by Sarah Herman
THE LEGO NAME
In 1934 Ole Kirk held a competition to name the toy company with a bottle of his homemade wine for the winner. None of the entrants’ choices impressed him more than his own, though, so he stuck with “LEGO.” Ole Kirk didn’t know it at the time, but LEGO is also the Latin word for “I put together” or “I assemble,” a definition that would come to be more than appropriate in the years to come.
One of the original wooden ducks is proudly displayed at the LEGO Museum in Billund. © Alex Howe
This manual wood-working machine, on display at the LEGO Museum, enabled Ole Kirk to mass-produce parts for his wooden toys. Later, these were replaced by electric machines. © Alex Howe
As a small company with just ten employees in 1939, the LEGO Group had tough competition from these and other imported toys. Despite the fact that LEGO wooden toys were never sold outside of Denmark (with the exception of some sales in Norway), the company wasn’t immune to the trends and crazes of the toy industry. A popular and well-known LEGO story is that of Ole Kirk’s brush with the yo-yo. In the mid-1930s, the demand for yo-yos was at an all-time high in America after Duncan Toys took over a Californian yo-yo manufacturing company and began promoting yo-yo contests. The craze soon found its way to European shores, especially after the first World Yo-Yo Competition was held in London in 1932. Fully equipped to deal with the demand for the little wooden toys, Ole Kirk set about producing a large supply for Danish children, but as all crazes soon do, this one died out, leaving Ole Kirk with a huge surplus of yo-yos he was unable to sell. He struck on a great idea—turn the yo-yo discs into wheels for his toys including a brand-new toy truck, and his thinking paid off—the truck was a success. This was an important lesson for the toymaker, and for the company, which avoided following popular trends and toy crazes for many years to come. He learned the importance of innovation and originality over following in the footsteps of other manufacturers, and perhaps the most important point of all: If you want to have longevity, and customers who keep coming back for more, you have to sell them a toy that has endless possibilities.
Despite a factory fire in 1942, the LEGO Group continued to grow and to produce wooden toys even after the introduction of plastic toys in 1949. In fact, plastic and metal were incorporated into some of the designs—see Monypoli below. Unfortunately, as the company’s plastic toy line developed and aligned itself with the large-scale manufacturing of the future of toys, the sales of the wooden line peaked in 1952, and remained slow thereafter.
As Bill Hanlon explains in his 1993 book Plastic Toys: Dimestore Dreams of the ’40s and ’50s, it’s hard to imagine the world around us without plastic. Over sixty years of development and manufacturing has resulted in the abundance of the safe plastic-based toys we know today, and the LEGO Group is an important part of that history. There was a surge in the use of plastic injection-molding during World War II because of the increase in demand for mass-produced and affordable items. Unlike wood or metal toy production, where fine details were costly to include and uniformed precision was harder to achieve, injection-molding provided the toy industry with a cheaper product that was faster to produce. As Hanlon explains, the advantages were many. Color could be added to the cellulose acetate granules (the type of plastic originally used by the LEGO Group), rather than painting the toys after molding, meaning the color could not chip or peel; plastic was relatively strong and did not splinter like wood; transparent parts, such as car windshields, could be added in plastic; and they were also far more hygienic than their wooden counter parts. Perhaps one of the most fundamental differences between the two types of manufacturing was the fact that they were usually lighter and therefore cheaper to ship on a large scale. This cost difference was passed on to the consumer, meaning children were able to save whatever small amount of money they had to buy cheap plastic toys.
MONYPOLI
Monypoli might sound similar to the Parker Brothers/Hasbro property game Monopoly, but there were no Scottie dogs, fake money, and definitely no jail to be found on this board. This road safety game was the first board game produced by the LEGO Group and, until fairly recently remained the only one. Released in 1947, it included a game board, a traffic sign instruction poster, game cards, a die and cup, small metal cars, and wooden circular tokens. Although TLG did not revisit board game manufacturing—with the exception of licensed products—for many years to come, the motifs of road safety and traffic police were incorporated into the construction system that was developed a few years later.
The LEGO Group joined the world of plastic toys in 1947, when it became one of the first companies in Denmark to own an injection molding machine. Ole Kirk saw a real future in plastic toys, and had wanted to buy three machines, but at DKK 30,000 (approximately $65,000 in 2012 dollars) each, his family managed to persuade him to wait until they were certain the investment would pay off. But Ole Kirk had been keeping his eye on the industry and saw how plastic toys were beginning to become more available across Europe—and the reaction was positive. The company spent two years creating designs and molds and in 1949 released the first of their plastic toys. These included a plastic rattle shaped like a bloated fish designed by Godtfred Kirk Christiansen. The toy was made by fusing two mirror-image pieces together. Many different colored plastic granules were mixed before heating, so the rattle was available in a huge variety of color patterns. The details (eyes, fins, lips) were hand-painted on afterward with the same level of quality and precision already associated with LEGO toys.
As TLG became more comfortable with the material and the equipment, toys became more detailed. The 1951 Teddyflyver—a small teddy bear flying a brightly colored plane, consisted of five separately molded parts, and was available in a variety of color combinations. In the same year, TLG released its first Ferguson farm vehicles—its most complex plastic creations at the time. The Ferguson Trackto, modeled on the popular British tractor designed by Harry Ferguson, consisted of between ten and fifteen separate parts and was mainly available in gray and red, although there were also rare colors, such as a limited number of transparent tractors. The tools and molds required to produce the Tracktor cost DKK 30,000—more than the price of a real Ferguson TE 20 at the time. But the expense paid off because the model, either bought and assembled as a set or as individual pieces, was a big hit for the company. There were also a number of farming tools and additional vehicles available—some accessories were made in association with another manufacturer called Triton. Not only did this toy introduce the idea of “added play value”—giving children the opportunity to build as well as play with the finished product—but it was the first time the LEGO Group had employed the sales method of stocking toy stores with sets as well as boxes of individual parts, something it would continue to do with the Automatic Binding Brick and LEGO bricks.
One of the earliest injection-molding machines with teddy mold on display at the LEGO Museum. © Ian Greig
The introduction of injection-molding meant the LEGO Group could produce brightly colored plastic toys like this 1951 Teddyflyver. © Ian Greig
The introduction of plastic toys also marked the first LEGO creation that the company felt warranted a patent. Somewhat surprisingly, the first LEGO patent was for a toy gun. Today, the LEGO Group is careful not to produce “war toys”—although weapons relevant to particular themes and characters are included, they are not the focus of any LEGO toy. In 1945 TLG produced a wooden pistol and then reproduced it in plastic four years later. Available in black, green, and blue, this toy pistol had a clever self-loading mechanism that meant it could rapidly fire the plastic projectiles that were also available. When you pressed the trigger, it would load a projectile from the magazine into the back of the barrel where a main spring would release it before pushing the trigger forward, ready for the next shot. So unique was the gun that Godtfred, who was now regularly designing toys for the company, patented it.
A 1950s red Ferguson Tracktor model with its original box�
�to the right, an open box displays some of the other available parts. © Ian Greig
The evolution of the first plastic LEGO brick was as logical as that of the wooden gun to plastic gun or the wooden truck to the plastic Ferguson farm vehicles. TLG had made traditional wooden building blocks for years. The first ones, released in the 1940s, were painted in different colors and hollowed out to include a rattle inside. Later versions, such as the LEGO Klodser, was a set of thirty-six bricks that measured four centimeters (about 1.6 inches) and featured letters and numbers painted on the sides. Other bricks varied in size and some had pictures of animals painted on. With the introduction of plastic, there was more opportunity for creativity when it came to the simple idea of building bricks.
Of course, Ole Kirk and Godtfred were not the only people to have considered the possibilities of plastic building bricks. Wooden construction toys such as Lincoln Logs (first released in 1916), created by Frank Lloyd Wright’s son, John, had been growing in popularity throughout the 1930s and ‘40s, as well as A. C. Gilbert’s steel Erector sets in America and Frank Hornby’s earlier Meccano construction kits in Britain. Some companies had begun to develop the idea of turning traditional building blocks into a more sturdy brick-building system such as the 1934 Bild-OBrik and 1935 British-made Minibrix. Both toys were made from hard rubber rather than plastic. Minibrix kits consisted of a number of parts to create building structures (bricks, roof tiles, doors, windows, etc.). Most parts connected together with the use of lugs, or “pips” as they were known in the company, protruding from the bottom on the brick which connected into small holes in the top of another brick. One man, however, is known for laying the foundations for the brick TLG would go on to develop—British toymaker Hilary Page and his Kiddicraft Company.
Toy historian Kenneth Brown describes Hilary Fisher Page as a pioneer of plastic toys based largely on his observations of children and how they play. While other toy manufacturers were busy producing the toys parents thought their little ones should be playing with, Hilary Page was spending one day a week attending different nurseries, gaining a deeper understanding of child psychology and ascertaining the suitability of plastic as a moldable, colorful, non-toxic, and hygienic material.
In 1937 Hilary Page produced a line of plastic “Sensible Toys” mainly modeled on Russian toys he had previously imported as well as building bricks, which he named Interlocking Building Cubes and patented in 1940. Unlike the earlier Minibrix cubes, these small 2 × 2 bricks were hollow on one side. Four small studs on the top side of each brick prevented lateral movement when another brick was stacked on top of it. The marketing emphasis of these bricks were on their practicality and indestructibility—the packaging claiming it would be impossible for a child to remove any trace or color or damage the material itself, and that the bricks could be washed indefinitely—rather than the creativity associated with later LEGO bricks. Illustrations and photographs on packaging showed children simply stacking bricks in towers, rather than building anything in particular. Despite the initial success of Page’s plastic toys (sold initially under the name Bri-Plax, due to his investors’ uncertainty about the success of plastic) production ceased during World War II. Kiddicraft picked up in the postwar years and when the plastic industry boomed, Hilary Page was ahead of the game in terms of development.
British toymaker Hilary Fisher page in the 1950s. © Geraldine and Vivienne page
Hilary page’s large Interlocking Building Cubes were patented in 1940. © www.Hilarypagetoys.com
He pushed the design of the Building Cubes and made a couple of significant changes in the late 1940s, resulting in the release of the Self-Locking Building Bricks. Patents granted in 1947 and 1949 respectively were for a smaller 2 × 4 studded brick (alongside 2 × 2 bricks) and bricks with slits on the ends into which window/door/roof components could be connected. This was a significantly advanced building system from the Interlocking Building Cubes, as it encouraged children to build structures using an overlapping building method that replicated real-life construction. A patent was also granted in 1952 for a supporting sheet onto which children’s creations could be built and then transported. A 1948 advertisement for the bricks states that they are an absorbing and instructive hobby, suitable for children over the age of seven. This new toy was a big leap from the nursery building blocks the market was familiar with. A box of Self-Locking Building Bricks, known as “No.1 Set” included a selection of 2 × 2 and 2 × 4 bricks in red, yellow, blue, green, and white, as a number of matching window and door pieces and illustrations of possible models children could re-create using the set. But while Kiddicraft’s development of the plastic brick was innovative, it failed to ignite the same level of interest from consumers as construction toy giant Meccano—by 1951, a Meccano factory in Bobigny, France, was producing more than 500,000 sets every day. The Self-Locking Bricks continued to be part of the Kiddicraft catalog and Hilary Page soon turned his attention to the development of other toys including the Kiddicraft Miniatures—a line of licensed replicas of everyday products including Heinz soups, Quaker Oats, Persil laundry powder, and a full range of spirits, beers, and even cigarettes!
The Interlocking Building Cubes’ packaging claimed the bricks were “unbreakable” and emphasized their “hygienic” and educational selling points. © www.Hilarypagetoys.com
While the Interlocking Building Cubes and Self-Locking Building Bricks may not be household names today, as Tim Walsh explains in his book Timeless Toy, they influenced Ole Kirk and Godtfred’s creation of the original LEGO bricks. The production of plastic building blocks at TLG came hand in hand with the introduction of plastic in the late 1940s. In a 1950s retailers’ catalog LEGO Plastic Kubus were advertised alongside plastic dolls, vehicles, and toy pistols. These were simple plastic alphabet blocks with letters and images painted on the sides. The plastic injection molding machine Ole Kirk had purchased from the U.K. in 1947 came with sample toys to show its capabilities. One such product was Kiddicraft’s brick.
The contents of the original Kiddicraft No.1 Set of Self-Locking Building Cubes. © www.hilarypagetoys.com
In a 1988 Privy Council ruling (InterLEGO AG v. Tyco Industries Inc.), Lord Oliver of Aylmerton explained how for all practical purposes the original building bricks created by the LEGO Group, known as Automatic Binding Bricks, were precise copies of Hilary Page’s design. The Kiddicraft brick had no patent protecting it in Denmark and Godtfred had admitted in court that he and his father took the samples of Kiddicraft’s bricks and used them as a model. Small changes were made to create molds for the LEGO bricks—the rounded corners were straightened, the size of the brick was converted from inches to centimeters and millimeters (the metric system was in use in Denmark from 1908), altering the size of the brick by one-tenth of a millimeter. Another design change was to the studs themselves, which were had rounded tops on the Kiddicraft bricks and were flattened for the LEGO bricks. There is also a noticeable difference in the shape of the slits on the side of the bricks, which are slightly curved on the Self-Locking Building Bricks and straight in LEGO’s new design.
Released in 1949, initially, LEGO’s Automatic Binding Bricks had no identifiable markings—later, molds would include “LEGO” on the under-side of the brick. They were known as Automatic Binding Bricks in Denmark rather than having a Danish name. After World War II all LEGO toys would take on English names as had become the common practice among Danish companies.
In comparison with the Kiddicraft bricks, the Automatic Binding Bricks were not particularly well made—excess plastic often filled the side slits of early versions. LEGO was not used to the precision required for creating such small parts, and the equipment was still relatively new to them. Despite having molding machines, a lot of the work was still done by hand and was still fairly labor-intensive. The bricks themselves had no real fastening mechanism and their hollow shells were prone to problems such as cracking and shrinking, meaning when the plastic was cooled the bricks did not alway
s fit together with the precision LEGO bricks are known for today. The first bricks made were 2 × 2 and 2 × 4 bricks with the slits, and an assortment of varioussize windows and a door panel. Bricks were available in red, green, white, and a sandy yellow. They were sold as a part of gift sets, similar to the Kiddicraft boxes—four different sets were released in 1949 and then a further three in 1950 (these sets were the first of the 700 series—the prefix product number used for gift boxes and basic sets until the mid-1960s). The elements were arranged in a zigzagged pattern in a shallow box—the covers of which featured illustrations of children happily building houses, factories, and walls from the new bricks.
“Hundreds of hours of worth-while play,” declared the box of Kiddicraft’s No. 1 Set. This original box lid shows just some of the possible creations children could build using the plastic bricks. © www.hilarypagetoys.com
Despite the rising popularity of its plastic toys, the bricks were not an immediate success. As LEGO moved into the 1950s, the sales of plastic toys were increasing, and between 1952 and 1953 they accounted for around half of LEGO’s income. The Automatic Binding Bricks, however, weren’t faring so well and accounted for only 5 to 7 percent of LEGO’s sales. Deciding the name might be putting buyers off, in 1953 Godtfred, now Junior Managing Director, changed it to LEGO Mursten (LEGO bricks), which illustrates the growing importance of the construction toy within the company and a dedication to developing it into a popular brand. Evidently, many of LEGO’s other wooden and plastic toys such as cars, trucks, and tractors complemented the large, colorful sets of bricks which children could use to create their own houses, farms, and shops. LEGO Mursten tried to find its feet on the toy market through what appeared to be a rather unplanned and chaotic marketing strategy. Between 1951 and 1955, LEGO gift sets of house-style buildings emerged, as well as supplementary sets, such as a collection including just windows and doors—LEGO Mursten was also available as individual brick items which could be bought for as little as six-hundredths of a Danish Krone (about nine U.S. cents in 2012) for a 1 × 2 brick. Although the LEGO name was molded onto every brick from 1953 onward, rather than brand the product with one cohesive packaging style, three different box types were used, their availability overlapping each other. Furthermore, before 1955 each individual LEGO product that was released featured a completely different design on the box, although the name LEGO Mursten was always present, meaning the brand failed to secure a memorable and firm place in the minds of consumers.
