Laura Ingalls Wilder's Name Removed From Book Award

[lludwig]

Little House On The Controversy: Laura Ingalls Wilder's Name Removed From Book Award

A division of the American Library Association voted unanimously Saturday to strip Laura Ingalls Wilder's name from a major children's literature award over concerns about how the author referred to Native Americans and blacks.

The Association for Library Service to Children says the Laura Ingalls Wilder Award will now be known as the Children's Literature Legacy Award.

Wilder, who wrote the Little House book series, was the first recipient of the award, which was established in 1954 and intended to honor books published in the U.S. that have had a big impact on children's literature.

Source & More: NPR article

https://tinyurl.com/y7ncqhjb

[ozarkjoe]

Ridiculous, no historical person is safe from slander.

[lludwig]

Even the publication "Gastro Obscura" weighs in with an article about "Little House." Pretty amazing.

The Harsh Reality of Food for ‘Little House’ Pioneers

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/what-did-they-eat-little-house-on-the-prairie

"Gastro Obscura covers the world’s most wondrous food and drink."

[taylor_memorial]

I may still have a couple books aimed at librarians discussing their responsibility to censor what appears on their shelves.

Truly a disgusting topic for discussion. These were written in the McCarthy era.

[lludwig]

And on the flip side . . . Excerpts are from the end of the article. Well worth reading the entire article imo.

Librarians without Chests: A Response to the ALSC’s Denigration of Laura Ingalls Wilder

"Rather than being anti-Native and anti-Black, Wilder’s works lead readers of all ages to ponder important truths about American history. The award created in her honor encourages endeavors in children’s literature equally devoted to depicting essential aspects of American life. Stripping Wilder’s name from this award removes all meaningful context from the medal. Moreover, it sullies Wilder’s literary reputation and creates a slippery slope for excising all literature that doesn’t adhere to a strict definition of “inclusivity,” whether or not that inclusivity accurately reflects American history.

. . . This brave new world of erasure threatens to wipe out such questions, favoring instead a history of “inclusivity” that respects nothing of the past, denies the integrity of beloved authors, and responds only to that which is most trendy and politically correct. Through her stories of the little houses Pa and Ma built across the West, Laura Ingalls Wilder constructed the parameters of children’s literature. Naming the Wilder Medal in her honor reflected her immense contribution to the genre. Renaming the medal with the generic title, Children’s Literature Legacy Award, uncovers the motives of the ALSC: removal, if not complete destruction, of a beloved coming-of-age story set in the complicated context of westward expansion, depicting one of American children’s literatures greatest heroines, Laura Ingalls.

The rejection of the author and the rejection of her semi-autobiographical novels produce the same result: In favor of safe spaces and trigger-free zones, this country’s professional librarians seek to destroy the literary heroine that millions of American girls (and boys) identified with and aspired to emulate. In doing so, they seek to destroy us all and re-make us in their own image, based on their core values of inclusivity and responsiveness, rounded out by respect (properly placed, of course) and their version of integrity. Join me in being naughty on the inside (one of my favorite aspects of young Laura’s character) by refusing to accept the Association of Library Services to Children’s version of Laura Ingalls Wilder. We know better."

Read more: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/laura-ingalls-wilder-alsc-award-removal/

[s.eve71]

I wouldn't listen to NPR, or read the National Review, lludwig, it all politics, all the time, everyday, a pointless effort to remain relevant, even if it means being vicious & vengeful, which is how I see both organs, vicious & vengeful. 🙂

Whew, that's alota commas.

[lludwig]

---

@s.eve71 wrote:

I wouldn't listen to NPR, or read the National Review, lludwig, it all politics, all the time, everyday, a pointless effort to remain relevant, even if it means being vicious & vengeful, which is how I see both organs, vicious & vengeful. 🙂

Whew, that's alota commas.

---

That is your choice not to read or listen to certain publications and I certainly hope you are not suggesting that I don't read or listen to what I want. I've been reading for over 60 years and will continue to read whatever publication I want.  I like to read many sides on the same topic so that I am more informed. 

[lludwig]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8625624@N03/26302538910

[s.eve71]

Yeah, yeah, I know,  if you read enough, and listen long enough, you'll be able to make informed decisions, BUT, I think I may understand what's going on with this award without listening to all the blather - it's a cruel world - and , well, Little House on the Prairie is a cruel story, and probably not a suitable for the times...

[lludwig]

It is interesting that you just signed up yesterday and your very first comments are to a thread about which you say you already understand what is going on without all the 'blather'.  I wouldn't even bother wasting my time reading a thread that I thought I already knew everything there was to know. 

Maybe you will find some other threads more to your liking. Good luck in your book selling and/or book buying. 

[s.eve71]

One more thing, madam, Laura Ingalls Wilder will be around long after the American Library Association is gone and forgotten, (along with their tin plated prize). I really don't know who these people think they are, they're about as worthless as warts on a hog, in my opinion. Good luck to you too.

[wri-8727]

102 year old Beverly Cleary won this award at some point in her life...

http://beverlycleary.com/about.aspx

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverly_Cleary

[bestpaperboy]

I understand what has happened but that does not mean I actually comprehend what these people at the library association were thinking. 

First, while it may be hard to do, you need to separate the literature - and that is what we are talking about - from the originator.  When this was written there was a distinctly different take on popular culture. Writing about native Americans and blacks, how they were characterized, was so different than how these subjects are treated today. Does that mean that the person who created them was racist or should be seen as racist. I don't think so. 

I will probably never read anything by Laura Ingalls, her writing does not appeal to me. 

This reminds of another discussion I saw someplace else about HP Lovecraft and the name of his cat.  Yes his cat had a horrific name. 1. Lovecraft did not name the cat, I think it was his father. 2. When that name was given it was a totally different time. The population more than 100 years ago, spoke differently and thought differently about racial differences - not saying they exist but back then people were certain that there was a difference between white people and people of color.

The library association is wrong, and it has besmirched Ingall's name. But they cannot take away the power of her prose or her insights into humanity. 

[bestpaperboy]

I understand what has happened but that does not mean I actually comprehend what these people at the library association were thinking. 

First, while it may be hard to do, you need to separate the literature - and that is what we are talking about - from the originator.  When this was written there was a distinctly different take on popular culture. Writing about native Americans and blacks, how they were characterized, was so different than how these subjects are treated today. Does that mean that the person who created them was racist or should be seen as racist. I don't think so. 

I will probably never read anything by Laura Ingalls, her writing does not appeal to me. 

This reminds me of another discussion I saw someplace else about HP Lovecraft and the name of his cat.  Yes his cat had a horrific name. 1. Lovecraft did not name the cat, I think it was his father. 2. When that name was given it was a totally different time. The population more than 100 years ago, spoke differently and thought differently about racial differences - not saying they exist but back then people were certain that there was a difference between white people and people of color.

The library association is wrong, and it has besmirched Ingall's name. But they cannot take away the power of her prose or her insights into humanity. 

[bestpaperboy]

I understand what has happened but that does not mean I actually comprehend what these people at the library association were thinking. 

First, while it may be hard to do, you need to separate the literature - and that is what we are talking about - from the originator.  When this was written there was a distinctly different take on popular culture. Writing about native Americans and blacks, how they were characterized, was so different than how these subjects are treated today. Does that mean that the person who created them was racist or should be seen as racist. I don't think so. 

I will probably never read anything by Laura Ingalls, her writing does not appeal to me. 

This reminds me of another discussion I saw someplace else about HP Lovecraft and the name of his cat.  Yes his cat had a horrific name. 1. Lovecraft did not name the cat, I think it was his father. 2. When that name was given it was a totally different time. The population more than 100 years ago, spoke differently and thought differently about racial differences - not saying they exist but back then people were certain that there was a difference between white people and people of color.

The library association is wrong, and it has besmirched Ingall's name. But they cannot take away the power of her prose or her insights into humanity. 

Michael