Source:Laura Frost for Times Higher Education wrote:Even as Smith wants to grant these dolls lives of their own, the obsessions and proclivities of their creators constantly assert themselves. For example, Kokoschka’s life-size companion, custom-designed to resemble his ex-lover Alma Mahler, leaves Smith a bit baffled. If this doll was supposed to be a replicate of Mahler, why was it covered in fur? Was Kokoschka a trichophiliac? Smith isn’t sure. Nor is he sure what exactly Kokoschka was doing, sexually, with that “monstrously furry…freak”. Smith wants to give a phenomenological account of his subject, but understanding someone else’s fetish can be tricky, especially if it is one as culturally loaded as men playing with dolls. By Smith’s account, there is nothing queer about these dolls: they are a manifestation of “banal” male “heteronormative” desire. [...] These prosthetic lovers are blatantly built for copulation and still, Smith suggests, inspire romantic feelings in some men. [...] Representations of sexualised dolls by female contemporary artists such as Cindy Sherman and Sarah Lucas appear, unanalysed, as a kind of silent retort to all this.
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/b ... 15.article