Every so often, there are complaints by older people in Britain that modern playground equipment is boring and unexciting, There is good reason for this.
I remember playing as a child in our local park on the rocking horse and roundabout etc. it was really quite dangerous when I look back, especially as children we went as fast and hard as we could on this equipment. Cuts, grazes and bumps were common place.
And the large playground swings. Those got most of the attention for fear that children would fly off or the chain break at the peak of the excursion, which could be rather high for a practiced swinger.
All this safer playground stuff is probably a good idea of course, I do not object to it as I will never have to contend with it! Now it is all made of bright plastics. Not too far from here there was a big playground full of plastic structures beneath a highway bridge in an urban area. Vandals set fire to it and the conflagration actually damaged the bridge and closed it till repairs were accomplished. The vandals could not set fire to structures of iron pipe!
OH and we had these sort of wheels that were round close to ground flat platforms with an axle set in the ground. They were metal and they had waist high railing handles that radiated out from the centre. The idea was you ran along side to get it spinning and climbed on to go round. Several if not many children could participate if desired. Sometimes the bright idea was to get it going very fast to see if you could fling other children off, losing their grip. Then they would roll off into the grass and brush themselves off probably. Then some kind of ridey horsey things. Fibreglass horses etc. with a large central spring set in the ground. The idea was to rock back and forth on this thing as far as you could and still hang on. Or the mundane teeter-totter, jump off your end and slam an inattentive playmate down hard on his end.
In the US in the 60s amd 70s we had what were called "monkey bars" steel pipe constructions of a platform, ladders and things you could hang on and climb on and basically look like a lot of monkeys playing. Underneath was pavement like the rest of that playground area. I am thinking I had seen stuff like gravel below swings and the ground-up tyres bits for cushioning was a later innovation. Plus it was less harmful for the kids to throw chunks of rubber instead of rocks. They took out all the fun and challenge for the sake of a few bruises here and there. Do not recall all the broken bones and skulls they speak of, occurring.
Smashed my head at 9 projected off a heavy old roundabout into a wall, convinced it affected me for the rest of my life. You are right Simon some memories of the playgrounds are not of the fun variety. Patricia Norfolk Uk.
Two comments: Simens describes the obvious costs of archaic playgrounds with many words. But uncushioned playgrounds also hold many lessons. Yes, a cruel assessment, but life and reality are cruel. Tribal children play and grow up in extremely dangerous environments. Often I have observed Badjao children navigate and play on wooden planks connecting stilt houses high above the water. During low tide, a fall could have been deadly. How does a society deal with such risks? What are the evolutinary forces? What are the costs of NOT exposing children to potentialy dangerous environments - and thus preventing them from learning. In short: There is another side. Limiting risks by eliminating danger comes with costs. And Simens leaves these cost out of the equation. He only focuses with many, too many words (my second citicism) on the obvious health risks of old playgrounds.
So much for theory. The reality is: Would my child today play without supervision in a playground of my youth... I would freak out.
I've no illusions they were dangerous, but it is it any different from crossing a road with the potential of being hit by at the minimum a 1/4 ton piece of metal travelling at at least 30mph. Of course you can say that climbing trees were far safer, it is only, in some cases, a 12ft drop. I wonder what inspired Dr Illingworth so long to decide play park were dangerous because they certainly weren't before her "discovery."
Thanks for yet another dose of realism, Simon!
Sometimes progress is really progress and we shouldn't let nostalgia blind us to the facts.
I am, alas, prone myself to viewing the past through rose-tinted spectacles...
Myself also.
Judging by your article you can overcome it.
To see things clearly, we all should.
I remember playing as a child in our local park on the rocking horse and roundabout etc. it was really quite dangerous when I look back, especially as children we went as fast and hard as we could on this equipment. Cuts, grazes and bumps were common place.
Yes, indeed!
And the large playground swings. Those got most of the attention for fear that children would fly off or the chain break at the peak of the excursion, which could be rather high for a practiced swinger.
Yes indeed, many accidents of that kind.
All this safer playground stuff is probably a good idea of course, I do not object to it as I will never have to contend with it! Now it is all made of bright plastics. Not too far from here there was a big playground full of plastic structures beneath a highway bridge in an urban area. Vandals set fire to it and the conflagration actually damaged the bridge and closed it till repairs were accomplished. The vandals could not set fire to structures of iron pipe!
.... trying to make a volunteer 'loop the loop'!
The 'volunteer' being someone who 'bragged' or was 'dared' into being pushed higher and higher.
Fortunately we never did manage to succeed 😱.
I remember trying to do that. Like you, we never quite managed.
Happy memories of being knock down while running in front of lads on the swings.
It happened a lot. Not as bad as being knocked down by the swing boat...
OH and we had these sort of wheels that were round close to ground flat platforms with an axle set in the ground. They were metal and they had waist high railing handles that radiated out from the centre. The idea was you ran along side to get it spinning and climbed on to go round. Several if not many children could participate if desired. Sometimes the bright idea was to get it going very fast to see if you could fling other children off, losing their grip. Then they would roll off into the grass and brush themselves off probably. Then some kind of ridey horsey things. Fibreglass horses etc. with a large central spring set in the ground. The idea was to rock back and forth on this thing as far as you could and still hang on. Or the mundane teeter-totter, jump off your end and slam an inattentive playmate down hard on his end.
In the US in the 60s amd 70s we had what were called "monkey bars" steel pipe constructions of a platform, ladders and things you could hang on and climb on and basically look like a lot of monkeys playing. Underneath was pavement like the rest of that playground area. I am thinking I had seen stuff like gravel below swings and the ground-up tyres bits for cushioning was a later innovation. Plus it was less harmful for the kids to throw chunks of rubber instead of rocks. They took out all the fun and challenge for the sake of a few bruises here and there. Do not recall all the broken bones and skulls they speak of, occurring.
Smashed my head at 9 projected off a heavy old roundabout into a wall, convinced it affected me for the rest of my life. You are right Simon some memories of the playgrounds are not of the fun variety. Patricia Norfolk Uk.
I remember flying off a roundabout and breaking a finger! I'm sorry to hear that your own injury though had a longer lasting effect.
Two comments: Simens describes the obvious costs of archaic playgrounds with many words. But uncushioned playgrounds also hold many lessons. Yes, a cruel assessment, but life and reality are cruel. Tribal children play and grow up in extremely dangerous environments. Often I have observed Badjao children navigate and play on wooden planks connecting stilt houses high above the water. During low tide, a fall could have been deadly. How does a society deal with such risks? What are the evolutinary forces? What are the costs of NOT exposing children to potentialy dangerous environments - and thus preventing them from learning. In short: There is another side. Limiting risks by eliminating danger comes with costs. And Simens leaves these cost out of the equation. He only focuses with many, too many words (my second citicism) on the obvious health risks of old playgrounds.
So much for theory. The reality is: Would my child today play without supervision in a playground of my youth... I would freak out.
I've no illusions they were dangerous, but it is it any different from crossing a road with the potential of being hit by at the minimum a 1/4 ton piece of metal travelling at at least 30mph. Of course you can say that climbing trees were far safer, it is only, in some cases, a 12ft drop. I wonder what inspired Dr Illingworth so long to decide play park were dangerous because they certainly weren't before her "discovery."