Should we ban GONE WITH THE WIND? (1 Viewer)

[Aaron Silverman]

Incidentally, Margaret Mitchell was a fascinating person. During the '20s, she was a sexually adventurous flapper. Late in her sadly too-short life, she secretly gave a lot of money to medical school scholarships for students at Morehouse College, a black school.


You can watch a great American Masters PBS documentary on her here: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/margaret-mitchell-american-rebel/watch-the-full-documentary/2047/

 

[marsnkc]

Show me where the editorial says anything about anyone banning anything.


Maybe it's supposed to be a 'dog whistle', communicating things to true believers without actually saying them. But I skew literalist on first reading to understand meaning. And the essay says little, with no particular call to action.

Wanting to see it consigned to a museum may not be an overt call to action or for an outright ban, but it's disingenuous to think that's not what he hopes for. 'Becket's' King Henry could legalistically deny that his "Will no one rid me of this priest" plea was anything more than voiced frustration, but it nevertheless resulted in its fulfillment.

 

[JoHud]

That is probably the goofiest thing I've seen relating to this. It's cool to exploit a war that killed hundreds of thousands of people by making it into a game but being historically accurate is too fucked up?

That is indeed hilarious. Freedom Fries style knee-jerk reactions here. The Civil War battles depicted in those games highly technical and strictly strategic. I mean, only one civilian died in the Battle of Gettysburg, and that was from a stray bullet! Compare that to the "Modern Warfare" carnage that is doled out on a daily basis where entire cities are leveled and innocents die constantly.


Sure there were ugly acts of civilian massacres in the Western territories like Kansas and such, but those strategic games don't cover those guerrilla conflicts, or for that matter Sherman's March to the Sea. However, these games don't hardly ever cover that ugly side of it, just the strictly West Point army vs army on a barren field sorts of conflicts the war is generally more known for.


Where's the part of the police investigation in which the killer played any of these Civil War games?

 

[Dr Griffin]

You win the prize for best post on the internet. Getting rid of the Confederate flag is easy and utterly unimportant when compared to trying to solve the much more serious and difficult issues behind racism and mass murder.

While it will not end racism and associated mass murder, it is hugely symbolic. It will take slowly chipping away, from many different angles, at the ingrained racism in certain southern cultures. I've seen Confederate flags proudly flying above the Mason-Dixon line, which really irks me, because up here it only means one thing: I Hate _______. I agree it will take much more to eventually shame and smother it out, if that is even possible.

 

[JoHud]

While it will not end racism and associated mass murder, it is hugely symbolic. It will take slowly chipping away, from many different angles, at the ingrained racism in certain southern cultures. I've seen Confederate flags proudly flying above the Mason-Dixon line, which really irks me, because up here it only means one thing: I Hate _______. I agree it will take much more to eventually shame and smother it out, if that is even possible.

It's not just a Southern problem. Pretty much most of America is a breeding ground for that sort of stuff.


Also "shaming" is not always a viable solution. They tend to just hunker down and harden their extremist beliefs, playing the oppressed victim. In addition, racism is often much more subtle than parading around with banners and shouting obscene slogans.

 

[Dr Griffin]

What does the thread title mean, "Should we ban GONE WITH THE WIND"?


Who is "we"?

What does it mean to "ban" a movie?

How does this relate to the opinion piece, which does not suggest anyone ban anything?

Ask Stalin.

 

[Dr Griffin]

It's not just a Southern problem. Pretty much most of the American heartland is a breeding ground for that sort of stuff.

It's not!? (kidding)

That's why I mentioned the flag above the Mason-Dixon line bit.

 

[KevinGress]

It's not just a Southern problem. Pretty much most of America is a breeding ground for that sort of stuff.


Also "shaming" is not always a viable solution. They tend to just hunker down and harden their extremist beliefs, playing the oppressed victim. In addition, racism is often much more subtle than parading around with banners and shouting obscene slogans.

That's a pretty broad brush you're painting with. Where are your facts to substantiate such a claim?

 

[MatthewA]

The controversy caused the film's sales to skyrocket to #1 on Amazon. Imagine how much money Song of the South could make if Disney were to actually release it. All the criticism has just drawn more attention to the film, so if they actually "cry Uncle" and release it, there's no way it will lose money. And the studio's critics will no longer be able to accuse them of censorship.

It's not just a Southern problem. Pretty much most of America is a breeding ground for that sort of stuff.

It's not just an American problem either.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The controversy caused the film's sales to skyrocket to #1 on Amazon. Imagine how much money Song of the South could make if Disney were to actually release it. All the criticism has just drawn more attention to the film, so if they actually "cry Uncle" and release it, there's no way it will lose money. And the studio's critics will no longer be able to accuse them of censorship.

The proper way to handle Song of the South, in my opinion, is to release the film intact and unaltered, but include maybe a brief one or two minute introductory video that explains the historical context both of the Reconstruction Era in which the film is set and the state of racial consciousness in the 1940s when the film was made. This brief video could direct viewers to a more substantial documentary in the special features that would explore these topics in greater depth.


I think the opportunity exists to do something really exciting with such a release that could make a real contribution to the cultural discussion. Unfortunately Disney doesn't have someone with Grover Crisp's passion, dedication and ingenuity overseeing its film preservation and restoration efforts like Sony does.

 

[DaveF]

Ask Stalin.

Maybe I'll ask Godwin too...

Wanting to see it consigned to a museum may not be an overt call to action or for an outright ban, but it's disingenuous to think that's not what he hopes for. 'Becket's' King Henry could legalistically deny that his "Will no one rid me of this priest" plea was anything more than voiced frustration, but it nevertheless resulted in its fulfillment.

If the Confederate flag is finally going to be consigned to museums as an ugly symbol of racism, what about the beloved film offering the most iconic glimpse of that flag in American culture?

What does it mean to be "consigned to museums"? Perhaps this is code for "outlawed"? Big Government passes a laws making it illegal to sell or own GWTW. Maybe that's what the author meant? But I don't think so.


Perhaps this is code for "Song of the Southed". It's simply taken out of print and no longer sold ever again. That's a more plausible case. Did the author mean that? Maybe, but then it's not available, even in museums. Again, I don't think that's the author's meaning.


A small diversion: I wish for racial slurs and racially derogatory jokes to consigned to museums.

What I mean, is that I hope we, as a society, come to the point where it is normative to disdain such slurs and jokes. It's removed from normal conversation. Uncle Joe doesn't casually make off-color racial jokes at Thanksgiving like he did 30 years ago. The hiring manager doesn't comment on how that applicant is obviously a bad hire because of their skin color. But through social pressures, corporate adoption, and a new generation growing up with fresh attitudes, this social ill falls away, and well socialized people think it's bad manners (at the least) to talk and think such ways.



Assuming GWTW is apologia for seccessive, slave-owners, perhaps the author meant, that it will fall out of favor. People will stop buying it for "fun" watching. It will fade away, no longer viewed as cinematic treasure, but offensive material from a bygone era. It will be a museum piece, not a blu-ray on display in the living room shelf.


Maybe that's what the author meant.


Maybe even then, folks think that's a terrible thing for historically important movie. Fine. That's a discussion worth having. But I think it's worth first defining some terms rather than debating an invented title devoid of meaning.

 

[Dr Griffin]

I was left thinking he had this revelation only after seeing 12 Years A Slave? He never saw Roots? I always slightly cringed at the text in the beginning of GWTW too.


“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...”

 

[Sam Posten]

Show me where the editorial says anything about anyone banning anything.


Maybe it's supposed to be a 'dog whistle', communicating things to true believers without actually saying them. But I skew literalist on first reading to understand meaning. And the essay says little, with no particular call to action.

Just look at his winking chuffaws on Twitter Dave, it's clear he expected this tempest and chose his words carefully so that he could have done nothing less than lit the fire and watched as the world burned.


Yes, Crawdaddy, it's the post but Lou has been a pretty rational voice from what I've read of his in the past. This is different for him as far as I can tell.


It's the lighting the bag of shit on the doorstep of the internet, ringing the doorbell and running away.

 

[MatthewA]

This Margaret Mitchell documentary from PBS' American Masters certainly sheds a lot of light on her life. I doubt Lumenick bothered to watch it.

 

[DaveF]

Just look at his winking chuffaws on Twitter Dave, it's clear he expected this tempest and chose his words carefully so that he could have done nothing less than lit the fire and watched as the world burned.

I don't Twitter (as some find Facebook useless, I find Twitter useless for my life.) So I've not seen any of the meta discussion (I've only gone by the article as written).

Can you link to some Twitter comments?

 

[Jonathan Perregaux]

No. Next question.

 

[Sam Posten]

How I pushed GONE WITH THE WIND to the top of the Amazon chart with some help from fearmongers http://t.co/Z18ZLZ7sR9 http://t.co/IfhpquQWqP

Obama's coming for your guns + @LouLumenick's coming for your GONE w/ THE WIND DVDs! 1939 film now @amazon top seller http://t.co/PKPpRU2d0V

Between GWTW and GOODFELLAS, me and Lt. @rkylesmith are probably responsible for half of @WBHomeEnt's deep catalogue sales this month.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

In honor of this thread, I watched GWTW on Saturday. My golf round was rained out, so I had time to kill.

 

[Vic Pardo]

Films of that time had attitudes which are often glossed over. In The Philadelphia Story, Hepburn comments on the south parlor that she was "expecting piccaninnies and banjos". In Casablanca, Ilsa refers to Sam as the "BOY who's playing the piano".

The CASABLANCA line always puzzled me because no European woman would have called a black man "boy." That's strictly an American usage. And I wonder if Ingrid Bergman (a Swede playing a Hungarian) ever questioned its inclusion in the script. And who wrote that line, the Epstein brothers or that big liberal Howard Koch?

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

And I wonder if Ingrid Bergman (a Swede playing a Hungarian) ...

Actually Ilsa talked about "her home" in Oslo Norway. I believe she was supposed to be Norwegian.