Bizarrely totalitarian statements in this thread.
I loved EB as a child. I think some of her books are great for children as they encourage reading stamina. I still find them far more interesting than Harry Potter which I cannot bear (but would not ban my children from reading - I can't see that I'm really going to ban my daughter from reading anything).
I think some of her books have been rewritten to remove the golliwogs and the names like this. Fine by me. Not suitable for this day and age and the names can easily be changed without affecting the story. But there are many other books with equally concerning stereotypes that would pass the censor because they are cooler.
Shakespeare is pretty full of this stuff especially on Jewish characters, as is Dickens who is also dreadful on women. Almost all fairytales demonise people we prefer not to demonise today (eg stepmothers). One of my favourite books, the L Shaped Room, just wouldn't be written today because of its depictions of black and Jewish characters despite actually being a very "liberal" book for its time. Roald Dahl has some very odd views I think (and is particularly lookist in parts). Wind in the Willows (a favourite book even now) is pretty unpleasant on class issues and almost every pre 1970s children's author would have had a very non pc attitude to what girls could and couldn't do with their lives.
One of the things I love about these writers and books is that they reflect a different world to my own. I love Dickens despite his shortcomings and I used to love reading Ballet Shoes despite what is clearly now its raging class snobbery - partly because it described a world that I didn't understand - "galoshes" and "supper". There's a value in books being different to the world we live in.
One of my favourite childhood books was "Little Black Sambo" which is an incredible story. Of course you'd never call a book that now (I had my mum's 1940s edition) but I just thought the boy's name was Sambo just like Noddy's name is Noddy. Didn't know Sambo was a generic name for black men. It's also a fantastical story about a little boy who turns tigers into butter so entrancing and amazing.
Personally I hated Winnie the Pooh and Alice in Wonderland. Twee and/or irritating. This insistence that they are "beautifully written" is rather bizarre. And this statement is just alarming:
"And it really isn't a subjective issue, you know. Enid Blyton's books really are the equivalent of fruit shoots"
Didn't realise the global arbiter of literary quality was now posting on Mumsnet. May I post my own reading list for this year and see if it gets the seal of approval? .