Faceless Mourning Photos

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Location
Central Pennsylvania
cw back of head2.jpg

These ' back of the head ' photos were MOSTLY intended for mourning purposes. The thing is, I discovered a few later photos of females whose dres did NOT indicate sorrow, as in at all. it transpires quie another purpose was served by a type of photo featuring females taken from the ' back'. Guess what? They were advertisements for early ( post war, pre 1900's ) ladies of the evening! NO WAY!

I really can't find anything on why people chose the faceless mourning poses- but will keep looking. It must be symbolic, certainly does look very sad albeit odd to our 2014 eyes.

Some, as usual, will certainly stray from era- these are tougher to find than the usual ' Dressed in black ' mourning photos, or even a front shot of a face covered in a veil. It does make you cast a little wider net. :smile:

This is probably the most well known- I'm guessing because it's the prettiest, loveliest hair, nicest shot.

Short hair- I've always been told this would have been because a woman had been sick? Maybe the photo is of a much later era, and the style is short hair but pretty sure that's not the case.

cw back of head3.jpg


cw back of head.jpg


cw back of head4.jpg


cw back of head5.jpg


cw back of head7.jpg


cw back of head8.jpg


cw back of head10.jpg
 

Attachments

  • cw back of head6.jpg
    cw back of head6.jpg
    58.9 KB · Views: 494
Last edited by a moderator:
Sure the negatives are not just turned around like we see often with front facing?? :mask:

Or perhaps the old saying 'if my dog was that ugly I would shave its rear and teach it to walk backwards' human version?

Or maybe the photographer was a shunned Mormon or Amish person.

Or " I'm glad to see you're back, especially after seeing your front'
 
Thanks for sharing these! Had never heard of such a custom before. How would these have been used? Were they intended as family keepsakes, reminders of a sorrowful time in one's life? Or were they a formal, stylized way of taking a portrait while preserving the subject's dignity by not showing a sad or tearful expression?
 
I find it quite fascinating that, when you were in mourning, you would have a picture taken of the back of your head. That's two things in less than three days I've never heard of. (OK, of which I've never heard.)
 
I find it quite fascinating that, when you were in mourning, you would have a picture taken of the back of your head. That's two things in less than three days I've never heard of. (OK, of which I've never heard.)

No, the first one Ole- I've spent all my life running sentences through a filter before they come out in conversation- all that does is make it appear I've been drinking. Besides, when the sentence structure is the right way around it frightens me anyway- had a thoroughly terrifying great aunt ( loved her, she just had a way of making you feel your underwear was showing ) who spoke that way ALWAYS. When it comes out of my mouth, jump and look around, she hasn't been around since 1986.

These ring a bell somewhere? The explanation, I mean- although having said that who knows if what THAT was could have been one of those made-up things, like what was brought up on Cheller's ' Underground Railroad Quilt " thread. Someone was trying to sell a book, had it out there that quilts contained messages pertaining to the journey- and it's all nonsense. SO much of this stuff has become garbled through the years- when we think maybe there's a 'real' explanation, nope! Time to keep looking!

The Victorians made such an artform out of mourning, perhaps it was merely a fad, albeit an odd one. We'd all split, looking at the post-mortum photos, when in fact they were taken for a purpose, not ghoulish delight. Someone died, there was no other photograph. What IS ghoulish is this era's fascination with them and the large collections of them you find- actual clubs with these as their theme- family tragedy for fun. Have to say, the Victorians had it right, mourning with all their heart and soul- getting it OUT. Today, someone dies, 2 weeks later what the surviving family gets is ' Are you still talking about that? ' Now THAT is ghoulish.

Thanks Loyalty- I'd looked there for one dedicated to just these and failed. Sometimes there will also be a blurb on the genesis of the practice, and sometimes it's right, too! :smile:

Last point would be no way in heck is someone getting a formal photo of my other side, no matter how much I'm expressing sorrow for a loved one's passing. Just no. I feel it is asking far too much of the surviving family member, and very good proof they were in shock- those rat ba***** photographers took advantage of them in their weakened state, that's what happened.
 
Sounds reasonable, Annie. I did not look at mom and dad in their coffins. I had better things to remember about them. I have no idea if the mortician did or did not do a good job. I prefer to remember them with all the warts and blessing they offered. I don't have to remember them in their coffins.

I wish I could say a good time was had by all, but it was hell on wheels. And I'm so very glad that they were my parents.
 
No, the first one Ole- I've spent all my life running sentences through a filter before they come out in conversation- all that does is make it appear I've been drinking. Besides, when the sentence structure is the right way around it frightens me anyway- had a thoroughly terrifying great aunt ( loved her, she just had a way of making you feel your underwear was showing ) who spoke that way ALWAYS. When it comes out of my mouth, jump and look around, she hasn't been around since 1986.

These ring a bell somewhere? The explanation, I mean- although having said that who knows if what THAT was could have been one of those made-up things, like what was brought up on Cheller's ' Underground Railroad Quilt " thread. Someone was trying to sell a book, had it out there that quilts contained messages pertaining to the journey- and it's all nonsense. SO much of this stuff has become garbled through the years- when we think maybe there's a 'real' explanation, nope! Time to keep looking!

The Victorians made such an artform out of mourning, perhaps it was merely a fad, albeit an odd one. We'd all split, looking at the post-mortum photos, when in fact they were taken for a purpose, not ghoulish delight. Someone died, there was no other photograph. What IS ghoulish is this era's fascination with them and the large collections of them you find- actual clubs with these as their theme- family tragedy for fun. Have to say, the Victorians had it right, mourning with all their heart and soul- getting it OUT. Today, someone dies, 2 weeks later what the surviving family gets is ' Are you still talking about that? ' Now THAT is ghoulish.

Thanks Loyalty- I'd looked there for one dedicated to just these and failed. Sometimes there will also be a blurb on the genesis of the practice, and sometimes it's right, too! :smile:

Last point would be no way in heck is someone getting a formal photo of my other side, no matter how much I'm expressing sorrow for a loved one's passing. Just no. I feel it is asking far too much of the surviving family member, and very good proof they were in shock- those rat ba***** photographers took advantage of them in their weakened state, that's what happened.
Lighten up, Annie. Those ratbastards are always with us. It's called reality. It doesn't go away.
 
You should start a website - Civil War Oddities and More - Crazy Did Not Start With Us. Really. It would be a good site. I have never known anyone who can ferret out the odd and interesting like you can. I like the hairstyles from behind that are so intricate. But this gives new meaning to the phrase "showing your backside."
 
Back
Top