Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Onion AV Club)   Gone With The Wind blows back onto HBO Max   (news.avclub.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Racism, African American, Slavery, Race, Racial segregation in the United States, Gone with the Wind, film scholar Jacqueline Stewart, Racial segregation  
•       •       •

639 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 25 Jun 2020 at 6:19 AM (16 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



45 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-06-25 3:10:59 AM  
Gone with the Wind is a great movie. It's also a great example of mythmaking and propaganda that contributed massively to the ahistorical and pernicious Lost Cause myth of the Civil War.

It's not so much that the film is problematic because "it was of its time and people back then were less enlightened". It's more that the film helped create and popularise many of those views "of its time" -- views which were considerably more racist and less historically informed than they would have been, say, thirty years prior. The film was at its release greeted with widespread criticism and a number of protests; the protests proved ephemeral and the film embedded itself into the popular consciousness, and with it its whitewashed and slaver-sympathetic view of the plantation (how romantic!), slavery (they were happier then!), the Civil War (noble and glorious!) and Reconstruction (awful and unfair!).

The film shouldn't be banned or anything like that. It's a really important movie for all sorts of reasons. But like Birth of a Nation, it should be recognised not as a naive expression of historical views, but rather as politically motivated revisionist propaganda produced almost a century after the events it depicts, intended to shape modern views in ways that are -- and at the time were recognised as being -- contrary to history.

(Incidentally: GOTW was produced as long after the Civil War as the modern day is after WWII. Imagine today some alt-righters producing a film about how lovely things were under the Reich, how nobly Aryans struggled against the Bolshevik hordes, how pleasant life was for Jewish occupants of the camps, and how tragic the occupation and de-Nazification of Germany was. Would that film be a work "of our time", or propaganda intended to reshape our views of a previous time for modern political purposes?)
 
2020-06-25 3:51:50 AM  
This is me, trying to give a damn -> .
 
2020-06-25 6:25:14 AM  
Song of the South is wondering what all the fuss is about.
 
2020-06-25 6:26:06 AM  
Good.  Now all the people who complained about it being pulled should be forced to sit through it.
 
2020-06-25 6:36:26 AM  
I'm old enough to remember when GWTW was one of those "it" movies, but I never watched it.  But a few weeks ago I did watch it and ah....no.  I really didn't like it and Scarlett O'Hare was pretty much the first Karen.
 
2020-06-25 6:47:58 AM  
Who's going to show the remake with Kirk Cameron as Rhett, Victoria Jackson as Scarlett and James Woods as the wacky ghost of General Stonewall Jackson?

Stacey Dash isn't sure about the script.
 
2020-06-25 7:03:05 AM  
So now you get to sit through 2 hours of explanation before the movie, now even less of a reason to see it again.
 
2020-06-25 7:09:17 AM  

pkjun: but rather as politically motivated revisionist propaganda produced almost a century after the events it depicts, intended to shape modern views in ways that are -- and at the time were recognised as being -- contrary to history.


This is entirely true, but I find it interesting how the antebellum south is painted as feckless and vapid, the call for war painted as foolish on its face, and yet- they're clearly romanticizing the period. I mean, I guess it ties to themes: Scarlett as a petulant child, growing as she suffers (out of proportion to her childish behavior).

But yeah, it's important to see Gone With the Wind, not because it's good, but because it was such a landmark moment in media history that it still is shaping popular culture.
 
2020-06-25 7:26:37 AM  

Brandi Morgan: I'm old enough to remember when GWTW was one of those "it" movies, but I never watched it.  But a few weeks ago I did watch it and ah....no.  I really didn't like it and Scarlett O'Hare was pretty much the first Karen.


You're over 85 but only just saw it?
 
2020-06-25 7:45:00 AM  

groppet: So now you get to sit through 2 hours of explanation before the movie, now even less of a reason to see it again.


You know there's a fast forward button on the remote, right?
 
2020-06-25 7:47:32 AM  
It's a pretty awful film.
 
2020-06-25 8:17:19 AM  
Frankly, motherfarker, I don't give a shiat.
 
2020-06-25 8:23:04 AM  

Brandi Morgan: I'm old enough to remember when GWTW was one of those "it" movies, but I never watched it.  But a few weeks ago I did watch it and ah....no.  I really didn't like it and Scarlett O'Hare was pretty much the first Karen.


Scarlett O'Hare may have been annoying as Karen, but was waaaaay hotter
 
2020-06-25 8:42:08 AM  
This is the right way to handle it.  Use it as a platform to initiate a discussion about how farked up it is and what it represents.  Although I'd go one stop further and make the introduction not optional.  If you have the time to watch Gone With The Wind, you have a few extra minutes at the start to hear why it's problematic.
 
2020-06-25 8:47:43 AM  

pkjun: Gone with the Wind is a great movie. It's also a great example of mythmaking and propaganda that contributed massively to the ahistorical and pernicious Lost Cause myth of the Civil War.

It's not so much that the film is problematic because "it was of its time and people back then were less enlightened". It's more that the film helped create and popularise many of those views "of its time" -- views which were considerably more racist and less historically informed than they would have been, say, thirty years prior. The film was at its release greeted with widespread criticism and a number of protests; the protests proved ephemeral and the film embedded itself into the popular consciousness, and with it its whitewashed and slaver-sympathetic view of the plantation (how romantic!), slavery (they were happier then!), the Civil War (noble and glorious!) and Reconstruction (awful and unfair!).

The film shouldn't be banned or anything like that. It's a really important movie for all sorts of reasons. But like Birth of a Nation, it should be recognised not as a naive expression of historical views, but rather as politically motivated revisionist propaganda produced almost a century after the events it depicts, intended to shape modern views in ways that are -- and at the time were recognised as being -- contrary to history.

(Incidentally: GOTW was produced as long after the Civil War as the modern day is after WWII. Imagine today some alt-righters producing a film about how lovely things were under the Reich, how nobly Aryans struggled against the Bolshevik hordes, how pleasant life was for Jewish occupants of the camps, and how tragic the occupation and de-Nazification of Germany was. Would that film be a work "of our time", or propaganda intended to reshape our views of a previous time for modern political purposes?)


Its a brilliant movie...TECHNICALLY. The production design and visuals are amazing.

The rest of it is hot garbage , and should only be thought of as a sick southern fantasy.


Sherman should have burned the south back to the stone age
 
2020-06-25 8:56:57 AM  
They should digitally remaster it with Rhett switching between a klan hood and Scarlet carrying a Starbucks Frappuccino with TRUMP written on the side.
 
2020-06-25 9:02:04 AM  

pkjun: Gone with the Wind is a great movie.


No, it isn't. It's a good movie. And then it dilutes that with a very dull 2nd half. And, even if you walk out at intermission, it evaporates with 20 seconds of thought,
 
2020-06-25 9:29:33 AM  

yakmans_dad: pkjun: Gone with the Wind is a great movie.

No, it isn't. It's a good movie. And then it dilutes that with a very dull 2nd half. And, even if you walk out at intermission, it evaporates with 20 seconds of thought,


It's an okay movie, but a great production. Costumes, sets, cast. It was really done well from a technical aspect.
 
2020-06-25 9:33:37 AM  
Now all the idiots whining about HBO viciously slaughtering "our history" can continue not watching the movie just like they weren't watching it before. They can refocus their outrage over the murder of the pancake lady.
 
2020-06-25 9:38:49 AM  

pkjun: Gone with the Wind is a great movie. It's also a great example of mythmaking and propaganda that contributed massively to the ahistorical and pernicious Lost Cause myth of the Civil War.

It's not so much that the film is problematic because "it was of its time and people back then were less enlightened". It's more that the film helped create and popularise many of those views "of its time" -- views which were considerably more racist and less historically informed than they would have been, say, thirty years prior. The film was at its release greeted with widespread criticism and a number of protests; the protests proved ephemeral and the film embedded itself into the popular consciousness, and with it its whitewashed and slaver-sympathetic view of the plantation (how romantic!), slavery (they were happier then!), the Civil War (noble and glorious!) and Reconstruction (awful and unfair!).

The film shouldn't be banned or anything like that. It's a really important movie for all sorts of reasons. But like Birth of a Nation, it should be recognised not as a naive expression of historical views, but rather as politically motivated revisionist propaganda produced almost a century after the events it depicts, intended to shape modern views in ways that are -- and at the time were recognised as being -- contrary to history.

(Incidentally: GOTW was produced as long after the Civil War as the modern day is after WWII. Imagine today some alt-righters producing a film about how lovely things were under the Reich, how nobly Aryans struggled against the Bolshevik hordes, how pleasant life was for Jewish occupants of the camps, and how tragic the occupation and de-Nazification of Germany was. Would that film be a work "of our time", or propaganda intended to reshape our views of a previous time for modern political purposes?)


Ssssshhhhhh
Ssssshhhhhhhh

Hush.

It was about as anti slavery and anti-The-South as was possible to get away with and still have your movie made at the time. Get some historical context.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fukT​k​8gJ3M
 
2020-06-25 9:48:07 AM  

youre killing independent george: pkjun: Gone with the Wind is a great movie. It's also a great example of mythmaking and propaganda that contributed massively to the ahistorical and pernicious Lost Cause myth of the Civil War.

It's not so much that the film is problematic because "it was of its time and people back then were less enlightened". It's more that the film helped create and popularise many of those views "of its time" -- views which were considerably more racist and less historically informed than they would have been, say, thirty years prior. The film was at its release greeted with widespread criticism and a number of protests; the protests proved ephemeral and the film embedded itself into the popular consciousness, and with it its whitewashed and slaver-sympathetic view of the plantation (how romantic!), slavery (they were happier then!), the Civil War (noble and glorious!) and Reconstruction (awful and unfair!).

The film shouldn't be banned or anything like that. It's a really important movie for all sorts of reasons. But like Birth of a Nation, it should be recognised not as a naive expression of historical views, but rather as politically motivated revisionist propaganda produced almost a century after the events it depicts, intended to shape modern views in ways that are -- and at the time were recognised as being -- contrary to history.

(Incidentally: GOTW was produced as long after the Civil War as the modern day is after WWII. Imagine today some alt-righters producing a film about how lovely things were under the Reich, how nobly Aryans struggled against the Bolshevik hordes, how pleasant life was for Jewish occupants of the camps, and how tragic the occupation and de-Nazification of Germany was. Would that film be a work "of our time", or propaganda intended to reshape our views of a previous time for modern political purposes?)

Ssssshhhhhh
Ssssshhhhhhhh

Hush.

It was about as anti slavery and anti-The-South as was possible to get away with and still have your movie made at the time. Get some historical context.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fukTk​8gJ3M


LOL, the "about" has links to Gavin McGinness and "Was the Civil War Really About Slavery" just asking questions, etc. All the lulz.
 
2020-06-25 9:57:34 AM  

t3knomanser: pkjun: but rather as politically motivated revisionist propaganda produced almost a century after the events it depicts, intended to shape modern views in ways that are -- and at the time were recognised as being -- contrary to history.

This is entirely true, but I find it interesting how the antebellum south is painted as feckless and vapid, the call for war painted as foolish on its face, and yet- they're clearly romanticizing the period. I mean, I guess it ties to themes: Scarlett as a petulant child, growing as she suffers (out of proportion to her childish behavior).

But yeah, it's important to see Gone With the Wind, not because it's good, but because it was such a landmark moment in media history that it still is shaping popular culture.


It's with Birth of a Nation for its importance alongside its horrific racist imagination. Birth of a Nation is completely reprehensible -- but also nearly unwatchable for most modern audiences -- but it was vital in transforming the language of film. GWTW wasn't as groundbreaking, but it's a very important film. But covering it with its explicit context and making clear what a portrait of "happy mammy" slaves and the courtly, genteel and kindly white races it is, is vital.
 
2020-06-25 9:59:03 AM  

yakmans_dad: pkjun: Gone with the Wind is a great movie.

No, it isn't. It's a good movie. And then it dilutes that with a very dull 2nd half. And, even if you walk out at intermission, it evaporates with 20 seconds of thought,


It's a aesthetic odd-ball.

The first audiences were more impressed by the visual technology than the story.  Some modern viewers find romantic notions in it because the film was designed as a romantic fantasy, like a dime-store novel.
 
2020-06-25 9:59:23 AM  

Brandi Morgan: Scarlett O'Hare was pretty much the first Karen


Fark user imageView Full Size

'I demand to speak to the ultimate manager!
Hello? I'm entitled to an explanation!'
 
2020-06-25 10:03:46 AM  
Finally, people who never watched an 80-year-old movie can stop complaining about being temporarily not being able to watch it on one of countless platforms on which it is available. Our national nightmare is over.
 
2020-06-25 10:06:08 AM  

youre killing independent george: pkjun: Gone with the Wind is a great movie. It's also a great example of mythmaking and propaganda that contributed massively to the ahistorical and pernicious Lost Cause myth of the Civil War.

It's not so much that the film is problematic because "it was of its time and people back then were less enlightened". It's more that the film helped create and popularise many of those views "of its time" -- views which were considerably more racist and less historically informed than they would have been, say, thirty years prior. The film was at its release greeted with widespread criticism and a number of protests; the protests proved ephemeral and the film embedded itself into the popular consciousness, and with it its whitewashed and slaver-sympathetic view of the plantation (how romantic!), slavery (they were happier then!), the Civil War (noble and glorious!) and Reconstruction (awful and unfair!).

The film shouldn't be banned or anything like that. It's a really important movie for all sorts of reasons. But like Birth of a Nation, it should be recognised not as a naive expression of historical views, but rather as politically motivated revisionist propaganda produced almost a century after the events it depicts, intended to shape modern views in ways that are -- and at the time were recognised as being -- contrary to history.

(Incidentally: GOTW was produced as long after the Civil War as the modern day is after WWII. Imagine today some alt-righters producing a film about how lovely things were under the Reich, how nobly Aryans struggled against the Bolshevik hordes, how pleasant life was for Jewish occupants of the camps, and how tragic the occupation and de-Nazification of Germany was. Would that film be a work "of our time", or propaganda intended to reshape our views of a previous time for modern political purposes?)

Ssssshhhhhh
Ssssshhhhhhhh

Hush.

It was about as anti slavery and anti-The-South as was possible to get away with and still have your movie made ...


Okay so when I am looking to figure out whether something is Racist or Not Racist, my first source is probably not going to be a YouTube rant from a guy who apparently spends most of his time whining about SJWs putting women and black people in movies, and who links in the video notes to "Was The Civil War Really About Slavery" and "Five Reasons Not To Ban The Confederate Flag" from far-right outlets that share staff with the neo-Nazi Proud Boys and the Daily Stormer.
 
2020-06-25 10:19:26 AM  

pkjun: youre killing independent george: pkjun: Gone with the Wind is a great movie. It's also a great example of mythmaking and propaganda that contributed massively to the ahistorical and pernicious Lost Cause myth of the Civil War.

It's not so much that the film is problematic because "it was of its time and people back then were less enlightened". It's more that the film helped create and popularise many of those views "of its time" -- views which were considerably more racist and less historically informed than they would have been, say, thirty years prior. The film was at its release greeted with widespread criticism and a number of protests; the protests proved ephemeral and the film embedded itself into the popular consciousness, and with it its whitewashed and slaver-sympathetic view of the plantation (how romantic!), slavery (they were happier then!), the Civil War (noble and glorious!) and Reconstruction (awful and unfair!).

The film shouldn't be banned or anything like that. It's a really important movie for all sorts of reasons. But like Birth of a Nation, it should be recognised not as a naive expression of historical views, but rather as politically motivated revisionist propaganda produced almost a century after the events it depicts, intended to shape modern views in ways that are -- and at the time were recognised as being -- contrary to history.

(Incidentally: GOTW was produced as long after the Civil War as the modern day is after WWII. Imagine today some alt-righters producing a film about how lovely things were under the Reich, how nobly Aryans struggled against the Bolshevik hordes, how pleasant life was for Jewish occupants of the camps, and how tragic the occupation and de-Nazification of Germany was. Would that film be a work "of our time", or propaganda intended to reshape our views of a previous time for modern political purposes?)

Ssssshhhhhh
Ssssshhhhhhhh

Hush.

It was about as anti slavery and anti-The-South as was possible to get away with and still have your movie made ...

Okay so when I am looking to figure out whether something is Racist or Not Racist, my first source is probably not going to be a YouTube rant from a guy who apparently spends most of his time whining about SJWs putting women and black people in movies, and who links in the video notes to "Was The Civil War Really About Slavery" and "Five Reasons Not To Ban The Confederate Flag" from far-right outlets that share staff with the neo-Nazi Proud Boys and the Daily Stormer.


If nothing else, it's a reminder of what a cesspool YouTube is.
 
2020-06-25 10:25:13 AM  
pkjun:
(Incidentally: GOTW was produced as long after the Civil War as the modern day is after WWII. Imagine today some alt-righters producing a film about how lovely things were under the Reich, how nobly Aryans struggled against the Bolshevik hordes, how pleasant life was for Jewish occupants of the camps, and how tragic the occupation and de-Nazification of Germany was. Would that film be a work "of our time", or propaganda intended to reshape our views of a previous time for modern political purposes?)

Fox is heading there. Trump is getting desperate, and his minions push the race card more and more.
 
2020-06-25 10:31:22 AM  
oh ffs. The veritable glossary of content descriptors HBO puts up in front of a movie couldn't have dealt with this? HERE...let's go with this:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-25 10:40:28 AM  
They need to include a complete list of "Further Reading" books on the Civil War, slavery, and interpersonal relationships.
 
2020-06-25 11:27:47 AM  

Glorious Golden Ass: They should digitally remaster it with Rhett switching between a klan hood and Scarlet carrying a Starbucks Frappuccino with TRUMP written on the side.


Rhett was a member of the Klan in the book.

Can't help with the Starbucks cup.
 
2020-06-25 11:28:03 AM  
GWTW is one of uncle Ruckus' favorite movies.

Just sayin'.
 
2020-06-25 12:35:08 PM  
I remember way back in the 1970's GWTW was going to be run on network television in prime time for the first time.  It was a "big deal" apparently.  Of course, in the age of three channels, no VCRs, etc. I guess it really was.

I also remember sitting through the whole thing just to see the Rhett Butler's famous line.  Talk about being a) bored out of your goddamn mind, and b) underwhelmed at the payoff for all that time wasted.
 
2020-06-25 2:04:56 PM  

Leader O'Cola: Brandi Morgan: I'm old enough to remember when GWTW was one of those "it" movies, but I never watched it.  But a few weeks ago I did watch it and ah....no.  I really didn't like it and Scarlett O'Hare was pretty much the first Karen.

You're over 85 but only just saw it?


It took a long time to get the VCR to stop flashing 12:00
 
2020-06-25 2:11:41 PM  

stoli n coke: groppet: So now you get to sit through 2 hours of explanation before the movie, now even less of a reason to see it again.

You know there's a fast forward button on the remote, right?


But it is waaaaaaaaaaay over there and I have to get up to go get it.
 
2020-06-25 4:48:12 PM  

Brandi Morgan: I'm old enough to remember when GWTW was one of those "it" movies, but I never watched it.  But a few weeks ago I did watch it and ah....no.  I really didn't like it and Scarlett O'Hare was pretty much the first Karen.


She had some pretty dresses though. That was what I watched it for was the dresses and the hair that people wore back then in the south.
 
2020-06-25 4:48:45 PM  
Interminable..almost as bad as On The Beach.
 
2020-06-25 5:06:17 PM  
Somebody needs to make a mockup cover of "Exactly When, Where, and How Movies Should Be Allowed to Deal with Racism" by Whitey McMovieFan.
/"The book black people should be grateful for."
 
2020-06-25 5:43:32 PM  
The movie needs to be seen just like huckleberry finn  needs to be read.  It was like that once. It's better now but that isn't saying too much. More like less worse.
 
2020-06-25 7:31:08 PM  
Dark Victory
Gone with the Wind (Best Picture winner)
Goodbye, Mr. Chips
Love Affair
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Ninotchka
Of Mice and Men
Stagecoach
The Wizard of Oz
Wuthering Heights

These were the Best Picture nominees that year, for comparison.

Really liked Ninotchka and Of Mice and Men
 
2020-06-25 8:03:33 PM  

Great_Milenko: I remember way back in the 1970's GWTW was going to be run on network television in prime time for the first time.  It was a "big deal" apparently.  Of course, in the age of three channels, no VCRs, etc. I guess it really was.

I also remember sitting through the whole thing just to see the Rhett Butler's famous line.  Talk about being a) bored out of your goddamn mind, and b) underwhelmed at the payoff for all that time wasted.


This is like a 10-year old youtube video but when you get to about 0:50 there's a dubbed recreation of this that might make the wait worth it (Warning NSFW Mel Gibson rant sounds):

Mel Gibson, Script Doctor: "Blow Me!"
Youtube J2vjsJgqno8
 
2020-06-25 8:16:00 PM  

t3knomanser: pkjun: but rather as politically motivated revisionist propaganda produced almost a century after the events it depicts, intended to shape modern views in ways that are -- and at the time were recognised as being -- contrary to history.

This is entirely true, but I find it interesting how the antebellum south is painted as feckless and vapid, the call for war painted as foolish on its face, and yet- they're clearly romanticizing the period. I mean, I guess it ties to themes: Scarlett as a petulant child, growing as she suffers (out of proportion to her childish behavior).

But yeah, it's important to see Gone With the Wind, not because it's good, but because it was such a landmark moment in media history that it still is shaping popular culture.


This is a structural part of the Lost Cause myth, though GWTW treats them a bit more cynically than previous versions of LC myth making. It's the "lost" part of lost cause. The myth remakes the South as tragic. It was always doomed to lose the war due to Northern material/industrial superiority. The "cause" is a nebulous sense of nobility and spiritual superiority that the myth makers used to downplay the moral horror of slavery. Anyone making the "it wasn't really about slavery" argument today is reiterating this myth.
So, in GWTW, the antebellum southerners are foolish, but we are given the impression (embodied by Ashley) that even if they realized how foolish they were being, they'd still go to war on principle. Rhett and Scarlett are more cynical but by the end of the book and film, they come to the realization that they need some of that antebellum nobility or else they are really no better than carpet baggers. So, the film -and Lost Cause generally- attempt to recuperate the antebellum South, downplay the horrors and immorality of slavery and reseat a modern Southern identity around a virtuous depiction of a lost way of life that is to be a model for salvaging meaning in the economic despair of the late-19th century for the original lost causers and the Depression for Mitchell.
 
2020-06-25 8:35:58 PM  

sgarri7777: The movie needs to be seen just like huckleberry finn  needs to be read.  It was like that once. It's better now but that isn't saying too much. More like less worse.


Huckleberry Finn is one of the most powerful anti-slavery novels ever.

Any word on if you can fast-forward through the lecture at the beginning?
 
2020-06-25 10:04:52 PM  

Billy Liar: Dark Victory
Gone with the Wind (Best Picture winner)
Goodbye, Mr. Chips
Love Affair
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Ninotchka
Of Mice and Men
Stagecoach
The Wizard of Oz
Wuthering Heights

These were the Best Picture nominees that year, for comparison.

Really liked Ninotchka and Of Mice and Men


Robert Donat won Best Actor. He beat out Clark Gable, Jimmy Stewart, John Wayne, and Laurence Olivier.

Great performance, but the movie will give you the beetus.
 
2020-06-26 12:19:40 PM  

groppet: So now you get to sit through 2 hours of explanation before the movie, now even less of a reason to see it again.


It's 4 minutes of context delivered by Dr. Jacqueline Stewart, who hosts Silent Sunday Nights on TCM.  Yes, GWTW distorts history and is racist AF, but it is also a terrific epic from the Golden Age of Film, and damn, Clark Gable was sex on a stick. Also, it provided the source material for the funniest Carol Burnett Show sketch ever.

Went with the Wind
Youtube -8wVvGQ0P4Y
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.