eye color

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 10:38 am

Many of the descriptions in books and articles on Lizzie mention her having brown eyes, but her pictures look as though they were a very light blue. What were they?

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:42 pm

The police record from Lizzie's arrest states that her eyes were gray.
But there are also newspaper reports that state they were blue, gray, or brown, so....I guess it depends on who you want to believe.

Edisto · Post by **Edisto** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:51 pm

Well, unless Lizzie reappears from wherever she went, I doubt that we'll ever know for sure what color her eyes were. However, the police blotter reflecting her arrest says they were "gray." I posted that on another thread, because I had mistakenly said the blotter described them as "light." The description given by the police is 5' 4" tall, with light complexion, light hair and gray eyes. That's probably the best we're going to get, because it's likely based on somebody's eyeballing her and jotting down what he/she saw. Of course, gray eyes can often have flecks of blue or green or maybe even brown, and that may explain why they were variously described.

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:06 pm

The description of brown seems so weird because the first thing that really hit me the first time I ever saw her photos was way her eyes looked. They seemed so ultra light and eerie, but never brown.

john · Post by **john** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:24 pm

That's very interesting Angel, because her eyes are milky - don't take my word, look at the pictures - as seen on people who are alcoholics or drug addicts. Glad you brought that up.

Liz Crouthers · Post by **Liz Crouthers** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:48 pm

I'm very sure they were light blue, which changes to gray with mood swings.

stuartwsa · Post by **stuartwsa** » Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:32 pm

Victoria Lincoln, everyone's favorite authoress, described them as an "almost colorless ice blue."
Since she did see Lizzie personally, I think we can take her at her word.

Edisto · Post by **Edisto** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:41 pm

i think Victoria Lincoln's memory was beginning to fade by the time she wrote about Lizzie. Didn't she think Lizzie was a near neighbor of the Lincolns, when in fact the houses were pretty distant from each other?
One of my granddaughters has brown eyes, but they're a light brown (almost amber). They look fairly light in pictures. However, I think it's likely that Lizzie's eyes were a rather pale shade of gray/blue. She liked to wear blue, and that possibly made her eyes look more bluish. I certainly wouldn't describe her eyes as "milky." I'm looking at the picture on my mousepad, and they look clear as a bell.

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:49 pm

Right. They're not milky at all, but very clear, looking almost colorless. That's what makes her pictures look so spooky.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:47 pm

Is that what most of these photos of her (attributed as her) have in common, then? These light blue eyes?
If so, it seems possible those are of her. Which photo is suspect exactly?
I know this is another topic but I think it's an eye question overall.

stuartwsa · Post by **stuartwsa** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:29 pm

I would think that anyone that looked into those eyes would not forget them--or their color--very soon.
I always loved the comments in Agnes deMille's book:
"'She was known in town for her 'peculiar look.' Eva Kelly Betz said, 'I saw Lizzie a few times when I was young. She had dreadful eyes, colorless and soul-less like those if a snake.' Another neighbor unkindly remarked she was certain the lids came up from the bottom. She was given to staring; old women still remember how frightened they were as children, even though at first ignorant of her identity, whenever that face appeared with its peculiar unexplained look staring outside windows of stores or stations. It was her eyes, they said, the emptiness in her eyes. But for her eyes, her face would have been mild, even comely."

Haulover · Post by **Haulover** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:51 pm

victoria lincoln says they had been called "dead eyes" but she remembers them as bright as washed pebbles (or to that effect). there was a definite consensus that there was something "peculiar" about them. they were blue or grey/blue. nance o'neil had something to say about them, but tina is the authority on that.

Edisto · Post by **Edisto** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:09 pm

I looked at the thumbnails in the "Lizzie" photo gallery again. The first one is of a very young and somewhat "unfinished" looking Lizzie, if indeed it is she. The second and third images are the ones in which she's wearing the same orb-and-arrow earrings. (There's more than one copy of some of these, but I'm speaking of separate images.) If one of those is Lizzie, then both probably are. The fourth image is probably the one that gives me the most trouble. It's the one in which Lizzie is wearing a light-colored blouse that looks wrinkled. (Hoffman used it on the cover of "Yesterday in Old Fall River.") The person in that picture seems to me to have a more oval face and less-prominent cheekbones than some of the other Lizzie photos. That outfit looks different from her usual clothing, too. Generally she's photographed wearing something dark, sometimes with a touch of white at the throat. One problem is that we don't know when most of these pictures were taken nor exactly how old Lizzie was supposed to be at the time. I use the "pansy" picture as my baseline, because it's the surest bet to be Lizzie, and for sure it was taken before the murders. Few of the other pictures resemble that one very much. Lizzie's mouth looks wider in that one, and her jaw is squarer. She has that somewhat androgynous look that the newspapers hinted at.

Someone mentioned the redoubtable Florence Brigham as an authority on Lizzie's eyecolor and someone who had seen her in the flesh. But Lizzie Borden would have been a contemporary of my great-grandparents, and Mrs. Brigham was a contemporary of my mother. Lizzie and Mrs. Brigham were far removed in age, and as I understand it, Mrs. Brigham didn't know Lizzie until late in Lizzie's life. It was her mother-in-law who was Lizzie's friend. So, even though Mrs. Brigham might have been the best witness we could find, she still might have left something to be desired in that department.

I'd just like to see some kind of scientific study done of the pictures to see whether any can definitely be ruled out. Having some of Fall River's older residents eyeball them doesn't constitute a scientific study, at least IMHO.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:08 am

I think the lady curator before Mrs. Brigham was the one alluded to. Mrs. Gifford?

Here is the page of "Lizzies" from Pearson, Notable Trials Library, 1989.
Stef had correspondence with our William to find out from him if his original Pearson had the same page of photos and it did. I believe the same dates were included. It was my understanding at the time Stef was questioning this, that this was a true facsimile of the original.

I'm not saying these are Lizzie, but this might get you back as far as what was believed in 1937.

Sally · Post by **Sally** » Thu Jul 07, 2005 7:26 pm

I am pretty sure I recall reading that Lizzie was a redhead. As the mother of a son with copper colored red hair, I can tell you that he has eyes that are extremely icy blue. I have seen redheads with eyes of all colors, but it seems the predominant color is an icy blue, which can give the impression of an "empty" look. Lizzie may have had the typical "redhead" coloring, with pale eyes and milky white skin.

stuartwsa · Post by **stuartwsa** » Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:57 pm

Edisto, I have always found the photo that you mention of Lizzie in the white lace blouse to be my favorite. It is Lizzie at her most accessible. I'm quite sure it is indeed her. I think that she lucked out by finding an extremely skilled photographer, who caught her at just the right angle. The lighting is such that it brings warmth to her eyes, and her hair looks clean and not overly dressed.
I would love to see the original of this photo. But whenever I've seen it published, it always seems to be a copy of a copy.

Haulover · Post by **Haulover** » Thu Jul 07, 2005 9:23 pm

stuart:

yes, that photo is flattering to her.

i don't guess anyone questions the authenticity of the one of her behind the chair? if you compare that face to the one that stefani uses here on the home page -- they have the same eyes.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Thu Jul 07, 2005 9:38 pm

Has anyone seen the imagine Scoundrel uses of Lizzie? She has morphed Lizzie into some semi-provocative pose and it looks just terrible. Tasteless. No surprise.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Thu Jul 07, 2005 11:40 pm

THAT picture looks like Scoundrel trashed some Patsy Cline (God rest her soul) album cover and trashed a picture of our Lizzie (God rest her soul too)...then trashed them both once more putting them together. It's a disgrace to both Patsy and Lizzie.

Tracy...

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Fri Jul 08, 2005 6:16 pm

i think Lizzie's eyes are what keeps me so interested in this case. "the eyes are the window to
the soul" and i believe that yet what i see in Lizzies
eyes from the pix are Empty AND Compassion. Both. Quite a complex lady, where's Dr. Phil?

Elizabeth Ann · Post by **Elizabeth Ann** » Fri Jul 08, 2005 6:46 pm

I haven't had a chance to post and read much here over the last few months but in catching up on reading this is the one subject that particularly caught my attention. I too am one that thinks eyes tell great stories. I pulled the photos above into my photo editor to look at them enlarged. I agree there is complexity there. At first they appeared empty to me and then as I looked at them more closely they did seem to have a depth to them, but I am not sure if it is compassion or contemplation or perhaps calculating a plan??

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Fri Jul 08, 2005 8:46 pm

I think Lizzie was a sad person. To me her eyes reflect all of her unhappiness.

When I think of Lizzie I get the feeling she never felt she belonged. She felt left out, left behind and always on the outside. She seemed desperate to please people in order to gain acceptance-- Yet may have hated what she saw as what stood between her and being happy...

Her eyes seem to have a haunted look to me.

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Sat Jul 09, 2005 7:06 pm

Yes, no sparkle, no joy. Too bad there are no pix
from later years, she did have connections in Washington and Boston, just no pictures of her. She must have had happy moments but just weren't
caught on camera.
My daughter in law has posted more than 300 pix
of baby Nya on Snapfish, only 5 months old, I don't
even have one picture of my son from that age.
Times with the camera were sure a lot different in
Lizzie's day. HI Elizabeth Ann!

twinsrwe · Post by **twinsrwe** » Sun Jul 10, 2005 10:17 am

Lizzie's eyes have always intrigued me. I see her eyes as being cold and unforgiving - yet warm and forgiving. She appears to be a person you don't ever want to cross; I think she could be just as nasty as she could be nice. Her eyes are mysteriously haunting; she seems to have been a very complex woman.

I also see a great deal of sadness reflected not only in her eyes, but her entire face; she has no laugh lines, even though it appears she has a slight smile on her face. Her photos show a great deal more sadness in her face, than happiness.

Edisto · Post by **Edisto** » Sun Jul 10, 2005 1:49 pm

It's interesting all the different emotions we see in Lizzie's photographs. Everyone seems to have a slightly different view. That's why I think it would be a good thing to have someone validate the photos in a truly scientific way. I'm not sure how that's done these days. I can imagine that computer imaging could be used to turn the pictures so that they all faced the same way and were the same size. Then measurements could be taken of the distance between features, and perhaps negatives could be made and laid over each other to be sure they matched. Mind you, I know little about how such things are done. I did recently see someone using the "overlay" method on a TV show to determine whether two images were of the same person. I also know there's facial-recognition software that can be used to identify airline passengers (for example) without fingerprints or an ID card.

Using computers, very realistic images can be created. Imagine that we could eventually have new movies starring people who died decades ago. We could have a "Casablanca" sequel starring Ingrid Bergman and Humphrey Bogart, God forbid! And with computer aid, someone could probably bring Lizzie to life, even with the technology we have now.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:34 pm

Oh you know- I love 3-D movies! How about a Lizzie 3-D movie, starring Lizzie!? Hey Keim!!

I've been noticing too in these old photos (I think because of the Civil War stuff on TV lately) that people posed and did not smile back then. It's my understanding that was due to a few things: Like a somber society which said 'Sure get your portriat taken but don't have fun doing it." And because not everyone's teeth were any good, plus they didn't just automatically smile- they didn't feel like they needed to look happy- they wanted to look like themselves.

So analyzing those photos we need to put them into context. Personally I think it's possible that Lizzie practiced the face she wanted to use before she had her portrait done. And in those days she may have wanted to look like a poet, gazing off into the ether, or another time she may have wished to show some of her ripening beauty, or another time show something else. She had those photos taken for a reason.
If we figure out the dates, and have an inkling as to what going on with her life at the time, that might be reflected in how Lizzie had her portrait done.
Or it might just be the photographer told her to "look" a certain way.

Do we know, in the history of photography, about when people first really started grinning at the camera proving what a good time they were having?

Fargo · Post by **Fargo** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:33 am

Has anyone considered the possibility that Lizzie wore different coloured contact lenses, thus explaining the conflicting reports about her eye colour.

I don't think Lizzie's eyes make her look empty, they make her look intriguing, anything but empty.

Fargo · Post by **Fargo** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:35 am

I have thought the same thing about the picture of lizzie in the white blouse. If you compare it with the picture of lizzie with the earings and a slight smile on her face they look different. The hairstyle is different along with the difference in lighting I guess that could explain it.

Fargo · Post by **Fargo** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:36 am

john · Post by **john** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:37 am

I think, after meeting many thousands of people as a salesman, that I can say most of them are usually just somber. It's the unusual person who says hi and smiles.

twinsrwe · Post by **twinsrwe** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:58 am

Kat - I too have heard that the people in old photos did not smile, and it's true; I have yet to see an old photo where the person is wearing a smile.

Lizzie's overall appearance is of sadness; melancholy. Her eyes have the look of an old soul; someone who has gone through a great deal in life at a young age.

Fargo - Were contact lenses available back in 1892-93?

john · Post by **john** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 9:03 am

I think that was a joke.

john · Post by **john** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 9:20 am

Free iced tea, a trip to Hawaii for three, and a duckboat at the "Could All The World Have Known This Was Coming Down" site, plus you can have your picture taken with "Toonces," The Cat Who Could Drive.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:38 pm

Posters might start getting annoyed at your endng every topic like this.
We take things seriously, tho can be light-hearted about things as well.

john · Post by **john** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:47 pm

Well, Edisto just won a duckboat and whatserface got a stainless steel blender so you tell me!
OKnomore.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 9:11 pm

Kat - I too have heard that the people in old photos did not smile, and it's true; I have yet to see an old photo where the person is wearing a smile.

While slightly off topic, I thought this was interesting along the lines of this thread. My future in-laws and I had our pictures taken by one of those old timey photography places, the ones where you can dress in psuedo Victorian garb and the photo is done in sepia tone. The clothes, though they looked pretty elaborate were like aprons, they covered up your front and were all open in the back like a hospital gown and closed with ties. We took two pictures, in one we are all smiling and the other was at the insistance of the photographer, no smiles. The no smiling pic looks like the real deal, its eerie, we all look like people from the 1800s, nothing modern about us!

I did ask the photographer if he happened to have any hatchets in his store of props, the closest he could come up with was a tomahawk. I opted for a fringed parasol and a six shooter. We look like some wild west gang of cattle rustlers, wish I had a scanner to share it with you all.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:21 pm

Someone told me once they didn't smile as it make the photos blurry... I do not know if this is true though.

Fargo · Post by **Fargo** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:29 am

Someone mentioned before on the forum that people had to stay still because of the time that it took to take the picture. I guess it would be easier to keep a blank look on your face than it would be to hold the same smile for that long. Compare

and

Sally · Post by **Sally** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 10:31 am

Yes, the reason no one in old photos smiled was because of the time it took to take the image. Usually up to two minutes. Everyone had to stay perfectly still or the image would be blurred. On occasion I have seen an old photo where someone was smiling, but for the most part it would be extremely difficult to hold a smile for the length of time it took to take the image. Having a photo taken was time consuming and a very special occasion. I would think that having to sit or stand for a length of time, perfectly still, would account for the serious and sometimes vacant expressions on the faces in old photos.

Edisto · Post by **Edisto** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:02 pm

Actually, Lizzie does have a kind of half-smile in that second photo in which she's wearing the earrings. Supposedly that was taken when she was about 19 or 20, according to the LBQ article. At that age, I wonder what kind of sadness she had endured, other than having lost her mother at a young age (something she didn't even remember).

Several of her photos certainly have pleasant expressions, if not a smile exactly. The one of her as a middle-aged woman (or older) is pleasant enough, for example.

If that photo of Lizzie in the white blouse is indeed Lizzie, I vote for it to be her mug shot, because she looks somewhat frazzled and ill-groomed, as if she hadn't expected to be photographed. However, her expression is pleasant enough.

Somewhere I read that Lizzie had some visible gold fillings in her teeth. I'm sure it was in one of the "novelized" versions of her story, such as Lincoln's. She may have literally had a "dazzling" smile.

stuartwsa · Post by **stuartwsa** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 9:41 pm

The gold in Lizzie's teeth reference is courtesy of Agnes deMille:
"She had a good deal of dental work done and there was a gleam of gold when she smiled. She opened her mouth wide when she laughed, and her laugh was memorable--unexpected, mirthless, and very loud."

mrsmig · Post by **mrsmig** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:51 pm

My brother and I are both blue-eyed, and some years ago we had an authentic daguerrotype (or it might have been a collodian process photo - at any rate, it wasn't one of those sepia-toned instant photos) taken of us at the Smithsonian. The photographer recommended that we not smile as the exposure took about a minute, and he also warned us that because we had light-colored eyes, the process would make our eyes look "weird." I asked what he meant by weird and he said "sort of ghosty."

When we picked up the photo later, I could see exactly what he meant. My brother's eyes looked cold and dead, and my eyes looked positively eerie.

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 5:42 pm

that is interesting Msmig, welcome. when I had my
pix taken at the DMV the picture taker actually said
"lets do it again" my eyes were half closed, he said
"you look a lot better than this" so he took another
photo that was just as dreadful. I wonder how much we can trust the only photos we know of Lizzie?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 1:49 pm

Thanks Stuart! I was wondering about that!
I've only read the first 1/2 of de Mille- a few times- and it's sitting right next to me- but I don't think I would have looked there!

stuartwsa · Post by **stuartwsa** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 8:06 pm

I must confess also, that while I have read and enjoyed the first half of deMille's book several times myself, I've never read the second half.

While I enjoy the ballet, and I am enthralled by the Borden case, I'm not particularly interested in reading about the combination of the two. I would enjoy seeing a performance of "Fall River Legend," but I don't think that it is performed much.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:20 pm

Anybody here read the whole thing, raise you hand?!

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:35 am

After looking at Lizzie's pictures again it seems to me that not only are her eyes so pale and dead looking, but it looks (to me, anyway) that one eye looks completely different than the other, like one eye is slightly off from the other. Does anyone else see that? It's not much, but it's just enough to make her look like she isn't focusing right.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 6:03 pm

Is that an astigmatism?(sp?)
She did end up with glasses later.

pigeonsandpears · Post by **pigeonsandpears** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 6:16 pm

I know what you are talking about Angel. When I was making the Lizzie photo I posted last night I had trouble making the right eye match up with the left. Maybe it was just my lack of skills, but I had a terrible time with that right eye. Could have been the angle too I guess.

Little Lizzie · Post by **Little Lizzie** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 6:21 pm

Kat @ Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:03 pm wrote:Is that an astigmatism?(sp?)
She did end up with glasses later.

Well perhaps your right