Margaret Mitchell’s novel Gone With the Wind was published on June 30, 1936. Mitchell spent about ten years writing the book, using her own imagination, her research, and her childhood memories of family gatherings where relatives “refought the Civil War.” Her work over such a long time period paid off. More than 30 million copies of the book are in print around the world, and David O. Selznick’s 1939 movie version of the novel is considered the biggest earning film of all time if you adjust for inflation.
Like movies such as Star Wars and The Big Lebowski, the book and film Gone With the Wind has rabid fans, calling themselves “Windies.” There is a museum devoted to the book and movie in Marietta, Georgia, which I recently visited. The movie, which deviates from the novel in some ways, has detractors who note the movie’s glorification of the South’s cause and that the film ignores slavery’s inhumanity. On the other hand, some note that the movie and the book have a strong feminist theme, with an unusually strong portrayal of a female lead role for 1939. Is it okay to love and hate a movie at the same time?
Gone With the Wind leaves us with a similar problem presented by Birth of a Nation and other movies. One must ponder how to deal with a work of art that is tainted by ignorant beliefs and stereotypes from a prior time period. A lot of movies have confused messages about important topics. Like anything, the solution is education as opposed to censorship. We might still learn from films, even if what we learn is not the producer’s intended lesson. But it is also possible that the mixed messages may ruin the entertainment value.
Gone With the Wind is a great artistic achievement, but its legacy might be something more if it is used as a starting point for discussion and education about the Civil War and our country’s legacy of slavery. Everything about America and race is complicated, and so is the movie’s legacy. Gone With the Wind features stereotypical African-American characters like Mammy, but then the wonderful Hattie McDaniel broke through a barrier and became the first African-American to win an Academy Award (as Best Supporting Actress) because of her portrayal of the character.
One thing about Margarett Mitchell’s book, though, is certain. There are few twentieth-century novels that have been as popular, or had such an impact around the world, or which still may provoke such controversy, as her 1936 novel about Katie Scarlett O’Hara.
Above is an interesting clip of screen tests for the movie, leaving one to wonder how different the film might have been without the performances we know by Vivien Leigh, Clark Gable, Hattie McDaniel, and others.
Photos by Chimesfreedom.
What do you think about Gone With the Wind? Leave a comment.
(Some Related Chimesfreedom Posts)
(1995), during the weeks between Pres. Lincoln’s inauguration and the first shots at Fort Sumter, the president was physically exhausted by stress. But there was some relief after this date. Because the first shots were fired by the Confederates, the rebels now had the burden of starting the war, not the North.
notes that Mickey Newbury’s original intent is unclear, as the combination could have been about America’s lack of innocence or been intended ironically in reference to Pres. Nixon and the Viet Nam War.
(1975), critic Greil Marcus considered “An American Trilogy” to be Elvis’s attempt to combine all aspects of America and bring everyone together in a fantasy of freedom. But Marcus believed that Elvis’s song failed in that goal because the lack of complexity in the song creates “a throwaway America where nothing is at stake.” (p. 124.) For example, Marcus claimed, “There is no John Brown in his ‘Battle Hymn,’ no romance in his ‘Dixie,’ no blood in his slave song.”
