Lacks the horrifying aspects of enslavement and fails to represent the rather large portion of slaves that were fleeing plantations in hopes of a better future, contributing to the start of The Civil War. – Lindsey Sowers

Where to begin…. The treatment of slavery in the movie was by far the most inaccurate. As we saw in the reading, the institution of slavery in the south was cruel and inhuman. Humans were treated as property and abused by their owners. This idea that slaves and owners had a caring relationship or that after the war African Americans were on top and whites were on the bottom is just not accurate. The movie demeans slaves and glorifies the institution of slavery. –Grace Corkran

It is a minor inaccuracy, but when Melanie is caring for a wounded soldier in the hospital he refers to the battle he was in as Bull Run instead of Manassas. The Federals called the battle Bull Run, while the Confederates referred to it as Manassas. -Maddie Shiflett

The movie romanticizes the master and slave relationship and is inaccurate of the time. – Courtlyn Plunkett

The portrayal of stereotyped minstrel slave characters was the first offense. While Scarlett did hit Prissy and threaten her, Prissy was still portrayed to be dumb and subservient in every way. Sam also went out of his way to save Scarlett when she was being attacked, and went out of his way to speak to her like an old friend when he was being taken to dig trenches for the soldiers. He also seemed quite happy about serving the confederacy. –Erin Shaw

I agree with Grace. The movies portrayal of how slaves were treated was inaccurate. In class we talked about systematic violence and in the movie, that horrible and cruel treatment of slaves was not shown. –Caroline Collier

Going off of both Erin and Caroline, the idea of Paternalism that we discussed in class as being the main thinking of the south was true in the fact that many of the southerners believed that slavery was beneficial. But the movie show that idea of Paternalism as fact and a certainty in southern cotton culture. There is a romanization of slavery and there little violence shown towards slaves during the antebellum period and during the war. Through the interactions with Mammy and Big Sam who both are very happy to have been owned by Scarlett and her family. This relationship between the owners/planters and the slaves is not accurate at all. Especially with the willingness of the slaves to just go out and help support the cause without being told to. Slaves seemed to support the institution of slavery, with the exception of Prissy who was a total character of what slaves were supposed to be. As well as Mammy staying with Scarlett and seemingly not being paid shows a false relationship romanticized by film. Also Gettysburg happens way before Sherman is in or near Atlanta and Rhett says that the troops attacking Atlanta will be busy with another battle in Gettysburg. https://www.nps.gov/gett/learn/historyculture/civil-war-timeline.htm--Jack Hagn

The famous scene in the hospital before Scarlett leaves with the soldier getting his leg amputated without chloroform is probably a total dramatization. Although its true that the Confederacy had supply shortages and there were cases that this occurred, 95% of surgeries and amputations during the Civil War used anesthesia. This a major Hollywood myth that Gone with the Wind had a big hand in perpetuating. http://www.civilwarmed.org/surgeons-call/anesthesia1/ A tiny detail as well–the letter about Charles's death was signed by Wade Hampton, but Cobb's Legion wasn't part of Hampton's command in 1861, and even then only cavalry was under Hampton later.–Jessie Fitzgerald

Like many other people have mentioned, this movie had a very poor interpretation of slavery. Slavery was shown as not only not bad, but at times good which is the opposite of reality. Based on the lecture in class, I also found inaccurate that a proper rich southern woman would be actually tending to soldiers as a nurse. Based on what Dr. McClurken taught, that would have been extremely improper, especially for both Scarlett and Melanie. Another thing I noticed in this movie is how easily people in this movie can die from falling off a horse. Yes, falling off a horse is dangerous, but two characters in this film died that way and that seems excessive when I think of how many times I personally have fallen off a horse in my life. – Carolyn Stough

I agree with Erin and Caroline, the brutal treatment of the slaves was not shown. There was one scene where Scarlett hits Prissy and we see her threaten her but that’s all. There are moments where I would’ve thought the white characters were going to become very upset at something the slaves did but that didn’t happen. When Mammy brought out the guns by mentioning to Scarlett that she hadn’t seen Ashley ask for her hand, Scarlett throws a murderous look at her . . . and then eats, as Mammy had been begging her to. It was funny to see, but I don’t believe slaves had this sort of relationship with their masters. At times, it almost seems as if the slaves fear the Yankees and aren’t really interested in obtaining their freedom. For example, when Mammy goes into town with Scarlett, she plays the role of a devoted servant as she makes way for her master to pass through all the while giving disapproving looks to those she comes across. - Johana Colchado

The portrayal of the women at this time was fairly accurate. As we learned in class time, women were an integral part of plantation life. They had to oversee a lot of the plantation labor as well as take on many household duties. – Lindsey Sowers

The civil war was a thing –Grace Corkran

Reconstruction, also a thing– Grace Corkran

Sherman existed, they got the name right– Grace Corkran

When Charles leaves to go and fight, he tells Scarlet that “the war will be over in a few weeks and I'll be coming back to you.” This was a commonly accepted idea at the beginning of the war. Many people, on both sides of the conflict, thought it would be a quick fight. William Tecumseh Sherman was one of few to disagree with this and argue that the war would be drawn out and bloody. “William T. Sherman.” American Battlefield Trust. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/william-t-sherman. -Maddie Shiflett

The movie got a lot of small details right about the 1860's, from period dress and house furnishings, to the popularity of peacock feathers as a symbol of status, mourning dresses and rules for mourning, and gallant balls for the wealthy. In terms of the Civil War, Cobb's Legion was for Georgian soldiers, ammunition depots were burned as the Confederates evacuated from Atlanta, and amputations were often carried out with no medicine of any kind due to scarcity of resources. Charles dying from pneumonia and measles would've been a common death faced by soldiers, since death from disease outweighed death on the battlefield. According to the American Battlefield Trust, “for every three soldiers killed in battle, five more died of disease.” Lastly, Rhett refers to Gettysburg as “some little town in Pennsylvania,” because it would have carried no weight at the time. “Civil War Casualties.” American Battlefield Trust. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/civil-war-casualties. -Maddie Shiflett

The costumes were confirmed to be historically accurate for the south at the time. The costume designer, Walter Plunkett did meticulous research and had a careful design process when it came to making the costumes. http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/web/gonewiththewind/costumes/#top -Courtlyn Plunkett

One interesting detail in particular that the movie got right was the southerners and barbecue. I've come to learn from peers and friends alike that apparently many people believe that the barbecue itself is a more modern invention, when in fact, the barbecue (at least for America) is a very old concept, going as far back as when Columbus first found the new world. For southerners in particular at this time, pork was a major food source especially in regards to barbecues (they were cheap, and didn't require as much nourishment as cattle). Prior to the Civil War, the southerners ate an average of five pounds of pork for every pound of cattle. Though we don't actually see the barbecue in action, the fact that the setting is a barbecue shows that the movie did its homework. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-evolution-of-american-barbecue-13770775/ –Robert Dallas

In class we talked about how during the war many single or widowed (Scarlett) women worked as nurses for wounded soldiers of the war. This was portrayed accurately, until Scarlett left the makeshift church hospital ~complaining~ that she has had enough. –Caroline Collier

Scarlett’s first husband died of pneumonia and in class we talked about how many men died of diseases during the war, not just causualties of fighting. -Erin Andrewlevich

The scene where Scarlett walks out into the street of Atlanta looking for a doctor to see hundreds of wounded men was most likely dramatized but accurate at the same time. In places that became Civil War hospitals, there would be such a number of wounded men that most of them would be placed where ever they could find space.The most serious injuries would go into the hospital rooms which would be crammed with as many soldiers that they could possibly get in and if your injury was not as serious, you would be placed outside. During the first battle of Fredericksburg, Burnside suffered 12,600 casualties and many more who were wounded in the battle and all of these soldiers were brought back to Chatham Manor which is now part of the Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park. Most of the people brought to Chatham were placed outside along the grounds of the manor since there was a lack of space inside. Outside was also where all the amputated limbs and the bodies of the dead were put which lead to Walt Whitman's famous quote from when he was at Chatham Manor where he said “a heap of amputated feet, legs, arms, hands, etc.-about a load for a one-horse cart. Several dead bodies lie near….. each covered with its brown woolen blanket.” https://www.nps.gov/frsp/learn/historyculture/chatham.htm –Ellora Larsen

As we discussed in class there were various methods in which enslaved peoples could protest their masters. As we see in Gone with the Wind, when Mrs. Wilkes is having her child she sends the slave woman to the hospital to get the doctor and during that scene Scarlett threatens to sell her children for not moving fast enough. In the next scenes you see the slave woman singing downstairs and taking her time as a form of passive protest. –William Roszell

The movie accurately portrayed women during this time period, specifically relating to plantation life. Women often had to oversee work, which we see in the movie when Ellen O'Hara was overseeing and directing work on the plantation. –Maryanna Stribling

Although the movie is biased, it does offer an accurate insight as to how the south viewed itself. It shows how the Southerners victimized themselves and acted like the North was trying to ruin their way of life. It also shows us that the Civil War mostly affected wealthy plantation owners due to the heavy reliance on slavery, although they didn't recognize it as immoral and wanted it to continue, another view point that we see in the film. –Maryanna Stribling

Sherman’s ‘scorched earth’ march to the sea from Atlanta to Savannah was accurately portrayed. By eliminating the need for his logistics to catch up, destroying military and civilian infrastructure and living off the land, he the Confederate forces were in constant retreat and unable to mount a counter attack. Essentially breaking the back of the South. – Andrew Mullins

Many of the Civil War era events that are mentioned in the movie actually did happen, such as Gettysburg and Sherman’s “March to the Sea”. The hardships faced by the characters, although not entirely accurate in substance, do reflect how difficult the Civil War era would have been for civilians off of the battlefield living their lives. - Sam Hartz

This film only relied on history so that Scarlett could wear beautiful costumes. Every mention of the war is just a backdrop for Scarlett's insufferable story. At the end, the Civil War and Reconstruction setting hardly seems to matter, as the family slaves continue to work for them, no one too important to Scarlett dies in the war, and she ultimately profits off of the destruction. This movie is not only hard to watch due to its length, but also because of its completely unlikable characters. It could have easily been just a bad love story between two terrible people without the Civil War setting. –Erin Shaw

Clearly racial representation wasn't the greatest in 1939, but for them to essentially make a heteronormative love roller coaster epic with casual racist stereotypes thrown in just seems strange. As the second world war emerged shortly before the film was released, I was wondering if the war setting of this film was meant to be a reaction to the first world war/current tensions? Were the racist stereotypes simply meant to be comedic relief from Scarlett and Rhett's love story, or just a typical anecdote of films in the 30s? I am going to assume they made this film about romance to get lots of money and sadly become a keystone of American film despite it's cringe-worthy representation of the Civil War. –Jessica Lynch

The film was very open with slavery as a good thing, which its definitely not. The film seemed okay with using this idea of confederate cause and the glory and honor of the confederacy. But this was after World War I and African American men served in two combat divisions as well as serving in service units. There was more of an integration in some officer camps as well. So was the movie meant to show that whites were still important and still on top? Because there was a lot of racism and for a long movie acting like an epic this just showed a false history of the Civil War. Was this book and film a reaction to more rights for African Americans in the US? Or the creation of the NAACP in 1909? It seems like a reactionary film that was made with the purpose of preserving the idea of Paternalism. https://armyhistory.org/fighting-for-respect-african-american-soldiers-in-wwi/ –Jack Hagn

Through out the movie, one of the things that kept coming into mind is how much you can see the lost cause narrative pop into the storyline. In the opening text after the opening credits, the scroll says “There was a land of Cavaliers and Cotton Fields called the Old South . . . Here in this pretty world Gallantry took its last bow. Here was the last ever to be seen of Knights and their Ladies Fair, of Master and of Slave. Look for it only in books, for it is no more than a dream remembered. A Civilization gone with the wind . . .” This opening scrawl was put over the background of enslaved workers out in a field with, if I remember correctly, a picturesque sunset right behind them doing hard labor. That opening shot just tries to establish the narrative of the “happy slave” and that it was all stolen by those “dang Yanks” during the war. Theres just little comments thrown in to try and consistently support the lost cause narrative through out the movie with all of the enslaved characters sticking with their masters. Was that the whole purpose of creating this movie to support the lost cause and to romanticize the old south?– Ellora Larsen

As many people have already said, this movie clearly has a bias for the south. The romanticizing of the southern experience through the demonization of the North is one of the major themes of the film itself. While the major focus is the cringeworthy drama of Scarlett never knowing what she wants at any given moment, the movie continually takes jabs at the Union. From the brushing off of slavery as an inconsequential part of the war, to essentially calling General Sherman a monster (which to be fair, at least from the perspective of the South, he was), this movie doesn't try to hide its disdain for the Union's victory over the Confederacy. My question in the context of the time this movie was made is: Why? What need did the filmmakers have that they felt obligated to glorify the south as victims of an oppressive opposition? Was this film meant to be some kind of “last hurrah” for Confederate sympathizers? –Robert Dallas

I don’t think the movie romanticizes the south at all. Instead, quite the opposite. I think it is a very accurate depiction of the sobering realities of many things that were prevalent during the Civil War and immediately afterward. Namely, the utter misguided romanticism that existed on both sides of how war was going to solve the problems of the day, [see Ashley’s resistance to fighting in the first place, and Rhett’s unpopular but prescient attitude to taking any side in the war] and then the brutal realities of war and its aftermath. Specifically, the Fourth phase of all conflicts that usually results in an equal amount of human destruction, score settling and opportunism [see carpetbaggers and scalywags] that is overlooked or hijacked by correctionist historians. – Andrew Mullins

Obviously the movie is steeped in Lost Cause-ism. However, one thing that I always associate with that is denouncing and hatred for what Sherman did in Georgia, calling it “war crimes” (not really) or unnecessary violence against civilians, claims of mass rape (totally legitimate, but like we discussed in class more towards black women), or just that he was straight-up evil. But this movie has a pretty accurate depiction of Sherman's March and its effect on civilians, the destruction of property and the effect of both armies and looters on Atlanta. Sherman isn't liked by anyone, but he's not seen as evil or extremely brutal. One of the few actual Federal soldiers we see that Scarlett kills at Tara is a deserter, communicating that only someone like a deserter would come to cause trouble for the civilians left at home. Considering aspects of the rest of the movie, it is somewhat surprising that Sherman's supposed atrocities and terrible Yankee soldiers wasn't played up in the movie. It's one of the most historically honest parts. –Jessie Fitzgerald

I think it’s important to understand that this movie was produced in 1939. While it doesn’t excuse the film, you must understand it as a work of the time. Most of the narratives on slavery and the south had depicted slavery from point of view of the overseer or the white owners. It wasn’t until the 1976 works of Eugene Genovese’s Roll, Jordan, Roll that anyone really does any work from the point of view of the enslaved. –William Roszell

Did the filmmakers intentionally make the main slaves except for Mammy seem like silly idiots? The slave girl seemed especially exaggerated in almost a caricature of slaves in a way that is particularly concerning today. Was that kind of caricature still perpetuated in the 1930s when this was made? – Carolyn Stough

Although I do see stereotypes of the slaves in the movie, during the scene when Scarlett arrives at Tara after her journey and is told they have no more food or livestock, the slaves looked lost when. They said that since they were house slaves they didn’t know what needed to be done or how to work the field or milk a cow. I wonder if that’s how it truly was in those times- if the house slaves weren’t allowed to learn about anything else except household duties. Also, can we please talk about Prissy? At first, I couldn’t stand her and felt she was completely useless but upon further research on this character, I came across some interesting things. Although it’s just some people analyzing the character on their blog, they do bring up interesting points that make sense. Did anyone catch the big moment where Scarlett leaves to find the doctor so he can deliver Mellie’s baby just after she hit Prissy? If you look at the way she says “few” it looks like she’s secretly cursing at Scarlett. And all the things she says throughout the movie - she’s scared of or doesn’t like a lot of things, avid liar, and acts up during circumstances where she is expected to do things. She is rebelling, not obvious, but still rebelling. Well done, Prissy, well done. (https://earthasitis.com/2015/03/04/) -Johana Colchado

This movie is TERRIBLE for trying to understand what slavery was like but it is very helpful in understanding the perception of slavery by whites in the 1930's. They wanted to glorify their history and make slavery seem like a noble institution, one that was to the benefit of the masters and the slaves. They made the decision to glorify their slave owners and war veterans to show that their cause was great. They believed it was a good cause and brave men killed by a violent and oppressive north and that all the beauty of the south and of slavery was gone with the wind. This is similar to the idea of the noble but doomed Indian that was a theme in the last of the Moh. the belief that it is a good cause that was against bad odds. –Grace Corkran

Not only were the African American actors and actresses included in the film made to portray slavery in a manner that was deceptive of its realities. They also faced inequality during the production process. The film was premiered in Atlanta on December 15, 1939 and African Americans were not allowed to attend. Hattie McDaniel, who played Mammy, did not attend even though she ended up winning an Academy Award for her role. She was also kept off of the souvenir book for the movie. This movie speaks volumes about the state of racial issues during the 1930's. Dietrich, Alicia. “Bernstein Recounts the Segregated Atlanta Premiere of 'Gone With the Wind'.” 2014. http://news.emory.edu/stories/2014/11/er_gone_with_the_wind_anniversary/campus.html. -Maddie Shiflett

The Mammy character was commonly used in cartoons produced around this time period, which were aired before movies. Betty Boop, Felix the Cat, and Merrie Melodies all used a Mammy character at some point to make jokes at the expense of black people. (Betty Boop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIxHfwhckcs&t=309s, Felix the Cat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpjeGHUimIU&t=25s , Merrie Melodies: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT2LSB1Bz2o) (Warning: the clips are extremely racist). While Hattie McDaniel was praised for her role in this film, she was still being used as the butt of a joke. Mammy, Prissy, Pork, and Sam are all minstrel portrayals of black people that were guaranteed to get a laugh from a 1939 audience. These were stereotyped stock characters, similar to how stereotypical nerds and jocks get laughs in today's movies about high school. While McDaniel did receive an Oscar for her performance, she was still intended to be the comic relief. –Erin Shaw

So far this is the oldest movie we’ve watched in this class and it clearly shows. Many people have pointed out how this movie deals so inappropriately with slavery and race (inappropriately in today’s terms). Along with this this movie heavily romanticizes the Civil War from a southern point of view and sure this still happens today but I don’t think to an extent that this movie went to. A movie like this probably wouldn’t be made today and if it was, it most likely be fundamentally different in the aspects of things we are more understanding of today, such as race. -Erin Andrewlevich

This movie adequately builds off how history was written at the time. History was written primarily from a white supremacy point of view. It isn’t until the civil rights movements that history begins to change the narratives and perspectives of how enslaved people were treated at the time. -William Roszell

It is a good primary source of the way things were when Margaret Mitchell wrote the book and when the movie was made. I think the movie does an excellent job of portraying a nuanced position of the day on slavery in that not everyone who had servants or slaves treated them poorly and that there actually were some progressive thinking plantation owners in the south who wanted to rid themselves of 18th century slavery. – Andrew Mullins

Many people have mentioned how this movie is blatantly racist (a point on which I agree, the character of Prissy was such an awful stereotype it made me gag every time she spoke), but nobody should ignore the movie’s equally blatant sexism. The gender politics of the 1930s were on full display in the relationship between Rhett and Scarlett. The most disgusting thing in a movie full of disgusting things is the way that Rhett Butler, a man who never once in the movie has a consensual kiss with his wife, a man who threatens to smash his wife’s skull while on a drunken bender and then rapes her, a man who tells his wife that her pregnancy isn’t such a big deal because she might have a miscarriage, continues to be painted as the victim of Scarlett’s machinations. (Justin Curtis)

Gone With The Wind is a perfect example of the ‘lost cause’ argument that emerged after the Civil War and evidence of how the South romanticized the War. The South is viewed in the movie as the victim as well as a hero despite their detrimental loss of land and economy. Further, the lost cause argument tends to shy away from mention of slavery and instead details the fight fueled by honor the South fought for their southern way of life (i.e. Plantation system sustained by slavery). In the movie, slavery is sugar-coated and looked upon as nostalgic. Given Gone with the Wind released in 1939, pro-slavery and racial arrogance still reigned. However, as part of the lost cause, slavery is remembered through books such as Uncle Tom’s Cabin and Disney’s motion picture, Song of the South. -Lake Wiley

The slaves included in the movie: Mammy, Prissy, Pork, and Big Sam are seemingly serving their benevolent masters who care for them and view their slaves as practically family. In fact, viewers believed and fell for the faithful slave depiction so hard that Hattie McDaniel (Mammy) became the first black Oscar winner. Further, she accepted her award in a ‘no blacks’ hotel in Los Angeles. From that point, she played in 74 maid roles after Gone With the Wind. In the linked article, McDaniel was questioned by both the black and white community for her depiction of slaves in the ‘Old South’. The NAACP disowned her because of her acting out of the lost cause black stereotype. While it makes me happy to know that McDaniel received recognition for her role, it is disheartening that she had to continue playing the playing the same role in order to keep her job and appease white audiences.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/oscars-first-black-winner-accepted-774335 -Lake Wiley

The movie as a secondary source for that time is not an acceptable one if being used for learning about history. As a secondary source for today, it could be considered a good one if used as an example of how African Americans were treated in Hollywood. This movie could also be used to describe how Hollywood pictured slaves in film. –Alyx Wilson

I agree with Grace, this is not the slave’s perception but it’s of the Southern white upperclass during the Civil War and post-war era. It is also casually mentioned in the film about “cleaning out the woods” and “political meeting” was something more gruesome that involved a group dressed in white sheets. It was mentioned so casually and indirectly, so it was easy to pass it off as the men being saviors and protecting the women . . . until you realize there is more to that. The film is a good interpretation of one P.O.V. and only one. https://nypost.com/2015/06/24/gone-with-the-wind-should-go-the-way-of-the-confederate-flag/ - Johana Colchado

Gone with the Wind is a good primary source for the time that it was written and that the movie was made. It shows how people liked to view slavery and the idealized antebellum South. It does not do a good job though of actually depicting slavery and the antebellum South in a way that is at all accurate. - Sam Hartz

No emphasis is placed on the 13th Amendment and the freeing of slaves during the film. The movie slightly alludes to emancipation with scenes of free men in suits walking around Atlanta and the offer of 40 acres and a mule in exchange for a vote by a man on the street. Yet, there is never any blatant statement made that the slaves have been freed. And for the slaves of the O'Hara family, there is never a point where they must decide whether to remain with the family or leave. It seems as if Margaret Mitchell found it “impossible to imagine the reality or meaning of freedom for the South's four million slaves.” Within the Diary of Ella Gertrude Clanton Thomas, there is large discussion of her slaves deciding to leave and it was a big deal to her. The movie dodged the issue. Faust, Drew Gilpin. “Clutching the Chains That Bind.” Southern Cultures 5, no. 1 (1999): 6. Literature Resource Center (accessed October 7, 2018). http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.umw.edu/apps/doc/A54289598/LitRC?u=viva_mwc&sid=LitRC&xid=7f8f4ac2. -Maddie Shiflett

Through the readings of Jacob Stroyer and the letter sent by slaves and formers slaves, it was very apparent that they were mistreated by slave owners and did not want to be slaves at all, but Gone with the Wind did not portray their side of slavery. Gone with the Wind took the accounts of people like George Fitzhugh who romanticized the concept of slavery for African Americans, depicting Southern slaves as people who liked slavery instead of hating it. What the movie ends up with is a Confederate South where not one slave tried to escape to the North, even though historically large amounts did. -Kyle Moore

Ella Gertrude Clanton Thomas wrote extensively of rampant bankruptcy and claims she is “more intensely opposed to the north than any period of the war.” Scarlett also has money struggles when confronted with taxes on Tara. Scarlett and the other women show an obvious disdain for the union soldiers. The way Ella and Scarlett speak of their experience, they believe they are the victims of the war, not the millions of enslaved Americans who died as slaves or the soldiers who witnessed the horrors of war. Ella realized that she had to help one of her remaining servants clean the dishes. Scarlett and her sisters learn to pick cotton to be able to afford food. While white southern women had to adjust to losing some “luxuries” after the war, this movie parallels Ella's account that the end of the civil war was absolutely horrible for them to endure… –Jessica Lynch

Will raises an interesting point when he suggests that Prissy failing to get the doctor and generally acting in ways likely to get her owners killed might actually be a form of protest. While I thought along the same lines at first, I feel that it is more likely that the movie simply intended her to be a simple-minded black stereotype who is clearly too dumb to survive outside of servitude, thus justifying her enslavement. Still, it reminds me of how the readings described slaves rebelling against their masters and even allegedly killing one (Mary Chesnut, 132). I would prefer if Will was right though, and Prissy was intentionally trying to kill Melanie. That is a movie I would have wanted to watch. (Justin Curtis)

With most depictions of African American women in film, it often follows the archetype of the Mammy, the Jezebel, or the Sapphire. Mammy in the movie follows the perfect archetype of the Mammy or Mammie figure. How does this stereotype play into this movie and how does it play into movies today? – Ellora Larsen

Were audiences in 1939 at all sympathetic with Scarlett? Because she made the entire experience of watching this movie unbearable with her constant whining. I didn't understand why she was the main character, and why we should root for her. –Erin Shaw

Gone with the Wind is incredibly biased toward the South and slavery, but was still a huge hit in the 1940’s and a huge contributor to the romanticization of the “Old South” that is still prevalent. -Kyle Moore

How did this movie act to further hide the atrocities of slavery so white people didn't feel guilty? Well, start by directing the enslaved characters to act as unintelligent and obnoxious as possible to start with some subconscious disgust. Next, totally neglect the primary accounts of enslaved peoples during their lives as slaves and during the civil war to undermine their contributions and suffering. Finally, portray the white people as the victims of the civil war, who apparently value land more than anything else, including human life. “Gone with the Wind” does a great job of neglecting the frightful stories of African Americans so white people can sit down and enjoy a triumphant story about unhealthy relationships, plantations, and whiny women. –Jessica Lynch

The strongest parts of the movie are scenes dealing with the war and Reconstruction, and how it affected southern civilians. The last hour or so hardly deals with it at all and it shows. Without it's historical backdrop, I don't think this movie would have been as well-received in 1939 or as well-liked and remembered today. –Jessie Fitzgerald

As Justin pointed out under the secondary source wiki, everyone has just talked about the issue of slavery in this movie while ignoring the obvious rape scene between Rhett and Scarlett. Why has this scene been ignored so much? The scene itself can be taken as just a romantic thing between the two, but obviously viewers notice that Scarlett struggles against Rhett and unless meanings have changed within the last 2 minutes, struggling usually means no bueno to the other party. –Alyx Wilson