The CBB :: View topic - Joey & Co in the Tirol

#1: Joey & Co in the Tirol Author: Rachael,

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 2:18 pm

A summary for this book may be found here Fave/worst scenes? How do you like this one as another non-school book? Opinions on Jack's parenting skills, specifically when disciplining Mike? Likewise, the Professor (though not when disciplining Mike! Rolling Eyes

) Another coincidence - Rosomans & Richardsons? What insights, if any, did you get into the Triplets? Anything else?

#2: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 3:11 pm

Fave scene where the youngsters attack the bank robbers! We have all said much about the way that Jack punishes his children by ignoring them, and none of it is flattering to him. I seriously believe that EBD had only two methods of punishing boys, - a good whipping or ignoring the miscreant, neither of which we find acceeptable. The professor is a non-starter as a parent. Of course, his obsession following his wife's death is another plot device to bring yet more young people into Jo and Jack's orbit/care, to show how good they are to the whole world. The Richardson/Rosomon connection was not really a surprise, I sometimes feel that the CS world ought to be called the wonderful world of coincidences. By this time in the series, the number of coincidences is wearing a bit thin, especially when you add on the fact that it is Irma who turns out to be living in the old CS building. What on earth was Jo thinking of to take a whole bunch of young people and children out up the mountain paths wearing sandals? She was supposed to be experienced at this sort of thing, so she ought to have known that the weather could change dramatically. I felt rather sorry for poor little Charles having to have his appendix out, and that episode shows Len as careful and responsible, but I think she was a bit of a prig when she told Ruey off for getting into bed without brushing her hair. Then too, the triplets are still in their 'Isn't Mamma wonderful?' phase, it sometimes seems a shame that they don't ever really grow out of it, as normal girls do.

#3: Author: patmac, Location: Yorkshire England

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 6:14 pm

I quite enjoyed this book, although on re-reading I found the storyline coincidences a little too much! I was also rather amazed at the idea of anyone taking off in a 'private rocketship' as a storyline - that went out with HG Wells. I don't think EBD had any idea of how real fathers interact with their children so she has a rather narrow role for them in the books. She was only interested in the girls and their mothers - so long as they were ex-CS of course! the husbands, fathers and sons were there for background only.

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

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 7:31 pm

I think the problem was that EBD had no real insight into how a father should behave - her one had left home after all. That said though I think Jack's parenting in this was appalling, yes Mike had done wrong but he wasn't responsible for the way Joey reacted to it - spineless jellyfish or what! At least, once she came round, Joey had the right idea. Agree favourite scene was the kids attacking the hikers! Felt the coincidence was way OTT - why couldn't the Richardsons have been totally unrelated?That would have made their adoption all the more poignant. One scene that does rankle - Len with Charles -not her caring - that was wonderful - but that she not only didn't wake her father, but she fed Charles with aspirin and milk when later he was going to have a general anaesthetic - thet were lucky he didn't aspirate and choke to death on the table!

#5: Author: claire, Location: South Wales

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 7:41 pm

On Jo's side with her fainting she had not long given birth (and had probably been kept in bed for quite a while afterwards) so her fainting isn't that surprising.

#6: Author: jennifer, Location: Sunny California

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 7:49 pm

PatMac wrote:

I was also rather amazed at the idea of anyone taking off in a 'private rocketship' as a storyline - that went out with HG Wells..

Coincidentally enough, the first privately funded and built manned (personned?) flight into space occured last week - EBD was only off by about 45 years. Very Happy

In this case, it was for a contest with a fairly hefty prize, and the launch was in the Californian desert. Even then, they only took off, made it into space, and landed again.

#7: Author: shoe__gal, Location: St Andrews, Scotland

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:06 pm

My favourite scene in this has to be the trip to the Salt Mines - I just think it sounds like such a fantastic place to visit, and a lot of fun. I liked the fact that we got to see the girls with male friends too - nice to see they could get on just as well with the boys despite living in such a female environment. Some of the Switzerland books at this point seem to be getting a little repetitive and I thought this made a really nice break!

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

Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2004 9:51 am

Liked the Salt mines trip and loved the kids attacking the bank robbers/hikers! Thought Jack's treatment of Mike was awful, the poor boy probably felt bad enough anyway without being sent to coventry on top of it. Generally I enjoyed the book, especially when i first read it, it was a refreshing change from the school books and fun to see the Maynards with the three R's, even if the coincidences were a little too much to be believed.

#9: Author: Ellie, Location: Lincolnshire

Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2004 9:28 pm

This is actualy one of my favourite CS books - apart from the story line about the 3R's father taking off in a rocket! Even as a ten year old I found these sort of story lines a bit preposterous, at least when introduced into an otherwise rational world - they were ok in their place. I loved the scene when the kids attacked the hikers - that was great, although they were lucky not have caused their victims more serious injuries, throwing around kettles of boiling water indeed! EBD's insistence on trying to relate everyone to everyone else was starting to become a bit irksome by this point, it would have been better if the R's hadn't turned out to be related to Daisy, but she seemed to think that stories of long lost relatives being reunited was rather romantic, and it gave an alternative guardian for the Richardson's when she wanted them out of the way so she could oncentrate on the Maynards. As for Jack and Mike, I always had the impression that he avoided/ignored him because he couldn't guarantee that he would hold on to his temper if he had too much to do with him, but that is only my impression.

#10: Author: Helen, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:47 am

I enjoyed parts of it. It was good to see the Maynards in holiday mode. I enjoyed the attack on the "thieves" and also Jo telling off Dr Jack when he got into an arguement with another driver. Dr Jack doesn't come off that well does he? I did like the last paragraph though with him and Jo. It was sweet. Other parts irritated though. That planned rocket ride, oh yeah sure thing and most annoying of all that box of Professor R. they find. It is suppose to be so important but we never find what is in it.

#11: Author: Ruth, Location: Lincolnshire, England

Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 2:30 pm

Favourite scene would have to be when the Maynard children first meet the 3Rs. I like the way Jack deals with Mike and I love the last paragraph of Jack and Joey together. The Professor gets on my nerves - stupid man! I bet his rocket blows up or something as he is never heard of again!

#12: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 3:21 pm

Wouldn't the pieces have fallen down through the atmosphere and landed on Earth? I am of course speaking from almost total ignorance of space flight. Mind you, surely a lot of it would have burned up, creating lots of BCBs a la 'Fifth Elephant'

#13: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 3:27 pm

I suspect that what happened to the stupid prof was along the lines of what nearly happened to Apollo 13!!! I would love to know where he got the money for that BTW!!!

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

Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 7:38 pm

Depending on the speed the rocket re entered the atmosphere it could either bounce off and hurtle into outer space, or burn up before reaching the ground!

#15: Author: Nicci, Location: UK

Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 11:23 pm

I've only read this off the transcript which makes it seem less book-like to me, but as far as the 'out of school' stories go, I much prefered Rescue. I didn't like Jack's treatment of Mike. Although as Ellie pointed out, I did feel that this was more to do with Jack thinking he might not be able to hold onto his temper. - which is a worry really. I mean - was Mike really so bad?! Jack should meet some of the young monsters around today! Loved the scene with the hikers - perfect holiday fun! IMO the Charles appendix storyline seemed out of place. I can't explain why but it felt like it was just there to show how grown-up Len was (as if we didn't have that pointed out enough in this book) Poor Ruey, she must have felt under so much pressure! LOL over the previous comment about Jo taking the kids up the mountain in their sandals! So true. On the whole I liked it, but it certainly isn't a favourite. Its sadly affected by the unrealisticness of Professor R's character the the plight of the 3Rs. ETA and yeah, what was the deal with that box??

#16: Author: Nicole, Location: New Zealand

Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 1:26 am

I have to admit I'm not a big fan of this book - perhaps this is because I've only read it in transcript, which is not my favourite way to read a book. Jack's treatment of Mike was, IMO. appalling. I can understand him saying something along the lines of "I'm too angry to speak with you now, we'll discuss this later", but 2 weeks later is far too long to leave a child on tenterhooks. Just as a matter of curiousity, how old was Mike - about 7 or so? I have mixed feelings about the holiday books. It's great to see the characters away from the school, and it's fantastic to see the boys, but I tend to find them a little too Joey centric for my taste. The holiday books are where she irritates me the most. The Professor - well as a parent, he's a non event. If I look at things from todays point of view, he'd be lucky if the 3 R's weren't taken into care. He has basically abandoned them to essentially chase a pipe dream. Coincidences - yes, well. In real life it's *possible* that this could happen, however it's exremely unlikely that it would happen. I think EBD does start to go a bit far with the Bettany/Maynard/Russell interconnected families bit. It can happen -I'm from a very small town where the unofficial motto is "If they're not related to you, they're married to your cousin", but even so. The triplets - I think I need to reread the book again. Len seems to be very much groomed into being the responsible one of the family (also Steve to a lesser extent). I can't really recall anything else that I picked up on about them. The only other thing that I can think of to bring up is that I think there were a few loose ends that weren't tied up at the end of the book. I remember being annoyed by this. Apologies if this doesn't make sense - it doesn't seem very coherent to me.

#17: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 1:09 pm

I agree that the Professor Richardson bit was unrealistic. I've heard of a ruling passion, but that was ridiculous!

#18: Author: Ellie, Location: Lincolnshire

Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2004 11:41 pm

Another thing which I find slightly annoying/strange is Jack's actions after Roger had injured his leg. After Roger developed a fever he said that he expected that might happen - in that case why on earth did he send him back to the remote chalet with just Len, Margot & Ruey to look after him?

#19: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:45 am

So he could later arrange to spend the night there to show us what a wonderful doctor he is, and also to give a valid reason for the Maynards taking on the three Richardsons.

#20: Author: Clare, Location: Liverpool

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 12:20 pm

Hmm, fave/worse scenes... Well, I was always a fan of the trip to the salt mines, and when I went to Salzburg last month, the weather was so bad, I went and booked myself on a trip to the salt mines in Bavaria. We went into the mountain on a little train, had a tour guide with a really thick Bavarian accent, went down to the other levels on a slide and crossed a salt lake. Oh, and most people wet their fingers, rubbed them on the wall and licked their finger to see if the rock was salty! So, that chapter has really come to life for me now Laughing

My other favourite scene is when Charles has appenicitis. Awwww, how cute is he? I felt so sorry for him, and I like the way Len handles it until she realises it is beyond her. Can't think of any scenes I don't particularly like, though I'm not a fan of the whole 'space explorer' excuse for the Prof ignoring his children. Seems a bit daft to me. I like this one as a non-school book, especially as it's set in the Tirol. And how can you not rate it when you have the scene with the Maynards and Richardsons capturing the 'robbers'? Don't get me started on the Rosomans and Richardsons coincidence. Why oh why do they all have to be related, no matter how distant the connection? That irritates the life out of me.

#21: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 12:46 pm

Another thing that irritated me was Jo's being convinced that the new twins were begining to teeth. It was way too early for them to egin. They were only ten weeks maximum when they went to the Tiernsee. Also, did anyone else notice the wholesale way the younger children were swept away from their parents for over a month, so Jo could have a rest? Didn't anyone think that the younger ones might feel unloved and excluded?

#22: Author: Clare, Location: Liverpool

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 1:01 pm

Definitely. But it's only really expressed in Future when Cecil complains about being left behind. And anyway, how often did Joey see the kids during the day?? Anna and Rosli (?) were with them most of the day, Joey only saw them a couple of times during the day. I felt sorry for the boys. Away from the family all through the school year and then they're swept off pretty promptly when they arrive home. They really must have felt unwanted!

#23: Author: Susan, Location: Carlisle

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 1:19 pm

Jennie wrote:

Also, did anyone else notice the wholesale way the younger children were swept away from their parents for over a month, so Jo could have a rest? Didn't anyone think that the younger ones might feel unloved and excluded?

One thing irritates me through the whole CS series (and other boarding school books) and this brings it to light. That is the whole - send them off to boarding school and then farm them off to other relatives or friends for as much of the holidays as possible. Most of the boys in the series (and some of the girls too) must have felt unwanted by their families. I have just re read 'Rescue' Jo takes Sybil with her, and David is off to a school friend for the holidays. They come home just a short while before term begins. I am surprised this did not lead to jealousy and great big teenage rebellions. And it is not as if Jo or Madge or any other families it happens too need to look after their childrem 24/7 they all have help oif some description or the kids are old enough to do things for themselves. Half term visits are not as bad but when it comes to the summer holidays grrr!!

#24: Author: Angel, Location: London, England

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 5:49 pm

I used to beg and beg to go to friends in the holiday and was never allowed when I went to boarding school, so used to belt off on my bike to see them - long long trips. Most of my friends were similar - parents weren't so close and interfering as our daygirl friends seemed to find, and we didn't do the whole 'rebellion' thing because we'd found our own identity at school without the parents around. The ones that did rebel were the ones whose parents insisted on them being around. That probably makes no sense. I always suspected that the fathers (Jem and Jack) saw far more of the boys than we ever suspected, and that's how I've written it in Crax. Charles is the big exception.

#25: Author: claire, Location: South Wales

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 8:17 pm

In Jo to the Rescue I think the main reason Jo has Sybil is because of Madge being heavily pregnant (ie get the kids out of the house for the birth - the triplets go to Madge a few weeks before Stephen is due for that purpose) but she does keep Josette so that theory is a little flawed, but it was quite common back then - my girls however had no problem with being in the house (although not the room) when their brother was born - and when Katja was born, Alicia slept through the lot

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

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 9:58 pm

Josette was recovering from being seriously burnt though wasn't she? I think that's why she stayed with Madge. Obviously my mum got it all wrong in having her children at home, so that, when my brother was born, she had a 5 year old (me) and a 3 year old (my sister) to cope with too! Oh well - we were probably one of those families that Madge, Joey et al wouldn't have wanted to associate with anyway!

#27: Author: LadyGuinevere, Location: Leicester

Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 10:37 pm

I believe my middle sister and I went to my grandparents quite soon before sister no. 2 was born. Probably a good thing too, as that weekend my sister started mumps. ~LadyG

#28: Author: Kathy_S, Location: midwestern US

Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:37 am

To some extent, I think both the children-out-of-the-way around a birth and the boarding school phenomenon were cultural norms among some segments of society, and, as such, wouldn't have been taken too personally by the children. (Not our societal niche, of course .... though Mom might have been less frazzled person with some time off and an Anna or two. As it was, virtually the only times she was without children underfoot were the hospital stays for new ones Confused

. )

#29: Author: MissPrint, Location: Edinburgh

Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 8:41 am

My best friend was sent to her grandparents for two months when her twin sisters were born, she was four, and didn't know them particularly well. She's still carrying round resentment and hurt even now, forty years later. At least she is now on speaking terms with the twins. Though I don't think she was ever on particularly cordial terms with her grandparents. I, on the other hand, spent a year living with my Grannie and loved every minute of it. Was quite peeved when this lady calling herself Mummy came to claim me and my little brother. Vastly peeved when I discovered the size (or lack of size) of our new house and garden. I had become rather used to grounds and shrubberies and a patch of muddy grass with a clothesline could not compare.

#30: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 12:34 pm

And when Madge finally got both her children home after giving birth, she wouldn't let them see the baby for over twenty-four hours.

#31: Author: Ally, Location: Jack Maynard's Dressing Room!!

Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:00 pm

A similar thing happens in Anne of Ingleside, when all Anne's children are sent away to various places for about two weeks, and Walter gets upset and runs away home. I certainly think it would not have been uncommon to EBD.

#32: Author: Rachel, Location: Plotting in my lair

Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 9:42 pm

Ally wrote:

But wasn't this done because in the pregnancy prior to the one in this book, Anne was seriously ill after the baby's birth? It never read as being the usual for Anne and Gilbert to pack their kids off to others.

#33: Author: patmac, Location: Yorkshire England

Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 9:56 pm

In the aristocracy, it was normal for parents to only see their children at set intervals - e.g. after tea and before dinner and I think the middle classes who could afford help followed suit. Even the working classes farmed children out quite happily. When my grandparents moved from Enfield to Rochdale, they left the eldest three children to be brought up by a childless uncle and aunt. I never heard of any resentment. I found the same as Angel. Going to boarding school meant your friends were not local and that would apply to the Maynard and Russell boys.

#34: Author: Angel, Location: London, England

Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 10:00 pm

My Grandmother was farmed out and resented it bitterly. However there was (as ever) more to that story... My ex was seriously screwed up by spending the first five years of his life with his grandparents - from a couple of weeks after birth until a year after his sister was born.

#35: Author: patmac, Location: Yorkshire England

Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2004 7:47 am

Mind you, I know some people who have been seriously screwed up by their pwn parents so I think it is more of a matter of personalities and how things are handled. Someone farther back on this thread said she had enjoyed the time with grandparents. (sorry, can't remember who said that now)

#36: Author: Angel, Location: London, England

Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2004 8:31 am

The ex always said it was the best time of his life, but you only had to get to know him to see how deeply insecure he was. He was always concerned about being abandoned, and used to pretend to be the same age as the sister. I always think that Bride and Co must have really felt it - their parents had been able to keep the others in India, but not them.

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

Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2004 9:31 am

Wasn't it more a case of they had to keep second twins in India? War had broken out by the time the twins were of an age that they could really have been separated from their mother, and made travel if not impossible, then very dangerous and too risky to attempt with two young babies/toddlers.

#38: Author: Angel, Location: London, England

Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2004 9:35 am

Whether or not they wanted it, it must have hurt. I remember some comment about Maeve and Maurice no longer being the oldes, and suddenly Peggy and Bride seeing their mother for the first time in 10 years....

The CBB -> Book Discussions

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

Page 1 of 1