FOR SALE

Saturday, 8 June 2019

The Manikins

I mentioned in my previous post that the lovely little Toddler, Iona, was not alone in the parcel that came from my special dolly friend in the US.  Iona was actually accompanied by two very unusual (to me) dolls, and as soon as I saw them I thought they were worth researching a little. 

The dolls are actually called 'manikins' and from what I can find on the Internet, they were made by a company called Latexture of New York City, who produced these figures alongside Simplicity, (the pattern company who were also based in NYC) who produced the patterns specifically for this size of 'doll'.  The original 'dolls' would have come in a box which included a pattern, a wooden stand, a tape measure, some thread, a little pair of rounded end scissors, and possibly other sewing paraphernalia for the budding seamstress.

The box, as far as I can see, was made of hard cardboard.  I found the following couple of photos of what the complete sets probably looked like:




The two manikins that I received are without their boxes, they are from the 1940s I believe and that was apparent as soon as I saw them, the style of their hair is very 1940s.  When I say 'hair', they have molded on hair and it is painted a glossy deep brown.  The bodies are only jointed at the shoulders and apparently the arms pop in and out on 'pegs'....I think these pegs might have been prone to breaking as a lot of the dolls I've seen for sale, are missing one or both of their arms.  Both mine have their arms and are in quite good condition, although one has some pin pricks to her torso as well as a bit of damage to her face paint.   I'm guessing she was the one who was used by a seamstress to make outfits.  

Both girls are approx 13 inches tall and they have slim bodies with small bust and hips and not a considerable difference between their top and bottom halves in measurements.  This must have made it a lot easier for young seamstresses to work with, no need for masses of darts....I'm just guessing here as unfortunately I don't have the patterns.

Here are their basic measurements:

Height: Approx 13 inches

 
Bust: 13.5cm
Waist: 10.75cm
Hips: 14cm
Inside leg: 16.75cm
 


Although both of these 'dolls' appear to be the same sculpt, there are some subtle differences between them.  As you can below, one of the dolls has a slither of paint missing from the end of her nose so I will refer to her as 'girl A' (shown on the left above) and the other as 'girl B'.   In the photo above and below, you might be mistaken into thinking that the girl on the left, 'girl A' has a smaller head than her companion, I thought the same at first, but it is actually that her 'posture' is better and you will see this more clearly in my photos of them from the side.  Both girls faces are exactly 3cm long from the edge of their molded hair to the bottom of their chins. 
 


Also, it looks as if 'girl B' has a thicker neck, again this is because of her posture, both girls necks measure exactly 6cm round.
 
Both girls' faces are quite simply painted; their eyelashes, as you can see below, are all painted to one side of both eyes, so although one eye has lashes on the outside edge of the eye and nothing towards the inner eye, so the other eye has them painted so that her inner eyelid has the lashes, whilst her outer eyelid has nothing but blue eyeliner!    They both have blue eyes to match the eyeliner and red 'rosebud' painted lips which I think  probably reflect the fashions of the day.

'Girl A'
 

'Girl B'


Here, from the side, you can see that 'girl B' has a more pronounced 'slouch' than her companion.  I suspect that this was caused by age or maybe even warmth as at the base of her neck I can just about make out some very fine wrinkles in the plastic, but these were so fine that I couldn't really get them to show up properly in photos....


Seeing the girls full length from the side is interesting as you would think that the girl on the right, 'girl B' is slightly shorter than the other.  This is just an illusion though as they are exactly the same height.  I have measured both girls all over and there is only one difference that I can see in their measurements, and that is 'girl B' has slightly shorter arms!  Both of her arms are each 13cm long, whereas the other girl's arms measure 14cm.  Also 'girl B' has a bit of a 'problem' with her left leg in that the ankle is slightly curved, so causing her not to be able to stand up as straight as the other girl.


In the rear view you can see the damage to 'girl A', probably caused by sewing needles or pins.  

You can also see the makers mark.  Both girls are marked with the words 'Fashiondol' (yes just the one 'L' in doll...and the copyright ©️ across the small of their backs, nothing more. 


Also as you'll see above, both girls are 'wearing' painted on high wedged shoes.  I believe that these shoes would have originally had 'pegs' attached to them, so that they could be pushed into the wooden stands that the girls would have originally come with.


Apart from their posture, there are a couple of other differences that I want to mention.  Firstly and most obviously to me, are the differences in the definition of the molding on the girls.  'Girl A' has much more definition to her mold than the other girl.  Her hair is more detailed, her company name on her back is slightly easier to read as it's imprinted better and her ears in particular are far more detailed than 'girl B'. 


This difference in the two dolls is really easy to see on their hair, for example.....

Girl A


And 'Girl B'
 

And here you can see the differences in their ears.....with 'girl B's ears, on the right, being almost flat compared to the girl on the left.....


As well as those differences, their skin tones are also different, with 'girl A' having a more beige toned skin colour compared to the other girl's skin which has a more rosy tone to it.  Their hair colour though is exactly the same, from this angle the colour reminds me of lovely shiny conkers!! πŸ˜„

Apart from that, both girls more or less feel the same, their bodies are completely hollow so they are 'squidgy' and slightly pliable, although because of their age I've not squashed their bodies in too much as I don't want their surface paint, if that is indeed what it is, to get any further damage to it.

Well I hope you have enjoyed seeing these two 'manikin' dolls, I know that I have enjoyed receiving them and trying to find out all I can about them, which sadly hasn't been much.  I don't know if they'll stay as I am supposed to be downsizing further, (and my friend sent them to me with a note to sell if I wanted to) but we shall see....I mean they really don't take up too much room, do they? πŸ˜‰πŸ˜Š

Have a great weekend and thank you for visiting!

Big hugs, Sharon in Spain xxx


18 comments:

  1. They are amazing, I have never seen dolls like that before! And what a intresting story behind them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Kamelia, aren't they interesting dolls, I think there must have been many a youngster who learned to sew because of one of these :)
      xxx

      Delete
  2. It's interesting when you discover dolls like these. I've never seen or heard of them before but then again, their age makes them almost invisible in this day and age and unheard of unless you actually have these dolls on hand. I like the idea of the dolls and how they were distributed to people to encourage sewing. It's such a neat idea. I wish this kind of concept was still around today.

    Their face painting is quite nice, simple but beautiful and the body looks like it is well sculpted too, perfect for dressing.

    Thank you for sharing your newest addition. It was quite interesting to read about these older dolls.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No I hadn't either, I didn't have a clue, but remember as I pulled them out of the tube I immediately thought "oh they look like mini versions of the manikins you see in old fashioned shop windows!" And then the search began. I would think that they could be a little bit addictive and would make a nice display if space were available!
      I'm glad you found it interesting
      xxx

      Delete
  3. Oh I did enjoy reading all your research about these two mannequins Sharon. I was thinking that perhaps A was fresh from the mold when it was new and B more towards the mold's end of life, hence the difference in definition. I like the shape of their torso, it's slim yet still shapely.

    I imagine you are thrilled, as a dolly seamstress yourself, to have these in your collection, I know I would be. My hats off to the generous lady that found them for you!
    Big hugs,
    X

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks very much Sandy, I'm glad you enjoyed reading about them. Seeing how you spell mannequins, this is how I also spell it but kept seeing the 'manikins' spelling, I wonder if it's an American spelling? Do you know?
      My friend really is a very generous person, isn't she! They are very interesting and I suspect they were very useful too, back when they were released.
      xxx

      Delete
  4. Dear Sharon, Happy World Doll Day!!!

    I loved hearing about these dolls. I did not know about them. Thanks for sharing your research.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Dorothy, I didn't realise it was World Doll Day!
      I'm glad you enjoyed reading about these dolls :)
      xxx

      Delete
  5. Aren't these interesting? Have you seen the one I had? I did a post on her. Mine was rubbery and definitely not as attractive as your girls! http://planetofthedolls.blogspot.com/2017/09/doll-day-2017-246singer-mannikin-doll.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They really are Tam! I didn't realise how many different ones there were and that not just Simplicity but other pattern companies also worked with patterns for these little manikins. I went to read your thread and it's very interesting.
      xxx

      Delete
  6. Hello Sharon! Have not heard about these dolls, so it was really interesting to read what you found about them. And being so small, they sure can be a beautiful set standing somewhere just for show. :) Thanks for sharing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Niina
      I'm glad you found this interesting, it was fun to research even though I didn't find out that much really.
      xxx

      Delete
  7. Very interesting dolls you have there Sharon. it's amazing what was made and why years ago.
    Very much dolls of their time but I do love their shape, the way they stand with a slight bent knee and the curve of their head and neck.
    It's a shame they didn't hand paint the faces would have made a big difference. Thanks for sharing all you found out about them

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Dee, they are interesting aren't they! I don't know if I'll ever sew for them, I struggle with sewing for who I have here at the moment! But I do like the way they look, a little bit of history I guess!
      xxx

      Delete
  8. That's an interesting find. As a child, I had a Little Mermaid doll whose legs also popped off very easily. I guess that's a way to make sure the "peg" won't break down.
    Take care.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you! I think you're right, but these being older I think maybe they didn't think it through as they might do more these days. I am just going to be very careful with them and hope for the best.
      xxx

      Delete
  9. These are fascinating! I felt as though reading this post was a bit like watching an episode of Antiques Roadshow! ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aww thanks so much! I wish I could have found again the page that I originally found information on!
      xxx

      Delete

Your comment will be visible after moderation.