Posted by Patrick Newman on February 27, 2002 at 06:17:23 from 210.50.37.115:
In Reply to: Re: Purported Attack on Nancy posted by Peter H on February 26, 2002 at 21:35:45:
To state someone is "plain wrong" without supporting evidence or opinion is just plain wrong.
Prue's opinion is supported with statement of what she believes where the mores of society at that time. She stands to be corrected or not as the case may be. To imply that she hasn't read the books and to chauvinistic interpretation of Ransome's writing from her statement boggles my mind.
My Emily Post isn't with me currently so I can't look up the etiquette of letter writing but suffice to say that My Wife, who goes by her maiden name has received correspondence address to Mrs Patrick Newman, much to our amusement. If that chauvinistic, non PC address can survive into the 21st century why not the addressing to a male child in preference to a female in the 1930's?
I personally think it was addressed to Roger because he was the youngest, much like you give the youngest something first to keep them happy or make then feel involved, similar to letting Bridget do things in Secret Water. I however stand to be corrected by logical augument.