The First Four Years

Well, the series ends in true Little House on the Prairie form, by which I mean this very slender volume has far more misery and disaster that feels entirely fair. It starts with the usual foibles of early married life, like Laura making a pie for a luncheon but forgetting to put sugar in it, but before long it is diphtheria, a paralysed husband, failing crops, blizzards, their first son dying in infancy, their daughter nearly drowning, and their entire house burning to the ground with all their possessions in it. And Manly feels very like Pa, with his 'oh, we'll just buy something on credit and try for another year, it will come good soon...'

And so this uneven series comes to a close, with a dreadful book that shouldn't have been published. This is the original draft of a book Mrs. Wilder never published. After the death of everyone in her family, it was published as written. It reads like a scattershot diary. Some interesting events are passed over in the blink of an eye. Some uninteresting events are given great detail - especially the constant worrying about debts, and recording how much everything cost and how much wad owed. The book also suffers a bit simply by being the story of an adult instead of centering on a child or teen. But the main issue is that it was never edited to make any real form of story.
For someone who is truly fascinated with the entire life of show more Laura Ingalls Wilder, this might be of interest, as it tells of another portion of her life. But for anyone hoping to find a well written story, interesting and entertaining, don't read this. Allow the series to end as Mrs. Wilder clearly intended, with "These Happy Golden Years." show less

First sentence: The stars hung luminous and low over the prairie.

The First Four Years was published several decades after the death of Laura Ingalls Wilder. It was published after the death of Laura and Almanzo's daughter, Rose Wilder Lane. It is based on three hand-written notebooks. The story is believed to have been written in the mid to late forties. It is also believed to have been shelved by Laura Ingalls Wilder after the death of Almanzo. She never went back to work on it again. She never polished it up. She never sent it to the publishers. It is what it is, a first draft.

It has a completely different feel than the other Little House books. It doesn't have chapters, for one thing. But more than that there is an emotional show more undertone of sadness and regret that makes it pointedly different than its predecessors. It is just very melancholy. Yes, it captures all the horrible things that happened next. Yes, it's probably accurate enough to assume that most if not all farmers experienced this many brutal hardships. The other Little House books often dealt with hard issues as well. But I suppose they felt more balanced. I think she injected enough hope and light to lift them up.

Personally, I'd rather have the "happily ever after" ending of These Happy Golden Years than the brutal hardships of The First Four Years. Not that I'm promoting the unrealistic fairy-tale ending where marriage is problem-free. But to read of all the hardships with the farm, the land, the money problems, the debt, the worries, the health problems, the weather/environment problems, etc. It's just so hard, so brutal, so depressing. show less

In this novel I feel like I’m reading Laura Ingalls Wilder’s pure voice for the first time. This book, as is well known, was never edited by her daughter Rose Wilder Lane and is very different from the other Little House books. The language is more plain, but the book feels more honest.

Rose Wilder Lane wanted to tell a story of self-reliant and successful pioneers, so one thing she did was to take out certain events, like the death of Laura’s baby brother, Charles Frederick. (Events that she wanted to take out but Wilder insisted on keeping include Mary’s blindness and the laborers’ riot near the Silver Lake settlement). By contrast, in “The First Four Years” we get a succession of setbacks and tragedies: the Wilder crop show more is destroyed repeatedly, their house burns down, and their infant son dies. All this is reported without sentimentality or overt drama – and certainly without uplifting lessons. There are hardly any episodes even of fun and laughter.

It’s not that Laura and Almanzo are made to seem dour here, but their life is revealed as harsh and uncertain, with little-to-no payback or progress.

It’s an unfinished work, of course, and merely a first draft. We can never know what Wilder herself would have done with future drafts.

But her voice is heavily reportorial, and intensely descriptive. Much of the gift for storytelling that you see in the other books remains in this one, such as when Almanzo gets lost in a blizzard merely on his way from the barn to the house. But there’s no overarching lesson of self-reliance that shapes this book. It’s hard to see any overarching lesson at all, actually. At the very end Laura does recommit to the life of a farming family and to the persistence that it requires, but it feels like she’s embracing this commitment not because it’s an overarching faith but simply because she can hardly do anything else except go on working and living.

This is very different from the other Little House books, and maybe this novel doesn’t come up to my favorites, but I deeply appreciate its simple honesty. show less

In this novel I feel like I’m reading Laura Ingalls Wilder’s pure voice for the first time. This book, as is well known, was never edited by her daughter Rose Wilder Lane and is very different from the other Little House books. The language is more plain, but the book feels more honest.

Rose Wilder Lane wanted to tell a story of self-reliant and successful pioneers, so one thing she did was to take out certain events, like the death of Laura’s baby brother, Charles Frederick. (Events that she wanted to take out but Wilder insisted on keeping include Mary’s blindness and the laborers’ riot near the Silver Lake settlement). By contrast, in “The First Four Years” we get a succession of setbacks and tragedies: the Wilder crop show more is destroyed repeatedly, their house burns down, and their infant son dies. All this is reported without sentimentality or overt drama – and certainly without uplifting lessons. There are hardly any episodes even of fun and laughter.

It’s not that Laura and Almanzo are made to seem dour here, but their life is revealed as harsh and uncertain, with little-to-no payback or progress.

It’s an unfinished work, of course, and merely a first draft. We can never know what Wilder herself would have done with future drafts.

But her voice is heavily reportorial, and intensely descriptive. Much of the gift for storytelling that you see in the other books remains in this one, such as when Almanzo gets lost in a blizzard merely on his way from the barn to the house. But there’s no overarching lesson of self-reliance that shapes this book. It’s hard to see any overarching lesson at all, actually. At the very end Laura does recommit to the life of a farming family and to the persistence that it requires, but it feels like she’s embracing this commitment not because it’s an overarching faith but simply because she can hardly do anything else except go on working and living.

This is very different from the other Little House books, and maybe this novel doesn’t come up to my favorites, but I deeply appreciate its simple honesty. show less

In this novel I feel like I’m reading Laura Ingalls Wilder’s pure voice for the first time. This book, as is well known, was never edited by her daughter Rose Wilder Lane and is very different from the other Little House books. The language is more plain, but the book feels more honest.

Rose Wilder Lane wanted to tell a story of self-reliant and successful pioneers, so one thing she did was to take out certain events, like the death of Laura’s baby brother, Charles Frederick. (Events that she wanted to take out but Wilder insisted on keeping include Mary’s blindness and the laborers’ riot near the Silver Lake settlement). By contrast, in “The First Four Years” we get a succession of setbacks and tragedies: the Wilder crop show more is destroyed repeatedly, their house burns down, and their infant son dies. All this is reported without sentimentality or overt drama – and certainly without uplifting lessons. There are hardly any episodes even of fun and laughter.

It’s not that Laura and Almanzo are made to seem dour here, but their life is revealed as harsh and uncertain, with little-to-no payback or progress.

It’s an unfinished work, of course, and merely a first draft. We can never know what Wilder herself would have done with future drafts.

But her voice is heavily reportorial, and intensely descriptive. Much of the gift for storytelling that you see in the other books remains in this one, such as when Almanzo gets lost in a blizzard merely on his way from the barn to the house. But there’s no overarching lesson of self-reliance that shapes this book. It’s hard to see any overarching lesson at all, actually. At the very end Laura does recommit to the life of a farming family and to the persistence that it requires, but it feels like she’s embracing this commitment not because it’s an overarching faith but simply because she can hardly do anything else except go on working and living.

This is very different from the other Little House books, and maybe this novel doesn’t come up to my favorites, but I deeply appreciate its simple honesty. show less

In this novel I feel like I’m reading Laura Ingalls Wilder’s pure voice for the first time. This book, as is well known, was never edited by her daughter Rose Wilder Lane and is very different from the other Little House books. The language is more plain, but the book feels more honest.

Rose Wilder Lane wanted to tell a story of self-reliant and successful pioneers, so one thing she did was to take out certain events, like the death of Laura’s baby brother, Charles Frederick. (Events that she wanted to take out but Wilder insisted on keeping include Mary’s blindness and the laborers’ riot near the Silver Lake settlement). By contrast, in “The First Four Years” we get a succession of setbacks and tragedies: the Wilder crop show more is destroyed repeatedly, their house burns down, and their infant son dies. All this is reported without sentimentality or overt drama – and certainly without uplifting lessons. There are hardly any episodes even of fun and laughter.

It’s not that Laura and Almanzo are made to seem dour here, but their life is revealed as harsh and uncertain, with little-to-no payback or progress.

It’s an unfinished work, of course, and merely a first draft. We can never know what Wilder herself would have done with future drafts.

But her voice is heavily reportorial, and intensely descriptive. Much of the gift for storytelling that you see in the other books remains in this one, such as when Almanzo gets lost in a blizzard merely on his way from the barn to the house. But there’s no overarching lesson of self-reliance that shapes this book. It’s hard to see any overarching lesson at all, actually. At the very end Laura does recommit to the life of a farming family and to the persistence that it requires, but it feels like she’s embracing this commitment not because it’s an overarching faith but simply because she can hardly do anything else except go on working and living.

This is very different from the other Little House books, and maybe this novel doesn’t come up to my favorites, but I deeply appreciate its simple honesty. show less