The American Girl dolls and all their accoutrements are beautiful, but one thing always bothered me.

When I was a girl (and that was in the early to mid 'fifties) dollplay was quite a creative affair. Our dolls were our emotional companions, and we made up stories about them. Our play involved a lot of dialog, in which my friends and I voiced what the dolls "thought" and "felt" and "wanted." Of course we liked having doll clothes, but the play was the thing. Too, instead of buying doll clothes for us, our mothers and grandmothers would make them and even showed us how to make them, ourselves. I was never very good at stitching, but I did try to knit hats and blankets and bibs and the like.

When I was about 8, my aunt bought me a Revlon Doll, which, in 1957, was a precursor to the Barbie. The Revlon Doll was a beautiful young woman who wore sophisticated outfits and ball gowns and high heels. The doll was so beautiful, but I don't remember involving her in so much creative play. I don't think that I even gave her a name. I was less interested in what she thought and felt and wanted and more interested in how she looked. I handled her carefully because I did not want to muss her, and, it is perhaps for that reason that I never really loved her. In addition, I never tried to make clothes for her because the ones that she had were already so beautiful. I knew that I could never make items as beautiful as the ones already produced by the manufacturer.

In the American Girl and similar situations, it would appear that most of the creative activity comes from the company, and not from the girl, herself. The company makes the clothes and the furniture, and what young girl has the skills, the tools, and the historical information ever to produce anything as wonderful? And, what the dolls think and want and feel also comes not from the girl, herself, but from the books that are also created by the company. The girl does not have to go into herself to find out what Felicity (and, it is the company, not the girl, who names the doll Felicity) cares about because the Felicity books are already there to tell her.

It is perhaps the case that the more that the company creates, the less opportunity there is for the girl to create. The main way (and the suggested way) for the girl to participate in the creative activity is, quite literally, by buying into it. In other words, shopping for all the things that the company creates becomes a proxy for creating, oneself.

For all that, I still think that the dolls are wonderful and am a little sad that they came along too late (I was about 40 years old when they were introduced!) for me ever to own one of my own!

I had Molly and Addy, and reading their books and playing with them was like making a new friend. I liked it that they came with stories and personalities, and learned a lot about history in the process of "getting to know them".

These dolls really do inspire creativity. I planted a Victory Garden after reading about it in Molly's books. I learned to play "Battle Hymn of the Republic" on the piano after reading Addy's books. I sewed aprons and skirts and other simple clothes for them, and even tried to write my own stories for them. They were the most fun toys I ever had.

I'm trying to figure out who - if the dolls were introduced in 1986 - are the moms who had these dolls when they were kids.

I'm not that old am I - that it seems absurd?

Wah!