Richard Gottlieb

Barbie vs. Bratz: What is really going on?
May 28, 2008

In my last blog, I talked about the Mattel vs. MGA trial that starts this week. I have read a number of pieces on this case and what interests me about the debate is not the legal issues involved so much as what the media and the litigation has missed, and that is the multi-cultural, multi-racial underpinnings of Bratz’s success. 

The Wall Street Journal and others like it site the power of Bratz as originating from its use of doll clothes and hairstyles to more accurately reflect the tastes and attitude of modern children. Here is how the Wall Street Journal article describes the genesis of Bratz: “Here’s what happened...In 1998, designer Carter Bryant … says he had a eureka moment involving the fashions and hair styles of teenagers that led to the Bratz sketches.”

I don’t doubt that for Carter Bryant, this was indeed his “eureka moment.” I don’t think, however, that a simple change in clothes is going to create a franchise with the power of Bratz. If it were that simple, Mattel would simply have had to changes Barbie’s clothing styles to take back its lost market share. In fact, if it was really that simple, we would all talking about the power of Hasbro’s Jem brand. Hasbro made a run on Barbie by, among other things, creating a doll that had some attitude. The clothing was more daring and to some parents (just like Bratz) a bit too daring. Hasbro’s attempt included a television show and a full out ad campaign but ultimately they could not overcome the power of Barbie.

So why did Bratz succeed where so many other dolls failed. I think what happened was something over which Mattel had no control. The US, and the world for that matter, changed. Barbie was born in the 1950’s and rose to icon status in an era in which U.S. and world culture was dominated by Caucasians. 

The challenge for Mattel is embedded in the deep roots that Barbie has in our culture. Created in 1950’s, a time when the US was still dominated by WASP (White Anglo Saxon Protestant) culture, Barbie manifests that culture's sense of what defines beauty. Now, the US has changed and the toy business has gone global. Therefore, no matter how hard Barbie changes skin color and adds new friends, she will always in essence be a Caucasian American girl in a multi-cultural world. In the words of the song by the Aqua, she is “a barbie girl in a barbie world.” This is the power and weakness of becoming a cultural icon. 

Study the features of a Bratz doll and you will recognize skin tones and features that are a mix of Caucasian, Black, Asian and Hispanic. They look like, well, nobody and everybody. Any little girl, anywhere in the world can, by looking at a Bratz doll, see herself. In short, Bratz has a little bit of every girl while Barbie has whole lot of one kind of girl. 

This vision of ambiguous racial beauty is powerful in a world where Caucasian parents in the United States adopt Chinese children, where movie stars, singers and sports stars are of different races and where a growing segment of the population is mixed race and does not want to be pigeonholed. 

What is Mattel to do? Well, for one thing, there will always be a Barbie and she will always be a powerhouse. She will, however, have to share the stage with other dolls. That is, of course, why Mattel wants Bratz. 

I am, of course, not sure what is going to happen at the trial but it would seem that, no matter what happens, Mattel needs to just let Barbie be Barbie and move on. Instead, why not put all that fantastic creative energy into creating the next step in dolls. 

Mattel’ virtual world, Barbiegirls.com, draws mostly girls over eight years old. This means that girls seen as too old for Barbie dolls still want to associate with her in her virtual incarnation. So, instead of working to make Barbie appeal to all races, why not for her next act have her appeal to all ages.

Posted by Richard Gottlieb on May 28, 2008 | Comments (0)