NOT-LOLAS IN PHOTOGRAPHY .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Victorian images of brunettes either looking Spanish, dressed
in a riding habit or simply in black have been widely represented
optimistically --or deceptively-- as depicting the famous Countess.

After all, a celebrity photo is worth much, much more than yet another
"Unknown Woman", and will lend luster to an institution's collection.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The photo we see here is absolutely not of Lola Montez, but was identified
before her real appearance was well known. This woman's features do not
remotely resemble Lola's, and while Lola was famous for her blue eyes,
these are quite dark. Lola's hair was wavy; this is straight hair crimped
with an iron, worn at a length and in a style never employed by Lola. But
she's certainly a brunette, and wears what might be a Spanish shawl--
Thus a new Lola was born.
This excellent ambrotype is held by the Bancroft Library at UC Berkeley,
where for many years it was considered an authentic portrait of Lola.
After careful consideration, it is no longer officially recognized as such.
However, having been widely published, along with quite a number of
other false Lolas, it will no doubt be with us for some time to come.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It is regrettable that Lola didn't have the benefit of as skilled and careful an
artist with the camera as Antoine Samuel Adam-Salomon. This magnificent
portrait of alas! another unknown woman is one of his finest compositions;
Lola's other photographers are merely competent in comparison.

This elegant lady bears no facial resemblance to the Countess, and the
picture dates from the 1860s, well after Lola's death. But she wears black,
and an arrogant air-- and holds a riding crop. Thus a new Lola was born.

By substituting Lola's face for that of the original subject and
comparing the two, the difference in features is undeniable.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Harvard Theater Collection at one time featured this image as Lola,
but eventually disallowed it --quite emphatically-- with a decisive 'X'.
Possibly the swagger stick held by Ms. Unknown had been interpreted
as a riding crop. Aside from the lack of any resemblance whatsoever,
the hairstyle alone would date it as from no earlier than the late 1860s.
But another new Lola was born.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

How this sad-looking creature came to be identified as Lola is a mystery.
She looks more like the woman above-- but her photo was supplied to a
trusting public by the Bettman Archive for some decades. Here again, the
hairstyle seen did not come into existence until years after Lola's death.
Nonetheless, a new Lola was born.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

LATTER-DAY 'LOLAS'

"Lola (sometimes Lolla) Montes" was the stage name of an entertainer
popular in Paris during the early 1900s and 1910s. She appears on
numerous postcards of the time, and was more flatteringly depicted
than the original Lola. She certainly used a good deal more makeup!

A number of latter-day performers traded on the recognition value
of being a 'Lola Montez' or 'Lola Montes', adding considerably to
confusion over the Countess's appearance. Such is the price of fame.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

NOT-LOLAS IN FINE ART.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This Heigel portrait of an unknown woman resembles Lola
neither in features, coloration or hairstyle-- but she wears a
little Spanish comb... and thus another new Lola was born.

RETURN TO TOP

LOLA HOME

3D FAIRY