|
|
Post by Angela on Jul 2, 2009 13:30:27 GMT -5
We've all read and or heard that Charlie took Fannie and his children to Winston-Salem, bought them each a new outfit then had their photo made. We know for certain he had the photo made in Winston-Salem at a professional Photography Studio because the name Ideal Photographers is stamped on the back and also you can tell that photo was taken by a professional photographer in a professional studio. But store bought clothes? I'm beginning to believe that the clothes they are wearing were not bought that day in a store. I blew the photo up and if you look closely at it you can tell that Arthur's suit, James' suit AND get this....Maybell's dress are exactly alike. The material is identical. And the collar on Carrie's dress is identical to the collar on Maybell's dress. I think Fannie made those clothes. Especially since Maybell's dress is made from the same identical cloth as her 16 year old brothers suit as well as her 4 year old brother's suit. Carrie's dress looks so much like the dress Sadie Hampton made for her five year old daughter from a feed sack. Nancy still has that dress and I have seen it and held it. I think that story about Charlie buying them all a new outfit was made up. The story about going to Winston to have the photo made is true but I think the story about the new clothes is not true, but was made up.
|
|
|
|
Post by angel71242 on Jul 2, 2009 13:49:49 GMT -5
Good Lord...the hundreds of times I've look at that photo and never noticed that! It's weird how it's so clear now that you have pointed it out! It does seem really strange that a store would have identical outfits for a 16 yr old boy, a 4 yr old boy and a 7 yr old girl!! And you are right about Carrie's dress - there is no form to that thing at all, certainly seems like a feed sack dress. And Maybell's collar does look identical to Carrie's dress.
Also, from speaking with the elder generation, I know it was VERY common to make your own clothes back then and I'm pretty certain that clothes you bought from a store usually needed alterations so they would fit correctly, which takes time. It's my understanding from the book that the clothes were bought the same day the picture was taken, yet everyone's clothes seem to fit right. Course the 2 yr old is all squished up in his suit, but you can't expect a toddler to sit up right!!
That's really awesome that this came to you after the probably thousands of times you've look at that picture!! You still got it girl!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Jul 2, 2009 13:59:16 GMT -5
That's a good point you made too Angel, about alterations!!! I've still got it and now it seems you've got it as well!!!!!!! I've always thought that the trip they made that day was over crowded. It took a good while to make that trip from Germanton to Winston and it would take ALOT of time for 9 people to find an outfit they not only liked but that fit them as well and then it took a long time for that photo to be made then a long drive back from Winston to Germanton. All of that in one day? No way. It does prove one point though...Fannie was an excellent seamstress.
|
|
|
|
Post by angel71242 on Jul 2, 2009 14:09:24 GMT -5
It does prove one point though...Fannie was an excellent seamstress. LOL!! She certainly was!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by smpyrtle on Jul 2, 2009 14:47:31 GMT -5
Good observation Maria. I guess no one else really looked closely at the clothing. I can remember the feed sacks that you could buy for sewing fabric.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian on Jul 2, 2009 15:28:22 GMT -5
I always thought Arthur's suit looked store bought, but I never paid it much attention. And I certainly did pay attention to fabric. But I did always think Carrie got the short end of the stick, her dress looks very plain and ill fitting, and even baggy (no pun intended).
Assuming these are homemade clothes, what does this do to the theories about getting the portrait taken? For instance: were the clothes being made specifically for the purpose of getting the portrait taken? Or did the portrait wait till the clothes were finished? This might also put a dent into theory that Charlie had the portrait taken as part of his murder plan. It would have taken weeks (at least) to make all of those clothes, I would imagine.
Also, if Arthur's suit was made by Fannie instead of being purchased by Charlie, why did he not wear it to the funeral? If she had made it herself I would imagine Arthur would have been more sentimental about it and would have worn it to honor/remember her. But of course he could have had his own reasons for not wearing it.
I will have to examine the photo more closely when I get home. It occurs to me that maybe someone in the family could have gotten new clothes that day, just not all of them, and over the years the story grew to include everyone getting new store bought clothes.
I would have to say that its very difficult to make a homemade men's suit that looks decent. If Fannie made Arthur's suit she was extremely skilled.
Any thought on Charlie's suit? Of course he may of had it for years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Jul 2, 2009 16:11:47 GMT -5
Charlie's suit looks rumpled and old. I think he'd had that suit for years. I think Fannie made those clothes though not for the photo shoot. They were probably their Sunday clothes and Charlie may have told them to wear their Sunday clothes for an outing he was taking them to in Winston-Salem that day. I don't think the clothes being made by Fannie rather than store bought alters the story of what took place Christmas Day nor do I think it changes anything involving the family portrait. To me it just shows another instance of artistic license being used.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian on Jul 2, 2009 16:37:15 GMT -5
I agree, pretty much that same thought just occurred to me (that they already had the clothes before that day). With all the misinformation, false stories/memories, and artistic license floating around one has to wonder how much of what we think we know is actually true.
|
|
|
|
Post by debbie on Jul 3, 2009 5:58:19 GMT -5
Thats an amazing observation Maria!! You are definitely right about the fabric. I aways thought Carrie's dress was somehow different than the clothing of all the other family members. All the other ones are dark and hers looks more like a summery material. I wonder if any of the clothing were hand me downs from family members or friends.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Jul 3, 2009 6:02:36 GMT -5
Very little of it I'm afraid Brian. Very little indeed. I can't stress enough that way way way too much artistic license was used in the writing of those two books which were based on a true story. I was watching AS TIME GOES BY, (my favorite British Comedy) last Saturday night. In that particular episode Lionel Hardcastle, a man who was writing a book about his life during the time he lived in Kenya, said to the woman who was helping him put the true story together in a professional format for publication "Oh, just make something up". That was his response to a question she asked him about something he didn't know the answer to. The woman, a professional ghost writer replied, "oh no sir, I can't do that, this book is based on a true story. You can't take that kind of license with a true story". I have a feeling I was the wrong person watching that episode!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by douglas on Jul 20, 2009 15:05:59 GMT -5
GOOD POINT ABOUT THE CLOTHES I GOTTA TAKE A LOOK AT THAT GOOD POINT MARIA
|
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Aug 1, 2009 7:16:23 GMT -5
Hey Doug, did you ever take a look at that "good point" of mine about the clothes the Lawson family were wearing when they had their photo made? If so, what do you think...store bought or "made by Fannie"?
|
|
