![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
stoutfellowMichael O'Hare has some thoughts on toys. I've been worried about similar issues for some time now.
As a child, I ran across a book entitled How to Do Nothing with Nobody All Alone by Yourself. Unfortunately, it seems to be out of print, but I think it would be a useful (partial) corrective to the problems O'Hare raises. I really enjoyed that book.
As a child, I ran across a book entitled How to Do Nothing with Nobody All Alone by Yourself. Unfortunately, it seems to be out of print, but I think it would be a useful (partial) corrective to the problems O'Hare raises. I really enjoyed that book.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-12-08 12:42 pm (UTC)Yes, older Lego was more versatile. No question there. But his objection, that it no longer mimics real world construction principles, seems misplaced. None of the many aircraft or AFV models I assembled over the years mimicked real world construction principles, either. Yet many of my colleagues in my engineering courses were avid model-builders. And there are plenty of Lego models these days that do stand up to play without falling apart, though I will grant that they are more finicky than the blocky kits and Legoland kits of my youth in the '60s and early '70s.
Walk into any toy store and you'll see that stuffed animals are available in abundance. Gimmicky schlock isn't limited to modern toys. My sister had plenty of dolls that crawled, cried, ate, and even "processed" baby food -- "Baby Alive", by Kenner.
And paint-by-number kits are familiar to any baby boomer.
Yes, a number of today's toys are "controlling." The fact of the matter, though, is that these controlling toys aren't a new phenomenon but rather 30-40 years old ... at least.