this man was not offered the usually amenities because of his race. Riverton, New Jersey, did not have a large African American population at the turn of the century. The subject is wearing a suit the boxy jacket of which looks too big for him, and its bottom edge is puckered, as if the jacket has not been hemmed by a professional tailor. Still, it is clear that, whether this man improvised his clothing or not, he has dressed well for the record. Like the jacket, however, the dog may also have been borrowed, as there is no visual indication of a relationship between the two. The dog is part of the iconography that seems to have been expected for a middle-class presentation, as we’ll see in chapter 2.
Depending upon the context, then, sleeping and sitting dogs may occupy no particular relational or aesthetic purpose but are present as iconographic filler, although that choice is in itself a comment about the identity of the sitter. As we have just seen in the preceding figures, however, dogs can also be found on chairs, chair arms, tables, and studio pedestals, often occupying the dominant visual space in the image and suggesting a loving equality and respect. Even large dogs can be posed on furniture so as to appear at lap level, if not eye level, as is evident in figure 18. In figure 20, the dog gets the couch, with one leg extended over the arm of the couch so that the girl can “hold paws” with her pet. In fact, it is possible for the human to have the uncomfortable position, just to make sure that the pets get appropriate billing, as in figure 21, an outdoor presentation with little composition or planning beyond bringing the chair outdoors. I am treating this image as if the dog and cat belong to the woman, although, as chapter 3 documents, white employers sometimes had pictures made of the domestic help and pets, as if they were the same category of creature. When pictures of African Americans and dogs are involved, interpretation is even more tenuous.
FIGURE 19
Cabinet card, 1900–1910, 9.9 × 14.1 cm. Photograph by Lothrop. Riverton, New Jersey.
The image is not pristine. There appears to be melting snow on the ground, suggesting that additional discomfort was involved in producing this picture. Although there were African American photographers working at the turn of the century, many African Americans would not have had access to the amenities of a well-furnished indoor studio. Despite the incongruity of her clothing in the casual outdoor setting, this formally attired African American woman perches on the arm of a rocking chair so that the dog gets the comfortable seat. She’s trying to hold on to the uncooperative cat as well, making the balancing act especially challenging. Her forthright gaze, however, replicated by the dog’s gaze and posture, claims the dignity of the moment.
FIGURE 20
CDV, 1880s, 6 × 9.6 cm. Photograph by J. O. Knutson. Blooming Prairie, Minnesota.
FIGURE 21
Unused RPPC, 1913–1922, 7.7 × 11.2 cm.
In figure 22, professionally attired Mr. Streck has put his alert Dalmatian on a table beside him. Although he is not touching the dog, the tilt of their heads and their symmetry of expression suggest a comfortable relationship between the two, especially in that putting a long-legged dog on a small table and having it sit so nicely suggests that the dog trusts its owner. In figure 23, the dog gets equal billing with the child, both visually and in words. On the back of the image, the two are identified as “Helka and Queedle.” Unlike Mr. Streck, who gets overshadowed by his dramatically colored and positioned dog, Helka holds her own with Queedle thanks to her commanding hat and equally commanding gaze.
Images of children with the family pet are probably the most numerous of all dog presentations. Much like occupational photographs, images of children contain visual documentation about their childhoods, including toys (dolls and guns), wagons, bicycles, and the family dog. The RPPC in figure 24 shows “the young sprout at play,” a boy with his wagon, his dog, and his cloth-faced doll riding in the wagon. His backdrop is a drying bear skin, and his Buster Brown clothing suggests that he has been dressed up for this picture, despite its casual setting. Generally, the RPPC was 8.8 × 12.7 cm (3 × 5 in), although there can be noticeable variation from company to company. Postcards were introduced by the Columbian Exposition (World’s Fair) in 1888, and by 1906 most delivery routes in rural areas had been established. Anyone could have an image developed in small batches—maybe ten at a time. Traveling photographers visited towns and rural homes, setting up impromptu studios in the house, on the front porch, or in the garden, and all the possible conventions of dog positioning evident in the cabinet card or carte de visite are available in the RPPC format.9
FIGURE 22
Mr. Streck. Cabinet card, 1900–1910, 7.9 × 10.3 cm. Photograph by Dingeldey, 780 Jefferson Street, Buffalo, New York.
FIGURE 23
Helka and Queedle. Used RPPC, 1910–1918, 8.2 × 11.5 cm.
As noted with figure 13, the RPPC offers the appealing, if dangerous, possibility of wedding text and image. A person could write a quick message in the morning, post it, and have someone in an adjoining county receive it that afternoon. The speed of this communication is comparable to the advent of e-mail, and, like e-mail, the postcard brought private lives under public scrutiny. Folks were careful about what they put on the cards, knowing that the postmistress and the mail carrier might very well be interested in their comments, leading some to pen terse and cryptic messages, while others crammed as much commentary as possible into the small space allocated, as we saw in figure 1. In figure 24, the writer mentions the dog’s name but not the boy’s, writing in a neat cursive hand, “The young sprout at play. Will send another of the boy and Bird as soon as finished.” The affectionate message suggests that the dog—Bird—is as much of interest as the nameless “sprout.” Like today’s text messaging, these cards perform the same work, though their effect may be less ephemeral.
FIGURE 24
Young Sprout and Bird. Used RPPC, 1906–1908, 8.2 × 11.3 cm.
FIGURE 25
Cabinet card, 1910s, 17.2 × 12.2 cm.
In addition to the various stagings with furniture that put the dog front and center, makeshift outdoor presentations often import an element from the