Bransom, TX

a discussion place for our web site


You are not connected. Please login or register

BOTD 02-13-14 The Blind Eye - An Ivor Production

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Skater


Bransom Postmaster
The Blind Eye
An Ivor Production

You are a master at a private/public school in Britain in the late 1950s.

You are walking to school in the morning when you see a group of your pupils. They are not necessarily in your form but they are from your school

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

(For the benefit of non British readers the two are playing conkers)

School rules dictate that boys must wear their caps to and from school which some are obviously not doing. The punishment for being caught without a cap is two strokes of the slipper.

The boy on the right is actually a prefect and it is one of his responsibilities to report boys for such breaches. He obviously hasn't done so as they are still capless. For that he would also get a double slippering and could lose his post as a prefect.

Are you going to turn a blind eye or take some names and have about half a dozen boys reporting to you at lunchtime?


_________________
Can you dig it?
http://www.malespank.net/listAuthor.php?author=Skater

Skater


Bransom Postmaster
I think a long line at lunch.. however I will let the prefect keep his rank just after he takes his whacks on the bare!


_________________
Can you dig it?
http://www.malespank.net/listAuthor.php?author=Skater

John Boy


Sherrif
Skater wrote:I think a long line at lunch.. however I will let the prefect keep his rank just after he takes his whacks on the bare!
ditto

http://www.malespank.net/listAuthor.php?author=John+Boy

Stone Man


Marshall
I can't and won't argue with Skater on this one. Nailed it!

1strappedboy


Sherrif
Given the time and place, there hall indeed be a long line at my door. I shall permit him to keep hi status as prefect but he will be quite sore indeed as he shall receive double on the bare to keep his status. More to point, I'll let him know that I'll be on him like a dirty shirt for the next few months; he'll get away with NOTHING!!

MemoryMan


Sherrif
Two strokes of the SLIPPER?  Hadn't boys got soft by the fifties?  

Speaking as one who, in the dim distant past, has sported a collection of STRIPES for this heinous crime they will certainly be reporting to me at lunchtime. (sadly bare is not an option)

Fast forward to today and I suppose I would also have to punish them for playing conkers without their safety glasses.

http://www.malespank.net/listAuthor.php?author=MemoryMan

squarecutter


Sherrif
Form an orderly queue outside my study after lunch boys. I will take the prefect last and remind him of his responsibilities when he had his 4 strokes as I am quite sure he won't want to lose his badge or have his punishment upgraded to a caning the next time I catch him colluding with malefactors in this way.

Jack


Admin
Seeing as I can't imagine myself thinking this rule is any better then than I do know, I would interrupt their game to remind them of it, and let them know that I will be watching to make sure they all have caps on when they start to school.... And that I'd better not catch them again.

Technically, they've probably violated the rule, but I'm sure they'll take the hint and at least be more cautious, if not more obedient, in the future.


_________________
"In the end, it's just a story. But if you ask me, it's all true."
http://bransomtx.forumotion.net

Pi Beta


Deputy
That era - definitely - the capless ones will be reporting to me after lunch for their due punishment. The prefect would only be in danger of losing his badge if I were to report him to the headmaster - I prefer to whack him myself than let the headmaster have that pleasure!

Kat


Editor Extraordinaire
I agree with almost everyone else: the slipper for the capless boys, and the prefect doesn't lose his prefecture -- just gets the joy of double strokes.

Kat

David M. Katz


Marshall
Jack wrote:Seeing as I can't imagine myself thinking this rule is any better then than I do know, I would interrupt their game to remind them of it, and let them know that I will be watching to make sure they all have caps on when they start to school.... And that I'd better not catch them again.

Technically, they've probably violated the rule, but I'm sure they'll take the hint and at least be more cautious, if not more obedient, in the future.

What he said!


_________________
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
http://www.malespank.net/listAuthor.php?author=David+M.+Katz

db105


Trailboss
MemoryMan wrote:
Fast forward to today and I suppose I would also have to punish them for playing conkers without their safety glasses.

 Laughing That was funny

http://www.malespank.net/listAuthor.php?author=Danny

db105


Trailboss
My first instinct here is to join the minority opinion of the court and vote with Jack and David. The thing is that, even though the rule is clear, I have no respect for that rule, and therefore it doesn't feel right to punish harshly.

I found it interesting that in other BOTD threads people tend to be much more lenient, and here, for an offence that nowadays we would regard as unimportant, since the rule itself seems ridiculous, most people go for the slipper.

Yes, I realize that the times have changed a lot. Certainly the use of corporal punishment was much more widespread and generally accepted. However, in other BOTD threads it is assumed that spankings are accepted within the naughty boy's family... Perhaps, even in a spanking family, people nowadays tend to think of spanking as a last resource, rather than a standard response to misbehavior.

Or perhaps you guys are thinking that what seems now a silly rule was not seen as silly then, and maybe it was legitimate for them to feel that way. Perhaps it was a way to keep a high standard of discipline, reasonable when you are raising a generation of youngster who might be called to defend their country and empire in war, or perhaps it was a way to encourage pride and a sense of belonging towards the school. I find that latest mentality quite alien, but some of our Commonwealth writers have helped me understand it in part through their stories. If you have never read Naturalman's stories, I would encourage you to seek them at the MMSA, because they are very strongly based on real-life experiences and offer a fascinating glimpse of how some of these British-tradition schools were able to become a source of pride and sense of belonging for their students, even though the discipline was so harsh by today's standards.

In that context, a teacher who refused to enforce the school standards might be seen by some with a certain disdain, seeing his actions as a sign of weakness or lack of values rather than a sign of compassion. He might be seen as letting down the school and the pupils themselves.

So, the question is: trying to put myself in that time and circumstances, do I still think that the rule about wearing the cap is arbitrary and senseless?

With some reluctance, I will still vote for (relative) leniency this time. I will approach them, letting them see me and, hopefully, put on their caps. Then I'll tell that the morning mist sometimes prevents me from seeing clearly from a distance, but that I hope I never have to see them not wearing their caps when they are supposed to do so, since I would then have to slipper any capless boy I caught.

I will tell the prefect to report to me at lunchtime, however. I will tell him that I respect it when a prefect chooses to guide the boys in his charge instead of always applying the letter of the law, but that he is letting the school down for not doing any of those things. He should have at least made those pupils put on their caps. If he is not willing to respect the school rules maybe he should not be a prefect. I will then say that this time I will not report him to the headmaster, so he will remain a prefect, but that I will give him a good slippering.

http://www.malespank.net/listAuthor.php?author=Danny

1strappedboy


Sherrif
db105 wrote:My first instinct here is to join the minority opinion of the court and vote with Jack and David. The thing is that, even though the rule is clear, I have no respect for that rule, and therefore it doesn't feel right to punish harshly.

I found it interesting that in other BOTD threads people tend to be much more lenient, and here, for an offence that nowadays we would regard as unimportant, since the rule itself seems ridiculous, most people go for the slipper.

Yes, I realize that the times have changed a lot. Certainly the use of corporal punishment was much more widespread and generally accepted. However, in other BOTD threads it is assumed that spankings are accepted within the naughty boy's family... Perhaps, even in a spanking family, people nowadays tend to think of spanking as a last resource, rather than a standard response to misbehavior.

Or perhaps you guys are thinking that what seems now a silly rule was not seen as silly then, and maybe it was legitimate for them to feel that way. Perhaps it was a way to keep a high standard of discipline, reasonable when you are raising a generation of youngster who might be called to defend their country and empire in war, or perhaps it was a way to encourage pride and a sense of belonging towards the school. I find that latest mentality quite alien, but some of our Commonwealth writers have helped me understand it in part through their stories. If you have never read Naturalman's stories, I would encourage you to seek them at the MMSA, because they are very strongly based on real-life experiences and offer a fascinating glimpse of how some of these British-tradition schools were able to become a source of pride and sense of belonging for their students, even though the discipline was so harsh by today's standards.

In that context, a teacher who refused to enforce the school standards might be seen by some with a certain disdain, seeing his actions as a sign of weakness or lack of values rather than a sign of compassion. He might be seen as letting down the school and the pupils themselves.

So, the question is: trying to put myself in that time and circumstances, do I still think that the rule about wearing the cap is arbitrary and senseless?

With some reluctance, I will still vote for (relative) leniency this time. I will approach them, letting them see me and, hopefully, put on their caps. Then I'll tell that the morning mist sometimes prevents me from seeing clearly from a distance, but that I hope I never have to see them not wearing their caps when they are supposed to do so, since I would then have to slipper any capless boy I caught.

I will tell the prefect to report to me at lunchtime, however. I will tell him that I respect it when a prefect chooses to guide the boys in his charge instead of always applying the letter of the law, but that he is letting the school down for not doing any of those things. He should have at least made those pupils put on their caps. If he is not willing to respect the school rules maybe he should not be a prefect. I will then say that this time I will not report him to the headmaster, so he will remain a prefect, but that I will give him a good slippering.

When Mum's cousin's sons were our guests (Summer of '77) they were attendees of a British Public School, and the attitude you describe essentially summarizes how they felt. The school still caned despite the fact that this was in the waning days of the use of that particular instrument (and their Dad SURE used it!!) and they held it as a matter of pride. A master who 'let them off' would have been seen as 'a soft ol duffer' or some other form of derision. Though they certainly didn't enjoy it when they were the "victim" of such discipline, they felt it was, for lack of a better term, character building.

Pi Beta


Deputy
In a prep school 1955-1960, we were required to wear our caps on the way to school and when out of school. I don't recollect any rebellion against this at that time and at that age.

In public school from 1960 - 1964, we were again required to wear caps or straw boaters when out of school. Again, though there were mumbles about it - especially since it was at the time when hairstyles were starting to be an issue - caps were decidedly preferable to the boaters except when we had safety in numbers. I wasn't a rebel and can't remember ever not abiding by the requirement, though I'm pretty sure I didn't wear it once off the bus walking the last few hundred yards home (I was a day boy in the predominantly boarding school). I'm sure a few did rebel and were whacked - probably after a warning - but cannot be sure.

The boys of the local grammar school at that time were also required to wear caps, so we weren't singled out as being anything different; this probably greatly reduced any resentment about the rule.

At least our caps, unlike those of some such schools, weren't a garish mix of colours - just navy blue with the school badge (approx 3x2cm) on the front. The boaters were either speckled or, for the 6th form, white with different coloured bands round them signifying house/sport/status etc. but were required wear on only one day of the year - the commemoration of the founder of the school plus, for leavers, the final day of their time at the school.

I still have my boater and lend it out for amateur dramatics in the village, but the cap probably went in the bin the day I left!

Jack


Admin
db105 wrote:I will tell the prefect to report to me at lunchtime, however. I will tell him that I respect it when a prefect chooses to guide the boys in his charge instead of always applying the letter of the law, but that he is letting the school down for not doing any of those things. He should have at least made those pupils put on their caps. If he is not willing to respect the school rules maybe he should not be a prefect. I will then say that this time I will not report him to the headmaster, so he will remain a prefect, but that I will give him a good slippering.

You have a very good point there, DB, and one I wish I'd thought of. While I still have no problem letting the other boys off on the context that they don't seem to be headed to school at the moment, the prefect should be held to a different standard.

And Dmitri, any boy who thought I was soft because of my attitude towards something like this would have been unpleasantly surprised if he tried to take advantage of me in school.  Twisted Evil 


_________________
"In the end, it's just a story. But if you ask me, it's all true."
http://bransomtx.forumotion.net

MemoryMan


Sherrif
1strappedboy wrote: When Mum's cousin's sons were our guests (Summer of '77) they were attendees of a British Public School, and the attitude you describe essentially summarizes how they felt.  The school still caned despite the fact that this was in the waning days of the use of that particular instrument (and their Dad SURE used it!!) and they held it as a matter of pride.  A master who 'let them off' would have been seen as 'a soft ol duffer' or some other form of derision.  Though they certainly didn't enjoy it when they were the "victim" of such discipline, they felt it was, for lack of a better term, character building.

Character building never entered our heads.  If it had we'd probably have been disgusted.  "One of the hazards of life" is probably the term you were looking for Dimitri.

In my day boys were always ready to exploit weakness and whilst a strict master who occasionally turned a "blind eye" would normally be respected as a good sport, one who was habitually soft would soon find mob rule scupper his chances of being able to control a class.

http://www.malespank.net/listAuthor.php?author=MemoryMan

1strappedboy


Sherrif
MM, I believe you have captured Eddie's attitude!!  He did say, however, (when we were kids) that he'd see someone who 'let them get away with murder' as a bit  of a fool (that his fellows would take TREMENDOUS advantage of) so I took a bit of liberty in presuming that someone who "held them to a standard" would be more respected.  At least that's the air I got from Ed.



Last edited by 1strappedboy on Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:18 pm; edited 1 time in total

squarecutter


Sherrif
In 1959 there would have been little or no protest. It may not have been seen as the most heinous offence but it would have been seen as letting the school down to be slovenly in public as the authorities would see it. You might have had the odd rebel in a senior school but not in the group here where even prefects would only be 12/13 at the most and usually the keenest to enforce the rules such was the conditioning and peer pressure within the system. Most parents would also be right behind the school. This after all was why they put their children into these schools.This is pre Beatles and before Dylan sung of 'times they are a changing.' So rebels were easily isolated and squashed.

I was in that kind of uniform some 10 years later and the seachange was in force, more so among teenagers than among juniors who were more easily, shall we say, regimented. I only felt free to pocket my cap and tie when three miles out of school and away from the rest of the school and on the second leg of my journey home from there and yes I felt a little rebelliousness stirring then. Though I never heard of CP given for uniform infractions the fact of the canes existence exerted a force well beyond the school gates.

My feeling is that UK schools rightly or wrongly chose this as a battle ground whereas US schools might fight other issues. Looking back now I think I think my backside might have been in more danger in Texas schools in the 70s( from what I read) than in my school in the UK.

Padraig


Trailboss
I can't imagine that era but I wonder what a prefect boy usually would have done. Would he told them to put their caps on and went straight to a master (or someone else) to report it? Or would it have been sufficient to report them when arriving at school? If it was the latter I can't really see an offense of that boy, except that I can't recognise if he is wearing a cap himself.

Pi Beta


Deputy
Padraig wrote:I can't imagine that era but I wonder what a prefect boy usually would have done. Would he told them to put their caps on and went straight to a master (or someone else) to report it?

It would depend upon the boy. However, I can remember that at prep school when I was probably just 13 and in my last year there, I had to stay late for some reason. I can't now remember the reason, but I was still in the prep school when evening prep for the boarders finished. A junior boy, probably about age 10, knocked nervously at the door of the duty master, close to where I was waiting for my mother to drive up to pick me up. The master came to the door and asked him why he'd come to see him. What I heard remains ingrained in my mind to this day.

"Please, Sir, I've been sent."
"Who by?"
He named one of the monitors - a 13 year old, like me.
"What for?"
"Talking in prep, Sir."
"You'd better come in."
About thirty seconds later came the sound of gymshoe striking 10 year old's bottom three times and a few seconds later, the boy emerged, tears flowing, hands gripping his bottom as he made his way up the stairs to the dormitories and out of my sight.

He had been put on trust to report himself and did so. The monitor didn't take him or report him, though I suspect he would have checked later that the youngster had actually gone.

pushkin


Cowboy
This photograph, Ivor, was actually taken in 1962, and the noble building is Durham Cathedral.  One of the smaller boys without a cap is a young Tony Blair, who was a pupil there at the time.  

Does this make any difference to the action you would take?

Pushkin (NTAISS)

squarecutter


Sherrif
pushkin wrote:This photograph, Ivor, was actually taken in 1962, and the noble building is Durham Cathedral.  One of the smaller boys without a cap is a young Tony Blair, who was a pupil there at the time.  

Does this make any difference to the action you would take?

Pushkin (NTAISS)

 What a Face If that was Tony Blair I would have wanted the headmaster to flog him senseless if I couldn't do it myself !  Interesting, as it was documented that his

Public school headmaster found him to be an extremely rebellious boy and quite difficult to handle. Apparently he always wanted the last word

ivor


Marshall
pushkin wrote:This photograph, Ivor, was actually taken in 1962, and the noble building is Durham Cathedral.  One of the smaller boys without a cap is a young Tony Blair, who was a pupil there at the time.  

Does this make any difference to the action you would take?

Pushkin (NTAISS)

Surely not, Push? This must be Blair minor as opposed to Blair major because if it was the latter he'd be much closer to the bush on the left of the picture. Smile 

http://www.malespank.net/listAuthor.php?author=Ivor+slipper

Jack


Admin
ivor wrote:
pushkin wrote:This photograph, Ivor, was actually taken in 1962, and the noble building is Durham Cathedral.  One of the smaller boys without a cap is a young Tony Blair, who was a pupil there at the time.  

Does this make any difference to the action you would take?

Pushkin (NTAISS)

Surely not, Push?  This must be Blair minor as opposed to Blair major because if it was the latter he'd be much closer to the bush on the left of the picture. Smile 

The problem was that the bush in the picture was on the left, Ivor - he was torn between it and getting as far to the right as he could.


_________________
"In the end, it's just a story. But if you ask me, it's all true."
http://bransomtx.forumotion.net

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum