-
5 Deaf Eyes The Allen Sisters’ Pictorial Photography,1885–1920
- NYU Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
98 5 Deaf Eyes The Allen Sisters’ Pictorial Photography, 1885–1920 “The Misses Allen,” they were most often called—personally, by those who knew them in Deerfield, Massachusetts, and also professionally, by those critics who wrote about their photography at the time.1 And although their names do appear singly in relationship to a few of their photographs , more often than not they appear as a unit, Mary (Figure 5.1) and Frances (Figure 5.2) Allen together: The Misses Allen. For nearly fifty years, they were companions in art, work, communication, and everyday life. In this essay, I work from five different contexts. And, although I move through these contexts one by one, I must also confess that this movement and my established contexts serve as an artificial organizational design for painting a portrait—taking a picture, as it were—of the Allen Sisters and their photographic art. The Allen Sisters and their photography is a subject that I have found to be quite complex, in fact. The five contexts I want to work around, in, and through overlap at many junctures. First, I want to focus on just the sisters themselves and develop a mini-autobiography —a sketch, as it were—of them before I begin discussing additional images and contexts. Second, I move out of that close-up autobiographical frame and briefly discuss another concentric circle surrounding their lives and work—the context of Deerfield, Massachusetts, during the period of their photographic work, 1885–1920. Third, I offer some background about women and photography in general during this particular period in American (and international) history. Fourth, sandwiched between the third and fifth contexts, I take a visual break as we look at examples of their photography and place these examples in several kinds of (again often overlapping) categories. This categorizing work I do with the Allen Sisters’ photographic images is greatly influenced by contexts of gender, history, and disability. Deaf Eyes 99 Then, finally, fifth, I end with the part of my essay that serves as my main title: “Deaf Eyes.” In this last part, I want to conclude by re-viewing some of the context of the gender and history section (the third one) with a “deafness” lens or filter laid over it, as well. What would it have meant to have been deaf, and a woman, and a professional photographer at the turn of the twentieth century? I do not propose that the Misses Allen hold the answers to all the parts of identity posed in that question. But I do think that exploring some of their history—looking, in particular, at their multiple contexts and between placements—and placing that exploration alongside their photographic images can develop and frame some interesting pictures for us as we reflect on that question. Frances and Mary Allen: A “Well-Rounded Life in the Chiefest of Things” Born to a successful farmer, Josiah Allen, and his wife, Mary Stebbins, in the town of Deerfield, Massachusetts, Frances and Mary were joined by 5.1 and 5.2 Frances Stebbins Allen & Mary Electa Allen. Photographs courtesy of the Pocumtuck Valley Memorial Association, Memorial Hall Museum, Deerfield, Massachusetts. [44.223.70.167] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 12:01 GMT) 100 Deaf Eyes two brothers, as well.2 Frances was the oldest child, born in 1854, and Mary, four years younger, was born in 1858. The Josiah Allen family was an extended one, with numerous close relatives always stopping by. The family also housed many boarders during the children’s younger years—especially young, unmarried, female teachers for the local school. In the fall of 1874— when Frances (often called “Fanny” at that time) was twenty years old and Mary (known sometimes as “Mame”) was sixteen—they began, together, a two-year program at the State Normal School teacher’s college in Westfield , Massachusetts. Upon graduation from the normal school, Frances spent the next ten years, from 1876–1886, teaching school. Mary’s health was reportedly poor during this period, so her teaching was sporadic. By 1886, their hearing loss had proven great enough that they both gave up teaching. The specific source of the loss is as yet unknown, but their deafness does not seem to have surfaced as a significant problem until they were in their early thirties. The best medical guess we have today is that their loss might have been the result of otoschlerosis, a hardening of the bones of the ear. This condition, once thought to be...