legoman19892

LEGO is destroying creative play according to this article.

Recommended Posts

I don't think the question with this is whether people are as creative as they want to be - sure, if AFOLs have more creative drives, they MOC more than those that don't. If a child is more creative, they will be more likely to pull a set apart and rebuild it than one that isn't.

I thought the question raised (or criticism presented) was do LEGO sets now inspire children to create as much as they used to? The LEGO movie should certainly inspire children to create but do the sets, or are they tailored more to the idea of buy one, need them all? Collectible minifgs for instance.

I personally don't think it takes a 'child expert' to work it out and agree that the article is more sensationalist than reasoned (wonder if she has even had her own children and played LEGO with them?). Yet it seems fairly obvious to me that LEGO has become much more of a collectible action toy following it's rebirth in the 2000s than it was before and that this structure would have effects on how much creativity can be packed into each box - Creator sets aside.

Edited by ummester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See I would say yes but compromised, legoman. Yes, each box is still a pile of potential creation but it isn't sold as primarily that now.

But no, it's defiantly not destroying creative play - it is one of the few toys that still allows it.

BTW - don't take offence anyone - I like LEGO but also like playing the devils advocate when mindsets seem locked in a certain way of thinking. It's creative discussion, intellectual building :tongue: It's too easy for everyone to go - 'nah, the lady is full of it, LEGO is cool, how dare she criticize it!' Every opinion is valid and I think it is better to fully understand something than just blindly appreciate it.

Edited by ummester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think parents have a greater influence on their children's creativity than a toy manufacturer. Do they make them follow the rules to the letter or allow them to think outside of the box or some combination thereof? :classic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm like many of you. As a boy, I built the model the first time, but in a week or two, the model was destroyed. The instructions were MIA, and my set was now something entirely different or sitting in my huge toy box of LEGO pieces.

Even now, the kids in my family will play with the models for a few days - maybe weeks - but the sets (Friends, City, Lego Movie, etc. etc.) are eventually (and happily) mixed in a big box with new creations being put together. I love it when one of the little ones comes up to me and says with a grin, "Look at my plane!" - even if I only see a strangely shaped pile of mixed bricks. But, they see it, and that's what is so cool about LEGO.

Anyway, there will be criticisms all the time, but I don't think LEGO is limiting anything. If anything, the lack of engagement by parents with their kids to help them explore the possibilities is the true limitation. I hate seeing small ones, younger than even a year, placed in front of TVs and video games just to keep them quiet while the parents do whatever they want. Engage them. Help them be creative. Let them explore. I think LEGO is a great tool for this, even if it is initially packaged as some instruction-led set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think she is right, that play is a child's way of learning about the world, and the more creative and social the play is, the better. I observe this even in adults.

But, I think she has picked the wrong target with Lego. If all Lego made was, say, Star Wars sets, I might agree a bit, but in the end Lego stands for exactly those values (i.e. creative, social). Perhaps some of that has been lost in the publicity of licensed lines and perhaps Lego need to be a bit better at reminding people that creativity is written into the company's DNA. Maybe they should make a movie or something :laugh:

I also dislike the way the article has conflated this (perceived) loss of creativity with the ongoing spat with Greenpeace about Shell. I think that is an issue that Lego needs to address but the two things are not related. I am kind of surprised the article didn't mention the thing about female minifigures too...

EvilTwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't even understand their argument. LEGO includes instructions with their sets to create a model. Does that mean that kids can't break the model down later and make something new? The only reason they wouldn't is if they didn't want to. And what's wrong with licensed sets? They don't "restrict" creativity. I have a friend with a much younger brother and whenever I go to his house I always see his bizarre creations with pieces and figures that he took from licensed sets.

Licensed sets also encourage kids to roleplay. Let's face it, some kids in the 6 to 10 range would rather roleplay as Luke Skywalker than as a town citizen-whether it be in the backyard or with their LEGO bricks. The uneducated always assume that the creativity only comes from what kids physically create and don't take into account the stories they tell to themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel as if the author of this article was a bit unfair. Lego offers a lot of options, for those who want to build what's on the box and for those who want to build whatever they can come up with. I mean up until a few years ago Lego even included alternate models on many sets with no instructions just so the builder could figure it out for themselves. It's true the licensed sets dominate the shelves, but that doesn't mean it stops kids from building whatever they want from the pieces inside. And one could argue that well designed sets might encourage a child to design things for themselves, even modifying and improving upon the original model. Honestly I sort of doubt the author of this article has even put together a Lego set in years. And if she thinks that Lego is stifling creativity she's obviously never seen any fan creations online.

And her bit about the Friends theme really isn't fair. She describes it as shopping malls and model catwalks to support her argument, but leaves out everything else. Friends may lay on the pink a bit too much but it's offered more than just girls shopping and trying on clothes. Like it or not these characters hold down jobs, participate in sports and take part in family activities just to name a few things. Granted it does feature a lot of typical activities, but I don't think houses, schools, bakeries, malls, stables and treehouses are really negative or damaging, I think they're more there for kids to relate to. Most of these sets feature everyday places and activities that kids actually see and do, so I don't think Lego is wrong to include them. And even when leveled with criticism Lego has gone out of their way to change. There was a lack of adventure in the theme, so now the Friends are out saving the rain forest and it's animals. If this author wanted to criticize the overuse of pink than I would agree wholeheartedly, but the theme has expanded to a point where it offers a bit of everything, so I hardly thinks that counts as a "misadventure."

Edited by strangely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

strangely: As for "Overuse of pink" Take a look at most Friends sets and you'll find pink is just an accent color. For those LOOKING for more pink sets, they don't feel like Friends has ENOUGH pink in it. Just a few bricks here and there. Friends has more bright colors than City -- but bright colors of all hues. Pink, Yellow, Blue, Green, Purple, etc. Probably more white than black. Etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

strangely: As for "Overuse of pink" Take a look at most Friends sets and you'll find pink is just an accent color. For those LOOKING for more pink sets, they don't feel like Friends has ENOUGH pink in it. Just a few bricks here and there. Friends has more bright colors than City -- but bright colors of all hues. Pink, Yellow, Blue, Green, Purple, etc. Probably more white than black. Etc.

As I mention in another thread... I used to go to the LEGO Store a lot when my kids were younger. My daughter likes LEGO, but not like I do, so she might have picked out a set or two (Belville, FTW!) The only time she asked for a P@B cup is when they had pink and purple bricks on the wall...

EDIT: of course, that might have been because she could build with all my other colors anyway, but still, it was the only time she asked.

Edited by fred67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that Dr Spock is ultimately correct on this and it can be applied to many other discussions about LEGO - it is more the parent's responsibility than TLGs to ensure that a child plays creatively.

Yes, the world has changed and yes, LEGO has changed with it (whether all of these changes are positive is obviously debatable) but none of this stops the parent from being the primary source of influence for their children.

I do wonder whether the people writing the articles or creating the fuss about toys are parents themselves, or just self proclaimed experts with less vested interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the question raised (or criticism presented) was do LEGO sets now inspire children to create as much as they used to? The LEGO movie should certainly inspire children to create but do the sets, or are they tailored more to the idea of buy one, need them all? Collectible minifgs for instance.

How many people would buy lego sets if they were just different sized boxes of primary colour bricks (bricks, not parts, but I'll let you include a few windows and doors). How many of those would buy the same or a similar box again the next year, and the next year, and so on. Lego needs sets to inspire children to build and to survive as a company.

As for collectable minifigs, there are different ways of using them. Personally, I don't have the collect-them-all mentality. I collect the ones I like, often in large numbers to army build, for MOCs. I also use single characters to inspire smaller MOCs. There are a number of them that I don't like, so I don't feel the need to keep them if I happen to get them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many people would buy lego sets if they were just different sized boxes of primary colour bricks (bricks, not parts, but I'll let you include a few windows and doors). How many of those would buy the same or a similar box again the next year, and the next year, and so on. Lego needs sets to inspire children to build and to survive as a company.

As for collectable minifigs, there are different ways of using them. Personally, I don't have the collect-them-all mentality. I collect the ones I like, often in large numbers to army build, for MOCs. I also use single characters to inspire smaller MOCs. There are a number of them that I don't like, so I don't feel the need to keep them if I happen to get them.

Oh fore sure MAB - a box of brick's is unappealing compared to a plane flown by super heroes, a train or a fire engine, for both kids and AFOLs, no doubt.

As I came to understand in another thread, there was a reason the minifg evolved to be LEGOs flagship element and, as most of us realize, the bricks would probably have been doomed if they didn't take on licenses like Star Wars. These things have changed the LEGO set though.

The was a discussion about the X Wing models in the Star Wars forum. The initial Star Wars sets were closer to 70s/80s LEGO sets than the new ones are - now they are models with some collectible figures, it's like a box has to advertise NEW MINIFIG! just to sell the build.

It's difficult to articulate what has changed exactly and there is probably some nostalgia on my behalf - but licenses and minifgs have changed the product, they have made it more desirable but less malleable or versatile somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh fore sure MAB - a box of brick's is unappealing compared to a plane flown by super heroes, a train or a fire engine, for both kids and AFOLs, no doubt.

Actually, I'd love it if LEGO started releasing boxes of basic bricks again. The 2x4 used to be the commonest part ever, now the only way to acquire decent amounts of them is through Bricklink or PAB...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New parts are more sophisticated though Lind and combined with LDD, MOCing has never been this good. The brick itself still has immense creative potential - but how many kids LDD and Bricklink MOC?

I would love to see more parts packs though, especially for earthy colours, tiles, plates, corners - all those parts that allow detail and texture to be added to MOCs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I'd love it if LEGO started releasing boxes of basic bricks again. The 2x4 used to be the commonest part ever, now the only way to acquire decent amounts of them is through Bricklink or PAB...

Lego sells boxes of basic bricks all the time. I even see them in the aisles at Wal-mart.

Go under Bricks and More on the Lego site

They used to have one with wheels I bought for my son when younger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The boxes they sell now have too many different types in too many colors...

Edited by fred67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "child expert" can think whatever she wants but I know that lego is really good for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it can be reasonably argued that the modern proliferation of "child experts" and "university studies into child play and behavior" have probably had the greatest role in the destruction of creative play. Far more so than the evolution or presentation of any one toy. Back in the day when we just had "parents" rather than child play experts the only real restriction on play and imagination was "nobody better be bleeding!" Outside of that the kids were free to explore. These days kids are restricted by a battery of PC restrictions on violence, ethnicity, gender roles, who oppressed who centuries ago, social justice, etc. all the poor kid wants is to play with his Lego bricks and be left alone. And maybe give his brother a right good smack when no one is looking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points Faefrost, kid's are too wrapped up in cotton wool these days to truly be able to explore what they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fae,

I agree. We built our own toys from whatever junk was lying around, and we pretended it was anything we wanted. No one analyzed what our play meant and if it was politically correct or anything else. Kids played together on each block in the 50's and 60's US before TV, video games and computers took away that free play time outside everyday. There was very little parental involvement in the kids' games and play. And yes, we did whack our siblings on the head now and then and managed to live through it.

Today it seems like parents feel they either 1) have to entertain Johnny 24/7 or 2) they ignore him leaving technology to be his best friend. Could we strike a middle road here and let kids entertain themselves or play with friends half of the time, and restrict the playing with technology to maybe one or two hours a day? My son could play with his bricks or Matchbox type vehicles for 2-3 hours at a time when he was three because there was little tv in the house and I had to do some school work at home as a professor. He learned to entertain himself with me nearby but not interfering nonstop with my work. And he got to play video games at TRU now and then as a reward because we did not have them in the house. it is tough for many parents to say "no" to their kids and stand by that, but this is an important part of parenting. You can't be your child's best friend and do a good job as a parent until they reach the age of 18 or so.

So LEGO can play an important role in helping a child learn to entertain herself. And express her creativity at the same time. We don't need child experts to tell us that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it seems more the case that LEGO has just adapted to social change, whilst still trying to hold onto it's creative elements, do you think Legogal?

I wish there were more articles that addressed the possibility that the way society is evolving may not be in our children's best interests, rather than criticizing a toy. I guess if the 'child experts' were entirely honest about the situation, they would negate the need for their own profession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the sake of pointing it out, the greatest cause of mortality and morbidity for children in the U.S. and Canada is unintentional injury. While it is still the largest contributor, the rates of unintentional injury have been on the decrease in the 20th century, with a significant contributor being preventative measures (and technological intervention being much less significant), and this includes safety during play. So, when you talk about child experts, I figure the CDC and WHO are pretty good experts - if people want to rail against all those other child experts who apparently just make things up I think it would be helpful if posters were specific about who they were talking about.

Edited by GregoryBrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the original suggestion was that child experts inhibit creative play, GregoryBrick, not that they made play less safe. It is possible that the safer something is, the more controlled and potentially restrictive to creativity it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what is the criteria that makes up a "Child Expert"..?

Or do they mean an adult posing as a child..?

Apparenty they neglected watching The Lego Movie since the message in the movie was about being creative...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.