Ok I’m wrong – I said in a comment “you don’t see Virginia Woolf dolls, Frances Perkins dolls, Janet Reno dolls” and I’m wrong, you do see Virginia Woolf dolls. She’s pretty damn cool, too.
On the other hand, the doll as a doll is a good illustration of my point. The doll is well supplied with indications that she is Virginia Woolf, while the putative transgender doll is supplied with zero indications that she is transgender.
By “indications” I of course don’t mean “anyone would know that’s Virginia Woolf” – I just mean the doll doesn’t look like your ordinary generic nobody in particular doll.
None of this will make any sense to anyone who hasn’t read the post about the putative trans doll.
I find the Virginia Woolf doll pretty charming, I have to say.
Comments
6 responses to “Straight outta Bloomsbury”
Very charming. Who could be afraid of her?
Cuddly Virginia Woolf!
Is this Raggedy Ann? Why do they call it a wolf doll when it doesn’t look anything like a wolf?
I think you’d have to leave the tag on for anyone to grasp that it was supposed to be Virginia Woolf. The permed hair, the round nose…
We have an Oscar Wilde doll from Dublin that looks so preposterously unlike him that it cheers me up every time I see it.
Give the Wolfe doll a pair of glasses and it would be a dead ringer for British comedian (comedienne? Do we still differentiate? I’d say ‘no’; anybody who acts is an actor, anybody who…ahem…comedes is a comedian.) Sarah Millican.