The Wilder Life
The Wilder Life, by Wendy McClure (who tweets as @HalfPintIngalls), is a tribute to her fascination with Laura Ingalls Wilder’s books and life. I’ve read the whole original series, but until I picked up this book, I had no idea that the Little House phenomenon could be so entertaining, emotional and, on occasion, bizarre. Part memoir, part homage, and delightfully snarky in places, this was a very enjoyable read.
The first step of the journey into what Ms. McClure calls “Laura Land” is to cook the meals described in the books. So she grinds wheat, bakes sourdough bread, and makes syrup-on-snow candy, with mixed results (vanity cakes, she discovers, require one to two pounds of lard). And sometimes it’s difficult to explain to friends who rely on iPhones and Starbucks that you’re churning your own butter.
When talking to friends about buying a dash churn, one must be careful when making hand gestures. Do not simulate holding the dash in your hands and pumping it up and down.
With her boyfriend along for the ride, the author plans to spend a few days on a farm which provides workshops to develop such skills. Unfortunately her fellow participants turn out to be members of a survivalist cult focused on preparing for the end times and the collapse of civilization. Her boyfriend, questioned about their relationship, says they’ve been married three years (living together = no-no) and in their tent that night, they write messages to each other rather than risk being overheard. They also decide that if the end times occur, they don’t want to be anywhere near the survivalists, and will take their chances with whatever post-apocalyptic fate awaits them.
Her boyfriend, no doubt won over by her fried apples ’n’ onions – if not by the encounter with cultists – starts reading the Little House books and becomes a fan too. So the two of them decide on a road trip, a journey from Kansas to Walnut Grove to Plum Creek to De Smet. They’ll visit all the Little House sites along the way. This proves to be a great case of fiction meeting reality, especially when she discovers that Laura’s family also lived in Burr Oak, Iowa, where they worked as servants in a hotel, and then left in the middle of the night to avoid paying a landlord (!).
Another thing I learned from this book was that Ma’s brother was married to Pa’s sister, and also, one of Ma’s sisters married Pa’s brother, “and all of this no doubt made Laura’s extended family tree look less like a tree and more like the chemical diagram of glucose.” And then there’s the museum which features the Ingalls family recreated as life-size rag dolls and posed limply in armchairs, which I thought of as Little House in Uncanny Valley.
…in their demented way, they really did look a bit like the Ingallses, inasmuch as one could look at an old photo and render it in pillow form.
One of the most interesting things in the book are the three aspects of Laura Ingalls Wilder—the books, the TV show, and the reality. Oh, and by the TV show, I mean the 1974 one starring Michael Landon as Pa, not the Japanese animé series with episode titles like “A Cute Calf Has Arrived!” and “Wheat, Grow Tall!” As for real-life Laura, she’s intriguing. She worked together with her daughter Rose on the books, yet disagreed with her when necessary. For instance, Rose advised Laura to make Carrie the protagonist of Silver Lake, reasoning that book-Laura, at twelve, might be too old for the readership. Laura objected to this, saying that she couldn’t switch heroines halfway through, and she was right.
There’s so much more to discover about Laura Land, especially its politics and its impact on the lives of people today. I enjoyed the road trip/journey back through time, but whenever the author returned to her own life or reminisced about her own family, it just wasn’t as humorous or entertaining, which is why this isn’t a DIK for me. But The Wilder Life still gets a strong recommendation, especially for Little House fans.
Buy it at: Amazon
Visit our Amazon Storefront or shop at your local independent bookstore
Buy The Wilder Life by Wendy McClure:
Book Details
| Reviewer: | Marian Perera |
|---|---|
| Review Date: | January 6, 2020 |
| Publication Date: | 04/2011 |
| Grade: | B+ |
| Sensuality | N/A |
| Book Type: | Non Fiction |
| Review Tags: |
Oh, I love this book! I’ve got it in my big pile of keepers!
It was a great read. I’d love to visit one or two of those Little House sites now, and maybe buy myself a tin cup or a sunbonnet.
I enjoyed this book when I read it several years ago. I especially liked the part where McClure visits one of the original cabins and can’t believe how small it is. She describes it as being like something in a Samuel Beckett play and questions if anyone could actually have hidden Christmas gifts from anyone else in the family in such a small space—as Wilder claims they did.
Yes, at one point she says something like “Ma found a broom in a corner? This space is like twelve feet square, how much finding did it take?”
I really enjoyed this book when I read it several years ago. I had read all the LIW books so many times as a child I pretty much had them memorized in my youth. It’s fun to revisit them as an adult. As a child I took them as gospel thinking they were based on Laura’s diaries from her entire life. As an adult I was stunned to find out the “the truth” about many things, such as that the family had other people living with them during the “Long Winter”. I think the author did a great job of exploring the “real” LIW without losing any of the “magic” associated with the books.
That’s how I felt, that despite the reality of Laura’s life, not to mention some of the real-world issues affecting Little House sites and museums, the author still felt the warmth and appeal of the books. She has her snarky moments, but her understanding and affection also comes through.
I love the Little House series and show and had high hopes but was extremely bored by this book. I’m surprised you liked it this much lol
Book appeal is like that. Today I tried The Flatshare because so many people loved it. I read a few chapters and got this urge to surf the web.
I’ve come to have very mixed feelings about the Little House books. As a kid, I loved them, read them ten million times, and used to pretend with my friends that we were characters in the books. But when I reread them as an adult, the level of racism against Native Americans, particularly from Ma, horrified me. Everything I had loved as a child was still there, but the racism made it a very different colour. Is this addressed in this book?
Yes, it is, including Mr. and Mrs. Scott’s racism, and even Laura’s “Pa, get me that little Indian baby” request.
Ani, I’m not sure if you would be interested in this, but Dr. Debbie Reese runs the blog “American Indians in Children’s Literature” and talks a great deal about problematic content in the Little House books as well as many contemporary depictions of native characters in children’s through YA literature. She recommends the “Birchbark House” series as an alternative to “Little House” and promotes a number of other chapter books here: https://americanindiansinchildrensliterature.blogspot.com/p/best-books.html.
Thanks for the link, Nan. Very informative reading. The author of The Wilder Life has also commented on that blog.
You are welcome! While I was reading through Dr. Reese’s blog, I read her take on the RWA controversy. She did a very good job detailing Ms. Davis’s misrepresentation of Salish people in one of her other books. It’s well worth reading as well.
I am quite disappointed, ambivalent, and at times disillusioned about the whole dang profession of writing at this point. On the one hand, I don’t want to support obviously poor/slipshod research in historical fiction, but on the other hand, I don’t want to police what writers should or shouldn’t say- especially in regard to how individual characters present themselves within a narrative. It’s a messy, complicated business, this trade of the written word. I just hope everyone can come to an amicable solution to some of these current debacles.
I’ve got mixed feelings about them, too . Pa and Ma and even Laura fail to see the First Nations people they encounter as people but obstacles to their land ownership or threats to their safety, and it’s terrible to re-read everything with adult eyes.
I don’t know about you, but I find myself being much more stringent and critical toward books targeted at impressionable children than those written for a strictly adult audience. It reminds me of something Marlon Brando said during a Dick Cavett interview in the 1970s or 1980s. The topic they got on was stereotypes and racism in movies, and Mr. Brando made an interesting comment along the lines of “Sure, grownups can brush off the hurt, all the demeaning images they’ve seen before. But who it really weighs on is children who never see anything but the (insert stereotype here). Seeing people who look like them always relegated to certain roles whether that’s the butler or the wily villain- that weighs on them.” (This is a paraphrase from memory, mind you. You can find the actual quote on YouTube unless it got taken down). Listening to the whole interview, he certainly didn’t imply (at least to me) that it was okay to go around running roughshod over adults either, but I definitely agree with him in regard to children.
As for things written for an adult audience, I am far more lenient on the grounds of, “You know what, we’re all big boys and girls here. We can choose to close this book and read something else. Or write something else.” Children, especially if given assigned reading in school, don’t always have that choice. And I think that in addition to developmental differences, that’s a huge factor for me. And it’s one of the reasons why I respect Dr. Reese’s work so much. A lot of her analyses are focused on children’s and YA lit, which can help educators, parents, and whoever else stop and think before offering damaging images to growing minds.
I am not a parent, but I did read all of the Little House books in the 1960s when I was a child, and I loved them. I do think it’s important to recall not the only the time and place that was being written about, but also when they were actually written. As awful as such attitudes were, they were the norm at that time for most white Americans. They certainly were in the community I grew up in.
Today, parents can use passages like that as teachable moments. Ask your child what they think of those ideas, and why do they think that. Help them to understand that being different is good, we all need to be respected for who we are, inside and out.
We can’t place 21stC standards on books written many many decades ago, It would be like re-writing Gone With the Wind or Huckleberry Finn. Let’s learn from these books, not throw them away because we don’t like the history they portray.
“we all need to be respected for who we are, inside and out.” Very true.
“We can’t place 21stC standards on books written many many decades ago, It would be like re-writing Gone With the Wind or Huckleberry Finn. Let’s learn from these books, not throw them away because we don’t like the history they portray.” Hey, I’m with you there. As for teachable moments, I think it’s a delicate balance. On the one hand, you can definitely show how things have improved since then (or not, as the case may be). On the other hand, how much do you shelter young people from, especially when they are very young? I think that’s one of the age-old questions. And everyone’s comfort level with introducing certain topics is going to be different.
When it comes to adults, I’m pretty much “anything goes.” And, to the annoyance of some, I don’t think every protagonist in a 21st century novel needs to hold 21st century “woke” views. In the world around us today, there are lots of good people who have some odd and/or outdated attitudes. Should they be excised from novels or exclusively vilified? Not necessarily. There’s room in modern literature for politically correct or morally ambiguous protagonists just as much as enlightened or morally sound ones. I always say, the more books, the better. Then, maybe someday soon, we can all find a large quantity of books we like.
That line should read “There’s room in modern literature for politically INcorrect or morally ambiguous protagonists…” Ugh, proofreading…
I agree, there is room in contemporary writing for bigoted characters. They don’t even have to be the heavy, they can just be ignorant. Pollyanna-land does not have to be created in every book written today. I certainly run into ignorance and stupidity in my real life, so portraying it in fiction is no different. How can we demonstrate what ‘good’ is it we don’t show ‘bad’? Books that contain these kinds of characters can also have all sorts of diversity, humor, sex, poitics, religion, you name it. But a sprinkling of stupidity makes the rest that much more interesting.
Case in point: I hired a handyman to come into my home and work, for which I paid him at the end of the day. He proceeded to hand me a brochure inviting me to his church. IN MY HOME!!! I am athiest, but he didn’t know this; we hadn’t discussed religion or much of anything else. I was shocked speechless for a moment, then I chased him to his truck, handed him back the brochure, and told him I planned to warn every homeowner I knew about him. Which I did. I also called the guy who referred him to me, and he was upset, too. He had no idea the guy was doing this.
This is a perfect example, imo, of an ignorant and thoughtless person, and the world abounds with them. To accurately reflect the world, characters like this idiot need to be present in fiction.
Ha ha! I think we all have our share of handyman stories- but thank God (so to speak) that we have handymen! Although I don’t necessarily think religious belief = idiot, I would say he overstepped his bounds giving you religious literature in your house without your having mentioned an interest.
You’ve probably noticed this too, but certain beliefs permeate certain professions. Your average handyman, for example, is unlikely to share too many (if any) political views with your local college professor. But I definitely don’t write off conservatives as a whole as “ignorant” or “thoughtless.” If anything, tradesmen often have legitimate reasons for holding the beliefs and values that they do. For example, I often hear people in the trades bemoan liberal tax/regulation policies- because they and their businesses are often directly hurt by those policies. Not theoretically, but actually. (I don’t want to get into specifics here, but I’m sure we could all think of some examples.) So I definitely understand where they are coming from even though I could do without some of the more overt religious beliefs that tend to come with the mix.
On a final repetitive note, I am so glad we have people in the trades. Because of them, I have the ability/luxury to sit here and comment on a forum. So as far as I’m concerned, I’m not going to pop a gasket about some of their idiosyncrasies. After all, I have far more use for plumbers, builders, welders, mechanics, etc. than I do for literary critics (I should talk…) and some other “intellectual” jobs I could name, but won’t.
By literary critics, I didn’t mean those of us at AAR, of course! I just reread that comment, and that totally came out wrong. Sorry! I meant the tear down type of critics rather than the thoughtful types.
I am definitely grateful for tradespersons of all kinds. Who else would install my water heater, fix my car, or cut my hair? But to assume when you’re in a private home that someone else in that home (homeowner or otherwise) needs the ‘good news’ is presumptive, rude, and ignorant. Perhaps he’s not an idiot, that was pejorative I admit. But it was thoughtless, and when I confronted him he clearly wasn’t surprised by my ire. So it was likely not the first time someone had called him out on this.
I respect his and everyone else’s right to believe how they choose; I try to graciously put up with proselytizing when away from home. If offended, I simply walk away. But in my home I DEMAND the right to have my own beliefs and not have them challenged in any way. As far as values and politics go, again…we all can choose whichever ones we want as long as it respects the rights of others to do the same.
Others may have had a different reaction in an identical situation, but don’t tell me how to think or what to believe when I’m in my own living room. That is where my politeness ends.
I once spent a few days in the States before flying to Canada. My suitcase was searched by the TSA, and they left a card inside saying they had searched it.
However, I had a copy of Bertrand Russell’s “Why I am Not A Christian” in the suitcase, and I think this is why whoever searched it wrote “I belive in Jesus” on the card. Spelling mistake and all. I contacted the TSA to let them know about this, but never heard back.
And I wouldn’t want to be proselytized to in my home either.
“I agree, there is room in contemporary writing for bigoted characters. They don’t even have to be the heavy, they can just be ignorant.”
I’m originally from Sri Lanka and have a large extended family still living there. All brown-skinned, just for the record. I will bet that if you asked them about their views on gay marriage, trans* people’s rights, and so on, you would not receive very inclusive or liberal answers, because a lot of my family grew up in rural parts of the island and are very religious into the bargain.
However (and people are free to disagree on this if they choose) I don’t believe this makes my grandparents, uncles, aunts, or cousins evil. I think they’re ignorant because they haven’t been exposed to differing views, or they feel that working towards LGBTQ rights is just not as relevant to their lives as getting the rice planted or the coconuts picked.
So basically, I’m all for interesting, nuanced portrayals of bigoted characters. I personally find those more compelling than bigoted characters who are unredeemable or one-dimensional villains.
I agree Marian! My grandparents were pretty prejudiced in their thinking about anyone who was different, but they were rarely exposed to those kinds of people, so it’s not that surprising really. I was even told as a young teen that if I ever dated a black man I was not welcome to come to.their home again. I’m sure they were rolling over in their graves when I did just that many years later! They grew up on farms, they worked hard during the depression and the war years to raise their kids, they owned a small business and held down jobs, and 98% of the people they were exposed to were white, working class, Midwestern Americans of limited education. It never occurred to them to think beyond that, really. They were busy. They were tired.
But, and I find this a very interesting story in the light of all of that, my grandfather had a nervous breakdown in the 1950s sometime. The only person who came to visit him (and there was a HUGE extended family) was a black man who swept out the store next to Grampa’s barber shop. He came every week, brought food his wife had made, or produce from his own garden, and did a little yard work while he was there just because he was a kind man.
I like complicated characters, too. One-note villains or heroes are dull!
KesterGayle wrote:
“We can’t place 21stC standards on books written many many decades ago, It would be like re-writing Gone With the Wind or Huckleberry Finn. Let’s learn from these books, not throw them away because we don’t like the history they portray.”
Followed by:
“I hired a handyman to come into my home and work, for which I paid him at the end of the day. He proceeded to hand me a brochure inviting me to his church. IN MY HOME!!! I am athiest, but he didn’t know this; we hadn’t discussed religion or much of anything else. I was shocked speechless for a moment, then I chased him to his truck, handed him back the brochure, and told him I planned to warn every homeowner I knew about him. Which I did. I also called the guy who referred him to me, and he was upset, too. He had no idea the guy was doing this.
This is a perfect example, imo, of an ignorant and thoughtless person, and the world abounds with them. To accurately reflect the world, characters like this idiot need to be present in fiction.”
Nan de Plume wrote:
“You’ve probably noticed this too, but certain beliefs permeate certain professions. Your average handyman, for example, is unlikely to share too many (if any) political views with your local college professor. But I definitely don’t write off conservatives as a whole as “ignorant” or “thoughtless.” If anything, tradesmen often have legitimate reasons for holding the beliefs and values that they do. For example, I often hear people in the trades bemoan liberal tax/regulation policies- because they and their businesses are often directly hurt by those policies. Not theoretically, but actually. (I don’t want to get into specifics here, but I’m sure we could all think of some examples.) So I definitely understand where they are coming from even though I could do without some of the more overt religious beliefs that tend to come with the mix.”
Now from me:
I am an old timer at AAR (20 years at least). I generally try to keep out of politically tinged discussions for which the old Wild West board was appropriate and valuable. And I have followed with interest what both of the two contributors above (and others) have written on the quite controversial discussions we have had here recently. However, this exchange has really surprised me and so I am going to dip my toe in the murky, swirling waters. First I will say (as I have before) that I was born and educated in California (MA History with a BA Minor in Political Science at UCSB) and at the age of 29 left the US to marry and live in England where I continue to be very interested in current events on both sides of The Pond and think I have some small ability to comment where relevant on the situations both here in the UK and in the US.
My take on the above comments are that, firstly, yes, you can’t re-write history but you can and should learn from it as an aid to shaping your moral and ethical judgments. So I was surprised that having made the first, shall we say “liberal minded” comment, KesterGayle then can’t contain her irritation at someone merely handing her a leaflet. OK, if you are not a believer, that’s fine but why not just politely say, “No thank you, I don’t wish to read this” and hand it back? And then to report him to his boss? This is really surprising as it might cause the poor handyman to lose his job. If he’d been a Muslim, would KesterGayle have chased him to his truck to remonstrate with him? You certainly would think twice here in the UK in doing that because you could be considered to be possibly committing a racist “hate crime” offence. Therefore, not liberal at all, really.
And why does Nan de Plume assume that “overt religious beliefs” come with “the mix”. Please define “the mix”. I have to assume you refer to the blue collar folk (such as the handyman) who voted for the current President of whom very few “professional/white collar” liberal folk (in most places in the world including here in the UK) approve. Why call should KesterGayle call the handyman an idiot? On what basis to you define him thus? Because he does not agree with you? Because he might have differing political/moral/ethical beliefs? And why is he wrong to hold them, especially in the country that prides itself as the ultimate manifestation of democracy in our world?
We had a general election in the UK on 12 December and the whole raison d’etre for it was Brexit about which I hope a few of the US readers here are aware and maybe understand just a bit. To me it had political and sociological similarities with the 2016 election in the US in that it was about what might be defined as “Joe Public” deciding that the urban intelligentsia could stick their platitudes up their you-know-whatsits and stop telling “Joe Public” (or for British readers here, the folk outside the M25 or north of Watford, etc.) that Nanny Knows Best. Actually, I don’t think “Joe Public” isn’t stupid, part of a “mix”, knows right from wrong and has a POV on many matters that is not stupid or idiotic but often born of life experience in the real world where many of those identified as the liberal elite don’t dwell.
So apologies from me. Truly, humbly, my apologies. But I have been astounded at some of the comments coming out here on a number of threads and finally had to put my 2 cents/ha’pen’orth in. I didn’t vote for Mr Trump in 2016 and finally, after 40 years in the UK as a dual citizen, I gave up my US citizenship in 2018, so I won’t have a say at all in 2020. But, please, let’s stop assuming – ALL of us – that if someone does not agree with you they are stupid, ignorant, prejudiced, unwoke, racist, blah, blah, blah, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Thanks for listening and thanks for letting me have my say – even if you don’t agree with me and want to click on Frown Face.
The handyman was self employed, and he could have handed me religious brochures all day long anywhere else. But NOT in my living room..
This story about the “handyman” and KesterGayle made me genuinely sad when I read it because I think it represents a lot of situations and interactions that go on nowadays and because at the heart of it I feel is story of lack of understanding of the other person’s situation.
Having been raised Catholic, my situation (which I think applies to all the Catholics I know as well as all my Jewish friends) is that it is largely an “inherited” religion. My relatives and ancestors going back (I don’t even know how long), were all Catholic and produced more Catholics. All my Catholic and Jewish friends and schoolmates were the same. No one was “converted” or decided one day they would become Catholic or Jewish, it was as much a part of all of us as our ethnicities, (which was varied).
It wasn’t until I was closer to an adult that I was exposed to more religions, particularly ones where “Evangelizing” is not only a part of the religion, but a huge requirement. While I am no expert, I do know that many members of (and I am thinking now of many Christian religions) demand that practitioners spread the word. They genuinely believe and are told by their preachers, leaders etc. they are failing as a member if they don’t try to spread the “good word” which is essential to people being “saved.” I have a friend who moved south and was genuinely shocked when every phone call she made to get situated there (including ones to local utility companies) ended with an invitation to for her to “join their church if she hadn’t found one yet.” I was shocked in my early working years when a Born Again coworker would ask me if I was, and kept telling me (despite my stating I was raised Catholic and had been baptized once already) that Jesus and the Bible said it was necessary or I wouldn’t be saved. She truly meant it and seemed very worried that others were not following the same path. Years later, at a totally different job I heard someone in another office ask a co-worker quite seriously if they had “accepted Jesus Christ” as their “personal savior”.
As someone who never had a thought of trying to convert anyone to anything and always considered religion as a very personal, “settled” matter I won’t deny it was jarring to hear at first. I wasn’t offended or angry, but to me it was like asking overly personal questions to a mere acquaintance about their private business the way I wouldn’t ask them about their weight or private life or bank account balance. My friends who are Jewish, Congregationalist, Episcopalian etc etc would no more try and convert anyone to their religion than I would have asked anyone to start saying “Hail Marys”. It wasn’t part of our religious education or how our religions “worked”. This is not the case with other religions and groups where inviting people to join you is essential and required.
While I’m not shopping for a new religion, I certainly wouldn’t call anyone who issued a genuine invitation to their church (or temple, or mosque or meeting or whatever) an idiot or ignorant or try to ruin their livelihood. While it’s clear it hit a genuine nerve with the poster here because of her own feelings about religion- I get no sense the “handyman” had any malicious intent. I’m sorry KesterGayle felt uncomfortable in her home and I am sorry the man (who it seems did a good job on the work) probably took a blow to his income.
It seems to me to be a situation about two people with diametrically opposing views on religion (and probably many other things) having a culture clash. Add to this the heightened emotions attached to everything going on in the world today and this seems like a microcosm of the U.S. right now and a lot of what I witness on Facebook.
Chrisreader, thank you for explaining some religious differences. I think it is sometimes easy to forget that while evangelizing is a nuisance or deep offense to some, it is a strongly held tenet to others. Just part of living in this messy world with so many different, often diametrically opposed beliefs.
I know, for example, there are people out there who would probably love to prevent me from publishing erotica- whether through evangelization or the ballot box. And while some of these people might be just plain busybodies, others may be genuinely fearful that I’m going to roast on an eternal spit in you-know-where if they don’t save me. And others still may be secular people who sincerely believe that what I’m doing somehow encourages sexual crime, even though I only write on-page sexual situations involving consenting adults. (Shameless plug over…)
Overall, to wrap this up, I believe the culture wars you are describing are very real. The RWA kerfuffle that is still going on is just one example of many. But I like to think that there’s always room for love and joy, which is what so many of us readers and writers strive for.
There are many reasons I left the Middle East and migrated to Canada, but one of them was the pressure from my parents’ extremely religious friends who seemed unable to accept that I’m an atheist. More than once, they tried to persuade me to attend their church. When I repeatedly declined, they invited me to lunch, except the lunch was actually a meeting with a pastor and it turned out to be a surprise intervention.
I fully believe that their efforts stemmed from concern. They didn’t want me to burn in hell, so they felt that any amount of coercion was preferable. They had good intentions.
However, you know what they say about good intentions. Their efforts were meant kindly, but I don’t believe that any of those people respected my choices or my right to make those choices for myself. None of those people seemed to look beyond the scarlet letter A pinned to my chest, to find common ground or shared humanity. They just saw me as someone who had to be corrected.
I don’t think this is a very effective approach when it comes to any controversial topic.
I’m so sorry this all happened to you! I’ve been blessed (so to speak) that the majority of my religious encounters have been on the annoying/irritating side rather than the pushy/coercive side, at least during adulthood.
“They just saw me as someone who had to be corrected. I don’t think this is a very effective approach when it comes to any controversial topic.” Very true, but easier said than done. This is one of the reasons I ducked out of the RWA controversy as gracefully as I could. And peeking back at the thread, it looks like I left just in time. It has become quite heated again- and is now incorporating arguments about religion.
Thanks! A few times I’ve come across people here who react with concern when they realize I’m a nonbeliever and make religious overtures, but those have been mild rather than in-your-face. Also, all these encounters took place at work, and I would not hesitate to go to my supervisor or HR if anyone got pushy (which would not have been an option in the Middle East). It’s such a different culture.
Marian, I went through the conversion wars with both of my siblings, and got good at politely pretending to pay attention. I even sat in on a few bible study groups when trapped in one of their homes. But the lack of respect for my beliefs and choices was palpable and offensive nonetheless. I tried to keep our interactions light and funny, but I had to distance itself from my family, too. I moved 1500 miles away, got married, settled down, and communicated almost exclusively by phone or email. I rarely visited them and they never visited me. They are both dead now, and I miss them, but I do not miss the way they treated me.
Now, my husband and my closest friends all share my values for the most part, and I can be who I am. Found family is the best!
I’m sure you miss your family and friends, but I hope you have developed a new Canadian family who loves you exactly how you are.
Nothing like a substantial distance when it comes to peace of mind! I’m sorry about your siblings, but I’m glad that you found people who care about you and accept you. You listened to the bible study sessions, and that was more than fair. I wonder how many people inviting us to their church services would agree to listen to a talk about atheism in exchange?
As for myself, I can happily say that no one here treats me any differently because of my lack of religion, and for some of my friends, that’s a plus point! God bless Canada! Er… you know what I mean.
Lol!!
Marian, I agree 100% that there is nothing more infuriating than people not listening to or deliberately fighting your feelings or beliefs. It’s beyond disrespectful and very hurtful.
If I thought the man in the story above was trying to brainwash KesterGayle or knew she was an atheist and was being deliberately disrespectful, particularly in her home, I wouldn’t have looked at the story in the same way. I think it’s a very likely possibility that he was just issuing what he thought was a genuine invitation to participate in a church he believes in and that encourages evangelization. (Based solely on what I have observed in the past or friends have experienced). In all of the cases I have experienced or observed anything from a polite demurral to a firm no thank you was all that was needed to end the conversation. There were no accusations, anger or unkindness on the part of the evangelizer so perhaps it was easier for me and my various friends/acquaintances to shake it off without taking offense. It was the same invite/offer/overture these people were tendering to most of the people they encountered.
That was also the sense I got from KesterGayle, as the man was likely offering a pamphlet to anyone he did work for or randomly encountered. He wasn’t seeking her out because he felt she was doing something wrong any more than say a Jehovah’s Witness going door to door in a neighborhood is.
I also agree confrontation and aggressive “correction” does nothing but create resentment.
Nan thank you for your thoughts-and believe me I am far from an expert on any religion, even the one I was raised with. I’m just sharing some experiences that I had that I had to wrap my head around or get a little more information to digest properly.
I certainly agree this is a messy world and we can all use a lot more kindness and a lot less judgement on all sides.
I am pretty middle of the road and get myself in trouble with both “sides” because I think people should be able to say whatever they want and do whatever they want unless it is directly harmful to others. I don’t like hypocrisy and I think rules should be enforced squarely across the board. I also can’t help pointing out the problems across both “aisles” as it were- which ends up just making everyone else unhappy with me because nowadays you need to pick a “side” and defend it against all criticism, reason and common sense.
Hi, Elaine s. Sorry if I went on a tangent back there, but to answer your question, “And why does Nan de Plume assume that “overt religious beliefs” come with “the mix”. Please define “the mix”. I was only referring to general observations in my life, nothing scientific or anything like that. My point, which was never meant to be disparaging in any way, was about how certain beliefs tend to cluster in certain groups. For example, when I encounter someone who espouses hardline conservative views, I can usually safely predict that the person also holds some “traditional” religious beliefs. Is this always the case? Of course not. I know conservatives who are secular as well as liberals who are devoutly religious. Everyone is an individual, after all! But I have observed certain belief patterns and their relative probabilities in certain professions, etc., which is all I meant by that comment.
And in literature, as in life, a variety of characters and thoughts is what makes things interesting and often forces us to mentally challenge ourselves rather than hiding in an echo chamber. That’s one of many great things about AAR. People with different beliefs who share a love of literature get to come together and explore those differences. For this, I am grateful- and very, very happy!
Sorry – Typo Alert! “I don’t think “Joe Public” isn’t stupid” – should have read “I don’t think “Joe Public” is stupid”. Fingers faster than brain syndrome.