Why Little House is Purple

I like purple. I like it a lot. It’s my favorite color, in fact.

I remember when I first learned how purple came to be. During those carefree childhood days of summer, my grandparents kept all of us kids well supplied with freeze pops. My cousin and I would each eat half of our popsicle, then let the rest melt into colored sugar water in its long narrow plastic sleeve. Then we’d combine the juice to make new colors. How exciting to discover that red and blue, both perfectly good colors in and of themselves, combined to form a deliciously delightful purple.

The New Yorker article and the discussion it has created has us all thinking — yet again — about the writing relationship between Laura Ingalls Wilder and Rose Wilder Lane.

I’m not sure why this comes up again and again, nor why each time it does, it’s treated as if it’s breaking news. In 1978, when Rosa Ann Moore first published her findings after studying the manuscripts and correspondence between Wilder and Lane* it was big news. But that was more than thirty years ago.

Certainly further study was and still is warranted, but I believe the majority of Little House readers are ready to stop arguing about whether Laura wrote the books or Rose did, and agree that a collaboration took place. Yes, Rose played a role in the creation of the Little House series. Got it. Let’s move on.

Move on to what?

I would love to see someone with expertise in writing as an art form, someone skilled in literary critique, thoroughly analyze not only the existing manuscripts and correspondence, but also the fiction of Rose Wilder Lane (specifically Let the Hurricane Roar and/or Free Land, as these books deal with the same family pioneering stories told in the Little House books) and the other writings of Laura Ingalls Wilder (especially The First Four Years, the writing of which opens up a whole ‘nother can of worms that I’ll save for another day…).

Wouldn’t it be a fascinating study, to attempt to extricate each woman’s contribution to the final product? To examine the writings of both women on their own for style, for use of imagery, for thematic construction, etc, and compare this to the style, imagery, theme, etc. of the Little House books?

Although I do feel this would be an excellent research project for just the right person to explore, I think I already know what the conclusion would be. I think that, although the study would have great value in creating an understanding of the underlying strengths that each woman brought to the team, actually determining who did what would be impossible.

Because I think “Little House” is like purple. Just as two good colors combined to produce a new (and in my opinion, better) color, so two good writers combined to produce a new and far superior literary work than what either of them could have created on their own. A work with a style of its very own.

My cousin and I could never have separated our newly created purple popsicle juice back into her red and my blue. Nor would we ever have thought to argue about whether it was the red or the blue that was responsible for creating the beauty of the purple. We simply enjoyed the purple for what it was.

So it is with the symbiotic relationship between Laura and Rose. There should be no argument about who was responsible for this masterpiece, about whose literary genius resulted in the success of the series. Obviously, the two women joined forces in just the right combination to create an exceptional and timeless classic.

I don’t know about you, but I think I’ll just enjoy “Little House” for what it is.

*Rosa Ann Moore. “The Little House Books: Rose-Colored Classics.” Children’s Literature 7 (1978): 7-16.