Gone with the Wind is a classic, but until this week, I’d never seen it.
I know, I know. How could I consider myself a true romantic and lover of the Victorian era if I’d not immersed myself in Margaret Mitchell’s masterpiece?
Well, I remedied that Wednesday night, watching all three hours and fifty-four minutes in one sitting. And, no, Gwynly, wonderful guy that he is, didn’t join me for my marathon. Since my teacher hubby had school the next day, I excused him.
So, you might be wondering what I thought of the show. Did I fall in love with it as so many have?
Um, how shall I say this without sounding like I have no heart?
Ah, yes. I’ll be tactful and simply say I didn’t care for it.
Now, before your chin hits the floor or you think I’m touched in the head, let me say that I can see why so many are die-hard Gone with the Wind fans. The story is compelling. The acting is great. And the costumes are wonderful.
I have two reasons why the show didn’t work for me: I didn’t like three of the main characters, and I can’t stand the ending.
Scarlett is beautiful–on the outside. Inside she’s selfish. She’ll do or say whatever it takes to get what she wants, and she doesn’t care who she hurts in the process. Stealing her sister’s beau is reprehensible in my book. And that’s just the beginning of her manipulations and machinations. Her obsession with Ashley causes nothing but trouble and threatens his happiness as well as the happiness of his sweeter than sweet wife, Mellie, the one main character I like (although I think she’s pretty clueless or has a serious case of denial.)
Even when Scarlett captures Rhett’s heart and gives him her hand in marriage, her obsession with Ashley prevents her from loving Rhett in return. She doesn’t even care for her own daughter all that much. I do appreciate the fact that she honored her promise to Ashley and took care of Mellie. But overall, I don’t like Scarlett. She’s a spoiled rich girl who reaps what she sows, and I have a hard time feeling sorry for her.
Rhett, while charming, is a scoundrel. He earned his fortune illegally, frequents brothels, and is no gentleman. Sure, he’s a man’s man and a bad boy, but I like a man who has morals. To his credit, I loved that Rhett loves Scarlett so deeply and so passionately, but I think his indulgence keeps her from growing and becoming a better person. I like a hero who brings out the best in a heroine, not one who condones her bad behavior until he’s had enough and walks away.
Ashley needs a backbone. He never stands up to Scarlett or puts Mellie first. Only when his wife is on her deathbed does he say he doesn’t love Scarlett. Until then he’s been emotionally unfaithful to his sweet, devoted wife. And he even indulges in that stolen kiss that fuels Scarlett’s obsession. I realize that if he’d been an honorable gentleman, treated his wife well, and severed his ties to Scarlett, the story would have fallen apart. But that’s what I wanted to see. Not another man who’s fallen under Scarlett’s spell.
And the ending? Sheesh. Could it get any more depressing? Rhett and Scarlett’s daughter dies. Mellie and the baby she’s carrying die. Then Rhett walks out on Scarlett, the one woman he professed to love. Of course, considering he threatened divorce a number of times, this doesn’t come as a surprise. But really. After investing nearly four hours, I wanted a happy ending. Perhaps it’s the romance writer in me, but death and divorce are depressing. I ached to see the characters grow and change and become better people than they were at the start. Instead, I felt gypped.
If you’ve read this far and aren’t ready to chuck rotted fruit at me, I’d love to hear what it is about Gone with the Wind that countless fans find so endearing.
What did I miss? Why is it such a beloved classic?
I invite you to set me straight.
Keli, thank you so very much for saying everthing I have thought ever since I read the book almost 40 years ago. Because I didn’t care for the book I never watched the movie othet than an occassional clip.
like you I can see why it is a classic but so is whither heoghts and trithfully i didn’t like it either.
I’ve read the book and watched the movie once…that was enough for me. I didn’t like it for the reasons you mentioned. I don’t mind if characters start out in a bad place, but I want to see change and growth. The characters’ change in this movie happened too late…and the ending…how is that romantic???
The movie is pretty good but the book is so much better! Haven’t you read the book? Scarlett and Rhett are everything you say they are. I can’t help but love it! My favorite thing about Scarlett is her tenacity. She’s spoiled and manipulative but nothing will keep her down. And I love the ending! Not all the deaths, but when Rhett finally leaves. You know that Scarlett means it when she says she will get him back! It’s one of my favorite books. I haven’t read it in a while; I think it’s time for a re-read!
Did I write this post? I too am one of those few who couldn’t stand this story. I don’t always have to completely love a character too appreciate a well written story, but Scarlett was the antithesis of a heroine to me. The whole story left me unsettled and depressed as you said. But then, I’m a happily ever after kind of girl, like you.
thanks for taking a stand, Keli.
The story is compelling. I think the mistake is in thinking it’s a romance. There is little to admire in Scarlett’s character, and yet, she is fascinating. A great study in the anti-heroine. She and Rhett are perfect for each other…when they’re together, they’re not making two other people miserable.
I didn’t like the book as much as the movie simply because dialogue was written phonetically and I had a hard time keeping up.
I did like the movie. I think I liked Scarlett’s strength even though she was manipulative and deceitful. I didn’t like the end, but in the back of my mind, I just knew she’d get him back. When Scarlett wants something, she gets it and I felt like Rhett deserved to see her work a little to prove that he was the real man for her.
I never liked Ashley. The only reason I think Scarlett wanted him was because she knew she couldn’t have him.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts–and for not running me out of town on a rail for sharing my honest opinion of a classic beloved by many.
It’s reassuring to hear that I’m not the only one who wasn’t instantly enamored of GWTW. I like thinking that anti-heroine Scarlett (love that term for her) does change after the movie ends and earns the right to get Rhett back, but I sure would have liked to see that happen. Of course, the movie would likely have ended up six or seven hours long then.
Amen, Sister. I read GWTW when I was en–yes, I did understand it and still remember details. Hated it then. Hated the movie when I saw it a decade later. Scarlett is selfish, Melanie is weak, etc. . . And that ending. The so-called sequel by Alexandra Rippley doesn’t help in the least.
It’s been so long since I’ve seen the movie, I’d forgotten much of the storyline. But I do remember it didn’t stick with me as a longstanding favorite. Now I know why.
Oh, Keli, AMEN AND AMEN!!
I didn’t see the movie, I read the book. O.my. gosh I agree with you so much. In fact towards the end, I actually gave up on the book and let me tell you THAT is rare for an avid reader like me. Scarlett was definitely not very likable and Rhett.. sheesh! Not a gentleman. But did you know there’s a sequel (by another author) who gives them a happy ending? I only read parts of it…including the ending. Hmm… not bad, I guess…
Anyways, I respect the opinions of those who really liked GWTW though
Blessings,
Ganise
Well looks like I’m the one who is going to say how much I loved it. I saw the movie when I was a teen, and I’ll admit I was disappointed with the ending. But I saw so much more in Scarlett, her bravery and the soft heart underneath that she always tried to hide. And I loved Clark Gable. Couldn’t see what Scarlett saw in Ashley though. Wimpy!
I loved the contrast between Mellie & Scarlett, and how Mellie always saw the good in Scarlett – kind of how God sees us. Only the good and ignores the bad. (There I got some theology in there!)
Though I do see everyone’s point. And I didn’t care for the book when I read it after the movie.
Guess I’ll put it down to a teen starved for romance! LOL.
Get ready for the rail ride, Keli. I loved the movie and like it even more now that I know how stories are put together. When I was in Atlanta at one of the RWA conferences, Carla and I visited Margaret Mitchell’s house and I was so enthralled when I heard her story and how it came to be a published book. Did you know it is the second most sold book, the Bible being the first?
I liked seeing how the characters matured and what caused them to have to grow up. Mellie was based on Margaret’s cousin who became a nun. She promised her she would keep the character sweet. I guess I just love the history and how it was woven around these characters.
Paisley,
I would have loved the Margaret Mitchell’s house. But I’m into houses and history. It won’t help me like the story better but I guess it would give me an insight to it.
I’ve never seen or read Gone With the Wind. It doesn’t appeal to me. Same for Star Wars, Star Trek, Casablanca, the Godfather, and pretty much any other pop culture classic that made an appearance before 1990.
It’s nice to see that there are some out there who are Gone with the Wind fans. I knew there had to be some. After all, it is a classic. =)
Keli … I’m late to this party but I can’t resist. I am not shocked or dismayed that you didn’t like the classic GWTW … I am sensitive to many of the comments made in agreement with yours.
Instead of saying yeah or nay … I have a question. How much of the era from your book have you read? The times lent themselves to melodrama with extreme characterizations and unseeming plots. If one tries to dissect Wuthering Heights or heaven’s forbid watch the old b&w movie … they would come away with the same feelings.
Most of the British and American writers of the nineteenth and early twentieth centures were what we would think of as “camp.” Mysteries of the day were exagerated and noir might be seen of a just plain funny. Romance was to do or die … plots were basic and characters were sooooo over-done … the good and evil extremes were played to the hilt and Maggie M was a product of her time like Austen and the Bronte sisters. Romance was so sticky sweet a person could get a cavity just reading them and the old, very old romance and musicals of the great 50′s were so impossibly perfect, one wanted to hit someone in the head … hey wake up … this is not real life.
And that is my late take on poor Scarlet and Rhett
Florence, you make some good points. I love Little Women, but I’ve admitted in a past post how disappointed I was by the ending. While I love Alcott’s writing, Laurie and Jo were meant to be together, and the fact that he married Amy instead doesn’t work for me.
I’m with you–beautiful costumes and cinematography, but I don’t love the story. Really, there aren’t a lot of movies from before the 1970s or so that I love, because so many of them demean women and people of color. In many of those cases, the filmmakers’ intentions were not bad, they were just a product of their time. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to enjoy seeing Faye Dunaway get slapped repeatedly (Chinatown), Maureen O’Hara dragged by her hair across the lovely Irish countryside (Quiet Man), or Scarlett O’Hara getting carried up to the bedroom against her will. How that is supposed to be romantic, I’ll never understand.
On the other hand, give me a spunky heroine who fights against the restraints of her time and I’m all over that!