The CBB :: View topic

#1: Prefects Author: joelle, Location: lancashire, england

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 4:11 pm

i think its in school at the chalet that the headgirl (for the life of me cannot remember her name, getting it confused with grizel) makes a decision which is seen as a make or break decision regarding how the prefects will be seen for the rest of chalet school time. but then, not long later (in cs time anyway) joey as a prefect with her friends (also prefects) pull some pranks (i think in exploits). doesnt that totally disrupt the whole cs prefect thing? wouldnt some crazy middle take it as a licence to misbehave? sorry long post, just had to get that out there since its annoying me.

#2: Author: Lesley, Location: Allhallows, Kent

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:35 pm

Gisela was the first Head Girl, and her decision was not to allow the Middles to misbehave - even if it meant reporting them to Madge. Joey and co.were sub-prefects (in Rivals) when they relatiated to a series of practical jokes from the Middles - no it wasn't in keeping with the dignity of the Prefects - but this was Joey - she could do no wrong, even when she did! Wink

In fairness, it was after Joey had returned from serious illness,and they got into serious trouble from Madge.

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

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 9:14 pm

It would also be the precursor to the girls preferring to get into trouble with the staff than the prefects. If Gisela had done nothing at the time, this process could never have happened.

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

Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 2:55 pm

I think Gisela's decision was important because it was the option between reporting to Madge or letting Grizel (and Juliet?) cheek the prefects and get away with it. If they'd done nothing, then the prefects in the school would never have had any clout, by reporting it Gisela showed that messing with the prefects wasn't something that was done. Joey & co's trick in Rivals should really be beneath the dignity of a prefect, especially as they are supposed to set an example to the younger girls, and the punishment given was fairly strong by the standards of the books at that time - giving up their free time to wash and dry the hair of those they'd floured, washing and drying hair wasn't the quick and easy thing then that it is now - where most of the punishments seem to be repitition, lines, or being sent to bed! Liz

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

Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 7:24 pm

Also because of the small size of the school weren't Joey & co only around 15 or just 16 at this time, which might make it more excusable than if they were 17/18?

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

Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 9:43 pm

Hmm, possibly, but later in the series, most 15 and 16-year-olds are quick to mature and get past that stage, which is why the odd example that doesn't (Prudence Dawbarn, etc.) stand out so much.

#7: Author: Miriam, Location: Jerusalem, Israel

Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:06 pm

KB wrote:

Hmm, possibly, but later in the series, most 15 and 16-year-olds are quick to mature and get past that stage, which is why the odd example that doesn't (Prudence Dawbarn, etc.) stand out so much.

THat is actually in line with the way that social norms changed over that period. In the 50's and 60's girls did grow up much faster than they did during the 20's and 30's. In the later books it would make more sense to expect maturity at the age of about sixteen than it would have twenty or so years earlier.

#8: Author: Lisa_T, Location: Belfast

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:03 am

Doesn't the Head even say so to Joey in Redheads, when she points out that Len and co are much older at 16/17 than Joey and her crew 20 years before?

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

Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 3:36 pm

But then the early books talk about how the Tyrolean girls grow up faster than 'English' girls, and Joey is often mentioned as rebelling against growing up - interesting how she then doesn't want her girls to grow up too fast - as if she's trying to manage their lives as she wishes hers had been maybe? - although there's a huge discrepancy between her saying she doesn't want them to grow up fast and then piling responsibilities on them, especially Len! And I would say the first prefects, who were 15/16 at the time weren't they? are much more mature than the 15/16 year-olds in the Swiss books. Liz[/i]

#10: Author: jennifer, Location: Sunny California

Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 7:38 pm

LizB wrote:

But then the early books talk about how the Tyrolean girls grow up faster than 'English' girls, ... - although there's a huge discrepancy between her saying she doesn't want them to grow up fast and then piling responsibilities on them, especially Len!

Or throwing them at handsome doctors ten years older than them...

LizB wrote:

And I would say the first prefects, who were 15/16 at the time weren't they? are much more mature than the 15/16 year-olds in the Swiss books. Liz[/i]

I think there are different ways of measuring "mature", which is where the confusions comes from. There's mature as in worldly wise - including "boys", a wide range of experiences and travel, independence, and knowledge about what are often regarded as as adult topics. By those standards the later girls are much more mature, although Joey's lot are kept pretty young in some of those respects. There's also mature defined by personal behavior, sense of responsibility, trustworthiness, and ability to take an adult role, rather than being one of the kids that needs to be kept in line. By those standards the earliest prefects are much more mature. They don't act out, do mad things or play pranks the way many of the other girls do, they can be depended on to be responsible for the younger ones, and they move into an adult role very young (including young marriages). So Joey would be immature by both sets of standards, the early prefects by the second but not by the first, and Len by the second and only somewhat by the first (she doesn't need a chaperone to go out, and has travelled, but is still kept fairly naive). Joan Baker would fit the first category, but not the second. Does this make sense?

The CBB -> Anything Else

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

Page 1 of 1