RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Sloe Gin on Sunday 01 March 09 21:05 GMT (UK)
-
I was looking at the Victorian carte de visite photographs on ebay. These were posed studio portraits which were given out to friends and family; they were all the rage circa the 1860s and people would collect them in albums.
I came across a right shocker. A mother holding her dead baby (http://bestsmileys.com/scared/4.gif) Imagine getting all dressed up and trotting down to the studio, posing, and then handing out the souvenirs later. I know attitudes to death were different then (and this one is American) but who the blazes would want that in their album! :o
Item no is 400033271155 if you want to have a look, or go to Collectables > Photographic Images > Antique pre-1940 > CDVs and no, I have no connection with the vendor!
-
It's not that unusual.
Shocking to us nowadays but it was very common for folk to have a photo taken of a child that died in infancy.
I must say, I've not seen many where mother has been holding child but photos of dead weans were common.
Dave
-
Blimey - just had a look......
you can only imagine what she must have been thinking - maybe she could not bear to let her baby go... :'(
Vonni
-
Hard for us to believe isn't it .. ?
There was a thread on RootsChat about this subject quite a while ago, here is a link explaining it better than I can.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2007/apr/14/guardianspecial4.guardianspecial24
-
Thanks Pels,
I recall a similar thread but can't find it.
Your link sums it up tho.
Dave
-
What a sad photo. :( Just goes to prove, I suppose, that not all "Kodak moments" are happy ones...
-
Hi Everyone,
Not my cup of tea, but obviously it was important to them at that time; when death was sadly a more frequent event in most family's lives:
http://www.deathonline.net/remembering/mourning/victorian.cfm#photos
Paulene :-\
-
I've seen similar photos to the one in the link before, but they tend just to look like a child sleeping. Most if not all of them were probably taken in a studio, but there's still something quite homely about them.
This one, though, with the whole "dressing up to go the studio" vibe about it .... it seems weirder, though it's hard to say exactly why.
-
Not sure about this, though :(
Link deleted - didn't see photographs, and do not want to cause any upset or offence. Aplogies.
-
OK, enough for me.
I'm not following this thread any more.
Each to their own......
Dave
-
Sorry, Dave - just thought it was a bit sad some of the terms he used. Please don't be offended.
I'll shut up now :)
-
Have to say I agree with Dave on this one .. it isn't bedtime viewing and I daren't look at the latest links .. ! :-\
-
Oh dear, I didn't look at any links - sorry, everyone :-[
just thought the way he expressed himself was a bit off - - apologies - I'lll delete the post.
-
Yes, well, I purposely did not include a link to my opening post so that people would have to do a bit more than click to see. The subject was made clear, no need for anyone to look, and no need for anyone to announce they're not going to look either.
-
Thanks Pels,
I recall a similar thread but can't find it.
Your link sums it up tho.
Dave
Hi,
Is it this one?
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,24403.0.html
-
Of course, nowadays if a baby is stillborn, or dies in hospital the parents quite often take photographs.
Lizzie
-
Maybe I'm coming from a different view point.
Due to unforeseen circumstances our son was "born" (there's a reason for the quotes but not relevant to discuss here, and he wasn't a still birth either) at only 20 weeks. Needless to say he didn't survive.
I have pictures of my child. I treasure them. My family and close friends have seen them and also treasure them.
For the briefest moment he was part of our family and there is no reason he should be forgotten or his memory erased.
I didn't see the original pictures referred to in the first post, but the one on the guardian link - I don't see a problem with.
Maybe modern society in general isn't able to cope with death any more and therefore see it as something that shouldn't be discussed or viewed.
I'd rather see a treasured photograph of a dead, but loved, child than see pictures of war (which is far more horrific, yet accepted as "normal").
-
Hi JustKia,
When my sister-in-law had a still born child at over seven months into her pregnancy, she comforted herself through her loss by various things to remember Louise - they even 'adopted' a child in India who they send money to support through school, etc. All these things helped her, and her husband, through their tragic loss. I think it was probably harder for those outside the direct family to understand these things, than for those closer to her.
You're quite right that today often death is hidden away (good in some ways, but certainly not in others); we're expected to grieve in private and hold things in a bit. I wonder sometimes if other cultures deal with loss in a better way than we do.
In Victorian society death was always with them and I think the bit on the site (the one I did check carefully) expressed their reasons quite clearly - and that is the reason I included it:
"What a comfort it is to possess the image of those who are removed from our site. We may raise an image of them in our minds but that has no the tangibility of one we can see with our bodily eyes."
Flora A Windeyer in a letter to Rev. John Blomfield, Nov 1870.
Maybe the medical authorities (midwives, etc) are starting to realise more now that grief is much better expressed in a natural way, rather than in the closed way of past decades. Perhaps the Victorians weren't quite as we picture in some respects. We all need to deal with our grief in the way that is right for us; and as we all different we will do this in different ways.
Thank you for sharing this with us JustKia - I don't think any of us who hasn't lost a child can fully understand this awful loss. May your photos of your child continue to bring you much happiness and comfort.
Take care,
Paulene :)
-
I understand that still borns in hospitals have a photograph on file in case the parents request it
-
I understand that still borns in hospitals have a photograph on file in case the parents request it
We were given the opportunity to spend time alone with our child and to take our own photographs.
-
What I find unbelievable is that someone paid £53 for it!
My daughter died in special care at 3 weeks old, we have a lot of photo's of her alive but they still took one of her after she died and gave it to me. I had to give it to my mother because I couldn't destroy it but didn't want it in the house.
-
I was frequently asked to take such photographs of dead people - not just babies, but older children and adults, as well - when I lived in a small village. I did not enjoy doing so but, in most cases, those photos were the only ones the family had. I'm sure they would have preferred a living photo but it was too late.
-
I understand that still borns in hospitals have a photograph on file in case the parents request it
We were given the opportunity to spend time alone with our child and to take our own photographs.
It is comforting to know that you treasure your photographs and I sincerley hope they continue to be so treasured by all of your family and friends.