Posted by PeterH on January 07, 2007 at 21:57:12 from 86.149.219.240 user Peter_H.
In Reply to: Re: Commander Walker style upbringing posted by Peter Ceresole on January 07, 2007 at 17:40:18:
Yes, Peter Ceresole’s analysis of the parental ‘safety net’ in the S&A books is surely correct, but I was really making a different point. The ‘command structure’ and the monitoring system are merely the structure for the adventures, and it is then left entirely to the children how to occupy their time. If you like, the ‘natives’ supply the frame, and the children then paint the picture. My point is that no one attempts to tell the children what they should do. In my experience, this is unusual and represents a very enlightened attitude. At the time at which AR was writing the stories, it must have been revolutionary. Many children were, to my certain knowledge, highly organised by adults during the holiday. I have already described my own duties as a child in respect of social visits – many children I knew had a much worse time, and every minute of their holiday was filled in by their parents with some sort of approved activity.
If the Walkers had been like some of the families I knew, then the Swallows would not have been allowed to, eg, wander over High Topps pretending they were gold prospectors – "Good heavens, no – that’s a silly thing to do. Why not play football or cricket or hockey on the field by the lake – play proper organised games. Tomorrow we’re all going to climb Helvellyn – I’ve ordered the packed lunch, and John’s in charge, ha ha!!. We can look at Grasmere when we come down, then visit Wordsworth’s cottage . . ." Etc etc. Other people’s childhood reminiscences will confirm this sort of thing – eg, as a boy John Betjeman was expected to caddy for his father when on holiday in Cornwall.
Instead, on the very first page of the very first book, the Swallows make a bid for freedom. The ‘Duffers’ telegram gives them that freedom, and that is the keynote for everything that follows. They can do what they like, provided they don’t go out of range of the monitoring system (a very wide one), and provided they don’t do something silly like setting the fellside on fire. It is when they were in danger of doing that that an adult had, at last, to intervene. It is interesting that in the Lakes books, apart from the G.A., Mrs Tyson is the only adult who attempts to impose any real fetter on the children (with her ‘nice and handy for the house’ and her strict mealtimes). Even then, she doesn’t try to tell them what to do during the day.
I think it is in the Lakes books that this freedom is so exhilarating. On the Broads, freedom is more circumscribed by the very nature of the location – on the whole ‘linear’, but even there no adult told the children to try and protect coots’ nests. Robert Hill mentions ‘Secret Water’ and I must admit that this is the most ‘adult-organised’ of the books, which is why, IMHO, it doesn’t work quite so well.