As previous insights into Barbie’s world have expressed, the impact of Barbie has a complicated social reality. For some, she has come to represent the upholding of gender stereotypes and unrealistic beauty expectations. For others, she is a statement of independence, self-expression and increasingly a reflection of a diverse society in which we live. The aim of this object lesson is not to focus on Barbie herself or on her various clothing items and accessories. Rather the aim is to consider the ways in which toy manufacturer Mattel’s original 1962 Barbie Dreamhouse, and its included contents, expressed the culture of suburbia, as well as the demographic characteristics of the teenage cohort during the postwar period in North America. It will consider how this too was complicated by the ideals and values that were ascribed to the house by its adult creators and passed along to the child consumer.
Barbie came into being in 1959, at a time when much emphasis was placed on the well-being of children and the importance of ensuring their proper psychosocial development by professionals, popular media, and society in general, was already well underway.1 The same groups also came to express concern and interest in the increasingly influential cohort of the teenager. In addition, this period was also characterized by affluence and suburban living. These intersecting social facts produced the conditions under which the Barbie Dreamhouse was created in 1962.
Dreaming of Suburbia: The role of Barbie’s Dreamhouse in expression of domesticity and creativity
Within this discussion, the Dreamhouse will be examined in a similar way one might engage with an artistic rendering, as it evokes similarities to the medium. This comes across in two main elements. First, from an architectural standpoint, the exterior of the Dreamhouse reflects key features of suburban mid-century modern design, which one would see in the illustrative house plans of the time, such as the one for The National Plan Service (NPS) from 1962.2 [Figure 2] This includes the use of board and batten siding, along brick and stone, as well as the inclusion of a large front door. [Figure 1] In addition, the Dreamhouse is alluding to outdoor space with the inclusion of plants and trees at the front and sides of the house in a similar manner to the NSP house plan, highlighting the outdoor space as an important feature of suburban living. The ability to engage in outdoor activities involving all members of the family denoted an element of the postwar good life narrative. It was seen as a space for neighborhood gathering and beneficial to health, as it was away from the noise and dirt of the city.3 The second feature that a rendering evokes is the imaginative dream-like qualities through their composition. These same qualities are intended to be expressed during the act of play and through toys selected for play, by way of design elements such as vibrant colors and whimsical features. It is with this in mind that this discussion will consider what sociologist Daniel Cook refers to as “commercial personae.” The representation of “assemblages of characteristics – known or conjured, real or imagined – constructed by and traded among interested parties in the service of their industry,” to examine how elements of the Dreamhouse expressed its creator’s understanding of the teenage cohort, as well as how this fit into with idealized notions of suburban living.4

Although not everyone found themselves living in suburban neighborhoods following the Second World War, suburbia came to reflect and produce notions pertaining to society’s family values and norms of the postwar period. At the center of this was the child. In the land of suburbia, the wants and needs of the child were top of mind and included in this were the type of toys children would play with. As Amy Ogata discusses psychological studies during this era deemed creativity a “vital and productive aspect of the human personality.” This scientific insight became popularized by magazines and toy manufacturers and the creative child was viewed as a “quantifiable consuming citizen…” and as a result became idealized notions.5 While children had been an established market for toys, the 1960s saw the involvement of child development experts to better understand children’s likes and dislikes. This, as Lizabeth Cohen notes, meant more directed advertisement towards children rather than parents and set in motion a lifetime of consumption.6 Those involved in the creation of the Dreamhouse, and the advertisements for it, were “cultural brokers,” in that they were “persons who occup[ied] gatekeeping positions in organizations and industries and thereby adjudicate cultural products and their meanings.”7 Therefore, while it may have been the case that Mattel was marketing to its intended target market, its techniques sought to “divine what parents would allow their child to consume.”8 Barbie’s material world has always negotiated domesticity and reproduced particular visions of it over time to “…capture prevalent social sentiments in commodities…”9
Unlike other editions of the Dreamhouse, the original did not include a kitchen. The expression of domesticity, therefore, had to be evoked through other means. This is present in a commercial for the Dreamhouse which highlights conformity to gender norms, as the narrator expresses that arranging and rearranging the furniture included in the Dreamhouse is a “ladies’ privilege.”10 This reinforces the well-established, yet over-generalized societal norms that the private sphere is a female-centered space. As Veronica Strong-Boag notes in her examination of women and suburban living in postwar Canada, the suburban home “enshrined [the] gendered division of labour [and] also responded to a generation’s anxiety about changes in the world about them.” This in part meant that through this gendered division of labor, women were expected to bring uniqueness to the uniform suburban home through decoration and design.11 Focus given to decoration and design was part of the larger postwar concept of “creative living.” The idea of creative living was an “…ongoing project for postwar middle-class families who aimed to meet the social expectations of a popular culture obsessed with family life.”12 While the commercial and the toy itself sought for children to express their creativity through movable pieces, the type of creative expression was in some ways predetermined. That is, like many other elements of Barbie’s world, the Dreamhouse “…was conceptualized as a teaching tool, an idealized assemblage… which would instruct young middle-class (or aspiring middle-class) girls…”13 The intent was to communicate this domestic ideal to the child consumer through its carefully curated image of the suburban home and lifestyle. The elements of the Dreamhouse also curated an image of teenage culture and this is where the discussion now turns.
Creating Teenage Space: The commercial persona and the teenage cohort
In examining how the Dreamhouse curates the image of teenage culture, the consideration of Barbie’s age presents another facete to the discussion of Barbie’s world. While considered a toy for a younger market segment, Barbie herself was in her later teen years. Given this, the Dreamhouse could also be considered a dorm room or perhaps a studio apartment. However, given that the exterior signifies a suburban home, for this discussion, it will be considered a bedroom located within a family home. Due to this age gap between Barbie and those who were intended to be playing with her, a question arises regarding how this mediates the representation of the teenage demographic.
As previously mentioned, the cohort of the teenager was receiving attention for its ever-expanding autonomy in postwar society. This autonomy was largely a result of the luxury of disposable income and market power. It is within this context that the teenage cohort was seen by wider society as both a cause for anxiety (such as rising concern of delinquency among the cohort) and an opportunity for goods, services and spaces marketed towards them. What took place was what Leerom Medovoi refers to as the “paradox of the youth market.” Whereby, youth did not participate in conformist market consumption, largely represented in domestic suburbia, but rather, a secondary suburban market, distinct from the primary family market through a particular set of goods.14 The teenage bedroom was one space where this secondary suburban market was highly visible.
According to Jason Reid, the autonomous teen bedroom was a space where an adolescent expression of the homeowner’s ideal could be indulged. Home décor experts and furniture manufacturers sought out the teen market, encouraging teenagers to fill their bedrooms with everything from desks and new beds to posters and knickknacks.15 In marketing their products, companies utilized a commercialized teenaged persona. This persona was present in consumer magazines, which largely appealed to adult audiences, resulting in adult priorities over teenage interest. Teenagers, on the other hand, were developing their persona, separate from adults, based on social interactions with members of their peer group. Shared dress, language and pastimes are such examples of this persona. As a result of this identity, which opposed adult authority, companies found it difficult to sell to the teenage market. In his 1957 study of the teenage market, market researcher Eugene Gilbert found that in matters related to goods purchased for their rooms, it was the opinion of the teenager (teenage girls) that carried the weight.16 Nevertheless, for the creators of the Dreamhouse, who as cultural brokers sought to maintain a certain image for the purpose of profitable outcomes, this commeral teenage persona was embraced. The result is an amalgamation of attributes that are more reflective of idealized notions rather than the teenage demographic itself. This is in line with previous findings, that the world of Barbie was, at times, both in and out of step in response to the social cultural changes, not utilized to entirely transform society, but instead reflect modest changes.17
Beginning with the examination of color, the bright palette selected for the Dreamhouse is reflective of the popular colors of the time, with Cerulean (Pantone’s first color of the year) selected for the chair and ottoman (Figure 3). Along with keeping on trend, the selection of vivid colors was reflective of the awareness of the toy’s intended target market, as colors such as yellow and red were recommended to stimulate imagination in children’s play spaces.18

The art on the left wall and centered on the back wall might be more reflective of the creators of the Dreamhouse as opposed to teenage taste. Whereas items, such as ‘spirit flags,’ located on the right-hand side of the Dreamhouse, acted like a “badge of membership,” that signified belonging to a peer group.19 In this iteration it is belonging to a state university. While this type of décor might have been an element of teenage culture becoming part of the idealized persona, these spirit flags were from the earlier decades of the postwar era, as opposed to the 1960s.
Examining the movable furniture included with the Dreamhouse, the TV-Hi-Fi console highlights an important aspect of teenage culture, entertainment, and especially music. While music had been established as an important aspect of the teenage social scene in the 1920s, in the 1960s “‘teenage music’ or young people’s music emerged as totally separate from adult music,” with rock music becoming an emblem of youth.20 As Reid notes, products such as stereo equipment that “…originally entertained the entire family soon migrated into the [teenagers] bedrooms…”21 This is especially true as television became the popular form of family entertainment. In terms of goods where teenagers had the most influence, records were a top category. This brings an interesting aspect to the items included in the Dreamhouse product tie-ins. Included with the console were replicated records from real recording artists. The records included were, Nat King Cole’s Love Is The Thing (1957), Frank Sinatra’s Swingin’ Session!!! (1961), The Kingston Trio’s Goin’ Places (1961), The Four Preps’ The Four Preps On Campus (1961), The Lettermen’s A Song for Young Love (1962) and Vic Damon’s Linger A While (1962). The records selected, and their respective artists, were chart-topping in their popularity, with trade music magazines, such as Cash Box, highlighting them in bestselling lists and album reviews.22 The genres of music represented were largely, pop, jazz and swing. The selection of albums draws on the idealized commercial persona that had less of a connection to the generational style of teenagers of the late 1950s into the 1960s. The exception to this was the folk band, The Kingston Trio. Folk music became increasingly popular for postwar youth who sought expression for political awareness, voicing concerns for a variety of social ills.
In selecting this music, the curated image of the teenage cohort is again one of modest change. This allowed Mattel to represent the teenage cohort in a way that was acceptable to parents who may have been concerned about their children emulating the new rock and roll style. A style that was largely viewed by older generations as morally suggestive, not dissimilar to how adults viewed changes to music in previous decades. As Kelly Schrum notes of swing music in the 1920s and 30s, there was a strong visceral response, with media depictions often utilizing racist language and imagery to denounce the style.23 For the older generations in the late 1950s and 1960s, fears over swing music were replaced with fears of rock and roll and the fears of teenage delinquency that went with it. Like other elements in the Dreamhouse, the music selection, while not unpopular, was more representative of earlier teenage preferences. Rather than reflecting the consumer preferences of the teenager at the time, the selected music reflects the idealized values and norms of an earlier period. By doing so, it reflects the desire of Dreamhouse creators not to jeopardize the profitability of the world of Barbie by fully signifying the teenage cohort of the period.
Lessons at play in the Barbie Dreamhouse
While not categorized as an educational toy, ascribed in the content of Barbie’s 1962 Dreamhouse is an assemblage of characteristics. Characteristics that, when examined, reveal an intended yet somewhat hidden curriculum. The lessons which its creators passed along to those that played with the Dreamhouse, were lessons in suburban living, namely creative domesticity. For adults, included in this narrative was the space of the teenage bedroom, whereby it was an outward expression of the good life, a fulfillment of ideals. The teenage space created in the Dreamhouse expresses an adult-mediated representation of the teenage demographic. This idealized notion of teenage culture was represented in what cultural brokers saw as acceptable expressions of this life stage. While creative play was deemed as an important aspect of child development, utilizing this carefully crafted persona, the creators of the Dreamhouse sought to ensure that their younger target market was not taught aspects of teenage culture, as they deemed them to be harmful to child development and well-being.
Kirsten Widdes holds a MA in History from Carleton University, as well as a BEd in Junior/Intermediate Education from the University of Ottawa. She is currently an independent researcher who specializes in Canadian social and cultural history. Her areas of interest include gender history, the examination of consumer culture, teenage and youth culture, as well as space and place.
- Dr Spock’s 1946 book, The Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care, is one example of this. ↩︎
- National Plan Service, Inc, Town & Country Ranch Homes (Chicago: National Plan Service, Inc, 1962), 2, https://archive.org/details/NationalPlanServiceTownandCountryRanchHomes0001/mode/2up. The National Plan Service provided modularly designed homes which were based specifications that the owner would select and order through the catalogue service or planning center. ↩︎
- Doug Owram, Born at the Right Time: A History of the Baby Boom Generation (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996), 60. ↩︎
- Daniel Thomas Cook, The Commodification of Childhood: The Children’s Clothing Industry and the Rise of the Child Consumer (Durham: Duke University Press, 2004), 19. ↩︎
- Amy F. Ogata, Designing the Creative Child: Playthings and Places in Midcentury America, 2. ↩︎
- Lizabeth Cohen, A Consumer’s Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America (New York: Knopf, 2003), 320. ↩︎
- Daniel Thomas Cook, The Commodification of Childhood, 18. ↩︎
- Marlys Pearson and Paul R. Mullins, “Domesticating Barbie: An Archaeology of Barbie Material Culture and Domestic Ideology.” International Journal of Historical Archaeology 3, no. 4 (1999): 257, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20852937. ↩︎
- Pearson and Mullins, “Domesticating Barbie,” 229. ↩︎
- “1962 Barbie DreamHouse commercial,” 0:31. ↩︎
- Veronica Strong-Boag, “Home Dreams: Women and the Suburban Experiment in Canada, 1945-60,” The Canadian Historical Review 72, no. 4 (December 1991): 474, 492. ↩︎
- Ogata, Designing the Creative Child, 104. ↩︎
- Pearson and Mullins, “Domesticating Barbie,” 233. ↩︎
- Leerom Medovoi, Rebels: Youth and the Cold War Origins of Identity (Durham, N.C: Duke University Press, 2005), 34-35. ↩︎
- Jason Reid, Get Out of My Room!: a History of Teen Bedrooms in America (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2017), 5-6. ↩︎
- Eugene Gilbert, Advertising and Marketing to Young People (New York: Printers’ Ink Books, 1957), 48. ↩︎
- Miriam Forman-Brunell, “Barbie in “LIFE”: The Life of Barbie, ” The Journal of the History of Childhood and Youth 2, no. 3 (2009): 308, doi:10.1353/hcy.0.0073. Pearson and Mullins, “Domesticating Barbie,” 236. ↩︎
- Ogata, Designing the Creative Child, 81. ↩︎
- Born at the Right Time, 147. ↩︎
- For example, see Kelly Schrum, Some Wore Bobby Sox: The Emergence of Teenage Girls’ Culture, 1920-1945 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), 97-127 for discussion on music and teenage culture prior to 1950. Owram, Born at the Right Time, 152. ↩︎
- Reid, Get Out of My Room!, 6. ↩︎
- “Best Selling Pop Albums,” The Cash Box, July 13, 1957, 30, https://archive.org/details/cashbox18unse_41/mode/2up. “The Cash Box: Best Selling Monaural & Stereo Albums,” The Cash Box, February 4, 1961, 28, https://archive.org/details/cashbox22unse_19/mode/2up. Album Reviews: ‘THE FOUR PREPS ON CAMPUS’— Capitol ST 1566,” The Cash Box, May 20, 1961, 22, https://archive.org/details/cashbox22unse_34/mode/2up?view=theater. “The Cash Box: Best Selling Monaural & Stereo Albums,” The Cash Box, June 24, 1961, 21, https://archive.org/details/cashbox22unse_39/mode/2up. Cash Box: Best Selling Albums, The Cash Box, March 24, 1962, 25, https://archive.org/details/cashbox23unse_26/mode/2up.
“Cash Box: Best Selling Albums, The Cash Box, April 7, 1962, 31, https://archive.org/details/cashbox23unse_28/mode/2up. ↩︎ - Schrum, Some Wore Bobby Sox, 99-100. ↩︎