So last night I pulled I first Elsie book (New version) off my bookshelf because I was bored and it was set in the time period I'm writing in, and immediately lost some respect for the author just off the first chapter. The first sentence of the book is describing the school room. So are the first four paragraphs, then you are introduced to Elsie. If I was one of those people who just read the first page for reading the book the first time before deciding if the plot was good enough to carry on, I think I would have slammed it shut. I'll keep reading anyway, just as maybe some light research about the richer people and their lives on a large plantation, since it's been a while since I read it.

Or they couldn't find anyone willing. Even a good portrayal of Elsie might ruin a promising acting career.

*laughs*

Or perhaps they didn't bother trying to make one, because it probably wouldn't sell anyway.

Ok, ok...Be nice.

Poor Elsie. She needs someone to defend her, Ana dear.

I suggest giving the books (at least the first one) a try before you make a judgement on them. You might find them a very enjoyable read.

Were you addressing me, Aemi?

Ana, I was just teasing, dear. Like Willow.

*Digs up a very old thread*

So, I found this today: http://www.breakpoint.org/features-colu ... y/12/22395 Vision Forum is going to stop publishing the original Elsie books.

Now, I've only read the new Life of faith series ones, published by Mission City Press, and I think those will keep being published. But to you who have read the old ones, do you think what the article says is true? It seemed a bit harsh to me.

Yes, it does seem harsh. Recently I tried re-reading Elsie book four and couldn't get past the first few pages. I agree with the article on some points... compared to today's standards the book is very racist. I mentioned some of these points to my mom, and she pointed out that this was a different time. These books were written in the late 1800s/early 1900s. Things were different. And things are very different today. What was considered fine then may seem very wrong now. This is why it's probably a good thing that these books have been updated.

Azlyn, you've read the revised versions, right? What do you think? Wikipedia says, "An adapted version has been published, but it leaves out several of the most important facts and details." To be honest, it has been several years since I read the books and I don't really have any intention of reading them again, so I'm just going on what I remember.

And then - I do feel that Elsie marrying Edward Travilla was weird. Sixteen years' age difference is quite a bit, especially for one who marries so young. As for modeling the relationships Elsie has with Travilla and her father - nonono. And the disadvantage - by the time Elsie & Travilla have several older children (they have eight in total), Travilla has died (see book seven, Elsie's Widowhood). "He [Edward Travilla] often wishes she was 'ten years older, and that I was ten years younger'" (Wikipedia). Yech. You must also remember Edward Travilla and Horace Dinsmore, Elsie's father, were childhood friends. That makes Elsie's father also about 16-18 years older than her. And if I remember correctly, Elsie's mother was a year or two younger than him.

I checked out Amazon's description of the book.

Truth, yes. Faith, yes. Religion, yes. Morality? Not really. Humanity? Certainly not by today's standards!

As for Elsie herself... she is very perfect. I cannot ever, ever, ever see any of the younger girls I know acting this way. I cannot picture myself or my friends acting the way she did in the first book. No one I know has that much patience. Not even moms with lots of kids! XD And it's hard to see a twelve year old with that much conviction. She is indeed very childlike, which is in itself not wrong (Matt. 18:4 "And he said: 'Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven...'"; Matt. 19:4 "Jesus said, 'Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these'"). But when you're married, have a plantation to oversee, and have several children, you need to grow up some.

Also, the scene where Horace Dinsmore makes Elsie play the piano on Sunday until she falls off and hits her head... I would think, since Elsie wants to please him so much, she would do immediately what he asks. It's partially his fault, too, since Travilla had just asked it, then Mr. Dinsmore forces her to do it. Wikipedia says: "Elsie feels she must obey the Word of God before that of her father and can only obey her father when his orders do not conflict with Scripture. For example, her young uncle Arthur ruins her copybook and does other damage which he blames on Elsie. Because Elsie will not tell on him, her father is ready to punish her, until she is saved by last-minute testimony from Lora." Now, I have no idea why it is considered wrong by her to report someone's misdoings/vandalism of property. Also, I will quote a book review I read, and agree with:



Disclaimer: To be honest, it has been several years since I read the books and I don't really have any intention of reading them again, so I'm just going on what I remember.

Something positive, now. I do believe my favorite character was Walter Dinsmore.

*heartily applauds Elly's post* I agree with all you said, Elly dear. Very well said. I actually think that article hit on a lot of valid points, especially regarding her relationships with her father and Mr. Travilla. I kinda got the creeps a bit recalling those parts of the book.


Agreed! Also agreed on the point about the 8 year old sticking to what they believe is "morally right". And to be frank, how many 8 year olds know the Bible so back to front as Elsie does in order to make that claim? A. They probably couldn't even read it in KJV at that age, and B. they do not have the wisdom to even understand what they're reading in order to apply it!

Those are my two cents I'm adding to Elly's dollar.

From what I've gathered of the discussion of the old books, the storyline is the same, pretty much. She's living at the Greyson plantation and heir to a large fortune, Horace Dinsmore Sr comes to get her and take her to Roselands, Elsie's father returns when she is seven or eight, I think, and he is cold to her as she tries to win his love and affection.

Then there is many of the same events, Elsie's father forcing her to sit at the piano until she plays the secular song on the Sabbath, being asked to read a newspaper to her father on the Sabbath and refusing, which results in the ultimate conflict that is most of book two.

When she is 18 she almost marries that creepy guy while staying with Aunt Wealthy. And then later she marries Edward Travilla. Which is also creepy, considering the age difference and how he was like a second father to her as a child. Edward Travilla does die long before Elsie, though that happens in the Violet series about Elsie's daughter.

The character of Elsie sounds the same. She is waaay too perfect.

I didn't detect the racism the article mentioned, but there was the same morality issues for sure that you guys have been talking about.

The racism has a lot to do with how the writer exaggerated the slaves' dialect. I'm assuming most of it has been changed in the revised version. "Da blesserd chile" = "the blessed child", and so forth. I understand putting in some of people's different accents, but it was way overdone in the originals.

Ah, I see. I think the slaves still have some accents, but not very much.

I started re-reading book four of the revised versions, Elsie's Stolen Heart. The one where she almost marries the creepy guy. Anyway, I already dislike it more.... Just... Ick. There's some weird implications I didn't notice before, and two in particular have stood out to me in the first four chapters.

The first one is where someone is telling Elsie how a woman bumped into a pole because she was watching another man, and the woman was embarrassed and people laughed at her for running into the pole. Then Elsie responds with:


So it is wrong to be amused when someone bumps into a pole, according to Elsie?

And then the other weird moment was when Aunt Wealthy first meets the creepy guy, Bromly Edgerton, and he stays and chats longer than she liked. When Weathly returns to Elsie and Lottie, this is what they say:


Um, what? WHAT? I found that rather disturbing, anyway. 'Nough said.

Interesting. I don't remember Bromly very well. As for the first quote - if I ran into a pole because I was watching a guy, I would probably blush and be embarrassed, then start laughing at myself. Sometimes Elsie takes herself much too seriously to be real. I'd rather laugh and joke around than sit around being solemn all day.

I fall off stuff and run into things all the time, if I was as perfect as Elsie, a smile would crack my face for all the times I'd have to get upset over the stupid things I've done.

*laughs heartily * I find it so amusing that several of you are disturbed by the fact that Travilla marries Elsie (age 19 or 20, can't remember) when he is 35. He's not old, guys. In fact, it happens more often in our modern age than you think. My Uncle was 18 years older than my aunt, and he was the best thing that ever happened to her. My Grandpa Ken (not biological) was 16 years older than my Grandmother. I know women married to men 8, 10, and 12 years older than them.

Plus, you are talking about a time period when men had to be fully established and capable of taking care of a family before they were allowed to even consider getting married. So most men were in their late 20s when they got married.

Also, Elsie's father was only 16 years or so when Elsie was born. So it wouldn't be like my Dad's childhood friend marrying me (I was born when he was 24).

As for the slavery issue, most people don't really know enough about the actual events of the civil war, or the reality of American slavery, to write an article criticizing someone who actually lived through the civil war. Also, we have to remember that Martha Finley was actually a northerner, so she wasn't giving this biased southern opinion. She sympathized with the South because of the atrocities that were occurring.

As for the slavery issues... I'm not sure how anyone can claim racism... the books do deal with slavery, yes, but Elsie and her family adore the blacks. For goodness sakes, Elsie was raised by a black woman. The book does depict KKK dealings, but it is always in a negative light. To be honest, I think the real issue people have is the fact that the books use the old speech of the blacks (which is politically incorrect now a days) and that Mammy and others chose to stay with the Dinsmore/Travilla family after they were free (which is historically accurate and many of the freed slaves asked their masters to let them stay).

Elsie sitting on Travilla’s lap as a child is laughable. In our culture we sexualize everything. People try to coax Elianna (my little sister) on their laps all the time (she’s 6) because she’s so stinking cute! Not many people can resist her quick grin, spiraling curly top, and mischievous personality. Elianna draws people. Just because a man (who, let us remember, is her father’s childhood buddy) tries to coax a kid into his lap, doesn’t mean he’s thinking inappropriate thoughts about her, like the article said.

And the issues people have with Elsie’s affectionate nature towards her father… I guess that one I don’t understand why people get up in arms over. One of the biggest reasons we have out of wedlock mothers is because their Fathers have nothing to do with them and pay them no attention. It’s a proven fact. Girls whose fathers are an active part of their life as a teen and adult are far more stable and much more self assured than girls who aren’t. In both the secular world and the Christian church. I’m 22. People think it’s weird and gross that I kiss my Daddy, or for that matter, that I call him Daddy. To be perfectly honest, I’ve had 2 people say all kinds of horrible untruths about Daddy and I because I am affectionate with him and because I’m unwilling to say it is wrong that I am affectionate with my Daddy. In my mind, I feel it is incredibly hurtful to slight my Daddy and tell him “no, I’m a teen/adult now, so I don’t want to hug you, or kiss you, or spend any time with you”, despite the fact that he has always been there for me and has always loved me.

However, all that said, I have several issues with the Elsie Dinsmore series. Elsie is too perfect, therefore unrelatable . Her author is soooo focused on Elsie’s beauty that it is unhealthy. Elsie is a terrible witness to her Father as a child because she is often disobedient about things that are trifles and therefore she should do as the Bible commands her and obey her Father instead of always forcing what she thinks she should do. Elsie never struggles (except with Brombly, but really, she brought that on herself). Elsie always says the right thing when ministering. Her children are obnoxious. Several situations that the children undergo (including Elsie) are anticlimactic. And the responses that several main characters have towards situations.... let's face it, several of the characters are drama queens (and I mean some of the men, too).

Essentially, Elsie is, as Nancy Carey says in Mother Carey’s Chickens, “the pink of perfection” (which is not a compliment).

However, though I have A LOT of issues with Elsie, I don’t think it is fair to not defend her in areas that I think are not really issues

So, I do have all 28 Elsie Dinsmore books (only read the first 16), but Elsie and I have several issues which we have been unable to reconcile. Plus… I think she lacks depth, now that I look at her as an adult and from the standpoint of an author. Most of the characters lacked depth. And with 28 stories about them, you’d think they should be really, really fleshed out.

* ^ exactly what I was going to say except I would have said it worse *

Aww, thank you, Juliet.

Of course I don't have anything wrong with a little kid sitting on someone's lap. Travilla says he fell in love with her when she was 8 or 10. This is - ugh.

I'm still against the kisses between Horace and Elsie, though. Most of these are not innocent little kisses on the lips that toddlers give (and of which I have been the receiver before ). These are instances where Horace kisses his young daughter on the lips. Ew.

*chuckles * I suppose we are all grossed out by different things.

I haven't read the books for a while now, but from what I remember kissing on the lips was not a culturally romantic thing, necessarily – it wasn't just something that Elsie and her father did, lots of relations and friends would kiss each other, on the lips as well as the cheeks or forehead. Kisses were much more of a cultural normality then than they are today. It would have been weird for her father not to kiss her that way. He did it even when he didn't like her. Cultures are all different when it comes to that. Ancient Hebrew culture had it quite common for people to kiss each other – and one verse in the Bible specifically mentions kissing on the lips in a context that was not romantic. So... * shrugs * It doesn't bother me.

'Fall in love' is a phrase that is used in a lot of different ways. Travilla saw a charming, perfect (ugh) young girl, and wished that the disparity of ages between them was not so great so that he might be better suited to court her when she grew up. When they married I do believe that he said that he fell in love with her when she was a little girl – but everybody says that. "I've loved you since the day we met.' I'm usually like, 'Well, actually, I disagree; you didn't. But whatever. '

I completely agree, Juliet. After all, the Bible talks about brothers and sisters in Christ greeting one another with a holy kiss, and we know the Bible is not advocating homosexuality in this verse.



Yeah, if you're "falling in love" the first moment you see someone, it's called lust.

Good thoughts, folks. I guess I may not have had much of an issue with the whole kissing/loving thing between Elsie and her father/Travilla if it had been written in a slightly more tasteful way. The rich descriptions and lingering over them gives you room to feel uncomfortable, I believe. Might be just me. If it were done maybe a little more lightly and not so emphasized, I may have missed it altogether.

*nods * I would agree. I, personally, don't like the Elsie Dinsmores in part because of the constant focus on Elsie. Her beauty, Her charm. Her "vivacity" (I don't think she's that interesting of a person, so I have a hard time seeing her a vivacious). Her wealth. Her sweet temper....

It's like everyone falls in love with her at once, and she's supposed to draw admiration and love from everyone she meets.

I think the focus on Elsie's beauty and magnanimity is just unhealthy and makes her irksome. Because let's face it. There are lots of people who don't like each and every one of us. And very few humans are stunningly beautiful. Especially not naturally. And that's okay.

Girls have enough issues with body image and being happy with themselves.

Hear hear! The focus on her is boring honestly. Her delightful character, her charm, her beauty, her curls... *takes breath* her eyes, her skin, her lips, her thoughts, her sweetness, her kindness, her gentleness, her piousness...

YES! WE GET IT ALREADY! SHE'S PERFECT! MOVING ON...

*laughs heartily *

Yes, I'm not finding much of racism in the new books. (I finished Elsie's Stolen Heart and started reading Elsie's True Love, mainly just to dissect them. ) The slaves do not talk in a dialect. The only dialect I've found is Mrs. Murray when the Dinsmores visit Ireland.

In Elsie's True Love, Horace and Elsie even have a conversation about how they don't really approve of slavery... But can do nothing about it at the time except make sure their own slaves are very happy and well treated. And with the civil war later in the books, they are correct.

As a whole, from what I gather from the revised versions, the books by Martha Finley do a reasonable, but still not great, job of portraying slavery. Out of the five main plantations in the book (Roselands, The Oaks, Ion, Viamede, and Meadshead), the slaves are happy and well-treated on all but one of them. And there were plantations that mistreated their slaves, correct? Just much, much less common then what the modern world says about slavery nowadays.


This is something they changed in the revised versions, and I'm glad of it! In the new books, Travilla says that he thought of Elsie as no more than a young friend until the family returned from Europe. Then when he saw her, he realized that she was no longer a child but a woman (And she was age 21), and fell in love. Much less creepy.


Agreed! As I re-read them, it's just... disgusting how pretty she is. What's even worse than the other characters complimenting her all the time is the AUTHOR constantly praising her beauty in the narrative. Ick!

Maybe one day I'll rewrite the Elsie books myself.

Most simply - this. I enjoy describing people in length, but I've never put anyone as "beautiful" as Elsie in my stories/novels (or described anyone as much as Martha Finley enjoyed describing perfect little Elsie).

@Azlyn- Well, it's good that they changed that bit about Travilla, anyway... Yes! You should rewrite them, and make Elsie a spunky, well-developed character who doesn't look perfect in the least!

Oh don't get me wrong, my dear, I love describing characters. And most of the women in my stories are pretty (Airianna, my MC's younger sister being very attractive in order to work well with plot points and issues I chose to portray in the stories), but I don't spend time praising them for that.

Here is the way I look at it. If you write your character as if people should love that character because they are beautiful and perfect, you will have a character people despise for those things. If you write a character that happens to be pretty, but you write that character so that people love her for her spunk, personality, and faults, people will because they can identify with her.

Finley wrote an unrelatable character. So to add her beauty on top of her unrelatability... it's just a recipe for disaster.

So I'm with you. I love writing descriptions, and I don't ignore the physical descriptions of people.

Yes, it's fine to have beautiful characters, but to constantly praise them as such, that's another thing.


*Laughs* Unmanageable curls, perhaps?

Though the lack of plot might make the rewrite a little hard.

Another thing I noticed.... It's not just Elsie who is perfect. Do you ever recall Travilla making a mistake? And it says he's handsome. And Elsie's father, he's also handsome and perfect. Elsie's step-mother, Rose, even her younger half-siblings, Trip and Rosie and far too good to be real children.

I say we rewrite the series leaving Elsie perfect, but instead make her ugly as a nightmare, and see how the dynamics change... *coughcough*

It's - it's like a perfect little stereotype of a family.

I like the curls idea. Maybe some freckles, to spoil her "perfect" complexion? Yes... rewriting a basically plotless, 28-book series would be quite challenging. But I bet it'll be a lot shorter if you take out all the praises of everybody's looks.

Oh, and did I mention that I wrote Elsie fanfiction several years ago?

But... But, I adore freckly children!!! They are so cute!

I see a major flaw in this plan...

I adore freckles too, Airi. And thick curly hair.

But anyway. This is getting a bit off-topic.

*Laughs* Well, she can be pretty, but not in a perfect-complextion-perfect-curls way, more like a loveable cute way.





And us naughty mods and even responsible. *Laughs* Erm, back to the Elsie books.