Just for kids: Sylvanian family dolls.

What does a feral dachshund have to do with a famous lioness? In Born Free, Joy Adamson told the story of Elsa, an orphaned lion cub, whom she raised and eventually returned to the wild as an adult. Just recently, Valerie the miniature dachshund turned Elsa’s story inside out, when she went missing from her pampered Australian life on a camping trip on Kangaroo Island, off the coast of Western Australia, more than 500 days ago. Long since given up for dead by her distraught Gen Z “dog parents”, Valerie has now been spotted after surviving for 18 months in the wild.
Would a movie about Valerie’s adventures be called Born Tame? Valerie, who stands six inches tall, spent the first year of her life being cosseted with treats and toys and woolly jumpers. And yet, having now spent longer in the wild than she did living in a household, she is reportedly “looking very healthy”. The couple are confident that it’s only a matter of time before she is recaptured. But what if she doesn’t want to go home? Josh Fishlock, Valerie’s purported owner, has told Australia’s Today programme that attempts to lure the dog back to captivity are not going well; every time someone tries to approach her she runs away.
No wonder; it sounds to me as though she’s living her best life. There’s something heroic about a creature that, bred to live as a pampered pet, has rediscovered enough of her canine instinct to survive for months in the Australian wilderness. In turn, Valerie’s unexpected wild flourishing shines a spotlight on our strange modern relation to pets: often radically denatured, anthropomorphic proxies for ourselves, or substitute babies, mostly or entirely denied opportunity to express their animal instincts.
Part of the problem is that we first invented childhood innocence, then grew to love it. But we have also, over time, turned this into an urge to stay innocent of the most poignant natural childhood fact: babies grow up.
Historians and curators are fond of observing that the idea of “childhood innocence” is a distinctively industrial-era invention: children were segregated away from adult activities when Britain began to be industrialised, and adult activity abandoned its mainly agrarian premodern setting. The first wave of compulsory education was initiated in the 19th century partly as a means of keeping young children out of factories.
As the poet Seamus Heaney illustrated in The Early Purges (1991), this enabled a shift in how children relate to animals. We think of animals as cute, furry, stroke-able, meriting care and protection. Heaney, by contrast, describes his childhood memories of witnessing animals being killed, as part of everyday life on a farm, and how he soon grew inured to the sight. Against this grim reality, he calls the urban fixation on “prevention of cruelty” a feature of cultures “where they consider death unnatural”.
Among such urban communities, in which the kind of death Heaney describes is no longer routinely visible, it has become possible to conceive of childhood as a kind of moral Eden, that children enjoy in the brief years before they learn about the harsh realities of life. And if it came to being with industrial urbanisation, this style of innocent kids’ content is still very much with us today, as illustrated in charming form by a new movie released next week. Based on the Sylvanian Families children’s toys, its plot could not be less arch, or perilous, or postmodern, or ironic, or in any other way postmodern or internet-poisoned. It’s about how Freya the Chocolate Bunny goes looking for a lovely birthday present for her mummy.
Sylvania perfectly illustrates both the industrial-era Eden of children’s innocence, and its denatured modern relation to animals. Sylvanians are wholly anthropomorphic, with animal heads but identical, humanoid bodies. They are all the same size regardless of species, and there’s no sense of predator/prey relations. Meanwhile, as proxies for our human lives, the message they convey is both charming and — by postmodern standards — very conservative. For if there’s no death in this Arcadia of trim cottages, well-kept pavements, and consumer abundance, sex is present — but only implicitly. Clothing in the playsets is meticulously gendered, and families are stubbornly heteronormative — not to mention very fecund.
It represents, in other words, a note-perfect toy version of the industrial-era idyll that held, at least in the world of children’s toys, until very recently. So given the post-industrial and post-modern turn in our culture, I was genuinely surprised to see Sylvania played so straight in the movie. For even as children have grown fewer, and child-substitute pets more numerous, so Toyland has reached ever further into adulthood — and, at times, become less innocent with it. Many children’s toy franchises now cater overtly for adult audiences too.
Much of this is innocuous enough, as for example LEGO’s “Creator” sets, or takes the form of ironic asides aimed at parents sitting through a favourite show for the umpteenth time. But there are also more unsettling spin-offs of children’s toys, that collapse the supposedly “safe” sex and death-free space of childhood, such as this PVC-clad Build-A-Bear with devil horns and dominatrix boots, or the sometimes fetish-tinged “Brony” subculture of adult male My Little Pony fans. So needless to say I was not just surprised, but relieved, to find Sylvania as clean and un-cynical as ever. But my surprise itself signals how fragile this sensibility now appears to be.
So what explains the influx of adult preoccupations and sensibilities into children’s toy franchises? When so many adults seem so fearful of “adulting”, and shy away from parenthood in favour of “fur babies”, perhaps it’s only to be expected that childhood innocence would extend. When we’re told that adolescence now stretches all the way from 10 to 24, you might think this would mean a longer period of innocence. And yet puberty has been getting steadily younger. Meanwhile, even if we still keep death mostly tucked carefully out of sight, sex seems to be everywhere — even wildly inappropriately “sexy” clothing for little girls.
The creep of adult preoccupations into children’s toys speaks more to this protracted adolescence than childhood as such. My own little girl is well into primary school, and whenever I imagine her stepping into this world, my overwhelming feeling is: “Please, no, not yet.” And yet, while I can do a little to slow the rush, I can’t stop it. Nor, it occurs to me, should I want to — at least not in every sense.
Recently, while teaching her to ride a bike, I was struck by how much easier pedalling away was for her, than letting go of the saddle was for me. She’d travelled 50 yards before she realised I wasn’t holding her; I meanwhile jogged behind, the emptiness in my hand like a 10-tonne weight. But what else can I do? There would be nothing kind or loving about wanting to keep her “safe” from the joy, fitness, and freedom that come with riding a bike.
And perhaps there’s another insight here, into why so many now seem to prefer a “fur baby” to the human kind. For it’s not that we want to extend childhood all the way to mid-20s. On the contrary: my surprise at the irony-free Sylvanian Families movie storyline points to the reality that Victorian-style childhood innocence is not expanding but shrinking. But what if the adult preference for “fur babies” reflects a yearning for children that won’t grow up? If “helicopter parenting” describes mothers and fathers who find it difficult to let go, perhaps “fur babies” are for adults so fearful of the bittersweet feeling of watching your baby grow up that they can’t bear to go there at all. Pets are not children — but at least they stay dependent and goofy forever. All, that is, except the ones who escape into the wilderness on a camping trip, and refuse to be recaptured.
So the unlikely flourishing of Valerie the sausage dog, reborn as a feral dachshund, could be read as a diminutive rebellion against Sylvania. But not in the sense of “modernising” Sylvania in accordance with adult proclivities, or some grievance studies script or other, so much as in defence of creatures having natural needs. Her vigorous health after 18 months of freedom on Kangaroo Island declares: “I may be small, but I’m not a toy or a fur baby. I’m an adult dog, and a predator.” I wonder: what will happen to Valerie if she’s captured but can’t adjust to the playpen and the knitted jumpers? I picture a sequel to Born Tame, in which she is tearfully returned, at long last, to her life as a wild dachshund. But however that story ends, it remains true that part of the nature of dogs, however domesticated, is still hunting. And the nature of children is to grow up.
Part of a mother’s love, then, must be judging when to let go. I tell myself this on a daily basis — and even so, the pride I feel at every milestone comes with a twinge of sadness. So I feel only grateful to Sylvanian Families for choosing to make a movie that hasn’t joined the rush toward modern extended adolescence. And doubly grateful that my little girl is still young enough to enjoy it.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI am keeping it simple, just rooting for Valerie.
I fully sympathise with letting go of the bike. I started taking my son to swimming lessons when he was a baby – his mom is a bit of a hydrophobe when it comes to submerging herself, and we wanted him to be used to water from the off to avoid any chance of “inheriting” it.
I was the *absolute worst* in the class of 20 or so at letting go of him in the water. The instructor used to yell at me over it.
Now in his teens, I’m working hard on getting him ready for the “real world” – teaching him basic DIY, household finances, extra tuition for his studies and such, so I think I must be past whatever it was. Maybe living with a teenager has altered my thinking!
Can’t comment on Sylvanian Families, I guess I’m old enough to have missed them coming out, and i thought it was some sort of vampire thing (Hotel Transylvania style)…
You sounds like a great dad! You didn’t miss anything with the Sylvanian Families, they were freaky things.
Good for you. I mean teaching him the real and really useful things I bet they still don’t teach at school. Basic DIY. How to manage money at household level. You’re setting your son on the path of a successful life
Well done in letting go of the bike. I hope you are successful in letting go psychologically to allow your daughter to become a fully independent adult. So many parents never achieve this.
Re: pets as ersatz-children. I have observed (and thought) this recently.
My circle of acquaintances includes a couple who are empty-nesters. Their son is in his early 20s, he was mainly raised by his mother who stayed at home while dad worked. This set-up seemed to work quite harmoniously, but I always felt that the wife’s compromises in life had included accepting (or having to accept) that her husband was not a giver of emotional support or nourishment; he was focused on work, always doing his own thing and probably never thought too much about his wife’s emotional needs. Buy her nice clothes, nice Christmas presents, the occasional nice holiday – job done.
Anyways, as soon as the child flew the nest, the wife got a dog. The husband’s life continued as before (work, work, work, travel, travel, travel) but a huge void had clearly opened up in her life when her child grew up and her role as mother retreated (I assume that it never “stops”) and the dog was the perfect way of filling it. And it was, I suppose, also a way of keeping the marriage ticking along as it had done before. The wife’s mothering instincts shift onto the pet, which is dependent as a child and gives a kind of emotional sustenance. The husband can keep the distance he obviously needs to be happy in the marriage. Everyone’s a winner.
Re: adults using kids’ toys. I scoffed at this for a long time – until The Other Half (a Lego lover from early on) persuaded me to do a Lego project. I said OK, go on then. Being as lovely and generous as he is, he bought me a beautiful girly set: an autumnal flower arrangement.
I loved it! I wasn’t just impressed and delighted at how well these things are made and thought out, it was intensely soothing to lose myself in a manual project after spending all day in the digital sphere.
It’s now an annual ritual: he gets a project and I get a project and we sit down and do them together. This year, I had a kingfisher, he did Notre Dame cathedral.
Who cares if we’re the typical, overgrown millennial kids? We can afford it and it’s something to do together that doesn’t involve screens or politics.
What a good idea, and your acquaintance’s also.
Makes me think ultimately the human spirit will triumph, despite all the nonsense.
I think there are far more worrying things than doting on pets to fulfill one’s own emotional needs. As long as the pet doesn’t suffer from the lashings of love and care, everyone’s a winner.
Almost agree. They, and society, are not winners if they have pets rather than children. Unless they are loony progressive woke types of course.
Im sure she would feel much more included in society and relevant if she got a job as an early morning cleaner at IKEA and got up at 3am to catch the 5.30am bus across town. She’d get a surprise if she did. A whole secret society of people who have dropped out,but still need to pay bills. Are super intelligent but choose to keep it to themselves rather than sell it to The Man. So much nicer to spend most of your precious time in the company of shitty people you don’t like and who you carefully curate OUT of your friend group. For money. Your husband has to. You don’t . So dont.
Owning a pet is a strange business. You deprive it of a natural adult life and take total responsibility for it. Parents do not own children, their role is to nuture them whilst they mature into an adult and wean them, so they can be an adult. It should be an enjoyable experience on both sides. Ownership is not part of it and they shouldn’t be a surrogate pet.
I think that Mary is experiencing the loss of innocence the second time around, the first being her own, the second her child’s. As a mother, she can create an innocent being, but not prevent its loss of innocence any more than she could prevent her own. That’s what I experienced, but didn’t fully realize it until reading this article. And that’s yet another reason why Mary is worth reading.
Fine observation. I hadn’t put her thoughts in the context of loss of her own innocence, but i think you’re right.
Plus, it’s probably a lot more important than many of us might care to acknowledge, as we rush towards independence. The surest sign of success as a parent is an independent child, a fully-fledged adult.
Becoming independent in a more complex world than my youth seems to be more ‘scary’ and the recent trans phenomenon is likely a reflection of that. Maybe those adults who promote it are suffering from their own issues over loss of innocence. That’s not to exonerate them; not at all. It’s simply to reflect on something deep within the human psyche.
Point of order. Mary did not create her daughter. Lack of understanding of biology with perhaps a touch of misandry MJ
The subject here isn’t biology, but growing up and becoming a person. The idea of ‘creation’ in this is not misplaced.
Co-created then. I understand the biology of procreation. If she had mentioned her husband sharing the same feeling, I might have used that word instead. And no, I don’t hate men, neither myself nor you.
Loss of ignorance not innocence. I’ve known old ladies of 80+ who’ve had several children and know what’s what but they keep that quality till they die. You lose Ignorance. Usually from experience despite “sex education”. And then you realize that most of what you’ve learned was never worth knowing in the first place.
You don’t need to lose innocence as you become older.
I’m sure you’ll love your little girl even when she’s a big girl and bossing you about. That’s a film I’d watch “I claimed Freedom ,woof woof”. I wonder how many rare endangered Australian native creatures Valerie has killed and eaten so far! But maybe she is filling a niche that we had emptied. When I was ten I had to,with my younger siblings go to stay with my grandparents on their remote Dartmoor farm. It was for two months while my Mum was in hospital. Another ten year old girl lived up the lane. She was more like a granddaughter to the family than we were. Well,they knew her she was there all the time. She had a very special relationship with my uncle,my Dad’s youngest brother,at that time a good looking and vigorous 25 year old young man. I.so remember the cuddly huggy closeness of Uncle Stuart and his cute little doll like friend. I mean we all know now that children born of us are void of sexuality until the magic day they hit 18,or is it 21,or maybe 30. I guess it depends on how rich the one you want to sue is.
Eh?
I am “triggered” by any mention of Sylvanian Families. My younger son had a brief, all-pocket-money-spending, pash on them. The most revolting items I’ve ever seen. I even preferred the later Panini stickers and WWE figures pashes.
Anyway, I must be heartless, because I never felt any pangs. Oops.
Interesting conflation of ideas. Made for a good read but communicated intrinsically what we already knew.
Who would want to pour filth onto the world of the Sylvanians? Undoubtedly there would be radicals of some persuasion or other who would, just as they did with that other reflection of childhood innocence, Rupert the Bear.
If you want to stay your hand and not do this, it would be out of pity. The individual creatures cannot fight back, even the predatory ones. You would have some sense that you must not transgress a sacred boundary over which the other exists in a way that you do not.
The Edwardians would have called these toys ‘dressed animals’. They appear in such novels as Wind in the Willows; essentially a story for adults. The Victorians had a fad for stuffing small animals, dressing them and posing them in human settings. A strange mixing of their sometimes ghoulish treatment of death with innocence.
How would the Sylvanian infants benefit from being taught sex, swearing, and smoking? Would they be ‘liberated’ from the ‘darkness’ of ignorance?
If they were taught to feel despondency and gloom over the state of maritime pollution, as clearly the schoolchildren of Eastbourne have, to judge from their poems that decorate the 1930s seafront bandstand, would they be freed from their bourgeois ‘isolation’?
There is a scene in the film Titanic where the rebellious female hero sees an upper middle class mother and her dutiful daughter at table in the restaurant. The heroine looks at them with contempt, even hatred, and then goes carousing and out-drinking the men. From frilly lace respectability to frowzy ‘authenticity’.
There is what may be called a law of sin in Christian theology. Once sin has mastered a person they feel a craving to drag others down into the pit. Such was Potiphar’s wife in the Genesis story.
Her target is a young man who had been abominably treated and who might have been expected as a consequence to have developed a bitterness of spirit that would give opportunity to receive this invitation to rebellion.
But the young man, Joseph, responds, “How can I do this great wickedness and sin against God.” How could anyone pour filth on the Sylvanian infants? How could anyone teach the Sylvanian primary school children ‘bum sex’ and not know exactly what they were doing, both to each individual and also to their family structure?
In the Gospels, Jesus of Nazareth holds up infant children as exemplars of the kingdom of heaven. Small children copy their parents exactly and trust them implicitly. When engaged in a task, they have a formidable single-mindedness. All these characteristics are those ascribed to Jesus of Nazareth in his following of his Father in Heaven.
In the setting that the Sylvanian parents and children are posed in by those who play with them, there is a recreation of Eden: a spiritual reminder of our fall.
Sorry if I keep repeating myself but, yet again, the whole pet thing is another leisure pursuit (and lucrative industry) due to our relative wealth in the last 40 odd years. Before that cats and dogs usually worked for their living helping with the hunt, or keeping vermin down.
The aristocrats and gentry were the only ones who could afford to have toy or ‘lap’ dogs, or occasionally little monkeys. It is that self indulgence that has filtered down to almost anyone in the latter half of the 20th century, and up until today in the 21st.
Maybe it’s just that humans like to have something to lavish affection on if possible, especially when the creature can be so devoted – dogs, or sensuous – cats.
Of course ‘helping with the hunt or keeping vermin down’ or watching the kids and home, etc. are part of a more naturally fulfilled life for our pets. It’s really the best way to keep them happy.
P.S. The hunt doesn’t have to end in anything’s death. The chase is the important part. My father had a small dog who couldn’t get enough of chasing the deer. Eventually the deer started coming around to tease her and off they would go, playing harts and hounds all around the adjacent woods, until she came home happy and ready for a long nap.
There might be some good advice here in re: raising children. But, alas, I’m not in a position to say.
It was ever thus,
https://verse.press/poem/in-reference-to-her-children-23-june-1659-10831
Lovely poem which I hadn’t come across before. Thank you.
Point of Order: Kangaroo Island is off the coast of South Australia, not Western Australia.
You beat me to it. I wondered what the dachshund lived on or if it was decimating all the boring little grey marsupials but it appears there are mice and rats (introduced) there which is just what it was designed to hunt.
The breed was actually designed to flush badgers out of their sets, I believe, hence the name.
Home of the wonderful Echidna!
You’re thinking of Echidna Island.
Not in my case as Kangaroo Island is the only place I have spotted the ‘beast’, and that includes extensive yet futile searches in Tasmania!
Stealthy beast, the echidna. The platypus even more so.
Plenty around where I grew up in the Otway foothills. My Scottish friend was delighted to spot a spiny anteater on his visit and tried to think of the usual name but … ‘echidna.
I’ll get my coat.
When I read ‘Sylvanian’ I just assumed K.I. was off the coast of Noeline Donaher.
Have a look at forest_fr1ends on X if you want some Sylvanian smut.