Thinks happen: The Story Behind the Photograph

Things ain't what they used to be. (In fact, they never was.)
The Profile (more than you really wanted to know) is here.

Eugene E. “Ardmore” Eldridge never seemed to grow out of his “terrible two’s” disposition and maintained a high level of disobedience, disloyalty and distrust all his life. His distraught parents, Able and Iodine Armwire, declined to discuss Eugene’s disreputable childhood which thrived well into his 20’s.

Able and Iodine deserted and disinherited the dismal offspring in the spring of 1892 and dispatched the defiant delinquent to the Death Valley desert dunes where he took up with a comely cactus called Caroline. Caroline “Handy” Coalstove had worked as a cue-card holder for a traveling troupe of tree-trimmers and thespians. She had ditched the dramatacists and defoliators in the desert and took up with eligible Eugene in desperation sending her life in a decidedly different direction. By that time E. E. was known only as “Wyandotte” Wilson, a pocket watch welder and wholesale whale watcher.

Carolyne Coalstove had no trouble taming the tyrant Wyandotte Wilson (AKA E. E.). She simply secured his sullen self in a stolen steamer trunk and cast the key into Kennywaha Canyon, which was no minor toss, as she was not in Kentucky at the time. With all of the captive’s Keno winnings, she walked away to Wisconsin. There is no trace of her after that. She probably changed her name.

Years later, the only surviving member of the family, Iodine Armwire discovered a miracle cure for which there is no known disease. She left her entire fortune to President G. Clifford Prout (played by Buck Henry, who had not been born yet) for the SINA cause.

Comments

soozika says: Grumpy little fella! Wonder who he took after ...

Love the names people had at the time ... and what most decorative patterns and fonts they had on the reverse sides on their photos.

anyjazz65 says: I thought you would like that so I included the reverse. I am not even sure what the name is. Is it L. V. Bean? Possibly a predecessor to L. L. Bean?

And note too that this picture was taken and dated before North Dakota and South Dakota became states in 1889.
soozika says: Looks like L.U. Bean to me - but then this font is as lovely as it is peculiar! L.L. Bean - :o)

All engrossed by the fonts&decorations I hadn't even noticed that it only states "Dakota" - thanks for the info!

ed ed says: i'll have to look into the history of photography. this is much older than i would have expected. i thought in those times, exposure times were so slow that people had to keep still..i'm sure he didn't..i'll have a look at the exposition in the morning...

anyjazz65 says: I thought about that too. There might be some discrepancy in the dating. The photographer might have used an old preprinted backing that was made before the Dakota split into two states. But then the handwriting also claims 1862 or 1867. I don't know.

meagain625 says: Great find, anyjazz :) He's one kid I would put down for nap time *before* he started getting cranky. Which looks like he would be in nap time for days on end :)

anyjazz65 says: Hey thanks meagain625. Wouldn't you just love to know what really happened to this guy? Do you suppose he ended up as a loan officer or a pawn shop owner or what? Not a friendly looking kid at all. I bet bears steered clear of him.

ed ed says: after reading your history of EEE and his mother, (another great one) (the history, not the mother, but her too...) i feel she was a wonderful woman. if i get that unknown disease, how can i find her cure? your pictures/expositions ought to be in a book i think. i'd buy a couple of copies at least. i guess that what i took as a date, 1862, is just the beginning of a serail number. some photos i found recently have similar numbers on the back: in order to get copies, i suppose.... keep finding and posting, anyjazz

Dunottar says: "It's the hessian underpants," whined Eugene. "Why won't anyone believe that my parents force me to wear underpants made out of hessian?"

Dunottar says: I doubt very much that this photo was taken 1862. I do not think that photographic technology capable of taking such a candid photo was available until at least the 1890s - exposure times were far too long before then, not unless Eugene was a committed and brilliant exponent of sustained gurneying. An enfant terrible you might say :-)

anyjazz65 says: Ha! That's funny!

anyjazz65 says: ed ed and Dunottar: I agree with you entirely.

The blue fountain pen ink has not faded. Early ink is often seen faded to a transparent sepia color. The name and number written in ink with pen-point, not ball-point, could have been an afterthought of someone trying to update a family history even a hundred years later, perhaps not so accurately. Or perhaps it isn't even a date but a series number as ed ed suggests.

I put more weight to the imprinted information on the mounting card. Since “Sioux Falls, Dakota” became Sioux Falls, South Dakota in 1889 then the picture must have been mounted around that time. Unless of course, the photographer had an endless supply of the preprinted mounting cards that served him decades after that, it must have been used within perhaps five years of that date.

Clearly, the child is NOT holding still, a challenge even for today's portrait cameras. A fleet shutter speed would be required.

The photo is probably very faded as many are from the early eras. But there is a possibility that the subject was in a very brilliant light washing out much of the detail of the background and clothing. This would help the exposure time but probably not enough to stop action. Or perhaps it was just a really lucky shot; the clouds parted and the kid froze for five seconds.

Or, maybe the photographer was a visionary that had a bit of magnesium powder. He sat the kid in the dark opened the shutter, and with a sudden flash, caught him, mid-tantrum. Look at where the reflections are in the glossy finish of the chair. It looks as if the main light source came from just to the left of the camera. He does look like a kid that wouldn’t like sitting in the dark. (Or anywhere else for that matter.) But, there does not seem to be a single shadow behind the chair as a flash would cast.

I suppose there could be other theories too: time travel, forgery. Hm. Forgery. We have fake antique furniture, why not fake antique photographs? With today’s technology, we could crank out samples like this one for pennies each to be sold in flea markets and genuine antique stores for two to five bucks each. Only sophisticated testing would prove it fake. Who’s gonna do that?

This one is probably authentic however. I did find another photograph with identical backing on the net at ancestorville.com and an entry on page 193 of Biography of Western Photographers, the notation that “Varney and McCulloch, partnership in Sioux Falls, Dakota Territory, producing stereoviews. Studio located at 220 Eight St., c. 1890, Successor to L. V. Bean.” So Bean went out of business circa 1890. This again would lead one to believe that the picture was at least mounted in 1890 or before.

The REAL current value of a photo like this is the thought it stimulates; the speculation about the origin, the subject, the provenance and the technology. And of course, the camaraderie, the conversation between you and I.

Ah, if there were more conversation, where would we be?

ole1879 says:Levi Bean does show up in the 1900 US Census living in Sioux Falls - he is a photographer.

This biography appears on page 442 in "History of Minnehaha County, South Dakota" by Dana R. Bailey.

"BEAN, LEVI V., was born ar Corina, Maine, March 3, 1845; attended the common schools and worked on a farm during his youth, and after attaining his majority engaged in milling and farming intil he removed to Osage, Iowa. In 1871, he commenced work as a photographer, and was in business at Osage until October, 1880, when he removed to Dell Rapids in this county. He remained there engaged as a photographer until January, 1882, when he located at Sioux Falls and opened a photograph gallery. In 1889 he rented his residence and business building until 1897, when he resumed business at the old stand. He is an artist of established reputation, and a repected citizen."

This would appear to indicate that this photo was taken between 1882 and 1889.

anyjazz65 says: Many thanks!

Now there's some REAL research for you! I guess you gotta know where to look!