Barbie The corporate pedagogy that communicates

distorted identities and images to young females

Laura Wright 2541671

Education II Australia, as a member of the western world, is drenched with the produced

normative ideals of children and young people as presented by the media. These

ideals are projected on to the undiscerning minds of children, were they

contribute to the formation of identity and to the assessment of knowledge.

According to Steinberg & Kicheloe (1997:3) education takes place in a variety of

social context involving formal schooling yet not restricted to it. The

interchangeability of the terms “popular culture (and) popular pedagogy”

becomes increasingly accurate as the differences between entertainment,

structured education and advertising become obscure (Steinberg and Kincheloe

1997:3). In reaction to power of the media in children's lives parents and

teachers must equip young people with the skills and knowledge of how to see

past the “glitz and glamour of surface appearance”, to see “behind... raw

representations of consumer objects and identities” to the story behind the

image (Kenway and Bullen, 2001:174). Such images and identities can be

epitomised for girls in the marketing giant Barbie. By using advertising, products

or entertainment the benchmark is set as to what young girls are to aspire to. A

carefully cultivated ideology is forced upon them that continue into adulthood.

The real story is the “backstage pass.” Young females need this pass if they are

ever expected to survive this present media age with a healthy knowledge of

who they are and the world they live in.

With all these issues in mind, the identity and worldview that Mattel asserts, in

the pop culture icon Barbie, shall be looked at through the gender, socio-

economic and racial ideal she presents. These three issues, when analysed, show

the damage that Barbie as; doll, movie character and advertiser, is capable of in

the formation of values and goals in young people. Then, in reaction to this

phenomenon, the skills that parents and teachers need to give children in order

for them to be able to discern.

Since the beginning, 1959 (fig.1.0), Barbie has been a cause of debate: of which

gender appropriate behaviour is the centre. The fear that Barbie would not

prepare girl for the role as wife was of major concern at her conception. Girls

were to aspire to the womanly role of the wife "to nestle, nurse and nurture"

(Ducille 1994:62). Yet "Barbie's curvaceous (38-14-34), big busted, almost fully

female body...” inspired not the “maternal but the sexual, not the nurturing

mother but the sensuous woman" (Ducille 1994:62) The image of the 1950’s

women that society wanted young females to worship and imitate was not being

propagated in Barbie. In the sixties and seventies, the criticism did not cease,

merely changed form. The feminist movement maintained that Barbie

"encouraged girls 'to see themselves solely as mannequins, sex objects or house

keepers"' (Lord 1994:90). Barbie's deformed body forces young girls into the

bondage of “mindless acquisitiveness and poor body image" (Garfield 1999:45).

Feminists claimed that Barbie chokes young girls with feelings of inadequacies

when the ideal and expected is realised to be unattainable. Barbie becomes "an

emblem of frustration and bewilderment" because of that inability to compete

(Cunningham 1993:81). "Barbie combines the stereotypes; Miss America (fig1.1)

and run-way supermodels (fig1.2) - she is all prettiness and cuteness and the

experienced slinkiness... (she) looks out of a face cutely dimpled and empty of

feminine guile, yet somehow seductive" (Cunningham 1993:80). This frustration

and inability to measure up to standards of “consumption, glamour, and

perfection...” can lead girls to depression and consequently a range of eating

disorders.

In today's society, the story has little difference. Barbie, despite all efforts to

change; having tried out more than 75 different careers including running for

President in 2000 and 2004 (fig1.3) (Mattel Press Release), and splitting up with

Ken in February this year, the focus is still the image/figure under the clothes.

Critics assert: Barbie teaches girls 'the skills by which their future success will

be measured on: purchase of the proper high-status goods, popularity with their

peers creation of correct personal appearance, and the visible achievement of

'fun' through appropriate leisure activities." (Best 1999) The gender role that

Barbie plays is one were her ultimate power and value is contained in her

aestheticism.

As Anne Ducille states;

“I regard Barbie and similar dolls... as objects that do the dirty work

of patriarchy and capitalism in the most insidious way – in the guise

of child's play... Barbie is not simply a child's toy or just a teenage

fashion doll; she is perhaps the icon - of true white womanhood and

femininity, a symbol far from the innocent ideological stuff of which

the Miss American dream and other mystiques of race and gender

are made.” (1994:50)

The idea that in order to, or attempt to, achieve the highly fashioned Barbie

gender ‘look’, young female must maintain the expected level of consumption and

hence be within the upper to upper-middle socio-economic bracket. The image

mentioned above of Barbie as an amalgamation of Miss America and a Super

model can be best seen in the Versace Barbie (fig1.4). This “willowy blonde” has

the perfect combination of “classical glamour and modern vitality.” She is

“beautifully realised with precise touches (of) doll's face paint... eyes painted a

soft amber shade, full lips painted in a shade matching the gown and just a hint

of blush... and a perfect French manicure (Barbiecollector.com). Versace Barbie

is a brilliant marketing strategy. The love of high price consumer goods is set in

the minds of young females for the future. The idea is not to sell Versace to

young girls but to plant brand awareness so that in 15 years when she can wear

those types of clothes, the women will fondly remember her childhood Barbie

and choose Versace over rival fashion houses. As other companies such as Ford,

Corvette, Volkswagen (fig1.5) and Volvo have taken similar strategies. Brand

awareness is for in the future and for the child’s present wants as well. “Young

consumers have a colossal emotional stake in the identities they have been...”

involved in “construct(ing) around corporate logos...” (Kenway and Bullen

2001:170), Barbie, Bratz (fig1.6), Powerpuff Girls (fig1.7) etc are all apart of the

circular production of identities for young girls. The question is whether

companies produce under demand or if children take what is given to them. It

would seem that the latter is more plausible. Barbie.com is the official website

and most up-to-date and powerful method for the normative ideals of corporate

pedagogies to be communicated. The home page (fig1.8) is full of loud

expectations. Fashion is a major element of Barbie, and in reflection this site,

with “Fashion Star” the largest banner on the page. The main page is linked to

themed sites; Fashion Show, Makeover Magic, Barbie Closet. All three options

are based on aesthetics, with nothing about reading or thinking beyond what

something, or someone looks like.

The third and final element of Barbie’s constructed identity is race. Proper race

representation is essential for healthy identity construction. In 1959 the typical

Barbie image was Anglo-Saxon with Blonde or Brown straight hair. In 1968,

Christie, an African-American Barbie was made. She was exactly the same doll

with a long thin nose, round eyes, and straight hair. The only feature that made

her “African American” was her darker hair and skin colour. The process of what

is ‘normal’ is being set. There was recent outrage with the “Barbie for President”

range went on sale that there was a marked absence of an “Asian” alternative

(Edut). An Anglo-Saxon, Latin and African-American were all represented in the

line, complete with smart suits and sensible, shoulder-length haircuts. Currently,

the "Friend of Barbie" cast contains only two Asian characters: Kira, from the

international set; and the collector's-edition Fantasy Goddess of Asia doll

(fig1.9) (Edut). Not only are these dolls marginally promoted and highly

stereotypical, they carry a higher price tag than those of the other ethnicities

mentioned (Edut). As with the African-American Barbie in 68, the facial

features have not been altered, save the eyes being a little more almond in

shape. Most of the time, Kira is wearing the same thing as Barbie, however in a

brighter version (fig2.0). Fantasy Goddess of Asia is presented in what could be

called stereotypical ‘Asian traditional dress’. The dress is covered in shinning

materials with a massive fan shaping her head like a Las Vegas showgirl. This

image of the Asian women as an object only further convinces young girls of the

place of their value. The effect that this stigmatising of the Asian ethnicity has

on young Asian girls cannot be under estimated. Without seeing positive

representations of Asian women in our culture, young girls can suffer from an

identity distortion. Their looks and culture become not something to be

embraced and proud of but that which prevents them from being “normal”. The

Fantasy Asian Goddess is only one of the dolls within a set designed by Bob

Mackie. There is Goddess of the Arctic (fig2.1), whom looks nothing like and

Eskimo or of the like. There is also and African Goddess (Fig 2.2) and one called

“Goddess of the Americas” that is presumably Native American (fig2.3). These

are stereotypes far removed from reality and as has been stated above, there is

a likeness to Vegas showgirls.

The final example of Barbie’s normative power can be seen through the ever-

evolving “Pop Culture Collection” of Barbie and Friends. The set is supposed to

represent the icons of popular culture, back to the 1950’s. The collection

includes Barbie as Sandy from Grease (before (fig2.4) and after (fig2.5)

makeover), as Elle Woods from Legally Blonde (fig2.6), as Samantha Stevens

from Bewitched (fig2.7), as Catwoman (fig2.8), as Wonder Woman (fig2.9), and

as the women that hangs off the arms of James Bond (fig 3.0), Frank Sinatra

(fig 3.1) and Elvis (fig3.2). Every woman in the range reflected all attributes of

the normative female in beauty, socio-economic status and ethnicity. Samantha

Stevens from Bewitched (fig2.7) for example; the beautiful, white, wife, mother

and full time homemaker at home with her daughter Tabitha while her husband

is at work. The James Bond women (fig.3.0), beautiful, seductive, laced in jewels

and luxuries, and is always conveniently in distress when Mr Bond is around. Both

very different characters yet both are the same in the ideals they communicate.

Gender, socio-economic and race normatives are standards that can be deeply

affected by what the media portrays. Parents and Teachers must teach children

what Barbie and other identities of the like really mean. The toys that a is given

away with McDonald’s Happy Meals are made in Chinese sweatshops were

children are made to work 7 days a week and sleep in appalling conditions. To

equip children with the skills, the next time these toys are mentioned show them

some photo’s of sweatshops and what these workers/children could afford to

eat on $5.25 a day. The next time children ask for a Nike soccer ball tell them

that a child maybe just like them was getting 6 cents a hour to make that ball

(Kenway and Bullen 2001:180). Children born in the last 10-15 years have seen

enough on the television and on film for them to have totally lost their

innocence. Parents and teachers must now take an active role in their education

and stop leaving it to the media. The more awareness of what the truth is about

the manufacturing of the product, and the identity that comes with it, the

better off children will be when they are constructing their own identity.

Barbie is currently available in more than 150 countries around the world. The

Mattel owned Barbie industry is worth US$1.7 billion a year (1998) (The Great

Idea Finder 2004). Scanning the shelves of Toys R Us at Westfield, Miranda the

message is bright and clear. If you are white Anglo-Saxon and have a small

waist, a big bust, long flowing golden hair, perfect complexion, the right clothes,

accessories (to wear and use) car, house and boyfriend, girl power is all yours -

you can do anything!! The normative ideals that Barbie enforces is nothing more

than corporate pedagogy, sent to form consumerist ideologies that take a

prominent place in young girls future world view and spending habits. Barbie is a

metaphor for a social predilection toward whiteness, aesthetic beauty and

money. Girls of minority ethnicity, lower socio-economic bracket and those whom

are not considered to be conventionally beautiful, can suffer from an identity

distortion when they don't see images of themselves, loved and accepted,

represented in popular culture and the media. It is only parent and teachers

that can give children the skills to see through the hype and glamour, to see the

truth of their value as a intelligent and loving human being.

Appendix

Fig1.0 1959. The very 1st Barbie

Fig1.1 Miss American 2004

Fig 1.2 Super Model Kate Moss

Fig 1.3 Barbie for President on Barbie.com

Fig 1.4 Versace Barbie from Barbiecollector.com

Fig 1.5 Barbie Volkswagen from www.fisher-price.com

Fig 1.6 Bratz homepage

Fig 1.7 Powerpuff Girls homepage

Fig 1.8 barbie.com homepage

Fig 1.9 Fantasy Goddess from Asia

Fig 2.0 Kira as seen on

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/lifestyle/barb27.shtml

Fig 2.1 Fantasy Goddess of the Arctic

Fig 2.2 Fantasy Goddess of Africa Fig 2.3 Fantasy Goddess of the

America’s

Fig 2.4 left and Fig2.5 right

Olivia Newton John as Sandy in “Grease” before and after

Fig 2.6 Reese Witherspoon as Elle Woods in “Legally Blonde”

Fig 2.7 Samantha Stevens from “Bewitched”

Fig 2.8 Catwomen

Fig 2.9 Wonder Women

Fig 3.0 James Bond and a seductive sidekick

Fig3.1 Frank Sinatra and Fan

Fig3.2 Elvis Presley and Fan

Bibliography

Steinberg, Shirley R. and Joe L. Kicheloe Changing multiculturalism, Open University Press, Buckingham, England, 1997 Kenway, Jane and Elizabeth Bullen. Consuming children : education-entertainment-advertising, Open University Press, Buckingham, 2001 Matell Press Release Mattel Investors site http://www.shareholder.com/mattel/news/20040812-141478.cfm “The Great Idea Finder” Facts about Barbie and Ruth Handler http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/story081.htm http://www.Barbie.com Official Barbie site http://www.Barbiecollector.com Official Barbie Collector site Ophira Edut “Eastern Exposure? Asian American Barbie Is a NoShow “ http://www.adiosbarbie.com/bology/bology_asian.html Best, Joel. "Too Much Fun: Toys as Social Problems and the Interpretation of OF Culture." Symbolic Interaction 21(1998): 197-213.6 April 1999. http://gw8.epnet.com/ehost.asp?kevw-Uh6x1e&site=ehpst". Cunningham, Kamy. "Barbie Doll Culture and the American Waistland." Symbolic Interaction 16 (1993): 79-83. Ducille, Ann. "Dyes and Dolls: Multicultural Barbie and the Merchandising of Difference." Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 6.1 (1994): 46-67. Garfield, Bob. "Barbie Becomes More Than Just a Pretty Face." Advertising Age 15 Feb.1999: 45.6 April 1999 http://gw1.epnet.com/print2.asp?records=CU=ƒrm=&sortOption=&filter=&hitNum=4&x-66&y=11. Lord, M. G. Forever Barbie: The Unauthorized Biography of A Real Doll. New York: Avon Books, 1994.