I'll treat that remark with the contempt it deserves.
I have now finished the Journal and a jolly good one it was, too. One advantage of taking a time to read it means the pleasure continues for a long time!
I won't re-iterate what has already been said, but will just comment on a few things that seemed pertinent to me. Firstly, in Anita's second part of
The Happy House Trilogy, she comments on Enid not using the term 'escalator' whilst Benjy is in the Underground. I was not confused. We always (on the rare occasion of a trip to London and the Tube) referred to escalators as 'moving staircases' (not to be confused with the ones at Hogwarts!). Having never seen anything like it, they were stairs that moved, and that's what they were known as. It wasn't until many years later that I knew them as escalators.
Angela Canning seemed a little bemused that Christmas puddings were still referred to as plum puddings, in the 40s:
Surely in 1994 it had long since ceased to be called a Plum Pudding!
Well, in the 50s we
certainly knew them as plum puddings. I must say, those parents seemed a real couple of eggheads!
Although I have no wish to read
The Adventure of the Strange Ruby, at least not in its re-written form, Rob is writing a fascinating account of it. However, one problem of splitting an article is to ensure it joins seamlessly. The first sentence was rather abrupt and seemed to be taken in mid-sentence - I guess it was continuing from exactly the place where the scissors cut in part one.
"Instead, Tessa suggests she and Pat set about rescuing the twins themselves....."
Instead of what? I could go upstairs and hunt out Journal 60 to find out what it was instead of, but it seemed too much effort! I soon put this minor irritation behind me and continued enjoying the article.
The making of Cloud 9's Adventure Series was another good read. I am always fascinated by accounts of behind the scenes stories of TV adaptations. Enid's
In a Bookshop was most interesting, too. I wonder what she would make of
Enid Blyton for Grown-Ups? - colourfully advertised on the back cover. Let's hope our membership don't think they are by Enid and rush out to buy them! They were listed in the contents page and I was looking forward to reading a review. I didn't realise until I got to the end that it was just an advert! Maybe I should read them all and write an article?
Lastly, but not leastly (is that a word?), I always love reading the editorial. I look forward to the summer when Tony once again dusts off his 'barbie'. I will be there with a bag of baps and a bumper box of burgers!
All joking aside, another bumper Journal. I can't comment on each individual article and writer, but there wasn't one I didn't enjoy. And, even if I was a tad slow in completing it, this issue alone was worth the annual subscription. Many thanks, as always, to Tony and all the contributors to make it so splendid.
Incidentally, I belong to the Malcolm Saville Society, and their Journal -
Acksherlsy! - arrive soon after our Journal. Also, coincidentally,
Acksherley! 61. It took me under an hour to read that - several articles being of lesser interest to me.
In my defence it's been a year and a half and my memory simply doesn't stretch that far back these days. 
That's all right, my first one was a last-minute contribution a couple of years ago!! It was a write-up of a talk by Blyton expert David Rudd, in which he quite brilliantly brought out why Enid is such a great author and deftly skewered all the criticisms against her. I would love to have a copy of his book (Enid Blyton and the Mystery of Children's Literature), but unfortunately it was only published once, has been out of print for years, and tends to go for an exorbitant price every time a copy comes up for sale... 
