Readathon - Secret Mountain and Secret of Killimooin

[Liam]

...in the end, I think it's more important to be friends with people here than to show yourself to be right and them wrong.

Very well said. That is my own sentiment too, Michael.

But, even if certain parallels can be found between books, I am wary of attaching too much significance to them, and often think they are just coincidence. In summary, I have never seen any particular similarity between "The Secret Mountain" and "The Secret of Killimooin" beyond the obvious common elements (travelling to a remote place and getting embroiled with a remote, isolated society that terrorizes the surrounding districts) - despite the many parallels Liam pointed out. Perhaps some elements from "The Secret Mountain" lingered in Enid Blyton's mind and found their way into "The Secret of Killimooin", quite likely unintentionally; but they are mostly details that don't prevent the plots being very, very different, and I don't attach a lot of significance to that - in fact, in all my life, I never even noticed many of the things Liam listed until I read his list.

Michael, just about everyone who commented had the same views as you - Anita, Daisy, etc. - and I had no issues with them. From the start I stated my ideas were speculation. So just logically, the disagreement with Rob took place on a different level.

I guess that was the gist of my comments, and I think I avoided belittling anyone or putting them down - so I will go over the more detailed comments I wrote last night some time, and consider whether some of them should be posted or not.

You did not belittle or put me down in disagreeing with me, Michael. I do hope you find it in yourself to post your other ideas on the subject. I look forward to seeing them.

But I am very wary of getting embroiled in this at all, beyond what I've just said, so I'm just not sure yet whether to say any more - especially since the comments do tend to differ from Liam's viewpoint.

I would recommend that you read Rob’s last post - it’s very brief - only two lines - and pay particular attention to the last line, and especially the last word. I consider the matter settled, so I would not try to explain it. But I do read posts carefully, and I think Rob accepted some responsibility for what happened. Like I said, I consider the matter settled, and consider myself on good terms with Rob.

[MJE]

Michael, just about everyone who commented had the same views as you - Anita, Daisy, etc. - and I had no issues with them. From the start I stated my ideas were speculation. So just logically, the disagreement with Rob took place on a different level. 8)

     Well.... I thought it was a disagreement about how much significance to attach to certain similarities, or even whether some were illusory in some way, and how similar the two books are. I must admit that I missed how Rob's comments may have been qualitatively different from the others who disagreed, except perhaps for being a bit more detailed. If there are different levels to what passed, perhaps I missed that.

You did not belittle or put me down in disagreeing with me, Michael. I do hope you find it in yourself to post your other ideas on the subject. I look forward to seeing them. :)

     No - I was fairly confident that nothing I posted put anyone down; but, since my not-yet-posted comments did take up a number of detailed points one by one, I do wonder whether they could be taken differently - at the least, they might sound a bit picky.
     Anyway, I still have the comments in a separate text file, so I will go over them and see if they are okay to post. They are long, too - as my posts sometimes tend to be. But I am aware that long posts are not all that popular with some forum members.
     I'm at my mother's at present, so may not get the time for something like that for a day or two. It's okay to make a series of short posts in odd moments when visiting - but, depending on what we do, it's not always easy when visiting to find the time to do a long, detailed piece of work (either writing or just carefully considering or editing something previously written) - I don't multi-task well, and don't swap easily from one task to another, then back again.
     The reason for my caution is that, in the past, I have (three times, I think) inadvertently offended, quite seriously, people - maybe not by my opinions themselves, but apparently something about the way I expressed them. It genuinely took me aback each time, and I apologized each time (without necessarily retracting the opinions themselves), and it was accepted; but I do try to be careful about this, as it seems I do have the capacity to be a bit tactless at times - maybe a bit blunt sometimes.

I would recommend that you read Rob’s last post - it’s very brief - only two lines - and pay particular attention to the last line, and especially the last word.

     Well... having just read the post you referred to, it didn't occur to me as I read this discussion that Rob was getting too personal - nor you, either. A more personal feel (in not an entirely desirable way) just sort of grew somehow, and I'm not quite sure how it happened; but it did cause me to hold back on some of what I was going to say. As I say, I try to be careful in disagreeing with others, although of course I don't think one should never disagree with another person.

Regards, Michael.

[Liam]

… since my not-yet-posted comments did take up a number of detailed points one by one, I do wonder whether they could be taken differently - at the least, they might sound a bit picky.

Tell you what, since you already made that criticism of them, I’ll just consider it an inadvertent goal you scored on your own team, so no use for me to use it again.

Anyway, I still have the comments in a separate text file, so I will go over them and see if they are okay to post. They are long, too - as my posts sometimes tend to be. But I am aware that long posts are not all that popular with some forum members.

Since I love to go a-paralleling, I’m pretty sure they’ll be popular with me!

The reason for my caution is that, in the past, I have (three times, I think) inadvertently offended, quite seriously, people - maybe not by my opinions themselves, but apparently something about the way I expressed them. It genuinely took me aback each time, and I apologized each time (without necessarily retracting the opinions themselves), and it was accepted; but I do try to be careful about this, as it seems I do have the capacity to be a bit tactless at times - maybe a bit blunt sometimes.

That I understand. I seem to offend quite a lot! Apart from being confidently unconventional in my thinking (which by itself draws opposition), I can be more focused on the logic of my post than on the emotion of it, which isn’t always the best. But that is why they have created emoticons, so I should use them a little more. In addition, my language tends to be a bit bookish and philosophical, which can go over people’s heads. For example, I have written the phrase “undermine my arguments”, and I meant it in an entirely positive way. I was welcoming such efforts, because I wanted my ideas tested. But the totally opposite meaning was conveyed. People thought I was hurt by the attempt to poke holes in my ideas, or that I was obsessed with being right. The lesson to take away is not to use such heavy words as “undermine” or even “arguments”. Hope it sticks.

[MJE]

That I understand. I seem to offend quite a lot! Apart from being confidently unconventional in my thinking (which by itself draws opposition), I can be more focused on the logic of my post than on the emotion of it, which isn’t always the best.

     That probably applies to me sometimes, too. Well, I don't know if my thinking is unconventional or not - it may be in some areas, at least - but certainly I am usually more interested in the logic of things than the unpredictable emotional aspects others may read into them, which I often don't understand anyway. (If you haven't already got the impression, it is probable that I have some form of Asperger's syndrome.)

But that is why they have created emoticons, so I should use them a little more.

     I don't like them, and never use them. I tend to agree with the opinion of some that, if an emoticon is needed to convey that something is not meant seriously or literally, then there is something wrong with the way it is worded, and work is needed to improve that.
     Some guides to "netiquette" I have read say that you can never use an emoticon to remove the offensiveness of something that is, by its wording, offensive to some, and I tend to agree with that, too.
     Also, I just think they look childish and undignified, somehow - peppering one's words with little cartoonish pictures (or punctuation marks, formerly, that suggested cartoonish pictures).
     But that's me; I seem to be in a minority now. I have a friend who lives in France, so, for 25 years or so, our main method of communication has been by e-mail. When he first adopted e-mail (which was a bit later than me - unusual with anything technological for me to get in before someone else), he and I both agreed how absolutely appalling and tacky smileys were (I don't think the word "emoticon" existed then), and he certainly concurred with me that he would never use them, no matter what. But, by some strange transformation in him, he is now one of the most intensive users of them that I know; but I have not softened my own view about them in the slightest.

     (By the way, someone once noticed that, when I quote words from someone else, any smileys get transformed to a word like "smile" or "frown", or something, and they asked whether I edited it to that because I don't like smileys.
     (No, I don't do that - I feel that would be patronizing, somehow. It just seems that the software I use automatically does that, by some means I don't really know. And indeed, it must be at least two different sets of software that do it, because it happens whether I am posting from a Windows or Macintosh computer. I tend to use text-based editors for constructing posts, and when I post directly in the edit box on this forum, I have it in plain-text mode - so I think perhaps text-based software tends to do this.
     (I eschew non-text-based software (or settings) when only text is required because, over the years, I have just seen this cause problems with incompatibility between sender and receiver, unorthodox characters changed into gibberish characters, and such things, and I like to keep things simple and readable. It's amazing to me that, even today, many such things are still hopelessly non-standard, so that every different piece of software reads things differently (or not at all), and shows something different. Even accented characters for other languages can do this sometimes.)

Regards, Michael.

[Irene Malory Towers]

Catching up on all threads and I hope I am not offending anyone here as the discussions got quite heated here, but I found the discussions about the similarities between Killimooin and Mountain fascinating and I am so impressed with all the detail and analysis. I had also found them to be strikingly similar and noticed some of the points that Liam made. Another similarity is that in both stories they come perilously close to death and that is unusual in EB Books. I think only the in Island of Adventure when Jo Jo traps them at the end is that the case. I wonder whether there was a lot of subconscious inspiration from Mountain to Killimooin going on in EB's head. Another unusual point of similarity is the role played by the adults Ranni and PIlesco and again only mirrored in the Adventure books as the adults are mainly superfluous in her other stories. Also the feel of both books is very similar. They are not actually my favourite ones, just too far fetched for me, but they are both very exciting reads. Even now I find both stories a bit scary and don't like to read them late at night in case I get nightmares. Best to stick to the antics of Claudine and Darrell for late bed time reading.

[Anita Bensoussane]

I like it when a forumite has something to add to an old thread, Irene. Readathons are great as they give people the chance to delve deeply and discuss a book (or books) from all angles, and I particularly enjoyed this Readathon as I love the Secret series and it doesn't get as much attention as most of the other adventure/mystery series.

[Irene Malory Towers]

I recently did my own readathon of the secret series apart from old Moon Castle. Like many of her last books in the series (and I see there is another thread on that which I might comment on) I find it so much worse than the previous books and I want to end on a high. Yes the series is not as popular as the others and I am not quite sure why as they are very good stories. Again I think there is another thread here on that, I think it is because the children are not as well developed or as individual as in other series. Still a good read but my favourites are the Island and Spiggy Holes. When the adventures depart too much from reality I don't like them as much which is partly why I don't like the Mountain of Adventure that much.

[Bertie]

Still a good read but my favourites are the Island and Spiggy Holes. When the adventures depart too much from reality I don't like them as much which is partly why I don't like the Mountain of Adventure that much.

I agree with much of that, Irene.
Except, and for the bolded reason you give, I don't really like Secret Mountain or Secret of Killimooin as well as the Mountain (and River) of Adventure.
Unlike most series, I actually much prefer the last book - Moon Castle - to its two predecessors. Although, like you, my favourite two are Secret Island and Spiggy Holes. It pretty much becomes a different series after those two, especially for the two books under discussion here, set in completely different places - the kind I'm least fond of reading about in Enid's adventure stories - and with adults in charge. Moon Castle at least brings it back to feeling more like Spiggy Holes, with the children dominant and doing the investigating and solving.

[Hannah]

Another similarity is that in both stories they come perilously close to death and that is unusual in EB Books. I think only the in Island of Adventure when Jo Jo traps them at the end is that the case.

I think they're in quite serious danger in "Five on Kirrin again" too.
But of course you're right - it's rare that there is such kind of danger.

[Irene Malory Towers]

I must reread Five in Kirrin again as I don't recall such danger in any of the Five ones except with the awful Red Towers. Or is that when Uncle Quentin builds the tower and they threaten to blow up Kirrin Island, in which case yes that is the most scary of the Famous Five. Re Bertie's point about the Secret of Moon Castle being his favourite, I must reread it. I remember not liking it that much and so I constantly avoid it and lambast it, but perhaps as an adult I will actually quite like that. Tastes can change from being a child (so so many years ago for me ! ) and being an adult. I seem to remember that one of the reasons I didn't like it is that Mike and Jack play out most of the adventure leaving the girls cold. But that could said of Killimooin and even to a lesser extent to the Ring O Bells mystery where Diana misses out on the final exciting chapter. And there are possibly others that fall into this category.

[Bertie]

...Re Bertie's point about the Secret of Moon Castle being his favourite, I must reread it. I remember not liking it that much and so I constantly avoid it and lambast it, but perhaps as an adult I will actually quite like that. Tastes can change from being a child (so so many years ago for me ! ) and being an adult....

It's not my favourite of the series - I definitely prefer the first two books. But I do prefer it to Secret Mountain and Secret of Killimooin, and I think it's a good book compared to most of the other last books in each series. Although I guess that's helped by it being written in the early 50's, rather than the 60's like some of the other 'final' books.

[Hannah]

Or is that when Uncle Quentin builds the tower and they threaten to blow up Kirrin Island, in which case yes that is the most scary of the Famous Five.

Yes, that't the book. Quentin and some of the children are left under ground and the mechanism of the stone is destroyed so they can't get out on their own as it now can only be opened from the outside. So I guess the villains wouldn't have minded if all of them had died when the island was blown up.

Edit: I don't like the Secret Mountain at all but I like Killimooin and Moon Castle isn't too bad either.

[Debbie]

I'm not too keen on Secret Mountain. It feels a bit contrived. I think it reminds me of Missie Lee by Arthur Ransome which made a lot more sense to me when I was told that the children made up the adventure during a wet holiday (although I love Peter Duck, which also is made up). So I think whereas the others feel possible, it just feels that step too far to believe it happened.
Island is my favourite of the set, but it is the only one that isn't really an adventure story, so has quite a different feel.

The only series where I do really get the feeling that they are seriously in danger is the Adventure series. All the other books feel as though the crooks are too gentlemanly to do more than tie them up/lock them in the room, and perhaps give one of the boys a box on the ear.

Island: Jojo does actually explode the passage and they are close to drowning.
Castle: Scar is a serious spy and you do feel that he'd kill them as well as being trapped in the underground room.
Valley: Not as much danger although I think the baddies would have happily killed their prisoner, plus they would have left them trapped in the valley.
Sea: The line from Bill "don't worry they won't hurt kids" is chilling. Underneath it means they will hurt him, and, as an adult, it sounds desperate rather than as though he believes it, although as a child I accepted what Bill said.
Mountain: The wings-if it hadn't been for Bill taking the place of the pilot then Philip would have been killed.
Ship: Perhaps less danger there again. Not my favourite one other than the ship in the bottle though.
Circus: They would have killed the King once he'd signed the papers, and if they'd caught the children with the Prince after escaping I wouldn't have reckoned the chances of the boys at any rate-nor the circus people who'd helped them.
River: At the start Bill makes it clear that Raya Uma is dangerous.

[Irene Malory Towers]

Yes the Adventure series are the scariest of all and in the others there are only hints of extreme danger. Was there something in the Ring O Bells mystery at the end when the "baddies" talk about taking them out and there could well have been casualties there. But that was more that they were in the way one feels rather than intentional. But then again they did want to kill Rawlings the detective so who knows.

[Debbie]

(sorry a bit off topic)
Yes, there are times when in EB books the children are at risk of fall out, but generally the main children aren't hurt deliberately. It's more along the lines of the baddies taking others out and they'll be "very sorry" if the children get in their way, but they won't go out of their way to hurt them.
I think Philip gets a few clips on the ear, and Fatty gets some bruises from Goon (although they're often presented as well-deserved) and also in Secret room from the baddies, but in real terms the baddies in both case would probably have bumped them straight off as a danger. In EB world they get locked in.

I think though that's a common theme in children's literature that if the main children are in serious danger of being hurt, that's when they spot a secret passage on the piece of wall that they've walked past 1000s of times before and never noticed, or it's the side children, that the reader has less emotional attachment for, who are hurt.