Ivy League Posture Photos
Yale started taking nude photos of incoming freshmen in 1919 as part of a program to detect and correct posture problems. The Yale photos have erroneously been associated with William Sheldon, a psychologist at Harvard and author of Nazi-like eugenic theories who used Harvard nude posture photos to illustrate his theory of somatypes. But, as far as I can tell, the Yale photos are not connected to Sheldon's work.
Here are five more posture photos taken at Yale that I had the opportunity to acquire. For privacy reasons, I redact the names of men who might still be alive. All of these men have passed away, so their names are not redacted.
This is Yale freshman Otis Treat Bradley on Oct. 9, 1950.
In 1952, Yale installed an apparatus using mirrors to photograph the front, rear, side and top view. Prior to that, the posture photos showed only a side view, like these ones.
This is Yale freshman Edwin Dagobert Bransome on Nov. 17, 1950.
Note the strange pins stuck to each student's back and chest. The pins were stuck on at specific points for later posture analysis. Supposedly, by examining the angles formed by connecting the points where the pins touched the body, certain posture problems could be detected.
This is Yale freshman James Frederick Carter, Jr. on Sept. 28, 1950.
The photos were then analyzed. If posture problems were detected, the student had to attend remedial posture sessions.
This is Yale freshman Henry David Marcus on Sept. 29 1950.
The photography and analysis of the photos was conducted by the staff of Yale's Payne Whitney Gymnasium. Nobody outside this staff saw the photos, and the photos were not published for other students to see.
This is Yale freshman William Reed Usher, Jr. on Oct. 2, 1950.
After the photos were used, they were filed away. The posture photo program was discontinued in the 1960s, and later, most of the photos were burned. However, some of the photos escaped burning, including the photos that I have been showing in this series.
* * *
Note: some of my followers have questioned the propriety of publishing these photos. If you think I should not publish them, please don't comment to that effect. Too much time and space has been taken up on the subject. We can agree to disagree. If you don't like it, go to some other blog. Here is my position:
1. Were these photos an invasion of privacy for the students? By today's standards, yes. By the standards of the day, not so much. In that era, guys were routinely naked around each other in locker rooms and in swimming pools when women weren't present. Being asked to strip and even being photographed naked as part of a posture examination would not seem too outrageous.
2. To protect the privacy of the students, I redact the names of students who may still be alive. I only publish the names of students who have died. Legally, the right to privacy does not extend beyond death, i.e. it does not extend to spouses, children, grandchildren, etc. of the deceased person.
3. In my opinion, publishing these photos is similar to publishing nude photos of athletes and soldiers taken by LIFE magazine photographers. At the time, the understanding of the photo subjects was that photos with frontal nudity would not be published in the magazine (and they never were), but the LIFE photo archive containing those photos is now publicly available online, and nobody seems to be complaining about it.
4. I consider these photos to be a historical record of the time. Almost all of the Ivy League posture photos were burned when their existence became widely known. In my opinion, that was akin to book-burning of books that someone claimed were obscene. These photos are not obscene. They should be celebrated, not hidden away.
10 comments:
I enjoy observing that each young man shown today has a full bush. This era was well before manscaping trends. James Frederick Carter, Jr. gets my vote.
I’ve never understood the attraction when it comes to Ivy League posture photos, please tell me - other than historical interest - what you see in them. I don’t mean to be dismissive, just trying to grasp it all
ps. I really like your posts & look at it every day, thank you - just trying to understand this posture black & white thing
@ anonymous
They're kinda-sorta unashamed? Like the boxers there was a future reward for doing this so it wasn't entirely their idea. I wouldn't have stripped for anything when I was their age only as I have gotten older (admittedly not much older than that) did I realize we're all God's children.
Lol I would have to died off shame if I should have done that their ages. Like getting sick off nerves three weeks before.
But no definitely not unashamed. Look at James Frederick Carter Jr. How he pulls in his stomach and the look of his face. He seems body conscious and rather uncomfortable with the situation.
thank you, think I get it now - I would have been eager & slightly turned on - to be unashamed or not to be 🤪
so diffenret from Estonian men
I wonder if the real discomfort of the young men had less to do with the actual photo session part of it all as opposed to having those strange pins attached. I mean, it must have taken a good ten minutes or so to have the pins placed in exactly the correct spot. Most likely, clothed upperclassmen "assistants" placed the pins while the completely nude freshmen just stood there, completely exposed during the whole process. Then they probably had to stand in line for another fifteen minutes as they awaited their turn with the photographer. And then, afterwards, all the pins had to be removed, probably by yet another clothed assistant. All in all, a good half hour of being stripped, pinned, photographed, and unpinned. What a way to be welcomed to your new school.
Someone asked why we appreciate these images:
Because they are of normal young men in totally asexual setting in an era where it was not an issue to be naked in sports/locker rooms (or in the USA even swim naked).
It is very strange that a generation who was tought that a real man is not affraid to undress in locker room would not have transmitted this to their kids in the 1980s leading to a whole generation(s) of towel dancers or people who put on bathing trunks at home and put pants over them so they don't have to undress at the pool.
The program to take such pictures at school may seem controversial for today's "towel dance" generations, but once has to go back to a time where it was not an issue for men to undress un front of other men. And from a posture point of view, seing the angles between back, ass and legs was important and would not be visible if the dude wore boxers or baggy briefs.
@ Anonynous 7th Mar 8:42
You might have done that for that reason. Even though I am a nudist and do not care and would not have *actually* cared I would have (as a teen) stood on religious grounds against Yale about having my picture taken naked. If they did manage convince/coerce me, I would have had a 'fuck you' face on at all times. But that's because I'm an ornery bastard. :)
If my dad who was a worker was sucking in his gut after taking his shirt off, he would be doing that because be showing off and/or thought there was someone nearby worth showing off at. He didn't much care one way or another otherwise, only that there be the least social pretext (beach, the fair, warm weather).
Post a Comment