As we rush to buy that last doll, truck or game for the child on our
list, it's hard not to wonder whether our obsession with shopping and
toys drowns out the deeper meaning of the holiday season.
But toys themselves are brimming with meaning. For better or worse,
toys tell us a lot about who we are as a society. Toys, in a sense, are us.
We are concerned about the environment but seduced by SUVs; we
support gender equality but still have definite ideas about masculinity
and femininity. Is it any wonder that two of this year's big sellers
are a remote-controlled Hummer and the curvaceous Barbie? Even in time
of war we want kids to be non-violent, and yet Americans produce
ever-more-violent video games. In other words, toys reflect back to us
the conflicts and mixed messages that we struggle with as a society.
Generations ago, Americans may have had other concerns, but they did
raise their children with much the same sort of toys. These days,
critics complain about video games that reward players for virtual
killings. Violent toys, they fear, may create violent kids.
Yet mock killing in children's play is not new, nor are toys that
reflect gender stereotypes. In fact, a look back reveals that while
technology has changed some toys, the types of toys haven't changed as
much as we might think.
Early versions of toy guns appeared soon after firearms were
invented around the 14th century. By the 19th century, toy guns began
to look like real guns, and after the Civil War, kids' cap guns sounded
real, too. Slingshots and peashooters were popular homemade toys in
families who couldn't afford store-bought toy guns. In a
still-mostly-rural America, shooting squirrels and rabbits was
considered not only acceptable but also a way to improve hunting skills.
It's no accident that war games were heavily marketed after World
War II, when the United States expanded its military force and budget
and foresaw the potential for ongoing conflicts with the Soviet Union.
Evolution of toys
A look through old Montgomery Ward catalogs reveals how war toys
evolved from simple toy soldiers to more realistic-looking weaponry.
In 1959, parents could buy a Yankee Doodle Rocket Test Center and
model missiles. Cold War-era kids could also get their hands on a toy
60mm trench mortar with exploding pillbox and a ``Man From U.N.C.L.E.''
thrush rifle with sniper scope.
The 1964 catalog offered the little soldier on your list an arsenal
of weaponry all in one toy: The Johnny Seven One-Man Army included a
grenade, anti-tank rocket, anti-bunker missile, automatic repeating
rifle and an automatic weapon.
Of course, a discussion of war toys must include G.I. Joe, a toy
inspired in the 1960s, ironically enough, by the success of Barbie
dolls. (Even Barbie has appeared recently in combat garb on military
bases.)
Video games don't stray far from their Cold War predecessors. New
games such as ``Conflict: Desert Storm''; ``SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs''
(developed in conjunction with the U.S. Navy); ``Operation: Armored
Liberty''; and ``F14 Tomcat'' all serve much the same purpose as the
rocket launchers of the '50s. They allow players the vicarious
excitement of war and perhaps pique their interest in joining the
military.
Yet despite the long history of killing as a theme for toys, today's
critics of violent video games worry about the difference between kids
acting out mock violence in their back yards and kids watching blood
spurt from their digital victims on a multicolored screen. Even though
the most violent games are marketed to older teens and young adults,
Democratic presidential aspirant Sen. Joe Lieberman is among those who
fear real-life fallout when they make killing without consequences seem
fun. (Actually, during the huge growth in video game sales in the '90s,
the FBI's Uniform Crime Report statistics indicate that youth violence
declined -- sharply.)
Violence in games
Part of the concern video games create has to do with the virtual
medium itself. New technologies have always brought fear, and video
games are the latest in a long line of new media to elicit anxiety
among those out of the loop, just as comic books, television and movies
did in generations past. When people don't fully understand new
technology, they tend to fear its repercussions.
If toys are an indicator, violence has been and remains a central
facet of American life, in both the make-believe and the real worlds.
What has changed is the fear many people feel. During the Cold War,
military toys were considered patriotic because the nation feared the
threat of communism. Now many in America also fear young people
themselves, as shown by their support of tougher punishment for young
offenders.
But the violent toys sell nonetheless, as do gender-specific toys.
We may feel our society has changed significantly in recent decades, as
men and women alike have wrestled with gender equality in the workplace
and home. But in 2003, toys, especially for young children, remain very
gender-specific.
Barbie best represents our ambivalence about gender. Her perennial
popularity speaks to our continued worship of female beauty --
especially if it is young, buxom and blond. This year's featured model
is the elegant Swan Lake Barbie with a unicorn carriage and castle --
but no briefcase or computer.
For boys, action figures, Tonka trucks and Hot Wheels remain popular.
Parents ambivalent
We've long been ambivalent, too, about the role of toys in
childhood. We want kids to have fun and enjoy a carefree existence
while they still can. At the same time, we scrutinize how they use
their leisure time, and prefer that it be spent doing something
educational.
That's probably why LeapFrog's Leapster and LittleTouch and
Fisher-Price's Power Touch Learning System are some of the hottest toys
this year for preschool and elementary school children. All three use
electronics to teach lessons (designed to be fun), and are toys that
serve parents' needs as much as, if not more than, children's desires.
Using toys to promote learning is not an invention of our
super-competitive child-rearing approach of the 21st century.
Nineteenth-century girls were often expected to make dolls to enhance
their sewing skills, and Cold War-era boys played with chemistry sets
to encourage them to take an interest in science so America could stay
competitive with the Soviet Union in the arms and space races. The
Cosmotron, sold in 1958, enticed boys to ``learn the secrets of atomic
physics and electricity at home.''
Cycle of toys
Perhaps the clearest proof that the more things change, the more
they stay the same is that parents are buying toys they grew up with.
Toys can take us back to a place we may now idealize, even if as kids
we couldn't wait to grow up. Such '60s- and '70s-era toys like
Operation (a surgery-inspired board game with lights and buzzers),
Lite-Brite (an electric peg board) and the Easy-Bake Oven can help
adults reconnect with their own childhoods.
The Back to Basics toy catalog offers toys that are ``pure, plain''
and ``simple,'' and the chance to ``remember the toys you loved as a
kid.'' If you and your child both experienced playing with a Slinky or
Etch A Sketch, it creates a sense of continuity -- something some
adults may feel is missing in the world of digital toys.
When I recently asked my parents, children of the '40s and early
'50s, about their favorite toys, their choices were remarkably similar
to mine -- and to many of those on sale today. Lego sets, Lincoln Logs
and board games remain on toy stores' shelves. Barbie has been around
more than 40 years now.
Some of the games Toys R Us lists on its Web site as the year's hot
toys are bingo, in the electronic Dora the Explorer version, and chess,
Harry Potter style.
Toys do merit our scrutiny -- there certainly are plenty I would
hesitate to buy for a child. But when we stop to think about it, the
games kids play today aren't so different from those we played
ourselves. And if toys reflect who we are, maybe we haven't changed so
much either.
KAREN STERNHEIMER is a sociologist at the University of Southern
California and the author of ``It's Not the Media: The Truth About Pop
Culture's Influence on Children.'' She wrote this article for
Perspective.
Contact UsSite IndexArchivesPlace an AdNewspaper SubscriptionsNews by Email
