# "Little Women" - mostly a copy of an earlier book **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 5, 2005, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524 "2005-02-05T15:19:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![teela\_brown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d9b06d/32.png) [@teela\_brown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/teela_brown)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/1 "2005-02-05T15:19:24Z")
I love Project Gutenberg. Through it, I can read older books which are unavailable in libraries and out of print. Lately, I heard about and have started reading _The Daisy Chain_, a book written in 1856 by British author Charlotte Yonge. I’m gobsmacked to discover that Louisa May Alcott’s _Little Women_ virtually copies its characters, scenes, situations and moralizings almost directly from this earlier work. After googling, I see that _The Daisy Chain_ was one of LMA’s “influences.” Har - that’s a nice name for near-plagiary. LMA’s famous Jo March is almost completely identical to Yonge’s Etheldred May. What a letdown. I always thought that _Little Women_ was completely the ingenious, original invention of Louisa May Alcott. I do know that she quickly whipped out this work without enthusiasm because her publisher requested a story for girls. Maybe she figured it would flop and no one would read it and spot the extreme similarities. BTW, here’s a link to Yonge’s [The Daisy Chain](http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/tdcoa11.txt), if anyone’s interested. ---
**Author:** ![Anaamika](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Anaamika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anaamika)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/2 "2005-02-05T16:15:50Z")
Sigh, another childhood idol destroyed. Why do you do this to me, world? WHY? WHY? WHY? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Caprese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a9a28c/32.png) [@Caprese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caprese)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/3 "2005-02-06T01:47:48Z")
I thought “Little Women” was based on Louisa (Jo) and her sisters? But yes, the “May” family and all that. The Daisy Chain looks a little bit too instructive and/or religious for me–but in terms of the Victorian era, it does look interesting. ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/4 "2005-02-06T02:11:38Z")
I just saw the new broadway musical Little Women. And yes many people in the audience were saying how it seemed an great deal like The Daisy Chain.\* \*not really ---
**Author:** ![kung\_fu\_lola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f4b2a3/32.png) [@kung\_fu\_lola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kung_fu_lola)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/5 "2005-02-06T02:32:28Z")
Really, anyone who names a main character “Etheldred” is just _asking_ to be relegated to obscurity. ---
**Author:** ![hazel-rah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/73ab20/32.png) [@hazel-rah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hazel-rah)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/6 "2005-02-06T02:45:38Z")
> [@kung fu lola](#): > > Really, anyone who names a main character “Etheldred” is just _asking_ to be relegated to obscurity. You might even call her “Etheldred the unread.” ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/7 "2005-02-06T03:03:37Z")
Excellent, **hazel-rah**! A perfect pun! ---
**Author:** ![Lisa-go-Blind](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Lisa-go-Blind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lisa-go-Blind)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/8 "2005-02-06T23:33:32Z")
> [@Caprese](#): > > But yes, the “May” family and all that. Actually, “May” is Louisa Alcott’s middle name, not maiden name. Her father was [Bronson Alcott](http://www.vcu.edu/engweb/transcendentalism/authors/alcott/), and she had a younger sister named May (after her mother’s maiden name). ---
**Author:** ![choie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/choie/32/7829_2.png) [@choie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choie)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2005, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/9 "2005-02-07T01:39:18Z")
IMHO your childhood idols are safe, **anaamika**. At least this one is. 🙂 Other than the similar themes of following a family of siblings through the years and their attempts to better themselves as humans, I don’t see much of a resemblence between _Daisy Chain_ and _Little Women_. Jo, a copy of Ethel, because Ethel’s a tomboy and likes books? It is to laugh! C’mon, it wasn’t exactly unusual for women who wrote 19th/early 20th century books – especially semi-autobiographical ones – to focus on book-loving girls who don’t match society’s idealized standards of dainty girlhood. Look at chicks like Laura from _Little House…_ books, Francie from _A Tree Grows in Brooklyn_, the eponymous Jane Eyre, and Mary from _A Secret Garden_. They not only have a lot in common with the authors, they probably resemble more than a few of the readers! Anyway, where it counts – quality – the two books are very, very different. The whole beginning chapter of _Daisy Chain_ is cringeworthy: dull, vague, poor at even the basics of identifying individual characters or depicting the setting in an immersive way. I was hard-pressed to figure out even how many siblings there were, they all kinda blended into one another. Contrast that with the funny and telling first paragraphs of _Little Women_. Each sister kvetches in her own inimitable way about the substandard Christmas she’s going to have due to the family’s diminished circumstances and their father having gone to war. (At this point, none of them see the irony of complaining about being poor while they have a maid/cook running around, a warm fire in front of them, and enough money to buy themselves little presents. This will change, of course.) The first chapter takes us right into the March family dynamics, depicting each of the four siblings’ quirky little personalities and casting them in sharp relief from one another through both dialogue and description. And Alcott’s narrative, unlike Younge’s, gives you a true _mise en scene_. You can practically feel the warmth from the fire, hear the clicking of the knitting needles, and see the growing anxiety and remorse on the girls’ faces as they read the sobering letter from their absent father. Looking at the broader themes (of personal growth and maturity), _LW_ tells a much more interesting story and has a more satisfying conclusion, especially for those who value individuality. Ethel in _Daisy Chain_ learns that her book-larnin’ and boyish ways are detrimental to being a proper member of church-going society. She becomes a domensticated dullard. OTOH, the main lessons that the March girls learn is to think of others and to consider their words/deeds before acting in haste. They’re not turned into simpering ideals of femininity, forced to set aside their ambitions in order to become perfect little housewives. They retain the core aspects of their personalities. Sure, Meg learns not to be quite such a materialist, Jo learns to consider her actions before going off half-cocked, Beth learns to be a bit more outgoing, and Amy becomes less of a selfish, vain twit. But at the end of the book, the March girls are still the March girls: Meg is still capable of throwing a hissy, Amy’s still strongwilled and bossy, and Beth … well, okay, Beth kinda does lose some important aspects of herself. (Like, the breathing and the living parts.) Best of all, Jo is still wonderful, horsey, emotional, stubborn, outgoing Jo. She does become a little quieter, primarily due to maturing, feeling lonelier, and above all having suffered the grievous loss of a family member. But otherwise she retains most of her impetuous, determined, romping-with-boys demeanor. So geeze, **pugluvr** , I think your OP title’s waaaay overstating the facts of the matter. Alcott may have been influenced by the general idea of writing about a family of siblings, but the notion that _Little Women_ is “mostly a copy of an earlier book” is hooey. _Christopher Columbus!_😃 ---
**Author:** ![Idlewild](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/8491ac/32.png) [@Idlewild](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Idlewild)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2005, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/10 "2005-02-07T05:03:10Z")
Thanks to this thread I got to reading through yet another of L.M. Alcott’s darling little books of inspiring stories for girls and ran across this passage (from _A Garland For Girls)_: > [@](#): > > “I know you’d like this,” said Eva, patting her book with an air of > calm content; for she was a modest, common-sense little body, full > of innocent fancies and the mildest sort of romance. "I love dear > Miss Yonge, with her nice, large families, and their trials, and > their pious ways, and pleasant homes full of brothers and sisters, > and good fathers and mothers. I’m never tired of them, and have read > ‘Daisy Chain’ nine times at least. I was amused. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2005, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/11 "2005-02-07T05:16:34Z")
Just wanted to point out that the OP made reference to women and “daisy chains”. Off to get the lotion and tissues, back in a sec… ---
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2005, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/12 "2005-02-07T05:22:51Z")
Ah… I always thought a daisy chain was A group of men engaged in a long line of anal sex back to back to back to back, etc. This is what I think of everytime I hear the Tick yell, “SPOON!” ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2005, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/13 "2005-02-07T05:26:48Z")
I was imagining a female equivalent…… Don’t rain on my parade, I have so little 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2005, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/14 "2005-02-07T05:40:19Z")
Wouldn’t that actually be front-to-back, front-to-back, front-to-back? I don’t see how “back-to-back” would work. ---
**Author:** ![kung\_fu\_lola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f4b2a3/32.png) [@kung\_fu\_lola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kung_fu_lola)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2005, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/15 "2005-02-07T05:45:48Z")
Grody sexual explanation: The women would all be on all fours. It can be done, I’ve seen it in a porno from the 70’s called _Taboo_. And now, I feel dirty. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/74df32/32.png) [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Devil_s_Grandmother)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2005, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/16 "2005-02-08T00:32:47Z")
> [@kung fu lola](#): > > And now, I feel dirty. O, you poor sweet thing. Let me draw you a bath…and scrub all that dirt away. ---
**Author:** ![kung\_fu\_lola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f4b2a3/32.png) [@kung\_fu\_lola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kung_fu_lola)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2005, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/17 "2005-02-08T00:41:25Z")
Sorry, luv, but I’m [spoken for](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/member.php?userid=32779). Back on topic, I’d be interested in hearing some rebuttals of/elaborations on **choie** ’s post. Anyone else read both books? ---
**Author:** ![QuarkChild](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/c5a1d2/32.png) [@QuarkChild](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuarkChild)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2005, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/18 "2005-02-08T04:56:57Z")
I’ve read _Little Women_ about a dozen times and I’m halfway through reading _The Daisy Chain_. I think there is a strong stylistic influence of the latter on the former, although _Little Woman_ is slightly less preachy. Ethel seems similar to Jo, but I think there is still plenty of originality in _Little Women._ I wouldn’t say it’s just a copy of _The Daisy Chain._ It’s easy to see, though, why _The Daisy Chain_ doesn’t have the other’s popularity. Its incessant moralizing, “dear mamma” this and “dear mamma” that, and long passages concerning the obscure culture of English schoolboys make it less rewarding to read. It was interesting to hear the word “fag” used in the schoolboy sense, though. It kind of reminding me of reading _Boy_ by Roald Dahl. ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2005, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/19 "2005-02-08T15:21:55Z")
Great post **choie**! That, ladies and gentlemen is how it is done. ---
**Author:** ![teela\_brown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d9b06d/32.png) [@teela\_brown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/teela_brown)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2005, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524/20 "2005-02-08T16:29:05Z")
I’ve now finished _The Daisy Chain_, and I still feel it’s amazingly similar to LW. In fact, it feels like _The Further Adventures of Jo March, Now With Extra Piety_, at least the first half. Thanks, **QuarkChild** , for pinpointing my reason for starting this thread: it’s the _style_ of writing, particularly when describing Ethel’s struggles for self-improvement, which make me feel like I’m reading another Alcott book. In addition, certain plot points from _The Daisy Chain_ reappear in other LW books, like _Jo’s Boys_, _Eight Cousins_, and _Rose In Bloom_. I won’t discuss these yet, because **QuarkChild** is still reading. **Idlewild** , that’s why I love Project Gutenberg, because you can read more obscure works by past authors which you may not easily find elsewhere. Remember, in LW, the account of how Jo March published a book, to mixed reviews? That story is based on LMA’s original novel for adults, _Work_, which you will find in the PG list. Also noteworthy is _Hospital Sketches_, her fact-based memoirs of working as a military nurse during the Civil War. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/little-women-mostly-a-copy-of-an-earlier-book/288524.md?page=2)