Playmobil uber Lego part III; Peaceful Coexistence within our grasp

I didn't intend to make the Lego Playmobil post a trilogy, and I did have an extremely serious post in mind to do instead of this post which I am actually writing, but I could not resist the opportunity to illustrate a point which I made earlier and might have undermined with my own irresistible instinct to absolute honesty; that is my posting of photos of some kid art done by my child with Legos in a post which trumpeted the creative nature of Playmobil toys as superior to Legos. I believe I sufficiently explained why those photos did not undermine my point, but just to emphatically underline the explanation of the non- undermining photos I have taken some photos of a piece done with Playmobil:

I won't pretend to understand what's going on here in terms of the larger themes explored in the piece, but I am convinced that any intellect powered by even an average amount of neurocomputing circuits could quickly and easily grasp that the creative medium employed here compares favorably to the medium utilized in the pieces depicted in the previous post, in terms of expressive possibilities and lack of predetermined content. 

I originally discovered the work in late evening under dim lighting, but refrained from capturing the piece at that time due to its association and unpleasantly reactive nature with some sinister and anxiety-producing connotations in my own mind, and I was forced to flee the room. There has been some political ferment in the house of late due to some recent unpopular parental decisions, and I am well aware of the artistic themes presaging the Jacquerie in medieval France. I think the reader will agree that the daylight softens the impact of the piece, and the gentle spirit of reasonableness and cooperation, inherent in the English Parliamentary system for instance, seems to sing happily from the scalped but firmly attached heads on the smiling people to the carefully curated accessories arranged with the respectful care of a smithsonian exhibit, clearly denoting a peaceful surrendering of some symbolic powers in return for a long and dignified armistice. 

I will not trouble the reader with the uncanny transformation of the overall message effected by the dimming of direct light

More on Modding; Prevercursive Canonization

Just to continue some thoughts from the previous blog, something I rarely am able to do, I discovered a whole other level of "modding" the other day; the concept of "canon" as it relates to fan fiction. I knew about canonical text as it relates to religious discussion about scripture; different scholars representing different sects arguing over which ancient texts "belong" in the bible or as scripture , i.e., are divinely inspired.  But in the world of fan fiction, as far as I've been able to tell, "canon" means that a story from a particular story's universe has been published with the approval of the story's author or holder of the legal rights to the story, as indicating a continuation of the story. 

So a piece of fan fiction might be published on the web, but could not be sold to anyone or be charged for viewing without the approval of the copyright owner. I think. That's my vague kind of understanding of it. But the copyright holder could suddenly choose a piece of fan fiction and approve it as part of the official storyline, and publish works with characters and plots that refer to the events in the "canonized" story as having happened in their universe. But it seems that in the eyes of the fans, the legal copyright holder is not considered as authoritative, with regard to canon, as the original author.  The word "author" comes from "authority" after all. Or the reverse, but my point holds true either way. With The Lord of the Rings, for instance, a work I myself was once quite excited about, people were attentively judging the eponymous movies for their adherence to the original books. I would count myself among these people, who regarded the original books, by Tolkien, as "Canon," although I did not use that exact word. And I watched the movies with a highly critical eye as to their agreement with the books. I would never have considered the movies to be "canon", unless Tolkien himself had written and directed them. I always viewed the movies as a lesser work, to be judged as they agreed with the books, which I now realize is a quasi-religious attitude. I've actually seen movies based on other books, movies that have been given enthusiastic approval by the author of the book them self, that I myself have intensely disliked as much as I loved the book. I would say that this seems to indicate that print holds greater authority over the human subconscious, except that I've experienced the opposite effect, with The Shining for instance, where the movie felt like the canon, and the book, which was the original and parent work, read to me like an inferior novelization.   This might be a tribute to Stanly Kubrick's artistry, or it might merely be more simply and disappointingly attributed to my having seen the movie first. 

Which makes me wonder what someone's attitude would be if they happened to read the omnipresent fan fiction for a certain universe before they read the canon. You can do this easily on the Internet. I've read and seen many comic panels and illustrations that I didn't even realize were fan fictions because I knew nothing about the original comics. Deadpool for instance. I've never read the canon at all, and the same for all the satirical or fan fiction works based on the manga comics.  I'd expect to find the canon markedly superior, of course, except for incredibly rare instances where a gifted person may have the economic freedom and the inclination to devote huge amounts of time to a fan fiction work. But why would they, except as a form of perverse exaggerated humility?  Such a person would be a creative, but the opposite of an "author."  A sub-author. An under-author. The written version of an inker. A "wrinker": One who insists on composing fan fiction only, for no money even though they have the talent to create excellent original work of their own. 

But there's a lower level; someone who mods only the work of unpublished authors. Perverse in reverse, you could say, or "preverse", to use a wording from "Doctor Strangelove" that I've finally found a use for. Preverse, as in Prevert: One who insists on modding only unpublished work. But I'm thinking that maybe Prevert applies more to someone like myself, someone who mods only their own, unpublished work, which is more the reverse of humility, in a kind of endless recursive loop. Preverse, as in; "I find your work preversely solipsistic, especially when you took everything wrong with the original and made it worse."

I guess the whole concept of canon fascinates me because it reveals the hierarchical and religious instinct in the human brain. I understand copyright as a way to protect work and motivate creativity, but only the hierarchical mind could conceive canon and take it seriously. Why did I judge the LOTR movies on the books, really?  So what if the original author wrote them?  Why couldn't someone make the original better? 

What if someone took everything I've posted to the Internet and re-worked it to make high art?  Well, that would be insulting and I'd have to sue them, even while acknowledging their genius. But I'll probably lighten up about it after I've died. 

This seems to be a ridiculously solipsistic and empty post itself, but I had to work hard to overcome autocorrect while coining the new words. Perhaps Autocorrect is the true preversion. 

My Ideas for Playmobil in their time of need

While reading  my previous post on this blog (somebody has to), I realized that I had illustrated my pro playmobil post with pictures of Legos, and no playmobil pieces. This may seem, to many people who don't understand the volatility of child toy usage patterns, and it's complex inter-relation to parent child political struggles, that I have somehow disproved my own point, whether through ignorance or through the sinister workings of a subversive subconscious. The truth of any situation will always surpass the explicative power of a few hundred words on a blog post to even the most discerning reader, but I will try to summarize; at time of the post, the Playmobils had recently been put away by parental decree, the Lego creations depicted in the post were out on a temporary permit, issued by house rules. 

I was simply trying to illustrate that we are absolutely not an "anti-Lego" house, and that I am very familiar with the creative possibilities of the toy. But it also illustrates an unmistakeable advantage of Legos, that playmobil will have to combat, if they care to. Maybe they don't want to be a bloated corporation like Lego. They might be perfectly happy to leave the mass market share points to Lego. 

But if they do want to make it a fight without whoring their sets to Hollywood, I have come up with a plan; Mods. Mods, or "user modifications" as we older folks used to call them, are the new subversive creativity, the youngsters call it hacking from the computer hijinks we've all grown to adore from the unbelievably annoying online security measures they've forced everyone to adopt. 

You can hack everything now, people call them "life-hacks", but really most of these hacks are Mods, a more positive less hostile sort of idea. There are mods for games and hardware and re-mixes for songs, and mash-ups, and parodies and re-edits for books and movies. And they all signify a spirit of creative play, taking something and reworking it. They also signify the work of someone with a lot of time on their hands, or a "kid", as I would call them. 

My idea for the playmobil Mods would require the marketing of 3D printers, purchase of which would be no problem for the playmobil demographic, who tend to be educated and rich. The company could partner with some hip 3D printer company in the promotions, collaborating to produce the software and electronic designs and specs which would enable the kids to print whatever mod they wanted for their playmobil toys, from hats and clothes to different heads and faces and bodies, different hair, little food items, animals, swords for the soldiers, little versions of objects and people in their own life, anything.   Here's an idea of mine; rock band hair, with guitars. 

Fun!  People can choose their own colors of course. 

I wouldn't be surprised if they already do something like this on their web page with the stickers and labels they include in their sets. Mods.  Here's another couple ideas; a big cowboy hat on the guy, and I turned the lady into an elephant lady:

And the great thing about my Mod strategy is if Lego copycats it like they did the stickers, it would have a Trojan horse effect on their marketing, because the Mods would undermine the whole Lego shtick; if you can print whatever shape you want, why do you need the brick shape?  People who buy Legos for the movie sets, who just want the brand, could buy the brand in 3D template form and skip the bricks. 

Of course the Modding could subvert the Playmobil product as well, but this would depend on what kind of materials the 3D printers could feasibly produce in the immediate future. Eventually any toy could be 3D printed by any consumer. The toy industry will need visionary leaders (ahem, clears throat significantly and strikes marble statue type pose)  to guide them through the terrifying changes ahead.