The CBB :: View topic - How well off is Joey?

So it wasn't the doctoring that paid well - you had to be Jack (or Jem) to earn the big bucks!

The one that really bugs me is when Mrs Gay tells Rosamund Lilley that she and her husband were "frightfully poor" at one point: surely a vicar's wife must have seen genuinely poor people in her parish and have had a bit more idea of what constituted genuinely "poor" and what didn't :roll:

Would the Maynards have got money from giving their house to the National Trust?

Alison H wrote:

That always annoys me too, especially as she tells Rosamund they were poorer than Rosamunds family is now. How can that possibly be the case?

In fact, the only person I can think of offhand who actually talks about expenditure in relation to her salary is Joey, who mentions with gratitude having just banked a cheque from her publishers when there's something major that needs to be bought (can't remember what).

(Did Bob die before he inherited? I can't remember). And the Maynard grandparents left money to the Triplets and Stephen, I think, can't remember which book.

I think it's all relative, but I still find it annoying that no-one seems to acknowledge how well off they are compared to the vast majority of people.

no-one ever acknowledges that most of the population have to manage on what they earn.

It would have been nice (but very unrealistic) for Madge to offer Marie and Andre's daughters a CS education (though that wouldn't have been fair on the boys, I suppose).

I think this is a problem with a lot of GO books, to be honest. There's usually the obligatory scholarship girl, but nothing else to suggest poverty/difference in circumstance:

The endownment was often raised by selling off great chunks of land and/or important/valuable chattels.

At the time the Maynards would have supposedly given their house to the National Trust, the National Trust tended to take on large houses with an endowment from the owner to fund maintenance to the house in the future. So in essence they were losing income but removing the tax and upkeep burden which should roughly break even. The National Trust in return allowed them to carry on living there as tenants in return for a certain amount of open days which at the strt of the country house scheme was a minimum of 30 days.

These days the National Trust when they obtain property which is rarer than at that point post war buy it with loans, grants and appeal money as in the case for Tyntesfield.

(sorry just finished making notes on the National trust houses for my dissertation! :oops:

)

She does have a very Victorian view of charity - it's ok to be generous just as long as everyone stays in their own place in society.

I think this is a problem with a lot of GO books, to be honest. There's usually the obligatory scholarship girl, but nothing else to suggest poverty/difference in circumstance:

Re Joey and Jack's wealth, I brought the subject up because of the extension made to Die Blumen. It had, after all, once housed a school. Why was it necessary to extend it further?

Would upper middle class girls like the Bettanys and Mollie Maynard have gone to a high school rather than a boarding school?

“Jack’s handing it over to the National Trust, lock, stock and barrel – after we’ve rescued the things we either want or ought to keep. We couldn’t afford to keep up three places and the girls and I have never been really well there. It lies in a hollow and it’s too relaxing. We’re taking the old stuff and most of the pictures and so on, and with what’s left, I believe they’re talking of making it into a kind of guesthouse for foreign notables. Plas Gwyn will be our English home in the future.”

St Scholastika's was never a very big school, though, was it - I don't recall it having more than 30 students. Granted, that's a lot bigger than either the Russell or Bettany family, but the building wouldn't have been huge.

Getting back to Pretty Maids, I've just been reading Reunion, which talks about an old clock that had been at Pretty Maids for almost 300 years, but Jack and Joey removed it to stand in their own family home when Jack 'let the government have Pretty Maids for their own purposes'.

I was sure another book said it had gone to the National Trust. Another EBDism? There's a very big difference between the two!

I remember one book I read, it could have been a DFB, where the head mistress adopts one of the school maids and she is educated by the school. Anyone know which book I'm referring to? The girl in question had red hair and was called Rusty, and she was very much a leader in the form

What on earth did EBD mean by "a guest house for foreign notables" :roll:

? How many "foreign notables" were likely to be lurking around in the New Forest at any one time? It sounds like some kind of spy ring!

if it was a house that'd been in the family for a long time then it must've been a wrench for Jack to part with it. He couldn't really have kept the house on and kept up a family home near the San as well, with the rising cost of living after the War, but all Jo seems interested in is that the "relaxing" air doesn't agree with her. You'd expect someone with such a keen sense of history to be able to see the heritage aspect of things more clearly.

Jem, who sounds as if he should've had a family home, presumably sold up after his parents died, maybe to raise the money to open the San. He never seems to have any ties to anywhere: we're never even told which part of the country he comes from.

We're never told how long the Maynards had been at Pretty Maids - does the 300-year-old clock suggest that there'd been Maynards there for 300 years, or was it a family heirloom but not necessarily connected with the house, or was it just something that Jack's parents'd picked up at an antique shop? - but if it was a house that'd been in the family for a long time then it must've been a wrench for Jack to part with it. He couldn't really have kept the house on and kept up a family home near the San as well, with the rising cost of living after the War, but all Jo seems interested in is that the "relaxing" air doesn't agree with her. You'd expect someone with such a keen sense of history to be able to see the heritage aspect of things more clearly.

There is a balance between modernising to create a liveable space or leaving buidling untouched because of it's merit. (sorry I'm getting carried away again! :oops:

I'll shut up!)

I know, I just feel like it's a bit like that old 1990s Oxfam advert - give a man a fish vs. give him a net; EBD seems to prefer very Victorian-style charity giving.

I wonder how realistic it is that so many of the girls could stay in school. Especially during the war when their fathers would have been on army, not professional, salaries (or did companies keep paying men?). Did everyone just 'muddle through' and hope for the best?

Dorneywood is a National Trust house, but left with the proviso that it's used for/by members of the Government...

Perhaps EBD was intending something similar? More probably she just got confused :lol:

Re Joey and Jack's wealth, I brought the subject up because of the extension made to Die Blumen. It had, after all, once housed a school. Why was it necessary to extend it further?

Author:	MJKB [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:35 am ]
Post subject:	How well off is Joey?
I've just been re reading Future Chalet Girl and wonder how much it would have taken to maintain two such enormous houses. The Maynard household rivals the wealthiest celebrity families nowadays. As well as the tow Alpine houses, they also own Plas Gywn and Pretty Maids, all mansions too. I'm amazed when Joey talks occasionally about 'minding their pennies' when they obviously have the money to keep up such an enormous portfolio of super properties. They seem quite unconscious of their privillaged lifestyle, which is surprising when you think of the relative poverty of the early days of the sisters.

Author:	Miss Di [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:15 am ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Didn't Jack give Pretty Maids to the National Trust? And I am fairly sure they sold Plas Gwyn. But I don't think they're poor at all. Jack would have a pretty good income from the San, plus they own shares in the school, plus whatever Joey gets from her royalty cheques.

Author:	Llywela [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:36 am ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
They certainly don't own all four houses at the same time. Pretty Maids is offloaded quite early on, as I recall, and although when they first move to Switzerland the plan is to stay ten years and then return to Plas Gwyn, I believe it's only about five years before they announce that they are selling the house in England. They might even have bought Die Blumen with the proceeds of the Plas Gwyn sale! I agree, though, that the family seems unaccountably wealthy. Clearly being Head of the San and Josephine M Bettany are lucrative occupations! And yet the Couvoisier and Graves families are squished together into one Chalet, divided into flats. So it wasn't the doctoring that paid well - you had to be Jack (or Jem) to earn the big bucks!

Author:	Cosimo's Jackal [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 8:06 am ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Llywela wrote: So it wasn't the doctoring that paid well - you had to be Jack (or Jem) to earn the big bucks! In the world of the CS, men in particular tend to be pitied slightly for 'only having their salary', without any other source of income from inheritance, investments etc. Jem clearly has lots of money from sources other than his medical income - do we ever know where he worked as a doctor before he set up the San, come to think of it? - either from family money, or from his mysterious South African adventures. And Jack seems likely to have had some inheritance other than Pretty Maids which gives him some income other than his medical income, too. The majority of money of the ideal CS man doesn't seem to be from salaries. Aren't we told too somewhere that Reg has some money other than his salary? (Plus, of course, presumably he would have had no med school debt, if Jack paid for his entire training.) In fact, the only person I can think of offhand who actually talks about expenditure in relation to her salary is Joey, who mentions with gratitude having just banked a cheque from her publishers when there's something major that needs to be bought (can't remember what). It's interesting to think of Joey and Madge's changing financial circumstances, but I think EBD would definitely have considered it vulgar to depict them as relieved or happy to have money. (Too close to the Bakers and their big spending after the pools win!) My impression is that she intends us to think that their own early financial mess (that led to the setting up of the CS) was very much down to their guardian's mismanagement of their investments, and that, if he'd managed things better, they would have been financially comfortable. So the pre-CS financial pinch was more of a temporary reverse than a long period of genuine genteel poverty. They don't behave like people who are used to being poor, and they never seem to have to really penny-pinch even before the CS income can possibly have kicked in - there are at least two roaring fires in the Taverton house during the opening scene of Chalet, they seem to stay in good hotels en route to the Tyrol and don't travel third class etc., and there are no mentions of mended clothes etc. (It's not like Miss Bubb when she reappears on the scene, for instance.)

Author:	Alison H [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 8:57 am ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
You'd expect the head of the San to be on a big salary, but everyone in CS land is expected to have a "private income" too. Even Reg, who is supposed to be from a working class background, apparently has some investments inherited from his aunt, although I think EBD only mentions that to reassure us that he'll be able to support Len in the manner to which she's accustomed . There's a scene in which we're told that Vanna Ozanne is getting married and that her husband's got a private income (which Janie Lucy had evidently put in her letter to Joey, just as Joey informed Mollie and Grizel about Reg's finances!) so Vanna won't (heaven forfend!!) have to manage on just what he earns. & Kathie Ferrars talks about buying new clothes when she gets her dividends - although Kathie's case is different as she'd've inherited money and maybe got a life insurance policy payout from her parents' death. Poverty is relative, and if you're used to being well-off and all your friends and family are well-off then you might consider yourself "poor" even if by most people's standards you're not. Joey and Madge consider themselves "frightfully poor" at the start of the series, even though they own a house and have some investments. Lorna Hill's characters always talk about being "frightfully poor" when they're anything but, as well! I do find it annoying, though, because they must have been aware that real poverty existed. The one that really bugs me is when Mrs Gay tells Rosamund Lilley that she and her husband were "frightfully poor" at one point: surely a vicar's wife must have seen genuinely poor people in her parish and have had a bit more idea of what constituted genuinely "poor" and what didn't . I assume that the Bettanys were fairly well off before their guardian mismanaged their finances. There's no suggestion that Madge ever expected to have to work, and also they'd done a lot of travelling abroad. Madge made a great match, financially . Jem must've inherited a fortune from his parents to've been able to set up the San when he was only in his 30s.

The CBB http://www.the-cbb.co.uk/

How well off is Joey? http://www.the-cbb.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7549

Author:	ChubbyMonkey [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:31 am ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
This reminds me of a thread a while back, when somebody suggested the possible original Round House - it was massive! I think that EBD would be aware that she needed to give them some amount of money, partly to emphasise the kudos of the school but also to explain the lengthy families all shunted off to boarding school and the writing them out with trips to Canada/Australia whenever she wanted to.

Author:	JB [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:25 am ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
What a terribly vulgar thread. I can't believe you're talking about money Oh well. The Maynards give Pretty Maids to the National Trust before they go to Switzerland. Joey tells Mary Lou in Coming of Age, that they're selling Plas Gwyn. The Maynards have large overheads - all those children, school fees for the boys, houses, staff - but, understandably, they don't seem to have that much additional disposable income. Joey does talk about having a cheque from her publishers when a larger item of expenditure is mentioned. They do have shares in the school but there may not always have been dividends. Moving the school to Switzerland and the almost constant expansion would requirement investment and they may have reinvested profits to do this (more likely, in the 1950s, than borrowing the money?). Presumably Jack inherited some money after Bob's death but would have been several lots of death duties close together, then that post-war taxation and most of the money may have been tied up in Pretty Maids. I agree that the Bettany's pre-Chalet School poverty is meant to be seen as a blip after their Guardian mismanaged their money.

Author:	Loryat [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:29 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Alison H wrote: The one that really bugs me is when Mrs Gay tells Rosamund Lilley that she and her husband were "frightfully poor" at one point: surely a vicar's wife must have seen genuinely poor people in her parish and have had a bit more idea of what constituted genuinely "poor" and what didn't . That always annoys me too, especially as she tells Rosamund they were poorer than Rosamunds family is now. How can that possibly be the case? I know some CofE salaries used to be absolutely pitiful, but if they could afford to send Tom to the CS they weren't in the gutter. Unless someone else was paying the fees? I love how Tom's dad gets a promotion seemingly through the CS network - not even old girls, either! Would the Maynards have got money from giving their house to the National Trust?

Author:	Llywela [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:40 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Loryat wrote: Would the Maynards have got money from giving their house to the National Trust? ...I want to say no, they wouldn't, because I have a vague idea that as the National Trust is a charity, they don't pay for properties they take on - in fact, I had a vague idea that people had to give them money for taking over the running of a property. But now that you've asked, I realise I have no idea if that is correct or not, and I'm not sure how to find out. They could well have sold off land and other assets associated with the house, though, even if the house itself was simply signed over rather than sold.

Author:	ammonite [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:43 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
At the time the Maynards would have supposedly given their house to the National Trust, the National Trust tended to take on large houses with an endowment from the owner to fund maintenance to the house in the future. So in essence they were losing income but removing the tax and upkeep burden which should roughly break even. The National Trust in return allowed them to carry on living there as tenants in return for a certain amount of open days which at the strt of the country house scheme was a minimum of 30 days. These days the National Trust when they obtain property which is rarer than at that point post war buy it with loans, grants and appeal money as in the case for Tyntesfield. (sorry just finished making notes on the National trust houses for my dissertation! )

Author:	RoseCloke [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:59 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Loryat wrote: Alison H wrote: The one that really bugs me is when Mrs Gay tells Rosamund Lilley that she and her husband were "frightfully poor" at one point: surely a vicar's wife must have seen genuinely poor people in her parish and have had a bit more idea of what constituted genuinely "poor" and what didn't . That always annoys me too, especially as she tells Rosamund they were poorer than Rosamunds family is now. How can that possibly be the case? I always assumed that he hadn't always been a vicar - when I was a teenager my vicar had been a teacher first. This was about eight years ago and they were just scraping by too. They had a house, but I remember contrasting (and thank goodness I was old enough to know not to say anything - I was a horribly tactless child! ) their lifestyle with that of a slightly wealthier parish I had experience of. They had two children, which took a lot of money, and I know they shopped very carefully (we spent a lot of time at their house - they were some of the nicest people ever ) and their daughter had a lot of my hand-me-downs. They weren't on the poverty line, but they definitely didn't have any extras and holidays were spent at home/locally. Maybe it depends on your parish? Also, maybe Tom's fees were paid by the Church to begin with (don't ecclesiastical/military organisations offer places at certain schools?) or a nice godparent?

Author:	sealpuppy [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:00 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
The Maynard parents presumably left money to Jack, having probably provided for Mollie on her marriage and Bob's wife would have money from him too. (Did Bob die before he inherited? I can't remember). And the Maynard grandparents left money to the Triplets and Stephen, I think, can't remember which book. I'm not sure they were all that wealthy really. I know it looks like it from today's viewpoint but even if Jack still owned Plas Gwyn (did they let it when they went initially to the Platz?) he could have afforded to buy a place in Tyrol - it was cheap when the CS started, and possibly also when tourists were able to go back. Like people today buying a weekend cottage, I imagine. How desirable was Plas Gwyn to the average buyer in 1940? Pretty large, a bit ramshackle, miles from anywhere, and with other potential buyers ie men, off to war? It could have been a bargain price and bought with inherited money. Plus property didn't cost so much when measured against income as it does now. Did they buy Freudesheim? I know Joey says Jack 'found' them a house, but it could just be rented. I don't know if it's ever mentioned, but people did rent far more often than they bought, in those days.

Author:	JS [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:24 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Quote: In fact, the only person I can think of offhand who actually talks about expenditure in relation to her salary is Joey, who mentions with gratitude having just banked a cheque from her publishers when there's something major that needs to be bought (can't remember what). Was that when she said she'd just had a cheque from her publisher so she'd "go shags" with Jack over airfares?? Despite all the stuff about long families being no trouble, the boys' school fees would have been hefty and can you imagine the bill for outfitting the lot of them? Even with lots of hand-me-downs, the shoe costs alone would be horrendous. Unless, of course, they were funded by the MBR clan's secret crime ring which used carefully packed school trunks (supervised by Matey) to smuggle contraband around the world with CS girls.....

Author:	Lexi [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:34 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Ammonite has completely stolen what I was about to say The house I work in was handed over to the NT during the war years with virtually no endownment and the trustees having just sold off all the family silver and land for their own benefit So they did take on some houses with small or no endownments at that time but it was very much not the norm. The endownment was often raised by selling off great chunks of land and/or important/valuable chattels. I'm sure I've said this before somewhere but I think, depending on exactly when Bob died, that Jack would have been clobbered by two lots of death duties in quick succession. The chances of them having any money left at that point are slim!

Author:	JB [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:41 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
sealpuppy wrote: (Did Bob die before he inherited? I can't remember). And the Maynard grandparents left money to the Triplets and Stephen, I think, can't remember which book. EBD is a bit muddled about this. Joey and Jack spend part of the summer of 1939 at Pretty Maids but by the beginning of Goes to It, in the following March, his parents are dead. So, yes, Bob had inherited Pretty Maids before his death and there would have been two lots of death duties. And Granny Maynard would have left money to someone who wasn't born for another three years. Perhaps she left it to Joey and Jack's first son even though they didn't yet have one?

Author:	Loryat [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:44 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Sounds like the sort of sexist thing people would do in those days... I leave £1000 to their first son, failing that any daughters who come along. I can see Margot having something to say about the unfairness of that!

Author:	Alison H [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:50 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
I think it's all relative, but I still find it annoying that no-one seems to acknowledge how well off they are compared to the vast majority of people. For example, we're told that Ted's mother had to look after Ted "with only a young girl" to help her. She'd evidently had a nanny and at least one nursemaid to help her when her sons were babies, so from that viewpoint she was managing in reduced circumstances, but does no-one in CS-land realise that the vast majority of new parents have to cope with no "nursery staff" at all? It's the same with all the talk about Vanna's husband and Reg having private incomes: yes, it's what CS people are used to, but no-one ever acknowledges that most of the population have to manage on what they earn. I appreciate that EBD had to move the school away from Tyrol because of the Anschluss and the War, and then later moved it to the wealthiest country in Europe because she wanted an Alpine location and political events in Austria were still up in the air, but I think that in the Tyrol books there's a sense of social responsibility and awareness of what life is like for genuinely poor people which is lost later on. For example, there's that scene in which Madge and Marie are discussing Zita's owners and we "see" Marie thinking that it's all very well for Madge but she doesn't have to look after a big family on a small wage, and Madge then acknowledges what a struggle the family in question face.

Author:	RoseCloke [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:00 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Alison H wrote: I think it's all relative, but I still find it annoying that no-one seems to acknowledge how well off they are compared to the vast majority of people. I think this is a problem with a lot of GO books, to be honest. There's usually the obligatory scholarship girl, but nothing else to suggest poverty/difference in circumstance, for example a girl worrying about not going on a trip because her parents can't stump up the extras (I think one exception is Mallory Towers where someone - Daphne or Irene? - works herself into illness over it). It wouldn't have taken much for EBD to show even the staff discussing it. It annoyed me when I read (can't remember which CS book) about one of the prizes - I think the Margot Venables [edit: just remembered; it was the Therese Lepattre (sp?) scholarship] - which represented a lot of money and a girl going for it was, even by CS standards, very well off but going for it anyway, to the possible exemption of another CS girl who could have done with the money. And all the things in Tyrol about giving to the local poor - how about seeing if any of the girls would like a free place at school? Certainly reading GO books gave me some unrealistic expectations - I never understood why I couldn't go to boarding school in Austria and have kaffee und kuchen instead of warm milk and soggy sandwiches

Author:	Loryat [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:11 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Alison H wrote: no-one ever acknowledges that most of the population have to manage on what they earn. In fairness to Joey, she acknowledges this very thing in Problem, where she is talking about 'when the new nursery governess arrives then I'll be in clover' and admits that 'some poor folk' (ie most) have to manage without anyone. I particularly hate it in GO when the author is always careful to point out that the scholarship girl is a 'gentlewoman' in reduced circs, not actually someone working class. A DFB book, Nancy to the Rescue, is especially bad for this and is riddled with snobbish comments. EBD is not quite so bad, as we do have Biddy after all, though I always hate it when she tells us that Reg's father actually was a schoolteacher (making it acceptable for Reg to harbour professional ambitions). It would have been nice (but very unrealistic) for Madge to offer Marie and Andre's daughters a CS education (though that wouldn't have been fair on the boys, I suppose).

Author:	RoseCloke [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:23 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Loryat wrote: It would have been nice (but very unrealistic) for Madge to offer Marie and Andre's daughters a CS education (though that wouldn't have been fair on the boys, I suppose). I know, I just feel like it's a bit like that old 1990s Oxfam advert - give a man a fish vs. give him a net; EBD seems to prefer very Victorian-style charity giving. Or how about that excellent scene in JayB's 'Grey-Walled Paradise' where someone questions how useful/patronising having one free bed in the San was. It's all very well to pity someone, but not ultimately very useful Much more useful to provide a scholarship to someone who really needs it and let them help themselves and their family out for good. I do like the scenes during the war books when Joey has to worry about what she has left and ends up serving (I think) toast or something she thinks is totally unsuitable for a 'high tea' with JMB. Thinking about it (and having read a lot on scarcity for my latest assignment) I wonder how realistic it is that so many of the girls could stay in school. Especially during the war when their fathers would have been on army, not professional, salaries (or did companies keep paying men?). Did everyone just 'muddle through' and hope for the best?

Author:	JB [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:29 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
I suspect that EBD assumed most of the pupils' families would have private means, as well as any income earned. Also, I don't think boarding school would have been as expensive as it is today, relative to earnings. She does have a very Victorian view of charity - it's ok to be generous just as long as everyone stays in their own place in society.

Author:	Cosimo's Jackal [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
RoseCloke wrote: I think this is a problem with a lot of GO books, to be honest. There's usually the obligatory scholarship girl, but nothing else to suggest poverty/difference in circumstance: I can think of a couple that are more realistic about pennypinching. There's at least one Angela Brazil (The Youngest Girl in the Fifth, maybe?) and The Junior Prefect by Christine Chaundler from the early 30s - the latter I remember as having the real (if genteel) poverty of the day girl heroine's family as one of its main themes, and there was lots about her trying to get published to try to get together enough money for school club subscriptions and dress her little sisters for a party etc. I haven't read it in years, but I really liked it. I suppose you could argue that even some Enid Blytons at least acknowledge poverty - there are a few plots about girls who steal to be able to give birthday presents to other girls and pay subscriptions etc. But as Loryat said, it's nearly always a very genteel (and sometimes temporary) poverty in the CS and GO in general - if you discount the Tyrolean peasants as mostly picturesque background - and there's still a squeamishness about class. I get a bit cross with the depiction of the Chesters' 'poverty' in Janie Steps In, when we're explicitly told that their hard-working, illiterate sole servant girl is on minimal wages, because no 'better' servant would work for so little money. Grr.

Author:	julieanne1811 [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Lexi wrote: The endownment was often raised by selling off great chunks of land and/or important/valuable chattels. Completely OT, but this has made me think of something. I live in what is eupemistically called a 'mobile' home - although it doesn't go anywhere! Anyway, it's such a blessing because I was born in Surrey and all my family live here. Being a poor soul in terms of worldly wealth I would never be able to afford my own place. So, about 10 years ago, I was able to buy my mobile home for a mere £500.00. Did it up with some money I had from an accident (calf ran out into road, farmer lost control, emergency brake from me then my car was smashed to smithereens by an uninsured driver - took a long time to sort it all out, but I did get some compensation) and it's now effectively a 2-bedroom detached bungalow with a lovely garden (just don't talk t me about the deer - they eat everything). Well, when they cold-weather payments were made to pensioners (which I am not) I found out that people who live in mhs don't get the payment because the properties are considered to be chattles ..!!!! So, I live in a chattle. There you go. That's it. It sounds terribly medievil dosen't it?!

Author:	Llywela [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:25 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
ammonite wrote: At the time the Maynards would have supposedly given their house to the National Trust, the National Trust tended to take on large houses with an endowment from the owner to fund maintenance to the house in the future. So in essence they were losing income but removing the tax and upkeep burden which should roughly break even. The National Trust in return allowed them to carry on living there as tenants in return for a certain amount of open days which at the strt of the country house scheme was a minimum of 30 days. These days the National Trust when they obtain property which is rarer than at that point post war buy it with loans, grants and appeal money as in the case for Tyntesfield. (sorry just finished making notes on the National trust houses for my dissertation! ) Ooh, thank you. So my vague ideas weren't too far off the mark JB wrote: She does have a very Victorian view of charity - it's ok to be generous just as long as everyone stays in their own place in society. Totally - which makes Biddy all the more remarkable, really. I think she is just about the only character in the series who is allowed to step beyond her place in society. It's interesting because when Biddy is first introduced and we are told her full backstory, EBD makes a point of the fact that despite being adopted by a school, the child will not be attending that school, but must go to the local village school with the other peasant children. Because she is the wrong class. Then in later books, Biddy is very quietly absorbed into the Chalet School itself (having proved too bright for the village school), and I don't think we are ever fully reminded of her humble origins. We are allowed to remember that she is an orphan and that the school adopted her, but the servant status of her parents is not referred to again.

Author:	MJKB [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Cosimo's Jackal wrote: I think this is a problem with a lot of GO books, to be honest. There's usually the obligatory scholarship girl, but nothing else to suggest poverty/difference in circumstance: I remember one book I read, it could have been a DFB, where the head mistress adopts one of the school maids and she is educated by the school. Anyone know which book I'm referring to? The girl in question had red hair and was called Rusty, and she was very much a leader in the form Re Joey and Jack's wealth, I brought the subject up because of the extension made to Die Blumen. It had, after all, once housed a school. Why was it necessary to extend it further? Would upper middle class girls like the Bettanys and Mollie Maynard have gone to a high school rather than a boarding school?

Author:	JB [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:48 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
MJKB wrote: Re Joey and Jack's wealth, I brought the subject up because of the extension made to Die Blumen. It had, after all, once housed a school. Why was it necessary to extend it further? I wondered if it had been altered to make it smaller at some point in between the Russells leaving Austria and the Maynards buying the place. Then again, it doesn't sound very big when Madge and Joey are looking around it in New and deciding how they'll use each room. MJKB wrote: Would upper middle class girls like the Bettanys and Mollie Maynard have gone to a high school rather than a boarding school? I don't think i'd put the Bettanys into the same class as the land-owning Maynards who were upper middle class. However, in her non-Chalets, EBD does have girls from middle class backgrounds simiilar to the Bettanys as high school pupils. In A Head Girl's Difficulties, I would say that the high school is seen as on a par with a boarding school and Rosamund Atherton is off to Oxford. There's also movement between day and boarding school with some pupils leaving a day school to board.

Author:	Llywela [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:47 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
St Scholastika's was never a very big school, though, was it - I don't recall it having more than 30 students. Granted, that's a lot bigger than either the Russell or Bettany family, but the building wouldn't have been huge. Getting back to Pretty Maids, I've just been reading Reunion, which talks about an old clock that had been at Pretty Maids for almost 300 years, but Jack and Joey removed it to stand in their own family home when Jack 'let the government have Pretty Maids for their own purposes'. I was sure another book said it had gone to the National Trust. Another EBDism? There's a very big difference between the two!

Author:	abbeybufo [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:52 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
If Jack offered it 'to the Nation' in lieu of death duties it probably would have ended up as National Trust or what is now English Heritage

Author:	JB [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:56 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
In Changes, it's a mixture of National Trust and Government guest house: Quote: “Jack’s handing it over to the National Trust, lock, stock and barrel – after we’ve rescued the things we either want or ought to keep. We couldn’t afford to keep up three places and the girls and I have never been really well there. It lies in a hollow and it’s too relaxing. We’re taking the old stuff and most of the pictures and so on, and with what’s left, I believe they’re talking of making it into a kind of guesthouse for foreign notables. Plas Gwyn will be our English home in the future.” The Maynards still own it at this point so who knows what's been happening to it for the past 7 years or so. It doesn't sound like it was handed over in lieu of death duties.

Author:	Llywela [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:01 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
But the National Trust is not a government institution, so EBD can't have it both ways. It has to be either one or the other. I'm pretty sure the National Trust doesn't run guest houses for foreign notables, either. Did EBD actually know what the National Trust is?

Author:	ammonite [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:06 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
The National Trust at that time did get some properties handed over from the Government notably Hardwick Hall from the Duke of Devonshire. The National Trust did not show all properties at that time if they weren't thought to be of true architectural merit they were leased out for use, which could be what happened at Pretty Maids as I can't imagine it was either an intact Tudor gem or a classical villa/mansion, which is all that would have passed the country house committee at that time.

Author:	GotNerd [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:21 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Llywela wrote: St Scholastika's was never a very big school, though, was it - I don't recall it having more than 30 students. Granted, that's a lot bigger than either the Russell or Bettany family, but the building wouldn't have been huge. Getting back to Pretty Maids, I've just been reading Reunion, which talks about an old clock that had been at Pretty Maids for almost 300 years, but Jack and Joey removed it to stand in their own family home when Jack 'let the government have Pretty Maids for their own purposes'. I was sure another book said it had gone to the National Trust. Another EBDism? There's a very big difference between the two! Perhaps during the war the government were given it 'for their own purposes', as would have happened to Howells' were it not for the school. Then, when the war ended, it reverted to Jack and Joey's possession, and they later decided to give it to the National Trust.

Author:	Alison H [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:29 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
I've always taken that to mean that it was used by the authorities during the war, like Flora and Fiona's house was, and given back to the Maynards later on. What on earth did EBD mean by "a guest house for foreign notables" ? How many "foreign notables" were likely to be lurking around in the New Forest at any one time? It sounds like some kind of spy ring!

Author:	Jennie [ Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:34 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How well off is Joey?
Well, If you care to google 'Farm Hall, Godmanchester', you'll find out what the government did with largeish houses during the war. Apparently, when the present owners of FH were restoring the house, they were amazed at all the cables under the floorboards.