Book Listing

[Rob Houghton]

sorry - 'vanished' prince, of course!!

[Daisy]

I am not quite sure what Philip Mannering means when he says "I am not impressed, since, as they are mystery stories, the author should give everything to the reader first....." Surely the point of the mysteries is that not everything is known at the beginning? We, the readers, are the audience living with the characters as they try to solve an unfolding puzzle. A detective is not very often handed all the vital information at the start of an investigation! In the Pantomime Cat, the Find-Outers gradually piece together a picture of what happened. As Fatty says in one of the books - it's like having a jigsaw with one of the pieces missing - and without that piece you can't make sense of the whole picture. I don't think I would enjoy a story if I could immediately guess who the culprit is. The magic of Blyton is that even though we've read the stories many times we can still gain much pleasure from reading them yet again and, let's face it, after the first reading we do know Who-dun-it!

[Rob Houghton]

I tend to agree.

And I must say I still think that in 'Invisible Thief' Enid makes the thief very obvious from the begining purely because the baker is immediately unfriendly towards the children. This doesnt happen with Alec Grant in Pantomime cat, who appears just as friendly towards them as the other suspects. This is different to most of the other books in the series: Mrs Moon is nasty to the children, Mrs Fangio is nasty, Tupping is nasty. I'm afraid I still have to agree with David Cook, who, in Journal 36 calls 'Pantomime Cat':

'The best whodunnit that Enid ever wrote. The whole story has a natural flow and the case is solved purely by observation and deduction. The case draws the reader in more with stronger characters that we can relate to for better or for worse, without making the culprit as obvious as other entries in the series...'

I guess, as people have observed before, it's all down to a matter of taste.

Agatha Christie seldom gives the reader everything they need to solve the mystery: at least, I've never noticed that she does when I've read her books! - perhaps I'm just stupid!! Sometimes she comes up with a piece of evidence right at the last minute, rather as Enid does, and it is only through fitting in this last piece of evidence that the mystery is solved.

The 'Vanished Prince' is a much better example of Enid 'telling' the Find Outers how the crime was committed. They actually hardly find anything out for themselves in this book, being told almost everything that happened by the gyspy boy who was involved! Now that book IS a real 'cop out' I feel!

Either way, The Find Outer books are some of the best books Enid wrote, and are very enjoyable: even Banshee Towers is more enjoyable than some!

[Philip Mannering]

I tend to agree.

And I must say I still think that in 'Invisible Thief' Enid makes the thief very obvious from the begining purely because the baker is immediately unfriendly towards the children. This doesnt happen with Alec Grant in Pantomime cat, who appears just as friendly towards them as the other suspects. This is different to most of the other books in the series: Mrs Moon is nasty to the children, Mrs Fangio is nasty, Tupping is nasty. I'm afraid I still have to agree with David Cook, who, in Journal 36 calls 'Pantomime Cat':

'The best whodunnit that Enid ever wrote. The whole story has a natural flow and the case is solved purely by observation and deduction. The case draws the reader in more with stronger characters that we can relate to for better or for worse, without making the culprit as obvious as other entries in the series...'

I guess, as people have observed before, it's all down to a matter of taste.

Either way, The Find Outer books are some of the best books Enid wrote, and are very enjoyable: even Banshee Towers is more enjoyable than some!

You make some valid points, Robert. I admit the baker's unfriendliness does make it obvious - but I just wrote him down as a thoroughly irritating character, not important to the plot at all. I was surprised when it turned out as an opposite!

As you said, it's a matter of taste. Pantomime Cat isn't so bad (I gave it 8/10!), and the culprit is not obvious at all, I agree. But I found the whole Boysie framing thing painfully obvious, and that was the thing that weakened the book for me. Otherwise, it was a good read.

Banshee Towers is more enjoyable than some? Well, which book is worse than that? Five are Together Again? Or some of the Secret Sevens? I'm intrigued; I thought Banshee Towers was a poor and silly story, right there with the worst of Blyton. The last Seven, the last Five, the last Find-Outer...these were the worst.

I am not quite sure what Philip Mannering means when he says "I am not impressed, since, as they are mystery stories, the author should give everything to the reader first....." Surely the point of the mysteries is that not everything is known at the beginning? We, the readers, are the audience living with the characters as they try to solve an unfolding puzzle. A detective is not very often handed all the vital information at the start of an investigation! In the Pantomime Cat, the Find-Outers gradually piece together a picture of what happened. As Fatty says in one of the books - it's like having a jigsaw with one of the pieces missing - and without that piece you can't make sense of the whole picture. I don't think I would enjoy a story if I could immediately guess who the culprit is. The magic of Blyton is that even though we've read the stories many times we can still gain much pleasure from reading them yet again and, let's face it, after the first reading we do know Who-dun-it!

Sorry Daisy, I'm afraid I didn't make myself clear. I'm not saying I would enjoy it if I would figure out the culprit a few pages on the book...no, I would not. Well, I suppose my comment doesn't make sense....

I agree with you that even if we read the books again, the magic of them is still there. Obviously different to some other books...where, after reading once you don't want to read it again.

[Rob Houghton]

Banshee Towers is more enjoyable than some? Well, which book is worse than that? Five are Together Again? Or some of the Secret Sevens? I'm intrigued; I thought Banshee Towers was a poor and silly story, right there with the worst of Blyton. The last Seven, the last Five, the last Find-Outer...these were the worst.

I would rather have Banshee Towers than the last Secret seven or the last Famous Five, and I think it's better than 'The Mystery that Never Was' and 'The Hidey Hole' and just as good as 'The Adventure of the Strange Ruby'.

Banshee Towers is very low down for a Find Outer book: a sort of pale imitation of the others in the series, but I still quite like it. I like the idea of the forged paintings etc, and the clue left out of one of them (though its a bit unlikely!) but I hate the 'comedy' parts, which just arent funny, only tired. I guess I'm just a massive F.F.O fan!

[Moonraker]

Banshee Towers is very low down for a Find Outer book: a sort of pale imitation of the others in the series, but I still quite like it. I like the idea of the forged paintings etc, and the clue left out of one of them (though its a bit unlikely!) but I hate the 'comedy' parts, which just arent funny, only tired. I guess I'm just a massive F.F.O fan!

You and me both, Rob! I rather like Banshee Towers, although freely admit it is by far the weakest of the series. Somehow, it just didn't have the feel of a Find-Outers' book.

[Lucky Star]

I rather like Banshee Towers, although freely admit it is by far the weakest of the series. Somehow, it just didn't have the feel of a Find-Outers' book.

I too think it has a few saving graces. The problem for many people
is the sense of disappointment that it is so terribly different in atmosphere and ambience from the rest of the series. The last Secret Seven is much worse than Banshee Towers and the last Famous Five is just as unexciting so it is by no means Blyton's worst book.

[RainbowJude]

The Mystery of the 'Disappearing Cat suffers from the very same weakness, but in this we are certainly supposed to suspect Luke, even though it is obvious he is being framed and that there is really only one other suspect!!

About The Mystery of the Disappearing Cat, I felt this book was strong in terms of mystery and plot, but maybe that's just me, since a number of people have said that it's the weakest. Yes, we had to suspect Luke, but then, what other choice were we to have? Much as I hated Tupping, I couldn't find a way that he had committed the crime, much to my disappointment. I was fooled there, and I admired the whole plot. A good book, in my opinion.

I think, Philip, that this is exactly the thing that sustains the tension in The Mystery of the Disappearing Cat. Like the Find Outers, we all want to believe that the villain is Tupping and I think we all realise that he is the culprit. The mystery is not so much about who committed the crime, but about how the crime was committed. I agree with you on the fact that this is a strength of the book rather than a weakness. The other thing that I found most compelling about the book was the characterisation, particularly in the supporting characters (Tupping, Luke and Miss Trimble in particular).

Having read this almost directly after finishing the first book in the series, I can also quite safely say that I found The Mystery of the Disappearing Cat a more satisfying read than The Mystery of the Burnt Cottage. I suspected pretty early on in that book - as early on as when they found the footprint - who the villain was, so the book's entertainment for me largely rested upon the characterisation of the suspects (which I enjoyed) and on how the Find-Outers would prove the culprit's guilt. While I feel it was a clever idea to let Fatty make the link regarding the Tempests, I felt that everything depending on that slip of the tongue was a bit contrived, largely because they hadn't even had a passing mention in the chapter describing the night of the fire, which is all that would have been needed to make the situation totally believable in the final analysis.

Later days
David

[RainbowJude]

I really don't think much of Secret Room...

I too don't think much of Secret Room and Hidden House, both more adventure stories.... I think I prefer the "true mystery" books of this series to the adventurous ones.

I kind of get what you mean about The Mystery of the Secret Room being a bit more of an adventure story that other books in the series, although I don't feel it's predominantly an adventure book. I think it doesn't stray too far from being a straightforward mystery until Chapter 16 ("A Bad Time for Fatty") when Fatty's part of the story takes on elements of an adventure while the other Find-Outers still have to use their detective skills to solve the problem of Fatty's disappearance and avoid getting caught out by the criminals' trick in the process. The ending, with Inspector Jenks and his men capturing the criminals, takes on the tone of an adventure, but - as I see it - this is only because the mystery has been solved and it is the only way to wrap things up. We do miss, to an extent, the traditional unveiling of the villain by the children, as we saw in the first two novels, but I think that such an episode wouldn't really have a place in this story.

Still it's interesting that I also didn't enjoy this title as much as the first two in the series, albeit for different reasons:

(a) I felt it took too long to get into the mystery proper. The bit in the beginning, where Fatty teaches the others the skills he has learned during the term is lots of fun and certainly important in terms of developing the characters for the series as a whole, but I found that I started getting impatient whilst waiting the Find-Outers to find a case and start investigating it.

(b) I thought the characters from the community that the children encountered weren't as sharply drawn or as interesting as in the first two books. Miss Crump(et) was enjoyable, but was really just a variation on Miss Trimble; the real estate staff were barely sketched out for us; and Sims was lots of fun, but barely more than a cameo. There wasn't anyone as interesting as the staff of the various houses in The Mystery of the Burnt Cottage or as fleshed out as Luke in The Mystery of the Disappearing Cat.

I was glad to find that I'm not alone in thinking that The Mystery of the Secret Room might not be one of the best in the series. How do others feel about it?

Later days
David

[Anita Bensoussane]

Secret Room isn't one of my favourite titles either, and I think the lack of colourful minor characters may well have something to do with that. The sketches of Peterswood and its inhabitants/visitors that Enid paints throughout the series add so much life to the stories.

Anita

[Rob Houghton]

The great 'wadge' of 'lessons' in the first half of the book doesnt help it, either, with the things Fatty teaches being coincidentally needed by the children in the second half of the book.

The minor characters are also very much lacking, as has been said above, and the village of Peterswood features less than the first two books.

[70s-child]

The great 'wadge' of 'lessons' in the first half of the book doesnt help it, either, with the things Fatty teaches being coincidentally needed by the children in the second half of the book.

Actually I have a soft spot for this book primarily because of all the lessons at the beginning . As children, my friends and I had a lot of fun writing 'secret' letters with orange juice (we also nearly burnt ourselves on the old-fashioned hot iron we had at home); and trying to get out of locked doors. Until I read this book I had no idea either could be done! In addition, I love the wintry feel of this book.

I think the weakest FFO is actually the next one in the series - spiteful letters. If anyone else has figured out the motive, please enlighten me. Maybe I am a real ding-dong, but I can't see one at all! It's a terrible anti-climax since she builds up the story very well. It leaves me with a 'huh!??' feeling.

[RainbowJude]

I WANT to really like Spiteful Letters, but the villain is again very obvious.

I agree with you about Spiteful Letters, the culprit is obvious there, but otherwise, that book is a mysterious and good read.

I think the weakest FFO is actually the next one in the series - Spiteful Letters. If anyone else has figured out the motive, please enlighten me. Maybe I am a real ding-dong, but I can't see one at all! It's a terrible anti-climax since she builds up the story very well.

I think that, along some with other things, the fact that the villain is pretty obvious is indeed a flaw in the book. What might have made me forgive that is if the motive for the crime had been interesting. In this way, the book might have been similar to The Mystery of the Disappearing Cat where the culprit is also obvious, but the actual mystery was more about proving how he committed the crime and why he did it. As mentioned above, motive in The Mystery of the Spiteful Letters is conspicuously absent and does leave the reader with an anti-climatic sense regarding the story. One thing I've considered as a counter-argument to this stance is that Blyton might have wanted to put across the moral perspective that spite in itself is terrible enough, but I wish, if this was indeed the case, that the culprit had revealed her spiteful nature more overtly in a final breakdown before the Goon and his cronies clapped her in handcuffs and carted her off to the clink.

Later days
David

[70s-child]

One thing I've considered as a counter-argument to this stance is that Blyton might have wanted to put across the moral perspective that spite in itself is terrible enough

One thing that your post has got me wondering about is if spite is enough for criminal prosecution. Indeed is writing anonymous letters a criminal act? It is certainly unethical in the case of this book, but there were no serious consequences (no one died), so why is the letter writer arrested? She could be fired, given a warning, or something else, but surely an arrest and being put in prison is excessive.

In addition, in several circumstances writing anonymous letters or wanting to remain anonymous is common-sense. Consider the case of whistle-blowers for instance, or students evaluating their teachers, or clients wanting to leave complaints about their doctor/other service providers. And in the latter two cases (complaining about teachers and service-providers), the anonymous letter/note can be very harsh, but in both cases remaining anonymous is typically encouraged. Certainly none of it is a criminal act. In fact in most cases, if a person wishes to remain anonymous, blowing their cover is illegal.

As far as spite alone is concerned, there is any amount of spite in this world. But none of it results in criminal prosecution, unless it has some kind of serious consequence - like someone gets hurt physically in the process.

But then again, I don't know the laws in Britain. Maybe writing any kind of anonymous letter is considered criminal there (??).

[RainbowJude]

One thing that your post has got me wondering about is if spite is enough for criminal prosecution. Indeed is writing anonymous letters a criminal act?

A little Internet research reveals that if the letter is threatening, then legal action can be taken against the perpetrator should his/her identity be discovered. If the threats have been ongoing, the matter may be taken even more seriously.

In addition, in several circumstances writing anonymous letters or wanting to remain anonymous is common-sense. Consider the case of whistle-blowers for instance, or students evaluating their teachers, or clients wanting to leave complaints about their doctor/other service providers.

There is a vast difference between an elicited feedback form that allows the participant to remain anonymous and an anonymous letter like those we've seen in The Mystery of the Spiteful Letters. Furthermore, in cases where there is no system of a formal review in place, in the case of a particular incident or in regard to a particular teacher or doctor, for example, there are systems in place that allow one to make a formal complaint that will be followed up by the relevant authorities.

Whistle-blowers and tips on crime-lines occur in a completely different context and are in no way comparable.

Later days
David