Okay, here is a confession: I expected not to like Little Women on reread. My memories of it are as somewhat preachy, pious, and sentimental, which I liked when I was ten because I too was somewhat preachy, pious, and sentimental. I mean, hopefully I am still pious in its original sense, but not in combination with the other two. Even then, though, it was never a true favourite with me the way it is with lots of small bookish children. I agreed to read it mostly because it was a buddy read with Melanie (and Biscuit), and I always enjoy our conversation irrespective of whether I like the book itself. Sometimes it’s more interesting if I didn’t like the book, actually, because then there’s more to talk about! So, were my expectations met? Well, yes and no. A cautionary note: this book contains some spoilers for Little Women/Good Wives, which you have probably all either read, watched, or decided you have no interest in.
I doubt there’s anyone reading this post who doesn’t have at least some knowledge of the premise, but just in case: four sisters, ranging in age from 12 to 17, are living with their “Marmee” and their cook, Hannah. Their father has just gone away to be a chaplain for Union soldiers in the American Civil War, and they miss him terribly. The novel follows them in a more-or-less episodic fashion over the course of about a year. All four girls have strengths and flaws – Meg is pretty and gentle, but always longing after the Before Days when her father was rich; Jo is kind and generous, but a bit wild with a hot temper; Beth is sweetness itself, but intensely shy; Amy is charming, but selfish and impetuous. At the very start of the novel, they become friends with boy-next-door Laurie. He and Jo quickly become inseparable. The novel advertises itself in the first few chapters as being about the girls working to overcome their flaws, loosely informed by the story of A Pilgrim’s Progress – but, for my money, it’s by far at its strongest when Alcott forgets that and writes about the girls’ various adventures with Laurie.
Little Women is as moralistic as I’d remembered. Much is made of the fact that they are trying to do good works despite being poor, but I found it difficult to make sense of this when the novel opens with a neighbouring family almost starving to death for want of money. The Marches, in contrast, have a nice house, a cook-housekeeper, and money for the doctor. This was irritating (though of course poverty is relative; it’s implied that they have lost a great deal of money through a bad investment, and are now much poorer than all their social circle). I also got annoyed on several occasions with Alcott’s preaching – she and I have some important theological differences, most notably in this book to do with the role of both work and works within salvation. Alcott has a tendency to present a specifically US-American version of Christianity as The Gospel Entire. I think I would have found this annoying even if I agreed with it, but I do not.
I was tempted to do a whole post all about Alcott’s theology and my problems with it, but I don’t think anyone would find that interesting, so I’ll confine myself to a single example. At one point, the girls have a holiday from work – a week off, where they do not do any of their jobs or chores unless they want to. And, of course, the moral of this episode is that they hate it, because Work is Always Good and also if you aren’t working then Do You Have a Purpose Even? After all, only selfish people want holidays, ergo being on holiday turns you selfish. Bleugh. This is very Puritan, which is why it’s so prominent in contemporary American evangelicalism, but it’s by no means common to all denominations and families of churches. There are plenty of churches outside the US, and probably plenty within, that have a healthier view of work and rest. The stuff about work ethic, and especially working for salvation, is so integral to Little Women and so contrary to my own beliefs that I really struggled with it this time around.
Good Wives is different. It opens with Meg’s wedding, and stretches over a few years when the March sisters are in their late teens to mid twenties. I have always liked the three sequels to Little Women more than the first volume, and I like each one more than the previous: I like Good Wives, I really like Little Men, and I absolutely love Jo’s Boys. I think Alcott manages to tone her preaching down a lot in these books, and when she does preach it at least tends to be on topics where we are more in agreement. See, for example, her comments about old maids (and try to forgive her for laying so much emphasis on the “oldness” of people who are maybe 45):
Gentlemen, which means boys, be courteous to the old maids[…] Just recollect the good aunts who have not only lectured and fussed, but nursed and petted, too often without thanks, the scrapes they have helped you out of, the tips they have given you from their small store, the stitches the patient old fingers have set for you, the steps the willing old feet have taken […] if death, almost the only power that can part mother and son, should rob you of yours, you will be sure to find a tender welcome and maternal cherishing from some Aunt Priscilla, who has kept the warmest corner of her lonely old heart for ‘the best nevvy in the world’.
Now. I do have issues with this – the implication that unmarried and childless women are lonely by default, and the assertion that all women are inherently maternal, just for a start – but Alcott apologises for her “little homily” in the next sentence, so at least she’s aware it went on a bit. Knowing a little bit of her biography, it’s clear that she is basically describing herself here, which makes me feel fonder towards the passage. This is what I mean about the preaching being less annoying (for me) in the second book. This is more-or-less how I feel about children and the prospect of motherhood. I love children, but am unlikely to have any of my own for a variety of medical, temperamental, and social reasons. Irrespective of this, my godchildren (plus any nieces or nephews I may eventually acquire) have an extremely important place in my heart and always will. So Alcott is still preaching, but because this is something I agree with, it’s less annoying. Even though I believe it in a less saccharine way. And with fewer references to “old” and “lonely”, if you please.
In short, Good Wives feels more authentic and believable to me than Little Women. Alcott is no longer actively trying to tie the story to A Pilgrim’s Progress, and it unfolds more naturally – I think that’s why there’s so much less preaching. On the flipside, there were things that I found much harder to read this time around. For instance, Laurie is clearly in love with Jo, who obviously loves him deeply in return but without the same romantic attraction. It’s apparent that he’s on course for a nasty heartbreak in the early part of the book, and I wanted to step into the story and give him a hug. I don’t remember being as moved by that when I was thirteen! I’m immensely glad, though, that she doesn’t marry Laurie – I think this is one of the strongest points of the whole series. I think that Alcott’s decision to keep them as best friends who survive a difficult estrangement is rare and lovely. This is especially true because they then both end up with people who are neither a threat to nor threatened by their friendship, and there’s not a hint of pining. They have to resolve the fact that they love each other dearly, but differently, which is something that happens in real life but is not much addressed in books.
Overall, I’m very glad I reread this. I enjoyed my conversation with Melanie and Biscuit a lot. We talked a lot about the differences in work culture between the UK and the US – the UK tends towards a more European relationship with paid leave, for example, though over the past few years (and especially during the pandemic) there has been an expectation that people won’t take leave. Frankly, the American managers who have been bringing their weird work norms over here can leave any time they please. I’ll keep taking all my contractually entitled leave even if it costs me promotions. (I went searching for a non-Reddit link to add as supporting information for that statement about American managers – but the first thing I found was an American manager complaining about how “disloyal” British employees are to their bosses because we actually take our leave. I do not wish to link to him, but it was so dispiriting that I gave up the search before I could find anything else). Anyway, the reread led to a great conversation, and I enjoyed revisiting Good Wives. I’ve reread Little Men and Jo’s Boys a couple of times over the years, and I dare say I will continue to do so. I might even add Good Wives into the mix sometimes following this reread. I doubt I’ll pick up Little Women again, though!
That’s sad that the UK is being infected by the US in that way. We Australians are very tenacious about taking our four weeks leave and 12 public holidays.
I only read Little Women for the first time a couple of years ago and enjoyed it immensely. I’m used to being preached at in old books and didn’t mind it particularly – but I enjoyed your explanation of the difference in religions (how do you find The Scarlet Letter?).
I thought Alcott was quite good on the subject of independent women – Jo speaks quite strongly about pursuing a career rather than marrying Laurie – and was disappointed when she does eventually marry and then makes her husband principal of her school.
I haven’t read The Scarlet Letter yet – I approach American writing on religion with extreme caution, so though I do have my favourites in both fiction and non-fiction, it does make me hesitant to pick up work where I know it will be a theme.
I disagree pretty strongly about Jo, though – I thought Alcott made it clear that she couldn’t marry *Laurie* and have a career, but marrying Fritz she gets both a loving relationship of equals (I love that he calls her “Professorin”) and a career as a writer. It makes sense for him to run the school since he’s a trained and experienced teacher and she’s not. I love the fact that, by the time of Jo’s Boys, it’s become a coeducational college with the same curriculum for both male and female students – so Jo has been instrumental in providing options for girls, like her, who want to use both heart and mind in their work. She has a great character arc across the four books, but it’s only halfway through at the end of Good Wives.
I enjoyed this as a child but as an adult reader, the moral tone irritated me enormously.
I worked for an American company for 18 years with several American managers. I’m happy to say that at no time was I made to feel disloyal or lazy for taking holidays. The colleagues in Germany, France and Belgium where 3 weeks summer break is very normal, were similarly accommodated.
I’m glad you were accommodated and able to take holidays! I don’t think every American manager is like this by any means – but it does seem to be a pretty big cultural difference in general, at least based on the comments on Melanie’s review.
I was never really able to forgive Jo for rejecting Laurie – admittedly I was only about ten when she broke my heart at the same time as she broke his. But these early emotions are hard to get past and even though I could see on later re-reads why she felt they were so unsuited, I still couldn’t fully accept it. I think part of the problem was that I disliked Amy so strongly and felt Laurie threw himself away on her. If he’d found someone that I felt was worthy of him I may have got over it better. But then I could never really see why Jo would prefer ancient old Professor Bhaer to lovely Laurie either…
I was never really invested in the Amy and Laurie relationship either – I don’t think Alcott really cares about it much and she doesn’t give it that much page space. Prof Bhaer isn’t that old though! I realised that this time around, which I didn’t as a child – most of what we get about him to start with is in Jo’s letters, where she’s trying very hard a) to reassure her mum that there are no shenanigans going on and b) to reassure herself that she’s not into him. But I think it’s pretty clear that she likes him straight away – he’s so kind and clever, and he has a good sense of humour! He’s one of my favourite characters in the whole series, I think.
I, for one, would love to read a post all about your thoughts on Alcott’s theology! While I definitely don’t agree with much of her perspective, it wasn’t as abrasive to me, possibly because it’s a pretty familiar viewpoint here in North America. I completely agree that one of the best decisions Alcott makes is to maintain Jo and Laurie as friends and partner them with other, very different people. I think that’s one of the things that makes the book still so interesting to read after all these years. Re-reading this to my own girls, I struggled more with those paragraphs on the roles of women and “old maids” etc but it definitely highlighted how much our society has changed!
I did think even as I wrote that line that you might be the exception who would enjoy it! I’m quite tempted to do a reread of Little Men and Jo’s Boys now, having read the first two, and maybe I’ll do a post about Alcott’s theology then.
I definitely struggled with some of the stuff about women and old maids, and it really is clear that society has changed a lot. I’m just a real sucker for anything that portrays childless adults (especially childless women) as still able to have a meaningful impact on children’s lives – I love the kids in my life, and I hope that I am able to show them that over the years and make a positive contribution to their lives as they grow up. So Alcott and I are on the same page there, even if she is much more didactic about it than I am!
I might be your target audience for that post! I don’t remember as much of a religious overtone in Little Men and Jo’s Boys but it’s been a while since I read those.
I like that perspective on what Alcott has to say about the roles of childless women. And I think she was definitely drawing on her own experience. I know I really treasure those people who take those roles in my own kids’ lives and I see the ways they are able to have a positive influence sometimes because they don’t have their own kids.
I would also like the post about religion. I’m so steeped in U.S. religion that I have a hard time seeing it any other way. My brain assumes all Christians associate work with goodness, for example. Charity and good deeds are more for show (and an obligation) than a natural part of being in a community. Etc.
I will say the part about aunts and old maids is something I’ve been thinking about a lot lately. I’ve had a few classmates tell me I’m their college mom, or the closest thing to their mom, because I check up on them or remind folks about a random event happening that they’ve likely forgotten but could really use for a grade. I like being the hub, in a way, and don’t really associate it with mothers, though I can see why young people do. On the other hand, every time our friends have children they quit speaking to us. Because we don’t have children (basically for the same reasons you listed, Lou), folks assume we hate children. Invite me to that 1st birthday. I’ll eat the hell out of that cake and play in the bouncy house, too.
Yeah, trying to maintain friendships once people have become parents can be a real challenge. One of the things I really appreciate about one of my best friends is that she has gone out of her way to make me a part of her daughter’s life – my goddaughter is only four and they live a long way away, so I haven’t seen much of her in person, but we have video calls where we watch Disney films or have lunch together. So many of my friends have dropped me once they got married or had kids, with a preference for hanging out with “mummy friends”. She has made a concerted effort not to do that and I’m really grateful.
I’m probably wrong, but I feel like moms wouldn’t want mom friends because then all you’re doing is sitting around and talking about children. Maybe a separate little slice of life that doesn’t revolve around small people? And I’m surprised your friends exclude you given that you are a pediatric nurse and work with children all the time.
It’s so interesting to hear that perspective and I’d love to hear more of Lou’s thoughts. From what I know, Christianity in North America is heavily influenced by John Calvin and the Puritans, which placed a much heavier emphasis on personal works. There’s also lots of variation from one denomination to another.
I’m sorry your friendships have ended when friends have kids. It can be a hard one to figure out and I’ve been on both ends. I had friendships that fizzled after I got married and had kids. Looking back, I could definitely have done better but I’ve also had friends who seemed to lose interest in me when I became a parent and wasn’t as available at the drop of a hat. I’m glad to know you still want to be invited to birthday parties though! Our kids parties have always basically just been the people we like and want to have around!
Nick and I were talking about this, and I think a lot of the problems develop when people have children in their twenties. Their single friends may still have a party vibe, or a spontaneous wish to do something. Creeping up on 40, though, we’re not spontaneous ourselves. We bust out our little calendars to plan things, so I think it makes sense that parents and non-parents can come together. The only other thing would be for both parties to make clear if the event is child-friendly or not. Sometimes kids are distracting. Other times, they are part of the scene and fun to have around. In other situations, adults want to have adult conversations.
Ugh, I typed out a response that doesn’t seem to have posted. The gist was basically that I also try not to assume that other people are always excited to have my kids around. I have friends who have dealt with infertility who really struggled to be around pregnancy and babies and that’s totally fair! I also have mom friends who I see regularly with kids but we also make an effort to connect as adults without our children around!
Ooof, I hate when comments get deleted after I worked so hard typing them. Usually, I get frustrated and do the voice thing on my phone and talk out the comment to the best of my ability.