The Richard Thomas movie wasn’t much of an improvement over the series, IMO. I thought John-Boy was actually quite a good Pa – he had a beard at least, and is a good enough actor to really convey Pa’s spirit. I always saw Pa as a man who was really born under a wandering star, but who loved his family enough, and took his responsibility to them seriously enough, to voluntarily and selflessly tie himself down. Thomas did a wonderful job showing both Pa’s itchy-feet and his loving heart, and the way those two things combined to make the man. The actress who played Laura was a blonde, though, which I had a hard time getting past, and Mary was a redhead! The clothes were wrong, too – they had Laura in some dumpy old man’s felt hat instead of a sunbonnet, for instance. And they felt the need to over-modernize and sensationalize the story – on her wedding night for example, Laura lured Almanzo outside so they could make love for the first time under the stars :rolleyes: But the essential failing of the movie was one of spirit, in my opinion. It’s almost a given with TV that conflict has to be hystrionic, so we have a scene with Pa asking Laura to get a job teaching because he needs the money (can you imagine?) and another in which Laura has a snit-fit because she has to teach and sacrifice so that Mary can go to school. She actually says, “When will it be my turn?” Again, can you imagine? The books, of course, have plenty of conflict and danger, but much of the best conflict from the books was left out of the movie to allow for this Darwin’s Creek-esque teen-angst garbage.
About the collaboration between Laura Ingalls Wilder and Rose Wilder Lane: some critics seem to feel that Rose actually wrote the books and merely gave Laura the credit. I read a book years ago (Ghost in the Little House) that made this claim to some degree. Here’s the deal: Laura had done a lot of writing over the years, but none of it was fiction. Mostly it was for farm journals and such. Rose Wilder Lane, on the other hand, was a professional writer who had experience with historical fiction. Laura wrote a biographical book she titled “Pioneer Girl” and asked Rose to help her get it published. Laura’s plan at that time was to write 2 books, “Pioneer Girl,” about her life and “Farmer Boy,” about Almanzo’s. Rose and her publisher were excited about the idea more than the execution. “Pioneer Girl,” BTW, took Laura from her earliest memory all the way to her wedding – it was, in other words, the whole Little House series condensed into one volume. Rose suggested splitting “Pioneer Girl” into a series of books, instead. Laura didn’t think she was up to that task and only undertook the project when Rose promised to help. Laura would write the first draft in longhand and in first person; Rose would type a second draft, switching the manuscript to third person as she did so and making any changes she felt needed or appropriate. Then Laura would go over the typed draft making any further adjustments or corrections and, finally Rose would type a final draft. Sometimes they would disagree on various points and the manuscript would travel back and forth a few extra times, straightening out the disagreement. I haven’t read “Pioneer Girl” in its entirety, BTW, but I have read exerpts and it is certainly in a very different style than the Little House books. Specifically, “Pioneer Girl” is rough – it was obviously written by an amateur. That said, I have also read some of Rose’s fiction and it also differs greatly from the Little House books. I think that Rose ‘polished’ her mother’s work, and applied some professional tricks – combining characters for clarity, simplifying and condensing events – that greatly improved the books. But she did these things while retaining her mother’s voice, IMO. Laura, BTW, wanted Rose to be credited as co-author and Rose refused, saying that the books were Laura’s work and she (Rose) was no more than as editor. Personally, I would say she was a good deal more than that – a lot of the stylistic elements that I particularly like in the books are too professional to have been Laura’s work – but I would certainly call it a collaboration rather than a ghost job.
The two women did have an ulterior motive in writing the books. They both had a great degree of reverence for the “pioneer spirit” and wanted to hold those values – of thrift, hard-work, stoicism and honesty – up for admiration. I feel sure they would have been absolutely horrified by the series and can’t even imagine what they would have made of the Richard Thomas movie. Poor Laura could have sued for slander just for the wedding-night scene alone!
One last thing. Mrs. Wilder, towards the end of her life did a lot of speaking and writing to children, and to school and church groups. She spoke of her books, and also of the pioneer experience in general. Here is a quote from one of her last letters. It was a letter to a group of children and was wholy written by Laura – several drafts of this letter exist in her hand.
“It is still best to be honest and truthful; to make the most of what we have; to be happy with simple pleasures and to be cheerful and have courage when things go wrong…”
IMO, that is the voice, and spirit, of the Little House.