnegie.
209
largely because of the impact that the National Board of Review had on the motion
picture industry.
But even in the late 1910s, some chautauqua program committees were still
unsure about movies. Ocean Park offered a trial of a few motion pictures in 1919 before
fully adopting them in 1920. According to the 1920 program, “This was done as an
experiment, to ascertain if the Ocean Park constituency would approve of the use of the
motion picture as a medium for entertainment. In view of the general favor expressed
toward a reasonable use of the pictures, it was decided to secure a motion picture
machine as a permanent piece of equipment.”50
Showing movies at chautauquas was especially tricky because often they were
shown in the same auditorium where church services were held, and there was a question
of using a sacred space for film exhibition. Ocean Park held its biggest events in an
octagonal building known as the Temple; the building was designed to be structurally
self-supporting, but it did have one center pole. When the community began showing
movies, this pole disrupted the projection. Ocean Parkers determined that the center pole
could be cut midway down without compromising the stability of the building. In this
instance showing movies with a clear picture was important enough to change the
architectural structure of their most significant building.
Chautauquas in the 1910s supported a growing industry of films targeted towards
a middle-class audience. Those in charge of organizing the films for chautauquas did
exert further local control over what was shown. Literary classics were especially
popular, and played a role in the Colorado Chautauqua’s decision to add more films to its
50
Ocean Park Assembly Program, [1920], Ocean Park.
210
program in 1917: “There has been a growing feeling that since the quality of films has so
noticeably improved, and such a large number of masterpieces have become available
with their educational possibilities that perhaps Chautauqua assemblies should make a
larger use of this form of entertainment.”51 Additionally, they often chose films that
connected with other chautauqua programming. For example, in 1915 John Barleycorn
and Just Prohibition were shown to complement prohibition programs, which were active
and regular parts of the middle-class programming at Chautauqua.52 By 1920, most
chautauquas scheduled motion pictures multiple times a week.
Many films highlighted the American Dream, and had much to do with the
elasticity of class. Mary Pickford’s 1919 hit Daddy-Long-Legs was shown at the
Chautauqua Institution in 1920 and offers a plot typical of those shown at chautauquas.
The story begins with the births of two white girls: Angelina Wykoff is a child of fortune,
and Jerusha Abbott (Mary Pickford) is a baby born on the streets and raised in an
orphanage. By the time they grow up, it is obvious that Angelina is pretty on the outside,
but very ugly on the inside. Conversely, Judy is a naughty girl, but does it all in care for
the other children in the orphanage. An tall anonymous trustee of the orphanage, whom
Judy nicknames Daddy-Long-Legs, offers to send Judy to college. Because of this gift,
and through love and her hard work as an author, Judy gains access to the aristocracy. As
society expected of a woman of this newfound status, she decides upon one man to
marry, and when she finally meets Daddy-Long-Legs for the first time seeking his
permission to marry, of course, Daddy-Long-Legs is the man with whom she had already
51
Colorado Chautauqua Bulletin, 1917, quoted in Mary Galey, The Grand Assembly: The Story of Life at
the Colorado Chautauqua ([Boulder, CO]: First Flatiron Press, 1981), 71.
52
Schmitz, 2.
211
fallen in love. This film shows several elements of earlier cinema, with an especially
successful slapstick scene when Judy is about ten and she and another young orphan
accidentally become drunk. As Judy matures, and the romance heats up, it is more
typical of late 1910s films. Over it all is an expectation that Judy can make something of
her poor situation by adopting standard middle-class values, through her strong heart,
hard work, a man, and the kindness of strangers. Many middle-class films popular at
chautauquas had similar messages.
Buster Keaton’s The Navigator (1924) was shown at Ocean Park in 1925, and
presents another look at class, hypothesizing what happens to a wealthy couple when they
are left to fend for themselves on a boat drifting at sea. At first they have difficulty with
simple tasks like making coffee and opening a can of asparagus, but weeks later, they
have developed mechanized systems for daily tasks. After a very white-skinned Betsy is
kidnapped by dark-skinned cannibals (what else happens when you are adrift in the South
Seas?) and Rollo (Buster Keaton) rescues her, they are shown in a rather compromising
situation: he floats on his back while she sits on him and rows him back to the safety of
their boat. Still, this falls within the physical comedy of the film and highlights the
characters’ ingenuity. Daddy-Long-Legs and The Navigator both emphasize that, despite
the limits of one’s class, one can be successful in life – a highly middle-class
understanding of class.
Chautauquas’ support of middle-class films made them popular enough that
eventually they had to compete for patrons. Middle-class films became so prevalent that
they were shown in regular movie theaters, not just in churches and chautauquas.
Douglas Gomery has argued that a large suburban middle-class audience had developed
212
by the 1920s and had easy access to movie theaters.53 By the mid-1920s, many movie
theaters were owned by chains and content was standardized so that people all over the
country saw the same films; these films mainly targeted a middle-class audience and
could not be objectionable.54
In their study Middletown, Robert S. Lynd and Helen Merrell Lynd used a
sociological analysis of Muncie, Indiana to make general claims about “middle
America.” They identified the most popular movie “heroes” by 1925: “Harold Lloyd,
comedian; Gloria Swanson, heroine in modern society films; Thomas Meighan, hero in
modern society films; Colleen Moore, ingénue; Douglas Fairbanks, comedian and
adventurer; Mary Pickford, ingénue; and Norma Talmadge, heroine in modern society
films.”55 At first glance, these same stars were quite popular in chautauqua movies as
well. However, a review of the fifty-seven movies shown in the 1925 season at
Monteagle, Bay View, Winona Lake, the Chautauqua Institution, and Ocean Park shows
that they starred only in a combined 24 percent of the movies shown. Some of this
discrepancy has to do with the fact that groups organized series like the Ladies’ Library
Movie series, which didn’t pull in first-run movies. Additionally, movies were chosen to
correspond with other elements of the program.
53
Douglas Gomery, “Movie Audiences, Urban Geography, and the History of the American Film,” Velvet
Light Trap 19 (1982), 23-29,
http://pao.chadwyck.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/articles/displayItem.do?QueryType=articles&ResultsID=12
D1831FD376E67E3&filterSequence=0&ItemNumber=8&journalID=s536 (accessed January 4, 2011).
54
On the impact of movie chain development on working-class neighborhoods, see Lizabeth Cohen,
Making a New Deal: Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919-1939 (New York: Cambridge University Press,
1990), 123-129.
55
Robert S. Lynd and Helen Merrell Lynd, Middletown: A Study in Modern American Culture (1929; repr.
New York: Harcourt Brace, 1957), 266.
213
However, chautauquas also consciously decided to show films that were different
from those to which audiences usually had access. The Chautauqua Institution outlined
its policy for choosing movies for its 1925 season, and it is worth quoting at length:
From the consistently high standard of entertainment which its screen has
furnished has come inspiration for many earnest people and the realization that
the same type of motion pictures can replace the tawdry ones on the screens in
their own cities.
For the present season, the program represents months of careful thought
and preparation. Tabulated lists showing every film produced during the past
year were carefully studied. Each film which had outstanding merit was checked
and the best of these films were contracted for. While it is recognized that new
pictures were a necessary part of the program, the underlying thought in the
selection of the program was to secure the best.
Many independently produced pictures which have had a very poor
circulation in theaters owned by corporations or individuals who cater to
sensation seekers are included. …
The policy which has been entered into means that during the short season
of eight weeks, attractions will be presented day after day, that would be
advertised far and wide as the outstanding feature of the year in city theaters.56
By 1925, chautauquas were differentiating themselves from mainstream movie houses.
Because of a plethora of middle-class movies, the chautauquas often chose less popular
films that they thought had educational value or other merit.
One such movie was D. W. Griffith’s 1924 film, America, shown at Winona Lake
the summer after it was released. Despite the fact that the film was a box-office failure,
America was chosen to fill the gap in the programming when native Winonan and
preaching celebrity Billy Sunday could not speak due to illness. A letter was written to
the friends of the Winona Assembly advertising the special event of America. It
described the film:
This is the most elaborate historical film that has been attempted. Many claim it a
greater picture than ‘The Birth of a Nation’ Mr. Griffith’s first success.
56
“The 1925 Film Season,” Chautauquan Daily, July 4, 1925.
214
It has only been exhibited in a half dozen of our great cities. … All in all
the 12 reel photoplay America is the most appealing picture ever produced along
the patriotic line. It is enthusiastically endorsed by patriotic organizations such as
the Daughters of the American Revolution, The American Legion, the Junior
Order of the United American Mechanics and all true Americans.57
America is a Revolutionary War film that frames the conflict as a civil war between two
groups of British subjects, depicting important locations and people at the same time as
telling family sagas and a love story. It is generally recognized as the beginning of the
end of Griffith’s career. According to two scholars, “Even when his films were
reasonably popular his insistence on continuing elaborate and expensive roadshow
engagements made them unprofitable.”58 In this case, however, the stop in Winona Lake
was a tremendous success. On a Friday and a Saturday night, 9,225 tickets were sold,
earning over $7,000.59 This film that was generally unsuccessful elsewhere was the most
important event of the season at a chautauqua.
Throughout much of the 1920s, chautauquans had to leave the grounds to see the
most nationally popular films. At this point, chautauquas were out of synch with the
desires of average “middle Americans.” My grandmother and her friends often walked
into Petoskey to attend the movies during this period. In response, chautauquas tried
harder to attract locals to their films. Lakeside offered special passes for people wishing
to only attend movies; according to the Lakeside News in 1929, “So that people living
outside Lakeside can attend the performances [of movies] without extra charge a special
57
Don Cochran, Publicity Manager, Winona Lake Assembly, to Friends of Winona Assembly and Bible
Conference, [1924], Grace College and Theological Seminary Archives, Winona Lake, IN.
58
Donald W. McCaffrey and Christopher P. Jacobs, Guide to the Silent Years of American Cinema
(Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1999), 138.
59
Box Office Book 1923-1924, Winona Lake Assembly, Grace College and Theological Seminary
Archives, Winona Lake, IN.
215
arrangement has been made. Under the new plan the time limit of hour passes issued at
the gate on deposit of 25 cents, is extended to one and one-half hours when stamped at
Orchestra Hall.”60
Monteagle, in a quite rural area, actually showed the only movies in the area, so
many locals did attend. Julia Pulliam remembers,
We always allowed the mountain (we’d always say the mountain boys because I
don’t think many girls really ever came), but the mountain boys could go to the
movie. And there was a ticket booth up there and they could pay forty-five cents
and come in and go to the movie. And we were delighted, because there was no
movie house in Monteagle, there wasn’t one in Tracy, there wasn’t one anywhere
anybody could go to the movie, so we were delighted.61
Monteagle was an exception, however; when chautauquas were near communities with
movie theaters, the community theaters were usually more successful.
Because of technological innovations in the late 1920s, chautauquas lost any
remaining competitive edge over local movie theaters; they were too slow in adopting
talking picture technologies. In the case of Ocean Park, it took several years and a
significant downturn in attendance before the equipment was installed. By the summer
season of 1929, a quarter of all movie theaters in the U.S. and 30 in Maine were wired for
sound; film historian Donald Crafton argues that “sound films were within driving
distance for most middle-class people by the end of 1929.”62 Ocean Park was not wired
for several more years. The 1931 program states:
As usual, the motion pictures will be given in the Temple on dates as elsewhere
indicated and will be in silent picture form. In spite of the fact that fewer silent
60
“Movie Schedule,” Lakeside News, July 20, 1929.
61
Pulliams, interview.
62
“Wiring Being Speeded in All Sections,” Film Daily, August 8, 1929, 11-12; Donald Crafton, The
Talkies: American Cinema’s Transition to Sound 1926-1931 (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press,
1997), 254.
216
pictures are being made, since the development of the spoken form, yet we feel
pleased to be able to announce a list of pictures for this season that will meet all
of the requirements for high class programs.63
In 1932, the story was the same: “The large expense of installing the ‘talkie’ system of
pictures precludes the use of that system for the present in the Temple. However, we
shall present a select number of silent pictures which we believe can be made to serve our
needs both for educational and entertainment purposes.”64 In 1933, only one film was
scheduled, listed as “To Be Announced” in the program (and was certainly a silent). At
this point in time, it was better to show no movies at all if they could not be talking
pictures. In 1934, Ocean Park tested the possibility of talkies for a few weeks, and finally
in 1935, offered a full season of talkies: “Don’t forget that we are having a new talkie
screen and are arranging for the latest in talking picture projectors run by well qualified
and thoroughly competent operators. We have already improved the lighting and exit
facilities in the Temple. All we need now is the continued loyal and enthusiastic
patronage of our people.”65 Ocean Park was exceptional in the time it took to adopt
talking pictures. By the 1930 season, Lakeside, Chautauqua, and Winona Lake all had at
least one talking picture venue.
Correspondence from Bay View in 1931 shows that converting to talkies was a
serious financial undertaking. Hugh Kennedy, the president of the Board, wrote to each
of the trustees suggesting that they rent-to-own talking picture equipment. According to
63
Ocean Park Assembly Program 1931, Ocean Park.
64
Ocean Park Assembly Program 1932, Ocean Park.
65
Ocean Park Assembly Program and Business Directory 1935, Ocean Park.
217
the memo, the equipment would be supplied by Universal Sound System, of Saginaw, for
$2,700.
They put it in on trial and if we do not like it, we are under no obligation to buy.
They will allow us to use it for the summer and if we do not buy, we will have to
pay the $100.00 to the engineer and $230.00 for the use of the equipment if they
have to take it out. That may look a bit large, but on account of the size of the
auditorium they have to make an especially large horn for the loud speaker for
they say that there are very few auditoriums the shape of ours and as large as ours,
so they have to make some special parts.66
The system put in place did have a secondary benefit, which is that it improved the
quality of audio projection for lectures and other entertainments as well.
Kennedy’s reference to the size and shape of the auditorium points to the fact that
the auditorium was not especially conducive to sound projection. These auditoriums,
many built in the 1910s, were designed for maximum seats and a decent stage rather than
for optimum sound. E. Tom Child was twelve when Bay View converted to talkies. He
recalls, “I remember when the movies went from silent pictures to talkies at the
Auditorium. The acoustics were terrible with the sound. They had to do only the first
one [motion picture], and they had to do a lot of the acoustical dampening or something
to stomp down the reflection of sound.”67 Similarly, when Lakeside equipped Orchestra
Hall with talkie equipment, building acoustics required adjustment: “Acoustic material
has been placed on the ceiling so that the building is perfect, not only for sound pictures,
but for the many conferences, conventions, and other meetings that are held in the
66
67
Hugh Kennedy to F. E. Durfee, June 16, 1931, Ditto Collection, Bay View.
E. Tom Child, oral history interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI, July 27, 2008,
recording and transcript, Bay View.
218
popular hall.”68 Though it was done primarily to show talkies, the updating of the sound
systems made for better listening in all kinds of performance media.
Chautauquas were slow to start the process, but they did eventually modernize
their equipment. Without the availability of talkies at assemblies, chautauquans went
outside the grounds to see their movies. By the early ‘30s, the chautauquas that hadn’t
yet made the switch ran out of movies to show as very few silent pictures continued to be
made; they had to show older movies that audiences already knew, and as a result,
chautauquans lost interest.
The strongest rationale for adopting talking pictures was that it became a cheaper
alternative than live performances. Movies made up more than 40% of the programming
at the Chautauqua Institution when the assembly made the switch to talkies in 1930, more
than any other category of performers, including all lecturers combined. Films jumped
from just 2.5% of the programs offered in 1925 to 37% five years later when Lakeside
began showing talking pictures. Not all chautauquas showed such significant change so
quickly, but movies were certainly having an impact on the programming.
This trend occurred at the same time that the chautauqua circuits were collapsing.
No longer could chautauquas buy a prepackaged set of programs or look for their
favorites among stacks of talent brochures. Instead, programming committees again had
to seek out their own talent, and this was not an easy or inexpensive undertaking. As
when Winona Lake substituted America when Billy Sunday canceled in 1924,
chautauquas found it very easy to fill in programming gaps with films. Travel costs and
the expense of an exhibition were also much cheaper for rolls of film than for live
68
“Items of Interest,” Lakeside Bulletin, April-June 1930, 4, Lakeside.
219
performers. Movies rarely missed their trains or got flat tires or complained about the
accommodations.
Certainly, live performances at chautauquas remained. Most still held weekly
concerts, hosted regular speakers, and had religious programs, but going to the movies
became the regular entertainment at chautauquas. Julia Pulliam went to the movies in the
mid-1930s in Monteagle; she recalls, “Everybody went to the movie, because it was
always a good movie. … All the adults went to the movie, I mean, you really looked
forward to going to the movie. It wasn’t re-re-re-runs … they would have [new movies].
… And we had a movie Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.”69
In Bay View, movies were shown twice a week in the ‘30s. Barbara McLaughlin
Brown reminisces, “I went … always to the movies that we had on Mondays and
Saturdays – those were big events. Although our movie equipment often failed, still, it
was a convenient way to go to the movie. … Oh, yes, everybody went. And they were
very careful about the movies that they chose, but of course the choice of decent movies
was a lot wider than it is now.”70 Movies were the program, and they were not just for
youngsters. E. Tom Child remembers going to the auditorium in Bay View with his
family, but not sitting with his parents: “Oh, I think families [would go together]. We
didn’t stay together, the kids always sat in the balcony. But the adults were interested. It
wasn’t a kids’ program.”71
69
Pulliams, interview.
70
Barbara McLaughlin Brown, oral history interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI,
August 8, 2008, recording and transcript, Bay View.
71
Child, interview.
220
Unlike most live entertainment, the exhibition of movies was work for local
chautauquans. As a young adult, Jonathan Amy was a projectionist in Bay View (he later
became a world-renowned chemist). He remembers the challenges that projecting in Bay
View presented to his scientifically-inclined mind:
And we had all the problems that you had with movies of that time, with film
breaking and having to splice. And then part of the Bay View tradition were the
Bay View bats, and the Bay View bats would often sweep down through the
beams of the movie projector as you were showing films there. You’d have to
change reels, yes. Yes, and you probably turned some lights on so that you could
see to thread the film. … But the real problem came when you had to change the
carbons in the carbon arcs, and that took some skill in order to get everything
properly lined up and lined up with the film – optical math.72
Professional projectionists were common early in the chautauquas’ film history, and
certainly they had their own share of technical difficulties, but when chautauquans were
more responsible for the projecting, the quality of the projecting was not always the
highest. But that was part of the charm of attending the movies at chautauquas.
With the shift from a program filled with a variety of live entertainments to more
and more movies, an era at chautauquas was ending. Chautauquas had had a significant
impact on the kinds of programming made available and acceptable to middle-class
audiences. Early films incorporated live elements, but once the movie became the
entertainment rather than an illustration, it was no longer unique to a particular
chautauqua exhibition. Middle-class entertainment became standardized, not unique to
chautauquas. With the popularizing of movies throughout American society, movies
shown at chautauquas could also be accessed at more commercial movie theaters. The
72
Jonathan Amy, oral history interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI, August 4 and 6,
2008, recording and transcript, Bay View.
221
programming that chautauquas chose to show their middle-class audiences no longer had
an impact on broader society.
222
CONCLUSION
THE GATES ARE STILL OPEN:
PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUAS TODAY
Especially with the growing popularity of movies at chautauquas and elsewhere,
permanent chautauqua programming and middle-class culture became incorporated into a
more unified American mass culture. Rather than creating their own bottom-up culture,
chautauquans generally relied upon the popularity of Hollywood and other major engines
of mass American culture for their programs. By 1935, chautauquas had come to rely on
movies as the primary entertainment. In Winona Lake and Bay View, movies were more
prevalent than anything except religious lectures. In the Colorado Chautauqua, movies
made up 45% of the programming in 1935, more than double any other category of
performance. At the Chautauqua Institution, there were more movies shown than all
other programs combined. Movies had taken over chautauquas.
Still, the chautauquas that survived the Depression without the diverse
programming from the circuits did manage to stay afloat. Of the permanent chautauquas
discussed in this volume, all but the assembly at Winona Lake have lasted as summer or
year-round chautauqua communities. Winona struggled in the late 1930s, opened its
gates in 1938, had a change in program leadership after the 1939 season, began calling it
an “improved Concert-Lecture Series of entertainment” in 1941, and finally abolished the
chautauqua in 1943 to focus on its Bible conferences.1 Today, it is a typical town that is
home to Grace College and Theological Seminary.
1
Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of Winona Lake Christian Assembly, August 17, 1938,
Winona Lake Christian Assembly Minutes: 1937-1947, Morgan Library, Grace College and Seminary,
Winona Lake, IN; Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of Winona Lake Christian Assembly,
August 20, 1941, Winona Lake Christian Assembly Minutes: 1937-1947, Morgan Library, Grace College
223
Approximately eight chautauquas have remained as assemblies in one form or
another. Some have year-round residents, but the bulk of the programming takes place in
the summers. They all have programming relating to religion, education, performance,
and recreation; these four program elements are now referred to as the “four pillars” of
chautauquas. Fountain Park in Remington, Indiana still has its short two-week summer
season and Lakeside and Chautauqua each hold nine-week seasons with programming in
the “shoulder” seasons. Movies continue to make up a large percentage of the program,
but in the last decade or two, there have been renewed efforts to bring in more live
performances. There are attempts afoot at some chautauquas to expand their educational
programming. Quite recently, chautauquans have begun to develop a new awareness that
their most wonderful place in the world is actually part of a much larger movement and
the word chautauqua has returned to their vocabularies. However, permanent
chautauquas are no longer producing culture that impacts America on a large scale.
Lifelong Lakeside resident and historian David T. Glick has hypothesized about
why resorts like Lakeside have lasted into the present, “One of the answers that has
appeared to me is that our resort became a true community while most of the former
centers remained seasonal camps.”2 It is this “true community” emphasis that supports
all of the remaining chautauquas.
Yet, chautauquas remain contested sites of race, class, gender, and religion. More
and more, as American families are changing, chautauquas are feeling outside pressures
to conform to societal norms. These families are not all white, all Protestant, and all
and Seminary, Winona Lake, IN; Vincent H. Gaddis and Jasper A. Huffman, A Memory and a Vision: The
Story of Winona Lake (Butler, IN: Higley Huffman Press, 1960).
2
David T. Glick, “Lakeside,” Lakeside Heritage Society Manifest (February 2009): 4.
224
heterosexual. Women do not stay at home to raise the children in the same numbers as in
the past. Families are complicated by divorce and by geographical distance. Cottages are
much more expensive and many in the newest generation can no longer afford to own
second homes.
As a result, chautauqua families are different. Many chautauqua households are
made up of grandparents and grandchildren, with not just fathers, but both parents
coming for the weekends. Or, families come only for a few weeks a summer and rent
rather than own cottages.
Chautauquans are no longer universally white, and many children have one parent
from a white chautauquan family and the other is a non-white newcomer to chautauqua.
This reflects a much larger American cultural trend; in the 2000 census, for the first time,
individuals were able to identify themselves as being of two or more races.3 In addition,
many chautauqua families have adopted children from outside the United States.
Through marrying across race lines, because of a stronger awareness of nonwestern or non-Protestant religions, or through a disillusion with religion entirely,
younger chautauquans are not uniquely Protestant. The Chautauqua Institution has
actively sought a broader religious base. The Chautauqua Catholic Community was
founded in 1988. In 2009, the Everett Jewish Life Center was dedicated. There is now
talk of creating a Muslim center on the grounds. Religious lecturers at Chautauqua are
now drawn from a wide variety of faiths. However, other chautauquas have held fast to
their Protestant heritage. In Bay View, for example, one must still have a letter from a
minister to become a member of the association, which is necessary to own a cottage, but
3
U.S. Census Bureau, “State and County QuickFacts: Race,”
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68178.htm (accessed February 15, 2011).
225
not to rent or to attend programs. People of differing faiths or of no faith are on the
grounds at chautauquas and impact the communities.
The demographics of chautauquans are also changing because they do not always
belong to heterosexual nuclear families. Ocean Grove is a Methodist Camp Meeting on
the Jersey Shore; it was founded in 1870 and had chautauqua programming for several
years around the turn of the twentieth century. Today, it is a thriving year-round and
summer community, and until recently, had a large gay population. In 2007, three
lesbian couples sought permission to use a camp meeting building on the boardwalk for
their civil union ceremonies. The Camp Meeting Association denied their request,
claiming that they are a church that does not approve of gay marriage or civil unions. As
a result, the Camp Meeting Association has lost some of its tax exemption because that
building is not open to all, and many gay people have left the community. 4 Chautauquas
are a popular site for weddings, so as more states allow gay marriage, permanent
chautauquas may need to confront this issue.
Chautauqua families now also include many step- and half- families. For one of
my cousins, Bay View is the only place where he sees all of his family. On his Facebook
profile in 2009, Austin Smith wrote, “My brother lives in Charlottesville, VA. My
Stepsister lives in Washington, D.C. My Dad and Stepmom live in Naples [FL]. My
Mom and Sister live in Chicago. My Stepbrother lives in Denver. I live in Missoula,
MT. We are all united through Bay View, Michigan.”5 This is the information Austin
4
Caren Chesler, “Gays in a Methodist Town? No Problem (Until Now),” New York Times, June 10, 2007;
Jill P. Capuzzo, “Group Loses Tax Break Over Gay Union Issue,” New York Times, September 18, 2007,
5
Austin Smith, Facebook,
http://www.facebook.com/search/?q=austin+smoth&init=quick#/profile.php?id=23500156&ref=ts
(accessed December 9, 2009).
226
submitted for the main section to describe himself on Facebook; Bay View is an intimate
part of his identity because his family has been divided across the United States.
For people like Austin, Bay View is home. Yet most young people who grew up
in chautauquas will not be able to afford to own or maintain their own cottages. As with
many resort areas, chautauqua cottages have become more and more expensive in the last
forty years. Bets Shier suggests that, in Bay View, it was around the time of the 1975
Bay View Centennial that things began to change. She recalls the costs of cottages
before then, “my grandmother, when she died, her cottage – now this is a fairly large
cottage – as I say, it’s on three lots – for her estate purposes, it was appraised at five
thousand dollars. And her other cottage down the street [was valued at] three thousand
dollars. And of course, you know, they were all sold with everything in them.”6 Contrast
this story with one a few decades later, from Jonathan Amy, also of Bay View:
It’s becoming much more expensive to live in Bay View, which means
immediately that there’s a different group of people, because many people who
might want to live here, if they stop and look and think, say, “We can’t afford it.”
One couple that we helped to get an associate membership wanted to buy a
cottage and he said, “We looked at a lot of cottages and we found some. There
were some five-hundred thousand dollar cottages that we could afford to buy, but
when we looked at the ten-thousand dollar a year tax rate and other expenses
involved, we just decided we couldn’t afford it.” And I think we’re beginning to
get that realization now. And all of us, all of us feel sad in various ways.7
The rise in cottage prices has attracted different types of people to the permanent
chautauquas.8 Usually, this mixing of old and new families has been harmonious, but not
6
Elizabeth “Bets” Shier, oral history interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI, July 28,
2008, recording and transcript, Bay View.
7
Jonathan Amy, oral history interview by author, Bay View Association, Bay View, MI, August 4 and 6,
2008, recording and transcript, Bay View.
8
Fountain Park in Remington, IN is one chautauqua that has not had such a sharp rise in housing prices.
Cottages, when they are available, can still be purchased at reasonably low prices.
227
always. Mary Stewart grew up in Lakeside in the 1920s and ‘30s; her grandmother
bought a cottage in 1905. Stewart has strong feelings about keeping Lakeside close to its
heritage. She argues:
To my generation, the charm of Lakeside was that it was natural. … You honored
the wild growth. … That was the charm of Lakeside, that you were living in the
woods. And now you’re living in a gated community. So us old-timers, we’re
not sure we can go along with this. It’s not the same. … The people that used to
come here came here because they had inherited an old cabin and they could
afford to come here for vacation. … Now the people that come here have air
conditioning … I’m glad they want to come. I’m glad they like Lakeside. But
they’re not the kind of people that we knew, the people whose families had come
here early and left them an old [cottage]. With those gorgeous new winterized
mansions, they’re not going to go back to the way Lakeside used to be.9
As discussed in Chapter 1, chautauquans have been mostly middle class, but there have
always been people of different economic status in permanent chautauquas. Today, more
people are upper or upper-middle class, and that desire to live as a middle-class person
for the summer has sometimes been replaced with a yearning to build a bigger, showier
cottage.
Chautauquas have been impacted by many changes in American society, and they
have had to stand by their heritage in order to preserve their communities. They have
been aided in this regard by gaining preservation status. The Colorado Chautauqua, the
Chautauqua Institution, and Bay View are all National Historic Landmarks. Lakeside,
Monteagle Sunday School Assembly, and Ocean Park are on the National Register of
Historical Places. Several other areas that used to be chautauquas have been protected in
some way. These efforts at preservation limit the changes that can be made to the
9
Mary L. Stewart, oral history interview by author, Lakeside, OH, August 13, 2009, recording and partial
transcript, Lakeside.
228
buildings, but sometimes act as a justification for narrowing opportunities for
programming in new and different ways.
It is the connection to place, the desire to return to the same place next summer,
that continues to sustain the permanent chautauqua communities that exist today. They
are no longer producers of a middle-class culture that can impact the broader American
culture; instead this American culture dictates what is presented at chautauquas. As that
American culture becomes more complex in the third century that chautauquas have
existed, chautauquas again find themselves a site for the renegotiation of race, class,
gender, sexuality, and religion. Through their programming and by living in a closelyknit community, permanent chautauquans have always redefined all of these categories to
fit their needs, and they must continue to do so. Chautauquans have a long and rich
heritage to look back upon, to remember when they have been inclusive and to learn from
their mistakes of bigotry and narrow-mindedness. Because of this rich history,
chautauquans have an opportunity and a legitimacy in renegotiating how individuals fit
into a broader society.
Chautauquas do not need to be the kind of gated communities that Mary L.
Stewart fears. Neither should they be associations that rely entirely on their past to
dictate their future. They must remain living, breathing communities that impact
individuals, families, and the whole of American society. Vincent wrote of the
chautauqua concept in 1886,
It aims to … take people on all sides of their natures, and cultivate them
symmetrically, making men, women, and children everywhere more affectionate
and sympathetic as members of a family; more conscientious and reverent, as
worshippers together of the true God; more intelligent and thoughtful as students
229
in a universe of ideas; and more industrious, economical, just, and generous as
members of society in a work-a-day world.10
Chautauquans today have a responsibility to protect that heritage, not just of the buildings
at permanent chautauquas, but also of the idea of chautauqua itself. Through this, they
can again effect lasting change on American society.
10
John H. Vincent, The Chautauqua Movement (Boston: Chautauqua Press, 1886; repr., Charleston, SC:
BiblioLife, 2009), 4.
230
APPENDIX A
PERMANENT CHAUTAUQUA PROGRAM ANALYSES
The charts included in this appendix outline the frequency of different kinds of
performances at several permanent chautauquas in five-year increments in the period
from 1900 to 1935. When a program was unavailable for a year, one a year before or
after was substituted if possible, and is indicated with an asterisk. Some chautauquas no
longer have programs available for several years, in which case “no program information
available” is noted.
Based on the title and performer name, each performance printed in the
chautauqua programs was categorized as a lecture, theatrical, music, a program
specifically for youth, or an entertainment act. It was then subcategorized. Many
lectures likely crossed sub-categories, so educated guesses were made as to what the
program would most likely entail. If music performances involved both choral and
instrumental music, they were subcategorized as “Combined.” Entertainment acts
included magicians, dancers, spelling bees, and fireworks. It should be noted that there
were often changes to the actual programs after bulletins were printed, so the numbers
represent a solid estimate of what was shown.
For each year, the raw total column shows the number of times a performance of
that subcategory appeared in the program. The raw percentage shows the percentage that
subcategory represented in the overall program for the year. The sub-group percentage
describes how prevalent that subcategory was within its category. At the end of each
category is a subtotal for the raw total of that subcategory and the percentage it represents
in the whole annual program. At the bottom of the raw total column is a year total for the
231
number of performances given at the permanent chautauqua for the year. The type total
at the far left of the second page of each table describes how prevalent the categories and
subcategories were at the chautauqua in the combined period from 1900 to 1935.
Table A1. Lakeside Program Analysis
1900
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1905
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1910
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1915
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
16
5
5
5
3
34
39.02%
12.20%
12.20%
12.20%
7.32%
82.93%
47.06%
14.71%
14.71%
14.71%
8.82%
16
5
5
5
3
34
11.27%
3.52%
3.52%
3.52%
2.11%
23.94%
47.06%
14.71%
14.71%
14.71%
8.82%
44
17
4
3
0
68
23.78%
9.19%
2.16%
1.62%
0.00%
36.76%
64.71%
25.00%
5.88%
4.41%
0.00%
80
6
8
3
7
104
37.91%
2.84%
3.79%
1.42%
3.32%
49.29%
76.92%
5.77%
7.69%
2.88%
6.73%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
2
0
0
0
2
4.88%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
4.88%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
3
0
0
5
8
2.11%
0.00%
0.00%
3.52%
5.63%
37.50%
0.00%
0.00%
62.50%
4
0
0
2
6
2.16%
0.00%
0.00%
1.08%
3.24%
66.67%
0.00%
0.00%
33.33%
2
1
0
2
5
0.95%
0.47%
0.00%
0.95%
2.37%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
40.00%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
3
0
1
4
7.32%
0.00%
2.44%
9.76%
75.00%
0.00%
25.00%
4
0
85
89
2.82%
0.00%
59.86%
62.68%
4.49%
0.00%
95.51%
8
10
80
98
4.32%
5.41%
43.24%
52.97%
8.16%
10.20%
81.63%
2
19
71
92
0.95%
9.00%
33.65%
43.60%
2.17%
20.65%
77.17%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
1
1
2.44%
2.44%
100.00%
5
5
3.52%
3.52%
100.00%
11
11
5.95%
5.95%
100.00%
5
5
2.37%
2.37%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
6
6
4.23%
4.23%
100.00%
2
2
1.08%
1.08%
100.00%
5
5
2.37%
2.37%
100.00%
YR TOTAL
41 100.00%
142 100.00%
185 100.00%
211 100.00%
232
Table A1. Continued
1920
Raw total
Raw %
Sub-group %
1925
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1930
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1935
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
TYPE TOTAL
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
44
17
7
1
3
72
24.04%
9.29%
3.83%
0.55%
1.64%
39.34%
61.11%
23.61%
9.72%
1.39%
4.17%
77
13
8
3
2
103
32.63%
5.51%
3.39%
1.27%
0.85%
43.64%
74.76%
12.62%
7.77%
2.91%
1.94%
54
12
3
2
4
75
14.21%
3.16%
0.79%
0.53%
1.05%
19.74%
72.00%
16.00%
4.00%
2.67%
5.33%
55
12
3
0
1
71
13.38%
2.92%
0.73%
0.00%
0.24%
17.27%
77.46%
16.90%
4.23%
0.00%
1.41%
386
87
43
22
23
561
21.58%
4.86%
2.40%
1.23%
1.29%
68.81%
15.51%
7.66%
3.92%
4.10%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
3
3
0
0
6
1.27%
1.27%
0.00%
0.00%
2.54%
50.00%
50.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
6
0
142
148
0.00%
1.58%
0.00%
37.37%
38.95%
0.00%
4.05%
0.00%
95.95%
0
8
0
283
291
0.00%
1.95%
0.00%
68.86%
70.80%
0.00%
2.75%
0.00%
97.25%
14
18
0
434
466
0.78%
1.01%
0.00%
24.26%
3.00%
3.86%
0.00%
93.13%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
14
13
78
105
7.65%
7.10%
42.62%
57.38%
13.33%
12.38%
74.29%
21
7
94
122
8.90%
2.97%
39.83%
51.69%
17.21%
5.74%
77.05%
26
13
109
148
6.84%
3.42%
28.68%
38.95%
17.57%
8.78%
73.65%
23
10
9
42
5.60%
2.43%
2.19%
10.22%
54.76%
23.81%
21.43%
101
72
527
700
5.65%
4.02%
29.46%
14.43%
10.29%
75.29%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
1
1
0.55%
0.55%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2
2
0.53%
0.53%
100.00%
2
2
0.49%
0.49%
100.00%
27
27
1.51%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
5
5
2.73%
2.73%
100.00%
5
5
2.12%
2.12%
100.00%
7
7
1.84%
1.84%
100.00%
5
5
1.22%
1.22%
100.00%
35
35
1.96%
100.00%
183
100.00%
236 100.00%
380 100.00%
411 100.00%
1789
233
Table A2. Ocean Park Program Analysis
1900
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1905
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1910
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1915
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
83
39
12
4
3
141
44.62%
20.97%
6.45%
2.15%
1.61%
75.81%
58.87%
27.66%
8.51%
2.84%
2.13%
62
20
2
1
0
85
48.82%
15.75%
1.57%
0.79%
0.00%
66.93%
72.94%
23.53%
2.35%
1.18%
0.00%
75
15
3
2
1
96
47.47%
9.49%
1.90%
1.27%
0.63%
60.76%
78.13%
15.63%
3.13%
2.08%
1.04%
17
42
0
0
2
61
16.19%
40.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1.90%
58.10%
27.87%
68.85%
0.00%
0.00%
3.28%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
5
0
0
0
5
2.69%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2.69%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2
0
0
4
6
1.57%
0.00%
0.00%
3.15%
4.72%
33.33%
0.00%
0.00%
66.67%
1
0
0
0
1
0.63%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.63%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
3
2
0
2
7
2.86%
1.90%
0.00%
1.90%
6.67%
42.86%
28.57%
0.00%
28.57%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
13
5
0
18
6.99%
2.69%
0.00%
9.68%
72.22%
27.78%
0.00%
4
4
0
8
3.15%
3.15%
0.00%
6.30%
50.00%
50.00%
0.00%
4
6
0
10
2.53%
3.80%
0.00%
6.33%
40.00%
60.00%
0.00%
3
19
3
25
2.86%
18.10%
2.86%
23.81%
12.00%
76.00%
12.00%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
20
20
10.75%
10.75%
100.00%
23
23
18.11%
18.11%
100.00%
47
47
29.75%
29.75%
100.00%
10
10
9.52%
9.52%
100.00%
2
2
1.08%
1.08%
100.00%
5
5
3.94%
3.94%
100.00%
4
4
2.53%
2.53%
100.00%
2
2
1.90%
1.90%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
YR TOTAL
186 100.00%
127 100.00%
158 100.00%
105 100.00%
234
Table A2. Continued
1920
Raw total
Raw %
Sub-group %
1925
Raw total
Raw %
Sub-group %
1930
Raw total
Raw %
Sub-group %
1935
Raw total
Raw %
Sub-group %
TYPE TOTAL
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
88
16
0
3
0
107
53.99%
9.82%
0.00%
1.84%
0.00%
65.64%
82.24%
14.95%
0.00%
2.80%
0.00%
83
14
1
0
0
98
54.25%
9.15%
0.65%
0.00%
0.00%
64.05%
84.69%
14.29%
1.02%
0.00%
0.00%
37
15
0
2
0
54
38.54%
15.63%
0.00%
2.08%
0.00%
56.25%
68.52%
27.78%
0.00%
3.70%
0.00%
34
22
0
2
0
58
24.64%
15.94%
0.00%
1.45%
0.00%
42.03%
58.62%
37.93%
0.00%
3.45%
0.00%
479
183
18
14
6
700
42.54%
16.25%
1.60%
1.24%
0.53%
68.43%
26.14%
2.57%
2.00%
0.86%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
13
2
1
10
26
7.98%
1.23%
0.61%
6.13%
15.95%
50.00%
7.69%
3.85%
38.46%
2
2
1
9
14
1.31%
1.31%
0.65%
5.88%
9.15%
14.29%
14.29%
7.14%
64.29%
2
1
1
19
23
2.08%
1.04%
1.04%
19.79%
23.96%
8.70%
4.35%
4.35%
82.61%
0
2
1
20
23
0.00%
1.45%
0.72%
14.49%
16.67%
0.00%
8.70%
4.35%
86.96%
28
9
4
64
105
2.49%
0.80%
0.36%
5.68%
26.67%
8.57%
3.81%
60.95%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
1
18
1
20
0.61%
11.04%
0.61%
12.27%
5.00%
90.00%
5.00%
0
20
2
22
0.00%
13.07%
1.31%
14.38%
0.00%
90.91%
9.09%
0
8
0
8
0.00%
8.33%
0.00%
8.33%
0.00%
100.00%
0.00%
1
13
0
14
0.72%
9.42%
0.00%
10.14%
7.14%
92.86%
0.00%
26
93
6
125
2.31%
8.26%
0.53%
20.80%
74.40%
4.80%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
7
7
4.29%
4.29%
100.00%
17
17
11.11%
11.11%
100.00%
8
8
8.33%
8.33%
100.00%
40
40
28.99%
28.99%
100.00%
172
172
15.28%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
3
3
1.84%
1.84%
100.00%
2
2
1.31%
1.31%
100.00%
3
3
3.13%
3.13%
100.00%
3
3
2.17%
2.17%
100.00%
24
24
2.13%
100.00%
163
100.00%
153
100.00%
96
100.00%
138
100.00%
YR TOTAL
1126
235
Table A3. Chautauqua Institution Program Analysis
1900
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1905
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1910
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1915
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
53
98
17
12
19
199
20.46%
37.84%
6.56%
4.63%
7.34%
76.83%
26.63%
49.25%
8.54%
6.03%
9.55%
71
65
4
12
16
168
25.82%
23.64%
1.45%
4.36%
5.82%
61.09%
42.26%
38.69%
2.38%
7.14%
9.52%
69
66
15
16
21
187
23.55%
22.53%
5.12%
5.46%
7.17%
63.82%
36.90%
35.29%
8.02%
8.56%
11.23%
85
61
9
6
24
185
18.76%
13.47%
1.99%
1.32%
5.30%
40.84%
45.95%
32.97%
4.86%
3.24%
12.97%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
16
1
0
2
19
6.18%
0.39%
0.00%
0.77%
7.34%
84.21%
5.26%
0.00%
10.53%
42
0
0
0
42
15.27%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
15.27%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
31
4
0
4
39
10.58%
1.37%
0.00%
1.37%
13.31%
79.49%
10.26%
0.00%
10.26%
46
7
0
111
164
10.15%
1.55%
0.00%
24.50%
36.20%
28.05%
4.27%
0.00%
67.68%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
25
9
1
35
9.65%
3.47%
0.39%
13.51%
71.43%
25.71%
2.86%
27
13
9
49
9.82%
4.73%
3.27%
17.82%
55.10%
26.53%
18.37%
26
15
23
64
8.87%
5.12%
7.85%
21.84%
40.63%
23.44%
35.94%
39
12
32
83
8.61%
2.65%
7.06%
18.32%
46.99%
14.46%
38.55%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
9
9
3.27%
3.27%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
18
18
3.97%
3.97%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
6
6
2.32%
2.32%
100.00%
7
7
2.55%
2.55%
100.00%
3
3
1.02%
1.02%
100.00%
3
3
0.66%
0.66%
100.00%
YR TOTAL
259 100.00%
275 100.00%
293 100.00%
453 100.00%
236
Table A3. Continued
1920
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1925
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1930
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1935
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
TYPE TOTAL
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
84
72
17
7
37
217
18.63%
15.96%
3.77%
1.55%
8.20%
48.12%
38.71%
33.18%
7.83%
3.23%
17.05%
148
93
8
5
22
276
23.53%
14.79%
1.27%
0.79%
3.50%
43.88%
53.62%
33.70%
2.90%
1.81%
7.97%
136
108
8
3
15
270
18.89%
15.00%
1.11%
0.42%
2.08%
37.50%
50.37%
40.00%
2.96%
1.11%
5.56%
151
70
22
8
21
272
21.51%
9.97%
3.13%
1.14%
2.99%
38.75%
55.51%
25.74%
8.09%
2.94%
7.72%
797
633
100
69
175
1774
21.07%
16.74%
2.64%
1.82%
4.63%
44.93%
35.68%
5.64%
3.89%
9.86%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
17
3
0
135
155
3.77%
0.67%
0.00%
29.93%
34.37%
10.97%
1.94%
0.00%
87.10%
10
3
0
236
249
1.59%
0.48%
0.00%
37.52%
39.59%
4.02%
1.20%
0.00%
94.78%
27
13
10
290
340
3.75%
1.81%
1.39%
40.28%
47.22%
7.94%
3.82%
2.94%
85.29%
8
12
11
283
314
1.14%
1.71%
1.57%
40.31%
44.73%
2.55%
3.82%
3.50%
90.13%
197
43
21
1061
1322
5.21%
1.14%
0.56%
28.05%
14.90%
3.25%
1.59%
80.26%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
18
12
37
67
3.99%
2.66%
8.20%
14.86%
26.87%
17.91%
55.22%
10
23
36
69
1.59%
3.66%
5.72%
10.97%
14.49%
33.33%
52.17%
9
20
36
65
1.25%
2.78%
5.00%
9.03%
13.85%
30.77%
55.38%
4
18
65
87
0.57%
2.56%
9.26%
12.39%
4.60%
20.69%
74.71%
158
122
239
519
4.18%
3.23%
6.32%
30.44%
23.51%
46.05%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
9
9
2.00%
2.00%
100.00%
30
30
4.77%
4.77%
100.00%
34
34
4.72%
4.72%
100.00%
16
16
2.28%
2.28%
100.00%
116
116
3.07%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
3
3
0.67%
0.67%
100.00%
5
5
0.79%
0.79%
100.00%
11
11
1.53%
1.53%
100.00%
13
13
1.85%
1.85%
100.00%
51
51
1.35%
100.00%
YR TOTAL
451 100.00%
629 100.00%
720 100.00%
702 100.00%
3782
237
Table A4. Bay View Program Analysis
1900
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1905
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1910
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1915
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
13
29
15
3
5
65
10.83%
24.17%
12.50%
2.50%
4.17%
54.17%
20.00%
44.62%
23.08%
4.62%
7.69%
28
23
1
4
7
63
21.88%
17.97%
0.78%
3.13%
5.47%
49.22%
44.44%
36.51%
1.59%
6.35%
11.11%
12
5
1
7
3
28
20.00%
8.33%
1.67%
11.67%
5.00%
46.67%
42.86%
17.86%
3.57%
25.00%
10.71%
54
22
26
4
11
117
32.34%
13.17%
15.57%
2.40%
6.59%
70.06%
46.15%
18.80%
22.22%
3.42%
9.40%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
8
0
0
2
10
6.67%
0.00%
0.00%
1.67%
8.33%
80.00%
0.00%
0.00%
20.00%
12
0
0
0
12
9.38%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
9.38%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
13
4
0
1
18
21.67%
6.67%
0.00%
1.67%
30.00%
72.22%
22.22%
0.00%
5.56%
12
5
1
3
21
7.19%
2.99%
0.60%
1.80%
12.57%
57.14%
23.81%
4.76%
14.29%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
12
9
7
28
10.00%
7.50%
5.83%
23.33%
42.86%
32.14%
25.00%
35
8
0
43
27.34%
6.25%
0.00%
33.59%
81.40%
18.60%
0.00%
7
5
0
12
11.67%
8.33%
0.00%
20.00%
58.33%
41.67%
0.00%
16
5
2
23
9.58%
2.99%
1.20%
13.77%
69.57%
21.74%
8.70%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
14
14
11.67%
11.67%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
3
3
2.50%
2.50%
100.00%
10
10
7.81%
7.81%
100.00%
2
2
3.33%
3.33%
100.00%
6
6
3.59%
3.59%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
YR TOTAL
120 100.00%
128 100.00%
60 100.00%
167 100.00%
238
Table A4. Continued
1920
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1925
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1930
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1935
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
TYPE TOTAL
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
68
27
12
2
4
113
38.64%
15.34%
6.82%
1.14%
2.27%
64.20%
60.18%
23.89%
10.62%
1.77%
3.54%
58
11
0
1
3
73
43.94%
8.33%
0.00%
0.76%
2.27%
55.30%
79.45%
15.07%
0.00%
1.37%
4.11%
49
2
2
1
1
55
42.98%
1.75%
1.75%
0.88%
0.88%
48.25%
89.09%
3.64%
3.64%
1.82%
1.82%
44
1
0
1
2
48
43.14%
0.98%
0.00%
0.98%
1.96%
47.06%
91.67%
2.08%
0.00%
2.08%
4.17%
326
120
57
23
36
562
32.63%
12.01%
5.71%
2.30%
3.60%
58.01%
21.35%
10.14%
4.09%
6.41%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
3
4
0
26
33
1.70%
2.27%
0.00%
14.77%
18.75%
9.09%
12.12%
0.00%
78.79%
1
3
0
28
32
0.76%
2.27%
0.00%
21.21%
24.24%
3.13%
9.38%
0.00%
87.50%
0
3
0
27
30
0.00%
2.63%
0.00%
23.68%
26.32%
0.00%
10.00%
0.00%
90.00%
0
4
0
23
27
0.00%
3.92%
0.00%
22.55%
26.47%
0.00%
14.81%
0.00%
85.19%
49
23
1
110
183
4.90%
2.30%
0.10%
11.01%
26.78%
12.57%
0.55%
60.11%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
23
2
0
25
13.07%
1.14%
0.00%
14.20%
92.00%
8.00%
0.00%
24
1
1
26
18.18%
0.76%
0.76%
19.70%
92.31%
3.85%
3.85%
20
1
2
23
17.54%
0.88%
1.75%
20.18%
86.96%
4.35%
8.70%
22
0
0
22
21.57%
0.00%
0.00%
21.57%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
159
31
12
202
15.92%
3.10%
1.20%
78.71%
15.35%
5.94%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
1
1
0.57%
0.57%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
15
15
1.50%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
4
4
2.27%
2.27%
100.00%
1
1
0.76%
0.76%
100.00%
6
6
5.26%
5.26%
100.00%
5
5
4.90%
4.90%
100.00%
37
37
3.70%
100.00%
YR TOTAL
176 100.00%
132 100.00%
114 100.00%
102 100.00%
999
239
Table A5. Monteagle Program Analysis
1899*
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1905
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1910
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1915
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
99
42
0
8
1
150
41.60%
17.65%
0.00%
3.36%
0.42%
63.03%
66.00%
28.00%
0.00%
5.33%
0.67%
123
26
4
2
0
155
44.57%
9.42%
1.45%
0.72%
0.00%
56.16%
79.35%
16.77%
2.58%
1.29%
0.00%
170
35
2
0
9
216
51.36%
10.57%
0.60%
0.00%
2.72%
65.26%
78.70%
16.20%
0.93%
0.00%
4.17%
72
14
10
10
2
108
27.59%
5.36%
3.83%
3.83%
0.77%
41.38%
66.67%
12.96%
9.26%
9.26%
1.85%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
2
0
0
0
2
0.84%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.84%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
14
0
0
2
16
5.07%
0.00%
0.00%
0.72%
5.80%
87.50%
0.00%
0.00%
12.50%
5
0
0
16
21
1.51%
0.00%
0.00%
4.83%
6.34%
23.81%
0.00%
0.00%
76.19%
6
1
0
8
15
2.30%
0.38%
0.00%
3.07%
5.75%
40.00%
6.67%
0.00%
53.33%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
3
3
39
45
1.26%
1.26%
16.39%
18.91%
6.67%
6.67%
86.67%
44
8
48
100
15.94%
2.90%
17.39%
36.23%
44.00%
8.00%
48.00%
46
6
40
92
13.90%
1.81%
12.08%
27.79%
50.00%
6.52%
43.48%
100
14
5
119
38.31%
5.36%
1.92%
45.59%
84.03%
11.76%
4.20%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
39
39
16.39%
16.39%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
18
18
6.90%
6.90%
100.00%
2
2
0.84%
0.84%
100.00%
5
5
1.81%
1.81%
100.00%
2
2
0.60%
0.60%
100.00%
1
1
0.38%
0.38%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
YR TOTAL
238 100.00%
276 100.00%
331 100.00%
261 100.00%
240
Table A5. Continued
1920
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1925
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1930
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1935
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
TYPE TOTAL
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
129
10
10
0
1
150
43.14%
3.34%
3.34%
0.00%
0.33%
50.17%
86.00%
6.67%
6.67%
0.00%
0.67%
83
21
11
0
3
118
34.30%
8.68%
4.55%
0.00%
1.24%
48.76%
70.34%
17.80%
9.32%
0.00%
2.54%
91
20
0
0
2
113
39.22%
8.62%
0.00%
0.00%
0.86%
48.71%
80.53%
17.70%
0.00%
0.00%
1.77%
87
10
2
1
3
103
39.73%
4.57%
0.91%
0.46%
1.37%
47.03%
84.47%
9.71%
1.94%
0.97%
2.91%
854
178
39
21
21
1113
40.71%
8.48%
1.86%
1.00%
1.00%
76.73%
15.99%
3.50%
1.89%
1.89%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
7
1
0
8
16
2.34%
0.33%
0.00%
2.68%
5.35%
43.75%
6.25%
0.00%
50.00%
2
0
0
23
25
0.83%
0.00%
0.00%
9.50%
10.33%
8.00%
0.00%
0.00%
92.00%
17
0
0
30
47
7.33%
0.00%
0.00%
12.93%
20.26%
36.17%
0.00%
0.00%
63.83%
1
0
0
38
39
0.46%
0.00%
0.00%
17.35%
17.81%
2.56%
0.00%
0.00%
97.44%
54
2
0
125
181
2.57%
0.10%
0.00%
5.96%
29.83%
1.10%
0.00%
69.06%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
22
9
86
117
7.36%
3.01%
28.76%
39.13%
18.80%
7.69%
73.50%
20
1
77
98
8.26%
0.41%
31.82%
40.50%
20.41%
1.02%
78.57%
69
1
0
70
29.74%
0.43%
0.00%
30.17%
98.57%
1.43%
0.00%
0
10
55
65
0.00%
4.57%
25.11%
29.68%
0.00%
15.38%
84.62%
304
52
350
706
14.49%
2.48%
16.68%
43.06%
7.37%
49.58%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
15
15
5.02%
5.02%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
12
12
5.48%
5.48%
100.00%
84
84
4.00%
100.00%
1
1
0.33%
0.33%
100.00%
1
1
0.41%
0.41%
100.00%
2
2
0.86%
0.86%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
14
14
0.67%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
YR TOTAL
299 100.00%
242 100.00%
232 100.00%
219 100.00%
2098
241
Table A6. Winona Lake Program Analysis
1900
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1905
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1910
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1915
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
57
41
7
5
7
117
38.51%
27.70%
4.73%
3.38%
4.73%
79.05%
48.72%
35.04%
5.98%
4.27%
5.98%
61
28
9
7
5
110
29.33%
13.46%
4.33%
3.37%
2.40%
52.88%
55.45%
25.45%
8.18%
6.36%
4.55%
99
48
1
4
6
158
36.00%
17.45%
0.36%
1.45%
2.18%
57.45%
62.66%
30.38%
0.63%
2.53%
3.80%
125
23
41
2
9
200
40.06%
7.37%
13.14%
0.64%
2.88%
64.10%
62.50%
11.50%
20.50%
1.00%
4.50%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
5
0
0
2
7
3.38%
0.00%
0.00%
1.35%
4.73%
71.43%
0.00%
0.00%
28.57%
9
0
0
2
11
4.33%
0.00%
0.00%
0.96%
5.29%
81.82%
0.00%
0.00%
18.18%
7
4
6
2
19
2.55%
1.45%
2.18%
0.73%
6.91%
36.84%
21.05%
31.58%
10.53%
3
0
6
2
11
0.96%
0.00%
1.92%
0.64%
3.53%
27.27%
0.00%
54.55%
18.18%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
5
7
2
14
3.38%
4.73%
1.35%
9.46%
35.71%
50.00%
14.29%
5
2
61
68
2.40%
0.96%
29.33%
32.69%
7.35%
2.94%
89.71%
4
8
69
81
1.45%
2.91%
25.09%
29.45%
4.94%
9.88%
85.19%
9
8
65
82
2.88%
2.56%
20.83%
26.28%
10.98%
9.76%
79.27%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
6
6
4.05%
4.05%
100.00%
12
12
5.77%
5.77%
100.00%
6
6
2.18%
2.18%
100.00%
10
10
3.21%
3.21%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
4
4
2.70%
2.70%
100.00%
7
7
3.37%
3.37%
100.00%
11
11
4.00%
4.00%
100.00%
9
9
2.88%
2.88%
100.00%
YR TOTAL
148 100.00%
208 100.00%
275 100.00%
312 100.00%
242
Table A6. Continued
1921*
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1925
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1930
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1935
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
TYPE TOTAL
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
133
11
3
1
8
156
55.19%
4.56%
1.24%
0.41%
3.32%
64.73%
85.26%
7.05%
1.92%
0.64%
5.13%
35
21
2
0
7
65
21.21%
12.73%
1.21%
0.00%
4.24%
39.39%
53.85%
32.31%
3.08%
0.00%
10.77%
60
5
1
0
5
71
35.50%
2.96%
0.59%
0.00%
2.96%
42.01%
84.51%
7.04%
1.41%
0.00%
7.04%
49
2
0
0
13
64
37.69%
1.54%
0.00%
0.00%
10.00%
49.23%
76.56%
3.13%
0.00%
0.00%
20.31%
619
179
64
19
60
941
37.56%
10.86%
3.88%
1.15%
3.64%
65.78%
19.02%
6.80%
2.02%
6.38%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
5
4
4
9
22
2.07%
1.66%
1.66%
3.73%
9.13%
22.73%
18.18%
18.18%
40.91%
7
6
0
9
22
4.24%
3.64%
0.00%
5.45%
13.33%
31.82%
27.27%
0.00%
40.91%
0
12
0
6
18
0.00%
7.10%
0.00%
3.55%
10.65%
0.00%
66.67%
0.00%
33.33%
0
11
0
15
26
0.00%
8.46%
0.00%
11.54%
20.00%
0.00%
42.31%
0.00%
57.69%
36
37
16
47
136
2.18%
2.25%
0.97%
2.85%
26.47%
27.21%
11.76%
34.56%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
5
15
27
47
2.07%
6.22%
11.20%
19.50%
10.64%
31.91%
57.45%
9
16
45
70
5.45%
9.70%
27.27%
42.42%
12.86%
22.86%
64.29%
15
9
46
70
8.88%
5.33%
27.22%
41.42%
21.43%
12.86%
65.71%
5
19
13
37
3.85%
14.62%
10.00%
28.46%
13.51%
51.35%
35.14%
57
84
328
469
3.46%
5.10%
19.90%
12.15%
17.91%
69.94%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
6
6
2.49%
2.49%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2
2
1.54%
1.54%
100.00%
42
42
2.55%
100.00%
10
10
4.15%
4.15%
100.00%
8
8
4.85%
4.85%
100.00%
10
10
5.92%
5.92%
100.00%
1
1
0.77%
0.77%
100.00%
60
60
3.64%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
YR TOTAL
241 100.00%
165 100.00%
169 100.00%
130 100.00%
1648
243
Table A7. Colorado Chautauqua Program Analysis
1900
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1905
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1910
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1916*
Raw total Raw %
no program information available
no program information available
1
26
8
6
3
44
0.83%
21.67%
6.67%
5.00%
2.50%
36.67%
2.27%
59.09%
18.18%
13.64%
6.82%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
9
4
0
1
14
7.50%
3.33%
0.00%
0.83%
11.67%
64.29%
28.57%
0.00%
7.14%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
11
7
40
58
9.17%
5.83%
33.33%
48.33%
18.97%
12.07%
68.97%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
1
1
0.83%
0.83%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
3
3
2.50%
2.50%
100.00%
Lecturer
Religious
no program information available
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
YR TOTAL
Sub-group %
120 100.00%
244
Table A7. Continued
1919*
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1926*
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1930
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1935
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
TYPE TOTAL
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
1
27
15
1
4
48
1.19%
32.14%
17.86%
1.19%
4.76%
57.14%
2.08%
56.25%
31.25%
2.08%
8.33%
1
5
0
1
26
33
0.98%
4.90%
0.00%
0.98%
25.49%
32.35%
3.03%
15.15%
0.00%
3.03%
78.79%
4
17
0
1
0
22
4.94%
20.99%
0.00%
1.23%
0.00%
27.16%
18.18%
77.27%
0.00%
4.55%
0.00%
0
6
2
0
0
8
0.00%
10.91%
3.64%
0.00%
0.00%
14.55%
0.00%
75.00%
25.00%
0.00%
0.00%
7
81
25
9
33
155
1.58%
18.33%
5.66%
2.04%
7.47%
4.52%
52.26%
16.13%
5.81%
21.29%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
0
0
0
2
2
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2.38%
2.38%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
100.00%
0
4
0
44
48
0.00%
3.92%
0.00%
43.14%
47.06%
0.00%
8.33%
0.00%
91.67%
1
5
2
17
25
1.23%
6.17%
2.47%
20.99%
30.86%
4.00%
20.00%
8.00%
68.00%
0
5
0
25
30
0.00%
9.09%
0.00%
45.45%
54.55%
0.00%
16.67%
0.00%
83.33%
10
18
2
89
119
2.26%
4.07%
0.45%
20.14%
8.40%
15.13%
1.68%
74.79%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
2
7
25
34
2.38%
8.33%
29.76%
40.48%
5.88%
20.59%
73.53%
2
14
3
19
1.96%
13.73%
2.94%
18.63%
10.53%
73.68%
15.79%
11
7
13
31
13.58%
8.64%
16.05%
38.27%
35.48%
22.58%
41.94%
7
5
1
13
12.73%
9.09%
1.82%
23.64%
53.85%
38.46%
7.69%
33
40
82
155
7.47%
9.05%
18.55%
21.29%
25.81%
52.90%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1
1
1.82%
1.82%
100.00%
2
2
0.45%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2
2
1.96%
1.96%
100.00%
3
3
3.70%
3.70%
100.00%
3
3
5.45%
5.45%
100.00%
11
11
2.49%
100.00%
YR TOTAL
84 100.00%
102 100.00%
81 100.00%
55 100.00%
442
245
Table A8. Pennsylvania Chautauqua (Mt. Gretna) Program Analysis
1900
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
no program information available
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
1905
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1909*
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
24
34
4
9
2
73
25.81%
36.56%
4.30%
9.68%
2.15%
78.49%
32.88%
46.58%
5.48%
12.33%
2.74%
39
29
3
3
0
74
41.94%
31.18%
3.23%
3.23%
0.00%
79.57%
52.70%
39.19%
4.05%
4.05%
0.00%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
1
0
0
4
5
1.08%
0.00%
0.00%
4.30%
5.38%
20.00%
0.00%
0.00%
80.00%
5
0
0
1
6
5.38%
0.00%
0.00%
1.08%
6.45%
83.33%
0.00%
0.00%
16.67%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
2
8
2
12
2.15%
8.60%
2.15%
12.90%
16.67%
66.67%
16.67%
2
8
3
13
2.15%
8.60%
3.23%
13.98%
15.38%
61.54%
23.08%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
1
1
1.08%
1.08%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
2
2
2.15%
2.15%
100.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
YR TOTAL
93 100.00%
1915
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
no program information available
93 100.00%
246
Table A8. Continued
1920
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1925
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1930
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1935
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
TYPE TOTAL
Raw total Raw %
no program information available
no program information available
no program information available
63
63
7
12
2
147
33.87%
33.87%
3.76%
6.45%
1.08%
42.86%
42.86%
4.76%
8.16%
1.36%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
6
0
0
5
11
3.23%
0.00%
0.00%
2.69%
54.55%
0.00%
0.00%
45.45%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
4
16
5
25
2.15%
8.60%
2.69%
16.00%
64.00%
20.00%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
1
1
0.54%
100.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
2
2
1.08%
100.00%
Lecturer
no program information available
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
YR TOTAL
Sub-group %
186
247
Table A9. Fountain Park Program Analysis
1901*
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
1905
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
Lecturer
Religious
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
29
7
1
3
9
49
25.66%
6.19%
0.88%
2.65%
7.96%
43.36%
59.18%
14.29%
2.04%
6.12%
18.37%
24
15
3
0
9
51
22.64%
14.15%
2.83%
0.00%
8.49%
48.11%
47.06%
29.41%
5.88%
0.00%
17.65%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
9
0
0
1
10
7.96%
0.00%
0.00%
0.88%
8.85%
90.00%
0.00%
0.00%
10.00%
0
0
0
4
4
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
3.77%
3.77%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
100.00%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
39
6
4
49
34.51%
5.31%
3.54%
43.36%
79.59%
12.24%
8.16%
39
6
0
45
36.79%
5.66%
0.00%
42.45%
86.67%
13.33%
0.00%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
5
5
4.42%
4.42%
100.00%
6
6
5.66%
5.66%
100.00%
YR TOTAL
113 100.00%
1910
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1915
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
no program information available
no program information available
106 100.00%
248
Table A9. Continued
1920
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1925
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1930
Raw total Raw % Sub-group %
1935
Raw total Raw %
no program information available
no program information available
17
0
0
0
2
19
36.96%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
4.35%
41.30%
89.47%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
10.53%
70
22
4
3
20
119
26.42%
8.30%
1.51%
1.13%
7.55%
58.82%
18.49%
3.36%
2.52%
16.81%
Theatrical
Reader
Actor-Group
Opera
Film
Sub-total
0
8
0
3
11
0.00%
17.39%
0.00%
6.52%
23.91%
0.00%
72.73%
0.00%
27.27%
9
8
0
8
25
3.40%
3.02%
0.00%
3.02%
36.00%
32.00%
0.00%
32.00%
Music
Combined
Choral
Instrumental
Sub-total
4
3
0
7
8.70%
6.52%
0.00%
15.22%
57.14%
42.86%
0.00%
82
15
4
101
30.94%
5.66%
1.51%
81.19%
14.85%
3.96%
Youth Program
All types
Sub-total
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0
0
0.00%
0.00%
Entertainment Acts
All types
Sub-total
9
9
19.57%
19.57%
100.00%
20
20
7.55%
100.00%
Lecturer
Religious
no program information available
Educational
Political
Illustrated
Other
Sub-total
YR TOTAL
46 100.00%
Sub-group %
TYPE TOTAL
Raw total Raw %
Sub-group %
265
249
250
APPENDIX B
FILM INDICES
The charts in this appendix give a sampling of the kinds of films that permanent
chautauquas showed. The first chart lists several early film companies that visited
permanent chautauquas and the known years they visited. The second chart describes
films in Ocean Park (OP), Bay View (BV), Lakeside (LK), the Chautauqua Institution
(CI), and Winona Lake (WL), but sampled in 1915, 1920, 1925, and 1935. The list is
meant to provide examples of the kinds of movies shown rather than being
comprehensive. When any of those same films were shown with short subject films, they
are listed in the third chart.
Table B1. Traveling Film Companies at Chautauquas
COMPANY
American Vitagraph
Armstrong, Albert
Black, Alex
PLACE
ME/FP
MG
OP
CI
DATE
1905
1904/1905
1900
1900
Bowden, Mrs. Katharine Ertz
Brandt, Rev. J. L.
Buckwalter, H. H.
FP
FP
CO
1905
1901
1905
Decker, Prof. N. Y.
Kempton, Rev. A. T.
Lyman H. Howe Moving Pictures
OP
OP
CI
BV
CO
WL
MG
1905
1915
1910/1915
1915
1911
1915
1905
MG
CO
WL
CO
WL
WL
WL
1905
1907
1905
1911
1900
1905
1910
Martin, Anna Delony
Morimoto, A. M.
Oxenham's Famous Moving Pictures
Rathom, John R.
Robertson Co.
NOTES
w/orchestra, "Greatest Moving Pictures on Earth"
"A picture play," - dramatic pictomat entertainment
picture plays "Miss America," "The Girl and the
Guardsman"
"Hiawatha" films from Canadian performances
The Passion Play moving pictures
polyscope artist, moving pictures of Chautauqua and
Boulder
Jesus, Ireland; cameratograph machine
"Picture Play"
Travel Festival
Parsifal, film accompanied readings, with Helen Mar
Wilson (reader)
illustrated lectures of Japan
anti-flicker attachment; see blue book
Lantern lecture
"Edison's Projectoscope" - D.W. Robertson, manager
D.W. Robertson Projectoscope Company
D.W. Robertson's Moving Pictures
251
Table B2. Some Films Shown at Permanent Chautauquas
FILM TITLE
Abie's Irish Rose
PLACE
OP/BV
YEAR
1930
Adventures of a Boy Scout
CI
1915
Air Mail, The
ME
1925
Alaskan, The
Alias Jimmy Valentine (I)
Alias Jimmy Valentine (II)
All of a Sudden Peggy
All Quiet on the Western Front
America
BV
CI
CI
CI
CI
BV/WL/ME
1925
1920
1915
1920
1930
1924/1925
Anne of Green Gables (I)
Anne of Green Gables (II)
Antony and Cleopatra
Arab, The
Are Parents People?
Around the World in Eighty Minutes
CI
WL
CI
ME
CI
LK
1920
1935
1915
1925
1925
1932
Arrival of Perpetua, The
Ashes of Vengeance
Aviator, The
Babes in Toyland
Baboona
CI
BV
OP
WL
BV
1915
1925
1930
1935
1935
Bab's Burglar
BV
1920
NOTES
1928, Jean Hersholt, mono Western Electric talking
sequences or silent
1915, Herbert Hoover (himself), National Movement
Picture Bureau, silent
1925, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., George Irving, Famous
Players-Lasky
1924, Thomas Meighan, Famous Players-Lasky
1920, Metro
1915, Peerless Productions, shown in Museum
1920, Famous Players-Lasky
1930, Universal, mono sound (Western Electric)
1924, D.W. Griffith Productions, special event at WL
(1924)
1919, Realart Pictures
1934, RKO, mono (RCA Victor) sound
1914, Pathe Freres
1924, MGM
1925, Famous Players-Lasky
1931, Douglas Fairbanks, Sr., Elton Corp., mono
sound, first talkie in Central Aud.
1915, Shubert Film Corp.
1923, Norma Talmadge Film Corp. (also star)
1929, Vitaphone silent
1934, Laurel and Hardy, Hal Roach Prod.
1935, also with Fox Movietone News, BV Library
movie
1917, Marguerite Clark, Famous Players
252
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Bab's Diary
Bab's Matinee
PLACE
BV
BV
YEAR
1920
1920
Baree, Son of Kazan
Beloved Rogue
CI
BV
1925
1930
Between Savage and Tiger
Big Brother
Big House, The
Big News
Big Pond, The
CI
BV
ME
ME
CI
1915
1925
1930
1930
1930
Bill Apperson's Boy
Blooming Angel, The
Blue Bird, The
Boy of Flanders
Boy of Mine
Brewster's Millions
Bright Eyes
Bright Skies
Brothers Divided
Bulldog Drummond
CI
CI
BV
OP/BV
BV
ME
BV/WL
CI
CI
LK
1920
1920
1920
1925
1925
1935
1935
1920
1920
1930
Cabiria
Call of the Wild
Cardinal Richelieu
CI
BV
ME/CI
1915
1925
1935
NOTES
1917, Marguerite Clark, Famous Players
"Bab's Matinee Idol"?, 1917, Marguerite Clark,
Famous Players
1925, Vitagraph Co of America
1927, John Barrymore, Feature Productions, silent
with musical score
1913, Italian
1923, Famous Players-Lasky, dir. Allan Dwan
1930, Cosmopolitan Productions, mono sound
1929, Pathe Exchange, mono sound
1930, Claudette Colbert, Paramount, also with
MovieTone
1919, Jack Pickford Film Co. (also star)
1920, Goldwyn
1918, Famous Players-Lasky
1924, Jackie Coogan Productions (and star)
1923, J. K. Mcdonald Prod.
1935, Herbert Wilcox Prod.
1934, Shirley Temple, George Irving, Fox
1920, Brentwood Film Corp.
1919, Frank Keenan Prod.
1929, Ronald Colman, Howard Productions, mono
sound, one of first talkies in Orchestra Hall
1914, Italian, shown in Amphitheater
1925, Hal Roach Studios
1935, George Arliss, 20th Century
253
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Captain Blood
PLACE
OP
YEAR
1925
Cat's Paw, The
Charley's Aunt
Charming Sinners
Circus, The
Circus Clown, The
Clive of India
Clodhopper, The
Coquette
BV/WL
CI
ME
OP
BV
ME
CI
BV
1935
1925
1930
1930
1935
1935
1920
1930
Cohens and the Kellys in Scotland
BV/WL
1930
Conductor 1492
Copperhead, The
BV
CI/WL
1926
1920/1921
Count of Monte Cristo
County Chairman, The
Crackerjack, The
Cup of Fury, The
Daddy
Daddy Long Legs
Daddies
David Copperfield (I)
David Copperfield (II)
Deer Slayer, The
ME
BV/WL
BV
CI
BV
CI
OP
OP
WL/CI/OP
OP
1935
1935
1926
1920
1925
1920
1925
1930
1935
1930
NOTES
1924, Vitagraph Co of America, based on Sabatini
novel
1934, Harold Lloyd Corp (and star)
1925, Christie Film Co.
1929, Paramount, Movietone mono sound
1928, Charlie Chaplin Prod. (and star), silent
1934, Joe E. Brown, First National
1935, Ronald Colman, 20th Century
1917, Kay-Bee Pictures
1929, Pickford Corp. (and star - won Oscar), mono
MovieTone sound
1930, George Sidney, Charles Murray, Universal,
mono MovieTone
1924, Warner Bros.
1920, Lionel Barrymore, Paramount, in Amphitheatre
at CI
1934, Robert Donat, Reliance Pictures
1935, Will Rogers, Mickey Rooney, Fox
1925, C. C. Burr Prod.
1920, Eminent Authors Pictures
1923, Jackie Coogan Prod. (and star)
1919, Mary Pickford Co. (and star)
1924, Warner Bros.
unknown year, English cast
1935, David O. Selznik, MGM
1930, Larry Darmour Prod., "The Deerslayer" in
program
254
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Devil May Care
Desert Song
Destruction of Carthage (Markia)
Disraeli (I)
Disraeli (II)
PLACE
ME
ME
CI
WL
OP/CI/ME
YEAR
1930
1930
1915
1925
1930
Divine Lady, The
Doctor's Secret, The
CO
ME
1930
1930
Dog of Flanders, A
Dollar Mark, The
Dorothy Vernon of Haddon Hall
Double Speed
Doubting Thomas
Dress Parade
Duke Steps Out, The
ME
CI
BV
CI
CI
LK
BV
1935
1915
1925
1920
1935
1928
1930
Dynamite
Education of Mr. Pipp, The
CO
CI
1930
1915
Erstwhile Susan
Evangeline (I)
Evangeline (II)
CI
BV
OP/BV/CI
1920
1920
1930
Evensong
Excuse Me
Excuse My Dust
ME
ME
CI
1935
1925
1920
NOTES
1929, MGM, mono (Movietone) sound
1929, Myrna Loy, Warner Bros., mono sound
Italian film
1916 film?
1929, George Arliss, Vitaphone (sound and
production)
1929, First National, silent/vitaphone (music/effects)
1929, Dir. DeMille, Ruth Chatterton, J.M.Barrie story,
Paramount, mono MovieTone sound
1935, RKO
1914, William A. Brady Picture Plays
1924, Mary Pickford Prod (and star)
1920, Famous Players-Lasky
1935, Will Rogers, Fox
1927, DeMille Pictures Corp.
1929, William Haines, Joan Crawford, MGM,
MovieTone music and effects
1929, DeMille, mono (Western Electric) sound
1914, George Irving, All Star Feature Film Corp.,
based on Charles Dana Gibson play
1919, Realart Pictures, shown in Amphitheatre
1919, Fox, benefit film
1929, Delores Del Rio, Edwin Carewe Productions,
MovieTone sound
1934, Gaumont British Picture Corp.
1925, Norma Shearer, MGM
1920, Famous Players-Lasky
255
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Fair Barbarians, The
Fairy and the Waif, The
Floradora Girl
Folies Bergere
Follies Girl, The
Follies of 1930
PLACE
BV
CI
ME
CI
CI
LK
YEAR
1920
1915
1930
1935
1920
1930
Fool, The
Footlights and Fools
For Napoleon and France
Forty Winks
Four Feathers, The
Fourth Commandment
CI
ME
CI
ME
CO/LK
BV
1925
1930
1915
1925
1930
1930
Free and Easy
Fugitive from Matrimony, A
Gay Old Dog, A
CO
CI
CI
1930
1920
1920
Gentleman from Mississippi, A
Girl of the Limberlost (I)
Girl of the Limberlost (II)
Girl Shy
Going Out
Golden Dawn
CI
BV
WL
BV
BV
CI
1915
1925
1935
1925
1925
1930
Great Expectations (I)
BV
1920
NOTES
1917, Vivian Martin, Pallas Pictures
1915, Frohman Amusement Corp.
1930, Cosmopolitan Productions, mono sound
1935, 20th Century
1919, Triangle Film Corp.
1930, "New MovieTone Follies…", Fox, some color
segments (Multicolor), one of first talkies in Orchestra
Hal
pre-release showing (released 15 Nov)., 1925, Fox
1929, Vitaphone, Colleen Moore, Fredric March
1914, Italian
1925, William Boyd, Paramount
1929, Fay Wray, Paramount, mono, silent in LK
1926, Universal, Belle Bennett, Mary Cary, Henry
Victor, Universal, silent, Ladies' Library Movie
1930, MGM, mono (Western Electric) sound
1919, Jesse D. Hampton Prod.
1919, Hobart Henley Prod., "An Old Gay Dog" in
program
1914, shown in Museum
1924, Gene Stratton Porter Prod.
1934, mono, W. T. Lackey
1924, Harold Lloyd Corp (and star)
year? Ladies' Library Movie
1930, Vitaphone (sound and production), color twostrip technology
1917, Jack Pickford, Famous Players
256
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Great Expectations (II)
Great White North
PLACE
BV
WL
YEAR
1935
1930
Greatest Love of All
Greased Lightning
Grumpy
BV
BV
BV
1925
1920
1925
Halfway to Heaven
BV
1930
Hallelujah
Happiness
Happiness Ahead
Happy Warrior, The
He Who Gets Slapped
ME
BV
BV
CI
ME/BV
1930
1925
1935
1925
1925/1926
Heart of the Hills
Heart of Youth
Heartease
Hearts of Humanity
Her Wild Oat
His First Command
Hobbs in a Hurry
Hold 'Em, Yale
Homeward Bound
Home Town Girl, The
Hoosier School Master
Hottentot, The
CI
CI
CI
CI
LK
OP
BV
LK
BV
BV
WL
OP
1920
1920
1920
1920
1928
1930
1920
1928
1925
1920
1935
1930
NOTES
1934, Universal
aka "Lost in the Arctic"?, 1928, documentary,
silent/mono
1924, George Beban Prod.
1919, Thomas H. Ince Corp.
1923, dir. William C. DeMille, Famous Players-Lasky,
Ladies' Library Movie
1929, Jean Arthur, Paramount, Mono (MovieTone)
sound
1929, dir. King Vidor, Dixie Jubilee Singers, MGM
1924, dir. King Vidor, Metro Pictures
1934, First National
1925, Vitagraph Co of America
1924, Lon Chaney, Norma Shearer, John Gilbert,
MGM
1919, Mary Pickford Co. (and star)
1919, Famous Players-Lasky
1913, Vitagraph Company of America
1918, Universal Film Manufacturing
1927, Colleen Moore, First National, silent
1929, William Boyd, Pathe Exchange
1918, William Russell Prod. (and star)
1928, DeMille Pictures, silent
1923, Famous Players-Lasky, Meighan
1919, Famous Players-Lasky
1935, Monogram Pictures
1929, Warner Bros., Vitaphone sound
257
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Huckleberry Finn
Icebound
PLACE
WL
BV
YEAR
1921
1925
I'll Get Him Yet
I'll Show You the Town
Illustrious Prince, The
In Wrong
Iron Mask
BV
CI
CI
CI
BV
1920
1925
1920
1920
1930
It Pays to Advertise
It's a Great Life
Jack O'Hay
Jane Eyre
Janice Meredith
CI
BV
ME
WL
WL/CI
1920
1930
1935
1935
1925
Jazz Singer, The
Jes' Call Me Jim
John Barleycorn
LK
CI
CI
1928
1920
1915
Journey's End
Jubilo
Judge Priest
Julius Caesar
Just Neighbors
Just Prohibition
Keeper of Bees
Kibitzer, The
CI
CI
BV/WL
CI
BV
CI
WL
BV/WL
1930
1920
1935
1915
1920
1915
1935
1930
NOTES
1920, Famous Players-Lasky
1924, Dir. DeMille, Famous Players-Lasky, "Ice
Bound" in program
1919, Dorothy Gish, New Art Film Co.
1925, Universal
1919, Hayworth Pictures
1919, Jack Pickford, Jack Pickford Prod.
1929, Douglas Fairbanks, Elton Corp., mono sound
(talking sequences, effects, music)/silent
1919, Paramount
1929, Duncan sisters, MGM, mono MovieTone sound
no information
1934, Monogram Pictures
1924, Cosmopolitan Productions, Will Rogers (bit
part?)
1927, Al Jolson, Warner Bros., mono Vitaphone sound
1920, Will Rogers, Goldwyn
1914, Hobart Bosworth Prod., based on Jack London
novel
1930, Gainsborough Pictures, mono sound
1919, Will Rogers, Goldwyn
1934, dir. John Ford, Will Rogers, Fox
1914, George Kleine distributor, Italian, silent
1919, dir. and star Harold Lloyd, Rolin Films
no information
1935, W. T. Lackey Prod.
1930, Henry Greene, Movietone mono sound
258
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Kid Brother
King of Kings
Laddie
Last Gentleman
Last Laugh, The
Life Begins at 40
Light of Western Stars, The
PLACE
OP
LK
ME
BV
CI
CI
CI
YEAR
1930
1929
1935
1935
1925
1935
1925
Lilac Time
LK
1929
Lion and the Mouse, The
OP
1930
Lion of Venice, The
Little Colonel, The
CI
BV/WL
1915
1935
Little Comrade, The
Little Lord Fauntleroy (I)
BV
CI
1920
1915
Little Lord Fauntleroy (II)
Little Minister, The
WL
OP/BV/ME/WL
1925
1935
Little Orphan Annie
Little Red Riding Hood
BV
OP
1920
1925
Little Robinson Crusoe
Lion and the Mouse, The
BV
OP
1925
1930
NOTES
1927, Harold Lloyd Corp. (and star), silent
1927, Dir. DeMille, DeMille Pictures Corp.
1935, RKO
1934, George Arliss, 20th Century
1925, German
1935, Will Rogers, Fox
1925, Famous Players-Lasky, based on Zane Grey
novel
1928, Colleen Moore, Gary Cooper, First National,
mono sound
1928, Lionel Barrymore, Warner Bros., silent or mono
Vitaphone (talking sequence)
1914, Italian
1935, Shirley Temple, Lionel Barrymore, Hattie
McDaniel, Fox
1919, Famous Players-Lasky
1914, Natural Colour Kinematograph Co. (in
Kinemacolor), UK film
1921, Mary Pickford Co. (and star)
1934, Katharine Hepburn, RKO, based on J.M. Barrie
story
1918, Colleen Moore, Selig Polyscope Co.
1922, dir. Walt Disney, Laugh-O-Gram Films,
animated - Disney's first film
1924, Jackie Coogan Productions (and star)
1928, Lionel Barrymore, Warner Bros., silent or mono
Vitaphone (talking sequence)
259
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Lives of a Bengal Lancer
Louisiana
Love Insurance
Love Light
Maker of Men, A
Man from Brodney's, The
Man in Hobles, The
PLACE
ME
BV
CI
WL
BV
BV
OP
YEAR
1935
1920
1925
1921
1926
1926
1930
Man of the Hour
Marianne
CI
BV/ME
1915
1930
Merton of the Movies
Midnight Romance, A
BV/ME
CI
1925
1920
Mighty
Mingnon
Miracle of Money, The
Miracle Man, The
CO
CI
CI
BV
1930
1915
1920
1920
Montana Moon
Most Precious Thing in Life
Mother Knows Best
Mrs. Wiggs of the Cabbage Patch (I)
Mrs. Wiggs of the Cabbage Patch (II)
CO
BV
LK
CI
OP
1930
1935
1929
1915
1935
Mysterious Island, The
CO
1930
NOTES
1935, Gary Cooper, Paramount
1919, Vivian Martin, Famous Players-Lasky
1919, Famous Players-Lasky
1921, Mary Pickford Co. (and star)
"Makers of Men", 1925, Bud Barsky Corp.
1923, Vitagraph Co. of America
1928, Lila Lee, John Harron, Tiffany-Stahl Prod.,
silent
1914, William A. Brady Picture Plays
1929, Marion Davies, Cosmopolitan Productions,
silent, Ladies' Library Movie
1924, Famous Players-Lasky
1919, Dir. Lois Weber (1st major female dir, was a
street evangelist), Anita Stewart Productions
Paramount, no other information
1915, California Motion Picture Corp.
1920, Hobart Henley Prod.
1919, Lon Chaney, Mayflower Photoplay Co., benefit
film
1930, MGM, mono (Western Electric) sound
1934, Jean Arthur, Columbia
1928, Fox
1914, California Motion Picture Corp.
1934, Paramount, mono sound, children encouraged
to attend
1929, MGM, original silent, also talking sequences
(mono-Western Electric)
260
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Mystery of Edwin Drood (I)
Mystery of Edwin Drood (II)
My Best Girl
My Lady's Garter
My Own United States
Naughty Marietta
Navigator, The
Navy Blues
Never Say Die
Noah's Ark
North of 36
Now or Never
No, No, Nanette
Officer 666
Oh, Doctor
Old Curiosity Shop, The
Old Dutch
Old Glory
Once a Mason
One Night of Love
One More Spring
One Romantic Night
Othello
Other Half, The
Overland Red
Paramount on Parade
PLACE
CI
BV
OP
CI
WL
CI
OP
CO
BV
OP/CI
BV/ME
ME
ME
CI
BV
CI
CI
LK
BV
BV
WL
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
YEAR
1915
1935
1930
1920
1921
1935
1925
1930
1926
1930
1925
1925
1930
1915
1926
1915
1915
1928
1920
1935
1935
1930
1915
1920
1920
1930
261
NOTES
1914, Dickens novel, World Film
1935, Universal
1927, Mary Pickford Co. (and star), silent
1920, Bruce Calhoun, Maurice Tourneur Prod.
1918, Frohman Amusement Corp.
1935, MGM
1924, Buster Keaton Prod. (and star)
1929, MGM, mono (Western Electric) sound
1925, Pathe Pictures
1928, Warner Bros., Vitaphone talking sequences
1924, George Irving, Paramount
1921? - Harold Lloyd, Rolin Films
1930, Vitaphone, First National
1914, George Kleine Productions
1925, Universal
1914, UK
1915, Florence Turner Prod.
1922 short?, no charge-dedication service
1919, Drew Comedies
1934, Columbia
1935, Janet Gaynor, Fox
1930, Movietone, Joseph M. Schenck Productions
1914, Italian
1919, Dir. King Vidor, Brentwood Film Co.
1920, Harry Carey, Universal Film Manufacturing
1930, separate music numbers using Paramount
actors, some in Technicolor
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Paris Green
Partners of the Night
Peck's Bad Boy
Penrod and Sam
Peppy Polly
PLACE
CI
CI
BV
BV
BV
YEAR
1920
1920
1935
1925
1920
Peter Pan
Pied Piper Malone
Pollyanna
Poor Relations
BV
BV
WL
CI
1925
1925
1921
1920
Public Be Damned
Public Hero # 1
Pursuit of Happiness, The
Putting on the Ritz
CI
CI
ME
CI
1920
1935
1935
1930
Racing Luck
Rag Man, The
Re-creation of Brian Kent, The
Redskin
BV
OP/ME/WL
CI
BV
1925
1925
1925
1930
Regular Girl, A
Right of Way, The
Rio Rita
CI
CI
ME
1920
1920
1930
Rip Van Winkle
CI
1915
NOTES
1920, Thomas H. Ince Corp.
1920, Eminent Authors Pictures
1934, Jackie Cooper, Sol Lesser Prod.
1923, J. K. Mcdonald Prod.
1919, Dorothy Gish, New Art Film Co., "Peppy's Polly"
in program
1924, Famous Players-Lasky, Ladies' Library Movie
1924, Thomas Meigham, Famous Players-Lasky
1920, Mary Pickford Co. (and star)
1919, Dir. King Vidor, Brentwood Film Co., might
have been listed as "Poor Regulations"
1917, Public Rights Film Corp.
1935, MGM
1934, Paramount
1930, Joseph M. Schenck Productions, Vitaphone
sound, musical
1924, Grand Asher Films, Ladies' Library Movie
Jackie Coogan, MGM
1925, Sol Lesser Prod.
1929, Richard Dix, Paramount, silent, black and white
or 2-strip Technicolor
1919, Elsie Janis, Selznick Pictures
1920, Screen Classics
1929, RKO, mono (RCA Photophone System), black
and white or Technicolor
1914, Rolf Photoplays, based on Dion Boucicault play
262
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
River of Romance
PLACE
BV
YEAR
1930
Robin Hood
BV
1925
Rogue Song, The
Romance in Manhattan
Rose o' the River
Sally (I)
Sally (II)
CI
BV
CI
CI
ME
1930
1935
1920
1925
1930
Salomy Jane
Salute
CI
WL
1915
1930
Saturday Night Kid
Saturday's Millions
Sawdust Paradise
CO
BV
BV
1930
1935
1930
Scarlet Pimpernel
ME
1935
Scarlet Seas
Seats of the Mighty, The
Seeing it Through
Sequoia
Servant's Entrance
LK
CI
CI
ME/CI/OP
BV/WL
1929
1915
1920
1935
1935
Seven Chances
ME
1925
NOTES
1929, Charles Rogers, Paramount, mono (Western
Electric) sound
1922, Douglas Fairbanks Pictures (and star),
"Robinhood" in program
1930, MGM, mono sound
1935, Ginger Rogers, RKO
1919, Famous Players-Lasky
1925, Colleen Moore, First National
1929, First National, mono (Western Electric) sound,
2-strip Technicolor, nominated for Oscar
1914, Western, California Motion Picture Corp.
1929, Fox, mono (Western Electric) sound - alltalking, army/navy
1929, Clara Bow, Paramount, mono sound
1833, Universal, Library movie
1928, Esther Ralston, Paramount Famous Lasky
Corp., mono sound (Western Electric score/effects)/silent, Ladies' Library Movie
1934, London Film Prod., mono (Western Electric)
sound, UK film
1928, First National, Vitaphone sound
1914, Lionel Barrymore, Colonial Motion Picture Co.
1920, Robertson-Cole Pictures
1934, MGM, kids encouraged in OP
1934, Janet Gaynor, dir. Frank Lloyd and Walt
Disney, Fox
1925, Buster Keaton Prod. (and star), black and
white and Technicolor
263
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Seven Days Leave
PLACE
BV/ME
YEAR
1930
Seven Swans
Shadows
Shannons of Broadway
BV
OP
BV
1920
1930
1930
Shepherd of the Hills, The
She Goes to War
LK
BV
1928
1930
Shore Acres
Show Boat
CI
BV/CO
1915
1930
Silver Streak
Skinner Steps Out
ME
BV
1935
1930
Snow White
Soldiers of Fortune
Son of the Gods
Sophomore, The
CI
CI
ME
OP
1920
1920
1930
1930
So Big
So This is College
Spartacus
Spite Marriage
Sporting Youth
BV
BV
CI
BV
BV
1926
1930
1915
1930
1925
Square Shoulders
OP/ME
1930
NOTES
1930, Gary Cooper, Beryl Mercer, Paramount, mono
(Western Electric) sound, based on J.M. Barrie story
1917, Marguerite Clark, Famous Players Film Co.
date?, Lon Chaney, 1929 is a short
1929, James and Lucille Gleason, Universal, mono
(Western Electric) sound
1928, silent, First National
1929, Eleanor Boardman, Inspiration Pictures, mono
sound (Western Electric - talking sequences)
1914, All Star Feature Film Corp.
1929, Laura Le Plante, Joseph Schildkraut, Universal,
talking/singing sequences (not BV)
1935, RKO, aka "The Rainmakers"
1929, Glenn Tryon, Universal, mono (Western
Electric) sound, Ladies' Library Movie
1917?, 1916? Educational Films of North America
1919, Allan Dwan Prod.
1930, First National, Vitaphone sound
1929, Pathe Exchange, mono (RCA Photophone
System)
1924, Colleen Moore, First National
1929, MGM, Mono (Western Electric) sound
1914, Italian
1929, Buster Keaton, MGM, silent
1924, Reginald Denny, Universal, Ladies' Library
Movie
1929, Frank Coughlan Jr., Lewis Wolheim, mono
sound or silent
264
Table B2. Continued
PLACE
LK
YEAR
1929
Stephen Steps Out
Still Alarm, The
Stop Thief!
Stream of Life
Street Angel
BV
ME
CI
WL
LK
1925
1926
1915
1921
1929
Successful Calamity, A
LK/BV
1933/1935
Sweetie
BV
1930
Taming of the Shrew
BV/CI
1930
Tess of the D'Urbervilles
ME
1925
Thief in Paradise, A
This Thing Called Love
CI
LK
1925
1930
Three Men and a Girl
Three Must Get Theres, The
BV
WL
1920
1925
Trail of '98
CO
1930
Turn of the Road
Twenty Three and a Half Hours' Leave
Uncle Tom's Cabin
CI
CI
BV
1920
1920
1930
NOTES
1928, Buster Keaton Prod. (and star), No "Jr." in
program
1923, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., Famous Players-Lasky
1926, Universal, Fire in Monteagle's 2nd auditorium
1915, George Kleine Production, silent
1919, Plimpton Epic Pictures
1928, Janet Gaynor, Fox, Silent/Mono sound
(MovieTone music and effects)
1932, George Carliss, Vitaphone Corp., LK opening
event of 1933 program, BV Library Movie
1929, Nancy Carroll, Jack Oakie, Paramount, Mono
sound (Western Electric)/silent, Ladies' Library Movie
1929, Pickford, Fairbanks, Elton Corp., mono sound
"all talking"
1924, Blanche Sweet, MGM, "Tess of Durbeville" in
program
1925, George Fitzmaurice Prod.
1929, Pathe Exchange, Mono (RCA Photophone
System), black and white or Technicolor, one of first
talkies in Orchestra Hall
1919, Marguerite Clark, Famous Players - Lasky
1922, Max Linder Prod. (also star), "There's" in
program
1928, MGM, mono sound (Western Electric music and
effects)
1915, Vitagraph Company of America
1919, Thomas H. Ince Corp.
1927, Universal, silent/Movietone (score and effects)
265
FILM TITLE
Steamboat Bill, Jr.
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Unholy Three, The
Vagabond King, The
PLACE
CI
LK/CI
YEAR
1925
1930
Viking, The
CI/BV/CO/LK
1930
Virginian, The
Wagon Master, The
Wanted: A Husband
Washington at Valley Forge
Water Hole
Welcome Danger
We're Rich Again
What a Night
White Parade
White Sister, The
Who's Who in Society
Why Worry?
Wings in the Dark
CO
CO
CI
CI
CO
CO
BV
BV
ME
CI
CI
OP
ME
1930
1930
1920
1915
1930
1930
1935
1930
1935
1925
1915
1925
1935
Winning Girl, The
Winning Stroke, The
Wishing Ring, The
BV
BV
CI
1920
1920
1915
With Byrd at the South Pole
LK
1930
Wreck of the Hespera
LK
1928
NOTES
1925, Lon Chaney, MGM
1930, Paramount, mono sound, one of first talkies in
Orchestra Hall
1928. MGM, silent, entirely Technicolor, good for kids
(LK)
1929, Gary Cooper, Paramount, mono sound
1929, Universal, MovieTone talking sequences
1919, Paramount
1914, Universal Film Manufacturing
1928, Paramount, silent
1929, Paramount, mono, "Hear Harold Lloyd talk!"
1934, RKO, mono (RCA Victor)
1928, Bebe Daniels, Paramount, silent
1934, mono, docu-romance about nursing school
1923, Lillian Gish, Inspiration Pictures
1915, George Kleine Productions, shown in Museum
1923, Harold Lloyd, Hal Roach Studios
1935, Myrna Loy, Cary Grant, Paramount, mono
sound (Western Electric Noiseless Recording)
1919, Shirley Mason, Famous Players-Lasky
1919, Fox
1914, A Schubert Feature, "An Idyll of Old England" but filmed in NJ, shown in Museum
1930, Paramount, Western Electric music and
narration, or silent
1927, DeMille Pictures, Corp.
266
Table B2. Continued
FILM TITLE
Woman Proof
PLACE
BV
YEAR
1925
Yolanda
Young Eagles
BV
ME
1926
1930
Your Girl and Mine
CI
1915
NOTES
1923, Thomas Meigham, Famous Players-Lasky,
Ladies' Library Movie
1924, MGM
1930, Jean Arthur, George Irving, Paramount, mono
sound (Western Electric)
1914, Tom Mix (bit?), Selig Polyscope Company,
silent, "A Woman Suffrage Play"
267
Table B3. Some Short Subject Films Shown at Chautauquas
SHORT TITLE
Ain't Nature Wonderful
Alligator Hunt, The
Beautiful Dove
Beneath the Scepter of our Silent
Snows
Bobby Bumps cartoon
Butcher Boy
Call a Cop
Centennial Pageant of Allegheny
College
Don't Worry
Eta Bita Pie
Fair But False
Fortunes of Corinne
Four Cylinder Frame-Up, A
Great Men of Today (Famous Men of
Today?)
Hearts and Diamonds
His Master's Voice
Hip Hip
Ho. Mr. Jap Van Winkle, the
In the Kingdom of Nosey Land
I'm On My Way
Kids and Kidlets
License Applied For
Little Bo Peep
Mutt and Jeff cartoon
PLACE
SHOWN
CI
CI
BV
CI
DATE
SHOWN
1920
1920
1920
1920
CI
BV
CI
CI
1920
1920
1920
1915
CI
CI
CI
BV
CI
CI
1925
1920
1920
1920
1920
1915
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
BV
CI
CI
CI
CI
1920
1920
1920
1920
1920
1920
1920
1920
1920
1920
NOTES
1920, Eddie Lyons and Lee Moran, Universal
1920, Ford Motor Co., documentary
"Officer, Call a Cop"?, 1920, Lyons and Moran
1925, Century Film, comedy
1920, Christie Film Co.
1918
1920, Supreme Features
1914
1920, Supreme Features
1919, Christie Film Co., comedy
1919, Chester Films, documentary
1915, Rex Motion Picture Co.
1920, Christie Film Co.
1919, documentary on wool industry
268
Table B3. Continued
SHORT TITLE
Next Aisle Over
Pay Your Dues
Ramona
Romance and Rings
Roof of America, The
Scenes of Naples
Scenic Kaiteur
Sheriff, The
Skyland
Spenders, The
Spring Fever
Taken with a Grain of Salt
That Mummy of Mine
Tick Tick
Tick Tock Man
PLACE
SHOWN
BV
CI
CI
BV
CI
CI
CI
BV
CI
CI
BV
CI
CI
CI
CI
Watch, The
Wild Animals
CI
CI
DATE
SHOWN
1920
1920
1915
1920
1920
1915
1920
1920
1920
1915
1920
1920
1920
1920
1920
NOTES
1919
1919, Harold Lloyd, Rolin Films
1910, Mary Pickford
Fatty Arbuckle
1919, in Color (Prizma Color)
1919, Eddie Lyons and Lee Moran, listed as "Tick,
Tack Maw" in program
1920
1920
269
270
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Oral History Interviews
(All recordings and transcripts of oral histories conducted by the author are housed in the
Betsy Loyd Oral Histories of Permanent Chautauquas Collection, Special Collections,
University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA and also at the individual chautauquas where they were
conducted.)
Amy, Jonathan. Oral history interview by author. Bay View Association, Bay View, MI.
August 4 and 6, 2008. Recording and transcript, Bay View.
Brown, Barbara McLaughlin. Oral history interview by author. Bay View Association,
Bay View, MI. August 8, 2008. Recording and transcript, Bay View.
Child, E. Tom. Oral history interview by author. Bay View Association, Bay View, MI.
July 27, 2008. Recording and transcript, Bay View.
Curry, Jane. Oral history interview by author. Bay View Association, Bay View, MI. July
30, 2008. Recording and transcript, Bay View.
Duncan, Baker. Oral history interview by author. Colorado Chautauqua, Boulder, CO.
June 5, 2009. Recording and partial transcript, Colorado.
Gary, Mary Churchill. Oral history interview by Sandra Polk. Monteagle, TN. Summer
1980. Transcript, Monteagle.
Greer, Bob. Oral history interview by author. Colorado Chautauqua, Boulder, CO. June
10, 2009. Recording and partial transcript, Colorado.
Guthery, Barbara Sublett. Oral history interview by author. Colorado Chautauqua,
Boulder, CO. June 10, 2009. Recording and partial transcript, Colorado.
Howorth, Judge Lucy. Oral history interview by Edith Provost. Monteagle, TN. N.d..
Transcript, Monteagle.
Loyd, Donald. Telephone interview by author. March 7, 2011. Notes in possession of
the author.
Pulliam, Walter and Julia. Oral history interview by author. Monteagle Sunday School
Assembly, Monteagle, TN. July 14, 2009. Recording and partial transcript,
Monteagle.
Schmitz, Jon. Interview by author. Chautauqua Institution Archives, Chautauqua, NY.
October 16, 2008. Notes in possession of the author.
271
Sheaffer, Anne Child. Oral history interview by author. Bay View Association, Bay
View, MI. August 8, 2008. Recording and transcript, Bay View.
Shier, Elizabeth “Bets.” Oral history interview by author. Bay View Association, Bay
View, MI. July 28, 2008. Recording and transcript, Bay View.
Thomas, Glennie Schaerer. Oral history interview by unknown interviewer. Monteagle,
TN. N.d. Transcript, Monteagle.
Uhrich, Andy. Interview by author. Chicago Film Archives, Chicago, IL. August 5,
2010. Notes in possession of the author.
Utley, Ruth Crais. Oral history interview by Pat Bates. [Monteagle, TN]. N.d.
Transcript, Monteagle.
Archives
A. A. Paddock Collection. Colorado Chautauqua Association Records. Boulder Historical
Society. Carnegie Library for Local History, Boulder, CO.
Bay View Association Archives, Bay View, MI.
Chautauqua Institution Archives, Chautauqua, NY.
Colorado Chautauqua Association Archives, Boulder, Colorado.
Fisk, Marion Ballou. Papers. Special Collections Department, University of Iowa, Iowa
City, IA.
Fountain Park Museum, Remington, Indiana
Historical Society of Ocean Grove, Ocean Grove, NJ.
Lakeside Heritage Society, Lakeside, OH.
Monteagle Sunday School Assembly Archives, Monteagle, TN.
Mount Gretna Historical Society, Mount Gretna, PA.
Ocean Park Association Archives, Ocean Park, ME.
Redpath Chautauqua Collection. Special Collections Department, University of Iowa,
Iowa City, IA.
272
Worrell, Ruth Mougey. Family Papers. Ohio Historical Society, Columbus, Ohio.
Primary Sources
“Among the Independents.” Lyceum Magazine, June 1927.
Andrews, Edward G., ed. The Doctrines and Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal
Church. Cincinnati, OH: Jenkins and Graham, 1904.
http://www.archive.org/stream/doctrinesanddis17churgoog/doctrinesanddis17chur
goog_djvu.txt (accessed December 2, 2009).
Bay View Magazine. Reading Circle Interests. April 1894.
Bay View Magazine. The Bay View Reading Circle. December 1893.
“Bicknell Calls of Merom Chautauqua’s Funeral.” Lyceum Magazine, August 1926.
Blichfeldt, E. H. “What a Chautauqua is Not.” Chautauquan Weekly, August 1912.
http://proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu
/pqdweb?did=433675192&sid=1&Fmt=10&clientId=29945&RQT=309&VName
=HNP (accessed 26 February 2010).
Bowden, Charles L. and Katharine Ertz-Bowden. A Pictorial Story of Hiawatha: 19001904. Chicago Film Archives.
Bryce, Catherine T. To Arms for Liberty: A Pageant of the War; Choruses and Incidental
Music. Boston: C. C. Birchard, 1918.
Chautauquan. C.L.S.C. Round Table. January 1907.
–––. C.L.S.C. Work. November 1883.
–––. C.L.S.C. Testimony. November 1883.
–––. Editor’s Notebook. June 1882.
–––. Editor’s Outlook, October 1883.
http://books.google.com/books?id=ZycZAAAAYAAJ (accessed October 9,
2010).
–––. Local Circles. May 1884.
–––. November 1883. http://books.google.com/books?id=tHkAAAAAYAAJ
(accessed February 2, 2011).
273
Child, Anna Blackford. “Family Tale, 1924-1927” journal entry. “Diaries and Personal
Journals, 1913-1976.” Author’s collection.
Child, Anna Blackford. “Stops on Our Way North by Car” journal entry. “Diaries and
Personal Journals, 1913-1976.” Author’s collection.
Child, D Earl. July 27, 1932 journal entry. “Diaries and Personal Journals, 19131976,” edited by Anna Blackford Child. Author’s collection.
Chinquilla. The Old Indian’s Almanac. Jamaica, NY: Indian Craft Museum, 1938.
“Commencement Day C.L.S.C.” Chautauquan, July 1882.
Davol, Ralph. A Handbook of American Pageantry. Taunton, MA: Davol Publishing Co.,
1914.
Deseo, Lydia Glover [and Ruth Mougey Worrell]. “Pageantry at its Best.” Chicago:
World Services Agencies of the Methodist Episcopal Church, ca. 1929, Worrell.
Durr, Eleanor. August 6, 1919 journal entry. Eleanor Durr Collection, Lakeside.
Eastman, Charles A. From The Deep Woods to Civilization. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press, 1916.
Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. “From Chautauqua.” The Woman’s Column, September 3,
1904.
“Golden Jubilee Celebration at Lakeside.” Western Christian Advocate, August 22,
1923. Quoted in “The Pageant of 1923.” The Lakeside Heritage Manifest 2 no. 4
(November 1992).
“Graduation Day.” Bay View Magazine, June 1897.
“Harness Power and Put It To Work.” Lyceum Magazine, September 1927.
Harrison, Harry P. and Karl Detzer. Culture Under Canvas: The Story of Tent
Chautauqua. New York: Hastings House, 1958.
Hicks, Ford. “The 1926 Redpath Chautauqua Season.” Lyceum Magazine, July 1926.
“International Chautauqua Alliance.” Chautauquan Weekly, October 21, 1909.
Kramer, Harold Morton. “Around the Convention.” Lyceum Magazine, October 1927.
274
Lincoln, Jennette Emeline Carpenter. The Festival Book: May-day Pastime and the MayPole. New York: A. S. Barnes, 1913.
http://books.google.com/books?id=2hBbAAAAMAAJ (accessed October 3,
2010).
Lewis, Sinclair. Main Street. 1920. Reprint, New York: Barnes and Noble Classics, 2003.
Mendenhall, T. C. Monographs on Education in the United States. Albany, NY: J. B.
Lyon Co., 1899. http://books.google.com/books?id=-OK-_G01XR4C (accessed
October 10, 2010).
“Motion Picture Activities in the Country’s Churches.” Educational Film Magazine,
April 1920. http://www.archive.org/stream/edu1920cationalfilmmwhitrich
(accessed January 4, 2011).
“Redpath Outing at Harrison Michigan Farm.” Lyceum Magazine, November 1927.
Roney, Henry B. “Pageantry, A Civic Pastime.” Popular Mechanics, March 1917.
“Statistics of the Class of 1882.” Pioneer Hall Collection, Chautauqua Literary and
Scientific Circle, Chautauqua, NY.
Tarbell, Ida M. All the Day’s Work. 1939. Reprint, Henry Ford Museum & Greenfield
Village Herald 13, no. 2 (1984), 12-21.
“The 1927 Chautauqua.” Lyceum Magazine, June 1927.
“The Circle at the Assembly.” Bay View Magazine, November 1897.
“The Circle’s Summer Meetings.” Bay View Magazine, June 1900.
“The C.L.S.C. An Educational Necessity of the Times,” Chautauquan, October 1883.
“There’s a Job for Everybody.” Lyceum Magazine, July 1926.
Triggs, Jennifer, ed. Winona Revisited: 1899-1900: Capturing the History of Winona
Lake, Indiana Utilizing Programs and Other Printed Materials. Winona Lake,
IN: Morgan Library, Grace College and Theological Seminary, 2005.
–––. Winona Revisited, 1907-1911: Capturing the History of Winona Lake, Indiana
Utilizing Programs and Other Printed Materials. Winona Lake, IN: Morgan
Library, Grace College and Theological Seminary, 2005.
–––. Winona Revisited, 1914-1916: Capturing the History of Winona Lake, Indiana
Utilizing Programs and other Printed Materials. Winona Lake, IN: Morgan
Library, Grace College and Theological Seminary, 2005.
275
–––. Winona Revisited, 1916-24: Capturing the History of Winona Lake, Indiana,
Utilizing Programs and Other Printed Materials. Winona Lake, Indiana: Morgan
Library, Grace College and Theological Seminary, 2005.
Vincent, John H. “Chautauqua, A Popular University.” Contemporary Review 51
(1887): 725-735. http://books.google.com/books?id=cb8CAAAAIAAJ (accessed
October 19, 2010).
–––. The Chautauqua Movement. Boston: Chautauqua Press, 1886. Reprint, Charleston,
SC: BiblioLife, 2009.
“Women in the Public Eye.” Woman Citizen, May 16, 1925.
Woodman, Ned. “Just for Fun: Tuning out Competition.” Lyceum Magazine, April 1928.
Worrell, Ruth Mougey. Pageant of Bay View 1875-1925. Worrell.
Secondary Sources
Altman, Rick. “From Lecturer’s Prop to Industrial Product: The Early History of Travel
Films.” In Virtual Voyages: Cinema and Travel, edited by Jeffrey Ruoff, 61-76.
Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006.
–––. Silent Film Sound. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004.
Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of
Nationalism. New York: Verso, 1983.
Aron, Cindy S. Working at Play: A History of Vacations in the United States. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1999.
Auster, Albert. Actresses and Suffragists: Women in the American Theater, 1890-1920.
New York: Praeger, 1984.
Banta, Martha. Imagining American Women: Idea and Ideals in Cultural History. New
York: Columbia University Press, 1987.
Branham, Robert James and Stephen J. Hartnett. Sweet Freedom’s Song: “My Country
‘Tis of Thee” and Democracy in America. New York: Oxford University Press,
2002.
Butler, Judith. “Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology
and Feminist Theory.” Theatre Journal 40, no. 4 (December 1988): 519-531.
276
Butsch, Richard. The Making of American Audiences: From Stage to Television, 17501990. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Canning, Charlotte B. The Most American Thing in America: Circuit Chautauqua as
Performance. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press, 2003.
–––. “The Platform Versus the Stage: Circuit Chautauqua’s Antitheatrical Theatre.”
Theatre Journal 50, no. 3 (1998): 303-318.
Carter, Robert J. “Forum on the Bay: Oral Communication Aspects of the Bay View
Association, 1875-1965.” PhD diss., Michigan State University, 1966.
Case, Victoria and Robert Ormond Case. We Called it Culture: The Story of Chautauqua.
Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1948.
Chesser, Barbara Jo. “Analysis of Wedding Rituals: An Attempt to Make Weddings
More Meaningful.” Family Relations 29, no. 2 (April 1980): 204-209.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/584073 (accessed October 5, 2010).
Clark, John Burton, ed. The Banners and Mosaics of Chautauqua 1882-1992.
Chautauqua, NY: Alumni Association of the C.L.S.C., [1992].
Cohen, Lizabeth. Making a New Deal: Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919-1939. New
York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Cooley, Steven D. “Manna and the Manual: Sacramental and Instrumental Constructions
of the Victorian Methodist Camp Meeting during the Mid-Nineteenth Century.”
Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation 6, no. 2 (Summer
1996): 131-159.
Crafton, Donald. The Talkies: American Cinema’s Transition to Sound 1926-1931.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1997.
Deloria, Philip J. Playing Indian. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998.
DeMott, Benjamin. “American Culture and the Chautauqua Era.” Henry Ford Museum &
Greenfield Village Herald 13, no. 2 (1984): 70-79.
Doerr, Mary Jane. Bay View: An American Idea. Allegan Forest, MI: Priscilla Press,
2010.
Douglas, Susan J. Inventing American Broadcasting, 1899-1922. Baltimore, MD: Johns
Hopkins University, 1987.
–––. Listening In: Radio and the American Imagination. Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press, 2004.
277
Fennimore, Keith J. The Heritage of Bay View, 1875-1975. Grand Rapids, MI: William
B. Eerdmans, 1975.
Gaddis, Vincent H. and Jasper A. Huffman. The Story of Winona Lake: A Memory and A
Vision. Butler, IN: Higley Huffman Press, 1960.
Galey, Mary. The Grand Assembly: The Story of Life at the Colorado Chautauqua.
[Boulder, CO]: First Flatiron Press, 1981.
Gennep, Arnold van. Rites de Passage. 1906. Translated by Monika B. Vizedom and
Gabrielle L. Caffee as Rites of Passage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1960.
Glassberg, David. American Historical Pageantry. Chapel Hill: University of North
Carolina Press, 1990.
Glick, David. “Independent Chautauquas Mentioned in the Chautauquan Magazine
1881-1913.” Lakeside.
–––. “Lakeside.” Lakeside Heritage Society Manifest (February 2009): 4.
Goffman, Erving. The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NJ:
Doubleday Anchor Books, 1959.
Gomery, Douglas. “Movie Audiences, Urban Geography, and the History of the
American Film.” Velvet Light Trap 19 (1982): 23-29.
http://pao.chadwyck.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/articles/displayItem.do?QueryType
=articles&ResultsID=12D1831FD376E67E3&filterSequence=0&ItemNumber=8
&journalID=s536 (accessed January 4, 2011).
Gunning, Tom. “From the Opium Den to the Theatre of Morality: Moral discourse and
the film process in early American cinema.” In The Silent Film Reader, edited by
Lee Grieveson and Peter Krämer, 145-154. New York: Routledge, 2004.
http://books.google.com/books?id=apqZd0uY9mYC (accessed January 4, 2011).
Gusfield, Joseph R. and Jerzy Michalowicz. “Secular Symbolism: Studies of Ritual,
Ceremony, and the Symbolic Order in Modern Life.” Annual Review of Sociology
10 (1984), 417-435.
Heaton, Frances Parks. All in the Life Time of Mr. James Heaton, Winona Lake’s Mr.
Chautauqua. N.p., 1979.
Hugh, G. J. Syntony and Spark: The Origins of Radio. New York: Wiley, 1976.
278
Humphrey, Lin T. and Theodore C. Humphrey. “The High School Reunion: A
Traditional Festival?” Journal of Popular Culture 19, no. 1 (Summer 1985): 99106.
Hurlbut, Jesse L. The Story of Chautauqua. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1921.
Johnson, Russell L. “‘Dancing Mothers’: The Chautauqua Movement in TwentiethCentury American Popular Culture.” American Studies International 39 no. 2
(June 2001): 53-70.
Kasson, John F. Houdini, Tarzan, and the Perfect Man: The White Male Body and the
Challenge of Modernity in America. New York: Hill and Wang, 2001.
Kennedy, David M. Freedom From Fear: The American People in Depression and War,
1929-1945. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Kestle, James Allen. This Is Lakeside, 1873-1973: Ohio’s Chautauqua of the Great
Lakes, The Centennial History. N.p., 1973.
Kilde, Jeanne Halgren. “The ‘Predominance of the Feminine’ at Chautauqua: Rethinking
the Gender-Space Relationship in Victorian America.” Signs 24, no. 2 (Winter
1999): 449-486. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3175649 (accessed November 11,
2008).
Knicker, Charles Robert. “1978 – Centennial of a Forgotten Giant: The Chautauqua
Literary and Scientific Circle.” In C.L.S.C. History and Book List 1878-1985,
edited by Nately Ronsheim, 4-5. Chautauqua, NY: Chautauqua Literary and
Scientific Circle, Chautauqua Institution, [1985].
Knight, Arthur. Disintegrating the Musical: Black Performance and American Musical
Film. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002.
Kuftinec, Sonja. Staging America: Cornerstone and Community-Based Theater.
Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2005.
Levine, Lawrence W. Highbrow Lowbrow: The Emergence of Cultural Hierarchy in
America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988.
Lindvall, Terry. Sanctuary Cinema: Origins of the Christian Film Industry. New York:
New York University Press, 2007.
Lippy, Charles. “The Camp Meeting in Transition: The Character and Legacy of the Late
Nineteenth Century.” Methodist History 34, no. 1 (1995): 3-17.
Lott, Eric. Love & Theft: Blackface Minstrelsy and the American Working Class. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
279
Lynd Robert S. and Helen Merrell Lynd. Middletown: A Study in Modern American
Culture. 1929. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace, 1957.
MacLaren, Gay. Morally We Roll Along. Boston: Little, Brown, 1938.
Marchand, Roland. Advertising the American Dream: Making Way for Modernity,
1920-1940. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1985.
May, Lary. Screening Out the Past: The Birth of Mass Culture and the Motion Picture
Industry. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980.
McCaffrey, Donald W. and Christopher P. Jacobs. Guide to the Silent Years of American
Cinema. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1999.
McNally, Michael David. “The Indian Passion Play: Contesting the Real Indian in Song
and Hiawatha Pageants, 1901-1965.” American Quarterly 58, no. 1 (March 2006):
105-136.
http://muse.jhu.edu.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/journals/american_quarterly/v058/58.1m
cnally.html (accessed Dec. 21, 2010).
McNamara, Brooks. Step Right Up. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976.
Morrison, Theodore. Chautauqua: A Center for Education, Religion, and the Arts in
America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.
Musser, Charles and Carol Nelson. High-Class Moving Pictures: Lyman H. Howe and
the Forgotten Era of Traveling Exhibition, 1880-1920. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1991.
Myerhoff, Barbara G. “We Don’t Wrap Herring in a Printed Page: Fusions, Functions,
and Continuity in Secular Ritual.” In Secular Ritual, edited by Barbara Myerhoff
and Sally Falk Moore, 199-224. Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum, 1977.
Nelson, Julie R. “A Subtle Revolution: The Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle in
Rural Midwestern Towns, 1878-1900.” Agricultural History 70, no. 4 (Autumn
1996): 653-671.
Orchard, Hugh A. Fifty Years of Chautauqua. Cedar Rapids, IA: The Torch Press, 1923.
Pederson, Isabel B. “Banners as Folk Art.” In The Banners and Mosaics of Chautauqua
1882-1992, edited by John Burton Clark, 4-13. Chautauqua, NY: Alumni
Association of the C.L.S.C., [1992].
Pettem, Sylvia. Chautauqua Centennial, Boulder, Colorado: A Hundred Years of
Programs. Boulder, CO: Book Lode, 1998.
280
Pierson, George W. A Yale Book of Numbers: Historical Statistics of the College and
University 1701 – 1976. New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1983.
http://www.yale.edu/oir/pierson_original.htm#F (accessed October 17, 2010).
Plank, S. E. “Academic Regalia at Oberlin: the Establishment and Dissolution of a
Tradition.” Northeast Ohio Journal of History 1 no. 2 (April 2003): 55-74.
Porter, Curt. “Chautauqua and Tennessee: Monteagle and the Independent Assemblies.”
Tennessee Historical Quarterly, 22 no. 4 (December 1963): 347-360.
Postlewait, Thomas. “The Hieroglyphic Stage: American Theatre and Society, Post-Civil
War to 1945.” In The Cambridge History of American Theatre, 1870-1945, edited
by Don B. Wilmeth and Christopher Bigsby, 107-195. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1999.
Prevots, Naima. American Pageantry: A Movement for Art & Democracy. Ann Arbor:
U.M.I. Research Press, 1990.
Pulliam, Walter T., ed. “The Fires of Monteagle.” [Knoxville, TN]: Walter T. Pulliam,
2005.
Ray, Angela G. The Lyceum and Public Culture in the Nineteenth-Century United States.
East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 2005.
Razlogova, Elena. “The Voice of the Listener: Americans and the Radio Industry, 19201950.” Ph.D. diss., George Mason University, 2003.
Reiser, Andrew Chamberlin. “Secularization Reconsidered: Chautauqua and the DeChristianization of Middle-Class Authority, 1880-1920.” In The Middling Sorts:
Explorations in the History of the American Middle Class, edited by Burton J.
Bledstein and Robert D. Johnston, 136-150. New York: Routledge, 2001.
–––. The Chautauqua Moment: Protestants, Progressives, and the Culture
of Modern Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press, 2003.
Rennert, Jack. 100 Posters of Buffalo Bill’s Wild West. London: Hart-Davis, MacGibbon,
1976.
Robins, Roger. “Vernacular American Landscape: Methodists, Camp Meetings, and
Social Respectability.” Religion and American Culture: A Journal of
Interpretation 4, no. 2 (Summer 1994): 165-191.
281
Rosini, Vincent Thomas. “Sanctuary Cinema: The Rise and Fall of Protestant Churches
as Film Exhibition Sites, 1910-1930.” PhD diss., Regent University, 1998.
Shaffer, Marguerite S. See America First: Tourism and National Identity, 1880-1940.
Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2001.
Smiley, Gene. Rethinking the Great Depression. Lanham, MD: Ivan R. Dee Publishing,
2003.
Smith, Robert J. Art of the Festival, Publications in Anthropology 6. Lawrence, KS:
Department of Anthropology, University of Kansas, 1975.
Talbot, Mary Lee. “A School at Home: The Contribution of the Chautauqua Literary and
Scientific Circle to Women’s Education Opportunities in the Gilded Age, 18741900.” PhD diss., Columbia University, 1997. In ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses,
http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.uiowa.edu/pqdweb?index=0&did=739850981&
SrchMode=2&sid=4&Fmt=2&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName
=PQD&TS=1297598865&clientId=29945 (accessed October 10, 2010).
Tapia, John E. Circuit Chautauqua: From Rural Education to Popular Entertainment in
Early Twentieth Century America. Jefferson, NC: McFarland,1997.
Thornton, Harrison John. “An Adventure in Popular Education.” Ca. 1952. Manuscript.
Thornton Collection, Chautauqua.
Trachtenberg, Alan. Shades of Hiawatha: Staging Indians, Making Americans, 18801930. New York: Hill and Wang, 2004.
–––. “‘We Study the Word and Works of God’: Chautauqua and the Sacralization of
Culture in America.” Henry Ford Museum & Greenfield Village Herald 13, no. 2
(1984): 3-11.
Turner, Victor. “Betwixt and Between: The Liminal Period in Rites of Passage.” In The
Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual, 93-111. Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press, 1967. http://books.google.com/books?id=62bKQB5xEo0C
(accessed March 3, 2011).
Ubbelohde, Carl, Duane A. Smith, and Maxine Benson. A Colorado History. 9th ed.
Boulder, CO: Pruett Publishing, 2006.
http://books.google.com/books?id=RRZKwjiPJZoC (accessed Dec. 21, 2010).
Uminowicz, Glenn. “Recreation in a Christian America: Ocean Grove and Asbury Park,
New Jersey, 1869-1914.” In Hard at Play: Leisure in America, 1840-1940, edited
by Kathryn Grover, 8-38. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 1992.
282
U.S. Census Bureau. “State and County QuickFacts: Race.”
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68178.htm (accessed February 15,
2011).
U.S. Diplomatic Mission to Germany. “Facts & Figures: Income and Prices 1900-1999.”
About the USA. http://usa.usembassy.de/etexts/his/e_prices1.htm (accessed
March 1, 2011).
Volpe, Andrea. “Cartes de Visite Portrait Photographs and the Culture of Class
Formation.” In The Middling Sorts: Explorations in the History of the American
Middle Class, edited by Burton J. Bledstein and Robert D. Johnston, 157-169.
New York: Routledge, 2001.
Waldrop, Frank C. ed., Mountain Voices: The Centennial History of Monteagle Sunday
School Assembly. Monteagle, TN: Monteagle Sunday School Assembly, 1982.
Weeks, John A. Beneath the Beeches: The Story of Bay View, Michigan. Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 2000.
Weiss, Elaine F. Fruits of Victory: The Women’s Land Army of America in the Great
War. Washington, D.C.: Potomac Books, 1998.
Wheeler, Clark S. Bay View. Bay View, MI.: Bay View Association of the Methodist
Church, 1950.
Williams, Raymond. “Culture is Ordinary.” In Convictions, edited by N. McKenzie,
1958. Reprint in Studying Culture, edited by Ann Gray and Jim McGuigan, 5-15.
New York: Arnold, 1997.
Wilson, Raymond. Ohiyesa: Charles Eastman, Santee Sioux. Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, 1983.
Wynn, Neil A. Cross the Water Blues: African American Music in Europe. Jackson, MS:
University Press of Mississippi, 2007.
http://books.google.com/books?id=PMaszIALuVYC (accessed March 1, 2011).