Wiki for Dr. McClurkens Courses

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
329:question:329--week_6_questions_comments-2020

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
329:question:329--week_6_questions_comments-2020 [2020/10/01 02:38] – [I.How does this movie work as a secondary source? What does the movie get right about history?] 76.78.225.89329:question:329--week_6_questions_comments-2020 [2020/10/01 13:20] (current) – [II.Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact?] janis_shurtleff
Line 7: Line 7:
  
  
-//Gone With the Wind// can kind of work as a secondary source for the Civil War because it is a romanticized story that is set in the period before and during the Civil War, and during the Reconstruction Period. There are accuracies portrayed in the film such as how many people who lived in the South during this time felt about owning slaves. The depiction of slavery within the film contributes to the fact that many southerners didn't see owning slaves as a problem. Even if someone knew that owning slaves was wrong, they still joined the bandwagon of having their slaves do their work for them. -Lauren Simpson+//Gone With the Wind// can kind of work as a secondary source for the Civil War because it is a romanticized story that is set in the period before and during the Civil War, and during the Reconstruction Period. There are accuracies portrayed in the film such as **how many people who lived in the South during this time felt about owning slaves**. The depiction of slavery within the film contributes to the fact that many southerners didn't see owning slaves as a problem. Even if someone knew that owning slaves was wrong, they still joined the bandwagon of having their slaves do their work for them. -Lauren Simpson
  
-When it comes to what is accurate in the movie, it's very basic. The architecture and southern mannerisms portrayed seemed accurate to life during this time in the South. The clothing seemed within the time period. They also seemed to accurately portray how women had to operate plantations. In terms of this being a secondary source, it can definitely serve as one that portrays how the South thought of themselves at the time. -- Jordan Petty +When it comes to what is accurate in the movie, it's very basic. The architecture and southern mannerisms portrayed seemed accurate to life during this time in the South. The clothing seemed within the time period. They also seemed to accurately portray **how women had to operate plantations**. In terms of this being a secondary source, it can definitely serve as one that portrays how the South thought of themselves at the time. -- Jordan Petty 
  
-//Gone With the Wind// can certainly be argued as a secondary source. The film does a good job at accurately portraying the Civil War from a certain point of view. That point of view is from the perspective of the white southern slave owners, who glorified their participation in the war and saw slavery through the lens of that reciprocal relationship we discussed in class. However, the way the movie goes about this is something that makes me argue against its validity as a secondary source. //Gone With the Wind// is based off a fictional novel by Margaret Mitchell, who is not a historian of any capacity. It would be different if the novel had been written during the time of the war, or anytime immediately thereafter. Mitchell finished her book in 1936, meaning she is not a contemporary of the conflict. She is not a scholar on the subject of the Civil War, and therefore her story cannot be taken at face value. At its roots, //Gone With the Wind// is no more than an epic romance fiction and drama set during and after the American Civil War. In fact, as the movie progresses it becomes less about the time period and struggles of the characters and more about the relationship between Scarlett O'Hara and Rhett Butler. My initial reaction to this film was that it was no more than a whimsical romance set in the Antebellum South. I was not let down, considering the conduct of Scarlett throughout the movie. I couldn't help but find her name to be rather apt, especially at the casual way she throws herself at every man before deciding to play hard to get with Rhett. The overall historical context with the Civil War, while a vital part of the storyline, is usually lost in the interactions between the characters before you are reminded by a scathing remark about "Yankees" or "Sherman." It is because of these qualities that I do not think //Gone With the Wind// works well as a secondary source. It is nothing more than fictional drivel that conveniently takes place in the Antebellum South. -- Lyndsey Clark+One of the things that the movie gets correct is the idea of transitioning from slave labor to other labor.  After the end of slavery, the labor system is not as simple as having a slave to do everything.  Like the characters in the movie, some people had to start doing the work themselves because their former slaves had run off.  The movie covers the general theme of changing from a simple easy life to a life that is much harder and complex because of the end of slavery.-Daniel Walker 
 + 
 +//Gone With the Wind// can certainly be argued as a secondary source. The film does a good job at **accurately portraying the Civil War from a certain point of view**. That point of view is from the perspective of the **white southern slave owners**, who glorified their participation in the war and saw slavery through the lens of that reciprocal relationship we discussed in class. However, the way the movie goes about this is something that makes me argue against its validity as a secondary source. //Gone With the Wind// is based off a fictional novel by Margaret Mitchell, who is not a historian of any capacity. It would be different if the novel had been written during the time of the war, or anytime immediately thereafter. Mitchell finished her book in 1936, meaning she is not a contemporary of the conflict. She is not a scholar on the subject of the Civil War, and therefore her story cannot be taken at face value. At its roots, //Gone With the Wind// is no more than an epic romance fiction and drama set during and after the American Civil War. In fact, as the movie progresses it becomes less about the time period and struggles of the characters and more about the relationship between Scarlett O'Hara and Rhett Butler. My initial reaction to this film was that it was no more than a whimsical romance set in the Antebellum South. I was not let down, considering the conduct of Scarlett throughout the movie. I couldn't help but find her name to be rather apt, especially at the casual way she throws herself at every man before deciding to play hard to get with Rhett. The overall historical context with the Civil War, while a vital part of the storyline, is usually lost in the interactions between the characters before you are reminded by a scathing remark about "Yankees" or "Sherman." It is because of these qualities that I do not think //Gone With the Wind// works well as a secondary source. It is nothing more than fictional drivel that conveniently takes place in the Antebellum South. -- Lyndsey Clark
  
  
Line 18: Line 20:
 I think the most accurate part of the film was the fact that a lot of the union soldiers depicted were wearing bits and pieces of original civil war uniforms. Can't get more accurate than that, right? - Wilson LeCount I think the most accurate part of the film was the fact that a lot of the union soldiers depicted were wearing bits and pieces of original civil war uniforms. Can't get more accurate than that, right? - Wilson LeCount
  
-If you watch nothing more of this movie except the context transition cards, you'll get the exact same view of the Old South as if you'd wasted four hours watched the entire movie. It should only be viewed as a source for the time period it was made/written in. -Madison Roberts+**If you watch nothing more of this movie except the context transition cards, you'll get the exact same view of the Old South as if you'd wasted four hours watched the entire movie**. It should really only be seriously viewed as a source for the time period it was made/written in. Maybe if less focus was on the romance aspect of it (since almost everything after the intermission had nothing to do with history) then there would have been more screen/page time given to the actual war and Reconstruction. But for me at least, it's like viewing a historical bodice-ripper as a secondary source for 18th century Scotland or 19th century London. -Madison Roberts 
 + 
 +I think that this movie would not make a good historically-accurate secondary source at all. It was definitely a film that romanticized and glorified slavery and minimized the trauma, hate, racism, and torture that many people endured. It also was more of a romance movie and less of a historical film. --Mariah Morton   
 + 
 +I think that any accuracies from the film should be taken with a grain of salt, making it not at all the first option for a secondary source. There are minor accuracies such as the men going off to war and the women staying home to take care of the plantation and work as nurses, however, most of the movie was not and was not a great show of the South either. I think it definitely showed the thoughts of white people at the time that African Americans were just as happy with slavery as White people were but I think it mostly ignores all the history and focuses on the drama and romance. Making it not a great secondary source. --Kimberly Sak  
 + 
 +Despite the fact that Gone With The Wind presents such a grossly romanticized and idyllic view of the South, the Confederacy, Slavery, and racism in the South, one of the few benefits of this film are that it does make a fairly accurate attempt at showing the terrible violence and toll that the Civil War took on the South and the attitudes of Southerners to the North ("Yankees") before and after the war. The panning scene as Scarlett attempts to flee the fall of Atlanta showing the "hospital" and all of the bodies helps to represent how bloody the Civil War was and the inability of war hospitals to cope, especially in the late days of the Confederacy. This is also shown by the scene of the families waiting for the list of the dead after Gettysburg. It can also lend some perspective to the views of the South, particularly in the early party scene when the men are talking about the Confederacy and their confidence in a quick victory over the North. I think those are really the only merits with regard to its use as a secondary source, beyond and in addition to that, it is so idealized and horribly misrepresents the treatment and portrayal of blacks in the South and in the Union that its primary merit is as a primary source of Southern effort to repaint and glorify the Antebellum South and Confederate war effort.  - Ashley Dimino  
  
 ====== II. Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ====== ====== II. Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ======
 //Gone with the Wind// also presents several historical inaccuracies. The main problem with the film lies in the source material. Due to the author's upbringing and the societal norms of the time it was originally written, the film further romanticizes the horrors of slavery. It makes the Confederacy out to be great people who deserved better, when the actual reasons for war were very black and white, literally. Slavery is presented as being what whites wanted to show, that the slaves "wanted" and "liked" to be there, when we know this is far from reality. -Tara Scroggins  //Gone with the Wind// also presents several historical inaccuracies. The main problem with the film lies in the source material. Due to the author's upbringing and the societal norms of the time it was originally written, the film further romanticizes the horrors of slavery. It makes the Confederacy out to be great people who deserved better, when the actual reasons for war were very black and white, literally. Slavery is presented as being what whites wanted to show, that the slaves "wanted" and "liked" to be there, when we know this is far from reality. -Tara Scroggins 
  
-This film almost immediately takes liberties with it's history when it begins. The most obvious and borderline ridiculous example of how its narrative specifically changes history is it's blatant use of Southern Lost Cause revisionist propaganda. This infects almost every aspect of the film, painting reconstruction as this punitive force upon white southerners, slavery as a mutual relationship where slaves were respected members of the household, even showing them on their way to build barricades and digging trenches for the Confederate soldiers in Atlanta. The film also paints Sherman as much southern propaganda does, as a mass murdering maniac whose troops looted and raped and pillaged their way across beautiful Georgia. Beside this much of the culture of the south is heavily romanticized, and censored from any kind of unpleasantness. A person who watched this film may have believed the Antebellum south was a "Moonlight and Magnolia" paradise before those evil meddlin' yankees showed up. --AJ DeGeorge +This film almost immediately takes liberties with it's history when it begins. The most obvious and borderline ridiculous example of how its narrative specifically changes history is it's **blatant use of Southern Lost Cause revisionist propaganda.** This infects almost every aspect of the film, painting reconstruction as this punitive force upon white southerners,** slavery as a mutual relationship** where slaves were respected members of the household, even showing them on their way to build barricades and digging trenches for the Confederate soldiers in Atlanta. **The film also paints Sherman as much southern propaganda does, as a mass murdering maniac whose troops looted and raped and pillaged their way across beautiful Georgia.** Beside this much of the culture of the south is heavily romanticized, and censored from any kind of unpleasantness. A person who watched this film may have believed the Antebellum south was a "Moonlight and Magnolia" paradise before those evil meddlin' yankees showed up. --AJ DeGeorge 
  
-As I was watching Gone With the Wind I noticed that the way the African American slaves were portrayed was very incorrect. They acted as if they were against the Union's effort to free them, and were alliances with the Southerners who enslaved them. I also noticed that some of the slaves were portrayed as “simple-minded” and could not complete simple daily tasks without being punished or reprimanded. For me personally, this was the biggest inaccuracy in the movie. - Kaylee Williams +As I was watching Gone With the Wind I noticed that the way the African American slaves were portrayed was very incorrect. T**hey acted as if they were against the Union's effort to free them**, and were alliances with the Southerners who enslaved them. I also noticed that **some of the slaves were portrayed as “simple-minded” and could not complete simple daily tasks without being punished or reprimanded.** For me personally, this was the biggest inaccuracy in the movie. - Kaylee Williams 
  
 //Gone With the Wind// additionally portrays historical inaccuracies. The perspective of the story is told by Scarlett O'Hara who is the daughter of a wealthy plantation owner in Georgia so the plot seems to be very biased toward the South and the Confederacy. The plot is only showing half the picture and not showing the views of the Northerners. It portrays as the "Yankees" as the bad guys coming to violently ruin the South, with the Confederates trying to protect themselves. However, the movie fails to mention how the Confederacy was falling apart to begin with along with the unjust slave culture. The movie made it seem like all the slaves and their owners had great relationships with one another. -Lauren Simpson //Gone With the Wind// additionally portrays historical inaccuracies. The perspective of the story is told by Scarlett O'Hara who is the daughter of a wealthy plantation owner in Georgia so the plot seems to be very biased toward the South and the Confederacy. The plot is only showing half the picture and not showing the views of the Northerners. It portrays as the "Yankees" as the bad guys coming to violently ruin the South, with the Confederates trying to protect themselves. However, the movie fails to mention how the Confederacy was falling apart to begin with along with the unjust slave culture. The movie made it seem like all the slaves and their owners had great relationships with one another. -Lauren Simpson
  
-I honestly had a lot of problems with this movie in terms of its historical accuracy. It became clear very quickly that this movie, although it was made in 1939, is propaganda for the Southern perspective during the Civil War. This makes even more sense when you consider the author of the book the movie is based on. Mitchel was born in Atlanta, Georgia, and she did not learn of the South losing the Civil War until she was ten. The best evidence to support this being propaganda is its portrayal of race relations and slavery during the Civil War. There was absolutely no negative depictions of slavery in the film, making it seem like it was a pleasant affair. It completely erases the horrifying truth of slavery. On the other hand, this portrayal makes sense, as many southerners did not see a problem with slavery. It also seemed to romanticize plantations and make it seem like large-scale plantations were more common than they actually were. -- Jordan Petty +I honestly had a lot of problems with this movie in terms of its historical accuracy. It became clear very quickly that this movie, although it was made in 1939, is propaganda for the Southern perspective during the Civil War. This makes even more sense when you consider the author of the book the movie is based on. Mitchel was born in Atlanta, Georgia, and she did not learn of the South losing the Civil War until she was ten. The best evidence to support this being propaganda is its portrayal of race relations and slavery during the Civil War. There was absolutely **no negative depictions of slavery in the film**, making it seem like it was a pleasant affair. It completely erases the horrifying truth of slavery. On the other hand, this portrayal makes sense, as many southerners did not see a problem with slavery. It also seemed to romanticize plantations and make it seem like large-scale plantations were more common than they actually were. -- Jordan Petty 
  
 Gone with the Wind presents a southern perspective that looks at the problems during and after the Civil War with romantic eyes for the southern gentry. With the arrival of general Sherman at Atlanta he is given no screen time but is rather presented as a force of evil as the screen is coated in flames as soldiers advance. Even the carpetbaggers are shown as a careless malevolent group as they arrive laughing and actively insult the southerners. The whole interpretation of the film plays the southern gentry as victims of the northerners in both language and presentation. The race relations presented in the film is by far the most egregious aspect as the slaves are a happy folk who stick with their masters. The film blatantly ignores the periods race relations while presenting horrible stereotypes. The film constantly presents the southern gentry of victims of northern oppression while ignoring the many factors that led to war as it rather presents the issue as a given occurrence of southern honor rather than being the result of any political or social interests. With the film’s focus on the upper classes it ignores many of the dynamics that are only hinted at with such characters as the slave driving having a mulatto child that died and finding financial success in the aftermath of the war. The plantation owner is presented as the primary example of the south. Rather than commenting on the ideas of the past the film perpetuates a romanticized view of the old south, counter to the historical record. -Robert Keitz Gone with the Wind presents a southern perspective that looks at the problems during and after the Civil War with romantic eyes for the southern gentry. With the arrival of general Sherman at Atlanta he is given no screen time but is rather presented as a force of evil as the screen is coated in flames as soldiers advance. Even the carpetbaggers are shown as a careless malevolent group as they arrive laughing and actively insult the southerners. The whole interpretation of the film plays the southern gentry as victims of the northerners in both language and presentation. The race relations presented in the film is by far the most egregious aspect as the slaves are a happy folk who stick with their masters. The film blatantly ignores the periods race relations while presenting horrible stereotypes. The film constantly presents the southern gentry of victims of northern oppression while ignoring the many factors that led to war as it rather presents the issue as a given occurrence of southern honor rather than being the result of any political or social interests. With the film’s focus on the upper classes it ignores many of the dynamics that are only hinted at with such characters as the slave driving having a mulatto child that died and finding financial success in the aftermath of the war. The plantation owner is presented as the primary example of the south. Rather than commenting on the ideas of the past the film perpetuates a romanticized view of the old south, counter to the historical record. -Robert Keitz
  
 +One issue I have with the accuracy of this film is the treatment of the enslaved peoples after the war. While Sherman or "The Great Invader" is closing on there is the few scenes where Prissy is scolded and beat by Scarlett. Scarlett threatens to "sell her south and beat the hyde off of her". The issue in accuracy comes after they return to Tara. All of a sudden Scarlett's sisters are out picking cotton and **Scarlett is telling her father that she would "never tell them (Mammy, Pork, Prissy) to do anything she's not doing herself". This likely wouldn't have happened**. The complete 180 they have Scarlett do after the war is ridiculous. There is also the scene where Scarlett and Ashley were discussing using prison labor instead of hiring freed slaves for the saw mill. Ashley says he will, "not make money off of the enforced labor and misery of others". Then Scarlett mentions that he had slaves and he says he was going to free them anyway before all of this happened." -Dan Dilks 
 +
 +This movie has several major historical inaccuracies. One problem that bothered me the most was the portrayal of enslaved African Americans and the concept of slavery itself. Slavery was glorified in the film and made out to be a better system than it was. Furthermore, the power dynamics between the slavers and the enslaved made it seem like enslaved people had more freedom and rights than they actually did. The way Mammy talked to Scarlett and most of the family would not have been okay at all during that time period. Plus African Americans hated being slaves, no one would have willingly stayed with their master after the Civil War so it's off-putting that Mammy and Pork would stay even after getting their freedom. -Purnaja Podduturi
 +
 +The two female slave GWTW decided to depict were Mammy and Prissy.  Mammy is portrayed as a beloved member of Scarlet’s family, who is happy to work and comfort Scarlet.  Prissy is portrayed as naïve and scattered to the point of being a burden to Scarlett.  Neither of these characters were representative of the horrors of being a female slave.  As the Harriet Jacobs reading painfully described, female slaves were often raped and forced to have the children of their masters.  After this they would be sold to not upset the mistresses and have to live in shame and humiliation.  Mrs. James Steward and Mrs. Nancy Howard both fled to Canada to escape the atrocities of their masters, which included abuse and torture as punishment for things they did not do.  The portrayal of slave women in this film is harmful because it lends to the concept of the “happy servant”.  A figment of the white imagination this type of character is the embodiment of how the south accepted slavery, as it was not a bad thing but something that the slaves were “happy” to be a part of. – Janis Shurtleff 
 +
 +There were definitely a lot of problems with historical accuracy, and one of the most apparent problems was the portrayal of slavery. **It was portrayed as if slavery was not a horrific, torturous system; but one that helped African Americans and allowed them to live better than they had before.** I also think that some of Scarlett's behavior would not have been accepted, yet for the sake of the movie, she was allowed to be perceived as an independent, powerful woman. Especially after the intermission, when she went into business with a man that was not her husband and continued to make her own decisions without her husband. -- Mariah Morton
 ====== III. How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ====== ====== III. How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ======
  
-I would argue that GWTW actually aligns more with the primary sources we read then goes against it. At least, the primary source that is from the viewpoint of Southern whites. Specifically, I'm thinking of George Fitzhugh's "The Blessings of Slavery." Fitzhugh calls slaves "some of the happiest...freest people in the world." This idea of slavery being a mutually beneficial agreement is something shown in the film as well, especially the way Scarlett's dad and Ashley talk about African Americans in the second half of the film. The entire movie has both subtle and blatant racism throughout that emphasizes this way of thinking. --Cat Kinde+I would argue that GWTW actually aligns more with the primary sources we read then goes against it. At least, **the primary source that is from the viewpoint of Southern whites**. Specifically, I'm thinking of George Fitzhugh's "The Blessings of Slavery." **Fitzhugh calls slaves "some of the happiest...freest people in the world."** This idea of slavery being a mutually beneficial agreement is something shown in the film as well, especially the way Scarlett's dad and Ashley talk about African Americans in the second half of the film. The entire movie has both subtle and blatant racism throughout that emphasizes this way of thinking. --Cat Kinde
 ====== IV. How does this movie work as a primary source about the time period in which it was made or the filmmakers? ====== ====== IV. How does this movie work as a primary source about the time period in which it was made or the filmmakers? ======
-//Gone With the Wind// was released in 1939, so there is a lot of historical context that needs to be taken into account. The book the movie is based off of was initially released in 1936. The book was an instant success, leading to the creation of the movie, which also proved to be insanely popular. The film was released in the middle of the Great Depression, just as World War II was taking shape in Europe. I believe it is safe to say that during the Great Depression, Americans readily reminisced of the "good old days" in the Antebellum South. The hardships they had endured for the past decade were similar to the struggles faced by those during the Civil War. This was a time of economic downturn, a time of war, and a time of deep-rooted racism. All of these were things that hadn't changed that much from eighty years prior. The movie offered a familiar landscape in American history that was distinctly similar to the plight they faced at the current time. Much like the history and collapse of the moonlight and magnolia view of the Antebellum South, America in the 1930s had taken a drastic turn from the prosperous Roaring Twenties into the throes of a terrible Great Depression. War was also prominent in both times. While the Civil War was a romanticized affair in //Gone With the Wind//, America had faced trials due to the Great War, and with the coming of the Second World War. Both times also faced trials due to racism. While //Gone With the Wind// is reminiscent of life before and after emancipation, America had yet to lose its deep racist roots and fully accept African Americans into society. These are just some reasons why //Gone With the Wind// must have appealed to such a broad audience at the time of its release. -- Lyndsey Clark+//Gone With the Wind// was released in 1939, so there is a lot of historical context that needs to be taken into account. The book the movie is based off of was initially released in 1936. The book was an instant success, leading to the creation of the movie, which also proved to be insanely popular. The film was released in the middle of the Great Depression, just as World War II was taking shape in Europe. I believe it is safe to say that **during the Great Depression, Americans readily reminisced of the "good old days" in the Antebellum South.** The hardships they had endured for the past decade were similar to the struggles faced by those during the Civil War. This was a time of economic downturn, a time of war, and a time of deep-rooted racism. All of these were things that hadn't changed that much from eighty years prior. The movie offered a familiar landscape in American history that was distinctly similar to the plight they faced at the current time. Much like the history and collapse of the moonlight and magnolia view of the Antebellum South, America in the 1930s had taken a drastic turn from the prosperous Roaring Twenties into the throes of a terrible Great Depression. War was also prominent in both times. While the Civil War was a romanticized affair in //Gone With the Wind//, America had faced trials due to the Great War, and with the coming of the Second World War. Both times also faced trials due to racism. While //Gone With the Wind// is reminiscent of life before and after emancipation, America had yet to lose its deep racist roots and fully accept African Americans into society. These are just some reasons why //Gone With the Wind// must have appealed to such a broad audience at the time of its release. -- Lyndsey Clark
  
-As a primary source about the time period, the film works well. Its portrayal of the South could align with what was being taught about the Civil War in certain areas of the country in the 1930s and 1940s. The portrayal of women, specifically Scarlett's character, definitely seem to fit the economic situation that many women were in during the Great Depression, even though the film is set in the 1860s. -- Jordan Petty+As a primary source about the time period, the film works well. Its portrayal of the South could **align with what was being taught about the Civil War in certain areas of the country in the 1930s and 1940s**. The portrayal of women, specifically Scarlett's character, definitely seem to fit the economic situation that many women were in during the Great Depression, even though the film is set in the 1860s. -- Jordan Petty
  
 +The time period this came out in was not exactly a time period where everyone was free because of the Civil War.  **The depression and segregation were both present at this time.  African-American castmembers could not attend the premiere and Oscars.**  In many ways, making a film about the destruction of the south would be even more effective during the depression than any other time because the audience could relate to poverty.  Everyone knew what it was like to be poor because of the depression.  The film also undoubtedly glorifies the old south as the title suggests.  If a movie were made today about the same subject, it would definitely be produced differently.  The South would not be glorified to nearly the same extent and slaves would be portrayed differently.  However, the fact that the film was produced this way is evidence of what the time period it came out in was like. -Daniel Walker
  
-I was shocked by the marital rape scene in the second half of the movie. While I know many people condemned marital rape at this time, this scene making it into the movie at least reflects the fact that spousal rape was not legally and personally considered to be rape by many states and people in the '30s. It's even more disturbing that scarlet is portrayed as having enjoyed Rett's actions in the following scene. This part of the movie is just one of many windows into into contemporary public perceptions and debates about sexuality provided by GWTW.+I was shocked by the marital rape scene in the second half of the movie. While I know many people condemned marital rape at this time, this scene making it into the movie at least reflects the fact that spousal rape was not legally and personally considered to be rape by many states and people in the '30s. It's even more disturbing that scarlet is portrayed as having enjoyed Rett's actions in the following scene. This part of the movie is just one of many windows into into contemporary public perceptions and debates about sexuality provided by GWTW. -Ethan
  
  
-This film was released in 1939 and it serves as a great primary source for that time period. As mentioned in class, the idealist version of the antebellum south was perpetuated in America well into the 20th century. In 1939, the effects of the Great Depression greatly impacted the nation yet this book was still a bestseller. While the film starred some big names in Hollywood at the time, like Clark Gable and Vivan Leigh, the story and plot itself were really what made the movie a hit with the public. Of course, the romance and soap opera plot of the movie really caught a lot of Americans’ attention, it was the social implications of the movie that really made it famous I think. People wanted an escape from the difficulties they were facing in 1939, and this movie painted a picture of a past that acknowledged and mirrored what many Americans were going through at this time in some ways. Scarlet O’Hara lost everything; family members, her land and crops were destroyed, and what was left of her home and resources were far less than ideal. This movie showed how she perceived red through the struggles and despite never truly being happy again; she survived and thrived later in her life. This movie also connected with people as it glossed over many of the horrors that slavery exhibited. In this movie, the slaves of the O’Hara family were their friends and as discussed in class, it appeared to be a symbiotic relationship between them. While we know that this is far from the truth, it perpetuates the narrative that slavery was not as horrific as it really was. White Americans in 1939 enjoyed the idea that their ancestors were really actually doing good for other people, and that the South had experienced a great loss and hardship before and survived against all odds, so modern Americans at the time could as well. -Morgan Gilbert+This film was released in 1939 and it serves as a great primary source for that time period. As mentioned in class, the idealist version of the antebellum south was perpetuated in America well into the 20th century. In 1939, the effects of the Great Depression greatly impacted the nation yet this book was still a bestseller. While the film starred some big names in Hollywood at the time, like Clark Gable and Vivan Leigh, the story and plot itself were really what made the movie a hit with the public. Of course, the romance and soap opera plot of the movie really caught a lot of Americans’ attention, it was the social implications of the movie that really made it famous I think. **People wanted an escape from the difficulties they were facing in 1939, and this movie painted a picture of a past that acknowledged and mirrored what many Americans were going through at this time** in some ways. Scarlet O’Hara lost everything; family members, her land and crops were destroyed, and what was left of her home and resources were far less than ideal. This movie showed how she perceived red through the struggles and despite never truly being happy again; she survived and thrived later in her life. This movie also connected with people as it glossed over many of the horrors that slavery exhibited. In this movie, the slaves of the O’Hara family were their friends and as discussed in class, it appeared to be a symbiotic relationship between them. While we know that this is far from the truth, it perpetuates the narrative that slavery was not as horrific as it really was. White Americans in 1939 enjoyed the idea that their ancestors were really actually doing good for other people, and that the South had experienced a great loss and hardship before and survived against all odds, so modern Americans at the time could as well. -Morgan Gilbert
  
 GWTW is a great look into the mindset of 1930's America. It depicts the casual and blatant racism and misogyny  present at this time, as well as the burgeoning lost cause ideology. Around the time that this book was written and the movie was made, the veterans of the Civil War were dying out rapidly and southerners in particular were trying to redeem the confederate cause before the memory of the veterans was totally gone. The lost cause ideology swept slavery under the rug and painted confederate veterans as heroes of southern Independence. This film is full of that. It depicts enslaved people as completely submissive and willing to help the confederate cause for their "benevolent" slave owners. It portrays the southern aristocracy as noble gentlemen who can do no wrong, and fight the "evil Yankees" for southern values and independence rather than to protect the institution of slavery. While many wealthy southerners did see themselves as these noble heroes, they also all knew that the war was started to defend southern slavery, which was not shown at all. As a whole, I also think the film represents escapism for readers and viewers during the depression, and probably the reason it was so popular. It not only shows the elegance of the Old South that so many whites wished to return to, but it also depicted Scarlet and her family overcoming the hard times after the war, and coming out wealthy and prosperous afterwards. This was definitely something people during the depression would have idolized. - Wilson LeCount   GWTW is a great look into the mindset of 1930's America. It depicts the casual and blatant racism and misogyny  present at this time, as well as the burgeoning lost cause ideology. Around the time that this book was written and the movie was made, the veterans of the Civil War were dying out rapidly and southerners in particular were trying to redeem the confederate cause before the memory of the veterans was totally gone. The lost cause ideology swept slavery under the rug and painted confederate veterans as heroes of southern Independence. This film is full of that. It depicts enslaved people as completely submissive and willing to help the confederate cause for their "benevolent" slave owners. It portrays the southern aristocracy as noble gentlemen who can do no wrong, and fight the "evil Yankees" for southern values and independence rather than to protect the institution of slavery. While many wealthy southerners did see themselves as these noble heroes, they also all knew that the war was started to defend southern slavery, which was not shown at all. As a whole, I also think the film represents escapism for readers and viewers during the depression, and probably the reason it was so popular. It not only shows the elegance of the Old South that so many whites wished to return to, but it also depicted Scarlet and her family overcoming the hard times after the war, and coming out wealthy and prosperous afterwards. This was definitely something people during the depression would have idolized. - Wilson LeCount  
Line 52: Line 69:
  
 It’s extremely accurate to the book. (I wish that every book to movie adaptation was like this) And no matter how you feel about the movie plot and topics, you have to admit that there are some impressively shot scenes for the time period. The slow zoom out of the Confederate soldiers lying in the streets of Atlanta as far as the eye can see is pretty well done. However, that’s about all the praise I can give it. Yes, they have black actors and actresses, but not one of them portrays a character along the lines of Theodore Joadson (Amistad) in being a positive depiction. Every slave is either incompetent (Prissy) or half in love with their masters (Mammy, Big Sam, etc). That wasn't done by accident. -Madison Roberts It’s extremely accurate to the book. (I wish that every book to movie adaptation was like this) And no matter how you feel about the movie plot and topics, you have to admit that there are some impressively shot scenes for the time period. The slow zoom out of the Confederate soldiers lying in the streets of Atlanta as far as the eye can see is pretty well done. However, that’s about all the praise I can give it. Yes, they have black actors and actresses, but not one of them portrays a character along the lines of Theodore Joadson (Amistad) in being a positive depiction. Every slave is either incompetent (Prissy) or half in love with their masters (Mammy, Big Sam, etc). That wasn't done by accident. -Madison Roberts
 +
 +I think there is a lot to be said of the way enslaved people were depicted in the movie. Almost every one seemed like a caricature. Pork seemed humble but unable to do anything. Big Sam was depicted as the big smiley stupid guy. Prissy was depicted as the slow one with an annoyingly high pitched voice that was either supposed to make you hate her or laugh at her. Mammy's character was about as stereotypical as they could get. If this movie were ever remade today, none of that would fly. Nor should it. - Dan Dilks 
 +
 +I think the movie is a good testament to when it was made as well as the book it is based on, especially considering the accuracy of the book to the movie. It depicts the South as the southerners wanted to remember it, rather than how it happened. I think there are a lot of things in this movie that would not be shown today including the characters, even more of a testament to the time it was made. -- Kimberly Sak 
 +
 +Gone With the Wind is a great primary source about the time period, especially Hollywood and film production at the time. In 1939 when this film came out 482 feature films were produced in Hollywood. However, this was one of if not the only films to not premiere in Hollywood. This film premiered in Atlanta, Georgia, and because of it, the Governor claimed it to be a state holiday. Many people felt that it was the film that people needed to come out. In fact, Mary Anderson, the actress who played Maybelle Merriwether, said that people were just coming out of the depression and the war in Europe had just started so “people were looking for a fairyland a wonderful wonderful dream to come true.” It seems as if this movie provided people with the escape that they were looking for due to its popularity.
 +
 +As mentioned in our previous class, Margaret Mitchell was the author of Gone With the Wind, which became a VERY popular book for this time period. As a result, the publishers wanted $100,000 for film rights. However, they struggled to find someone willing to buy it because at the time Civil War pictures were seen as “box-office poison.” Eventually, David O. Selznick bought it for $50,000. People who worked with him in this film said he was a perfectionist who wanted to make as great of a picture as humanly possible. As a result, he made his staff work intolerable hours. In fact, I believe a former assistant said “He was a fascinating man to work for and the most difficult man I've ever known.”
 +
 +The casting of this film was a long process. One reason it was a long process was that no man wanted to be in this film. Clark Gable, Rhett Butler,  "The King of Hollywood" did not want to be in this film. In order to get him in this film, someone on the production staff had to promise his wife, whom he wanted a divorce from, $500,000 if she would divorce under the stipulation that he had to star in this film. Apparently Gable was terrified that we would fulfill the expectations of his role as Rhett Butler. In my opinion, I think he did a fine job even though he didn’t win Best Actor. Something that was interesting about Gable was that he never cried on screen before this film which speaks of the masculine complex during this time period. Another male actor who was reluctant to star in this film was Leslie Howard, Ashley, who apparently never read the book or his lines unless they were the ones he needed for the next day of filming. Fun fact about Leslie Howard was that after the film he returned to England where he died as a British intelligence officer during the war.
 +
 +A second reason why casting took so long was that Selznick insisted that he wanted an unknown actress to play Scarlett O'Hara. This desire resulted in two years of searching for the perfect Scarlett. In fact, when they started filming they did not have a Scarlet, as a result, they filmed the burning of Atlanta first. It was while they were burning Atlanta when Selznick met Vivien Leigh, who in his eyes was the perfect actress for this role.
 +
 +Fun fact about the casting process, Selznick got a lot of casting suggestions, especially for Mammy. In fact, Bing Crosby had someone in mind and so did Eleanor Roosevelt.  The person who Eleanor Roosevelt suggested was her cook, unfortunately, she never called for an audition.
 +[[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T15-UFz9DxI]]
 +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B4blSwOqNM]]
 +-Megan Williams
  
 ====== V. The "So, what?" question ====== ====== V. The "So, what?" question ======
 As we had talked about in class, this was how the topic of the Civil War was presented to Americans in 1939. Of course there are some things this movie does get correct, like the period clothing, the timeline of the war, and the devastating aftermath of the Civil War. But, there are some issues within the movie itself. There is recognition of these issues, and today there are warnings and disclaimers stating that. I feel like this might have been a decent movie in its time, but today there are many movies and documentaries that are much better representations of the Civil War, and slavery.- Kaylee Williams  As we had talked about in class, this was how the topic of the Civil War was presented to Americans in 1939. Of course there are some things this movie does get correct, like the period clothing, the timeline of the war, and the devastating aftermath of the Civil War. But, there are some issues within the movie itself. There is recognition of these issues, and today there are warnings and disclaimers stating that. I feel like this might have been a decent movie in its time, but today there are many movies and documentaries that are much better representations of the Civil War, and slavery.- Kaylee Williams 
  
 +The fact that this film is essentially blatant Lost Cause propaganda means that we cannot ignore the historical fallacies of it. This film is incredibly important to the history of filmmaking and the history of the United States popular culture, and without it's advancements I do not think film would be the same. However, unlike previous films where the historical inaccuracies were a bit problematic, this film can severely damage people's perception of history, and is trying to convince them of a narrative that is historically false. Whenever the characters mention the "moonlight and magnolias," the "Bonnie Blue flag," or shows images of the evil yankees burning their way across a "civilized land," the film is convincing you the Confederacy were in the right. And that cannot be ignored. --AJ DeGeorge
  
-As a museum worker who has interacted with curious historic site visitors from around the country, I would argue that GWTW has affected public perception of the past more than any movie ever created. Even though younger Americans may not be as familiar with the piece as their elders who grew up in the past century, the tropes and treatments of historic lifeways perpetuated by this film are everywhere in the popular imagination.+Gone With The Wind is one of the most successful movies in the history of American Cinema.  Not only was it a blockbuster about superheroes or a fictional topic, it was about a real-time period and about a story that could very well have been real.  Everybody knew about the Civil War and reconstruction, some people were still alive who had fought in the war.  The reason this is all important is because for many people, they see and remember Gone With The Wind when they think of this time period.  They think this story is what happened to everyone.  Whether they think the movie is accurate or not, the movie still pops into mind when thinking of the time period.  Movies with such an influence have an even greater need to be accurate and true than others.  A movie as popular as this, can create an entire culture about the topic.  In this case, people see this movie as what the old south was like and what happened to it.  They see the hardships that became of these people and they are sympathetic.  They see how slaves and recently freed slaves were in the movie too.  Once again, despite if the movie is accurate or not, these images last in people's minds. -Daniel Walker 
 + 
 +As a museum worker who has interacted with curious historic site visitors from around the country, I would argue that **GWTW has affected public perception of the past more than any movie ever created**. Even though younger Americans may not be as familiar with the piece as their elders who grew up in the past century, the tropes and treatments of historic lifeways perpetuated by this film are everywhere in the popular imagination.
  
 Among these are the following stereotypes: the part-admirable and part-laughable image of stoic, acquiescing, and self-controlled  gentlewomen who willingly or unwillingly injure themselves with tight stays; the casual approach to slavery and abuse of the enslaved when discussing southern history; the idyllic picture of a warm, sweat-tea-and-barbeque-laden, simple southern lifestyle.  Among these are the following stereotypes: the part-admirable and part-laughable image of stoic, acquiescing, and self-controlled  gentlewomen who willingly or unwillingly injure themselves with tight stays; the casual approach to slavery and abuse of the enslaved when discussing southern history; the idyllic picture of a warm, sweat-tea-and-barbeque-laden, simple southern lifestyle. 
Line 68: Line 105:
  
  
-This movie impacted generations of Americans’ perceptions of the antebellum south, and it did so in a way that really altered their understanding of the ugly truth of slavery. This movie caught Americans’ attention, despite much of the population struggling to make ends meet, most of the nation saw the movie or read the book. It became a staple in American culture; my father who was born in 1960 remembers seeing the movie at a drive-in theater with his parents when he was 7(1967). This movie perpetuates the idealist vision of the antebellum south in that the confederacy was the victim in the narrative, not the slaves who were mistreated. The confederacy and white southerners were the ones who lost their land, lives, and affluence and not the slaves who were mistreated before, during, and well after the Civil War ended. Gone with the Wind impacted generations of Americans and their understanding of the horrors of slavery by grossly misinterpreting and glorify some conditions and common practices in the antebellum south. While in modern America, society has gotten a little better about understanding that movies are biased and somewhat learned not to believe everything that happens on screen, early 20th-century American society took much of what occurred in the movie as direct facts and a true depiction of the past. Analyzing this movie really exposes how the idealist view of the treatment of African Americans in the past and present is strengthened by pop culture in many ways, and it also displays how far-reaching the impacts of movies can truly be in society. -Morgan Gilbert +**This movie impacted generations of Americans’ perceptions of the antebellum south, and it did so in a way that really altered their understanding of the ugly truth of slavery.** This movie caught Americans’ attention, despite much of the population struggling to make ends meet, most of the nation saw the movie or read the book. It became **a staple in American culture**; my father who was born in 1960 remembers seeing the movie at a drive-in theater with his parents when he was 7(1967). This movie perpetuates **the idealist vision of the antebellum south in that the confederacy was the victim in the narrative, not the slaves who were mistreated**. The confederacy and white southerners were the ones who lost their land, lives, and affluence and not the slaves who were mistreated before, during, and well after the Civil War ended. Gone with the Wind impacted generations of Americans and their understanding of the horrors of slavery by grossly misinterpreting and glorify some conditions and common practices in the antebellum south. While in modern America, society has gotten a little better about understanding that movies are biased and somewhat learned not to believe everything that happens on screen, early 20th-century American society took much of what occurred in the movie as direct facts and a true depiction of the past. Analyzing this movie really exposes how the idealist view of the treatment of African Americans in the past and present is strengthened by pop culture in many ways, and it also displays how far-reaching the impacts of movies can truly be in society. -Morgan Gilbert  
 + 
 +This is **one of the highest grossing movies ever**. This influenced how so many people of the time perceived the Civil War, and to some extent still does. Too many people read it and want to hold on to that ideal version of the South, no matter how unrealistic it is. It's still a movie and book that holds cultural prestige, no matter how badly it's aged or how long ago it was made/written. -Madison Roberts 
 + 
 +This movie is just blatant propaganda that definitely influenced the minds of multiple generations. It wants the viewer to feel bad for these people that lost "everything" and were forced into "poverty". Then all of a sudden what does Scarlett do? She starts living the American dream, she acquires a business and is very successful. Then she starts a family. She starts checking off all of those do it yourself boxes. Its pretty obvious. All of the main characters act like babies because they can't have their fun parties anymore, they want things the way they were when the land was "of grace and plenty". - Dan Dilks 
 + 
 +I think this movie is a good thing to watch for the purpose of watching something that made such an impact on cinematic history, regardless of its historical basis. It is most certainly a reflection of the time period it came out of but that is why it was culturally important to such an extent that it is still known today. It also influenced a lot of peoples view of the Civil War and the South, it was an ideal thought of what we want to remember the south as rather than what it was really like. --Kimberly Sak  
 + 
 +Gone With the Wind has a complicated legacy. While when adjusted for inflation it the highest grossing films of all time it still denies the horrors of slavery. As a result of this film has become an important part of history, influencing popular views of history and slavery. In my opinion it is an important film it starts conversations about slavery and racisim during the Civil War and the racisim in Hollywood when this film was made in 1939. (Jacqueline Stewart’s Introduction to Gone With the Wind on HBO Max and). -Megan Williams 
 + 
 +[[https://www.npr.org/2020/06/29/884551356/gone-with-the-wind-returns-to-hbo-max-with-intro-by-black-scholar]] 
 + 
 + This film is and was a wildly popular movie and just reading the reviews of it on Amazon demonstrates the incredibly problematic effect that this movie can have on the uneducated viewer. **There are people out there who genuinely believe this film is an accurate depiction of the Antebellum South** and that these views of slaves or "servants" as they are referred to consistently throughout the film. **It depicts nearly all of the stereotypes of black slaves and freedmen throughout the film, especially through the portrayal of Prissy and Pork in the film.** Yes, it does actually make an effort to **represent some of the horrors of war,** call out some of the faulty views of the South through Rhett, he himself his own complicated character, and does give Scarlett and some of the other female characters the benefit of growth and hardness in the time of war when it is necessary and called for and demonstrates how much of her helplessness and foolishness was an act and use of privilege. But it does so much more harm than good in supporting the idea of the glory of the Antebellum South, brushing over and mostly ignoring violence against blacks and northerners in the South following the end of the Civil War. It was painful to watch in several parts, especially as the primary focus of the movie is despite Scarlett's consistent strength and stubbornness to protect Tara and ruin her reputation as needed to get what she wants, she is always willing to throw herself into a man's arms as her solution to the problem, and she spends the entire film pining over a man, for the majority Ashley, then at the very end Rhett in time for him to leave her. Also, the fact that Rhett was just as unfaithful to Scarlett and finally decides to leave her after in a time of great stress, she runs to the man who's honorable love she's sought the whole film instead of her husband that she has fought with over and over again and who'd threatened to kill her within the last few months, made the ending of the film so frustrating. HE was able to leave without a major effect on his life and left her pining after him once again to literally go wait at her family home for him to eventually come back to her. It so poorly represents black people and women in this movie in reducing them to such two-dimensional characters, that this film is very problematic to watch without understanding the period it's about beforehand.  - Ashley Dimino 
  
-This is one of the highest grossing movies ever. This influenced how so many people of the time perceived the Civil War, and to some extent still does. Too many people read it and want to hold on to that ideal version of the South, no matter how unrealistic it is. It's still a movie and book that holds cultural prestige, no matter how badly it's aged or how long ago it was made/written. -Madison Roberts 
  
329/question/329--week_6_questions_comments-2020.1601519929.txt.gz · Last modified: 2020/10/01 02:38 by 76.78.225.89