Those little silk labels are holding a secret . . .
The little silk label that’s on most CPK outfits, hold a secret. Special thanks to Jodi Punki Patch and her amazing observational skills for catching this and making me look into it more.
Within the Coleco factories, you can use the silk label to figure out where the outfit was made, to a point. At this point, I have found that there are four different labels.
Chinese factories use the regular label that we are all familiar with. Factories: OK, P, CC, FW, KT, LF, PMI, SS, WS
Two China labels, KT and OK. The right will be used for continued comparison.
Factories from Taiwan use a larger label is that is white in colour. Factories: AX, CY, EX, FD, IC, UT, WW, HRS
Taiwan (UT) Vs. China (OK)
Labels from the Korean factories (IJ, SY) look like the regular China labels, but they are slightly darker in colour.
Korea (IJ) Vs. China (OK)
Outfits from the USA factory are larger, white and made of a canvas-like material.
USA factory Vs. China (OK)
Jesmar outfits tend to have a slightly smaller tag, with a slightly darker green. I’ve also noticed that sometimes the stitching is done badly where it is sewn on. For more information on Jesmar outfits visit: Jesmars and J Clothing
Many outfits were made using the same fabrics, which can create confusion when trying to determine which pair of bloomers go with which dress. After all, the patterns look the same, why can’t we just match them up?
Courtesy of April Shaw
Courtesy of Gia Levato
It’s all about the frill! (Or lack thereof)
For almost 90% of the outfits I have recorded, the lace used around the sleeves is mirrored around the hem of the bloomer leg holes. If the sleeves don’t have any lace, then neither do the bloomers.
If they don’t match, they don’t go together!
Frilly style lace
Cotton style lace
No lace
Pink dress courtesy Jodi’s Punki Patch.
This holds true for all the original 1983 outfits and all the 1984 preemie dresses. Of the later outfits (#100+), most of them follow the same pattern. These are the exceptions that I am aware of:
162 – lace on bloomers, not on sleeves 164 – plain white instead of patterned 165 – lace doesn’t match at arm and leg, but the fabric patterns were not used for any other outfits 168 – lace on bloomers, not on sleeves 505 – no lace on bloomers, lace on sleeves 656 – no lace on bloomers, lace on sleeves 705 – no lace on bloomers, lace on sleeves 726 – no lace on bloomers, lace on sleeves 707 – no lace on bloomers, lace on sleeves
Now that I had a clue that the other outfits might exist, I started to pay attention. Unfortunately, my next find was still an accident! I asked for tag information on a dress that had a CPK label but didn’t look familiar at all. I thought it might be homemade with the label added. What I got sent by Jamie H., was the following:
Photo courtesy of Jamie Henry.
Now, the CC factory only made two types of outfits: 1) letters L, M, and N in the first 20 outfits (and this outfit was NOT one of those) and 2) the Casual Wear Line (CWL). When I compared the tag pictures with the CWL tags, they matched.
Photos courtesy of Jamie Henry. Special thanks to Jamie for her patience with this process.
So, I asked around. Nobody recognized it. I now believe that this might be one of the forgotten Casual Wear Line outfits, the red and white checked dress. It looks exactly like the dress that is worn under Allie Cat’s apron.
Source unknown
I do not know if the CPK version came with an apron. I have since found a second dress that also did not have the apron with it. Another collector also sent me a picture of a dress that looks like a green and white checked version, but I was unable to see a CPK label and was not able to get any other information. Interestingly, there was an early version of Allie Cat’s dress that was a green and white check. (Jennifer Pelfrey, Feb. 24, 2021.)
Photo courtesy of Jennifer Pelfrey.
What I do not have, is a MIB version of the red and white check dress, which I need to prove that this is a Casual Wear Line outfit. Do you have this treasure in your collection?
Missing
Based on thesources quoted in Pt. 1, we are still missing two Casual Wear Line outfits.
The first, described as ‘green jogging shorts with white tee shirt’, may be referring to the green jogging outfit; however, the descriptions are not a good match.
Jodi Punki Patch and I speculate that it may be referring to the S.S. Happiness character, Jack the Rabbit, and his green jogging shorts. Unfortunately, the description does not match the sleeveless tee that normally accompanies it. However, they could have matched it with the white character shirt each of the S.S. Happiness Crew can also be found in. I have no idea what graphic they would have put on it.
As for the ‘blue romper’, we have no leads as we cannot find a character outfit that matches the description. I wonder if it looks something like the elephant romper. Do you have any ideas? UPDATE: We now have an idea! Fellow collector, Jennifer Pelfrey, speculates that it may be referring to Snoopy’s Lifeguard outfit. What do you think? Do you have any CPK outfits that are similar?
A similar situation would have occurred with the White Tux outfit, as we can find no character reference for it either, except that collectors were already aware that it is a Casual Wear Line outfit. UPDATE: We’ve found a match! The White suit outfit is very similar to the Snoopy Disco outfit. (Jennifer Pelfrey, Feb. 24, 2021)
The Casual Wear Line (CWL) was the only brand name, separately packaged clothing available for Cabbage Patch Kids in 1983.
Creating
The clothing was modelled after outfits worn by the S.S. Happiness Crew and Peanuts characters.
The S.S. Happiness Crew was a four-book series written by June Dutton between 1980 -1983. She also collaborated with Charles M. Shultz to write several Peanuts (Snoopy) books during the same period of time. Both series were published by Determined Productions, who also copyrighted the character-based stuffed animals and their accompanying outfits for both storylines. (Ref)
S.S. Happiness StuffiePhotos courtesy of Jodi Punki Patch and unknown sources.
The original SS and Snoopy stuffed animals came in two sizes, 10″ and 14″, so the outfits came in both sizes. (Jennifer Pelfrey, Feb 24, 2021)
Photo courtesy of Jennifer Pelfrey.
They made very few changes for Cabbage Patch Kids. In fact, if you look closely at the back of the Safari Suit, you can see where the tail hole should be!
Can you find the tail hole?Photos courtesy of Jodi’s Punki Patch.
Determined Productions made good use of the outfits patterns as, not only were they later used for CPK outfits, some of the S.S. Happiness Crew clothing was also used for Peanuts Characters.
If you would like to know which Casual Wear Line outfits were worn by which characters, visit here.
Forgetting
The earliest description of the CWL that I have found comes from an in-house CPK newsletter produced in the ’80s, called Dolling Around.
“One group of items I feel shouldn’t be overlooked are the flat packaged 1983 Casual Wear. The painter’s smock, 3 pc. white suit, green jogging shorts, red pyjamas, safari suit, and blue romper are especially good. The red checked dress isn’t great, but worth having nonetheless.”
Another early source, Patchwork by E.N. Chapman, described it as follows:
“There was a Causal Wear Line out in ’83 only, that is also very good to get. There was a painter’s smock, safari suit, boy’s white three-piece outfit, green jogging shorts with a white t-shirt, red and white checked dress, red pyjamas, a blue romper outfit, striped denim jeans, and perhaps others.”
When I first learned about the Casual Wear Line a few years ago, it seemed that most collectors felt they had the ‘entire collection’ when they had these six outfits.
However, if you look closely, there are other outfits listed in the previous quotes that are not among the six.
Green jogging shorts
Blue romper
Red and white checked dress
Remembering
Later in one of the FB groups, a woman was selling off a very large collection of material. Many packaged outfits were displayed in each picture, and in one such picture, I saw an outfit I did not recognize. When I zoomed in, I found that it was a CWL packaged outfit . . . that was not among the six known CWL outfits AND wasn’t described in either of my references!
I asked around, and with the help of Jodi Punki Patch, I was able to confirm that it was a Casual Wear Line outfit and get a better MIB picture to prove it.
Photo courtesy of Jodi’s Punki Patch.
So, now I had an inkling that there were more outfits out there. I started to keep an eye out, hoping another would emerge. Keep reading in Part 2!
These outfits are the same as the 3rd Cornsilk series . . . yet not!
I’m calling this the Homophone Set as they are the same as the 3rd Cornsilk series, but they are also different. These dresses are made of cotton, instead of the sateen and velveteen of the fancier dresses. They don’t come with a special birth certificate, tights, or any of the accessories the cornsilk kids did. However, structurally, they are the same. The only significant difference is outfit #730 . . . more on that later.
Right pic courtesy of Kat Perhouse.
This group of outfits (724 – 730) came out concurrent with the 3rd Cornsilk series (718-723) in 1987. Refer to that post for details on the timing debate. It was made exclusively by the KT factory. They had matching bloomers, socks, and Mary Jane shoes. So far, I have only seen white shoes.
Photos courtesy of Kat Perhouse and Sarah Kimmel.
Based on my research to this point, I believe that the outfit codes for this series work like this:
There were six patterns used for these dresses, and each pattern comes in one to three colour options. There are six versions of each dress, as each dress comes in all six patterns, but in only one option for each colour. Consequently, if an outfit comes in purple with buds, it will not come in mint green with buds.
The Big Yellow Flower pattern might come in two unofficial versions. Some outfits are made of vibrantly coloured fabric, and others are made from fabric that appears faded. I’m unsure if this is caused by photo manipulation, flashes, or if there are actual differences in the fabrics.
Save the Boys for Last!
The last outfit in this series, #730, is a boy’s outfit. It was the only boy outfit produced in this series, and there is no cornsilk equivalent as there were no boy cornsilk dolls produced. It makes me wonder if a ‘fancy’ version of this outfit was created for the prototype Cornsilk boys. What a find that would be!
This outfit comes with a dress shirt, cotton dress pants (slacks), a vest and a bowtie. These outfits came with regular lace-up shoes. It’s absolutely adorable!
Photos courtesy of Kat Perhouse.I’m not sure which version of B is correct. I need to see a kid who’s been MIB.
I apologize for my infrequent posting this week. I had an opportunity to finally complete a project that has been on my to-do list for months. I call it my Group Shots.
These are photographs of my kids in various groupings, themed and clothing by number. It’s an annual record of my collection, and really, just something I like to do. However, I do post them in a FB photo album. If you’d like to see them, go ahead!
As I mentioned in the 3rd series, I am unsure which came first, the 3rd series (720s) or the 4th series (760s). I do know that these outfits came out in 1987 and came in the same boxes, with the same accessories, as the 720s kids. To review this discussion, jump here: Cornsilk Series 3: Beautiful Dresses, pt. 2
This series was made by the P factory, and they are among the hardest Cornsilk outfits to find. It’s likely that they weren’t produced for very long, and there doesn’t appear to be more than two versions of each outfit. That means fewer to find overall.
I only have five outfits recorded, out of what I think is a possible series of eight, if not more. Based on my records to this point, each outfit appears to have 1 or 2 versions (A, B).
They all come with white underwear. Most come with socks, although #765 has tights. Most appear to have come with white Mary Janes, but a few came with white sneakers and solid-form boots.
Mary Jane ShoesWhite SneakersUnderwearSolid Form Boots
The Outfits
#762 -Double shirt and quilted skirt
A – Photo courtesy of Heather McCurdy MinixB – Photo courtesy of Julie Champman
#763 – Unknown Outfit
#764 – Unknown Outfit
#765 – Romper dress and blouse
A – Photo courtesy of Sarah GaltB
#766 – Double shirt and skort
Photo courtesy of Lisa March Graves Kuhn
#767 – Unknown Outfit
#768 – Windbreaker Outfit
Photo courtesy of Melissa Crick Gore
#769 – Terry cloth top and tied pants
Photo courtesy of Jen Nicol.
I believe that this outfit is part of this series, but I don’t know which of the three numbers it fills: 763, 764, or 767.
Photo courtesy of Jodi Issacs.
Similar Outfits
Outfit #765 is often mistaken for outfits #148, #402-8, and #332.
#765#402-8 Photo courtesy of Annie Mauboussi Johnston#332#148 Photo courtesy of Jodi Issacs.
Outfits #762 and #766 can be confused for each other, as the only difference is the skirt versus the skort.
Outfit #768 and the ruffled unknown outfit are often mistaken for each other and for outfits #516 and #512.
#768 Photo courtesy of Melissa Crick GoreUnknown outfit – Photo courtesy of Jodi Issacs#516 Photo courtesy of Lori Clark.#512 Photo courtesy of Jodi Issacs
Other Information
Prototype outfits can be seen in these pictures from the 1987 Coleco Catalogue, p. 7.
Series 3 came out in 1987. Honestly, I’m not sure which came first, Series 3 or Series 4. Some reference sources indicate that Series 4 (760s) came out before Series 3. (Ref#2, p. 79; Ref#3, p. 150) However, there is also evidence for Series 3 coming out before Series 4.
4 then 3: Outfits in Series 4 are very similar to those in Series 2 (300s).
4 then 3: Series 4 kids seem to come with the earlier ‘flowered’ birth certificate more then Series 3. Most of Series 3 comes with the ‘non-flowered’ birth certificate.
3 then 4:Outfits in Series 4 are much harder to find than those in Series 3. Generally, this means the series was produced for a short length of time. This would have occurred if they had started selling them later in 1987 and then quickly switched to a newer group of outfits in 1988/98.
3 then 4:The codes in Series 3 are numerically lower than those of Series 4. From this, I assume that they planned Series 4 after Series 3. However, this does not tell us what order they came out in. Also, by the time these outfits were produced, Coleco was not always numbering outfits in order anymore.
Same time: The 3rd Series was made by the KT factory and the 760s by the P factory. Did they come out at the same time, but were made by different factories?
Description
This series (3rd) consists of six very pretty dress styles. I believe they initially came in the same boxes and with the same birth certificates as the 2nd series, but when those ran out, they changed. The newer boxes looked the same, but the ribbons were in plastic sleeves attached to the box liner, and the hand tag and birth certificate changed to have a modern look.
Courtesy of Doreen Russell
The dresses generally came with matching bloomers, lacy white tights, and white Mary Jane shoes. However, I have seen one example that came with socks, and a few of them came with black Mary Jane shoes. I don’t have enough information at this time to list which came with which. I need more information! I also need more information on their undergarments. I think they came with the white underpants, but I’m not sure. Do you know?
The Outfits
There are 6 outfits in this series and they were made entirely by the KT factory. I believe that there are six or seven versions of each outfit: 3 sateen (A, B, C), 3 – 4 velveteen (E, F,?). Using the Cotton Version Seriesas a reference, it appears that they did not create a D.
Sateen version and velveteen version.
Photos courtesy of Jodi’s Punk Patch, Callie Cabbies, and Cassidi Carroll.
There are 6 to 7 colour options for each fabric (6 sateen, 7 velveteen). As there are only three to four versions of each dress, only three colours were used for each one. There doesn’t appear to be a pattern for which colours they chose for which outfits.
For every dress in the ‘fancy’ series that came on Cornsilk Kids, there is a ‘less fancy’ cotton version that came on regular kids. (#724-729) They came out at the same time. For more information, jump to: Ho·mo·phone: the same . . . but different *
RegularCornsilkRegular (from Kat Perhouse)Cornsilk
Breaking the Rules
Some of these Cornsilk outfits were later found on ‘regular’ kids. I believe they did this when they were getting rid of extra stock in late 1987 or 1988.
Pop up topic: Who or what is Elkay? What are these tags for? That was the mystery, but we found the answer.
The other day Jodi Punki Patch asked me if I knew where these tags might have come from and or what they were for. I had no idea.
Looking closely, they’re from a company called ELKAY and have Made in USA in the top left corner, where the silk square labels used on CPK doll clothes don’t.
Regular CPK clothing tag
By doing some online research, I found a US company with the name ELKAY, which made children’s clothing in the 1980s. I did not find direct evidence that they produced CPK clothing; however, I could not find another company with that name that was doing anything even tangentially related to toys or children.
While discussing it with Jodi, I had a thought. Softies were often dressed in child-sized clothing.
BINGO!
Sure enough, the original outfit of one of my softies has this label in the neck. It appears that this company made at least some of the clothing used to dress softies in the mid-1980s.
This discovery leads to the following questions:
When exactly did they make CPK related clothing?
What softie lines did they making clothes for?
Did they produce human kid clothing?
However, these questions will need to be looked into by Softie collectors and those at the Soft Face Place. It does not fit my blogs mandate.
About Elkay
The company was incorporated in 1965 in New York, New York. They manufactured clothing, specializing in children’s clothing. They had multiple clothing factories located in South Carolina. The company filed for bankruptcy in 1990, and the majority of the manufacturing machines were auctioned off and sold in 1991. They continued attempting to register trademarks until 1996, but none appear to have been successful.
