Little Racist on the Prairie

[Nearly Sane]

Good decision, PC gone mad or something else?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44604844

[Robbie]

I haven't read the "Little House" books but I did see many episodes of the TV series which is about a poor pioneer family, the Ingalls and their children, eking out a living in bad times. It highlighted social issues of the era and that included racism, religious prejudice (against Jews), gypsies from Bulgaria, alcoholism, orphaned and abandoned children. It wasn't all 'nice' and 'twee'. So many of the Ingalls neighbours were unkind, suspicious and used language that would be considered inappropriate now.  It shouldn't be airbrushed in my opinion and the reason Laura Ingalls Wilder wrote about it was to tell the truth about how things were when she was growing up - and the good values her parents instilled in their children.

"The Waltons", also based on autobiographical and family stories written by Earl Hamner served a similar purpose except their family were fairly prosperous. However it covered the Great Depression and the Second World War ('the war in Europe') when everyone was feeling the pinch & had to tighten their belts. Black people were treated as inferiors, had menial jobs and fought hard to be treated with respect - especially women who were portrayed as strong & upright.

It was like that - still is in many places.

We don't remove derogatory language about Jews from Shakespeare and Dickens because that would be dishonest but reading those works at school fuels thought and animated discussion.

[Nearly Sane]

Surely the question here isn't about airbrushing but rather whether the author's views are such that giving her credit as a role model in terms of the prize are problematic?

[Robbie]

From what I have read about Laura Ingalls Wilder (& Hamner), they were not racist, they & their families did their best to counter injustice, but they picked up on and recorded the stereotypical language & attitudes of their era. They were bound to. I missed out 'disability' in my previous post as something else that was tackled occasionally but the stories were also about community and values, good and bad, in difficult times.

I read Harriet Beecher Stowe and cried buckets when I was a child; later on her famous 'Uncle Tom's Cabin' was reviled as portraying African slaves in a stereotypical way but she was a pioneer and her book was a landmark. Mark Twain also though his writing was humorous.

In contrast to the above mentioned writers it seems that Shakespeare and Dickens were prejudiced people but are applauded and students are encouraged to put their words in context.

What I think is important is that, if children do read such stories, they are aware that it's wrong to 'talk like that' now, people didn't know how to express themselves better in those days. We've moved on.

Reading widely is to be encouraged and literature leads to appreciation of other subjects on which it touches - economic and social history, politics, religion, medicine, art, science, geology. They all join up.

I read the article that you linked to a day or two ago & had already formed opinions but they are just my opinions.

[Nearly Sane]

Sorry, I'm a bit baffled here. Given that we know very little about Shakespeare, how do you know he was prejudiced? What's the method you are using to say that Wilder wasn't prejudiced and Dickens was? If someone is prejudiced,does that mean we should/shouldn't have prizes given in their name?

The story doesn't argue that Wilder should not be read, so I don't get why you seem to concentrate on that. My own opinion is that Wilder apologised in later life for the portrayal, and that it isn't indicative of racism, but the choice of someone as a role model is surely a different question as to whether they should be read?

[Rhiannon]

It’s been made clear that nobody wants to censor these works or discourage anyone from reading them. I think to give an award in Wilder’s name to a non-white recipient would be tasteless and so my gut feeling is that this is a good decision - there was a precedent here with the removal of Lovecraft’s name from an award. My concern is that people will see theseworks as off limits because of who wrote them.

Incidentally, I think ‘we don’t talk like that now but people didn’t know better then’ doesn’t really help. Politeness is meaningless without a change in attitude and how we think about others.

[Robbie]

I don't see why Wilder shouldn't be a role model. She was not personally unkind (as far as we know) and she was not a famous writer until later in life. It was difficult for women to get a decent education in those days but she persisted. A person can be a role model and sometimes use language that would now be considered quite wrong. As you say, she apologised in later life for any offence, basically saying, "I wouldn't describe people and situations in that way now".

It's a long time since I read about Shakespeare but do remember studying him at school, alongside his works, as a person whose writings reflected the Elizabethan age and here in England there were people of colour and many Jews. Shylock was written about in an unfavourably stereotypical way, Othello was a sympathetic character.

Dickens captured Victorian society and attitudes portraying the character of Fagin as a deplorable criminal, exploiter of children; there was another Jewish character in 'Our Mutual Friend' (name I can't remember atm) who was quite the opposite.

Yes I do believe prizes should be given in their names, there is so much more to their work than prejudices common in the eras in which they lived. Dickens highlighted the plight of the poor, slum conditions, cruelty towards children, and hypocrisy on many levels which far outweigh, in my opinion, any religious or racial (Grace Poole springs to mind) stereotyping.

Good night, sleep well.

PS: Rhiannon just saw your post. You said:
'Incidentally, I think ‘we don’t talk like that now but people didn’t know better then’ doesn’t really help. Politeness is meaningless without a change in attitude and how we think about others.'

Yes I agree wholeheartedly, I didn't mean that change in speech should not be preceded by a change in attitude & that happens.

[Nearly Sane]

I agree with your worry, things should be read. Lovecraft was barking, and any prize in his name isn't going to have the cachet of Wilder.

[jeremyp]

Sorry, I'm a bit baffled here. Given that we know very little about Shakespeare, how do you know he was prejudiced?

You can form a judgement from his writings. There is, for example, an argument that the Merchant of Venice shows him to be anti-semitic but then everybody who wasn't Jewish was anti semitic if judged by modern standards.

[Nearly Sane]

You can form a judgement from his writings. There is, for example, an argument that the Merchant of Venice shows him to be anti-semitic but then everybody who wasn't Jewish was anti semitic if judged by modern standards.

I suggest you read the post I was replying to to see why this isn't an answer to what I asked.

[Rhiannon]

According to my eldest there’s now calls for Wilder’s books to be banned in the US, and Instagram has decreed that anyone who reads them is a racist.

[Nearly Sane]

Bugger, I shouldn't have read Mein Kampf

[SusanDoris]

I read the series back in the late 70s I think it was because it formed part of lists of books for children and I used to read what the children in school were reading as part of my job. I don't remember noticing the racism particularly but remember wincing slightly at the overly sentimental, life-with-the-perfect-family  sentiments. However, I do remember well reading the one about the long hard winter on a hot summer's day and the descriptive writing was so good that I found myself shivering slightly.

[Nearly Sane]

I've always liked the books, they are sometimes trite but as Robbie talks about they cover all sorts of hard issues.

[Robbie]

I haven't read the books though I did see quite a lot of episodes of the series a long time ago. After our discussion of the other night I decided to order some of the books and a biography of the author and await their delivery. I thought to myself I can't really have a proper opinion without reading the words for myself.

After reading quite a lot on the internet I moved on to Pocohontas  , don't ask me how that chain of events happened. I read about her when I was a child and was, at the time, enthralled but now am less so. Her story has definitely been romanticised, poor girl, and I've ordered a couple of biographical books about her.

The other thing is re-watching some of the 'Little House' TV series. It's on in the middle of the night and during the day so have set it to record (& hope it does!). So I will be square eyed pretty soon.

[Robbie]

I have the books at last (a couple came from America) & will read them but in the meantime I've been watching old episodes of 'Little House..' that I've recorded, also 'The Waltons' which is set in the 1930s but similar. There is definitely racist language in both but those who use it are invariably shown up as ignorant. I'll return to this thread when I've read all the books. I'm going away to Cornwall for a week next month & will take them with me.

[jeremyp]

I suggest you read the post I was replying to to see why this isn't an answer to what I asked.

You asked how we know Shakespeare was prejudiced. I answered by telling you it comes out in his writing.