BBC to bring the famous five to TV

[Dinopawus]

Just seen this in the Times.

For the love of Timmy, can the BBC please leave George as the Tom-boy she is?

Im not confident.

Famous Five go on a progressive adventure for new generation in TV adaptation

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/25335ec2-1388-11ee-b768-bb6d328f2d92?shareToken=8042c7bc7e8225df45e0537407fb335a

heaven knows I don’t love revisionism

But it is revisionism. In the 1950s the UK was more than 99% white. Today the UK is 82% white. Portraying rural villages in the 1950s as mixed presents a false narrative and history to the UK.

One of the great things about a story set in a different time is it helps us put our own ideas and lifestyle into a wider perspective.

Fr Brown is supposed to be a rather light., positive show, which is great, there is a time and place for that. But in the end it uses the setting for charm, but clearly has no respect for anyone who lived at that time, or for anyone with any kind of serious attachment to Catholicism. I think it actually borders on being a little offensive to Catholics, and I don't say that lightly.

But it's like they are writing a show about a Rabbi sleuth, meant to be very atmospheric and using the religious and cultural setting to appeal, but at the same time they feel the need to change or gloss over most of his actual Jewishness to make it acceptable to viewers. It's a bit yuck.

Why not just write a show about a modern CoE vicar who is believes everything the viewers do?

Was it the Lone Pine books by Malcolm Saville? I used to like those.

It's not even as if the STORIES of FF were very good. I mean, Blyton had about four or five storylines and about a dozen stock archive characters, and just recycled them endlessly.

I meant to comment on this before. I agree that EB was obviously not 'high literature', but nevertheless, there must have been something to the stories that makes them still popular now, over 50 years after her death.

I'm not convinced that the storylines themselves are necessarily the important factor; I think it's often the settings, the context, the vibe, the familiarity, characters that children can relate to or wish they could have been like in whatever ways.

Look at soap operas nowadays. Many adults who watch one or two (but not all) of them don't usually flip back and forth between their regular one(s) and the one(s) they don't usually watch, depending on the storylines. They also don't look at what the storylines will be before deciding whether to watch any individual episode in isolation; for the vast majority, when it's the regular time for Coronation Street or Eastenders, they tune in and watch it - as they habitually do.

I think this was even more evident in some of Blyton's other works, such as the Adventure series (with Jack, Lucy-Ann, Philip and Dinah) - where large parts of it were just about the sense of having an adventure, being together, irrespective of what particular dramatic incidents occurred.

I think EB was a similar kind of writer to JKR, actually. Not literature, but fun and readable and imaginative in certain ways that are appealing. The HP series took as much from Mallory Towers as any fantasy type fiction.

I'm a maths grad, so take this with a disclaimer, but I vaguely remember someone talking about books that use stock characters and why they can be so popular and it's too do with the reader being able to place themselves very easily in the shoes of the character. Basically EB's books (and Harry Potter, and many others) appeal, particularly to children, because they don't need to do much mental effort to imagine themselves as one of the characters, because the characters are broadly drawn. George is a tomboy who likes dogs, Anne is a girly girl who likes cooking, Dick is - actually I'm not sure I can remember a single actual feature of Dick's character - he likes food, maybe? And so on.

I've also heard it said that EB's books weren't worth much as literature but very useful to get children reading. I'm pretty sure librarians of the fifties were a bit sniffy about them.

George was rebelling against the restrictive social role assigned to girls, so if the remake portays her as not a girl because she doesn't subscribe to stereotypes - that's as reactionary as you can get.

I liked Malcom Saville, and also Arthur Ransome. And each had the tomboy character. Peter in the Lone Pine managed to do it with long plaits. Both writers also used real backgrounds. And there was the obligatory tomboy in Little Women, Jo was much more interesting than Meg.
But I remember on parents' evening when one family were desperate to avoid their daughter becoming a tomboy. Didn't read the right books. I read the room and didn't push Nancy and Jo and George, but I was worried.

George was rebelling against the restrictive social role assigned to girls, so if the remake portays her as not a girl because she doesn't subscribe to stereotypes - that's as reactionary as you can get.

Which is still reductive, uninclusive and relying on compartmentalising people into a one-dimensional label-cage constructed of a narrow set of stereotypes - by whether they do or don't adhere to them - rather than treating somebody as an individual with a wide range of interests, characteristics, likes and dislikes, regardless of which of the two sexes they happen to be as a starting point.

Nobody would suggest that, say, if George commented that she didn't like any of roast beef, Elgar, morris dancing, queuing or complaining about the weather, she must therefore clearly not be British.

'For many years now, your Aunt Fanny and I have not had a proper marriage. She's a relentless nymphomaniac. And I am a screaming homosexual'.

Bloody loved those Comic Strip skits!

I think this was even more evident in some of Blyton's other works, such as the Adventure series (with Jack, Lucy-Ann, Philip and Dinah) - where large parts of it were just about the sense of havingan adventure, being together, irrespective of what particular dramatic incidents occurred.

I thought the Adventure Series superior in many ways to the Famous Five (despite the annoying parrot). Much of its beauty was in the way Blyton writes about nature and locations - this lot are more intrepid than the Famous Five and their travels go global - and the way she makes both boys so passionate and knowledgeable about nature and wildlife.

The ballsy, 'George' figure knows fine well she's a girl but despite this inconvenient impediment in life she's well able to hold her own, thank you very much. Whereas Lucy Ann, the youngest, isn't much of an adventurer but she's certainly not always 'playing house', and when the chips really are down she's the bravest of the lot. In one book she offers to do a parachute jump in place of Philip, with only a pair of flimsy wings to hold her up. That kid has mettle!

It's also one of the few examples of a step-family - two adopted kids, a professional mum and later a step-dad - I've ever seen in Blyton. Gosh, how modern ....

Loved the character of Bill Smugs, too.

I'm pretty sure librarians of the fifties were a bit sniffy about them.

My mum (not a librarian) always went on about how Dad's youngest sister truthfully named an Enid Blyton book when asked during a job interview for the most recent book she had read. Apparently, she should have known better and lied. Something by Dickens knowing my mum's tastes...

They can't do much with George! Read the series aloud to the dc during lockdown...
The 5 are all different aged & attend boarding school. I would guess George is 11/12, already has adopted George (short for Georgia), wears boys clothes & is as capable as Julian & Dick if not more so. They can't properly trans George as her character is too young & they can't do anymore to make her even more boyish. She is a tomboy simply who really enjoyed when she got mistaken as a boy by strangers.. I hope they use the word tomboy.

Now Anne's character on the other hand.. Always left to make the beds, set up camp, wash up after the other 3! Would like to see Anne a little more modernised..

As a child and massive Blyton fan I always wondered why the F5 series was her most well-known, when to me the Adventure series (as mentioned by SerafinasGoose) was the stand-out. I read the Circus of Adventure in a single evening after school aged 7 and it remains the most intensely thrilling literary experience of my life. With a bit of fudging, that series could potentially have a contemporary setting and a diverse cast (blended family) and be much more visually exciting.

I remember my 80s editions of the F5 having an illustration of Anne and George at their boarding school in uniform so both wearing skirts, but George with short hair being herself. Interesting that that is the image that I remember after all these years.

@Beowulfa I read the secret seven to the dc also during lockdown. I really enjoyed it. Bossy Peter😁 My dc really enjoyed Susie & Binkie spying on the 7s meetings 😊
The dc have read EBs circus of adventure & other books from that series themselves, they really enjoyed them.

I liked the ones with Fatty, the scottie dog and the Find-Outers who constantly pitted themselves against the gormless village bobby, PC Goon.

They're not as adventurous or as interesting location/nature-wise as the adventure story, but they have a verve and humour that's pretty uncommon in Blyton.

When I think back, dear old 'Ju' was pretty insufferable: a real pompous prig. No wonder George comes up against him so much - the books seem to make us sympathise entirely with Julian as being on the side of the 'right' - but IMO George has some genuine grievances against him as he really does treat her like crap on occasion. All on the premise of 'you're JUST a girl', of course. In one book he actually says to her 'and like it or not, girls have got to be taken care of'.

No wonder he was one of the few characters who never got kidnapped, despite his connection of a military and nuclear-scientific genius of an uncle who knew state secrets. No one could put up with him for more than five seconds at a stretch!

It would be quite interesting to see what a modern audience would make of such attitudes. IMO a heavy satire like The Comic Strip is much more fun and makes the point more strongly than a simple decolonization of a 'white' point in history that's completely devoid of humour. (Even though the originals WERE all 'furriners' with some physical impairment, particularly scars on their necks) ...

Original 'baddies', that was meant to say.

@SerafinasGoose fatty was always dressing up a girl, "in disguise" was what the find outters called it😁

I think this is actually very true, come to think of it. And you know, I as an adult read all kinds of books. I'm reading a book about North Korea right now, and I've also got a "cosy village murder mystery" on the go. I guess kids also want comforting easy reads sometimes, just like we do.

I do also agree with another PP, though, that the Adventure series was an awful lot better than the FF; I think Blyton spent a lot more time and care making the stories individual and memorable, and I also had a bit of a pre-pubescent crush on Bill! (I bet Blyton herself did as well; he was definitely quite the cool James Bond type as well as being the ideal exciting stepdad). I'd quite like to see some of those being remade - well, apart from the River of Adventure, which really was quite horrifyingly racist; you'd have to pretty much gut that one to make it acceptable!

I also had a bit of a pre-pubescent crush on Bill! (I bet Blyton herself did as well; he was definitely quite the cool James Bond type as well as being the ideal exciting stepdad).

Ha! You and me both. Even though his parenting skills were questionable to say the least, and Allie is so in despair at his constantly leading the kids into danger that her solution is to marry him! A strange response to that particular dilemma, but anyone can see why she falls for him.

Agree about the racism in River - not to mention Jo Jo in Island and there are some fairly dubious moments in Circus as well.

Apparently Bill was based on a real bloke. I was trying to remember why/how I knew this, and found this thread here:

Let's have a Bill Smugs appreciation thread - The Enid Blyton Society

Apparently, she should have known better and lied. Something by Dickens knowing my mum's tastes...

But Dickens didn't originally write books as such; they were stories that were first serialised in two local newspapers. It was the Bicester Times and it was the Worcester Times

fatty was always dressing up a girl, "in disguise" was what the find outters called it

Ah, so he would already have qualified under the modern Stonewall 'trans umbrella' then - no need for revisionist editors to trans George from the F5 or any other EB characters!

"Do be very, very careful, Fatty, you mustn't take any unnecessary risks."

"Don't you worry about me, Daisy. I have my notebook and pen, my penknife, my box brownie camera, my torch for signalling with Morse Code and my 2-way transistor radio - Pip has the other one of the pair. I will also take Buster with me, to scare off and chase away any miscreants who might approach me. Plus, as I know that these hardened criminals will stop at nothing if they do spot me, to be on the safe side, I will be wearing my - I mean my sister's - shimmering sequinned evening gown, matching clutch, diamante tiara and pearl necklace to accessorise and 8-inch purple stillettos!"

🤣🤣🤣🤣

Off topic but the railway children sequal is an example of diversity being put into a story and it working well and being historically accurate (within the bounds of child friendliness and a feel good film). I guess it also helped that it is one of the cases where the UK came out looking better than America re racism so it was also more appealing in that regard.

So it can definitely be done, and within a historical context.