Fiddle dee dee! GWTW and other Southern Novels

[Browncoat]

And one thing I'd forgotten -- when I first read the novel, I had no idea what "caveat emptor" meant, so I didn't get the joke of Rhett suggesting the name "Caveat Emptorium" for Scarlett's store.  Sounds like a good name for a second-hand store!  

[peacheslatour]

1 hour ago, Browncoat said:

I just finished a re-read of GWTW.  I wanted to refresh my memory of the book and separate the book from the movie.

One of the most striking things is the ages of our main characters.  They all had so much thrown at them when they were just teenagers!  I can't imagine being solely responsible for a woman who is having a difficult pregnancy/birth when I was only 18!  And that wagon ride back to Tara!  Scarlett is really remarkable just for managing all of that.  I mean, when I was 19, all I really had to worry about was college classes.  I can't imagine being pretty much solely responsible for all the things Scarlett was.  And the dowagers -- Mrs. Meade, Aunt Pittypat, Mrs. Merriweather, etc., are probably only in their early to mid-30s at most at the beginning -- roughly the same age as Rhett!  The movie makes them all so much older.

It also reminded me that Scarlett both grew up very quickly, and also not at all.  By the end of the book, in many ways, she's still the naive, idealistic 16-year-old we meet at the beginning (until Melly's death when she has her epiphany about Ashley and Rhett).  But she's also very adult in her business dealings.  I feel like Melanie's death and the realization at that moment that now she has not only Ashley and Beau looking to her, but Aunt Pittypat and India as well will help with her emotional maturity. 

It also made me wonder about birth control during that time.  There had to be something -- maybe only the "bad women" used it, but it had to exist, or Scarlett would have gotten pregnant on her honeymoon.  No way Rhett abstained, and Scarlett seemed pretty fertile.  Did he use condoms?  He likely would have forgotten/not bothered on the night he raped Scarlett.    

The timeline at the end, with Scarlett's second pregnancy, Bonnie's death, and Melanie's death seems quite different than in the movie, too.  It would appear that Melanie was only a couple of months into her second pregnancy when she died, but more time than that passed between Ashley's ill-fated birthday party and her death.  That indicates to me that Ashley and Melanie had some sort of sex on the regular -- not just for birthdays and holidays.  So did Ashley use condoms?  

I'm still torn at the end whether or not Scarlett and Rhett get back together.  She will go back to Tara and let Mammy take care of her for a while.  I don't see her staying there, though.  She'll get bored and come back to Atlanta.  Ashley probably will go bankrupt even with sure-fire money-makers like the mills and lumberyards, and Scarlett will resent the hell out of him.  Rhett will go make amends with his remaining family in Charleston.  But he won't stay.  Maybe with Scarlett's newfound emotional maturity and self-realization, they can make an honest go of things.  I don't know!  And that's why I love the ending so much.  I can make up my own future for them.  I do still think they're a really good match.

 

Whatever you do, don't read that misbegotten "sequel" Scarlett. It's just terrible.

[Browncoat]

1 hour ago, peacheslatour said:

Whatever you do, don't read that misbegotten "sequel" Scarlett. It's just terrible.

I made that mistake when it first came out, and have completely erased all of it (except the title) from my memory.  It was abominable.  That author did not understand Scarlett at all.

[Starleigh]

Re, birth control...it sounded like Scarlett got pregnant with Bonnie pretty early on in the marriage, maybe even during the honeymoon. And when she mentioned wanting to "do something" about the pregnancy Rhett got very upset and said something like, "only the madam of a whorehouse would know tricks like that." I think that men back then just didn't bother themselves about birth control. Rarely did they have to pay the consequences, so it just wasn't something that was specifically on their radar or that worried them.

I do wonder that the first time Scarlett had satisfying sex was the night of the rape, you'd think Rhett would know a bit more about pleasing a woman than her previous husbands. They shared a room and a bed until she shut him out a couple months after Bonnie was born, so I'm sure they were hardly abstaining until then.

Edited March 21, 2021 by Starleigh

[peacheslatour]

Quote

I do wonder that the first time Scarlett had satisfying sex was the night of the rape, you'd think Rhett would know a bit more about pleasing a woman than her previous husbands. They shared a room and a bed until she shut him out a couple months after Bonnie was born, so I'm sure they were hardly abstaining until then.

He surely knew her other husbands were garbage in the sack but although he knew how to make it happen for her, he was afraid of shocking her. The night of the rape/passionate lovemaking he was past caring about that.

[Lady Whistleup]

On 3/21/2021 at 1:16 PM, Starleigh said:

Re, birth control...it sounded like Scarlett got pregnant with Bonnie pretty early on in the marriage, maybe even during the honeymoon. And when she mentioned wanting to "do something" about the pregnancy Rhett got very upset and said something like, "only the madam of a whorehouse would know tricks like that." I think that men back then just didn't bother themselves about birth control. Rarely did they have to pay the consequences, so it just wasn't something that was specifically on their radar or that worried them.

I do wonder that the first time Scarlett had satisfying sex was the night of the rape, you'd think Rhett would know a bit more about pleasing a woman than her previous husbands. They shared a room and a bed until she shut him out a couple months after Bonnie was born, so I'm sure they were hardly abstaining until then.

Women back then were taught to abstain during the pregnancy. So if Bonnie was a honeymoon baby then it's possible Rhett and Scarlett didn't actually have that much sex since she shut him out pretty quickly after Bonnie's birth and Rhett wouldn't have pushed Scarlett to resume relations until her body was recovered.

[JAYJAY1979]

The sequel had Scarlet willingly give up Tara and travel.  I always viewed Scalet as wanting to be the big fish in a little pond.

But I also think she was lost without Melanie...who always saw the good in everyone..and always rooted for Rhett and Melanie.

I always figured Scarlet never got Rhett back so having them reunite didn't work either.

Speaking of southern writers..Harper Lee...I wish we could have seen her 2 unfinished works (another fictional story and a true crime novel)..just to see what they were like.

[peacheslatour]

Quote

I always figured Scarlet never got Rhett back so having them reunite didn't work either.

Spoiler

OMG, that C-section scene.

 

Edited March 28, 2021 by peacheslatour

[Blergh]

On 3/27/2021 at 2:56 PM, JAYJAY1979 said:

 

Speaking of southern writers..Harper Lee...I wish we could have seen her 2 unfinished works (another fictional story and a true crime novel)..just to see what they were like.

I didn't like Go Set a Watchman and consider it to be read as a rather awkward work-in-progress  and nowhere close in quality or charm as the masterpiece of To Kill a Mockingbird. Not only was Atticus himself by no means the fair-minded voice of reason that would be the rock of the classic work but I was frankly disappointed in how Scout herself was willing to throw untold numbers of other women under the bus via when Atticus said he hoped she was not interested in having romantic ties with any African-Americans- and rather than her just saying 'No, Atticus, I myself have no interest in that but if other white women want to, that's entirely their own choices which we  should respect   even if we personally wouldn't make the same choices',' she actually called any white women who DID have  romantic bonds with African-American men 'trashy'.

Moreover, considering that the latter work wasn't published until after it was well known that Miss Harper Lee had serious visual and hearing challenges AND after the death of her centenarian older lawyer sister Miss Alice Lee (who was very diligent in protecting her younger but less pragmatic sibling's interests), I believe that its publication was something that was not something that Miss Lee would have wanted in her younger years for good reason (and perhaps was a symptom of those who were eager to take advantage of aging and declining health).

Now, I might have liked to have read the true crime novel  I wonder if it focused on the same case that her then-friend Mr. Capote  violated countless ethical boundaries to publish- and ultimately sacrificed his soul to become a sad self-parody for the remainder of his life. 

[MargeGunderson]

14 hours ago, Blergh said:

Now, I might have liked to have read the true crime novel  I wonder if it focused on the same case that her then-friend Mr. Capote  violated countless ethical boundaries to publish- and ultimately sacrificed his soul to become a sad self-parody for the remainder of his life. 

It was a different case - Reverend Willie Maxwell. There is a book about Harper Lee and the case, Furious Hours, which I read when it came out but for the life of me can’t remember much about it. It sounds like Harper Lee really had a case of writer’s block and couldn’t get very far writing about it.

[peacheslatour]

I just finished reading Why I Live At The P.O. by Eudora Welty. Holy crap, what a terrible family. I hated them all.

[Snow Apple]

A southern book that stayed with me for decades is Peachtree Road by Anne Rivers Siddons. I'm not sure why. I didn't like most of the characters but damn if the book doesn't suck you in.

Of course I haven't read it in many years. I wonder if I'll still feel the same rereading as an adult.

[Starleigh]

Does anyone here read Southern "grit lit" books? I love the genre, but there are only a few authors who do it well, imo.

The gold standard for me will always be Gods In Alabama by Joshilyn Jackson, her debut novel, actually. I like her other books, too, but they don't come near the intensity of her first book.

[eel21788]

On 2/26/2021 at 6:21 PM, peacheslatour said:

It all kind of depends on how old you are when you read it. When I was 12 and read it the first time, I sincerely believed Scarlett would find a way to get him back. When I reread it at 30, I recognized just how "done" Rhett was with the whole thing. I think the dream of Scarlett finally evaporated for Rhett in very much the same way Scarlett's dream of Ashley did for her.

Rhett was a villain but also excellent at reading people. He knew that Scarlett only wanted the man she couldn't have. I think he would have stayed just close enough to keep her pining after him to torture her in order to feed his own ego. He was that vindictive. 

[Dr.OO7]

On 2/18/2021 at 11:30 AM, peacheslatour said:

love the movie for many reasons but I hate the way Victor Fleming reduced the character of Scarlett to a one dimensional shrew

I agree. The book fleshes her out much more--there are many scenes where it's clear that she actually does feel bad about the horrible things she says and does, as well as moments of being genuinely hurt by something someone has said or done.

I hate Rhett. With the exception of Bonnie's death, I think he's a grade A jerk who gets a sick thrill out of saying or doing things to upset Scarlett, then laughing in her face at her upset/angry reaction, then pouting because she doesn't reciprocate his feelings. He's flat out verbally and emotionally abusive, not to mention the constant threats of physical violence, which he eventually carries out when he rapes her.

[Black Knight]

I mean, it's really two terrible people who probably should be together just so they don't inflict themselves on other people who deserve better. The only thing that flies in the face of that being the author's interpretation is Saint Melanie who always thought both of them were just wonderful.

That's the question I would ask Margaret Mitchell if she were here: Is Melanie meant to be taken as gospel or not? The whole saint thing argues for the former, and given the way Rhett unreservedly admires her (and of course Scarlett goes to pieces later in the book over Melanie), I think that's probably what Mitchell intended. But there is just enough there to support the other reading. Granted most of it is Scarlett's own inner thoughts, which we're obviously not supposed to pay too much attention to because she's shallow and jealous (and again, goes to pieces over Melanie in the end), but there is the bit with Melanie expressing horror at the idea of her child interacting with black children as well as when we briefly get the Yankee wives' POV on Melanie.

[Ohiopirate02]

On 6/3/2021 at 2:30 AM, Black Knight said:

I mean, it's really two terrible people who probably should be together just so they don't inflict themselves on other people who deserve better. The only thing that flies in the face of that being the author's interpretation is Saint Melanie who always thought both of them were just wonderful.

That's the question I would ask Margaret Mitchell if she were here: Is Melanie meant to be taken as gospel or not? The whole saint thing argues for the former, and given the way Rhett unreservedly admires her (and of course Scarlett goes to pieces later in the book over Melanie), I think that's probably what Mitchell intended. But there is just enough there to support the other reading. Granted most of it is Scarlett's own inner thoughts, which we're obviously not supposed to pay too much attention to because she's shallow and jealous (and again, goes to pieces over Melanie in the end), but there is the bit with Melanie expressing horror at the idea of her child interacting with black children as well as when we briefly get the Yankee wives' POV on Melanie.

I have lived in the South long enough to have met a few Melanies in my day.  A saintly woman who exudes love, kindness and understanding for her kind, but balks at her precious son interacting with a black child,  welcome to the South.  She would also balk at Beau spending time with the offspring of poor whites.  Her Christian charity has well-defined limits.  The black and poor whites who came to her door asking for assistance would not be allowed onto the porch.  They would be handed food, clothes, money etc and sent on their way.  And the rest of Atlanta Society would laud Melanie as the paragon of Christian Womanhood.  Melanie would abhor any vulgar displays of racism, but she is still a racist.  

[SmithW6079]

On 5/31/2021 at 1:53 PM, Dr.OO7 said:

The book fleshes her out much more--there are many scenes where it's clear that she actually does feel bad about the horrible things she says and does, as well as moments of being genuinely hurt by something someone has said or done.

Scarlett might feel bad about the things she does, but she still makes the decision to do them. And I'm not convinced she feels bad about, say, hiring convicts and working them almost to death (until she realizes Gallagher is stealing from her, and that's more about money than concern for their welfare). She's forever holding herself up to the ideals of Ellen, but consciously chooses not to act upon those ideals. Of course, Ellen and Gerald would be like Ashley and Melanie, beat down by the Confederacy's defeat and unable to navigate the brave new world like Rhett and Scarlett and some of the other characters who are finding ways to survive and thrive during Reconstruction.

On 6/3/2021 at 2:30 AM, Black Knight said:

there is the bit with Melanie expressing horror at the idea of her child interacting with black children as well as when we briefly get the Yankee wives' POV on Melanie.

To be fair, that was the mentality of the time. The "heroes" of the book, including Frank Kennedy, Ashley Wilkes, Doctor Meade, and others are members of the Ku Klux Klan and are frequently derogatory to Black people. Rhett himself kills a Black man who was "disrespectful" to a white woman. 

Mitchell writes in the book about how it was the women of the Confederacy who were the most passionate about the Confederacy (we see this in Melanie), while the men, having lost the war, wanted to return to their lives. It was the Daughters of the Confederacy who formulated and prompted the "Lost Cause" myth.

How Southern socialites rewrote Civil War history

It was after I read "Gone With the Wind" that I was on an antebellum South/Civil War kick for a while (at the time, I bought into the whole Lost Cause myth without realizing that's what it was called). There was a book series (maybe a trilogy, maybe more) about a southern family. I can't remember the name of the books, but I remember there was a character named Bruce who was born with a harelip. She was the daughter of one of the characters and got her name because he really wanted a child named "Bruce" (as I recall). Does that sound familiar to anyone?

[peacheslatour]

Quote

Quote

 named Bruce who was born with a harelip.

 

I believe the preferred nomenclature is cleft lip.

[Black Knight]

On 6/7/2021 at 9:41 AM, SmithW6079 said:

To be fair, that was the mentality of the time. The "heroes" of the book, including Frank Kennedy, Ashley Wilkes, Doctor Meade, and others are members of the Ku Klux Klan and are frequently derogatory to Black people. Rhett himself kills a Black man who was "disrespectful" to a white woman. 

Yes, I know that was the mentality of the time. But my question is, did Mitchell herself see Melanie as a product of her times, with some attitudes that are lamentable now, or did she really consider Melanie to be an actual saint walking on earth?

Of course that goes for the book at large. It's steeped in Lost Cause romanticism and filled with awful racism that the characters consider right and good, as we all know, but is that only because it is told from the point of view of racist Confederates, or also because the author herself really bought into all that?

[Ohiopirate02]

7 hours ago, Black Knight said:

Yes, I know that was the mentality of the time. But my question is, did Mitchell herself see Melanie as a product of her times, with some attitudes that are lamentable now, or did she really consider Melanie to be an actual saint walking on earth?

Of course that goes for the book at large. It's steeped in Lost Cause romanticism and filled with awful racism that the characters consider right and good, as we all know, but is that only because it is told from the point of view of racist Confederates, or also because the author herself really bought into all that?

I have never believed that Margaret Mitchell believed in all of the Lost Cause propoganda.  In fact, she continues to have Scarlett poke  fun at it all the time.  Scarlett wants absolutely nothing to do with the Old Guard in Atlanta after the war.  She constantly mocks them for their chosen path of genteel poverty and later their obsession with building monuments to the confederate dead.  It's the movie that pushes the Lost Cause romanticism, not the book.  It also doesn't help that Margaret Mitchell died before she could see how people misinterpreted her book.  

I do think she believed in the Happy Darky myth.  

[peacheslatour]

2 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I have never believed that Margaret Mitchell believed in all of the Lost Cause propoganda.  In fact, she continues to have Scarlett poke  fun at it all the time.  Scarlett wants absolutely nothing to do with the Old Guard in Atlanta after the war.  She constantly mocks them for their chosen path of genteel poverty and later their obsession with building monuments to the confederate dead.  It's the movie that pushes the Lost Cause romanticism, not the book.  It also doesn't help that Margaret Mitchell died before she could see how people misinterpreted her book.  

I do think she believed in the Happy Darky myth.  

I read an interview with Mitchell where she said she didn't even know the South lost the war until she was twelve years old. She resented the willful ignorance of her Southern neighbors.

[SmithW6079]

21 hours ago, Black Knight said:

Yes, I know that was the mentality of the time. But my question is, did Mitchell herself see Melanie as a product of her times, with some attitudes that are lamentable now, or did she really consider Melanie to be an actual saint walking on earth?

Of course that goes for the book at large. It's steeped in Lost Cause romanticism and filled with awful racism that the characters consider right and good, as we all know, but is that only because it is told from the point of view of racist Confederates, or also because the author herself really bought into all that?

A little of both probably.

13 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I have never believed that Margaret Mitchell believed in all of the Lost Cause propaganda.  In fact, she continues to have Scarlett poke  fun at it all the time.  Scarlett wants absolutely nothing to do with the Old Guard in Atlanta after the war.  She constantly mocks them for their chosen path of genteel poverty and later their obsession with building monuments to the confederate dead.  It's the movie that pushes the Lost Cause romanticism, not the book.  It also doesn't help that Margaret Mitchell died before she could see how people misinterpreted her book.  

I do think she believed in the Happy Darky myth.  

I've always kept in mind that not only is the era Mitchell is writing about steeped in racism, so is the era in which she was writing, so I think you're right about her believing in the "Happy Darky" myth or at least of having some beliefs that Black people weren't as good as whites.

This excerpt from "Memory and Myth: The Civil War in Fiction and Film" would suggest she had the innate racism of the time.

(I can't quote the passage separately because it's an image. Mitchell is quoted starting around the middle of page 16 & continuing for a couple of pages after.)

While Scarlett mocks "those who are winnowed out" for not understanding this new era requires a different set of skills than the old, at the end of the book, she reflects that she understands now why folks gather together and reminisce about the "good old days." She wants to join them but can't, because she's alienated every one of the Old Guard.

 

Edited June 10, 2021 by SmithW6079

[MadyGirl1987]

I definitely do think the book is kind of a refutation of the lost cause myth. While it does perpetuate a lot of racist thoughts of the time the novel was set, and the time it was written in, I do think that it does not show the cause of the Confederacy as a positive. I get more of a sense of “what was it all for?” When reading the novel, it struck me how critical Scarlett was of the Confederacy and how those that did the best and rose in the years after the war were, like Scarlett, those less caught in the the past and willing to do whatever it takes to get what they want, such as how she does business with northerners when others won’t and how she has Frank call in the debts people owed him when he was hesitant to when people were struggling after the war. I also think it’s telling that the man who turns out to be Scarlett’s match, Rhett, is seen in one of the first scenes he’s in saying the South would never win a war and it would be foolish to fight.

[Starleigh]

46 minutes ago, MadyGirl1987 said:

I definitely do think the book is kind of a refutation of the lost cause myth. While it does perpetuate a lot of racist thoughts of the time the novel was set, and the time it was written in, I do think that it does not show the cause of the Confederacy as a positive. I get more of a sense of “what was it all for?” When reading the novel, it struck me how critical Scarlett was of the Confederacy and how those that did the best and rose in the years after the war were, like Scarlett, those less caught in the the past and willing to do whatever it takes to get what they want, such as how she does business with northerners when others won’t and how she has Frank call in the debts people owed him when he was hesitant to when people were struggling after the war. I also think it’s telling that the man who turns out to be Scarlett’s match, Rhett, is seen in one of the first scenes he’s in saying the South would never win a war and it would be foolish to fight.

I agree with every bit of this. However, I feel that Mitchell portrayed the Northerners as either sleazy or else as sort of bumbling social climbers who would never master the class divide (kind of like the social divide in Jane Austen's world where you could never reach the level of a "gentleman's daughter" unless you were actually born one).  And she does portray Scarlett as being kind of cold and lacking in compassion for the Old Guard Southerners when she called in their debts. So, while I think Mitchell saw the waste in pining over the Confederacy as well as the South's  arrogance and stupidity in rushing off to fight the war they had no chance in winning, I think her book does show both nostalgia for the Old South as well as a touch of contempt for the Yankees. (Or was that just the brilliance of her writing, in that she was so accurately able to portray the feel of the times & an authentic Southern POV?)

Edited June 10, 2021 by Starleigh

[SmithW6079]

1 hour ago, Starleigh said:

However, I feel that Mitchell portrayed the Northerners as either sleazy or else as sort of bumbling social climbers who would never master the class divide (kind of like the social divide in Jane Austen's world where you could never reach the level of a "gentleman's daughter" unless you were actually born one). 

The Republicans in charge of Reconstruction at the time were amazingly corrupt, so she was being accurate.

[Ohiopirate02]

10 hours ago, SmithW6079 said:

The Republicans in charge of Reconstruction at the time were amazingly corrupt, so she was being accurate.

They really weren't though. Reconstruction was all about bringing the states that seceded back into the fold, holding some Confederates responsible for their actions, and giving some protections to the newly freed slaves.  Republican corruption during Reconstruction is another Southern myth.  When Reconstruction ended, the Southern whites wasted no time attempting to undo any progress made and disenfranchising black voters.  The literacy tests and poll taxes that were enacted to keep blacks from voting lest the South still have black members of Congress.  The southern whites used this "corruption" by Republicans to justify their actions in the decades after Reconstruction.  This was easily bought by many whites across America, and was a prevailing opinion during the time Margaret Mitchell wrote her book.  It's easier for people to believe there was corruption than to examine their own racist beliefs and the racist actions of their ancestors.  

[peacheslatour]

3 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

They really weren't though. Reconstruction was all about bringing the states that seceded back into the fold, holding some Confederates responsible for their actions, and giving some protections to the newly freed slaves.  Republican corruption during Reconstruction is another Southern myth.  When Reconstruction ended, the Southern whites wasted no time attempting to undo any progress made and disenfranchising black voters.  The literacy tests and poll taxes that were enacted to keep blacks from voting lest the South still have black members of Congress.  The southern whites used this "corruption" by Republicans to justify their actions in the decades after Reconstruction.  This was easily bought by many whites across America, and was a prevailing opinion during the time Margaret Mitchell wrote her book.  It's easier for people to believe there was corruption than to examine their own racist beliefs and the racist actions of their ancestors.  

Yep. If they had acted like a real conquering nation, events would have been very different.

[anna0852]

I always had the impression from the book that the Black characters had a certain respect for Scarlett, more than they did for Melanie. Scarlett was absolutely racist but she didn't cloak it the way Melanie did and for those whom she considered part of her family she absolutely went to the mat for them. She wasn't just struggling to feed her father and her sisters; she was just as committed to supporting Mammy and Pork and Uncle Peter and Dilcey and Prissy. And I do think that her struggles were recognised. Melanie's niceness was wrapped in hypocrisy while Scarlett simply was who she was. 

Does that make sense?

Edited June 12, 2021 by anna0852

[peacheslatour]

22 hours ago, anna0852 said:

I always had the impression from the book that the Black characters had a certain respect for Scarlett, more than they did for Melanie. Scarlett was absolutely racist but she didn't cloak it the way Melanie did and for those whom she considered part of her family she absolutely went to the mat for them. She wasn't just struggling to feed her father and her sisters; she was just as committed to supporting Mammy and Pork and Uncle Peter and Dilcey and Prissy. And I do think that her struggles were recognised. Melanie's niceness was wrapped in hypocrisy while Scarlett simply was who she was. 

Does that make sense?

Yes and I think Scarlett certainly had more respect for Dilcy, Mammy and Pork than she ever did for her useless sisters.

[SmithW6079]

On 6/11/2021 at 6:51 PM, anna0852 said:

I always had the impression from the book that the Black characters had a certain respect for Scarlett, more than they did for Melanie. Scarlett was absolutely racist but she didn't cloak it the way Melanie did and for those whom she considered part of her family she absolutely went to the mat for them. She wasn't just struggling to feed her father and her sisters; she was just as committed to supporting Mammy and Pork and Uncle Peter and Dilcey and Prissy. And I do think that her struggles were recognised. Melanie's niceness was wrapped in hypocrisy while Scarlett simply was who she was. 

Does that make sense?

I never got the impression the slaves didn't respect Melanie. I think she was loved by black and white folk alike.

The Hamiltons of Atlanta regarded Uncle Peter as "one of the family" (insofar as slaves could be). We never saw any of the slaves at Twelve Oaks, so we don't know how they were treated, but they were probably treated the same as the slaves at Tara.

Melanie openly stated that she didn't want Beau going to school with Black children but I'm sure neither Scarlett nor Rhett wanted their children associating with Black children either (and Rhett killed a Black man for being "uppity" to a white woman). I don't think Melanie's attitude makes her a hypocrite any more or less than any other Southerner of the time. Mrs. Merriweather expresses shock at the "slave auction" of the young women at the dance fundraiser, but she probably owned slaves herself.

Blacks were viewed as inferior back then, even among "enlightened" folks. (Abraham Lincoln believed slavery was wrong, but he didn't believe blacks were the equal of whites.)

Let's not forget that Scarlett threatened to sell Prissy south during Melanie's labor because Prissy was being useless. Selling a slave south meant selling them to harsher owners who valued their lives even less than the more northern slave owners.

On 6/12/2021 at 5:27 PM, peacheslatour said:

Yes and I think Scarlett certainly had more respect for Dilcy, Mammy and Pork than she ever did for her useless sisters.

Because they worked hard. She also had respect for Will Benteen, even though he was a poor white. She respected her neighbors who were making a go of it in their reduced circumstances, not the ones lamenting the bygone days or the ones who wasted what little money they had on tombstones or bringing their dead sons back to be reburied in family cemeteries.

**

One of the things that jumped out at me in some of my re-reading of the book are the descriptions of food, especially before the war, whether it's Scarlett's breakfast right before the barbecue or the barbecue itself. It always makes me hungry. :-)

[peacheslatour]

Quote

One of the things that jumped out at me in some of my re-reading of the book are the descriptions of food, especially before the war, whether it's Scarlett's breakfast right before the barbecue or the barbecue itself. It always makes me hungry. :-)

I think of that dinner she had with Rhett when they were in New Orleans. She was eating so much he told her she was going to get as fat as "the Cuban women" and he would have to divorce her. She merely looked at him and asked the waiter to bring the pastry cart.

[Lady Whistleup]

On 6/16/2021 at 5:39 PM, peacheslatour said:

I think of that dinner she had with Rhett when they were in New Orleans. She was eating so much he told her she was going to get as fat as "the Cuban women" and he would have to divorce her. She merely looked at him and asked the waiter to bring the pastry cart.

I really like how the book verbalizes some of the practical hardships for Scarlett during the war, like the fact that she had no practical shoes to do the kind of gritty manual labor, and her hands bled and had callouses. Also how HUNGRY she was. Like, physically hungry. 

I also think the Pork/Mammy/Uncle Peter respected Scarlett because instead of sitting around reminiscing about the "good old days" Scarlett went to work like they had always been forced to do. 

[peacheslatour]

1 minute ago, Lady Whistleup said:

I really like how the book verbalizes some of the practical hardships for Scarlett during the war, like the fact that she had no practical shoes to do the kind of gritty manual labor, and her hands bled and had callouses. Also how HUNGRY she was. Like, physically hungry. 

I also think the Pork/Mammy/Uncle Peter respected Scarlett because instead of sitting around reminiscing about the "good old days" Scarlett went to work like they had always been forced to do. 

She did. She saw what needed done and she did it. And the hunger. All they had for weeks, until it was safe enough to go see neighbors, was milk and goobers. Day in and day out.

[Lady Whistleup]

31 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

She did. She saw what needed done and she did it. And the hunger. All they had for weeks, until it was safe enough to go see neighbors, was milk and goobers. Day in and day out.

I also feel like the slaves respected her because I have a feeling they could talk to her about practical matters without fearing that she'd need her smelling salts. 

As for Melanie, I think Scarlett resented Melanie but was wrecked when she died because this is someone who has been there since they were teenagers. It would be hard to lose one of the few people who were around when Scarlett was at her lowest. 

Melanie's racial attitudes are unfortunately really common even today. Kindness, compassion, and empathy are limitless -- if you are white. Met quite a few people like that and it's 2021.

ETA: I also think Melanie is the type where if you are black and you show up on her porch begging for a donation for a sick relative, she'd absolutely empty the coffers. That's the Christian, good thing to do. However, she'd be adamantly against all anti-segregation measures and against giving blacks the right to vote. As long as Black people are not encroaching on what she perceives to be "her" rights, she's kind of charitable. 

Edited June 27, 2021 by Lady Whistleup

[peacheslatour]

Quote

As for Melanie, I think Scarlett resented Melanie but was wrecked when she died because this is someone who has been there since they were teenagers. It would be hard to lose one of the few people who were around when Scarlett was at her lowest. 

Scarlett said that Melanie was the only woman since her mother died that ever loved her. Scarlett never had a girlfriend. She was too smart to fall for that vapours shit and she didn't really trust other women because she'd been taught that getting a husband was all she could ever achieve in life. In some ways the war was a godsend for women like her who were after more than that.

[Lady Whistleup]

50 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

Scarlett said that Melanie was the only woman since her mother died that ever loved her. Scarlett never had a girlfriend. She was too smart to fall for that vapours shit and she didn't really trust other women because she'd been taught that getting a husband was all she could ever achieve in life. In some ways the war was a godsend for women like her who were after more than that.

WW2 was a godsend for women too in a way. Women whose dreams didn't revolve around marriage and babies got to do what they wanted -- go to work.

I think it's interesting that Ashley Wilkes is (relatively) the most politically liberal character and he's the weakest. 

[peacheslatour]

16 hours ago, Lady Whistleup said:

WW2 was a godsend for women too in a way. Women whose dreams didn't revolve around marriage and babies got to do what they wanted -- go to work.

I think it's interesting that Ashley Wilkes is (relatively) the most politically liberal character and he's the weakest. 

Rhett Butler was very liberal in many ways and he was pretty damn far from weak.

[andromeda331]

16 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

Rhett Butler was very liberal in many ways and he was pretty damn far from weak.

He was also the only one who was smart enough to know the south couldn't win. Not that anyone else listened when he pointed that out. 

[SmithW6079]

On 6/27/2021 at 7:51 PM, Lady Whistleup said:

I think it's interesting that Ashley Wilkes is (relatively) the most politically liberal character and he's the weakest. 

I don't think Ashley is all that liberal, at least in the modern sense. He was pretty traditional, and he also reflected the racism of the times -- he's one of the Klansmen who goes to clear out Shantytown after Scarlett is attacked. He is certainly one of the weakest characters, although I sympathize with his desire to merely live out his life isolated at Twelve Oaks, surrounded by his books and his family. If the war hadn't happened, Ashley probably would have run Twelve Oaks into the ground eventually, having to sell off slaves to pay the debts he incurred because he would be an incompetent farmer. (Or maybe not, if he had a good overseer and manager -- Scarlett would have run Twelve Oaks efficiently, but maybe not Melanie.)

23 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

Rhett Butler was very liberal in many ways and he was pretty damn far from weak.

I think Rhett had no use for convention (at least until Bonnie was born), but that's not the same as being liberal. Although he encouraged Scarlett's business ventures, I believe he makes comments later on after their marriage, that give the impression he considered some of her wheeling and dealing as "unwomanly." He certainly tells her she has no maternal instinct and that her children are frightened of her. (In the movie, they give the line about letting Bonnie cry in the dark until she gets over it to the English nanny, not Scarlett.) 

7 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

He was also the only one who was smart enough to know the south couldn't win. Not that anyone else listened when he pointed that out. 

I think Ashley was also smart enough to know the South would lose too, even if he hadn't thought it out as precisely as Rhett had. And although we never know much about John Wilkes, I think he knew it too. I don't recall exactly in the book, but in the movie, Ashley says that he hopes it won't come to war but if "Georgia fights, I'll fight with her."  

The movie skews our perception of Ashley, because Leslie Howard is so much older than everyone else and looks it (he was 46!). In the book, I think Ashley is supposed to be maybe 24 or 25 (four years of college, then a year or two on the Grand Tour of Europe). Scarlett and Melanie are 16 and 17, respectively. Rhett is the oldest at 34. I think part of Rhett's disdain for Ashley is because of his relative youth and naiveté and his weakness of character (not in a moral sense, but in the sense that Ashley is a passive re-actor, not an active actor to events). 

When I read the book, I imagine the actors who played the characters, but for Ashley I always try to think of a younger actor.

I always feel sorriest for the children: Wade Hampton and Ella. I get why they were excised for the movie, but the removal of Wade Hampton especially eliminates one of the bonds between Melanie and Scarlett. Rhett was a good stepfather (for a while at least), and I guess Frank and Scarlett weren't married long enough to ever get a sense of him as a stepfather.

 

[Lady Whistleup]

Both Ashley and Rhett went up north for school (Ashley to Harvard, Rhett to West Point). I think that gave them a deeper perspective on the Civil War than people who had never ventured outside of Georgia.

[Ohiopirate02]

4 minutes ago, Lady Whistleup said:

Both Ashley and Rhett went up north for school (Ashley to Harvard, Rhett to West Point). I think that gave them a deeper perspective on the Civil War than people who had never ventured outside of Georgia.

I don't see this.  Prior to the start of the Civil War, young southern gentlemen went north for school.  Harvard, Yale, etc. were full of southern men who brought their slaves with them.  They traveled to the North, but they brought the South with them.  Their education did not broaden their horizons, that was not the purpose of an Ivy League education in the 19th century.  Back then, a college education meant you were rich enough to study esoteric concepts instead of having to dirty your hands making money.  It was (and still is) a way for them to network.  Campus radicals were not a thing.  It's not like Ashley Wilkes went to Oberlin.  He was more educated than the rest of the planters' sons in Clayton County, but that was an authorial choice.  In reality, the rest of the planters' sons would have completed their degrees from UGA, UNC or UVA if not an Ivy.  This is still the time of "Gentleman Cs" where as long as your daddy paid your bills and you showed up enough you received your degree.  Ashley was the nerd who actually did the reading, but it was still reading to him--concepts to be debated, but never acted upon.  

[peacheslatour]

32 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I don't see this.  Prior to the start of the Civil War, young southern gentlemen went north for school.  Harvard, Yale, etc. were full of southern men who brought their slaves with them.  They traveled to the North, but they brought the South with them.  Their education did not broaden their horizons, that was not the purpose of an Ivy League education in the 19th century.  Back then, a college education meant you were rich enough to study esoteric concepts instead of having to dirty your hands making money.  It was (and still is) a way for them to network.  Campus radicals were not a thing.  It's not like Ashley Wilkes went to Oberlin.  He was more educated than the rest of the planters' sons in Clayton County, but that was an authorial choice.  In reality, the rest of the planters' sons would have completed their degrees from UGA, UNC or UVA if not an Ivy.  This is still the time of "Gentleman Cs" where as long as your daddy paid your bills and you showed up enough you received your degree.  Ashley was the nerd who actually did the reading, but it was still reading to him--concepts to be debated, but never acted upon.  

I seriously doubt West Point allowed cadets to bring valets (slaves) with them. Harvard may have but Ashley's anti war views were not formed there. His father, John was also staunchly anti war. Ashley did not believe in the "Cause" but he went anyway because that's what honorable gentlemen did, as did his father when the South started running out of troops. Ashley became a Major in the CSA and was captured. He was in Rock island Prison for a year. Starved and beaten. He was a broken man by the end of the war. Ashley wasn't so much weak as impractical.

[Browncoat]

Didn't Ashley say that he would have freed his slaves if the war hadn't done it for him? 

[Lady Whistleup]

8 minutes ago, Browncoat said:

Didn't Ashley say that he would have freed his slaves if the war hadn't done it for him? 

Yes he did. Ashley and Rhett were both less sanguine about the "Southern way of life" than the rest of the characters.

[Ohiopirate02]

4 minutes ago, Browncoat said:

Didn't Ashley say that he would have freed his slaves if the war hadn't done it for him? 

He may have, but I cannot see him actually following through with it.  Freeing slaves was not easy and very costly by design.  There was a cost to freeing each slave and then the newly freed usually had to leave the state once free.  Georgia and other southern states did not want large populations of free blacks living near the enslaved.  So if Ashley really wanted his slaves to be free, he would have to pay the cost to free them and then give each slave enough money to get out of Clayton county.  He was rich, but he would not have been that rich to free hundreds of slaves.  And if there were families on different plantations like Pork and Dilcey, then those families would be now separated.  

[SmithW6079]

4 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

I seriously doubt West Point allowed cadets to bring valets (slaves) with them. Harvard may have but Ashley's anti war views were not formed there. His father, John was also staunchly anti war. Ashley did not believe in the "Cause" but he went anyway because that's what honorable gentlemen did, as did his father when the South started running out of troops. Ashley became a Major in the CSA and was captured. He was in Rock island Prison for a year. Starved and beaten. He was a broken man by the end of the war. Ashley wasn't so much weak as impractical.

I tried to do a little research earlier, but I can't find anything about substantial about slaves at West Point among cadets. However, apparently officers kept slaves, although not necessarily at West Point itself.

"Officer, Gentleman, Slavemaster: Slavery and Racism at West Point and Fort Leavenworth"

Quote

During the 40 years before the Civil War, a pay system unique to the U.S. Army induced officers to keep slaves wherever they were posted in the country, including in supposedly "free" states and territories. In this groundbreaking book, Walt Bachman reveals how relatively few officers kept slaves at West Point in New York (among them Robert E. Lee, who served as superintendent of the nation's military academy from 1852 to 1855), while a great many officers (many of them West Point graduates) used slaves as their servants in Kansas at Fort Leavenworth, one of the nation's largest army bases. 

I agree that Ashley was certainly impractical, but I think he was weak too. Even Scarlett sits in judgment of him for not being able to "roll with the times" and reinvent himself, as others in Atlanta or the county are doing.

4 hours ago, Browncoat said:

Didn't Ashley say that he would have freed his slaves if the war hadn't done it for him? 

 

3 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

He may have, but I cannot see him actually following through with it.  Freeing slaves was not easy and very costly by design.  There was a cost to freeing each slave and then the newly freed usually had to leave the state once free.  Georgia and other southern states did not want large populations of free blacks living near the enslaved.  So if Ashley really wanted his slaves to be free, he would have to pay the cost to free them and then give each slave enough money to get out of Clayton county.  He was rich, but he would not have been that rich to free hundreds of slaves.  And if there were families on different plantations like Pork and Dilcey, then those families would be now separated.  

I never knew it was that involved. That's interesting. (However, Gerald buys Dilcey and her daughter Prissy as a "present" for Pork. I forget if Prissy is supposed to be Pork's daughter or just Dilcey's child by another man.)

[Ohiopirate02]

20 hours ago, SmithW6079 said:

 

I never knew it was that involved. That's interesting. (However, Gerald buys Dilcey and her daughter Prissy as a "present" for Pork. I forget if Prissy is supposed to be Pork's daughter or just Dilcey's child by another man.)

Southern whites knew they were outnumbered and lived in fear of a slave uprising.  They could control their slaves to a point, but freedmen could legally move about from plantation to plantation.  So, whites did what they could to make the lives of freed men and women difficult from drafting laws limiting their freedoms to kidnapping them and selling them out of state.  Many free POC moved either north or west to escape or they gathered together in cities like Richmond.  The fines assessed to the master was another way to limit the number of free POC.  Southern whites did not want one of their own to suddenly free 200 slaves and release them in their area.  That was a recipe for rebellion.  They could stomach a master freeing a faithful servant upon the master's death.  That spoke to their ideas of "Christian charity."  Or a husband buying his wife and children from their owner with funds raised by hard work.  

Another interesting fact I learned this year--Pork and Dilcey could not be legally married as slaves.  Marriage is a contract and slaves could not enter into contracts.  So during Reconstruction, many newly freed couples were legally married by the Freedman's Bureau immediately after the end of the war.  

[peacheslatour]

Quote

Southern whites knew they were outnumbered and lived in fear of a slave uprising. 

Especially those, like Scarlett's maternal grandfather who had lived through the slave uprisings in Haiti.

 

Edited June 30, 2021 by Athena

[Starleigh]

1 hour ago, peacheslatour said:

Especially those, like Scarlett's maternal grandfather who had lived through the slave uprisings in Haiti.

 

I don't remember that! Was it mentioned in the book early on?