Journal 56

[Rob Houghton]

Thank you for your comments on my article, Anita - always appreciated. I'm glad people have enjoyed it and found things they can agree with and relate to.

I was very interested to read the Letter from Enid Blyton in this issue - quite telling, as it seems to give definite evidence that Enid did NOT like publishers to make decisions on her behalf, by way of alterations etc, or publishers to use her name to make money at the expense of her integrity and reputation. Sounds like she had quite a low opinion of M&S, at least feeling they had to be 'watched' in case they did anything underhand. Hmmm! I wonder what she would have made of today's goings on, where publishers plaster her name on books even when the content is written by others? It was very good to get a glimpse of Enid's hard-nosed business woman attitude.

[John Pickup]

I've just read John Henstock's article on Enid in Swallowdale and elsewhere. I haven't read this book but it did remind of another series set in the Lake District, the Bannerdale books by Geoffrey Trease. These didn't have much mystery or adventure either.
Buster's letter also reminded me of Bobs, a very similar style. I shall start Anita's article later this evening.

[Francis]

Thanks to all the contributors and to Tony for editing and designing another special issue. What I like is how varied and complimentary the articles are - a fascinating miscellany. The letter from Enid to W E Johns shows just how businesslike she was.

[Francis]

Anita wrote

It seems that Enid and Kenneth were considering a holiday in France, or at least were being encouraged to go there by W. E. Johns, but we know that they never did go to France together.

I am not sure that Enid would have suggested going to France but I suspect that it was more a case of Johns suggesting it. He was immensely fond of France and the French which dated back to the time of his flying exploits in the First World War. He spent many happy holidays in that country.

[Julie2owlsdene]

Almost finished the Journal now. Fabulous as usual, thanks Tony.

Lovely to see a letter from Buster, and reading Anita's Secret Series, I'm just pondering whether to give these a re-read or not.

Good work all contributors. Makes excellent reading.

[Poppy]

Well, the Journal has been an excellent read. Highlights for me have been Anita's evocative reflections on The Secret of Spiggy-Holes, which makes lovely reading. John Pickup's article was very thought-provoking and entertaining: like others, I look forward to Part 2. John Lester's article comparing Dinah and Diana was fascinating, and I thoroughly enjoyed realizing the similarities between these two fantastic characters. And finally it was great to read Courtenay's article describing the Lecture. Nevertheless, I really did enjoy every single article. Thanks so much, once again to Tony and all the contributors. Another excellent Journal!

[Moonraker]

So far so good! But then, it always is, isn't it? I will post some comments when I have completed it. Really busy at the moment, so it might be a while!

[Anita Bensoussane]

It seems that Enid and Kenneth were considering a holiday in France, or at least were being encouraged to go there by W. E. Johns, but we know that they never did go to France together.

I am not sure that Enid would have suggested going to France but I suspect that it was more a case of Johns suggesting it. He was immensely fond of France and the French which dated back to the time of his flying exploits in the First World War. He spent many happy holidays in that country.

That's interesting. Thanks for the information, Francis.

Many thanks for people's comments on my Spiggy Holes article. The Secret series is well worth a re-read, Julie. I'm thoroughly enjoying working my way through it and I'm particularly looking forward to getting to The Secret of Killimooin, which I haven't read for many years despite the fact that it was one of my favourites as a child.

I've now finished reading the Journal and, as ever, I'm sorry to have got to the end! John Pickup's account of how he began collecting children's books was interesting. He must be thanking his lucky stars that he stumbled across that book fair in Buxton - otherwise he might never have sought out this website and got to know all us lot! I liked Freda Knight's article too, and her revelation that a number of second-hand bookshops have further goodies "in the back" if you can pluck up the courage to enquire!

I always enjoy John Henstock's forays into books by other authors, and how he brings his observations back to Enid Blyton. Reading his article reminded me how much my daughter (and I!) liked the Home Farm Twins TV series when she was little.

What delightful words and phrases Enid Blyton uses to describe the April day in her 'From My Window' article - "capricious", with "kaleidoscopic, ever-changing patterns made by the moving crowds and traffic in the streets", and umbrellas that "sprang up like mushrooms". She's clearly in a playful mood, ready to rejoice in whatever the day brings and keen to share its wonders with her readers.

Eileen Soper's drawing of Little Dolly Dawdle is charming and the Famous Five Bestime jigsaws make for an attractive centre spread. As for the back cover, it's a veritable carpet of colour - it's lovely to see the first 12 A.K. Johnston & G.W. Bacon 'Little Books' all set out like that.

I was pleased to see the letters from John Henstock and Julia Day as it's fascinating to read people's thoughts on the Journal and not everyone wants to post on a public forum.

Last but not least, a big thank you to Courtenay for her review of Professor David Rudd's lecture at the Canterbury Beaney. A very thorough account of what was said, and it's always heartening to hear of Enid Blyton's work being taken seriously as it deserves to be.

[Rob Houghton]

I found John Henstock's article 'Enid in Swallowdale - and Elsewhere' very interesting and entertaining, especially since I have sadly never read any of the non-Blyton books he mentioned, except The Secret Garden. I found a couple of things quite interesting, though - not exactly to do with what John wrote, but ideas stemming from his article. John mentions the books by Jenny Oldfield and Holly Webb - both are the types of books I would avoid with several barge poles rather than one. Even as a child I never much liked stories about animals, at least, after the age of about 6 (and even now, despite reading several good things about 'The Children at Green Meadows' I haven't actually read it!) and so the Home Farm Twins series and 'Jess the lonely puppy' type scenarios are books I'm not likely to try.

It struck me, reading the article and remembering the endless series of books similar to these that my niece had while growing up, that these modern books pretty much repeat the same plot ideas time after time - at least as far as rescuing a sick or homeless animal is concerned. They are very popular, and yet aren't they doing just what Enid was accused of doing? Repeating plot-lines, giving children something they are familiar with? Keeping children in their 'comfort zone'? It's interesting that these Home Farm type books haven't been banned in libraries and schools...or maybe they have!

It also seems, as John Henstock points out, that most of these series are aimed just at girls...amazing the authors haven't been branded as sexist as Enid often is, despite Enid writing for both boys and girls. Does sexism only exist in books written before 1970?

A very thought provoking article!

[Courtenay]

It struck me, reading the article and remembering the endless series of books similar to these that my niece had while growing up, that these modern books pretty much repeat the same plot ideas time after time - at least as far as rescuing a sick or homeless animal is concerned. They are very popular, and yet aren't they doing just what Enid was accused of doing? Repeating plot-lines, giving children something they are familiar with? Keeping children in their 'comfort zone'?

Yes!! I always avoided those kinds of books like the plague myself when I was little. The main ones while I was in primary school were the interminable Babysitters Club series (ugh) and its spin-off Babysitters' Little Sister (for slightly more juvenile readers), or Goosebumps (aimed more at boys), or Sweet Valley High (double ugh) for teenage girls. I rarely even touched them, but whenever I did occasionally look at one, the quality of writing was extremely poor. But they sold like the proverbial hot cakes and were certainly never banned from our school library... mercifully, neither was Enid Blyton!

It also seems, as John Henstock points out, that most of these series are aimed just at girls...amazing the authors haven't been branded as sexist as Enid often is, despite Enid writing for both boys and girls. Does sexism only exist in books written before 1970?

Obviously.

[Anita Bensoussane]

I only ever saw the Home Farm Twins TV series so I don't know how closely it followed the books, but the stories were actually quite varied with the two girls getting into scrapes, helping people, doing things with their family, etc. They involved animals of different kinds but they weren't too repetitive as far as I remember.

I do recall my daughter at one point being hooked on the "Animal Ark" books though, by "Lucy Daniels" (in reality a syndicate). They had titles like Puppies in the Pantry, Fawn in the Forest, Pony in the Porch and Owl in the Office. I used to joke that she ought to read Mongoose in the Mincer and Pigeons in a Pie! I was glad when she moved on to other authors. At least if children are hooked on Enid Blyton, they're encountering a variety of genres written for a wide age-range!

[Rob Houghton]

Mongoose in the Mincer! I like it! Those were the books my sisters two girls were hooked on also, in the 90's/early 2000's, and I thought at the time how repetitive they must be (though I never read one!)

[Chrissie777]

Our mail lady just delivered Journal 56. I'm so excited !!!

[Chrissie777]

Not about puffins, is it?

Probably not.
In case you are interested, Nigel, the puffin cam on Burhou is still not turned on.

[John Pickup]

He'll be devastated, Chrissie.