" Hidden Mothers " Photos, Awesome, Little Creepy

Lol...ok, now that we're back on topic, if these are dead mothers, what's keeping them from toppling over and taking the subject of the pic over with them? I'm in my 50s and I definitely remember making odd maneuvers with my arm under the fuzzy rug required in 1970 studio portraits with a firm tightened fist on the back of the kiddos shirt to try to keep them upright. Thank goodness for fast exposure times and flashes, I might have been forced to try humming soothing lullabies which I'm sure would have horrified everyone but my devoted babies :eek:
 
Lol...ok, now that we're back on topic, if these are dead mothers, what's keeping them from toppling over and taking the subject of the pic over with them? I'm in my 50s and I definitely remember making odd maneuvers with my arm under the fuzzy rug required in 1970 studio portraits with a firm tightened fist on the back of the kiddos shirt to try to keep them upright. Thank goodness for fast exposure times and flashes, I might have been forced to try humming soothing lullabies which I'm sure would have horrified everyone but my devoted babies :eek:

Amen. Too many obvious wrasslin' holds going on there......
 
How do we know that they are the children's mother?

The little blurbs tell us the same stories- and it's kind of the point of these hysterical shots? The little ones would ( and will ) either freak out of not stay still long enough for a photo unless they are with Mom, right? Or Dad- one of the shots you can see poor Dad's legs. Hee- can you imagine one of our kids, the screech they'd have sent up should a stranger in a stranger-yet sofa cover grab them from behind and say " OK, sit still little guy! ".
 
Oh I don't know- the wandering off topic isn't always a bad thing. Makes for interesting reading then you're like " Whoa, wait a minute, what? " It's always a slight shock to get back to what the thread is because I've gotten so distracted, I missed it.

One thing I refuse to do is post pics of dead folks- makes me ill. There are entire websites dedicated to this, pages and pages on Pinterest. It's more than merely creepy- as Diane said, most were taken because it would have been the single pic every taken of a dead person. Photographs were uber expensive- if someone died, they'd sure scrape the cash together to have at least ONE.

BUT. Talk about intrusive! No one is now left alive who could object to sensationalizing these sad relics attached to a family's personal tragedy. What if these were OUR fathers, mothers- much less dead CHILDREN posted all over the internet- heck, they'd invent laws just for this! It isn't fair, folks aren't around any more to get to decide if these most personal of pics become public property, to b marveled over like a side show in a circus. Such a lot of heartbreak. These hidden mother photos- I'd have to doubt they have dead mothers in them. The Victorians included dead mothers right out in front, frequently with the child in some natural pose nearby or on a lap. Yes, gruesome. Just not OUR gruesome- should have been buried when the family line died away- I'm guessing no one foresaw the inevitability of these old things making their way into the public eye- for sheer entertainment.

Anyway, those pics are out there, you just won't find them here. I mean, of course it's up to Mike what gets posted and what des not- I'd personally never bring them to our forum, bottom line.
 
I think the book I mentioned, "The Hidden Mother", tells this covering of parents was done in Europe as well as here. It was way to keep child still for the length of taking a photo in those days. I am going to check and see if my library has the book or can get it on inter library loan. I think it be worth reading.
 
Anyone who hasn't seen these ' Hidden Mother ' photos really might wish to tool through them- I keep bumping into more of them but lately just haven't had time to collect any in docs. Hopefully will soon- they are hysterical but having had children and having taken these same children to the photographer's in fruitless attempts to capture a good mood while there I can also see where someone came up with the idea.
 
This is a cool post and I enjoyed viewing it.
These photos are strange! The figure that's to be "hidden" becomes the focus of the composition due to the weirdness of the idea. Who would want their child or children's photo displayed with a rug monster holding them? Can you imagine the descriptions in the family photo album...here's Junior with a wonderful Silk Persian lumped beneath him....here he is with a Caftan. Reminds me somehow of the disturbingly bad rug the guy wore in National Lampoon's Christmas movie with Chevy Chase. What will we find next? Maybe a family portrait where everyone is standing with their backs to the camera?
 
Couldn't understand how I'd missed this thread -- then saw it had all passed in just 2 days last June, when I was in hospital and "out of touch".

It puzzles me as to why, if the mother for whatever reason had to be concealed, it wasn't done better. She certainly wasn't camouflaged. It was perfectly obvious she was there -- often with her skirts showing, and it would have been quite simple to arrange a curtain/backdrop making her virtually invisible.
 
Actually, there are a few of those. Portraits and small groups, anyway.
Perhaps this is a good idea! The same photo can be sold at yard sales for generations, hung on the wall and avoid detection of being someone else's portrait. These photos could become something of a perpetual nature in becoming useful to the masses if reproduced in great quantity.
 
Sometimes they couldn't even put it all back together again.....point in case, Cousin Black Jack....

from wiki:"A popular postcard was made showing the body. Afterwards his head was sewn back onto the body for viewing, and he was interred at the Clayton Cemetery." Now THAT is creepy!
 
This lad seems to be trying to see what's on top of his head:
hidden-mothers-10.png

The photographer's stand behind him just wasn't enough to stop the fidgeting, I guess.
 
Last edited:
Or not happy with the goofy hair style. Wonder what he is thinking...
There's speculation on another web site that this is a post mortem photo, with eyes painted on over closed lids, the stand, and the hand holding the head. The use of flowers as a prop also suggests post mortem. It's hard to say but his eyes do look strange to me.
 
There's speculation on another web site that this is a post mortem photo, with eyes painted on over closed lids, the stand, and the hand holding the head. The use of flowers as a prop also suggests post mortem. It's hard to say but his eyes do look strange to me.
Would be a shame if it is a post-mortem. Allie, if so, now you made me feel like an ogre for poking fun. Surely this was not in disrespect or intentional. But how did they prop him up? That footed thing behind him looks too far away.
 
Would be a shame if it is a post-mortem. Allie, if so, now you made me feel like an ogre for poking fun. Surely this was not in disrespect or intentional. But how did they prop him up? That footed thing behind him looks too far away.
On the con side, some people feel there is motion blur around his feet which would suggest that he moved, which would mean he's alive.

I haven't the faintest how these stands worked, but in at least one case (posted on the site linked above) of a clearly deceased child the mother is visible, hiding behind a chair, so hiding a mother in a post mortem photo of a child is a thing that people did back then.

While researching my ancestry recently I came across a post mortem of a baby great-something-uncle in a christening gown. I knew post mortem photos existed but it felt very odd to look at one of my own relative.
 
Back
Top