. . . and a woman bathes a toddler for 21.96 seconds. I watched this on the Library of Congress web site, sort of wondering what was so special about this 1890s dunking that it would persist into the 21st Century. (America, not known as the most progressive nation on Earth, reputedly did not have indoor bathing facilities for its chief executive at the White House until the reign of Millard Fillmore, which meant Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Adams, Jackson, Van Buren, Harrison, Tyler, Polk, and Taylor all went bath-less--unless they were vacationing in London or Paris.) Unfortunately, neither the Library of Congress nor IMDb identify the bather or the bathed, and therez seemingly nothing remarkable about this episode, unless a little soap gets into the eyes of the little one.
5 Reviews
Quite Dated, But More Harmless Than Most Such Features Of the Time
Snow Leopard23 November 2005
This brief Edison Company feature is quite dated in its portrayal of its characters, but it seems more harmless than most movies of this kind from the era. Although it makes use of racial stereotypes, at the same time it also pokes fun at the way that African-Americans were commonly portrayed in the stage productions of the time, so it's something of a mixed bag when viewed today.
The movie simply shows an African-American woman giving her young child a bath in a large wash basin. Her repeated scrubbing and her displays for the camera were intended to poke fun at the way that stage productions often portrayed African-American characters by using 'white' actors who blackened their faces using burnt cork or similar methods (there was a time when this practice also became common in movies). This feature attempts to make fun of the practice through its reference to how hard it could be to remove the artificial color produced in such a fashion.
If you watch a lot of movies from the 1890s and the first decade of the 1900s, it soon becomes clear that racial stereotypes were used rather freely and with little apology. It often happened that the different studios would even film rival versions of the same idea (this is one such case). It does seem as if the Edison features are usually less harsh than those of some other contemporary studios, but it's possible that this is simply a consequence of their approach rather than any particular degree of enlightenment.
At any rate, features like this, regardless of whatever minimal entertainment value they may have, can be helpful now in enabling us to understand the way that such issues were viewed at the time.
The movie simply shows an African-American woman giving her young child a bath in a large wash basin. Her repeated scrubbing and her displays for the camera were intended to poke fun at the way that stage productions often portrayed African-American characters by using 'white' actors who blackened their faces using burnt cork or similar methods (there was a time when this practice also became common in movies). This feature attempts to make fun of the practice through its reference to how hard it could be to remove the artificial color produced in such a fashion.
If you watch a lot of movies from the 1890s and the first decade of the 1900s, it soon becomes clear that racial stereotypes were used rather freely and with little apology. It often happened that the different studios would even film rival versions of the same idea (this is one such case). It does seem as if the Edison features are usually less harsh than those of some other contemporary studios, but it's possible that this is simply a consequence of their approach rather than any particular degree of enlightenment.
At any rate, features like this, regardless of whatever minimal entertainment value they may have, can be helpful now in enabling us to understand the way that such issues were viewed at the time.
The kid gets clean, you get bored
Horst_In_Translation12 October 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Honestly, the only really entertaining thing about this short film is that it was directed by a man named white. It shows a black woman and her baby as the little one has to take a bath and is obviously not having a great time at all. The foam may have gotten in its eyes and now it's burning and then the woman who's always so gentle to it rubs it hard to get off the dirt. Not a nice time, but what has to be done has to be done. Maybe if she wasn't talking to somebody, not the director, all the time, it wouldn't hurt that much? In any case, there's nothing remotely interesting about this short film and it's not even remotely close to the best short films or documentaries from the end of the 19th century. Quite a waste of time, even at under 30 seconds.
Early Edison
Michael_Elliott30 December 2008
Morning Bath (1896)
*** (out of 4)
This film is certainly dated by today's standards and is somewhat controversial but I find the thing to be fairly harmless. We see a black mother washing her child in a bucket with soap all over him. That's it but some view this as showing black folks in a negative way but I'm not sure why. To me the film is rather innocent and it appears the mother is having fun showing off in front of the camera, although at the same time it's easy to see the baby doesn't appear to like taking baths. I think this film is important for several reasons including the fact that we see actual black people and not white actors in blackface. There aren't too many films like that from this era so that should be kept in mind.
*** (out of 4)
This film is certainly dated by today's standards and is somewhat controversial but I find the thing to be fairly harmless. We see a black mother washing her child in a bucket with soap all over him. That's it but some view this as showing black folks in a negative way but I'm not sure why. To me the film is rather innocent and it appears the mother is having fun showing off in front of the camera, although at the same time it's easy to see the baby doesn't appear to like taking baths. I think this film is important for several reasons including the fact that we see actual black people and not white actors in blackface. There aren't too many films like that from this era so that should be kept in mind.
First Child Pornography in Film?
Tornado_Sam28 December 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Yep, this is most certainly the first use of child pornography in film. I will admit, though, it is rather harmless. We see a tin bath, and a young African mother bathing her child in it. That's really all that's here but you can't expect more because of the time period. Although I'm sure many will object to the "racist" content in here, it's really nothing objectionable; the mother seems to be having a fun time scrubbing away (the baby's a different story, however). It's simply a portrayal of how Africans bathed their children back then so you can't criticize it for that. Other than the child porn in here it's nothing too ground-breaking, but those interested in the early years of filmmaking will enjoy the watch because of the historical background.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
