Posted on by TracyC · 3 Comments

Ruth Fielding and the Gypsies

Ruth Fielding

Ruth Fielding and the Gypsies; Or, The Missing Pearl Necklace by Alice B. Emerson (Stratemeyer Syndicate), 1915.

Just as a quick note before I begin to describe the plot of this book, this book is part of the Ruth Fielding series, an early Stratemeyer Syndicate, before they started writing some of their more popular and best-known series, like the Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew. Some books in early Stratemeyer Syndicate series are awkward because they use racial terms that polite people would not use now. During the mid-20th century, around the time of the Civil Rights Movement, the Stratemeyer Syndicate revised the books it had in print, updating the technology and slang terms in the stories to be more modern and removing or altering some questionable racial terms and attitudes. Unfortunately, the Ruth Fielding series had already ended by that time, and these books were not among those that were revised and updated. I’ve explained this before on the pages for some the Stratemeyer Syndicate book series and individual book reviews, but I have to explain it again here because some people might object to the word “gypsy.” I know that’s not really the correct or polite way to refer to the Romany or “Travelers”, as they’re sometimes called, but it can’t be helped here because the Stratemeyer Syndicate put it right in the title. This is one of those books where I just can’t avoid it, and it’s all through the book. Some of the attitudes and stereotypes around the characters are also likely to be objectionable, but I’ll address that further in my reaction section.

The Ruth Fielding series is interesting because it was kind of a precursor to Nancy Drew, with a similar type of heroine, but one that, unlike Nancy Drew, grew up, went through school, and had a career during the course of the series. There are some aspects of this series and the development of the characters that I think were better done in this series than in the Nancy Drew series. There are also times when the books are surprisingly thoughtful about the conditions of life and society in the early 20th century, when they were written, and this book and the next one begin to mark a turning point in the main character’s life. Ruth is a poor girl, and before her education is over, she will have to seriously consider her career options, which is something you don’t see much in the Stratemeyer Syndicate series that are still in print because those characters never age. The characters in the earlier series did, which is why those series ended. There are some things in the series that I don’t like, like the racial terms and attitudes and when the stories are more adventure than mystery because I really prefer mystery, but this is what the books are like. In these reviews, I’m just explaining what the books and characters are like. On the bright side, if you don’t like what the books are like, you can consider that I read and reviewed them, so you don’t have to. You can find out what they’re like from my reviews and save yourself some time.

The Plot

Ruth Fielding is with her Uncle Jabez in a boat on the river near the Red Mill where they live when the boat overturns. Uncle Jabez falls out and hits his head. He almost drowns, but Ruth holds his head above water. She can’t pull him out of the river by herself, but she calls for help and attracts the attention of a passing gypsy boy. The gypsy boy, called Roberto, pulls Uncle Jabez out of the water.

Uncle Jabez is grateful, but the incident brings back an earlier argument about whether boys are more useful than girls. Uncle Jabez argues that boys are more useful than girls because they are stronger and can do heavier work, and he thinks that his near-drowning proves that. Of course, Ruth, Aunt Alvira, and Ruth’s friend Mercy are all offended by that assessment. Aunt Alvira points out that the boy who helped Uncle Jabez wouldn’t have been able to do that if Ruth hadn’t already been holding his head above water and calling for help. Ruth says that not all work is heavy work. Uncle Jabez says that girls are costly because they need money for education, and they’re not likely to have careers afterward, like men do. Ruth says that the reason why she wants an education is so that she can have a career and support herself.

Ruth knows that a poor orphan like her is lucky that she can attend boarding school with her friends. Her friend, Helen, is from a wealthy family, who is willing to fund her education in anything she wants to study, whether it eventually produces money or not, but Ruth doesn’t have that luxury. Eventually, she will have to get a job of some kind. Aunt Alvira says that, when she was young, most girls got a basic education and then got married, which is probably what Uncle Jabez is expecting Ruth to do. However, Aunt Alvira knows that modern girls have more ambitions. (Keep in mind that this story is set around 1915, contemporary to the time when it was written.) Ruth’s music teacher at school thinks that Ruth has a promising voice, and she wonders if she can train as a singer, although that’s not the kind of thing that her uncle would think of as something useful.

Before returning to boarding school with her friends, Ruth goes on a car trip with Helen and Helen’s twin brother, Tom. It turns out to be an unexpectedly eventful trip. Not long after setting out on the trip, they meet up with Roberto again and begin talking with him. The others ask Roberto about being a gypsy and if he wouldn’t prefer a more settled life with a regular job. Roberto says that, while he could work as a farmhand easily enough, few people would hire him for other jobs because he’s a gypsy, and people don’t trust gypsies. Besides, he sees little use in such a life. Tom says that he could afford better food and better clothes if he had a better job. Roberto says that he does well enough traveling around with his family, taking odd jobs, and helping his uncle at horse trades. He tells the others a little about his family and his life with them. After he leaves, Tom makes jokes about the rumors of gypsies kidnapping people.

Further down the road, Tom accidentally hits a lamb in the road with his car. The lamb is still alive, but its leg is broken. The farmer is angry, says that the lamb is useless now, and demands that Tom pay for the lamb. The price he demands is about twice as high as it should have been, but Tom pays it anyway to avoid further trouble. Then, they learn that the farmer, who doesn’t want to be bothered nursing the lamb until it heals, plans to simply kill it and feed it to his dogs. The girls are upset about the poor little lamb, and they plead for its life. Ruth is sure that the lamb can be healed. The farmer says that the lamb is his to do with as he pleases, but Helen points out that the lamb isn’t his anymore because Tom just paid for it. The farmer protests, but they take the lamb anyway. At first, Tom says that he doesn’t know what else to do with the lamb except take it to a butcher, but the girls persuade him to let them keep the lamb and try to help it.

Later, there is a storm, and the group seeks shelter in an old, empty house. The girls go inside while Tom parks their car in an old shed. The girls find the house spooky and wonder if it could be haunted. In some books, investigating a haunting in an old, abandoned house like this would be the main mystery, but in this one, it’s just one episode that gives them a clue to something else. While the girls are exploring the upstairs rooms and Tom is still outside, two strange men enter the house. The girls don’t let the men know they’re there. They’re not sure of who the men are or what their intentions are, so they listen to their conversation. They can’t understand everything the men say because half of their conversation is in an unfamiliar language, but from what the girls understand, they have either committed a theft or are going to be involved in one. The girls don’t want the men to find them or Tom, so they scare them out of the house by spooking some bats, which take flight and frighten the men away.

All of this would be exciting enough, but as they all travel further, Tom’s car breaks down. Tom leaves the girls and sets out on foot to get some help. The girls wait at the car for him, but it starts getting dark, and they start to get worried. A group of gypsies passes by with their wagons, and although Ruth isn’t sure it’s a good idea, Helen asks the gypsies if they can give her and Ruth a ride to her parents’ house. The gypsies ask the girls some questions, and then, they agree that the girls can come with them. Helen leaves a note for her brother that they’ve gone with the gypsies, but when she isn’t looking, one of the gypsies takes the note and destroys it.

It turns out that Ruth’s concerns about the gypsies were justified. The leader of this gypsy band is an elderly woman, who the girls recognize from Roberto’s stories as his grandmother, although Roberto is not currently among the group. The grandmother is a greedy woman, and she has realized from the girls’ car that at least one of them is from a wealthy family. To her, that means that they have relatives who would be able to pay a ransom for the girls. The girls become captives of the gypsies. The old woman also has an ability to hypnotize people with her eyes, and Helen seems particularly susceptible to it. During the night, while spying on the old woman, Ruth also learns that she is involved with the thieves they saw in the empty house.

The girls try to escape from the gypsies, and Helen gets away, but Ruth is caught. The old woman makes Ruth disguise herself as one of the gypsies so no one will notice her among the others. Can Ruth find a way to escape, or will Tom, Helen, or Roberto manage to help her?

This book is now in the public domain and available to borrow and read for free online through Project Gutenberg.

My Reaction and Spoilers

The Mystery/Adventure

The story covers not only Ruth’s adventures but the adventures of Ruth’s friends while she is captive, including Tom’s encounter with a suspicious farm couple and Helen’s frightening experience on a whitewater river. In the end, Roberto does help Ruth to escape. By the time Ruth returns to her friends and is able to tell her story to the authorities, the gypsies are well out of the area.

However, there is still something that bothers Ruth. She knows that Roberto’s grandmother had a valuable pearl necklace in her possession, apparently the spoils of the theft that the men in the empty house were talking about. Ruth wonders who they robbed and where the necklace came from. At first, it seemed like this plot line was going to be left hanging, but when Ruth returns to boarding school with her friends, she gets the answer. A new student is joining the school, Nettie Parsons, and she is the daughter of a multi-millionaire who made his money in sugar. She is the one who was robbed of the pearl necklace, which really belongs to her aunt, and there is a $5,000 reward for its return. $5,000 would be a pretty decent reward even in the 2020s, but it went much further in the 1910s. Ruth realizes that she knows who has that pearl necklace, and if she can get it back for Nettie, she would not only be doing a good turn for a classmate but getting the much-needed reward for herself. $5,000 would be enough to give Ruth some monetary independence and could fund her continued education.

Like other early Stratemeyer Syndicate books, the story is more adventure than mystery, although there are some mystery elements. Ruth gets some of the clues to the theft that the gypsies committed, but it’s more by coincidence than investigation that she discovers who the pearl necklace belongs to. Ruth does get the reward in the end, which allows her to finish at Briarwood Hall and go on to college in later books. However, while the old woman was apprehended with the necklace on Ruth’s information, I think it’s important to note that Ruth does not chase her down and apprehend her herself. Ruth is still at boarding school when others do that on her behalf, and she is then summoned to identify the apprehended suspect. On the one hand, this would never happen that way in a modern, 21st century book. In modern books, the girl heroines are much more active and would insist on catching the bad guys themselves. On the other hand, I have to admit that the way the book did it would actually be the more likely way this situation would play out in the real world, with the boarding school kid just providing information and being kept at boarding school while others apprehend the criminals. I think if the book was rewritten in the 21st century, Ruth would be more active in catching the criminals and retrieving the necklace, but there is some realism in the way the book actually ends.

Ruth’s career ambitions are not resolved in this story but are addressed more directly in the next book in the series.

Stereotypes and Racial Attitudes

I was curious about the notion that gypsies kidnap people because I’ve read about that in other books, and I wondered where that idea came from. According to an article that I found, it seems to come partly from traveling gypsies being used as scapegoats for missing or murdered children (like in old movies, where the small-town sheriff is anxious to blame a “drifter” for a crime) or as “bogeymen” in stories parents told to scare their children into not wandering away from home and also partly from people noticing children among traveling Romany groups who did not seem to resemble the people raising them, particularly if the children seemed to be lighter-skinned or have lighter hair or eyes than the adults. The reasons for the children not looking like the adults have been proven in modern times to be because the children were either adopted or were simply biological children who didn’t look like their parents through quirks of genetics, which sometimes happens. Light-colored eyes and light-colored hair are recessive traits, while dark eyes and dark hair tend to be more dominant traits, but even a dark-eyed, dark-haired person can carry the recessive genes for light hair and eyes, and those recessive traits can come out in the next generation. Basically, the children resemble previous generations in the same family, such as grandparents or great-grandparents, and if observers could see all the generations of the family together, it would be more clear how the traits were handed down to the children. (People also used to think that it was impossible for two blue-eyed parents to have a brown-eyed child, but that also happens sometimes because genetics can be complicated, eye color can be influenced by combinations of multiple genes together, and genetic mutations sometimes take place.) Basically, some people overreact when they see a child who doesn’t match the adults they’re with and start imagining kidnapping, but often, there are other, logical explanations, and being too quick to scream “kidnap!” causes problems. Some people do this to families who have had interracial adoptions. Personally, my brain would be more likely to consider possible divorces or previous relationships or possible affairs or maybe that the adult was actually a hired caretaker rather than a parent to be the next most-likely explanations after adoption for children who don’t look like parents, and I wouldn’t be eager to publicly ask questions about the sexual or reproductive history of total strangers. Unless the child appeared to be in immediate physical danger or was screaming, “Help!” or “This isn’t my daddy!” or something similar, I would be unlikely to interfere. “If you see something, say something” can be helpful, but it also helps if what you see is the big picture.

I also noticed that the gypsies in the story are described as being non-white people because they have darker skin, and even Ruth seems to dislike them and be suspicious of them for that alone. Granted, these particular people are actually criminals in the story who kidnap Ruth and Helen, but Ruth was thinking that just from looking at them. While I would have understood Ruth being reluctant to trust them because they’re strangers and because they know from the men in the empty house that there are thieves in the area, it’s their darker skin that bothers Ruth first. When Ruth first meets Roberto’s grandmother, Ruth thinks that the gypsy woman is too dark and strange/foreign to be trustworthy, and she later hates that her gypsy disguise involves bare feet and her skin dyed darker. She is ashamed of the way she looks in that disguise and thinks that she would be embarrassed for Tom to see her looking like one of the gypsies. Ruth’s prejudices bothered me more than if another character had done it because, while the older Stratemeyer Syndicate books do have inappropriate racial language and attitudes, the characters who are outright racists are typically the ones the stories show to be unfriendly antagonists or outright villains. From what I’ve seen so far, it’s rare for a friendly main character to be outright disparaging of racial appearances even if they have stereotypical notions about other people.

It’s really an irony that Ruth has prejudices against non-white people because the beginning of the story involves an argument with her uncle about his prejudices about girls. If this book had been written, or at least revised, during the 21st century, the rest of the story would have involved overturning both sets of prejudices. In the book as it is, nobody’s prejudices seem to be proven wrong.

Uncle Jabez’s assertions about girls’ usefulness go largely unchallenged. The girls are kidnapped when they’re by themselves, after Tom leaves them alone. Ruth copes decently with her captivity by helping Helen escape, but she needs help to escape herself, and men apprehend the criminals in the end, not Ruth herself. If Ruth’s uncle has any rethinks about the relative usefulness of boys and girls, he doesn’t mention it, and he isn’t presented with any strong evidence in favor of girls. Ruth is just content that she got the reward money for the return of the necklace, so she isn’t solely dependent on miserly Uncle Jabez’s grudgingly-given support.

There are no prejudices about gypsies proven wrong in the story. While I’m sure that most real-world Romany are not kidnappers, the gypsies in the books are criminals and kidnappers. Roberto is fond of his family and their traveling lifestyle, but at the end of the book, he accepts a new job as a gardener at Ruth’s school. He cuts his hair more like mainstream American styles of the time, and he starts wearing more mainstream American clothes. Ruth notes that his skin is still darker, but she is happy about these other changes. It is revealed that Roberto’s family came from Bohemia (a region now part of the Czech Republic) about ten years before, and his grandmother will now be deported back there, but Roberto wants to stay in the United States. He Americanizes his name and starts having people call him Robert. That’s quite a conversion from his attitudes much earlier in the book. Granted, having relatives arrested for theft and kidnapping can have an effect on a person, but from his earlier descriptions of his grandmother, I’m pretty sure that these sort of situations are not new to Roberto’s grandmother and the rest of their group. Maybe getting caught is new, but there is an implication that his greedy grandmother has done shady things before for the sake of money. But, part of the happy ending of this story is that Roberto gets assimilated into mainstream American society and becomes less ethnic, which is bound to leave a bad taste in the mouths of modern Americans.

So, Did I Like the Book?

I liked parts of it. As I pointed out, there are things in this book that are highly problematic for modern people, and I think the book as it is would be more suitable to adults who are interested in nostalgic children’s literature or the evolution of children’s literature. However, there are parts of the book I did find interesting, and I can see ways in which the book could be rewritten to make it both more exciting and more acceptable to modern people. For example, I really liked the part with the empty house where they overheard the thieves talking and the way the girls scared the thieves with the bats. If I were rewriting the story, I would extend that scene and leave out the part with the lamb, which didn’t contribute much to the rest of the story.

Of course, I would just have the criminals be part of a random criminal gang, not Romany. (How common were traveling caravans in the early 20th century anyway? I’ve never seen even one in real life. Was that really a common thing at one point so that it ended up in so many children’s books? From what I’ve read about Romany populations and migrations in the United States, some of the stereotypes about them had some basis in fact, like that some of them occasionally resorted to stealing to survive, but were exaggerated in the press for the sake of sensationalism, so I’m thinking that the prevalence of gypsy caravans and fortune tellers were probably also greatly exaggerated in literature.) I picture the criminal gang organized with the two guys who hide out in the old house being the thieves, and the others being a seemingly-ordinary and pleasant-looking couple who act as the fences of their stolen goods. Then, the girls could hitch a ride from this nice-looking couple after their car breaks down. At first, they wouldn’t know there was a connection between the “nice” couple and the thieves, but they would later accidentally see the couple talking with the thieves and the thieves handing over their goods. The girls would get caught spying on them, so the criminals would kidnap them because the girls now know too much.

Later, after the girls get away from the criminals, Ruth could find out that the necklace they saw being handed over wasn’t among the thieves’ belongings when the police caught up with them. Thinking about the place where the thieves were caught and something she may have heard them say, she could then realize that the thieves doubled back on their trail after the girls escaped from them, returning to their hideout in the abandoned house to hide the necklace because they still don’t know that the girls were in the house when they were talking there before. Then, Ruth could sneak away from her boarding school for a day to go back to the house and look for the necklace, finding it in a clever secret hiding place. I think that arrangement of events would make Ruth more active in solving the mystery, better justifying her acceptance of the reward at the end.

Posted on by TracyC · 4 Comments

Five Go to Mystery Moor

The Famous Five

Five Go to Mystery Moor by Enid Blyton, 1954, 1974.

The girls, George and Anne are attending a riding school, and the boys, Julian and Dick, are camping when George receives a letter that her father is ill, and her mother wants the girls to stay on at the riding school for a while longer. The girls are disappointed and think that the boys will probably stay on at their camp, but they soon get a letter that the boys will be coming to the riding school to join the girls. The children are hoping that they will find another adventure when they’re all together again.

At the riding school, George has developed a rivalry with another girl called Henry. Henry’s real name is Henrietta, like George’s real name is Georgina, and like George, Henry likes to dress and act like a boy. However, rather than bonding over their shared interests and styles, George and Henry resent each other. (George makes a big deal of not liking to be a girl and wanting other people to look at her and refer to her as a boy. I’ve wondered whether the implication is that she’s actually transgender, without using that word to describe her, or if she’s merely a tomboy who things girl things are sissy stuff. Enid Blyton’s books are often full of the implication that boys are tougher and braver than girls, and it seems to be a mark of praise for a girl to be like a boy. In this particular book, it seems like both George and Henry are trying hard to be “not like other girls“, and the reason why they resent each other is that they’re both disgruntled to realize that at least one other girl is like them, making each of them seem less exceptional. They each seem to feel like the other is horning in on their shtick.) In spite of the rivalry between George and Henry, the other children like Henry. Eventually, George and Henry settle their differences. Henry joins the other children on some of their rides and explorations.

While the children are still at the riding school, a gypsy boy comes to the stables with an injured horse, asking for help. (They’re referred to as “gypsies” all throughout the book, although that’s considered a kind of insult. The proper name is really Romani, and they’re also sometimes called “Travelers.” The name “Gypsy” comes from an earlier misunderstanding that their ancestors were originally from Egypt, kind of like how Native Americans were mistakenly referred to as “Indians”, and the name stuck. I only use the word “gypsy” here because the author does, and I want to make sure that fans of the original book understand what I’m talking about. This note is here to clarify the difference. Gypsies are stock characters in Enid Blyton books, and they’re all pretty stereotypical.) The boy is told that it will take a few days before the horse is able to walk, let alone pull a caravan wagon. The boy is very upset because his father has a nasty temper, and he’s not willing to wait. The other children soon see how abusive the boy’s father is, and they’re sympathetic to him. Julian and Dick catch the father trying to steal a horse or reclaim his in spite of its injury during the night. When they ask him why he needs a horse so badly and can’t wait until his is properly healed, and he tells them that his group needs to go to Mystery Moor. Seeing that he’s not going to get another horse, the father decides to move on with other members of their party, leaving his son behind to tend to their horse and catch up to them when he can.

Julian, Dick, George, and Anne are intrigued by Mystery Moor, although they can’t imagine what could be there that would make someone so desperate to go there. The name of the place intrigues them, and they are told that it used to be called Misty Moor until some strange things happened there years ago. A wealthy family established a sand quarry there and built a small railroad line that crossed the moor, but they had a dispute with the gypsies who lived on the moor. The gypsies sabotaged the railroad, and when the sons of the family went to deal with the situation, they all vanished and were never seen again. The local rumor is that the gypsies probably murdered the sons, but nothing was ever proven, and to be honest, nobody really misses the sons because they weren’t nice to anybody else, either.

The children think that this is the adventure that they’ve been looking for, and when the riding school becomes crowded because of the arrival of new students, they decide that they want to go camping on Mystery Moor. They look forward to heading out onto the moor to see if they can find any traces of what happened to the missing family. However, there’s a modern mystery on the moor as well. The children spot a plane that flies low and circles the area, seemingly guided by a mysterious light. The children discover that the plane dropped a package, and that package is stuffed with packets of US money! Who would drop that much money from an airplane, and who was supposed to come pick it up?

The book is available to borrow and read for free online through Internet Archive (multiple copies). There is also an audiobook on YouTube. As the cover of the book notes, the Famous Five series was made into a television series, and you can sometimes find clips or episodes on YouTube.

My Reaction and Spoilers

Old and New Versions

I find that many of Enid Blyton’s mystery/adventure stories, no matter which series, are very much on par with Stratemeyer Syndicate books (Bobbsey Twins, Hardy Boys, Nancy Drew, etc.), especially the earlier ones. On the one hand, they contain many of the elements that children love in stories – mystery and adventure, independence from parents and other adults, spooky and mysterious happenings, kids who save the day, and a lovable dog. On the other, both Enid Blyton’s books and the Stratemeyer Syndicate books were revised in later reprintings to update the language and to remove or alter racially-insensitive and offensive terms.

I didn’t know how much some of the Stratemeyer books I read as a kid had changed from their original versions because I was born in the late 20th century, after many of these revisions had already taken place and didn’t read some of the original editions until I was an adult. I was surprised. Since I grew up in the US, I didn’t read any Enid Blyton books as a child at all. They’re available here, but not nearly as popular as the various Stratemeyer Syndicate series, and many American children don’t know about them at all. I’d heard of Enid Blyton books because they were referred in other books and movies I saw, but I didn’t read any until I was an adult. By that time, I wasn’t too shocked at some of the more problematic parts of the books.

“Gypsy” isn’t really a shocking word for me because there’s less emotional baggage attached to that word from the time and place where I grew up than there is attached to certain other racial words that I’d rather not mention. When I was a kid, I thought it was a more neutral, generic word than it really is, although someone did explain to me at some point what the name comes from and that it’s not really the proper name. However, when you find out that something really bothers people or that they don’t want to be called certain things, it’s better to just call them whatever they like to call themselves. I think the later reprintings of this book use the word Traveller (British spelling) instead, like this audiobook on YouTube.

As with Stratemeyer Syndicate books, I think the revised reprintings are fine for modern children, and the earlier versions are best kept for adults with an interest in vintage and nostalgic children’s literature. I find these books interesting particularly because they have the classic setup of a mystery-solving group of children and their dog, just like the Scooby-Doo mysteries, which is something that I grew up loving! The Scooby-Doo mysteries have a similar format to the Famous Five, and the working title for the original concept of the cartoon series was Mysteries Five, which might be an indication that the writers had Enid Blyton’s books in mind.

Interesting Information

One interesting piece of trivia is that the book discusses patrins, signs that the Travellers leave for each other to indicate which way they’re going. During the course of the story, the Traveller boy leaves patrins to help the other children.

The Mystery and spoilers

Like many vintage children’s mysteries, the story leans a little more toward adventure than mystery. The Travellers are definitely the ones who are there to get the dropped packets of money, and that’s why they were so worried about getting out on the moor in time. The real mystery is why they’re doing this and where the money comes from.

Toward the end of the book, the police reveal that the money is counterfeit, and that’s why it had to be smuggled into the country. Henry is helpful to the others at a point when they’re in danger, and that helps George to reconcile with her. Because the Traveller boy’s father is abusive and is about to be arrested for smuggling counterfeit money, he is likely to be sent to a foster home, which is actually good news for him because he was unhappy with his father and afraid of him. He says he would like to live a settled life in a house where he can ride his bike to school, and George promises to give him a bicycle as a reward for helping them when they needed it.

Posted on by TracyC · 1 Comment

The Girl in the Window

The Girl in the Window by Wilma Yeo, 1988.

Kiley Mulligan Culver lives in a fairly small town, Meander, in the southern United States.  Although not much usually happens in their small down, about a year before the story begins, a little girl named Leedie Ann Alcott was kidnapped.  The crime literally hit Kiley very close to home because she and her father (Kiley’s mother died when she was a baby) live on the Alcott family’s estate.  The Alcott mansion was once a plantation, and Kiley and her dad, who is an author, live in the old house that once belonged to the plantation’s overseer, so they know the Alcott family well.  Mr. and Mrs. Alcott are divorced, and Mr. Alcott lives in another state.  Mrs. Alcott owned a children’s clothing shop in town, Kiley would sometimes babysit or play with Leedie Ann, who was younger than she was.  In some ways, Leedie Ann was kind of like a little sister to Kiley.  At the time she disappeared, Leedie Ann was four years old, and Kiley was about nine.  Mrs. Alcott never received a ransom note for Leedie Ann, but everyone is sure that her disappearance was a kidnapping, not just a child wandering off.

A year later, when the story begins, Leedie Ann has still not been found, and no one knows what happened to her.  After Leedie Ann disappeared, her mother closed her clothing shop, and a strange gypsy woman named Pesha came to stay with her.  Pesha is mysterious and secretive, and no one knows why Mrs. Alcott has her staying with her, although they seem to be holding seances.

Then, one evening, Kiley looks up at the Alcott mansion and sees Leedie Ann Alcott standing in the window of her old room! But, before she can do anything, another, shadowy figure closes the drapes on the window.  By the time that Kiley can tell her father what she’s seen, Leedie Ann is gone.  Her father goes to the Alcott house to ask Mrs. Alcott if everything is all right and if she needs anything, and everything seems to be normal (or what passes for normal at that time).  Kiley’s father thinks that Kiley imagined the whole thing, but Kiley knows that she didn’t, and she is sure that she wasn’t mistaken and that it was really Leedie Ann.

Kiley tells her friend, Sarah, about what she saw and persuades her to help find out whether Leedie Ann is really in the Alcott house or not.  Sarah is nervous about it, but she agrees to go along with Kiley’s plan to go to the Alcott house and ask to use the bathroom, pretending that she has been waiting for Kiley to meet her at her house but that she just can’t wait anymore.  While Sarah is supposedly using the bathroom, she’s supposed to check Leedie Ann’s room upstairs.  Kiley can’t do this herself because she wouldn’t have the same excuse that Sarah would and because Mrs. Alcott would know that Kiley knows where the downstairs bathroom is and that she would have no reason to go poking around upstairs.

When Sarah follows through on Kiley’s plan and checks Leedie Ann’s room, she tells Kiley that she did see Leedie Ann there!  However, Pesha saw her spying and made her leave the house.  Kiley and Sarah think that perhaps Pesha has both Mrs. Alcott and Leedie Ann under a spell and is holding them prisoner in their house.  But, what can the girls do to help them?

Kiley comes up with a daring plan to trick Pesha into revealing what she knows about Leedie Ann Alcott by writing an anonymous letter to her as if she already knew that Pesha was involved in her disappearance, but the plan backfires.  The police reopen the inquiry into Leedie Ann’s disappearance (don’t ask me why they didn’t notice that the letter appeared to be written by a child), but Kiley accidentally implicates an innocent person.  Adults in town are nervous, and Sarah’s mother doesn’t want Kiley to see her anymore.  Just as Kiley thinks things can’t get any worse, Pesha asks for her help, offering a charm to help restore Kiley’s friendship with Sarah in return.  Pesha claims that her only purpose is to use her psychic abilities to help Mrs. Alcott find Leedie Ann and that what Kiley believed was Leedie Ann in the window was actually a mannequin left from Mrs. Alcott’s clothing store that Leedie Ann had always begged to have as a life-size doll for herself.  Is Pesha really as innocent as she claims to be?  Can Kiley trust her?  What about Mrs. Alcott?  Above all, where is Leedie Ann Alcott?

Although Kiley may have made a big mistake, the reopening of the kidnapping case does bring to light the real secret behind Leedie Ann’s disappearance.

The book is available to borrow and read for free online through Internet Archive.

Themes and My Reaction

One of the side plots in the story is about how differences between people can lead to mistrust because people sometimes get a false impression.  Kiley knows that her friends’ mothers don’t really approve of her because she is being raised by her father alone.  Some of her friends’ mothers, especially Sarah’s because she’s overprotective, think that Kiley is a wild child because she doesn’t have a mother to look after her, and they worry that Kiley will be a bad influence on their daughters.  Kiley does sometimes get into trouble because she’s a little daring and a little impulsive, but those are more personal character traits rather than the result of growing up without a mother, and some of her escapades are undertaken in the name of helping someone, like trying to find Leedie Ann.  Her friends’ mothers don’t understand Kiley’s intentions, though, and they never ask enough questions to find out what is really going on.  It seems oddly cold behavior from mothers to me.  Where I grew up, other people’s mothers would have taken more of an interest in a motherless child, purposely checking up on her and wanting to have her hanging around where they could keep an eye on what she was doing.  If they push her away, then she’s even less monitored than she was before.

However, Kiley realizes that everyone’s suspicions about Pesha, including her own, were also based largely on the fact that Pesha is different from everyone else.  For awhile, Kiley helps Pesha to hide from the police because Pesha fears their inquiries.  The two of them get to know each other better.  Pesha is actually a Holocaust survivor. Pesha has the tattoos on her body that the Nazis used to put on prisoners in their concentration camps (I’ve see those tattoos in real life, and I recognized them from the book’s description before Kiley understood what they were) and she tells Kiley about a place in Germany where her family was and terrible things happened.  Besides Jewish people, gypsies were also targets of the Nazis during the Holocaust and were sent to concentration camps along with them.  Pesha fears the police because she fears being locked up again, something that Mrs. Alcott tells to the police to explain Pesha’s sudden disappearance.  Knowing this helps Kiley to become more sympathetic to Pesha and more determined to help straighten out the mess that she helped to cause, eventually discovering the real whereabouts of Leedie Ann in the process.

Something that bothered me about the adults in the story, pretty much all of them, is their lack of interest in asking questions and taking charge.  Even after Kiley’s father realizes that she was helping Pesha to hide from the police, he doesn’t ask enough questions about why she was doing it.  He simply reports Pesha to the authorities and orders Kiley to stay out of it, just like he simply told her to stop imagining Leedie Ann Alcott and making up stories back when Kiley first saw the girl in the window.  Kiley’s father didn’t want to ask the awkward questions to verify what Kiley saw, so it was easier to assume that she didn’t see anything.  Part of that is a plot device, so that Kiley has a reason to dig for the truth herself, but it also figures into the way other adults, like Sarah’s mother, treat Kiley and how they approach the whole inquiry into Leedie’s disappearance.  Instead of checking on what motherless Kiley is doing and helping her father to supervise her, they want to just shrug her off as a problem they don’t want to deal with, figuring that someone else will handle it because they don’t want to get involved.  Then, when Sarah’s mother finds out about Sarah helping Kiley to write the letter that reopened the investigation, she refuses to tell the police the truth about it, allowing the investigation against Pesha to go forward even when she knew it was groundless, just because she didn’t want to get involved.  Disbelieving adults/adults not wanting to get involved is a trope of children’s mysteries because the adults’ non-involvement provides a reason for the children to investigate, but I still find it annoying and irresponsible.

Pesha’s innocence is finally established when Kiley finds the courage to admit what she did in front of everyone at Pesha’s court hearing.  Kiley comes to realize that a quality that she and her father both have is honesty.  Her father didn’t try to hide it when he discovered that Kiley was harboring a fugitive the way Sarah’s mother tried to hide the truth to avoid becoming involved and to hide her child’s involvement, and that’s something to be proud of.  The aftermath of her confession also gives Kiley the opportunity to spot the tell-tale clue of Leedie Ann’s current whereabouts, and Leedie Ann is safely returned to her mother.

Posted on by TracyC

Mystery of the Golden Horn

goldenhornMystery of the Golden Horn by Phyllis A. Whitney, 1962.

Vicki Stewart doesn’t mean to get into trouble. However, with her mother in the hospital with a back injury and Vicki in the care of her unsympathetic aunts, she has allowed her schoolwork to slide to the point where she cannot go on to the next grade. Faced with the prospect of admitting her failure to her friends, Vicki decides that she would rather leave school early and skip summer camp. Instead, she will join her father in Turkey, where he has been teaching at a girls’ college. The prospect of going to a new country and facing her father after her humiliating failure isn’t pleasant, either, but Vicki sees it as her only path to a fresh start. Indeed, her life will never be the same.

Vicki’s father rents his rooms from Mrs. Byrne, an American living in a palace that once belonged to a pasha along with her son, Ken, and her distant cousin and ward, Adria. Adria is about the same age as Vicki, and she has problems of her own. Adria’s parents are dead, and she has not been happy living with the Byrnes. Adria is something of a mystery to Vicki. She’s a dreamy, unpredictable girl who believes in magic spells and fortune-telling. A gypsy friend of Adria’s has told her that her fortune is to be found with a mysterious “golden horn,” and Adria’s single-minded pursuit of it has a tendency to get her into scrapes.

Unfortunately, Adria also tends to drag Vicki into trouble, partly because she is convinced that Vicki’s fortune is intertwined with hers. Vicki resents these complications in her life that add to her “problem child” reputation. However, she sincerely wants to help troubled Adria. Strange things are happening in the house, particularly in the spooky, disused haremlik, but not all of the strange things are Adria’s fault. As Vicki puzzles over these strange things and Adria continues her search for the golden horn, the girls gain new perspectives on their lives and their problems. The solutions aren’t as far-away and mystical as they think, but the girls will have to rely on themselves and each other to see them.

Phyllis Whitney’s books are wonderful for their colorful settings and insights on human nature. Vicki’s disappointment and embarrassment over her failure are true-to-life, and her struggle to change and redeem herself is something that everyone has experienced at some point. It’s a touching and reassuring story about how to deal with failure and life’s problems. The mystery is subtle (up until the end, you’re not quite sure how much of the trouble in the house is Adria’s doing and what her motivations are), and the setting is vivid and engaging. Whitney has also included interesting historical details about Turkey and comparisons between the past and present (by 1960s standards) culture.

The book is currently available online through Internet Archive.