Wordless Wednesday

Comments

September 4, 2008 at 2:31 pm

(1) Anne Lipscomb says:

This is the ugliest Shirley that I have ever seen.

September 4, 2008 at 3:58 pm

(2) Melody says:

I agree she is not a very good likeness but I don’t know that the word ugly and Shirley Temple should ever be in the same sentence. Where did this doll come from. Is she a reproduction or new or one that slipped through the cracks.

September 4, 2008 at 6:18 pm

(3) Annie says:

She looks like a craft doll that’s lost it’s color. Turned white. You can buy Shirley repro’s to dress up. That’s what this one looks like, to me. I don’t think she’s an old doll but she looks quite a bit like one of the old Ideal Shirley dolls.

September 8, 2008 at 4:28 pm

(4) Darlene says:

This is a porcelan Shirley made ,I believe, in the 80’s maybe from Franklin Mint. The porcelan one’s just look kind of cold and a little frightening. I only have 2 porcelan Shirley’s in my collection and the rest are vinyl and composition. Thanks !

September 10, 2008 at 8:50 am

(5) Nancy says:

Yes, this Shirley doesn’t resemble the real Shirley very much. Maybe no doll could; Shirley Temple’s appeal came from her expressions and bounciness and happy smile.

September 10, 2008 at 9:16 am

(6) Jone says:

I was just writing a little about Shirley Temple this week: she’s still surprisingly popular: Top 100 Notable Women on the Net

September 11, 2008 at 6:42 pm

(7) Marseille says:

She’s from the 80s. I have one. Not my favorite (I’m a big fan of the compo Shirley, and becoming more fond of the 50s vinyl dolls….), but the first Shirley I had in my collection.

They did a whole series–all were pale vinyl like that–wearing various movie outfits. The porcelain dolls from vaguely the same era were actually a better likeness, IMO. Those were Danbury Mint–believe this was still Ideal, though I’d have to confirm.

September 11, 2008 at 10:17 pm

(8) iris says:

she is an Ideal 80’s doll they all looked like that, I had a large 18″ one and she was this pale.