Domestic Abuse

[Nair Snehalatha]

Talking of villains what about the villains who nearly blew up kirrin island in Five on kirron island again--- The timely intervention of uncle Quentin.saved everyone-- George going through the passage under the sea bed with the sea booming above-- somehow I csnt say I liked that much--- too adventurous for me-- but the villains were deadly-- Its all or nothing with us -- they tell uncle Quentin

[Debbie]

I think you do have to read that aspect of EB books as set in the past.

With the villains, they're clearly using it to exert power, or to be cruel. Like when Goon canes Ern, he's clearly enjoying frightening Ern, and often dishing it out excessively (like Nobby in Caravan). But for the "good" adults, I suspect children reading them at the time would have thought (eg) "Yes, Snubby is irritating and he knew he should be quiet..." or "My dad would have belted me if the village policeman had complained about me too".

In the Adventure books especially, if you read what the villains plan against the children, it's actually quite violent. The thing is that they rarely get anywhere near carrying it out. The exception perhaps is "Island of Adventure" where the children do have to escape the flood water. As a child reading though. I often missed bits which now re-reading make my spine curdle. In Sea of Adventure when Bill says "don't worry, Lucy-Ann, they won't hurt children", I just accepted that when I read it first. Now I can see two things, firstly he's knowing that they will hurt him, and secondly it's desperate words. They'd probably have killed the children to get Bill to talk.

I remember my oldest reading "Dame Snap" and being confused why they were so scared of her. She didn't think even what she said was that bad. When I found an older book she felt it was better because she was scary.

I think EB gets the balance right. There needs to be an element of the children facing a risk-even if it's only from the wrath of parents. You see very little actual violence-I think Philip Mannering gets hit a couple of times and Fatty does too, but on the whole there is very little over all the books, certainly on stage as it were. You get mentions in passing, but not it actually happening that you see.

Harry Potter I do think doesn't really get the balance right. No way would his guardians have acted like that. They cared what people thought, so they'd have made sure Harry was dressed well and outwardly looking fine, so they could bask in the "oh you're so lovely taking in your nephew". In nearly seven years of school, no teacher raised concern? He never mentioned (nor Dudley) that he slept in the cupboard under the stairs or the other abuse? No parent wondered why the well dressed Dudley had a cousin who was clearly being neglected? Even as a family adoption then they'd have been on the radar of Social Services.
And Snape, I have a real issue with there. He's so nasty to Neville, he's his biggest fear? He's nasty to Harry from the moment he sees him, and to the others as well, and it's clear from what is said that he's generally like that.
And there's no excuse for it in real terms. If any of the Death Eaters had challenged him then all he had to say was "if I'm to be an effective spy for Voldemort then I need to stay under Dumbledore's radar, so I can't treat him badly." And the bit Harry sees in the pensieve (if I remember rightly) where Snape had gone to Dumbledore to complain about Harry ("as mediocre as his father... arrogant.") shows a sign of a real bully, trying to put him down and turn others against him. I find it odd that he's turned round to be a brave hero by Harry. He was far too far drawn in his nastiness to do that.
<rant over>

[Midnight-Visitor]

Didn't Will Janes give his elderly Mother a Black eye in Five Go to Billycock Hill?

There's a Betty Maxey illustration in the paperback 1970's edition of Anne helping to put Mrs Janes' washing on the line with her watching with the Black eye.

[pete9012S]

Lovely to hear the marvelous Betty Maxey get a mention Midnight-Visitor!

We can compare the two different illustrations of the lady above.

[Jomo]

Domestic violence and child abuse is the motive behind the desperate acts of the children in The Secret Island.
The children had been removed from school whilst grieving for the loss of their parents, forced to labour in the house and on the farm, subjected to physical punishment for the slightest perceived shortcoming.
[“Yes,” said Nora, wiping her eyes. “Aunt Harriet slapped me six times this morning because I didn’t wash the curtains well enough. Look!”
She showed him her arm, red with slaps.
“It’s a shame!” said Jack.
“If only our father and mother were here they wouldn’t let us live like this,” said Mike.]
[“… If I knew some place where we would never be found, I would run away—and take the two girls with me too. I hate to see them slapped and worked hard by Aunt Harriet.”]
[Even Nora took a slapping without tears. She was so happy when she thought of the secret island that she couldn’t shed a tear!]

I think that part of the very high and enduring appeal of this book is the deep empathy we feel for the children in the face of these injustices. We feel their pain and their bruises, we know that it’s only right to escape from this cruelty.

Did it match our realities as children? We certainly resented any form of physical punishment or isolation - being sent to our room for example - but we did know children who had it far, far tougher. One of my friends was regularly belted with a razor strop by his father, there were indications that his mother did not get off lightly either. The father was often away on business but their life was a misery when he was home. I was too young to really understand what was happening, but in later years as teenagers we were able to discuss it in depth and all the gruesome facts came out.

[Julie2owlsdene]

And the Soper illustration looks more convincing, Pete.

Betty's looks like the lady in question has been looking through a single scope with ink around it's rim.

[Lucky Star]

Absolutely Julie. She also has a most unlikely smirk on her face. I'm afraid Soper has won this one hands down.

[pete9012S]

[Julie2owlsdene]

Don't cry Pete, you know we love you, even though you do like Maxey.

[pete9012S]

[Moonraker]

Nobody's perfect, Julie!

Back on topic, your post makes for depressing reading, Jomo. So many of Enid's books contain such cruelty. Maybe they should rewrite the texts.

[Jomo]

Back on topic, your post makes for depressing reading, Jomo. So many of Enid's books contain such cruelty. Maybe they should rewrite the texts.

Nooooo!



Exactly why they shouldn’t rewrite the texts!
Enid Blyton has been accused by so many of not including realism in her novels - the Secret Island was one of her earliest ‘adventure’ books and it starts off with some pretty grim realities for the protagonists. I think it’s an absolute marvel. No matter how tough your circumstances might have been you could retreat to a secret island, away from abuse. The psychology of the book is stunningly perceptive. She really knew the workings of a child’s mind from the inside.

[Moonraker]

I wonder - considering the modern, illustrated covers, how many children reading Blyton's are aware of the age of the stories?

[Boatbuilder]

It does make you wonder, Nigel, especially with today's altered texts.

Personally, I think it's sacrilege to change what a late author wrote in her books. In some ways it's no different than forging someone's signature. As I've mentioned elsewhere on the forum in the past, they don't change the text of the likes of Dickens - or at least I'm not aware it.

[Jake]

It is perhaps interesting to note that Mark Twain’s works seem unaltered, despite the fact that some of the terms are unacceptable today. It seems that somehow the fact that they are older and in a different context makes them acceptable.