Attitudes towards the Native Indians in Little House on the Prairie.

A variety of positive and negative attitudes are expressed throughout 'Little House on the Prairie' towards the Native Indians by the main characters, Pa, Ma, and Laura. Throughout the novel, Native Indians are seen as savages and unwanted within the more modern society that is being created by settlers heading West. The removal of Indians due to settlers cultivating the land leads to potential war and internal disagreements for both tribes and settlers.

In the eighteenth chapter, 'The Tall Indian' it is clear that Ma's views of Native Indians are extremely negative compared to Pa and Laura's judgement of them. By speaking on behalf of Jack, the dog, as to hating Indians and that she 'didn't blame him' suggests that she is forcing her opinion onto not only the other people around her such as her daughters but also on an animal who cannot talk for himself. Ma continues this outlook, declaring that Indians are 'so thick around here' when looking out across the fields and by seeing them, she expresses that she deems them uncivilised and unkempt compared to herself and her style of living. In addition to this, Ma's abrupt statement of 'Let Indians keep themselves to themselves and we will do the same.' reinforces that Ma does not agree with Native Indians being near her home and that they are and will not be a part of her society and lifestyle. Mrs Scott agrees with Ma when discussing the rights of land and whether the Wilders are in Indian Territory or not, saying that 'Treaties or no treaties, the land belongs to folks that'll farm it. That's only common sense and justice." Therefore, regardless of where settlers live, the Native Indians are deemed uncultured and useless to the settler's society and that they do not use the land in a sufficient way.  

So what or whom exactly has led to the pessimism that Ma expresses towards the Native Indians?

In Riley's 'Challenges of Plains Living', she analyses how many women settlers 'absorbed dramatic and often inflated stories' surrounding Native Indians during the move towards the West and that for many they [Native Indians] were to be feared due to their demeanour and brutal lifestyle. This is supported by the description of the Native Americans throughout Little House on the Prairie as they are written as if they are aliens or sub-human of some form due to repetitive description of their 'black eyes' and 'scowling and mean' features while appearing dirty compared to Laura's family. Therefore, it is possible that Ma's experiences of Native Indians have been negative since she first gained an understanding of them and their impact on her life due to listening to stories and conversations from others of their experiences with the Native Indians.

On the other hand, Pa's view significantly overshadows Ma's outlook on Native Indians as he influences Laura, his daughter's judgement and outlook towards the Native Indians. Pa views the Native Indians as peaceful and friendly in comparison to Ma. Pa continues even to defend them when Jack goes to attack the Native Indians and agrees that 'it's his path' as it was an Indian trail long before they themselves arrived. Pa expresses respect for the Natives and admires them to a certain extent as he engages with their lifestyle and living and does similar himself but with a settlers outlook on living standards. Pa prefers to live in the open where wild animals roam free and live unafraid of settlers similar to the lifestyle of Native Indians. Further on in the novel, Pa suggests that Ma could 'wash clothes in the creek' like the Indian women do but she refuses as she does not agree and is unaccustomed to this way of living. So did Pa experience earlier on in life a peaceful encounter with the Native Indians that leads to his approving attitude towards Native Indians?

Following on from this, Pa's view does change according to events that occur and believes that in contrast to Mr Scott's view of 'The only good Indian is a dead Indian' there are good Indians such as Soldat du Chene who prevents the local tribes from attacking them due to them settling near to one of their trails.  

In addition to Pa's attitude towards the Native Indians, Laura has made her judgement of the Indians quickly throughout the novel. Her desires of seeing an Indian throughout the novel, and her continuous questioning to Ma and Pa shows her deep interest in Indians. By understanding that these people were 'wild men with red skins' and not like herself she is keen to understand the differences between the two people. The frustration she shows when Ma disapproves of all her questions before bedtime about what happens to Indians when settlers arrives shows an underlining detachment between mother and daughter due to holding different interests. Why does Ma not wish to talk openly about Native Indians? What does Ma fear that Laura does not? For Laura, the Native Indians seem interesting and exciting and she struggles to understand why the government wish to move the further West when she is living near Indian Territory and they are not a threat to her. Laura even demands that Pa takes an Indian baby from the tribe and gives it to her but remains unsuccessful. Her wish to be an Indian is expressed in the novel but why does Laura wish to be a Native Indian? As Ma continuously disapproves Laura, she still seeks for an undefined answer about the Native Indians. 

Sources: Riley, G., Women's Responses to the Challenges of Plains Living, (1989), 175.
Wilder, L.I., Little House on the Prairie, (Harper, 1941), Ch 18.

Hardships faced by the Ingalls family

Hardships faced by the Ingalls family

The Ingalls family faced many hardships which were documented in little house on the prairie. From illness, to issues with the federal government, many obstacles were in the way of the Ingalls family’s American dream. Although the author of the novel, Laura Ingalls Wilder, was only a very small child at the time the book is set and she changed some facts to sell the book better, most of the events were either her own memories or memories and tales passed down by members of the family who were old enough to recount what happened in Kansas.

The start of the novel depicts the dangerous journey west across the frozen Mississippi and into the prairies of Kansas. On this journey, you begin to see the struggles the family will face throughout the book. The first major problem faced is the crossing of a creek, which does not seem to be much of a problem until their dog, Jack, is washed away and presumed to be dead. This highlights dangers to the family which may not have been obvious at first. It also shows that small actions could have major consequences, including the death of a family member.

When Jack, the dog, returns to the family it brings up another hardship faced by the Ingalls family which is a theme throughout the novel. The fact that Pa reaches for his gun, assuming the dog to be a dangerous animal such as a wolf or coyote proves that they are always in danger from the wildlife surrounding them. Further on in the book this issue is touched upon once more, when the family has to stay in the house and keep watch all night long after a pack of fifty wolves has surrounded them. Wolves in America were abundant at this time and historically their territory spanned nearly the whole country. Wolves were not the only wildlife that threatened the family though, Eastern Cougars (which are extinct as of 2011) were also a threat to safety. This was not just an issue for the white settlers though as shown in the novel when Pa goes out to kill the Cougar because it threatens the safety of the family and a native American man tells him through sign language that he has already killed it. This shows a link between the settlers and the Osage through threats to both their safety.

A major problem for families looking to settle in new lands was trying to find somewhere they could actually sustain themselves, with fresh water and sources and food for example. Pioneer America was a dangerous place, with harsh weather, deadly wildlife and little law enforcement. Cooperation with other settlers was necessary for survival in these conditions and luckily the Ingalls neighbours were helpful.

A large problem for the family was Native Americans. Their house was built in Osage territory and the family had several encounters with them. The first major encounter was when two Osage Indian men approached the house whilst Pa was off hunting, ate the family’s cornbread and took his tobacco. This event conveys a sense of vulnerability, making the family seem as though they are at the whim of the ‘Indians’.

The Ingalls unknowingly settled their house on Osage Land and towards the end of the novel there is a feeling of uneasiness towards the native Americans. This comes about when the Indians start using the trail past the house more and more, frequently stopping at the house for food and tobacco. Some in the community become suspicious when there is a raging prairie fire and put it down to the Native Americans who are gathering for a buffalo hunt nearby. Although pa dismisses this saying they are peaceful, you can see how tensions between settlers and the Osage could have reached breaking point. The general sense of discontent towards the Indians led to paranoia and the Ingalls were lucky that there was no violence on either side which could escalate. There is one point in the novel where several tribes have arrived near their house and are fighting nearby which leads to some of the Native Americans arguing that they should kill the settlers. This not only highlights the danger of living as the Ingalls did, but paints a brutal picture of the fates that some settlers and Native americans must have had. For this reason i feel like this is one of the most significant chapters which references the Hardships faced by settlers such as the Ingalls. The Native Americans were by far the most dangerous thing faced by the family in my opinion and this chapter perfectly encapsulates this through not only the paranoia the settlers had but also giving insight into the Native Americans opinions towards the settlers and the Ingalls. 

People of this time period, especially in Kansas, would not have had as good a grasp on medicine and what caused sickness as we do today. This is captured perfectly by the character Mrs Scott, who believed malaria was caused by eating “watermelon”. Because of little understanding of health issues at this time, sickness was also a major hardship for the family. Ma and Pa catch malaria, and are very ill. If either one of them had died from the illness the family may not have survived. This is especially true for Pa who was the main provider of food for the family.

Everyday there were circumstances which could have become deadly for the family. A good example of this is when the well is being dug by Pa and the family’s neighbour, Mr Scott. Mr Scott says that the well if fine to dig in, even though he hasn’t sent a candle down to check for poisonous gas. Because he hasn’t checked he does not realise that the well is actually full of gas and passes out at the bottom of it. Luckily, he is saved by Pa who was on hand at the time but this shows just how easily a small mistake or trying to cut corners in an environment like this could lead to tragedy. Another example of everyday danger is seen later on in the book when the chimney catches on fire. Had this fire become out of control then the house would have burned down and the family would most likely have died. Life on the prairie was hard and you had to be on constant alert to survive as one little mistake could mean the end for you and your family.

Towards the end of the book it becomes clear that the government is not happy with pioneers settling in Kansas at this point in time. Pa gets word across that the family will be evicted from the land when the army comes, so they decide to leave on their own terms rather than face the army. The government at this time was seen as a hindrance to many settlers who disagreed with the rolling out of the state and growth in federal power. Between the self-governing Osage Indians and the rising pressure from Washington, the Ingalls really had no say in whether or not they could stay in their homestead.  

Although it seems like life was terrible for the Ingalls Family in the novel, I believe that they would have been content with the lifestyle they led, it wasn’t just their family who faced hardships at this time, many settlers would have had worse experiences than they did. The sense of optimism is apparent in the book, demonstrated perfectly by the quote from the book “There's no great loss without some small gain.”. This kind of attitude is what pushed people to make it work for them out in the middle of nowhere.

The Operation of Traditional Gender Roles

The traditional gender roles are not challenged a great deal in Little House on the Prairie. For the most part, there is a clear separation of duties. Pa deals with the physical and outside work, makes the decisions, and protects his family. Ma tends to the children, keeps the house in check and always has the supper ready for when Pa returns home from his hard day’s work. While these duties demonstrate the traditional duties of the men and women of the patriarchal society they came from, there are times within the text when it is seen that the women need to step-up and fulfil extra duties in order to be successful in the settling process. This is because there were often not many men around to be able to help in the physical tasks that were too much for one person, like building a house for example.

In Chapter five, The House on the Prairie, there is clear evidence that supports Glenda Riley’s statement in Women’s Responses to the Challenges of Plains Living, that “all Plainswomen… were expected to attend to, or help with, domestic duties.” In the opening paragraph of the chapter, Laura and Mary “hurried to help Ma wash the dishes,” even as small girls, they are expected to help Ma with the domestic tasks, another example of this elsewhere in the novel is when Ma asks Laura to lay the table. When they were washing the dishes, “Pa was loading everything else into the wagon and hitching up Pet and Patty,” this shows how Pa takes on the masculine duties of the father. He goes on to demonstrate the patriarchal nature of the pioneering family when he stops the wagon and announces “Right here we’ll build our house.” Ma doesn’t have a say in this, as Pa is in control of the decision making.

Showing his masculine abilities, Pa makes the house. He has the skill required and the knowledge of how to. This is a very traditional notion of self-sufficiency. However, he cannot do it alone and Ma has to help him. While this challenges the traditional gender roles of the time, it was not a successful challenge. A log fell, “Pa was trying to hold up his end of it, to keep it from falling on Ma. He couldn’t. It crashed down. Ma huddled on the ground.” This incident reveals that the woman cannot always take on the male roles. While she helped to some extent, she got hurt and showed that women are not physically capable of everything a man is, adhering to the traditional gender roles. He then goes on to blame himself as he is the man of the house, and responsible for protecting his family, which in this instance, he fails to do. Ma, despite being hurt, still has to fulfil her duties as a mother and wife, “she got supper as usual, only a little more slowly.” She soldiers on, ignoring the pain. Riley notes that “huge numbers of plucky women faced the challenges with creativity, energy, and optimism,” this can be seen when Ma claims “cheerfully” that she will get better soon enough, and seen by her continuing her duties.

The introduction of Mr. Edwards shows the reader that women need protection. This is clear when Pa says that “he can get along without a house better than you and the girls can.” There is no mention here of Pa being without a house, but of the women needing the security of the house, and in helping them first, Mr. Edwards sacrifices his own safety to provide it for the Ingalls women. His masculinity is praised when he is referred to as “a fast worker”.

Laura is an interesting character in terms of gender roles, as she doesn’t want to be ladylike as society dictates. “She wanted to hide and be still in the tall grass, like a little prairie chicken. But she didn’t. She helped Ma,” this tells the reader that Laura has a wildness in her that is not a traditional idea of how to be a woman. As a little girl, she is allowed to want to hide, but as a frontier woman she is expected to help out with the domestic duties no matter how she feels, as there are limited people to help. This is also demonstrated later on in the novel, when the entire family is ill, and she has to fetch water for Mary, despite being very sick herself, because Ma and Pa cannot do it themselves. Again, hinting at Laura’s desire for the outdoors, she “explored a little.” This contrasts with Mary, who is content to stay indoors in the domestic environment with Ma. Laura likes to be outdoors with Pa, examples of this include when she wants to go wading in the water, and when she wants to see the wolves. The reader gets a more vivid idea that Laura is not at all ladylike, when she “tried and tried, but she could never spit so far or so well as Mr. Edwards could.” This is a very masculine activity and as a girl she should never have even tried, and in doing so, she challenged the traditional gender roles of society.

In Riley’s article, she makes some interesting observations. In regards to the dangerous weather, “men feared these fires because they endangered the animals, crops, and buildings that were largely men’s responsibilities, but women often thought of their children and homes, and their cows, pigs, and chickens.” The reader sees Ma react to this danger by helping Pa to control and put out the Prairie fire later on in the novel, and in doing so she steps up and takes on a masculine role in order to protect her role as a mother. Riley also notes that “a common theme was the absence of other women and their longing for family members who had not migrated.” This must have been difficult for Ma, to initially only have the young children and Pa, who was often out hunting or doing another masculine activity. Despite the emotional difficulty, Ma was able to stay optimistic and cheerful, agreeing with Riley’s later point that “the majority of them [women] managed to maintain homes and families, carry out domestic functions, and perpetuate the many values associated with the home.”

Alvin Coffey

Alvin Coffey was a black pioneer and a slave who made the journey west across America. His journal is of significant importance as there aren’t many accounts of black people who travelled through the states at this time. He made the journey as part of an ‘ox team’ which consisted of several wagons pulled by oxen. Although he doesn’t specifically state how many people he travelled with he said that on train ahead of him had fifteen wagons each carrying 5 people in it.

Alvin set off from St. Louis in Missouri on the 2^nd of April 1849. It does not say what caused his owner to leave but he talks about hundreds dying on a regular basis from cholera in St. Louis and in St. Joe. It was a very dangerous journey with many things to plan for, such as when to cross certain parts of the country such as desert. 

Even with precautions taken such as giving the cattle a day to rest before making the move across the desert to ‘black rock’, Alvin still writes that ‘a great number of cattle perished’ on the way.

The danger was not only because of the landscape, Coffey also writes about when he was travelling through Sacramento Valley and one of the oxen collapsed, only for wolves to eat it alive.

Camping conditions were also bad for the pioneer, who writes that even though they had tents they had to share with others and they barely kept them dry.

He writes about an entrepreneur selling his train 100 pounds of bear meat for a dollar per pound which was a large amount of money in 1850, which was the year he got to California. Alvin Coffey eventually earned his freedom and went on to live a long life.

Sources: http://www.sfmuseum.org/bio/coffey.html

Who Discovered the South Pass?

WHO DISCOVERED THE SOUTH PASS?

Link to post: https://user.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/html/crooks.html

This is a letter by a Ramsey Crooks from New York of 1856. The letter alludes to the integrity of a Col. John Fremont who Crooks sees as a potential President of the then confederacy. He first begins by a short doubt of his potential by from an article in the Detroit advertiser but quickly changes the mood to commend Fremont on his masculinity. He clearly views the role of President to be an ideal of stereotypical masculinity as he comments on the brawn and bravery of him discovering the American mountain land where he is “surrounded by savages and grizzly bears”; a quality that he says is rare in the US but he seems to believe shows good promise for future leadership skills. He seems to to and fro between his positives and negatives which is formally worded but informally structured. It’s almost as if he’s trying to play devil’s advocate with himself here and is just venting his opinions to a respected friend.

He goes on to not only disavow Fremont but also his endorsers by saying that others that had gone before him, the hunters and traders who many of which had gone through the South Pass long before the colonel. It was therefore not only an untrue claim of ‘discovery’ but also a meaningless one as an attention seeker for political and social status benefit, as he mentions that his party “must be pressed very hard when they had to drag in a circumstance so very unimportant as who discovered the 'South Pass.'”

It is after this point in the letter that Crooks gives a much clearer and decisive verdict on his feelings towards the Col. Fremont. He then enters a brief history lesson to back up his point regarding the true discovery of the South Pass. This is interesting considering the time as this information is surprisingly detailed given the time period. Archives of these kind of discoveries would largely be harder to come across than in today’s world. This does open up the possibility for Crooks to be stretching the truth, but given the detail of the various events spanning from 1810 to 1814, and given Crooks’ Esquire title assumes Crooks is more likely to be an intellectual pioneer.

George Bonniwell - The Gold Rush Diary

The Diary written by George Bonniwell gives a day by day outline of their journey from Milwaukee to California on April 12th 1850. Throughout the journey, Bonniwell discusses his views on the physical landscape that they venture through describing some places such as Beloit as a 'beautiful place' with large churches, a well-established society and a successful place for businesses.

As the journey towards the west continues, Bonniwell talks about how dysentery had affected the group of men he was travelling with and how they were able to recover from the disease within a short time even though it does reoccur within the group multiple times. Not only this, they also had medicine for scurvy for the men on the journey which suggests that disease and ill-health was a common occurrence.

Bonniwell discusses the variety of landscapes such as the woodlands and crossing the large prairies identifying that some were deemed good land whereas others were not, 'as far as the eyes could see'. He continues to discuss the Indian graveyards that he walks through being seen as 'quite a curiosity' within their newly founded society. As the society in Fort Des Moines inhabited nearly 400 people, they were able to protect themselves from the threat of the American Natives attacking due to the on-going conflict between the Natives and the settlers.

Bonniwell concludes his diary with the acceptance of his journey being potentially unsuccessful due to injuries, diseases, and the unsuccessfully built dam that failed due to leaks and the previous dam destabilised itself, therefore setting them back further from completion. The journey in itself had been a difficult one and that the end result of the journey had been a failure.

Sources: http://www.emigrantroad.com/gold05.html

Florence Melton 1857-1926

Florence's maternal great-grandfather married an Englishwoman and they settled in Maryland, not too far from Chesapeake Bay. In this particular area, there was an ongoing war with the Native Americans, this was not uncommon. As a result of one of their many conflicts, some settlers were taken as prisoners, including Florence's great-grandfather.

In this particular tribe, if any of the tribe died in the conflict, their next of kin were able to choose one of the prisoners to replace the lost tribe member. In this instance, one elderly woman had lost her only son, and so she chose Florence's great-grandfather to replace him. At the time, he had a wife and two young children. He aided her with the physical tasks such as carrying her loads and chopping wood for her. He treated her as he would have treated white women. Many of the Native Americans found it amusing that he was doing women's work and laughed at him when his "civilised" stomach could not cope with the native food. But because he treated his Native mother well, she prepared him his own food that he could eat. When he was rescued over a year later, Florence notes that his "Indian mother wept bitterly when parted from him," emphasising the bond they shared.

Florence goes on to refer to that experience as an "Indian adventure" as if it was a meaningless event and that the natives posed no threat to him. If he hadn't been chosen then he would have been put to death with the rest of the prisoners. It was not an adventure, more a period of time when he was forced into slavery. Not unlike how westerners treated people they came across when settling.