About
This site is a little project that lets me make fun of some things and sense of others. I use it to think a little more relationally without resorting to doing actual math.Subscribe
This site is a little project that lets me make fun of some things and sense of others. I use it to think a little more relationally without resorting to doing actual math.
I guess my parents are the exception to the rule. Still, it’s true,
Well, there’s another factor in this: The advent of (much cheaper) digital imaging.
I assume most of us were babies long before that, though.
Digital imaging didn’t seem to affect my little brother’s (currently 10) lack of pictures.
exactly! there are so many pictures of me and only so few of my youngest sister!
I got lucky; my parents weren’t crazy with memory keeping
I do know that, under most circumstances, you’re right, but it really depends on how close your kids are together. Only a year apart=not as many baby pictures, ten years apart apiece=lots and lots, no matter how many you have.
Not necessarily true – there are four kids in my family, all just over three years apart to make a difference of 10 years between the oldest (me) and the youngest (my little brother). There are about 5 photo albums full of pictures of me from 0-3 years old, and my little brother has about… half an album ^.~
I experienced this effect to an extreme, I think, as I was the first grandchild on both sides in addition to the firstborn of my parents.
My 3 older siblings have beautiful baby books. Me? Nothing. That’s why they teased me by saying I was adopted!
My parents had made this large mural of the family made out of cut out photographs. (or at least the first 5 kids, nearly a dozen came later) The proportions were roughly the oldest had half, the next had a quarter, the next had an 1/8, etc.
I pointed it out to my dad, and his reasoning was this: “When you have your first child, all the pictures are of him. Then the next child comes, and you take a picture of the new baby, but you keep taking pictures of the oldest. Then the next child comes and you take pictures of the baby and then pictures of the previous two.” The rate of photos do probably diminish along the way, but as long as they’re taking family pictures there is no way the younger ones can catch up.
Here’s christmas when you where 4, and here on the next page, is christmas when you were 5…
The oldest also gets to type “First!”
Oh this is so true. I was always intensely jealous of my older brother whose baby book was full whereas mine had 15 depressingly blank pages at the back. I’ve now made sure that both my own kids don’t experience the same sort of dismay and dissapintment – but as our camera went into hybernation soon after the birth of my daughter we don’t so much have baby books as baby leaflets.
My own illustrative take on parenthood can be found at The Occasional Dad-O-Graphic: http://dadographic.blogspot.com/
so please do pay me a visit.
LOL. So true! And it only took two kids for me to prove this: on #2′s first birthday, I only took 2 pictures, and one of them is of his bib brother eating his cake!
One of my former co-workers and his wife re-labeled some of their first child’s pictures so the second child wouldn’t realize just how few photos they had actually taken of him.
I have 3 kids and one on the way, all in 4 years. We actually had people on facebook confused when we said we were pregnant with the 4th because they had never seen pics of number 3. Sad but true.
Spoken from a firstborn, this is true!