I read this book aloud, a chapter a night, to my four and a half and six and a half year old daughters. When I began reading the first chapter, I thought that they might not choose the book again the following night. The language is obviously somewhat old-fashioned - the book was published in 1894 after all. But as Ethel Turner writes, she addresses the reader - she is telling the story to them. The book begins, 'Before you fairly start this story I should like to give you just a word of warning.' And she then proceeds to tell the reader that the tale she is about to unfold is one of very naughty children and that it is something about the Australian landscape - 'the sunny brilliancy of our atmosphere' - that contributes to their naughtiness.There are a few things about this introduction that I think children find so appealing. The first is the idea that they are going to read about naughty children. What will these naughty children do? Just how naughty will they be? And what will happen to them when their naughtiness is discovered? I could well imagine that these thoughts were running through my daughters' minds as we read.From there, the story traces all the mischief of the children - from Bunty laming his father's horse with a cricket ball, to Judy depositing the baby at her father's barracks so she can enjoy an afternoon of fun at the fair, to the children continually interrupting a dinner party in the hopes of taking plates of roast chicken up to the nursery, rather than bread and butter. It's all good, innocent fun and daring - apart from Bunty and the horse - but the consequence of it is that Judy is sent off to boarding school, a place she promptly runs away from, setting in train the tragic events at the end of the book.My daughters didn't cry at the end - they left that job to me. So, if you have children aged around 6 or 7 and want to enjoy a piece of classic Australian literature with them, then I thoroughly recommend Seven Little Australians to you. Just remember to have a box of tissues on the couch beside you!My full review is here: http://whilethekidsaresleeping.wordpr...
This is a charming little novel, but very much a product of its time. Chapters in the beginning read almost like a serial, with each chapter containing a small, self-contained little narrative with uncomplicated complications and neat resolutions that lead into the next chapter with ease. However, as the book progresses, the stories elongate and spread across multiple chapters leading to a tragic - but not unpredictable - end. With a large cast, she at times struggles to differentiate the characters. The younger ones, in particular, are distinguishable only by their sex. The elder ones are more fleshed out with failings and hopes - but the brevity of the story stops them from being realised in the same way that stories from similar eras (for example: Anne of Green Gables) have successfully realised unforgettable, dynamic characters. Turner discusses the plot with her readers, warning them of what is to come so nothing comes as a surprise. For this reason it would make a good story to read aloud to children at night. For adult readers, the most enjoyment comes from the values of Turner's Australia creeping into the text. It is a very rose-coloured tinted reminiscence of Australia at the turn of the century, with the children's naughtiness and their subsequent whippings tolerated and easily forgiven. I found the landscapes evocative of the dusty-country-town-to-outback childhood I was fortunate enough to share with the seven little protagonists, but a small part of this comes from my own fond memories, not just the skill of the author.
Seven Little Australians is the first of the Woolcot Family series by Australian novelist Ethel Turner. Set in the late 19th century, it details a few months in the lives of Captain John Woolcot, his young (20 years old) wife Esther and their family at their house, Misrule, up the Parramatta River. There were six children he had by his first, now dead, wife: Meg(Marguerite), 16, Pip (Phillip), 14, Judy (Helen), 13, Nellie, 10, Bunty, 6, and Baby, 4, and his and Esther’s baby, the General (Francis). The fact that these were not the children of a Minister, like those perfect March girls of Louisa Alcott’s, may well account for their mischievousness: they had a tendency to get into trouble, even if their hearts were essentially good. Nor was Captain Woolcot the perfect father. This novel has a very Aussie feel and is both funny and sad. Readers will look forward to the next instalment, The Family at Misrule.
—Marianne
As an Australian, I was supposed to read this book as a child. I didn't. I am also supposed to like it. I don't. There are too many people to follow to get any feel for characterisation. The writing style is antiquated and often hard to read because of the odd vocabulary and turns of phrase. After announcing the differences between Australians and the British at the start, the story then outlines the behaviour of any children, who only happen to live in the Australian countryside; they could be from any British children's novel of the early twentieth century. The landscape isn't even clearly described as distinctly Australian until they go north to visit their stepmother's old home, and I enjoyed the more evocative atmosphere of this country retreat. But I didn't see much distinctive Australian dialogue or dialect in the main characters - only in the speech of one Aboriginal man who lived on their grandparents' property. Their misbehaviour is hardly scandalous - what little rambunctiousness they show is beaten out of them by their father, when he isn't away, and by the end of the book, they are all rather meek and boring. Times have certainly changed, and probably tastes as well. Now 120 years since its first publication, this "classic" book no longer works.
—James Perkins
Well, it wasn't godawful, but it was still too Enid Blytony, let's get belted by father and then have a picnic type of book for me to ever want to read it again. Granted, I'm not the target audience, although I'd find it hard to believe that children of this era would really take to it either. But yeah ... not a lot to say about this one. The characters weren't interesting (wild-child Judy is okay, I guess), their shenanigans weren't amusing - actually, the dad yelling that everyone was "demented" for crying about one of the kids being sent to boarding school was pretty (unintentionally)funny. But that was it. Meg's little romance subplot was kinda cute but the attempted moralistic resolution was distinctly un-cute, and so that was disappointing. It was just disappointing all round.
—Lauren
