mental_floss magazine
SUBSCRIBE >
GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS >
DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTIONS >
subscriber services >
I was digging through disorganized piles of old photos in a Portland antique store last week when I happened upon a goldmine of weirdness: amidst fading snapshots of family vacations and weddings were scattered a half-dozen or so photos of twins. At first I couldn’t figure out how they all came to be in the same antique store — but then I found a stamp on the back of one of them:
They were all from a local, long-dead (and apparently twins-obsessed) photographer’s archives, which had found their way, along with thousands of other photos, to several drawers in the back of a dusty consignment shop nearly a century after they were taken. I know next to nothing about the children in these photographs, except that I find them totally haunting and strange, but if anyone recognizes their great-grandmother or something, leave a comment. (You never know!)
Three sets of twins. (The boy in back is clearly an evil twin.)
This one seems ripe for a caption contest. If you come up with any good ones, leave ‘em in the comments.
The proud parents of these babies had the above photo made into a postcard. Their brief note on the back is the only date I have for any of these:
There’s something Diane Arbus-y about these girls.
Identical twins; identical weird haircuts.
The dolls control their minds.
These girls aren’t twins, but they might well be sisters. Note the hyper-creepy, pinheaded Victorian doll in a stroller and completely unnecessary, Edward Gorey-esque umbrella.
Comments (42)
Comment
- Follow mental_floss
Creepy…
posted by Dave on 8-5-2009 at 7:32 am
Well, now I’m going to have nightmares….
posted by Str4y on 8-5-2009 at 8:11 am
Caption entry: “Wait, we’re conjoined where?!”
posted by Arian on 8-5-2009 at 8:32 am
caption for the first photo: I wish I knew how to quit you.
posted by Steven on 8-5-2009 at 9:02 am
Caption: “What?! Sunflowers?! I’m sorry Ms. Geddes, but that’s just plain atrocious!”
posted by Jenny on 8-5-2009 at 9:04 am
In the last picture, the doll has (from “Seinfeld”) “man hands”
posted by Anne on 8-5-2009 at 9:04 am
I’m completely scarred by these pictures! They’re hilarious and frightening!
Arian & Steven – your captions should win something!
Anne – you typed the words right out of my mouth.
posted by Kathi Robinson on 8-5-2009 at 9:38 am
Caption entry…baby pic…”oh my god, is that the new Coolpix 12.0 megapixel digital camera? I’m soooo jealous!!”
posted by Todd Emanuelli on 8-5-2009 at 9:59 am
caption: “What happened in the womb… oh the horror!”
posted by Will on 8-5-2009 at 10:00 am
That (last picture) is the strangest doll I have ever seen!
posted by Hyacinth on 8-5-2009 at 10:03 am
that photo with the three sets of twins, those two girls both look like the evil twin.
posted by Meister Jazz on 8-5-2009 at 10:03 am
I’m fairly certain that 3 of those pictures aren’t of twins.
posted by Jared on 8-5-2009 at 10:12 am
There are great!
posted by Kristine on 8-5-2009 at 10:47 am
HEY! I’m a twin…
and yes we are creepy…I can be talking to you and creeping up behind you to snap your kneck and only half of me will go to jail! :D :o
posted by Dean on 8-5-2009 at 11:03 am
Ever since “The Others” and “Skeleton Key”, old photos have creeped me completely out.
Dean-Thanks for kicking the creepy up a notch…
posted by Alysha on 8-5-2009 at 11:20 am
i think the pictures are neat looking. I particularly like some of the shoes…
posted by Addie on 8-5-2009 at 11:34 am
“Wait, how did we get here?”
posted by Kimberly on 8-5-2009 at 11:35 am
These are a great find. Thanks for sharing! Research-friendly for yet another horror movie involving creepy-looking kids.
posted by Rosemary on 8-5-2009 at 11:41 am
I don’t think they’re creepy, they’re just old. I think the sepia finish and the serious expressions give us the impression they’re ghosts, but that’s what old photos look like. If that picture of the baby twins was in colour, we’d be laughing at it.
posted by Ranger J on 8-5-2009 at 12:17 pm
Oh great, now the blog is haunted. Good going, Riggs.
posted by Chris Higgins on 8-5-2009 at 12:38 pm
Who needs it to be in color? I’m glad I’m alone in the office right now, cuz I definitely laughed. Really loud.
I love old pics. I’m currently working on digitizing and labeling all my family’s old 19th century-present photos while my grandmother is still around to identify everyone. I have one of my great-great grandfather in this little lord fauntleroy suite and it’s fabulous!
posted by Hastings on 8-5-2009 at 12:49 pm
caption: You’re going to stick the thermometer WHERE?
posted by Hastings on 8-5-2009 at 12:53 pm
Baby twins caption: “Hey, I think this big hairy thing we’re on just moved!”
posted by Monica on 8-5-2009 at 12:55 pm
Truly disturbing. I agree about the Edward Gorey-ness of the last picture. Plenty of creepy details: the umbrella, the stroller with stuff tied to it, the uber-creepy doll with the shrunken head…
posted by Cathy on 8-5-2009 at 1:06 pm
Come play with us, Danny.
Forever.
And ever.
And ever…
posted by David on 8-5-2009 at 1:21 pm
“DIRTY DIAPERS BATMAN!”
posted by Jim on 8-5-2009 at 1:37 pm
Nos. 4 and 6 are not twins, the eyes and mouths are quite different. Sisters, though. And sweet really–the girls remind me of Cheaper by the Dozen.
posted by Cathy J on 8-5-2009 at 1:42 pm
Cathy J and Jared–
Just because their eyes/mouths are different doesn’t mean they aren’t twins. It just means that they are Fraternal, not identical.
posted by Bettie on 8-5-2009 at 2:11 pm
To the people saying that some of the pictures aren’t of twins: being “twins” and being “identical” are not the same thing.
posted by Stephanie on 8-5-2009 at 2:21 pm
caption “The horror…the horror…” – from Apocalypse Now
Cuz you know, they’re twins, so you know they think alike.
posted by Jonny on 8-5-2009 at 2:32 pm
In the identical weird haircut photo, the one on the right looks like Seth Rogen.
posted by Kate on 8-5-2009 at 3:17 pm
I agree that 4 and 6 don’t seem to be twins. Since babies were born about once a year in some families, siblings could be very close in age and look very much alike yet not be twins.
Finally, I think the last pic is one of friends. Looks like the three play together and this was just the equivalent of a snapshot.
posted by Kelly on 8-5-2009 at 3:27 pm
“The horror, the horror”… NOT from Apocolypse Now. Just because they cribbed it for the movie doesn’t mean it should get attributed to Brando.
Lit nerd, out.
posted by Audrey on 8-5-2009 at 3:55 pm
Caption on the bundled babies:
“We are going to have to live with these people?”
posted by sevanslaw on 8-5-2009 at 4:56 pm
In the picture of the twins with the huge bows, it looks like the doll on the right is doing a “Heil Hitler” salute. Uber creepy.
posted by girlwhosangtheblues on 8-5-2009 at 5:19 pm
@ David — good film quote! These pictures really do make you think of the creepy twins in The Shining…
posted by Brandy on 8-5-2009 at 7:18 pm
Could have been a lot worse. Twin “memento mori” photos, anyone?
posted by Seanette on 8-5-2009 at 9:42 pm
Hate to be nitpicky, but these aren’t Victorian. One is dated 1917 and the rest look like the ’20s. Victorian era was 19nth century.
posted by blah on 8-6-2009 at 4:13 am
@ Audrey
I never attributed it to Brando, I attributed it the movie, which yes, is based on the novella Heart of Darkness, which as a lit nerd, you neglected to mention.
I attributed it to the movie, because I’ve seen it parodied from the movie, and thus the movie version has made it part of pop culture, making it ripe to reference via caption.
Insomniac out.
posted by Jonny on 8-6-2009 at 5:13 am
Caption: What do you mean due to the economy you’re gonna have to let one of us go?!
posted by Y on 8-8-2009 at 3:27 pm
Creepy x 10. I love it.
Mark
posted by Mark Herpel on 8-20-2009 at 11:03 am
creepy baby caption: Mommy and Daddy are brother and sister?!?!
posted by Amanda on 1-5-2010 at 5:40 pm