Sickness/illness/injury in the Famous Five Books?

[pete9012S]

Just how much sickness/illness is there in the twenty one Famous Five books and also the short stories?
Lets find out book by book in a logical order!

1. Five On A Treasure Island: None that I can think of - can you think of any?

2. Five Go Adventuring Again: Julian's Mother and Julian and Dick:

'Oh, George - we can't go home for the holidays!' said Anne, with tears in her eyes. 'Mummy's got scarlet fever and Daddy is in quarantine for it - so they can't have us back. Isn't it just too bad ?'

..we've got to have a tutor for the holls, partly to look after us so that your mother doesn't have too much bother with us, and partly because both Julian and Dick have been ill with 'flu twice this term, and have got behind in their work.'

3.Five Run Away Together:

[Courtenay]

Isn't Five Go Adventuring Again also the one where Timmy catches a cold and George rubs his chest with camphorated oil?

[Daisy]

Five Run Away Together - Aunt Fanny is taken ill and disappears to hospital with Uncle Quentin in attendance! This leaves the children in the charge of the Sticks.

[Katharine]

In Five Go Off in a Caravan Barker is poisoned - does that count as sickness?

[Lucky Star]

In Five Go Off in a Caravan Barker is poisoned - does that count as sickness?

No. Blooming health. Just joking. It's certainly illness but I think Pete was probably looking more for incidences of Enid's using family illness as a plot device to get the children away from parental supervision so they could have adventures. I can't actually think of any such illness in Five go off in a Caravan. Nor in Smuggler's Top for that matter.

[Daisy]

I'm jumping along the series now, but weren't they off to Wales in "Fix" to get over the 'flu?

[Wolfgang]

Uncle Quentin having heart troubles after learning that his daughter had been kidnapped (plenty of fun)
George having a cold after bathing in the sea in April (wonderful time)

[pete9012S]

Excellent suggestions!

Of course, Tim must be included as he is one of The Famous Five!

ps. I think there is definitely a mention of sickness/illness in Smuggler's Top!

[StephenC]

Illness also featured in the very last FF book, Together Again, as Kirrin Cottage was in quarantine, after Joan the cook, was taken ill with some infectious disease. Which required the Five to go to the Hayling home and catch up again with Tinker.

[Daisy]

Broadening the question out a little... I've been reading lots of books written in the mid twentieth century and it struck me that it seems the norm then for illness to be taken more seriously. Quarantines were common... catch a cold and you had to stay in bed for a few days but being cut off from others did mean the reduction of passing on an infection. I don't think adults were penalized if they stayed away from work when suffering from anything infectious, but gradually the attitude seems to have crept in that you should carry on regardless, unless really collapsed from an illness! I can recall a few stories where children have been in bed and then have to go away to convalesce. As mentioned already, Five get into a Fix is a case in point. It was a useful device for giving the children time for another adventure. I suppose the use of antibiotics made a difference, but I wonder if it is such a good idea to struggle on regardless. Times are very different now, aren't they!

[Katharine]

Interesting comments Daisy.

Personally I've always felt that convalescing/isolating were more for the well off than for working class people. I do know family members who had to be away from school/work for serious illnesses such as measles, scarlet fever and flu but they certainly wouldn't have been sent anywhere to recuperate - they couldn't even afford 'normal' holidays other than a couple of day trips to the local seaside during the summer. I must admit that's something that did strike me as rather odd when reading the books as a child. I couldn't quite understand the concept of families going away to the seaside for a whole month which seems to happen in a quite a few stories.

I suspect that in the past, the working classes had to struggle on regardless of their health problems - before the welfare system, if they didn't work, they didn't eat.

In some cases, the advent of antibiotics and a better understanding of illnesses has helped reduce the amount of time people need in to recover, but I do worry that it's going too far the other way. I know many of many children sent back to school/child care with stomach upsets because the mothers can't afford to take time off to care for them. I also worry about the so called flu cures advertised on TV. In my experience of flu, complete rest for several days is necessary, and if someone really does have flu, firstly can the medication really make that much difference, and if it does, surely it is only masking the illness which isn't fair on all those it gets spread to, and I wonder how much strain it puts on the body to keep on going?

[RDMorrell]

I agree that there is a prevailing attitude in society nowadays that you sort of have to "harden up" and "get on with it" if you get sick - especially if it's only a cold. However, COVID-19 might be changing that. Certainly, in New Zealand, following a sudden community outbreak in Auckland, one of the messages being drummed into us is "If you're sick, STAY HOME and DO NOT GO TO WORK". The advice is that if you have respiratory symptoms, do not go out unless it's to get a coronavirus test. What is more, for the first time, mandatory quarantine has been introduced for people who have tested positive. A hotel in Auckland that was already being used for positive cases caught in our managed isolation facilities (also converted hotels) is now being used to accommodate the city's community cases. Something that perhaps Enid Blyton's characters wouldn't find too strange!

Meanwhile, in Melbourne, one reason why the virus has spread so severely in that city is because people have been getting sick and going to work anyway! And this was the case even when they knew they'd tested positive! Very poor form, but perhaps a reflection of the ingrained mentality of "soldiering on" if you're feeling a bit under the weather.

I'm no stranger to enforced quarantines, actually - my mother kept me home and in bed whenever I got sick as a child - and that happened rather often! She would wear a face mask around me too, which seemed a bit OTT back then, but is kind of funny in view of how big a deal face masks have become today! And she didn't get my colds too often either, so food for thought about the effectiveness of masks, perhaps. Thankfully I've generally enjoyed much better health as an adult. I had a cold at the start of the year, and it was my first respiratory illness since 2005! It lasted two weeks. I didn't stay in bed for this year's bug, but I didn't go out too much either, even though COVID-19 had not yet cast its shadow on the world. My reason for staying around the house was more that I didn't want to aggravate it. I'm self-employed, so that wasn't an issue. But although I got up and dressed every day, I suppose I did effectively self-isolate before that became a thing in subsequent months.

[Katharine]

I think that apart from the Covid-19 situation it's very hard to draw a line between "soldiering on" and staying at home.

When I had the flu I wasn't working and so didn't have the dilemma of how long I should take off work, but if I'd have waited until I felt completely better, I would have needed a month off! However, I doubt I'd have been contagious for that whole time, so the difficulty is, how long would I have been a risk to other people?

In my last job, I started a cold on my very first day, but still went in, as I didn't think it would look good to phone in sick before I'd even started, plus as it was on a self-employed basis, I wouldn't have been paid. Thankfully I wasn't in a position where a day's absence would really matter financially, but I'm sure that many people in a similar situation wouldn't have been able to afford a few day's loss of income.

Some people only get the statutory sick pay (£95.85) per week, which is £25 less than the minimum weekly wage, and they can only claim that from day 4 of their illness, so while I'm not saying it is right to carry on working when they are a risk to other people's health, I can understand why they would do so. How many people can afford to lose 3 days pay, plus another £25 per week?

The other problem with the Covid-19 virus is that I know several people who have been ill this year, some at the start of the outbreak, who didn't get a test because they weren't widely available at the time, so may well have had it, but didn't realise. Or more recently, have received a negative test, but my understanding is that some people receive up to 3 negative tests before their positive one, so again, as these people were only tested the once, could they have actually had the virus?

While not in any way excusing people who test positive and carry on working, I can perhaps understand why they are doing so. Firstly because of the financial reasons I've already mentioned, especially if they feel under pressure from their employers, and secondly, if they just feel a bit under the weather, they might not fully appreciate how much worse someone else might be if they pass the virus on.

[RDMorrell]

While not in any way excusing people who test positive and carry on working, I can perhaps understand why they are doing so. Firstly because of the financial reasons I've already mentioned, especially if they feel under pressure from their employers, and secondly, if they just feel a bit under the weather, they might not fully appreciate how much worse someone else might be if they pass the virus on.

To address your second point (fully agree with the first BTW), this virus is very devious in that way. It can be very mild in some people, and that might make them not take it very seriously. But if they pass it on to say, ten people, two or three of them might get seriously ill. It's a real Russian roulette, much more so than the flu. By and large, the flu makes everyone feel absolutely horrible. So you know to take it seriously, especially when it's at its peak in the first few days. But COVID-19 is fairly harmless to some people and lethal to others. If you get the flu, it's pretty easy to predict what it will do. But if you get this coronavirus, you don't quite know whether it will be Dr Jekyll or Mr Hyde, and even if it's Dr Jekyll for you, it might be Mr Hyde for some of the people you pass it on to. And as we saw with Boris Johnson, sometimes it might start quite benignly and then turn potentially deadly. So it's Jekyll AND Hyde in some people.

So yeah, the sheer unpredictability of COVID-19 turns it into a real Russian roulette illness. Unfortunately, I think the people who take it lightly haven't fully grasped this, though there are probably a few who don't care either.

[pete9012S]

Interesting comments everyone, thank you.



In the next book, Five Run Away Together it is Aunt Fanny who is taken ill.
She tries hard to stoically carry on, to no avail:

In the end it was Aunt Fanny who saw Mrs. Stick and arranged about the sandwiches. Mrs. Stick went up to see Aunt Fanny, who was having breakfast in bed, and agreed to make sandwiches, though with a very bad grace.
"I didn't bargain for three more children to come traipsing along," she said, sulkily.
"I told you they were coming, Mrs. Stick," said Aunt Fanny, patiently.

"I didn't know I should be feeling so ill myself when they came. If I had been well I could have made their sandwiches and done many more things. I can only ask you to help as much as you can till I feel better. I may be all right tomorrow. Let the children have a good time for a week or so, and then, if I still feel ill, I am sure they will all turn to and help a bit. But let them have a good time first."

But sadly, Aunt Fanny is taken ill:

"Now, Edgar, tell us what we want to know, and tell us quickly, or you'll be sorry."
"Well, there isn't much to tell," said Edgar, keeping his eye on Timothy. He shot a look at George and went on. "Your mother was suddenly taken very ill — with a terrible pain here—and they got the doctor and they've taken her away to hospital, and your father went with her. That's all!"
George sat down on the sofa, looking paler still and rather sick.

“DEAR GEORGE,
“Your mother has been taken very ill. I am going with her to the hospital. I shall not leave her till she is getting better. That may be in a few days" time, or in a week's time. I will telephone to you each day at nine o'clock in the morning to tell you how she is. Mrs. Stick will look after you all. Try to manage all right till I come back.
“Your loving.
“FATHER”.
"Oh dear!" said Anne, knowing how dreadful George must feel. George loved her mother dearly, and for once in a way the girl had tears in her eyes. George never cried—but it was terrible to come home and find her mother gone like this. And Father too! No one there but Mrs. Stick and Edgar.
"I can't bear Mother going like this," sobbed George suddenly, and buried her head in a cushion. "She—she might never come back."

This sickness opens the way for the smelly Sticks to temporarily rule the Kirrin roost...