The Naughtiest Girl In the School series has a major plot hole

[TheKrakening3]

This bothered me as a child and is bothering me again now I am reading the series to my kids.

The school money box just wouldn’t work, would it? Parents wouldn’t send their kids back to school with pounds and pounds of holiday money, knowing it was going to be put in a school box and redistributed evenly to all kids. Parents would either-

1. Send their kids with no money, but heaps of stamp sheets and sweets;
2. Send their kids with a small bit of money in keeping with the ethos of the school but not send pounds and pounds for birthdays etc in the school term as it would disappear into the box;
3. Send their kids with nothing, knowing their kids would be getting weekly money from the box.

The whole system would collapse in days.

What annoyed me was if you had the money to send your child to a progressive expensive boarding school ,than you were not poor ,why couldn't the school stipulate how much money each child could have? The thing with Enid Blyton books were she clearly had no idea what poor really meant ,even her poorer characters had nannies ,and maids and sent their kids to boarding school.

@x2boys

What annoyed me was if you had the money to send your child to a progressive expensive boarding school ,than you were not poor ,why couldn't the school stipulate how much money each child could have? The thing with Enid Blyton books were she clearly had no idea what poor really meant ,even her poorer characters had nannies ,and maids and sent their kids to boarding school.

I can't remember whether this gets mentioned, but wouldn't there have been kids there on scholarships?

I wanted to go to the Chalet School anyway, sounded much better. I then moved on to wanting to fly Spitfires in WW2 - thank you, W E Johns, for giving me unattainable life goals .

I went to Whyteleafe school. But its just a ordinary primary in Surrey.

Was it Arabella who didn't put all her money in the box and got caught?

Used to love reading what was in their tuck boxes sounded 'jolly' delicious and 'much the best'

I wanted to go to Malory Towers, although I expect I'd have been spanked with a hairbrush I don't have an issue with the money box, where my DD goes to school a lot of parents pay a monthly direct debit to the school to help it out with things not in its budget. I don't because I like my (small amount of) money being mine but there are plenty that genuinely don't mind. I could imagine little thingys mummy telling all her friends how she had send thingy off will 50 whole pounds because she so wanted to help all those poor children

MarthasGinYard Yes, it was. She took one of the newer, naive students with her and bought some expensive chocolates. I was actually rooting for her! I always thought the system was unfair.

A similar thing happened at Malory Towers - all money had to go to Matron. Gwen stole £5 and went on the run!

Did Arabella turn out to be good in the end ? I can't remember.

Yes!! I always objected to that money box as a child. The system didn't seem right!

Jesus I haven't read these books in 30 years and it's bringing back some memories!

Didn't someone get sent a big cake and they kept it to themselves?

Oh yes, Noel Streatfield.
Where one child got no birthday or Christmas presents from her parents for two years because they were replacing 4 umbrellas she sold.

x2boys I couldn’t remember so have just googled (I’m way too invested now!) and apparently she stopped fussing so much about her appearance and manners. I’m surprised to learn there was another book in the original series as I thought the last one was ‘The Naughtiest Girl is a Monitor’. I might have to trawl around the 2nd hand bookshops when I can go out again (Tier 3 and there’s an excellent bookshop in the next county).

I also thought the last one in the originals was Naughtiest Girl is a Monitor! I thought it swapped to Pamela Cox or someone after that. This is more exciting than it should be at my age!

Yes I thought The naughtiest girl is a Monitor was the last book too

Yes, some of the books had poorer children there on scholarships or from poor backgrounds (St Clare's did for example).
Like Eileen whose mum worked as matron, or Carlotta, the circus girl, think there was some others across the books.
They were always looked down on and referred to as "charity girls"
They were all right stuck up snobs looking back lol

@ChrissyPlummer

MarthasGinYard Yes, it was. She took one of the newer, naive students with her and bought some expensive chocolates. I was actually rooting for her! I always thought the system was unfair.

A similar thing happened at Malory Towers - all money had to go to Matron. Gwen stole £5 and went on the run!

Wasn't it Jo Jones? She dropped her money, Matron found it & Jo didn't want to ask for it. She sneaked into Matron's room & took the money plus a lot more and ran away with Deidre.

@TeenPlusTwenties

Oh yes, Noel Streatfield. Where one child got no birthday or Christmas presents from her parents for two years because they were replacing 4 umbrellas she sold.

The tennis house???

Yes, Tennis Shoes.
I really enjoyed her books, but that bit just seemed so mean.

The thing is, the people who would have sent their children to this school are different to you and I.

They would be well-off families on the whole (bar the couple who had scholarships) and boarding school would be a status symbol. So, rather than wanting their child to get the most out of the system (i.e. not sending them with any money and just having them take from the box that others had contributed to) they would want it to be seen that they had money, that they were generous, and that they could afford not only to pay what were probably exorbitant school fees, but also to send their children back to school with pounds and pounds to put in the box.

And for the children, it's instilled in them from day 1 that they should be proud to be at this school, that it is like a family. So putting money in the box isn't like losing money, but contributing to their new family. And they would want to contribute, therefore they'd be asking parents whether they could take money at the start of term, or get it for birthdays, etc.

It's not really a plot hole when you simply consider the fact that the children there are from very different backgrounds than probably the vast majority of us - but because it's focussed mostly on the school, you don't get much of a glimpse of what the family at home are like .. though the fact that they all have governesses and maids should be a good indication.

Here's the Naughtiest Girl! is a Blyton original. It was originally published in an Enid Blyton annual. It was published on its own in the '90s with various others to celebrate the centenary of her birth. It's quite short.

There are also a load of other sequels, written by Anne Digby, so they don't count (much as I loved Trebizon.)

It maybe shows how sheltered I was, but one of the things I found weird about The Naughtiest Girl series was that the boarding school was co-ed.

Pretty sure they're on faded page if anyone wants to access them online online. Lots of downloadable EB on there. Or read online on internet archive.

It started off as 2 shillings and was changed to 20p post-decimalisation (my editions span the 60s to the 70s). Interesting to hear it's £2 now. A missed opportunity for children to learn about pre-decimal coinage and inflation. It never bothered me reading my many jumble sale Blytons that were still in pre-decimal currency in the 1980s - it was always obvious from the context what the value of a shilling was, because the books specified what it had been spent on.

The money box was obviously there as a teaching point - fair redistribution of wealth - and the sort of parents who sent their children to a progressive unisex boarding school would've been all for that.

For anyone who's read Blyton's 'House at the Corner' there's a reference to Whyteleafe School in that book - the twins in the story (a boy and girl) beg to go there so they won't be separated.

Wasn't Whyteleafe based on Summerhill?

Yes, I believe I learned on a Mumsnet thread that it was based on Summerhill. Summerhill sounds more chaotic IRL.

I'm interested in these updates.

Do they shift the whole story from the 50s/60s (whenever) to modern day, or only change money and out dated attitudes on physical chastisement?

How do they get round using post decimalisation currency in a pre-decimalisation world?

It seems a bit weird to me. Either you accept the stories as being 'of their time', or say they are thoroughly outdated, or do complete re--writes complete with internet. How can they tinker with them?