As for children's literature....I guess I would definitely say that if people were using novels to instruct children's worldviews (which I think is a pretty weird thing to do, personally), I would definitely not allow these books to stand alone or even be heavily emphasized as a representation of life in the late 19th century.
Yeah, but the thing is, I think every book a child reads DOES instruct his or her worldview. Little kids are information sponges: everything they see instructs their worldview, from the way people interact in front of them, to things they learn in school, to tv shows and books. Even silly fantasy stuff that isn't presented as "history" can instruct a kids' worldview. They don't have the historical context or resources to think to themselves, "Is this realistic according to X Y and Z, the accurate factual record?" And most of the time they don't have the awareness to think to themselves, "Wait, when this book portrays A B and C, this is just one person's flawed perspective, and X character in this scene might see things totally differently."
And for most kids, this book *is* the only representation they're going to get as a depiction of "American settlers interacting with Indians in the late 19th century." I don't remember getting anything this memorable/visual in school on that particular subject. (In most curricula, you get a couple of sentences about Plymouth Rock and a couple of sentences about the Trail of Tears, and that's about it for Indians in American history.) So yeah, you could totally come away from the book thinking it was accurate and that the Ingallses were completely correct in their actions from a historical perspective.
no subject
As for children's literature....I guess I would definitely say that if people were using novels to instruct children's worldviews (which I think is a pretty weird thing to do, personally), I would definitely not allow these books to stand alone or even be heavily emphasized as a representation of life in the late 19th century.
Yeah, but the thing is, I think every book a child reads DOES instruct his or her worldview. Little kids are information sponges: everything they see instructs their worldview, from the way people interact in front of them, to things they learn in school, to tv shows and books. Even silly fantasy stuff that isn't presented as "history" can instruct a kids' worldview. They don't have the historical context or resources to think to themselves, "Is this realistic according to X Y and Z, the accurate factual record?" And most of the time they don't have the awareness to think to themselves, "Wait, when this book portrays A B and C, this is just one person's flawed perspective, and X character in this scene might see things totally differently."
And for most kids, this book *is* the only representation they're going to get as a depiction of "American settlers interacting with Indians in the late 19th century." I don't remember getting anything this memorable/visual in school on that particular subject. (In most curricula, you get a couple of sentences about Plymouth Rock and a couple of sentences about the Trail of Tears, and that's about it for Indians in American history.) So yeah, you could totally come away from the book thinking it was accurate and that the Ingallses were completely correct in their actions from a historical perspective.