Banshee Towers

[Moonraker]

I have an original first edition and full book cover. And the book has been hardly opened, but I can't remember how much I paid for it.

Me too. I can't remember either what I paid for it.

Edit: I have just checked in my library, and there is a ticket inside that is marked at £36. I must have been feeling flush that day!

[darylcheshire]

I read this book in the late ‘60s when I was 10-12 or so, I had read many of the Find-Outers by then and I had a feeling that this book was more recent. I enjoyed it but it was different. I was too young to know in any way. It is interesting to know it was written in 1961.
My favourite part was when Fatty activated the Banshee moaning machine.

[IceMaiden]

Unlike many on here I like Banshee Towers very much and don't see the weaknesses in it that others seem to seem. I also like the last two Famous Five books as well (especially Mystery to Solve) which are also regarded as weak so maybe it's just me. I seem to have a totally different viewpoint to others on most things!

[pete9012S]

I never had a problem with the book when I read it at a young age IceMaiden -or even now.

I liked all the later books (Famous Five etc) written when Enid had allegedly lost many of her storytelling powers too.


I read Spiggy Holes much, much later as an adult and found it rather derivative - until I found it predated many of my favourite plot lines by many years!!

[Courtenay]

Unlike many on here I like Banshee Towers very much and don't see the weaknesses in it that others seem to seem.

I've always really liked Banshee Towers too, I don't mind admitting, so you're not alone, IceMaiden! It's not the strongest plot in the series by a long shot, but they all vary — some are overall better constructed as mystery stories than some of the others, but all the FFO stories have things about them that make them fun reads (for me, anyway), whether or not the actual mystery is so brilliant. I had no idea, when I first read it, that Banshee Towers was the last one Enid wrote and that she was in the twilight of her career at the time and starting to lose her mental clarity; I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have picked that up just from reading it. Despite not being right up there with the best ones in the series, it's got lots of flashes of fun and humour, especially with Ern and Bingo — I'm always sorry Enid didn't live to write more in the series, as there could have been a whole lot more fun she could get out of TWO madcap dogs with a grudge against PC Goon. And although the plot twist — Bets noticing something missing from a painting — isn't exactly the most clever and credible, it wouldn't be the first Enid Blyton book to require a bit of suspension of (adult-level) disbelief!!

[Lucky Star]

It's not a case of disliking the book. I've just always thought it a rather sad end to a great series. The wonderful, atmospheric village of Peterswood has vanished and been replaced with a bland town which has a "bad part" and a seperate police station. Mr Goon is not his usual comic self, in fact he barely features in the mystery at all and the secret tunnel device is more suited to the Famous Five than the Find-Outers. For me it just falls flat after the fourteen mostly sparkling books that preceded it.

Each to their own. I am delighted that the book has it's fans. As an aside Ice Maiden, I often find myself nodding in agreement with your opinions so you are certainly not alone here.

[Bertie]

This is my least favourite book in the series. I'm not fond of many of the later books as, to me, they read as if someone else has written the bulk of them - as they just don't have the same 'feel' as the rest of each series, nor do they have the same quality.
There's also some inconsistencies that don't make much sense to the rest of the series - as others have pointed out, Peterswood comes across as sounding a very different type of place to what has been described in the first 14 books. In the penultimate Famous Five, it's mentioned how they and George cycle over to each others houses and it not taking too long - when in the first book it took them about 7 hours in a car! They might have moved much closer to Kirrin in the meantime - but that's never mentioned at any point.
But I can cope with the occasional issues like that, for me the main problem with Banshee Towers, the last two FF books, etc, is that they just read very differently to the rest of the series, and have a very different 'feel' and an inferior quality.

I've noticed some on here - and I was reading another thread a few days ago and I'm sure it was on there as well - talk about how great it was that it was Bets who discovered the clue about the boat. I don't read the book anywhere near as much as I do the others, preferring to stop at Strange Messages most times, but I remembered it as Ern spotting it. I checked up on it and the actual chapter is called 'Ern's Queer Discovery'. He stares at the painting again and then spots the boat is missing and tells Fatty about it. It's only later, back in the shed, that Fatty asks Bets to describe the painting, and when she doesn't mention the boat, presses her for anything else she remembers and that's when she mentions it. Then they go again to look at it and Bets points out the same place on the painting that Ern did. But Ern was the one who 'spotted' the clue.

[Boodi 2]

Thanks for pointing out that it was Ern who initially spotted the missing boat in the painting, as that was also my memory of "Banshee Towers" so I am glad I was not mistaken. When I first started reading the FFO series in the late 1960s/early 1970s I could not wait to get my hands on "The Mystery of Banshee Towers", as the title sounded deliciously "spooky". However, I remember that even then the book did not live up to my expectations and while I do not dislike it (I actually prefer it to "Burnt Cottage" for some reason), it is a rather sad ending to an otherwise exceptional series.

[Moonraker]

I remember that even then the book did not live up to my expectations and while I do not dislike it (I actually prefer it to "Burnt Cottage" for some reason), it is a rather sad ending to an otherwise exceptional series.

I am with you regarding Burnt Cottage. The characters are introduced well, and it makes for fascinating re-reading to see how annoying and big-headed Fatty was, knowing he would ingratiate into the group and become its leader.

However, my biggest gripe was the title. Although a proper cottage is illustrated on the cover, it bears no resemblance to its description in the book - a single storey workroom, as I remember.



It seems the flames should be coming out of the building on the rear cover (left, in picture).

Than annoyed me as a twelve-year-old, and still does.

As for Banshee, I certainly don't dislike it, but to me it is the weakest and doesn't feel like a FF-O&D story at all.

[pete9012S]

Interestingly, as we know, the first edition does not even depict the workroom type building that is not on fire at the bottom of the garden.

The picture with the two cottages first appeared in the 1950 edition.
Larry has much more to say in this first book:

“It’s not the house!” cried Larry. “It’s the cottage he works in, in the
garden—his workroom. Golly, there won’t be much left of it!”
There certainly wouldn’t. The place was old, half-timbered and thatched,
and the dry straw of the roof was blazing strongly.

“Well, we all know that Mr. Hick’s cottage workroom, which stands at the
end of his garden, was burnt down last night,” said Larry.

I'm off topic with this in the Banshee Towers thread!! Apologies.

[Moonraker]

Which begs the question, why was it called The Mystery of the Burnt Cottage, when the cottage in question didn't catch fire, except on the cover?

[pete9012S]

Might explain why Goon looks so extra puzzled!

[IceMaiden]

I liked all the later books (Famous Five etc) written when Enid had allegedly lost many of her storytelling powers too.

See I really don't see this "lost her storytelling powers" in the slightest. I personally don't believe Enid Blyton lost any of her ability to write stories at all, rather that by that time she was perhaps running out of ideas (and who could blame her) so some stories become a bit samey. After all how many caves, dungeons, treasures, and secret tunnels can one realistically write about before they start to resemble one another? No matter how many ideas someone can dream up if they keep doing it for long enough sooner or later the new ideas are going to turn into variations of old ones because there's only so many possibilities that can be thought of!

I've read all the supposedly 'weak' books(as an adult so no childhood nostalgia), Mystery To Solve, Together Again, Banshee Towers, Fun For the SS, The Hidey-Hole and The Mystery That Never Was and honestly can't see them as weak. Recycling other plots, yes, but how could they not by that point.They're still highly readable, enjoyable and appealing in my view and I'd argue that Enid Blyton with 'lost' storytelling powers still triumphs any other author at the top of theirs!

[Courtenay]

I'm not quite sure what the puzzle here is — have I missed something? The text quoted clearly refers to "the cottage he works in, in the garden — his workroom" and "Mr Hick's cottage workroom"... so even though the cover illustration depicts a largish building that's on fire and a smaller one that's not, the building that was burnt is clearly defined as a "cottage" by all those involved in the story, and referred to as such throughout the story.

Is there some reason why it should never have been called a cottage — and if so, shouldn't the blame go to Enid for using incorrect housing terminology, not to the talented (?) Joseph Abbey for apparently not reading the story too carefully?

[pete9012S]

I'd argue that Enid Blyton with 'lost' storytelling powers still triumphs any other author at the top of theirs!

My sentiments entirely!