Little House in the Wrong Thread

[Soloist]

2. What are the appropriate themes and subjects for children's literature intended for early readers ages say 7-10. Where your primary objective is to get them to move up from picture books and into chapter books. There are thousands and thousands of chapter books written for early readers in this age range. You have to be selective.

If it wasn’t for the school, I very likely would not have this in their list until older.

The fact that Laura Ingalls Wilder didn't detail the abusiveness of her father in her works of children's fiction are not in my mind reasons to reject them. Much more problematic in my mind are her portrayal of Indians. "The only good Indian is a dead Indian," is repeated several times by various characters, as the book goes on to describe Indians as "wild", "terrible", "savage warriors." That sentiment was no doubt common among 19th century white settlers who were literally in the process of stealing Indian lands. And it was what they told themselves to justify their crimes and acts of genocide. But it isn't the message we want to pass down to 8 year olds in the 21st century.

I couldn’t remember the specifics but I think that was the watered down version.

[ken_sylvania]

Two completely separate threads being discussed here.

1. Should we continue to use books that we now know were written by a serial sexual predator and liar? Especially given that there are a near infinite range of alternatives?

2. What are the appropriate themes and subjects for children's literature intended for early readers ages say 7-10. Where your primary objective is to get them to move up from picture books and into chapter books. There are thousands and thousands of chapter books written for early readers in this age range. You have to be selective.

The fact that Laura Ingalls Wilder didn't detail the abusiveness of her father in her works of children's fiction are not in my mind reasons to reject them. Much more problematic in my mind are her portrayal of Indians. "The only good Indian is a dead Indian," is repeated several times by various characters, as the book goes on to describe Indians as "wild", "terrible", "savage warriors." That sentiment was no doubt common among 19th century white settlers who were literally in the process of stealing Indian lands. And it was what they told themselves to justify their crimes and acts of genocide. But it isn't the message we want to pass down to 8 year olds in the 21st century. Would you give your 7 year old a children's book set in Germany in which various sympathetic characters said: "The only good Jew is a dead Jew"? and then went on to repeat various vile stereotypes about the Jewish people?

I generally agree with this, especially considering the age bracket of the target audience. If I remember correctly, though, in most of those situations there is also either a character who gives some pushback, or a bit of a story or narrative in which the Indians are portrayed somewhat positively. For instance, when Laura's Uncle Tom? tells his story about being with a group of settlers who squatted on Indian territory, and the US troops burn the fort these settlers had erected and march them back home, he admits that the settlers had been in the wrong. It seems to me that the girl Laura never seems to really connect with Ma's disgust and fear of Indians. (it's been a long time since I read these books though.)

[Ken]

2. What are the appropriate themes and subjects for children's literature intended for early readers ages say 7-10. Where your primary objective is to get them to move up from picture books and into chapter books. There are thousands and thousands of chapter books written for early readers in this age range. You have to be selective.

If it wasn’t for the school, I very likely would not have this in their list until older.

The fact that Laura Ingalls Wilder didn't detail the abusiveness of her father in her works of children's fiction are not in my mind reasons to reject them. Much more problematic in my mind are her portrayal of Indians. "The only good Indian is a dead Indian," is repeated several times by various characters, as the book goes on to describe Indians as "wild", "terrible", "savage warriors." That sentiment was no doubt common among 19th century white settlers who were literally in the process of stealing Indian lands. And it was what they told themselves to justify their crimes and acts of genocide. But it isn't the message we want to pass down to 8 year olds in the 21st century.

I couldn’t remember the specifics but I think that was the watered down version.

Well there are two separate issues when selecting books for children.

The first is the practical issue of vocabulary and reading level. The Little House books are at about a 2nd or 3rd grade reading level. You want your kids to progress and learn so you don't want reading materials that are too easy or too challenging. You have to find their sweet spot. The Little House books are a little to easy for the average 13 or 14 year old.

The second is the issue of themes. Some themes are just not appropriate for early readers, and also frankly don't interest them.

I had this issue with my middle child. She was an extremely bright and precocious reader. She was reading on her own in pre-K and reading shorter chapter books in kindergarten. By the time she was in say 2nd grade she could whip through the books written at that grade level in no time at all and it was difficult to keep her in books. She could bring a stack of books home from the library and have them all read that same evening.

The problem was that she wasn't really that interested or engaged by the themes common in more advanced books intended for older readers which trend very quickly into relationships. She didn't want to read about boy/girl stuff. She wanted to read about horses and cats and fairies and girls her age having adventures. We didn't have to keep say Pride and Prejudice away from her because of the mature themes about love. She was utterly disinterested in those themes at age 7 and wouldn't have read it anyway. Eventually I found longer and more challenging (in terms of vocabulary) books about nature where she could dive into reading about the rain forest or oceans and such. But it was a challenge to keep her challenged. Her older sister was the exact opposite. We actually had to put on the kitchen timer and monitor her to make sure she got her required 20 minutes of reading in for school. And even that was sometimes a challenge as she would often get distracted and I'd have to reset the timer and keep on her.

[Ken]

Two completely separate threads being discussed here.

1. Should we continue to use books that we now know were written by a serial sexual predator and liar? Especially given that there are a near infinite range of alternatives?

2. What are the appropriate themes and subjects for children's literature intended for early readers ages say 7-10. Where your primary objective is to get them to move up from picture books and into chapter books. There are thousands and thousands of chapter books written for early readers in this age range. You have to be selective.

The fact that Laura Ingalls Wilder didn't detail the abusiveness of her father in her works of children's fiction are not in my mind reasons to reject them. Much more problematic in my mind are her portrayal of Indians. "The only good Indian is a dead Indian," is repeated several times by various characters, as the book goes on to describe Indians as "wild", "terrible", "savage warriors." That sentiment was no doubt common among 19th century white settlers who were literally in the process of stealing Indian lands. And it was what they told themselves to justify their crimes and acts of genocide. But it isn't the message we want to pass down to 8 year olds in the 21st century. Would you give your 7 year old a children's book set in Germany in which various sympathetic characters said: "The only good Jew is a dead Jew"? and then went on to repeat various vile stereotypes about the Jewish people?

I generally agree with this, especially considering the age bracket of the target audience. If I remember correctly, though, in most of those situations there is also either a character who gives some pushback, or a bit of a story or narrative in which the Indians are portrayed somewhat positively. For instance, when Laura's Uncle Tom? tells his story about being with a group of settlers who squatted on Indian territory, and the US troops burn the fort these settlers had erected and march them back home, he admits that the settlers had been in the wrong. It seems to me that the girl Laura never seems to really connect with Ma's disgust and fear of Indians. (it's been a long time since I read these books though.)

Sure, and there is also a big difference between a book that you might read in class or together with your children where you can actually dissect and discuss these sorts of themes, put them into historical context, talk about stereotypes and prejudice, and talk about how we think differently today.

Versus just giving your 8 year old a stack of books and letting them rip on their own and absorb the author's own mindset without any critical examination.

[Soloist]

Well there are two separate issues when selecting books for children.

The first is the practical issue of vocabulary and reading level. The Little House books are at about a 2nd or 3rd grade reading level. You want your kids to progress and learn so you don't want reading materials that are too easy or too challenging. You have to find their sweet spot. The Little House books are a little to easy for the average 13 or 14 year old.

The second is the issue of themes. Some themes are just not appropriate for early readers, and also frankly don't interest them.

I had this issue with my middle child. She was an extremely bright and precocious reader. She was reading on her own in pre-K and reading shorter chapter books in kindergarten. By the time she was in say 2nd grade she could whip through the books written at that grade level in no time at all and it was difficult to keep her in books. She could bring a stack of books home from the library and have them all read that same evening.

The problem was that she wasn't really that interested or engaged by the themes common in more advanced books intended for older readers which trend very quickly into relationships. She didn't want to read about boy/girl stuff. She wanted to read about horses and cats and fairies and girls her age having adventures. We didn't have to keep say Pride and Prejudice away from her because of the mature themes about love. She was utterly disinterested in those themes at age 7 and wouldn't have read it anyway. Eventually I found longer and more challenging (in terms of vocabulary) books about nature where she could dive into reading about the rain forest or oceans and such. But it was a challenge to keep her challenged.

That would be your field of expertise and I would expect you to know. My growing up years were colored by the books I read and I found those books such as Tom Sawyer and little house on the prairie to be interesting although I didn’t learn to read until I was 10. By the time I was 12 I was reading the classics, a great deal of adult fiction, and some college level material. I am very well read and I regret that no one was filtering what I read. I consider some of the children classics to have serious issues in terms of morality and practice. I find that in the “Christian” children novels too.

[barnhart]

... Much more problematic in my mind are her portrayal of Indians. "The only good Indian is a dead Indian," is repeated several times by various characters, as the book goes on to describe Indians as "wild", "terrible", "savage warriors." That sentiment was no doubt common among 19th century white settlers who were literally in the process of stealing Indian lands. And it was what they told themselves to justify their crimes and acts of genocide. But it isn't the message we want to pass down to 8 year olds in the 21st century. Would you give your 7 year old a children's book set in Germany in which various sympathetic characters said: "The only good Jew is a dead Jew"? and then went on to repeat various vile stereotypes about the Jewish people?

My wise mother read these books to me as a child and when she got to the objectionable passages, like the things you site, she would stop and say, "Well, that's not right." or "How terrible!" and then go back to reading. From this I learned not only the common attitudes of frontier settlers but also how to think about it. Thank God for parents wise enough to teach their children to think.

[Ken]

Well there are two separate issues when selecting books for children.

The first is the practical issue of vocabulary and reading level. The Little House books are at about a 2nd or 3rd grade reading level. You want your kids to progress and learn so you don't want reading materials that are too easy or too challenging. You have to find their sweet spot. The Little House books are a little to easy for the average 13 or 14 year old.

The second is the issue of themes. Some themes are just not appropriate for early readers, and also frankly don't interest them.

I had this issue with my middle child. She was an extremely bright and precocious reader. She was reading on her own in pre-K and reading shorter chapter books in kindergarten. By the time she was in say 2nd grade she could whip through the books written at that grade level in no time at all and it was difficult to keep her in books. She could bring a stack of books home from the library and have them all read that same evening.

The problem was that she wasn't really that interested or engaged by the themes common in more advanced books intended for older readers which trend very quickly into relationships. She didn't want to read about boy/girl stuff. She wanted to read about horses and cats and fairies and girls her age having adventures. We didn't have to keep say Pride and Prejudice away from her because of the mature themes about love. She was utterly disinterested in those themes at age 7 and wouldn't have read it anyway. Eventually I found longer and more challenging (in terms of vocabulary) books about nature where she could dive into reading about the rain forest or oceans and such. But it was a challenge to keep her challenged.

That would be your field of expertise and I would expect you to know. My growing up years were colored by the books I read and I found those books such as Tom Sawyer and little house on the prairie to be interesting although I didn’t learn to read until I was 10. By the time I was 12 I was reading the classics, a great deal of adult fiction, and some college level material. I am very well read and I regret that no one was filtering what I read. I consider some of the children classics to have serious issues in terms of morality and practice. I find that in the “Christian” children novels too.

Well, I'm a HS teacher not an elementary teacher so I don't teach reading. But I have raised 3 girls so have gone through it from a parent's point of view. In my mind, the important thing is staying engaged with your children rather than trying to censor and control what they are exposed to. I think there are two different approaches and I think you can guess as to which I think is better.

Approach 1: Carefully curate/censor what your children are exposed to in terms of books, television, etc. And then just leave them to their own devices. That was how my parent's grew up. My grandparents strictly controlled what they were exposed to in terms of books, but did zero engagement with them in terms of what they were reading and learning. Sure my grandparents were busy and tired running a farm and supporting a family. But they also never bothered to engage their kid's minds and really talk to them. From how my father tells it, the only intellectual engagement he ever had with his father was family bible studies. And that was always in the form of lectures, not analysis. As in, "let's read a passage of my choosing and *I* will tell you want it means."

Approach 2: Keep an eye on what your children are reading of course, but engage with them, probe their thoughts and what they are learning. Make them think about the hard questions, and trust them to come to their own conclusions. Which they are going to do anyway. And read challenging books together. This takes a LOT more time and effort. But it is also a matter of priorities. I read some pretty dense books together with my girls when they were young and we took time to talk about them. You only have their attention for a short amount of time when growing up. Make the most of it. If you talk intelligently to them when they are 10 then are much more likely to keep talking to you when they are 17 and struggling with more adult issues. If you don't talk to them and constantly engage them when they are young, don't expect them to start when they are age 17 and thinking about the opposite sex. By then it is far too late.

[Grace]

As a child I loved the "Little House on the Prairie" books. And I didn't turn into a racist Indian hater, either. We need to remember the times and era these books were written in. Some elements of the books are true, some are not. For example the little miscreant Nellie Olson was a composite of three girls that vexed Laura in her life. As soon as I learned to read I always had my nose in a book. As I got older my public school librarian challenged me to read more in depth, mind broadening books. I remember one particular book, was a story about some kids and the neighborhood witch. I was in fifth grade and my parents were oblivious to the content. It did not influence me to seek after witchcraft, because I realized it was just a good fictional story. While we are on poorly written books, I also devoured the Nancy Drew and Hardy Boy books. They were all fiction and the vocabulary and writing style was horrible. But I didn't realize that until I was older. We didn't have TV and reading was our entertainment on long winter evenings. At around sixth grade my parents bought an encyclopedia. I spent countless hours reading that, probably was better for my mind than Nancy Drew or the Hardy boys.

Two links that offer explanations on Laura Ingalls Wilder books.

https://ultimatehistoryproject.com/laur ... ction.html

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/918 ... ched-truth

[Josh]

It is amazing how easily offended modern man is. Basically, no book is appropriate for children except some modern book like “Heather Has Two Mommies”.

[Soloist]

It is amazing how easily offended modern man is. Basically, no book is appropriate for children except some modern book like “Heather Has Two Mommies”.

Yes, the one person objecting to it wants your book suggestion