Accounts of corporal punishment in schools during the post-war decades frequently illustrated the extent to which discipline was regarded as an integral part of everyday educational life. Excuses for incomplete assignments or unsatisfactory examination results were occasionally offered, though they were seldom successful. A pupil might explain that his homework had been completed but inadvertently left at home in the confusion of preparing for school. Such explanations, however, rarely met with acceptance. Equally uncommon were attempts to avoid punishment for poor examination performance by pleading insufficient time for revision, as few boys expected such arguments to receive a sympathetic hearing. Masters were generally considered unlikely to excuse one pupil when others faced punishment for the same offence.
On certain occasions examination papers were returned before punishment was administered. Boys would anxiously examine their marked work in the hope of discovering an error, perhaps an incorrectly marked answer or a mistake in the addition of the final score. When such inaccuracies were identified, the number of strokes imposed was sometimes reduced. In these instances, many masters appeared fair-minded and willing to acknowledge their mistakes.
One incident from my second year at school remains particularly clear in my memory. An English master, known among the pupils for the remarkable speed with which he administered the slipper, summoned six boys, myself included, to the front of the classroom at the start of a lesson. He announced that each was to receive three strokes for failing to complete spelling corrections. Whenever a spelling error appeared in written work, the incorrect word was underlined in red ink and marked with a capital “S” in the margin. The pupil was then expected to discover the correct spelling and write the word out several times.
Among the six boys was one who had previously been punished for copying homework. As we stood beside the master’s desk awaiting our turn, he produced his exercise book and explained that he had completed the corrections at the back of the volume. After examining the work and confirming the explanation, the master instructed him to return to his seat. The remainder of us stepped forward in turn, bent over the desk, and received the prescribed punishment.
Another unusual episode occurred during my third year. One boy suffered from a minor physical disability affecting his foot and seldom encountered disciplinary difficulties. On one occasion, however, he was due to receive punishment from the French master, apparently for failing an examination. The boy protested that, owing to his condition, the master was not permitted to administer the slipper. The teacher appeared momentarily uncertain before deciding instead upon an alternative punishment consisting of additional written work. Whether some arrangement had previously been reached between the headmaster and the boy’s parents was never made clear, though one might have expected the staff to have been informed if this had indeed been the case.
The nature of the gym shoe or slipper itself was often a subject of discussion among pupils. Experience suggested that the most painful examples were those with particularly flexible soles, especially the inexpensive canvas varieties fitted with thin black rubber soles. Such footwear behaved almost like a strap, bending upon impact before snapping back with considerable force. This flexibility appeared to increase both the sting and the sharp cracking sound produced on contact.
The sound itself formed an important part of the experience. A forceful stroke created a loud report which echoed throughout the classroom and undoubtedly heightened the apprehension of those awaiting punishment. In many schools, silence was strictly maintained during such occasions, making the sound seem all the more pronounced. Thin classroom walls occasionally enabled boys to hear punishments being administered in neighbouring rooms.
The most effective gym shoes were generally regarded as those with light canvas uppers and thin, supple soles. Some masters modified them by cutting away sections of the upper canvas in order to improve their grip and increase flexibility. One particular slipper, remembered by many boys, had the canvas around the heel removed for precisely this purpose.
Punishment at home differed considerably from that administered at school. In my own case, my father employed an old moccasin slipper kept in the top drawer of his wardrobe. Such occasions usually took place on Saturday mornings while my mother was out shopping, with me positioned face down across a pile of pillows upon the bed. I distinctly recall receiving as many as six strokes on several occasions.
At school, punishments were generally less prolonged but often sharper in effect. The physical education master commonly administered a single stroke with a gym shoe. I experienced this only once after failing to hear an instruction during games. The resulting bruise remained visible for nearly a week.
Some accounts of school punishment from that period appear severe by modern standards. At grammar school, however, it was comparatively unusual for more than two strokes to be administered, although occasional exceptions did occur. Even two strokes could cause considerable pain, particularly during physical education lessons when boys wore only thin athletic shorts. Many pupils admitted to experiencing a mixture of apprehension and fascination when witnessing others being punished.
My earliest experiences of corporal punishment occurred at junior school. On one occasion, a female teacher administered two comparatively mild strokes with a slipper, causing little discomfort. More memorable, however, was a punishment delivered by a male teacher, who lined several boys up and struck each repeatedly by hand. Even so, this was generally regarded as far less painful than the slipper itself.
