Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

"The Ghost in the Little House" was a poorly written book with, what seemed to me, a clear agenda: To restore Rose Wilder Lane to her rightful literary position, and to dethrone Laura Ingalls Wilder as the genius behind the "Little House" books. Not content with criticizing her professionally, Mr. Holtz also portrays Laura as an indifferent mother who was directly responsible for all of Rose's problems. There was no middle ground. His interpretation of the facts was that in order to elevate Rose, we must denigrate her mother. One scene in the book has Laura, at an advanced age, falling to the ground and struggling to get up while Rose merely watched in silence, never extending a hand to help her mother. I think we were supposed to see this as an indication of how poor a mother Laura had been, but it simply made Rose seem heartless. Certainly there are two sides to every story especially in as complex a relationship as mother and daughter, but Mr.Holtz doesn't give Laura's side any hearing. He interprets Rose's stream of conciousness scribbles and bitter diary entries as meaning that Laura was a bad mother, though Rose never says any such thing. Never mind that these notes were never meant for publication or even to be seen by anyone besides Rose herself. Never mind that we've all had moments in which we may have seen our childhood or our parents in a dim light. Mr.Holtz takes a number of small facts and embroiders them to prove his point. Rose was Great, Laura was Small. Rose was talented, Laura was not. Why is it that in order to praise Rose he felt he must insult Laura? As for his theory regarding the writership of the books, the evidence is thin indeed. His dismissal of Laura's other writings as "prosaic" offended me, as I found her letters in "West From Home" and her essays in "Little House Sampler" to be delightful. Additionally, his appendix in which he compares Laura's version of the books to Rose's ignores one vital point. Who is to say that every comma and period in the books that aren't in Laura's orange notebooks was written by Rose? Did no other editor touch the manuscript? Are there, perhaps, interim versions of the books that haven't been found? The way the appendix was set up, you'd think it had been proved conclusively that everything in the final version of the books was Rose's doing, though he supplies no evidence supporting this. He simply compares Laura's first drafts with the published version. Mr. Holtz completely ignores the fact that "Let the Hurricane Roar," which describes many events that are also in the "Little House" books, lacks the vivid detail and lively characterization of the "Little House" books. If indeed Rose is the genius behind the books, this should be clear from reading the things she penned under her own name. It is not. So it seems clear that even if everything this man says is true, and the "Little House" books wouldn't be what they are without the participation of Rose Wilder Lane, it seems equally clear that they wouldn't be what they are without Laura Ingalls Wilder.