“I enjoyed parts of this, but be aware that there is a lot of pearl clutching in a dramatic way to create content. I agree that there can be some problems that arise when discussing a text written a century ago about experiences a century and a half ago. The culture and understanding was different then. Some of the things they find so offensive and horrifying that might influence children were not confusing to me as a child reader. I understood that the book was describing a little girl’s experience a long time ago. The incident where Laura wants the Indian baby- she was 3. 3 yr olds can be weird. I don’t think it helps to read into it. The feeling I took away from it was that she saw the humanity in the baby and wanted to hold that close. Same with Dr. Tann, I never saw her descriptions of him as negative even as a child. It’s ok for a child to experience something new as strange. Finally, I have to say that it really bugged me to have so much air time given to the TV show, especially when they had spent so much time fact-checking the books. While they criticize the books it seems that maybe the host has too much of a crush on Landon to criticize the show equally? I find Landon’s selfish decision to stray so far from the books distasteful. If he wanted to tell another story he should have just told another story and not called it LHOtP. They go on about how weird it was having a 15yr old Laura marry an adult Almanzo in the show but that wasn’t even reality, so the whole situation was Landon’s fault. Laura was 18 and Almanzo 28 in reality. Melissa Gilbert claims they weren’t very far apart in age so I’m not sure where she gets that. They treat her as a paragon of Laura’s legacy when the show didn’t even really tell Laura’s story, so that’s weird and annoying. Anyway, the earlier episodes were interesting.”
oxaloacetate1st via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
08/18/23