Little House, Long Shadow: Laura Ingalls Wilder's Impact on American Culture

by Anita Clair Fellman

Beyond their status as classic children’s stories, Laura Ingalls Wilder’s Little House books play a significant role in American culture that most people cannot begin to appreciate. Millions of children have sampled the books in school; played out the roles of Laura and Mary; or visited Wilder homesites with their parents, who may be fans themselves. Yet, as Anita Clair Fellman shows, there is even more to this magical series with its clear emotional a covert political message that made many readers comfortable with the resurgence of conservatism in the Reagan years and beyond.

In Little House, Long Shadow, a leading Wilder scholar offers a fresh interpretation of the Little House books that examines how this beloved body of children’s literature found its way into many facets of our culture and consciousness—even influencing the responsiveness of Americans to particular political views. Because both Wilder and her daughter, Rose Wilder Lane, opposed the New Deal programs being implemented during the period in which they wrote, their books reflect their use of family history as an argument against the state’s protection of individuals from economic uncertainty. Their writing emphasized the isolation of the Ingalls family and the family’s resilience in the face of crises and consistently equated self-sufficiency with family acceptance, security, and warmth.

Fellman argues that the popularity of these books—abetted by Lane’s overtly libertarian views—helped lay the groundwork for a negative response to big government and a positive view of political individualism, contributing to the acceptance of contemporary conservatism while perpetuating a mythic West. Beyond tracing the emergence of this influence in the relationship between Wilder and her daughter, Fellman explores the continuing presence of the books—and their message—in modern cultural institutions from classrooms to tourism, newspaper editorials to Internet message boards.

Little House, Long Shadow shows how ostensibly apolitical artifacts of popular culture can help explain shifts in political assumptions. It is a pioneering look at the dissemination of books in our culture that expands the discussion of recent political transformations—and suggests that sources other than political rhetoric have contributed to Americans’ renewed appreciation of individualist ideals.

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Biography, Adult, Pop Culture, Literature, Literary Criticism

360 pages, Kindle Edition

First published May 21, 2008

Reviews

[Kressel Housman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wendy McClure, die-hard Little House fan and author of The Wilder Life, cited this book in her research, and it sounded like just the thing I’ve been searching for. If you accept that Rose Wilder Lane collaborated with her mother on the Little House series, you can’t help but connect the dots between the text and her libertarian ideology. I started a thread about this on Goodreads here some years ago, but I was always looking for a more in-depth analysis. This book provided precisely that.

The first two chapters were dense and academic. They compare the historical record of Laura’s life with the stories presented in the series. Wendy McClure did this in her book also, but with a lighter tone, which made reading this book easier since the facts were fresh in my mind. The highlight of these chapters for me was seeing the author point out precisely the same stories as I did in illustrating libertarian themes. But I was disappointed to learn that the Ingalls’ entrepreneurial spirit in running an ad hoc hotel for newly-arrived homesteaders was an invention. In general, the thrust of these chapters was to show that the Ingalls were far less isolated than the series makes them out to be. That would have been too communal a message for the individualist Rose.

The next three chapters were “Little House in School,” “Little House at Home,” and “Little House in Public,” all of which showed how ubiquitous and influential the series has been in American culture. I’d never thought of it before, but because of this book, I’m now wondering if my love of history began with my love for Laura, and ditto my attraction to religion, even though I’m a Jew and not a Christian. If that’s true, that’s a pretty big impact.

I should add that the TV show does get mentioned in this section, but not in great depth. The author said that if she had included more about the TV show, she might never have finished writing the book. But I would have loved to see more of an analysis there. As the author mentions, President Reagan himself claimed that the show was his favorite.

The last chapter was the one I’d been waiting for: “Little House in American Politics.” I could see someone skipping right ahead to this one, but its argument is really built on the earlier parts of the book. One of the points it makes is the inherent contradiction in today’s right-wing political bloc, comprised as it is of a libertarian, laissez-faire attitude toward capitalism and a traditionalist, even statist, attitude toward issues like gay marriage. That is the contradiction between libertarian Rose and the more traditional Laura. Because the books merge this contradiction, so does the American right.

This book may not appeal to all Little House fans. For those who reject Rose’s influence on the books, and I’ve come across some vehement ones, this book will surely be a turn-off. Wendy McClure didn’t enjoy it because she didn’t like thinking of herself as having been indoctrinated in values she disagrees with when she was so young. I, however, found that it corroborated much of what I gathered on my own. I teetered on giving it 4 stars because of the writing style, but for research and analysis, it really is top-notch, so it gets a 5. In this current climate in which “statist” institutions like Medicare are in danger of being privatized, I hope it can launch a broader conversation about just how much everyone really does depend on everyone else.

[Michael · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'll give this book two stars because it is so well researched (there are about 500 footnotes and an extensive bibliography). The author, a Women's Studies professor in Virginia, is writing about Laura Ingalls Wilder and her series of Little House on the Prairie books. Professor Fellman does not like the fact that Wilder and her collaborator, Rose Wilder Lane (Laura's daughter) were not fans of FDRs New Deal, and that the Little House books were written to try and influence the American people to steer clear of big government.

Some of the information in this book I didn't know. I didn't know, for example, how important a factor Wilder's daughter Rose was in the creation of the series. Some of the things Professor Fellman writes about, like the long, long chapter of pscyhobabble related to mother-daughter relationships, or child rearing philosophies in the 19th century, were of little interest to me since they were so speculative. And other things were just irritating. For example, the author's thesis is that Laura and Rose shaped their narrative to push readers toward a certain interpretation of the Frontier experience, and that interpretation was one that led to a more conservative world view. The ramifications, of course, are that there would be more people open to the ideas put forth by political conservatives. The mote in the good professor's eye is that she is doing the exact same thing! In her opinion--not fact, not Holy Writ, but opinion--people should focus more on community, and the efficacy that Big Government brings to just about every aspect of our lives. The author is doing just what she is scolding Laura Ingalls for doing! So silly.

This is a long, involved, dense academic book. I do admire the depth of the author's knowledge and research, and I understand that it's very difficult for a person writing history to keep their own world-view and biases out of their texts. But I am always amazed by the inability of people who are politically liberal to see the world through the eyes of those with whom they disagree. Likewise, I am forever...alarmed, I guess, by the tentacles of cultural studies that have coiled around academia in this country. I couldn't help but think the good professor's greatest complaint is that these books are popular because they are about values that are inimical to her politics: self-sufficiency, faith, the primacy of the individual, etc. This author believes--as many nice Progressives believe--that government is community, and that real community--people who choose to live together, to pray together, to accomplish goals together--is a threat to the collective.

Which it is. Thank God.

So I'd skip this one, unless you are really, really left of center and want to learn about Laura Ingalls, her libertarian daughter, and the necessity of Washington's teat to suckle us all. I am sorry I wasted my time. I should have known better.

[Ngaire · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting look at the long term impact of the Little House books on American culture. I read and reread these books as a child, and still respond to them as a adult. Of course, I had no idea that they'd been written with any kind of political agenda - mainly, Laura Ingalls Wilder's and her daughter Rose Wilder Lane's opposition to the New Deal. I just liked the descriptions of making butter and Pa telling stories in the evenings and all the adventures that Laura had.

I have to admit that after reading Wendy McClure's The Wilder Life, I was a little disillusioned that some of my favorite childhood books were not true accounts of life on the frontier (the Big Woods of Wisconsin, for example, were actually full of people when the Ingalls family lived there (many of them Indians) but that didn't sound as dramatic or make the family seem as heroic as having them drive for hours through the snow just to see family at Christmas). But I have to forgive Laura for this - she was writing fiction, albeit fiction that was semi-autobiographical, and had to make decisions about what made for a better story.

Of course, the pity is that people have seen these books as completely true tales of life on the frontier, when they are not. The Little House on the Prairie, for example, was almost certainly built on the Osage Diminished Reserve, one of the last refuges of the Osage Indians before the US Government, under pressure from white settlers and railroad companies to open up the land, broke yet another treaty with them and forced them into Oklahoma. So the Ingalls family were actually squatting illegally on Indian land, hoping that it would eventually open up to legal settlement and that they would have first dibs on it (which is what had happened in some other parts of Kansas). Funny how reality is always so much more complicated than fiction.

Fellman spends the first part of the book comparing the events of the Little House series with the realities of Laura Ingalls Wilder's life. The hard part about this is the fact that Laura and Almanzo's lives were never easy, at least until her book started selling really well in the 1930s and 40s, and that their daughter Rose Wilder Lane was an unhappy person who longed, desperately, for a close relationship with her mother, but never had one. However, she was a really interesting person, who worked as a journalist, lived in Albania, and is considered by many to be one of the founders of the modern Libertarian movement. So, when I said she was unhappy, I was grossly oversimplifying.

The second half of Little House, Long Shadow, looks at the way the books have been used in classrooms, libraries, and in political discourse. It's a fascinating topic. Fellman posits that because the messages of individualism and hostility toward government in the Little House books are cloaked in the guise of children's books, many people embrace it without really being aware of it, drawn in by the tales of adventure and the warm family life that Laura enjoyed. I know I wasn't aware of that message, at least not as a child. As an adult, I might find it hard to take. I guess I don't think that the ability to work hard and have skills makes you averse to help when you need it, whether it's from a neighbor or the government. But I can see why Laura Ingalls Wilder would think that - she and her family endured much hardship and privation without much help (although it's worth noting the government of North Dakota funded the school for the blind that her sister Mary attended). People can be contradictory when it comes to that kind of thinking.

[Melissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bought in Walnut Grove. Yes, that Walnut Grove. . .

A wonderful look at the long range impact children's literature can have. At the museum, we've often talked about how Little House has become synomonous with pioneer history, and this book helps explain how that came to be.
Fellman has certainly done her homework--interviewing teachers, long-time readers, and visitors to the various LIW site. These were the stories I liked best--how people completely fell in love with the books and how it changed their lives. She also extensively explores both Wilder and Lane's political beliefs and how they were integrated into the narrative. Though I agree with the idea that politics (and reaction against the New Deal) helped form some key plot choices in the book, her arguement that Wilder and Lane helped shape the modern conservative movement seems a bit much.
Read this for the stories of how this book became so prominent. I did lots of nodding and lots of thinking about how other children's books have shaped my life.
Highly recommended, especially for those interested in the stories behind books--and the ripple effects of books we love.

[Sally Sugarman · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a well balanced and informative book. Fellman looks at Wilder from a variety of perspectives. She discusses the discipline that she learned the hard way growing up with her demanding mother and the fact that she had to control her own strong temperament and devote herself to supporting and caring for her blind sister who was the favorite in the family. Her relationship with her daughter Rose was not a good one as she tried to control Rose in the same way. Rose rebelled against this and did not like the isolated life her family led. Although it was not as isolated as the books suggest. Rose felt obligated to care financially for her parents and sent them a sum of money each year as well as gifts. She suggested Laura write and she co-wrote the books with her. Both Laura and Rose were against the new deal. Rose was to write many well known Libertarian books . Rose went the gamut from left wing radical to right wing radical in the course of her life where she was married, divorced and had several love affairs. Laura resented the government because the family was forced off the land that they shouldn’t have been on by the government because it still belonged to the Indians. The books were heavily fictionalized, particularly the later ones. Because they were children’s books, they glossed over some of the bitterness and unhappiness such as the child who died in infancy. Since there was not much in the way of children’s historical literature when the books were published and the child readers thought they were true, they were widely popular and used extensively in classrooms. Fellman reports extensively on the ways that they were. They also were widely popular generally and they became somewhat of a business. While seemingly representing a simpler way of life where material goods were not that important, they became a consumer item in terms of trips to the various homes of the Ingalls Wilders and all kinds of good for collectors. It was somewhat of a shock when it became widely known that the books were written by two people. When someone wrote a book revealing this, fans were upset. The only criticism that finally came was about the treatment of Indians. I was glad that the author talked about the Birchbark House books and the Dear America, the American Girls and American Diary series because they take away the distinction of the Little House books being the only ones dealing with the history of children . The author also makes the point that the Little House books are also a part of the mythology of the west, We are a country that lives by myths instead of reality. She notes that the Ingalls Wilders were only upset about the government, not about the railroads that gouged the pioneers. They weren’t the heroes they remembered themselves to be, stealing lands from the Indians. Felllman talks about how Wilder bought into the Turner thesis about the frontier which has been pretty much disproven. This book does raise the question of the political messages that children are receiving from the literature that they read.

[Colleen · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a dense, well-researched book about the Little House books written by Laura Ingalls Wilder (and her unacknowledged co-author, her daughter Rose Wilder Lane). This is not a light read, so it will appeal only to rabid LIW fans and those interested in American culture.

Yes, I’m a Laura fan. I read the books many, many times from childhood through to young adulthood. I played “Mary and Laura” with my dolls; I sketched countless “Lauras” in my drawing pad; I longed to own a calico dress and bonnet. As an adult I’ve spent hours poring over websites devoted to Wilder’s life story and have read most of the books about her life.

Having said that, this was still a bit of a slog at times because it is quite scholarly. Some chapters appealed to me more than others, and I think most fans who tackle this book will find the same thing.

One of the main theories put forth by the author is that Laura and Rose, who were opposed to Roosevelt’s “New Deal” politics during the Depression, wrote the books to send out a political message. At first I scoffed, but I must confess by the end of the book she had at least partially convinced me. As she started quoting sections from the books, I began to realize how many comments are made (often by Pa) about government and how it basically should keep its nose out of citizens’ business. As a child I hadn’t given these passages a second thought but now, as an adult, I can definitely see the link that Fellman is making between Wilder and Lane’s strong individualistic viewpoints and the sentiments expressed in the books.

I particularly enjoyed reading the “Little House Readers at Home” chapter, where Fellman discusses the impact of the series on children and adults at home. This is what fascinates me because I am “one of them”: someone who has reread the series countless times and has indentified so strongly with the Laura character. I can’t explain the hold the books had on me, but it was interesting to read about the millions of others who have had the same experience, and the reasons behind their attraction. Of all the books read by children (and adults), why is it this particular series that has that affect on readers above all others? Fellman doesn’t necessarily solve this mystery, but it makes for an interesting read.

Throughout the book the topic of racism is brought up. I admit, I hadn’t read the books for many years when I pulled them out and began to read them to my young daughters. I was shocked to read aloud some of the remarks about the Indians; they were offensive and certainly would have no place in books that are written today. Fellman debates whether or not Wilder and Lane were racist (and, for that matter, whether Pa was, because he does say positive things in the latter books about the Indians). Fellman’s argument for racism lies not just with the offensive passages, but also the fact that Indians and other visible minorities simply don’t appear in the stories, implying that the Western frontier was a white frontier.

You know what, probably Wilder and Lane WERE racist to some extent because in the 1930’s, a lot of people were. (And wake up, a lot of people still ARE today.) But I think it’s unfair to come down too hard on them; they are products of their times. Although there possibly were Native Peoples and other visible minorities living in the area, it is entirely possible that Laura didn’t see them or have anything to do with them, therefore to her it would be reasonable to leave them out of her family-centered stories.

I grew up in what is considered by many the most multicultural city in the world (Toronto), yet growing up in the 1960’s and 1970’s, most of the people in my particular working class neighbourhood were of British, German or Italian background. People often don’t believe me when I say the first black person I ever met was my grade 2 teacher, and I didn’t meet an East Asian person until a student arrived at our school when I was 12. So if I were to write a series of fictional books about my childhood, I could conceivably not mention any non-white characters and be relating the truth. The difference being, of course, that this is 2014 and I wouldn’t dream of doing that; I would want to be inclusive and make all readers feel welcome, and include a mix of characters representative of the current ethnic make up. But Wilder and Lane lived in a different time, so although I don’t like their “white frontier”, I think we can’t be overly harsh for their portrayal of such. Yes, it is wrong, but it’s no more wrong than Mark Twain using the “n-word” in Huckleberry Finn.

In summary, a well-researched book for very serious fans only. It brought up many interesting points, so now I’m going to have to dig out my collection (because I own the series, of course!) and reread them through a more critical set of eyes. I think it will be an interesting journey!

[Rebecca · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is not an easy book to read but very interesting. I will admit I only skimmed the last chapter because I got lost in the political jargon. It was interesting to read about how the times she lived in influenced Laura Ingalls Wilder's writing and how her writing has influenced the generations that read it. Especially interesting was the fact that the book award named after her, removed her name from the award during the time I was reading the book.

[Sha]

DNF@Page 173

Mhm. I think there may be too much conjecture in here (especially re: interpersonal relationships) for me to be really comfortable with this books' thesis? Valid how the initial draft of Pioneer Girl differed from the little house books, though.

[Mary · Rating 2 out of 5]

I did not enjoy this book as much as I had hoped. It was very analytical. The author did posit some interesting theories, though.

[Erin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting but incredibly long-winded. I read the first half then started skimming.

[Bernice · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is very well researched and academically written. There was much of interest in it. I particularly enjoyed the chapters on influence in the schools, libraries and the home. No question about it, the Little House books DO have a long shadow in that regard. However, the idea that there was direct intent to push libertarian ideals through these books, I completely disagree with. These people were simply hard-working farmers and people who believed in independently living and working out their problems. It is true they did not appreciate government interference. I think this is the story of every American farmer, at least up until the last decade or so, when family farms are largely disappearing. I grew up on a farm and know how hard the life can be, but farmers just want to care for their animals, farm their land, and live their lives. I think that Laura would laugh at the idea that her books had some "political" message interwoven in them. She was simply telling her life story and explaining how people lived before electricity, cars, and refrigeration - to name just a few luxuries we take for granted.

I appreciated reading about some famous people and how the books influenced them. Laura Bush loved them. General Douglas McArther's wife convinced her husband to have The Long Winter translated into Japanese after WWII to give Japanese children a glimpse of early American life. In addition, of course, they have been translated into many languages - more evidence of a long shadow.

The suggestion was also put forward that these stories were not completely true, and that Rose had a large hand in writing the books.

As I was reading this book, I was simultaneously listening to the audio version of "The Selected Letters of Laura Ingalls Wilder." These were very enjoyable, and did show that Laura looked to Rose for advice about her writing, and that Rose had a hand with some suggestions for the books. However, over and over, Laura wrote in letters of reply to children that these are true stories. So I am just making the point that I think this author was pushing these two points without merit.

[Melissa McCauley · Rating 4 out of 5]

I opened this book expecting to dislike and disagree with it, but I have to admit that Fellman won me over with her scholarship. I have read more than my fair share of books by and about Wilder, and it is no surprise that the Little House books are not the literal truth, and that Rose was an unacknowledged co-author. (And I'm one of *those* fans, I confess: I've even made fan-girl pilgrimages to De Smet and Mansfield.)

I did not know that Rose was such a rabid Libertarian, a huge fan of Ronald Reagan, and that Little House royalty money helped finance Roger Lea MacBride's 1976 presidential bid. (Does anyone else get the impression that he scammed the impressionable Rose?)

Much of the tome is taken up with documenting the history and spread of the books by teachers and librarians, the lengths to which fans will go, and the subtle infiltration of all things Laura into American culture. (I write this sipping tea from my DeSmet surveyor's house mug)

As is the case with most of the biographical books I have read, I learned things about the subject that rather left me wishing I had not. Laura is portrayed as passive aggressive and Rose as a pathetic flake. (Wilder worshippers will be foaming at the mouth.) If you want to skip 250 pages, you can read Fellman's afterward, it sums up her assertions in a few pages.

The most enduring impression I have after closing this book is sadness; because I realize that political correctness and the availability of American Girl books may spell the end of Little House's popularity.

[Cheryl Malandrinos · Rating 4 out of 5]

While admittedly, I didn't care much for the earlier chapters, overall it was a satisfying read. Fellman discusses everything from a possible political agenda in the books, to the Ingalls family being racist, to how Wilder's memories created a different than reality version of frontier life, to current events during the writing of the books, to the continued impact Wilder has on modern society, and beyond.

Fellman didn't leave many stones unturned. The book is structured so the beginning two chapters are really about Rose and Laura and their collaboration. By chapter 3, Fellman is on to the discussion of how Wilder viewed her stories and how her memories might have been different than reality. The final four chapters show how the books are used in the classroom and at home, and then move into "The Little House Books in Public" and "The Little House in American Politics." Chapter 6 shows how Wilder has become a part of our heritage and the last chapter talks about Lane's views, the New Deal, Ronald Reagan, libertarians, and how "mainstream" values are associated with the Little House books.

I didn't agree with some of what Fellman had to say, but overall she provides an even-handed glimpse into Wilder's persistent impact on American culture, which is what she set out to do. I would have liked some historical photographs, but other than that I was satisfied. I'm glad to add this one to my Laura Ingalls Wilder collection.

[Connie]

I am finally done with this book! It took me a long time to slog through it. It is an intriguing topic and a well-written examination of it from many different angles. But it is not a fast read. It tends toward scholarly dryness in the later chapters, and by the last chapter, which is about American politics as related to Wilder's and Lane's political philosophies both embedded in the "Little House" books and expressed in other venues, I was exhausted. The first few chapters are best because they comb the facts of Laura Ingalls Wilder's life as compared to the stories in her books. They don't diminish the value of her books, by any means, but it's intriguing to know the real Laura a bit better. Rose Wilder Lane is portrayed as a somewhat unstable, volatile personality, which is consistent with other books I've read about her (especially "Ghost in the Little House"). The bottom line is that Laura and Rose were staunch anti-statist conservatives who vaunted the individualism and self-sufficiency portrayed in the books, even though the truth may not have been quite so black and white.

[Tracy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very scholarly approach to the Little House books and their impact on American culture. The author asserts that Laura and her daughter Rose, who were unhappy with the politics of the 1930s (specifically the New Deal), carefully crafted the history of the Ingalls family to present their ideals that Americans should shy away from big government and be as independent as possible. The first part of the book compares the real experiences of the Ingalls family to what the women chose to put into the books. Later chapters discuss how and why the books are so popular. I was fascinated by the author's theory and how well her research supported it, but at the end she suggests the popularity of these books, combined with the TV show, have been responsible for shaping the political landscape of the second half of the 20th century, and that I'm not so sure about.

[JoyfulK · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read the "Little House" books as a child and again as an adult, but I never realized how much Wilder changed the details of her life when she wrote the novels until I read this book. It's an intriguing look at the political philosophies of Wilder and her daughter, Rose Wilder Lane, her collaborator, and how their philosophies affected the point of view and details they put in the books. The author then goes on to analyze how the libertarian view that runs through these books has influenced modern culture, both directly and indirectly, through the television show. Definitely worth a look for those who are interested in political theory, Wilder's life, or the influence of children's books on culture.

[Annette · Rating 4 out of 5]

Anita Fellman provides interesting insights into the connections among Laura Ingalls Wilder, her daughter Rose, and the larger philosophical and political backdrop of the Little House series so cherished by generations of children. [return][return]Many books have been written about Wilder, however this one addresses the larger issue of how her life story translated into popular historical fiction. How she was influenced by her daughter's political leaning and her thoughts about New Deal programs will always be a matter for debate. However Fellman's larger contribution is encouraging readers of all ages to think about a work of literature as a reflect of the author and the time it was written.

[Stephanie · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had to return this to the library before I was finished, but I did read or skim most of it. (I had it for 6 weeks so I should have/could have finished it if I'd really wanted to.)

It was a little dry, honestly, and dated in that there are a fair few references to people who talk about LIW and the books ON THE INTERNET!! Hee.

But I did feel I had gotten a lot of the information (Laura and her daughter Rose were collaborators, etc.) from Wendy McClure's 'The Wilder Life' which was what pushed me to read this book in the first place.

I'd like to get this back and try to finish it.

[Amy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this book because I loved the "Little House" books. It was dry and took a long time to read, but the chapters on politics and advertising were interesting. Looking at the book from the political point of view of Wilder and her daughter Rose Wilder Lane was a fascinating new way to think about the books.

[Lorice · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed parts of it. It got a little to bogged down in details for me. Did give an interesting perspective.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

Insightful.

[Jane H · Rating 3 out of 5]

interesting and thoroughly researched, this proved more dense than anticipated. Listening to the little house series now with my kids, I do note things from a slightly different perspective now.

[Shawn Thrasher]

I liked the first half of this book, but it jumped around too much by the end. Not for me.

[Jeannie · Rating 4 out of 5]

still reading...looks promising.