Comments on: Are you raising a Nellie Oleson?

By: BethAnne of CNY

BethAnne of CNY — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 21:33:28 +0000

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

By: NJLawyer

NJLawyer — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:39:10 +0000

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

By: Tess

Tess — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:55:35 +0000

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

By: hopesprings

hopesprings — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:28:34 +0000

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

By: Tess

Tess — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:07:50 +0000

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

By: Peter L

Peter L — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 15:57:38 +0000

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

By: hopesprings

hopesprings — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 06:57:54 +0000

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

By: Inky33

Inky33 — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 06:26:21 +0000

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

By: kBells

kBells — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 04:58:12 +0000

The TV series did cover the death of the baby brother.

Report comment to moderator

By: Cheryl D.

Cheryl D. — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 03:27:54 +0000

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