What is the LEGO Group's position on war toys? Other brands make tanks and army stuff. I noticed LEGO sets include more realistic guns in the Star Wars range than they used to. What's up with that?
Add a comment
|
6 Answers
Kind of.
From the LEGO Group's Corporate Responsibility report:
Guideline for weapons and conflict in LEGO experiences
A large number of LEGO minifigures use weapons, and are – assumedly – regularly being charged by each others’ weapons as part of children’s role play. In the LEGO Group, we acknowledge that conflict in play is especially prevalent among 4-9-year-old boys. An inner drive and a need to experiment with their own aggressive feelings in order to learn about other people’s aggressions exist in most children. This in turn enables them to handle and recognize conflict in non-play scenarios. As such, the LEGO Group sees conflict play as perfectly acceptable, and an integral part of children’s development.
We also acknowledge children’s well-proven ability to tell play from reality. however, to make sure to maintain the right balance between play and conflict, we have adhered to a set of unwritten rules for several years. In 2010, we have formalized these rules in a guideline for the use of conflict and weapons in LEGO products. The basic aim is to avoid realistic weapons and military equipment that children may recognize from hot spots around the world and to refrain from showing violent or frightening situations when communicating about LEGO products. At the same time, the purpose is for the LEGO brand not to be associated with issues that glorify conflicts and unethical or harmful behavior.
Page 26 of the 2010 report.
answered Oct 27, 2011 at 22:25
-
What about LEGO Halo? I don't see it on their website but the LEGO logo is written on some LEGO Halo models (Halo as in the MA video game) Commented Dec 20, 2011 at 3:25
-
4@annonymously The Halo sets are made by MegaBloks, a "compatible" brick construction toy company. Have you got any links to LEGO branded ones? But either way they'd be covered by the "avoid realistic weapons" bit. Commented Dec 20, 2011 at 8:03
-
The SMG is pretty realistic in my opinion, but maybe it really is just megablocks. Commented Dec 20, 2011 at 8:41
-
The stuff I could find is all AFOL made and generally uses weapons from BrickArms, a 3rd party creator of "realistic" weaponry. Indeed, TT Games stated (when the April Fools of the LEGO Halo game was doing the rounds): "'Halo' is not a game that is age-rated for young players, and it's not appropriate for us to sort of recruit people into that experience.". Commented Dec 20, 2011 at 9:59
Their position has shifted over the years, in response to changing attitudes as well as commercial pressures, and the rising age of LEGO enthusiasts!
Originally LEGO bricks were only available in bright primary colours e.g. red blue and yellow, with the conspicuous absence of green, aside from baseplates. It seems quite likely that this was a deliberate attempt to prevent people from building tanks and military vehicles which in Europe were generally painted green. The creator of LEGO was known to be a pacifist and have strong opinions on the issue.
I remember that when the Pirates series came out in 1989 they were the first sets to include pieces that were explicitly firearms: muskets, pistols and canon. The Pirates series was also the first to include non smiling faces, allowing figures to show more emotion, including anger. Although LEGO castle sets had featured weapons a decade earlier, the wide smiles on faces of the knights and guards suggested a lack of aggression.
Space sets have always had some ambiguity between what is a weapon and what is a scientific instrument, though the same trend is observed toward more conflict in later sets. Competition with other brick toys which feature military sets as well as movie tie-ins have caused conflict/aggression to be a major feature of many LEGO sets made more recently, which is probably what triggered LEGO's shift in official message on the subject, as detailed in the corporate responsibility report linked to above.
-
is there any citation for the claim "It seems quite likely that this was a deliberate attempt to prevent people from building tanks and military vehicles"? Commented May 7, 2012 at 6:18
-
1well, I can find a LEGO exec repeating this on camera in this video at 8:36 -- Jorian Murray "Lego Ad Exec" says "the founder was a pacifist and he absolutely did not want LEGO to be used for wargames, and that's why when it was originally launched, they just worked with few primary colors." Not totally happy with this source though. Commented May 7, 2012 at 6:24
-
1Some Space sets before 1989 included parts that could be interpreted as sci-fi weapons (blasters, phasers, etc.), but that could also be interpreted as flashlights, telescopes, cameras, or other devices that astronauts might carry in space. What these parts were not, however, was realistic - you had to use your imagination to figure out what they were or could be, rather than just look down and say "oh, that's an 18th century European pistol". Commented Mar 6, 2019 at 15:45
-
"corporate responsibility report" is a dead link now :/ Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 14:49
I believe that war sets have not been allowed from day one at lego, with the oft-quoted reason that Ole Kirk Christiansen did not was to reduce war to a 'state of child's play.' He was also reportedly a pacifist, and I have found a source stating that while lego may produce generic gun pieces, they will never directly model a contemporary gun, or likewise produce a set of one.
As stated (I think) in the 'Ultimate Lego Book,' Christiansen made sure that bricks in 'army colours' (i.e. green, brown, and olive green) were not produced. This changed later on however, when various sets required these colours, of course.
Hope this helps!
While the current plastic Lego "guns" are generally more tame (blasters, pirate pistols), that was not the case with wooden toys from the 1940's including this machine gun from 1945. It's about 18" long and makes a rat-tat-tat sound when turning the crank.
-
1
-
1While I found this photo online, I actually own one of these. Mine is a bit nicer, not nearly as worn.– KevinSCommented Jan 4, 2013 at 21:43
LEGO has always been a bit iffy on it's stance towards war related sets, which might be part of the reason most custom part makers specialize in realistic guns.
Being primarily a children's toy, they had shied away from depicting tanks and battles in the beginning. It might be said that as popular culture in general had an easier stance with "playing war" (video games were probably a big part of this), LEGO also eased it's policy. I think the fist time LEGO sets included toy guns for mini-figures might be it's Western theme in the late '90s.
There might have been laser blaster type guns earlier than this with the Space and Star Wars themes. Now it seems that with Indiana Jones and other movie licenses they have obtained, Lego is again allowing their sets to be portrayed in a more violent manner.
-
2No, already the pirates (and the blue-white or red-white anti-pirate forces) had cannons, pistols and rifles, and this was in the early 90's (or even late 80s). Commented Nov 6, 2011 at 20:44
-
@PaŭloEbermann: True, but they had historical weaponry of the kind that can be seen in any museum of history. More modern-looking pistols and rifles were introduced with the Wild West theme, and these were re-used in the Indiana Jones sets - however, then combined with vehicles that could pass as contemporary military for the first time, and also complemented with a more modern-looking gun accessory. Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 14:44
Even some of the classic sets had castles/knights with weapons, though most minifigs were decided in the non-violent category (astronauts, etc.).
As other posters have noted, many of the new licensed sets (Star Wars & Indiana Jones) are more violent, though often in a fantasy setting.
