Monday, March 4, 2019

Doll-A-Day 2019 #63: Barbie's '60th' Week: Bubble Cut Barbie

  As most of you will know, this year is Barbie's 60th birthday. She debuted at Toy Fair on March 9th,1959. She looks pretty good for her age. In fact, she looks a lot younger than she did to begin with! Is it just me, or did Barbie the Teenage Fashion Model start out looking like a middle aged woman? Anyway, for the next 7 days, leading up to March 9th, we'll be looking at some vintage Barbies. Today's Barbie is the Bubble Cut.

Barbie runs up a little something for her Hope Chest. (You young people can find out what a Hope Chest was HERE.)

Barbie started out with a ponytail. There were several slightly varied versions of the ponytail Barbie, before she was given a new hairstyle: the bubble cut.  The bubble cut was so called due to it's round shape.
 
Sorry about the green ear.
  I have a rant to do here. I'm getting really tired of hearing how Ruth Handler, one of the founders of Mattel, 'invented' Barbie. That's blatantly untrue.
 
She's wearing the 1965 Barbie fashion, Student Teacher.
Barbie began life in 1952,as a cartoon about a woman called Lili, created by Reinhard Beuthien for the German tabloid 'Bild'. Lili's dialogue was suggestive, and she appeared in various states of undress or suggestive clothing. Lili was well liked by the adult readers of Bild.


  Around 1953 Bild asked Max Weissbrodt of the toy company O&M Hausser to produce  a Lili doll. Hausser made the first prototype Lili doll. She was marketed mainly to men, as a novelty gift. She had molded shoes, bee stung lips, and a curl on her forehead...and looked amazingly similar to Barbie. The doll became very popular, eventually even selling to children. She had a wardrobe and later furniture and room settings. Lili dolls were sold in other European countries. There was an attempt to market her in Spain, but the country was very conservative at the time and the doll was unpopular, eventually being taken off the market.


   In the 50's Ruth Handler visited Hamburg and discovered the Lili doll. She acquired the rights, and Mattel produced the Barbie doll. That's very different from the official Mattel story these days. In an article dated January of this year, Ruth Handler is credited with 'inventing' Barbie. Mattel's Director of Global Brand Marketing for Barbie, Nathan Baynard, was quoted as saying, "Her daughter Barbara was limited in the choices of her toys -- the only ones were baby dolls."  Which of course, is strictly not true. There had always been dolls that weren't 'baby dolls'. In the decade or more preceding Barbie there had been dolls like Ideal's Miss Revlon and Toni, Cosmopolitan's Ginger, Vogue's Jill, Uneeda's Suzette and Dollikin, and Madame Alexander's Cissy. These were dolls with mature figures, high heels and extensive wardrobes of fashionable clothing, dolls with lingerie, painted fingernails, and hair that could be curled and set. These were not 'baby' dolls. Years ago I remember reading an article in which Ruth Handler stated that her 'inspiration' for Barbie had been her daughter's sophisticated paper dolls, with their fashionable clothes. She wanted to come up with an actual doll like that that her daughter could play with. Which version of the story are we going with here?


  Baynard also stated, "The only role she (Barbara) could imagine through that play was caregiver, mother," and Handler's son, Ken, "could imagine being an astronaut, cowboy, pilot, surgeon." Ok, well, there are other roles that could be played there, like doctor for one thing. Apart from that, there is the point that Ken was playing astronaut, cowboy, pilot, and surgeon without the help of a doll. What was stopping Barbara from doing that? (Other than her mother thinking Barbara could only act those things out with the aid of a doll because she was a girl?)


Baynard further claimed that the whole original point of Barbie was to teach girls, "that they had choices, that they could be anything. In 1959, it was a radical idea!" What a lot of bull! Handler's earlier claim that she came up with Barbie so her daughter could play with a doll with a massive fashionable wardrobe without the annoying paper clothes continually falling off seems to have been turned into a whole new tale meant to impress the mothers of today. And as far as Barbie being made 'to teach girls...that they could be anything', Barbie was specifically called 'Barbie, Teenage Fashion Model'. She already was something. I will concede that Barbie later became other things. But she did begin her run as a teenage fashion model.


    In the same article Barbie designer Carlyle Nuera explained why Barbie was created with her massive chest and tiny waist with this story, "In 1959, her body structure was exaggerated to match the aesthetics of the time and the fabric available." Uh.NO. Her body structure was exaggerated to appeal to men in suggestive German cartoons. You know, even if Barbie was made under the guidelines of what a woman should look like according to the 1950's, that was THAT time. You don't have to try to lie about it and make up for it now. Just be better from now on and be in line with the opinions of the current society. Mattel is rewriting the whole story of Barbie in an attempt to make her look more politically correct, and it really annoys me. I hate lies.


  For the record, I was never concerned that my daughters would think they had to look like a Barbie doll. I never thought it myself either. It's a good thing I didn't ever think I had to look like my dolls, since I had a predilection, (and still do!), for goofy looking and sad faced dolls. Most kids don't want to play with unattractive dolls. It's human nature to be attracted to attractive things and people. The idea of what is attractive is subjective anyway, so not everybody is going to find Barbie's figure appealing. (My dad, for example, would have preferred a bigger bottom and heavier legs. No accounting for tastes.)


  Interestingly, Weissbrodt later sold the rights for the Lili doll to Louis Marx and Company, who used them to produce Miss Seventeen and Miss Marlene dolls. Marx later tried to sue Mattel over the license. You can read the story in detail HERE. They didn't win, of course, and Barbie continued on to turn 60 this month.




 We'll see another version of her tomorrow.

15 comments:

  1. I hate the constant changes to the "Why I made Barbie" story too. The earliest version I've come across was from the 70s, possibly the 60s. Which claimed Barbie had been "invented" to help girls learn to dressmake and put outfits together. Quite a long way from that to the nonsense they spew today.
    I also can't stand the whole "Barbie ruins kid's body image" silliness. I may as well say I'm fat because my Cabbage Patch dolls were, or my niece thinks she's a horse because she played with the Equestria Girls.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you. It's just a doll,and kids have all kinds of dolls. They don't tag that on to any other type of dolls. What would Monster High dolls do to kids? Or Bratz? It's stupid. You're going to have those weirdos who try to make themselves look like a Barbie. Some people are just crazy.
      To help girls learn to dressmake? I never heard that one before. Could that have been specifically referring to the cut and button or sew free clothes or something?

      Delete
  2. First, thank you for telling of Barbie's beginning as a Lili "lookalike." I would sometimes show my students the documentary Barbie Nation. It does seem to get at some of the truth about Barbie.
    Second, I remember when I received my Barbie (no I am not saying the year -laugh) but I was about 12. It was from my Aunt. I have two younger female cousins. My Aunt did not purchase a Barbie doll for her daughters because they were too young for Barbie. It's funny how now a child cannot BE too young to receive a Barbie.
    Third, I have a love-hate affair with Barbie. I certainly love my Barbie. I think she was the third incarnation. I do think that, at least initially, Barbie showed the "female" version of professions instead of the professions themselves.
    When I discovered the Smartee Dolls, I thought "this is what I would want Barbie to be."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think I've seen "Barbie Nation". What did your students think of it? I was very small when I got my Barbie,and I can just say a 4 or 5 year old could not take good care of a Swirl Barbie! (You may have heard her sad tale here on the blog.) I never even thought about Barbie being a bad influence or my daughter thinking she would have to look like a Barbie,until all that started. I still think it's stupid. It's just a doll. I didn't think I had to 'look like a Barbie'. My kids had all kinds of dolls,and all colours.
      I think you're probably right about Barbie being 'the female version of professions'.

      Delete
  3. I found this a very interesting post Tam because I too have wondered where the truth of the origins of Barbie had disappeared to, having heard about how she was basically a copy of a German doll! And it is almost comical how they've 'reinvented' her and the alleged 'inspiration' for her over the years. It's another example of a big company stomping over a littler one I'm guessing.
    As for thinking I should look like my childhood Barbie (one and only, as I was more into Sindy, Ken and Patch)I never gave it a thought for one moment, she had such a weird shape really with her big boobs tiny waist!
    And I love my sad, not particularly beautiful dolls too...in fact I've always preferred dolls with a bit of character to their faces, over those that are just pretty.
    Hugs
    Sharon x

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How many versions of the same story can somebody tell?! And why aren't people calling Mattel out on this? I can see why they are embarrassed about her origins in today's world. But lying about it is stupid.People can look it up,but of course,most people will take the truth of the story for granted and accept it. Tell the truth, and make things different NOW.
      I went beyond character with my childhood dolls. I like the kind with big, goofy smiles and freckles,or sad faces,like Little Miss No Name and Susie Slicker. The doll I had that I bought because I thought she was so beautiful was the comical looking Suzanna Little Sophisticates doll.(I'll feature her on the blog sometime.) As for tiny waists and big boobs,there are people who really look like that naturally,without diets or surgery...but then they get a progesterone imbalance and all Hell breaks loose,and I got fat!

      Delete
  4. I read in a doll magazine that Ruth Handler basically ripped off the Bild Lili doll and whoever owned the rights in Germany didn't get a cent. That is, she just took a Lili home and had Mattel make something similar. I guess Weissbrodt did make money, if the rights were sold to Marx. I think Mattel is trying too hard to be politically correct. Fire your Director of Global Brand Marketing and put some money into quality toys.

    My daughters know what hope chests are. Each girl on my husband's side of the family gets one as a graduation gift, and both of my daughters like having one.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I believe Ruth Handler stole the idea for a Barbie straight from seeing the Bild Lili doll. There too are dolls being made today that copy Bild Lili even closer to her .
    Cricket

    ReplyDelete
  6. Agree, agree, agree with all your "rant." The story I read was Handler saw the doll in Germany and it was "just what she had been thinking of inventing." She bought 2, went home, flat out copied them and started making and marketing. I wondered how she didn't get sued. I guess she did. Lol. Thanks for the interesting info.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're welcome.
      "Just what she was thinking of inventing'?! Too bad she was beaten to it, but give credit where it's due.

      Delete
  7. I cannot agree more. I had old Revlon dolls before I was to be trusted with a tiny little Barbie. You tell the truth sister!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am in the minority because I never read either story! But I am glad I know the truth after your post. I feel sorry for that man and his heirs. They were cheated out of a rightful windfall. Every Barbie and item sold should give his family something.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's certainly never going to happen!

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I know, I guess I am idealistic about some things. But then I wouldn't be me if it wasn't, so that's okay.

      Delete

Thanks in advance for your comments.