Dolls, Dreams and Design - Susan Golton`s Portfolio

Transcription

Dolls, Dreams and Design:
An investigation into the ways people assign personalities to
objects and the implications for design, including a case study
on Asian Ball Jointed Dolls.
Susan Golton
Innovation Design Engineering
Word Count: 10891
2009
1
Contents
Introduction
Objects designed for emotional attachment
a) Aspects of Designing for Emotional Attraction
b) Anthropomorphism: Personality by design
c) “Aliveness” and Relational Artefacts
d) Caleb Chung's Animated Toys
6
6
7
11
13
How people interact with objects: Play and Psychology
a) Emotional Attachment
b) Transitional objects
c) Toys, Play and Creative Customisation
d) Self expression and Possessions
e) Self extension: Avatars
f) The Psychology of collection
16
16
17
20
23
25
28
Asian Ball Jointed Dolls: A case study
a) An Introduction to Modern Asian Ball Jointed Dolls
b) Investigation
c) Analysis of survey answers
Owner profile
Gender and sexuality
Collecting
Self Extension
Doll Customisation
Photography
Character vs Personality
A “Doll kind of alive”
30
30
32
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
37
Conclusion
46
References
42
Appendices
1) Ashley Westwood: What are Asian Ball Jointed Dolls?
45
2) Asian Ball jointed Doll Survey and answers
46
Bibliography
81
2
Illustrations
Fig 1: A tamagotchi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tamagotchi_0124_ubt.jpeg (Accessed 14th September
2009)
Fig 2: A 1998 Furby http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Furby.JPG (Accessed 14th September 2009)
Fig 3: “Pleo” The robotic dinosaur by Caleb Chung http://www.robotsrule.com/assets/images/pleo-heroshot.jpg ( Accessed 4th June 2009)
Fig
4:
“Munny”
customized
by
Ryan
Crippen
content/uploads/2007/07/pose.jpg ( Accessed 5th June 2009)
http://www.iwantyourskull.com/wp-
Fig.5:
Avatar
creation
screen
from
the
game
World
of
Warcraft
http://journal.transformativeworks.org/index.php/twc/article/viewArticle/72/98 (Accessed 12th September
2009)
Fig. 6: A Selection of Asian Ball Jointed Dolls. Photograph by Susan Golton taken in August 2009
Fig.7: Two Asian Ball Jointed Dolls. Photograph by Susan Golton taken in August 2009
3
Introduction
People often relate to objects as though they have some sort of personality. People may name their cars or
attempt to reason with their computers. How far does this behaviour of assigning a personality to an object
go?
Pareidolia, or the phenomenon of finding meaning in random things, means that people are likely to see
faces and expressions in anything from the fronts of cars to teapots. There is a tendency to
anthropomorphise even objects which are not intentionally person-like, not only visually, but while
interacting with them, bestowing a basic personality on the object. Can this desire to find human likeness
can be taken advantage of in design?
There exist robotic products and software with programming approaching reason and character in a real
sense, these objects invite the assignment of a personality and could even be said to possess a robot kind of
personality. These objects provide a useful insight into how people relate to them, but is a robotic interaction
necessary for the assignment of a personality? Can the the robotic interaction be replaced by the human
side of the human-object relationship to form an equally strong bond?
The concepts of self extension and internalisation are important in investigating this idea, the two are
distinct types of behaviour. Self extension implies an extension of a personality, a way of assigning aspects of
one's personality to an external object, while internalisation implies that an object becomes a part of one's
personality, absorbed as part of a person. These types of personality assignment are compared to the
creation and assignment of a separate “character”, akin to a character developed by an author. These ideas
are explored in a the context of a case study.
One of the most anthropomorphic products on the market has to be the Asian Ball Jointed Doll. This product
was chosen for the case study included in this text, rather than the many dolls intended as children's toys,
as it is intended for an adult market. There is also a large creative aspect to the Asian ball Jointed Doll
owners community. In short, if any inanimate object is going to have a personality, this is.
4
5
Objects designed for emotional attachment
a) Aspects of Designing for Emotional Attraction
Donald A Norman notes three aspects of design in his book “Emotional attachment”, the Visceral,
Behavioural and Reflective aspects. The Visceral aspects are the way a designed object looks. The
Behavioural aspects are the “Pleasure and effectiveness of use”(p5), and finally the Reflective aspects can be
described as design which considers the “rationalisation and intellectualisation”(p5) of the product. In short,
design which tells a story. He explores how emotion and cognition are important within each of these
aspects. If a product is to provoke a bond with the user then it must appeal on an emotional level in some
way. He suggests that “much of human behaviour is subconscious”(p11) and so the appearance of the
object, the way the user interacts with it and the meaning of the object are all aspects that can be designed
to appeal to both the cognitive part of the human psyche and the subconscious emotional aspect.
So how can designers appeal to customers on a subconscious, emotional, visceral level? Norman lists
aspects that we as humans are “Genetically programmed for” and that should be considered:
“Warm, comfortably lit places,
temperate climate,
sweet tastes and smells,
bright, highly saturated hues,
“soothing” sounds and simple melodies and rhythms,
harmonious music and sounds,
caresses,
smiling faces,
rhythmic beats,
“attractive” people,
symmetrical objects,
rounded, smooth objects,
“sensuous” feelings, sounds and shapes.”(p29)
6
Many of these aspects relate to “healthy human”-like aspects. For example; symmetry, smoothness,
attractive people and smiling faces are all anthropomorphic in character. This human mimicry may well be an
important aspect of designing for emotional attachment.
However, while these aspects broadly appeal to everyone, once these ideas are narrowed down to apply to
products there are other aspects that effect whether the product will appeal to someone, such as cultural
differences, personal preference and even day-to-day changes in personality. Norman discusses this;
“Personality is the particular collection of traits of a person that last a lifetime...we all have multiple
personalities, emphasising some traits when with families, a different set with friends.”(p32) This leads to
the possibility of the same product being disliked by some and liked by others, or liked by someone one day
and not the next. Norman suggests that the job of the designer is to tackle this problem and find new ways
of appealing to the user.
b) Anthropomorphism: Personality by design
While similarity to a human form is not necessary for human interaction and attachment, it seems that
products designed with human traits in mind are intended to inspire some form of emotional response in the
user. These responses can be realised through Visceral, Behavioural or Reflective design. An
anthropomorphic form is intriguing by the nature of its shape, anthropomorphic behaviour provides a rich
user experience and human-like objects by their nature often suggest a deeper meaning or story.
Norman notes that “Humans are predisposed to anthropomorphise, to project human emotions and beliefs
into anything. On one hand the anthropomorphic responses can bring great delight and pleasure to the user
of a product. if everything works smoothly...if the design itself is elegant, beautiful...we attribute our
pleasure to the product, so we praise it, and in extreme cases become emotionally attached to it.”(p138)
From the subtle gestures exhibited by Apple computers to the overt and complex interaction offered by
robotic toys such as Pleo the dinosaur, the inclusion of anthropomorphic aspects can increase the level of
emotional attachment it can inspire.
7
DiSavio, Gemperle and Forlizzi define anthropomorphism in “Imitating the human form: Four kinds of
anthropomorphic form” by splitting it into four categories as follows:
1. Structural Anthropomorphic form which “imitates the construction and operation of the human body with
a focus on its materiality” and “reflects the thing-ness of the human body”(p4). Examples include a jointed
artist's model.
2. Gestural Anthropomorphic form, or “The use of motions or poses that suggest human action to suggest
meaning” (p4) For example, the log-in screen on a Macintosh OS X computer will shake from side to side
when an incorrect password is entered, an imitation of a human head shake to say 'No'.
3. Anthropomorphic form of character, or form that “imitates the traits, roles or functions of people”.(p5)
This type of anthropomorphism is, in a way, a pre-assigned character aspect distilled into form. The example
given by DiSavio, Gemperle and Forlizzi is the Jean-Paul Gaultier “Le Male” Perfume bottle : a form which
depicts male sexuality.
4. Aware Anthropomorphic form, or a form which “imitates the human capacity for thought, intentionality or
inquiry. It also recognises the social qualities of being human.”(p5) This form is not a common one but has
important implications for the future of anthropomorphism. At some level this object could really have a
personality, not just an assigned one in the mind of the user. As for examples, Caleb Chung's “Pleo”
interactive toy comes close to this form of anthropomorphism, as do the relational artefacts discussed by
Sherry Turkle.
On examination, many products and systems utilise anthropomorphism to some extent, many examples are
discussed by Disalvo and Gamperle in “From Seduction to fulfilment, the use of anthropomorphic form in
design”. One way that Disalvo and Gamperle define the use of human-like form in product design is literally
to “reflect human values”. Often the form of anthropomorphism used here is gestural, interacting with
people on a human social level.
8
It could be said that all these forms of anthropomorphism in some way lift an object out of its inanimate
state and provide the conceptual possibility of life in the mind of the user. If this is the case then the
addition of a personality or an emotional state would seem more natural and an important part of what can
inspire the creation and assignment of a personality to an object. When the design intent is to create
interaction on an emotional level using anthropomorphism to project human values it could be said that the
design intent is for the user to assign a personality to the product.
So, from a user perspective, how can anthropomorphic form lead to the assignment of a personality?
Perhaps the way people automatically react to an anthropomorphic object is based on what they assume it is
capable of. Stuart Watt argues that a device as simple as a thermostat can have “opinions”, it “decides”
when it it too hot. He suggests in “Seeing things as people: Anthropomorphism and theory of mind in mixed
society” that:
“It is possible to reason psychologically about a thermostat; to say a thermostat believes it's too hot or a
thermostat believes it's too cold, but for most of us, at least for those of us that know how a thermostat
actually works, that would be just pushing things a bit too far. Alternatively we can take a physical stance,
and talk about the little bits of wire inside the thermostat being bent out of contact because of the
temperature. When we're thinking about the thermostat we have to decide when it is appropriate to apply
each stance. This is where the rationality assumption ---and therefore anthropomorphism – may play a
role.”(p5)
In other words, the observer of an object has to make a judgement about whether the object is rational. In
other words; the conscious or unconscious decision about whether it can make rational decisions based on
information. If the object happens to behave like a human or appear human-like, it may make it more likely
that an observer will assign rational powers to it. If the rationality assumption is made then interaction on a
human level can occur. If that happens then automatically the object must have some level of “personality”
based on reason to be able to interact with a person, even if this “personality” is purely in the mind of the
observer.
9
10
c) “Aliveness” and Relational Artefacts
If an object passes the rationality assumption and has enough of the anthropomorphic types associated with
it, then the concept of Alterity becomes relevant, explained by Chapman as follows:
“Alterity is experienced by users as the feeling that something is both autonomous and in possession of its
own free will; when objects embody this eccentric quality, the relationships forged between subject and
object are frequently strong and long-lasting.”(p74)
One area where this sort of interaction is explored is in robotic or emotive toys, such as...
“...Sony's AIBO, Bandai's Tamagotchi, or Hasbro's Furby, which essentially seek to stimulate the parental
urge that supposedly lurks within each of us.” (p72)
The relationships formed with these objects are based on a reliance of
the object on the user: by acting like a pet or a child the object
demands attention and requires a set of actions to be performed. For
example a tamagotchi, a digital pet displayed on an egg-shaped key
ring, requires that its “owner” feed, clean and entertain it or it rapidly
Fig 1: A Tamagotchi
becomes unhappy and ultimately dies (see Fig 1). Chapman notes one
case where the relationship between the user and the tamagotchi went too far:
“The relationship that resulted from this interaction seemed quite real, so much so that one Japanese child
actually committed suicide when their Tamagotchi died.” (p73)
Naturally this level of attachment is not the norm, but it surprising how far these seemingly simple toys can
enter into relationships with their owners.
These toys relate to Sherry Turkle's idea of a relational artefact:
11
“‘relational artefacts’...convince their users that they are in a relationship by pushing certain ‘Darwinian’
buttons (making eye contact, for example) that cause people to respond as though they were in
relationship.”
She describes how a robot designed to make eye contact and press these Darwinian buttons can relate to a
maternal instinct, a human face-to-face interaction or an advanced level of gestural anthropomorphic form.
These sort of 'buttons' are played on in the design of many robotic toys. They work, but to what extent? To
the Japanese child above, her tamagotchi seemed very much alive. But in general, how convincing are these
pet-like robots? Turkle spoke to children about their robotic pets:
“A nine-year-old is convinced that her Furby is alive because she ‘likes to take care of it’. She immediately
amends her comment to acknowledge her new pet’s limitations. ‘It’s a Furby kind of alive, not an animal kind
of alive.’”
This suggests that “Aliveness” can be perceived in shades of grey. Turkle suggests that if there is a “robot
kind of alive” there could be a “robot kind of love”. These properties suggest a whole new layer of
“aliveness”, somewhere between a human and an inanimate object. This way of thinking, by giving robots a
new and different set of very valid human-like emotions, elevates them to an acceptable status of “alive”
without the necessity that they mimic humans or animals precisely. This enables humans to interact with
robots in a new way, recognising their robot kind of emotions. This “robot kind of love' seems to be the basis
of the emotional attachment to robotic toys.
12
d) Caleb Chung's animated toys
Caleb Chung is described by Wired Magazine as
"a modern Geppetto, a craftsman determined
to bring toys to life." He primarily works
designing
anthropomorphic
animated
toys
designed to invoke an emotional connection.
He is best known for the 'Furby', an immensely
successful product that earned him $10 million
in royalties in 1998. According to his talk at
Fig 2: A 1998 Furby
EG07 and filmed for Ted.com : “Caleb Chung
plays with Pleo”, it was actually designed to create life like movement with the fewest parts; Caleb started
with the concept of an amoeba or 'single cell'; a single motor.
In 1999 Caleb voiced the following inspiring view in a Wired interview:
In the future there will be all sorts of artificial creatures that serve as both toys and tools - like an
animatronic turtle that wanders around the yard and cuts the grass. "The key," the TOY founder says, "is
interactivity, not autonomy."
Caleb Chung most recently worked for 4 years with Bob
Christopher in the production of the "Pleo" dinosaur robot
by a company called Ugobe. As he explains in his talk
“Caleb Chung plays with Pleo” at EG07 and filmed for
Ted.com, $10 million was spent and 40 people took 4
years to develop, as far as possible, a real dinosaur. It
was designed to evoke a feeling of caring in the user
Fig 3: "Pleo" the robotic dinosaur
through lifelike movement, a 'growing up' process, 37
sensors, 14 motors and 7 micro controllers. It also has USB and SD card ports, designed to be open format.
Obviously a labour of love and the result of a long term fascination with dinosaurs on the part of the
13
designer, Caleb notes in his lecture that there is a social responsibility in the making of these toys and
'friends' for children.
John Sosoka, the Chief Technical Officer of Ugobe, commented on the development on a Pleo-specific
internet forum in June 2009 stating “This is a very important step in the development of human/robot
interaction.”
The original design intent was to create interact on an emotional level with children, in order that the child
could benefit from the social interaction and learning in a positive way how to behave in society. While Pleo's
form is not strictly anthropomorphic, more a structural zoomorphic from with gestural anthropomorphic
attributes, it still utilises a human-like design (a babyish chubbiness with a friendly face and big eyes) in
order to fulfil the design goals. In a way it is bestowed with “Aware” anthropomorphic form, it almost has a
rudimentary personality before the user can even interact with it. In this way the assignment of a personality
is hardly necessary, it already has a name “Pleo”, the ability to interact, express emotion, protest at poor
treatment and to develop in maturity.
How do owners react to Pleo's anthropomorphic qualities? After exploring an online forum dedicated to Pleo
owners it became apparent that most of the users are young adults, rather than children as originally
intended. Owners on the forum often refer to their pleo dinosaurs as animals or pets, re-naming them,
sharing and discussing their distinct “personalites” or quirks. For example, user Justbede describes the
behaviour of his Pleo, Baxter:
“The last thing he does is pretty cute/ funny when he manages to find my shoes he likes to stick his nose in
them and have a good sniff (hah poor guy) and do so until he gets stuck and has to scream for help lol.”
Although this behaviour can be explained by the way that the Pleo's obstacle detection system works, the
user prefers to attribute this action to a quirky personality.
There are also many examples of home videos uploaded onto YouTube demonstrating the individuality of the
14
Pleo dinosaur. For example one video entitled “Pleo stole our dog's tennis ball!” shows the dinosaur robot
taking the ball and walking away with it. Although Pleo's actions can be rationally explained as clever
robotics and programming, it seems many people would rather believe that it has a distinct personality. The
rationality assumption is made, the object is deemed to have alterity and a long-lasting relationship with the
object can be formed.
At this extreme end of the scale, the assignment of a personality by the user is hardly surprising. However,
the phenomenon can be observed with many different objects, from the designed to the incidental, from the
heavily anthropomorphised to the featureless. This idea is explored in the next section.
15
How people interact with objects: Play and Psychology
a)Emotional Attachment
Is design everything? Norman suggests that for every product there is a “personal component as well, one
that no designer or manufacturer can provide. The objects in out lives are more than mere material
possessions. We take pride in them, not necessarily because we are showing off our wealth or status, but
because of the meanings they bring to our lives. A person's most beloved objects may well be inexpensive
trinkets, frayed furniture...A favourite object is a symbol, setting up a positive frame of mind, a reminder of
pleasant memories, or sometimes an expression of one's self.” (p6)
This aspect of attraction to an object is forged almost entirely through the mind of the owner and not
through initial design. Self expression is one aspect, while the association of the object with a memory or
feeling is another. While feeling an emotional attachment for an object is not the same as assigning a
personality to it, it may be the first step in this process.
Chapman notes: “Although designers can elicit emotional responses, the explicit nature of the response is
beyond control. The unique assemblage of past experiences particular to each user determines this.” P108
In some cases this can be taken to extremes...
“Occasionally, humans and objects hit it off to surprising degrees; as if by accident, strong empathic bonds
are formed between subject and object, forging practically inseparable unions...one notable example is an
Australian man who felt such strong empathic bonds with his TV set that he actually married it.” P69
This case is interesting as a television set has very few anthropomorphic qualities, it is rather a medium
through which media is displayed. It would be interesting to know if the man married the television because
of the visceral aspects of its design or because he felt an emotional attachment to the programmes being
shown through it. It serves to illustrate the vastly differing reactions to products across the spectrum of
people using them, the extreme here being deeply emotional “love”.
So what are the physiological reasons for emotional attachment to objects? Some aspects are explored in
the following sections.
16
b) Transitional Objects
What is the first important interaction with an object that a person experiences? D. W Winnicott introduces
the concept of a “transitional object” as part of the development of an infant's understanding of the world.
When a child makes the distinction between the self and the rest of the world, he/she needs to define an
object or possession which is not self and cannot be “destroyed”. The concept of the transitional object is
explored by Michael Jacobs in “D. W. Winnicott”:
“Winnicott calls it a possession rather than an object...It is cuddled as well as loved and mutilated, and it
must survive this (which presents it quite a problem for parents, since they cannot change it. Only the infant
can do that!). The object has some warmth and vitality of its own, and it comes neither from without nor
within....It is never under magical control, nor like an external object is it internalized, becoming an internal
object in a Kleineian sense.” p.54
So the infant finds an object which cannot be directly controlled or destroyed by his/her desires, and through
repeated experience he/she learns that it is a part of the real world, not a part of him/her. Winnicott defines
“destruction” further as follows:
“It will be seen that, although destruction is the word I am using, this actual destruction belongs to the
object's failure to survive. Without the failure, destruction remains potential. The word 'destruction' is
needed, not because of the baby's impulse to destroy, but because of the object's liability not to survive,
which also means to suffer change in quality, in attitude.” p93
D.W Winnicott talks about the use of an object in his paper “ The Use of an Object and Relating through
Identifications”. He defines “Use” of an an object as being a more advanced capability than the ability to
relate to an object.
“...usage can not be described except in terms of acceptance of the object's independent existence, its
property of having been there all the time.” p88
17
This idea relates back to the idea of a transitional object, the distinction between the self and the rest of the
world. He proposes that in order to “use” an object a process must be undertaken:
“This sequence can be observed: (1) Subject relates to object. (2) Object is in process of being found
instead of placed by the subject in the world. (3) Subject destroys object. (4) Object survives destruction.
(5) Subject can use object.” p.94
If destruction is defined as a change in quality, then the act of customising an object could be taken as a
form of destruction. If an object survives a destruction attempt by a child, it becomes part of the real world,
so if the opposite is true in relation to a creative process, the customisation of an object could be seen to be
an internalisation of the object. This provides an interesting insight into the many customisable objects that
are on the market, some of which are discussed later.
If the process of customisation is regressive or internalising as this theory may suggest, then it is at odds
with the idea explored in the next section and expressed by Woodrow Phoenix that “play” in general is a way
of expressing desires, not in itself a regressive process. This way of looking at play and customisation is
counter intuitive, initially one might perceive play as regressive and the creativity of customisation as the
more mature aspect of emotional interaction with objects.
If the idea of a transitional object can be related to how adults interact with objects, is the nature of the
transitional object itself changing? Sherry Turkle speculates that the role of the traditional static transitional
object could be taken over by robotic toys or relational artifacts, much like Pleo the dinosaur, which actively
interact with children:
“With them, children’s expectations that their dolls want to be hugged, dressed, or lulled to sleep don’t come
only from the child’s projection of fantasy or desire onto inert playthings, but from the digital doll crying
inconsolably or even saying: ‘Hug me!’”
This human-like engagement could be seen to diminish a child's creativity, a doll providing spoon-fed
18
responses fixes it in a role, closing up its infinite possibilities as an actor in any number of roleplay situations.
Moreover, Turkle suggests that such toys may be used as “self objects”. Psychoanalyst Heinz Kohut describes
this as the idea of experiencing another person as part of the self to help re-enforce a “fragile sense of self.”
“Relational artefacts (not as they exist now but as their designers promise they soon will be) clearly present
themselves as candidates for this sort of role. If they can give the appearance of aliveness and yet not
disappoint, they may have an advantage over human beings as a kind of ‘spare part’, and open new
possibilities for narcissistic experience with machines.”
Turkle voices the opinion that these relational artefacts may be fascinating but ultimately “don’t teach us
what we need to know about empathy, ambivalence and life lived in shades of grey.”
It could be speculated that if children are introduced to these relational artefacts at a young age, the object
may form a mental crutch and provide the expectation that such predictable objects will always be present
to lean on to define the self. But is this so different from using one's possessions to define who we are in
society? This could be the evolution of our material culture.
19
c) Toys, Play and Creative Customisation
An automatic association is made linking toys to children, but does this need to be the case? Is “Play” a
universal, exploratory and expressive process? The value of the toy to any person is explored by Woodrow
Phoenix in “Plastic Culture: How Japanese Toys Conquered the World”:
“The power of toys is not about regression or infantilism. It is the recognition of possibility. Toys are symbols
that have a figurative power to embody thoughts and emotions that may have their origins in childhood, but
are not childish. We recognise parts of ourselves- our secret, wishing selves- in toys. The part of us a toy
touches is our unexpressed, dream(ing) self.” P9
“Play” could be taken as a form of customisation, not a physical change but an emotional personalisation.
Relating back to transitional objects, customisation and play could be seen as ways of “destroying” an
object, by exerting power over it and thus internalising it. It could be said that internalising objects is the
regressive and opposite process to understanding that they are a part of the world rather than the self, as
described by Winnicott. But are play and customisation really regressive, or instead creative, exploratory
processes? Perhaps it is here that the difference between internalisation and self extension becomes
apparent. If play and customisation are both non-regressive processes they cannot be acts of internalisation,
instead they represent self extension, a way of expressing the self rather than acting as crutches to support
it.
It could be suggested that toys including dolls and action figures take anthropomorphism of character to
extremes by objectifying some aspect of human culture or personality. If a toy can be seen to be a metaphor
for some aspect of human emotion, then it can be adopted as object of self-extension, to define the owner:
“When a toy is played with, it becomes more “charged”, more filled with the personality of the owner. As a
toy absorbs and re-enacts plans, secrets, ambitions, and desires, it becomes an essential part of the owner,
both carrier of and link back to intense personal experience.” p9
20
The concept of self extension is explored by Kiesler and Kiesler in the study “my pet rock and me”, finding
that an important aspect of self expression is the creative process of physical customisation. During the
study participants were asked to design a rock:
“Approximately half of the participants drew a face on their rock, a quarter gave it a body,
and about half said they gave the rock “personality.” A possible explanation for the self
extension results is that the spherical rock suggested humanlikeness.”(p4)
Even an object like a painted rock can be described as having a personality when it is customised by its
owner. This result also illustrates the human tendency to anthropomorphise objects. If the suggestion of an
anthropomorphic form of structure is already inherent in an object, even in a subtle way such as in a
spherical rock, it may inspire the creative customisation of the object in order to give it anthropomorphic
form of character.
For example, there is a relatively well established trend for customising toys such as “My little pony”. This
toy is anthropomorphic “in character” as DiSalvo and Gemperle would classify it, the undecorated form
implies a squat, “cute” impression of a humanised animal. The most way to customise the form is to provide
the toy with a new character, either by mimicking characters from popular culture or embodying a cultural
trend. This sort of user design adds an edge of reflective design to the object.
Customisation in itself seems to be a trend in toys aimed at adults, the “Munny” vinyl figure by Kidrobot is
designed
specifically
for
the
buyer
to
decorate
the
simple
anthropomorphic form in any way they see fit (see fig.4). It embodies
both a blank canvas and a cult designer object and a large gallery of
designs is available to view at kidrobot.com. This device of allowing
user customisation takes advantage of the idea that the customer may
well view the completed figure as an extension of self, and therefore
feel that it has more value than one purchased already decorated.
Norman suggests that a creative hobby is a strong way to define the
g 4: "Munny" customised by
Ryan Crippen
21
Fi self, providing a “personal sense of accomplishment”(p55) and an
opportunity to share this success with others.
22
d) Self Expression and Possessions
Objects are often used as a way of expressing oneself, as a way of showing status, wealth or simply a
signifier of who you are. Chapman introduces the idea of empathy, suggesting that emotional connection
with an object requires some projection of personality:
“In 1912, German psychologist Theodor Lipps propounded the theory that the appreciation of a work of art
depended on the capacity of the spectator to project his personality into the object of contemplation. Lipps
claimed that 'one had to feel oneself into it'. He named this cybernetic process Einfuhlung which translates
as 'empathy'.”(p20)
So it could be argued that any object with which an empathic bond is formed becomes an extension of self
in some way. Chapman takes this idea further:
“We transfer resources into products that- in a sense- provide us with existential mirrors, allowing us to view
and experience our dreams and desires in real time.”(p53)
This suggests that products or objects act as vessels for not only self expression but as a medium for
fantasy and playing out desires. This relates back to Phoenix's notion of play as a way of living a dream. Is
the process of expressing oneself through an object, projecting what one wishes to be, similar to the action
of playing with a toy? Perhaps children play in preparation for this type of self expression. After all, it is
commonly held that people have different personalities for different occasions, and perhaps this vital life skill
can be facilitated through objects. If this is the case, self extension is the means by which we use objects to
express ourselves and communicate rather then internalising them in a regressive way.
Norman emphasises the importance of self expression in every aspect of life, including products a person
owns, their home and their behaviour...
“Whether you admit it or not, approve or disapprove, the products you buy and your lifestyle both reflect
and establish your self image, as well as the images others have of you.”(p55)
23
24
e) Self Extension: Avatars
On-line avatars are a good example of
objects designed specifically for self
expression. An avatar is a virtual
object, an image or animated computer
game character chosen or customised
by the user to represent themselves
online (see fig.5). This naturally gives
people the opportunity to present
Fig.5: Avatar creation screen from the game World of Warcraft themselves exactly as they wish to be,
giving them complete control of the
first visual impression they give to others. The object is designed for play, particularly through the medium
of Massively Multiplayer On-line Role Playing Games (MMORPGS). User-created alter-egos present an
interesting area to explore. In the book Alterego: Avatars and their creators, pictures of people are placed
next to pictures of their avatars and their opinions on the games they play are given. In this book Chris Scott
sums up the charm of these on-line avatars by comparing them to toys:
“When we were younger we'd play with action figures and come up with all these stories and characters
using the toys, giving them different powers. So when we got to do it, it was an amazing experience and
something that will always make me smile when I think about it.”(p93)
The attitudes of the users to their avatars are varied, but a common theme is that of entering a “flow” state.
Norman discusses the idea of “flow” developed by Csikszentmihalyi, a state of becoming “Engrossed and
captured by the activity being performed that it is as if you and the activity were one”(p48). Lucas Shaw
notes that “time goes by and you don't really have that much handle on what's been going on outside the
game world”(p13). Some users see their avatar as a separate person. Hoisu, another gamer describes their
avatar as “like having a boyfriend or girlfriend...I definitely don't get confused between my real self and my
virtual self.”(p39) Jilian Dibbel describes an avatar as a “fictional character with a life of its own”(p1)
25
Conversely, other gamers describe their avatars as extensions of self. Thierry TeDunne describes his avatar:
”Naemie is my digital spirit, perfectly realised in her striking image – red headed, savage, generous,
lethal!”(p47). Mi-Jin-Kang says “Where else can you wield a sword and dress like a supermodel? The feeling
of power is intoxicating!”. Serge Creola speaks abut his avatar by saying simply that “Megatox is me and I
am Megatox.”(p89)
An interesting point here is that while some people refer to their avatar as an extension of themselves,
others define their avatar as a separate being. They assign a character, define the way they look and
behave, then role-play though this new entity. It need not be the same gender, age, or even species as
themselves. Having recently played an online game myself, I felt that my avatar Erebis was a separate
character from myself, with her own personality. However, it's hard to know if her personality is on a level
with one made for a fictional character in a book for example, or simply an extension of my own.
Some players even set up business within games based on their creative additions to their own avatars.
Kimberly Rufer-Bach sells virtual tails for avatars in the game Second Life: “Other people wanted a tail like
this too, so i put it on sale...it sells quite well. I sell other things I've made – flapping wings...and all sorts of
other pretty, magical things.”(p53) It shows that there is room for endless customisation and creativity in
interaction with an avatar, even more so than with a vinyl toy or any other engaging physical object.
While this sort of on-line role-play is literal and game play is designed to be utterly engrossing by game
companies such as Square Enix or Blizzard, the avatar objects themselves are virtual. Can physical objects
be as engrossing? Norman notes that the flow state can come from “transactions with valued things”(p48),
particularly objects that are constructed by the user themselves or that re-affirm the identity of the user in
some way. Both these properties apply to a virtual avatar by its nature, it is created, at least in part, by the
user and represents them in some aspect. So it follows that a physical object that is both representative and
created or customised by the user could provoke a deep flow state, akin to the immersive action of virtual
roleplay.
26
27
f) The Psychology of Collection
Leading on from the idea of self extension comes the concept of the collector and their collection.
Baudrilliard places the concept of self projection as the reason for collecting a series of objects:
“The singular object never impeded the process of narcissistic projection, which ranges over an indefinite
number of objects: on the contrary, it encourages such multiplication, thus associating itself with a
mechanism whereby the image of self is extended to the very limits of collection. Here, indeed, lies the
whole miracle of collecting. For it is invariably oneself that one collects.”P14
He then defines the possession of an object as “the reciprocal integration of object with person”.p14
This idea of 'possession' then seems linked to the idea of internalisation, which is different from self
extension. 'Self extension' can be used as a concept to cover both the conscious self extension in the
creation of a character for an avatar-like object and the more straightforward and less conscious use of an
object to define oneself. It can be seen to be different from internalisation, which applies to collectors. It is
the process of taking an object into oneself. A collector categorises and groups objects, exerting control over
them, possessing them and internalising them. In this way his collection becomes part of him.
Possession then is the initial act, after something is acquired by a collector it becomes a possession, or
something which is under complete power of the owner. Braudilliard discusses it in terms of the object;
“...for while the object is a resistant material body, it is also, simultaneously, a mental realm over which I
hold sway, a thing whose meaning is governed by myself alone. It is all my own, the object of my
passion.”p7
He then explores the idea of functional objects and non-functional objects,
“possession cannot apply to an implement, since the object I utilize always directs me back to the world.”p7
28
Therefore, according to Bradilliard, for an object to be collected it must be stripped of its function or
machine-like qualities and re-defined by the owner as a “posessed” object. It also has its ability to be “used”
removed, relating back to Winnicott's idea of the “Use” of an object being more advanced than simply
relating to an object. This points to the first step of an internalising process.
If it is not used, is also stripped of behavioural “personality” inherent in its function (for example, a computer
which seems stubborn or a coffee machine which must be “coaxed” into working). So collected objects have
no inherent personality, only the projected personality of the collector, spread across the collection as a
whole.
Bradilliard also explores the link between sexuality and collecting, noting that the collecting, ordering and
possession of objects occurs to compensate for active sexuality at the pre-pubescent stage and late middleage. He paints a picture of the typical collector as male and at these various life stages. He draws a
comparison between a collection of objects over which one has control and a harem of people as sexual
objects. Later he identifies the idea of the static realm of objects being a place of security against the realm
of human relationships or the knowledge of death, stating that “...the object thus emerges as the ideal
mirror...it reflects images not of what is real, but only what is desirable.”p11
He also observes that a
collector is able to enter a “flow” state when with his collection, absorbing himself in the process of ordering
and expanding his collection.
The idea of the jealousy system is introduced, stating that “possession derives its fullest satisfaction from the
prestige the object enjoys the the eyes of other people, and the fact that they cannot have it”p18 He
discusses this concept in terms of keeping something that is beautiful for oneself, linking it back to sexual
ideas about possessing a person.
29
Asian Ball Jointed Dolls: A case study
a) An introduction to Modern Asian Style Ball Jointed Dolls
Modern asian ball jointed dolls are gradually gaining popularity in the west, often associated Japanese
culture. A recent convention for fans of Japanese animation was held in Leicester in September 2009 under
the name Alcon. This convention was also host to a meet-up for BJD owners, and the following description
of the dolls was written by a doll collector named Ashley Westwood and published in the convention book.
She emphasises the creative aspects of doll collecting:
“Asian Ball-Jointed Dolls (ABJD) or Ball-Jointed Dolls (BJD) are realistic and fully poseable resin dolls
designed and made in Japan, Korea or China. They’re normally collected by adults and are used for artistic
purposes such as photography and drawing. An owner can completely customise their doll by changing
eyes, wig, clothes, even head and hands and painting them, sanding, tattooing and even piercing them to
their hearts desire.”
She continues to describe the various types of doll that fall into this category, and a brief history; these dolls
were not commercially produced until 2001. The full text can be read in Appendix 1.
The photograph below (Fig.6) was taken by myself at a “Doll meet” in London in August 2009:
30
Fig. 6: A Selection of Asian Ball Jointed Dolls
After studying community and company websites, the following observations can be made. These dolls have
a high perceived value and hence a high price due to sumptuous advertising, low production runs and the
craftsmanship and precision in their manufacture. Often dolls are sold on for a similar or greater price
second hand. The dolls n Fig. 6 represent a wide selection of types and styles. Each doll pictured is likely to
cost somewhere between £150 and £700 according to company websites such as doll-zone.com.
The two dolls in Fig.7 represent the large range of sizes
available, the small doll is a 25cm Dollzone Leo mold, while
the larger doll is an 80cm SOOM Mecha-Angel Sabik mold. The
smooth features and idealised beauty of these dolls is
apparent in their facial features, these are designed to be
heavily anthropomorphic in both form of character and
structurally, using DiSavio, Gemperle and Forlizzi's definitions.
They also tick many of Norman's aspects that people are
“genetically programmed” to like, for example; symmetrical
objects, “attractive” people and smooth rounded objects. It is
worth noting that both these dolls are designed to be male,
Fig. 7: Two Asian Ball Jointed Dolls
often these dolls are quite androgynous in form, particularly
featuring feminine men. This is a trend that is also present in some Japanese animation or comic styles,
particularly in “Shoujo Manga” (girl's comics). This visual style represents another link to Japanese culture.
The designers of these objects come close to using every possible way to persuade the user to desire,
purchase and interact with the product, while the product itself has no practical function. The BBC3 Program
“Japanorama” goes into more detail about the Japanese culture surrounding these dolls and the relevant clip
about “Super Dolfie” can be seen on youtube. On this program, Hideyuki Shigeta, the creator of “Super
Dolfie”, or the original BJD, says that Super Dolfie is “a mirror that reflects yourself, when you're happy, it is
happy, when you're sad, it is sad.” On doll owners he says ”They fall in love with the doll in a way, thinking
that the doll is a reborn form of themselves. Then they become an owner.” So the design intent is to project
yourself into the doll so completely that you feel “reborn”. This links back to the concept of play being a way
of living a dream, but also implies that the doll becomes the utterly predictable “self object” that Turkle talks
about, an object designed to be internalised. Is this really how owners interact with the dolls?
31
b) Investigation
A 37 question survey was written and distributed among English-speaking Asian Ball Jointed Doll owners
living in the west in August 2009. The art-sharing community website deviantart.com was used to distribute
the surveys. 11 responses were collected, covering a spectrum of ages, genders and doll preferences. The
survey and answers can be read in Appendix 2.
The aim of this survey was to explore different aspects of assigning personalities to objects, and to test the
ideas put forwards so far using this example. Asian ball jointed dolls were selected for this case study
because of their anthropomorphic qualities, design aesthetic and the creativity of their owners.
c) Analysis of survey answers
Please note: The surveyed person who owns one or several Aisan Style Ball Jointed Dolls is referred to as
“the owner” while Asian Style Ball Jointed Dolls are referred to as “BJDs” or “dolls”.
Owner profile
The surveyed owners ranged from age 18 to mid-thirties. This demonstrates that the dolls are often owned
by adults rather then young teenagers or children, much like the owners of the “Pleo” dinosaur. The gender
of the owners was a female majority, with only one male doll owner. From personal experience this
correlates with experiences of doll meets and the online community.
Interestingly, only two of the owners described themselves as liking dolls as a child. One of the owners
claimed to have been more interested in toy cars and seemed to take offence at the toy association, saying
her dolls are “pieces of art”. Others had a more creative approach, one cut Barbie's hair off and tattooed her
with a biro. If the general trend is that owning BJDs is not generally rooted in a childhood love for dolls, the
root of the interest in the dolls may lie elsewhere, possibly in an interest in Japanese culture.
All the owners who responded to the survey answered positively about liking Japanese culture, with many
saying that they are fans of Japanese fashion or animation (Anime). The reason for this could be the fact
that the dolls come from Japan, China and Korea and have a visual similarity to styles found in Japanese
32
animation. This suggests that “Anime” fans are more likely to become BJD collectors than people who are
not familiar with the genre.
Gender and sexuality
There seems to be a preference for adult proportioned dolls with human rather than animal features. These
adult bodies will have defined chests and genitalia in most cases. Four female owners own male dolls only
while six others own a mixture. The single male owner owns a female doll, stating that any future dolls he
purchases will be female also. The preference for adult-proportioned dolls with the opposite gender to the
owner suggests that there is something more wish-fulfilling or sexual than maternal in the appeal of these
dolls. Both male and female dolls available are very “beautiful” and feminine in their appearance, there may
be something of a combination of role-play and desire in the interaction of the owner with the image these
dolls project.
Most owners define their dolls as having a sexual preference, with a large proportion of dolls which are “not
fussy” or bisexual. This may be because this leaves more options open for role-play situations if the story
takes a turn towards sexuality, or perhaps it it linked to conventions in “Yaoi”. This is Homo-erotic fiction,
animation or comics either created by fans or as professional media, usually with a link to Japan. It is
described in Mobile cultures: new media is queer Asia as “created by and almost exclusively for women”
(p70). Yaoi is often popular with female Anime fans in the west.
Collecting
The number of dolls owned by one person varied from just one to twenty two dolls. Most of the owners
provided pictures of their dolls, some of which have been included in Appendix 2. Most of the owners have
more than one doll, so it seems that there is a trend for collecting. It is interesting to note that Bradilliard's
first requirement that the collected object have no practical use is already fulfilled by the nature of the dolls.
Indeed, the doll is an object under literal control of the owner; its posable nature makes it endlessly
customisable. The object seems to invite a projection of self through this creative interaction. From
observation, the “flow” state mentioned in the context of collectors and on-line avatars is also present here
to some extent with interaction with the dolls. However, the target audience differs from Bradilliard's image
33
of a middle aged male collector, being mainly young and female. This indicates a different behaviour, not
focused on the desire to possess, internalise and exert power over a “complete” set of objects. When the
creative aspects of doll ownership are taken into account, I do not believe that the doll is internalised in a
regressive sense in most cases. I propose that self extension is the main mechanism when interacting with
these dolls.
Self Extension
If self extension part of doll interaction, do owners view their dolls as representations of themselves in some
way? The design intent is certainly to embody the self. The answers were varied, two owners explained that
their doll represented their perfect partner, one owner saying that her doll was her “fantasy of a dream boy”.
This relates back to the relationship that some people reported with their on-line avatars, the earlier
example of a gamer called Hoisu describing their avatar as like “having a boyfriend or girlfriend”. In contrast
to wish-fulfilment based character, other owners said that they felt their dolls represented aspects of
themselves, one owner put it in an interesting way when she said “it's a bit like splitting yourself up into less
complex pieces”. Others said they had one particular doll which was designed to represent themselves while
others explained that their dolls had their own distinct characters.
Three overlapping trends of self extension are then evident, the doll designed to act as a wish fulfilling
fantasy of an ideal person or partner, the doll designed to represent an aspect of the self or the self in
entirety and the doll with its own and distinct character.
Doll Customisation
It seems that customisation is the primary way that an individual character can be applied to a doll, a unique
look makes the doll more “special” and more anthropomorphic. One owner said that she “can't stand them in
default wigs or faceups”. All the owners said that they had customised the clothes and wigs of their dolls to
some extent, spanning a variety of historical styles, contemporary fashion and clothes from subcultures like
Goth, Japanese Rock etc. Most owners have made clothes, accessories or new faceups (makeup) themselves
while others have commissioned them to look a particular way. Exclusivity and individuality seem to be key
in the successful assignment of a personality or character to a doll.
34
It is fairly common for dolls to be changed physically. Several of the owners surveyed have made
modifications by sanding and refining the shape of body parts or added pointed teeth or ear tips. The feeling
that was conveyed about these modifications is that anything is acceptable as long as it fits the character,
even when asked about “extreme” modifications like scars, zombie effects or other drastic permanent
changes. The general opinion seemed to be one of admiration for the skill involved in such a change. This
re-enforces the idea that the doll itself is not sacred as as designed object and can be altered and
customised as part of the interaction with it.
Photography
Creative interaction on a social level seems to involve photography of the dolls, with “photo stories” being
popular; photos put together and captioned like comic strips. Artistic photography or themed photo shoots
are also common. After attending a doll meet to see how the dolls are interacted with, it seems that
photographing other people's dolls or posing dolls together to take interesting shots is a big part of the
social side of the community, as well as re-enforcing the doll's personality. After all, a still image of a doll is
much like a still image of a person.
Character vs Personality
Names seem to be an important part of a doll's character. From the survey answers it was noted that most
of the dolls had been re-named. This indicates that some sort of identity had been bestowed upon the doll
by the owner, elevating it from just a simple object to the level of something worthy of interacting with on a
more human level. The names given were often unusual or exotic or with a Japanese influence, referencing
different cultural trends according to personal preference. It is interesting to see that many of the dolls are
named before they are physically received, one owner said that she had a long list of dolls she wanted to
own and had named them all already. Often it seems that the physical attributes of the doll itself are chosen
based on a its predetermined character. If the character is predetermined, is the “character”, as a separate
entity, more important than the physical doll?
When owners were asked directly whether they believed that their dolls had personalities, four of the owners
35
explained that the dolls are simply representations of characters developed previously and separately from
the doll for use in role-play, storytelling and artwork. In these cases the dolls had been chosen and
customised to fit the characters. One owner described one character she had created that required two dolls
to act as “shells”, as the character had two forms. This separation of character and doll highlights the
phenomenon of people owning “characters” in much the the way an author does. Indeed, all but one of the
surveyed owners had written some form of fiction about their dolls. Role-play online is also common, or
posting messages as though the owner were that character.
Where this distinction between character and doll is present, dolls tend to have original characters. Although
some owners cited real life influences or characters based on avatars from online games, the general view
was expressed that having original characters is what makes the dolls special and unique.
There exists the phenomenon in the doll community of owners simply not “bonding” with their dolls after
purchasing them. One doll that had not even been given a name had been rejected by the owner after it
arrived in a poor quality state. This disappointment prevented the doll from being interacted with in the way
intended. Another user explained that she had failed to bond with a doll after it hadn't looked the way she
wanted it to. She also explained that once lots of people have the same doll, it feels less special and
individual. Other owners said that this had happened to them but they couldn't explain why. It seems that
poor aesthetics and a lack of uniqueness are often to blame.
So some dolls simply embody an existing character, but it seems that others dictate their own personalities
based on their physical attributes. One owner said that she would try to match a doll to a loose existing
character, but often it wouldn't work because “they seem to pick their own personalities!” One owner said
that he waited until he had seen the doll so that he could “form opinions about who she was”. A common
practice seems to be to create a written “back story” for the doll, providing it with a set of personalitydefining experiences. This type of character could be said to be more like a personality.
It seems in these cases that, in the eyes of the owner, the personality is possessed by the doll itself. Owners
gave examples, one describes her doll as seeming to “radiate gentleness to those around him, even though
36
he slouches and looks moody”. Another doll is described as “cold, sarcastic and superior” while a third is
“really grumpy, and will flick his head down if you move him”. One owner said that the personality of her doll
developed over time as it was interacted with; the easily posable design of one of her dolls made him more
”hyper” as he was able to hold interesting poses. These personality traits are linked to the physical
appearance and capabilities of the doll. Some owners stated that their doll “fights against” being dressed or
posed or is “uncooperative”. These are again linked to the design or construction of the doll but these
problems seem to be taken as aspects of the doll's personality by the owner. This links back to the rationality
assumption about personality-like behaviour made by owners of “Pleo” dinosaur robots given earlier.
There seems to exist a spectrum running from a doll embodying an existing external character to a dollinspired character. At the doll-inspired end of the scale, the character of the doll could be called a
“personality” as it is inseparable from the physical doll. At the other end of the scale the doll serves as a
representation of an existing character, the physical doll could be substituted for another while keeping the
character intact. The terms “personality” and “character” therefore distinct in this context.
A “Doll kind of alive”
Dolls are not “relational artefacts” in the sense that Turkle gives the term; they rely on projected emotion
and do not literally ask for attention. But would this level of interaction be desirable? The owners were asked
if they would like their dolls to require looking after like a “tamagotchi, pet or small child”. The answers
ranged from the strongly negative to the enthusiastic. A common view was that needing to feed or comfort
dolls would interfere with their characters; many owners like the non-demanding nature of dolls.
Interestingly, one of the owners who had a positive response to this idea said that they would like it if the
interaction was “more complicated like a furby”. I take this statement to mean that rather than the regular
care that a tamagotchi needs, like feeding, cleaning, playing games, she would like the dolls to communicate
through expression and voice like a Furby. This level of interaction is much closer to Turkle's relational
artefacts, and suggests that if the interaction was subtle and undemanding, perhaps it would be more
suitable for use in ball jointed dolls.
Following Sherry Turkle's concepts of a “robot kind of alive” and a “robot kind of love”, a question was
37
included in the survey asking people's opinions on the concepts of a “doll kind of alive” and a “doll kind of
love”, without explaining further. Four owners stated that they didn't understand the question. Nearly
everyone else interpreted a “doll kind of love” as being about love felt by the owner for the doll, rather than
love “felt” by the doll. Four owners expressed the opinion that they “love” their dolls, in so much that they
enjoy playing with them, but ultimately dolls are inanimate objects and are incomparable to humans or
animals. One owner said that the doll represented a “materialised form of my personality”, recognising the
self extension often present in doll interaction, but ultimately still inanimate. One owner said that while they
could see that a doll is just a doll, “each one is alive to me. Born of my imagination”. Possibly the most
interesting answer was “I think those concepts deserve to be considered different and separate from other
kinds of love”, showing that this owner considers dolls to be distinct enough from other inanimate objects
and from animals and humans to deserve their own “kind of love” and “kind of alive”. Does this then place
dolls somewhere in the middle of a spectrum, from completely inanimate objects to robots to humans in
degrees of “aliveness”?
Perhaps another way of approaching this idea is by rephrasing the question. On the “Den of Angels” on-line
forum the question was asked: “Do you think your doll has a soul?” There were, again, a range of answers,
but some of the positive ones show interesting views. An owner called “Reverie” expressed the following
view:
“i belive my doll has an essence about herself. shes alive but then again shes not. i think her spirit will grown
as i become more attached to her. but i do think she is alive in some aspects. i belive she can think for her
self and has feelings. ill put a dress on her and i can tell she doesnt like it.”
Other responses theorise about objects like dolls absorbing energy from people, prompting discussion on
this idea. An owner called Arylon said:
“I believe that objects can take on some of the energy we direct towards them. Ever been in a house that
just didn't feel "right"? I think that is due to a residual energy. Dolls, like houses, can serve as a vessel for
our emotion. We pour so much into them, that sometimes we swear we see it reflected back.”
38
It would seem that the owners of the dolls have varying levels of attachment, varying from the aesthetic to
the deeply emotional. Many owners see their dolls as a form of self expression. Rationally, most owners
admit that the doll has no literal personality, it isn't alive in a human sense, but many seem to express the
view that such an extreme form of anthropomorphism bestows the object with some sort of personality-like
“essence”. This has been recognised in marketing from the early days of commercially produced dolls, as
demonstrated in extracts from a “letter” to the young owner of the Bebe Jumeau doll in the late 19th century.
It is reproduced in “Antique Dolls” by Agnes Melger:
“Understand me well, I shall never learn anything. I am pretty, magnificent, wonderful, but unfortunately I
am not intelligent... I do not want to be your loving, unbreakable doll, but also a friend who knows how to
console you when your heart is heavy from difficulties...My large blue eyes which shine so beautifully, will
never betray my emotions.” (p40)
This subtle, almost human, personality-like essence seems to be an important part of the appeal of asian ball
jointed dolls, and of dolls in general. Is this the “doll kind of alive” hypothesised? This quality seems to stem
directly from the heavily anthropomorphic appearance of dolls.
39
Conclusion
It seems as though there are a number of ways in which an object can have personality.
Firstly, some objects are intended to act as though they have a personality. Turkle's Relational Artefacts,
Disalvo and Gamperle's “Aware Anthropomorphic Form” and animated toys such as Pleo the dinosaur all
relate to an anthropomorphic object that can literally interact with its owner on a human level. It is a short
leap of the imagination to make the rationality assumption and assign a personality, complete with “quirks”,
personal preferences, emotions and rational decision making. This type of object could be seen as being a
“robot kind of alive”.
Secondly, an object can form part of the personality of its owner in an act of internalisation. The object can
becomes a reliable and crutch-like “Self object”. Collected objects are often internalised as part of a
collection. This process can be seen as regressive, the opposite of the process undergone by a child with a
transitional object.
Thirdly, an inanimate object can be the object of an act of self extension, often facilitated by creative
customisation, either physically or mentally through play. In this case the personality of the object represents
an aspect of the personality of its owner.
Fourthly, an object can have a distinct “Character” deliberately applied to it. These objects act as containers
for a character which exists separately from the object. The Asian Ball Jointed Dolls explored often have this
type of “personality”.
Lastly, an object can develop its own personality in the mind of its owner. It seems that this type of
personality is most easily applied to heavily anthropomorphic, attractive objects. Some form of soul or
agency is perceived within the object, which could be described as being “doll kind of alive”.
These phenomena can be utilised by designers through the use of mechanisms such as anthropomorphism,
robotic interaction, human expression and exclusivity. In the case of the Asian Ball Jointed Dolls studied, the
40
final three types of personality are most applicable in various combinations. An interesting design direction
for objects like these dolls would be to introduce aspects from the first type of personality, that of a
relational artefact. The moral implications of developing more relational artefacts were questioned by Sherry
Turkle, and it could be said that the trend for such objects may lead to more people internalising them and
relying on them over healthy human imagination and interaction. I believe that a balance can be struck to
produce fascinating, interactive and beautiful objects which retain creative aspects, have use and function
and add value to people's lives.
41
References
Aspects of Designing for Emotional Attraction
Norman, Donald A Emotional Design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things, USA: Basic Books, 2004 (p533)
Anthropomorphism: Personality by design
Norman, Donald A Emotional Design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things, USA: Basic Books, 2004
(p138)
Watt, Stuart,“Seeing things as people: Anthropomorphism and theory of mind in mixed society” (2003)
retrieved from http://www.comp.rgu.ac.uk/staff/sw/stuarts_papers/theoryofmind.htm (Accessed 4th june
2009) p.5
DiSalvo, Carl, and Gemperle, Francine. “From seduction to fulfillment: The use of anthropomorphic form in
design” Proceedings of the Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, June
2003. (pp. 67-72)
DiSalvo, Carl, and Gemperle, Francine. “Imitating the Human Form: Four Kinds of Anthropomorphic Form ”
retrieved from http://www.anthropomorphism.org/pdf/Imitating.pdf (Accessed 4th June 2009) (pp. 4-5)
“Aliveness” and Relational Artefacts
Chapman, Jonathan “Emotionally Durable Design, Objects, Experiences & Empathy”, London
Earthscan,2005 (p.53)
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n08/turk01_.html (Accessed 21st August 2009)
Caleb Chung's Animated Toys
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/caleb_chung_plays_with_pleo.html (Accessed 4th June 2009)
http://www.pleodinosaur.com/ (Accessed 4th June 2009)
http://www.time.com/time/2006/techguide/bestinventions/inventions/toys.html (Accessed 4th June 2009)
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.06/mustread.html?pg=11 (Accessed 4th June 2009)
http://www.idahobusiness.net/archive.htm/2009/04/21/Ugobe-Inc-files-for-Chapter-7-bankruptcy (Accessed
4th June 2009)
http://www.jetta.com.hk/main.asp?c=company&p=7 (Accessed 8th August 2009)
http://bobthepleo.com/forums/index.php?topic=515.0 (Accessed 8th August 2009)
http://bobthepleo.com/forums/index.php?topic=80.0 (Accessed 10th August 2009)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Owhqia3ShU&feature=related (Accessed 10th August 2009)
Emotional Attachment
Earthscan,2005 (p.69-108)
Transitional objects
42
Winnicott, D.W, “The use of an Object and Relating through Identifications” International Journal of PsychoAnalysts volume 50 (1969) (p 88, p93, p94)
Jacobs, Michael “D.W. Winnicott” London:SAGE, 1995 (p.54)
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n08/turk01_.html (Accessed 21st August 2009)
http://www.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/objectrelations.html (Accessed 11th September 2009)
Toys, Play and Creative Customisation
Cooper, Robbie Alter Ego: Avatars and their creators, London: Chris Boot Ltd, 2007(p5)
Phoenix, Woodrow Plastic Culture: How Japanese Toys Conquered the World, USA: kodansha International
Ltd, 2006 (p9)
Kiesler, T., & Kiesler, S. “My pet rock and me: An experimental exploration of the self extension concept.”
Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XXXII (32) (2004) (p.4)
http://www.kidrobot.com/2008/munny/(Accessed June 5th 2009)
http://www.aikarin.com/mlp/customs/customgallery.html (Accessed June 5th 2009)
Self expression and Possessions
Earthscan,2005 (p.20) referencing Lipps,T, Academy Lecture, 209/2, Germany, August 1912
Self extension: Avatars
Cooper, Robbie “Alter Ego: Avatars and their creators”, London: Chris Boot Ltd, 2007(p1-93)
The Psychology of collection
Jean Baudrillard, “The System of Collecting”, published in John Elsner & Roger Cardinal; “The cultures of
collecting”, USA, reaktion Books, 1994. p7-23
Asian Ball Jointed Dolls: An Introduction
43
Alcon Event website:http://www.alcon.org.uk/news.php (Accessed 10th September 2009)
Doll Zone company website: http://www.doll-zone.com (Accessed 10th September 2009)
SOOM company website: http://www.dollsoom.com (Accessed 10th September 2009)
Doll Zone Leo product page: http://www.doll-zone.com/showproduct.asp?id=188 (Accessed 10th September
2009)
SOOM Sabik product page: http://www.dollsoom.com/shop/step1.php?number=2207 (Accessed 10th
September 2009)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoujo (Accessed 10th September 2009)
Japanorama Dollfie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LM0oyLFAOY&feature=player_embedded#t=225
(Accessed 21st September 2009)
Asian Ball Jointed Dolls: Investigation
Japanorama Dollfie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LM0oyLFAOY&feature=player_embedded#t=225
(Accessed 21st September 2009)
“Den Of Angels” Forum Website
http://www.denofangels.com/forums
http://www.denofangels.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55172
(Accessed 9 March 2009)
Chris Berry, Fram Martin, Audrey Yue, “Mobile Cultures: new media in queer Asia”, USA :Duke University
Press,2003(p70)
44
Appendix 1) Ashley Westwood: What are Asian Ball Jointed Dolls? Published in the “Alcon”
convention booklet September 2009
What are Asian Ball-Jointed Dolls? By Ashley Westwood (in the Alcon 2009 Conbook)
Asian Ball-Jointed Dolls (ABJD) or Ball-Jointed Dolls (BJD) are realistic and fully poseable resin dolls designed
and made in Japan, Korea or China. They’re normally collected by adults and are used for artistic purposes
such as photography and drawing. An owner can completely customise their doll by changing eyes, wig,
clothes, even head and hands and painting them, sanding, tattooing and even piercing them to their hearts
desire.
Volks and the History of BJD’s
In the late 1990’s, the Japanese company Volks produced 1:6 scale dolls for hobbyists to customise and
called them Dollfie, which is a combinaion of the words Doll and Figure. In 1999 the artist Akihiro Enku
created a 57cm version for his wife. This is considered the first ever BJD as we know and love today. Volks’
first release were called the Four Sisters, and in 2001 the first ever boy doll was released and his name was
Licht. In 2003 Volks hosted a Dolpa (Doll Party) exclusively for Volks doll owners which involved lotteries and
limited edition dolls and clothing sets. They opened their first store in Kyoto in 2004 (called Tenshi no Sato)
and then in 2005 Volks USA (Tenshi no Sumika) arrived in Los Angeles. There are now many companies
throughout Asia that make these dolls, most notably Iplehouse, Dollmore, Dream of Doll, Dollzone, Soom,
Dollshe, Luts, Leeke and Dollfairy Land.
So, tell me about them?
There are essentially five types of BJD’s: SD (1/3 scale), MSD (¼ scale), YOSD (1/6 scale) Tinies and
Anthro’s. Super Dollfie and Dollfie are in fact registered trademarks, but do tend to be used throughout the
community as a generic term to refer to all BJD’s regardless of manufacturer. Size varies from 55cm to 65cm.
They usually represent full grown teenagers or adult bodies types. There is also a range of even larger BJD’s,
from about 70-80cm they are made by Dollshe, Dollzone, Iplehouse and Soom.
MSD’s (Mini Super Dollfire) tend to be more childlike or a ¼ scale adult and measure approximately 4225cm. They were first introduce in 2001 by Volks although they are very popular throughout all the
companies. One of the more famous MSD’s is “U-noa Quluts“) designed by the Japanese hentai artist
Gentaro Araki. They are sold exclusively through a lottery system via Alchemic Laboratory. U-noa has
faceplates kown as Lusis and Sist. They do tend to have maturer bodies, but you can purchase optional bust,
hands, feet, kitty ears, horns and more
The YOSD (Young Super Dollfie) are the children of the BJD world with an average height of 26cm. Volks
only sell them as limited edition, however companies such as Leeke, Dollfairyland and Customhouse sell
them as standard. They are often genderless, with large eyes and chubby bodies.
Tinies are anything below this size, particularly the Puki Puki by Dollfairyland which only measures 11cm.
Anthro’s refer to BJD’s which are made to look like animal, and range from 26-35cms. Cats, dogs and rabbits
are very popular within this range, with Pipos leading the way.
BJD community and culture
Interest in Lolita fashion, Manga, Anime and photography tends to make up a large population of BJD
collectors and is often seen crossing over into the styling of these dolls, whether it be their clothing or
aesthetics. Meet-ups are very popular amongst collectors, the UK itself has regular meetups across the
country in London, Norwich, and Midlands and Yorkshire.
45
Appendix 2) Asian Ball jointed Doll Survey and answers
Survey of Asian Ball Jointed Doll owners on the on-line art community DeviantArt.com carried
out in August 2009
Number of responses: 11
Response 1 : User name mily066
Link to community profile page: http://mily066.deviantart.com/
First, a little about yourself...
Are you male or female?
female
Are you under 20 years old, between 20 and 30 or over 30 years old?
I'm 21
Are you, or were you at one time, a fan of Japanese culture or Anime/Manga?
I'm a big fan of all japanese culture.
The basics...
Do you currently own a BJD?
yep
How many dolls do you have?
I currently own 8 dolls
Do you have any pictures of your dolls?
Yep I do. Source: http://mily066.deviantart.com/gallery/#Bjd-s (accessed September 2009)
(Two examples given)
Are your dolls male or female or a mixture?
I have 3 girls and 5 boys plus one kitty
Are your dolls physically adult or juvenile?
4 of them are adult and 3 are children.
Do you give your doll(s) new names? What are they?
Yep, I always give them names. They are:
46
Momo, Suki, Evie, Archie, Blood, Lake, Lacey and Scat
If you name them, do you name your dolls before or after you have seen them physically?
It all depends on the doll. Sometimes I know straight away what name I want to give them, but sometimes
the name changes completely when I hold them for the first time.
I've based a couple of them on already made characters, but the others formed their own characters as I
played with them.
Are your dolls human in appearance?
They all are, apart from the little cat I have.
One of them is a Kitsune and the other is a species I made up, but they appear human.
Do you save up to buy your dolls from the internet? What's the longest time you've had to wait
for a doll?
Yep, a couple of them were gifts from my parents. I normally end up waiting 6months because I always
want to make sure the doll is the absolute one I want since it's a lot of money.
Wait time to actually get the doll made and shipped is anything from a week up to 2months.
Did you like and play with dolls as a child?
The only dolls I ever really liked was barbie dolls. I never had any interest in proper baby dolls.
A little more in depth...
Do you believe your doll(s) represent you in some way?
I don't believe the dolls do. I think they more are what my ideal would be. I pick out dolls that I think are
good looking. I've been told that one of my girls looks like me with how she is styled, but it wasn't
intentional.
One of the characters I've used for one of the dolls I feel represents a side of me. He's a character that I'm
very fond of.
Have you ever found that you didn't “bond” with a doll after purchasing it? Could you justify
why, was it an aesthetic reason or something less defined?
Yep it's happened a couple of times. I think it's down to them not looking how I want. I've seen people with
the same doll as me but styled different and I adore them, so I think it's down to the wig/face up/clothing.
Also, I noticed that I stopped bonding with a doll when a lot of people had the same mold. They didn't feel
special to me any more because of it.
Do you believe that your dolls have personalities? If so, could you explain a little or give
examples?
I feel that my dolls develop personalities over time. Often I'll give a personality to the doll that I want it to
have, but then when I'm at doll meets or roleplay the dolls character online with friends it changes
completely.
One doll for example, was meant to be a quiet little boy that would enjoy sitting and reading. However,
when I took him to my first doll meet his personality changed completely. Instead he was a big show off and
a hyper little boy. He's known now for creating a little madness at the meets.
This was down to how I posed him and that he was able to hold some pretty impressive poses. I had fun
seeing what he could do and the quiet little boy just didn't suit him anymore.
However, his sister was meant to be the same as him, but when I got her she wasn't good at posing and
had a sad looking face. So instead she's become more of a quiet and caring little girl.
I like my dolls to have personality and a background history because it adds more character to them, rather
then just being dolls.
Before I got properly into bjd's when I only had the one, I never gave him a personality or a name and I
never really bonded with him. He was more just an expensive ornament, but once I started giving them
character they became a whole lot more.
If your dolls have personalities, do you buy the doll to fit an existing character or does the doll
itself inspire the personality?
47
More often I buy dolls that I absolutely love and work a character to fit with them. However, with my latest
doll I had a character that I've been wanting to create in resin for over 5years, so I've been hunting for a
face that would work for him.
Other times I'll have a loose idea for the sort of character I want and will see which of my dolls will be able
to take that on. (however, often that doesn't work out because they seem to pick they're own personalities!)
If you bought the doll to fit an existing character, was this one from an existing source such as
a TV show or book or an original character?
He's an original character that I made up years ago and is very personal to me.
If your doll(s) have personalities, are the personalities of your dolls adult or juvenile, and does
this fit with the body type of the doll?
The personalities normally fit in with the body type of the doll. Some of my dolls are human and are brothers
and sisters so the body reflects the age I've given them. The ones that are fantasy based have adult bodies
anyway.
I personally don't like my characters having an older personality but being in a younger body etc.
If your doll(s) are adult in personality, do they have a sexual preference? Are they homosexual,
heterosexual or bisexual?
Two of my boys are bi, my girl is straight, she has a daughter :3
Do you make up stories or write fiction about your doll(s)?
Yep, I roleplay with a friend, and we write stories etc together with our dolls. One of them I used to roleplay
as a character with another friend before I knew about dolls. I've got a story I want to write with him but
never got round to it.
What do you think about the concepts of a “doll kind of alive” or a “doll kind of love” as
opposed to a person kind of love or a pet kind of love?
I do love my dolls but I don't think of them being alive, they'd also never be able to replace a pet or a
person. They're more like a continuation on from my childhood when I used to really enjoy playing with dolls
and dressing them up. They're like a grown up barbie.
Have your dolls ever behaved in an unexpectedly human-like way?
Only if I've posed them in a human like pose. Sometimes in photo's I've taken I think they look very human.
One photo I took of my doll I did a double take on because I thought it was a real man asleep and I was
confused about how the picture would have got on my camera, before I realised.
If Ball Jointed Dolls required looking after like a tamagotchi, pet or small child, would this add
to their appeal in your opinion?
I think it would, I used to enjoy tamagotchi's and if I could say have my kitsune character like that then I
would love it. The only thing I think would be different is I'd be more careful about the amount I bought and
may only have a couple instead of 8.
Customisation
Do you customise your doll(s) by buying and changing clothes and accessories?
Yes I do.
If so, are these clothes and accessories in a historical style? From a subculture? Fantasy?
Contemporary? Tell me about them.
One of the dolls is meant to have clothes that have an 18thC feel to them. I've got to make his clothing to
be able to achieve that. At the moment most of my dolls are dressed in a modern style. One of the boys
wears smart clothing like a shirt and trousers. My girls normally wear cute looking dresses. My little boy is
dressed like a typical boy you'd see today.
My kitsune is going to be dressed in traditional Japanese kimono etc, but again it's something I have to
make.
48
Do you customise your dolls by making them clothes or accessories?
Yes, I make some of the clothes for them. More the sort of stuff that is impossible to buy.
Do you do your own face-ups and/or body blushing?
Normally I get the company to do it because I can't manage the extreme fine detail they do with eyelashes
etc, but I do my own body blushing and have painted a faceup myself.
Do you do mods such as vampire teeth? if so, what are they?
No, none of my characters require modding like that.
What is your opinion on very extreme mods such as zombie effects, extensive scars or wounds?
Do you create them or commission them for your dolls?
I'm okay with it. I think it's better when people aim to make it look realistic as possible as it creates more of
a wow factor. I enjoy looking at how people are able to transform the dolls.
Do you make your own dolls or doll parts?
nope, although I do want to have a go at doing it.
Community...
Do you provide a service for other doll owners that you charge for? if so, what is it?
Nope, although my mum wants to break into making clothes.
Do you make photo-stories or photograph your dolls in an artistic way and share the pictures?
Yes, I photograph my dolls and share the pictures on forums and with friends.
Are you active in the Ball Jointed Doll community? If so, what are your favourite aspects?
I'm active in 3 bjd forums and they all offer different things.
One of them is for my friends I meet up with, another is a general type and the other is more of a relaxed
bjd forum with a wide range of users where you can talk about other things aside dolls.
I love the close friendships I now have. I've met a wide variety of people from all walks of life that I
probably would never have met before.
I also enjoy the photography side of things.
It's also nice being in a community where you can share your passion with others.
What are your least favourite aspects in the Ball Jointed Doll community?
there aren't many really. I guess I might say people attempt to scam. It's hard to know who to really trust
when your buying from another and your dealing with such large sums of money.
In your experience, what do other people who don't have BJDs think of the dolls? Do you have
any examples of how people have reacted to them?
Some people are fascinated by them and want to know more, others think they are creepy and frown upon
you because you still ';play' with dolls.
People have called me weird or have looked at me as a freak in the past. I only really take them out in public
if I'm meeting up with doll friends because I don't like to have to deal with all the attention they bring about.
The worst situation is a little girl was fascinated with my friends bjd but her father dragged her away
claiming we were all weirdo's for having the dolls with us. I found it insulting because it wasn't like we were
sat playing a game with them, we were merely carrying them in our arms.
Thats why I enjoyed making friends who shared the same interest because I now have friends who don't
think it's weird and I can happily chat about dolls etc with them.
If BJDs were very common in the country where you live would they be more or less interesting
to you, or would it not make a difference?
I'd still be as interested as what I am now. I'd love for bjd's to be more available where I live. However, I
also like the fact that they're so special because it's not something you see everyday.
49
Response 2 : User name yenna-photo
Link to community profile page: http://yenna-photo.deviantart.com/
female
between 20 and 30
Well, I used to be a big anime/manga fan, nowadays I just enjoy it without the fan factor.
The basics...
Yes
20 (+ a few heads without bodies)
Do you have any pictures of your dolls? (post links if you have them, if not don't worry)
Just see my gallery here. Source: http://yenna-photo.deviantart.com/gallery/ (accessed September 2009)
(two examples given)
I have both
I have children, teenagers and adults.
I do, and I'm too lazy to list them all. ^^' But they're named so that they fit their characters.
50
Both. Sometimes I already have a name and then decide a doll for it and other times I wait to get the doll in
my hands before I think of a name.
Most are, but not all of them.
for a doll?
I do. The longest I've waited was a bit less than 5 months.
Not as much as I enjoyed animal toys.
Not really?
I've had trouble with one of my dolls for years. I love the look of the doll but I can't really find meaning in
having it, and yet I can't let it go.
examples?
The dolls themselves? No. They're just dolls. But I have put characters I've created into them.
Both. I often look for a doll to be a certain character (though most of the time the character is still very
vague), but sometimes I look at a doll I want and create the character based on the doll.
All my characters are originals, they wouldn't feel mine if they weren't.
I have child, teenager and adult characters. Though, the characters develop through RPG and photostories,
so some of the characters are older than their doll forms. For example, I have a doll whose character was 17
when I got it 4 years ago. The character is now 21, but I left the doll at 18, because it looks so young.
It varies. Most are heterosexual, but I have a few bi- and homosexuals in the mix as well. They sexuality
doesn't really play that big a part in my stories.
Yes.
I'm not sure if I understood the question but... I don't think you can compare dolls to any living creatures. I
love my dolls and I would never want to let them go (the materialist that I am), but they're definitely not the
51
same as my pets or family/friends. They're just objects.
Err... no. They're just dolls and they behave/pose like I make them to.
God no. It's enough that they need to cleaned, re-coated and re-face-upped at regular intervals. I'd give up
the hobby if I needed to feed them, too. I love dolls because you can do whatever you want with them and
you'll never hear a single complaint.
Customisation
Yes.
I have a variety of styles. Some dolls wear casual clothes, some punk, others historical. And if the style I
want to photograph/sew doesn't fit their characters, I'll do an out-of-character photoshoot.
Yes.
Yes.
Well... I haven't done any radical mods, but I have fixed some of the sculpts I haven't been happy with, for
example; I've sanded down necks, cheeks/chins, ears, breasts, customized joints and so on.
I do like to do scarring myself, but such mods of mine are always removable. Extensive mods by others are
nice, but I don't need them for my dolls.
I've made some horns for my dolls. I'd like to make a doll of my own but I'm not very good at sculpting.
Community...
I do face ups and sometimes sew clothes.
Yes.
Not really. I post my photos/stories and sometimes take part in conversations, but I wouldn't call myself very
active.
The craziness. I find people who think their dolls are alive/possessed by ghosts more than a little creepy. xD
I hear a lot of people have negative expeciences, but I've only ever had good ones. Everyone I've ever
52
showed my dolls to, have been very understanding even if they weren't so interested themselves.
Wouldn't make a difference. But it would be really nice to buy BJD related things from actual stores instead
of the internet.
Response 3 : User name SyntheticGeneration
Link to community profile page: http://syntheticgeneration.deviantart.com/
Female
I'm between 20 and 30
Yes, I'm very interested in japanese culture and fashion
The basics...
Yes
5
Source: http://syntheticgeneration.deviantart.com/gallery/ (accessed September 2009)
A mixture
53
All of them are over 20, adult
Jun, Megumi, Kiyoshi, Hizaki, Teru
Yes, because they are characters of my own creation or real persons (Hizaki is Hizaki from Versailles)
Yes
for a doll?
I had to wait 5 weeks to get my BJD Teru
No, I never liked it. I prefered little cars and playstation, and I still like it. My dolls are my pieces of art.
I have only one girl, and she represents me. My other characters are OCs and they all have something from
me. And Hizaki, is Hizaki XD
No, never
examples?
They are concrete representations of my characters
I buy the doll to make the character
Original characters, and real persons
They all are adult.
Jun and Megumi are heterosexual (even if Jun is bi-curious), Teru and Kiyoshi are homosexual, and Hizaki is
heterosexual (like the real one).
Some of my dolls come from the novels I write.
... I don't know
54
Hmm, no.
yes, it could be fun.
Customisation
Yes, all of them
it depends of the character, but all of them are Jrockers, and Megumi is Gothic Lolita.
Yes
Yes
No
No, but I would like to make scars on Teru's back because in my novel he got 2 sword slashes in his back.
No
Community...
No, not yet, but I will do some make up later
Yes
Yes, I send some photos
... I don't know
No, not really. Except the fact some people believed my dolls were girls.
No difference
Response 4 : User name Lainnocence
Link to community profile page: http://lainnocence.deviantart.com/
55
BJD Questionnaire
Female
Exactly 20 years old :'D!
I wouldn't call myself a fan, but I like anime/manga. I'm picky on which titles though.
The basics...
Yes
Six-ish (Not counting the floating head)
Source: http://lainnocence.deviantart.com/gallery/#Ball-Jointed-Dolls (accessed September 2009)
Male, the only female is the Baha cat, but it doesn't have any ';parts' if that counts.
The boys are between the ages of 17-21...but the cat, Nyaako...the age is unknown but she looks like a
baby ;;
Shion, Tora, Hoax, Nyaako, Calliel. The other doll has no name or face-up.
56
Usually before, I plan their characters out in my head first.
Yes except the cat ;;
for a doll?
Probably half a year. I save up slowly to buy them though I haven't purchased a new doll in a long time.
Now my current obsession is rekindled in buying lolita dresses xD
I played with ponies and dinosaurs ;; I somtimes played with Barbie too but mostly only with friends.
I guess Hoax and Tora represents my fantasy of a dream boy.
Yes. Quality reason mainly...I purchased a Dolkot Day and he came to me in awful quality. His skin was
yellowed and had a badly moulded body. After that I just completely fell out of love with him and threw him
into a box. Even now he still has no face-up/character and I don't think anything of him. I'll sell him one day
but I'll never get the price that I paid for him back.
examples?
I believe they have the personalities I created for their character, nothing more nothing less.
The doll is fit into the existing character. Their face-up is made to fit the character ^^
An original character. I could never own a doll from a fandom, I'd feel like I'm betraying my own original
characters.
I'd say Tora does not fit with his personality because he is quite a slutty character ;; But his body is young.
I've been meaning to buy a minifee to fit him into but my obsession with lolita clothing is holding that way
back xD
Tora is bisexual, Hoax is...hetero but makes a special exception for Tora. Shion is homosexual, Calliel is
...homosexual too probably. I made all these characters when I was a raving yaoi fangirl. Now, not so much
xD
Haha yes but it's embaressing to admit that because my writing is atrocious xDD
I feel it is a endeared possession and a materialised form of my creativity...but I don't think of it as alive and
not the same kind of love I feel for another human.
57
Nope
It would annoy me xD! Might be cute for Nyaako...But if I had to look after my adult characters like they
were vegetables, I think it would lose all appeal to me.
Customisation
Yes. I can't stand them in default wigs/faceups...
They come from the style I've set for their story. It's difficult to find anything exact, but I can find clothes
pretty close.
No I can't make anything ;_;
I mostly do my own face-ups. Body blushing, as gorgeous as it is is too much work for me x_x
No, but I'd like that for my vampire characters.
Zombie effects I think are pretty awesome. Extensive scars and wounds however I find quite jarring and
disturbing.
I tried once xD Failed spectacularly...
Community...
Face-ups I used to do until I moved house. I can't remember my price I charged for them xD I might start
makign mini foods again, though I haven't tried selling those yet.
I prefer to photograph them in an artistic way...
I'm not active anymore. I used to go there everyday, but lolita ahs taken over my life again now.
A lot of...weirdos and snobs o_o;
And to be honest, I'm not so keen on meetups. Maybe I'm just anti-social xD;
They mostly like them...Though some people have been really freaked out. But no big deal.
58
Wouldn't make much of a difference. I'm not obsessed with my BJDs or anything. I just like them for the
way they are, not because it's a subcultural fad or anything. They're just a lovely thing to own ♥.
Theres my answers, overall, I love my dolls but I'm not obsessed with them right now. I think I can only
handle one costly obsession at a time, and right now it is lolita, so this probably isn't the best time for me to
answer this questionnaire xD
Sorry if my answers were dissapointing *desk* I feel a little bit sad I don't play with my dolls half as much
as I used to.
Note: “lolita” refers to a Japanese fashion trend involving very “cute” or child-like dresses and
accessories. Typically they gave a Gothic or Victorian edge and involve frills, lace and bonnet
style hats.
Response 5: User name craftylilsewandsew
Link to community profile page: http://craftylilsewandsew.deviantart.com
female
Between 20 and 30
yes
The basics...
yes
22
Yup loads, some on my DA and some on my facebook
Source: http://craftylilsewandsew.deviantart.com/gallery/ (accessed September 2009)
59
mixture
I have adults and children
Yup: Silas, Daishiro, Jato, Emanuel, Victoria, Shigeru, Gayle, Dorothy, Arabella, Snowelle, William, Mae,
Ruddigar, Tiras Li, Ellody, Candy, Maddox, Bo, Banning, Letheo, Brody and August
Normally after
Yes, although Tiras Li and Letheo are elf, Ruddigar is a vampire and Ellody is a Draenei
for a doll?
Normally. It took over a year to get hold of Maddox as he is a Dollshe Husky. Order time was probably Ellody
who took 6 months to arrive after I bought her!
Mmm not really
I think each of them has an element of me in some way or another.
Yes, I’ve had four or five that have had to move on. I cannot exactly define why we didn’t bond, each has
been beautiful, but I just felt they didn’t fit in with the others.
examples?
Daishiro definitely does; he seem to radiate a gentleness to those around him, even though he slouches and
looks moody
I have done both
I have original characters (Letheo was to fit a character in a book I wrote), but TIras Li and Ellody are based
on my warcraft characters lol!
All fit with their body type
I think most are heterosexual, although Ellody is gay
60
yes
Its completetely different. I would be upset if something happened to one of them, but they are essentially
replaceable, love of a human is different.
I guess I find they sit in certain ways which portrays a personality. Daishrio is very slouchy and Emanuel just
falls into a really snooty pose like he knows he’s gorgeous
Hmm I would probably buy one that did that yes.
Customisation
yes
I have some steampunk dolls as I love that fashion, there are also fantasy (with chain mail and armour) as
well as some punks/Lolita/rock.
yes
yes
I have made elf ears and will be doing tendrils and a tail for Ellody
I think they look pretty cool but aren’t really for me
No but would love to
Community...
No but I would really love to be able to make clothes good enough to sell.
Sometimes I take photographs and post the pictures on DA or the forum
Yes I am very active within the community. I've been on the forum over 3 years now and regularly go to
meet-ups and chat to other doll collectors on a daily basis.
What are your lest favourite aspects in the Ball Jointed Doll community?
I don't like the cliqueness that surrounds certain doll companies and I don't really like how some collectors
61
can be really rude about someone elses choice of doll.
I have only had positive comments about my dolls so I'm really pleased that people seem to find them
interesting. Most people have been very curious and wanted to know more about them which is a good thing
in my book.
I don't really think it would make too much of a difference to me, although I would worry that there may be
a sudden surge in low quality dolls being released but companies just trying to make a quick buck. It would
certainly be a shame if this happened
Response 6: User name Niki-UK
Link to community profile page: http://Niki-UK.deviantart.com
Female
Over 30
Yes, I'm a long-time fan.
The basics...
Yes
Two that qualify as BJDs, plus a few Pullips and other smaller non-BJD type dolls.
I have a lot of pictures. Sources: http://niki-uk.deviantart.com/gallery/#_browse--2 and
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3413007&l=a2816cd895&id=757998337 (accessed september
2009)
62
My current two BJDs are both boys.
One's adult, one is a mini/super-deformed/chibi style.
Yes - Kotaro and Flux.
With these two, I named them before I physically owned them.
Yes, although Flux has pointed ears.
for a doll?
Yes, but they were both birthday presents and I didn't have to wait very long to get them. They both arrived
within a couple of weeks of ordering.
I wasn't into the kind of dolls little girls usually play with (humanoid ones). I really liked action figures and
plush animals though. I loved toys in general and I still do.
Most probably yes.
I've not experienced that as yet.
63
examples?
Yes, I feel both my BJD boys do. Much more so than the mass produced dolls I own such as the Pullips,
even though to an extent I like to feel those have personalities too. The BJDs, while not one-offs as far as
their moulds go are made unique through their individual face-ups and changeable features such as eyes,
hair and clothing. I project personalities onto them based partly on how I personally interpret their look. I
see individual characters in them, which brings me neatly into the next question...
With my guys so far it's basically been one of each case. I fell in love with the look of my first doll because
he resembled a character of my own design, so I wanted to make him into my muse, Kotaro. My new boy
Flux had such a characterful look about him that I created a personality especially for him, based on what I
saw in the doll design. I just thought he looked awesome and seemed full of attitude.
Kotaro was my own original character. The doll that became Flux reminded me a little of an idol of mine; the
late great Japanese musician Hide (Hideto Matsumoto). So there some real life inspiration there for Flux's
character.
Yes, they pretty much match their body types. Kotaro is by character an ancient incubus with the outward
appearance of a twenty-something male. He is intellectually mature but quite unaccustomed to human
emotions which can make him a little unpredictable. Flux is perhaps even more of an oddity because his
proportions are so caricatured. His personality is suitably crazy for that reason.
Kotaro is bisexual.
The character of Kotaro originated from a web comic I used to draw, so in a way yes. But in his case the
stories are focussed on the character rather than the doll specifically.
I think those concepts deserve to be considered different and separate from other kinds of
love.
The only example I can think of right now is when Kotaro has seemed to fight against me while I've been
dressing him. I was thinking "What do you have against wearing these clothes?!"
For some I think it would add to their appeal, but not for me. I prefer that it's completely down to the
individual as to how to look after them. I don't currently have the time to dedicate to giving my dolls the
kind of regular-like-clockwork attention that those other things require. I like that it's an as-and-when thing;
when I'm not playing with the dolls, they're proudly on display. That's good enough for me.
Customisation
Oh yes.
64
I have various styles for my guys, especially for Kota. He has his default outfit which is very cyberpunk/visual
kei, then there's a OOAK outfit I commissioned for him based on the Eighth Doctor from Doctor Who. It's a
very renaissance/aristocratic style and wouldn't look out of place on Anne Rice's Lestat (vampire). He also
has a traditional Japanese gentleman's outfit consisting of a short kimono jacket, undershirt, belt and
hakama trousers. He has some contemporary clothes as well including a smart business suit.
Flux has an animal suit that he came with (it kind of makes him resemble a black cat or a possum); he also
came with a bathrobe and a black belly bib.
I do, although I'm not a talented seamstress so I find it difficult to make clothing for a large doll such as
Kotaro. I'm quite handy at making accessories such as necklaces though and I can hand-sew small things.
I've made Flux an experimental little outfit consisting of a black and red chequered top with a belt and black
PVC shorts.
I do now! Flux has been the first doll I've tried doing this work on and I'm happy with the result. I
commissioned Kotaro's face-up to my specifications though as I didn't want to risk messing it up myself. I
wasn't confident enough that I knew what I was doing back then, and the face-up artist did a perfect job on
him. Money well spent for the peace of mind!
I haven't as yet, but I think I could do it if I really wanted to.
I don't commission them myself, but I have a great admiration for the artistry involved in such things. I'm
fascinated to see extreme mods that other people have done. Again, I think I could attempt extreme mods
myself but haven't felt the inclination to do any as yet.
Not BJD-wise.
Community...
Not currently.
Yes, I do a bit of that.
I'm something of a part-timer/lurker there but I do love the friendliness within the community, the wealth of
information that's available and the community-specific online marketplaces.
What are your lest favourite aspects in the Ball Jointed Doll community?
I've not really encountered anything I don't like about the BJD community, but I was a little disappointed
recently to find that HZ RORO dolls (same type as my boy Flux) are not really considered a true BJD on the
Den of Angels forums and are therefore off-topic there. It's a shame because I would like to find an area in
the community that's open to discussing these dolls (which in my view are legitimate BJDs as they are ball
jointed and strung; I don't see why the number of joints should be an issue, but then I'm not exactly an
authority on them). So I guess my least favourite aspect would be the criteria by which BJDs are classified
within the community, as to me it can come across as unnecessarily strict or snobbish.
65
Mostly people seem to be amazed/fascinated by them. Quite a few seem to think they're freaky, but then
some people think that of dolls in general and many BJDs are particularly 'alive-looking', so I can understand
them feeling disturbed by that. One person said to me about Kotaro "It's amazing, but I couldn't live with it
in my house. I'd be scared it'd come to life and get me in the night!"
Over a year ago I met the actor Paul McGann (who plays the Eighth Doctor) and I showed him Kotaro
dressed as him. Paul joked about it being rather spooky but he became increasingly curious about the doll
and started asking questions about it. He ended up getting a photo taken of Kota to take home and show his
son (who he said resembled Kota now more than he did). I saw Paul again recently and he remembered me
the moment he spotted me with my BJD! So these dolls can definitely leave a lasting impression!
I don't think it would make much difference in terms of my interest in them, I would still love them. But if
they were more freely available, maybe it wouldn't seem like such a special community for BJD owners to be
a part of. That could have both positive and negative sides. On the positive side, BJDs might be cheaper to
buy if they were more common, but by the same token maybe they wouldn't be so precious and well
treasured by people.
Response 7: User name Nikolai
Link to community profile page: http://Nikolai.deviantart.com
Female
Between 20 & 30 (21)
I am.
The basics...
Yes.
Just the 1 at the moment.
Source: http://nekolai.deviantart.com/art/Mysterious-Traveller-2-134448818 (accessed September
2009)
http://nekolai.deviantart.com/art/Julian-134587669 - This last
one is how I imagine him, I’m not sure if its what you wanted by way of pictures or not though.
66
Male
Adult
Julian.
Mine are always named before. I have a long list of dolls I would like to own someday and they each have a
name already.
Yes.
for a doll?
I bought Julian’s with my student loan but it was almost 2 years before I could afford to buy him a head as
well. He’s still not complete.
Yes. Barbie mainly, and my brother’s Action Men.
I see them more as the characters than extensions of myself. I guess they would represent my imagination
though.
Not yet.
examples?
Yes, I believe each character has their own personality. Julian for example is cold, sarcastic and thinks
himself superior. Kristos (another doll I want) is wise, generous and understanding.
I buy the doll to fit with the character, but sometimes I see more than one doll mold that could be used.
My current doll is based on a character from The Forbidden Game series by L. J. Smith. The rest are
characters I have made up randomly or through forum role play.
Yes, Julian is an adult in both personality and body.
I think Julian has no preference really. So bisexual.
Yes. I’m working on giving them each a ‘backstory’.
67
I can see that they are just dolls, but at the same time each one is alive to me. Born of my imagination, if
you will.
Julian seems very uncooperative sometimes. Like he doesn’t want me to be bothering him.
I think that would be a bit weird. As much as they are alive in my mind actually having to feed them or
something would be a step too far I think.
Customisation
He doesn’t have eyes or a wig at the moment, but he will do.
It depends on what material I have available, and what I think will suit them.
Julian has a punky jacket and trousers made from some plaid material that used to be my skirt. He also has
a smart pair of trousers and a waistcoat made from a pair of my old trousers.
Yes, I like to make him clothes.
No, but I’d like to someday.
Do you do mods such as vampire teeth?
if so, what are they? No.
If I had a zombie character that warranted such mods then yes. But I would only do it if it fit the character.
No.
Community...
No, although I’d love to make and sell clothes eventually.
I try.
I’m active online, but I’d like to get more active with meetups as well.
My favourite aspect is seeing the pictures. So many people can have the same mold of doll but they are all
different and unique characters. It’s fascinating.
Some people can be a bit snobby or elitist.
68
I don’t think they really understand why we would want them, or why we would pay so much money for one
either!
As long as the quality of them didn’t suffer from it, then I don’t think it would matter.
Response 8: User name Ehryn
Link to community profile page: http://ehryn.deviantart.com/
Female
Between 20 and 30 (23)
Yes
The basics...
Yes
11 and 2 on layaway ^^
Yes, but sadly none very good ones, sorry =(
Mostly female or feline! (one boy, 5 girls, 4 cats)
Mostly Adult (apart from the puki!)
Yes:
Paige
Clara
Pierre
Claudia
Spooky
Ruby
Nanette
Anor
Hessa
69
It depends, some get their names right away, others wait until they arrive, but mostly before they arrive.
Some of them!!
for a doll?
Yes, or pay in chunks with layaway. Longest wait is (about) 7 months! It was when China had a zillion feet of
snow and no post was coming out @_@
Nope!! XD I cut my barbies’ hair and gave them biro tattoos XD
Not really >.>
Yes. The reason… some were aesthetic, some were practicality (omg I canNOT carry a weighty 71.5cm boy,
I’m too small and weak XD) and others… I just went off the character and thus didn’t need the mould any
more. Though, even if I don’t like the character, if I’m still really keen on the mould I’d just change the
character.
examples?
That’s a slightly… difficult question. I wouldn’t say I ‘believe’ my dolls have personalities, since that would
suggest they actually do, but I do project ‘characters’ on to my dolls, which I use in a written story – the
characters have personalities, and the dolls are the physical representation of the character, but the dolls
themselves don’t have personalities XD So… I can’t really answer the second half of the question, as I don’t
think of their personalities in that way – I’d just be talking about my story characters.
Bit of both really =3
All my dolls are original characters =)
All of my dolls that have characters have ‘adult’ characters (I think character is the term you’re really looking
for here) though I do have one who is going to have two ‘shells’ (doll-form of the character) as she’ll have
her sidhe form and her human form – the sidhe form is a childish mould, and the human form is adult.
My characters are either not fussy (don’t even notice gender), bisexual or straight. I tried homosexual
characters, they didn’t last long XD
Yes
70
I’m sorry, I don’t really understand the question… I ‘love’ my dolls, in the way that I appreciate the way they
look and I am aware of their cost and want to take care of them, but it’s incomparable to ‘person’ or ‘pet’
love… is that what you mean? They’re certainly not ‘alive’ in any way, they’re inanimate objects XD
No… >.> They just sit there and look pretty
No. I wouldn’t be interested. If I wanted a tamagotchi, pet or child, I’d have one – I like the no muss no fuss
nature of BJDs XD
Customisation
Usually, yes.
th
Most of them are (attempts at) 18 century, but one or two just have clothes that they wear. One doll is a
bit punkish.
My artistic ability is in negative numbers, so no =3
I’m trying to learn, but currently, no.
No.
My dolls don’t require them, but they don’t bother me – what someone else does to their doll is their
business, and while I might go ‘uuuuurgh’ at seeing them in pictures, I still think they’re cool and admire the
artist or owner for having the courage to essentially maim their $500 doll XD
Not yet, but I’d like to.
Community...
No.
I don’t have a very good camera so not right now, but when I get a camera I will.
I am in the Midlands meetup community – outside of that, not really. I don’t have the money to travel far
(too much spending on dolls! Lol) and it’s taken me a long time to find a down-to-earth BJD group who are
socially pleasant.
OMG THEY’RE SO EXPENSIVE?!
WHY WOULD YOU SPEND SO MUCH ON A BIT OF PLASTIC?!
71
OOOOH, THEY’RE PRETTY, WHERE DID YOU GET THEM?
CREEPY CREEPY CREEPY GET IT AWAY FROM MEEEEEEE!
Most people are either intrigued by their looks but balk at the pricetag, or are just scared of them, lol.
I don’t know. I doubt I’d care to be honest =3
Response 9: User name not given
Male
22
Still a fan
The basics...
Yes
Just 1 
I do but I don’t have links at the moment. She is an AS Cinderella
Female. All future dolls probably will be.
My doll is 18
Alexandra (Lex)
After she arrived.
Yes
for a doll?
I have the money I don’t need to save up. I can but one as soon as I want.
No. but I very much liked/like bears
72
My dolls personality is probably similar to mine in most ways, except she is a girl.
I haven’t really bonded fully yet. I think its because I don’t have a full story for my doll yet, or a full
personality, that I cant quiet realise her yet.
examples?
My doll is definitely sarcastic, and a bit bitter.
The doll had the personality. I don’t think I could form strong opinions about who she was till I had seen her.
n/a
Adult. It does fit in with the body.
Hetrosexual.
Not yet.
I don’t understand the question
No.
It could do yes. Though it might be tedious after a while? Maybe If it was more complicated like a furby?
Customisation
Yes. I think its important for their to be lots of clothes. You cant express yourself with a single outfit so
neither can a doll.
Punk/Goth fashion
If I was confident in making clothes I would.
73
No. im useless with that sort of thing. I wouldn’t mind a tattoo though.
No.
I don’t really understand the appeal. I cant imagine caring for something that doesn’t look nice.
No.
Community...
No.
Not yet. I do however like taking dangerous shots. There is a lot of satisfaction in taking a photo most
people wouldn’t try for.
Not very.
A lot of people are confused by them, though many seem to find them visually appealing, so those ones can
understand the want to have one.
I think if it got to the point where everyone had them, like pokemon in the cartoon, or beyblades It might be
cool because so many people would understand the idea of them having a personality, and everyone would
treat the doll like a person, which is what we all want isn’t it?
Response 10: User name felicia-kitty
Link to community profile page: http://felicia-kitty.deviantart.com/
Female
25yrs
Yes (but don’t tell anyone D)
The basics...
Yes
Four
74
Source: http://felicia-kitty.deviantart.com/gallery/#BJD (accessed September 2009)
All male
Adult and a Chihauhau dressed as Biggles XD
All my dolls have names. They are Ilya, Kostya, Claus and Martel. I love naming, its one of the most fun
parts of dolls for me because i have a deep rooted fascination with languages, meanings, sounds and
personality. I also think that names are very important and shape character/personality.
It depends. All my dolls were named before i bought them except Claus who was a surprise present. Ilya
was named but then i developed a story around him and other characters came into existence which i then
got dolls for.
All except Claus who is an anthro Chihauhau dressed as Biggles
for a doll?
I used my xmas bonus to buy Ilya, Claus and Kostya were gifts and Martel i got my friend to pick up from
China for me whilst she was on holiday. I’m pretty impatient so i haven’t really had to wait for any of my
dolls. Ilya was bought from Dream of Doll on the internet, once you pay they then make the doll (if its wet
season you have to wait longer because the damp hinders the resin part of production) I waited three
months for him to arrive.
No! I put dolls clothes on the cat though.
75
Yes a lot of character embody different aspects of myself, its abit like splitting yourself up into less complex
pieces.
Yes, the DZ Leo.
When i saw them i wanted one so badly because he was smiling and impish and a lot of dolls look so
miserable. He was going to be Koryu from CLAMPs “Wish” theni found out someone had done the same
thing already so scrapped that idea. Then i fell out of love with him lacking a character or any idea of
personality, i also found out i prefer larger dolls and don’t really like YOs or Tinies (i wont go smaller then SD
or MSD now).
examples?
Yes. Read my stories :P http://felicia-kitty.deviantart.com/gallery/#Fiction (part three will give you some
insight on the dolls representing me in some way question aswell)
They have been but only after my first doll Ilya, who i created a personalty and character for after i had him,
his look just suggested to me. Ilya and Kostya feature in a novel i’m writing and Martel is a character from a
forum RP. Claus doesn’t have a character but he does have a personality that shows only when doing
photoshoots (because thats when i think about it). I am told by other doll friends that i’m very good at
making them look alive in my photos which i think is because i portray personality in my BJD photography.
All my current dolls are OCs (original characters) its much more fun and creative also they feel more unique.
I like unique its part of the attraction i have for BJD, other ppl may have a doll of the same anime character,
i don’t like that idea (also my ideas are better then most TV influences lol).
I have a ‘set of characters’ so body types have to match up. Example Kostya is very tall so he is a SOOM
Sabik (80cm) which works well with his brother who is shorter and more feminine (70cm) both are adult
sculpts. Isla (when i get her) is a 13yr old girl so i have my eyes on MSDs (45cm) female adolescent sculpts
such as the ‘Cutie’ option in the minifee a la carte selection. http://dollfairyland.com/shop/step1.php?
number=361
I actually really don’t like the MSD with huge boobs cos i can only think of them as children and it makes me
feel uncomfortable (i’m strange i know, its not as bad as the sexed up My Little Pony i accidently found on
DA tho...i can never un-see that!)
They are all period set dolls so their sexual preferences are in keeping with the era XD (Except Martel who is
from a Yaoi RP so yeah...lol)
Yes
Not really sure what your asking here.
 Issy the cat treats them like people and goes to sit in their laps seeking attention.
76


I have glass eyes for them that are designed to follow you.
My friend Ashley commented at LF&CC that whilst setting up the BJD stand Kostya just falls into the
most amazing poses and that some BJD just do that like they are more alive then others.
No.
Customisation
Yes.
Historical style because that’s where my interests are. I love 1700s-1800s clothing/fashion and the romance
of personas like highwaymen etc. Ilike the mystery of that time period, when people were learning but not
yet understanding. I also like Victorian clothing and era but have no dolls in this style because its so over
done XD Martel is 1920’s as this is when the RP was set, in one of the first cocktail bars of London and at
the start of Art Deco style.
I buy them because i don’t have time to make them.
Yes, its great fun to body blush, i also do commissionable face ups. However i do not do my own dolls faces
because it detracts for the special-ness of them for me.(its like cooking a meal, when your done you don’t
wanna eat it anymore, its much nicer when someone else cooks for you).
Yes, Vampire teeth.
If it fits the character or features in his/her/its story then its fine in my opinion. I want to commission a silver
burn for Martel’s hand (as he is a vampire character) so it looks like he has picked up a silver piece of
jewellery. It’s part of making them unique and yours.
No, although i would like to.
Community...
Face Ups, Body Blushing, Photoshoots and i have helped a lot people name dolls strangely enough.
Yes to all.
I would say so (although i have cut back on meets due to money troubles). My fav is the doll days i have
with Ashley.
WHAT I DONT LIKE!
I dislike the snobby elitism you sometimes get at convention meet ups and the rudeness that follows. Mostly
i despise Den of Demons and the two-faced ppl who use DoA and DoD.
DoD: http://radiotrash.org/dod/index.php
77
Strangely ED sums it up best: http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Dollfie
They have been described as ‘creepy’ mostly or ‘interesting’ most people who compliment them tend to end
up with own doll eventually.
It would make things easier and cheaper!
Response 11: User name Rhiahnon
Link to community profile page: http://rhiahnon.deviantart.com/
Female
i am 18...
I love japanese culture and anime and manga....
The basics...
Yes
Six
(no answer)
i have 2 girls and 4 boys :)
well the go from 14 to 21 :)
Yes, i have at home... Sasori, deidara, Jasper, Ziva, Kuro and tonomi! :)
Before
Umm some of them
for a doll?
I do save up the longest wait had to be kuro and he was about a month may be more...
78
Yes but not a lot
Yeah they are a part of me, thats the way i feel any way.
i did but i worked it out! it was just that i did spend as much time with her as the others
examples?
they do like sasori is really grumpy, and will flick his head down if you move him and dei is a cuddle moster
and will throw his arms up if you move him lol!
Bit of both ...
yes Sasori and dei but they more came from how they are written in fan fictions....
a bit of both and some times
they are all Bi...
yes alot!
not sure i under stand this one... sorry!
(no answer given)
not add so much but it would be cool!
Customisation
yea, but not much, cant really afford it but when i can i do!
nah they are pretty modern but how i would like to dress.
yea when i get a chance
79
No, i want to have a go tho...
i am hoping to do that to 2 of my boys in the near future!
i think that some look good but they dont appeal to me
no but i want to have a go at making hooves!
Community...
Yea my mum knits clothing for peoples dolls!
Yea but once again when i can
Meets!
(no further answers given)
80
Bibliography
http://www.denofangels.com/forums
(Accessed9 March 2009)
http://www.volksusa.com/ (9 March 2009)
http://www.gigglegeek.dk/bjd.htm (9 March 2009)
Fariello, Anna M. '”reading” the language of objects' in Objects & Meaning: New Perspectives on Art and
Craft, edited by Anna M. Fariello and Paula Owen, 148-173. Lanham, Maryland: The Scarecrow Press. Inc,
2004
Waelder, Robert Psycho-Analytic Avenues To Art, United States of America: The Hogarth Press, 1965
Hayles, N. Katherine How we became posthuman: Virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature, and informatics,
London: The University of Chicago Press, Ltd, 1999
Peers, Juliette the fashion doll: from Bebe Jumeau to Barbie, Oxford and New York: Berg. 2004
Cooper, Robbie Alter Ego: Avatars and their creators, London: Chris Boot Ltd, 2007
Norman, Donald A Emotional Design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things, USA: Basic Books, 2004
Melger, Agnes Antique Dolls, Lisse: Rebo Productions, 1997
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/452993/personality (4th June 2009)
Phoenix, Woodrow Plastic Culture: How Japanese Toys Conquered the World, USA: kodansha International
Ltd, 2006
Wiedemann, Julius Digital Beauties : 2d and 3d CG Digital Models, Italy: Tachen, 2002
Kemp, Sandra Future face, Great Britain: Profile Books, 2004
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly Design and Order in Everyday Life, Design Issues, Vol. 8, No. 1 (Autumn, 1991), pp.
26-34 The MIT Press
Brown, Bill, ”How to Do Things with Things (A Toy Story)” Critical Inquiry, Vol. 24, No. 4 (Summer, 1998),
pp. 935-964
Lévi-Strauss, Claude, ”The Savage Mind”,USA: University of Chicago Press, 1966
Kiesler, T., & Kiesler, S. “My pet rock and me: An experimental exploration of the self extension concept.”
Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XXXII (32) (2004)
http://metarand.com/tag/bob-christopher/ (4th June 2009)
http://www.networkworld.com/podcasts/panorama/2007/062107pan-ugobe.html (4th June 2009)
design” Proceedings of the Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, June
2003.
81
design” retrieved from http://www.anthropomorphism.org/pdf/Imitating.pdf (4th June 2009)
Watt, Stuart,“Seeing things as people: Anthropomorphism and theory of mind in mixed society” (2003)
retrieved from http://www.comp.rgu.ac.uk/staff/sw/stuarts_papers/theoryofmind.htm (4th june 2009)
Chris Berry, Fram Martin, Audrey Yue, “Mobile Cultures: new media in queer Asia”, USA :Duke University
Press,2003
Jean Baudrillard, “The System of Collecting”, published in John Elsner & Roger Cardinal; “The cultures of
collecting”, USA, reaktion Books, 1994.
82

Dolls, Dreams and Design - Susan Golton`s Portfolio

Transcription

Similar documents

Make Your Own Dress-Up Dolls To Last The Test Of Time

pinella - Drusilla

The Third Issue! - Lillian Alberti

Who`s the Best Hunter ?

2009 4-c RP Single Pages.qxd

KidKraft EU Catalog Spring 2015 Layout Mock Up

Finishing the Figure

Volume 6 No 1

DOLL SHOW - The Dollery

Dress-up dolls