wedding cake review

[acorniv]

Another code.

Someone else thought it was too large. I thought - wow - a properly proportioned cake - YMMV.

Cute charms - I'm going to see if the ring actually fits a doll. Might actually be silver or silver plate?

Cake looks too too too Barbie. Molded plastic stacking cups (this is okay - I expected this). Flowers are mezzo mezzo - could be better, could be worse. However, the cake and flowers together look wrong. I'd either do iced flowers on that shiny slick cake, to tone the plastic quality down, (get out the fimo) or these flowers on a more hand made looking cake. Wrong cake for the era too, as it likely would have been one of the brand new ice box cakes. That is the fun of a historical doll - thinking about how new and novel regriferation was.

The bride and groom on top are just too 1960's looking, and the generic looking bridal dress doesn't help any.

I had a friend who collected cake toppers and have seen them in magazines like Martha Stewart. I can't remember any that were made earlier than 1920. could be wrong, but the feel is off. All in all it says Barbie a lot louder than American Girl.

My verdict - very cute kids toy - reminds me of our old playmobil set, and I can see a kid having great fun with it. But for the adult collector or serious history buff of any age - give it a pass.

Popsie

[dianasmama]

Popsie, what does YMMV mean? [img]redface.gif[/img]

[gingerharp]

I heard a lot of people didn't like the cake and the bridesmaid outfit for Samantha.
I know that my bridesmaids would have been horrified if I had made them wear something like that!
I don't think the bridesmaid dress is a very accurate dress either for that time. I think the color is kind of fishy, but I'm not a historian so I don't know. I do play tons of weddings at a very old Victorian/Edwardian hotel so lots of people want weddings of that theme and I have seen many 9-12 year old girls as junior bridesmaids in period clothing but not quite like Samantha's bridesmaid dress. Usually they are a peach or off white lacy material. More nuteral looking and not all that purple and lace. These dresses are more floaty. I'm really not sure which more accurate Sam's or the one's I've seen. I don't know much about period clothes. I just know what I see. Usually the bride wears an old fashioned bonnet with a veil attached to it and I don't know if that;s authentic either.
I can't go by my wedding because it wasn't a period wedding really.

Enough psyco babble. I know nothing about Victorian or Edwardian weddings, but I'd love to know more so if anybody wants to educate me please write. I just know I don't like Sam's bridesmaid dress. Poor girl.

[courtneysunshine]

I guess we're in the minority [img]smile.gif[/img] I really like the cake. It does look very Barbie-ish, but I was overall impressed. I think the size if fine when you consider it has to be scaled for a nine year old and not an adult. I also really like Samantha's bridesmaid dress. I didn't think I would like either of these, but when they arrived I was plasantly surprised.

Kim

[amandajg]

Popsie, I enjoyed reading through your detailed description of the clothing of the Victorian era. You had some interesting things to say on the subject. I love learning about fashion history (well, I love any history... especially that related to art, architecture, decorative arts, and fashion...) your collection of old fashion magazines must be fascinating!

I've questioned Samantha's clothes before. I wonder what Pleasant was thinking when she decided on Samantha's clothes, like her Christmas outfit and what AG was thinking especially with the (IMO, sorry) hideous Bridal outfit. It's too bad that they are drifting from the original point of the AG collection: to be accurate, educational, and historical, in favour of what I assume are clothes and accessories that they think will sell better. At least a few of her outfits are accurate, like the Talent Show dress. I didn't know her bed was inaccurate, that's very interesting...

out of curiosity (and if you don't mind me soliciting more of your advice...) I am wondering about other AG's, particularly Kit (if you are familiar with her era) - I realise, of course, her era was much much less rigid than the Victorian era, but I am curious about your impressions of her outfits.

Thanks again for the great and very interesting info!!!

[acorniv]

I looked at our cake more carefully and oh my - our cake topper bride has a monobrow, and a bushy one at that! I think she might be Frank Zappas daughter. Or Count Olaf's. Dear dear dear, didn't tweezers exist then?

This was a thing I liked the idea of more than the execution, but the photo didn't lie - I pretty well knew what I was getting ( except for the eyebrows) so for anyone who likes it, you won't get any surprises.

I think it will be great for girls who don't care about history and I think we'll make our own cake to put our charms in, because we do. They are what I bought it for. I had no idea it came with a mirror and brush - that was a nice bonus.

About Samantha's bridesmaid dress, I AM a historian, and my area is fashion. I have lectured on fashion history and was the fashion expert for the San Francisco Art Deco Society. I have an extensive library of fashion history, including old Delineator magazines ( the lead fashion magazine of Samantha's era). I have some from 1904. It is inexcusable that AG does not use this magazine to dress Samantha out of. The company does sell itself as an educational company, and Samantha is not educational. If you like her for other reasons, great - but from her lower class brass bed to her bridesmaid outfit, please don't use her for educating children, because the poor dear cannot seem to tell the truth. .


It isn't psychobabble ( not sure why you chose that term, Ashley) to care about the clothes and accessories, etc., being accurate. Perhaps you meant to say frivolous? Fashions are a great way to gain an understanding about more important aspects of any era, so it isn't frivolous either.

This was an era that revolved around decorum. Everyone had a place and everyone knew their place. You did not step out of place.These are all terms from that era. If you've ever seen Remains of the Day, Anthony Hopkins played a man who knew his place and kept it. If you ever saw the Edwardian era based Manor House series on tv, some participants fully understood the way life was led, and others didn't - it created major problems when people refused to live according to the times - and they learned squat from the experience as well .

This era was stodgy, no doubt about it. Pretentious too. It extended far beyond clothing, but clothes are a good place to measure from. Boys wore dresses and then short pants and then graduated to long pants as a rite of passage. It was simply not done to break that rule. The term 'simply not done' is from that era, too. This was an era of absolutes, and you absolutely did not go trotting arond in long pants ( no matter how cold you were) untill you were of age. Hence the expereeion "I've known that since I was in short pants) .

Girls had it much the same. They wore long baby dresses and then dropped waist dresses ( usually over itchy wool combination suits (underwear) year round) and they wore their hair down except for the part my dd inexlicably calls the Katydid, which was tied up with an enormous bow ( not the sort Sam wears - much larger). They wore very pale pastels most of the time and tertiaries - not secondary colors, and never primaries. They wore their dresses below the knee to mid calf, and no longer. Not untill they were eligible for dating at which point they could put their hair up and their waistline came up too. So, is Samantha dating age yet??? Because according to her dress she is, and is half dressed inher bedclothes to boot. They did not show their petticoats, wear a mobcap (except to bed) or stiff lace that stuck up. I am trying to remember if I ever saw a shiny taffeta dress on a girl and I am sure I haven't. Fabrics were soft and draped. There is nothing whatsoever on this dress that is correct to the period. Nothing. Probably her shoes would cover her ankle and they would have a pointed toe. Probably it would be black with black stockings. Girls covered their ankles because ankles were considered sexy and they really did create a stir when exposed.

Since Samantha was wealthy she'd have been expected to adhere to the rules more strictly than lesser class people did. She'd have had the money to for one thing. The colors alone - the Samantha's World book shows a girl in a dark plaid and it very well could be that dress was made over from an earlier time - Sam would not have dealt with that.

If you are curious about more than this your local library will have books on fashion history, plus there are lots of websites, though few of them deal with children's fashion. You can also ask me - I'll be happy to look anything up for you.

Kim, I'm glad you enjoy this set - I don't want to take that away from anyone. But if anyone wants historical clothes, skip it and buy the Talent dress or the blue silky one or either of her saiilor suits instead.

Popsie