The Wouldbegoods by E. Nesbit, 1901.
“We are the Wouldbegoods Society,
By Noel Bastable
We are not good yet, but we mean to try,
And if we try, and if we don’t succeed,
It must mean we are very bad indeed.”
The previous book in the Bastable Children series, The Story of the Treasure Seekers, ended with the children and their father going to live with their “Indian uncle.” The uncle isn’t identified by name, but he is apparently their real uncle, and he had only recently returned from living in India in the previous book, when he invited the Bastables to come live with him at Christmas. Since then, he has been helping the children’s father with his business, and the children are once again going to school, but not boarding school because their father doesn’t believe in boarding schools. However, the six Bastable children are still motherless and not accustomed to being supervised much in their free time.
During the spring, the children of one of their father’s friends come to stay for a visit. The Bastable children don’t like the other children much at first because they seem too timid and too well-behaved. The imaginative Bastable children decide that what these other kids need is a good game of pretend to get them out of their shells. One of the Bastables’ favorite books is The Jungle Books by Rudyard Kipling, so they decide to make their own jungle and act out scenes from the book. They give their guests the book to read, pointing out parts that they want to act out, while they go set up the jungle. They use the garden hose to create a waterfall, and they haul a bunch of their uncle’s taxidermy animals out of the house to set the jungle scene. They also set loose some guinea pigs and a pet tortoise and cover their dog in coal dust so he can be a wolf. Their father’s friend’s son, Dennis (called Denny), starts really getting into the game, but his sister, Daisy, prefers just to read the book. Matters come to a head when the boys frighten Daisy too much with their tiger costumes, and she faints. It is at that moment that their father and uncle arrive with some friends, seeing the children all gathered around Daisy, whom they first fear has died of fright. Some of the boys are nearly naked, their skin covered in brown dye so they’ll look like Mowgli from the book (no modern children should dye their skin for a costume like that, and that should be something adults explain to them, if they read this book), the taxidermy animals are all wet from the hose, the coal-covered dog is on the sofa inside, and the tortoise and one of the guinea pigs are never seen again.
Naturally, the adults are angry at the situation, and the children admit that their game went too far. The uncle swats the boys with his cane (not the girls because it would be ungentlemanly to hit a girl), and all of the children are sent to their rooms and put on a temporary diet of bread and water as punishment. Their father briefly talks of the possibility of boarding school, which shocks the children because they know how he feels about it. What the adults decide to do instead is to send the children to the country for the summer. Their friend from the previous book, Albert’s uncle, is an author, and he has rented a house in the country, where he will be writing. He always appreciates the children’s imagination and playacting, and he agrees to take all eight children, both the six Bastables and Denny and Daisy. (Albert isn’t there, so he’s probably somewhere with his mother.) Of course, since Albert’s uncle (who is never identified by any other name) will be writing much of the time, readers can guess that the children will have little supervision in the country.
The old manor house that Albert’s uncle has rented is a fascinating place. It has a moat around it, and a secret staircase, although it’s not really secret anymore because people already know about it. The eight children immediately begin doing things wrong in the country because they don’t know what they’re supposed to do and what they aren’t supposed to do, and adults usually only tell them what they’re not supposed to do after they’ve already done it. They ring a bell that is only supposed to be rung in emergencies, and they play in some hay that the horses are supposed to eat. Then, the girls in the group bring up an idea they’ve had.
The girls are still feeling guilty over the earlier bad behavior that got them sent to the country in the first place, so they’ve decided that it’s time for them all to reform their characters. Daisy in particular suggests that they form a society to do it because she knows that when people are serious about undertaking a good cause, they form a society for it. The boys aren’t as enthusiastic about the idea of forming a society around just being good, which doesn’t sound very fun or interesting, but the girls talk them into it. Oswald wants to know how it will be organized and who will be in charge, so they begin setting out some rules. Basically, all of the children are in the society, and nobody is allowed to leave it without telling the others. As long as they are in the society, they must always try their best to be good, and every day, they must try to do some good deed, which they will record in special book. After a debate about the name of their society, they decide to call it the Society of the Wouldbegoods. They also decide that this society must be kept secret from the adults, which is a major reason why their efforts turn out the way they do.
The first evening after they form the society, the children are unusually well-behaved but glum because they’re working so hard to be good. Albert’s uncle notices their odd mood, but they can’t explain to him why they feel this way, and he doesn’t press them. They also quickly have trouble finding good deeds to do, especially ones that are fun or interesting.
Dicky’s first good deed effort is to try to fix a window that seems broken to him, but it turns out that he doesn’t understand the reason why the window is the way it is. Because he changes it, a milk pan accidentally falls out the window into the moat. Oswald decides that the only good deed they can do is to retrieve the milk pan and fix Dicky’s mistake. They immediately recruit the other children to help them drag the moat, but none of them really knows how to do that, and by the terms of the society, they can’t ask the adults or tell them what they’re
trying to do. The only thing they can find to use for dragging the moat is a bed sheet, which they ruin by getting it dirty and tearing it, and it still doesn’t help them retrieve the milk pan. Failing that, they decide to make a raft and use it to reach the pan. This works better, but when they reach for the pan, the raft overturns and dumps everyone in the water, and Dora hurts her foot badly on an old tin in the water. Fortunately, the cook sees them fall in the moat, and she hurries to get Albert’s uncle, who gets the boat from the boathouse and rows out to rescue the children. (Apparently, the kids didn’t know there was a boat before they built the raft.)
Their next good deed goes better, although they don’t entirely think of it as a good deed. The children become fascinated with some soldiers who are training nearby. They like to watch the soldiers as they ride by and have their drills and exercises. When they wave to the soldiers, the soldiers blow kisses to the girls, which gives them a thrill. The kids dress up as soldiers and ask Albert’s uncle if they can borrow the old armaments that are decorating the walls of the old manor house as their weapons, and he says yes. (Oh, Good Lord, why? Nothing bad happens to the kids because of those old weapons, and they apparently don’t damage any of the antiques, but given their track record, this was taking a real risk.) The soldiers are amused by the children, and the next time they pass by, they stop and take a rest with the children. The captain of the soldiers takes some time to explain the soldier’s weapons to the children and tells them that they will soon be sent to the front overseas. (This is way too early to be World War I, and they refer to the Southern Hemisphere, so I think they’re talking about the Second Boer War, which was happening while this book was being written and published.) Before the soldiers leave, the children decide that they want to give them a parting gift, so they get some money from their father and give each of the soldiers a pipe and some tobacco, because the soldiers were all smoking during their rest break. Modern children’s books wouldn’t have the kids encouraging their smoking habit, but in this turn-of-the-century book, the gift goes over well. Sadly, the children never see any of the soldiers again after they leave for the front and don’t know what happened to them. Still, they did something nice for the soldiers.
The children’s experiences with the soldiers sets up their next attempt at a good deed, with mixed results. Part of it gets very uncomfortable, but it has a happy ending. The children notice an older woman who also watches the soldiers and seems to get very emotional when she sees them. They find out that her son is also a soldier who is already at the front, and she is very worried about him. The children decide that they should do something nice for her, so they try to weed her garden without permission. The problem is that the children
don’t know how to tell the difference between vegetables and weeds, so they also pull up her turnips and cabbages. The woman is angry with them, but they apologize and say that they’ll talk to their father about making things right with her.
Then, the children have to bring her a postcard addressed to her that was accidentally delivered to them with the mail for the manor house. They don’t even read it ahead of time although they could because they don’t want to do anything else wrong. This is a rare serious moment in this series because the postcard is from the army, and it says that the woman’s son is dead. The woman is very upset, and the children sympathize with her.
Then, the children decide that they can do something else nice for the woman by making a tombstone for her son. They know that he must have been buried at the place where he was killed on the battlefield, so he won’t have a normal tombstone in England, and they think it would be nice to make a memorial for him. The concept of making a memorial for someone who is buried elsewhere is actually a real thing. It’s called a cenotaph (although I don’t think these children know that word because they keep calling it a “tombstone”), and they are commonly done for soldiers who are killed overseas and buried there or whose bodies can’t be retrieved. (The musician Glenn Miller has one because his plane went down in the English Channel during WWII, and his body was never recovered.) Making a memorial of this type for the grieving family of a soldier would be a nice gesture, if it was done well and with the input of the soldier’s family. The kids do the best they can, carving a wooden tombstone and inscribing a beautiful message on it, but they don’t tell the soldier’s mother about it until after they’re finished. At first, the older woman thinks that they’re making fun of her grief, but Alice persuades her that’s not the case and convinces her to take a look. They decorate the tombstone with flowers and offer a lovely message about the soldier’s service to his country. The soldier’s mother is touched, and she appreciates the sentiment, although she has the children move the memorial to a more private spot. She likes it that the children continue to put flowers on the memorial, and she becomes friendly with them.
This episode also has a happy ending because it turns out that the reports of the soldier’s death were wrong. He was actually missing and injured, not killed. His mother and the children learn the truth when he comes home and sees the children decorating his “tombstone.” Fortunately, he is amused by the memorial and the touching sentiment expressed by the children, and his mother is overjoyed at his return. The children celebrate by chopping up the tombstone and using it for a bonfire.
Around this time, the children realize that they don’t have very many good deeds to record in their book, so they decide that they can make notes about any good thing that they notice someone else doing. Nobody is allowed to write about themselves or to persuade someone else to write something about them because bragging about their own good deeds wouldn’t be good or noble. It’s a fortunate decision because many of the children’s other adventures in the country aren’t directly related to the Society of the Wouldbegoods or their good deed efforts, but they count some of the things that certain children do during their adventures as good deeds (and Oswald gripes about things he did which he thought should have been counted but weren’t).
One day, the children are sent out on a long walk because Albert’s uncle has a headache and the children are making too much noise in the house. They decide to check out a tower that has some spooky local legends about it because it contains a tomb about halfway up the tower. The others credit Denny for a good deed because he offers to go first into the spooky tower. (This tower is somewhat based on a real landmark, but the
author took some creative liberties with it. The man who is supposedly entombed there, Richard Ravenal, isn’t a real person. He was created for this book, but he gets a mention in the lore of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.) The children have a frightening encounter there with a beggar. They give him a coin as a good deed, but he sees that the children have more money with them, so he locks them in the tower from the outside, telling them that he won’t let them out until they give him the rest. Oswald notices that there are bolts on the inside of the tower door as well as the outside, so he quickly locks them to make sure that the beggar can’t get inside. This turns out to be a good decision because, when the children toss the rest of their money to him, it isn’t as much as he thought they had, and he pounds angrily on the tower door. (Oswald thought that the others should have counted his locking the door as a good deed because it saved them, but they decide not to because it was really more “clever” than “good.” Oswald thinks that’s an unfair technicality.) The children are safe inside the spooky old tower until the beggar leaves, and they are able to signal to someone else to unlock the door from the outside. This incident wasn’t the children’s fault (for a change), but the adults insist that, from this point on, they take the dogs with them when they go very far from the house.
The children make some other attempts at doing good deeds on purpose, but again, they go horribly awry because the children don’t know what they’re doing, and they don’t talk to anybody else about their ideas before they do them. After they cause a disaster that ruins a fishing contest and wrecks a barge full of coal, which costs their father a lot of money to fix, Albert’s uncle explains to them the full consequences of what they did and how much trouble they caused for a lot of people. The children feel terrible about it, and Alice starts to cry. She doesn’t fully reveal the existence of their society to Albert’s uncle, but she does say that they’ve been working so hard at being good and doing good things, but nothing they do works out. She says that they must be the worst children in the world and dramatically says that she wishes they were all dead. Everyone is shocked by this, and Albert’s uncle calmly tells her that they’re not the worst children in the world. He says that he knows they’re all feeling bad about what they’ve done, and he does want them to feel badly because they have seriously caused some real problems, and he doesn’t want them to do these things again. However, he says that he doesn’t want them to give up on the idea of being good because that’s something that they will learn better how to do over time. Also, he notes that, in all the time he’s known then, none of them have ever done anything intentionally mean or wicked, they’ve never lied about what they’ve done, and they’ve always been sorry when things have gone wrong. Being truthful and genuinely regretful for causing harm are worthy qualities.
Oswald feels bad abut that part because he has realized that there’s one thing he’s done that caused a disaster, and he hasn’t admitted it to the others yet. What he did was unintentional, and he didn’t know the incident was his fault at first, but he’s been trying to work up the courage to confess since he realized what he did. Albert’s uncle’s kind words make Oswald confess right away, and Albert’s uncle is appreciative of his honesty for that, too. The others call credit Oswald’s confession as a good deed. He doesn’t think it is, but they say it counts because it was a difficult thing for him to do, and technically, he didn’t have to do it. At that point, nobody had guessed that he was responsible for one of the problems, and if he had kept quiet, it wasn’t likely that anybody would have found out. He had been honest because he simply wanted to be honest and do the right thing, even knowing that people might get mad at him or punish him for what he did.
Albert’s uncle forgives the children, although he still expects them to learn from their misadventures. At this point, the children also begin to consider just how far the Society of the Wouldbegoods will go. So far, it hasn’t been a great success, but they do appreciate what Albert’s uncle says about not giving up on the idea of trying to be good. Still, the children (especially Oswald), decide that it’s time to set an ending point for the society. They decide that each of them will try to do one more good deed of some kind, and when each of them has
one more deed to their name to put in their book, they’ll dissolve the society. From that point on, if any of them want to be good, they’ll do it on their own, when and how they choose do it. (The boys in the group are particularly relieved at this idea, although they’ve all been feeling some strain from the society.)
The children’s escapades still continue, some related to good deed efforts and some just part of summer activities that they do for fun. They try to hold a circus with some farm animals, which get loose. There’s a bonfire that gets out of control and burns a farmer’s bridge (although the children put it out themselves before it gets worse). Dora finds a baby who’s been left alone in his carriage and kidnaps/cares for it. At first, she thinks that maybe he’s the long-lost heir of a noble house who was kidnapped by gypsies, like in books,
and has been abandoned, so she must adopt him and care for him until he can be reunited with his family. Like many of the children’s good deeds, it has mixed results, but this one ends up being more on the side of good. She shouldn’t have just taken the baby from its carriage, and he technically wasn’t kidnapped until she took him. However, it turns out that his nanny was neglecting him, leaving him all alone while she flirted with her boyfriend. When the adults discover that the children have the baby and why they have him, the nanny’s neglect is exposed, and she gets fired.
A couple of the boys later buy a pistol, which they make all the children promise not to tell the adults about. (I thought at first that it was a toy pistol, but it apparently fires real bullets. God only knows why anybody thought it would be a good idea to sell these boys a real gun.) The boys were thinking at first that it would be handy to have if there was a burglar, but one of the boys accidentally shoots a fox with it and kills it. The other children, although they were pretending to be fox hunters, are upset at finding a real dead fox and bury it with a proper funeral before they know that it was one of the other boys who killed it. They get into some trouble over it from the master of fox hounds. The boy who shot the fox explains that, at the time he shot it, it was caught in a metal trap, and it bit him when he tried to let it loose, which is when he accidentally shot it. Albert’s uncle confiscates the pistol because none of this would have happened if the boys hadn’t been playing with a gun, and Oswald thinks that it would serve him right if they really did get a burglar in the house and were unable to fight him off. (I’m pretty sure that they’d be more likely to accidentally shoot one another or one of their own dogs before they shot anybody else.)
Toward the end of the summer, Albert’s uncle agrees to be a host for an antiquities society that wants to see the old manor house and investigate a nearby site for possible Roman ruins. Albert’s uncle is beside himself when he discovers that, rather than being host to a small club, more than 100 people show up to accept his invitation to have tea before touring the grounds. The children, inspired by a book called The Daisy Chain, decide that it would be amusing to bury some pottery that they made themselves, just so the antiquarians will definitely have something to find. That part turns out fine because the antiquarians can easily tell the pottery made by the children from actual antiquities, and they are amused by the children’s “relics.” The problem is that the children also decide to bury some pottery they found in the library along with their own pottery, and those were real relics. The antiquarians get excited when they find those, but Albert’s uncle realizes that those pieces of pottery belonged to the real owner of the rented manor house. The children have to go to the head of the antiquarian society to admit what they’ve done to get the antique pottery back.
From there, the children are inspired by something a tramp says to them to open up a stand offering free drinks (lemonade and tea), but it goes wrong when some people take advantage of their kindness. They also take part in some war games without realizing that it’s all a game or training exercise. Then, while acting out the pilgrimage from The Canterbury Tales, they meet a kind lady, who turns out to have a romantic past with Albert’s uncle! They’re not sure that they like the idea of Albert’s uncle getting married, but they’re willing to try to help him reconnect with his lost love if it will make him happy and for goodness’s sake!
THE EPITAPH
by Noel Bastable
‘The Wouldbegoods are dead and gone
But not the golden deeds they have done
These will remain upon Glory’s page
To be an example to every age,
And by this we have got to know
How to be good upon our ow—N.’
The book is now public domain, so it is available to read online through Project Gutenberg and Internet Archive (multiple copies, including audiobooks). There is also a LibriVox Audiobook on YouTube.
My Reaction
This book reminds me of a couple of more modern books, The Adventures of the Red Tape Gang by Joan Lowery Nixon from the 1970s and Why Did the Underwear Cross the Road? by Gordon Korman from the 1990s, which are both books about kids trying to do good deeds with unintentional and hilarious results.
Just as in the first book in the Bastable Children series, much of what the children do in this story is due to the children’s naivety and imagination and a lack of adult supervision. Oswald makes it a point to say that they were not entirely neglected by the adults while they were in the country. Although Albert’s uncle frequently had to spend time writing, he did spend plenty of time with the children, and their father and Denny’s father came to see them regularly, along with some other adults. The children enjoyed spending time with the adults and doing things with them, but Oswald doesn’t describe much of what they did with the adults because the things they did on their own were the most interesting. (In the sense of dangerous and disastrous, but also exciting.) At various times in the story, they meet up with adults who are happy to talk to the children and explain things about their business or how things work, but the children also like acting on their own initiative, without asking adults for advice or opinion or taking time to really prepare for things they want to do, like when Oswald didn’t want to take the time to actually train an animal to do something when the children decided that they wanted to have a circus with animals. The children’s innocence and ignorance are played for comedy, but child readers would probably appreciate the children’s sense of independence. Few modern children would be given even half of the opportunities the Bastables have to do things on their own and cause as much trouble as the Bastables do.
Racial Issues
In the first book of the series, I talked about some racial issues in the story, and there are also issues with racial language and attitudes in this book. I don’t know whether or not this book has been reprinted with altered language, like the first one. Some of the incidents in this book might take more editing than the first one, like where the kids darken their skin for acting out scenes from The Jungle Books or giving pipes and tobacco to the soldiers.
There is an instance of the use of the n-word in this book, and this time, it’s something Oswald says rather than something the adults say. Basically, he was talking about hard the children were working, and he was trying to imply that they were working like slaves, but instead of saying the word “slaves”, he says the n-word. Children’s word choice is influenced by the books they read reads and the things adults say around them, and we’ve already established that adults around them use the n-word in a casual way.
Again, this brings up the question of whether or not the author herself this that using the n-word is acceptable or if she’s just trying to portray the way some people around her talked. In a way, I think she does address this topic indirectly, although that might be unintentional. There is a point in the story when the children talk about unpleasant things found in poetry, like death and the devil, and they note that a person doesn’t always have to like the things they read or write about. It struck me that, perhaps, the author was trying to explain that she doesn’t always like, advocate, or believe in things that occur in her stories. This conversation isn’t directly related to the use of the n-word, so I’m not sure whether that would be one of the things that the author didn’t really like or not. It might have been a more general notion, like when authors write about sad things that happen or the things the children do that they really shouldn’t. It is a reminder, though, that characters are not exactly the same as their characters, and they may differ in important ways. The nature of the characters suits the story, but may not be a reflection of the author’s life and attitudes.
There is also one instance of an anti-Catholic attitude, but it’s played for humor. The kids are on a tour of Canterbury Cathedral, and their tour guide says, “This is the Dean’s Chapel; it was the Lady Chapel in the wicked days when people used to worship the Virgin Mary.”
(I’ve heard this accusation about Catholics worshiping the Virgin Mary before, all too many times, mostly from my Protestant grandmother. I belong to a family of mixed religions, and I had experiences like this from a very young age. Catholics don’t worship Mary. Catholics honor Mary, which is different. We also have a sense that those who were bound together by faith never lose that spiritual connection to the living members of the church when they die, so living Catholics can still communicate with the departed spiritually through prayer, which is what the whole thing about praying to saints is about. It’s about communication and spiritual support rather than worship. Catholics don’t have to do this if they don’t want to, but it’s always an option, if they feel the need of spiritual support from another soul who might understand their situation, because there is a sense that the spiritual connection is always there. Mary and the other saints are not substitutes for God or Jesus but rather part of an extended spiritual family that supports its other, younger, and more vulnerable living members in a spiritual way as they all, living and dead, serve and worship the same God. I suppose a simpler way of putting it is the concept that those who love us never leave us, or as C. S. Lewis put it in the The Chronicles of Narnia, once a king or queen of Narnia, always a king or queen of Narnia. Some bonds are unbroken by death. The punchline to the tour guide’s comment is in H. O.’s response.)
When the children think about the connotations of changing the name of the chapel from Lady Chapel to Dean’s Chapel because of changing worship styles, H. O. speculates, “I suppose they worship the Dean now?” You can imagine how well that question is received. Yeah, do they worship the Dean, or is the Dean just someone they’ve honored by naming something after him? You tell me if there’s a difference.
War and Soldiers
The scenes with the soldiers and war games remind me of something that the author couldn’t have known when she wrote the book. In the following decade, Britain would be involved with World War I (called the Great War before WWII), and many boys, like the kids in this story, would end up going to war. Oswald thinks that it would be exciting to be a soldier, but real war isn’t a game, and he might have many of his illusions shattered. Knowing what I know about this generation’s future, I have some real concern for the children in this story. There’s a very real risk that they could be killed in battle, just as the young soldier in this book that they built that tombstone for in this story could have died in the war that was being fought during his time. This story doesn’t go that dark because the Bastable Children series is a humor series, but there are moments of real sentimentality in the stories. E. Nesbit couldn’t have known about the war that was coming, but she did know about wars that existed during her lifetime. Introducing the children to the soldiers in this story introduces some serious concepts to the children, who are largely naive about many aspects of life, still thinking of many dangerous things as sources of excitement and adventure. We don’t know what happened to any of the soldiers the children befriended, but the knowledge that the old woman’s son almost died brings it to the children’s awareness that death is a very real possibility in that type of “adventure.” It’s a lesson that will accompany them into their future.
E. Nesbit is a very good author.
LikeLike