Review: 31210 Modern Art
Posted by Huw,
When 31210 Modern Art was revealed recently I think it's fair to say that reaction was mixed, not least because the set's name is somewhat misleading. Abstract Art would have been more appropriate.
I had originally dismissed it as being too peculiar, and was not expecting to have anything positive to say about it in my review, but it turns out that it does have some redeeming qualities.
Summary
31210 Modern Art, 805 pieces.
£44.99 / $49.99 / €49.99 | 5.6p/6.2c/6.2c per piece.
Buy at LEGO.com »
A conceptually interesting set that offers an easy way to create your own 'art'
- Good parts pack
- Great value for money
- Easily reconfigured
- Won't appeal to everyone
- Pink unbalances the palette
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
It's premise and execution is unlike other Art sets, and indeed unlike any other LEGO set, but the concept is simple: you are provided with pieces to build a frame and a number of primitives (as in a set of fundamental elements that serve as the foundation) in a variety of shapes and colours that are attached to the frame to make 'art'.
The frame is 20 x 32 studs by two bricks deep, and mostly covered in 1x4 tiles with two studs to enable the shapes to be attached and removed easily. Two 67139 PANEL 3X5, W/ 4.85 HOLE are provided to facilitate hanging it on the wall. They can be attached to any of the four sides thus allowing it to be hung in portrait or landscape orientation.
The shapes come in five colours, plus black and white. The larger ones are also mostly covered in the 1x4 plate/tile piece for the same reason that the frame is.
The set is an excellent parts pack, with a lot of 1/4 circle tiles, including the newest dia.3 ones, 2x2 triangular tiles, and 1x2 curved slopes.
During construction of the shapes the instruction manual provides guidance on creating compositions with balance, rhythm, movement and so on with the pieces made so far.
Once they've all been made you then simply attach them to the frame, choosing to either follow one of the four designs in the book or coming up with your own.
This is the one shown on the box which if you squint might look like a face.
This is one of the others in then book which might look like a crying cat.
It uses most of the primitives and as you can see it ends up being quite thick.
The shapes are easily removed from the frame and each other so rearranging them to make another picture is very quick and straightforward.
Here's one I made earlier. I didn't use any of the pink because I think it unbalances the primary colour palette. I'm clearly a symmetrist...
Here's what I imagine Tracey Emin might do with it...
I didn't really feel like I was creating art when coming up with my own compositions but, to my surprise, I did have fun doing so.
I don't think it will appeal to many of you reading this, but there probably are people out there with an artistic bent that might be intrigued enough to buy it rather than some other LEGO set.
Its main redeeming quality as far as AFOLs are concerned is that it's an excellent parts pack, priced very reasonably by today's standards. The 806-piece set will cost £44.99 / $49.99 / €49.99, and it's not full of tiny 1x1 pieces like many are nowadays. There are plenty of plates and tiles in a variety of shapes and sizes, some of which are hard to come by in the quantities provided here.
I'm not entirely sure what to make of it, really. It's not something that I would buy, and I'm not entirely convinced that the pictures you can make with it constitute art, but it's an interesting concept and as always I commend LEGO for trying something different and attempting to appeal to a new demographic.
If it's piqued your interest it'll be available at LEGO.com from August 1st.
143 likes
61 comments on this article
It doesn't look that modern. More like mid XX century, if not earlier.
It certainly is a thing. The set of all time!
(Much like modern art, interpret the above statement as you would this set - good, bad, or ugly!)
Should have been called ‘abstract art’.
Looks more like that bland, generic Memphis copycat style you see a lot nowadays than real "modern art"
Nevermind what the name of the set is, or what particular style or period of art it's supposed to represent (that 'discussion' was done beyond nauseum in the announcement article and will probably be tiresomely repeated here by those seeking to loudly demonstrate their knowledge of the high-brow aspects of life).
Instead I'm going to echo the (excellent) review and applaud LEGO for doing something that isn't just another grey spaceship (speaking as someone who enjoys building grey spaceships).
Personally, I think some of the creations would make a good backdrop for the Beetlejuice minifigure!
If the set and instructions actually teach about modern/abstract art, then this has much higher value than at first glance.
These are parts.
Other than the particular sub-branding and specific pieces offered, what sets this apart from a standard Classic box, particularly when Wal-mart sells one of those at substantial discount on Black Friday every year?
@mafon2 said:
"It doesn't look that modern. More like mid XX century, if not earlier."
Mid 20th Century is Modern Art indeed, it spans from the 1860s to the 1970s. The current art is Contemporary Art.
@Phoenixio said:
"If the set and instructions actually teach about modern/abstract art, then this has much higher value than at first glance."
Good point, and yes, I think to a certain extent it does, discussing various aspects of art, then showing examples made with the shapes to demonstrate it.
That content will be available for free, of course, once the instructions are on LEGO.com.
Thanks for a thoughtful and balanced review @Huw. I suspect a lot of the lazier commentators out there will lean heavily to the 'Thing Bad' end of the spectrum. It's certainly pushing the boundaries of what Lego sets can be in a very unusual way. Not one I'll be picking up, but an intriguing new idea.
@bananaworld: I enjoy gray spaceships too, but what I really enjoy are blue and gray spaceships.
There's a lot more volume here than I expected based on the earlier pictures. As such, yeah, seems like pretty decent value, much better than expected.
As for the art aspect....sorry, still a no for me.
I'll probably get this. Pretty cheap, and will be cheaper. A perfect addition to the 'They sold WHAT?' part of my collection. Only exhibit so far being 40468!
I like the concept here...it's very mid-century art deco...has a Miami vibe to me. As I said in the announcement thread: this will do well in art museum gift shops. So much so I'm kinda surprised it doesn't have a museum license, such as MOMA or the like. The price seems right for what it is. Overall it's not for everyone, me included, but I think there is a niche for it and I hope it does well.
If it wasn't the black box, I'd say it was a moc done by some kindergarten kids.
This is more generic than modern pop songs.
Is it hard always coming up with so many positives for fear of “the man” getting upset and cutting off the free pipeline of sets?
@shannon2611 said:
"Is it hard always coming up with so many positives for fear of “the man” getting upset and cutting off the free pipeline of sets?"
Go read another site. Huw provides honest reliable reviews. You... just complain.
We need a dislike button for comments.
@Huw said:
"might look like a crying cat"
I always struggled with Magic Eye autostereograms...
@shannon2611 said:
"Is it hard always coming up with so many positives for fear of “the man” getting upset and cutting off the free pipeline of sets?"
As I said "I don't think it will appeal to many of you reading this" and the comments so far suggest I was right.
Writing positive reviews is not a condition of receiving them.
I think it would have been interesting if Lego had commissioned some artists to come up with their own works using the parts in the set. I would be interested to see what Nathan Sawaya would come up with, or a more established artist like Grayson Perry.
Still, interesting set. Nice to see Lego do something a bit more experimental now and again. There are still plenty of "normal" sets for the naysayers to build.
It's... something different at least. When I heard the 'art' theme was coming out I admittedly hoped for stuff like this, not the 1x1 tile mosaics of pop-culture images. Which are basically just the furthest extreme of 'lots of pieces but they're 1x1 pieces' you could possibly get. Maximum fiddliness.
So better late than never I suppose. Yay for creativity!
That said, this is not for me. And it kind of feels very... kitsch? You can make an argument this set might be a platform to start on self-expression, but as it is it feels weirdly boxed off. You get some basic shapes and are told how you can arrange them. I'm not sure if that would qualify as 'genuine' art (which is a discussion I'm not interested in btw) considering it comes so pre-packaged. But then again, what is nót considered art anyway?
You could just as well create 'modern art' like this with a Classic box or with a specific licensed theme set's contents... You might say you're paying more for the ease of creating something specifically pre-packaged in an uncreative way, than for the raw contents...
It is not for me. It looks like the designer lost a bet and for the forfeit was given a brief to come up with the most pretentious set ever. And succeeded in that.
@ao_ka said:
" @mafon2 said:
"It doesn't look that modern. More like mid XX century, if not earlier."
Mid 20th Century is Modern Art indeed, it spans from the 1860s to the 1970s. The current art is Contemporary Art."
Yeah, my joke is terrible.
On the subject of the set: it's almost like these Classic pieces buckets , but with less choice. An interesting idea, but undercooked somewhat.
I like the idea a lot. The colour scheme not so much. Looking forward to browsing through the instruction manual online. I am surprised they did not go for LEGO's primary colours (black, white, red, blue, yellow). I assume they would get into trouble with Piet Mondriaan's heirs. :D
It's a weird set and I can't imagine it selling well, but i'm a fan of postmodern design so I do appreciate this set for all it's strangeness. Kind of bold of LEGO to actually release this! The reception has been very lukewarm so far, so I'm hoping to snag one from the discount bins soon. ;-)
I don't agree with the observation of the reviewer that the pink color doesn't belong in this set. Bright colors and sharp contrasts are an integral part of the postmodern Memphis Movement design, and the designers of this set clearly tried (and succeeded, in my opinion) to capture that vibe (although I do agree that doesn't make it a good LEGO set automatically, or that this set will appeal to a lot of people - but it's also nice that LEGO targets niche groups sometimes ;-) ).
A bit TOO modern for me.
While I have to admit the actual set they came up with is not for me, I like the general idea.
What puts me off is the colour palette chosen. Imho it's too garish. I would have loved a "classic" LEGO palette of red, yellow, blue, black and white.
Would have been great for some Mondrian-like art too.
Edit: I just saw @rick77 had the same thoughts.
As an 'art' set it's :|
As a 'part' set it's :)
(IMHO)
@AustinPowers said:
"While I have to admit the actual set they came up with is not for me, I like the general idea.
What puts me off is the colour palette chosen. Imho it's too garish. I would have loved a "classic" LEGO palette of red, yellow, blue, black and white.
Would have been great for some Mondrian-like art too.
Edit: I just saw @rick77 had the same thoughts. "
Yes, interesting idea - I agree with you both.
Personally I'd have called this "Vaporwave Art Kit" since the designs you can make look like they belong on a Trapper Keeper or the screensaver of a 1990s computer!
I don't hate this idea? But I'm just not sure it'd be a lot of fun to really play around with, nor do I think you could actually make "art" with it.
I could definitely see this selling OK in museum gift shops around the world, though.
I like the idea of this but don't think the colour scheme does it any favours - the bright colours almost looks like a selection of random pieces put together from about 50 years ago and something more subtle or earthy looking (thinking dark red, olive green type palette) would look more like it has been created as art - just my opinion obviously!
@AustinPowers said:
"While I have to admit the actual set they came up with is not for me, I like the general idea.
What puts me off is the colour palette chosen. Imho it's too garish. I would have loved a "classic" LEGO palette of red, yellow, blue, black and white.
Would have been great for some Mondrian-like art too.
Edit: I just saw @rick77 had the same thoughts. "
How about CGA 4 color palette?
(the horror....the horror)
It's just not for me, even though this comment places me firmly in the "lazy commenter"-pigeonhole that was created for me by others.
What would be REALLY lazy, would be to leave this comment unfi
Lazy commenters are the worst. They
Personally, not for me; not even as a part pack.
That said, I think they(Lego group) should make two of these. The other one would have the same number of parts and be identical in most ways except that the colours would be: dark red, bright green, yellow, sand blue, magenta, lime green and medium lilac. (basically feel free to pick any colours you want - you get the idea. The current palette is a start but sometimes, composition alone is not sufficient to convey an idea and colours are better at doing it.)
@WizardOfOss said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"While I have to admit the actual set they came up with is not for me, I like the general idea.
What puts me off is the colour palette chosen. Imho it's too garish. I would have loved a "classic" LEGO palette of red, yellow, blue, black and white.
Would have been great for some Mondrian-like art too.
Edit: I just saw @rick77 had the same thoughts. "
How about CGA 4 color palette?
(the horror....the horror)"
Doesn't this set already include the classic CGA palette of pink, cyan, black and white (aka palette 1, high intensity) ?
I love when LEGO tries something new, especially seeing how conservative and risk averse they've always been. We might not get a Friends for every Jack Stone but we don't have to, so long as we eventually find those gems. I'm slowly coming around to Brickheads (I'm looking at you Tusken Raider) and love love love our annual modulars, Ideas, Star Wars MBS, etc. They all came about because LEGO tried something novel. I'm also a really big fan of LEGO Art, already having picked up Iron Man, Batman, Mickey and Art Project (let's be honest, it's really White Spaceman).
I just don't get this set. For something as abstract as abstract, marketing a defined set (even if customizable) just feels like an antithesis to the concept. (IMHO)
@AustinPowers said:
"Doesn't this set already include the classic CGA palette of pink, cyan, black and white (aka palette 1, high intensity) ? "
It does....and also the Mondriaan palette. They don't go too well together :-)
@WizardOfOss said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"Doesn't this set already include the classic CGA palette of pink, cyan, black and white (aka palette 1, high intensity) ? "
It does....and also the Mondriaan palette."
Does it? From the images it seems to be dark azure instead of the classic blue. Also the yellow looks more bright light orange to me. Then again it might be the lighting.
@CCC said:
"It is not for me. It looks like the designer lost a bet and for the forfeit was given a brief to come up with the most pretentious set ever. And succeeded in that."
I fail to see the pretension here
Completely bewildering. Price per piece looks attractive, sure, but it would have to be half that again for me to even think about it. Weirdly, I rather like the original picture of the face, but the sort of art they're trying to suggest here simply isn't achievable with Lego bricks, and certainly not at this scale. What's left is simply the ability to make a nice pattern. Great, but... couldn't we do that anyway, and without spending £40+?
@AustinPowers said:
"Does it? From the images it seems to be dark azure instead of the classic blue. Also the yellow looks more bright light orange to me. Then again it might be the lighting. "
Nah, that's just different blue and different yellow. Like a Mondriaan painting that has been in the sun for too long.
@AustinPowers said:
" @WizardOfOss said:
" @AustinPowers said:
"Doesn't this set already include the classic CGA palette of pink, cyan, black and white (aka palette 1, high intensity) ? "
It does....and also the Mondriaan palette."
Does it? From the images it seems to be dark azure instead of the classic blue. Also the yellow looks more bright light orange to me. Then again it might be the lighting. "
The colours are blue, red, flame yellowish orange (bright light orange), bright bluish green (teal) and light purple (pink).
@yellowcastle said:
"(let's be honest, it's really White Spaceman)."
I bought 21226 with the intention of letting three of my nephews (I have another, but he's not very good at following instructions; he's six years old, although I think he was only four when I bought it, and still struggles building 4+ set. Besides, he doesn't stay here that often.) each pick three images to build, then hanging it in my room. But after waiting so long for a day when they were here (I'm living with my parents again after my stroke, but they only live here when my brother's working, and the youngest of the three is the only one who even does that all the time) got to be too much, I said "screw it" and built the Spaceman.
While I will preface this by saying I don’t really have any interest in buying this myself (got fairly specific interests really), I’ll add that I learned about Jackson Pollock before I was learning about the Renaissance Old Masters, and am generally of the opinion that teaching kids from an early age that art isn’t just replicating what you see is a fantastic idea so approve of the sentiment behind the set at least
@Huw: thanks for the explanation. I wasn't completely wrong then after all.
Wow... this is possibly the worst, most unappealing LEGO set of all time. No joke. Why would anyone buy this?
Now, if we put this on the 42146 Liebherr Crane's hook, that would be quite an interesting sight.
@shannon2611 said:
"Is it hard always coming up with so many positives for fear of “the man” getting upset and cutting off the free pipeline of sets?"
Says someone who clearly doesn't regularly read reviews on Brickset. They are among the best online, and they are not afraid of giving negative reviews when earned.
@GenericLegoFan said:
"This is more generic than modern pop songs."
I’m taking from your username that’s a good thing, right?
@Huw said:
" @shannon2611 said:
"Is it hard always coming up with so many positives for fear of “the man” getting upset and cutting off the free pipeline of sets?"
As I said "I don't think it will appeal to many of you reading this" and the comments so far suggest I was right.
Writing positive reviews is not a condition of receiving them."
I consider your reviews to be very fair, almost surprisingly so given that you receive free products from a single company that presumably has to be kept happy - product sites in some other industries / areas are almost universally positive about *everything" if it means getting free stuff. I hope you keep up the great work, as far as I'm concerned!
On the product itself, that does look like a nice collection of parts - I've recently picked up some discounted classic and dots sets for that reason. I won't go out of my way to buy this one, but I will keep an eye out if it does pop up for a good price.....
I was surprised to see such a negative reaction to this set! It’s definitely different from your standard LEGO fare, and that’s awesome! I’ll pick it up at some point for sure. Looking forward to creating some weird compositions.
@NickLafreniere1 said:
"Wow... this is possibly the worst, most unappealing LEGO set of all time. No joke. Why would anyone buy this? "
3263 may disagree.
@namekuji said:
" @NickLafreniere1 said:
"Wow... this is possibly the worst, most unappealing LEGO set of all time. No joke. Why would anyone buy this? "
3263 may disagree."
That's actually pretty cool. It's like Galidor and Duplo together ;)
@sjr60 said:
"I'll probably get this. Pretty cheap, and will be cheaper. A perfect addition to the 'They sold WHAT?' part of my collection. Only exhibit so far being 40468 !"
I’d love to add to your list if you don’t mind! I think sets 215 and 31129 might belong there too (although the latter is perhaps cliché by now).
Edit: I know 215 was released in the 70’s, but imagine if they released something like that today LOL
This honestly doesn’t look as bad as it did in the initial announcement. I think that the box unfortunately doesn’t do this set justice because I couldn’t really see how this set works until reading this review. I think that this is really the biggest problem with the set because the people who it may appeal to won’t actually know that it appeals to them.
That said, I have no interest in this set, but I did just buy the TIE Bomber!
@sjr60 said:
"I'll probably get this. Pretty cheap, and will be cheaper. A perfect addition to the 'They sold WHAT?' part of my collection. Only exhibit so far being 40468!"
I thought that was gonna be the sneaker before clicking.
Probably it was created by AI, who knows?!
If I wanted to read about art, I would buy a book about art, not a Lego set. The literature provided with a Lego set just isn't a selling point beyond a certain extent. I like abstract art, but I'm not seeing the appeal here.