Like most kids of my generation, I grew up with Enid Blyton books. I had the Noddy and Amelia Jane books read to me as bedtime stories when I was toddler, and, once I could read for myself, I went through the school stories, the mystery stories, the adventure stories and the farming stories. I and the other kids in my class at primary school dreamed of midnight feasts, were rather disappointed when we found out that macaroons and ginger beer weren’t actually very nice, and imagined ourselves having exciting adventures and solving mysteries. Ahem, there was even a phase of trying to stick notices saying things like “I am the Bold Bad Girl” on each other’s backs. Enid Blyton gave us all that, and encouraged us to read. You’d think that teachers would be pleased that kids were reading, but, no. Teachers in the early ’80s absolutely had it in for Enid Blyton! One officious teacher even told my mum and dad that they should stop me from reading so many Blyton books. And such is the legacy of Enid Blyton. Kids love her books. Certain other people don’t.
Yes, the language of her books is very simplistic, and the characters aren’t particularly rounded. But they’re aimed at *young* children. How sophisticated do people expect the language in Noddy books to be?! By the time I was 7 or 8, I was moving away from Blyton and on to authors such as Elinor M Brent-Dyer and Antonia Forest. People aren’t generally reading the Famous Five or even Malory Towers when they’re in their teens, but everyone has to start somewhere. And it’s quite interesting that the language in some children’s books is now being dumbed down, and yet people still criticise Blyton for being “simplistic”. The author of this book’s a bit vague about it all, but does make the point that a lot of the books are aimed at very young readers.
And then there was the book written by one of her own daughters, which more or less said that she as a bad mother. Yes, there were controversies in her private life. No, the naked tennis story probably isn’t true, but she did hush up the fact that she’d been divorced and remarried. And, cruelly, she cut her first husband out of their children’s lives. This book does focus largely on her personal life, rather than on her books, and it tells a complicated story of a woman who never got over her own father abandoning his wife and children, and who became estranged from her mother and brothers, with a lot of elaborate lies being told all round. Interestingly, although parents in Blyton books are generally sidelined, they are generally around, which often isn’t the case in children’s books.
Then there are the attacks on her just because she churned out so many books. People have even claimed that she didn’t write them all. Why *is* that? Is it better to have been like Margaret Mitchell, who only ever wrote one book? Or Jane Austen, who only wrote a few? What’s the snobbery over one person having written all these books? Is there any admiration for her work ethic, and the amount of time that she put into writing so many books. Apparently not. Maybe writers are supposed to starve in a garret, devoting their entire lives to writing one magnum opus. It’s just snobbery, isn’t it?
And that’s ironic, because the Blyton haters are always moaning that her books are snobby. Well, they are snobby. Think of the comments about Jo at Malory Towers, or Ern in the Five Find Outers books. Not to mention the Famous Five’s constant whingeing about “day trippers”. As a kid, I used to imagine that I’d be at the heart of the in crowd if I went to Malory Towers or St Clare’s. Because readers do that. In reality, the girls there would have made mincemeat of me, a fat kid with a Northern accent. But do they say anything that wasn’t typical of the times? These were the days when you couldn’t get a job on the BBC unless you spoke RP! And, as I’m always pointing out, it worked both ways. Imagine if someone like Julian Kirrin had turned up at a secondary modern in a working class area. The other kids would have had just as much to say about him as the Malory Towers girls did about Jo.
Then there are the allegations of racism. Are the books racist? Well, golliwogs weren’t considered problematic *at the time*. They featured on Robertson’s marmalade jars for decades. The Little Black Sambo book clearly is more of a problem, and the language used in that is unacceptable today and not very pleasant even by the standards of the time in which they were published. But it’s one book. And no-one attacks other authors – apart from Laura Ingalls Wilder – for writing in a way that wouldn’t be considered acceptable now. Dickens (Oliver Twist). Shakespeare (Othello, The Merchant of Venice). Jane Austen (the gypsies in Emma). Charlotte Bronte (St John Rivers wanting to go to India to convert non-Christians). I could go on and on. And Roald Dahl was an outspoken anti-Semite. Teachers don’t tell children not to read their works. R M Ballantyne’s books are virtually unreadable now, because of their portrayal of “natives”, but there’s nothing in, say, the Famous Five that’s anything like that bad.
So what is it about Blyton? Well, it probably is just literary snobbery. Coupled with virtue-signallers’ hatred of the well-to-do middle-classes – a bizarre form of self-hatred, given that that’s exactly who most of these people are. So leave kids alone, and let them read the books.
I ignored the whingeing teachers. And I read Enid Blyton’s books until I grew out of them. I assume that the author of this book did too. It’s a very short book, and I wouldn’t read it unless you can get it on a Kindle 99p deal. But, if you can, give it a go. And remember those days of mysteries and adventures and midnight feasts, and how they got you reading.