![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpPlDmY1S6yfAV5gDgT7HSC-83m2eOQJaA0G5WysIKiUmcDwElJcU_yatd2C-qWEbAEKS4p39SY6fQ7VxhdoB7dYa9dVhR_2nqFqY9UJOVwzfyX6hiPoPQFJoOEKd6WxwB5fBywxRswCxx/s320/awkward2.jpg)
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidbPlVq75tUT0J_dDOkKXU09iyYttxPwdwBJY7dR_a1qAEf0xDK6rNoFA6gxJvfv7BEwUheAhAMtHHYY18tem2hCcT_8zcXtgzv9a5G4hAxFp2BKK632jQD5BgSoN9KYNePu_8BnhZr6KY/s320/awkward.jpg)
It's always fun to imagine who the people in those old-timey photos were, what they did for a living, or even what their names were.
I did my best to color this one, since it was sort of grainy before. I found it on awkwardfamilyphotos.com. It is hilarious to think that someone decided "lining up in height order" was remotely classy. But it was a trend of the era -- this was taken in the early 1900's.
So was dressing baby boys like girls -- the baby on the end is actually a boy!
It is interesting to see the graduation of garments -- first a dress, then knickers, then suits, then pant-suits. (And the blonde one in the center looks like a trouble maker with his amused expression.) My guess is that they are all around 3 years apart, starting at 1 and ending at 12.
What I can synthesize is that they were probably very wealthy, because a) they got their picture taken, b) their clothes, and c) their pale skin. (Tan skin was considered a fashion faux pas! You can thank Coco Chanel for popularizing that bronzed, South-of-France look.) And who are they? We'll never know.
But we will know that they once posed very awkwardly for a family portrait.