Doodles by Dain Lee. Get info
on submitting your own artwork here.

Subscribe

RSS Feed
Weekly Newsletter
Updates, top stories & our favorite links straight to your inbox.


Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp

Contributors

JK Evanczuk | Email

Jennifer Blevins | Email
The Blevins Blog

Andrew Boryga | Email
Skilled Loser

Zach Bushnell | Email

Jessica Digiacinto
Twitter
Twenty Somethings

Alex Lam | Email
Anthology Media

Tracy Marchini
Twitter
My VerboCity

Tanya Paperny | Email
Culturally Progressive

Toby Shuster
Twitter
AlongThoseLines

Morgan von Ancken | Email

Little House on the Prairie, 75 Years Later

By Toby Shuster on Monday, January 11, 2010
More: Books

LHMainTitleIt’s enjoyable to reread classic pieces of literature once every few years to garner a deeper understanding of the work.  But it’s not always a Brothers Karamazov kind of day.  So sometimes I like to go back to the childhood classics.  And by revisiting once beloved texts with a different set of sensibilities, we can decide for ourselves if the things we loved as kids have held up.

Last December, I spent a few days in the feminine utopia of Little Women. This year, I tried Little House on the Prairie, the 1935 children’s book about a pioneer family’s westward expedition.  I remembered the elemental aspects of Ma and Pa’s wisdom, a covered wagon, and cornmeal mush, all of which all seemed very reassuring after several long months of working in a brightly lit office cubicle.

I made it through the first fifty pages before I was drop dead bored.

Why? For one, while it’s understandably terrifying for Ma and her young daughters to be brought out West to live with ruffians, a lot of the would-be interesting fears and conflicts in the series are glazed over by lengthy descriptions of domesticity.

On top of that, the offensive warning, “the only good Indian is a dead Indian” recurs throughout, as Ma and Pa converge with the few neighbors they have to strategize a defense against a massacre that never happens.

But as I persisted with the book, I found that the bigotry seemed to play a small role overall. And in between the Indian conflicts, I learned the basic steps to building a log cabin and stringing a beaded necklace.

It’s not that Laura Ingalls Wilder’s writing isn’t appealing; rather, it’s very clear in its detailed portrayal of frontier life. But these stories are simply not meant for adults. Taken as is, Wilder’s rhythmic prose is supposed to be read aloud. And it’s easy to see how kids can feel relief by Pa’s unrelenting motto, “If you do as you are told, you will be safe.”

So I’m willing to forgive all the tedium because Laura Ingalls Wilder knew how to capitalize on a child’s raw place in the world. And it is comforting to read about a family that’s surrounded by danger but is, at the end of the day, ultimately safe.

As for the racism, well, there aren’t many books written over 40 years ago that aren’t considered racist by today’s standards. The pioneers did have to worry about the Native Americans back then; it would be dishonest not to acknowledge that the fear was real at the time.

The fond memories I have of the Little House book remain, no matter how maligned.  And maybe Wilder’s simplistic narration of an era so far removed allows us to better comprehend the monotony in our own day-to-day routines. Because sitting in a cubicle isn’t nearly as arduous as churning butter.

  • Digg
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • E-mail this story to a friend!

5 Comments

  1. claire says:

    Oh, Toby, I could not disagree more!! I blew through Little House in the Big Woods all the way to Little Town on the Prairie (or whichever one it was when Almanzo and his brother hid their seed behind a fake wall in the shop) last Christmas and loved every minute of it. I was just as enthralled, and perhaps even more aware as an adult, about how stressful it must have been for the family to try and eek a life out of the American landscape, packing up their covered wagon and moving every year or so. The prose is definitely simple and written for children, and won’t find the depth that you do in Little Women, but this definitely a series I plan on returning to over and over with my own children.

  2. Toby Shuster says:

    yes, I agree. I’m not denying the quality of the books, and I will definitely return to this series when I have kids. But, until then, I’m going to leave Wilder alone…

  3. HPL says:

    Very interesting, though I’m not totally surprised it hasn’t held up quite as well as you might think. I love the idea that some books are meant to be read aloud, and I also think it was smart how you resisted the urge to put the book down and found something in it beyond your first reaction.

  4. NicoleS says:

    I decided to revisit Little Women this year. I’m going through it rather slowly, but it really is such a good read. It feels nice to call on old friends.

    I’m curious, now, if I would enjoy Little House. I loved the books so much as a little girl. I’ll have to tackle those again soon.

  5. Therese says:

    I read a little ways into Little House in the Big Woods a while ago, and was hugely impressed by the descriptions of Ma making her own cheese, Pa slaughtering and processing an entire pig, filching honey from a bear, the cabin being stalked by a jaguar, and so on. It was just amazing to me, the skills these people had, and the degree of self-sufficiency.

TrackBacks / PingBacks

Comment

  • Thanks for the RTs! @cloudcarvings @StraySyntax @Mel_Bosworth @pmc6284 1 day ago
  • New FREE BOOK FRIDAY: Attention. Deficit. Disorder. by Brad Listi, the 1st great road novel of the 21st century. Pls RT! http://ow.ly/1ieyo 2 days ago
  • A Mystery Science Theater 3000 haiku. http://ow.ly/1hACI 2 days ago
  • So what's in the David Foster Wallace archive? http://ow.ly/1gRiZ 3 days ago
  • Literary basketball team names: W.E.B & Da Boys, To Kill a Blocking Bird, The Fastbreaks of Wrath. Can you think of any? http://ow.ly/1h8h8 3 days ago