Link to Home

Danielsaurus

Everything Tagged with 'toys'

Talking About Toys

This year’s TED (Technology, Education, Design) Conference is over and past right now, but the folks behind TED were nice enough to put together a playlist of past TED Talks all centered around the topic of toys.

Today’s playlist is about toys that inspire learning, innovation — and of course fun! These are the toys of the technological age: they are alive, they think, they perform magic. What were your favorite toys as a kid (or an adult), and what did they inspire in you?

He-Man and the Masters of Transmedia

Henry Jenkins questions what was so wrong about the He-Man action figure toys that his son used to play with back in the day:

I never understood the parents who feared such toys would stifle my son’s imagination because what I observed was very much the opposite - a child learning to appropriate and remix the materials of his culture. The fact that these stories were shared through mass media with other kids and that they were some vividly embodied in the action figures meant that it was easy for children to have intersubjective fantasies, to share their play stories with each other, and to pool knowledge about the particulars of this fictional realm.

Jenkins’ thoughtful reflection made me thrillingly happy, because it’s a nostalgic reminder of the way things were for me growing up – and an important statement about how the things kids love – the video games, the action figures, the mass-mediated toys, and all the stuff we adults can’t see a value in – aren’t ever necessarily bad or good, in and of themselves. Rather what matters more is what kids do with them. I’ve become so exhausted lately of hearing about how video games and media are keeping our kids indoors and depriving them of nature. The sentiment may be well-placed indeed, but it’s aggravating to see the issue simplified, and to have a category of things demonised – especially when very few people making the statement have used or played what the kids are playing with, or understand the attraction they may hold for kids.

Nature and video games and cheap plastic toys can co-habitate our children’s lives very happily together, thank you very much, and in any case it’s never for us adults to decide what’s intrinsically valuable or worthwhile. Kids can make the most out of what adults perceive as utter crap; I know I did, as did Henry Jenkins’ son, as did every generation before. I think it’s time we start showing kids just a bit more trust when it comes to what and how they play.

‘The Kid Industry’

Adweek offers a special series of articles on marketing to children and families – but from the marketers’ perspective.

Kids want what they want when they want it. The little centers- of-our-universe can beg and plead for their essentials – toys, snacks and TV shows – with unfettered determination. Turns out that parents, television networks and marketers are working double time to oblige.

In our first special issue on kids, we illustrate how companies are advancing their offerings to further get this young consumer demographic to pull harder on the family purse strings.

Sure to disgust many readers – but also perhaps challenge some underlying assumptions about children and economic activity.

A Sad, Stupid, Sexist Question

An actual recent headline in the San Francisco Chronicle’s Mommy Files blog: “Are today’s girls abandoning their dolls too soon?”

Little girls are saying goodbye to their dollies and hello to tech gadgets and computer games. Does this mean they’re missing out on imaginative play?

Wow. If that’s not a patronizing thing to say, I don’t know what is. Girls, boys, dolls, and computers and cell phones everywhere should feel highly begrudged right now. (Yes, I’m including inanimate objects in that list. Hush now.)

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Just to be clear: I do actually get that the author is attempting to make a point about the supposed ‘disappearance’ of children’s imaginative play, and unconsciously presuming this is linked with children’s increasing use of mediated toys and technology instead of physical toys. I’m alright with being concerned about that, even if I think that fear is overplayed. Rather, it’s the wrapping that she surrounds her point in which is just presumptuous and sexist, while unconsciously reinforcing potentially harmful gender stereotypes.

First, there’s nothing necessarily “bad” with girls being interested in technology, nor is imaginative play necessarily inhibited by it. It’s a different topic, but one that should be considered: why is computer literacy still thought of as a predominantly male trait? As far as linking technology with the downfall of imaginative play – that’s a stretch, by far, and doesn’t actually consider the unique benefits that technology may offer to imaginative play. ‘Tis a topic worth it’s own discussion, and the research just ain’t there to make blanket statements at this point.

Second, while the prevalence of dolls has perhaps led us to accept that they’re necessary and beneficial, why should we assume that dolls are really all that important a thing in order for a girl to have a rich, imaginative playlife? As one commenter to the piece mentioned: If you’re concerned about a girl’s creativity and imagination, why not give her a tub of LEGO bricks in response? I should also probably not leave out the other begrudged party here – boys. What? Boys can’t play with dolls? History has shown that children (and adults) of all ages and genders have played with dolls in the past (see Howard Chudacoff’s book, “Children at Play: An American History”), so why have dolls become such a regimented part of the ‘girl’ gender stereotype?

I don’t mean to hate on dolls – there’s definitely a lot of play value in them, and I know a lot of little girls (and boys) who play with them. Even as the author recounts her own daughter’s doll play, you can get a picture of the richness dolls often add to play. But the real issues with this type of hypothesizing are the underlying assumptions made in the process: first with conflating doll play as a given and natural part of an imaginative girlhood (introducing gender stereotypes in doing so), and then with unnecessarily dichotomising technology against imaginative play (and undermining children’s potential in the process).

Those are some pretty big holes to be standing on when you’re asking about otherwise good topics.