Do we ever admit how poor our ancestors were?

[digitS']

I keep coming back to that picture that I only saw a day or 2 ago and thinking that Sylvia looks like my brother. Isn't that funny?

Altho' he is nearly the age that Sylvia was when she wrote that letter I can remember him when he was 18. I'm not sure that either one of them would appreciate the comparison.

My parents were from poor families. Mom's father showed up and swept Sylvia's daughter off her feet and spirited her away. The world was their oyster for awhile but Mom said that she didn't really know when the Depression began. It was always depressed at her house . They were some of the thousands of people who had left the farm but simple survival required that they had to go back.

Dad's parents were farmers who raised cash crops. Perhaps unfortunately, he decided to leave their place in New Mexico for the land of opportunity - California. After awhile, I think he may have decided to join the military to keep from starving! By the time he was to be discharged -- somebody had started a war! When he finally got home to the states, he seemed to be only interested in getting back to the farm .

Steve

 

[Southern Gardener]

My mom's family from central Louisiana were "dirt poor" as she always says. She was born in a small house with a dirt floor no electricity or running water. Eventually my grandfather had two old houses "put together" and fixed it up, although, the indoor plumbing and electricity didn't come until she was in high school. She and her brothers and sisters also picked cotton. My grandfather farmed a patch of land and my grandmother and great grandmother were excellent seamstress. They made clothes for the "rich folks". I still have the booklet that my grandmother used to take notes and measurements for their clients. They were well respected in the community.

Through hard times and hard work they put both of their sons through college. To this day, my mom says "those were the good old days - we had very little, but we had food, shelter, family and friends" The very best days of my childhood were at my grandparents; listening to their stories in French, pig roasts, fishing in the pond and running wild with my brothers, sisters and cousins.

 

[Ridgerunner]

food, shelter, family and friends

I guess this is sort of why I have some problems with the theme of this thread. To me, poor is in the eye of the beholder. Some people are going to be happy with good memories no matter what. Some people are going to be miserable no matter what their living conditions.

We got running water in the house about a week after I graduated from high school and left to work to help pay for college. We did not have any spare money but we had food, shelter, family and friends. Every year before school started we went to town and I got three shirts, three pair of jeans, one new pair of school shoes, and socks and underwear as needed. If I'd outgrown my coat, I got a new one that was bought a bit oversized. I can remember eating pinto beans, cornbread, raw milk we milked from our cow, and a bite of raw onion for supper seven nights a week. When the garden was producing we'd have more. Lunch was our dinner. When we did not eat it at school, lunch time was when we had meat (usually chicken or pork we raised ourselves) and different vegetables, or maybe just a peanut butter and jelly sandwich with a glass of milk in the summer when it was not Sunday dinner. No French fries and no potato chips.

What's this about our ancestors being poor? We were poor when I was growing up! In many ways, I was not brought up that differently than many of my ancestors. We did have electricity thanks to TVA, but until I was 13 we had no TV. Actually, back in the 1700's, some of my ancestors were pretty rich. 8 or 9 generations back one of my ancestors was appointed by the governor to serve in the Virginia House of Burgesses. The people picked for that were pretty much assured to be rich landowners. In the 1800's and 1900's, some of my ancestors were certainly not rich at all.

My parents worked hard. We kids worked hard. That did not make me miserable. That did not make me feel deprived. That made me who I am.

I went to the army. A low draft number will help you make certain decisions. I went through college and graduated not owing anyone a penny and my parents were not who paid for my education. I've lived and worked overseas in affluent Western Europe and in some really primitive places in African and Asia. I find those people living dirt poor in those primitive places are generally as happy as people living in luxury. Life is harder and they want the same things for their kids that the more affluent want but that has nothing to do with being happy unless you want it to.

Some of our ancestors had a hard time. Some did not. Infant mortality and medical care in general were not real good and affected rich and poor, poor probably more than the rich.

I think it is great to look back at our ancestors and see what went on. There are some great stories there. But whether you are talking 17th century or 21st century, some people were rich, some were poor. Some had or are now having a hard life, some had it easier. Some were happy, some were not content. Whenever, people are people.

Steve, I'm sure this is not where you wanted to go with this thread. Reminiscing about our ancestors is great, but don't project more misery on them that they probably felt. Rich or poor everybody had to look at infant mortality and medical issues. They did not know what we know today and yes, I'm sure that hurt a whole lot when it happened to them. To this day, life still hurts for a lot of people. My mother has had to bury two of her kids, my siblings. No parent should have to bury any of their kids, but it still happens.

 

[digitS']

Do you see how informative this conversation can be for folks who did not have any such experiences, growing food and milking cows, Ridgerunner? Our lives today are so filled with "things." I live in a house that is 111 years old. It may originally have had only 2 rooms, the kitchen is newer than the 2 rooms in front. I haven't quite figured that out but it may just have been that the kitchen burned &/or was completely removed & replaced. After a few decades, houses like this one were often replaced entirely and are long gone. With an average new home in the US having well in excess of 2,000 square feet, it is pretty amazing what simple residences some folks had 100 years ago.

. . . Eventually my grandfather had two old houses "put together" and fixed it up. . .

This may not be what you mean, Joan, but the way you wrote that made me think of "dogtrot houses" which were so common in the very early part of American history.

Dogtrots had an open area in the center of the residence - a dog could trot right thru . The home was essentially 2 buildings joined by a common roof. Some didn't have a common floor. And, the "buildings" might just be single rooms with dirt floors.

I doubt that this house had a separate building to serve as a kitchen 100 years ago but the separate kitchen was very common, 200 years ago. I would bet that there were more people living in simple cabins and dogtrot houses at that time than lived in any other type of home.

The Industrial Revolution brought us the opportunity to meet the essential needs of life and provide a little extra. Boy did we come up with ideas for extras! Ridgerunner and others make the case for how quality of life need not be tied to the extras. There are ways for lives to be full and meaningful without them.

Steve

 

[so lucky]

Lots of people who think they are poor today still get the essentials. Lots of people think they are poor because they can't afford an i-phone, a new laptop, designer clothes, big flat screen TV. These are all things that were not in our wildest dreams 50 years ago. I just feel our priorities have gotten a little skewed. I like to say that it is TV's fault. If I didn't see the ad for the designer clothes, I wouldn't think I need them.
I was in Hobby Lobby the other day, and noticed again that everything--every single item in the store is made in China. Do we need this stuff? No. Do we buy it? You bet! I will not express my opinion about this here.
I am enjoying the reminiscing and tales of our ancestors.
My favorite short tale is that when my parents married in 1945, they had no money. That first Christmas, the only gift was a bag of lemon drops, from Dad to Mom. I think they still had a great Christmas, with Dad home from the war only 2 months before.

 

[Southern Gardener]

To me, poor is in the eye of the beholder. Some people are going to be happy with good memories no matter what. Some people are going to be miserable no matter what their living conditions.

I totally agree.

 

[Southern Gardener]

Steve - although not a dogtrot, my grandparents house were actually two small houses on pier and beam - they knocked out the walls to make them one. I loved that old house - when it was torn down, I got a solid wood door, old door pulls and windows - these are now on my potting shed

 

[peteyfoozer]

Stopping short of my ancestors, my own experience of rich/poor has meant a lot to me. Born into a wealthy family (grandfather had a multi million$ business) youngest of 5 kids, each of us with our own room, own tv, own stereo, cars and skis for Christmas presents...now grown and practically strangers. The family lost it's fortunes when I was still young.
I was on my own at 16 due to the earthshattering change in family dynamics over money.

I was married at 18. We lived in a 100 yr old house on a ranch outside of a small town. I couldn't run the toaster and a radio at the same time without blowing a fuse, the house was cold and drafty and the toilet bowl froze solid on winter nights. But I had both my kids there and we went hunting and fishing and life was good and uncomplicated.

Eventually we built a big house, we ran two businesses and all that it entails. We were stressed. We had to make a change.
Today, we are ranch hands on a large cow/calf operation. Work is 24/7, but the boss allows me to have my chickens, my milk cow and raise our own sheep.
Being 230 miles from town, prepackaged food is not really an option. We shop every 3 months for the most basic ingredients and the rest we make ourselves, everything from baking all our own bread, to making vinegar, butter, cheese and all dairy products. We do buy meatie chickens every year to add to the beef and lamb in the freezers. We live in a teeny tiny drafty house, but there is a 250,000 acre 'back yard'.

The TV's, stereos and swimming pool never made me feel happy. You are so right, Steve, about the 'things'.
Our life is a lot of hard work, but it's satisfying. To me, that is what wealthy really is. I think, with the exception of lack of medical knowledge causing the infant mortality rates and lots of early death or suffering in old age, our ancestors had an advantage over most of us...I would be loath, however, to give up flush potties and internet!

 

[so lucky]

peteyfoozer, your present life sounds wonderful to me!

 

[digitS']

That's one thing that has definitely changed from last century...infant/child mortality. Personally, I think much of it had to do with the mother's resources just being depleted, giving rise to babies who were more susceptible to lots of things going around. . . .

I have been thinking about how loss of babies during the 19th century may relate to diet. Mickey brings up a very interesting point: the nutrition of the mothers. Here is a little something from the agricultural statisticians of the mid-20th century:

"The consumption of tomatoes and citrus fruit, important sources of ascorbic acid, increased gradually since 1909, but in the past 10 years the rise has been spectacular. In 1945 the average civilian consumed 116 pounds, compared to about 45 pounds in 1909. . . . Leafy, green, and yellow vegetables form another group that has gained importance in our national diet. From 1909 to 1913, annual consumption averaged about 74 pounds a person. Twenty years later it had increased to about 90 pounds. From 1941 to 1945 we had 121 pounds for each person, or nearly 65 percent more than the consumption from 1909 to 1913." Yearbook of Agriculture 1943-1947 (link)

Wow! From 45#/person to 116#/person and from 74#/person to 121#/person! Taken together: 237 - 119 = 118. Okay, if that was representative of all fruits and vegetables it would be a 100% increase in consumption!

Historian and anthropologists note the heavily weighted importance of meat and cereal grains in the diets of Americans 100 and 200 years ago. This looks like fairly strong confirmation of that.

Burt Wolf had a fun PBS show on a changing American diet. Here is something online about that, what Burt called "How Italians Saved American Cooking!" That part is about one-half way thru this 5 page pdf file (link).

Steve