James L. Haseltine, “Mormons and the Visual Arts.” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 1 No. 2 (1966): 17–34. Copyright © 2012 Dialogue Foundation. All Rights Reserved • A JOURNAL OF dialogue• MORMON THOUGHT MORMONS AND THE VISUAL ARTS James L. Haseltine This essay is the third in a continuing series, "An Assessment of Mormon Culture." The author, himself not a Mormon, examines the influence of the L.D.S. Church on the visual arts in Utah from pioneer times. Mr. Haseltine is Director of the Salt Lake Art Center and the author of numerous reviews and articles for professional journals; he recently produced a retrospective exhibit of Utah painting at the Art Center and did much of the research used in this essay in preparing the exhibition catalogue, "100 Years of Utah Painting." It seems curious to ask, "What support has the C h u r c h of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints given to the v i s u a l arts in Utah?" One would hardly consider as fields for fruitful exploration Baptist sup- port of the a r t s in Mississippi, Lutheran encouragement in Oregon, or Methodist patronage in Kansas. Yet in Utah perhaps such a ques- tion can b e asked, for seldom has o n e religion been so intertwined with other aspects of life. There is little doubt that Brigham Young felt a need for artists in the Salt Lake Valley very soon after the arrival of t h e first pioneers. By the mid-1850's he was instructing missionaries in foreign lands to devote special attention to t h e conversion of s k i l l e d artists, artisans, and architects. That many came to Utah is implied by C. C. A . Christensen, the fine pioneer painter, who remarked in 1872, after visiting the U t a h Territorial Fair, "I would never have believed so 18/DIALOGUE: A Journal of Mormon Thought much talent could be found among us as a people who are nearly all gathered from among the most downtrodden classes of mankind."1 Almost too many came, for none, by art alone, could make the income necessary to support himself and his family. There was appreciation of art but seldom sufficient means to purchase it. Pioneer artists often noted this problem in the diaries and journals. Danquart A. Weggeland2 states that he could occasionally dispose of a painting or a lesson for a few home-knit sox or a basket of onions, but that with- out commissions for his work in the Salt Lake Theatre, he would never have been able to pay his rent. Alfred Lambourne remarks in the 1870's that his paintings had been "traded for a pair of boots . framed and then sold for what the canvas cost . [traded] for canary and cage . sold at a ruinously low price . raffled at $8.00, won by Briggy Young" (apparently Brigham Young, Jr.) .3 George M. Ottinger says, "In the last 8 years I have up to this day, June 30, 1872, painted 223 pictures which have been sold for $3413.00 or a little over fifteen dollars apiece. Now deducting . seven dollars from each picture for cost of paint, canvas, stretchers and framing leaves me $1752.00 or a little over half ... or $219.00 a year. Would not the heart of the strongest quail. When I look around at my family and our wants, I seem to myself a coward, a slave. Why don't I stick pallet and brush into the fire. I certainly must have no talent, no, nothing requisite to me that is needed for a successful painter."4 Yet, as Ottinger also notes, people "as a general thing like pictures and admire them but they have no money to spend for them, unless some stranger like Mr. Perry comes to the Valley."5 (Ottinger refers to Enoch Wood Perry, Jr., who maintained a studio in New York. From 1862 to 1866 he lived in California, making trips to Utah and Hawaii. Another pioneer Utah artist regrets in a diary note of April 1866 that "a gentile artist" had received $1000 in gold for a portrait of Brigham Young. The gentile artist was most likely Perry, for Ottinger states in another 1872 entry that Brigham Young, whose portrait he was then painting, remarked to him that the Ottinger work was a much better likeness than the Perry portrait done six years earlier.) Edward W. Tullidge, the Utah historian, confirms this observation, speaking of the "early taste and love for pictures 1 William Mulder, Homeward to Zion (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1957), p. 113. 2 An alphabetical listing (with dates) of all artists cited in the text is provided at the end of the essay. 3 Alfred Lambourne, "Journal of Works of Art," 1869-1899. 4 George M. Ottinger, "Personal Journal," 1833-1899. 0 Ibid. GEORGE M. OTTINGER: The Ideal . The Real fi GEORGE M. OTTINGER: Painting Scenery for Salt Lake Theatre HASELTINE: Mormons and the Visual Arts/19 in the community, far in advance of that in surrounding territories and greater than the newness of the country would seem to promise."6 He cites two reasons for this phenomenon: a larger than average proportion of citizens very recently from the Old World, where they were in the habit of visiting galleries, and the fact that these citizens were "the reverse of a floating population."7 Some of the pioneers brought pictures across the plains; a number of works by William Warner Major, who was active in Nauvoo and Winter Quarters, and by itinerant artists who visited the early Mormon settlements sur- vive today in Utah collections. A love of art apparently existed, and Brigham Young apparently encouraged it. He took delight in pointing out to visiting dignitaries the Weggeland painting of his estate, hanging above his fireplace. Trained as a carpenter, Young understood craftsmanship and could appreciate a well-wrought painting. He evidently approved of the sculpture of the lion, which still crouches over the Lion House entrance, carved by William Ward in 1855, and admired the wood carvings of Ralph Ramsey which embellished the Tabernacle, Salt Lake Theatre, Beehive House and Eagle Gate. Beauty for Brigham Young was "a natural and necessary accompaniment of productive work."8 The performing arts, however, received much stronger support from the Church and its leaders. That this was so, and that the pattern thus set continues to this day, is not too difficult to under- stand. Performing arts — music, drama, dance — are essentially group arts. And the solidity of the group, of the gathered people, is essential to Mormonism. In pioneer days a song, a skit, a dance served to unite the flock as well as provide much needed recreation and diversion from the hostility of nature and, often, the hostility of other men. But the visual arts of painting and sculpture are essentially in- dividual arts. The heart of the esthetic experience is the quiet contemplation by one individual of one object created by one man. It is often a demanding experience and usually affords less recrea- tional or entertainment value than its sister arts. The continuing interest of the Mormon Church in performing arts has done much to enrich our culture. It has helped create a climate in which a fine choir, an excellent symphony, and extraordinary modern dance and ballet companies can flourish. Its less active encouragement of the visual arts has been a serious deterrent to artistic growth. 6 Edward W. Tullidge, History of Salt Lake (Salt Lake City: Star Printing Co., 1886), p. 810. 7 Ibid. 8 Mrs. Kenneth Smith, "Utah Artists." Unpublished, undated typescript. 201 DIALOGUE: A Journal of Mormon Thought The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints no doubt feels that it has been, throughout its history, a strong supporter of the painter, sculptor and architect. In a sense this is quite true. Few churches or their members in the last century have commissioned as many works of art. Utah may have more portraits per capita than any other state, as a result of the Mormon's intense interest in visual recordkeeping and of orders for several identical portraits during the days of polygamy. The Salt Lake Theatre, built by Brigham Young, furnished welcome employment for almost all the pioneer artists as scenery painters. And the Mormon temples abound with murals, paintings and sculpture. The painting of the Salt Lake Temple murals may be, in fact, a unique episode in religious art of America. The story begins as the second generation of Utah painters were studying under the pioneer artists Dan Weggeland and George M. Ottinger. Both in- structors, feeling perhaps a growing provincialism in Utah art, urged their students to study abroad. The first to take their advice was James H. Harwood, who in 1888 enrolled at the Academie Julian in Paris; the sculptor Cyrus E. Dallin arrived two weeks later. As a result of this precedent, Weggeland and others were able to persuade George Q. Cannon of the First Presidency of the Church to send John Hafen, John B. Fairbanks, and Lorus Pratt on "a mission to Paris to study painting,"9 with the understanding that they would decorate the Salt Lake Temple upon their return. In a letter to Lorus Pratt, who was selected to preside over the mission, Apostle Heber J. Grant stated, "We bless you that you may take joy in your labor and delight in your studies, that you may become proficient, and fitted and qualified and prepared through your labors and studies to beautify and decorate the House of God that shall be erected and the Temple of the Lord for the administering therein of the living and the dead."10 The three landed in Liverpool on July 2, 1890, and were in Paris by August, commencing their studies at the Academie Julian.