Differences

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

--- 329:question:329--week_6_questions_comments-2022 [2022/09/29 12:40] – [IV.How does this movie work as a primary source about the time period in which it was made or the filmmakers?] 76.78.225.92
+++ 329:question:329--week_6_questions_comments-2022 [2024/10/03 04:03] (current) – lbicknel
@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 I think that the way the movie portrayed how the women were left at home when all of the men went to fight in the war was very accurate. It did a great job of showing how these wealthy, white women who were only ever used to their enslaved workers taking care of their homes, meals, and themselves were now left alone to fend for themselves, but also to take care of others. Scarlett O’Hara went from a spoiled, wealthy woman to having to deliver babies and take care of her home plantation Tara. I also liked when the Union soldiers were coming to Atlanta and Scarlett, Prissy, and Melanie were fleeing, Scarlett’s hair and dress were no longer glamorous and put together. The disarray of her appearance did a great job of reflecting the hardships and difficulties of war time. If Scarlett had looked put together and cleaned the entire time, it definitely would not be accurately reflecting history. Scarlett’s objection to working in the hospital in Atlanta demonstrated her inability and lack of knowledge of taking care of others and being able to work. --Olivia Foster
+I don’t believe this movie would be a great secondary source, but it did get some details right about history. The treatment of women seemed historically accurate. Men saw women as dependents and fragile. Scarlet was blamed for being attacked when she left by herself on a carriage because she didn't have a man with her. She was also blamed for the death of her second husband, Kennedy, because he went out looking for the men who attacked her and got shot. Women also only really worked on their homes or as nurses, which Scarlett was doing while the soldiers got hurt. -Leah B.
 I do not think this movie works as a secondary source. At least in the way of being historically dependent and not having a bias towards it. I do think the movie could work as a gain in perspective though. I feel that there could have been many different perspectives of the fear the War can cause them while others believe it had nothing to do with the. The individuals in the movie refuse to take notice in the War while the others are more than ever to fight. I also think the movie did a decent job in showing how women had to take over when the men left for the war. Did it do a great job? No not necessarily but it helps spark a conversation of the role women did in the War. Another thing would have to be the dynamic between the enslaved people and their “masters”.  Their dynamic was buffered about what actually occurred with them. - Paula Perez
@@ Line 33: / Line 36: @@
 Both the class lecture and readings spoke in depth on how many enslaved peoples began to leave once the war started, taking advantage of the chaos, and if they didn't leave, they demanded better treatment at least. One of the more significant points of this was that after all enslaved people were formerly freed at the end of the war, none stayed with their original masters. The South had a huge shock when they saw that their former slaves had not been happy and were not willing to remain and labor for them out of loyalty - something this film does not touch on, as the characters of Mammy and Pork stay of their own free will, happily, even as the character of Scarlett treats them so poorly. -- Jane Michael
+The way this film portrays slavery is extremely unrealistic. They would receive harsh punishments for small mistakes. In the movie, they were forgiven unless they had done very wrong. The film portrayed African Americans as incompetent. They also portrayed slaves as very loyal to their owners. For example, after the civil war, Mammy seemed to have enjoyed staying with Scarlett, and didn’t receive too harsh of a punishment after disagreeing with her marriage to Rhett. After calling them donkeys or something of the sort, Scarlet just didn’t want to give her a present for Christmas. This was extremely inaccurate for the time as slaves received very harsh punishments for their actions. -Leah B.
 This movie depicts slavery completely differently from the reality. It paints the domestic enslaved people as lazy and stupid, as if they would not have been severely reprimanded for talking back, not completing their work, or wasting time. They are also always happy to see the white characters, and generally seem happy with their situation. This fully feeds into the belief that enslaved people did not want to be free and enjoyed being enslaved. Having the white characters believe that would not have been incorrect to historical interpretations, but portraying the African Americans like that is incredibly harmful. This movie feeds into many stereotypes about Black people that existed in the 1860s, still existed in the 1930s, and were perpetuated when this movie came out among generations that have watched since, even if subconsciously. Even though Scarlett is criticized for being harsh a couple times, even that is sanitized. The romanticism of the “good old days” in the South, especially Ashley’s line about the sweet singing of enslaved people, are completely incorrect in portraying a nice, happy vision of a world that was really full of terror and brutality.  — Sasha Poletes
@@ Line 60: / Line 66: @@
 This movie works well as a primary source, as it depicts the Lost Cause attitudes that were prevalent then (that still exist today). The way in which the characters talk about the Civil War and its causes, as well as the way in which slavery is depicted both lend themselves to this. -Sarah Moore
-The film speaks to a primary source of the time it was made, during the Great Depression and WWII. The themes on how women need to buck up and take care of business during wartime, but also be in love and care for their men really goes to the period of time the film was made. Of course filmmakers would want to encourage independent girls who would wait for their men no matter how long it would take. -Annika
+The film speaks to a primary source of the time it was made, during the Great Depression and WWII. The themes on how women need to buck up and take care of business during wartime, but also be in love and care for their men really goes to the period of time the film was made. Of course, filmmakers would want to encourage independent girls who would wait for their men no matter how long it would take. -Annika
 ====== V. The "So, what?" question	======
@@ Line 92: / Line 98: @@
 This movie is important to analyze and criticize because of its immense impact on American pop culture. It remains one of the most widely seen movies, and one of the most profitable movies in American history. So, with all of those eyes on it, the way it depicts history matters. It is a fictional story, but it is a fictional story that beses itself in the actual reality of the most polarizing conflict in America’s history. A debate that continues to be a hotbed for people, despite the very clear indication of who lost and why their loss was a good thing. People watching it will take what it says as fact, especially since it is a movie that has been around so long. Generations of people have been raised on this film and so the movie has been able to shape the perceptions of the Old South according to how this movie shows it. The glamourization of the Old South is one effect of the movie that carries through today. Plantations are used as wedding venues for their beauty and the past they represent, the idealistic Antebellum period. But the notion of getting married at a place where countless people suffered is just weird and ignored by so many it’s sick. It represents the profound effect of movies like Gone with the Wind on romanticizing the past and shaping the public perception of that past. People want to celebrate history when it is romantic, even if it is avoidant of the issues. The Old South is something that was, something should be celebrated, something that is a dream when it was anything but a nightmare for many. - Taylor Coleman
+How film works as secondary source:
+The film works very poorly as a secondary source due to it romanticizing the South. The film portrays the slaves being “happy” and somewhat part of the family. This has disastrous consequences for the audience watching the film because it gives a wrong notion of what the South really was like for the enslaved people. Additionally, there were many exaggerations throughout the film. Although I do believe that the film worked successfully in representing the women during the war and the roles that they had to take on while the men were away fighting, specifically the nursing roles that were portrayed.
+Problems with Historical Accuracy:
+Once again, the portrayal of enslaved people during the film was very wrong because it did not go into the depth the pain that the enslaved people suffered. On the contrary, it made their lives seem somewhat content working for the White people and being somewhat part of their family. Additionally, the portrayal of Prissy made enslaved people seem unintelligent which I think is very disrespectful to African Americans.
+How does the Film work as a Primary Source if it’s time:
+I do believe the film works very successfully in showing the racism and beliefs during the time it was created. In class we spoke about how one of the main actresses who was black was not allowed to sit with the white people even during the Oscars. This goes to show that during the time it was created, racism was very common and this goes into the stereotypes and romanticizing of the South that is seen. Overall, during this time there were many people and films who made the Antebellum South out to be a “Lost Cause” which has very devastating consequences for the people who were involved and harmed during this time.  - Erika Lambert