Vedika Saboo

The Family Portrait: Evolved over time, but superficiality remains...

Vedika Saboo

CAS HI 303

Professor Brooke Blower

5 May 2023

Family portraits are posed paintings, photographs or images that showcase all individual family members together. Family portraits are taken for a multitude of purposes including but not limited to showcasing your family, sending a message to others, for memories, or even to show off status. Family portraits have a rich history surrounding them and have evolved over time in many different manners including colors, garments, facial expressions, poses, the positioning of family members, and the background setting. Regardless of these alterations over the years, one thing seems to have remained the same: the superficiality behind these portraits. There may be much occurring behind the scenes, yet families continue to take family portraits to demonstrate how they crave to be perceived even if it is far from the reality. While family portraits and their purpose have evolved in various ways throughout time, alongside changes in family values and function, superficiality remains a consistent theme.

17th Century: The Beginning of Family Portraits

The beginning of family portraits can be traced back to around the seventeenth century, to the middle & upper class European families. During this time, portraits were painted so they required time, energy, money, and sitting still. These portraits promoted the idealization of families, emotional distance, and patriarchy (1). Parents during this time felt “compelled to apply strict adult controls to counter a deeply rooted natural depravity in youngsters”, which is why children did not have much freedom during the portraits (2). During the seventeenth century, these painted portraits were perceived as a luxury, mainly done by wealthy and royal families to flaunt their status and class.

18th century: Painted Family Portraiture

During the eighteenth century in Europe, this luxurious trend continued, as shown by Figure 1 titled “the Duke of Osuna and his family”, clearly demonstrating the importance of status in these portraits. The regal attire worn by family members supports this further. Backgrounds were usually plain, like in Figure 1, or depicted the inside of their grand home or castle. Families were much larger during this time period, so portraits included families with many children.

Figure 1: 18th century painted family portrait

Francisco de Goya, The Duke of Osuna and his Family, 1788

During the early eighteenth century, family portraiture acted as a preservation of ancestral lineage, genealogy and hierarchy, which was a continuing trend from the seventeenth century (3). However, “from the 1760s to the 1790s the genre of family portraiture was transformed (4).” Figure 1 was painted in the late 18th century, when emphasis was placed on demonstrating sentimentality and endearment within the family. However, this affective nature displayed may not have been completely truthful, as “sitters wished to present themselves in a manner that would appeal to and receive approval from their audience (5).” Therefore, superficiality was clearly an integral part of family portraiture. As confirmed by Bailey, “sitters commissioned portraits to advertise the fact that their lives followed socially-approved ideals (6).” Families planned deceptive poses and narratives that reflected family norms of this time. As shown in Figure 1, the father is standing over his family asserting his dominance, as the protector of the household, while also showing that he is caring by holding one of his children’s hands. The mother is seated, showing that she is cared for by her husband and she is holding another one of their children by the shoulder, showing her nurturing nature. The family members have calm and neutral expressions, with conscious posing, and a lack of overbearing touch or wide smiles.

In other late eighteenth century portraits, there was more “candid” posing with less formalities, where “parents were shown cuddling their offspring, playing with them, and tenderly relating to them (7).” There were new emerging attitudes on children, and “persuasion and every soft gentle method is recommended” for parenting (8).” As a result, the children during the late eighteenth century could be doing activities, spontaneous gestures, or had props in the portraits, as shown by the “presence of toys, pets, and educational aids”, in Figure 1 (9)” Unsurprisingly, to further communicate social and political status, families’ “features were elevated and beautified (10).” Since portraits were painted, artists could obscure them by enhancing ideal features and not including undesired features, further promoting this “fake” motif (11). Painted portraits started around the early nineteenth century in the United States and had very similar features to those in Europe.

19th century: Introduction of camera and emotionless portraits

The camera and film photography were introduced in the early nineteenth century, revolutionizing media and family portraits. Family portraiture increased in popularity, because of Queen Victoria’s indulgence and fascination in media and commissioning of royal family portraits (12). As a result, family portraits became more recognized as a way to convey wealth and status. Another potential reason for taking portraits could be since families would not have a very long time together, due to the low life expectancy during the Victorian era (13). The compassionate late eighteenth century ideals shifted to restrained ideals in the nineteenth century. During the Victorian era, portraits were formal and with minimal touch (14). Nineteenth century families were emotionally unattached to each other since the family was a “unit of society” as described by Goodsell (15). Family values were respect and stability, meanwhile, showing emotions were seen as a sign of weakness. Portraits were like “trickery, wherein the family has concealed its complicated, less attractive qualities for the sake of the illusion of respectability (16).”

`Figure 2 depicts how most family portraits looked during this time, with family members dressed very formally, looking neat and tidy. As Hudgins supports, “the signs of wealth and self-congratulation emerged from the photographs of richly dressed subjects of the era (17).” The two young girls are wearing white, demonstrating innocence and purity, while the mother is wearing black, showing maturity from girlhood. Portraits were usually taken with a plain background, indoors, and were black and white since color photography was not invented yet. Figure 2’s positioning is insightful. The father sitting in a chair at the front and center of the portrait communicates his “head of the household” role (18). He displays his power, masculinity and control over the family, since institutionalized gender stereotypes were prominent at this time. On the other hand, the mother is standing behind her husband and daughters, demonstrating that she was controlled by her husband (19). Figure 2 displays a lack of touch, except for the wife's hand on her husband's shoulder and the baby girl sitting on the father’s lap. There is not much emotion either as everyone has a stoic facial expression with no smile. Smiles were not common in nineteenth century culture, it was considered immature and could be associated with drunkness, madness, etc (20). Besides poor dental health and the long duration it took to capture photos with film cameras, smiling would also ruin the serious household image they desired to present.

Figure 2: 19th century family portrait

Bettmann, 19th Century Family Portrait, 1890

There were major differences and similarities in the purpose behind taking family portraits for white and black families. As the media continued gaining popularity, increasing images surfaced which began inaccurately portraying black families as dangerous and clown-like. Black families had to struggle with the degrading stereotype of being considered “dysfunctional” for a long time (21). Similar to white families, black families also used these portraits to showcase stability and respectability. Contrasting to white families, black families utilized portraits to defy these negative assumptions and exhibit their achievement and resilience from slavery (22). In the late nineteenth century, family portraits were also used to negate stereotypes like danger, rape, murder, and stealing, falsely affiliated with black men (23). Black fathers posed with their children in family portraits to show their traits of responsibility, community and family values to show society that they indulged in similar values and were not a threat (24). Around 1870, due to technological advancements, newer cameras were created which were easier and cheaper to use, thus leading to more families like lower middle class families, being able to indulge in family photography (25).

20th century: Increased accessibility of family portraits and Nuclear Families

As the twentieth century approached, drastic changes occurred in the family portraiture realm. With technological developments, photography became more accessible and affordable, thus leading to more indulgence in family portraits. With the flood of immigrants entering the United States during the early twentieth century, family portraits became a desired notion. Immigrants would “tog up in the best clothes and send back pictures to their families in the old country to show that they were doing well, even if they weren't (26).” Family portraits went from being luxurious to a regular tradition for most families due to the introduction of Kodak’s new cameras which kicked off the cheap photography era (27). Family portraits were even made into the traditional “Holiday Card”, sent to relatives and friends to show their perfect family, ready for the holidays. Family photos became unrestrictive and happier as shown in Figure 3, with all family members widely grinning to portray happiness. The smile seen today in pictures finally became the standard expression in photos in the 1920s and ‘30s (28). Smiling was further implemented through the popular “say cheese” phenomenon starting during this period.

Figure 3: 20th century nuclear family portrait

Harold M. Lambert, Family Sitting In Living Room, 1962

Additionally, the “family portrait” shifted to “family photo” due to the photography era. Alongside this, was a shift from “formality to informality”, with formal poses and expressions even being mocked (29). The main values during this century were to “naturalize a Westernized middle class model of the nuclear family, affirm heteronormative values and enact familial togetherness (30).” This notion is demonstrated in Figure 3. The nuclear family phenomenon symbolized the perfect home life, with the dominant father, obedient mother, and polite children, as demonstrated through various popular TV sitcoms like Leave it to beaver and Father knows best. Families took photos to convey a good social position, which is why portraits occasionally included the family’s possessions like their cars or homes, like in Figure 3 where the family is posed in their nice living room. The familial expectations were more sentimental, which was reflected through supportive gestures and more touch in the family photos. However, gender stereotypes and socially accepted family roles were still prominent. In Figure 3, the father is sitting in the chair in the middle, with his boy sitting next to him on the table and his daughter sitting in his lap, showing he is the leader of the house and probably the breadwinner. His arms are wrapped around his daughter, showing his affectionate side. The mother is sitting towards the back, near her husband, showing her devotion to him and their family, exemplifying the gender ideals, like of the perfect surburban housewife. Attire is not as formal compared to earlier time periods, but is still nice clothing like suits and dresses. Towards the mid twentieth century, colored photography and the digital camera were introduced, making family photos much more clear, quick, easy and professional looking.

The 21th century: Happy, goofy, candid family photos trending

Now in the twenty-first century, the theme of being a loving, supportive, and playful family is being emphasized. Families take delight in portraying dysfunction in their pictures, as compared to the past (31). However, even this “dysfunction” could be intentional to show that they are a close knit family that can be silly together, as demonstrated in Figure 4 (32). Family photos are more casual and fun, but are usually still posed, no matter how “natural” they may appear.

Photos are more often captured in outdoor settings like the beach, in fields, or in the park as demonstrated by Figure 4. Family photos reference the unified nature of family while also the preservation of members’ individuality. This symbolization of unity is usually exhibited through members wearing matching or color coordinated clothes. In Figure 4, family members are wearing somewhat similar colors to show how harmonized they are. Family photo attire is more casual nowadays, like shirts, sweaters, and jeans as illustrated in Figure 4. Portraits still sometimes have formal or mannered poses, but now display more silly or weirdly close poses so they are in compliance with family ideals (33). There are more “candid” family photos because the family wants to show they are hip and fun. There is also a shift from the nuclear family concept, since families now have various different structures: single parent households, divorced families, extended family, same sex couple households or big families with many structures embedded within it like Modern Family, thus influencing the portrait as well.

Figure 4: 21st century family portrait

The Good Brigade, Portrait of family making funny faces

Stereotypical gender positioning has decreased from earlier eras, which could be due to the rise of dual income households (34). As shown in Figure 4, the mother and father are at the sides of their kids with no specific power dynamic displayed. Emotions vary in family photos, there is not one uniform expression. However, they are usually happy expressions, since smiling has become the natural way to respond to cameras. In Figure 4, you can see the family making silly faces, laughing, and the baby is even crying. At least he was showing his real emotion! Additionally, family photos now can be easily posted to social media, sent to relatives, put into photo albums, or framed in the house. In contrast to earlier times, “family pictures here serve as record and reminders, not of power, status, or ancestry, but of good times (35).” However, these “good times” captured are almost always facilitated and arranged by the photographer. As shown in Figure 4, the family is hugging and huddled close together to show viewers they have a healthy and open relationship. Behind the scenes, this may not be the case. As demonstrated by Figure 5, a clip from a Modern Family episode, chaos and fighting may take place in the family photo process, which viewers cannot see.

Figure 5: Clip from Modern Family episode showing behind the scenes of a family portrait

Shine Through Sensation on Youtube, "Modern

Family: Final Photography | STS." 2022.

However, towards the end of the clip, they end up taking a more candid photo with mud all over them. This suggests that it is possible that not all family portraits are inauthentic, some may correctly reflect how the family members are feeling at that time or how close or goofy the family really is. With the rise of candid photography and good quality phone cameras being with individuals at all times, numerous photos can be taken wherever and whenever, which also leads to families capturing more unposed, unfiltered pictures. However, while most pictures shared today are trying to display that “natural” look and even if they look candid, many times, they are still constructed in some manner. This performative aspect of these photos has not diminished too much over time as families continue trying to display desirable aspects of their family while hiding underlying tension within, shown through Figure 5.

Overall, family portraits have evolved a lot from the seventeenth century to the present, in various manners. The time period influenced family function and values, which impacted the nature of family portraits. During earlier time periods, the family’s purpose was to survive, fulfill duties, and gain respect (36). However, the family’s role now is more affectionate, like supporting and loving each other unconditionally. As stated by Bailey, “family portraits capture the essence of what each era thinks is the meaning of family life (37).” Due to alterations in family ideals, “the modern family is often outdoors, caught in movement, grinning, and much more affectionate than its grim-faced, motionless ancestors (38).” Regardless of how different the portraits look in each time period, their use has remained the same: to uphold appearances and manipulate self and family identity (39). As mentioned in Bailey’s review, “the change in the depiction of the family reflects a cultural shift in the way that families portrayed themselves (40).” Family portraits have always been artificial and insincere but what they were trying to convey to viewers changed based on the family values and function in society during that time period (41). Will family portraits continue on this path of superficiality or will they start displaying the reality in the future? I guess we will see!

Endnotes

_________________________________________

1. Ji Won Park, "Contemporary Family Portraits: The Hidden Uncomfortable Truth of Family Dynamics. ”Undergraduate Theses—Unrestricted 34, (2015). Accessed March 20, 2023. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/undergrad_open/34

2. Margaretta M. Lovell, "Reading Eighteenth-Century American Family Portraits: Social Images and Self- Images," Winterthur Portfolio 22, no. 4 (Winter 1987): [Page 254], accessed March 20, 2023, https://www.jstor.org/stable/1181182.

3. Park, "Contemporary Family Portraits: The Hidden Uncomfortable Truth of Family Dynamics.”, 11.

4. Joanna Bailey, review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England, Reviews in History, last modified December 2006, accessed March 19, 2023, https://reviews.history.ac.uk/review/558.

5. Kate Retford, "Sensibility and Genealogy in the Eighteenth-Century Family Portrait: The Collection at Kedleston Hall," The Historical Journal 46, no. 3 (September 2003): [Page 536], accessed March 20, 2023, https://www.jstor.org/stable/3133561.

6. Bailey, review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England

7. Bailey, review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England

8. Lovell, "Reading Eighteenth-Century American Family Portraits: Social Images and Self- Images," 254.

9. Bailey, review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England

10. Park, "Contemporary Family Portraits: The Hidden Uncomfortable Truth of Family Dynamics.”, 11.

11. Park, "Contemporary Family Portraits: The Hidden Uncomfortable Truth of Family Dynamics.”, 11.

12. Mia Tramz, "Magnificent Obsession: How Queen Victoria Influenced Photography," Time, last modified February 4, 2014, accessed April 2, 2023, https://time.com/3806764/magnificent-obsession-how-queen-victoria-influenced-photography/.

13. Merrill Fabry, "Now You Know: Why Do People Always Look So Serious in Old Photos?," Time, last modified November 28, 2016, accessed April 1, 2023, https://time.com/4568032/smile-serious-old-photos/.

14. Bailey, review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England

15. Willystine Goodsell, "The American Family in the Nineteenth Century," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 160 (March 1932): [Page 13], accessed April 1, 2023, https://www.jstor.org/stable/1018511.

16. Nicole Hudgins, "A Historical Approach to Family Photography: Class and Individuality in Manchester and Lille, 1850-1914," Journal of Social History 43, no. 3 (2010): [Page 564], accessed March 20, 2023,

17. Hudgins, "A Historical Approach to Family Photography: Class and Individuality in Manchester and Lille, 1850-1914," 564

18. Goodsell, "The American Family in the Nineteenth Century," 13.

19. Goodsell, "The American Family in the Nineteenth Century," 13.

20. Fabry, "Now You Know: Why Do People Always Look So Serious in Old Photos?"

21. Janette Greenwood, "How Black Americans used portraits and family photographs to defy stereotypes," The Conversation, last modified March 8, 2021, accessed March 19, 2023, https://theconversation.com/how-black-americans-used-portraits-and-family-photographs-to-defy-stereotypes-154708.

22. Greenwood, "How Black Americans used portraits and family photographs to defy stereotypes."

23. Greenwood, "How Black Americans used portraits and family photographs to defy stereotypes."

24. Greenwood, "How Black Americans used portraits and family photographs to defy stereotypes."

25. Hudgins, "A Historical Approach to Family Photography: Class and Individuality in Manchester and Lille, 1850-1914," 564

26. Michael Hewitt, "The rise and rise of family photographs," The Guardian, last modified March 4, 2011, accessed April 1, 2023, https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/mar/05/family-photographs-history.

27. Hewitt, "The rise and rise of family photographs."

28. Fabry, "Now You Know: Why Do People Always Look So Serious in Old Photos?"

29. David Halle, "The Family Photograph," Art Journal 46, no. 3 (Fall 1987): [Page 217-224], accessed March 20, 2023, https://doi.org/10.2307/777035.

30. Silke Arnold-de Simine, Leal, Joanne, eds. 2021. Picturing the Family: Media, Narrative, Memory. N.p.: Routledge.

31. Brooke Blower, Lecture, Boston University, May 2, 2023.

32. Brooke Blower, Lecture, Boston University, January 26, 2023.

33. Brooke Blower, Lecture, Boston University, January 26, 2023

34. Brooke Blower, Lecture, Boston University, May 2, 2023

35. Halle, "The Family Photograph," 220

36. Brooke Blower, Lecture, Boston University, January 24 , 2023.

37. Bailey, review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England

38. Bailey, review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England

39. Bailey, review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England

40. Bailey, review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England

41. Brooke Blower, Lecture, Boston University, January 24, 2023.

Bibliography

Bailey, Joanna. Review of The Art of Domestic Life: Family Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century England. Reviews in History. Last modified December 2006. Accessed March 19, 2023. https://reviews.history.ac.uk/review/558.

Bettmann. 19th Century Family Portrait. Image. January 1, 1890. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/19th-century-family-portrait-news-photo/514895616?adppopup=true.

Fabry, Merrill. "Now You Know: Why Do People Always Look So Serious in Old Photos?" Time. Last modified November 28, 2016. Accessed April 1, 2023. https://time.com/4568032/smile-serious-old-photos/.

The Good Brigade. Portrait of family making funny faces. Image. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/portrait-of-family-making-funny-faces-royalty-free-image/1246162891.

Goodsell, Willystine. "The American Family in the Nineteenth Century." The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 160 (March 1932): 13-22. Accessed April 1, 2023. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1018511.

Goya y Lucientes, Francisco De. The Duke of Osuna and his Family by Francisco de Goya. Image. 1788. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/portrait-of-the-duke-of-osuna-pedro-tellez-giron-his-wife-news-photo/587491344?adppopup=true.

Greenwood, Janette. "How Black Americans used portraits and family photographs to defy stereotypes." The Conversation. Last modified March 8, 2021. Accessed March 19, 2023. https://theconversation.com/how-black-americans-used-portraits-and-family-photographs-to-defy-stereotypes-154708.

Halle, David. "The Family Photograph." Art Journal 46, no. 3 (Fall 1987): 217-25. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://doi.org/10.2307/777035.

Hewitt, Michael. "The rise and rise of family photographs." The Guardian. Last modified March 4, 2011. Accessed April 1, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/mar/05/family-photographs-history.

Hudgins, Nicole. "A Historical Approach to Family Photography: Class and Individuality in Manchester and Lille, 1850-1914." Journal of Social History 43, no. 3 (2010): 559-86. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20685425.

Lambert, Harold M. Family Sitting In Living Room. Image. January 1, 1962. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/family-sitting-in-living-room-news-photo/671674765?adppopup=true.

Lovell, Margaretta M. "Reading Eighteenth-Century American Family Portraits: Social Images and Self- Images." Winterthur Portfolio 22, no. 4 (Winter 1987): 243-64. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1181182.

"Modern Family : Final Photography | STS." MP4 video, 4:22. Youtube. Posted by Shine Through Sensation, May 1, 2022. Accessed May 1, 2023. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CRTja8e4X8.

Retford, Kate. "Sensibility and Genealogy in the Eighteenth-Century Family Portrait: The Collection at Kedleston Hall." The Historical Journal 46, no. 3 (September 2003): 533-60. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3133561.

Tramz, Mia. "Magnificent Obsession: How Queen Victoria Influenced Photography." Time. Last modified February 4, 2014. Accessed April 2, 2023. https://time.com/3806764/magnificent-obsession-how-queen-victoria-influenced-photography/.

About the Author

Vedika was born in Mumbai, India and moved to Atlanta, Georgia when she was 3 years old. As she grew older, she began getting interested in fashion, traveling, psychology, and music. After working at a crystal shop when she was 16, she fell in love with jewelry, especially funky earrings. Her favorite pastimes are singing, dancing, and color coordinating her outfits. She also has an unhealthy obsession with iced chais and crime podcasts. She moved to Boston for college, and is now majoring in marketing and minoring in psychology with hopes of being a marketing executive at a fashion firm in the future.

Page updated

Report abuse