Listen-Through/Discussion of Famous Five Audio Books

[Anita Bensoussane]

I agree that it's frustrating and quite worrying not to see the criminals apprehended at the end of The Rat-a-Tat Mystery. They're not only hardened villains but remarkably hardy. We know that they formerly slept in a boathouse which had a broken window, despite the extremely cold weather. Who knows what they might be up to? It's interesting that the German translator made some additions and alterations to deal with that, Dick.

[Rob Houghton]

When I said 'plain silly' I was just thinking in general, about the snowman, the one way footprints etc - because we are expected to believe that grown men would dress up as a snowman or bother to walk backwards (for a considerable distance!) being careful not to mess up the foot prints they are stepping back into. That's quite a feat! I think the knocker banging in the night is very atmospheric and creepy - there could have been more of that - and if the telephone wires had been cut, rather than just down due to the weather, that would also have had more impact. Also, if Snubby had been taken off by the baddies, there would have been a natural prolonging of the climax and the story would have had more momentum, in my opinion.

It sounds like the German translation was an improvement.

[Dick Kirrin]

I am co-reading with Daisy at the moment. I will send her the German ending in summary - maybe you are interested as well?

Now, the men seem to act childishly. At the first glance at least. However, they want to scare them away rather than harming them - which would have been easy enough. They had at least one gun, and we have four children, a spaniel (not the most intimidating kind of dog, sorry Loony) and a female housekeeper.
Enter, wake them at gunpoint, tie them down, get the boxes out and be off again. Yet they prefer to try and scare them away. So in that respect, dear Anita, they are hardy, but not hardened. And that may well be the reason why Snubby was not taken away... also, why take a boy along? Through the snow, with the boxes and with probably no place to hide him. It would have given us a nice climax - or one of the children being taken away in order to cover their escape?

[IceMaiden]

Yes - I agree - what I really meant was that girls wouldn't have been expected to wear shorts if there was 'company' at home, or if Grandparents arrived to tea, etc. Girls would have then been expected to put 'a nice dress' or skirt on - much as when they were at the riding stables in Mystery Moor. Girls wearing shorts on 'formal' occasions such as at school, or on trips to the theatre or going to a party etc would have been pretty much unheard of - and that is why I think George would have been told to wear a skirt when she was being tutored by Mr Roland.

This is my thinking too. George has to be dressed appropriately as if she was at school because of the fact there's a tutor in the house. I don't expect she liked it but accepted it and put up with it as it was the done thing, same as people who don't like wearing a suit will still wear one to a wedding or funeral without grumbling about it as it's the required and expected attire. If she'd been difficult about wearing a skirt I'm sure Uncle Quentin threatening to punish Timmy again would soon make her grit her teeth and bear it, and I doubt it was a girly pretty skirt anyway, probably a very plain, simple grey, brown or navy one.

Speaking of Timmy though, I wonder why he was Timothy for the first two books then Timmy or Tim for the rest of them? He's never mentioned as Timothy again after Adventuring Again but he's rarely mention as Timmy before then .

[Anita Bensoussane]

I suppose Timmy's name is just another thing that took time to become established over the first few books. "Timothy" is the longer form and sounds a bit more formal, so it's not surprising that it was dropped in favour of "Timmy" or "Tim".

Now, the men [in The Rat-a-Tat Mystery] seem to act childishly. At the first glance at least. However, they want to scare them away rather than harming them - which would have been easy enough. They had at least one gun, and we have four children, a spaniel (not the most intimidating kind of dog, sorry Loony) and a female housekeeper.
Enter, wake them at gunpoint, tie them down, get the boxes out and be off again. Yet they prefer to try and scare them away. So in that respect, dear Anita, they are hardy, but not hardened. And that may well be the reason why Snubby was not taken away... also, why take a boy along? Through the snow, with the boxes and with probably no place to hide him. It would have given us a nice climax - or one of the children being taken away in order to cover their escape?

You're right that the men didn't harm the children and housekeeper, but we don't know what they might be capable of if they realise the police are onto them. It makes me nervous that they're still at large when the story finishes, but we have to assume that all went according to plan. A more dramatic climax with a few twists and turns would have pepped the book up no end!

[timv]

When I read 'Five Go Adventuring Again', in the late 1960s paperback Knight edition, I assumed that although George normally wore shorts in the holidays as a badge of trying to be a boy, her wearing a skirt in this book was logical enough. Either her parents had made her do it because there was a guest in the house, ie Mr Roland (and an authority figure as the tutor who would expect more school-type dress), or else she had done so of her own accord because this would be expected.

In Arthur Ransome's mostly slightly earlier Swallows and Amazons books, written from 1929 to 1947 so overlapping with Enid's, it is only the 'Amazon' tomboys Nancy and Peggy who wear shorts, not the more sedate Walker girls Susan and Titty or Professor's daughter Dorothea Callum. Mrs Blackett is a more relaxed type that the others' parents anyway, and while she is away the 'Amazons ' have to wear skirts at home for their rigidly formal Great-Aunt.
In another series started in the mid-late 1940s, Marjorie Lloyd's Lakeland 'Fell Farm' holiday books, the relatively relaxed and 'outdoorsy' Browne girls, Kay (15) and Hyacinth (13), wear skirts in the illustrations even when walking on the Fells - possibly due to post-War clothes rationing. Similarly, in Elsie Jeanette Oxenham's Abbey series , in her 1940s books female characters who wear shorts for hiking have to or prefer to wear skirts indoors, and shorts are only worn for outdoor activities; one teenage girl tomboy a bit like George who runs a ferry is thought unfeminine in shorts by her City ballerina sister. So Enid having George as regularly being allowed to wear shorts when indoors with no guests around was 'advanced' for the early 1940s for a non-'Bohemian' (ie wealthy liberal) family , and all credit to Aunt Fanny for allowing it.

[db105]

So Enid having George as regularly being allowed to wear shorts when indoors with no guests around was 'advanced' for the early 1940s for a non-'Bohemian' (ie wealthy liberal) family , and all credit to Aunt Fanny for allowing it.

Yes, I get the impression that, although I wouldn't exactly call Quentin an ideal father, both Fanny and he were rather tolerant with George's unconventional tomboyish behavior, more than one would expect from the average parents at that point in time.

Very interesting post, by the way.

[db105]

I finished listening to Five Run Away Together (Famous Five #3). At the beginning I thought this book was new to me, but as the plot advanced I realized I had read it as a boy. In any case, I read these books so many years ago that many things feel new.

In the third book in the series the children go back to Kirrin Cottage for the summer holidays. Unfortunately, their regular cook is ill (another convenient illness) and George's parents have hired another cook to help them out while the children are there. In yet another triumph of the Kirrin Human Resources department, they hired the evil Mrs. Stick, with her horrid son Edgar in tow, and also her unpleasant dog Tinker (aka Stinker) and later her equally up to no good husband.

Then Aunt Fanny, who is ill (of course), gets worse and has to be rushed off to hospital, with Quentin accompanying her (for once he puts the family crisis above his work). The man may be too absorbed in his work, and also eccentric, irascible and clueless, but he does love his family. George, for some strange reason, is not allowed to visit her. Home alone with the Sticks, the children are subjected to very hostile treatment from them. They almost have to get into fights to get adequate food, and they try to poison Timmy.

Finally, they decide to run away to Kirrin island and live there on their own until George's parents come back. Of course, they'll find a great adventure there.

In these books, as much as the adventure I enjoy the slice of life part at the beginning. The five have so much fun together and visit such interesting locations that my imagination was captured when I read these as a boy, and even now as an adult those descriptions are excellent mind candy. Here, however, this first part is unpleasant, with the children being treated as enemies in their own house by the nasty Sticks. Come to think of it, the build-up of the previous book (Five Go Adventuring Again) had also an unpleasant component, with George's feud with Mr. Roland. Here, the situation is much more openly unpleasant, though, and there are no adult relatives to keep things from going too far. Also, the conflict her is not no emotionally-charged like in the previous book. Julian raises up to the challenge, with Tim's help, and he constantly stands up to the Sticks. At one point he is reluctant to do so, and he reflects that he is not afraid of the Sticks, but he is just tired of the unpleasant confrontations.

In this series, it will certainly not be the last time Julian has to stand up to hostile adults, and he usually adopts a very calm and adult tone to talk to them. In this book he does so for the first time in the series. Good thing that he did, because otherwise his siblings and cousin would have gone without adequate food. However, perhaps he has not perfected the technique yet. Instead of just reminding Mrs. Stick of her duties and what the consequences would be if she neglected them, I had the impression that he sometimes riled up the Sticks more than strictly necessary. Perhaps not the smartest strategy, but I can't really blame him. They were on their own home, so why should they let these people walk all over them? Thankfully he had Tim to provide physical protection, or things could have become very nasty.

All in all the Sticks made life miserable for the children, and thus I was missing the joy that these books have. Fortunately things improved a lot once they ran off to the island. They had a great time there, and I enjoyed it with them.

Finally, in the last part of the novel, they have to fight a gang of people they believed to be smugglers using the island as base, but who are later discovered to be kidnappers. And they turned out to be the Sticks! Great as it was to see the Sticks get their comeuppance, I have to admit that the plot was a bit contrived at this point. How likely is it that the Sticks of all people were the ones doing their criminal activities on Kirrin Island? And what kind of criminal operation was that anyway? Why did they need a ship delivering a pack with dolls on the wreck near the island in the middle of the night? Wouldn't it be easier for the Sticks to bring what they needed with them in their boat? And why did Mrs. Stick take a job as a cook while she was taking part in a kidnapping scheme that had nothing to do with Kirrin Cottage?

In spite of these questions, the adventure part was very good and thrilling, even if the villains were a bit too bumbling. I really loved the hidden cave they found and used as their headquarters. With that secure shelter, they always had the upper hand against the Sticks, who never quite knew what was going on.

Some random thoughts:

George planned to run away to the island alone, so that the others could go home instead of spending such an unpleasant holiday with the Sticks. It's clear that in spite of liking her cousins she had not yet assumed that they were a team, and that they could face any difficulties better when they were together.

The five gave as much as they received. More, actually. We never feel sorry for the Sticks, not even for their stupid and cowardly son Edgar, because they are the ones who started it by being incredibly nasty towards the children. However, listening to the audiobook as an adult I felt sorry for their dog, (S)Tinker, who doesn't seem to do much to deserve being persecuted by Tim, other than being generally unpleasant and belonging to the Sticks. This is a children's book, and it's a common technique to amuse young readers by having bad things happen to the bad guys, without taking much effort to discriminate how much each character deserves to be labelled "bad". It's similar to how in the Harry Potter books Hagrid gives Dudley a pig tail, when the one who deserved it was his father Vernon (well, Dudley probably deserved it to some extent for his behavior towards Harry in the past, but Hagrid did not know that).

On the other hand, it was quite nice of the children to invite the little girl they rescued to spend a few days with them in the island.

George showed great restraint with Edgar. At one point she mentions that she doesn't respond to his insults because she doesn't want Mrs. Stick to leave and therefore leave George's mother without help.

Coming next: Five Go to Smuggler's Top (Famous Five, #4)

[pete9012S]

...listening to the audiobook as an adult I felt sorry for their dog, (S)Tinker, who doesn't seem to do much to deserve being persecuted by Tim, other than being generally unpleasant and belonging to the Sticks.

We do have a Stinker Appreciation Society for balance:

http://www.enidblytonsociety.co.uk/foru ... it=stinker" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[db105]

We do have a Stinker Appreciation Society for balance

A most worthy and exemplary institution, I'm sure!

What can I say? The Five are also harsh on Edgar, but Edgar thoroughly earned it before that, so we don't feel sorry for him. On the other hand, we are not shown what poor Stinker has done to deserve being persecuted by Tim. We could assume that he did something off-screen. The novels are short, after all, and there's no room for everything. More likely it's the same kind of whimsical cruelty against unpleasant rivals that has a great tradition in children's stories. Like the kid who falls into the chocolate river and presumably drowns in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Or maybe it's an example of the Five not being perfect. In any case, it was enough for me to notice but not to spoil my enjoyment of the book.

[Rob Houghton]

I quite enjoy Five Run Away Together - except for one small thing, and that is - WHY would anyone choose a wrecked ship to hide a trunk of clothes on?! That always seemed a bit daft to me, as they could have hidden it anywhere they wanted - under a bush or even buried in the sand. Of course, Enid has the trunk hidden on the shipwreck purely for convenience, and so the children will easily find it, but it seems a bit odd that the kidnapper's would climb up ropes (which is what the Five have to do) with a trunk and hide it there.

[db105]

I quite enjoy Five Run Away Together - except for one small thing, and that is - WHY would anyone choose a wrecked ship to hide a trunk of clothes on?! That always seemed a bit daft to me

Completely true. Why bother sending a ship, and giving light signals, just to leave a trunk with clothes and dolls in it on the shipwreck for the Sticks to recover? EB wanted mysterious going-ons for the children to puzzle over and she created them, but it doesn't make much sense for the kidnapping plot. To be fair, as a child I was too caught on the thrilling story to notice. As an adult I noticed but I enjoyed it nevertheless. However I have to admit that, despite being adventure-light, I rated "Five Go Adventuring Again" over "Five Run Away Together", and this is one of the reasons. Also, Adventuring Again had other virtues to offer.

[Rob Houghton]

I read the whole of The Famous Five series in order in 2015 and thoroughly enjoyed doing so, as I'd never read them in order before. On previous reads I'd always considered Adventuring Again to be quite weak, but when I read it again, I found it interesting and absorbing, not so much for the adventure but for the details of Kirrin and George's home and family. We get to learn snippets that are interesting and add 'flesh to the bones'.

[db105]

Yes, those parts were very interesting for me too, along with the exploration of George's character. But I can understand that those who are mainly interested in the adventure will consider Go Adventuring Again a weaker book.

[Francis]

I like 'Adventuring again'. It reminds me of snowy winters from 'the good old days'.