Trials for the Chalet School
Select messages from
# through # FAQ
[/[Print]\]

The CBB -> Formal Discussions

#1: Trials for the Chalet School Author: RóisínLocation: Gaillimh PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:43 pm
    —
Is it ok to move on with these? Hope so Very Happy

There is a PB/HB comparison here and a synopsis here. Trials is one of the most heavily edited/cut of the books.

So, do you think that Naomi's mind really is 'warped'? Is she, or Herr Laubach to blame for the episode in the art class? Scarlet fever arrives and poor Rosalie is the most affected by it. What did you think of the Old Girls returning to provide the actresses for the Pantomine? This is the book where Mary-Lou is yet again the saviour of a new girl, where the Lost Property prank is played and where Evadne gets engaged.

#2: Re: Trials for the Chalet School Author: JayBLocation: SE England PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 3:13 pm
    —
Róisín wrote:
So, do you think that Naomi's mind really is 'warped'?


If it's just that she had no religious beliefs, then no. And since she wasn't baptised, it was presumably her parents' choice to bring her up that way, so it's unfair to blame Naomi.

But if it's that her attitude to her disability was threatening to spoil her life, then yes, she did need to be shown a healthier way of thinking. But she didn't necessarily need to become a Christian to achieve that.

Quote:
Is she, or Herr Laubach to blame for the episode in the art class?


Her Laubach. Naomi was careless in picking up the wrong stick, but he's the adult, and should have had more control over his temper. It's far from being the first time he's lost his temper with a pupil; he wouldn't get away with it in a modern state school. All the staff must have known that Naomi was a difficult pupil, and should have been prepared for trouble. To Herr Laubach's credit, he did acknowledge he was at fault.

I like the Lost Property prank. The punishment is really original.

I want to say something about M-L in this book, but can't quite get my thoughts together. I'll wait and see what others say, might help me to sort out what I want to say.

Jay B.

#3:  Author: Alison HLocation: Manchester PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 3:24 pm
    —
Mary-Lou's attitude towards Naomi's comments about religion wind me up - she says something along the lines of "What rot" and "It simply isn't true" IIRC. I can see that Naomi's attitude that the world was against her, whilst understandable, wasn't healthy, but it does annoy me when people, however well-meaning, make out that any religious beliefs other than their own are wrong. & it's very tactless given that Naomi's just said that her late parents were agnostics.

On the other hand, we see OOAO being thoughtful, e.g. staying behind when the others've gone out so that Naomi won't be left on her own, and sympathising with Naomi's back pain.

As for the scarlet fever, poor old Rosalie hardly ever gets a storyline (sorry to sound like a soap opera magazine!) and then when she does it has to be scarlet fever! But at least Evvy took her on a nice holiday afterwards Very Happy .

Herr Laubach shouldn't have lost his temper - it would've been understandable if Naomi had been playing up in class or had been rude to him, but not just because she was no good at art which she couldn't really help - but it wasn't his fault that Naomi'd brought the wrong stick out with her.

I like the Lost Property prank Very Happy .

#4:  Author: jenniferLocation: Taiwan PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 3:46 pm
    —
I've always had an issue with the way Herr Laubach taught his classes - he insults the students, calling them stupid, idiots and worse, he goes off in furious rages which appear to be unrelated to the students' actual performances - just working himself up into a frenzy and taking it out, even on the good students. He doesn't give any allowance for lack of ability, previous lack of training, or whether someone is trying, and is fond of ripping people's work off the board and flinging it down in disgust

None of the other teachers would have gotten away with behaviour remotely like like that. Grizel is condemned for her sharp tongue, and Miss Slater is criticised for only being fond of students who are good at her subject, but they come nowhere near this.

I think Naomi was warped, in her bitterness and expectation that she would receive nothing but pity from others.

#5:  Author: KathrynWLocation: London PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 3:51 pm
    —
I only have the PB of this and didn't realise how much it was cut. Maybe that's why I've always been a bit disappointed with it - apart from the whole religious thing, Naomi is hardly that 'warped' at all, no more than most people would be whatever their cross to bear is.

I do end up feeling a bit sorry for Herr Laubach but then I think it's completely his fault and, like Jennifer, he never really teaches in a very professional way


Edited after Lolly pointed out what I'd written didn't actually make sense... Laughing I blame the pollen!

Edited to put it back so that more people could laugh at me Very Happy


Last edited by KathrynW on Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:55 pm; edited 2 times in total

#6:  Author: LollyLocation: London PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:51 pm
    —
Kathryn it is not nice to comment on Jennifer's teaching like that Laughing

Sorry. Been too long in the library today

#7:  Author: RóisínLocation: Gaillimh PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:54 pm
    —
Lolly wrote:
Kathryn it is not nice to comment on Jennifer's teaching like that Laughing

Sorry. Been too long in the library today


*splutters* Laughing

#8:  Author: LollyLocation: London PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 7:08 pm
    —
KathrynW wrote:
I
Edited after Lolly pointed out what I'd written didn't actually make sense... Laughing I blame the pollen!

Edited to put it back so that more people could laugh at me Very Happy


sorry Kathryn that was mean! but I couldn't help myself.... Wink

#9:  Author: KathrynWLocation: London PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 7:36 pm
    —
It wasn't mean at all, Lolly. I deserved it anyway Very Happy

Kath

#10:  Author: MaeveLocation: Romania PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:58 pm
    —
I thought the way EBD has Naomi behave was rather interesting - she's not simply in sulks the whole time like Jessica in Mary-Lou of. She behaves in a way that makes everyone else feel uncomfortable but they can't quite put their finger on what's wrong or else, they don't know how to confront it. She comes across as a clever individual who knows exactly what she's doing and enjoys everyone else's discomfort -rather original compared to the usual trouble new girl in a huff or with a fairly straighforward problem.

On another tack, re-reading it recently, I loved the description of how 12 people with their suitcases and skis all fit into Dr. Graves "outsize convertible."
Quote:
Cases were piled up on the floor between the seats or under them.
I don't understand - where did the twelve suitcases go? And how did ten gilrs, two staff and the good doctor himself fit in around them? Anyone know just how big an outsize convertible is?

#11:  Author: KathrynWLocation: London PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:01 pm
    —
Maeve wrote:

On another tack, re-reading it recently, I loved the description of how 12 people with their suitcases and skis all fit into Dr. Graves "outsize convertible."
Quote:
Cases were piled up on the floor between the seats or under them.
I don't understand - where did the twelve suitcases go? And how did ten gilrs, two staff and the good doctor himself fit in around them? Anyone know just how big an outsize convertible is?


I sometimes get the feeling that EBD had never seen a car, let alone been in one, the amount of people she seems to be able to think they can take!

#12:  Author: PatLocation: Doncaster PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:02 pm
    —
Tardis sized obviously! Nothing else would do!

#13:  Author: Alison HLocation: Manchester PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:02 pm
    —
Some of them really should have been done for dangerous driving! What about when Joey, Juliet and Robin went to the station with Madge and Jem to wave them off on their honeymoon, with Juliet hanging on to the outside of the car and the other 4 squeezed into a 2-seater vehicle?!

Sorry, that is totally OT Embarassed !

#14:  Author: PatLocation: Doncaster PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:04 pm
    —
I suspect that the car had a running plate down the side, so Juliet would be standing on that and holding on tight!

#15:  Author: ChelseaLocation: Your Imagination PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:26 pm
    —
Maeve wrote:

On another tack, re-reading it recently, I loved the description of how 12 people with their suitcases and skis all fit into Dr. Graves "outsize convertible."
Quote:
Cases were piled up on the floor between the seats or under them.
I don't understand - where did the twelve suitcases go? And how did ten gilrs, two staff and the good doctor himself fit in around them? Anyone know just how big an outsize convertible is?


I figured if it was a convertible, they left the top off and piled it high (thinking of the opening sequence in "Beverly Hillbillies")

#16:  Author: Kathy_SLocation: midwestern US PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:30 pm
    —
Maeve wrote:

On another tack, re-reading it recently, I loved the description of how 12 people with their suitcases and skis all fit into Dr. Graves "outsize convertible."
Quote:
Cases were piled up on the floor between the seats or under them.
I don't understand - where did the twelve suitcases go? And how did ten gilrs, two staff and the good doctor himself fit in around them? Anyone know just how big an outsize convertible is?

I think of the pictures of the car in Cheaper by the Dozen. (Not that my family didn't regularly cram the 10 of us into a car that under today's laws would be limited to 5.)

#17:  Author: TaraLocation: Malvern, Worcestershire PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:24 pm
    —
Our first family car (c.1957) was a boxy Austin 11. It had a running board and it would have been perfectly possible to travel outside - not that I would ever have been allowed to! Always rather longed to try ...

Leaving aside the 'how-many-can-you-fit-in-a-telephone-box' qualities of EBD's cars for the moment, one of the things I find interesting about Trials is that, by that time in the series, the religious basis which was completely taken for granted in earlier years is maintained by apologetics. Naomi has a perfectly understandable reason for her lack of belief and has to be convinced otherwise. Her eventual change of mind is not based on very sound principles actually - she'll believe if she can be cured isn't much of a foundation for faith - but it does show that EBD was very aware of the changes in society, and was trying to deal with them. Naomi has to come to faith, of course, not to preserve the status quo, but because EBD's own faith was so fundemental to her life that she couldn't bear to leave her character in the (to her) sterile wasteland of unbelief.

#18:  Author: JayBLocation: SE England PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 10:30 am
    —
When Naomi is reading Humphrey Clinker, Mary Lou says she doesn't know if they're supposed to read it. Does anyone know why Humphrey Clinker might be considered unsuitable?

And is it right that girls of seventeen or eighteen should still be having their reading supervised? Next year many of them will be at university and be expected to deal with all kinds of reading.

Jay B.

#19:  Author: MiaLocation: London PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 10:55 am
    —
Humphrey Clinker

It's a bit bawdy IIRC - have only flicked through it cos of the CS reference. Like Tom Jones.

#20:  Author: JennieLocation: Cambridgeshire PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 11:35 am
    —
What I find unbelievable is that the doctors at the San can cure Naomi, when all the specialists she went to could not. And if they can cure Naomi, why can't they do so for Commander Carey?

#21:  Author: JayBLocation: SE England PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 12:14 pm
    —
Quote:
What I find unbelievable is that the doctors at the San can cure Naomi, when all the specialists she went to could not.


It's amazing that these doctors who are supposed to be TB specialists can perfom a miracle cure in whatever condition presents itself, plus coping with smallpox, scarlet fever, appendicitis, broken limbs, and rescuing random schoolgirls from drowning, snowstorms, etc etc.

I think it was highly irresponsible of Mary Lou to suggest it to Naomi. She has no medical knowledge, knows nothing about Naomi's condition or what treatments might have been tried already. The proper thing to do, if she had to do anything, would have been to speak privately to Jack and let him take it from there.

Jay B.

#22:  Author: RóisínLocation: Gaillimh PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 12:16 pm
    —
JayB wrote:
Quote:
What I find unbelievable is that the doctors at the San can cure Naomi, when all the specialists she went to could not.


It's amazing that these doctors who are supposed to be TB specialists can perfom a miracle cure in whatever condition presents itself, plus coping with smallpox, scarlet fever, appendicitis, broken limbs, and rescuing random schoolgirls from drowning, snowstorms, etc etc.


Yes, especially when the only methods they seem to employ are 'carefully watching', sometimes slipping a sedative and prescribing lots of bedrest for ANY condition Rolling Eyes Laughing

#23:  Author: Alison HLocation: Manchester PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 1:04 pm
    —
I've never worked out quite what went on at the San (in Switzerland). Did it have a maternity unit? If not, where was the hospital where Joey went to have her 3 youngest - she can't have had them at home because she "comes home" with Cecil (when Nina's there). & why was Frank Peters working at a specialist TB place when he seemed to be a specialist in (sorry, forget exactly what Phoebe's condition was) something else in Rescue?

#24:  Author: Kathy_SLocation: midwestern US PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 2:57 pm
    —
I ddn't find the handling of Naomi's injury by the San that surprising. Good TB sanitoria would have had to include specialists in orthopedics, dealing with "tubercular hip" and its ilk.

In terms of general illnesses, keep in mind that the patients were in for the long term. It would have been rather irresponsible not to have care available. For that matter, some of them hired their own teachers -- my grandmother, for one.

Edited for grammar


Last edited by Kathy_S on Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:35 am; edited 1 time in total

#25:  Author: MelLocation: UP NORTH PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 11:44 pm
    —
Also being the only hospital in the area it must have dealt with a lot of A & E?

#26:  Author: LesleyLocation: Allhallows, Kent PostPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 6:08 am
    —
I think it likely that the San would have diversified - although still being a centre of excellence for TB it would actually have become a General hospital, with all the specialities required of such. I can't see Neil Sheppard, Eugen Courvoiser and Frank Peters all fitting in otherwise.

NB. Frank Peters was most likely a Rheumatologist

#27: Re: Trials for the Chalet School Author: Loryat PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 5:57 pm
    —
Róisín wrote:
Is it ok to move on with these? Hope so Very Happy

So, do you think that Naomi's mind really is 'warped'?

I wouldn't go as far as to say it was warped, but she's certainly very bitter and inclined to assume that people are judging her etc (a sort of inverted prejudice). To be fair to EBD, it's not actually her who describes Naomi as warped, but one of the characters who has a bit of a suspect attitude anyway (letting her ward go to both Catholic and Protestant services till she makes up her mind, OMG!)

It seems to me like no-one's treated Naomi very nicely for a long time. About a term of the wonderful CS atmoshere works wonders for her. Her aunt, it seems to me, has done little to help her come to terms with her disability and society up till now doesn't seem to have treated her very kindly.

Quote:
Is she, or Herr Laubach to blame for the episode in the art class?

Both are to blame. HL should definitely not lose his temper the way he does. However, Naomi is sixteen (or seventeen?) and should be able to keep track of her sticks. If she had remembered to bring the right stick, the accident probably wouldn't have happened.

Quote:
Scarlet fever arrives and poor Rosalie is the most affected by it. What did you think of the Old Girls returning to provide the actresses for the Pantomine? This is the book where Mary-Lou is yet again the saviour of a new girl, where the Lost Property prank is played and where Evadne gets engaged.

Nice details, though in the pb we don't get much of the 'Old Girls'. Mary-Lou constantly saving people can be a bit irritating, but when you read the one book in isolation it doesn't seem so bad.

#28:  Author: Loryat PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 6:12 pm
    —
[quote="KathrynW"]
Maeve wrote:

I sometimes get the feeling that EBD had never seen a car, let alone been in one, the amount of people she seems to be able to think they can take!

Actually you can fit a fair amount of people into even quite small cars, admittedly breaking the law while doing so. I was once in quite a small 5 seater and there were nine other people (some of them kids though). Also, my dad has a van with five seats but there are seven in my family so sometimes a couple have to go in the boot.

Quote:
When Naomi is reading Humphrey Clinker, Mary Lou says she doesn't know if they're supposed to read it. Does anyone know why Humphrey Clinker might be considered unsuitable?

And is it right that girls of seventeen or eighteen should still be having their reading supervised? Next year many of them will be at university and be expected to deal with all kinds of reading.

Were reading lists as varied then as they are now, though? I mean, books were still being censored fairly recently in that period. Ulysses is a staple text for any Eng Lit course now, but when it was first published it was banned.

#29:  Author: PatLocation: Doncaster PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 6:19 pm
    —
At the time EBD was squashing people into cars there weren't any seat belts or laws about how many people a car should carry. We had 9 kids in a Ford Popular (sit-up-and-beg type car) when I had a birthday party at the beach - a 7 mile drive.

#30:  Author: JayBLocation: SE England PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 6:30 pm
    —
Loryat wrote:
Were reading lists as varied then as they are now, though? I mean, books were still being censored fairly recently in that period. Ulysses is a staple text for any Eng Lit course now, but when it was first published it was banned.


No, they might not have been reading Ulyssess. But quite a lot of Chaucer, for example, is pretty raunchy. Thomas Hardy deals with extra-marital sex. Tom Jones begins with an illegitimate baby. The private lives of writers such as George Eliot and Oscar Wilde probably wouldn't be approved by Miss Annersley. I imagine any or all of them might have been on a university literature syllabus in the '50s. If the CS girls weren't supposed to read Humphrey Clinker, would they have read any of these? And wouldn't they be at a disadvantage if they'd never read or had the opportunity to discuss anything of the sort before they arrived at university?

Jay B.

#31:  Author: MiaLocation: London PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 7:51 pm
    —
Fran has one of those magical cars.....



Laughing




[quote="JayB"]
Loryat wrote:
And wouldn't they be at a disadvantage if they'd never read or had the opportunity to discuss anything of the sort before they arrived at university?


Some of my tutors told us to forget anything we'd ever learnt for A level so I don't know. University (work) was completely different from school for me, even though it was the same - if that makes sense.

#32:  Author: Laura VLocation: Czech Republic PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:39 am
    —
I've just finished reading this book for the first time in ages, and there are 2 things that I would like to know:

-would it be possible for doctors at the time to repair Naomi's ligament damage so long after the original accident?

-what happened to Clem Barras' parents? I was so shocked to read that they had died, I always enjoyed the vivid descriptions of her father.

#33:  Author: jenniferLocation: Taiwan PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:59 pm
    —
The fixing Naomi part seemed a bit fishy to me as they are primarily TB specialists. I can see having expertise in trauma cases, as they are the only hospital nearby for alpine accidents, but Naomi's operations sound like it's the latest in surgical techniques - more suitable for a research hospital in a major city.

There is no mention of Clem's parents being killed when it happens - it just seems to be one of those random things.

#34:  Author: JayBLocation: SE England PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 5:14 pm
    —
Loryat wrote:
Quote:
And wouldn't they be at a disadvantage if they'd never read or had the opportunity to discuss anything of the sort before they arrived at university?


Some of my tutors told us to forget anything we'd ever learnt for A level so I don't know. University (work) was completely different from school for me, even though it was the same - if that makes sense.


I wasn't thinking of the difference between A level and degree work, rather the more basic issue that if the girls had never encountered sex, illegitimacy etc in literature, and had these things explained to them, before they went to university, they wouldn't understand a lot of what they were reading.

Jay B.

#35:  Author: CatrionaLocation: South Yorkshire PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 7:16 pm
    —
I so wish I'd read the h/b version! I think if I was Naomi and had lost both parents and been left with a disability I would be pretty mixed up and needing a lot of emotional support. Herr Laubach's temper tantrums have always annoyed me, as I don't think shouting at someone because they can't do something is at all helpful.

#36:  Author: Alison HLocation: Manchester PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 9:39 pm
    —
I haven't read Humphrey Clinker so can't really comment on it, but, given that "classic" books such as Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights, The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, Oliver Twist, Vanity Fair and even Sense and Sensibility deal with various "adult" (by CS standards) issues such as illegitimacy, adultery and domestic violence, it would be interesting to know who decided what they could and couldn't read, and how they decided it!

Seems a bit daft anyway because I'm sure they read all sorts in the holidays!

#37:  Author: KBLocation: Melbourne, Australia PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:35 pm
    —
Alison H wrote:
Seems a bit daft anyway because I'm sure they read all sorts in the holidays!


They must, as that is how Jennifer Penrose comes to bring Gone With The Wind back to school, having begun it in the holidays, although her parents are apparently unaware of the fact that she's reading it.

#38:  Author: MiriamLocation: Jerusalem, Israel PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:24 pm
    —
And Miss Annersley tells Inspector Letton (when he is concerned at the thought of Jo writing his story for schoolgirls) that they read far more lurid things during the holidays when she cannot control their reading. There does seem to be a note of regret that she can't though.

#39:  Author: JennieLocation: Cambridgeshire PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 2:09 pm
    —
In 'Richenda', her form is reading 'Mansfield Park' and that deals with adultery, so why Miss Annersley should want to control their holiday reading is a mystery.

#40:  Author: Loryat PostPosted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 3:00 pm
    —
KB wrote:
Alison H wrote:
Seems a bit daft anyway because I'm sure they read all sorts in the holidays!


They must, as that is how Jennifer Penrose comes to bring Gone With The Wind back to school, having begun it in the holidays, although her parents are apparently unaware of the fact that she's reading it.

I thought they read a book called 'Forever Amber'. Is it really supposed to be GWTW? Since that does have a scene of marital rape you can see why Miss Annersley would want to censor it (within context I mean).

Personally I have always been really curious to know what book it was that Vera Smithers had brought to school with her. Don't suppose EBD wanted to reveal the title though as it might give people ideas!

#41:  Author: RóisínLocation: Gaillimh PostPosted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 3:19 pm
    —
I think it was Forever Amber in the paperback and GWTW in the hardback. No idea about Vera but also curious!

#42:  Author: MiriamLocation: Jerusalem, Israel PostPosted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:20 pm
    —
In the hardback the book was Gone with the Wind, but in the paperack they changed it to 'Forever Amber'. Social norms change, and 'Gone woth the Wind' wasn't considered so unacceptable by then.

#43:  Author: KateLocation: Ireland PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:25 pm
    —
Loryat wrote:
KB wrote:
Alison H wrote:
Seems a bit daft anyway because I'm sure they read all sorts in the holidays!


They must, as that is how Jennifer Penrose comes to bring Gone With The Wind back to school, having begun it in the holidays, although her parents are apparently unaware of the fact that she's reading it.

I thought they read a book called 'Forever Amber'. Is it really supposed to be GWTW? Since that does have a scene of marital rape you can see why Miss Annersley would want to censor it (within context I mean).

Personally I have always been really curious to know what book it was that Vera Smithers had brought to school with her. Don't suppose EBD wanted to reveal the title though as it might give people ideas!


Thekla also was caught reading a book that Joey thought must have been smuggled into school. It didn't say what it was though - I think it was in Lintons/Rebel.

#44:  Author: CazxLocation: Swansea/Bristol PostPosted: Sun Jul 09, 2006 5:15 pm
    —
In New House Joey is reported to be reading The Forsyte Saga, which I found quite surprising considering that it deals with domestic violence, rape and adultery.

#45:  Author: JennieLocation: Cambridgeshire PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 2:08 pm
    —
One law for Jo, another for everyone else?

#46:  Author: MiriamLocation: Jerusalem, Israel PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 5:59 pm
    —
Maye in was considered acceptable because it was a 'classic' rather than a more modern book?

(as a disclaimer, I have no idea what it deals with or when it was written. I just rememer it being Radio Fours 'classic serial' on Friday afternoons for most of one winter. At the age of about fourteen I found it boring and didn't listen after the first episode or two - but I am left with the impression that it was classical. Rolling Eyes )

#47:  Author: JayBLocation: SE England PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:13 pm
    —
The Forsyte Saga was actually fairly contemporary at the time when Jo would have been reading it. It was published between 1906 and 1928. New House was published in 1935.

Those of us who are old enough remember the BBC tv serialisation starring pretty well anyone who was anyone in British acting at the time.

Jay B.

#48:  Author: KatherineLocation: London, UK PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:18 pm
    —
Is it also to do with how explicit things are. eg Mansfield Park has adultery but no sex, if you see what I mean. Don't know how explicit GWTW is as have never read it. Or is it considered silly and romantic?

#49:  Author: Joan the DwarfLocation: Er, where am I? PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:21 pm
    —
Humphrey Clinker has some fairly raunchy slapstick, including BOTTOMS! Including NAKED BOTTOMS!!

Jane Austen tends to be a bit more discreet with the bottoms and the whole sex thing.

#50:  Author: Alison HLocation: Manchester PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:37 pm
    —
Katherine wrote:
Is it also to do with how explicit things are. eg Mansfield Park has adultery but no sex, if you see what I mean. Don't know how explicit GWTW is as have never read it. Or is it considered silly and romantic?


GWTW doesn't actually describe anything "more" than kissing, but there are references to people shutting bedroom doors behind them, Scarlett's first husband not "tapping passion" (or words to that effect Rolling Eyes ) etc, plus it does include marital rape. I also wonder if Miss Annersley & co might have objected to the childbirth scene (when Melanie's baby is born during the siege of Atlanta)?

My mum was at school in the late '50s/start of the '60s when Lady Chatterley's Lover was still banned legally, but she says that they all read it anyway Laughing !

#51:  Author: JennieLocation: Cambridgeshire PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 9:47 pm
    —
There's nothing like banning a book to make everyone want to read it. One of my 'A' Level student's parents had forbidden her to read 'Lady Chatterley's Lover', which made her want to read it the more. I lent her a copy in a brown paper wrapper. She returned it two days later, saying she had found it boring, so had only read the first few chapters.

#52:  Author: PhilLocation: London UK PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:48 pm
    —
What I find interesting is this is the only book where Ailie Russell is allowed to take centre stage albeit for one part of the book. The lost property prank is fantastic and the punishment does indeed fit the crime. One can only imagine what Ailie and Co must have felt as they handed the lost property back and one can only imagine the scolding comments made by the furious sixth!

Ailie has previously been referred to as a "brat" or "pest" by Josette and Sybil, for not paying library fines or for asking Miss Annersley questions in assembly. We are also told she only does enough work to keep her out of trouble. Josette and Sybil by contrast get far more of a look in from EBD, even if Sybil is made out to be nasty through and through and Josette a goody goody who has never put a foot wrong. Later character development of Ailie is very disappointing. She seems to be "skipped over" in the series so EBD can bring in that awful Jack Lambert (who I admit is a strong, well drawn realistic character). Ailie by contrast is reduced to a foolish quivering wreck who squeals in terror at a thunderstorm in Prefects (or Althea) where she gets brutally squashed by Len of all people!

Sadly this is the one and only time we see Ailie and we see her shine here!

#53:  Author: ElleLocation: Peterborough PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:44 am
    —
What is wrong with Forever Amber? I have never read it, or even heard of it until I read about it in the Chalet School!


ETA - I can't believe GWTW was ever considered unsuitable! I think Mum gave it me to read when I was about 13 and I loved it. The only thinkg that annoyed my Mum about it was the fact that in the book Rhett Butler doesn't actually say "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn." I am watching the film with yr 12 this afternoon (my contribution to the civil rights course!)

#54:  Author: Therill PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2006 9:14 am
    —
Elle wrote:
What is wrong with Forever Amber? I have never read it, or even heard of it until I read about it in the Chalet School!


Well, from the review in the Guardian (here): '...70 references to sexual intercourse, 39 illegitimate pregnancies, seven abortions, 10 descriptions of women undressing in front of men, and 49 "miscellaneous objectionable passages".' *g* Actually, reading the review the book sounds quite interesting for the history, but you can understand why a schoolmistress of the time would have kittens at catching her young pupil reading it.

#55:  Author: ElleLocation: Peterborough PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2006 9:39 am
    —
Therill wrote:
Elle wrote:
What is wrong with Forever Amber? I have never read it, or even heard of it until I read about it in the Chalet School!


Well, from the review in the Guardian (here): '...70 references to sexual intercourse, 39 illegitimate pregnancies, seven abortions, 10 descriptions of women undressing in front of men, and 49 "miscellaneous objectionable passages".' *g* Actually, reading the review the book sounds quite interesting for the history, but you can understand why a schoolmistress of the time would have kittens at catching her young pupil reading it.


Shocked Shocked Shocked

#56:  Author: DawnLocation: Leeds, West Yorks PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:18 pm
    —
Elle wrote:
Therill wrote:
Elle wrote:
What is wrong with Forever Amber? I have never read it, or even heard of it until I read about it in the Chalet School!


Well, from the review in the Guardian (here): '...70 references to sexual intercourse, 39 illegitimate pregnancies, seven abortions, 10 descriptions of women undressing in front of men, and 49 "miscellaneous objectionable passages".' *g* Actually, reading the review the book sounds quite interesting for the history, but you can understand why a schoolmistress of the time would have kittens at catching her young pupil reading it.


Shocked Shocked Shocked


I was quite shocked when my very naive mother (then in her 70's) got this out of her local library to read a few years ago Shocked

Didn't stop me reading it as well - after about page 4 I knew exactly why the CS wouldn't approve of it Laughing. In fact I was quite surprised that it was named - I could imagine several irate parents complaining to Armada that their young daughters had read it after reading about it in the CS series!

#57:  Author: Loryat PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:02 pm
    —
Cazx wrote:
In New House Joey is reported to be reading The Forsyte Saga, which I found quite surprising considering that it deals with domestic violence, rape and adultery.

I was surprised too, I have to say. The Forsyte Saga rocks, though. Maybe as Jo was nearly eighteen she was given more freedom, while Jennifer Penrose and that lot were all about fourteen weren't they?

Forever Amber does sound like the kind of book a 1940s schoolteacher wouldn't want her pupils to read!

#58:  Author: Loryat PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:05 pm
    —
Phil wrote:
What I find interesting is this is the only book where Ailie Russell is allowed to take centre stage albeit for one part of the book. The lost property prank is fantastic and the punishment does indeed fit the crime. One can only imagine what Ailie and Co must have felt as they handed the lost property back and one can only imagine the scolding comments made by the furious sixth!

Ailie has previously been referred to as a "brat" or "pest" by Josette and Sybil, for not paying library fines or for asking Miss Annersley questions in assembly. We are also told she only does enough work to keep her out of trouble. Josette and Sybil by contrast get far more of a look in from EBD, even if Sybil is made out to be nasty through and through and Josette a goody goody who has never put a foot wrong. Later character development of Ailie is very disappointing. She seems to be "skipped over" in the series so EBD can bring in that awful Jack Lambert (who I admit is a strong, well drawn realistic character). Ailie by contrast is reduced to a foolish quivering wreck who squeals in terror at a thunderstorm in Prefects (or Althea) where she gets brutally squashed by Len of all people!

Sadly this is the one and only time we see Ailie and we see her shine here!


Ailie does get a chance to shine here. Maybe EBD had started to feel, though, that it was unfair to dominate the series by The Clans?

I always thought that while the earlier Sybil was a brat, she reforms after the accident and becomes quite nice. She's always shown being nice to little ones (as assistant hobbies prefect), new girls (in Carola anyway) and quite thoughtful (in Peggy, when she realises how hard it is for Jo to be separated from Margot).



The CBB -> Formal Discussions


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

Page 1 of 1

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group