A Pattern?

[Katie from IL]

The first movie was about Samantha...the wealthiest main AG character

The second movie is about Felicity...also a well-to-do main AG character

Now with Emily being the next book, it looks like Molly will be the third movie. Although not specified anywhere, Molly's family is probably upper-middle class. Her father is a doctor, they live in the suburbs, they have a hired housekeeper and all four children each have their own bedrooms.

Does anyone see a pattern here?

[lscogbill]

I haven't read Kaya's books and only a couple of Addy's, so I can't comment on those but ...

Samantha was well-off, especially for Victorian times

Kit's family was definitely in the upper-income ranks considering there was a Great Depression going on, and her uncle was definitely wealthy

Yes, Molly's family was probably upper-middle class since her dad was a doctor

Josefina's family also appears to be wealthy considering her time-period; I doubt many families lived on large ranches with pianos and violins

Felicity's father was the finest merchant in Williamsburg, and since she was taking private lessons we can assume she's wealthy

Kirsten's family probably wasn't the wealthiest around, but they seem to do OK

In other words ... most of these girls are living well above the poverty line.

[GreyMyst]

Poverty isn't fun so the stories aren't going to be about that.

Even Addy and Kirsten are living pretty well considering everything by the end of thier books. Both of them go from nothing to being firmly middle class.


It bugged me to no end as a kid but now I can understand why they are wrote that way. AG's audience is middle and upper class. They relate better to it and it makes for stories with more things to play with.

[Katie from IL]

Actually, I was referring to the fact that the these first chosen movies are all with the characters that are more well-to-do, over the fact that most of the others were poor or did not use any or much money -Kirsten, Addy, Kit, Kaya, and Josefina.

The first movies that were chosen were all about the more well-to-do characters over the characters that didn't have much money. I wonder if it's because the expense of the dolls and accessories and the fact maybe their main customer base might be families that are also more well-to-do.

I'm just making an observation, I'm not trying to put anyone down or make anyone feel bad. I just wish that maybe that the next character they picked was one that was poor to be more inclusive of a broader spectrum of people.

Let me know if I'm offending anyone and I'll remove the post.

[GreyMyst]

Nah not offending. I was just saying, NONE of them are really poor. There's only middle class and really really rich.

But yeah more money means they can make more things for a character without it being otally implausible. It does makes sense.

It's the Kaya effect. Not a alot of accesories means that character tends to get ignored.

[heidiabigail]

I thought Kirsten and Addy were lower middle class though. They both improve their situations over the course of the books, but they are in hard times to begin with. When Kirstn'e house burns, it is a struggle to figure out where to turn. Everything works out, sure, but I don't know if I'd call them well-to-do.

[Homemommie]

I could be waaaay off BUT *I* was thinking that they are probably making movies for the first dolls (Samantha,felicity ,& Molly) and that the other friends and movies will be made in the order that the dolls were released .....

It probably doesnt have anything to do with favorites or which doll had more money, just release dates ..

Just a thought.

[moderator]

Maybe another reason is because back in the "olden days" the only girls with multiple outfits and accessories would have been girls who were very well off. A lot of people only had maybe a couple outfits--wash one, wear one. [img]wink.gif[/img] If American Girl had made the characters lower-middle and lower-class, they would have few accessory and clothing choices. Look at Nellie, for example. They didn't make any accessories for her from before she was adopted. It doesn't give them enough merchandise tie-in possibilities.

Similarly, it would be difficult to take a doll like Addy and add on to her collection too much (to tie in with the movie), because it says in her books over and over again that the room she shared with her mom was very empty! Anything from her collection would maybe have to be something after her book series was finished.

I don't know if this is right or not...it's just a couple other things to think about. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Skittl1321]

Originally posted by Homemommie:
I could be waaaay off BUT *I* was thinking that they are probably making movies for the first dolls (Samantha,felicity ,& Molly) and that the other friends and movies will be made in the order that the dolls were released .....

It probably doesnt have anything to do with favorites or which doll had more money, just release dates ..

Just a thought.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">But the first three dolls were Samantha, Molly and Kirsten. Felicity was introduced 4 years later.