The Pimping of Laura Ingalls Wilder

Laura Ingalls Wilder

Laura Ingalls Wilder began working for a living at age 11 as a live in babysitter for a family who lived near her home in Walnut Grove, and she was paid .50 cents a week for her effort.

And so began the pimping of Laura Ingalls Wilder to help make up for Charles Ingalls' mistakes.

Yes, I'm going there.

Laura Ingalls: A Product of Her Environment

If Laura Ingalls minded going to work at any early age, she never mentioned it, at least not when she was 11. By her own admission Laura found being a live in babysitter to be an easy job and when she wasn't playing with the child, she was able to read and relax. However, let's not pretend it was a good life. She was in the company of unsavory people thoughout her life and this particular job ended after a local drunk came to her bed at night and told her to "lie down and be still."

 I think we all know where that would have gone if Laura didn't threaten to scream.

To her credit Laura's mom, Caroline Ingalls, who is named as the person in "Pioneer Girl: The Annotated Autobiography" who gave permission for Laura to begin working at such an early age, said she didn't have to go back to work after that.

Now, I want to make it clear that Laura doesn't appear to be under any duress, here. She rarely complains about having to work. She is a trooper for the cause. Her family is poor, her sister is blind (well that comes a little later), and Laura being the oldest seeing child in the family has to step up.
However, I'm very interested in learning as to why Mary - as the eldest seeing child during Laura Ingalls Wilder: The Live In Babysitter Years- wasn't selected to babysit this child.

It's no secret that Ingalls Family of Pepin, Wisconsin, Independence Kansas, back to Pepin, Wisconsin, Walnut Grove, MN, Burr Oak, IA, back to Walnut Grove, MN, and, finally, DeSmet, South Dakota were poor. At times, they were destitute.

The Ingalls were so poor they lived in a hole in the ground, up against a raging creek until they could afford to put a house up. They were so poor they took a partnership on a hotel in Iowa. A partnership where Charles Ingalls ended up receiving no pay for his share and fled his rent in the middle of the night. They were so poor they followed any promise of an opportunity, even if no opportunity existed.

They were so poor, they had to send their daughter to work at a very early age.

Working for Mary Ingalls

Mary Ingalls

I get a little ranty when it comes to the subject of Mary Ingalls. I get it. She was blind and her family wanted her to function more or less as a normal person. I don't have a problem with that part. However, I  can't talk about Laura sewing buttonholes and teaching in order to send Mary to college without getting a bit miffed.

I don't deny education is an important thing. I don't deny everyone deserves a chance at a career and education. I don't want to begrudge Mary that. However, I also wonder why Laura, as the Ingalls sister showing the most promise at the time, wasn't considered for more than a teaching career before becoming a housewife. Laura accepted her fate without question. Mary couldn't teach, so she had to. Why?

 Why was Mary the one to receive the benefit of a higher education, when the reality is her college education didn't amount to much more than reading Braille, playing the organ, and tying fishnets for a living? Why didn't anyone suggest Laura use her earnings to go to college instead? Why didn't anyone see promise in Laura as the eldest seeing child? She was in the top of the class in school, she obviously had a good work ethic, so why, when putting money in Pa's "pocketbook" to save for college, did no one put aside money for Laura?

Sewing and teaching...but for what end result?


When Charles Ingalls heard that a local merchant needed someone to help his wife sew shirts, he was more than happy to pimp out 13 year old Laura for the job. Ma Ingalls was unsure at first, this being a town job and all (Which struck me as odd since she sent Laura off to babsit and stay in another family's home when she was 11) but she relented. Why? So that Mary could go to college, of course.

So Laura sat in the shop window, laughing at town drunks coming out of a saloon, so she could sew buttonholes (which she hated) so Mary could learn how to tie fishing nets and play the organ. Two extremely important skills for a young lady to have. I mean, for all their complaining about the saloons in town, Ma and Pa certainly had no issue with Laura sitting across from one all day so she can earn money.

Ok. I know I'm getting sarcastic here and that Mary did learn to use Braille, but that's pretty much the extent of it, isn't it? It's not like she used this educational opportunity for anything truly great. An education is a wonderful thing, don't get me wrong, but it's how you use it that's important. And I see Mary's years at college as a waste of money, when that money could have been used for a more promising career.

Now, to be fair, no one technically  pimped Laura out to teach. But it was put in her head at an early age that if Mary wasn't to be a teacher, Laura had to do it even though she didn't want to. So when a 15 year old Laura was offered a whole $40 to teach in a school 12 miles away and live in an extremely unpleasant household, it was the last thing she wanted to do - but what choice did she have? Mary needed to go to college and that whole $40 was going to her. Laura traveled through snow and cold weather, and endured unpleasant conditions for $40 that she would never see.

You bought a what????

And what happened after several years of working and Laura's money wasn't needed for Mary's education or travel anymore?  Charles used it to buy Mary an organ.

An organ!!!

Mind you, this was a family, who, just a couple of winters ago was twisting hay and grinding wheat in a coffee grinder. This is a family who never had a successful crop their whole time in DeSmet. This is a family who had to move from town to town so they can earn scraps. Yet, at the first moment of prosperity not only does Charles use Laura's hard earned money to buy an organ for Mary, but he spends even more money to build a room on to their house for it. What the heck? Why not put it away. Why not save for a rainy day? Why not have Laura put away HER money to start her new life with Almanzo?

Yes, Laura insisted Charles take that money and use it for something, but he should have insisted she keep it for her future. Instead they used it for something they absolutely didn't need, for sweet, blind Mary - who wouldn't even be home to use the organ for another couple of years.

Never once, in any of the books, did anyone suggest Laura save money to continue her education. Instead, they sent her to work to pay for an education for a sister who wouldn't use it beyond playing an instrument, stringing some beads, and making fishing nets to sell for a pittance.

Never once did Laura complain about working hard for Mary. I respect her so much for that. She might have disliked the job, but she never complained about the cause. (I would have pitched a major fit, I can tell you that.)

Updated to Add: I forgot to mention Mary did receive assistance from the state to pay for school. However, my point is the same. No one encouraged Laura to put away for her future or explore opportunities of her own. One would think a family who lived in extreme poverty thus far would encourage Laura to save up money she earned so she didn't fall on similar hard times. 

I know Mary is this sacred subject no one is supposed to talk about, but for a family this poor, there were better options. 

Mary already knew how to move around the house, knit, and she already helped with chores. Certainly she could have sold her crafts, even without the benefit of college. So with or without government assistance my point is still the same. Mary didn't have to go to college and it didn't benefit her to the extent where she brought much money into the home or used the education beyond getting around the house and bringing in some spare change. This was an unnecessary expense her family shouldn't have spared or should have used where it would have done the most good. 

A Hand to Mouth Existence

Laura and Almanzo Wilder

Laura Ingalls Wilder learned how to live a hand to mouth existence from her father. It's the only way she knew.

In The First Four Years " it seems as if Laura is obsessed with money and debt, and it makes me wonder if this was something her family talked about often. Remember, this book didn't have Rose Wilder Lane's (we'll get to her in a minute) editorial guidance, so if Laura did worry more about money in the other books in the "Little House " series, Rose might have edited it out. That's just speculation, however.

One thing that is for sure is that the Ingalls didn't have two dimes to rub together until they were well established in DeSmet, and after Laura began working hard and eventually married. They were a poor family for as long as Laura lived with them.

One crop away...

One thing that wasn't touched on very much in the books before "The First Four Years" is that Almanzo was in debt. He had his mortgage, and his horses, and other purchases. He was always trading one debt for another. Like the Ingalls, he was always just one crop away from being rich and out of debt. Like the Ingalls, that never happened.

I wonder how much different things would have been for the Wilders if Laura was allowed to keep at least some of the money she earned though the years - and not just a little at the end just before she was married.

When I first read about Almanzo as a bachelor, I had this idea that he was doing fairly well for himself - but it looks like he was mortgaged to the hilt. Laura began working hard on the family household from the second she entered her new home as Mrs. Wilder. She cooked, cleaned, fed Almanzo's co-workers, and was a dutiful wife. That's not a rant. I just feel like Laura never had a break. All she knew was hard work. There was never a honeymoon. There was never a "let's just relax and enjoy each others' company" period. Laura put on her apron as soon as she entered into matrimony, and never took it off.

Both Laura and Alamanzo had a strong work ethic. They both knew the value of hard work both inside and outside the home, and neither complained. This is what they had to do to survive. However, a bout with Diphtheria put them both behind in their work, and it rendered Almanzo Wilder unable to use his legs in the same capacity again, which hindered his ability to work hard and earn money. They also lost everything in a fire. They could never get ahead and spent most of their lives working hard for very little money - a cause of resentment for their daughter Rose.

Rose Wilder Lane and the Pimping of Laura Ingalls Wilder

In addition to working on their farm, and selling the fruits of that labor, Laura eventually began writing for farm journals and local newspapers. She wasn't the strongest writer, but she had a pleasant, conversational tone that appealed to her generation. While this money did help to pay for their necessities, it's no secret Rose supported her family.

It's also no secret that  Rose Wilder Lane encouraged Laura with her writing, and influenced her to not only write her autobiography, but her "juveniles" as well. In "A Wilder Rose: A Novel," it's indicated that Rose wasn't all that happy to support her parents. She didn't appreciate her poverty, and didn't respect her parents work ethic. Though the book is considered a novel, much of it was taken from Rose's papers and diaries so I'm sure there's more than an element of truth, there.

Rose wanted her mother to write books as a means of support for all of them. While Rose did prosper, and made a good living as a writer, the truth is, she lost all her money during the depression. No one comes out and says this, but I will - I think Rose was also hoping for a bit of a meal ticket in her mom. I mean, she had no qualms about using her Mom's story without permission when she wrote "Young Pioneers " (something Laura was a bit miffed about), but she couldn't do that forever and those pioneer stories weren't going to write themselves.

 While I'm thankful for the Laura Ingalls Wilder the author and all her wonderful stories, they are the result of someone else pimping her out - her daughter.

Rose not only convinced her Mother to write the books, but she shaped them and typed them and negotiated for them. I contend that Laura wouldn't have been an author -beyond the farm journals - if not for Rose pushing her mother to write and earn more than she would at farming so Rose wouldn't have to support her.

You may not agree with any of the above. All the opinions here are my own. But Laura Ingalls Wilder worked hard her entire life. She worked hard for her parents, she worked hard for her sister(s), she worked hard for her husband, and she worked hard for her daughter.  She worked hard for her mortgage and her farm. She didn't complain that we know of, she did all because she had to be done. She did it all because she was expected to. She was a true role model who upheld the pioneer spirit her entire life.

Would she have done all of the above if she didn't feel she had to? I'm not so sure about that. Laura Ingalls Wilder liked to have fun, and I like to think if not for having to work hard for others, she would have been a bit more of a free-spirit. (Not that she wasn't, but I hope you get what I mean here).

 I'll let you draw your own conclusions about the pimping of Laura Ingalls Wilder. At least she got to see some success before she passed away and I hope she enjoyed her post-author life to its fullest.

Note: All images are via Wikimedia Commons as part of the Creative Commons or Public Domain. All links to books on this page are affiliate links.