Minidolls VS Minifigures - How to Resolve the War

 

Something very interesting has been happening with the Disney microscale sets. And by interesting, I mean something that has been making minifigure-lovers flip tables over. If you're at all involved in the LEGO Disney community, you know what I'm talking about. If you don't, well, just know we may be witnessing the turning of the tide. Or just Disney picking and choosing which movies are 'for boys' and 'for girls.'

The first of these microscale sets was the Disney Castle, based on the iconic castle at Disneyland. The set included a fairly standard Mickey Mouse minifigure. Nothing unexpected or out of the ordinary. Then came the next one - a miniature replica of the Haunted Mansion. Again, it featured a minifigure, to absolutely no-one's surprise.

But then came something that was surprising. The third set was based around the Palace of Agrabah, from 1992's Aladdin. Not only being the first set to be a model of a location from one of Disney's films, rather than a park attraction, but it featured no figure. The outrage and disappointment at this I think is completely understandable, even as a fan of minidolls as opposed to minifigures. I really did feel bad for all the fans of Disney and Aladdin. 

Now here's what's really gotten under the skins of the minifigure-lovers. The latest of the microscale builds, this time of Ariel's underwater castle from The Little Mermaid. While the set is beautifully built, with generally positive reviews, there is one thing that really seems to sting in the eyes of the minifigure community. That it comes with a minidoll of the titular character and beloved Disney Princess. I feel like it's obvious why this is the case - the first two sets were generally gender-neutral, and therefore minidoll-lovers (e.g, me) have to just suck it up, like we've been expected to do for years without a peep. Aladdin I think falls into a strange middle ground - not only is the movie both more targeted for boys but yet features a beloved Disney Princess in the form of Jasmine - but it acts as a sort of limbo between the minifigures and the minidolls.

Frankly, I don't see how either party wins in this regard. I mean, minifigure-lovers miss out on an updated Ariel or Ursula, or perhaps a minifigure iteration of a never-seen character in the world of minifigures such as King Triton. Minidoll-lovers just get yet another iteration of Ariel, that is neither unique nor rare, and doesn't even use her new hair mold (which I personally dislike, but I still want to see the hairpiece in action without paying lots of money for those market shops as that is, as far as I'm aware, the only way to get one).

In my previous post, I spoke about how minidolls don't deserve the hate. But I also want to acknowledge the fans of both Disney and minifigures, who can't have the most iconic and beloved characters in LEGO form, while us minidoll-lovers get to frollic with our princesses without thinking twice. The LEGO sets have been sorted into boxes based on their figure, or, to be more accurate, gender. Namely that 'boys sets' have minifigures, 'girls sets' have minidolls, and 'gender neutral sets' get minifigures and the minidoll-lovers just have to suck it up. There is a whole other conversation to be had here, but I want to pivot from negativity into what we may do to solve this problem.

Be aware the following solutions are neither realistic nor likely, and apply mostly to the larger, collector sets as they are the ones that are driving the wedge between minifigures and minidolls. Everything I'm about to suggest would, in this hypothetical world, not apply to every set.

One possibility is that LEGO just simply commits to minifigures altogether. This would leave me, and the few minidoll fans of the world, upset, as well as reducing sales for the 'girls sets.' On the other hand, committing to minidolls and abolishing minifigures would cause riots in the streets, violence in the LEGO stores, and very angry blog posts. It is simply not an option.

A solution I personally find to be more peaceful would be either not including any figures in these collector sets, having two versions of the same set, one with minifigures and one with minidolls, or even having the two sets of figures be available to purchase separately to the set itself. If I was to pinpoint one solution, in the same line of thinking, that would be most likely (using the word likely very loosely here), would be having every collector set include minifigures, with an alternative pack of minidolls needing to be additionally purchased - a 'minidoll tax' if you will. Do I personally like this solution as a minidoll-lover? No. Do I think it would please more people? Yes. Because minidoll-lovers just have to suck it up and get what's given to them, as we always do.

What do you think is the solution here? I personally think the problem is actually quite complicated, and that LEGO themselves are looking for a resolution to the war. Tell me what you think, I'm genuinely very curious.