24. Gone With The Wind. Margaret Mitchell. 1936. 1037 pages. [Source: Library] [5 stars, audio book, classic fiction, historical fiction, adult romance]
First sentence: Scarlett O’Hara was not beautiful, but men seldom
realized it when caught by her charm as the Tarleton twins were.
ETA: I listened on audio this one. It was WONDERFUL on audio. Because it was audio, it slowed me down in the 'reading' and it helped me notice details that perhaps I might have skimmed over in a forgetting way. Then again, it has been a few years since I sat down and read this one.
Premise/plot: Scarlett’s “love” for her brainy neighbor, Ashley Wilkes,
prevents her from living happily ever after with Charleston-born
bad-boy, Rhett Butler. Set during the war between the states and
reconstruction, Gone With The Wind showcases the good, the bad, the
ugly—and everything in between—of the American south. An example of the
good would be Melanie Hamilton Wilkes. An example of the bad would be
Scarlett O’Hara Hamilton Kennedy Butler, our “heroine” who excels at
math and manipulation. (But fails completely in being a good human.) An
example of the ugly...should I pick the racism, the sexism, or both?!
Even if you've never read the book, I would imagine you've got a fairly good notion of what Gone With The Wind
is about. At least on the surface. It's the story of the spoiled-rotten
Scarlett O'Hara and her quest to win her heart's desire through any
means possible. Scarlett is one that doesn't ask if it's wrong or right.
She only lives by this question--does it get me one step closer to what
I want? If it does--then look out!
Scarlett. Rhett. Ashley. You probably know the basics. A woman wants
what she can't have. She wants it until she can have it. The moment she
has it. She doesn't want it anymore. Scarlett is in a perpetual state of
frustration. The man in her bed doing her bidding is rarely the man in
her heart.
The book is about much more than Scarlett and her quest for love,
however. It's a love story, I won't deny it. But there is much more
than love at stake in the novel. War. Reconstruction. Civilization.
Society. Culture. Class. Race. Money. Politics. Survival. It's a novel
of contrasts. The Old South vs. The New South. Conformity vs.
Individuality. The haves vs. the have-nots. If asked to sum up Gone With
The Wind in one word, most would probably say "Love." I'd say gumption.
People who have it; people who don't. What do I mean by gumption?
Partly spirit. Partly courage. Partly determination. Partly ambition.
People with gumption act. They do what they must when they must.
One of my favorite non-love scenes from the book is Scarlett's
conversation with Grandma Fontaine. A wonderful, wonderful character by
the way. The setting is after Gerald's funeral. Scarlett is pregnant
with Frank Kennedy's baby. (Yes, the movie killed Gerald, her father,
off too soon.)
"We bow to the inevitable. We’re not wheat, we’re buckwheat! When a
storm comes along it flattens ripe wheat because it’s dry and can’t bend
with the wind. But ripe buckwheat’s got sap in it and it bends. And
when the wind has passed, it springs up almost as straight and strong as
before. We aren’t a stiff-necked tribe. We’re mighty limber when a hard
wind’s blowing, because we know it pays to be limber. When trouble
comes we bow to the inevitable without any mouthing, and we work and we
smile and we bide our time. And we play along with lesser folks and we
take what we can get from them. And when we’re strong enough, we kick
the folks whose necks we’ve climbed over. That, my child, is the secret
of the survival.” And after a pause, she added: “I pass it on to you.”
The old lady cackled, as if she were amused by her words, despite the
venom in them. She looked as if she expected some comment from Scarlett
but the words had made little sense to her and she could think of
nothing to say. (709-710)
It's a novel that goes above and beyond the central character of
Scarlett. Even if you hate Scarlett, I'd imagine you'd find some
character to love. Be it Melanie. Rhett. Mammy. Uncle Peter. Grandma
Fontaine. How could you not? There are so many characters, so many
individual stories. Stories of triumph. Stories of loss. Stories of
hope. Stories of disappointment. Stories of survival. Stories of
failure. There is depth and meaning that the movie doesn't even try to
accommodate. Depth and meaning that even diehard fans can't help but
learn something new with each rereading.
My thoughts: I have read this one dozens of times. It is nothing like
the movie. You probably doubt me on this. The movie is so iconic, so
classic, so beloved that surely it does a good to great job adapting the
book to the big screen. But no. Scarlett’s character is definitely more
complex and many of the events that shape and mold her most are just
not to be found on screen. Several relationships that shed light on
Scarlett are never developed because the characters never appear on
screen at all. True not every character in Mitchell’s novel can make it
to the screen. But some exclusions make no sense. For example, Scarlett
having Charles’ baby, Wade, and Frank’s baby, Ella. Or take the
existence of Will, a Confederate soldier who stays at Tara after the war
and ultimately marries Suellen. Or Archie, a prisoner—murderer—freed
close to the end of the war to fight for the Confederacy. He is taken in
by the kind-hearted open-minded Melanie. But probably my favorite
character that is excluded from the movie is Grandma Fontaine. Her
scenes with Scarlett (mainly after the war but before her marriage to
Rhett) are among my absolute favorites in the entire book. Her
observations on Scarlett are spot-on. Her advice, though not taken or
understood, is excellent. But it isn’t just an absence of characters,
but scenes or events as well. The tones and themes differ as well.
There were so many transformative moments in the book that fundamentally shape and change Scarlett. PIVOTAL moments that forever leave an impact that the movie simply ignores. So the character in the movie lacks ALL THE LAYERS. This time I read it through the lens of Scarlet's MENTAL HEALTH. How did the trauma impact and change her. HOW does she cope with trauma. DOES she ever process her trauma, her grief, her losses. We know that she copes by avoidance AND drinking alcohol, for example, but we also know those aren't working for her.
Hollywood’s “South” does not resemble Mitchell’s South. One could go
ahead and argue that Mitchell’s South bares little resemblance to the
actual South. But perhaps that is just its limited perspective.
Scarlett, the heroine, does a poor job observing and understanding the
world around her. She doesn’t bother with anything requiring deep
thought or analysis. She also takes selfishness to an extreme. But the
novel isn’t told merely or exclusively through her eyes, it includes
other perspectives—both of specific characters and a general omniscient
narrator. These would be limited as well. It is set during the war and
reconstruction and reflect that mindset. It was written by an author who
grew up listening to family stories from those who lived through that
time. Her growing up years would have not only been shaped by her
personal family but through her community, her culture. It was written
over a series of years—late twenties to mid-thirties. Would Mitchell’s
text have been viewed as (overly) racist when it was published? Would it
have been fitting given the time the novel was set historically and the
time it was published? That being said, reading the book today begs for
discussion. And not just about race, by the way. By all means talk
about the problems in the text. But try to keep context in mind.
My rule is context, context, context. My second rule is that it is
better to discuss and employ critical thinking skills than it is to
deny, hide, or censor. There are two contexts for reading Gone With The
Wind. The first is that of the author. Margaret Mitchell. A Southern
woman growing up in turn-of-the-century America. The 1920s and the
1930s. These were the years that Margaret Mitchell was living and
working on her novel. This is the culture and mindset of the author and
of the original audience. Gone With The Wind is not alone. It doesn't
stand out from the crowd. Many books, many authors used the n-word
without batting an eye. Many wrote with the mindset that whites are
superior--intellectually at least--to blacks. It doesn't make it true
then or now. But that is the mindset. The second is that of the setting
of the novel. 1860s-1870s America's South. You can't be true to history
without going there. It's a fact in America's history. There's no
disputing or denying it. It's not pleasant; it's often ugly. But there
you have it. You've got to know where you've been so you can measure how
far you've come. And so you can measure how far you've still got to go.
America--both as a nation and as a people--has never been perfect. Will
probably never be perfect.
As a reader, I can enjoy the story without being brainwashed. I can see.
I can question. I can realize when I'm being fed bull. Lines where the
former slaves still faithful servants are talking about how they've
never wanted freedom??? about how they've never wanted money or
independence??? I think I know that Mitchell was full of it. I think
most readers can make that division. I hope.
The last chapter was written first. Rhett’s leaving Scarlett was set in
stone—inevitable. What does this mean for interpreting the novel?
Mitchell never intended a sequel. Didn’t want one. Nothing ambiguous as
far as she was concerned. Scarlett had lost Rhett. Rhett’s love for
Scarlett was gone with the wind. Her happy ending just as much a lost
cause as the Confederacy. But readers like ambiguity. Scarlett is not to
be discounted just yet. She will live to fight another day. She will
not let go easily. But who will prove more stubborn? Can Rhett withstand
Scarlett’s manipulations? Is he really ready to walk away from her
forever?
I think Scarlett is at a crossroad. I have no doubt she’ll come out
standing, stronger than before. I have no doubt that she’ll prove
resilient. But will she get him back?! Much tougher. Because what she
needs is a complete, total, radical transformation or change of tactics.
Aggressive will not win Rhett back. I’m not sure passive-aggressive
will win him back. But perhaps passive, passive, passive, aggressive,
passive passive will. Her pursuit of him needs to be so subtle, so
layered-ly subtle that no one can even suspects she still wants him
back. Can Scarlett pull that off? She’s not good at subtle. Another
tactic might be to attract him back by being a better mother. It won’t
take much for Scarlett to be better than previously. She’s horrible,
absolutely horrible. But if she can learn to treat Wade and Ella with
kindness, give them affection and attention, spend time getting to know
and understand them. Perhaps Rhett will see her as capable of change, of
maturity. Perhaps he can see that she is capable of putting others
first, of empathy, of being human. Even if that should fail to get him
back, she won’t be alone-alone. Maybe she’ll be a super strong single
mother who has healthy relationships with her kids. But is Scarlett
capable of this? Does Mitchell write her that way? Does it matter what
her intentions are? I hate to think of Scarlett staying the same, of her
misery and desperation increasing day by day, week by week, etc.
What
Scarlett needs though she does not know it—more than a return trip to
Tara, more than winning Rhett back—is Jesus Christ. She has a god-shaped
hole that can’t be filled with alcohol, with money, with power, with
lust, with love.
© 2026 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews
