This shows a good example of how in the past the family was not centered around the child or a pet dog, while today it is.
Children, and dogs for that matter, were just a product of the family, meant to serve a purpose.
The family would have instead centered aroung the father/breadwinner and his needs and wants, as provider. That is why the other poster is correct, that much of the father's actions and silences are due to his shame in not being able to provide. Also the Parents have feelings but have been brought up to be stoic and hide them, and be practical. They attempt to have Joe understand that he needs to be the same, in the matter of the sale of Lassie.
Their actions are true to their time period, not ours.
reply
share
labellamaffia-2
16 years ago
"Their actions are true to their time period, not ours."
Yes, I agree with you, Gailsmile.
It was the depression era. No time or opportunity to feel sentimental about what had to be done for the good of the family.
I do think the father was very upset, he coudn't face Joe when Joe came in from school and the mother was left to be the one to tell him.
It did seem very cruel by today's standards, but we are living in a much different time. They were doing what they actually felt was better for the boy - dwelling on sadness & loss over an animal was an indulgence the family could not afford.
reply
share
Ironman54
14 years ago
Exactly. Adults realistically saw another mouth to feed. They didn't let themselves get too close to pets the way people do now. For one, the dog will die long before the human - fact of life that rural people dealt with everyday. Dogs weren't 'family members'.They had o be practical especially during the Great Depression and it carried on post GD. It was not unlikely that they may have to choose between feeding their child or the dog - the child is gonna win out every time.Why get so attached when these likelihoods might/will come to pass ?
No 3k Vet. bills either. Put 'em down if they get too sick.Poverty and priorities.
They'd never go in to debt over a pet. Hard to believe they're 'dinner' in some Asian countries - just like poultry and beef/pork. Theres a 'healthy balance' in there somewhere ! A sign of our affluence too - some would say 'decadence'.
I loved this movie though. The horse drawn wagon and the dogs in the English countryside - looked like a neat way of life to me ! Anybody notice how he slipped the little dog a 'treat' when she returned the hoop ? Hard to see - you have to look very close. It was in the same hand he grabbed the hoop with. As soon as the dogs mouth makes contact with his hand you can see his finger move and the dog grab it. A quick cut/edit covers up any other hint as to what transpired. If life could only be like this movie.... oh, without the stick wielding hobos ! Not that unrealistic I guess !
reply
share
heather_m1986
14 years ago
Perhaps adults back then weren't as sentimental about pets but children certainly were. Laura Ingalls Wilder talks about the family dog, Jack, as if he was another member of the family. In the early books, he gets as much mention as her baby sister. There were also films like this one and "National Velvet" about the connection that children have to animals. Heck, my 60 something father still gets misty eyed about a dog he had who died during a botched spaying when he was a boy.
reply
share
liscarkat (18373)
9 months ago
I grew up in the 1950s and 1960s, and our dogs were all beloved family members. My parents, who grew up in the 1930s (Great Depression) and 1940s, talked about the beloved dogs of their childhoods. My grandmother, who grew up in the 1890s and 1900s on a farm in Texas, told me about dogs who were loved by the family when she was a kid. Our relationships with dogs are nothing new.
reply
share