Posted 3 years ago
The_Collec…
(1 item)
Are these legit? No tags. Raggedy Ann & Andy Dolls I bought them at a thrift store. Any help is appreciated thanks.
8
Love it
0
Like it
Manikin loves this.
kwqd loves this.
jscott0363 loves this.
fhrjr2 loves this.
Newfld loves this.
vcal loves this.
fortapache loves this.
dav2no1 loves this.Create a Show & TellReport as inappropriate
Help us close this case. Add your knowledge below.
Comments
Want to post a comment?
Create an account or login in order to post a comment.
Not an expert. The original doll was patented in 1915...until 1960 they didn't have tags. I believe the old dolls had button eyes...if I remember correctly? I don't believe that googly eyes were even invented till 1971?
Your best bet is a doll expert...
https://howtoadult.com/barbie-dolls-manufactured-6859955.html
Oops wrong link...
https://howtoadult.com/out-raggedy-ann-doll-worth-money-10057836.html
They look like kit dolls to me. They were sold for people to build and sew as they pleased with whatever they wanted for clothes material. I recall my grandmother making kit dolls years ago. Just my 2 cents worth. If Manikin sees them she will give us all a lesson.
Hi, The_Collector. :-)
I agree with fhrjr2 that the dolls look home-made from a kit or pattern.
You could buy patterns for Raggedy Ann and Andy at least as far back as the 1940s, e.g.:
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-mccalls-1940-raggedy-ann-andy-428720786
It looks to me like the maker of your dolls like exercised quite a bit of latitude in their choice of fabrics. Also, that little decorative stitching on the hems is just irregular-looking enough for me to speculate that part might have been done by hand.
My own opinion (which along with a couple-three bucks might get you a cup of coffee) of how Raggedy Ann and Andy are supposed to look probably derive from Knickerbocker:
*snip*
The Knickerbocker dolls were introduced in the 1960’s and were dressed in old-fashioned gingham and calico fabrics, had cloth bodies, red and white striped legs, and an “I love you” message printed over their hearts.
*snip*
https://doyouremember.com/37960/remember-raggedy-ann-dolls
Yep, Ann in a blue calico dress with a white apron, and bloomers; Andy in a red gingham shirt, denim trousers, and white sailor's cap; and both of them with red and white striped stockings.
However, somewhere among my possessions is a gift from an old friend of a Raggedy Ann doll done in a Woodland camouflage theme, so the maker of your dolls wasn't alone in exercising latitude. };-)
The original Raggedy Ann Stories:
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/18190/18190-h/18190-h.htm
Here are Gruelle's original patents:
https://patents.google.com/patent/USD47789S/
https://patents.google.com/patent/USD56149S/
Here are some imitators:
https://patents.google.com/patent/USD96382S/
https://patents.google.com/patent/USD105861S/
https://patents.google.com/patent/USD105862S/
https://patents.google.com/patent/USD71095S/
Some more Raggedy history:
https://notsoraggedyacre.com/patann.htm
https://raggedyannraggedyandydolls.com/history-of-raggedy-ann-andy/
However, I too wait for the opinion of our resident doll expert Manikin. :-)
Homemade . Not sure what you mean by legit . They are not factory if that is what you meant . Very common to find homemade ones from pattens . fhr was correct :-)
Manikin, Thanks for weighing in. :-)
I suspect that what The_Collector might have meant by "legit" was, yes, factory-made, or 'official' or licensed dolls.
All of those original Raggedy Ann/Andy patents and copyrights are expired now.
How old the dolls in this post are is still a question.
dav2no1's observation about googly eyes is probably a clue (good catch, dav2no1):
https://www.skillshare.com/blog/all-eyes-on-googly-eyes/
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/whats-a-weepul
So these dolls are probably no older than the 1970s.
I would agree on eyes since they were declared a chocking hazard !
Manikin, Yes, those googly/wiggle eyes would be a choking hazard, but then so are buttons.
I wonder what the statistics are from a hundred years ago for children choking on small objects like buttons.
I have to think it happened, because human nature hasn't really changed, and if you take your eyes off of a child for more than five seconds, chances are excellent that said child could be doing something dangerous.
Probably what's changed since then, at least in the USA, is the modern pace of life where adults are more easily distracted, not to mention that we have an increasingly litigious culture, possibly a result of so many of the Founders having a legal background. Oh well.
The_Collector, Did we answer your question?
Your dolls are probably home-made from a kit or pattern, and no older than 1970s vintage (because of the googly/wiggle eyes).
BTW, I have to say that the fabric choices are interesting, because at first glance, I was tempted to say that the maker was using up scraps of leftover materials.
However, when I looked again, I noticed that Ann and Andy's face and hands are made from a pale peach color of fabric which pretty closely resembles the color of fair-skinned humans. It's the clothes where things get a bit wild.
The red bandana fabric of Ann and Andy's shirts isn't really wild, and would not have been out of place in the early 20th century USA, e.g.:
https://collection.cooperhewitt.org/objects/18620845/
Neither would be the navy gingham fabric of Andy's trousers, suspenders, and collar.
It's Ann's clothes where things get non-standard. First, it seems possible that Ann isn't actually wearing a dress, but rather just a shirt and bloomers, covered by an apron (the red bandana fabric doesn't peep out below the apron).
The apron itself is an unremarkable pink gingham, but the bloomers are a somewhat incongruous print of red flowers on a green background.
Both Ann and Andy are sporting multi-colored feet/shoes.
What was the maker thinking? Or drinking? };-)
Thanks appreciate the info.
The_Collector, You're welcome. :-)
Sorry if it seemed like I went a bit overboard, but I love Raggedy Ann.