Editing September Morn (section)

==History==

===Paris Salon and first sale===
Chabas first exhibited ''September Morn'' in the Paris Salon of April 14 to June 30, 1912.{{sfn|MET, September Morn}} Because he did not plan to sell it, he gave a price of 50,000 francs ($10,000{{efn|${{Inflation|US|10000|1913|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}})&nbsp;– more than he expected anybody to pay.{{sfn|The San Bernardino County Sun 1935}}{{sfn|Oakland Tribune 1914}} For the painting, and his ''Portrait of Mme. Aston Knight'', Chabas won a Medal of Honor, receiving 220 of 359 possible votes.{{sfn|The International Studio 1912|p=223}} At the Salon, the painting was uncontroversial,{{sfn|Green|Karolides|2009|p=506}}{{sfn|Pattison|1913|p=244}} and it was soon reprinted in American publications such as ''[[Town & Country (magazine)|Town & Country]]''{{sfn|Green|Karolides|2009|p=506}} and ''[[The Studio (magazine)|The International Studio]]''.{{sfn|Frantz|1912|p=107}}

Sources are unclear as to the painting's provenance after the Salon. According to the Met, the New York-based Philip (or Philippe) Ortiz, manager of the New York Branch of Braun and Company, purchased it in late 1912.{{sfn|MET, September Morn}}{{sfn|The Sun 1913, Nude Maid}} According to a 1933 report in the ''[[Times Herald-Record|Middletown Times Herald]]'', he paid 12,000 francs ($2,400{{efn|${{Inflation|US|2400|1913|fmt=c}}.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}}) for the work, but never brought the painting back to the United States.{{sfn|Middletown Times Herald 1933}} However, Brauer suggests that Ortiz sent it to his gallery in New York, where it caused [[#New York|a controversy]].{{efn|This is also corroborated by a 1935 ''Time'' piece {{harv|Time 1935}}.}}{{sfn|Brauer|2011|pp=123–124}} According to ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'', the painting was acquired by {{ill|Leon Mantashev|ru|Манташев, Левон Александрович}} {{circa}}&nbsp;1913, after the painting was returned to Chabas.{{sfn|Time 1957}}

A 1935 article in the ''[[Montreal Gazette]]'', meanwhile, stated that the original ''September Morn'' had yet to go to the United States, and that Chabas had sold it directly to Mantashev.{{sfn|The Montreal Gazette 1935}} According to Chabas, this was after an American approached him to purchase the painting, but was unwilling to pay the asking price.{{sfn|Oakland Tribune 1914}} In her memoirs, ''[[Vogue (magazine)|Vogue]]'' editor [[Edna Woolman Chase]] recounted how Ortiz had arranged for numerous reproductions to be made and sent to New York, and that&nbsp;– although he had been interested in acquiring the original&nbsp;– he had been unable to do so.{{Sfn|Chase|Chase|1954|p=64}} Although it is possible that the original did not cross the Atlantic by 1913, it is clear that reproductions did.{{sfn|The Montreal Gazette 1935}}

===Controversy and popularity===

====Chicago====
{{multiple image
| footer    = Newspaper reproductions of the painting, censored with clothing
| align     = right

| image1    = 'Miss Morn' of Chicago, 1913.jpg
| alt1      = In ''[[The Seattle Star]]''
| width1     = 126

| image2    =September Morn in Dress.jpg
| alt2      = In ''[[The Leavenworth Times]]''
| width2     = 150
}}
A full-size reproduction of ''September Morn'' was displayed in a window of Jackson and Semmelmeyer, a photography shop in [[Chicago]], Illinois, in March 1913.{{efn|The store was located at 44 Wabash Avenue {{harv|Chicago Daily Tribune 1913}}.}}{{sfn|Green|Karolides|2009|p=506}} A passing police officer noticed the print and on grounds that it was indecent, insisted it be taken down.{{efn|Sources disagree as to the name of this policeman. {{harvtxt|Boalt|1913|p=1}} gives "Jerry Sullivan", while ''The Milwaukee Journal'' gives "Fred Rirsch" {{harv|The Milwaukee Journal 1913, Paris}}.}} The mayor of the city, [[Carter Harrison IV]], agreed with the policeman's decision, and deemed that the image could be sold, but should not be displayed in public as children could see it.{{sfn|Pattison|1913|p=244}} Fred Jackson, the owner, was charged with indecency,{{sfn|Kendrick|1996|p=147}}{{sfn|The Milwaukee Journal 1913, Beautiful}} and at his request the case was brought to trial on March 18.{{sfn|Chicago Daily Tribune 1913}}

In front of a jury, the city's art censor Jeremiah O'Connor testified that ''September Morn'' was lewd and should not be displayed in public, but rather only in a museum exhibition.{{efn|In an interview with the ''[[Chicago Daily Tribune]]'', O'Connor stated that he personally liked the painting, but considered it "embarrassing for women to look at" and thought displays would have a negative impact on young boys. He drew a comparison with the [[Bible]], explaining that it "may be good reading for people who understand it, but some chapters are not intended for young folks" {{harv|Chicago Daily Tribune 1913}}.}} W.&nbsp;W.&nbsp;Hallam of the Chicago Vice Committee agreed, arguing that, as the woman was committing the illegal act of bathing in public, ''September Morn'' had to be banned.{{sfn|Green|Karolides|2009|p=506}}{{sfn|The Spokesman-Review 1913}} Other witnesses for the prosecution included censors, educators, and clergy, such as the superintendent [[Ella Flagg Young]] and the head of the [[Juvenile Protective Association]] Gertrude Howe Britton.{{sfn|The Milwaukee Journal 1913, Beautiful}}{{sfn|The Spokesman-Review 1913}}{{sfn|The Milwaukee Journal 1913, Don't be Afraid}}

Jackson, acting as his own lawyer, highlighted the hypocrisy of censoring the painting while a nude statue of [[Diana (mythology)|Diana]] stood in front of the [[Montgomery Ward Company Complex|Montgomery Ward Building]]. He called upon painters, poets, and sculptors as his witnesses, including the artist Oliver Grover and the art critic Walter Smith.{{efn|''The Milwaukee Journal'' reprinted one poem in defense of the painting, as follows {{harv|The Milwaukee Journal 1913, Beautiful}}:
<poem>
Sometime, glad time, in Arcady, I want
  to live a day
With Joy's slim daughter of the dawn
  to teach my love the way;
To live a day without the clothes, the
  coin, the masquerade
That burden so the struggle here—of
  hypocrites afraid.

Sometime, dear time, in Arcady, im-
  mune from 'pure' police
I hope to find the picture true, that
  caught its light from Greece;
To be as true to life, dear life, as is the
  painter's dream
Within the dawning of the day where
  new ideals gleam.
</poem>
}}{{sfn|The Milwaukee Journal 1913, Beautiful}}{{sfn|The Spokesman-Review 1913}} In his testimony, Grover stated "A nude woman is no more
indecent than a bare tree. Men and women weren't born with overcoats on. Anyhow, indecency may be decidedly apart from nudity."{{sfn|San Francisco Call 1913}}

After less than an hour of deliberations,{{efn|Sources differ as to the exact length of deliberations. The ''San Francisco Call'' gives 20 minutes {{harv|San Francisco Call 1913}}, while the ''[[Escanaba Morning Press]]'' gives 45 {{harv|Escanaba Morning Press 1913}}.}} the jury found for Jackson, allowing him to reinstate the image in his display;{{sfn|San Francisco Call 1913}}{{sfn|The Spokesman-Review 1913}}{{Sfn|Boalt|1913|p=1}} Jackson was so pleased that he promised a free copy of ''September Morn'' to each juror.{{sfn|Escanaba Morning Press 1913}} Ten days after the trial Mayor Harrison went to the city council and proposed stricter obscenity laws. The city government agreed, and imposed a $25–100{{efn|${{Inflation|US|25|1913|fmt=c}}–${{Inflation|US|100|1913|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}} fine for displaying nude art along public roads and in places frequented by children.{{Sfn|Boalt|1913|p=1}}{{sfn|Garvey|1988|p=158}} By September Jackson (together with fellow art dealers Samuel Meyer and William Kuhl) had been found in violation of this law. Mayor Harrison later stated that he was "through" with the painting, saying "Chicago has been made the laughing stock of the whole country because of this bathing girl picture".{{sfn|The Pittsburgh Press 1913, Chicago}}

====New York====
[[File:Anthony Comstock.jpg|thumb|Anti-vice crusader [[Anthony Comstock]]; his reaction to the painting promoted further controversy.]]
Further controversy arose in New York in May 1913, two months after the conclusion of the Chicago trial. [[Anthony Comstock]], head of the [[New York Society for the Suppression of Vice]] and nationally recognized for his campaigns against "smut",{{efn|Comstock had spearheaded [[Comstock laws|laws]] at the end of the 19th century which prohibited the inter-state commerce of material deemed indecent or pornographic. Though he had wide popular support, he also had numerous detractors. Comstock boasted that he had seized more than 160 tons of indecent material during his career {{harv|Healion|1964|p=42}}. He was not averse to arresting art dealers he considered to be peddling reproductions of obscene works; in 1887, for instance, he had arrested Roland Knoedler of the [[Knoedler|Knoedler Gallery]] for selling nudes painted by artists such as [[William-Adolphe Bouguereau]] and [[Jules Joseph Lefebvre]] {{harv|Beisel|1998|p=109}}.}} saw ''September Morn''&nbsp;– sources differ as to whether it was the original or a print{{efn|Modern sources stating that it was the original include {{harvtxt|Brauer|2011|p=124}} and {{harvtxt|Sterling|Salinger|1966|pp=222–223}}, whereas modern sources describing the controversial image as a print include {{harvtxt|Taylor|2012|p=166}}. Contemporary reports are less ambiguous. One describes the controversial image as "grac[ing] a frame less than a foot high" {{harv|The Sun 1913, Nude Maid}}, and in 1933 Ortiz stated that it was a print {{harv|Middletown Times Herald 1933}}.}} &nbsp;– on display in the window of Braun and Company, an art dealership on West 46th Street.{{sfn|The Sun 1913, Nude Maid}}{{sfn|The Sun 1913, Chabas's Picture}} Rushing inside, he raged "There's too little morn and too much maid! Take it out!".{{efn|Other versions are phrased "There's too little morning and too much maid!" {{harv|Monfried|1971|p=9}}, or include further lines such as "It ought to have been pitch dark for a girl to go wading like that" {{harv|The Tuscaloosa News 1937}}. The version told by {{harvtxt|Monfried|1971|p=9}} includes Comstock commenting on [[Jean-François Millet]]'s ''[[:File:Jean-François Millet - The Goose Girl - Walters 37153.jpg|The Goose Girl]]'' while leaving. Yet another quote is given by {{harvtxt|Ellis|1975|p=92}}: "That is not a proper picture to be shown to boys and girls! There is nothing more sacred than the form of a woman, but it must not be denuded. I think everyone will agree with me that such pictures should not be displayed where school children passing through the streets can see them."}}{{sfn|Monfried|1971|p=9}}{{Sfn|Shteir|2004|p=59}}{{sfn|Kendrick|1996|p=147}} A clerk, James Kelly, removed the work, but Ortiz, the gallery's manager, reinstated it in the window after returning from his lunch break.{{sfn|Monfried|1971|p=9}}{{sfn|The Sun 1913, Nude Maid}}

Comstock threatened Ortiz with legal action, and the manager&nbsp;– unaware that Comstock could not arrest him, and fearful that he could cause trouble for the gallery&nbsp;– was initially frightened. He consulted with [[Arthur Brisbane]] of the ''[[New York Journal-American|New York Evening Journal]]'', who told him he had nothing to fear, and sent some reporters to cover the story.{{Sfn|Chase|Chase|1954|pp=64–65}} The following day, the controversy was highly covered in the press, who hailed Ortiz as "one art expert with the courage to stand up against Comstock and his dictatorship". Following Comstock's visit large crowds blocked the street outside Braun and Company, ogling ''September Morn''. The gallery owner refused to sell his large print of ''September Morn'', so that it could remain in his window.{{sfn|The Sun 1913, Nude Maid}}{{sfn|Taylor|2012|p=166}}

After two weeks, when the dealership had sold every print it had, Ortiz removed the display.{{sfn|The Sun 1913, Chabas's Picture}} In a letter to the editor of ''[[The New York Times]]'', he accused Comstock of causing the controversy to earn greater publicity for himself, and stated that he wearied of crowds outside his shop, who blocked paying customers from entering it.{{sfn|The New York Times 1913, Wearies}} Ultimately, Comstock did not pursue legal action. The historian Walter M. Kendrick attributes this apparent leniency to ''September Morn''{{'s}} status as a work of art,{{sfn|Kendrick|1996|p=147}} whereas Gerald Carson, writing in ''[[American Heritage (magazine)|American Heritage]]'', attributes it to a knowledge that no action could be taken against the work.{{sfn|Carson|1961}}

The controversy promoted polemics regarding ''September Morn'' and censorship,{{Sfn|Shteir|2004|p=59}} and multiple [[editorial cartoon]]s; one depicted a young woman bathing, only her head showing, with a caption attributed to Comstock reading "Don't you suppose I can imagine what is UNDER<!--as original--> the water?".{{sfn|Healion|1964|p=42}} Comstock called the work "demoralizing in the extreme and especially calculated to excite immodesty in the young", arguing that it must be suppressed in the [[Think of the children|interest of the children]].{{sfn|Oregon Daily Journal 1913, September Morn}} He emphasized that "the law is the law&nbsp;... the picture will have to come out of the window".{{sfn|The Sun 1913, Nude Maid}} Reverend Sydney Ussher of [[St. Bartholomew's Episcopal Church (Manhattan)|St. Bartholomew's Episcopal Church]] took a more moderate approach, explaining that "so vivid a display of nudity as ''September Morn''" would best not be displayed in the United States, owing to the people's relative lack of appreciation for art.{{sfn|Oregon Daily Journal 1913, September Morn}}

[[File:Inez milholland.JPG|thumb|Suffragist [[Inez Milholland]] defended ''September Morn'' as "exquisite and delicate, depicting perfect youth and innocence".]]
Others expressed positive views of the painting itself. The suffragist [[Inez Milholland]] defended ''September Morn'', stating that it was "exquisite and delicate, depicting perfect youth and innocence", and found it "funny, if it weren't so sad" that such a work would be censored while more titillating film posters were left untouched.{{sfn|Oregon Daily Journal 1913, September Morn}} The social activist [[Rose Pastor Stokes]] wrote that this "glorious work of art" was a "rare" depiction of "the loveliest dream that nature ever made real—the human Body Beautiful" and that shame over one's body should not be blamed on ''September Morn'', but on a failed education system.{{sfn|Oregon Daily Journal 1913, September Morn}} The artist [[James Montgomery Flagg]] proclaimed "only a diseased mind can find anything immoral in ''September Morn''".{{sfn|Oregon Daily Journal 1913, September Morn}}

In his 1931 autobiography,{{sfn|Reichenbach|Freedman|1931|pp=104–105}} the [[public relations]] pioneer [[Harry Reichenbach]] claimed responsibility for the controversy surrounding ''September Morn''&nbsp;– and the work's resulting popularity. He stated that Braun and Company had acquired some 2,000 reproductions of the painting which they could not sell, and then hired him for $45{{efn|${{Inflation|US|45|1913|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}} so that he could unload the stock. They then paid for a large [[lithograph]] reproduction to be made and put on display.{{sfn|Considine|1957|p=3}} Reichenbach, he stated, then contacted public figures to protest against the display. When there was no response, he accosted Comstock in his office and dragged him to the dealership, where some young children, whom Reichenbach had hired for fifty cents each, lusted over the display. The public relations man then worked towards maintaining interest in the work, prints of which had already increased in price&nbsp;– from 10 cents to a dollar.{{sfn|Considine|1957|p=3}}{{sfn|Ellis|1975|pp=91–92}} Reichenbach's claim that his actions "brought the picture into the newspapers and into fame" has been questioned, particularly given that the Chicago court case had happened months earlier, and contemporary news accounts do not mention him.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/archive/permalink/the_september_morn_hoax/|title=The September Morn Hoax|work=Museum of Hoaxes}}</ref>

====Widespread reproduction and imitation====
A 1937 ''[[The Salt Lake Tribune|Salt Lake Tribune]]'' article stated that, after the 1913 controversies, reproductions of ''September Morn'' were shown "on the front page of every newspaper in the land".{{sfn|Salt Lake Tribune 1937}} Ortiz required these newspapers to pay a charge and mention his copyright, otherwise face a penalty of $500 to $1000;{{efn|${{Inflation|US|500|1913|fmt=c}} to ${{Inflation|US|1000|1913|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}} Chase recalled that ''Vogue'' had been one of those charged.{{Sfn|Chase|Chase|1954|p=66}} These newspaper reproductions, however, were sometimes censored. Fred L. Boalt of ''[[The Seattle Star]]'', covering a local exhibit of a reproduction, explained his newspaper's rationale for such censorship: "For humane as well as other reasons, [...] the ''Star'' artist has painted in a short petticoat. He didn't want to do it. He suffered. But we made him do it."{{sfn|Boalt|1913|p=1}}

Lithograph copies of ''September Morn'' were mass-produced for popular sale, extending the [[succès de scandale|success that followed the scandal]], and were widely hung in private homes.{{sfn|Carson|1961}} Reproductions were featured on a variety of products, including cigar bands, postcards, bottle openers, statuettes, [[watch fob]]s, and candy boxes;{{Sfn|Shteir|2004|p=59}}{{sfn|Carson|1961}} the model was also popular as a tattoo.{{sfn|Ellis|1975|p=92}} ''September Morn'' was the first [[nude calendar|nude used for calendars]],{{sfn|Sarasota Herald-Tribune 1973}} and by the late 1950s it had featured on millions.{{sfn|The Berkshire County Eagle 1957}} A couplet referring to Chabas's work, "Please don't think I'm bad or bold, but where its deep it's awful<!--Shteir gives two "w"s, but everywhere else (including some old memorabilia) it's one--> cold", was widely circulated.{{Sfn|Shteir|2004|p=59}}

<gallery mode="packed-hover" heights="235px" caption="Media and merchandise">
'September Morn' Pins.jpg|''September Morn'' pins
September Morn postcard.jpg|Postcard after ''September Morn''
You needn't wait for September Morn to show up.jpg|Postcard by [[Bernhardt Wall]] after ''September Morn''
Oh, You September Morn title sheet.jpg|Title page to "[[:File:Oh, You September Morn.pdf|Oh, You September Morn]]", a song from the musical ''September Morn''
Scene from September Mourn.jpg|A scene from ''September Mourning'', a 1915 [[L-KO Kompany|L-KO]] film inspired by the painting
</gallery>
Allusions to the painting were common in vaudeville acts,{{sfn|Considine|1957|p=3}} becoming stock gags in the [[Orpheum Circuit]].{{sfn|Time 1957}} Stage imitations of the painting were also created. In 1913, for instance, [[Florenz Ziegfeld Jr.]] cast [[Ann Pennington (actress)|Ann Pennington]] as the model as part of his ''[[Ziegfeld Follies|Follies]]''. In this successful version of ''September Morn'', the subject bore a sheer cape, with leaves placed strategically over her body, and stood on a stage made-up as water.{{Sfn|Shteir|2004|p=59}}{{sfn|Vallillo|1981|p=27}}{{sfn|Adams|Keene|Koella|2012|p=75}} A [[burlesque]] act, deeming itself the "September Morning Glories", was also created,{{sfn|Toledo Blade 1958}} as was a three-act [[Musical theatre|musical]] based on the painting. The latter&nbsp;– featuring a fifty-strong [[chorus line]]&nbsp;– was put on by Arthur Gillespie and Frank Tannehill Jr. and debuted at the [[La Salle Theater (Chicago)|La Salle Theater]] in Chicago.{{sfn|Brauer|2011|p=124}}{{sfn|The Charlotte News 1915}} In Milwaukee, a man wearing "little or no clothing" passed himself off as "September Morn" at the 1915 [[Wisconsin State Fair]]; he was brought to trial and fined $25.{{efn|${{Inflation|US|25|1913|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}}{{Sfn|The Milwaukee Sentinel 1915}} Theatrical references to the painting continued into the 1950s. For instance, in [[Tennessee Williams]]'s 1957 play ''[[Orpheus Descending]]'', the character Val sees it hanging in his room and mentions he "might keep turning the light on to take another look at it".{{sfn|Williams|1971|p=296}}

''September Morn'' also inspired several films. A two-reel production by [[Pathé]], titled ''[[September Morn (film)|September Morn]]'', was released in February 1914 and followed the misadventures of a sailor who gets a tattoo of the model. After his girlfriend disapproves, he tries clothing the naked woman with a ripped skirt, but this fails to gain his lover's approval; ultimately, he ends up with a fully clothed nude and the text "Votes for Women" inked on his arm.{{sfn|Taylor|2012|pp=166–167}}{{sfn|Moving Picture World 1914, September Morn}} Meanwhile, ''September Mourning'', a November 1915 release produced by [[L-KO Kompany|L-KO]], portrayed a pair of artists first vying for the attentions of a young woman in the park, then invading a school for girls.{{sfn|Taylor|2012|pp=166–167}} Robert McElravy, reviewing for ''Moving Picture World'', found the film funny, but considered it to lack plot.{{sfn|McElravy|1915|p=1319}} A third film, [[Lois Weber]]'s ''[[The Hypocrites (1915 film)|Hypocrites]]'', portrayed "The Naked Truth" (an uncredited Margaret Edwards) in a manner similar to Chabas's model.{{sfn|Taylor|2012|pp=166–167}} Allusions in popular media continued until at least the 1960s. ''September Morn'' was alluded to by a 1964 episode of ''[[The Dick Van Dyke Show]]'', "October Eve", where a nude painting of one of the main characters is discovered for sale in an art gallery.<ref>DVD commentary on the "October Eve" episode by Dick Van Dyke and Carl Reiner, ''Dick Van Dyke Show: Complete Remastered Series'' DVD Set, Image Entertainment, 2015.</ref>

{{Quote box
 |quote  = <poem>
:I want that girl they call September Morn;
:I'd like to meet her, I'd like to meet her!
:Dress'd up like the day that she was born,
:There's no one sweeter! there's no one sweeter!
:Nothing 'round her but a cloud of mist.
:She's a vision that I can't resist.
:In my heart she's posing night and day,
:I can't forget her, I can't forget her!
:I want that girl they call September Morn;
:I'd like to meet her. I'd like to meet her,
:If you find her won't you please remind her that I'm oh, so lonely, lonely,
:Oh so lonely! And I'm waiting for her only.
:For that girl they call September Morn.
</poem>
 |source =&nbsp;—Chorus to "[[:File:September Morn (I'd Like to Meet Her).pdf|September Morn (I'd Like to Meet Her)]]", by [[Stanley Murphy]]
}}
Several songs inspired by ''September Morn'' were likewise released. Musicians Frank Black and Bobby Heath penned a song, "September Morn", based on the painting,{{sfn|Considine|1957|p=3}} and [[Aubrey Stauffer]] of Chicago published [[sheet music]] (for voice and piano) of "[[:File:Oh, You September Morn.pdf|Oh, You September Morn]]", from Gillespie and Tannehill's musical.{{sfn|WorldCat, Oh You September Morn}} At [[Tin Pan Alley]], Henry I. Marshall composed two works, a [[waltz]] for piano titled "[[:File:Matin de Septembre (September Morn).pdf|Matin de Septembre (September Morn)]]", and a piece for voice and piano titled "[[:File:September Morn (I'd Like to Meet Her).pdf|September Morn (I'd Like to Meet Her)]]", the latter featuring lyrics by [[Stanley Murphy]]. Both were published through Jerome H. Remick&nbsp;{{&}}&nbsp;Co. in 1913.{{sfn|Carson|1961}}{{sfn|WorldCat, Matin de Septembre}}{{sfn|WorldCat, September Morn}}

''September Morn'' also inspired an eponymous lime and [[grenadine]] cocktail, described in 1917 as having gin, {{sfn|Bullock|1917}} and later in 1930 with rum and egg white. {{sfn|Craddock|1930}}

As interest grew, purity societies attempted to ban reproductions of ''September Morn'',{{Sfn|Shteir|2004|p=59}} and people in possession of them ran the risk of confiscation and fines.{{sfn|Brauer|2011|p=124}} Postcards bearing the painting were banned from the postal system.{{Sfn|Shteir|2004|p=59}} Harold Marx, a [[New Orleans]] art dealer who displayed a reproduction, was arrested a month after being told to take the painting down;{{sfn|Green|Karolides|2009|p=506}}{{sfn|The Indianapolis Star 1913}} displays of reproductions were also forcibly removed in [[Miami]] and [[Atlanta]].{{sfn|The Miami News 1983}} In Chicago, a man was charged with disorderly conduct after bringing home a reproduction.{{sfn|The Pittsburgh Press 1913, Trouble Maker}} Irene Deal, who dressed in a [[union suit]] and posed as "Miss September Morn" <!--in the [[Allegheny River]]-->in [[Harrisburg, Pennsylvania]], as a publicity stunt, was controversially fined $50{{efn|${{Inflation|US|50|1913|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}} for disorderly conduct.{{sfn|Variety 1913, Ideal's 'Morn'}}{{sfn|Variety 1913, Ideal is Fined}} In 1914, students at the [[College of Wooster]] in [[Wooster, Ohio]], burned a copy of the painting for being against their religious beliefs.{{sfn|The Washington Post}}

Ultimately some 7&nbsp;million reproductions of ''September Morn'', prints of which remained popular as late as the 1960s, were sold.{{sfn|Werner|1961|pp=219–220}} Reichenbach characterized this popularity as a "laugh on the overzealous guardians of virtue" in which the entire American populace participated.{{sfn|Reichenbach|Freedman|1931|pp=104–105}} Inspired by the commercial success of ''September Morn'', displays of images of nude women became more common; a ''New York Times'' reader wrote in 1915 that they had become "increasingly vulgar and suggestive".{{sfn|The New York Times 1915}}

In 1937 ''[[Life (magazine)|Life]]'' deemed ''September Morn'' "one of the most familiar paintings in the world",{{sfn|Life 1937, Painter}} and a retrospective ''[[Toledo Blade]]'' article characterized the model as having become America's number one [[pin-up girl]].{{sfn|Toledo Blade 1958}} Writing in 1957, Considine declared ''September Morn'' to be "the most controversial painting in the history of [the United States]",{{sfn|Considine|1957|p=3}} and the ''[[New York Post]]'' declared it "the most famous nude till the [[Marilyn Monroe]] calendar".<ref>Quoted in {{harvnb|Brauer|2011|p=124}}.</ref> Carson wrote in 1961 that ''September Morn'' had caused "the most heated controversy over nudity, art, and morals" in the United States since [[Hiram Powers]]' statue ''[[The Greek Slave]]'' in the 1840s.{{sfn|Carson|1961}}

===Russia and Paris===
The oil baron {{ill|Leon Mantashev|ru|Манташев, Левон Александрович}}{{efn|Also Mantacheff {{harv|MET, September Morn}}. The son of Armenian oil magnate [[Alexander Mantashev]], Leon was known for his extravagant lifestyle. Robert W. Tolf, in his history of the Russian oil industry, describes him as "Russia's greatest gambler, a collector of paintings, race horses, and beautiful women" {{harv|Tolf|1976|p=100}}.}} acquired the original ''September Morn'' in {{circa}}&nbsp;1913, for a price of $10,000{{efn|${{Inflation|US|30000|1913|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}} and brought it with him to Russia.{{sfn|Monfried|1971|p=9}} After the outbreak of the [[October Revolution]] the painting was feared destroyed.{{sfn|Toledo Blade 1957}} Following Mantashev's escape from Russia, pieces of his sizeable collection that were considered to have artistic value were sent to museums, but there was no information regarding works such as ''September Morn''.{{sfn|The Milwaukee Journal 1933}} By 1933 Chabas was seeking information regarding his work's fate, which ''[[The Milwaukee Journal]]'' suggested was "hanging in some crowded Russian room, its owner perhaps completely ignorant of its world fame".{{sfn|The Milwaukee Journal 1933}} At the time several American galleries had copies purported to be the original.{{sfn|The Montreal Gazette 1935}}

The painting, however, was safe: Mantashev had smuggled it out of the country,{{Sfn|The Milwaukee Journal 1937}} reportedly "rip[ping] it out of its frame" when the revolution broke out.{{sfn|The Montreal Gazette 1935}} In the early 1930s,{{efn|The Met gives 1931 {{harv|MET, September Morn}} while a 1935 ''Montreal Gazette'' article states that the sale happened the preceding year {{harv|The Montreal Gazette 1935}}}} in desperate need of funds, he sold ''September Morn'' to the [[Armenians|Armenian]] art collector and philanthropist [[Calouste Gulbenkian]] for $30,000;{{efn|${{Inflation|US|30000|1933|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}}{{sfn|MET, September Morn}} it was the last painting he owned.{{sfn|Levine|2007|p=48}} A [[United Press]] reporter discovered the painting, which was framed as a [[tondo (art)|tondo]], in Gulbenkian's Paris home in 1935.{{sfn|Sterling|Salinger|1966|pp=222–223}}{{sfn|The Montreal Gazette 1935}}{{sfn|The Berkshire County Eagle 1957}} There it hung with works by artists such as [[Claude Monet]] and [[Paul Cézanne]].{{sfn|Carson|1961}} By 1937 ''September Morn'' was on display in the [[Musée du Luxembourg]], hung between works by [[Jean-François Raffaëlli]] and [[Eugène Carrière]].{{Sfn|The Milwaukee Journal 1937}} The curator [[John Walker (curator)|John Walker]], who between 1947 and 1955 would try to acquire the Gulbenkian Collection for the [[National Gallery of Art]], described it as 'Gulbenkian's only lapse in taste.'{{sfn|Horizon 1970, How I Didn't Get}} After Gulbenkian's death in 1955, the painting was acquired by Wildenstein and Company of New York.{{sfn|Sterling|Salinger|1966|pp=222–223}}

===Acquisition by the Metropolitan Museum of Art===
''September Morn'' was purchased by the [[Philadelphia]] broker and sportsman William Coxe Wright for $22,000{{efn|${{Inflation|US|22000|1957|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}} in 1957.{{sfn|MET, September Morn}}{{sfn|Monfried|1971|p=9}} In April of that year he offered it to the [[Philadelphia Museum of Art]], but the painting was rejected for having "no relation to the stream of 20th century art".{{sfn|Beaver Valley Times 1957}} Eventually he anonymously donated the work&nbsp;– valued at an estimated $30,000{{efn|${{Inflation|US|30000|1957|fmt=c}} today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}}}&nbsp;– to the Met in New York City.{{sfn|Monfried|1971|p=9}} Speaking for the museum, Dudley T. Easby explained that, although the painting could not be classified as a masterpiece, it was nevertheless "a part of art history in view of the controversy that raged around the picture in earlier years".{{sfn|Toledo Blade 1957}}

[[File:September Morn on display in Toledo, 1958.jpg|thumb|''September Morn'' on display in the [[Toledo Museum of Art]], 1958]]
After acquisition, in September 1957 the painting was displayed near the Met's front entrance, taking a place previously occupied by the [[Pérussis Altarpiece]].{{sfn|Toledo Blade 1957}} This position of honor was held for several weeks.{{sfn|Werner|1961|p=219}} Hughes reported a "veritable pilgrimage" of visitors came to see the painting, which she considered to add a "fresh, popular appeal" to the Met which drew museum-goers who would never have come otherwise.{{sfn|Hughes|1957|p=15}} By then, the earlier scandal of the model's nudity had lessened;{{sfn|Hughes|1957|p=15}} discussing an exhibit of the painting in [[Toledo, Ohio]], Alan Schoedel of the ''Toledo Blade'' quoted a viewer as saying that 1950s America was so inundated with racy calendar art that the painting "couldn't stand the competition".{{sfn|Schoedel|1958|p=1}}

After ''September Morn'' was acquired by the Met, it was displayed at several venues, including the [[Legion of Honor (museum)|Palace of the Legion of Honor]] in [[San Francisco]] in 1958, the [[Toledo Museum of Art]] in Toledo, Ohio (also 1958), and by the Municipal Art Commission of [[Los Angeles]] in 1959.{{sfn|MET, September Morn}} Six years later it was again exhibited at Palace of the Legion of Honor, as part of an exhibition of works collected by the Wrights.{{sfn|Sterling|Salinger|1966|pp=222–223}} In 1971, the Met removed ''September Morn'' from display and placed it in storage; Walter Monfried of ''The Milwaukee Journal'' wrote that the once-racy painting was now considered "too tame and banal".{{sfn|Monfried|1971|p=9}} {{As of|September 2014}}, the Met's website lists the painting as not on display,{{sfn|MET, September Morn}} though it had been hung in the museum around 2011.{{sfn|Brauer|2011|p=139}}