BACK FROM THE HOSPITAL

I regret to report that I had the heart procedure done and it turned out that I didn't need a stent, just a funny-sounding drug. I should be happy about that but before I went under the knife I described the problem to friends in such gruesome detail that they were half convinced I'd never survive, and that had consequences.

They treated me to lunches, laughed at my bad jokes, gave me caricatures (above, from John)...everything to ease my transition into the next world. Gee, under the circumstances my survival seems somehow...ungrateful.

Here I am (above) flat on my back in the hospital, checking out the colorful plastic on the wall. Geez, you'd think Lego had designed the room. Immediately after I was wheeled into the operating room.

It was incredibly futuristic; something like the one above, but even better. I got this picture from the net.

It was something like this room, too.  Absolutely gorgeous!

For comparison here's (above) the kind of bare bones room I had my last operation in. Boy, what a difference!

In general the cardiac ward looked like a futuristic synthesis of three styles. One of the styles was an updating of the cool headquarters that SPECTRE always has in the James Bond films.

Then there was the Frank Lloyd Wright influence, especially in the nurses stations. I couldn't find any adequate pictures of those stations on the net so here's (above) a detail of a living room designed by Wright, which some of the stations resembled. The stations communicated dynamism, intellect, efficiency and fun.

The last influence was Lego. Lego should seriously consider branching out into real world architectural design. The Lego people somehow manage to make plastic glorious and fun, and hospitals are full of plastic. Wright's influence perfectly fits the Lego world and the best synthesis I've seen so far was my cardio ward. 

Well, that's it for now! Many, many thanks for the kind comments from readers!

BTW: John put up a blog post about my surgical woes: http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/

THOUGHTS ABOUT TENGGREN AND LEGOS

I started this piece with the intention of talking about Tenggren's toy paintings and I somehow digressed into a rant about Legos. I really should have split the piece into two separate articles, but I'm too sleepy to do a rewrite now. I hope you'll forgive me for allowing the post to remain the rambling platypus that it is. 

So...about Tenggren...he painted the beautiful picture above from "Pinocchio." I'm guessing that he, or a layout man, referenced toy sketches by Horvath. Anyway, whoever designed them would have had a great run as a toy designer in the 19th century. They're first rate!

I know what you're thinking...that Tenggren's toys were generic for their time (maybe 150 years ago), but were they? For comparison, here's (above) another Pinnochio picture painted by Claude Coates. Take a look at the toys. Now that's generic!

Back to Tenggren again. Most of these toys (above) are designed, they're not generic at all. When you look at it close, even the rocking horse in the foreground seems a little like a caricature of generic toy horses rather than the real thing.  

A lot of 19th century toys were sculptural and not very realistic. To us they seem like objects of art more than toys. They were so beautiful that I imagine parents were tempted to hold onto them long after the kids grew up and moved out. 

Horvath was a terrific designer of buildings. His version of Stromboli's Puppet Theater would have made a wonderful toy. It still would. If it was available in the toyshops when my kids were young, I'd have bought it for them. 

Some of the best toys we have today are by Lego (above). How do you like the Lego pirate ship, "Queen Anne's Revenge?"

Or this Lego castle?

Or the "Imperial Flagship" Above)?

The problem with Lego toys is that they're pricey and are made out of little blocks. Dads probably build the toys then kids take them apart, and once taken apart the essential pieces get lost forever.  Another problem is that the big, impressive sets are geared toward older kids, who are no longer the age that plays with toys. These sets are never in sync with the developmental stages of real children. 

One more gripe: what's with the cute little human characters? Pirates weren't cute. This is a concession made to hippie parents who foolishly wouldn't otherwise buy war toys for their kids. The little figures are nice and artistic, but they're not useful for kid fantasies. In fact, they were designed with the specific intention of thwarting kids war fantasies. What kind of toy is that? 

I still like Legos. The best of them are miniature works of art. I just wish molded plastic pirate ships et al were also available. There aren't many parts to lose in toys made that way, they're more inviting to fantasy, and they can be sold cheaper. 

  

TROUBLE IN THE KIDS BLOCK WORLD

I'm a big fan of Legos, Brio and all that, but the building blocks I and my kids had the most fun with were the Froebel (also spelled "Frobel") blocks shown above. These are big, heavy, hardwood blocks that cost a fortune in the high-end toy stores. If somebody hits you with one of these, believe me, you'll know it.

The problem with these blocks, apart from the cost, is that modern kids will only play with them from ages 3 to 5. After that they won't touch them. Amazingly, the blocks continue to have a life after they're abandoned. I used mine to make bookshelves. Some people make permanent sculptures and even desk supports out of them. Someday when my kids have kids I guess they'll return to being toys again.

The inventer of these blocks, and possibly alphabet blocks as well, was the same man who invented kindergarten: Frederick Froebel (1782-1852). Froebel was a genius (I forgive him for the idea of kindergarten, which may not have been a good idea). The beechwood blocks are a treat to hold in your hand. The weight, the proportions, the finely sanded but still tactile surfaces, the way they sound when they collapse...really, they're an almost perfect toy.

Froebel's only failing was that he disdained to provide shapes like turrets and staircases. He believed that everything can be made from cones, balls, rectangles and triangles, which is not exactly true.

The Haba company, which makes the Froebel toys, finally gave in and added some accessories to the lineup. Poor Froebel is probably rolling in his grave, but I like them. The dormers on the roof add a nice touch, don't you think?

And turrets add a lot, too. One of the many things I wish I could sell in the Theory Corner Store is add-ons to the Froebel blocks, but I'm not a woodworker and the demand would probably be small, if not non-existent.

Some other companies put out building blocks (above), and those have no shortage of turrets, but the blocks are way too small and light. Froebel had a knack for finding the weight and proportion that works.

There's something out there (above) called "Anchor Blocks." You can buy them now, but I don't know the details.

Then there's something (above) called "Richter Blocks." They might be a variant of Anchor Blocks, made by the same company. The Richter people have disdain for the Froebel people. I think there's a kind of block fan war going on, and the discussions get pretty heated.

The Froebel people have accused the Richter people of making blocks that have irregularities on the surface, which limits the height and stability of what you can build. The Richterites reply through clenched teeth that their wooden blocks are meant to simulate stone, and stone can and should be irregular.

The Richter people are putting out a set they're really proud of later this year. I'll be featuring these blocks in The Theory Corner Store (no profit for me, I'm just a facilitator), so check the store when it's up for updates.

Some of the competitors' blocks (above) are pretty colorful, but the designs are just okay.

This (above) is what all toys would look like if accountants were allowed to design them.

You see modern-artsy, Matisse-type ones sometimes. Interesting, but I don't know if kids would play with them. Boy, am I imagining it or are blocks increasingly becomming an adult toy?

The set that would have dominated the post-Froebel world would have been one based on Disney's theme park ride, "Small World," but for reasons impossible to understand the Disney management showed no interest in it. Too bad. A set of colorful blocks based on Mary Blair's still-fresh ideas would have sold, no doubt about it. Every year they could have added new designs for collectors.


Kids aren't as attracted to building blocks as they used to be, a horrible state of affairs that I blame on the decline of war toys. Blocks make great forts. If boys are discouraged from making that sort of thing, then they loose interest in building. These are hard times for little boys.

Many thanks to Hans Flagon who reminded me of what Froebel called his "gifts" in a comment on the previous post.

BTW: While researching this I stumbled on a number of fascinating examples of 19th century toys and children's furniture. Here's (above) a writing desk with a chalk board writing surface and a beautiful scroll containing summaries of the subjects on the right.

I wasn't able to find the nested "Noah's Arc" tower site I was looking for, but here's something similar, sold through Amazon for 20 bucks. The 19th century version I had in mind was hard wood and about 5' high. This is a modern knock off that's probably made of cardboard and is about 3' high.

The Noah's Arc toy had hand painted pictures of animals and their keepers inside the wooden cubes.