Enid Blyton Coin Rejected by Royal Mint

[Francis]

Not only is dear Viv back but Francis is back too! When dear Enid is attacked it brings back all her admirers. She is not around to defend herself but we will defend her for ever! Of course roald dahl had already been refused by the royal mint as he often made anti semitic remarks and no doubt Richmal Crompton would be too (one of her books in the 1930s pictured William giving a Hitler salute and one of her stories has William and the Outlaws blackmailing a sweet shop owner for being Jewish!). In comparison dear Enid was very much an innocent who accepted the stereotypes of her era. She would be bewildered and hurt by the fuss about her. Ironically my school headmaster who banned her books from the school library was a very unpleasant racist.

[Daisy]

Francis, how lovely to see you here again. I hope you are keeping well and you will find some posts of interest. It is lovely when old friends pop in again.

[Francis]

Dear Daisy
I have been fine thank you but I missed my dear friends on the Forum and you are very much part of that. I hope you are well and safe.

[Anita Bensoussane]

Good to see you posting, Francis! I hope that people who have read the unfair criticism of Enid Blyton will seek a more balanced picture and visit websites like ours.

[Eddie Muir]

Welcome back, Francis! It’s great to see you posting on the forums again and it’s good to know that you are well.

[Courtenay]

Great to see you, Francis! Have you been to Alton Secondhand Books lately? (I haven't forgotten the time I name-dropped you there as requested. I must go back again some time.)

As for Roald Dahl, I was aware of him having made anti-Semitic remarks but couldn't remember what they were, if indeed I'd read them before. Here's an article on the topic from last year: Royal Mint rejected Roald Dahl coin over antisemitic views

It's pretty clear from that article that his views were strident and unabashed, so I can understand why the decision was taken not to commemorate him in this way. The article does also point out that his books are excellent in their own right and should still be enjoyed by those who love them; it's only the views of the author that are indefensible and that no-one wants to look like they're celebrating or excusing. Whereas I don't know of any instance where Enid openly made such blatantly bigoted statements, and yet her books are written off as "sexist" and "racist" when they are, at most, merely reflective of the time they were written in — and often a lot more nuanced in their portrayals of different cultures and gender roles than all the critics seem to assume. Interesting to compare and contrast...

[Daisy]

It seems Enid's books are not the only ones to be amended. I read this on the Monica Edwards facebook page. It is written by John Allsup who is also a member here.

"One of the key elements for me in her writing is the inclusion of very incidental things which interest and 'set' the stories in a reality missing from most books. I love her books for these 'asides' to the plot. It's why I read them again and again, but with a long wait between so that I've overlooked or forgotten these small insignificant comments. Each reread, sometimes years apart, is a delight of discovery.
It's the main reason to obtain the full, original text of the stories, for these very 'off track' paragraphs are those most likely to be cut in abridged editions. It happened particularly in the several of the Armada editions - and those versions were used in the Collins Pony Library editions. The Goodchilds were rewritten rather than cut; 'modernised' to remove dated references but some awful (to my mind) alterations made to the text."

I have just spent 3 nights enjoying a short break in Rye Harbour, staying in the Vicarage where Monica lived.

[pete9012S]

Dear Daisy
I have been fine thank you but I missed my dear friends on the Forum and you are very much part of that. I hope you are well and safe.

Oh no!

Sorry, I mean a very warm welcome back to you Francis - you have been missed!

Best Wishes

Pete

[number 6]

I've read people comments and I totally agree with every one of their views. I do think Enid and Roald Dahl, for example, have been given a rough time. You've got to be fair and consider the Social classes from decades before. People like Enid didn't know they were using racist words. It was just the way people spoke in her day. The racist words/sayings were vastly influenced by the establishment who were Governing the Commonwealth Countries at the time. They used offensive words for people whilst ruling over them, ie annexing India for example. This language spread to mainland Britain via businessmen/traders, etc, and became an accepted part of our cultural society. What was normal then is incredibly offensive today. If Enid was alive now, she'd shudder at the thought she was classed as a racist. Anyway, If the Royal Mint is dismissing candidates due to vague outdated comments/innocent references of racism, etc, then they should remove the Queens head from every coin. Throughout history, the Royals have been the worst ones for racism and discrimination, and this still goes on occasionally to the present day. For instance, the Duke of Edinburgh's inappropriate racist remarks in public about the Chinese and Indian people, and the insults he's thrown at us Common people from time to time. The Queen, although innocent of any racial slurs, is still married to one the most bigoted people in our Nation. But he doesn't count, does he? After all, he's a so-called 'respected Royal"...and we don't want to upset the establishment, do we? You also have to take into consideration the Royal king(s) who turned a blind eye to the prolific African Slave trading and profited from it via taxes, etc. A blight on the UK's history. The list goes on, but I'll stop there. Racism? Some people don't know what they're talking about!

[Rob Houghton]

Well said number 6! And not to get too political (as he dives right in!) - our current PM is often racist, anti gay, anti women, anti European, etc etc etc. Its quite ironic that many modern-day leaders and royals are still just as racist as the upper ranks were decades ago, and yet Enid is picked on for being so as if it never occurs in 2019!

[Courtenay]

I find Roald Dahl's comments about Jews far less excusable than Enid's various foibles — if you read the Guardian article I linked to, his remarks were explicit and unmitigated and made in the 1980s and '90s, by which time just about anyone decent would have recognised those statements as bigoted and unfair — especially the "even a stinker like Hitler didn't pick on them for no reason" part. He might have got away with a statement like that in the 1940s or '50s, but not during my lifetime (I do remember the 1980s!), let alone now.

Mind you, there's absolutely nothing in Dahl's books (at least his ones for children) where he includes any kind of remarks or stereotypes or tropes that could be interpreted as anti-Semitic. So I agree with the point made by more than one commentator in the article — his contributions to literature are brilliant, but celebrating the man himself is much more problematic. I would say exactly the same for Rudyard Kipling, for example.

Enid, on the other hand — I cannot think of one instance where she is on record as making public statements that are openly and unambiguously racist or sexist or anything-ist. If she had made comments similar to Dahl's about Jews, or Africans or Asians or any other race or colour or creed, I'd also shy away from celebrating her. But she doesn't. She sometimes reflects certain stereotypes and assumptions of her time in the way she portrays some characters, but never in a way that could be taken seriously as saying "girls should accept male domination", "black people are evil", "all foreigners are criminals" or whatever. I very often get the impression that most of the critics who attack her works haven't actually read them, or certainly haven't read more than a few of them (or maybe a few key passages out of context)...

[Courtenay]

Anyway, If the Royal Mint is dismissing candidates due to vague outdated comments/innocent references of racism, etc, then they should remove the Queens head from every coin.

I can't agree with this, sorry. Totally agree about the Duke of Edinburgh making racist remarks in public, not to mention plenty of other royals and upper class people throughout history — and actually, plenty of lower class people for that matter. But I cannot think of ONE INSTANCE when Queen Elizabeth II has made any comments that could be taken as racist or otherwise offensive to any class of people. Regardless of the problems of the monarchy as an institution, I can't see anything the Queen herself can be faulted on personally there.

I also don't want to get off topic into a monarchy vs republic debate, but it's worth remembering countries without a monarchy can be just as stinkingly racist as countries with one. When the Americans threw off British colonial rule and the monarchy, they didn't throw off the idea of having people with black skin as slaves. In fact, they kept it up long after Britain had stopped doing it, and race relations in the US are still far more problematic there today than they are here. But all that's another matter and I don't really want to get into a debate over something that doesn't directly relate to Enid Blyton anyway.

[pete9012S]

Well said number 6!

Agreed!

[Francis]

Thank you for all the kind comments - you are a lovely group of people - well as you love Enid you must be the right sort! We have common values and decency and really that shines through the books.

[Francis]

Dear Courtenay

I would love to see you at Alton dear Courtenay - I have a few extra books you might be interested in (all at a very cheap price!). Not sure if you interested in the 3 in 1 Famous Five annuals (full of photos of the first Famous Five television series) but I have a spare copy of all three annuals that were published. Also some other Enid Blyton books as well - we might be able to temp some other forumites to come!