Probably many of you have, by now, read Call the Midwife by Jennifer Worth, or seen the BBC series based on the book and two follow-ups. Those of you who have not have the most marvelous summer treat in store!
Worth (1935-2011) wrote her memoirs in her 60s, and the first volume was published in 2002. The BBC series began airing in early 2012.
The story is autobiographical, with most names changed to protect the privacy of people Worth hadn't kept in touch with in the 50 years since the story's setting. And that setting? It's Worth's foray into midwifery in the tough slums of London's East End in the 1950s and early 60s! Yes! This is Betty's world, replete with caps and cloaks, Cockney accents and bicycles.
The first book contains a lot less romance (the author fled a doomed love affair, in her mid-teens, to learn nursing in a West End hospital, and doesn't care to discuss it) and a whole lot more gynecological detail than a Betty novel. There are also heartbreaking stories of poor people abandoned to horror by a system without safety nets. Worth doesn't shrink from the sorrow and horror, but keeps a stiff upper lip and soldiers on, calling in the chiropodist to deal with toenails untrimmed for decades, befriending a young prostitute and trusting a mother of 25(!) to deal with a premature baby successfully. There's also a skinnydipping interlude in literal Brighton, but other than constant babies, no mention of metaphorical Brighton.
I've only seen two episodes of the show, one from the middle and one toward the end, but I get the impression romance figures more largely in the film version than the printed. And oh, the costumes! The hairdos! The meals!
Must dash to library and attempt to wrestle volumes two and three (Shadows of the Workhouse and Farewell to the East End) from what is most likely a long list of requestees. So maybe the bookstore...
Enjoy!
Showing posts with label nurses. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nurses. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Betty by the Numbers: Titles
The United State Library of Congress has a collection that includes just under 23 million “catalogued books.” You try coming up with titles for each of those – I don’t believe it would be possible to do so without repeating, although I suppose you could get a long-ish way on _________ for Dummies and The Joy of ________. (I wonder what the most common title is?)
Now imagine trying to title just 135 books (requiring 141 titles due to re-naming; two were published under three titles each, and another two were published under two each).
The main reading room of the US Library of Congress.
Several months back, Betty Magdalen posed a question about recurring words in Neels-titles. The Great Betty and her editors managed not to repeat exact titles, but as one might expect with this oeuvre, heavy on the consistent elements as it is, there are several themes that appear and reappear. The most frequent is the use of our heroine’s name: 30 titles include her moniker, from the alpha Sister Peters in Amsterdam (1969) to the omega Emma’s Wedding (2001). Sister P is the only one whose surname makes the spine; all the others are given names. Those 30 represent 21% of the titles. They include four that use only the heroine’s first name, beginning in 1976 and ending in 1984; they are Esmerelda, Hannah, Judith and Polly. Only one hero gets his name on the cover: Valentine Seymour of A Valentine for Daisy (1993). Perhaps coincidentally, though Betty used eleven heroine names three times each, and 15 names twice, “Daisy” is the only one that makes it onto multiple covers – the other is Discovering Daisy (1999).
I have tried to group the remaining themes into lexical sets of sorts. The most-frequently deployed, after the heroine-name thing, is the seasonal theme. While mists and mellow fruitfulness get a starring role only in Tangled Autumn (1971), Christmas shows up six times (including once as 'mistletoe'), summer and winter five each, and spring four times (one spring, two Aprils and one May). That’s a total of 21 season-mentions, for 15% of the titles.
There’s a tie of sorts for the third most-used. One is variations on romance and its results: there are eight books with the word “wedding” in their titles, three with variations on “romance,” and two each of “proposal,” “kiss,” and “marriage.” That’s a total of 17, or 12% of the books. Feel free to argue that “wife” ought to be in this set – I’ve included it in the female-file instead. And that is our other third-place finisher, also with 17 mentions. The females include ten girls, three wives (convenient, ideal and good), two daughters, a single (independent) woman, and one damsel. The girls don’t show up until 1976, but from there on they include a gem of a one, one to love, a green-eyed one, an old-fashioned one, an ordinary one and five others.
Emotions are close behind, with sixteen mentions, for 11% of titles. The emotions are more widely dispersed than the previous categories, with six titles deploying the word “love,” three each of “happy” (or “happiness”) and “dear,” two “gentle,” and one each of “heart” and “dream.”
Butting right up against the emotions are extra-worldly forces, with fifteen titular appearances, also 11% of the 141 titles. Magic and chance occur four times each, fate three times and heaven twice, while “miracle” and “destiny” each occurs once.
The next set, with eleven appearances, is poetry – three citations from children’s rhymes, and eight from grown-up poems. I’ve almost certainly (90%-plus chance) undercounted here, as my knowledge of the Romantic and Pastoral English poets TGB seemed to favor is sadly limited – as is my knowledge of every other kind of poet. Then there are ten appearances (7% of titles) of light sources: three moons, three stars, two suns and two candles or candlelights.
In the early days, the Netherlands, doctors and nurses were the most common tropes. Remember, Mrs. Neels’s first four books got a total of nine titles. Only the first, Sister Peters in Amsterdam, was never re-named. In those nine titles, we get four nurses (two sisters; two nurses), a surgeon and a consultant, three Hollands and an Amsterdam. We also get three names (Peters, Maggy and Harriet) and a single season (April = spring). Amazon in an Apron (1969) could, of course, refer to a cook, French maid or blacksmith, I suppose, but it could also add a fraction to the “nurse” count.
But then they vanish! After Tempestuous April was retitled Nurse Harriet Goes to Holland (1970), we get no more nurses, sisters, or references to the Netherlands. Subsequent titles do add to the hero’s profession, with one each of “surgeon,” “professor” (the medical kind) and “doctor.” So by the time of The Doctor’s Girl (2001), we total nine references to medical professions (five doctors, four nurses), for 6% of titles. The only other profession to make a cover is Nanny by Chance (1998), unless you count daughter-ing and wife-ing as professions.
Botanical matter is the second of the seventh-place finishers, also hitting the front page nine times (6%), three times as roses, twice each as fruit (apple, pineapple) and fruit-turned-intoxicant (champagne and a liqueur that is sometimes translated as “dragonfly in green”), and once each for tulips and a nettle.
For some reason I cannot define, I grouped the three “nevers”, two “goodbyes” and two “waits” as a set. That’s seven references, or 5% of the titles, but I dunno – maybe it doesn’t really count, since I can’t seem to explain it. Maybe it counts extra because it just feels so right. Anyway, the true second-largest category is the 20 titles, 14%, that don’t include any of these recurring themes. They run from Blow Hot, Blow Cold (1969) through The Little Dragon (1977) and The Secret Pool (1986) to Always and Forever (2001).
Partially making up for those are three titles with three themes each. Two have the same three themes: Sister Peters in Amsterdam and Nurse Harriet Goes to Holland (nursing, heroines’ name, and the Netherlands); the third is Sun and Candlelight, with two light sources contained within a crib from Elizabeth Barrett Browning. There are 37 titles, 26% of the total, with two themes apiece; e.g., Nurse in Holland (1969), The Fifth Day of Christmas (1971), Pineapple Girl (1977), The Course of True Love (1988) and Dearest Eulalia (2000). That leaves 81 titles with a single theme each, or 57% of the total. My vote for most peculiar title: Three for a Wedding (1973).
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Death, Death and more Death
There are a lot of ways to die. In the land of Neelsdom, you've got your gastroenteritis, your hemorrhage, old age/neglect, sudden heart attacks, stroke, falling out of apartment buildings because a mom is ghetto enough to leave a toddler unattended, auto collision...
It's like The Great Neels knew something about death or something.
I've been pretty busy this month. In my ward (congregation) I had the brilliant idea (aided and abetted by the ward Family History consultant--yes, Mormons are that OCD about genealogy) to challenge the men of the ward to an Index-off. And it's all in the nature of a friendly little wager. Whichever auxiliary (the women or the men) Index more names this month wins (WINS!) an ice-cream social and glorious bragging rights forever and ever!! My sacred honor rests on crushing them. (Yes, I have not been above some ecclesiastical smack-talk.)
Indexing is pretty simple. You download a digital scan of a historic document--census records, draft registrations, death certificates, etc.--and simply (simple if you can read the writing) type into designated fields the information you see. It makes the document search-able for those that are looking for their family history records.
And it's been engrossing. But last week I stumbled onto a batch of un-Indexed Texas Death Certificates. It's actually been a bit sobering. My findings:
Anyway, I don't really have another point just props to La Neels.
P.S. So far we're beating the men but not crushing them. Cross your fingers!
It's like The Great Neels knew something about death or something.
I've been pretty busy this month. In my ward (congregation) I had the brilliant idea (aided and abetted by the ward Family History consultant--yes, Mormons are that OCD about genealogy) to challenge the men of the ward to an Index-off. And it's all in the nature of a friendly little wager. Whichever auxiliary (the women or the men) Index more names this month wins (WINS!) an ice-cream social and glorious bragging rights forever and ever!! My sacred honor rests on crushing them. (Yes, I have not been above some ecclesiastical smack-talk.)
![]() |
| Indexing is simply an organized way to drive rational people insane. |
Indexing is pretty simple. You download a digital scan of a historic document--census records, draft registrations, death certificates, etc.--and simply (simple if you can read the writing) type into designated fields the information you see. It makes the document search-able for those that are looking for their family history records.
| Yes. In Utah, they can even index in prison. |
And it's been engrossing. But last week I stumbled onto a batch of un-Indexed Texas Death Certificates. It's actually been a bit sobering. My findings:
- There are a LOT of ways to die and though these records are pretty old Texas was not shy about recording the details. ("Repeated blunt force trauma while working on an oil rig", "Auto accident and subsequent fire" and worse ones.)
- Betty Neels had a pretty normal range of methods that seemed to mirror what I was reading--lots and lots of myocardial infarction, gastroenteritis and auto collisions.
- When people get old, sometimes people stop caring about them. If only some thin-young woman in need of an occupation could have been spared to sit with them and read semi-trashy romance novels...
- The babies are the hardest to Index. Lots of deaths after just hours. There was a toddler who had passed away by drinking kerosene and I thought of all those babies in Neeldom who have to be treated in the Burn Units by heroic RDDs because of overturned kerosene heaters. Clearly, this was something that The Great Betty had seen in her nursing life and just hated.
![]() |
| Betty the Awesome |
Anyway, I don't really have another point just props to La Neels.
P.S. So far we're beating the men but not crushing them. Cross your fingers!
Labels:
Betty Neels,
nurses
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)






