I kind of don't want to give this book 5 stars. I'm going to, because it was epic. Seriously, it's a really, really good read and Margaret Mitchell was a fantastic storyteller. She captures the feel of a lost generation and a bygone world and makes it real, pulsing with life and bittersweet memory and pride. Her characters are wonderfully vivid and complicated and conflicted, larger than life archetypes symbolizing the different elements of society each one represents. And the story is sweeping and grand. If you've seen the movie and thought it was gorgeous and epic, Hollywood only barely did justice to the source material. Gone With the Wind is deservedly one of the greatest Civil War novels ever written.But... there is a really big "but" here.Here was the astonishing spectacle of half a nation attempting, at the point of bayonet, to force upon the other half the rule of negroes, many of them scarcely one generation out of the African jungles. The vote must be given to them but it must be denied to most of their former owners.There are a few things that Hollywood rather prudently left out in the cinematic version, like the fact that every white male character joins the Klan to oppose Yankees and freedmen in the period of Reconstruction following the war. And this is described in approbatory terms by the narrative viewpoint. In the book, unlike the movie, Scarlett finds Rhett Butler in jail because he killed a black man, for being "insolent" to a white woman. And this is treated as an example of how shocking, lawless, and hateful the Yankees are: they actually put a white man in jail just because he killed a negro!Indeed, throughout the book, Mitchell compares African-Americans to monkeys, apes, and children, describes slavery as a benevolent institution in which kind slave owners took care of their "darkies," and when the slaves are freed, society crumbles because black people are destructive children who can't function without white people telling them what to do. Reconstruction (in which the South learns that yes, you really aren't allowed to own slaves anymore and yes, you really did actually lose the war) is a horror beyond enduring, but we're meant to mourn the lost world of balls and barbecues attended by rich white plantation owners and their loyal, happy slaves.Now, you may be saying, "Well, sure, the characters are racist, of course former Confederates are going to be racist." And that's true, I wouldn't have a problem with the characters being racist and flinging the n-word about. That would be historically accurate. But the authorial viewpoint makes it very clear that Margaret Mitchell shared the POV of her characters.Aided by the unscrupulous adventurers who operated the Freedmen's Bureau and urged on by a fervor of Northern hatred almost religious in its fanaticism, the former field hands found themselves suddenly elevated to the seats of the mighty. There they conducted themselves as creatures of small intelligence might naturally be expected to do. Like monkeys or small children turned loose among treasured objects whose value is beyond their comprehension, they ran wild - either from perverse pleasure in destruction or simply because of their ignorance.Everything about the antebellum South (except its sexism, which is treated with satirical amusement and thoroughly lampooned by Scarlett in everything she does) is glorified and painted in a rosy hue. All sympathy is with rich white Southerners when Reconstruction destroys their world. Their former slaves? The author takes pains to describe how much happier and better off most of them were before being freed. Black characters are all offensive racial stereotypes who are constantly described (not by other characters, but in the narrative POV) as apes, monkeys, and children."Gawdlmighty, Miss Scarlett! Ah's sceered ter go runnin' roun' in de dahk by mahseff! Spose de Yankees gits me?"I don't think you have to be overly "politically correct" to find Gone With the Wind to be a hard book to get through at times, with really glaring evidence of the author's Southern sympathies and unquestioned racism.And yet I'm giving it 5 stars. I suppose in the interests of political correctness I should knock off at least a star, but I have to be honest: I was just enthralled by this long, long novel from start to finish. Even while I was sometimes gritting my teeth at the racist descriptions and all the "Wah, wah, poor plantation owners, the Yankees took away all their slaves, life is so hard for them now!" I wanted the story to keep going and going. I wasn't bored for one moment.The protagonists, of course, are what make this a timeless love story. Note that's "love story," not "romance," because there's very little romantic about Scarlett O'Hara and Rhett Butler.What Melanie did was no more than all Southern girls were taught to do: to make those about them feel at ease and pleased with themselves. It was this happy feminine conspiracy which made Southern society so pleasant. Women knew that a land in which men were contented, uncontradicted, and safe in possession of unpunctured vanity was likely to be a very pleasant place for women to live. So from the cradle to the grave, women strove to make men pleased with themselves, and the satisfied men repaid lavishly with gallantry and adoration. In fact, men willingly gave the ladies everything in the world, except credit for having intelligence.Scarlett exercised the same charms as Melanie but with a studied artistry and consummate skill. The difference between the two girls lay in the fact that Melanie spoke kind and flattering words from a desire to make people happy, if only temporarily, and Scarlett never did it except to further her own aims.Scarlett is an evil, conniving drama queen who if she had been raised in a society where women were actually allowed to do things would rule the world, but since she wasn't, she just learned to wrap the world around her finger and tell it to go to hell. She is absolutely the most self-centered character you will ever meet: in her mind, she is literally the center of the world. She sees nothing, understands nothing, and cares about nothing that isn't of direct and immediate importance to herself. And yet within her narrow, blindered view of the world, she's brilliant and adaptive and resourceful and unstoppable. The destruction of that glittering world of ball gowns and parties and negroes waiting on her hand and foot, in which she was raised to expect the world to revolve around her, is harrowingly depicted in her trials during the war and after it, and in her downright heroic accomplishments keeping not only herself but her extended family alive. Never mind that she never actually cares about anyone but herself, she does what has to be done, which is largely why her sister-in-law, poor Melanie Wilkes, believes to her dying day that Scarlett is a wonderful, noble, loving sister, even while the entire time Scarlett hates her and covets Melanie's husband Ashley.Then there is Rhett Butler. The most brilliant Byronic rogue ever. Rhett kicks Heathcliff and Rochester's prissy white English arses. He is a first class scoundrel and anti-hero with a dark, brooding swoon-worthy heart. Because he's ruthlessly pragmatic and mercenary, smart enough to know right from the start that the South has started a fight it can't win, and he makes millions as a "speculator," enduring the wrath and hatred of his peers and gleefully, smugly giving them the finger, and yet in the end he goes off to be a hero. And survives, and becomes a (very, very rich) scoundrel again, and his reputation keeps going up and down throughout the book. He is the only man who is a match for Scarlett, because as he points out, they are so much alike. Like Scarlett, he's awesome and caddish and hateful and the best character ever.Scarlett and Rhett's relationship is so much more tempestuous, conflicted, and compelling than in the movie. Every time they are together, it's like watching two grandmasters drawing knives and sparring. They were truly made for each other, they deserve each other, they could be happy together, and yet how could it end in anything but tears?Oh yeah, I loved this book. Parts of it are so offensive, it will not bear scrutiny to modern sensibilities (it was pretty darn offensive when it was written, even if they did make a toned-down Hollywood movie based on it a few years later), and if you can't stand reading Mark Twain and all his uses of the n-word, then Gone With the Wind will probably make you want to throw the book against a wall (which will make a big dent, because this is a big book). But it is powerful and moving, the drama is grander than any epic fantasy doorstopper, the romance is definitely there, and the characters are fabulous and melodramatic and you care about every one of them, even (especially) the African-American characters, despite Mitchell's offensive treatment of them.This is certainly not the only "problematic" book I've ever enjoyed, but never have I so enjoyed so problematic a book. If it weren't so damned racist, I'd give Gone With the Wind my highest recommendation. If it weren't so damned good, I could castigate it as a well-written but really offensive book whose author misused her gifts. But it's both, so I recommend it, but my recommendation comes with a big fat warning label.There was a land ofCavaliers and Cotton Fieldscalled the Old South...Here in this pretty worldGallantry took its last bow..Here was the last ever tobe seen of Knights and theirLadies Fair, of Master and ofSlave...Look for it only in books,for it is no more than adream remembered.A Civilization gone withthe wind...
The civil war. A beautiful woman at the height of selfishness. The love and death of home and land. Society wound up so tight an improper wink could undo you. Destruction, tragedy, political corruption, truth, lies, life, death, love, loss, big changes, new beginnings, intermingled with never ending cycles. All of this helps make Gone with the wind what it is: an epic novel that will never be forgotten, that will forever be loved, cherished, and discovered with delight by new readers for ages.I am one of those new readers. In my early thirties I’ve finally read the rather intimidating sized tomb that speaks of southern charm twisted with the civil war and all the tragedies that surrounded it. Of course I’ve seen the film – several times – and I always loved the story. Scarlett O’Hara is far from the typical heroine. She’s easier to hate than to enjoy, her thought processes are understandable but leave the reader cold. Her motivations are for the sake of survival, but her climb toward the top still leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Even before she does what she has to because she ‘has to’, she’s not likeable. Her spoiled demeanor and enjoying being the main twinkle in every man’s eye at the barbecue, taking away boyfriends from all the women without a twinge of conscience, makes it easier to sympathize with the rest than with her. Margaret Mitchell did a unique thing by taking an unlikeable woman and making it her story. It’s sort of a destructive, moral lesson tale that you can’t look away from, a literary train wreck impossible to ignore. While the movie had her spawn one beautiful, endearing child, the book showed her to have three kids instead. One from Charles, one from Frank, and finally one from Rhett. She was a horrible mother and some of the more heart wrenching scenes was poor Wade trying to psychologically adapt during the war. Ella is rarely mentioned and holds no scenes at all (unusual). I was especially irked when Scarlett was told a terrible tragedy by someone trying to help her, who sympathized with her plight, but was impatient through the tragedy to be on with her business. Even if Scarlett isn’t likeable with her thoughts, her motivations, and her outlook, she’s still fun as hell to read about. Rhett shines as a fascinating leading man. When he’s on the page, the paper almost shines. He steals the scenes and his dialogue especially amused me. Some say they are both evil in reviews and neither deserve happiness; I disagree. To me Rhett did have heart, he did have feelings, but he still enjoyed shunning a society which shunned him first. He spoke from intellectual insight and common sense, not letting falsely inflated southern pride puff him up to rush into a battle that had such poor odds. He didn’t mind speaking his mind, no matter how unpopular that mindset was. He did eagerly make money off societies failing, and without apology reveled in the riches he made from the war where it could be made. Still, he clearly hated the war, he warned against it, he hated the tragedy sowed. He was respectful to Mammie and her role in Scarlett’s life, he loved his daughter, he genuinely loved the spoiled woman his heart became cursed by.Gone with the Wind is over 1000 pages, and inside those pages the author manages to somehow cram an amazing amount of events while expertly shuffling intriguing inner dialogue and emotional moments that soared without growing boring, dull, or lagging the tale. Her writing style is easily absorbed, she had a natural knack with dialogue, and the scenes merged together flawlessly. She took care to give different insights during the civil war from all sides that I hadn’t considered before. The ending is haunting. It was the suiting ending that fit the story, summed up the moral lesson, brought to head the tragic tale of a spoiled main character reaping her spoils. But…even so, the romantic in me yearns for a happy ending she doesn’t deserve. I think it’s mainly because my heart laid with Rhett and it was such a bitter turnout. The ending speech and exchange with the light dying from his eyes shook me. In interviews Mitchell was asked if they reunited - in one version she said no, in another she said maybe. Scarlett's determination was fierce, but Rhett's mind was also all his own. The child’s death was painful. The war was bitter and horrible and all that war really is. Society was so twisted and strange back then, which I find with most historical novels. They would hate to be born in our age, and I thank God I wasn’t born in theirs.Gone with the Wind didn’t disappoint me at all. It’s impossible to sum up what makes this book so special. I included just some of the traits and events, but there are so many more, the characters being so rich they easily come to life in the reader’s mind, the tragedy is truly felt, the lessons experienced even if those with a conscience don’t need to experience them. It’s easy to see why this story has become such a legend that holds through the ages. The movie suffered a bit from melodrama, but the book not at all. I can’t recommend the novel highly enough. Sure, she didn't write this during the civil war, but the age in which is was written was antiquated with its moral outlook. Outstanding work by a talented author trying so many different sorts of viewpoints and personalities, especially in such a sheltered age.
What do You think about Gone With The Wind (1999)?
This review was written in the late nineties (for my eyes only), and it was buried in amongst my things until recently when I uncovered the journal in which it was written. I have transcribed it verbatim from all those years ago (although square brackets may indicate some additional information for the sake of readability or some sort of commentary from now). This is one of my lost reviews.Only one other time can I remember being so moved by the death of a character as I was by the death of Melly in Gone With the Wind, and that was by the death of Gandalf the Grey in The Lord of the Rings. Whatever aspects of Gone With the Wind bothered me, and they were considerable, they were largely dispelled by the tears I cried for her. The first four parts of Gone With the Wind (all compelling) were nothing more than a set up for the powerful fifth part. And Margaret Mitchell wrote the best ending I have ever read. While Hemingway's final line in [novel:The Sun Also Rises] -- "Isn't it pretty to think so?" -- is a personal favourite, it only beats "My dear, I don't give a damn" because Mitchell didn't stop there. That lady from the South sure knew how to end a book. So Gone With the Wind ... Racist? Yes. One of the best American stories yet told? Yes. Should it be read with a healthy dose of outside influence to mitigate that racism? Yes. Even so, it is a great novel. No wonder it made such a great movie.
—Brad
Before I give my opinion about this classic novel let me make a few things clear. This book certainly has a lot of literary value. It is well written, the characters, are for the most part, interesting and Mitchell certainly breathed life into her characters. They feel like people and the plot, while it goes on for ages, it constructed well and by the end you feel like you have been satisfied in terms of a character arc.Okay, now that that's done: I hate this book. I hate the characters (except Melanie), I hate the story and I hate everything this book became and contributed to the glorification of the Antebellum south. I found this book painful to read and riddled with stereotypes that made me cringe. It is strange that for all the people who told me how amazing this book is, not a single person brought up how the Civil War was treated in the novel. Everyone just love Scarlett and her star-crossed blah-blah with Rhett.As for Miss Scarlett O' Hara? Well I ended up writing a whole thing about her and I put some sections of that in this review because I felt cheated with her character. Everyone told me how amazing she was and everything like that, but what I found in the book was very different.“Some day I’m going to do and say everything I want to do and say, and if people don’t like it I don’t care”. This is what young Scarlett O’Hara declares as she is forced to eat and listen as her Mammy tells her that men desire silly wives. Lines such as these create an image of Scarlett as one of literature’s earliest feminist and progressive female leads. Her ambition and desires, which are counter to her delicate Southern upbringing, create the image of a strong, independent woman. However this is an illusion. I felt like this entire novel was telling me that Scarlett o' Hara is a horrible person and should stop trying to be strong.Scarlett is most certainly a protagonist of great emotional passion and ferocity. She is certainly capable of many things —er business savvy which managed to save Tara from destitution. However Scarlett is not idealized, but due to value dissonance and the problem of trying to place the title of “feminist” on any female protagonist, she has become an icon which goes against the message of the book, imo. Scarlett may have Tara and her few slaves, but she has nothing else. Her parents are dead, her sisters loathe her, she has no relationship with her living children and the only people who ever loved her truly (Melanie and Rhett), are dead or have abandoned her. Before her great revelation she had poured her emotional reservoir into Ashley, but now even that is lost to her. Scarlett is a failure by the end of the novel. In addition to that, the biggest issue with calling Scarlett a feminist heroine is her dislike of women in general. She viewed all women (save for Ellen and eventually Melanie) as her rivals and enemies. She looks down at other women and criticizes their looks in a cruel way like “a clump of fat crows”. Scarlett sees her sex as something to be used as manipulation and that is all. Throughout the book her sense of superiority lingers on to everyone she views beneath her, especially women. If there is any character who shows any sense of female comradely it is Melanie. Despite people constantly bombarding her with gossip about Scarlett, especially where Ashley is concerned, Melanie treats Scarlett as a loyal sister. After Frank dies, Rhett and Belle (a prostitute) help save Ashley from an altercation with the police Melanie treats Belle with respect despite her occupation. Belle assures Melanie that, “if you ever see me on the street, you—you don’t have to speak to me. I’ll understand” but Melanie responds, “I shall be proud to speak to you. Proud to be under obligation to you. I hope—I hope we meet again.”Melanie is the unsung heroine of Gone with the Wind, who, despite conforming to many of the ideals of the Southern Belle ideal, manages to be a kind, strong and compelling character. Due to the narration being framed around Scarlett, readers might be tempted to simply hate Melanie due to her naïveté. Yet, that is what makes Melanie different from Scarlett. One woman manipulated and hated another for the love of a man, where another one loved and cared out of the kindness of her heart.
—Lina
this is the greatest book ever written. or to be written. i read it for the first time when i was 11 years old. there are over 1000 pages and it took me 7 days. it changed my life! i am a complete romantic and a total history buff. both of my loves were tapped in this novel to end all novels. the characters are rich and lively, the descriptions are colorful and flourishing without taking away from the actual storyline. the complexities of the characters are amusing, frustrating and heartbreaking. all emotions will be visited while reading this book. many say that scarlett is a b*tch. well, yeah, you're right. and that't okay. that is part of what makes the storyline so incredible. she saves the day and ruins the day sometimes with the same action. hating her is part of the beauty. regardless of her selfishness, her ignorance, her passions, you still want her to succeed.
—Heidi
