One site about old dolls suggested that most have inscriptions on the backs of their necks. I have to warn you – if you thought the Ugly Face pictures were “Yoogly” (thanks, Greta) just wait till you see the neck pictures. Without further adieu -
Yeah, I know. Sorry.
Hidden among the cracks and discoloration were some letters. All I could make out was “COPR LASTIC PLASTIC 49”. Turns out “COPR LASTIC PLASTIC 49” was stamped on dolls manufactured by the Fleischaker Novelty Company. It was unclear to me if this company also sold the dolls, or if they were sold by Horsman Company. Several companies produced these “squalling” baby dolls, but the Lastic Plastic ones were the earliest, dating back to 1948-49. And speaking of the Horsman company, while they apparently made some attractive dolls, someone there had a mean streak, as is evident by their Bilikin doll of 1909, or the Carnivale Kid of 1915-1918. My doll is looking more attractive by the minute.
The Doll Reference website showed a picture of what Grandma’s garage sale find looked like originally. There were molded tufts of hair, blue eyes, rosy little cheeks, and red lips. While any signs of rosiness on the cheeks or lips have long since worn away on my doll, its eyes are still a faded blue, and there are faint mounds of “hair” on its otherwise bald little noggin.
According to the Doll Reference website, two models of this doll were made: a 16” version, and a 19” version. My doll measures 16”, and at one time allegedly had the ability to make a “squeak” or “cry”, perhaps by one of those irritating squeakers implanted in its little belly. If that’s true, it would explain why Grandma quickly sewed it a new fabric body. I assumed the original body was ripped or rotten; however, Grandma was smart. We didn’t have squeaky toys over at her house. Ever.
Plush Memories even has a post from a lady who use to have a pair of these dolls as a child, and would love to be able to find one now. She says, “My favorite dolls when I was little were two of the ugliest little life size twin babies I had ever seen.” See Grandma? I’m not the only one to use the “U” word.
While I’d still have to say this is an Ugly Baby Doll, I have a new respect for it and its origins - 63 years is a long time to hang around being disrespected, especially ~55 years by the same family. Grandma, it took a long time, but I finally have an appreciation for this doll, and dare I say, it’s as precious to me now as you’d hoped for then. Thank you.
Sources:
http://www.antiquedolls-collectors-onlineadvisors.com/Vinyl-Head-Dolls.html
http://plushmemories.com/8728/1948-lastic-plastic-fleischaker-squalling-babies.html
http://www.dollreference.com/horsman_dolls1910-1940s.html
Nice follow up post. Love how you changed the search words and came up with so much more.
ReplyDeleteStill ugly... but great sleuthing, Karen!
ReplyDeleteOHMYGOSH!!!! Those other baby dolls were truly harsh! I can't believe they didn't give kids nightmares! I think your baby actually looks better now than it did when it had the colors intact. Strange company. Can't believe they ever sold dolls at all! LOL
ReplyDeleteWhoa! There really aren't enough warnings for what one sees when clicking on those links. Proof positive the world was not kinder & gentler in Grandma's time. Great set of posts, though!
ReplyDeleteInteresting history, and even more interesting that someone really loved those dolls. But you are right, the back of the head is really scary - kinda reminds me of a Dr. Who monster or something.
ReplyDeleteWith those additional dolls, I think you may have found the reason for the sharp increase in mental illness in children. Seriously. That is some scary stuff. I'm glad you were able to figure out the background of your doll, and comparatively speaking, yours is no longer "the" ugliest.
ReplyDeleteI would have nightmares if I had that in my room as a child. :)
ReplyDeleteJennifer
www.climbingmyfamilytree.com