Are you raising a Nellie Oleson?
To celebrate my two middle girls finishing the Little House on the Prairie book series, this last week we watched the DVDs from the first two seasons of the TV show, which, as it turns out, is quite a primer on how to or how not to raise a brat.
Harriet, the character Nellie’s TV mother, indulged her, undermined her husband Nels’ authority, and protected her daughter from the consequences of her abominable behavior. Harriet spoiled Nellie and her brother Willie with candy, pretty clothes, and basically whatever the two little wretches wanted, and turned them into the brats of Walnut Grove.
Harriet may be a fictional character, overplayed for dramatic effect, but her parenting style is too nonfiction to be all that funny.
Last week I spoke to a coaching buddy who, besides being a fantastic life coach, also happens to teach abnormal psychology at the college level. Before we could even get into the conversation, he started ranting about the kids in his courses. More and more he is seeing kids with entitlement attitudes, who treat him like he was their slave, who expect him to get them off the hook if they miss assignments and give them A’s for half-completed work. When asked to write a 10-page paper, these kids consistently act shocked, like he is asking them to skip Christmas or scale Everest in their bare feet. “Who is raising these kids?” he asked.
My guess is parents like Nels and Harriet Oleson.
What are we thinking when we compensate for our children, when we save them from consequences, when we give them everything they want? And why am I writing about bratty kids on Thanksgiving?
Because thankfulness is the antidote for brattiness. The two can’t coexist. When our children have entitlement attitudes, like Nellie Oleson’s, they reek with ingratitude. Nothing is ever enough. Each gift, privilege, or outing they receive must be topped by the next. We give in to them to keep them quiet, to avoid a scene, and, in doing so, teach them that being a brat pays—big time.
Pa and Ma Ingalls raised their children differently. They lavished love, not love-substitutes like candy and gifts. They expected their children to do chores and, thus, learn the value of money. They offered encouragement instead of false praise. And in return, they got children who were sweet and, despite not having nearly as many nice things as Nellie Oleson had, far, far more grateful.
This Thanksgiving, I have just one question for you: Who is raising your kids?














Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top24 Comments to “Are you raising a Nellie Oleson?”
I have a friend who would say his nanny is.
Report comment to moderator
Me. With a whole lot of help.
Report comment to moderator
Mother lived with us while Daughter was growing up, which is the main reason she’s turned out to be a woman of prayer, faith, grace and strength. I was a working Mom and will be eternally grateful that Mother was there during those years.
Report comment to moderator
Okay, so I may be an indulgent mother, but at least I’ve read the entire Little House series–all seven books, eight if you count the last unhappy one– out loud FIVE times so my four children–three of whom are boys–would know about the Ingalls family.
And I’m thankful for the experience. Better yet, so are they–and we’re all better people.
Happy Thanksgiving. If only I had a recipe for oyster soup . . .
Report comment to moderator
My ten year old boy’s absolute favorite books are the Little House books. The girls have read bits but don’t like them much.
Report comment to moderator
I never planned on getting married and having kids back when I used to watch Little House with my parents, but perhaps some of it soaked in – the good example from the Ingalls family and the bad example from the Oleson family – to help me not to spoil my kids.
Report comment to moderator
I just used one of my all-time favorite Little House quotes, which is about gratitude, in a devotional I wrote for a book. Here is Laura’s Christmas stocking (all of her gifts, not just a few “extras” like stockings are today) from her perspective:
Think of having a whole penny for your very own. Think of having a cup and a cake and a stick of candy and a penny. There had never been such a Christmas. (Little House on the Prairie, p. 250)
Report comment to moderator
Kim is fairly familiar with the back story to the Little House series. The television series is quite removed from the books. The books were rather removed from the reality of Laura’s parents and her early life. Laura’s daughter, who became a successful writer and editor (though not a famous one), had a difficult relationship with her mother and contributed much of the writing and editing that turned the books into a successful…myth is not quite the right word, but something removed from the actual chronicle of events that Laura experienced and started out with.
Report comment to moderator
To anyone with a brat I would highly recommend the book by Dr. Kevin Leman, entitled “Have a new Kid by Friday”. He uses something he calls “reality discipline”. To often parents try to shield their children from the consequences of their own actions. The kid drags his feet in the morning let them be late and accept the consequences. The won’t clean his room, pay one of his friends to do out his allowance. The kid slams doors take his door off the hinges. I promise it works.
Report comment to moderator
Random,
Don’t know all the back story, but I did have a sense that in the Little House books that Pa could dream big, fiddle well, but never quite make a go of things, thus the constant moving.
Kbells,
We have taken the hinges off doors; works like a charm. My youngest daughter has a neighbor friend who stops by in the morning and walks to school. Our daughter was starting to leave later and later, foot dragging at its best. Of course I spoke with her about it and that it was unfair to the friend because she is always on time. One morning out daughter was exceptionally late so I drove the friend to school so she wouldn’t be late and left my daughter. That was the end of that problem.
Report comment to moderator
Adios, yes, it did seem like Pa wasn’t really good at planning for misfortunes. Also, Ma shows up as a somewhat unpleasant character at times (her prejudice against the Indians, for instance–she didn’t like them just because she didn’t like them). All in all, one gets the sense of a hard life met with gratitude. And of course the one thing that was probably the very hardest for their family, the birth, infancy, and early death of the family’s one boy, is left totally out of the series.
Report comment to moderator
Cheryl D, They did include the son. I saw a little of the second episode of a two-parter from the first season just this morning. Laura was running away from home because she believed she was responsible for the boy’s death [jealous, she wouldn't pray for him when he became ill]. I didn’t see the part before he died, so I don’t know how old the character lived to be.
Report comment to moderator
#10 Adios
It’s been quite a while since I read the Little House books and the other background material I consulted so my memory on these matters is not super fresh.
One of the interesting conclusions I came to was how difficult it was to survive as a homesteader. There was very little margin for error or misfortune. It was not really a life most people today would want to have anything to do with. Although my wife and I enjoy our life gardening in the country, and live very simply compared to much of mainstream, we would probably not survive a month trying to live the way the Ingalls had to.
Laura and her daughter Rose had a very testy and difficult relationship, difficult to sum up here. There is more about them in The Ghost in the Little House. University of Missouri Press. pp. 448
The conclusion I came to was that Rose was a much better writer than her mother, but her mother had the better story, and they became rather unwilling and uncomfortable collaborators.
Rose had a very unhappy marriage, and a child that died at birth or shortly thereafter. She was scarred deeply by both of these miserable experiences (as any of us might be).
The Little House books (which my granddaugher is hearing right now) are mostly successful as myths. As this is a web site and a group of people much attached to myths, it is no wonder there will be a warm attachment here to them. I don’t say this as an attack on them, but they are not “truth” in any literal sense; they are good stories.
Report comment to moderator
After years of seeing the TV version of Little House, I was surprised and pleased when the books turned out much different. In reading a detailed biography on Laura’s life that filled in the gaps not written in the books (i.e. the death of her baby brother in Iowa), it set the Ingalls experience in a backdrop of the way pioneer and homesteading life was in the 1800s and, for me, it enhanced the stories even more, however those books are cherished by many for a reason. The characters (as written) are engaging, the lessons are true, making them timeless, and the story covers a girl’s growing up years that hits upon memories of the reader. Today, reading about values that are considered old-fashioned and quaint may seem to propel these stories to a mythic stature, but they were real, especially to the writer. Remember, the old adage for writers is “write what you know.” This holds true for the Little House collection and other similar stories about a period of time that has gone by (i.e., The Waltons/Spencer’s Mountain, Anne of Green Gables, Pollyanna and many, many others).
Report comment to moderator
Kayvee,
The books don’t include the son; that’s what I meant. Having seen only sporadic episodes of the TV show (though I’ve probably seen more than half altogether), I wouldn’t have known, or even speculated, whether the show included the baby. I have, however, read the books multiple times.
My brother and his wife (recently deceased) got boxed sets of a couple of their favorite shows, and they watched one episode a night these last few months. I saw a few Little House episodes with them, and I was truly appalled at how badly they represented the books, that time period, and the book’s characters. When I was a teenager, I thought they did a horrible job casting Pa, but with the recent episodes I’ve watched, I realized they pretty much wrote their own story, with some very loose connections to the books (names of characters, Mary going blind, etc.).
For example, Laura at about 13 (TV version) has a crush on a boy, and everyone says she should tell him, so she keeps trying to screw up her courage. Then the town has a dance, but Laura doesn’t want to go since this boy didn’t ask her. Her pa tries to talk her into going. Well, this fits today’s boy-girl crushes, but not that era’s standards, and Pa took his family places; he didn’t beg them to go with him.
Later (again in the show), Almanzo proposes to a 16-year-old Laura, and Pa says they have to wait till she’s 18. Again, not in that era . . . and Pa says she’ll be teaching school soon, but in the books she started before she was 16. In the show Almanzo has a hissy and tells Laura she has to choose between him and her father, because he won’t wait two years–basically he’s showing himself to be a spoiled, disrespectful, lust-driven boy, which isn’t how the books show him. And 18 may br today’s legal age for marriage, but it wouldn’t have been the magic number then. There are multiple such discrepancies per show.
Report comment to moderator
The TV series did cover the death of the baby brother.
Report comment to moderator
In the books, Nellie Oleson was written as a childhood rival to Laura, more or less someone who created envy in Laura with dresses and toys. In their teen years, ending up in the same town of De Smet, they renewed their rivalry, yet Laura noted that the Olesons lost much of their wealth and became homesteaders as well, eroding most of the power Nellie held over Laura and some (but not all) of Laura’s envy as well. In part, envy usually begins with discontent. In response to Amy Henry’s question, we all struggle over discontent and its rapid development into envy, but the real danger is allowing that discontent to rule, which, thereby, may be what is truly raising children today.
Report comment to moderator
Although Nels is briefly mentioned in the above article, Harriet is given the lion’s share of credit for raising Nellie (the brat). Perhaps if Nels had stepped up to the plate a bit more, things may have played out differently.
Good thing that there is hope for “brats”.
Report comment to moderator
When you read the background of the stories, Nellie is a conglomerate of two or three children from Laura’s past. I always wondered how one child could be so bratty, now I know it was more than one.
As for the TV vs book versions- they do say the TV show is “based on” the books, not that the TV show is a retelling of the books. Could you imagine how depressing The Long Winter would be if seen on TV? I shudder at the thought. That book was so depressing, that the three or four times I read the books out loud to my children, I always made sure it was in Spring or Summer when we got to The Long Winter.
Report comment to moderator
Why is it so much easier to debate the truth vs. myth of the Little House series than to answer whether we might be making the same errors in parenting as the Olsens? Too many parents are so busy just trying to keep up with life that they do offer “love substitutes rather than love.” It seems to take less energy and time. Yet, they miss out on the beauty of a real relationship with their children and live in fantasy–just like Mrs. Olsen.
Report comment to moderator
Tess, I think that was part of my point above. Problems like those of the Olsens cannot solely be attributed to controlling moms, but also to passive dads. Of course, God has lots of grace for our “errors in parenting” as we turn, doesn’t He?
Report comment to moderator
I couldn’t agree more. I thank God for His grace to me in parenting as I sorely need it. I also thank Him for His instructions and example on how to go forward so I can enjoy the blessing of children walking with Him.
Report comment to moderator
Thank you, Tess! I don’t have a dog in this fight because I don’t have kids, but I do have to deal with the adults who result from poor parenting.
It is irrelevant what the reality was for the Wilder family. What we saw growing up were the stories on tv (or the written word). The thread was based on the Oleson family as we knew them that way.
Report comment to moderator
The joys, as such, of older television programs — many with some practical lessons! More and more Harriett Nelsons are creeping into good churches (and their ministries); more and more Lars Nelsons are letting Mom/Wife rule.
How sad it is to see spoiled “Christian” parents rearing children who are even more spoiled.
I am thankful for parents who still desire to teach their children to do what is right and to make right decisions.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!