Five Go Adventuring Again

[Maggie Knows]

I feel like talking about the story rather than the covers, but TBH I cant add anything to that said during the Readathon thread from a couple of years ago.

Of all the FF stories I suggest that this one is the most consistently under-rated by fans on here.

It must have been great for readers back in the 1940s to have received this one as a Christmas present and to have read it for the first time at Christmas time...

[Daisy]

I thoroughly enjoyed it when I first read it in the late 40s but can't for the life of me remember what time of year it was!

[Courtenay]

Yes (to get back on topic!), I always enjoyed Five Go Adventuring Again. It's nice and different with the winter/Christmas setting and the fact that the action happens in and around Kirrin Cottage rather than further afield. There's the excitement of the cousins being together again (it's only the second book in the series, and there's still a freshness about them), the inevitable entry of some mysterious and possibly sinister characters, the sparks flying as George clashes with Mr Roland, the threat of being snowed in, the thrill of another secret map (and the chance to learn some Latin - Via Occulta!), and that memorable scene where sulky George, in her father's study, suddenly realises there's something familiar about those panels above the fireplace...

The edition we had when I was little was Maxey-illustrated, so I've just been in the Cave acquainting myself with the Soper originals, and I'm delighted to find there are so many gorgeous portrayals of Timmy!

[Francis]

Timmy and George manage to work out the manipulative Mr Roland who fools everyone
else - he is one of Enid's creepiest villains.

[yarvelling]

If it's any comfort, these newer ones are even worse:

Yikes

Good grief!!! There's some marketing and publicity people involved here that are in the wrong jobs!!! These covers are appalling!!!! Betty Maxey's wild use of colours and misrepresentation of the characters is nothing compared to these atrocities!!
I really can't understqand why the publishers didn't stay with using coloured versions of Eileen Soper's original artwork.... some of these photo covers are ridiculous - they even look as though the two boys have had their toes run over by the train in one of them!! What WERE they thinking?????
If it ain't broke..........

[daanton]

Trouble is, with each generation of readers that comes along---or even with newer readers in-between the generations---the publishers always have to find a way for their classic titles to attract these new readers. So it's whatever style of book cover for each title that can better grab the new readers' interest(s). The greater attractiveness [no pun intended] of the book cover update(s), the better.

The publishers seem to feel, hey, it's worked well enough before in the olden days. From the original Eileen Soper-illustrated (inside and outside) original publications, to the Betty Maxey's painted cover-laden paperback reprints of the late '60s thru early '70s, to the Portman/Southern TV photo cover-laden reprints of 1978 thru 1980, to the Zenith North TV photo covers of the 1990's which have zero to do with the stories themselves [no offence], to the reprints featuring covers by David Barnett, Richard Jones and Adrian Chesterman....

And so it goes....

And never mind the ever-present fact that the publishers also have to compete against the Internet. *sigh*

[Moonraker]

I disliked the book on my first read, as a child - and have only been able tore-read it once. I have often known follow-ups to be a disappointment - this book is no exception, in my view. To make the book really awful, I suggest a copy illustrated by Maxey.

[Poppy]

To be very honest, the very first time I read this, after reading Five On a Treasure Island, I was slightly disappointed of the season (Winter/Christmas). I had very much been looking forward to reading about the children rowing out to Kirrin Island again, or lazing about the beach. Nevertheless, as I got further into the plot, I became more and more into it, and enjoyed the Christmassy touch, characters and the description of the farmhouse. Though it was blatantly annoying how Uncle Quentin brought in a tutor for the Christmas Holidays , as well as inviting this stranger the spend Christmas with them, the plot couldn't have been tackled any other way, and the outcome was even more shocking because of this. The later part of the book was also great; brilliant how the secret passage led from Kirrin Cottage to Kirrin Farmhouse. Everything linked together, ingeniously, as well as being a good read, but then I must go on to the rather depressing scenes at the start of the book when the others are all against George about Mr Roland, the tutor. Several unhappy scenes between the five, at Christmas time, triggered by the aspect of the tutor being there. Mr Roland not only being there at this merry family-festival, but also tore the children's friendship apart (without knowing, so I suppose Uncle Quentin is to blame for this).

Overall, however an enjoyable book, minus the unhappy scenes between George and the others. And though I did enjoy the winter season, I was glad that book no:3 returned the wonderful summer setting.

[Moonraker]

Yes, Five Run Away Together is a far superior book, and confirms the potential of the series.

[John Pickup]

Of the first six books in this series, Five Go Adventuring Again is my least liked. Saying that, I still rate it higher than some of the tail end of the series.

[Maggie Knows]

According to Google translate "cupboard" in Latin is "armarium" not "cellula".

Also, stone floor seems to translate to "area lapideum": 'solum lapideum' seems to translate to "only stone".

Just an observation.

[Courtenay]

Well, Enid didn't have Google Translate, did she? I don't know how extensive her knowledge of Latin was, or indeed how many children of the intended age group would be able to pick up any inaccuracies.

When I type "cellula" into Google Translate, it comes up with cell, lodge, cubbyhole, doghouse, cabin, so "cupboard" isn't too far off. "Armarium" comes up as "closet". Near synonyms, I would expect.

When I give it "floor", in English, it does translate it to "solum" in Latin (with "area" being next among the possibilities) - although as you say, in the other direction, it translates "solum lapideum" as "only stone". Obviously "solum" can mean either "floor" or "only", depending on context. (A bit like how "sole" in English can mean "only", the underside of one's foot, or a kind of fish - and I remember Enid herself wrote a little riddle playing on that word, in one of her story books! )

I don't know what a scholarly expert in Latin would make of Enid's efforts here, but it certainly seems she wasn't completely off the mark.

[Carlotta King]

I think I can kind-of understand how 'only stone' could be used to make perfect sense for a floor, perhaps to make sure the 'reader' of the old map/rag would know that it was a floor made completely of stone and not a wooden floor or something?
Perhaps my theory sounds a bit 'one banana short of a bunch' but it makes sense in my mind, haha!

[Moonraker]

Time to dye your hair, Cathy?

[Courtenay]

Was that a blonde joke, Nigel??