It’s with some disÂcomÂfort that the author names Gone with the Wind, pubÂlished exactÂly 75 years ago today, her favorite childÂhood book: It was thick, it was romanÂtic — and perÂhaps most cruÂcialÂly for any awkÂward, bespecÂtaÂcled preÂteen girl — it feaÂtured a headÂstrong heroÂine whose appeal to the oppoÂsite sex derived more from her charm than her physÂiÂcal beauÂty.
NonetheÂless, there’s no way around the proÂfound failÂings of both the book and the MGM epic film based on it: NovÂel and film treatÂed slavÂery as an inciÂdenÂtal backÂdrop to the war; they gloÂriÂfied and misÂrepÂreÂsentÂed the actions of the Ku Klux Klan; and most egreÂgiousÂly, they porÂtrayed the masÂter-slave relaÂtionÂship as one which neiÂther masÂter nor slave should ever dream of alterÂing. In the words of hisÂtoÂriÂan and sociÂolÂoÂgist Jim Loewen, author of Lies My Teacher Told Me: EveryÂthing Your High School HisÂtoÂry TextÂbook Got Wrong:
[Gone With The Wind] laments the passÂing of the slave era as “gone with the wind.” In the novÂel, Mitchell states openÂly that African AmerÂiÂcans are “creaÂtures of small intelÂliÂgence.” And this book is by far the most popÂuÂlar book in the U.S. and has been for 60 years. The book is also proÂfoundÂly wrong in its hisÂtoÂry. What it tells us about slavÂery, and espeÂcialÂly reconÂstrucÂtion, did not happen…it is proÂfoundÂly racist and proÂfoundÂly wrong. Should we teach it? Of course. Should we teach against it? Of course.
MeanÂwhile, HatÂtie McDaniel took home a best supÂportÂing actress Oscar for her role as ScarÂlett O’Hara’s loyÂal house slave, MamÂmy. She was the first African-AmerÂiÂcan woman to win an AcadÂeÂmy Award. The fact that she was not allowed to attend the film’s preÂmiere in Atlanta makes her accepÂtance speech (1940) even more poignant. It appears above.
SheerÂly Avni is a San FranÂcisÂco-based arts and culÂture writer. Her work has appeared in Salon, LA WeekÂly, MothÂer Jones, and many othÂer pubÂliÂcaÂtions. You can folÂlow her on twitÂter at @sheerly.
“…most egreÂgiousÂly, they porÂtrayed the masÂter-slave relaÂtionÂship as one which neiÂther masÂter nor slave should ever dream of alterÂing…”
On the conÂtrary, this is what makes GWTW an amazÂing piece of art. It porÂtrays the hearts and minds of those charÂacÂters, AS IF THEY WERE REAL, and not simÂply as loathÂsome carÂiÂcaÂtures to be viewed through the modÂern day “we must look down on these peoÂple for their culÂturÂal insenÂsiÂtivÂiÂty” lens.
I’m not sayÂing slavÂery is someÂthing that we ought to venÂerÂate now, or that racism is someÂthing that should be ignored. Not at all.
But I do think if you’re going to creÂate a qualÂiÂty piece of art, you need need more than just underÂstandÂing of your subÂject, you need empaÂthy.
Because of the forÂtunes of hisÂtoÂry, and the time we were born into, we’re no longer able to empathize with ScarÂlett, Rhett, or MamÂmy. Which, to me, makes GWTW even more rare and preÂcious. SomeÂthing like it could nevÂer be made again.
“And this book is by far the most popÂuÂlar book in the U.S. and has been for 60 years.” — by what meaÂsure is GWTW the most popÂuÂlar book in the US?
Hi DeduÂva,
Good quesÂtion. “PopÂuÂlarÂiÂty” can be ranked in so many ways, includÂing sales, library requests, varÂiÂous best-of lists… I can’t speak for ProÂfesÂsor Loewen, or know what criÂteÂria he had in mind durÂing the interÂview above. But accordÂing to at least some sources, he is not far off: AccordÂing to a 2008 HarÂris poll, for examÂple, GWTW ranked #2 among AmerÂiÂcans, after The Bible.
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20080408005148/en/Bible-Americas-Favorite-Book-Wind
SheerÂly
WithÂout addressÂing the failÂings of Gone With the Wind as a socialÂly enlightÂened film I’d like simÂply to menÂtion that HatÂtie McDaniel gave a splenÂdid perÂforÂmance and, curiÂousÂly, likeÂly deserved to win the Best SupÂportÂing Actress Oscar. I say *curiÂousÂly* because hisÂtorÂiÂcalÂly the AcadÂeÂmy of Motion PicÂture Arts & SciÂences was notoÂriÂous for its deeply opaque motives in choosÂing winÂners — often snubÂbing big box office perÂsonÂalÂiÂties (e.g. John Wayne, Cary Grant) until they were either retired or near death. In McDaniel’s case it appears they simÂply did the right thing for a woman who, thanks to Jim Crow, couldÂn’t even attend the film’s preÂmier in Atlanta. Of course, disÂmalÂly, the AcadÂeÂmy wouldÂn’t give anothÂer Oscar to an African-AmerÂiÂcan for 40 more years.
I stil can’t fathÂom how it ever won the Pulitzer except that the Pulitzer peoÂple just went with the most popÂuÂlar book of the day. Because it was atroÂtiousÂly writÂten, had no likeÂable charÂacÂters and was comÂpleteÂly unbeÂlieÂveÂable in every way, even if you disÂcount the blaÂtant racism and hisÂtorÂiÂcal ficÂtions.
It is the only instance I can think of where the movie was betÂter than the book and the movie was at least 2 hours too long.
Wow! To see so many misÂconÂcepÂtions about the GWTW, the author of GWTW, the perÂspecÂtive of the novÂel, the politÂiÂcal hisÂtoÂry or our nation, the hisÂtoric setÂting of the novÂel, the hisÂtoric setÂting of the time the novÂel was writÂten, and the culuÂtral perÂspecÂtive of the novel.…is just plain stunÂning!
May I sugÂgest a re-readÂing of the novÂel, includÂing the PrefÂace of more recent releasÂes by Pat ConÂroy. PerÂhaps a hisÂtoÂry lesÂson or two would be in order.
I hope my comÂments did not sound as piousÂly conÂdeÂscendÂing as the origÂiÂnal post and sevÂerÂal of the comÂments.
A dream that is dying. I have to do it.
To Greg G
Slaves ran away, facÂing recapÂture and death, to escape from servitude.They were NOT hapÂpy, and conÂtemÂpoÂrary accounts tell us so. We don’t have a disÂtortÂed perÂspecÂtive because of hisÂtorÂiÂcal disÂtance, as there were plenÂty of peoÂple back then who knew that slavÂery was demeanÂing and wrong. So GWTW, howÂevÂer pretÂtiÂly writÂten, was telling lies about the slaves. HonÂestÂly, when will we stop makÂing excusÂes for wrongÂdoÂing?