ABSTRACT
The publication of That Dreadful School provoked a debate about Neill's vision of child nature which exemplified many that were to take place in subsequent years. The book was widely reviewed, and generally welcomed as a clear and vivid account of Summerhill at work — and at play. The Observer reviewer commented: ‘Mr Neill is probably the boldest among the pioneers of free education in this country. His courage and benevolence are unquestionable.’ The anonymous reviewer in the Listener, who disagreed with Neill about the innate goodness of children and their ability to dispense with a framework of discipline and routine, nevertheless thought the book ‘should be read by those who have only heard of Mr Neill and have condemned him on hearsay, as well as his disciples’. Neill's tendency to polarise opinion was also reflected in the Daily Herald, where the reviewer wrote of the book: ‘It will shock many and annoy many more. It will provoke scorn among the diehards and sympathetic interest among the progressives.’ The TES reviewer came down firmly in the former category, devoting less than a hundred words to the book, and using all of them to scold Neill for supposedly setting out to shock grown-ups in a childish manner * Other reviewers criticised what they saw as Neill's dogmatism, his superficiality, and his infuriating habit of generalising in a highly unscientific way. Yet most acknowledged the significance of his work, and the courage which he had displayed in running Summerhill. Michael Rob-erts, in the Spectator, summed up the viewpoint of several in suggesting: ‘If parents and teachers care to read this book and think about their own reaction to it, they may learn much about their own half-conscious aims and jealousies.’
