Readathon - The Secret of Moon Castle

[Poppy]

I suppose this might also be something to do with Jack being the eldest, and of course, as you can tell from the rest of the book; they all respect his opinions and suggestions. It's a good point about the Famous Five being different but thinking about it as if Julian (being the eldest, therefore equivalent to Jack) suggested staying back. I'm sure the others would agree, and one of them would be pleased they had a chance to take responsibility for a change.

[Carlotta King]

Yes that's true - Dick would be thrilled at being 'in charge' of the group while they were out shopping or whatever they were doing. I can imagine Anne and Dick agreeing with Julian and being fine with him staying back, I could however imagine George giving a scowl and saying something along the lines of "Well why should a boy stay back? I could stay behind just as well as you!"

[Moonraker]

I seem to remember Julian 'staying back' with their caravan (on the roof) in Five Go Off in a Caravan.

[Spitfire]

I was having another read of Moon Castle yesterday and I know we've already mentioned this earlier but I was struck again by how well the children get on together.I particularly noticed this when they are all about to go with Dimmy into the town to get some shopping, and Jack suddenly decides to stay behind...

Definitely a point worth repeating IMHO! - I was really struck by the children's friendly, comfortable relationship with one another, and I can't think of another set of Blyton characters where the interaction seems quite so natural and amicable. They really like and respect one another. Jack does seem to be the leader (and he is a good one), but unlike Julian, Fatty and Peter, it's a role that he seems to slip naturally into when the need arises, rather than a status that he's conscious of. True, he could be bossy when they were on The Secret Island, but I think that was because he was so much more aware of the work that was needed for them to live successfully on the island. The fact that had so much practical knowledge gave the other children heart for hard work, and hope.

Having said that, I'm wondering (in the context of Moon Castle) if it could be said that the children are simply less interesting - less 'developed' than characters from other series, and that a bit of tension would give more 'character depth'. I think that my response to that would be that I'm not sure why critics get so hung up on 'character development'. I would admit that I find this particular set of characters only mildly interesting (and not at all intriguing), but so wholly likeable that I become completely engaged with the story, am rooting for the children, and enjoy every moment of the adventure.

I love how Dimmy doesn't really question what the children do. She obviously wasn't at all bothered by Jack staying back, and she doesn't question them at length over the lunch or tea table. I don't think that there was a single bruised leg in this story!! I have a vague memory of her being ok with the children having a secret in Spiggy Holes. Dimmy actually does intrigue me a lot more than the four children do!

I'm sorry I've not commented as intended - I'm so busy with other stuff - but I've absolutely loved re-reading The Moon Castle; it was like mental therapy for me, and I will come back with comments from time to time, as the story is still very fresh in my mind.

[Poppy]

A really interesting post, Spitfire. I know exactly what you mean about the children being 'less interesting' than others in different series. For example, there's George Kirrin in the Famous Five being a typical tomboy. There's Jack and Philip in the Adventure series; Jack owning a parrot seems quite unusual and Philip being a wonder with Animals, also quite original. Of course there's Prince Paul, but other than he, the children (I hate to say it) are quite boring. Actually, their parents are first class pilots, so they're not boring at all really, but this doesn't effect them very much, (except in The Secret Mountain), only breifly, that is. On the subject of their friendship; as you say, it seems more of a natural friendship than in any of the other books. The children of the other series are usually related in some way or other and, well, they have to spend time together whether they like it or not. The Arnold's choose their friendship, however, and I find this a nice difference.

Dimmy certainly understood the children's thoughts, feelings and intentions very well, indeed. She knows just what they're up to, whether they keep it a secret or not and still turns a blind eye. It was as if she had just recently been a child herself. She certainly was a great sport. I wonder if she had a family of her own. I wonder if Ranni had a family?

[Spitfire]

For example, there's George Kirrin in the Famous Five being a typical tomboy. There's Jack and Philip in the Adventure series; Jack owning a parrot seems quite unusual and Philip being a wonder with Animals, also quite original.

Yes, good examples... George Kirrin is a character for whom generations of children have felt interest or even empathy, as testified to by discussions on these forums and over at enidblyton.net. For me, George gave voice to very strong feelings of rebellion... I had an old-fashioned upbringing, and deeply resented being expected to behave a certain way, like certain things and want a certain future because I'm a girl. George goes too far for me - she doesn't actually want to be a girl - but I've only thought that's a shame as an adult; it never even occurred to me to mind that when I was a girl. Boys got to do and wear the sort of things that appealed to her, so of course she wished she was a boy. Simples!! It's great that so many people empathise with George, and I know other people have different reasons for liking her/being inspired by her, etc.

Philip and Jack also good examples, and I love how you echoed Enid Blyton's style of writing... 'Wonder with Animals...' I won't go on about these two as I've already Georgeified this post enough, but those three characters, when held up in comparison to the children of the Secret series, have many more interesting facets of character and almost make the latter appear quite bland. But again, I would argue that that simply doesn't matter - it was a thorough joy to read The Secret of Moon Castle, and the uncomplicated characters only helped me concentrate more on the spooky atmosphere of the castle and events of the adventure as it unfolded.

Of course there's Prince Paul, but other than he, the children (I hate to say it) are quite boring. Actually, their parents are first class pilots, so they're not boring at all really, but this doesn't effect them very much, (except in The Secret Mountain), only breifly, that is.

Paul's Princehood (if that's a word!), the Arnolds' flying careers, the Lot sisters' situation and Dimmy's character interest me far more than Jack, Mike, Peggy and Nora.

An early observation that I have made is that the Arnold parents seem more real than say those of the FF and SS. I found the exchange between Mr and Mrs Arnold when discussing his top secret test flight quite touching and their relationship seemed a lot more real than say the relationship that exists between Quinton and Fanny.

Yes, I liked that exchange too. Their love and loyalty for one another are very evident.

The adult characters seem particularly strong in this book. I enjoyed Mrs. Arnold's and Dimmy's cool-headed, no-nonsense way of dealing with the Lot sisters' when they tried to make difficulties. Ranni and Dimmy both stay in the background, but do not hesitate to intervene if they think they should (especially Ranni, with Paul's safety at the fore-front of his mind).

Dimmy I find appealing. She's comes across to me as a very likeable person, somebody with a strong sense of fun, and a balanced perspective in life. I would agree with you Poppy that she seems very young in her outlook. I also like that she's independent and apparently quite happy being single. (Possibly I'm reading too much into her; I must read the rest of the series! But those are my impressions of her.)

Must dash for now... *sighs*...

[Moonraker]

I have almost finished Treasure at Amorys, the latest in my Lonepineathon, and I must re-read Moon Castle. I have enjoyed reading your comments, and look forward to reading it again - the only book to give me nightmares aged 40!

[floragord]

I've hugely enjoyed reading through the whole SECRET series over the holiday, after many a long year..., just on the last few pages of THE SECRET OF MOON CASTLE - somewhat behind the Readathon! Does it strike anyone else that Dimmy is a bit of a "poor relation" in the series? In MOON she was to be left behind to hold the fort while everyone else toddled off to the Castle, Paul suggesting that she simply come over for the day - until the group from Baronia is delayed and the Arnolds go off to test out a new aircraft, when she is once more galvanised into action mending, packing and looking after the children until the parents reappear? Interested if anyone else picked up on this!

[Lucky Star]

Dimmy is used as a plot device I think. She is very handy when Enid needs to get the parents out of the way but the children need some sort of supervision; step forward Dimmy. In that she bears some similarity to Miss Pepper in the Barney series.

[Poppy]

Glad you enjoyed the Secret Series, floragord; it is indeed a wonderful selection of books. I think of all the last two are the most original and entertaining. I think Dimmy would have more or less been in the way at Moon-Castle if all who had arranged to go had. The Queen of Baronia was bringing some servants, wasn't she?, and there there the three Lot's. It doesn't seem like many but bearing in mind the children would have entertained themselves (being so many of them) that all they would really need was cooks (and cleaners). I don't think there was any need for Dimmy at all, really, though I agree, it does sound as if she if being used rather when one minute they don't want her, the next they do.

[Spitfire]

The Queen of Baronia was paying for the castle and I suppose her invitation only extended to the Arnold family when the original plans were on track. I don't think of Dimmy as a 'poor relation' exactly - it's been a while since I read the series, but I've always had the impression (especially from Spiggy) that she was independent with her own property and income, and her presence in the Arnold family so much simply arises from friendship. Of course, as LS points out, she is used as a plot device really - available when needed!

The comparison with Miss Pepper (which was also made earlier in the thread) catches my interest; but as I've not read the Barney mysteries any more recently than the Secret Series, I only have old impressions to draw on!! Dimmy I think comes across as younger and merrier, and possibly rather more adventurous whereas Miss Pepper, likeable though she is, gives the impression more of carrying out her duty or performing a task when she is with the children. However, both characters act as the sort of token adult in the books when required, as LS says, and that is their main function in the stories.

Just out of interest, Floragord, and because you've just read the series, which of the books do you like the best?

[floragord]

Just out of interest, Floragord, and because you've just read the series, which of the books do you like the best?

Since it was a long, long time since I'd last read the series, Spitfire, I enjoyed each book freshly, as to my favourites its a toss up between THE SECRET ISLAND and THE SECRET OF KILLIMOOIN, if I had to choose one though it would be the latter!

I think when we were growing up in the 50s and even in the early 60's there were many more "Dimmy's" about - maiden aunts or single ladies who had their own places and incomes but became absorbed into their own or a friend's family, or nannies/companions. In the changed social climate now not so many, although still present. I recently visited a family where the lady had a live-in companion, a very delightful person but I was struck how often someone said "Oh Hilda will do that" - and wondered how different things would have been for Hilda if she had an independent life!

[Spitfire]

Thanks for reply. Isn't it lovely to have a re-read that feels completely fresh - it's a bit like discovering a half-forgotten love! I'm so glad you enjoyed the series again.

Secret Island always feels like a bit of a stand-alone to me, and although strictly speaking I would have to say it is my favourite of the series, I generally separate it in my mind and leave room for another of the books to be favourite! That used to be Secret Mountain, but I couldn't say now as it's been so long.

I remember Killimooin as particularly exciting - the descriptions of the country, dress and customs in innocent Blyton-style at first, then going on to meet the strange goatherd. I can't really remember much of the actual story - it's the setting which has stuck in my memory.

There are a lot of "Dimmys" depicted in literature... (loads in Agatha Christie alone for example!) but it does feel a very strange these days to think of the amount of women whose life-work was to help bring up another family and even live with that family, especially when the general attitude in society towards such women then was rather patronising - as though they were to be pitied because life had somehow passed them by. Nowadays it seems to be less about Who a person is (i.e., Mrs), rather What they do for a living, and the terms 'spinster' and 'bachelor' (especially the former) are hardly heard. Of course, we still speak of 'nannys', but that's to describe a professional child carer. Times have changed so much in a relatively short period of time!!

[floragord]

Isn't it lovely to have a re-read that feels completely fresh - I'm so glad you enjoyed the series again.

I absolutely loved the 'read down memory lane', Spitfire - I'd remembered roughly how the series began on the Island and progressed through the other adventures, but it came alive again and was the perfect Christmas/NY page-turner. Sometimes going back to an old favourite movie or book can be a let-down as time goes by, but definitely not the case with SECRET!

Yes, the term "spinster" seems antediluvian now though still current in the Anglican Church marriage ceremony. Certainly the literary approval of "married mother" characters seems to pityingly suggest life had passed the governess and companion by, probably in the past either was considered a respectable occupation for 'girls from the vicarage' who still had to make a living?; even in the 60's the "you aren't MARRIED yet"!!?? seemed bandied about regularly; how swiftly circumstances have changed in not very long!

[floragord]

I wonder if Ranni had a family?

On the advert/job description for Baronia Palace I wonder if it stated: : 2 strong men required for full-time position in charge of one delightful boy. Must be able to travel at short notice and stay away for varying lengths of time. Unusual work conditions can be expected. Those not willing and able to commit to 24/7 duties need not apply! (with apologies to THE LADY!)