Maud Humphrey

Maud Humphrey

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Whopping Huge 23" Madame Alexander Baby PUDDIN' Doll!

So, this little (or should I say HUGE!) cutie joined our family yesterday.  I think she is just about the sweetest baby I've ever seen, next to my own kids, of course!

She is a vintage Madame Alexander Puddin' doll from 1965 and measures a whopping 23" long!

I found her at the thrift store for $4.  I couldn't believe my good fortune!  I've always loved Madame Alexander baby dolls--they just have the sweetest faces.  And this Puddin' is no exception. 

She didn't have any clothes when I found her, so I promptly dug through my suitcase of vintage clothing and found a real baby dress, slip and bonnet to fit her.  The bonnet just barely fits...I will be looking for a bigger one for her the next time I'm at an antique mall or doll show.

Her soft, strawberry blond hair looks like it has never been played with.

I have never seen a Puddin' this big.  She measures a whopping 23" from head to toe.  All the research I've done on these dolls says that they only went up to 21".  Obviously, the Alexander doll company made bigger ones, but maybe not many?  Perhaps mine is a rather rare example of this large size?

I found a little dolly for her to hold.  I love all the soft pinks and whites together.

All the Puddin' dolls I've seen have had a little braid on one side of their head.  This one did not.  I suppose one could have been there at one point, but the hair looks too perfect for that to be so.  Another mystery?

I am absolutely thrilled with this baby.  I've been gravitating to smaller dolls lately for space issues (you can fit more dolls into a space if they are smaller, you know!), but sometimes a "life-sized" doll has such a presence that you just can't obtain from a smaller doll.  My daughter carried this doll all through the Goodwill, and bounced her on her hip as we walked out to the car.  All the cashiers and customers smiled. 

I would be curious to know if anybody else has seen a Puddin' doll this large before?

No comments:

Post a Comment