To think that English Heritage properties should have more play areas and interactive thingys for the kids

[LEMisdisappointed]

I am not actually sure if i IABU or not actually. We won a EH card in a raffle and have used it a couple of times. Certainly not complaining as we have had two lovely days out so far. However we did notice that the places where we went (both castles in the south east) didn't have any playgrounds or interactive activities for children.

I can sort of see why they don't as they don't always have space for that and maybe don't want to encourage loads of kids running riot, wrong ambience etc but I can't help thinking they would actually make more money if they were a little bit more child orientated.

As i say, i'm a bit undecided because DD loved both places and was pretty engaged with both of them but it would have been nice for some sort of play area. There was a lovely walk and gardens in the place we were in today but would have been nice to have a bit of a chill out while DD burnt off some energy in the playground. Of course we would have then spent the whole time we were there saying "ok ok, we will go to the playground in a minute"

I think that EH would make more money from members by making the places more worth returning to for midweek trips, last minute things where you might not look round the whole thing but go for the playpark, have tea in the coffee shop etc if they provided these things.

Maybe im just very uncultered common

They'd lose a lot of interest too from those people who don't want to be bothered with kids running around while they try to look at architecture/gardens etc. Though, tbh, I loved going to places like that as a child and was interested not running rampant.

If you want your kids to run around take them to a play area or theme park.

There are plenty play parks / theme parks... Not everything has to be aimed at kids. Yabu

Maybe English Heritage's core demographic isn't the sort of people who want to take their kids to a playpark. Maybe they're after people who want to learn a bit about the history of the site they're visiting.

Does everywhere have to have a playpark? Isn't it possible for children to learn something without it being fed to them in tiny gobbets while they're bouncing on a trampoline?

Why should these places be geared towards people who don't teach their kids to behave appropriately depending on where they are?

Would they need planning permission for a kids play area? If so, would they get it because they are a heritage site?

I agree re the demographic, lots more older people there although lots of familes to. As I say, definately complaining. I just think that if they are wanting to make money from families then they could make the learning a little more child friendly.

blimey isn't a castle enough for them to play with

Our nearest EH place has a playground and puts on an orienteering type trail for DC in the school holidays. Plus a fab tea rooms. We must be lucky.

YABVU. It's called "Heritage" for a reason. "play areas and interactive thingies" aren't part of that. I don't want to see some gorgeous piece of architecture blighted by a bloody big slide and climbing frame!

There are play areas all over the shop these days, far more than when I was a kid in the 80s. I like taking DD to places without a play area for a change.

Youthecat i don't understand your post - what is thinking a play park might be a nice idea that would draw families back for repeat visits more frequently got to do with children not behaving appropriatey??

Strawberry - that is a very good point!

I rather like the fact that you can go to places which aren't decorated like an Early Learning Centre and full of climbing frames and bouncy castles.

One near us does falconry lessons, nature trail hunts, pond dipping, bat watching etc etc. Not a climbing frame in sight thank feck.

But why can't kids just look at and appreciate stuff? Why does everything need climbing on or interacting with?

We have visited two EH castles in the last year and both had excellent activities laid on for children. They had people in period costumes and dc were able to 'train' to be a roundhead in one and a knight in the other. Loads of stuff on involving swords, sheilds and hobby-horses. The dc had a fab time in both.

These activities are not on every day but it's just a case of looking on the websites and seeing what's on - there was no extra cost on top of the usual cost of these venues. There was also a trail and some dressing up stuff which I think is there all the time.

No playgrounds but plenty of green space - we took balls and stuff (well, used the stuff like that that we have in the car when we realised the set-up there). Our dc also enjoy rooting around ruins - climbing through 'windows', peering up chimnies etc - as do most dc, judging by the children I see at these places.

Your dd loved it - what's the problem? I think it's good for dc to appreciate that not every single place they go to has to have a playground.

EH isn't the same as the National Trust. Lots of their sites are protected historical sites, not just old houses that someone decided to 'leave to the nation' because they couldn't afford the inheritance tax.

The facilities vary. We took DS aged about 14 months to Carisbrooke castle. He loved it. They have donkeys, a big green where he could run around without bothering anyone, a formal garden with lots of unusual plants and a cafe.

Neo - i take that point to.

So yes, i IABU and think its better they don't have them

Isn't the castle enough?? I take my children to national trust places a lot (without playgrounds in the main) and I'm really glad they don't. The children enjoy running around the fields, castles etc and exploring houses and learning about where they are.

I think there should be play areas too. It is unreasonable to bung kids in the car for what could be a long journey then expect them to walk round quietly and get back in the car.

It could reduce conflict with the people who don't like children as the children would have a designated area to run and climb rather than do it everywhere else. These places need to attract visitors and more people would come.

I think the issue is good play parks cost a lot of money.

I hate the dumbed down interactive activities in places like this and museums...sorry yabu!

chimneys

Well you said yourself that if there were a playground there, you'd spend all the time saying "in a minute" so it wouldn't necessarily be an advantage.

Personally if I had a child that wanted to play in a playground I'd do that somewhere else. If you go to a castle or old house that's what you go there for. If there's a garden area where you can walk around, can't they just run a bit there instead?

One of the things that annoys me and my ds who is now 21 is that a lot of activities are dumbed down to take into account visiting children. My ds complains that it's all for children, nothing for anyone over 18 and under 60.

If your children are not ready to 'walk around quietly' then take them somewhere else.

My DC rate the EH/NT places on the niceness of the cake in the tea rooms.

I'd hate bloody playparks and shiny buttons, primary colours and screens and shit all over the properties. There's enough dumbing down like that in the museums and science parks and zoos. If that's what you like, there are thousands of places all over to cater for you.
DS ran wild in many an EH property, I always found climbing endless spiral staircases and around the gardens quite tiring. It's a different sort of excitement.
So that would be a YABU then.

I hate play parks in historical properties. There are more than enough of them already in NT properties. I don't think any more are needed.