Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Incorrigible

The photograph of a still born child or a older deceased infant/child was highly prized in the late 1800's and early 1900s. This is not new to our society.

If it provides comfort to the parents, who am I to judge if they should have such photos?


11 posted on 04/20/2006 11:25:42 AM PDT by texson66 ("Tyranny is yielding to the lust of the governing." - Lord Moulton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: texson66

In the early days of photography, adults were often photographed in their coffins with members of the family gathered around; it was likely the only photograph ever taken of the deceased.


15 posted on 04/20/2006 11:27:23 AM PDT by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: texson66
The photograph of a still born child or a older deceased infant/child was highly prized in the late 1800's and early 1900s. This is not new to our society. If it provides comfort to the parents, who am I to judge if they should have such photos?

Amen, and God bless you for saying that.

In Victorian times, obituary photographs were fairly commonplace, and I believe it was as much as anything, a way of saying, "this beloved person was once one of ours, not to be forgotten."

53 posted on 04/20/2006 12:58:22 PM PDT by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson