careers

As usual, I spotted a retro game at the thrift store and had to spend a whopping $1.99 — and make the someone play it. This time the game was Parker Brothers’ Careers (No. 66) and the victim was the husband, Derek. Fortunately, the only pieces missing were two dice — and, after lengthy searching, I was able to remedy that so we could play. (No one escaped playing games with me that easily!) Overall, I think it’s a very cool game. But then, maybe my standards are low; I just love board games & when they are “old” I’m twice as happy to play them.

Retro parker Bros. Careers Game

The version of the game we played has copyrights of 1971, 1976, & 1979 — however, it seems that there were several versions of the game & the game box during these years, and (at least in 1978), different international versions too, thus making it even more challenging for board game collectors who can’t exactly judge a game by it’s box cover.

1978 International Version Of Career Board Game

In fact, Parker Brothers’ Career board game has quite a number of versions — and the changes aren’t only in graphics.

The board game was first manufactured by Parker Brothers in 1955. Since then, Careers has been reprinted from time to time & you will also find official copies of Careers put out by Waddingtons and others — with the most recent edition of the game being published in 2008 by Winning Moves, who brought back the original version (including refill score pads). This is not only cool for those of us who may not be able to find (or afford) a complete vintage game, but for those of us who do not wish to risk wear & tear on a collectible by playing it with the family.

However, the different versions of the Careers game vary quite a bit — so if you’re at all like me, you’ll want to know more about all the options.

The original version included Farming & Prospecting careers, by 1965 Prospecting was Uranium Prospecting and by 1971 Uranium Prospecting became Sports and Farming was changed to Ecology to reflect that 70’s trend. Other changes also reflected the times. On the original game board, there was a Sea career option which became Teaching — and then was eventually just dropped. Originally there was no unemployment; those without jobs say on the Park Bench corner, which then became the Unemployment Office — which surely shows more sitting than the simple Unemployment of my version. And can you imagine the thrill of playing the 1950’s versions and making an Expedition to the Moon before anyone really had?!

Vintage Careers Game Rules Sheet

Along with changes in the board (many spaces removed entirely), there were changes in scoring (older versions offering a two-player game option requiring 100 points to win, instead of 60), and of course the game pieces & graphics. Check out the reusable scoring sheets with the 1958 version!

1958 Careers Board Game

But arguably the worst change to the Careers game came in 1990 when Parker Brothers thought a hot pink pandering board game would profit big time. It didn’t. Because it was no What Shall I Be? The Exciting Game of Career Girls.

You wouldn’t know it, unless you either obsessively Googled the game or had a 1997 Pressman edition of the game which credits the game’s designer, but the Careers board game was designed by James Cooke Brown, an inventor, writer, university professor, and sociologist. He had even created a more advanced edition in which enlightenment, virtue and power were added to the Success Formula. Sadly, this game re-design was never published. But we can still hope. And perhaps pester the James Cooke Brown Trust for such a glorious thing:

James Cooke Brown Trust
c/o Jenny Brown
1720 NE 75th St
Gainesville, FL 32641

(email info@jobmarketbook.com)

Taking such action is sure to give you 10 Happiness Hearts!

The cover of the February 2, 2009 edition of Antique Week teased the following snippet for an article in the National section:

Tough times = more education

Knowledge is power.
Nowhere, perhaps, does that time-honored adage ring as true as in the world of antiques.

I’ll admit, I ignored the article for this long because I’m already pretty done with the “how does the economy affect antiques and collectibles” angle — I get that folks are concerned, but I’ve been around this industry and this planet long enough to know most of these cultured pearls of wisdom strewn before anxious minds. And I was raised to generally believe in education as a wise approach to any problem or circumstance, so “no surprises there” is what I thought and why I avoided the piece in Antique Week. But eventually, as it was the only non-read section left in “the library,” I got around to reading it anyway.

The article, People turn to education when times are tough, by Eric C. Rodenberg, is quite a lovely pitch-piece for antiques education, especially for the Asheford Institute of Antiques™ and it’s director, Charles Green (son of the founder, Peter Green, maybe?), even if has the requisite amount of fear-mongering as motivation for money-making. But let’s start with the positive:

The school has an appraisal program, which includes the conventional methodology used in the field. But, it’s the hands-on knowledge of antiques that marks this school from traditional appraisal programs, says Green.

“The distinction is that we teach the product — we go into great specifics with antiques — something that your general appraisal classes do not do,” Green says. “the general appraisals course may spend two hours on the subject … we make the analogy that it’s like the brain surgeon who says he would really like to become a brain surgeon, but he doesn’t want to have to study all that medical stuff. We focus on that stuff — the antiques. Our graduates have the product knowledge, not just the methodology.”

Which really is another way of getting at the real issue of the business of being an antiques and collectibles dealer. I’ll get to more on that in a minute; let’s face the parts which focus on financial anxieties first.

The institute’s admissions dean, Tony Drew, is quoted as saying that his institute is seeing higher enrollments in response to “recent housing foreclosures and subsequent content sales.” (This quote is also used in Antique Trader’s blog — suspiciously word for word, though it was published on December 10, 2008. If the industry itself is going to beat the economic angle to death, can we get some new quotes or properly record the rehashing?) While all of this might make for great (anxiety based) copy, this whole “in times of economic trouble, increase your income with a new career in antiques and collectibles” thing is getting out of hand.

Antique Week Education Article

Especially when so many folks want to offer entering the world of antiques and collectibles as a lucrative opportunity if not a get-rich scheme; it’s just not that easy. Mainly because there are lots of variables in any business, not just specific to this sector of it. But there’s one factor that most of these articles fail to address which is not only misleading but rather insulting.

While I admire the Asheford Institute (which I’ve no personal experience with) for its dedication past the simple appraisal methodology, I must dutifully state that it takes more than “two years of in-depth college” education to cover the centuries of antiques and collectibles. After decades of experience, I’m making discoveries daily — and by that I mean I’m discovering antiques & collectibles which are off the maps. I’m not saying “no” to education; I’m saying that education must be ongoing in this business.

And to continue your self-education you’ll need a special ingredient to motivate you.

As my friend Cliff Aliperti (recently interviewed here at CQ) very eloquently said to me during a recent discussion about just what makes a successful antiques and collectibles dealer, “The passion comes from collecting, if you just jump into selling you may have a passion for your business, but are you ever going to have a true passion for your goods?”

Cliff and I (and zillions of others) feel that it’s the passion for the goods — the antiques — which is that special ingredient, that “thing” which makes you better as a dealer. It’s what makes you not only willing but wanting to learn more than the bare minimum. We obsessive passionate folks want to “study all the medical stuff.”

Maybe comparing an antiques & collectibles dealer to a brain surgeon isn’t quite the same thing — but Green started it. So let me finish it by saying that in either case I trust the professional who cares the most, who is passionate enough to be driven to know the most.

So, to any of you thinking of about starting in this business, I say, “Welcome!” — and I’ll tell you what most of these others won’t: You need a passion for antiques & collectibles — or at least your area of specialty, should you select one — in order to succeed in antiques & collectibles. You’ll need it to keep yourself educated, to make your customers happy, to not go crazy; and you just can’t get accredited for “passion” or even take a course in it.

I couldn’t help myself when I spotted this game at a rummage sale, so I dug deep and spent a whole $3. Eager to play, I pulled Destiny, our 11 year old daughter, over to the table to play.

“OK, first I have to tell you that this game may be a little weird. And it may not even be fun,” I warned. “But I’d like your help reviewing it and we’ll have fun anyway.”

She was, as expected, happy to play a game with me but a bit confused about my disclaimers. “Why would it be weird?” she asked.

“Well, it’s an older game — like almost as old as your dad — and it’s sort of an educational game,” I said. “Not like a math game or anything, but well, you’ll see once we get started.”

So we went about the process of counting all the pieces and game tiles to make sure it was complete. Satisfied it was, we endeavored to start.

The play is simple; roll the dice and move forward either the total shown on both dice or the number shown on either of them, collecting cards as you do.

The cards are:

School cards, with illustrations representing girls in school studying to enter a specific field, with the following choices: Medical School (Surgeon), Riding Academy (Jockey), Flight Training School (Astronaut), College (Commentator), Drama School (Director), and Law School (Lawyer).

Subject cards are round mod-orange cards like report cards. They are either the proof of success at school, or one of the barriers to entering the career of your choice. Examples include, “Diction; Good for: Director and Lawyer” and “You Failed Sociology; Bad for Commentator and Lawyer”.

Heart-shaped personality cards cover the traits girls need to be successful in the six specific careers, such as “You are a slow thinker. Bad for: Commentator, Jockey, Lawyer and Astronaut,” and “You get too excited. Bad for Surgeon, Lawyer and Astronaut.”

The goal of the game is to be the first to collect four school cards of one profession as well as two subject cards and two personality cards that are good for that profession.

Now we were each ready to answer the perplexing question, “What shall I be?”

We took our turns moving about the board, myself in pursuit of becoming a surgeon, so I can, as I told her, perform surgery on her brain when the game ends. That probably wasn’t the right thing to say because not long after, she drew the “You are not gentle. Bad for: Jockey and Surgeon” personality card, which not only works against her goal of becoming a jockey, but made her feel bad about herself.

“I’m gentle!” she exclaimed, “I’m nice with our pets!”

“Of course you are, this is just a game,” I reminded her. “Do you really think I should or even can do brain surgery even if that’s what I would win the game with?”

She laughed and sad, “No!” But then again, when she landed on the space where she had the opportunity to get a second College (Commentator) card she said, “No way. I don’t want those huge glasses.”

:sigh:

So much for pretending,or taking work more seriously than how you might look. But I bit my tongue and said nothing.

We continued to move our game pieces about the board — and I have to say, the game can be sort of boring as there are lots of rolls when nothing happens. At one point I landed on the same space as Destiny and I said, “I wonder if I can bump you off or something,” as I went to look at the instructions for game play.

Now you might think I’m a little too blood-lusty, looking for a way to bump another player (let alone a kid), but if this game is supposed to teach girls what it’s like to be a “career girl” then there should be some sort of pitfalls from competitors. Which is why I think the cards pertaining to assertiveness, competitiveness, and aggressiveness, should fit any and all professions. But maybe I’m expecting too much from a game.

Or maybe I’m just meant to be a Commentator or a Jockey.

The less-than-hyper activity of the game does allow for questions and discussions during game play though, which could be what the makers of the game envisioned. I figured I could play with that too.

“Des, can you think about why I called this an educational game?”

“Because it’s about school and stuff?”

“Well, yes, but really — and this may seem really strange to you — there was a time, not that long ago really, when girls didn’t think they could grow up and be anything they wanted to,” I said.

“People only thought they could be moms,” she asserted. I was impressed that she knew that much. But still… What did she really know about it?

“Exactly,” I began, “See even in my lifetime, there have been lots of women who couldn’t get into college or, if they got their degree, couldn’t get a job in their field because they were a woman. It made lots of women very angry. Can you imagine if you couldn’t become a counselor or police dog trainer just because you’re a girl?”

The idea of not being able to reach her career-goals-of-the-week affected her a bit. Her eyes widened and she said, “That’s not fair.”

“No, it’s not,” I agreed.

She nodded and then asked, “Do they make games like this for boys?”

“No. Boys don’t need games like this because little boys have pretty much always known or felt they could be anything they wanted to be. But girls haven’t. Some women who did get the jobs they wanted have been treated badly by the men they work with…” I trailed off, realizing at this point I needed to be mindful not to turn a bit of history and empowerment into a ranting episode — I could easily turn left and start talking about pink cars!

“So games like this were made to get girls interested in or at least thinking about other sorts of work besides being a mom and a wife… So that girls knew they could do it, even if they didn’t know anyone who had.”

Des nodded. And I really do think she was giving this all some serious thought. Cool beaners!

Eventually the game ended and I was the victorious winner — a surgeon after all! (But no, I didn’t crack her melon open.) Destiny was disappointed she didn’t end up a jockey; but there’s always next time.

Will there be a next time? I asked Destiny if the game was fun.

She said, “Yes.”

“Was it fun just because you and I played a game? Or because the game itself was fun?” I pressed.

“Um, both,” she said.

Game postscript:

The version of the game Destiny & I played was What Shall I Be? The Exciting Game of Career Girls, Edition Two, © 1976 by Selchow & Righter Co., game #33.

Selchow & Righter Co. (S & R Games) also made an earlier version of this game in 1966. This game is far more insidious than the version we played.

It’s not just the more female centric career options (Teacher, Airline Hostess, Actress, Nurse, Model, or Ballet Dancer), but much more nasty personality cards. As Claire Mysko wrote:

You are overweight. Bad for: Airline Hostess, Ballet Dancer, and Model (Better stick to Reading, Writing and Arithmetic, fatties!)

You are pretty. Good for: Model and Actress (Help Wanted. Ugly nurses inquire within.)

Your make-up is too sloppy. Bad for: Airline Hostess and Model (What’s up with all the ballerinas and their caked on foundation and clumpy mascara? Eeeew.)

You are a slow thinker. Bad for: Airline Hostess and Nurse. (So that’s why I can’t read good. It’s okay, cuz I’m purty y’all. Slow teachers rule!!!)

At least the 1976 version was less sexist — and didn’t have a pink game board.

Also, it turns out they did make a What Shall I Be? The Exciting Career Game For Boys. I guess the 60’s were so confusing, everybody needed those gender stereotypes reinforced.
================

Gotta Collect? Then You Gotta Connect – Join our Collectors’ Community!