I have both liked and been rather exasperated with and by Sarah Miller's Caroline: Little House, Revisited, as while I have definitely enjoyed the additional information and reading about Laura Ingalls Wilder's Little House on the Prairie from Caroline's, from Ma Ingalls' point of view, I also feel that Sarah Miller has spent both far too much time in Caroline Ingalls' head and given us too much continuous and detailed information on bodily functions, on physical sensations (on such mundane scenarios as using the outhouse or getting dressed, details that while perhaps interesting to a point did not need to be so extensively belaboured and depicted over and over again).
Now while I have indeed appreciated seeing Caroline Ingalls presented as not some glowingly shining heroine, as a perfect mother figure par excellence (and the entire Ingalls family, while generally lovingly, also as necessary negatively portrayed, especially and in particular regarding Caroline Ingalls' bigoted and often hateful attitude towards Native Americans), the constant depictions and descriptions of the latter's internal and often quite negative thought processes and reactions to life, to Charles, Laura and Mary, to her preganacy, to the trials and tribulations faced by the Ingalls family on their journey by covered wagon from Wisconcin to Kansas do sadly become a bit monotonous and tedious at times, a bit too much information and details, almost as though Sarah Miller were desperately trying to add more words, more sentences, more of Caroline Ingalls' musings (so much so that even though I have, as already mentioned, enjoyed reading about Caroline Ingalls as not an entirely positive person, I do wonder if at least some of the negativity portrayed in Caroline: Little House, Revisited might be a trifle overly exaggerated, a bit overdone).
And finally, while I was originally going to be ranking Caroline: Little House, Revisited with a high two star rating, I have now firmly decided on three stars, as yes, I do massively support and appreciate that Sarah Miller has shown that in reality (actually historical truth, proven through documents, census statements, letters etc.) and very much unlike Laura Ingalls Wilder's Little House on the Prairie, the Ingalls family was NOT FORCED OFF their Kansas land claim by the US government declaring their homestead Indian Territory, but because Mr. Gustafson (who had bought their property in Wisconcin) had reneged on his payments, which meant that Charles Ingalls and family, while of course retaining their property in Wisconcin also now did not have enough available funds to stay in Kansas, to pay for their Kansas land claim (and I do have to both wonder and yes indeed question why Laura Ingalls Wilder basically fibbed in Little House on the Prairie, blaming both the US government and Native Americans for their plight, for family financial problems that were actually caused by Mr. Gustafson, who was in all likelihood either Swedish or Norwegian, in other words, a Caucasion, reneging on his agreed payments, as to me it now sure does rather seem that it was I guess easier and felt better for Laura Ingalls Wilder to cast blame at the the US administration, at politicians, and by extension at Native Americans).