Laura Ingalls Wilder’s name stripped from children’s book award over ‘Little House’ depictions of Native Americans

But she herself is no longer worthy of having an award named after her. Somehow she became an unworthy writer even though her writings didn't change.

@burkaman put this better and more succinctly than I did, but while it's true that her writings didn't change, the ALSC did. They haven't made an overarching judgement of her or her writings as a whole, only as things pertain to their award. Some kids are hurt by Wilder's books because they have passages that dehumanize people like them. Whether or not the kids are engaging in a historical fallacy when they feel hurt by phrases like "they only good Indian is a dead Indian" isn't particularly relevant in the end. The ALSC has decided that, to be consistent with their commitment to all children, they don't want an award that some kids will associate with that, especially since a seal on a book leaves no room for proper context.

I honestly don't think there is a good interpretation of what they've done.

Okay. To be honest, if your first reply had been more like your second one, it would have felt less antagonistic to me and I probably wouldn't have included my final paragraph. It's fine if you don't (or can't) see it from their point of view. Sans sarcastic mocking I'd still have disagreed, but it would have felt like it left more room for discussion.

I'd still encourage you to read their full rationale (I've quoted below for people on mobile because it's a PDF). After reading a post with your thoughts stately clearly I don't think it will have an impact on your opinion, but personally I find it interesting.

[...] we acknowledge that Wilder’s books not only hold a significant place in the history of children’s literature and continue to be read today, but that they have been and continue to be deeply meaningful to many readers on a personal level. We also acknowledge that they have been deeply painful to many readers, and have been across decades alongside their popularity. Both of these things are true. Neither the option to rename the award nor the option to sunset the award and establish a new award demands that anyone change their personal relationship with or feelings about Wilder’s books.

Additionally, changing the name of the award, or ending the award and establishing a new award, does not prohibit access to Wilder’s works or suppress discussion about them. Neither option asks or demands that anyone stop reading Wilder’s books, talking about them, or making them available to children. These recommendations do not amount to censorship, nor do they undermine intellectual freedom.

We also acknowledge that Wilder’s books are a product of her life, experience and perspective as an individual White woman of her era. Her works reflect mainstream, although certainly not universal, cultural attitudes toward Indigenous people and people of color during the times in which she lived and during the era in which the award was established. Many who took our survey and argued against changing the name acknowledged the racism in such attitudes. Some, in recognizing that Wilder’s books have painful racist content, point to the value of her books—and by extension an award in her name—in providing a teachable moment to discuss history, racism and stereotypes with children. This presumes that every association with or reference to the award could be attached to a context, to these “teachable moments.” But the primary visibility of this and other ALSC awards is through the name and seal, which are often seen or referenced without greater context. There are not opportunities for curriculum or caveats or justifications or explanations attached to every mention or appearance of the Wilder Award, while the desire to provide teachable moments underscores the very concern that ALSC is seeking to address in asking us to “propose what, if any, changes should be made to address the inconsistency between Wilder’s legacy and ALSC’s core values.”

Additionally, while we agree that adults should think critically about Wilder’s books and the discussions that can take place with children around them, the purpose of the award is not to highlight or illuminate her works specifically (beyond the honor she received when the award was established), or to generate that critical discussion. Yet perceptions matter, along with the very real pain associated with her works for some, and year after year ALSC gives the impression of upholding Wilder’s works through an award that bears her name.

We understand that some desire this process be slowed down. If our research and the input and feedback we received made us think more information was needed, or made us uncertain of a path forward, then we, too, would recommend taking more time. Although there may be value in allowing people to adjust to the idea of this change, the truth is that it will inevitably be uncomfortable and upsetting to some no matter when it takes place, while slowing the process down would prolong a decision that, in the eyes of many, is already too long in coming.

Finally, changing the name of the ALSC award for significant and lasting contribution to children’s literature has no reflection on past winners or their achievements, and does not negate the honor they’ve received or their accomplishments. At the same time, it ensures future winners of such an award will not feel the need to weigh the honor of the recognition against concerns about having their name attached to Wilder’s works, or to forgo the honor or recognition in order to distance themselves from Wilder’s works.