I don’t have time to do a real post today, still. 😦 (But I have a couple of posts I want to do as soon as I can get some photography done. Hopefully it’ll be sunny tomorrow…) However, I thought I would briefly point you towards some more Kickstarter projects.
Specifically, I especially wanted to point you towards this one: Claudette, a curvaceous ball jointed doll.
The Kickstarter is to fund a 1/3 scale resin BJD that has more generous proportions, rather than the traditional super-skinny kind. The prototype looks very pretty, and as someone with considerably more flesh than is healthy, I’m obviously all in favor of something less anorexic-looking than…um…every single doll I own. (Ahem.)
The down side is that since the doll is 1/3 scale and resin, she’s going to be very expensive: the lowest pledge level to get a doll is 420 Euros, which comes to around $460 US, before the likely very expensive shipping. Yikes. That’s almost my entire bank balance at the moment. (Which is why, of course, I need to stop spending money, pronto. As usual…) Of course, the Kickstarter doesn’t end for 41 days (and being already at 86%, it seems a certainty that it’ll be fully funded) so I could, technically, obtain that money in the mean time, but…ugh, it’s a lot to drop on a single doll. (Though it’s not unusual for a 1/3 scale doll to cost that much, or more than twice that much…) For the moment, the doll will go on my “oh man, do I want that!” pile, and I’ll worry about whether or not I actually pledge to the Kickstarter later on. (Especially I’d like an idea of what kind of money I’ll be getting in my stipend, and when. I suspect it won’t be very much, but I have absolutely no idea how that sort of thing works, and I was embarrassed to ask.)
In any case, I wanted to pass the word along so that others could pass it along, so that anyone who’s interested in this unique doll (and can afford one) will have the chance.
Of course, speaking of curvaceous dolls, I assume everyone’s already seen photos of the new “curvy” Barbie body, right? I only saw the ones that Time magazine posted online (there may have been more in the printed version) and so far I can’t say I’m impressed. Something just looked off about her. (Possibly because she still had a Barbie face, which looked rather out of place above a more meaty body.) I think the parts that bothered me especially were her legs and chest. The really long legs don’t fit well with the fleshier shape, to my mind. More importantly, her chest was pretty small, making her backside larger than her top, which is just not attractive. (And, let’s be honest, the point of a fashion doll is to be attractive, irregardless of all else.) In my experience, the tendency is to gain weight relatively uniformly. I know there are women who gain more in the stomach and buttocks than in the breasts (technically, I’ve tended a little more heavily towards the lower half of the body in the last ten years or so, but not to the extent that I look particularly lopsided), but I think, overall, the majority gain weight in a relatively uniform fashion, and the doll would have benefited from being more balanced in that regard.
Naturally, seeing a few photos are not the same as seeing the doll in person. And yes, I’ll probably get one eventually. (When I have more money again…) Actually, I pretty much definitely will. I want to compare her to the Rosie O’Donnell doll that Mattel put out…uh…whenever that was. (I’m wanting to say very early 2000s, but it might have been very late 1990s. I’m really not sure anymore, and the doll’s in my over-filled hall closet, so I don’t want to dig her out and check the package’s copyright date right now.) The doll had a unique body as well as a unique face, and as I recall (haven’t set eyes on it in years) both had a pretty decent resemblance. I never actually opened the doll (I kept hoping Mattel would release some clothes based on some of her movies, particularly her uniform from A League of their Own) but if they ever did, I didn’t find out about it. Still, with a new Barbie body to compare her to, that seems a good reason to finally let her out of the box. Getting some other less scrawny dolls might be an interesting comparison, too, but I’m not sure what else would fit the comparison bill. (Lammily, maybe?)
Also on the Barbie front, I’ve heard that the articulated Silkstone Barbie is going to be a very affordable $40, so once I have some money again, I may have to pick up one of those, too. I don’t have too many of the Silkstone dolls (and most of them were gotten at Tuesday Mornings…) but I do love the weighty feel of the material, so having one that’s jointed at the knees, elbows and wrists should be pretty neat.
Anyway, you may recall that at the beginning of the post, I mentioned more than one Kickstarter project to direct you towards, right? Well, digressions now having been fully digressed, here’s the other one: Sweet Plush — Candy-themed Designer Plushie Toys.
(Hmm, kind of a theme with the last time I posted about a Kickstarter project…) These plushies are animal/candy fusions, and very cute…although the 2D keychain versions may be even cuter. This one has 12 days to go, and is only about 25% there so far, so they could use some help. One of the pledge rewards — apart from the plushies themselves — are some very cute, 3D decorated smart phone cases with an icing and candy theme…but I don’t have a smart phone, so they’re of no use to me. 😛 (Actually, while they look great, I don’t know that they’d be very functional; they’d get all wrecked up in your purse, surely. Or they would in mine, anyway. Everything gets wrecked up in there.)