Thursday, December 12, 2013

Could This Be the Same Woman?


I think I met my great-grandmother today. And I’ve come away from that meeting with a far different outlook than I held before this chance encounter.

As I rummage through my aunt’s belongings, I’m stumbling upon many items which connect with wisps of memories passed along to me—tales my mother would share throughout my childhood, now blended with the more recent recollections offered by my aunt in her last few years.

In yesterday’s post, I included a photograph of my great-grandmother, Martha Cassandra Boothe Davis. It was one I’d seen so many times over the last ten years, thanks to a choice my aunt made to dig it out of its storage place and to put it out on a shelf where it could be appreciated.

As I go through the boxes and envelopes of old, old treasures, I came upon another photograph of a tall, slender, upright elderly woman.

At first glance, her steady glaze and thin, pursed lips don’t seem to communicate much—or, perhaps, send a message of detached sternness.

The photograph itself seems like an afterthought—not the traditional cabinet card of the time, with its rigid backing, but the cut photo paper slapped onto another slim cardboard backing, awkwardly aligned, almost neglectful in its careless juxtaposition. If there was any photographer’s insigne, it seemed to have been cut out of the presentation.

Thankfully, though the photographer’s art was lost in the picture’s transmission to our current times, our age permits tools to disassemble what the original photographer’s camera had captured. Using Photoshop, I blew up this mystery woman, not just to edit—though in the end, I left the full evidence of the misaligned layers for all to see—but to see if any details would emerge from this darkened scene.

Perhaps it is my imagination: is there a “D” that emerges in the lower right corner? Could that be part of the photographer’s identification?

As I increase the percentage of enlargement, I can see more details. The “stern” woman turns out not to be so austere, after all. With furs draped over her shoulders, she wears earrings and a locket placed at her neck which features the likeness of a woman. As I stare at this woman, yearning to know my great grandmother better, I wonder who it is that she seeks to honor through the wearing of that remembrance.

Perhaps her tightly-set lips are not pursed in disapproval of life, after all. Magnifying the details, it seems a softer ambience emerges—a light about her eyes, a quiet confidence, a strength not bereft of femininity’s touch.

As I draw closer to the possibility of liking her, of seeing the person behind the pose, I begin to wonder: is this the same person as was seen in the photograph yesterday? Or is she another?

And if another, who?

undated portrait of elderly woman from eastern Tennessee

14 comments:

  1. I think it is the same woman. Shape of eyes and nose, same shape of prominent ears, even the set of shoulders to neck. And, trust me, the stern tight-lipped look can be as simple as sort-of-uncomfortable bad teeth.... Cover just the area below the upper lip with part of your finger, leaving all the rest of the photo, and take another comparison. I think I would have really liked to know this woman.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, yes, the bad teeth issue. Very possible. Thanks for the suggestion on taking another look, Linda. And yes, I think she would have been quite interesting to get to know. I'm sure there would have been loads of stories...

      Delete
  2. I'd say she does look like the same woman as in yesterday's post. How fun to have these photos Jacqi!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Jana, I appreciate you lending me that second set of eyes for comparisons. And yes, it's a treasure to have found this photo! I'm not sure why people in previous generations seemed so reticent about sharing things about their ancestors. I would have loved to know all the stories!

      Delete
    2. Jacqi,

      I want to let you know that your blog post is listed in today's Fab Finds post at http://janasgenealogyandfamilyhistory.blogspot.com/2013/12/follow-friday-fab-finds-for-december-13.html

      Have a great weekend!

      Delete
    3. Thanks, Jana. You always have such great finds! Looking forward to heading over and taking a look at your list for this weekend.

      Delete
  3. They are really similar in appearance. Such an "evocative" photo!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is one of those times I really wish I could have asked. What concerns me is the date range for this type of photograph style does not line up with the date range of Cassie's older years (she died in the mid 1940s). Could this have been her mother?

      Delete
  4. I looked at this yesterday, and had to mull it for a while. Yes I think it is the same person..or her sister:)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Far Side, you are precisely the one who can help me figure this out. What do you think would be a reasonable date range for that type of photograph? I don't think Cassie's dates would match up with the usual time period for this type of photograph.

      Delete
  5. The usual dates for Cabinet Cards is 1870 to 1895. However some photographers used Cabinet Cards into the 1920's. Different Card stock was used different years too.. and different colors and borders...all kinds of ways to help date the cards.
    My thought is that this was taken about 1890 to1900 and not by a very good photographer...because it was glued crooked. I
    I don't remember Cassies birthdate..but how old do you think this woman is in this photo 50?
    In the early days of photography people never smiled. They didn't have good dental care and it was hard to hold a smile for a minute or however long the film exposure was.
    I am not sure I have helped very much:(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, no, Far Side, that's been a great help! Thanks for posting that. It gives me some time frames to consider.

      That is quite a thought about non-smiling photographs, thanks to lack of dental care. While it doesn't quite seem like her eyes are smiling, at least they have a much softer demeanor than her unsmiling mouth!

      Delete
  6. Okay I went back and looked. Cassie must have been born in 1857..if this photo was taken in 1907 that would make her 50 years old...very possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That sounds do-able, Far Side. Thanks for checking!

      I'm not very good when it comes to judging people's ages by their appearance. I'm often quite a long way off from the correct answer, so I wouldn't be much help here. I suppose she could be 50...after all, this would pre-date the Clairol hairdresser's-secret era ;)

      Delete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...