Almost straight away after Simon and Kaggsy chose 1961 for the current club year, I started to come across references.
As in Stacey D’Erasmo’s memoir, The Long Run (2024) which draws a clear connection between one writer’s life and work and the values of the era: “We believed in it. I believed in it. I was born in 1961, so this is the 60s I’m talking about.”

And in Margaret Atwood’s Book of Lives (2025), where she writes: “If you were serious about being a writer in Canada in 1961, you were told by those who knew that you’d have to go to London, New York, or Paris, as Margaret Laurence had done, and Mordecai Richler, and Mavis Gallant—not that we knew who Mavis Gallant was yet—because Canadians didn’t respect writing, and especially not Canadian writing.”
She carries on, explaining that the Canadian poet “Earle Birney had written that the only books likely to be found in an average Canadian home were the Bible and the Edward Fitzgerald translation of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam.” (I can vouch for having seen the Rubaiyat on at least one family bookshelf, even though you could not have imagined a less likely literary candidate to have shelved in that household.)
“Most Canadians,” Atwood writes, “felt there wasn’t any Canadian writing, and even if there was some, it was bound to be second-rate. Real writers came from elsewhere.”

Which is where the idea to re-publish some earlier Canadian works resided. So you have Malcolm Ross and Jack McClelland and the “New Canadian Library” imprint with so many volumes published in 1961, drawing attention to works by writers like Morley Callaghan, who was chumming around in Paris with everyone else earlier in the century, but wasn’t half so well known as Fitzgerald and Hemingway. (So many of these titles show as having been published in 1961 in library catalogues, only because the NCL reprint appeared that year.)
Atwood herself had reason to call out 1961, as her first volume of poetry was self-published that year: Double Persephone—its cover made with linoblocks and all 220 copies handset on a flat-bed press. (Her first independently published collection would appear three years later, The Circle Game,)
In John Moss’ guide to the Canadian novel, he presents just two books for 1961:
Sheila Burnford’s Incredible Journey (you might know the Disney films, their heartwarming story of two dogs and a cat finding their way home through the Ontario wilderness), and
W.O. Mitchell’s Jake and the Kid (comic sketches about boyhood in a small Prairie community, similar in style to Stephen Leacock or Garrison Keillor or Stuart McLean).
Of course, this isn’t the whole story. It overlooks, for instance, one of Lyn Cook’s twenty-three novels (aka Evelyn Margaret Waddell) written for young readers.
You probably don’t recognise her name, but I grew up reading Lyn Cook’s books and regularly checked the shelves of the village library, in the heart of Ontario’s tobacco-growing country, to see which were available to borrow, because I loved rereading my favourites

The first Lyn Cook novel I read was Bells on Finland Street (1950), about a young Finnish girl living in Sudbury, Ontario who loves to ice-skate. My least favourite was Jady and the General (1955) because it was about a boy (and his horse, but I liked horses). One of my favourites was The Secret of Willow Castle (1966) because Secret and Castle—right? And The Road to Kip’s Cove was… somewhere in the middle. Honestly, I couldn’t remember it at all, and that made me curious.

It turns out that Kip also is a boy, nearly twelve years old and adjusting to life where his family has moved, near the small town of Bloomfield in eastern Ontario. (So I guess I know, now, why this one wasn’t a favourite: with a few exceptions, I really only wanted to read about girls. Isn’t it funny though, that the cover illustrations have Kip and Jady looking so similar!)
The biggest part of the appeal of Cook’s stories was that they took place in towns and cities where people I knew knew people. My landlord’s son had a family who lived in Cornwall, for instance, but not Susan Cooper’s Dark is Rising Cornall in England, but Cornwall in Ontario. So Cornwall was a town I knew, without knowing it. And I didn’t know Bloomfield, Ontario—but I did know it was between me and Cornwall. This is how I pieced together the world around me, via stories.
The Road to Kip’s Cove (1961) is set in what one character calls the “cradle of Canadian history”. There’s talk of the Seven Years War (1754-1763, between the French and English and their First Nations and Indigenous allies) and the American Revolutionary War (1776) when many families moved north because they identified as United Empire Loyalists (i.e. English Empire loyalists, as opposed to Americans). And there’s a map, which only adds to the sense of it feeling real and true.
It’s clear that being Canadian is something distinct, something that matters. But the other boy in the story who plays an important role is Dan, who’s identified as a Mohawk, and his family tells stories about their people which builds on the foundation of first peoples that Kip’s already accepted.
“Big battles right here in Prince Edward County between Huron and Iroquois,” Albert explains to Kip. “Wiped out the Huron missions. Funny thing. Indians fighting right here where we’re driving, eh?” And Kip quietly admits, to himself, that it is a funny thing. Trying to reconcile events from long ago that impact the present-day. (Contemporary writers and scholars have challenged the prevailing narrative that the Iroquois/Haudenosaunee were routinely characterised as the aggressors.)
When Kip asks a local man if he can work for him over the summer, learning about planting and growing by assisting in his greenhouse, the man agrees, even though he has had regular seasonal help (because he hasn’t seen the boy recently). It’s Dan who has worked there in the past, and when Kip learns that, he worries that he’s taken Dan’s job, a job that wouldn’t be a learning experience, but a necessary part of their family’s income. In other words, Kip wants to work but Dan—a Mohawk boy—needs to work.
He intuits this but later, when the boys go off paddling together for several days, Dan must explain why the two boys are treated unfairly by a man who assumes the boys are planning to steal from him—must explain the prejudice held against Dan and his people. The implication is that Kip can’t comprehend that kind of prejudice because it’s not evident in his own family and friends, and that both families—Dan’s and Kip’s—recognise a shared humanity, regardless of prejudice held by others in their communities. But of course prejudice can flourish beneath the veneer of polite conversation.

There is a good bit of exposition in the novel, recounting of a few tales (including a myth about treasure left behind by the French, who ultimately “lost territory” on the continent during those wars) and legends, and an acknowledgment that most white people don’t know any Indians, and haven’t been on a reserve, so they simply cannot understand the situation (and only need someone like Dan to explain things). It’s a coming-of-age story, both a boy’s story and a nation’s story.
The reservation system is presented as one that suits the natives because these regions were once part of their traditional territory. And the traditions that have been lost (like the harvesting of wild rice on Rice Lake, near present-day Peterborough) were lost because they no longer functioned—the rice had become diseased and the crops unreliable. (Contemporary playwright, Drew Hayden Taylor, writes in “Cottagers and Indians” about one Indigenous man who confronts the cottagers on the lake who do not appreciate his efforts to revitalise the traditional rice harvests.)

There’s respect and acknowledgement of historical relationships in a collaborative context, and it’s clear that the Indigenous families have been here as long as—longer, even—than settler families (the Americans that moved there during wartime are viewed as recent arrivals in comparison to the white Canadian settlers). It’s also clear that these Indigenous families continue to thrive in and populate the area generations later (they didn’t all die off from disease, as some would have it) and manage complicated historical relationships (who warred on whom, and how accounts differ).
But of course Kip’s ancestors were not there first, and even after he learns of a place’s original name, there’s no question of overwriting the colonial name. (And even that name is a colonial renaming, just as Dan identifies as a Mohawk and describes the Mohawk peoples’ relationships with other nations in other colonial terms, like Ojibways and Iroquois. So there is no mention of these nations’ terms for their own peoples: Kanien’kehá:ka, the Anishnaabeg and the Haudenosaunee, for instance.)
Further, you can see by the title that Kip, himself, feels entitled to rename the places that matter to him …Kip’s Cove. But there is a consensus that people have evolved. It’s said that people behaved badly in the past, and Dan even uses the term “savages” to describe the way that some of his ancestors behaved (specifically towards other first peoples, rather than settlers). Anyone is capable of behaving savagely, it seems, and, so, everyone is capable of choosing to behave otherwise, especially when the importance of doing so has been adequately explained.
Even though The Road to Kip’s Cove wasn’t a favourite of mine when I was a kid, I enjoyed rereading it and thinking about Cook’s decision to include an Indigenous boy as a key figure in the narrative when that was still an uncommon approach (and long before the publishing industry recognised the importance of Indigenous storytellers telling the stories of Indigenous peoples). Her novel perpetuates some stereotypes but challenges some too, and lands on the need to repair historical damage and recognise one another’s shared humanity.
It feels like the quintessential ‘60s novel in many ways, even though it won’t be well-known internationally; I also selected an acclaimed and readily recognisable title from 1961, so more about that in a couple of days.

Well darn, now I wish I’d held back that copy of The Incredible Journey from the Little Free Library. I know I read it as a child, and I watched the film version, but it wasn’t a favourite, so I didn’t plan to reread it. I only managed one book for 1961 Club in the end, Revolutionary Road.
I probably should have valued it more, because it’s the rare exception to a happy ending for an animal story. It intereste me more now, in all.
As is often the case, you’ve highlighted a number of books and writers I haven’t come across before, so thank you for the introductions. I love that edition of The Road to Kip’s Cove in your pic. It’s beautiful!
D’Erasmo is a well-established author in the United States (and, so, also in Canada), but she’s perhaps best known by readers who highlight queers writers in their stacks and on their shelves. But I can totally see how you wouldn’t know the others (well, except for the brief mention of Atwood. heheh)
I recently did a CBC segment on books that took place in the 1960s – maybe it was trending this year in publishing? haha
I really love Drew Hayden Taylor’s humour, I think I’d enjoy that cottagers book
He’s very entertaining: agreed! He presented a scene from the play one year at TIFA (then IFOA) and it was hilarious in his voice.
I wonder why, that seems rather random? I mean, during the “Madmen” years, I could see it… but why now? (laughs) There doesn’t have to be a reason of course: I love a good book theme, as you know!
We were slow in Oz. My father gave my copy of the Rubaiyat in 1970, and I can’t see that he had a copy of his own (I’m sure he did, but I haven’t ended up with it). I like the idea of a kid’s book discussing Indigenous issues in the 1960s. I think a sympathetic Australian book at that time would have treated them like the Celts for instance – a former culture with interesting stories whose time has passed.
The nearest I can get to you with childhood ‘Canadian’ books are (years are the years I got them): The Young Fur Traders, 1961; Jet: Sled Dog of the North, 1962; and With Wolfe in Canada, 1963.
I think it was kind of like how you would see Stephen Hawking’s book on everyone’s bookshelf at one point, but hardly any of the owners actually read it!
Well, there was The Lost Hole of Bingoola, from 1942, but at least one of the writers was Canadian I think? And the other eimgated? (Just going on the brief bio’s from the jacket.)
It definitely sounds like those are books with boys in them. /frowns (Just kidding.)
Definitely books with boys in them. I think Heidi was the only book I owned that was about girls. (Also the only book not inscribed by the giver. I wonder who did give it to me and what was their motive).
I went through a cosmology period – a long time ago now – and have a couple of Hawkings which, yes, I have read.
A long time ago in… astronomical terms? hehe Some must have read them true: it’s probably more a statement about the people I knew well enough to peruse their bookshelves, than about Hawking’s buyers/readers more generally. Also, I happened to be working in a bookshop that year, so I also probably believe more copies of it were sold than might have been in fact.
Heidi, I loved (but I think there is a boy in there too, and not just the grandfather): she’s practically an orphan! (It was considered a solid moral choice, so perhaps a good Christian book-bestower thought you would like to imagine tending goats in the mountains?)
Woo hoo, I’ve actually read Sheila Burnford’s Incredible Journey! I don’t think I ever saw the film, though I remember its coming out. I didn’t read it in 1961, but probably around 1968 when I spent a lot of time in the school library, helping the school librarian.
I didn’t much like books about boys either, but neither did “secret” and “castle” captivate me, particularly. Words like “family”, “school”, or “girl” in the title appealed to me. I adored school stories. I liked your comments and reflections on Kip’s Cove and the inclusion of an Indigenous boy as a key figure. Perpetuating some stereotypes is probably unavoidable, but it sounds like, to use a cliche, her “heart was in the right place” and she was trying to be true and inclusive.
Hahaha There were actually two films, and only one very skinny book, so I’m surprised anyone’s read the book rather than had the Disney experience… let alone on the other side of the world!
As a young adult, those elements would have pulled me in faster too; but, as a child, I think I found it unsettling to see just how far removed my own childhood was from (not divorced) families shown in books. Also why I was drawn to stories about orphans (actual, like in Anne of Green Gables, or might-as-well-have-been like in Harriet the Spy) and bands of kids who spent all their time finding treasure chests and making their own homes on an island (thanks, Enid Blyton!). But I did like books like Cheaper by the Dozen too… I just would have read the Secret Castle first. heh
You can see the limits of her understanding, as with the reservation system and her statement that they were traditional lands frequented by these peoples. After all, it was the official position that sites were chosen with respect for tradition and with input, so Cook’s statements are rooted in fact; but knowing that, decades later, there were still several boil-water-advisories in effect on reservation lands (i.e. no drinking water) reveals that it was more about convenience for settlers than consideration for the Indigenous nations. The facts are still presented from a point-of-view after all.
I guess I had a pretty standard happy family life – it wasn’t perfect, I could see my mum’s frustrations at times, but my parents were loving, decent people who respected each other, so we kids felt safe and supported. I think as a result I just loved any stories about families – big, small, happy, unhappy, busy, lonely. Castles were interesting as long as they were not spooky or fantastical!!
Of course, after I wrote this, I suddenly started to think of all the family stories I did read! Like the Five Little Peppers stories, also a big family with lot of activities. And Sydney Taylor’s stories about growing up Jewish in New York City in the early 1900s (also five kids, all girls). And even the orphan stories I loved, like the Oz books, depict sort of a “chosen family” scene (Scarecrow, Tinman, Lion, Toto, etc.). Hmmmm, I’m starting to think there’s something about groups-of-five! But I think my early Enid Blyton obsession put stories about gnomes and pixies, fairy queens and magic spells, above all else… for quite some time, and it sounds like you managed to steer clear of all that.
I, too, never wanted to read books about boys when I was a kid! And even today, I’d pick up just about any book with “secret” or “castle” in the title. 🙂
Hah: that’s good to know! It’s ridiculous, since almost all of my friends at that age (and for some time to come) were boys, but I recall pushing countless books back onto the library shelves simply because the cover featured a boy.
Graeme Gibson in Five Legs (1969) still worried you had to go to Europe to be a writer! Now Toronto’s the hotel and they come here?
And, yet, it’s set in southwestern Ontario mostly, not even Toronto, if I”m remembering right (I have Stratford and London in mind), so I guess they were both determined (even early on) to shift that expectation, each in their own way.
The popularity of the Rubaiyat is intriguing. The Cooks sound wonderful.
Isn’t it? But, then, that was a time when “everyone” was watching the same TV shows, seeing the same movies, reading the same books…
She was quite a figure, too readily dismissed as being “just a writer of children’s stories”.
Some interesting thoughts and books there – thank you for sharing! ☺
Thanks for hosting! 🙂