The top-voted reviews at this time show how difficult it is to please all people. I'd like to give my take on some of the objections:

* Not properly understanding the period or the world. At the old girls' reunion, every single flipping girl has a career. Now, the "special" ones like Mavis and Irene, fair enough, but you can't tell me that those many years later in that period none of them would be housewives --> this much is true, but it's not Pamela Cox's fault. Here (like in much of what she does in her continuation books) she is following Blyton's lead, who, in one of her Malory towers books, had the girls discussing their projects after school, and the vast majority of them had some professional aspiration. I think partially it's wish fulfilment, but it's also true that not all women would marry straight out of school. It would be normal for many of them to start some career and then abandon it when they got married and had children. Remember also that Blyton wrote her MT novels in the late 40s and early 50s, not in the 19th century. There were more career opportunities for women at that point, particularly with so many young men wiped out in the war, although of course far from what's now possible.

* Demonising the maid. Who has her living to earn, which doesn't matter at all. Yuck. --> I'm all for being sensitive to the plight of underprivileged people, but this sure is a weird complaint right after the previous one, since it shows a very modern way to look at things. People in the time period also were sensitive to the plight of underprivileged people, but in a different way. They recognized the merit of improving your plight by working hard and honestly, but would not suggest that poverty excused thievery, or suggest that just because a character is underprivileged she can't also be a thief. People are judged according to their actions, not their origins. Also, there are other situations during the series where a more privileged character turns out to be a thief. Anyway, the maid here is not treated badly. She is simply dismissed, and the police is not notified, so she's free to seek another job. Surely you see she can't remain after all the malicious and dishonest behavior.

* Forgetting things about Gwen that really were relevant. Darrell, Bill and Clarissa kept writing to her after she left. Darrell would know she was back at the school. Bill and Clarissa are particularly significant --> Cox mentions that Darrell and Gwen wrote to each other for a while, but eventually stopped. Which seems to me very realistic, even for school friends, which Darrell and Gwen were not. The same goes for Bill and Clarissa keeping in touch with Gwen.

* Crushes Are Bad. (This might explain why B&C were absent, I guess.) --> Again, another modern take I have to disagree with. B&C play a prominent role in some of Pamela Cox's novels, just not in this one. And attributing that to "crushes are bad" is something I can't agree with, partly because of that prominent role they played in other of the continuation novels, and partly because this female close relationship equals lesbian is another very modern take. You can certainly interpret it that way if you want (females with common interest starting a business together and living together as bachelors), but you won't find anything in Blyton's novels to support it being a sexual partnership. People of the same gender can be friends and business partners and even live in the same house without being gay. However you choose to interpret this relationship, though, the fact is that neither Blyton nor Cox have a problem including these characters in the plots of the novels when they deem it necessary.

* It was mentioned that Amanda couldn't make it to the reunion - but what about Moira, Catherine, Ruth and Mam'zelle's niece? Did they just cease to exist the way Daphne did in sixth form? I was very sad not to see Moira. --> I think this is also something that has its origin in Blyton's writing. It's how these books work. Each book, the plot is driven by a couple of new girls who provide a lot of the conflict and suspense. Then after the book, they leave and are replaced by the next batch of new characters. Some remain (Bonnie), but most do not. It's how the books were structured from the very beginning.

* suddenly narrationally insinuate that Malory Towers is some kind of exclusive boarding school with many domestics catering to the attending students (which from Enid Blyton’s original texts simply and really is NOT the truth --> I'm very puzzled by this objection, also. It's true that Blyton's novels do not feature maids. Apart from the teachers, Miss Grayling and Matron, only the kitchen staff and an old school caretaker is mentioned in Blyton's books, as far as I remember. However, surely you are not assuming that an expensive boarding school is functioning without any domestic staff. Sure, Malory Towers is not the kind of elite boarding school where the girls are pampered and have their every need attended to by maids. They are expected to make their own beds and keep their dorms in order. But from there to no domestic staff whatsoever there's a huge leap. Someone has to be washing the bathrooms, corridors, classrooms, also washing clothes... Do you think the girls did all the domestic work, in addition to their classes, schoolwork, plays, sports and other activities?


Anyway, coming back to the novel, I enjoyed it, as I have enjoyed all of Pamela Coxes continuation novels in this series. It very much follows the formula Blyton established. Perhaps it's too formulaic, you could say, although I can not blame Cox for that, as it's what I think people expect and want in a continuation novel. Her style is not quite the same as Blyton's, but it's a reasonable approximation.

In fact, there's one element in Cox's novels that I actually enjoyed more than in Blyton's: Cox's stories are more nuanced and less heavy-handed in their treatment of antagonists. Blyton often allowed redemption to her villains, but at the very end, after they had made many mistakes. Cox often makes those characters more nuanced, rarely making them act like complete villains.

I think overall Cox did an excellent job, and I don't minimize the difficulty, because Blyton has a storytelling talent that makes her stories very compelling, and it's not easy writing in the same series without disappointing. For me, these Cox novels can be placed beside Enid Blyton's Malory Towers novels without reservations, which is the highest compliment I can give to a continuation novel. ( )