The CBB :: View topic - Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School

“…she has been taught obedience from the very first, so we have no frettings and grumblings over her limitations, as we might have had from an English or American child.”

“If she had learned what the Robin and so many of the children here learn from baby days, the chances are that her weakness might have been overcome before this. As it is, it has needed these years to make her what she ought to be. I can assure you, I intend to see that David grows up to render absolute obedience to both of us.”

Maybe the current generation of parents don't do that? I would be interested to know.

I believe experiments have been done to see how far people would go in 'torturing' others because they were ordered to, sometimes with quite shocking results.

It's interesting to think of the Milgram and Stanford experiments in relation to EBD's favourite idea of 'instant obedience', which I've always found a bit sinister, rather as if the girls are household pets... I see why an institution like the CS needed basic rules to allow a lot of people to live side by side comfortably, but I think obedience as an abstract principle is a massively overrated virtue. It depends entirely on what you are being obedient to, as others have suggested! People need to learn to use their own minds and develop an independent moral compass - not be a 'spineless jellyfish'...

Quote:

Is this a criticism of the way Madge raised Joey?

I do find it strange that Juliet bemoans that, if she'd been taught obedience, she might have recovered from scarlet fever more quickly. It sounds rather retrospective, and quite worrying, for an adult woman, frankly.

There is no disguising the fact that Eustacia Benson was the most arrant little prig that ever existed. Her father, a learned professor of Greek, and mother, a doctor, both had great theories on how to bring up children, and to these they subjected their only child, the unfortunate Eustacia....

What an awful name. It's enough to make her weird."

There was a boy called Eustace Clarence Scrubb, and he almost deserved it..... He didn't call his father and mother "Father" and "Mother," but Harold and Alberta. They were very up-to-date and advanced people. They were vegetarians, nonsmokers, and teetotallers and wore a special kind of underclothes.

in nine cases out of ten, means that they are allowed to do pretty much as they like.

...It's interesting that both authors thought Eustace/ia such a dire name, suitable for the tale-telling type. Do you suppose C.S. Lewis read EBD? Or is there some cultural connotation that escapes me? I certainly can't see any connection with poor old heroic St. Eustace. (Poor old as in suppressed as probably fictional, along with those dare-to-stand-up-to-men heroines Sts. Katherine of Alexandria & Margaret of Antioch.)

Emma A wrote:

But I can understand what Juliet meant in that. She did go back to work much earlier than the doctor told her she could and was ill as a result. If she had of listened and done what he said, she wouldn't have been ill later or become ill again; so I can understand why she wished she had obeyed or listened to the doctor.

“Begin with the baby, my dear. You can’t afford to neglect even the first weeks of a baby’s life. I’ve seen that with Mrs Maynard. From the very first her children have learn certain things – obedience among them. The child reaches girlhood – or boyhood – with obedience engrained in its character. By degrees it becomes possible to drop the ‘you must’ attitude. Then one ought to see that any order is reasonable. If a child can see that, so much the better. If not then try to take time to give your reasons for it. Most of us are reasonable folk, Janet, if we’re given the chance. So if you start with all that sort of thing with a baby, certain qualities belong to one’s character and, unless one is a hopeless jellyfish, they won’t give way, even under severe strain.

But I still think it's interesting that it's Robin (who is saintly, but not generally known for heroic/impulsive acts) who is the one who acts and forces everyone's hand

(in fact, do we ever even see Captain Humphries in action as a father requiring obedience?)

Bernhilda and Frieda were too much afraid of their father’s anger to speak

six days later, Eustacia found herself motherless. She had wept decorously for the woman who had had so much to do with her training.

I don't actually think there's any criticism of Mr Winterton's behaviour, either - despite the fact that by most standards, the man is a distant, threatening, unloving father and husband. But there's no suggestion that Polly and Lala's fairly typical teenage sulks are in any way justified by their father's long absence and sudden reappearance, and the complete change of the rules of the household!

I think we are too keen on putting modern values onto an age gone by. Fathers going abroad to work etc was commonplace and would certainly not have been seen as putting your job before your wife and children, rather it would have been seen as putting family before self as he was depriving himself of home comforts to earn a good living for the family. Even fathers who remained at home often had very little at all to do with the upbringing of the children and were seen as quite distant figures by the children.

I agree that it's pathetic that Mrs Winterton is only bothered about what her husband would say

The sad thing is I think she herself isn't bothered about Polly understandably being brusque when she nearly walks off the harbour edge - but she's internalised her husband's strictness so much she parrots his stance on such things.

Alison H wrote:

I agree that it's pathetic that Mrs Winterton is only bothered about what her husband would say

We don't even get the impression that Jem is talking age appropriate obedience, which does make some sense. He comes across as incredibly arrogant and high handed because he seems to believe that, as a parent, he must always be 100% right on all occasions. Thankfully, for Joey, Madge doesn't share this certainty, and the young Joey is a result of her flexibility.

'And Uncle Jem being so furious about it makes it a lot worse. He doesn't usually lose his wool over things. If there is any ticking-off done in that family, it's generally Auntie Madge who has to do it.'

Even Jem-and he was wild with her for days-has to come around and forgive her. Madge, needless to state, did so almost at once.

I tend to take Jem's comments more with a grain of salt. A lot of people who have very little to do with children think like that or wonder why a parent doesn't discipline that child without much understanding that all children are different and aren't like robots. Madge who is extremely experienced with raising Joey, Robin, Juliet and Grizel, not to mention all the girls in the school shows much more understanding and doesn't insist on instant obedience. Jem obviously changes because it says in Gay by Daisy

But on the other hand you cannot excuse her for smacking Kitty the way she did...even Eustacia must have been able to see that that was wrong.

emma t wrote:

But on the other hand you cannot excuse her for smacking Kitty the way she did...even Eustacia must have been able to see that that was wrong.

I found her attitude to little Gretchen far more reprehensible than smacking Kitty.

Could it also be that EBD is actually slightly hostile (in my view, anyway) to the idea of a lady doctor being a mother at the same time? Daisy's career has been discussed on the board many times and isn't relevant here except to say that she becomes a celebrated female doctor, who gives it all up as soon as she becomes a wife and mother.

As regards Dr.Benson, I get the impression that she was more an academic than a practising doctor. And if Stacie picked up her views on 'peasant' children and disease from her, she may well have been into some sort of esoteric medical research into eugenics.

Funny, I never thought of Eustacia's mother as a medical doctor, I thought she was an academic dr - perhaps I thought this because she did die when she treated her cold. I always envisaged her following some favourite Roman cure she'd translated!

Me too! I never thought of her as a medical doctor either. I'm not quite sure why as all it says in the paperback is that Mrs Benson is a doctor and died from pneumonia. Is there more about her in the hardback?

Miss Di wrote:

THERE is no disguising the fact that Eustacia Benson was the most arrant little prig that ever existed. She was not so much to blame for it as was her upbringing. Her father had been a learned professor of Greek, who had married a lady doctor, neither of them being very young. Both had great theories on how to bring up children, and to these they subjected their only child, the unfortunate Eustacia—so called because of the meaning of the name in Greek,, ‘rich in corn,’ which the professor interpreted as ‘rich in knowledge.’ We have little difficulty in guessing the effect of those theories when we meet Eustacia for the first time one day in November, sitting in the drawing-room at her Aunt Margery’s, looking round it with a superior air, and mentally deciding how she would rearrange the room, should it be given over to her.
In the preceding June, Mrs. Benson had developed a cold, which she had insisted on treating herself. The result was that the cold rapidly went to her lungs, and, six days later, Eustacia found herself motherless. She had wept decorously for the woman who had had so much to do with her training.

I actually think that in the early days of the CS, EBD is far less dismissive of the idea of women choosing careers over marriage than she is in later days. Madge marries but keeps her 'hand in' in the running of the school; Mary Burnett is described as a 'born scholar' with, I think, the subtext that she would choose an academic career above marriage. But later we get numerous girls giving up their careers
to marry, often accompanied with a "Oh, she's had to forget all that, of course."

The difference between Madge 'keeping her hand in' and Dr./Mrs. Benson's work/parenting balance is that Madge never allows the running of the school to take priority over the rearing of her children, whereas Eustacia's mother puts her work before Eustacia. Even Eustacia's rearing is theoretical and lacking in warmth and appears to be more the working out of a hypothesis than the upbringing of a loved child.

Rather than the kind of robot EBD seems to suggest she is at the start of the book, where she doesn't seem to mourn either of her parents! I mean, whatever they were like, and even if they weren't 'good' parents by EBD's standards, Eustacia would have felt something...

Have I imagined this, or does Mary Burnett at some point call some sort of meeting of all the other girls to discuss Eustacia? If so, it's one of very few times in which we see everyone ganging up on one person.

Blossom turned back to her bricks without more fuss. Rosamund had brought up her children to obey her withough question and it would have been hard to find a better-trained little pair anywhere.

This is the same Blossom who later obeys without question a message to go to a teacher and is reprimanded for not questioning it.

I still think it's quite a cruel opening, from an author who's generally all about Christian forebearance and understanding. Not only does Dr Benson essentially kill herself through her own fault and is blamed for it by the author, but Eustacia is too prim to mind much, and Dr Benson isn't described as her mother, just the woman who trained her!

That's sort of what happens in Eustacia, to get back to it. Eustacia pulls away from Joey and in doing so accidentally bumps into Bill, which is all she does, and she ends up being made to feel that it'll be her fault if Robin dies of TB :shock:

Poor Stacie, though - we're supposed to see her accident and recovery as her deserved 'punishment' for disobedience (and, implicitly her threat to 'expose' the CS when she gets back to the UK, which I always think of as quite nasty - threaten the CS and Nemesis will get you!) but it seems to me that almost the worst thing to happen to her is being unfairly blamed for an illness Robin never even gets, and then being graciously 'forgiven' by Joey for something she didn't do!

I think that's the problem - not that Joey chose to blame Stacie and was really rather nasty about it - but that there is the implicit authorial approval of the fact.

Lesley wrote:

I think that's the problem - not that Joey chose to blame Stacie and was really rather nasty about it - but that there is the implicit authorial approval of the fact.

And that's really the problem with Joey overall, isn't it? She's one of my favourite characters, possibly my favourite character, in the series, but I always think that she'd have far less detractors (in real life, I mean) if EBD had just acknowledged her faults. I mean, blaming Eustacia is an incredibly human thing to do - people always want to blame something or someone tangible in situations where there isn't really anyone to blame - but EBD just can't bring herself to fault Jo.

For me, this is one of the examples of EBD making Joey human by showing her fallibility.

but I don't remember Jo saying 'I'm sorry for making you feel so guilty - I was wrong.' She seems to be forgiving Stacie, rather than asking for forgiveness, and poor guilt-stricken Stacie is thrilled to be pardoned.

Author:	JB [ Mon May 17, 2010 8:21 am ]
Post subject:	Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School is the sixth book in the Chalet School series. It was first published in 1934, the same year as The School by the River. It was subsequently reprinted numerous times by Armada. Eustacia Benson is a 14 year old recently orphaned girl. Her aunt despairs about what to do with her, as she is disrupting the family life, and Grizel Cochrane's stepmother recommends the Chalet School but Eustacia is by no means reconciled to the thought of going to boarding school. From the beginning she openly expresses her dissatisfaction with the and flagrantly disregards rules which she feels should not apply to her, thus incurring the wrath of the prefects. Eustacia's first enjoyable moment at the school seems to be the snow fight with St Scholastika's. At Half Term, she joins the expedition to Fulpmes and the Stubai Glacier. During the climb of the Stubai Glacier, the group get caught in a blizzard on the glacier, and Miss Wilson sprains her ankle. A spate of incidents culminates in Eustacia deciding to run away. And she becomes stranded in a flood in the mountains. When she is rescued, and on the road to recovery, her reformation begins, and Eustacia is no more. She becomes Stacie, and, in her own words.... "Eustacia wasn't nice, as you say. But I know Stacie will do her best to be a real Chalet School girl now and always". Thanks to the New Chalet Club. This is an abridged version of their synopsis. This week’s discussion will focus on the theme of “obedience” but please do comment on any other aspects of the book too. Here are a few questions to start things off: Eustacia refuses to obey rules she feels don’t apply to her eg taking a book from the staff section of the library and removing the plumeau from her bed, and she breaks the school girl “code” of not telling tales. Do you feel sorry for her or does she deserve the trouble in which she finds herself? Do you think the staff and prefects handled the situation well? Are you surprised by how the other pupils treat her as a new girl? Have your views changed since reading the book as a child? When discussing the Robin’s health with the Maranis, Jem says: Quote: “…she has been taught obedience from the very first, so we have no frettings and grumblings over her limitations, as we might have had from an English or American child.” And, referring to Jo, continues: Quote: “If she had learned what the Robin and so many of the children here learn from baby days, the chances are that her weakness might have been overcome before this. As it is, it has needed these years to make her what she ought to be. I can assure you, I intend to see that David grows up to render absolute obedience to both of us.” Is this a criticism of the way Madge raised Joey? Maria is “instantly and cheerfully obedient to the lightest word” of her parents unlike, her father, says the daughters of some of their friends (also CS pupils). Juliet says that if she had been brought up to be obedient and taken more time off college when she was ill, she might have recovered from scarlet fever more quickly. Do you find the concept of “absolute obedience” believable? Is it at odds with the CS ethos of not creating “spineless jellyfish”?

Author:	Alison H [ Mon May 17, 2010 9:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
This was the first CS book I've ever read, so I've got a soft spot for it ... and I always cry when we hear of Grossmutter's death during Bernhilda and Kurt's wedding reception, which is beautifully written. I feel very sorry for Stacie, who is about the only CS girl who suffers a long-term injury. The injured back storyline is straight out of What Katy Did, but Katy was at least surrounded by her family and friends. Stacie lost her home and her parents, wasn't treated with much kindness by her aunt and uncle, and was sent to a school where no-one seemed to understand that she'd never been to school before and didn't know the unwritten rules. & didn't Mary Burnett call some sort of school meeting so that all the other girls could bitch about Stacie together - I know that EBD didn't put it like that, but that was how it sounded. & then Joey made her feel as if it'd be her fault if Robin got TB, because she accidentally bumped into Miss Wilson. I thought the staff handled things badly too - maybe if Madge or Hilda had been more involved, it would've been dealt with better, but Mlle didn't seem to deal with anything very much, and Nell first of all told poor Stacie that if she'd been a boy then she'd've got thrashed for sneaking and then told poor Joey that it was her fault that Stacie had run away because she was so super-wonderful that Stacie couldn't handle not being her best mate! I do think that the concept of instant obedience goes too far - it becomes quite creepy, with Robin being made to sound like some sort of trained animal who obeys any command she's given. Also, I don't think it works in the context of Stacie's story. Whilst Dr Carr should have made it clear to Katy that the reason she wasn't to use the swing was that it was broken, Katy disobeyed a simple instruction given for a good reason. Stacie runs away because she is very unhappy after having a very difficult time of it, so the idea that she's being punished for her failings/getting her come-uppance just doesn't work for me: I just feel sorry for her.

Author:	RubyGates [ Mon May 17, 2010 11:59 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I also have a soft spot for Eustacia as it was the first book I read that I actually "got" and wasn't confused by it. I felt very sorry for Eustacia, not one single person can see that she's been brought up in a very different way to "normal" children and that she's recently lost both her parents and her home. No-one is prepared to give her even a bit of leeway, it's all "you're in the wrong Eustacia, you must change to fit in with us." Being very keen on reading myself I always sympathised with her objecting to all the fresh air and exercise the CS insisted on. With regards to the instant obedience bit I've always found it slightly creepy whatever book it's in. Maybe EBD didn't intend it to come across the way it does but it does seem as though the ideal child must be like a little robot, never questioning any commands.

Author:	Emma A [ Mon May 17, 2010 1:14 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Eustacia is one of my favourite books, though I think EBD weights the dice against her main character from the very beginning, when she states that Eustacia was "the most arrant little prig" who ever lived. That's really setting her up for a fall. EBD explains Eustacia's behaviour as a result of her elderly parents' training, but doesn't properly sympathise with this: in everything that follows, Eustacia is to blame. When she is taken in by the Trevanions, they are disconcerted because she refuses to conform to their expectations of how she should behave - I think if she'd been tearful, or openly grieving, or showing that she wanted some affection, her aunt would have provided this. As it was, I think she felt slightly repelled. I don't think that Mrs Trevanion made sufficient allowances, perhaps unsurprisingly, since she was the mother of four boys, who all appeared to be quite different to her niece. I don't think it's ever stated whether Mrs Trevanion is Eustacia's father's sister or her mother's sister: she must be considerably younger than her elder sibling, I'd have thought, and perhaps that also didn't help her understand her niece... I sympathise with Eustacia's predicament at the school, too. Unfortunately, schools can't really make allowances for individual requirements, and their smooth running depends on all the bits of grit becoming pearls. It would have been better if she'd reconciled with the school through a friendship with Evadne, for example. I do find it strange that Juliet bemoans that, if she'd been taught obedience, she might have recovered from scarlet fever more quickly. It sounds rather retrospective, and quite worrying, for an adult woman, frankly. Anyway, IIRC, the first time we see Juliet, in School At, isn't she disobeying her mother's instructions to stand up straight? So her parents evidently tried to make her obedient... Sorry, a bit rambling.

Author:	ChubbyMonkey [ Mon May 17, 2010 2:53 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
It strikes me that this book would be much more heavily weighted against Eustacia if it were in the Swiss era - at least EBD does try and put some of the blame with the school and Jo, though not very successfully I admit! I do like this book, but the instant obedience thing is a little odd; when I was younger I tended to accept it, because that was how my parents always thought things should be (not that they necessarily were, though that was more my brother's area than mine!) but now I can see some worrying side effects to it. When it comes to matters like illness, though, I think that Jem is right to say that children should be trained to obedience; there's a difference between "forgetting" you were told to put something away and deliberately disobeying and so putting yourself in danger.

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

Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School http://www.the-cbb.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=7866

Author:	MJKB [ Mon May 17, 2010 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I dont like the context within which Jem spouts that about 'instant obedience'. It always repelled me. However, a little more of it about nowadays might be no harm!

Author:	cal562301 [ Mon May 17, 2010 3:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I've never had children of my own, but it just crossed my mind to wonder what difference in reality there is between expecting instant obedience and a trend I noticed amongst my own peers as parents to say 'I'll count to three'. Meaning unless you obey me by then, you're for it. Maybe the current generation of parents don't do that? I would be interested to know. But I agree that it's also a question of degree. I think it's unreasonable to expect unquestioning obedience in every circumstance and at every age. The continental girls are still expected to be like this as teenagers. How many of today's teenagers accept their parents' dicta (dictums?) without question? Even my generation or to be more personal, I) didn't do that. It also reminds me of Nazi Germany where concentration camp guards and others used (or tried to use) the defence of 'I was only following orders'. I know that's taking it to an extreme, but it does make one wonder to what impact this unquestioning obedience from childhood had. I believe experiments have been done to see how far people would go in 'torturing' others because they were ordered to, sometimes with quite shocking results.

Author:	ChubbyMonkey [ Mon May 17, 2010 3:52 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
cal562301 wrote: Maybe the current generation of parents don't do that? I would be interested to know. Well, mine certainly did! cal562301 wrote: I believe experiments have been done to see how far people would go in 'torturing' others because they were ordered to, sometimes with quite shocking results. Yes - correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that it was Zimbardo's prison study. They had to end it after something like only three days, because the "guards" had started to beat up the prisoners and all sorts of other things. There was also the experiment where people were asked by a man in a white coat with a clipboard to deliver a "shock" of increasingly high voltage to another person if they got the answer to a question wrong (I want to say that Milgram did it, but I'm sure that he was the line experiment! I'm sure that somebody will be able to correct me) Something like over 80% of them would go to potentially fatal shocks - which weren't actually being delivered, I hasten to add! - despite watching the person in front of them "suffering" (acting). Sorry, that's all done from a very hazy remembrance of A-level psychology and rather off the point, but you're right, some of the things they discovered were absolutely shocking!

Author:	Llywela [ Mon May 17, 2010 4:15 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I believe it is the Milgram experiment and Stanford Prison Study you are referring to - I had to do some research in that field a while back, and yes, it is quite shocking to see the lengths that perfectly ordinary people will go to simply because they have been given an order.

Author:	Pado [ Mon May 17, 2010 8:58 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Milgram is the shocks and Asch is the line conformity. I think Eustacia (also one of my first reads and therefore a favorite) simply didn't perceive herself as being bound by the rules, especially as regards the library rules. She honestly doesn't see how they apply to her, and I suspect a more sympathetic character would have never been given the nasty punishment handed out by the prefects. Post-Emerence, they make an effort to explain to new girls about how rules need to be followed because One Is Living In A Community, but does anyone ever put it that way to Eustacia? Having essentially run the household in Oxford, she may simply be used to picking up keys as needed. [feeling a tad uncomfortable with my defence of her]

Author:	Cosimo's Jackal [ Mon May 17, 2010 9:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
It's interesting to think of the Milgram and Stanford experiments in relation to EBD's favourite idea of 'instant obedience', which I've always found a bit sinister, rather as if the girls are household pets. (Though ironically, the only canine character of the latter half of the series - a huge animal who should certainly have been trained to 'instant obedience' - is remarkably badly behaved...) And yes, I do think of it in relation to Nazism in the Tyrol books. I see why an institution like the CS needed basic rules to allow a lot of people to live side by side comfortably, but I think obedience as an abstract principle is a massively overrated virtue. It depends entirely on what you are being obedient to, as others have suggested! People need to learn to use their own minds and develop an independent moral compass - not be a 'spineless jellyfish'. Of course, in the world of the CS, the CS authorities are always right, so you know you are always being obedient to the 'right' orders, but 'always obey those in authority' doesn't seem like much of a preparation for the world at large, where not everyone is Madge or Mademoiselle! I always feel a lot of sympathy for Stacie, who, new to school, simply doesn't see why the CS shouldn't accommodate itself to her needs some of the time, too. The link EBD insists on between health and obedience drives me crackers. Juliet is an adult, and is best placed to make her own decision about when to return to work after an illness! But the one that really gets me is the continual statement that Robin only owes her life to having been trained to instant obedience, and having never being allowed to 'fret' - and that apparently is what saves her life for EBD. For one thing, I simply don't think it's possible to 'train' a child not to 'fret' inwardly - it takes enormous mental strength as an adult not to allow yourself to fret - all you can do is not allow the child to grumble or verbalise their displeasure. And that's less to do with a child's health than it is the comfort of the adults around them, surely! Also, we see Robin 'fretting' in Eustacia at Fulpmes, to the extent that she apparently makes herself badly ill in a short period!

Author:	Emma A [ Mon May 17, 2010 9:46 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Cosimo's Jackal wrote: It's interesting to think of the Milgram and Stanford experiments in relation to EBD's favourite idea of 'instant obedience', which I've always found a bit sinister, rather as if the girls are household pets... I see why an institution like the CS needed basic rules to allow a lot of people to live side by side comfortably, but I think obedience as an abstract principle is a massively overrated virtue. It depends entirely on what you are being obedient to, as others have suggested! People need to learn to use their own minds and develop an independent moral compass - not be a 'spineless jellyfish'... Apologies to Cosimo's Jackal for snipping her post. This just reminded me of Gail Carson Levine's Cinderella re-telling, Ella Enchanted, where Ella is made obedient (by a fairy curse, or well-wishing - I can't now remember), and it turns out horribly, because she has to obey a direct command, whoever gives it. Eventually, she manages to break the curse, but it takes a long time (and love) to do it. Sorry, not really very OT!

Author:	Lesley [ Mon May 17, 2010 10:53 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I'm another that thinks Eustacia was very poorly treated by the CS in general - I even wrote a drabble about it (Senior Mistress). No one seems to make alllowances for the fact that the girl has lost both her parents and been catapulted first into a completely different family life and then into a boarding school - it's not surprising she feels that the only thing she can do is run away. Her back injury is realistic - as is the fact she continues to have difficulties years later. What's not so realistic is that everyone blames Eustacia for Robin becoming ill - yet Bill's injury was not the reason the group spent the night in the hut - the blizzard did that - at most it delayed them by a few hours - but just why the guide - who went off in the early morning to fetch help - couldn't send word to the hotel I don't know.

Author:	Nightwing [ Mon May 17, 2010 11:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
JB wrote: Quote: “If she had learned what the Robin and so many of the children here learn from baby days, the chances are that her weakness might have been overcome before this. As it is, it has needed these years to make her what she ought to be. I can assure you, I intend to see that David grows up to render absolute obedience to both of us.” Is this a criticism of the way Madge raised Joey? I find this whole thing very weird! I don't think that Joey is actually a very disobedient child - her one big rebellion is going off to ice skate in Jo of, but for the most part her 'adventures' and illnesses are caused by her lack of forethought, rather than her being disobedient. Her other big rebellion was against the idea of being Head Girl - and would you really want a Head Girl who was so lacking in spirit that she just quietly accepted something like that without protest? EBD seems to be trying to credit Jo with a fault she doesn't really have - which is particularly amusing when you consider that she doesn't allow her to have any faults at all in later years. "Absolute obedience" sounds creepy to me, too. I understand the need for "instant obedience" in young children - even if I don't agree with it - but this whole thing makes children sound more like trained animals than human beings. I also hate the way Jo is told it's basically her fault that Eustacia ran off. I do think, given that Jo is presented as being very charismatic, that it's natural that Stacey is drawn to her; and it's equally natural that it's Joey that she locks horns with the most given, I think, that of everyone the school is most important to Joey. But Eustacia's unhappiness runs so much deeper than just being scorned by a girl that she could have admired; it's almost as though the staff aren't able to admit that it's partly (largely) their own fault, and so fish around to find someone else to blame. I wonder how different things would have been had Madge still been at the school?

Author:	Fiona Mc [ Mon May 17, 2010 11:31 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Emma A wrote: I do find it strange that Juliet bemoans that, if she'd been taught obedience, she might have recovered from scarlet fever more quickly. It sounds rather retrospective, and quite worrying, for an adult woman, frankly. But I can understand what Juliet meant in that. She did go back to work much earlier than the doctor told her she could and was ill as a result. If she had of listened and done what he said, she wouldn't have been ill later or become ill again; so I can understand why she wished she had obeyed or listened to the doctor. I'm a fan of instant obedience in some cases such as when a child is in danger i.e. about to run out onto the road in front of a car, but have found even in those cases kids don't tend to instantly obey, even though I wish they would. What I do find terrifying is, how many children are sexually abused in families simply because they obeyed an adult? It's okay (to a degree) if the parents are loving but even the best of parents make mistakes. Eustacia was my first book I ever finished and I do have a soft spot for it and for Eustacia. I do think when she was starting to turn Miss Stewert stuffed things up by being OTT about the pen. She did not make any allowances for someone who is normally extremely tidy or who was struggling being in school and was starting to settle in. I found Miss Stewert terrible like that. She did not have any understanding for anyone who was different or a 'difficult' character and did play favourites with certain girls (namely Joey). To a certain extent I could understand what Miss Wilson meant about Joey's influence and she caused Eustacia to run away. Joey could have been an amazing influence because she did have that ability and simply by offering her understanding and friendship could have helped Eustacia. I do find it interesting that EBD wrote another character who is very similiar to Eustacia. Cressie in Heather Leaves School is allowed to remain priggish but does show great courage. All she seems to do is soften around the edges as do the other characters and is accepted

Author:	Kathy_S [ Tue May 18, 2010 5:29 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Quote: There is no disguising the fact that Eustacia Benson was the most arrant little prig that ever existed. Her father, a learned professor of Greek, and mother, a doctor, both had great theories on how to bring up children, and to these they subjected their only child, the unfortunate Eustacia.... Quote: What an awful name. It's enough to make her weird." Quote: There was a boy called Eustace Clarence Scrubb, and he almost deserved it..... He didn't call his father and mother "Father" and "Mother," but Harold and Alberta. They were very up-to-date and advanced people. They were vegetarians, nonsmokers, and teetotallers and wore a special kind of underclothes. (C.S. Lewis, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader Same plot, really, except that Eustace gets turned into a dragon when he runs off, instead of having the more mundane sort of injury help him learn to fit in with the approved mores. Both authors seem to blame the protagonist's flaws on parental failure to provide proper structure in the obedient, respectful "honor thy father and thy mother" mode, and agree with Jem that leaving children to "develop their own personalities" Quote: in nine cases out of ten, means that they are allowed to do pretty much as they like. It's interesting that both authors thought Eustace/ia such a dire name, suitable for the tale-telling type. Do you suppose C.S. Lewis read EBD? Or is there some cultural connotation that escapes me? I certainly can't see any connection with poor old heroic St. Eustace. (Poor old as in suppressed as probably fictional, along with those dare-to-stand-up-to-men heroines Sts. Katherine of Alexandria & Margaret of Antioch.)

Author:	Emma A [ Tue May 18, 2010 8:53 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Kathy_S wrote: ...It's interesting that both authors thought Eustace/ia such a dire name, suitable for the tale-telling type. Do you suppose C.S. Lewis read EBD? Or is there some cultural connotation that escapes me? I certainly can't see any connection with poor old heroic St. Eustace. (Poor old as in suppressed as probably fictional, along with those dare-to-stand-up-to-men heroines Sts. Katherine of Alexandria & Margaret of Antioch.) Diana Wynne Jones has a character called Eustacia in her latest book, Enchanted Glass, but she shortens it to Stashe, because she (the character) doesn't like her full name... I don't think it's a bad name, myself, and unusual without being outlandish, though I could see why anyone at school would want to shorten it.

Author:	Cosimo's Jackal [ Tue May 18, 2010 9:31 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Fiona Mc wrote: Emma A wrote: I do find it strange that Juliet bemoans that, if she'd been taught obedience, she might have recovered from scarlet fever more quickly. It sounds rather retrospective, and quite worrying, for an adult woman, frankly. But I can understand what Juliet meant in that. She did go back to work much earlier than the doctor told her she could and was ill as a result. If she had of listened and done what he said, she wouldn't have been ill later or become ill again; so I can understand why she wished she had obeyed or listened to the doctor. But it's odd to cast it as a matter of 'obedience', though. Yes, Juliet relapses (at least in part) because she doesn't take medical advice seriously enough, but it's not as though she's a soldier or small child disobeying a command! And medical advice in the real world, given by real doctors, is far from infallible. A doctor advises - s/he doesn't 'command' a patient, not outside of EBD! You listen, but after all, it's your health and your body, and ultimately, your call. EBD behaves as though medical 'commands' are Holy Writ, but we all know people who have had to ignore illness and work on through it because it was necessary - not suggesting this was Juliet's situation, but it was her call, and maybe she was very worried about getting behind in college, having realised that the 'never cram, your health forbids it' ethos of the CS wasn't helpful for university exams! On the naming issue - I don't think Eustacia, objectively speaking, is any more outlandish or odd than quite a few CS names that EBD never remarks on, or seems to like, like Grizel, or Bernhilda, or Loveday. In fact, you'd expect in a school with so many nationalities, that people would be less quick to remark on names they consider 'odd', as for all they know that name is the Mary or Anne of another country, and your name means something faintly rude in Finnish!

Author:	MJKB [ Tue May 18, 2010 12:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Obdeience is, arguably, the pivotol virture in Catholocism. It may also have been greatly extolled in the early twentieth century Anglican Church. As a Catholic myself, I am uneasy about how it could be manipulated, indeed has been manipulated, by a minority of Catholic leaders. Together with the virtue of loyalty, it can be a recipe for disaster in the wrong hands. Adults aren't always right, and children sometimes have highly tuned instincts that should not be ignored. The worst type of parenting in my opinion is the highly controlling one. If children are expected to 'obey instantly' without any wriggle room whatsoever, it must lead to a geat deal of indecisve behaviour in later years, and worse, a huge amount of pent up frustration or resentment. We don't even get the impression that Jem is talking age appropriate obedience, which does make some sense. He comes across as incredibly arrogant and high handed because he seems to believe that, as a parent, he must always be 100% right on all occasions. Thankfully, for Joey, Madge doesn't share this certainty, and the young Joey is a result of her flexibility.

Author:	Cosimo's Jackal [ Tue May 18, 2010 12:28 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
This is slightly OT for Eustacia, but still about obedience. I was just thinking - the Robin ,as a child, is the main CS character who is most completely trained to 'instant obedience', right? Yet, arguably, it's the Robin who does the single most dangerous thing in CS history, by running out to intervene in the Nazi mob attacking Herr Goldmann. Now, unquestionably, it's a heroic, selfless thing to do, but it also - predictably - ends up endangering the lives of the entire CS party, who could easily have been killed. My question is, surely an ultra-obedient child like the Robin would have been the last person to rush out into a mob while on a school trip, surrounded by those she's been trained to obey? It's interesting that EBD chooses to have the Robin be the instigator, rather than a different CS girl known for heedlessness, which wouldn't seem like such a stretch. I assume she thinks Joey, now grown up, would not take the risk, or would realise she is not just risking her own life, and that Miss Wilson would be obliged to put her responsibility to the CS girls above trying to save a relative stranger. But I still think it's interesting that it's Robin (who is saintly, but not generally known for heroic/impulsive acts) who is the one who acts and forces everyone's hand. Younger Joey would have done the same thing, but it would fit in entirely with her impulsive, not-very-obedient character, and she is something of a compulsive rescuer. But it seems out of character for the Robin, whose 'goodness' has always been about forgiving people when they've done something wrong. Would other major CS characters have acted as Robin did? Would Len, or Mary-Lou?

Author:	Cel [ Tue May 18, 2010 2:08 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I could see a younger Mary-Lou doing it... I can't imagine Len quite so easily. It's a very young, naive thing to do, although incredibly brave and well-meant. So I agree that by this stage Joey was too old, although it would have been characteristic of the younger Joey to rush out without thinking. By this age, though, Robin's obedience doesn't seem to be as much of a feature - I can't think of the reference now, but I'm sure that there are other occasions where we're told that the (slightly older) Robin was being stubborn about something or other.

Author:	Llywela [ Tue May 18, 2010 2:11 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I think in that instance, EBD's desire to show Robin's tender heart and eagerness to save a life outweighed her interest in demonstrating absolute obedience.

Author:	Kathy_S [ Tue May 18, 2010 3:20 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
My guess is that EBD would characterize it as a "higher obedience."

Author:	Alison H [ Tue May 18, 2010 3:38 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I think that it's a really interesting scene. Joey, although she's around 20 by then, hasn't really stopped acting impulsively, and we're told that she's the one who's quite friendly with the Goldmanns, but it's Robin who initially rushes out and braves the mob. I also assume that the idea is that her wish to help an elderly person under attack overcomes any thought of anything else, but it's interesting that she was the one to take action. Robin is "stubborn" about wanting to do settlement work against the Russells' better judgement, but unfortunately she ends up giving that up. Instant obedience is very much a feature of What Katy Did and even more so of the (awful!) Elsie books, but EBD seems to see it largely as a Continental thing.

Author:	Cel [ Tue May 18, 2010 7:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Although she definitely seems to approve of instant obedience for young children, it's less clear whether she feels it's appropriate for teenagers. When somebody (Frieda? Marie?) in one of the early books is aghast at Grizel rebelling against her father, I don't get the impression that we're necessarily supposed to agree; Mr. Cochrane is clearly unreasonable and so his daughter's disobedience is seen as understandable, and the Austrians' horror at it comes across as a bit naive.

Author:	ChubbyMonkey [ Wed May 19, 2010 9:52 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Perhaps she saw it as part of growing up - young children are expected to be instantly obedient, but as you start to get older you are supposed to start reasoning for yourself what it is better to obey and what it isn't. Thus Robin is shown to be growing up when she rushes out (I agree that this was far more about her being tender-hearted and wanting to help someone in need than about instant obedience) to help without thinking.

Author:	Cosimo's Jackal [ Wed May 19, 2010 12:52 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I always think EBD's position on teenage obedience is a bit wobbly. On the one hand, she seems to approve of it, when you have, I think, Madge and Miss Maynard approving of Continental parental expectations compared to their sense of (presumably) contemporary parenting in the UK. Though as others said, when you have her describing Frieda or Maria Marani's absolutely unquestioning obedience to their fathers, you do have a sense of her distancing herself slightly from that, too. But in later books, particularly the Swiss ones, which are more realistic about teenagers, you have Hilda talking to Janet about how child 'instant obedience' needs to give way to a less authoritarian attitude: Quote: “Begin with the baby, my dear. You can’t afford to neglect even the first weeks of a baby’s life. I’ve seen that with Mrs Maynard. From the very first her children have learn certain things – obedience among them. The child reaches girlhood – or boyhood – with obedience engrained in its character. By degrees it becomes possible to drop the ‘you must’ attitude. Then one ought to see that any order is reasonable. If a child can see that, so much the better. If not then try to take time to give your reasons for it. Most of us are reasonable folk, Janet, if we’re given the chance. So if you start with all that sort of thing with a baby, certain qualities belong to one’s character and, unless one is a hopeless jellyfish, they won’t give way, even under severe strain. But there are a couple of problems with that - of course you can't teach a tiny baby 'obedience'! All you can do is accustom it to a strict routine which, depending on your opinion, makes parents' lives easier, a la Gina Ford - but that isn't obedience. (It seems to be the kind of thing Madge does with David, where she insists on him spending most of the day in his pram, rather than in her arms, and 'controlled crying', which I believe is very Gina Ford.) And while dropping the 'you must' attitude for reasoning with an older child sounds reasonable enough, when you look at what EBD is actually saying, it seems to be that the correctly-reared teenager will continue to obey after the adult has stopped the 'you must' attitude, because it's ingrained. Her theory still runs on the thesis that the adult is always right and reasonable, and that there is never a valid reason for acting contrary to the 'obedience' ingrained in you from childhood. That disobedience somehow involves being a spineless jellyfish...?

Author:	JS [ Thu May 20, 2010 12:12 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Quote: But I still think it's interesting that it's Robin (who is saintly, but not generally known for heroic/impulsive acts) who is the one who acts and forces everyone's hand I don't know much about the process of becoming an actual saint, but it strikes me that Robin's action here might form part of the body of evidence? On the Eustacia/obedience issue, I'm reminded of the beginning of Richenda where the name character is sent away for disobedience - and is, if you like, a little 'arrant priggish' herself with her 'fastidious' reaction to poor Joan's 'cheap prettiness'. EBD seems to forgive her, however, by having R saying over and over that she 'couldn't help it' - when really, frankly, she could.

Author:	Alison H [ Thu May 20, 2010 12:28 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
There are some interesting nuances to/variations to the theme of obedience. In the later Elsie books, which I assume EBD had read, Elsie's step-granddaughter Lulu is made to feel that it's wrong to do anything other than what her father tells her to do. When some friends ask if she'd like to go for a walk with them, she's supposed to say no because her father isn't in and so she can't ask his permission. There's also some really horrible creepy dialogue in which her father tells her that he can't love a disobedient child and that if she loved him then she wouldn't do anything without his permission. There's no suggestion that Herr Mensch or Captain Humphries (in fact, do we ever even see Captain Humphries in action as a father requiring obedience?) act like that, but we're told that Robin's trained to instant obedience and that Frieda would as soon have thought of flying as of disobeying her father. With Katy Carr, Dr Carr had a good reason for not wanting her to use the swing, but Susan Coolidge points out that either Dr Carr or Aunt Izzy should have explained that the swing needed repairing rather than just saying "because I say so". Then we get the question of Grizel's future career, and we get several different viewpoints - some people think that Grizel must obey her father even though it means being unhappy, whereas others think that Grizel should try to change his mind, and it's not 100% clear with whom EBD intends us to agree. Richenda's case is different again - Prof Fry requires obedience over a specific issue, and it's fairly reasonable that he should be worried about Richenda touching his valuable cases because of the risk of breakage and that he doesn't want his "personal space" invaded, but this time EBD seems to side with Richenda and to think that her father's the one in the wrong. Er, that was a lot of waffle! The point was that I'm never quite sure where EBD stands on the obedience issue either. I wish we knew exactly what'd happened to Rolf Maynard, because that might explain a lot. If, for example, he ran out in front of a car because he hadn't been taught to stop and wait when his mother called out to him to do so, that'd make sense, but we're never told.

Author:	bonnie [ Thu May 20, 2010 1:25 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Quote: (in fact, do we ever even see Captain Humphries in action as a father requiring obedience?) There is that bit in Eustacia where the Robin goes to Captain Humphries to try to get out of apologising to someone, and he tells her that she must always obey "Tante Marguerite" and not to come to him to try and revoke her punishments, and EBD states quite clearly that this was a gentle but firm rebuke. Apart from that, I don't know - in the books I've read they barely interact at all!

Author:	Cosimo's Jackal [ Thu May 20, 2010 1:38 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
EBD has a thing about obedience, girls and fathers, doesn't she? I have to say I always find Herr Mensch's effect on his daughters a bit chilling, even though we're clearly supposed to find him an admirable character. After he intervenes in the filming episode in Chalet and they are all rowing across the lake, we're told Quote: Bernhilda and Frieda were too much afraid of their father’s anger to speak despite the fact that they haven't done anything wrong! And then there are those chilling paternal withdrawals of love we see Jem and Jack doing from time to time, like after Josette's scalding, or with Margot after the Ted affair, which sound like some of the father-daughter bits in the 'Elsie' books - and which strike me as akin to psychological child abuse. And Professor Richardson sending Richenda off to school as a punishment, and Mr Winterton coming back after ten years abroad, deciding his daughters are 'everything he didn't like', and threatening to send them to schools at the opposite ends of Britain and not allow them to come home even after a year if they haven't reformed! I don't actually think there's any criticism of Mr Winterton's behaviour, either - despite the fact that by most standards, the man is a distant, threatening, unloving father and husband. But there's no suggestion that Polly and Lala's fairly typical teenage sulks are in any way justified by their father's long absence and sudden reappearance, and the complete change of the rules of the household! But - back to Eustacia - the hardback gives us a bit more than the paperback on what Eustacia's parents were like, and how utterly 'wrong' in every way they were by EBD's standards! Her mother, the 'lady doctor' is, I think, the only doctor in all of the CS who is criticised - Dr Benson 'insists' on treating her own cold and that is what kills her. (I ask you, if you are a doctor, and you have a cold, are you going to call in a specialist?) And we're told - I think quite cruelly for EBD - that Quote: six days later, Eustacia found herself motherless. She had wept decorously for the woman who had had so much to do with her training. That's such a strange, harsh way of describing Eustacia's mourning! Is she suggesting that Eustacia has no human feelings, or that Dr Benson wasn't a mother, just a woman who had 'trained' Eustacia? It seems pretty brutal of EBD, even if she didn't approve of the Bensons, especially when Eustacia in many ways emerges as quite an ordinary girl, with quite normal feelings - her unwilling liking for Joey etc - when she's at the CS, even before her accident. And OK, Professor Benson is more concerned with his book than his daughter, but you could say the same for many CS fathers like Prof Richardson, Mr Winterton, Commander Carey and Mary-Lou's father - even Dick Bettany - who all put their work ahead of their children. And in some ways, an absent-minded Aeschylus scholar seems less awful than Mr Winterton!

Author:	MJKB [ Fri May 21, 2010 11:52 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Cosimo's Jackal wrote: I don't actually think there's any criticism of Mr Winterton's behaviour, either - despite the fact that by most standards, the man is a distant, threatening, unloving father and husband. But there's no suggestion that Polly and Lala's fairly typical teenage sulks are in any way justified by their father's long absence and sudden reappearance, and the complete change of the rules of the household! I quite agree! I can't get my head around these fathers in the CS who swan off to foreign fields, leaving their wives to bring up their children and then expect to return to docile, loving, obedient and, actually, perfect adolescents. If my husband came back after years and had the nerve to criticise the way I'd nurtured and cared for his children in his absence, I'd tell him to pack his bags and go back to where he came from! The audacity of them !

Author:	Thursday Next [ Fri May 21, 2010 12:12 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
I think we are too keen on putting modern values onto an age gone by. Fathers going abroad to work etc was commonplace and would certainly not have been seen as putting your job before your wife and children, rather it would have been seen as putting family before self as he was depriving himself of home comforts to earn a good living for the family. Even fathers who remained at home often had very little at all to do with the upbringing of the children and were seen as quite distant figures by the children.

Author:	Cosimo's Jackal [ Fri May 21, 2010 1:01 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Books: Obedience - Eustacia Goes to the Chalet School
Thursday Next wrote: I think we are too keen on putting modern values onto an age gone by. Fathers going abroad to work etc was commonplace and would certainly not have been seen as putting your job before your wife and children, rather it would have been seen as putting family before self as he was depriving himself of home comforts to earn a good living for the family. Even fathers who remained at home often had very little at all to do with the upbringing of the children and were seen as quite distant figures by the children. I'm not suggesting we set up a wtichhunt for the CS's parade of crappy fathers (by 2010 standards)! No, it certainly wouldn't have been seen as putting your job before your family at the time of writing - and certainly EBD never questions it, as a woman of her time - but I don't think we are in the least obliged to read a 1947 novel with the eyes and attitudes of 1947 (if that were even possible!) And the kinds of scenarios EBD writes about for minor characters are often very revealing. The Bettanys she always presents as an ideal family, despite the long (initially voluntary, until the war) separation of the parents from the majority of their children. Mary-Lou never questions her father's wisdom is going off on a long, dangerous expedition and abandoning her and her mother. But the Wintertons, as much more minor characters, are much more revealing and problematic because EBD is less invested in presenting them as ideals - we see a geographically distant father returning to play havoc with his family after ten years away, and being resented and feared by his daughters (and possibly by his wife, though EBD carefully doesn't go there!) for his heavy-handed interventions. And even though the 'punishment' of school turns out to be wonderful, and the girls reform and are happy, to the delight of their mother, who visits at the end of term, there's no warm-and-fuzzy ending with punitive Mr Winterton. Even though there's not a breath of criticism of Mr Winterton, it's basically an interesting portrait of a fairly dysfunctional family that, unlike most CS scenarios, doesn't get neatly solved.