Walker’s Manly Exercises
blogs.bl.uk
blogs.bl.uk
The dangerous playgrounds of 1900s through vintage photographs
https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/dangerous-playgrounds-1900s...
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31855163
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_Park
Documentary:
> The Bailey Ball was an Alpine Center attraction developed and tested, but never opened to the public, as a result of those tests. It consisted of a large foam sphere in which a rider could be secured, and then rolled downward. The plan was to do it on a track with PVC pipe as its outer rails, and one was built alongside a ski trail.[11]: 16:25
> The designers neglected to take into account the tendency of PVC pipe to expand in heat. During the first test, with a state inspector present on a hot summer day, the ball, with a man inside testing it, went off the track as a result of the pipe expanding and bounded down the adjacent ski slope. It continued through the parking lot, across Route 94, and came to rest in a swamp. After it came to a natural stop at the bottom, the inspector left without saying anything and park management abandoned the project.[11]: 16:25 [43]
(Not that exact one, but a similar model in my part of Hampshire).
My local roundabout was a flat metal thing 3 ft off the ground with only tarmac to cushion the fall, and the slide must have been 18 ft tall. The monkey bars were more than tall enough for an adult, again with the same tarmac.
And the tarmac was ancient with loose gravel, so you got stones embedded in your grazes.
Them were the days!
I've not had a good look at playgrounds the last few years (none where I usually go for a walk), but the ones in my childhood weren't as tall like in the last pictures, but tall enough that I sprained my ankle when jumping down... one day before my first day at school.
If that's the best argument in favor, I'll stick with the current playgrounds. Kids got seriously injured when I was growing up. One of them broke his leg. At least one broke an arm. Smaller injuries like getting scraped up and having bruises were very common. I don't think the cost-benefit analysis worked out in favor of dangerous playgrounds. Most of the arguments in favor apply equally well to having kids jump out of moving vehicles.
However, that climbing picture reminds me of my childhood school. I'm just old enough that all my school equipment used to be telephone poles constructed into very high, and very dangerous obstacles which routinely resulted in broken arms. Children really are missing out these days.
Examples: https://whitmanarchive.org/published/periodical/journalism/t...
Cool hardback book of excerpts: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Whitmans-Guide-Manly-Health-Trainin...
My favourite quote:
“In robust training for this life, which is itself a continual fight with some form of adversary or other, the aim should be to form that solid and adamantine fiber which will endure long and serious attacks upon it, and come out unharmed from them, rather than the ability to perform sudden and brilliant feats, which often exhaust the powers in show, without doing any substantial good.”
Some evidence in a Gutenberg copy: 'Edited by "Craven"' (name in quotes in the original) and that name below the editor's preface. https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/69080/pg69080-images.ht...
EDIT: https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:John_William_Carleto...
> John William Carleton
> English writer, editor and army officer, published under the pseudonym "Craven"
As it stands, the actual book disappoints me.
This explains why I never made it to the Olympics. I bet Phelps practices in a tuxedo.
So if parents send a kid to swimming lessons for a few years, they'll end up doing it some time around age 10. (There are several different sequences of swimming awards, so it's no the second thing you learn despite the 2 in the name)
[1] https://www.swimming.org/learntoswim/swim-england-water-safe...
The government also provides school swimming lessons, aiming to teach all students to swim 25 meters by age 11 - so some kids start swimming quite a bit later.
The document I actually saw said the swimming-with-clothes course is aimed at 7-14-year-olds which I simplified down to 'around age 10'
Same here, but those parent-and-baby lessons are more about getting used to water, and not the structured lessons that lead to a diploma. And while regular lessons start when parents feel like it, nearly all parents feel like it between age 4 and 6. There's some discussion whether or not it's better to start early (I think it depends on the child), but starting at 7 would be considered late.
My son is 8, and, partially due to Covid lockdowns, partially due to a lack of talent, still doesn't have his A diploma, and he's the biggest kid of his group.
I had school swimming lessons from the ages of 7 to 11, including swimming with clothes, how to rescue someone and even making "floats" by tying knots in shirts/trousers and then filling them with air and tying them off.
We took our kids for swimming lessons from around 3 or 4 from memory. My niece has been taking her son swimming from being just a few months old.
I'm surprised France doesn't have that. It sounds like an important survival skill to me.
Out of the pool you're in the ocean daily as a kid, this is where we were before and after school [1], body boarding in a wet suit.
Seems like a good mechanic to understand for worst case scenarios if a person is on/near water with any frequency https://www.artofmanliness.com/skills/outdoor-survival/how-t...
This sort of thing was why every large homeowner brewed their own beer - the alcohol from the fermentation neutralized some? enough? who cares, drink more? of the pathogens. Reading books from the Victorian (and earlier) eras gives me the impression that everyone back then was suffering from chronic, low level infections their entire lives.