I’ll only watch Netflix's Little House reboot if it avoids this big mistake made by the original series

I'm a huge Little House on the Prairie enthusiast—the original show was the soundtrack of my childhood. I recall sitting cross-legged on the floor in front of the TV, eyes fixed on the screen, mesmerized by Laura Ingalls' exploits, pioneer life, and the warm family dynamics. It was all so wholesome and comforting. But when I was older and re-watched the show, something that never particularly bothered me smacked me with increasing regularity: how it portrayed Native American characters and their history.

With Netflix remaking Little House all over again now, I'm hopeful but cautious, but in reality, I'll only watch if they don't do the original show's best and worst errors. That error? How the show explained the American frontier history from a quite limited, settler-centric point of view—one that displaces or eliminates Native people entirely. The early Little House represented Native Americans primarily as background characters or antagonists, without depth or foresight.

It did nothing to confront the violent reality of colonization and the displacement of Native peoples, and that has never ceased to irk me. If this remake is going to redo this story in 2025, it needs to do better than that. It needs to be capable of confronting the entire picture.

---

The Original Little House series' depiction of Native Americans was reductive

Re-watching the original Little House on the Prairie with new eyes, it's obvious the show was susceptible to depicting Native American characters as hazy bogeymen or add-ons to the settlers' narrative. The Ingalls family-character types were portrayed as courageous, industrious pioneers, and the Native Americans were presented almost exclusively in settings that reinforced negative stereotypes or were relegated to the background. Their humanity, culture, or the effect that settler colonialism had on their lives was not or barely discussed.

This representation was not exclusive to Little House; it reflected the general media climate of the period, which inclined towards representing history Eurocentrically. Nonetheless, one must acknowledge that such representations helped create a skewed public perception of Native American history and experiences. The original series made no attempts to counter such stereotypes and present alternative narratives, leaving audiences with a cleaned-up and partial view of frontier life.

---

Why the Little House reboot must provide a more balanced approach

The revival provides an opportunity to return and reprogram the narrative, rather than merely reuse tired tropes. If Netflix does bring Little House out to new viewers, the program must feature the voices and existences that the original suppressed or excised. That means presenting Indigenous people as complete human beings with their own experiences, concerns, and mindset, not obstacles or scenery.

It isn't that the reboot should give up the emphasis on the Ingalls family that the original did. Theirs is a good story. But it should be in the context of a greater awareness of the complexity of the time. The expansion to the west was not only about constructing homes and towns—it was also about the displacement and pain of the Native people. To deny this doesn't negate it; it just makes the story incomplete.

---

Involving indigenous voices could make the story more authentic and richer

Having Indigenous individuals represented on the writers' room and intimate collaborations with Native peoples has the potential to prevent the missteps of the past reboots. Honesty over controversy-aversion is what is called for in an honest and respectful portrayal. A healthier representation would answer to the reality that the frontier was a universe of conflict, negotiation, and existence together more than it was one of romantic homesteading.

This type of approach would give the drama more depth and enable the story to speak to audiences now, who are more sensitive to historical context and starving for content that reflects those realities. It's a chance to make Little House a history-to-day story that honors history and welcomes all of it, not a gooey fantasy of a sanitized past.

---

The cost of ignoring the issue again

If the reboot circumvents this problem or glosses over it in the same manner as the original, it runs the risk of alienating audiences wanting to connect with responsible storytelling. Audiences today are not as likely to be forgiving of portrayals that reinforce negative stereotypes or muzzle marginalized voices. Suppressing Indigenous voices would not only damage the integrity of the show but also be a missed opportunity to discuss history wisely.

We've watched how media that wrestle with hard realities can get us talking. Little House remake can too. But if it isn't willing to wrestle with those blind spots of history, then it'll be unfairly judged and at risk of being dismissed as just another show mired in outdated thinking.

---

Moving forward: What I want to see in the Netflix reboot

In the end, I’m looking for a Little House that feels honest, inclusive, and aware. One that doesn’t shy away from the uncomfortable parts of frontier history. The reboot doesn’t have to rewrite the original story completely—it can still focus on Laura and her family—but it should also highlight the stories of the Native peoples whose lands they settled.

That means more thoughtful character development for Indigenous roles, a storyline that reflects historical realities without romanticizing or erasing trauma, and creative voices from those communities shaping the narrative. If Netflix embraces this approach, then I—and many others—might finally have a Little House reboot worth watching. Without it? I’m not interested. It’s time for this classic tale to grow up and tell the whole story.

Also read: 7 TV Shows with a child actor as the main protagonist