Posted by Ed Kiser on April 23, 2005 at 18:42:37 from 64.12.116.6 user Kisered.
In Reply to: Re: Susan posted by Ross Cossar on April 22, 2005 at 13:10:21:
One of the positive attributes of Ransome's stories is the total disregard to any aspects of gender, except for the fact that when a tent had two occupants, they were of the same persuasion. These children, and yes they were children, were able to enjoy being themselves, without close parental supervision, and play their "adventures" without any interference of any more "personal" relationships. While such a situation may not always be the case in real life with real young people who might need some older monitors, it is nice to have these admittedly fictional stories in which such "play" does not become part of their adventures. As for this FORUM, perhaps we should follow Ransome's example, and keep our studies of these stories at a level that avoids the more suggestive aspects of very personal relationships.
One of the related questions that come up from time to time is in regard to our guessing as to the futures of these children. What were they like 10 years later? What happened to them in the WAR? And this leads us to guessing as to who gets "involved" with whom. Very recently on this FORUM has been mentioned the Susan/Jim Brading pairing.
Prue Eckett has suggested the Nancy/Timothy and the John/Peggy sets. But these are all just mental games that have allowed these people to have gained that ten years of progress towards maturity, a time in which "pairings" become the natural way of things.
But at the age of our characters in these books, let them enjoy the fun of being young, of being comfortable with each other, regardless of gender. Let us not get caught up with the "Lolita" concepts here. This is not the place.
The joys of youth are all too short. Let us not push our childhood playmates into those more serious responsible aspects of growing up.
Ed Kiser, South Florida