How much of Enid's work is 'out of print'?

[tix]

I think I've missed the grand entrance of a whole new version of PC because it appears that yet another book has been attacked, and then republished in such a way that the original Blyton material has been completely discarded.

I’m speaking about 'The Very Big Secret.'

'SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER' -

My recollection was that mother went away to have a baby, which is of course the 'secret' (a secret only to the children so members are entitled to know about it because this is the EBS Forum and we're discussing the book). Meanwhile, the kids happen to find an apparently abandoned infant in the woods, so they take it home and, very assiduously, care for the little soul until the real mother appears.

Now that sounds like a nice little story - a typical Blyton presentation with an innovative twist but seemingly there are people who think it shouldn't be published, and sure enough the baby in question has now been replaced with a puppy!

Why?

What the heck's wrong with a couple of kids discovering a baby and looking after it for a few days? I reckon the girl readers particularly would love the thought, seeing the alternative is to leave the bundle in the bushes and walk away.

I gather that Mother didn't actually have a puppy so what happened? Did she go away somewhere to negotiate the cost of one and return with it? Did this take her several days? Did Granny come to stay? What did the kids do in the meantime - find a stray animal and care for it?

Perhaps someone could fill us in.

[Rob Houghton]

The thought that occurred to me, when reviewing this book for The Journal a while back, was that it sent out a good message to children - and gave them an insight into what a responsibility and a trial looking after a baby can be - so much more difficult than a doll, and much more important and time-consuming than looking after a puppy. I applauded Enid for taking this stance, and managing to produce an 'anti teenage pregnancy' lesson in the shape of a seemingly innocent story. Okay, so this book would never have been read by teenagers of course, but it might have discouraged a few children from thinking having a baby was a fun idea...

It was a strange story, but memorable because of it's strangeness, and actually fairly adult in it's themes of responsibility. I'm rather glad that the puppyized version has now gone out of print!

[Ming]

I agree totally with Courtenay - I would rather see Blyton stories going out of print than have them bowdlerised like this.

I am inclined to disagree. I'm with John Pickup in believing that I'd rather have access to these stories in some modified form than have no access to them at all. I grew up with the Award hardbacks and some Collins paperbacks and those led me to discovering the world of Enid Blyton. Now I can't find those same books in the shops in Bangladesh any more but I find newer editions which probably have many changes. But I'm grateful that at least a few of the newer generation will be exposed to her wonderful stories and perhaps find them compelling enough to discover more.

[Paul Austin]

Both Gillian and Imogen said that if the choice was having their mother's stories available in modified form, or not at all, they would choose available. Hugh Lofting's son made the same choice about the buffoonish black prince that had to be removed from his father's Doctor Doolittle stories.

[Rob Houghton]

I guess it depends. I would always rather see Enid's books in print if the changes are just a case of slight altering of words, removing racist terms, or slight updating, but do object to stories being altered just for the sake of it - such as 'The Very Big Secret' which might just as well have not been republished. The stories Gillian altered are anther case in point. I know she volunteered to update them because otherwise the publishers would just have found someone else to do it, but I could never really understand why the likes of The Treasure Hunters and Hollow Tree House and The Strange Ruby needed to be updated, and more to the point why they needed to become part of a series with names and situations changed to fit. Why couldn't they have been republished as stand-alone novels instead? It's these changes I object to, rather than changes we've discussed in Famous Five or the Mystery and Adventure series'.

[sixret]

It has to do with marketing. Readers will always tend to buy other titles in the same series.

I agree with John and Ming. It's very important for her books to be easily found in the bookstore. It attracts potentially new readers. Who knows they will become fans and will lead them to find more about Enid Blyton thus make them aware of this forum. By then, they will try to find the the books with original texts. I speak from my own experience.

[Moonraker]

I don't think I really mind - not as long as I have got my original hard-backs. Enid is so popular that I'm sure children don't see them as historical novels. I far more object to the TV adaptations that completely changed the story - Five Run Away Together is a case in point.

Having said that, if I read a Blyton to my grandson, I downdate it to include original names!

[Courtenay]

Here's something that always makes me wonder, talking of original names. In the Faraway Tree books, as we know, the characters Fanny and Dick have been changed to Frannie and Rick. But in the Famous Five, Dick and Aunt Fanny remain Dick and Aunt Fanny, even in the most heavily edited modern editions. Why is that? Is it because the Famous Five are Enid Blyton's best-known and best-selling books, and so the publishers feel there would be far too much of an outcry if they changed the names of such famous characters - whereas they figure they can get away with bowdlerising the Faraway Tree children, since they're not nearly as well known and less likely to have stuck in the memories of grown-ups who are now reading to their children or grandchildren?

[Rob Houghton]

Good point. I wonder if it has something to do with the fact that The Famous Five has been dramatised on TV and on stage and so as you say the characters are better known. I know they have changed Aunt Fanny's name in the various film and TV versions, but as you say Dick has always very much stayed as Dick - and the four children's names are definitely so iconic that many people can name them, even if they never read the books or haven't read them for years.

[walter raleigh]

It could be that or it may well be that as the 'Faraway Tree' books are aimed at a younger audience than the 'Famous Five' series, they think that the wee ones need more protection from the rudeness of the names. Either way it's inexscusable in my view.

[Anita Bensoussane]

It's because the two series have different publishers, and publishers have made different decisions when it comes to updates.

[stardust]

And I'm sure these 'classic' versions also don't contain the original text in 'Five On Kirrin Island Again' where the Five go to watch Martin's television and Anne 'gasped to see a man's face suddenly appear on the lighted screen of the set. " I can see him and hear him!" she whispered to Julian...' I'm sure that has also been altered, as it had in my Centenary edition!

Even my 1970 Knight paperback of Five on Kirrin Island Again doesn't contain Anne's reaction to television! The editing began about three decades earlier than Hachette seem to think it did!

Oh no, neither does my old book. Now I'm worried what else I missed out on! As of 2017 what series are still in print?

[pete9012S]

And I'm sure these 'classic' versions also don't contain the original text in 'Five On Kirrin Island Again' where the Five go to watch Martin's television and Anne 'gasped to see a man's face suddenly appear on the lighted screen of the set. " I can see him and hear him!" she whispered to Julian...' I'm sure that has also been altered, as it had in my Centenary edition!

Even my 1970 Knight paperback of Five on Kirrin Island Again doesn't contain Anne's reaction to television! The editing began about three decades earlier than Hachette seem to think it did!

Yes,even my 1969 Knight edition omits Anne's line and simply reads: "It was great fun seeing the television programme."


I wonder if the earlier 1967 Knight edition (above) uses the updated text too?
My 1951 hardback edition still has the original text from the 1947 1st edition.

[Fiona1986]

Ss is the following line from Mr Curton also cut - where he says something along the lines of "Just as well your dog can't smell him?"

[pete9012S]

Here's the original and edited text:

Martin was fiddling about with the television switches. Then the programme began, and Anne gasped to see a man's face suddenly appear on the lighted screen of the set. " I can hear him and see him," she whispered to Julian. Mr. Curton heard her and laughed. " But your dog can't smell him, or he'd be after him ! "
It was great fun seeing the television programme.
When it was over Mr. Curton asked them to stay to tea.

Martin was fiddling about with the television switches. Then the programme began. When it was over Mr. Curton asked them to stay to tea.