BJDs in amongst the Walmart Generation

I don't think that it has to do with the "Walmart Generation" or Walmart mentality, or anything like that. I think it's just that some people don't understand how much a doll can mean to somebody else.

I think that if somebody were to ask me why I didn't just get a Barbie, or a doll from the dollar store, or something like that, I would just find their question rude. And I'd probably just ignore it.

But even my grandmother, who has collected dolls since she was little, thinks the price tag on these dolls is high. The fact of the matter is, the price tag is high. But I don't know anybody that would be so rude as to ask me why I spend my money on them. I don't make a habit of talking about my money or my spending habits with anybody except my husband. Especially when I know that there are people out there who don't have that kind of money to spend.

 

Actually this thread has nothing to do whether or not it's OK to shop at WalMart. And it has been anything BUT snobbish in its frank discussion of the perceived value of handcraft vs. mass production. But the thread is more asking about that WalMart mindset , not the actual store itself: the mindset of those who always expect to pay the minimum price for everything they buy. If an item costs any more than that, it gets called Overpriced Elitist Crap (usually by those who have no idea what 'elitist' means).

But you've later turned round & noticed this mindset yourself: "a lot of people pay a lot for a phone or flat screen TV without knowing what really went into it or doing their research and end up with something crappy when they could have gotten something better for cheaper, and then still think it's good because of the price." This is much closer to the crux of the matter: cheaper is always better, merely because it's cheaper.

Here, go back up a few inches and read DeadLegato's explanation, which makes the distinction between Cheap and Thrifty much clearer:

 

I think that people do need to remember that terms like "Wal-mart Generation" are not meant to be taken literally. I'd suggest that the way of thinking being described predates Wal-mart, but it's just a chain that's easy to use as a symbol. It's not only the low-end places but brand names that have made the price-quality correlation moot. We get used to the fact that very expensive brand name stuff can be (and very often is) very poor quality, and that lower priced stuff can be decent. But this notion that we shouldn't have to spend money on anything we want, that it should ALL be cheap and easy to get, is a real problem IMO. It shows a lack of understanding or caring for how, where, and under what conditions things are produced.

For example, I live in a country where it's common to have fruit with prefecture of origin and variety listed at the grocery store. This is done because certain areas and varieties are known for their quality. People who come here are flabbergasted by the cost of fruit. However, it's fruit that is tended intensively and carefully, hand-picked, wrapped individually, and sent as fresh as possible to the store. It is always better than what I'm used to at home. People will clearly pay more for the good stuff, as they keep stocking it and selling it. At home . . . fruit is chosen for its uniformity and hardiness in shipping. I highly doubt it would sell well here. Consumer expectation is everything.

People who do good work should be rewarded for it. Making clothes for yourself for just the cost of the materials is one thing, expecting anyone else to do it for you is another. No one's time is worthless. These days I'm somewhat reluctant to spend a lot on mainstream items because it doesn't seem to get you anywhere, but I will spend a lot on things (like this hobby) that I like! I just don't tell people outside the hobby how much.

 

There are a few things I wish to comment on as I avoid my Japanese homework...

Quality/Price

I skimmed the above posts and most people see a coorelation between quality and price even if it's inconsistent. This may be true or false and I can't say one way or the other because I feel it's subjective. For some people, details are important. Some people need comfortable shoes. Others just need them to look pretty. Some want jeans that last years. Others don't care and will wear them with the holes. Some people want clothes to look perfect. Others just want clothes because they have to wear them.

The level of quality will change depending on what is important to someone. Dolls are no different.

Some people will pay $100 for a pair of glass eyes because that's important to them and then place those eyes into a $200 doll because the resin quality isn't so important (or they can't tell the difference). The details a collector focuses on will be where that collector invests his/her money because that is what will make him/her happy.

Price of the Doll is "Expensive"

Well, what is this compared to? A house? A Barbie? A car? A textbook? A university education? Expensive is relative. Anyone in any hobby will spend money on that hobby. Doll collecting is no different. The concept of "cheap" or "expensive" depends on one's frame of reference.

Walmart and Company Ethics

Walmart is a company that makes a lot of money. It hires a lot of people. It doesn't pay them very much. But, BJD companies are no different. Why are Chinese-made dolls cheaper? Why can South Korean companies make dolls for slightly less than Japan? Why are Japanese prices more? It's not necessarily about quality but about the cost of doing business which includes labour.

So, when I buy a BJD I often choose Volks. I can see it in-person and I know that even if they don't get paid a lot of money (which many don't from what I understand) they at least get to play with dolls at work. I see them laughing and smiling together because they enjoy their jobs. But, I can't see that in South Korea or in China, because I live in Japan. So, I try to lean towards shops that are creative in some way. Those companies that work hard to change and be dynamic are more likely to have more positive working environments (which, of course, isn't guaranteeed).

Buying from ethical companies is important to me but buying online makes it into guesswork.

Thrifty Versus Cheap

I think that this whole thread has little to do with Walmart itself. Perhaps it has to do with the growing detachment between buyers and the makers of the products which is what retail is all about. Perhaps it isn't so much about price but the blindly buying from companies one doesn't know anything about. Thrifty people research. Cheap people don't.

And timid, love the food examples! In Japan it was recently discovered that some Chinese companies were using sewage in their vegetable oils. This affected some products imported into Japan. Cheap people would continue to buy Chinese products. Thrifty people would not.

 

Quite sure this is the reason that none of my friends have them (besides the fact that majority of them think they're creepy.) Those that don't find them scary, don't have one because of the price tag. I guess it makes sense in a way though- they can justify the same money for shoes, iphones, ipods, laptops and ipads because those are 'socially acceptable' and they're things that they can 'use' over and over. I feel the same way about my dolls as I do about my Macbook pretty much- I love it, it was expensive, it was worth the money, and I'd kill someone if they broke/damaged it, so I guess that's why I joined the hobby. I'm sort of planning to pass on one of my junk heads to a friend of mine- she can't really do much damage, and it's not a sculpt I'm uber fond of or anything, so if she just leaves it gathering dust it really wouldn't bother me. I have no idea what she'll do with it- technically I'm giving her everything for it accept for a body- I'll give it a faceup for her, a wig, eyes, and I'll even help her get the body eventually (if she wants to.) if not, she can give it back to me and I'll sell it to raise money for my Elfdoll girl... I know it sounds pretty 'whatever' but that's because it is- I don't want to force someone into a hobby they don't like just so I have at least one real life doll friend. That said, I don't have difficulty justifying this, because I feel like most people spend the same or more in one semester on fast food- things like that.

 

This is an excellent point and one I immediately thought of when reading through the posts on this thread. There's no arguing taste--especially with people who don't have any. I have plenty of friends that grew up very low-brow who actually *hate* ball joint dolls because they think they are unfairly "disgustingly" expensive. They take the associated costs quite personally, as if it's offensive that a company would dare charge so much money for a doll.

While I grew up quite poor alongside them, it seemed that my family had higher-class sensibilities. There was always an appreciation for hand-made items with high detail work put into them, solid construction, durable materials, and unique design.

When I first started the hobby, I thought my husband would be seriously offended by the associated pricetags. However, he plays paintball and actually made the connection immediately: "I always find that when I buy cheap guns I just turnaround and buy the more expensive one after anyways and cheap equipment can just get you injured. It's best just to start off with what you really want from the beginning."

Expensive hobbies are expensive, but people with no taste will never understand the value behind something like this and continue filling landfills with the broken remnants of their mass-produced garbage.

 

Short version:
What it comes down to is: As no man is an island, no decision is made in a vacuum. Additionally, any time you get into these arguments, you end up with two sides like this: Either people are going to think you're a money-wasting, elitist brat who only buys name brands to show off how much money they have, or they're going to think you're a cheapskate who doesn't care about quality and only wants a pile of cheap junk so they can have a lot of it. You don't have to pick, depending on who is evaluating you, you can easily be both!! (I say that in jest, not in insult.)

Personally, I wish there WERE more information about there about how doll companies treat their employees and their business practices. At this point, I think very few of us really **knows** if we're paying more just because the company is 'A Name' and can charge more because people will pay more, or if they charge more because they're legitimately better to their employees. I'd be happy to pay more for a brand that treats people better. I certainly will *not* pay more simply to buy 'a brand name' that means nothing in terms of quality of product or treatment of employees/environment.



TL;DR VERSION IF YOU REALLY WANT TO GET INTO IT
I'm going to run with the pants example NOT TO SINGLE ANYONE OUT, but because it's already been used and it's pretty accessible to the general reader.

You have a choice between identical pants (same brand) from Store A or Store B. Store A charges 20, Store B charges 15. Store A provides a livable wage and health benefits for its employees. Store B pays everyone the state mandated minimum wage and not a penny more, thus allowing Store B to offer the pants cheaper.

Now this seems like a pretty easy choice on paper. Obviously, you say, I'll shop at Store A and support the workers. But real life is far messier than marks on paper or pixels on a screen. What if YOUR job doesn't offer health benefits and you just got a 2000 dollar medical bill? Are you obligated to spend that extra five dollars so that Store A employees can get benefits when you can't make your own ends meet? What happens if Store A realizes that, to stay competitive with Store B, they can't give their employees benefits anymore? How would you feel if it turned out Store A pays their workers just as poorly as Store B, with no benefits, but their stock holders are rolling in the cash because they've lead people to BELIEVE that paying more at their store would benefit the common man? How would you feel if you were an employee at Store A and lost your benefits because of Store B? How would you feel if you were an employee at Store B and they had to cut your job because people angry at upper management decisions, something you have no impact on or voice in? How would it affect your decision if you found out the foreign labor who made your pants got paid the same regardless of who you bought it from in the US? [More common than you'd think. Check out the product code labeling on canned food some time and you'll be surprised how many 'luxury' and 'cheap' brands are popping out of the same canning factor.]

Or if you're looking at a choice between Supplier C and Supplier D for pants. Supplier C is 10, Supplier D is 20. Supplier C is cheaper but pollutes the environment willy-nilly. Supplier D is obviously the environmentally better choice. But again, you personally don't have that extra 10 to spend, and all you want are a pair of pants you can slush around in the mud gardening in. Are you ethically obligated to get the more expensive pair? What about your obligations to your own finances? What if you buy the cheaper pair because the extra ten dollars will be spent buying entertainment, when you COULD have afforded the environmentally responsible pair, but then, you'd have had to sacrifice some of your own personal happiness? What if you found out Supplier D was just as environmentally toxic, but they charged more because they had a 'big name' attached and they simply COULD? (People were willing to pay for the name.)

If you're REALLY interested in this topic I'd recommend googling 'real cost cheap food' and reading the Times Article. It does a pretty good job covering wage depression as a result of demand for cheap products, environmental costs, social costs, ect ect.

 

This was a really good comment, and I agreed with what you said. It's a very complicated issue, I think. There's no way to really determine a 100% right or 100% wrong.

 

And I'm talking about the opposite mindsest, how many, many people view Walmart and similar venues, which I view as very elitist: because it's cheap, it must be crap quality, and I could directly quote a number of people in this thread saying things that boil down to just that.

You are turning my argument totally around! I said that the some people think a product is better simply because it's more expensive, and perceived it to be better in spite of lower quality, when there are perfectly good, if not amazing, lower-priced options. This leads to the companies that make overpriced, shoddy items being rewarded, and companies that make well-priced, decent products being punished.

I actually already read that, and thought it was really well thought-out and presented. Agreed on every point.

Edit: I'm not saying that cheaper products which can be better than more expensive products are better because they are cheaper, I am saying that quality and price don't always have a strict correlation in either direction, and that something can have I high level of one kind of quality and a low kind of another quality.

 

This. I knew someone would catch that one. Thanks! The good of the many over the good of the individual. That is what the "Walmart Generation" is about. Money and personal gain at ANY cost. When is it too much? Well, that's an individual choice.

Doll collectors are no different. Personally, because it's my hobby it's my luxury so I try to be as ethical as I can be since it's not a "need" and is a "want". This is my ~personal choice~ and I HATE that I'm considered by some to be a "doll snob" because I choose to spend more on clothing and dolls as a result. It's not that I want the "best" dolls (which is complete crap since it's completely relative), but rather that it's motivated by the fact I want to buy dolls and doll products from people I can actually see and interact with in-person. People will say "you're buying a name", well, I'm simply supporting people who like their jobs. Perhaps the "name" thing is simply an excuse people create to make themselves feel better about buying from companies they know nothing about? Brands develop over time because they are reliable and famous for a reason - often a good reason. That said, I don't think brandnames are all that reliable either and wouldn't buy Volks if I were not in Japan. To be honest, I wouldn't be able to afford it and would likely still collect artists dolls.

I think too many people value money over the good of society and this is what the "Walmart Generation" is about. So, the entire concept of the "Walmart Generation" being any different than BJD collecting is laughable. We live in a society that for better or worse uses mass-production to particular degrees. Although the clothes and accessories are not produced on the same level as those products at Walmart there is still an element of mass-production with clothing and accessories in the BJD market. I mean, we are all guilty to a degree to supporting the same ideas that Walmart stands for whether that be buying a pair of mass-produced shoes (guilty), mass-produced clothes (guilty) or mass-produced synthetic wigs (guilty).

Just because someone chooses to spend a lot of money on dolls doesn't mean they are any different than the "Walmart Generation". Just because BJDs tend to be hand-crafted doesn't make them "better" than mass-produced items if people are underpaid to do it or if pollution results from manufacturing techniques. I don't understand this whole "I'm better than other people in society because I spend a lot of money on my dolls". Really? Well, give the money to charity and then we can talk about that moral superiority.

Why do people spend money so much money on dolls? Because people want to. Some people will never respect that or understand that, and that's the way it is. Don't lump them into categories of "Walmart Generation" just because they have a different mindset. Perhaps they don't understand because they give their money to charity and work to benefit society rather than themselves.

 

imho, these dolls aren't just dolls, they are art. You can't buy art at Walmart (although you can buy a bunch of stuff there to make art!). If your friends have any sort of art appreciation, they should understand how you feel, when you tell them that these dolls are art.
In the meantime, you have no obligation to explain the cost of your art. Just tell them that your bjd's are one of a kind and irreplaceable. If they don't get it, they don't get it. There is no reason to expect acceptance, or to even want it. This is a personal hobby, your money is your money and you should be able to spend your disposable income in a way that brings you joy! Would you expect everyone who sees your favorite painting to understand what you see in it? I would not, my favorite paintings bring me joy, I bought them for me, not for anyone else. Art is personal.
Collecting bjd's is definitely not about the "good of society". It is an appreciation for an art form. If you want to do something for the "good of society", volunteer your time to a worthy cause or donate items you don't use anymore to a worthy charity. There is a thread here on doa "Seams for Free", that allows people to donate goods to folks who cannot afford to purchase items for their bjd's. It's not Habitat for Humanity, but it's something, and putting your energy towards "something" is better than nothing, if "the good of society" is a priority for you.
I believe we should do something for others as often as we can, and we should do something for ourselves as often as we can, but we should never get upset when others don't understand the things we do for ourselves.

 

Not all charities are created equal. It is no more a universally beneficial act than buying quality over quantity. Just like with shopping, there are ethical decisions to be made, and I don't consider myself morally superior for supporting causes I believe in or making my purchasing choices. Chances are plenty of DoA members give to the charities of their choice. Wal-mart Generation types probably do, too. There are some pretty nasty people out there giving to charities.

I.e., things are never that simple.

Mass-production is not really the culprit here. That predates the Wal-mart business model/consumer way of thinking by a good long time. The notion that things should be as cheap as possible regardless of the real cost is IMO more the issue. It leads to a lack of respect for quality, craftsmanship, and time spent (and of course labour conditions etc), which then demonstrates itself as a tendency to mouth off about people who will spend for those things or the prices companies will charge.

As mentioned earlier, we don't have much information about labour or environmental practices in BJD companies. I'd like to see more of that, too . . . it's hard, though. Labour issues are not particularly prominent in the minds of consumers here, from what I can tell. And while environmental issues are hot, singling out offending companies doesn't seem to be. That makes it hard to make those ethical judgements. As a professor once said to me, "You have to choose your interventions." I just try to be better in other areas where I have more information.

Like I refuse to shop at Wal-mart. :p

 

There is something unique and artistic about these dolls that has to be appreciated as art, not JUST as a doll. It would be like asking a collector car person why they paid so much for a 1957 Chevy when they could have gotten an entry level KIA. There just isn't a comparison for that kind of questioin.

 

Well, the price shocked me when I first know about dolls.But now I just know most of them worth the price.

As I know,the price of a doll even higher a few years before, and most of the owner said the resin is better in those period.

 

A barbie is cheeper but not nearly the same quality. Yes its a doll but its also mass produced and the same thing that millions of other people have. And even though they are cheeper i feel you louse a lot by just getting a regular old mass produced barbie off the shelf. Its like anything you buy that is of value itll cost more but will last longer and its one of a kind, and thats really what your paying for.

 

DeadLegato, you raise some really important issues. Lots of people are happy to go around saying how "green," "sustainable," "fair-trade," "ethical," etc. they are when they make choices as a buyer, but few actually understand every complexity involved in production.

I think this thread IS rather elitist. The term "Wal-Mart Generation" is nothing more than a stereotype, and I think it's rather hypocritical that so many people here are willing to agree that there is such a thing, but are quick to assert that it has nothing to do with THEM and THEIR views. We've established that there's a difference between cheap and thrifty, but people who have to worry a lot about costs are possibly too busy to sit around and do all the math, or they need something right away and aren't able to wait and save up, etc.

People have their reasons for buying the way they buy...much like us and our dolls. Why should we be offended when someone doesn't understand the difference between a BJD and a Barbie? Can you imagine someone getting angry with you for not comprehending how a Pikachu is different than a Raichu, or being offended that you didn't know why you have to use a differential equation instead of a mass balance? Different people are knowledgeable about different things. If you explain your reasons and someone is still angry or offended, odds are that that person is not very tolerant or understanding in general. You certainly can't change people's worldviews.

 

Bohemian, I think you hit the nail on the head right there. My boyfriend is into computers, my brother is into cars, and most of the time when they're talking about their interests I follow the best I can, but in the end, it's something that they know about so I trust their sense of value in it.

 

I'm still waiting to see a concrete example of elitism in this thread, from what I've read here.

Really? Consumer society today is the same as it was thirty or fifty years ago? Even the same as it was fifteen years ago? Ten? It isn't. The megastore and disposable goods mentality is an enormous influence.

Inexpensive and cheap aren't the same; it's a distinction that's been made in this thread and in others. Inexpensive goods vary in quality -- some are fantastic, some are cheap. Cheap goods, however, tend to be disposable and are often designed to be precisely that. They aren't generally made to last, regardless, and it has little to do with how much they actually cost.

I have some 'cheap' items I buy; they just aren't doll-related. I buy cheap hair ties and whatnot -constantly-, to the extent that I really do have too many. It's just not particularly relevant to doll talk, but it's a great example of the mentality being described. They're cheap, I can afford a ton of them, and as such, I don't have to care for them or wash them, if they get the least bit scrungy or nasty, instead of soaking them in the sink over night and letting them dry, I can just throw them away without tears.

This is, I think, what a lot of people are trying to describe. It's not about the amount of money being spent -- if it is a small amount to the spender (and that varies from person to person) it can contribute to an item being treated disposable, easily replaceable, or easier to 'lose' without heartache, but that isn't necessarily the case.

And yet, these are the people that should be doing the math before making a purchase because it's potentially going to be more relevant to them -- they can least afford to waste/lose money. I'm in this category myself.

 

Here goes...

In my experience, cheap jeans tend to be sturdier than expensive jeans, because they are made out of tough denim instead of smoother, thinner, more visually appealing denim. This quote is exactly saying that "inexpensive means cheap, and vice versa." I've never had a pair of $100-$200 dollar jeans, but the $40-$50 dollar ones went out way before the $8-$12 workhorse jeans I usually wear.

While I realize that this was a case-in-point, it still holds the mentality that cheap shoes will always be bad, expensive ones will always be better, and again, I've had quite a bit of experience with the opposite.

This is just, to me, upper-class thinking. Yeah, I've bought cheaper shoes that I knew from trying on wouldn't be as comfortable as more expensive ones, or comfortable as shoes in the same price range from a store that carried cheaper, higher-quality products but was too far away to bus to. But you know what? I could barely afford the $15 for those lower-quality shoes and the ones I was wearing were absolutely falling apart. Not everyone has the luxury of saving up.

Alright, yeah, there is general truth in the cliche, but I can't help but look at companies like Logitech and Hershey's and Wranglers that make a damn good product in most people's price range, especially compared to their competitors, and on the other hand you have companies like Apple that rake in a huge profit because everyone either assumes that a more expensive computer must be better (which they're not), or else really needs/wants one and has no other option. To the combat boots/pumps argument, I expect my boyfriend's Walmart work boots will last longer than my more-expensive suede heals, because they are designed to be worn a lot in a demanding environment.

At least, that's how I'm reading these. Feel free to disagree.

Edit: I'll also add another dimension to the price-quality relation. If someone has no idea what a BJD is, yeah, $700 is a lot to pay for what is, to them, "just a doll." So instead of getting offended, explain to them what makes it not "just a doll," and how is different than a Barbie or whatever. And don't just stick to "they're higher quality," because that won't sway most people. My brother had a friend who worked as a custodian, and he bought cheap shoes because he found that, with the chemicals he worked with, expensive work boots went out pretty much just as fast, so to him, the expensive work boots were "just shoes" for a higher price, and to someone who doesn't understand what makes BJDs special, they are "just dolls" for a higher price, and it only makes sense that this would be a strange thing to buy to them.

 

Thank you, foxdragon, you saved me a lot of digging! ^_^

surreality, when one makes a generalization ("people these days like to buy cheap, poor-quality stuff") and everyone who discusses it considers him/herself an exception, it's pretty safe to say it's a stereotype.

I'm not sure I understand how your response relates to my comment about hypocrisy...but maybe I feel like people are coming across as elitist, "oh-I-would-NEVER-do-that" because they're just staying on topic and not giving good (but OT) examples like yours about the hair ties.

And yes, the people who need to save the most money are definitely the ones who need to do the math, but nobody's perfect. I'll reiterate what I said before, too: it might benefit them in the long run to save up and buy the better quality (which like foxdragon said isn't necessarily the most expensive), but they might very well need the item immediately and have to settle for something that will do the job.

LOL and foxdragon, I just remembered that the pair of jeans I've had the longest are a pair of Old Navy that I bought secondhand for $0.25! The only decrease in quality was mine, LOL...I got fatter!

As far as dolls are concerned, I like to save up for the expensive dolls I want, but I balk at spending tons of money on clothing for them, even if it is probably better quality than what I already have or what I can make. It's great that doll people are so enthusiastic about handicrafts and like to support artists, but clothes aren't as important as dolls to me. What on earth is wrong with sock dresses?! People seem to sniff at them, but I've seen some fantastic, creative stuff!