Life Like Dolls: The Collector Doll Phenomenon and the Lives of the Women Who Love Them by A. F. Robertson

The enormous popularity of the Cabbage Patch and American Girl dolls has not gone unnoticed, either by major corporations or by anthropologists. Fascinated by this multibillion-dollar business, Robertson invested time probing the psychology not only of doll collectors but also of the companies that manufacture and advertise dolls. Robertson begins with a little history of the use of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century dolls as clothing models, and then continues with analysis of the allure of dolls' physical amenities and the way owners often emotionally bond with their dolls. The typical height of dolls is 14 inches, and their eyes and hair are usually the most compelling features (i.e., the main reasons they are bought). Yet it is by entering the bedrooms and living rooms of America that the author becomes privy to the behind-the-scenes details, where he and readers learn why these kinds of collectibles are purchased, from filling up empty nests to recapturing a sense of belonging. A fascinating look at the inner longings of collectors. Barbara Jacobs
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved --This text refers to the Paperback edition.

Reader Reviews
Just for Dr. Robertson, this review is gonna ramble...This is the kind of book that makes serious anthropologists cringe. This is the kind of book that makes the "hard science" scientists make jokes about social "scientists." I appreciate Dr. Robertson's attempt to appeal to the largest possible readership in order to sell the book, but, unfortunately, wandering around in the middle just made the book tedious, repetitive, rambling, poorly presented, and way too generalized. Instead of scientific conclusions (or even, methods) Dr. R. makes huge sweeping generalizations about what his little computer-generated statistics tell him! I was embarrassed for him. I understand that students were major contributors, so maybe I should keep that in mind. Congratulations, you can all say you are "published" contributors on your resumes now, through the kindness of Dr. Robertson. But, leaving the students out of it, Dr. Robertson often wandered off the subject (Porcelain Collector Dolls) into other areas and kinds of doll collecting, sometimes seeming to imply that other kinds of doll collecting are just as weird and demented as PCD collecting. Maybe so, but other kinds of doll collecting should have waited for another book, instead of muddying the water in this volume, generalizing, summarizing, pontificating, and just making the book an exasperating trial to read. That said, I do think the subject is a fascinating one, and I think the manufacturers would be even more fun to study! When I first started working in antique and vintage doll repair, my first response to the PCD's I saw in doll magazines was the same one Dr. Robertson most often encountered outside of the PCD collecting "world:" Eeeee-ee-eew; nauseating; weird! Who could be collecting these dolls? Well, now I know who they are, and that could have been summarized in an essay. After checking out some of those dolls at doll shows, I began to think about their usefulness in the Los Angeles area carpool lanes. Hmmm...might be worth the investment, but would I be strangely compelled to keep buying them?? Have a trunk full? More in carseats in the back? I doubt it. I don't exactly fit the "profile," and don't collect PCD's, although I am the "right" age and I do have a few other kinds of dolls lying around the house. I've never felt the "empty nest" syndrome (who first made that up, anyway?) -- I was thrilled when I finally had more time and a spare room to use for my avocation repairing dolls. I also think it's telling to note that the most often quoted sources in the book are both very out of date; why Dr. R. used studies from 1896 (Hall and Ellis) and Freud, who isn't even in the bibliography, and who no one takes seriously anymore anyway, is really beyond me. I was mildly entertained by Dr. Robertson's discussion of "hyperreality," but it was just one among many concepts he was handing out as scientific fact. It's fine to hypothesize and speculate, but he forgot to tell us that the WHOLE BOOK is a hypothesis with a lot of speculation thrown in! This is what my mathematician husband calls "telling stories!" God help anyone who believes this information hook, line, and sinker! The frequency charts in the appendix were really disappointing and will go over the heads of most readers; why didn't he just use bar graphs? Chapter 8 was the best, most organized, and most interesting section in the book; I wish I'd read it first and saved myself a lot of time.

Back To Top