It comes and goes.
The desire to go check out the local antique mall, looking for a hot find.
I’m sure we’ve all dreamed of that magical treasure, a misunderstood gem being sold for a song. We’ve all wished we could walk in there and find a Kenner Blythe with a tag saying “Big-headed Doll, Vintage 1970s, $12.”
But we’re never going to make that find, because no one’s that clueless.
Still, every so often I find myself wanting to go check, just in case. Not that I seriously expect I’d ever see a Kenner Blythe there (not for under $800, especially), but I know there’s always the chance I’d see, say, a nice She-Ra doll, or a Gene, or maybe even a vintage Madame Alexander that wasn’t too outrageously priced.
And when I find something good in one, then I want to go check all the others.
That’s the real danger.
Especially after making a good find.
Remember this doll I told you about a few days ago?
Well, thanks to Taswegian1957, I now know her name is Misty. In the mid-1960s, Ideal put out a doll called Tammy, to compete with Barbie, and Misty was one of her friends. (Though if you ask me, this Misty has a much prettier face than Tammy…) The whole Tammy line was only produced until ’67, and this doll’s head has a copyright date of ’65. Taswegian1957 also provided a link to DollReference.com’s page about the Tammy line, and according to that page, only one Misty was ever put out with her eyes looking straight ahead, instead of to the side, which would make this doll from 1966. In which case, the seller I bought her from really lost out on their lack of research! 😛 However, I’m trying not to take that information too seriously. Doll manufacturing wasn’t as precisely documented in the 1960s as it is now (or so I’d expect), so there might have been others that didn’t have sideglance eyes, especially since DollReference describes her as having blue eyes, and I’d call them green. Then again, she looks just like their example photo, so…yeah, not 100% sure she’s the super-rare Misty, but she’s definitely a Misty. And that’s pretty rare in itself, given the maximum window of two years she could date from.
Anyway, in celebration of figuring out who she is, I gave her a change of clothes. I’m probably going to buy her a vintage Barbie jumpsuit I found on Etsy (if it’s still there when I’m ready to make my “yay, I finished classes!” spending splurge) though it looked a bit disco for a ’60s doll, but for the moment I put her in some reproduction vintage Barbie clothes:
If she’d been dressed this nicely, they probably would have asked a lot more for her! I’m not sure what the “M” stood for originally (“Mattel” maybe?) but it works fine as standing for “Misty” here! Though those sleeves didn’t want to go on her at all. And if “abuse of vintage doll hair” is a crime, then I committed it getting that sweater on her. 😦 (It’s a pull-over, rather than being opened at the back…) Though, actually, I don’t think I made it much worse than it already was…
See what I meant about how nicely sculpted her hands are? If her “skin” wasn’t so shiny, you might almost think this was a picture of a real person’s hand! (Though the poor image quality due to having taken these pictures with my iPad instead of my camera would add to that…)
The picture quality’s not too good here, but you can still see the lines on her palm. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Mattel doll that has those, not even on the super-size Monster High dolls! It’s the kind of little touch that a kid might not necessarily even notice — and which would probably have less than no impact on play value — but it’s the sort of detail that I really appreciate.
Her hair’s a bit fly-away and a lot matted (which is sort of a weird combination, when you think about it) but it also retains a lot of the original flip hairstyle. Which will, of course, make trying to fix it up more of a problem. How do I do that without destroying the original hairstyle? Or do I just have to leave it as-is, since any attempt to make it better will make it worse?
Anyway, I just wanted to (take and) post these pictures because I was so pleased with how good she looks in these Barbie clothes. (In fact, I may decide not to get that jumpsuit even if it is still there, ’cause it probably wouldn’t look this good on her. Plus then I’d have to get the sweater back off her without wrecking up her hair further…)
This blog is probably going to go pretty quiet until my final paper is turned in. Just FYI. (But I’ll still likely be logging on during meals, so it’s not like I’ll be gone. I just won’t be producing any posts.) Oh, quiet except for the A-to-Z Reflections post! That’s supposed to go up on Monday…