Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.comAmazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Ben Fogle needs to get a clue



  • MissKittyFantasticoMissKittyFantastico Member Posts: 197
    SumoLego said:
    ^ Wait, what was the Lego Movie about?
    It was about Batman :)
  • OrmskirkBricksOrmskirkBricks Member Posts: 265
    I didn't even know he was a brand ambassador! I guess that says it all.
  • AllBrickAllBrick Member Posts: 1,497
    Is Ben Fogle more damaging to Lego than Ai Weiwei?
  • MattsWhatMattsWhat Member Posts: 1,643
    edited May 2016
    scottdd2 said:

    If 2 2x4 bricks can be put together in 24 ways the permutations can only go further when you add SNOT technics made possible by angle pieces or any other specialty part.

    My view is the more parts the more scope for imagination.

    Before I start, let me say I completely agree with you and some of the new building techniques that have become common place (like simple SNOT) make for more chance to be creative and mean more imagination.
    However, more parts does not always allow more scope for imagination - the more specific a part the less uses it has.  Let's take it to an extreme and say we had a one part fire engine - it's pretty hard to imagine this into something else.  So more variety is useful only to a point, before becoming too specific to be useful.  However, no one has to use the specific pieces - you can build anything you want with the other pieces in the box.  But Lego did go through a phase where the ratio of highly specific parts to 'normal' parts in a box was getting a bit bad, effectively reducing imagination and creativity (but nowhere near as low as the general plastic tat you get in a toy shop).  Lego have moved away from this now though - back to using more 'basic' bricks.
    You could argue that only providing one brick (much like Kapla) would mean that children have to be more imaginative - but the set of rules that all lego bricks fit into not only means children are learning creative skills but also maths and engineering skills (among others).  Loads of research has been done on the educational benefit of Lego, some of it even suggesting that children that have played with Lego go on to do better at University (in certain subjects) due to the problem solving skills it teaches them.
    All in then - although I don't agree with Mr Fogle, it is a valid point to say that the changes Lego has made (like changes the instructions) may have had an impact on how creative a child gets to be (or has to be, whatever).  But at the end of the day, when you compare the level of creativity and skill required to play with Lego compared to other toys the argument is completely redundant - it is still amazing for child development.
  • TigerMothTigerMoth Member Posts: 2,343
    AllBrick said:
    Is Ben Fogle more damaging to Lego than Ai Weiwei?
    Much of a muchness really. One's a piss artist; the other's a wee-wee artist.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,331
    edited May 2016
    Fogle's a tit who would be best of forgotten, but I thought it was pretty much accepted that the range of more specialist pieces produced by LEGO now (and more so in the past) was reducing the creative potential of sets, particularly smaller ones. We're not a good sample to use, most of us probably have hundreds of sets and boxes of loose bricks so its easy to see our children being extremely creative given a large number of every brick imaginable. Theres also fantastic moc'ers here who can create almost anything. But for a 'standard' child it feels that theres less opportunity for creativity from a small number of sets.

    But then I think back to sets from my childhood and could more be made from say #6030 than #70311? Both catapults, both two figures, both about the same size and parts. The later admittedly has 10 more pieces, and interestingly whilst 6030 has 25 different building parts (excluding minifig parts/accessories) 70311 has 39. I don't own 70311, but I'm guessing there is slightly less potential there to create something totally new - but probably not as much difference as people imagine.

    I actually wonder if a bigger impact is the wider range of parts allows LEGO to build more realistic, detailed, functioning models and that higher bar inhibits some kids to try? Not sure, just putting it out there. Parents not wanting to break up expensive, toys with percieved high value might be a bigger issue still. Also kids having a far wider choice of activities (mutliple tv channels, cartoons on demand, video games, tablets etc), far more toys in general and a bigger collection of LEGO in some cases might be an even bigger issue - they don't need to create new stuff because there's always something different they can move on to after playing for 5 minutes. (although again we're probably less likely to see that). It's clearly very complicated. But Fogle is a tit.
  • AllBrickAllBrick Member Posts: 1,497
    edited May 2016
    The last 4 letters of his surname can be rearranged to spell Lego. 

    The other 4 letters are useless.
  • MaffyDMaffyD Member Posts: 3,579
    ^ I thought the other four letters were b e n f?
  • MrShinyAndNewMrShinyAndNew Member Posts: 286
    I thought it was pretty much accepted that the range of more specialist pieces produced by LEGO now (and more so in the past) was reducing the creative potential of sets, particularly smaller ones. 
    I'm not sure that really follows. The small sets of thirty years ago had a small number of bricks, plates, and a few "specialized" pieces like doors, windows, wheels. Your small kit built a car. Or a small house. Or whatever. Now your small kit builds a car, or a house, or a mixel, or whatever, but has a greater variety of pieces. Which allows you to be more creative? Your old style car couldn't be turned into a house or plane any better than your new one can.

    A single small set is not a good test case. The true test is what happens when a kid has two or more sets. Does the car visit the house, in the kind of make-believe, creative story telling that kids have always done with all their toys? Does the house get cannibalized for parts to build a better car, or vice versa?

    Lego has been making "specialized" pieces for literally decades. I'm nearly 40 and my kids are playing with my childhood lego now and I can assure you (and brickset data backs me up) that my childhood was full of spacecraft parts, specialized bits like motorcycles and car windshields and castle-wall pieces and those didn't limit my creativity in any way. There's way more to creativity than just sticking two bricks together, calling it an airplane, and swooshing it around. Sometimes you need a specialized piece to prompt you to build something. How many kids would moc cars if they didn't have wheels? How many kids would moc moving parts like robot arms if they didn't have joints pieces? Specialized pieces are the seed, the enablers of creativity.  Not having them is like being told to always draw or paint in a single colour.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at or Amazon?

Please use our links: Amazon

Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started. is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.