Theatrical Syndicate

This article has multiple issues. Please help or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources:  –  ·  ·  · scholar · JSTOR (May 2011) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. Please by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (September 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (September 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

The Theatrical Syndicate was an organization that controlled most booking in top theatrical attractions in the United States, starting in 1896. The organization, composed of six men, controlled theatres and bookings.

Beginnings[]

Early in 1896, Charles Frohman, Al Hayman, A. L. Erlanger, Marc Klaw, Samuel F. Nirdlinger, and Frederick Zimmerman gathered for lunch at the Holland House in New York City. All were theatrical managers or booking agents with influence throughout the country. Frohman and Hayman owned theatres in New York and the surrounding area, Erlanger and Klaw were booking agents for almost all the major theatres in the South, and Nirdlinger and Zimmerman controlled theatres in the Ohio region. Frohman also owned a chain of theatres extending to the West Coast. At lunch, the men discussed the disarray in American theatre. These men had essentially formed the outline of the Theatrical Syndicate. For the Syndicate to succeed, they felt it had to form a monopoly. Within weeks of their lunch meeting, the men had organized all the theatres they owned or represented into a national chain, marking the beginning of the Theatrical Syndicate.^[1]

Operation[]

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, theatre companies in America thrived by touring. To take control of the situation, the Syndicate needed only to possess key theatres between the major touring cities. The Syndicate did not need control of theatres within the city. It needed only to control theatres on the routes approaching the city. The first city completely overtaken by the Syndicate was Philadelphia because of the influence of Nixon and Zimmerman.

At the start, the Syndicate owned 33 first-class theatres. Frohman, Klaw and Erlanger became the booking agents for the whole organization.^[2] Company managers no longer organized their tours by dealing with individual theatre managers. Instead they had to go through the Syndicate, which arranged their tour for them.

Praise[]

The Syndicate was praised in certain circles. Daniel Frohman, the brother of Charles Frohman, gives an account of the creation of the Syndicate. He writes that after discussing the growing chaos in the business of theatre, "They decided that its only economic hope was in a centralization of booking interests, and they acted immediately on this decision."^[3] Those who praised the Syndicate believed that they had saved theatre by standardizing bookings. In the time prior to the formation of the Syndicate, routing of road-based companies was described as chaotic. Smaller travelling companies found themselves in debt because of stiff competition. Klaw, who acted as spokesman for the Syndicate, was quoted as saying, "The Theatrical Syndicate has brought order out of chaos, legitimate profit out of ruinous rivalry."^[4]

Criticism[]

Criticism and opposition to the Syndicate came from managers, agents, and actors alike. At first, it was the managers that attempted to put a stop to the Syndicate, but they failed almost as soon as they began. A more serious threat to the Syndicate came in the form of rebellion from actors. The most prominent actors to take a stand were Nat Goodwin, Francis Wilson, and Richard Mansfield. Others who took a stand against the Syndicate were James A. Herne, James O'Neill. One actress, Minnie Maddern Fiske, became very well known for her opposition of the Syndicate. She became famous for her roles in plays by Ibsen, Shaw, and Wilde.^[5] The voices of the actors were much louder than any previous opposition. However, the fight was a very short one as Nat Goodwin, the original leader of the rebellion, was "captured" by the Syndicate. The others agreed to the Syndicate's terms very soon after.

Shubert family[]

The only real threat to the Syndicate came in the form of the Shubert brothers, Sam, Lee, and J.J. In the building stages of their empire, Sam Shubert was seen as the "leader." At the age of twenty one, Sam controlled theatres in Utica, Rochester, Syracuse, New York City, and Troy. In the next five years, he acquired many more, all over the country. At this point, his holdings were only surpassed by Syndicate itself. However, Sam died in a railroad accident in 1905. After his death, his brothers formed a very brief working agreement with the Syndicate. After three years of solidifying their holdings, the Shuberts were strong enough to go toe to toe with the Syndicate. At first, the Shuberts operated in a similar manner to the Syndicate. They dealt with theatrical managers and were able to book a year's tour for the manager, but any length of time after that became unprofitable. The Shubert brothers then changed tactics. They abandoned the approach of buying theatres. Instead, they focused on collecting actors. During the 1908-09 season, the Syndicate did not have enough actors or plays to fill all their theatres. The Shubert brothers took advantage of this by following the Syndicate to certain cities and performing similar works in the same city, but of a better quality.

Decline[]

Early in 1910, several prominent actors and playwrights defected from the Syndicate to the Shuberts. The fight of the Shubert brothers gave smaller independent theatres motivation to take a stand against the Syndicate, and by April, the New England area had completely declared independence from the Syndicate. In May of that year, 1,200 small town theatre owners joined to form the National Theatre Owners Association.^[6] This act helped to end the Syndicate's hold on American theatre.

See also[]

• Morosco Theatre

References[]