> Was I the only person who did not understand the draw of Logo as a kid? Having to use it in school made me feel like the world viewed me as a lobotomy victim.

> Was I the only person who did not understand the draw of Logo as a kid? Having to use it in school made me feel like the world viewed me as a lobotomy victim. > And today, whenever one of these teaching-kids-to-program language/environments comes out, I always wonder, "is a real language really beyond the 8-10 year old's grasp?" > I wish someone had introduced me to Lisp as a child. It's so fundamental. I remember thinking in similar terms, and would have had my mind blown on so many different levels if someone had introduced me to Lisp when I was 8-10, or even younger. Logo is a real language, and it is extremely similar to Lisp; a lot of people even just refer to it as a Lisp dialect. There's a lot more to Logo than turtle graphics, the same way there's a lot more to Racket or Python or any other language that has a turtle graphics package. Basically, you were more or less introduced to Lisp when you were a kid, and having to use it in school made you feel like the world viewed you as a lobotomy victim. The problem you encountered probably stems less from Logo and more from being taught Logo by teachers who barely knew it themselves, and who didn't care about or understand anything beyond turtle graphics, so that's all they're able to teach to students. Here's a good introduction to Logo by Brian Harvey with an emphasis on symbolic computation: https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/computer-science-logo-style https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/computer-science-logo-style