It seems we have a bit of a debate on our hands.
This article out of the Boston Globe appeared just a few days ago.
And then this article on bloomberg.com, a rebuttal of sorts, just came through my Google alerts.
I won’t be wordy here so that you can read them both. But… what say YOU?
August 15, 2013 – Edited to add: Yet another article. This time in the Washington Post online.
Comments4
Oooo-ooooh, let’s get a debate-style coverage of this at the next Laurapalooza! “Resolved: That Rose Wilder Lane intentionally “Libertarianed-up” the Little House books written by Laura Ingalls Wilder”
Not a debate comment, but this quote made me giggle –
“I’ve read the story of those innkeepers, as told by Lane. But it never occurred to me that Wilder and Lane might have put it in a children’s book, because it was one of the most chilling stories I’ve ever heard, and used to wake me up at nights. Only a lunatic would put a story like that in a book for children … at least, in a book for children that they wanted to sell.”
Well, yeah that’s not really a wholesome children’s story.
Are you referring to the Bloody Benders? I was under the impression that it was resolved Laura’s family had actually already left Kansas in 1871, and the Bender scandal broke in 1873. I agree, it’s chilling in any case.( I read the original newspaper accounts some time ago.)
The Woodside article is stupid and hypocritical. The McArdle article is well-reasoned and accurate. The Doherty article reiterates the McArdle article.
Woodside is an Ultra-Liberal nutjob (I read her Twitter feed and saw her Facebook page) that is writing a little house book and is trying to get people ready to buy it even if it’s only to rip it apart. I for one will only read it via the library. I will not contribute one cent to Woodside and her scheme.
Comments are closed.