The Enid Blyton Society

I'm selling Magazine Annual No 4 for £12 but will be happy to cut £2 off the price...

Sadly, my life doesn't revolve around Enid Blyton and I am one of those forum members that often miss or don't look at Tony's updates. In fact, I had more time when I was working! I now run and/or administrate three forums and four Facebook pages and find little time to sit and read - except at bedtime. I also find it difficult to keep up with the forums now after a break away. I was in London for the latter half of last week, and on

Having said that, I can see how Tony can feel that he needs to slow down. I am sure we all appreciate the time he devotes to the Society - and who knows, maybe one day I will have time to lose myself in the Cave!

I also wonder at how many of the non-forum Society members keep up to date with all the additions. If they don't look at the forums, how will they ever know? Maybe an updates page in each Journal?

I also find it increasingly difficult to keep up with the forums after some time away. I was in London for the latter part of last week, and upon viewing new topics earlier today, was bombarded with pages of new posts. Just selecting those of particular interest has taken up time when I should have been doing other things! I am away again from tomorrow, so the backlog will just get longer.

I know Tony has given reasons for not doing this (of which I can not remember!), but "Last updated January 27" doesn't actively encourage website visitors/Society members (as opposed to forummers) to search for the labours of Tony.

Moonraker wrote:I know Tony has given reasons for not doing this (of which I can not remember!), but "Last updated January 27" doesn't actively encourage website visitors/Society members (as opposed to forummers) to search for the labours of Tony.

i remember we discussed this before, but I do agree 100%, Nigel - most people would presume there have been no updates at all since January 27.

I've just been looking at the addition review by Terry G - Mr Icy-Cold.

Quite a lot of contents inside this book, but not one I would buy, sadly. Not really my taste of Blyton stories. I normally like many illustrations in Enid's books, but some of these in this book look quite scary.

They do, don't they Julie! I wonder if they scared any children!

I agree. I have a first edition with no dust wrapper. The stories are really typical Blyton fare in my view - but the illustrations make them seem a bit more unusual. Even though the illustrations are a bit scary-looking, I also love them. They are very reminiscent of the illustrations George Cruikshank did for Oliver Twist etc.

An extremely detailed account by Terry. There's a story very similar to 'The Left-Behind Cat' in one of the Mr. Pink-Whistle books, though it ends differently.

I've never come across this book and Terry's reviews are excellent. The book looks quite square in appearance, does anyone know its dimensions please?

Approx 17cm x 21cm and about 1.5cm thick.

I did it in cm's because I couldn't easily but half inches on here! How does one write six and a half inches without writing it in full?!

I'd put 6.5".

I thought of doing that - but I was always taught that '.5' isn't correct when talking about inches. Old habits die hard, lol!

You may well be right, Rob. I was only ever taught about centimetres. I just looked on two tape measures to see how many parts the inches were divided into, but one had each inch divided into 16 parts and the other had each inch divided into 24 parts!

I'm sure some of our more mature members will be able to help us out!

Why wouldn't .5 be correct with inches? That's how you write a half, whether it's in cm, or something that's not decimal like stones, pounds or ounces. The other alternative would be "6 1/2 in" but the 1/2 isn't as clear as it's the same size as the other text. In Word etc. 1/2 would automatically be shrunk down like the "th" is in "25th" etc.

Thanks Rob. I wondered whether the book was rectangular such as the Famous Five hardbacks.
I was brought up with imperial measurements but I can only recall a rule having 16 divisions of an inch, never 24.
When I was at school half inches were always written as 1/2 never .5.

Thanks, John. I suppose fractions were used rather than decimals because of inches not normally being divided into tenths.