Also

[perlmonger]

Via City of Sound, Jason Kottke writes, prompted by a Salon interview with Pamela Paul, about parenting, children and the “toy” industry.

Can’t argue with a word; it’s hard to find anything for kids, even in supposedly enlightened outlets like ELC, that doesn’t take all initiative away from babies and children. Best to improvise, and let your kids do the same: they’ll be happier, learn more, and you’ll save a goodly wodge of money besides.

Parenting isn’t passive, and learning sure as fuck isn’t either.

Comments

Children's toys

[geoffcampbell.livejournal.com]

Buy them power tools, Pete. The gift that keeps on giving.

GJC

[ixwin.livejournal.com]

Agreed*. I'm currently looking at getting a baby doll for Daniel in preparation for the arrival of his sister in a few months, and the dolls that talk, cry, giggle, wet themselves etc. are in an overwhelming majority over the ones that are, well, just dolls. It seems like most adults have forgotten just how vivid a child's imagination can be, and assume a toy must have all these props to be absorbing, when actually as a child I generally found such props to be more of a distraction than anything else.

*With the exception of Pamela Paul's criticism of baby sign-language, which has really worked out for us & Daniel, as it genuinely did enable him to communicate more precisely than he would otherwise have been able to before he could speak, and continues to enable him to have a much larger vocabulary than his current 10-20 word spoken one. Having said which, I do very much see it as a 'useful for now' skill, rather than a way of enhancing his long-term development or whatever, and certainly not as an essential thing for parents to do or anything.