Pounds shillings and pence

[BarrelOfOtters]

im in my 50s, too young to remember decimilisation in 1971 but I know about pounds, Guineas, sixpence etc. 20 shillings = 1 pound. Pence (d) – 12 pence = 1 shilling. 240 pence = 1 pound.

colleague in his 20s had never heard of this. I mean surely mos5 people have seen it in a film or read a book set in the 60s?

or am I really just old.

I'm 51. I know full well that pounds shillings and pence existed but I couldn't tell you what made up what!

I knew that shillings etc existed due to reading a lot of "older" books as a child, but I've never had any interest in how many shillings in a pound or similar. It's irrelevant. I've no interest in imperial measures, I know they exist but I couldn't care less and don't know how long a yard is, or how much in a gallon, as I work in km (sometimes miles, to be fair) and litres.

I’m a millennial. I learned about it from reading children’s books set pre-decimalisation and from the shilling coins still in circulation. Children’s books such as Enid Blyton have since been updated and the coins have disappeared, your colleague’s opportunity to learn this are fewer.
Independently of this, he may be stupid.

I always found it hard - and to cap it all I used to start off with the problem in pounds shillings and pence and end up in feet and inches.
"Jane's shopping cost 3ft 4." 🙄

😂😂

Of course it's ignorance. It may well be irrelevant in today's world, but not to even have heard of the concept is pure ignorance.

Children’s books such as Enid Blyton have since been updated
God, have they really?!

I don’t think this is a bad thing. They were intended as entertainment and escapism for children, not reference books. When Elizabeth the Naughtiest Girl in the School received a 20 shilling note in the post from her uncle and spent it all on her friend Sally, it provides more context and significance to the modern young child reader to understand that she essentially spent £200. By updating things like this, something is gained rather than lost from the narrative, which is that she spent a lot of money.

20 shillings was one Pound. Maybe they have updated the books in line with inflation?

I wish "ignorant/ignorance" didn't have such a strongly negative valence in almost all situations. It's useful to be able to say someone doesn't know about something in a single word, and there isn't a fantastic substitute word I can think of, off the top of my head, that would work in all the same situations. You could say someone's "innocent" of something but that implies that the thing they don't know about is bad, or at least adult or naughty or dirty. I guess there's "unfamiliar with" and similar, but sometimes "ignorant" fits better even if it's not meant in a derogatory way. It doesn't help that in some varieties of English, "ignorant" is used as a term meaning rude or boorish or similar, too.

I don't agree - I've got pre and post decimalisation EB's from my childhood. It sounds far more ridiculous now to read that someone bought a brand new book for 25p than it does to read that they spent 5 shillings on it.

When Elizabeth the Naughtiest Girl in the School received a 20 shilling note in the post

You mean a pound note?

I remember decimalisation.
For a while both sets of currency were in use- extremely confusing!

I'm generally for leaving books as they are — original spelling and grammar (American, British, Australian, whatever), vocabulary (jumpers, sweaters, parking lots, car parks), money (dollars of whatever variety, shillings, pounds, in the original quantities), and so on, EXCEPT when it's children's books, in which case I feel spelling and grammar should definitely be regularised to the standard of the region they're published in, and perhaps very confusing vocabulary could be changed (like jumper, which means different things in different varieties of English).

I think older children are quite capable of understanding and actually relishing differences in school systems, candy bars, vocabulary for everyday items, and money systems, depending on location and historical period, and that leaving Famous Five books in the original currency would actually be less confusing than the situation I was in, reading FFs published 70s to 90s and all "updated" to different levels of inflation (and different levels of trouser flare in the illustrations).

But Naughtiest Girl in the School readers are going to be young enough that I think, yes, they need the money to be in a denomination and of a sum that makes sense in context for them.

The problem with updating books is where do you stop?
You change the money, do you allow for inflation?
What about the lack of tech?
What about use of negative stereotypes?

At least keeping a book 'in its time' means you can discuss things if needed.

”Independently of this, he may be stupid”

@Eixample that is the most beautifully put and understated sign off I have seen on mn for ages. I shall add it to most of my posts on here from now on. Thank you.

I do think you are underestimating the ability of children to understand 'the money is different in this universe'. Nowadays they have Google if they are struggling. In my day you asked your mum or dad if there was something you couldn't work out - but there are still plenty of people 60+ to ask who still remember imperial currency.

The context usually makes it obvious if something is cheap, normal or expensive.

"Lashings of Coke Zero"

Me too!

I'm saying that older children (reading stuff like Famous Five) can understand.

The Naughtiest Girl books are for very little children, aren't they? Early primary? Can't imagine them having much appeal beyond that. Though having just looked them up, they suggest age 8–11, which is older than when I read them I think. I was thinking more 6-to-7-year-olds 😂

I’m 36. It’s been about three decades since I last read the book. Forgive me for not accurately remembering the entire text.

I'm 48, so it was before my time, but I find the whole thing really interesting so I have a full understanding of imperial currency (20 in answer to your question). My husband is in his 60s so remembers 'D-Day' and I often get him to tell me about it as a sort of bedtime story!

I think some children may be able to understand but I don’t see modern amendments as being any different from them being similarly amended - as they have been since initial publication - to include local currencies, measures and changes to particular words or phrases for overseas publication. The past is another country and all that. It’s creating clear context for young readers.

I think the point being made was that saying 'a 20 shilling note' is a like saying 'a 100p coin'.

D Day was 79 years ago!