The CBB :: View topic - Ku Klux Klan

#1: Ku Klux Klan Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 9:49 am

Why do the characters in the Tyrol books seem to think that there was something exciting/romantic about a dangerous racist organisation like the Ku Klux Klan? In one of the books - I think it's Rivals - they even go on about leaving coffins propped up against doors etc as if it's something to be admired. I know Gone With The Wind kind of does the same, but that was a book set in the 1860s/1870s and meant to be from the Confederate point of view at that time. It seems to start with Jo and the "Elsie" books.

#2: Author: joelle, Location: lancashire, england

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:05 pm

that always bothered me as well. dont they get the idea for something from the ku klux klan? cant remember the details. seems hard to explain away.

#3: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:15 pm

Did they really know what it was all about?

#4: Author: KB, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:40 pm

joelle wrote:

that always bothered me as well. dont they get the idea for something from the ku klux klan? cant remember the details. seems hard to explain away.

This is the mention I think you mean, from Rivals: Cornelia Flower, another American child, jumped to her feet. ‘Let’s swear a feud against them,’ she said. ‘Mademoiselle said we weren’t to,’ objected Margia. ‘Well, call ourselves the Ku-Klux-Klan, and then it isn’t a feud,’ put in Evadne. ‘It’s fighting for our rights—and things.’ Margia knew perfectly well that it would mean a feud only under another name, but she easily stifled the voice of her conscience, and nodded. ‘It seems an idea. What can we do? What did the American Ku-Klux-Klan do?’ No one was very sure, not even Evadne and Cornelia. Then the former was seized with a brilliant notion. ‘Joey Bettany has some of those awful “Elsie books.” Let’s borrow them—they’re American all right, so they’re sure to say something about them. Then we’ll know where we are.’ ‘Brain-wave,’ said Margia, getting down from her seat. ‘Cyrilla, you go and ask Jo to trot them out—but don’t tell her why we want them,’ she added. ‘Then what am I to say?’ asked Cyrilla Mazirùs, a rather shy Hungarian child. ‘Oh—just say—well, say that Cornelia has mentioned the Ku-Klux, and you want to know about it, so you thought those books might have all about it. That’ll be true enough, ’cos it’s what we all think.’ Thus primed, Cyrilla went off, and proffered her request to a startled Jo, who, on hearing what she wanted, stared at her. ‘You queer kid! Oh, you can have them if you want them, but take care of them. I know one of them tells all about the Ku-Klux, but I’m not very sure which it is, so you’d better take the lot, and look through them till you find it. Here you are.’ Jo put the nine volumes on Cyrilla’s open arms, and sped her on her way, without giving the matter another thought. It was Saturday, and the rain had poured all day, so she was busy with some work for Christmas she only concluded that Cyrilla was bored and that was the reason for her sudden thirst for knowledge. Afterwards, she said she could have kicked herself for not taking more notice of it but then it was too late. Cyrilla went back to the form-room where the meeting was, and delivered the precious volumes over to Margia, who dealt them round as far as they would go, and ordained that those left out must look over with someone. For a time there was no sound to be heard but the turning of leaves. Then, suddenly, Giovanna Donati uttered a cry of joy. ‘Here it is, Margia! See!’ Down wen the other book sand there was a unanimous rush to where she sat, and black, brown, red, and fair heads clustered together over the pages. Yes there it was. Margia commandeered the book, and waved them all to their seats. ‘Sit down, an’ I’ll read it to you. Then we’ll know.’ They sat down, and she read aloud industriously for half an hour, after which she passed on the office to someone else, as she was growing hoarse. The account of the doings of that far-famed ‘Klan’ as given in Elsie’s Motherhood thrilled them all, though they sometimes stumbled over the long words used and were bothered by the very elaborate style of the book. ‘Cut all that,’ commanded Margia when the reader came to any ‘preachy’ bits. ‘Get on to the fun.’ They were so good and quiet for the rest of the afternoon that the prefects wondered what had happened to them, and Mary even peeped into the room to see what was going on. Her amazement, when she beheld them all sitting round listening eagerly while one of them read aloud to the rest, made her gasp. ‘Are they going to be ill, do you think?’ she asked doubtfully of her own clan after she had told them what she had discovered. ‘Nonsense!’ said Joey. ‘It’s only a spasm. It won’t last long—not with that crowd.’ After Kaffee und Kuchen, they returned to their amusement, and by the time the bell rang for their amusement, and by the time the bell rang for them to go upstairs and change for the evening, they knew all they wanted about the original Ku-Klux-Klan. ‘Only we can’t go round beating people or sticking up coffins against their back-doors,’ said Margia regretfully. ‘No but it gives us a general idea of what they did,’ said Evadne. ‘Well, it’s dancing for the rest of the evening, so we can’t discuss it any more. But some of you be thinking out ways of getting those creatures at the other side of the lake to push off, and we’ll talk to-morrow afternoon.’ [...] Then everyone went in, and found that Yvette Mercier had contrived to fall downstairs and was suffering from a bumped head and bleeding nose. She was more frightened than hurt, but she yelled lustily, and by the time she was soothed and bound up the bell rang for Mittagessen, and as Mr. Eastley was there, they had to be on their best behaviour. But once they were set free to do as they liked for the afternoon, great was the discussion among them of the bad behaviour of most of the Saints. Margia Stevens promptly revived the old idea of the Ku-Klux-Klan, which was received with acclamation by most of her circle, and they spent a very enjoyable time planning various affairs to teach the Saints god manners. The prefects were not quite so violent, but they were very indignant, and did not scruple to say so.

#5: Author: Abi, Location: Alton, Hants

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:50 pm

I always assumed they didn't really know what the Ku Klux Klan was all about - I'm certain they wouldn't have approved if they had.

#6: Jo Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:51 pm

Jo seemed to find it all very "exciting" when she read the Elsie books - in Jo of the Chalet School I think - and she was supposed to be a history expert! Even if the girls didn't know any better, EBD should've done!

#7: Author: Carolyn P, Location: Lancaster, England

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:52 pm

Owning that particular Elsie book it does not present the KKK in a good light, even if you ignore the preachy bits. It shows them as violent against anyone who got in their way and while it presents the arguements the KKK tried toi use at that point, it also demolishes those arguements. Elsie and her family are targets because of the way they teach their former slaves to read etc, their house is attacked one night. One of their neighbours was almost killed and hunted down by the KKK.

#8: Elsie books Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:33 pm

In that case the girls really should have known better than to go on about it being "fighting for their rights"!!

#9: Author: jennifer, Location: Sunny California

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:09 pm

I must admit that one startled me when I read it - sort of as if in a modern book, you had a group of girls thinking about emulating the Gestapo as part of some school girl rivalry. I actually like it when they don't edit out comments/scenes like that it older kids' books. It can be startling (I remember a comment in Little House on the Prarie where Ma states 'the only good Indian is a dead Indian'), but it does give you a view of how attitudes change with time. It also makes you wonder which of today's views will be seen the same way 50/100 years from now...

#10: Author: Gabrielle, Location: Washington DC

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:55 pm

That bit did always disturb me, especially since even if the KKK had been painted in an ok light in the Elsie book (I'm glad it wasn't though, not a huge fan of Elsie, all she ever does is sit on Papa's lap and sob Smile

but still) Evvy and Corney should have known better. But I agree with Jennifer about comments in children's books not being edited out. Attitudes have changed a great deal and will probably change again. I have theories on how certain subjects today will be viewed in 50 years but since they are both contraversial and off-topic they won't be mentioned.

#11: Author: patmac, Location: Yorkshire England

Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 11:26 pm

I doubt if EBD had any notion of what she was writing about. This was the era when the British Empire still ruled so much of the world and racial segregation was normal in the Southern USA. During his inaugural address in 1963, the then Alabama governor, George Wallace, pledged: "In the name of the greatest people that ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny and I say: Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation for ever." A statute banning interracial marriage in the state was struck down only four years ago by 59% to 41%, with a majority of whites voting against the change. As late as 1948, the British Nationality Act introduced a new criteria for naturalisation "close connection" which meant that no one with less that "75% European blood" could register and migrate to Britain. On the 22 June that year the SS Empire Windrush arrived with 492 Jamaicans on board. Eleven Labour MPs promptly complained to their prime minister, Clement Attlee, that "an influx of coloured people domiciled here is likely to impair the harmony, strength and cohesion of our public and social life". Attlee reassured the MPs that he would modify immigration rules if it resulted in, as he put it, "a great influx of undesirables".

Gabrielle wrote:

I have theories on how certain subjects today will be viewed in 50 years but since they are both controversial and off-topic they won't be mentioned.

I'll not bet against a a sure thing Confused

#12: Author: Kathy_S, Location: midwestern US

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:38 am

I also found EBD's portrayal of the KKK pretty shocking, both because of my own cultural conditioning -- I still cringe at the usage of the term "lynch" on the board -- and as a collector of GO literature. As with Carolyn's Elsie example, early 20th century American girls' series books tend to portray the KKK's activities as altogether evil, despite casual racial/ethnic/religious slurs and stereotypes in some of the books. For example, one series set in Mississippi -- about as southern as you can get -- described their activities as "a blot on our state's honor." Admittedly I have probably selected against the more racist series in my own collection, but it still surprises me that someone with EBD's openness to such things as religious diversity could use the KKK as she does, except in ignorance.

#13: Author: patmac, Location: Yorkshire England

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 9:08 am

I haven't read many American GO books and I didn't realise that most are anti KKK. Apart from 'Elsie' which I only read a couple as they were too boring, the only American author I can remember at the period was Louisa M Alcott and Susan Coolidge. When I first read the early CS books (back in the 40s), I had no idea of the origins of the KKK or what it was and imagine most children in the UK of the era wouldn't have either. We had a scheme at junior school where we brought a penny to pay for a 'poor heathen black baby' to be saved (i.e. baptised) and it was referred to as 'buying' a black baby. Shocked

Later, I just put it down to the ignorance of the times - or of EBD at least. It's on a par with the patronising attitude to servants and 'peasants'. She never did get to being multi cultural except for the token Lilamani - who didn't even have a second name!

#14: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 9:49 am

She criticises Juliet Carrick for looking down on "foreigner" prefects and Verity Anne for not wanting to speak German, but her "multi-culturalism" only seems to extend to Europe, North America and Australia and New Zealand . & she seems to class Emerence Hope as British by virtue of her being an Australian, which seems a bit odd by the 1960s!

#15: Author: Kathy_S, Location: midwestern US

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:08 pm

We had a similar scheme for "pagan babies," in which the class got to name one every time they came up with the requisite $5 of "mission money." Confused

Pat, you're quite right about the persistence of pretty virulent forms of racism. Unfortunately, the KKK still exists and has its headquarters in Indiana Crying or Very sad

. However, I'm reasonably sure that, by the time EBD was writing, it wouldn't have been politically correct here to condone them in a work of children's fiction.

#16: Author: Kat, Location: Swansea

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:01 pm

Kathy_S wrote:

-- I still cringe at the usage of the term "lynch" on the board --

I think we should find a new term, because it isn't fair for you to be upset by it. Any ideas anyone?

#17: Author: Vikki, Location: Sitting on an iceberg, freezing to death!!!

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:38 pm

Good point Katkin! *wracks lickle brain cell*

#18: Author: patmac, Location: Yorkshire England

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:30 pm

Kathy_S wrote:

We had a similar scheme for "pagan babies," in which the class got to name one every time they came up with the requisite $5 of "mission money." Confused

$5? Whew, that was expensive! We got to name them as well - lots of Patricias in Africa!

Kathy_S wrote:

Pat, you're quite right about the persistence of pretty virulent forms of racism. Unfortunately, the KKK still exists and has its headquarters in Indiana Crying or Very sad

. However, I'm reasonably sure that, by the time EBD was writing, it wouldn't have been politically correct here to condone them in a work of children's fiction.

Over here I doubt if anyone knew!

Alison H wrote:

her "multi-culturalism" only seems to extend to Europe, North America and Australia and New Zealand . & she seems to class Emerence Hope as British by virtue of her being an Australian, which seems a bit odd by the 1960s!

To true!

#19: Author: Kat, Location: Swansea

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:47 pm

Ok, we have scrapped the CBB lynch mob and now have: The CBB Scragging Mob *appluads Vikki for coming up with it* I hop this one is ok, but if anyone has objections please let us know and we'll change it Smile

#20: Author: Lulie, Location: Middlesbrough

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:57 pm

I have no objections to Scragging, but in the Box of Delights they talk about "scrobbling" people, which I think is a pretty good term. In B of D they use to to mean kidnapping, but hey, English is an ever chaging language and if we were to use Scrobbling to mean poking people with sharp pointy sticks, then meh! to Them!!!!! What do you think, Vikki and Kat?

#21: Author: Nell, Location: London, England

Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 10:44 am

Scragging or scrobbling are both fine by me - agree with Lulie that scrobbling is a pretty cool word!

#22: Author: LizB, Location: Oxon, England

Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 10:33 pm

*thinks scrobble fits in nicely with other words such as drabble, yibble and wibble* Liz

#23: Author: patmac, Location: Yorkshire England

Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:42 pm

I agree! and vote we adopt it!

#24: Author: Vikki, Location: Sitting on an iceberg, freezing to death!!!

Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:46 pm

Well, tis fine by me!

#25: Author: Kat, Location: Swansea

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 3:54 pm

#26: Author: Ann, Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, England

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 5:39 pm

KB wrote:

The account of the doings of that far-famed ‘Klan’ as given in Elsie’s Motherhood thrilled them all, though they sometimes stumbled over the long words used and were bothered by the very elaborate style of the book. ‘Cut all that,’ commanded Margia when the reader came to any ‘preachy’ bits. ‘Get on to the fun.'

I've just checked this against my pb (1992 edition) because I thought it was slightly different to the passage I remembered, and it was edited:

Rivals wrote:

The account of the doings of that far-famed 'Klan' as given in Elsie's Motherhood shocked them all.They were so good and quiet for the rest of the afternoon...etc,

So although the reference was left in, it was altered to show the Middles in a slightly better light, being 'shocked' rather than 'thrilled'.

#27: Author: Betty Sue, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:09 am

[this is a long way off topic]
Just responding to ALison H and patmac's comments about Emerence Hope being British when she was Australian and this seeming a bit odd.

Until the Citizenship Act of 1948, anyone born in Australia was a British subject, and there was no such thing as an Australian Citizen. In 1948 all Commonwealth countries brought in legislation defining what a citizen, was declaring those citizens to be British subjects and recognising as British subjects the citizens of the other Commonwealth countries. countries.

Until 1969, all Australian citizens were also British subjects. After that, they had the status of British subjects but were called Australian citizens; and not until 1984 did Australian citizens cease to be British subjects.

So, it may seem odd that Emerence Hope was "British", but that would have been her legal status at the time the book was written.

[and now, please return to the topic!]

#28: Author: KB, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 1:38 pm

But that is such a fun topic to discuss!

Actually, for many Australians in the first half of the 20th century, Britain was still 'home', even if they had lived all their lives in Australia and had no intention of visiting Britain. The book of "On the Beach", the film where a nuclear explosion renders Australia the only habitable place on the planet (did I miss the explosion? I thought it already was... Wink

) has an Australian character lamenting that now she will never get to go 'home' - this despite the fact that she had been born in Australia to (I think) Australian parents. She was, however, supposed to be moving to England soon after the nuke was exploded and made it impossible. This film came out in 1956 and I think the book was about the same time.

When Singapore fell to the Japanese in 1942, there was a great deal of shame among Australians at having failed. (There was, of course, also fear that the Japs would invade Australia.) One of Australia's biggest breaks with Britain came during WWII. Churchill requested that Australian troops be pulled out of the islands to the north of Oz and redeployed to Africa, sacrificing Australia and their familes in order to save Africa for the British. The Australians told Churchill to go to hell (not in so many words, of course) and stayed, managing to hold out until the Americans entered the war.

This betrayal (as it was seen by Australians) was a major reason for Australians to begin breaking away from the very close ties it had had with Britain before the war and during the first few years of conflict.

#29: Author: Dawn, Location: Leeds, West Yorks

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 7:58 pm

KB wrote:

Actually, for many Australians in the first half of the 20th century, Britain was still 'home', even if they had lived all their lives in Australia and had no intention of visiting Britain. The book of "On the Beach", the film where a nuclear explosion renders Australia the only habitable place on the planet (did I miss the explosion? I thought it already was... Wink

Just read On the Beach 2 nights ago (and absolutely bawled my eyes out as usual Rolling Eyes

)
In it Moira says: I was going home in March to London. It's been arranged for years. I was to have six months in England and on the continent, and then I was coming back through America

It was published in 1957, but Nevil Shute flew his own aircraft to Australia in 1947/8 to do the research. I've just been thinking through his Australian novels and in most of them there are Australians referring to the UK as *home* even if they were born and bred in Australia. Taking a long trip back home is also a feature, either as a *gap year* equivalent or when older and have made a success of their life and have the money to travel. Nevil Shute himself moved permanently to Australia in 1950.

But as a child I never made the conncetion with Emmy being seen as British Embarassed

(and yes I was reading Nevil Shute fairly soon after I started reading CS)

#30: Author: KB, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:41 pm

Dawn wrote:

Just read On the Beach 2 nights ago (and absolutely bawled my eyes out as usual Rolling Eyes

)
In it Moira says: I was going home in March to London. It's been arranged for years. I was to have six months in England and on the continent, and then I was coming back through America

That was the line I was thinking of. Thanks, Dawn.

The CBB -> Anything Else

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod, All times are GMT + 1 Hour

Page 1 of 1