Important Auction Sale 15th September

[Katharine]

I can understand some of the private papers not being kept. Although of great interest to her many fans, I suspect in the wrong hands they might have been used against her. Personally, I don't think I'd want the whole world to know what I'd written in my diaries (assuming people didn't die of boredom reading them!)

I do think it a dreadful shame if anything relating to her actual work has been lost, ie workbooks, manuscripts etc.

I suppose as far as clothes goes it's difficult to know what to keep. We have a wardrobe full of my grandmother's clothes, in excellent condition, but dating from the 1980s. Do we hang on to them for another couple of decades in the hope they will become vintage and therefore collectable? I know she wasn't famous, so it's slightly different. Regarding Enid's sandals, maybe they wore out and so were thrown away?

I wonder if Emma Wedgwood ever knew about the list drawn up by Charles Darwin? I don't think I'd be too impressed if I discovered my husband had married me just because it made sense on paper! Maybe he's got it hidden away on a memory stick somewhere?

[Viv of Ginger Pop]

One item which sticks in my mind is a list he'd drawn up when considering whether to get married (to his first cousin, Emma Wedgwood). He had listed "fors" and "againsts", and as the first list was longer he went ahead and proposed - and was accepted!

I didn't know that. Did the list include "Genetically it is a bad idea to marry a cousin!"

Viv

[Anita Bensoussane]

One item which sticks in my mind is a list he'd drawn up when considering whether to get married (to his first cousin, Emma Wedgwood). He had listed "fors" and "againsts", and as the first list was longer he went ahead and proposed - and was accepted!

Did the list include "Genetically it is a bad idea to marry a cousin!"

That thought occurred to me too (and no, it wasn't on the list!) Though I think it was quite common in days gone by for people in royal, aristocratic or rich families - and people in tribal societies as well - to marry cousins. Is it the work of scientists like Charles Darwin that has made people more wary of marrying cousins, I wonder? Ironic, if so!

By the way, Darwin's "against" list included the observation that, if he got married, he'd have less money to spend on books and less time to read them!

[Ming]

By the way, Darwin's "against" list included the observation that , if he got married, he'd have less money to spend on books and less time to read them!

Brilliant.

[Katharine]

By the way, Darwin's "against" list included the observation that , if he got married, he'd have less money to spend on books and less time to read them!

I can understand the less money aspect as he'd have 2 people to keep, but surely if he had a woman to do everything around the house for him, he'd have even more time for reading/

Can lack of access to books be used as grounds for divorce I wonder?

[Anita Bensoussane]

Darwin's "against" list included the observation that , if he got married, he'd have less money to spend on books and less time to read them!

I can understand the less money aspect as he'd have 2 people to keep, but surely if he had a woman to do everything around the house for him, he'd have even more time for reading.

Charles Darwin came from a monied family and, whether married or not, he'd have had staff to do all the domestic chores.

[Viv of Ginger Pop]

By the way, Darwin's "against" list included the observation that, if he got married, he'd have less money to spend on books and less time to read them!

Hmmm... how about that he'd have got his own book written faster!

Viv

[Tony Summerfield]

Here we go!! The blurb below comes from Abebooks.co.uk and is for The Secret of Cliff Castle, being sold by Lasting Words of Northampton - the asking price is £250:-

"Book Description: Werner Laurie, UK, 1951. Cloth. Book Condition: Very Good ++. Dust Jacket Condition: Very Good+. G Brook (illustrator). New Edition. 12mo - over 6¾" - 7¾" tall. 1st Edition Thus 1951. A new edition with new artwork. Originally published under Blyton's married name of Pollock. Bookplate inscribed G Pollock. According to the auctioneers it is assumed that this was probably a gift from Enid Blyton to her daughter. This book is from the Estate of Gillian Baverstock ( 1931-2007) the eldest daughter of Enid Blyton. This archive of Enid Blyton books was recently sold in auction in the United Kingdom. The archive combines Gillians Baverstock's childhood and adult collection of works by and about her mother. A total of 82 lots including many original manuscripts, presentation books from the publishers to Enid Blyton, 1st Editions, pictures, a writing table and even Blyton's fur coats were offered. A number of these boxed lots which contained large quantities of Gillian Baverstock's Blyton books and ephemera, were purchased by Lasting Words Limited and now are being offered individually. Many of these books have Gillian Baverstock's name inside or her childhood names of Pollock and Darrell-Waters. As quoted in the auction catalogue, 'names seen in inscriptions include Pollock (Gillian's first family name) and G Pollock can be assumed to be hers as a child, and in all likelihood gifts from her mother.' A special bookplate has been commissioned and will be affixed to each book. This bookplate details the auction date, lot number and the quantity from each lot e.g. Lot 335 - 1 of 46 books. Book is very good++ and bright and clean. Contents very good. The wrapper is very good+ and bright. Edges lightly rubbed and nicked. Minsicule loss to spine top and corner. Small closed tear to spine base. PLEASE DOUBLE CLICK ON THE PICTURE TO ENLARGE. Digital images available upon request. Signed. Bookseller Inventory # 005756"

[Julie2owlsdene]

I can only find one with the highest price of £150! Am I looking in the wrong place? Yet the wording is identical to what Tony has posted.

[tkurbjuhn]

As Katharine said, I assume that Gillian must have had some early stage of dementia herself throwing away these papers. Perhaps it would be a good idea to contact her second daughter early enough.
But I must admit: in former times, I tried to keep many things of my childhood and of my ancestors. Since I run a little junk shop, this has changed a bit. I keep the things which to me have most personal value, many other things I have sold and I don`t have a bad feeling about it. Once the buyers will keep the things and second I see that most things are not very seldom, but I see them again and again.
Interestingly enough, people very often throw away things of value and keep worthless things. They come into my shop with glasses and such stuff and tell me happily they just threw away the thousand photos of SS-guys their father had collected.

[Katharine]

To be fair to Gillian she may not have thought anyone would be interested in the items she threw away. Although I find that a little difficult to understand as I believe she has attended a few Enid Blyton days so surely would have been aware of the interest in ALL things Enid Blyton related. Having said that though, it's difficult to know what is of interest. One persons junk is another persons treasure!

It must be difficult being the child of someone famous. No one would bat an eyelid if I threw the entire contents of my parents house in a skip - well they might, as they are still alive and living there

[bavers]

Hope you don't mind a new member just clearing up a few things from the very interesting posts concerning the auction etc.

I was very interested in the enthusiasm 'the table' generated and am delighted it has gone to be treasured in its new home. The estate/auctioneers certainly made a mistake about the desk which was sold earlier in the year I believe - it did belong to Granny and yes she did use it (not to type manuscripts though, which believe it or not she did mostly with the typewriter balanced on her lap!).

I can't understand how the misteke re the desk came about - one of the draws used to contain scores of signature cards which had been signed ready to send out - I assume these had been removed prior to sale - either that, or someone has a bonus!

Speaking of bonuses - whoever bought lot 333 doesn't probably realise, but the leather bound books in the box (Secret 7) were the author's own copies - another mistake!

The posts about the manuscripts are very interesting. Mum was not suffering from demetia, but she did until the latter years have a 'relaxed' attitude. For years, the only manuscript she possessed was kept in a bathroom cabinet! The ones Tony saw appear to be those previously at Darrell Waters Ltd, removed just prior to the sale of the company to Trocadero. The estate has now sold these, along with some belonging to me which they refused to return. I have got, however, 'Noddy in Toyland' in various versions (including Granny's working script) and also the Famous Five play. If the Society wishes to have a pdf of these, or borrow the originals sometime I would be happy to co-operate.

Thanks to those who expressed kind sentiments about the diary - I couldn't believe the price paid!

If I can help with any questions about the origins/history of items Society members bought I will be happy to do my best.

[Katharine]

Thank you bavers for the info. I hope I didn't cause offence when I queried your mother's motives for not keeping everything. As I'm someone who never throws out anything (much to the annoyance of my family) I sometimes forget that not everyone thinks like me. I'd not thought of a bathroom cabinet as an option for storing anything other than soap/toothpaste etc. I wonder if there's enough room for any of my books?

Sorry to hear there were some items that weren't returned to you, that must be very frustrating.

I for one would certainly be interested in any further info you can share.

[Anita Bensoussane]

Thanks very much for the information, Bavers.

[Wayne Pyer]

Hello and welcome Bavers. Thank you for sharing your memories with us.