Skip to content

Posts tagged ‘toys’

Feb 2

American Girl- Dolls & Books.

 

American Girl Samantha Doll and Book (americangirl.com)

When I was 10 years-old, there was only one toy I truly desired for Christmas that year. More than anything, I wanted an American Girl Doll. Having had access to their line of books at my elementary school library, as well as my many friends who were mailed the monthly American Girl catalogues that displayed the latest accessories for your miniature pal, I was groomed to desire one of the delicate and interesting dolls. The dolls and their corresponding books series, were introduced by American Girl Company in 1986 (acquired by Mattel in 1998) with the intent of “introducing historical characters to give girls an engaging glimpse into important times in America’s past… Gentle life lessons throughout the stories remind girls of such lasting values as the importance of family and friends, compassion, responsibility, and forgiveness,” according to the American Girl website. Just as Sterne emphasizes the importance placed on play not only being entertaining, but also used as educational stimulation, the strongest selling point to the American Girl series is the fact that they represent historical eras of time. Not only are little girls combatting boredom with the dolls, but ideally, also learning historical information. As previously mentioned, the dolls are also supposed to emphasize a certain set of values to their girl consumers. According to an article in The New York Times, “This return-to-innocence approach has corporate appeal.” In 2004, the company had reached $350 million dollars in sales, and looked upon as a more suitable toy to Barbie (who ironically was also created and manufactured by Mattel.) Similar to the points Cross makes in “Modern Childhood, Modern Toys” concerning gender roles, the American Girl dolls not only emphasize the classic maternal qualities dolls often invoke, but also on what defines an American girl: responsible, compassionate, and age-appropriate.

 

Feb 2

It’s not your 5 yr old son, it’s you

In an article from the San Francisco Chronicle by Margot Magowan, she argues that parents are the ones choosing to provide segregated toys for their children and these toys are limiting their brain development by placing a boundary on their experiences. She tells parents, they are the ones with the wallet, they need to ignore marketing and buy wisely. The idea of children and gender related toys has always been and is becoming even more widely seen today. It is very common that we give a girl the gift of a doll and a boy the gift of a toy truck. Elizabeth Segel also references this idea when explaining children’s books.

“Adults decide what books are written, published, and offered for sale, and, for the most part, purchased for children. (course packet pg. 67)”

Both authors are arguing that parents cannot blame their children for the toys and books that they have. The parents are the shopper and the parents are the one that purchase it for the child. Another issue they both bring up is that during childhood, our brains have more plasticity than at any other time in our lives. Children learn through play and the toys and books that children are exposed to while growing up will shape their attitudes and ideas about gender-roles. Magowan argues that these segregated toys will limit children’s learning because they are only experiencing half of the toys available. Segel argues that segregated books form their attitudes about gender-role behaviors. Encouraging children to try new things and move out of their comfort zone will enhance their learning as well as introduce an understanding of equality. This being said, it is extremely important to expose children to toys and books that are geared towards both the same and opposite sex.

 

Feb 2

What’s your Mood?

The year was 1975 and I was 12 years old when Mood Rings were popular. I remember wearing mine to junior high school and comparing the color to the rings of my friends.  According to the brochure that came with every ring, you could determine the mood of the wearer based on an interpretive chart.  Everyone wished for a violet-blue ring which signified happiness and romance.

Josh Reynolds and Maris Ambats were  the inventors of the Mood Ring.  They chemically bonded liquid crystals in a hollow glass shell and mounted the stones into rings.  The crystals would react with your body temperature and turn colors.

youtube, uploaded by futsang on Aug. 4, 2011

The rings were sold everywhere, from gas stations to department stores.  You could get a ring for as little as five dollars.  According to blogger Mortal Journey, a million dollars worth of these portable biofeedback aids were sold in a three month period during 1975 by the entrepreneurs.  Unfortunately, they went bankrupt because of failing to patent their idea and imitators soon saturated the market.  On page 50 of our coursebook, Gary Cross credits the rise in American manufacturing and the radical transformation of marketing after the Civil War, with abundant opportunities for retailers.

According to the article by Rick Kogan, the mood ring was seen as a symbol of control for a shifting culture.  Increased self-awareness and the popularity of group therapy during the mid-70s, contributed to the craze for these rings.  The jewelry gave the wearers a chance to display their emotional state to others.  By wearing the ring, a person supposedly felt a sense of control over their emotions.  I think mostly it was a fun fad that could not be taken too seriously.

 

 

 

Feb 2

Consumerism and Christmas

 

When we think about Christmas these days, what comes to mind are tons of gifts and over indulgence.   People are maxing out credit cards, and spending thousands of dollars getting presents, even though they can barely afford rent.  I feel that this mentality is engrained in us at an early age, by the time we are adults we have no hope.  In Cross’s article “Modern Children, Modern Toy,” he talks of how the people responsible for this is the parents.  Now it’s not just giving their children whatever they wanted, it has become a climb to the top for who has the most money.  Christmas is the perfect time to be able to over indulge your kid in whatever they want without looking irresponsible.  An amazing example of over indulgences with kids and their toys is when little babies like this have expensive things when there is really no need for it. The problem with this is that there is no reason for a two year old baby to have an Ipad.  The only reason a child would have something like this is so the parents can impress other people, by giving the impression to others they have enough money to blow on buying a completely useless (and expensive) “toy” for their child.  Consumerism has gotten way out of control in our country, and I believe it is time for a harsh wake up call.  With the economy how it is, it is time to start making smarter choices with our money.  The rest of the country needs to learn something from us “Austinites” and stop caring what other people think about us.  What’s important is over indulging your kids with love, not material possessions.

Feb 1

First Reading Journal Prompt: Christmas Buying

Photo by methyl_lives on flickr

If you pick the “Reading Journal” category for your first blog post, respond to this prompt:

In Gary Cross’ chapter “Modern Childhood, Modern Toys,” Cross argues that during the twentieth century Christmas gifts for children became a form of what Thorstein Veblen called “vicarious consumption”; through buying a ton of Christmas presents for their kids, parents could display their wealth to others without being seen as self-indulgent or spendthrifty. (See packet page 59 for the passage in which Cross develops this argument.) Apply this thesis to the contemporary American scene, using scenes from advertisements, movies, or television to argue whether or not Cross is correct.

Jan 25

Welcome!

Image from flickr user brizzle born and bred

Hello students! Next week you’ll be learning all about posting to this blog portion of the website. In the meantime, here’s a link to the Strong National Museum of Play’s website. The Strong’s online collections are great for exploring images of toys past; you may want to poke around in them to get ideas for primary sources to explore on this blog, or to investigate leads for your final papers.

Newer Entries »