Hi, Luke,
I wonder if the original of the image I’ve reproduced below was the very one your ancestor might have looked at before choosing her outfit. They were called “Garconne” (i.e. “boyish”) and I think the idea must have been for a woman’s silhouette to resemble a test tube instead of an hour glass
.
I thought I’d have a go at restoring your lovely picture as well, but after working on it for a couple of hours I found that in addition to the work by restorers this week there were also all the restores done when you originally posted it last year. Here:
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=745393.msg5925228#msg5925228I thought I wouldn't send mine because it couldn't add much to all the great jobs already done. Then I thought, "bugger it, for something different, I'll send it as a painting".
One thing I did notice while working on it (probably a red herring but I thought I’d mention it just in case): My first impression was that the child was a boy, about 2 year-old (believe me, I have 7 grandchildren under 10
). While little boys back then weren’t put into shorts until toilet trained, there were often other clues to their gender, like slightly shorter hair, with no ribbons, and toy trains instead of dolls. One other small thing that some families did was to part boys’ hair on the left and girls' on the right. This isn’t really much of a clue except that in this picture it stands out because the mother’s hair is parted on the right and the child’s on the left.
Anyway, as I said, lovely photo, and I hope it all gets sorted out.
Cheers, Peter.