Little House on the Prairie Series

Many, many people have contacted us over the years asking for a copy of our review of the Little House on the Prairie series by Laura Ingalls Wilder. Many of our book reviews were originally written in a magazine series that we published during the 1990's. The “Little House” treatise (it can really hardly be called a review) was actually one of the very first, and was, at first, little more than an informative blurb. In lieu of a review, what people have received on request, is a short collection of bits and pieces consisting of the original posting, and some additional “dialog,” if you will, that occurred over succeeding months.

            How did it all come about? We, as parents, had always been concerned about the relationship between proper reading and the rearing of Christian young people. Our daughter was a voracious reader and an extremely fast reader. She was a born reader, cruising effortlessly through books like “Little House” by second grade. She actually used to sit in her baby crib with a book containing no pictures for sometimes an hour, and page through it spending 30-60 seconds perusing each left-hand page and then the right-hand page. We would often watch from another room and wonder what could she be doing.

            Anyhow, our discernment in the beginning was not all that it should have been. Our daughter was our oldest, and she was almost reading by the time we came to Jesus. However, our discernment was growing by leaps and bounds as we tried to pre-read whatever we allowed her to read. Obviously, she was, by necessity, rereading approved books many times as we struggled to add new items, especially when many did not pass muster. As many other parents in this predicament, we began reading the first volume in a series, and if we were not struck by anything that posed any real objection, we okayed the whole series. Big mistake. We were about to learn that many authors, past and present, who propose objectionable ideas to young people, never do so in the first volume of the series. That is the most likely volume that cautious moms or dads read. However, even in the first volume, had we been more discerning, we would have seen something that came out in the aftermath of the original comments. This might have been avoided but that we took some of the common shortcuts like “remembering” that some books were harmless because we had read them a number of years before. Such as things are, the innocent setting and lovable family life presented in the “Little House” books very craftily covered the author’s goal—her life’s goal—feminine role reversal—which she was extremely effective in imparting to young readers without their careful parents ever knowing it.

            As well as we can remember, the original excerpts were published as a result of input we received from a reader. What followed was due to some of our own research and some reader participation. Since, it is so oft requested, the small collection of thoughts is offered for your convenience as follows:

A Note About the Little House Series, January 1995

            I (Susan) confess to not having read the Little House on the Prairie series for years and years, and so I am humbled to report the following. A dear family in Kentucky phoned one evening to ask me about books, and wondered if I had ever read the entire set of “Little House” books, and did I know that Laura refused to take the vow of obedience in her marriage to Alamanzo. No, I did not recall that. In the book In These Happy Golden Years, on page 269, we read:

            “Laura was silent again. Then she summoned all her courage and said, “Alamanzo, I must ask you something. Do you want me to promise to obey you?”

            Soberly he answered, “Of course not. I know it is in the wedding ceremony, but it is only something that women say. I never knew one that did it, nor any decent man that wanted her to.”

            “Well, I am not going to say I will obey you,” said Laura.

            On the next page, page 270—

            “I’d never expect you to,” he told her. “And there will be no difficulty about the ceremony, because Reverend Brown does not believe in using the word ‘obey.’ ”

            “He doesn’t! Are you sure?” Laura had never been so surprised and so relieved all at once.

            “He feels very strongly about it,” Alamanzo said. “I have heard him arguing for hours and quoting Bible texts against St. Paul, on that subject.”

            Well, the text speaks for itself. If we say that we are keepers of the faith and do not want to carry books that dishonor God’s Word, and could possibly encourage girls to feel that they, too, need not grow up to obey their husbands, our only biblical choice would be to not carry these books.

            As a further comment, this passage suggests that “any decent man” would waive the biblical vow of obedience. This calls any man who believes in the headship of the husband indecent, and also disparages the sanctity of the Bible.

More Thoughts on the Little House Series, March 1995

            This continuing discussion is prompted by the January/February article on Laura refusing to take the vow of obedience at her marriage ceremony. Laura later went on to become a feminist and push for the women’s right to vote, and her own daughter, Rose, lived a life steeped in feminism and worldliness with her own marriage ending in divorce. The question has been raised as to whether to let our daughters read these books, or at least to read the first couple in the series, which might not be as bad as the rest. Are they safe?

            After my daughter, Sue, received the last newsletter and read the brief article on Little House, she could not sleep all night. This article prompted some deep thinking on her part. She had read the Little House Series nine times as a young girl. It was her favorite set of books. Now, she has a daughter of her own. Would she allow her daughter to read these books? Could she at least let her read the first few books and eliminate the rest? As Sue’s thought process continued, she wondered where Laura had led her wrong. In other words, what had Sue picked up from these books? Were the seeds of feminism planted in the Little House Series? If they were, it surely must be in the first few books because seeds take time to grow.

            What were the seeds of Laura’s error? According to her writings, she had a manly father, and a feminine mother who was a keeper at home. She did not live in a feminist world. It was a world of no television, few books, no competitive sports, and yet, she longed to be a boy. Mary was the lady and Laura was the tomboy. So what was it? What were the seeds of longing to be a boy? Laura always wanted to be her daddy’s boy—the son he never had. Laura seemed to think that the way to her father’s heart was doing boy things. She wanted her dad to be proud of her. This was not necessarily her father’s intent (or was it?), but likely Laura’s imaginings, which her books, if they do parallel her early life, bear out. She never outgrew these imaginings, though. She pursued them and taught others to do the same in her adulthood. Were these the imaginings of a little girl—wanting to be a boy—wanting to have a special place in her father’s heart? Were they the seeds which determined her future course in life? We will never know for sure. The question that faces us is what seeds will these books plant in the lives of our daughters?

            Well, what’s the big deal? Will it harm a girl to read these books? The following is a testimony from my daughter who is willing to share these personal thoughts with you.

A Personal Testimony

            “After pondering the above thoughts, I began to think about some problems I had growing up. Even though I had a mom who taught me all the feminine skills such as cooking, crocheting, etc., and I loved doing them, and I had a dad who loved me as a daughter and praised all my feminine efforts, I still thought I had to be as athletically good (even though I was not allowed to play sports) as my brothers to really have my father’s approval. Where did I get this idea? Not from my parents. Could it possibly have been from Laura Ingalls? Looking back I know I loved her and wanted to be just like her. I read her books nine times and countless other books, all considered good books, which had a similar character like Laura who was a tomboy.

            I enjoyed feminine skills. In fact, I loved them, and did not even like ball playing, but I persisted in trying to please my dad in this vein until I was about eleven years old. I finally realized my dad loved my cakes and pies and would be well pleased with my feminine efforts. My dad loved me as a daughter, not as a son.

            What took me so long for this truth to sink in? I think the “Little House” books confused me. I believed them over my parents. I think it is very important for Dads to praise the feminine achievements of their daughters. Daughters need this from their fathers. And even if they receive this praise, like I did, books can still confuse them. Who is the author of confusion? I have decided not to let my daughter read these books because of seeing the first hand effects of this in my own girlhood.”

            Fifteen years ago I, as a mother, did not have this discernment as to the effect of what seemed to be good wholesome books which subtly visited one seriously incorrect idea upon the life of my daughter. I knew she struggled with the concept of pleasing her father, but did not know why, since we both gave so much positive reinforcement. She finally outgrew it, but what a time she had during the process. And, until we had a wonderfully long talk about the Little House books and the impact those books had on her life for, shall I say, evil, I would not have realized it. There is a great difference between what a child receives from a book and what an adult receives from the same book. Laura’s desire to be a tomboy would have no impact on a grown woman’s life but it would and did have an impact on Laura’s own life, and her persuasive “homey” writing style will very likely impact the lives of many other young girls who will find it easy to identify with her. We can never be too careful which books our children read. It only takes one seed planted by the deceiver to throw a life off course. Just ask Eve.

A Short Information Box, July 1995

Did You Know . . . that Charles Ingalls was a 33rd degree mason and Carolyn was very active in the Eastern Star (the Masonic rrganization for women)?

Did You Know . . .that Alamanzo Wilder was also very active in the Masons and Laura was the head of the local Eastern Star for many years?

This information can be verified by contacting the Laura Ingalls Wilder Museum in Mansfield, Missouri.

More Thoughts on Little House, November 1996

            Occasionally, we still receive letters, usually from young mothers, regarding the review of the Little House books. They almost always acknowledge the facts that Laura Wilder was a feminist who refused to take the vow of obedience to her husband. She believed that the Word of God was in error regarding marriage and the roles of men and women. Her daughter was a feminist, and her marriage ended in divorce. Laura and her husband were not Christians. They were heavily involved in masonry all their lives.

            In spite of the facts, women love these books. They are emotionally involved in the stories. Their comments are always, “I’ll let my daughters read them, but I will tell them that Laura was wrong regarding the issues of feminism and divorce. These books won’t hurt them when I tell them what God’s Word says.”

            This is not only faulty logic, but it defies Scripture. When it comes to the use of stories, Mrs. Wilder may be considered a talented temptress. This is why so many mothers love her books despite the heretical ideas they espouse. Have we forgotten that the Little House on the Prairie television series was effectively used to further the feminist agenda across our entire country? One does not rear submissive, godly daughters by feeding them with feminism wrapped in interesting and exciting stories that they will love. There will be no explaining away those effects. What is imprinted at the emotional level in a young person cannot be erased by logic. Mental images cannot be erased, period. They can be struggled against but not erased.

            Rare is the grown woman with whom I speak who does not struggle with submission. Almost all women struggle with some resentment of the role differences between men and women. Why? Surely, not because God made a mistake. Surely, not because there is anything in His Word which would cause this resentment. It is because the evil one plants the seeds, the thoughts, the words, which say, “It isn’t fair. Don’t you wish you were a male? Then you could do what you want. No one would be telling you what to do. You would never be limited.” To believe that God is good becomes an underlying lifelong struggle despite the fact that we know He is good and He loves us. Why? The devil has done it to us through books that we love! Mrs. Wilder very quietly and effectively implanted her ungodly beliefs into her writings that she might pass them on to multitudes of young girls.

            When we read a book, we become emotionally involved in the lives of the characters. We can become angry, sad, or even have a good cry when we read a heart-touching story. Can we not expect our daughters to do the same? Dare we give such an author control of our daughters’ minds through this emotional bonding? Can we then wipe away the resulting mental images, imprints, and appetites with the simple statement like, “I am glad that you love the book, but it was not right”? Will those words hold any value at all if we have already condoned such reading material as being right enough for our daughters to read in the first place?

            There is a battle for our children’s minds. Hitler wanted the minds of the young people in order to gain control of the nation. He used reading and education. The devil is no fool. He will happily slip his philosophies into the easy-to-reach minds of children under cover of a “good” story. Shall we hand over our daughters’ minds to the ungodly because they can tell a good story? Such authors will repay us by sowing the seeds of rebellion in their hearts. It would be far better to never to read for enjoyment, and have a happy, godly marriage someday. Laura is no role model for our girls. As good parents we would keep our daughters from the wrong friends. Can we risk their friendship with Laura?