Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

I'm really sorry to interject with a complete change of subject for a minute!

Urgh-my-Pancreas! Look out for the September copy of Vogue magazine! Torygraph journalist Hannah Betts has written in said newspaper a rather splendid article (06.08.08) "A new flame - revenge of the carrot tops!" celebrating the beauty of the redhead, which, with your penchant for gingerness, you might enjoy.

Plus - a preview of the Vogue cover. The model is Karen Elsen with the most fabulous flame-coloured hair. It's only the seventh time that a redhead has lit up this most prestigious magazine cover.

You are still ginger... yes?

I have tried to stay out of this but feel like i cannot now.

I think i have said this elsewhere but the schools are acting as the parents to the children whilst on their grounds....for day schools rules are very different. CH is a boarding school it is acting as the parent for over 800 pupils day in day out therefore its rules have to be so that parents are confident in sending their children there. Also surely its not wrong that school through their rules, restrictions expected behaviour is installing the children with good manors, morals and social skills required in life.
The school is in a huge period of change which Franklin is part of, it is difficult for any teacher/head to come in and replace someone who was much loved and respected by the pupils. And i am happy to say that from what i can gather, Franklin has gone down fairly well with the staff, they welcome his desire to sort the discipline (or lack of discipline) issues the school has. (I know of UF's caught drinking who had nothing more than a couple of nights gating!). Franklin along with his new deputy (Mary Ireland's replacement who i know nothing about.) need time to settle into the school, for them to adjust to the mechanics of the school and the pupils/staff to adjust to them.

As for Kimchi, if you took time to read the many other threads on this forum you will see as many have mentioned we are all a good natured bunch of people all from very different walks of life who are united in their shared interest in the school. You will see in other threads contentious topics raised by various memebers which we share our thoughts on. We dont all see eye to eye on many things and there have been some very good debates on here-however no matter how much someone may disagree with anothers point of veiw there is no agression and out right rudeness!
We are not skimming you posts looking for the bit to attack-we are just pointing out that in my opinion all of your posts have been rather attacking and rude and not willing to take on others opnions.

J.R. wrote:Josh. I can't quite remember the EXACT time limits set on each punishment after all this time.

I seem to remember the mile was from Coleridge B, round the mile and back in around five minutes, often followed by the punishing monitor on a bicycle. Failure to complete within the required time resulted in "Do It Again !!!!"

The QM was from CB, down the track to the post office and back. I seem to recall it was to be done in around 2 minutes.

I'm sure if I'm wrong on the times, there are people on here who will be able to correct me ! This was known as a 'Post-Office' ! John.

Just getting back to the Forum so I'll come to the kimchi in due course (= last he doesn't seem to deserve better !)
In Col A the mile was "round Big side", plus one change into or out of full uniform. From the ends of Big Side he had to go behind the houses - not along the Avenue) I don't know the distance but in Col A the time limit depended on age and capability (as decided by the monitors). A youngster might get 10 minutes, a senior person 6 minutes or less but there were just a few who were acknowledged as being physically inept (we had none who were actually disabled in the modern sense) who would get just a bit longer. Whatever the time it was designed to be do-able by the guilty, but only just. Do-it-again, yes but after several attempts the punishment giver would be consulted and could allow that the requirement had been met. If he didn't then it could go to the housemaster but there was always the caveat that, if the guilty party was consistently only a few seconds outside his limit, then the monitor was being unreasonable and even "God" wouldn't be able to help him (the monitor) .
PO Path - similar but shorter time - I can't remember what they were but de facto it was considerably easier - I never had trouble meeting the time limit even though I was/am asthmatic

kimchi wrote:A word of advice to anyone thinking of going to CH.

Christ's Hospital is deceptively nice, on the outside, but once you've spent a couple of terms there, you'll see its dark underbelly, full of corruption and hatred. I know someone who didn't fit in, so they forced him out on a technicality. John Franklin is the worst Headmaster ever to grace the Avenue, he cannot speak publically, and he has no control over the students. I only hope that you get a chance to read this before the Franklin Patrol come along and delete this.

With the best regards.

Where have you been for the first three years of your life (ie up to now)? Certainly there are (and always have and will be) people who simply do not fit in with those around them. There are a few possibilities:
- a neighbour has tried to commit suidcide several times and is exceptionally vocal in his condemnation of those who saved his life - he is a rea pain in the neck
- I know of a few who are effectively hermits - they cannot stand company
- there are those who could have become like that but who were taught how to avoid making enemies of everyone that they meet and have become useful members pof society. No, they are not necessarily the life and soul of the party but they are more than acceptable companyt. Having to survive in the close company of others in CH teaches them that.

Corruption? justify yourself with specific cases and evidence.
Hatred? ditto. Of course there are people who simply don't get on with one another but that is a fact of life and will continue to be so.

"Franklin cannot speak publically" - you mean that as a public orator he does not come across well; are you any better?

Franklin "has no control over the students". At least in my day the pupils were controlled by their elders with the masters / mistresses providing background (and often hidden) guidance. That meant that 16 years olds (and older) learned to guide and control; the quality was better in some houses than others. Of course the adult control was therefore well hidden; the fact that you don't see it doesn't mean that it is not there.

Every generation of pupils in the past 50 years has felt that incoming headmasters are wrong and many consider that they could do far better than the previous headmaster. Go through the posts to see what happened when The Oil was succeeded by Seaman to see that it is perfectly normal. OK so you don't like Franklin but when you get into adult life you will be subordinate to bosses you consider the worst boss to grace the company / city / country / universe. Too bad - you will have to get used to it and now is the best time to get used to the feeling.

Perhaps I shouldn't write it here (so sue me) but you do have the option of applying for a Darwin Award.
As for the Franklin Patrol deleting your post - where on earth did you get such a ridiculous idea?

Angela Woodford wrote:I'm really sorry to interject with a complete change of subject for a minute!

Urgh-my-Pancreas! Look out for the September copy of Vogue magazine! Torygraph journalist Hannah Betts has written in said newspaper a rather splendid article (06.08.08) "A new flame - revenge of the carrot tops!" celebrating the beauty of the redhead, which, with your penchant for gingerness, you might enjoy.

Plus - a preview of the Vogue cover. The model is Karen Elsen with the most fabulous flame-coloured hair. It's only the seventh time that a redhead has lit up this most prestigious magazine cover.

You are still ginger... yes?

short answer yes, long answer more 'passion red' (as the box says) than ginger
but i intend to stay this way for now, as my hair colour was not brought into discussion by anybody at school, so it seems to me that i'll be able to keep it
that seems like a wonderful article, might have to try and get my hands on it... it actually seems to me that more and more people are going the way of the red... it's appearing everywhere!!

thank you for pointing it out and going off topic for one airy moment
x

Hi Nastymum

Thanks for the research and précis

I would have qualified for entrry under current requirements by being from a family on limited income and possibly on living in cramped conditions - not a hostel, but a two bedroomed council flat, and having (shock! horror!) to share a bedroom with my sister.

After reading some of the things that current CH pupils are complaining about I took a step back to consider the conditions that I expected my own two offspring to comply with, and seriously wondered whether, if given the choice, they might not have chosen the seemingly freer life at Horsham

My feeling is that if the high risk, or any other, pupils truly believe that the school should tolerate any behaviour that those pupils believe to be acceptable, on the basis that they don't know any better, then there is, surely, no point in them being at CH - they may as well return home and have fun in their familiar environment.

xx

Exactly.From looking at most of the moaning on Facebook they main gripes seem to be that they are appalled that Mr F wants to stop them from contracting lung cancer and liver disease. Funnily enough even the most liberal of parents might be in agreement. They have completely forgotten that every school in the land has exactly the same rules . They also seem absolutely astonished that Mr F wants them to achieve good exam results. It would by my bet that the ones who are moaning are the ones who have been told off for their behaviour.
My son had a particularly poor report at the end of term concluding with a very terse comment from Mr F and quite right too. I certainly didn't take offence -that is his job.Son now knows where he stands and he has been well and truly told off by me for wasting the Foundation's money (nasty mum) .

I still haven't been onto the facebook group yet...

I think, from having spoken to some of the pupils over Old Blues Day, most of their gripes come from seemingly trivial things such as:
Not being able to applaud or cheer at assembly (normally when a pupil is getting a prize)
Cancelling / changing rock concert... this was a bone of contention when I was at CH, as they changed the date... nevertheless, I can't see any reason why seniors can't show off their (rock) bands!
Visiting other houses after prep. - on the seniors, UF and above, we used to be able to visit houses between 9.15 (end of prep) and 10pm - going up to 10.30 as you get older. I believe that this is / has changed... I used to enjoy using the time to go the library or music school, as well as havong friends come and chat in my study... what's wrong with that?

If visiting houses after prep has been harshly curtailed, how does it work for a pint now at the Club?
I remember going to club well after 9 and coming back later than 10....oh dear times are changing then?

Don't even start me re the Grecians' Club... I don't believe that you can have a apint there now unless you are 18 and that's only on a Saturday night... I think that's because the licence got changed...

This is indeed a sad state of affairs. The club enjoyed a great period in the 80s and I managed to get Ploughmans installed on the Sunday. We were open most nights and there was always a First XV Monday night to reveiw the weekends game over a pint. If the Club is now open only 1 night this is very sad news but license laws are license laws as JR would agree!

I seem to remember you could join on your 17 bithday in my day.....roll on the 80s (old ELO song?)

Hi,
I was reading about how the Grecian's Club worked a while ago. Over the last two years it has been open every Tuesday and Friday during the week, serving only soft drinks, crisps and a few sweets. Twice a term it is opened for the Deps and Grecians so they can hold a Theme Night. Theme nights are the only times alcohol is served (Each person is allowed 2 drinks) I have heard that next year there is only one disco each term so maybe they are cutting back on these theme nights also. There are rumours that the club might stop serving alcohol altogether, but maybe this is to do with the license. It sounds like it was a lot better when you were at CH! Just thought i'd give you some input on how the club has been working recently!

After a day of footy, then a day of rest, and the best part of a day of builders, I'm back. Grrrrr !!

Where is Kimchi when you were just looking forward to an acidic response ?

Licensing Laws ! Hmmm. How they've changed in the last year or two.

1. Licenses are now issued by the Local Authority, NOT the local court.

2. Licenses also fall very heavily under the 'Elf and Safety' regime. I should know as Safety Officer for DFC who have just refurbed their bar and club-house.

3. It is still strictly ILLEGAL to sell to, or purchase for persons under the age of 18, though certain drinks may be purchased for people over 14, IF they are eating in a restaurant.

Yes - I smoke and I drink, but as far as school rules are concerned, viz a vie, The Bax etc, I think the good old adage applies.

"When in Rome...... !"

Kimchi - I await your response with interest.

CHAZ wrote: I seem to remember you could join on your 17 bithday in my day.....roll on the 80s (old ELO song?)

Yes - I was lucky enough to have 2 years where I was able to go to the Grecians Club. I seem to remember it being most nights plus Sundays for an hour or so before lunch.

I had a year and a half of grecians serving alchol (only allowed in when truned 17!) We had a card we could put money on and could not spend more than £5 at any one time in the club!

I think its changed due to licensing nothing else