Secret Seven on the Trail.

[Rob Houghton]

My hardback Centenary Edition has the 'gripped by a bright idea' phrase added. The older hardback editions I have (1957) just have 'said Barbara' and no bright idea and no repeat of the word Barbara!

[pete9012S]

I don't suppose we have the original manuscript of this book anywhere?

[Daisy]

It's a bit of a puzzle, isn't it. I can't think that Enid herself made any change so late after it was first written. An original manuscript might just throw a bit of light - if the "bright idea" was there to begin with.

[pete9012S]

Makes me wonder how many other strange little anomalies are lying there still waiting to be discovered.

I only read the book because Michael gave it a decent review, and when I re-read a book I try to keep all my editions close at hand primarily to compare the illustrations!

[Rob Houghton]

Interesting that in between my 1957 copy and Pete's 1961 copy, those extra words appeared, along with the extra 'Barbara'. I wonder if the book text was reset between those two editions and they needed to add a sentence in there to stop a 'widow' from happening (one word that ends up on its own on a new page).

For example...Pete cites the pages 70/71 as being the pages where the text occurs - but in my 1957 edition there's a double-spread illustration on pages 70/71 (see below - image from The Cave) - which for some reason is in two pieces in The Cave!



The text Pete quotes actually takes place at the end of page 73 and start of page 74 in the 1957 edition, so obviously Pete's edition has less illustrations than earlier editions?

[pete9012S]

Good suggestion Rob - by my count there are four internal illustrations missing in my 1957 Brockhampton edition.
Who would have thought it!


Edit:
Sorry, 1961 edition not 1957!

[Rob Houghton]

Good suggestion Rob - by my count there are four internal illustrations missing in my 1957 Brockhampton edition.
Who would have thought it!

I have the 1957 edition...are some also missing from there?

[Daisy]

You'll have to compare it with those in the cave, Rob. My 1952 edition has them all - as you would expect as it's the first edition although second impression. Someone must have decided to save some paper later on in the 50s.

[Rob Houghton]

You'll have to compare it with those in the cave, Rob. My 1952 edition has them all - as you would expect as it's the first edition although second impression. Someone must have decided to save some paper later on in the 50s.

Well if that's the case, I'm wondering why Pete didn't mention his 1957 edition before - which has the same text as the earlier editions.

My 1957 edition has all 27 illustrations, plus the 'frontispiece' illustration opposite the title page - same as the Cave shows.

[pete9012S]

Rob, my post should have read 1961 edition - I apologise for all the confusion!

[Rob Houghton]

Rob, my post should have read 1961 edition - I apologise for all the confusion!

Lol! It doesn't take much to get me confused!

That means that sometime between my 1957 edition and your 1961 edition, some illustrations were removed, and therefore the text must have been reset - which seems to be when the extra text was added.

[pete9012S]

Thanks for your mercy Rob - I don't know whether to curse or thank Michael for all the editorial confusion since he highlighted this book!!!

(ps. Michael, that was a joke, because I know you will ask when you next check in! )

Regards

Pete

[Tony Summerfield]

For example...Pete cites the pages 70/71 as being the pages where the text occurs - but in my 1957 edition there's a double-spread illustration on pages 70/71 (see below - image from The Cave) - which for some reason is in two pieces in The Cave!

[Rob Houghton]

Its still in two pieces for me - which is odd! Its the first time I've ever clicked on a 'two page' image like this and only copied one side of it. Hence my comment. Its never happened before.

Very strange!!

[Daisy]

But they're now side by side in your original post, Rob... I'm a bit puzzled because I saw one below the other earlier on this morning.