I know this thread has been dormant for ages so no one will likely see this, but as a LIW-phile, I had to chime in about the constant griping (here and on other forums that discuss LIW/the LHoTP books) about Pa eating pancakes with the Wilder brothers during the long winter. I have re-read the series (and Pioneer Girl as well) several times as an adult and I definitely have come to see that Charles Ingalls made many, many stupid decisions over the years that did not help his family at all, but the fact that so many people get angry over him eating with the Wilders in TLW and call his decision "greedy", "selfish", "atrocious", etc. kind of boggles my mind.
Have all those people read the book more than once? It was obvious that Pa was the only member of the family that still had any kind of an appetite left after months of the same endless, boring diet, because he was not only sharing in the active chores that the others in the family were doing (grinding wheat, twisting hay), but was also struggling through the blizzards each morning and night to do the farm chores, and, on top of that, doing extremely demanding work dragging his poor horse through breaking snow hills to bring back enough hay to get them through to the next blizzard in between storms. Of course, the women in the family were also starving and would have been thrilled to see a steaming plate of pancakes and ham, but even if Pa had brought the food home (another issue, which I will address in a minute), I am completely certain that Ma and the girls would have either urged Pa to eat it all himself or would have given him the vast majority of the food, not because "proper ladies wouldn't begrudge a man food" (as someone said upthread), but because they a) knew he needed it more to keep up the very limited strength he had to haul hay and keep the farm animals alive and b) probably would not have been able to eat more than a mouthful or two themselves because the rich food, after a very scanty and limited diet and minimal physical exercise for months on end, would not have been easy to digest. As for Pa being "greedy" by then coming home and eating his full share of food there after eating heartily with the Wilders, I think it is mentioned several times in the book that any time anyone tried to give up extra food for Pa or didn't want to eat their fair share, he was very firm about making sure they ate their fair share. If he had offered extra food to the girls or to his wife, they would almost certainly have refused first because a) they felt, logically, that he deserved his fair share and if possible, the largest share of food given the extra physical work he had to face and b) Laura mentioned many times that even though they were, technically, starving, they didn't really feel hungry because they were so weak, listless, and bored of the same repetitive diet.
As for the people who keep mentioning how awful it was for Pa to not bring the extra food home to his family... how would that have worked, exactly?? If you went to visit a neighbour and that neighbour offered you a cup of tea and some cookies, would you pour the cup of tea into your thermos and wrap the cookies up in a napkin to take them home to your family? It would be considered extremely strange and rude to do so, because the food was offered to you as part of the social connection you are making with your neighbour, not as a take-home gift. The Wilders invited Pa to eat with them as part of their social visit - sharing a meal or offering food to visitors was a normal and polite social activity that they were able to luckily maintain even given the terrible weather circumstances, and so they were glad to extend that courtesy to Pa when he visited. If he had said "No, thank you, I have to leave now and go home to my family, but I'll just take that food you offered me 'to go'", that would not have been socially acceptable in any way. Even if you were to say "Screw social conventions! His family was starving and he saw available food; he should have humbled his pride and asked for some to take home!", that would not really have worked, either, because while the Wilders had enough pancakes/extra food to feed one extra person (Pa), it did not mean they had enough to send home for a family of six. Also, would they then be responsible to give out pancakes and ham to other starving families when they came to Royal's shop, too?
Pa was lucky that he was able to buy wheat from the Wilders even though Almanzo was determined not to sell it, and he was lucky that the brothers were hospitable enough to not get angry over him barging in to essentially steal the wheat they'd been hiding and offer him a visit and a meal instead. He took advantage of the meal, as anyone in his situation would, but he put providing for his family by convincing them to sell him the wheat first. If they had denied him the wheat that would essentially keep his family alive for a few more days, I don't think he would have then sat down and said, "Oh, well, I guess I might as well eat some of your pancakes anyhow before I go home and tell Caroline that we're entirely out of food with no hope of getting anymore since the secret wheat stash turned out to be owned by a stingy teenager."
