Young People ‘No Longer Think Golliwogs Are Racist’

Young people do not recognise golliwogs as racist symbols and are more likely to associate their exaggerated features with cosmetic surgery, new research has claimed.

Dr Todd Gray claimed the controversial doll “has lost its relevancy and potency among the younger generation” because they have “little cultural awareness of the Victorian minstrel attire” it was based on.

The historian’s new book, Waterwogs and the Contested History of the Golliwog, suggests that the golliwog caricature, created in the late 1800s, was not initially recognised as being black and so there was “no suggestion of racism”.

Instead, he describes the “fairyland character” created by Florence Upton in 1895 as being “oversized and ungainly, mostly with grey skin, unruly hair and exaggerated lips and eyes” with no hands or feet, which adults found ugly but children adored.

It was only when commercial companies reproduced it as a doll based upon “an American minstrel dandy” and “altered its personality, most notably by Enid Blyton who depicted him as a villain” that the strong racial overtones emerged when it became black.

Blyton cast a golliwog as a villain who steals a car in her Here Comes Noddy Again book.

Dr Gray, an Honorary Research Fellow in Exeter University’s Department of Archaeology and History, has also discovered an “unknown Great War variant” of the golliwog called the “waterwog”, which was created in 1914 in Exeter. The bath-time toy was made from loofah and dreamt up as part of a job-creation scheme for women during the Great War.

He has also unearthed a “walliwog” comical creature created in Wales in the same year and made from branches and roots of trees. No images of either characters have yet been discovered.

Dr Gray, who conducted research on how young people view the golliwog, said: “For two generations the golliwog has been debated as a symbol of racism but in recent decades it has lost its relevancy and potency among the younger generation, who are more likely to associate his blabber lips with cosmetic enhancement rather than as a racist caricature and have little cultural awareness of the Victorian minstrel attire.

“Meanwhile, the older generations continue to be divided – with the word and character variously triggering consternation, alarm or distress.”

‘Much-loved toy’

The 66-year-old academic, who was born in the United States but has lived in the UK since studying here for his undergraduate degree, believes British people were initially unaware of the racial connotations of the golliwog, only realising it was offensive from the 1950s when immigrants from the Commonwealth were invited here to work.

He said: “Part of understanding this history is recognising that simultaneously the golliwog was a much-loved toy while also being a means of denigrating another part of society.

“The golliwog’s history challenges modern Britain to try to understand both perspectives. It allows us to see how the figure permeated society through the innocence of children and was accepted without any reservations until the 1950s Caribbean immigration.

“That forced the country to re-evaluate the golliwog as it began to have a race consciousness. The figure provides us with valuable lessons on how Britain gradually has come to terms with multiculturalism.”

From around 1910, Robertson’s, the British brand of marmalades and fruit preserves, used a golliwog symbol after the son of the founder made a trip to the US and saw children playing with the black rag doll. The company retired the golly character in 2002 amid claims it was racist.

Dr Gray said: “I believe that the history of British race awareness can be uniquely understood through the golliwog. This history is difficult for many for different reasons but it needs to be addressed for the same reasons that we do not shy away from studying the Holocaust, African slavery, the British Empire or any other testing history.”