Why I Like Old Magazines
Jan. 21st, 2006 03:52 pmThe antique store around the corner from us is closing down. I went there to browse yesterday. They didn't have a whole lot I was particularly interested in, but their stock of old magazines was 50% off, so I could get three for 50 cents. I picked out LIFE from May 19, 1972; Better Homes and Gardens from August 1963; and Ladies' Home Journal from January 1966.
I find old women's magazines (1960s and earlier) to be particularly fascinating. While on the hunt for a lost family recipe this December, I determined that although it's easy to find current issues of Family Circle at local libraries, it's remarkably difficult to find issues from before 1980; they just don't get kept. Too bad. (The Minneapolis Public Library had what I needed, but it's in offsite storage until the new Central Library opens up. The U of M didn't have it, though I never called the College of Human Ecology to see if someone there might share my fascination with the Social History of Home Economists.)
Anyway, Ladies' Home Journal had one ad that was such a lovely example of what I find fascinating and hilarious about old magazines, I had to scan it in and share. (Below the cut. Totally and completely work-safe -- this came out of a 1960s magazine for housewives.)

That's right, moms! SUGAR IS GOOD FOR YOUR KIDS! YOU ARE A BAD, BAD MOTHER IF YOU DEPRIVE YOUR CHILDREN OF THIS IRREPLACEABLE NUTRIENT!
I actually strongly agree that Little Betty doesn't need any saccharine (or Nutra-Sweet or Splenda, for that matter) in her diet, either, but that hardly makes sugar the healthy alternative...
Edited to add: I am a novice at uploading graphics, and expected it to default to a larger size. If you click on it, you'll be able to see it more clearly. The small text under "Sugar sweetens dispositions" says, "...18 calories per teaspoon -- and it's all energy." The box says:
Note to Mothers:
Exhaustion may be dangerous -- especially to children who haven't learned to avoid it by pacing themselves. Exhaustion opens the door a little wider to the bugs and ailments that are always lying in wait. Sugar puts back energy fast -- offsets exhaustion. Synthetic sweeteners put back nothing. Energy is the first requirement of life. Play safe with your young ones -- make sure they get sugar every day.
I find old women's magazines (1960s and earlier) to be particularly fascinating. While on the hunt for a lost family recipe this December, I determined that although it's easy to find current issues of Family Circle at local libraries, it's remarkably difficult to find issues from before 1980; they just don't get kept. Too bad. (The Minneapolis Public Library had what I needed, but it's in offsite storage until the new Central Library opens up. The U of M didn't have it, though I never called the College of Human Ecology to see if someone there might share my fascination with the Social History of Home Economists.)
Anyway, Ladies' Home Journal had one ad that was such a lovely example of what I find fascinating and hilarious about old magazines, I had to scan it in and share. (Below the cut. Totally and completely work-safe -- this came out of a 1960s magazine for housewives.)
That's right, moms! SUGAR IS GOOD FOR YOUR KIDS! YOU ARE A BAD, BAD MOTHER IF YOU DEPRIVE YOUR CHILDREN OF THIS IRREPLACEABLE NUTRIENT!
I actually strongly agree that Little Betty doesn't need any saccharine (or Nutra-Sweet or Splenda, for that matter) in her diet, either, but that hardly makes sugar the healthy alternative...
Edited to add: I am a novice at uploading graphics, and expected it to default to a larger size. If you click on it, you'll be able to see it more clearly. The small text under "Sugar sweetens dispositions" says, "...18 calories per teaspoon -- and it's all energy." The box says:
Note to Mothers:
Exhaustion may be dangerous -- especially to children who haven't learned to avoid it by pacing themselves. Exhaustion opens the door a little wider to the bugs and ailments that are always lying in wait. Sugar puts back energy fast -- offsets exhaustion. Synthetic sweeteners put back nothing. Energy is the first requirement of life. Play safe with your young ones -- make sure they get sugar every day.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-21 10:41 pm (UTC)I find that the hardest thing is to find foods that haven't been adulterated with corn syrup. I mean, when I cook from scratch, there's no issue, but when I need to rely on the quickie lunch, it's really difficult. I end up buying a lot of Annie's versions of Spaghetti-Os and so on.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-21 10:48 pm (UTC)Good thing he is a fabulous cook.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-22 01:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-22 01:38 am (UTC)And voila. Help yourself if you want it. This just screams "funny-patronizing way to tell a snarky person to shut up." And that's always handy.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-22 02:18 am (UTC)Which shop is closing? I might want to look, if they aren't closed yet.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-22 03:21 am (UTC)And check out this job posting -- they previously posted (in a different city, I can't remember which) for researchers to look for unusually prescient (or incredibly clueless) early coverage of events that were later determined to be extremely important. (For example, a news article that speculated about the possibility of GRID being a blood-borne pathogen that could spread via blood donation and become a major problem for hemophiliacs.) Does that not sound like the coolest job ever? I would LOVE to do that. (And yeah, I applied, though I think she wants Journalism professors and professional historians. *sigh*.)
no subject
Date: 2006-01-22 03:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-22 06:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-22 06:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-22 08:42 pm (UTC)I spent some fun time googling images with the search term "housewife" last night. ;-)
Sandy
http://imponderabilia.blogspot.com/
no subject
Date: 2006-01-26 10:05 pm (UTC)Heels
http://www.mundanesuperhero.com