Mel wrote:
I seem to remember that Jo says that Granny Maynard's money paid for the triplet's and Stephen's education. It would hardly be fair on the other shareholders if Jo's vast family were educated free. I would imagine it would be reduced fees or paid for out of her dividends.
Oh, I think it's specifically stated (maybe in that same conversation between Joey and Hilda about large families and finances?) that the Maynard girls are educated for free, isn't it? And yes, I entirely agree about the effect on the other shareholders!
I think EBD has a slightly funny attitude to the Maynards' finances - she wants to depict them as being frugal and not-rich, presumably to seem like 'ordinary people' to her readers and because she's pretty suspicious of wealth in general, but she's also up against the fact that eleven biological children in private education, and several wards/adoptees, two houses and two or three staff etc simply don't come cheap!
Even if we assume the girls are educated for free, five boys at an English public school would cost insane sums, plus cost of their travel back and forth to Switzerland (though they're not all there at once, obviously). And presumably Joey and Jack still need to pay for the girls' outfits, books, uniforms, music lessons, sports and ski equipment etc. Would expeditions be extra, too?
And then she depicts them as doing insanely generous things like funding Reg's entire education and medical training, on top of their own large family's needs. Yet, she is keen to emphasise their hand-me-down ginghams and the fact that Minnie is purchased with a windfall, not out of Maynard income...