Parents beware: the awful Blyton is back

[Deej]

Disgusting. If everybody wants some review about Blyton get a child to do it! I don't really like Roald Dahl that much. His stories are pretty disgusting. If his figures measure up more than Enid Blyton it's only because some people are discouraged from even reading Blyton - like Nicola ! I would like to see how his books will be doing 45 years after his death.

To be fair the writer has her right to an opinion. You are quite happy to openly criticise Nicola's article and Roald Dahl's books as disgusting so let the writer think Blyton is awful.

On the whole the argument is weak because it is only the writers own experience of reading Blyton's books as a child, as a teacher and with her own children. I do find it strange how someone can like a book so much during their childhood to the extent that they will reconstruct scenes and then be so critical of it. As well as this, the comments about children from the local library defacing a Blyton book, sounds like the work of a couple of mindless yobs, hardly something that anyone hoping to be taken seriously would use to form an opinion that Blyton's books must therefore be bland and simple in terms of the language and plots. Another criticism I have is the writers failure to appreciate that the Blyton books were set in a different time period in society when attitudes were different. Surely part of learning the English language and reading and writing is looking at as wider range of texts as possible from both the modern age and past? That would be one criticism I have of English literature in schools these days. Shakespeare texts aren't read in full, nor are Dickens, nor is the Blood Brothers, and so the list goes on.

Having said that, I do appreciate the writers comments on Blyton's portrayal of girls. There are a number examples of gender stereotyping at the very least. In the FF books, Anne is always the one who does the cooking, and she is the one in Five Run Away Together that revels in making the cave cosy like the front room of a house. There is a similar example in Five Go Off In A Caravan. The two boys and George (masculine like, wants to be a boy) are also constantly making reference to how they can row and swim better than Anne. You can see something similar with Janet in Secret Seven when the children use the cave near the quarry as a hideout in Secret Seven Win Through. Secondly, I can understand the writers comments about some of the plots being a little slow-moving before anything happens, and Blyton definitely does play on social class within her characters. Anyhow, these are only a few examples, and not all Blyton's books are like that, and her characterisation is a lot more complex than simply being based on gender or class. The same criticisms can be applied to many other authors as already discussed in this thread.

As for the writers last comments about having a modern author like Blyton, that is a great idea, but I don't see why people should stop reading Enid Blyton's books. Generations of people have adored Blyton and the books she has wrote, and they should be able to continue doing so, and passing it down to their children as well. Anyone who advocates for her books to be banned clearly doesn't understand the meaning of a free democratic society. The PC left-wing liberal bridgade of the Guardian and Independent are certainly not wrong with all their arguments but their goodwill and intention to protect modern children can at times appear misguided and naive, and actually more damaging to a child's reading experience than anything that Blyton ever wrote. They are shown to be in the minority when you consider how popular Blyton's books remain. And this is coming from someone who likes reading these two newspapers more than any other.

[Katharine]

Deej, you are quite right, the lady in question is perfectly entitle to her own opinion. What concerns me however is that her opinion was printed in the national press, and may therefore have an influence on other people. I also felt it was poorly written.

It's a long time since I read The River of Adventure, so maybe her concerns about racism are justified, but as I've pointed out elsewhere, Enid wrote so many different books, that to condem all her books on the strength of just one hardly seems fair.

I've just read Castle of Adventure and it struck me that the whole sexism crticism is wrong too. The general opinion is that Enid's female characters are all weak and inferior to the males. Well, how come it's Tassie who crawls up the tunnel to rescue Phillip? Then there's Jo in the FF books who pretends to be George so she can escape? What about Aunt Grace in The House at the Corner? She's the one who holds the family together in times of trouble. There's Mary-Lou who battles a storm to deliver a parcel for her friend. The list goes on, but just because in some of the books it's the girl who cooks the dinner then Enid is immediately accused of sexism. I seem to recall Noddy baking cakes in one of his books, and didn't Moon Face make Toffee Shocks? I can't help wondering if Nicola Jones is suffering from some kind of guilt complex with her comment that her children moan that she never bakes them cakes.

As for her view that we need a new Enid Blyton, well perhaps she should make a start on writing a suitable book and then seeing if it sells very well? In the mean time I hope she campaigns to have all the Swallows and Amazons books removed from the shelves, as it's the girls in that book who usually do the cooking.

[Anita Bensoussane]

Another criticism I have is the writers failure to appreciate that the Blyton books were set in a different time period in society when attitudes were different.

True. And it's a good thing for children to be exposed to historical attitudes which will make them reflect on how society has changed - though textual updates to Blyton books confuse the issue!

Having said that, I do appreciate the writers comments on Blyton's portrayal of girls. There are a number examples of gender stereotyping... Secondly, I can understand the writers comments about some of the plots being a little slow-moving before anything happens, and Blyton definitely does play on social class within her characters. Anyhow, these are only a few examples, and not all Blyton's books are like that, and her characterisation is a lot more complex than simply being based on gender or class. The same criticisms can be applied to many other authors as already discussed in this thread.

Other authors don't seem to come in for as much criticism but perhaps it's the fact that Enid Blyton wrote numerous titles, remains popular with children and is read with such enthusiasm that causes parents and critics to take more notice of her. Would Nicola Jones be unhappy with children reading Peter Pan which also contains gender stereotypes, When We Were Very Young where many of the poems revolve around a middle-class lifestyle, or The Wind in the Willows in which the pace is slow, social class is an issue and female characters hardly feature? It does seem unfair that Enid Blyton is picked on constantly, though I suppose we can't complain if the reason is that children continue to have a genuine love for her books. After all, many other authors from several decades ago have either been forgotten or their books are chosen by adults for children, rather than being chosen by children themselves.

[Poppy]

Of course, the writer of the article is entitled to her own opinion, about Enid Blyton and any other author, and so are we, however it is sometimes nice to keep opinions to ourselves, (especially if they are as servere as that woman's article was). It is alright just a few comments, however such a long detailed article is posted to general public and any onine readers, it becomes very biassed and offending to other Blyton fans.

I also agree with Julie, that that it is sad that the writer is not here to defend herself. I myself think that the books are very well written. In my opinion I like to dive straight into the book instead of listening to alsorts of usless imformation that some authors include. They are also written in a beautifully simple style which allows Enid's books to be read for pleasure and you do not have to strain over difficult words and phrases.

[Julie2owlsdene]

They are also written in a beautifully simple style which allows Enid's books to be read for pleasure and you do not have to strain over difficult words and phrases.

This is so true, Poppy. One of the reasons why I didn't even need to read what a particular Blyton book was about on the dust sheet. I'd just pick it up, as I knew it wasn't going to be full of long, boring words, and lengthy pages of discription after discription. The story started straight away, and got you hooked on the first page. Not many authors can boast that. I've put many a book down and thought, can't be bothered with that, as the first few pages or just boring discriptions!!!

[Deej]

Good comments from all.

I'm not too worried about an article that was wrote almost 20 years ago in 1993. The Independent is read by a relatively small but well educated audience who won't believe every word this women writes. It's hardly going to create mass hysteria against Blyton.

[Poppy]

Of course it won't. One woman against the whole of the Enid Blyton Society and forums! She's got absolutley no chance!

[Moonraker]

Once I realised that Nicola was older than twelve, I read no more of her criticisms.

[Carlotta King]

This annoys me so much when people criticise Enid's stories for being 'racist'.
They're not racist, they simply describe people and situations relevant to the area/country that particular story is set in.

To use River of Adventure as an example, the story is set in a foreign country, where there are most likely a lot of poor people. Obviously the country is not as well-developed as Britain and people live very different lives to what we are used to.

To describe someone (Oola) as illiterate isn't being racist, it is just a true description. And he isn't described in a derogatory way either, it's not his fault that he can't read or write. Anyway I wouldn't exactly call him illiterate - he can speak enough English to have a conversation with the others, which, for a native boy in a foreign country, seems pretty well-advanced to me!

I imagine that a lot of children didn't go to school or have the opportunity in a country less well-off than Britain. Oola had no mother and had been given to his uncle to help with the snake-charming, so it's no wonder that he probably didn't go to school.

Not every foreigner in Enid's stories was a 'baddie' - Tala was clean, neat and a nice man. The teacher that Bill talks to was 'a native, with a fine face, intelligent and kind', and Bill actually describes him as "a very fine and intelligent fellow".
Bula was a baddie, yes, but it's not racist to make him a baddie, obviously he is a native because the story is set in a foreign country!

When you have a story set in a foreign land, all the characters, good or bad, are obviously going to be natives!

Enid simply put into her stories 'goodies' and 'baddies' in whatever country the adventure was set in. It's not as if ALL the goodies were white and ALL the baddies were black, there are just goodies and baddies in every country.

There are white baddies and white goodies in England, just as there are coloured baddies and coloured goodies in the foreign countries. To say the stories are racist is just ridiculous.

Tassie, for instance, in Castle of Adventure, cannot read or write so would be classed as illiterate, but she is a white girl because the story was set in Scotland. Again, in Five Go Down To The Sea, Yan is always playing truant from school, and (although it isn't ever stated) is probably a little behind in his reading and writing as a result of that fact, but he is a white boy, as it is set in Cornwall. Aily in Five get Into a Fix is always playing truant too. My point here is that Enid didn't just make the foreigners 'illiterate', there were plenty of white and/or British characters who couldn't read or write.

Enid included baddies of all races in her books, both men and women. There are Germans (Scar-Neck, or Mannheim as he is called, I presume he is German anyway, and possibly Meier and Erlick, from their names), South Americans (Valley, and Spiggy Holes), Europeans (thinking of Circus of Adventure, Tauri Hessia seems like a European country - the Count and his sister and her husband), Greeks (Ship of Adventure), Japanese (Mountain) and there are also goodies of all races - Sam the black man in Mountain is good, (whereas Jo-Jo in Island is bad). Mafumu in Secret Mountain is good. Andros in Ship is good. Otto in Valley is good.

Obviously the people who scream 'racism' don't know Enid's books very well, or they would see that there are villains of all races and colours, just as there are goodies of all races and colours.

It's just common sense - in poorer foreign countries there are obviously going to be people who cannot read or write, and are perhaps dirty and poor - it's not derogatory or racist, and the descriptions aren't mean or nasty, it's just an honest description and portrayal of the country in question.

And, just the same, there are descriptions of white people in Britain who are perhaps unable to read and write, like Tassie, or Sniffer, or Jo, because in those days I guess some children didn't always go to school, and there were gypsy children like Jo and Tassie who roamed the countryside - it's not a bad thing, it's just the way things were back then.

[Katharine]

I suppose part of the problem with Enid Blyton is that she often described her characters with quite a lot of detail, which in turn indicated their nationality. I'm not really sure how she could have got around that though. If she had only written about white people both good and bad, I suspect she'd have been accused of racism for not including people from other backgrounds.

The only modern author I'm very familiar with is J.K. Rowling. It would appear all three main characters are white, but I don't hear anyone calling her racist for not having an ethnic hero. Although admittedly I can't think of villains in her stories who are non white, people from other backgrounds seem very thin on the ground. One boy is described as having dreadlocks, so I guess from that he is black, although I have seen white people with them, and Cho Chang's name and description would suggest she is from an Oriental background.

As there are only 7 Harry Potter books, J.K. Rowling didn't need to create too many different characters, but as Enid Blyton wrote hundreds of stories, she needed to alter descriptions to distinguish different people. To always have a villain with thin lips, or a bald head would have got extremely tedious.

[Fiona1986]

There are also the Patil twins in Harry Potter, and in the movies at least Dean has dark skin, I can't remember if his skin colour is described in the books.

[Katharine]

Thanks Fiona, I'd forgotten about the twins. I can't remember if Dean's skin colour or racial background is mentioned in the books either. Also, there is Seamus, but I don't think he is ever referred to directly as being Irish, but I've always assumed he is.

[chloe1]

I haven't been here for a while but I dropped into read what you are up too and realised this thread has been bugging me all day.

With regards to Dahl (with whom I am a little shocked at some of your reactions) I wonder if those who don't connect with his work had the opportunity to read his books as a child. Growing up in the 80s I was lucky enough to be able to enjoy all his work in my childhood and I don't think there is any author who can conjure up such a thrill as Dahl. What child hasn't tried to move items with just their eyes, dreamt of being given a magical chocolate factory or attempted (and probably got into trouble for) trying to recreate Georges Marvellous Medicine. I can remember checking every gloved lady for signs she was a witch and wishing that I could be a mouse too as it seemed the perfect existence. For me Dahl was the master at story telling and still is.

However I still adored Blyton books and they did happen to be banned at my school. I don't wash with the sexism and racism remarks - the woman was writing in the 40s and they were very different times. If anything her books should be used to teach changes in culture and attitude in the 20th century. I do find that, due to the sheer volume and speed that she wrote her books, she can be repetitive but I forgive her for those occasions. Infact if anything I find her repetition reassuring.

So yes Enid is wonderful and does not deserve all the bad press that comes her way but please don't knock Dahl. The man really was a genius.

Ps - I believe Dahl was frequently banned and criticised in the States although I am not sure why. Too violent or scary I think.

[Katharine]

Chloe, I'm not sure if I'm included in your comment about Roald Dahl, but in answer to your question. I did read 3 of his stories as a child. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, The Glass Elevator, and James and the Giant Peach.

From what I can remember, I quite enjoyed Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and read it several times, the image of the grandparents all sharing a bed, and the excitement of opening the chocolate bar in the hope of getting the golden ticket is still fresh in my mind, even today. I can't remember anything at all about The Glass Elevator, so assume I didn't particularly like it. I don't remember much about James and the Giant Peach, so probably only read that once or twice. Certainly not over and over again like I did my collection of Enid Blyton books.

I certainly never felt the desire to hunt down any more of his work, whereas I know for a fact that one of my childhood ambitions was to collect every book Enid Blyton ever wrote (something I'm still working on ).

I did recently try re-reading James and the Giant Peach, but haven't got around to finishing it. I've only ever felt that way about one Enid Blyton book. There's just something in Roald Dahl's style that doesn't particularly make me want to turn the next page, whereas Enid Blyton does. I'm currently re-reading The Magician's Nephew which I'm also finding hard to put down, so it's not just Enid Blyton I feel that way about. Maybe it's just a question of taste. Both C.S. Lewis and Enid Blyton have an 'old-fashioned' feel about the way they write, perhaps Roald Dahl is too 'modern' for me?

[Deej]

However I still adored Blyton books and they did happen to be banned at my school. I don't wash with the sexism and racism remarks - the woman was writing in the 40s and they were very different times. If anything her books should be used to teach changes in culture and attitude in the 20th century. I do find that, due to the sheer volume and speed that she wrote her books, she can be repetitive but I forgive her for those occasions. Infact if anything I find her repetition reassuring.

So yes Enid is wonderful and does not deserve all the bad press that comes her way but please don't knock Dahl. The man really was a genius.

Ps - I believe Dahl was frequently banned and criticised in the States although I am not sure why. Too violent or scary I think.

I am quite interested to know when Blyton's books were first banned. If they were banned whilst she was still writing that would indicate to me that the culture and attitude in the early 20th century did condemn sexism and racism.

I agree on some of her books being quite repetitive and a little slow to get in to. I think this did make some of her books quite boring. The fact she rushed through a lot of her books certainly contributed to some being vastly inferior, hence the later books in FF. At times, Blyton did strike me as an author lacking creativity and ideas.

For me Dahl did have more variety to his book, characterisation and storylines.