Composite class portraits were natural heirs to the nineteenth-century social-anthropological/ethnographic photographic discourses that effectively defined “the other,” functioned differently. Only, rather than visually defining...
moreComposite class portraits were natural heirs to the nineteenth-century social-anthropological/ethnographic photographic discourses that effectively defined “the other,” functioned differently. Only, rather than visually defining “marginality,” composite class portraits idealized a semi-aristocratic group of white, Anglo-Saxon, and Protestant stock as the ideal models for an American, New England-focused, Positive Eugenics agenda that was indoctrinated at institutions including Harvard University. The photographs – which made using founding father of Eugenics Francis Galton’s composite techniques – discursively conveyed specific gender-role and hetero-normative norms for the consumption of college and university students. While men were expected to become captains of their industries, upper-class New England women were taught that they should lead a “proper” social life, which involved marrying within their caste, supporting their husbands, and maintaining the family’s social profile. As upper-class society saw itself as threatened by waves of immigrants, the women of colleges such as Smith College, for instance, therefore were reminded of their critical roles as mothers whose shared destiny included raising “well-bred” offspring to preserve their own elevated social caste in faithful adherence to the mission of the Positive Eugenics movement.
This book takes a closer look at composite portraiture and other related photographic practices that documented an idealized “reality” of the New England social-caste experience. Despite these images’ didactic and rhetorical functions as a reminder of “class” unity and duty, when the portraits are positioned in relation to the individual stories and portraits of members of the class, they reveal points of non-conformity and rebellion with their own rhetoric.