Podcast from June 12, 2017

Well, let’s get to the next podcast. Today you will find a small return to the origins, prepare more delicious food, and in the meantime, “мы начали” (these Russian words, as it is said, the famous shooting begins).
This time, let’s say a few words about Barbie and what became for her as the way to fame, and simply the only reliable legacy that managed to collect in forty minutes of strictly working records entire twenty years of her very long, I want to believe, life. This is not so much about the interview itself, but about a dozen photos and what, in the end, should be called the girl on them.
Re-search in Google brought nothing remarkable, except that the Creator of the video to investigate shoved in his masterpiece neurologist Tammy Regan, disability which was denied a week before the video was downloaded, and the unknown website gave a selection of “interesting pictures for adults” (although few who in their right mind will even catch the meaning of this publication) “girls like Barbie”, in which in addition to a one-armed blonde from the ‘ 80s recorded an obscure Parisian beggar, comedian Nikita Dubrovsky, “doll-blogger” Biga Egorov, as well as meme based on the Aqua song, “Portrait of the Arnolfini couple” and a good, but again quite decent drawing with the characters of Harry Potter… Even our Sigmund Freud was attacked.
As you know, the best minds of the search group are beginning to gradually retire, the same Sherlock, to whom we owe our existence, visiting the conference less and less often; at the same time, many subscribers of the community have been active since its inception and deserve to join a little closer to its main achievement.
Our Barbie was shot, apparently, for «Fascination», in this case they were put up for individual order and can be in the hands of several dozen people. The first eight photos were found as a result of long communication with users of the forum owned by the creator mucanzhe.net (this address can be seen in three photos from the first post), but with a large coverage — there is even a small Russification. Someone claimed possession of the full archive and gave a tip to «Ampix», but the owner of the magazine said he didn’t remember the model (He said that she had not passed the selection) and the later discovered issue.
After a while, it became clear that nothing more could be found out from the amputees themselves, so checking broken links in the web archive was on the agenda. So miraculously, the site “Becky & Bobbie” was found with the explanation “of Course not new, but so far two of my favorites” and nine photos signed as “435-04”, “435-06”, “becky1–6” and “becky8”. At a glance at the table, it became clear that the scans were focused on Becky, not on her environment, while the VC collection does not contain only “becky8”. Comparison gave the following results: 435-04, 435-06, becky2 are known in much higher quality (435-04 is named similarly, becky2 as 435-01); becky1, becky3 and becky6 are exact copies, two of which now exist without a watermark; becky4 resembles its copyright counterpart, but in a different color and there is no part of it; becky5 is a new one, made almost at the same time as the previously discovered one and cut. A second expedition to the forum brought only the original becky6, and already together with the film on a closed site, an alternative for becky1 was discovered with the true colors.
How do I understand the numbering principle? Since the same work was scanned twice, the loader did not have to put both files in the public domain at once, and in any case it would not have given both files the name 435-04, it is simply impossible to do this in the same folder. Two people could have borrowed the code from the back of the photo card, the explanation of which is a special system for numerous photos of the studio (similar can be found among many amputee models). The Creator of the site, having two printed originals, could borrow the rest from the archive known only by a few number of people, this explains both the mysterious link to BeckyA (featured in one of the podcasts), and the lack of Becky7, in which case the remaining one should be called Becky9.
Who is Barbie? This question prevents you from writing an ad for search. No, the “interesting facts” and key points in her video revelations are laid out decently, but what about the names? Becky is a pseudonym, that’s clear, but why isn’t Tammy? True, as far as we know this girl, the child’s world view would not allow her to lie about her own identity, but how does this view relate to passport data? After all, Tammy didn’t mention her last name, which suggests a certain informality in communication, why shouldn’t she be called Tamara? And according to the frequency of use, Sharon may well be a surname, not a first name.
As a bonus, keep a biographical documentary* with the interlocutor Becky (and this name is also short, Rebecca is a full name) Susan Abbott, made by the mysterious «One Take Short Stump Productions» (personally, I have memories of video shockers sample 2012, from the series One Lunatic One Ice Pick and Three Guys One Hummer), and judging by the initial screen saver with a copyright mark — Susan herself and for descendants. Maybe you will be able to hear something significant, or at least attract the audience of questionable movies with the participation of disabled people.
Actually, that’s all.