Sasha's Reviews > Gone with the Wind

Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
3144945
's review

did not like it
bookshelves: 2017

Margaret Mitchell was a racist and in 1936, 70 years after the Civil War, she wrote a thousand-page love letter to racism. If you'd like to hear why slavery was terrific and black people are inferior to whites and they liked being slaves, here is your epic. If that sounds unpleasant, you won't like Gone With the Wind.

A non-racist book can have racist characters, and all the characters in this book are racist. Is the book itself necessarily racist? Yes. It has an omniscient narrator, and many long, racist passages that are clearly not from any character's perspective. They feel like the nonfiction interludes in War & Peace and they're racist. Is it possible Mitchell means for us to disagree with her omniscient narrator? No. There's no evidence whatsoever of that, and the omniscient passages that defend the South and slavery are written with passion and supported by racist scenes in the story. This book intends to be racist; Margaret Mitchell believes what she says; she was a racist person who wrote a hateful book. I can prove it and I'm about to.

We start off in the glory days of the Old South, as a young, callow, beautiful Scarlett O'Hara flirts with everyone's boyfriends. Happy slaves bustle around:

"The house negroes of the County considered themselves superior to white trash...they were well-fed, well-clothed and looked after in sickness and old age. They were proud of the good names of their owners and, for the most part, proud to belong to people who were quality."

We meet some of them, Scarlett's "small white hand disappearing into their huge black paws and the four capered with delight at the meeting and with pride at displaying before their comrades what a pretty Young Miss they had."

Faithful slave Mammy is introduced, with her "kind face, sad with the uncomprehending sadness of a monkey's face" - "the mottled wise old eyes saw deeply, saw clearly, with the directness of the savage and the child, undeterred by conscience when danger threatened her pet." Mammy is one of the few morally pure characters in the book, but it's always that noble savage quality.

Luckily Scarlett stays away from the slave quarters, where "the faint niggery smell which crept from the cabin increased her nausea."

But then war comes. Here's noble and boring Ashley, the limpest point of the oncoming love triangle, describing what the war is about. Notice that his vision of the South is indivisible from slavery:

I hear the darkies coming home across the fields at dusk, tired and singing and ready for supper, and the sound of the windlass as the bucket goes down into the cool well. And there's the long view down the road to the river, across the cotton fields, and the mist rising from the bottom lands in the twilight. And that is why I'm here who have no love of death or misery or glory and no hatred for anyone. Perhaps that is what is called patriotism.

After the War and during Reconstruction, things get really dark (get it? lol) as Northerners ruin black people: "Some of the free negroes were getting quite insolent. This last [Scarlett] could hardly believe, for she had never seen an insolent negro in her life."

But "The [Freedmen's] Bureau fed them while they loafed and poisoned their minds against their former masters." And here's much more from the omniscient narrator:

[They] furthermore told the negroes they were as good as the whites in every way and soon white and negro marriages would be permitted, soon the estates of their former owners would be divided and every negro would be given forty acres and a mule for his own. They kept the negroes stirred up with tales of cruelty perpetrated by the whites and, in a section long famed for the affectionate relations between slaves and slave owners, hate and suspicion began to grow.

[Now Southerners] were looking on the state they loved, seeing it trampled by the enemy, rascals making a mock of the law, their former slaves a menace, their men disenfranchised, their women insulted.

This eventually leads to the formation of the noble Ku Klux Klan, who merely attempt to protect Southern women from being raped by uppity former slaves. Here's a Klan member now:

"'Wilkerson had gone a bit too far with his nigger-equality business. Oh yes, he talks it to those black fools by the hour. He had the gall - the - ' Tony sputtered helplessly, 'to say niggers had a right to - to - white women.'"

"The negroes were on top and behind them were the Yankee bayonets," thinks Scarlett: "She could be killed, she could be raped and, very probably, nothing would ever be done about it."

And here's the omniscient narrator summing it up:

It was the large number of outrages on women and the ever-present fear for the safety of their wives and daughters that drove Southern men to cold and trembling fury and caused the Ku Klux Klan to spring up overnight. And it was against this nocturnal organization that the newspapers of the North cried out most loudly, never realizing the tragic necessity that brought it into being.

This is all demonstrated in the action. Scarlett O'Hara's headstrong ways nearly get every man in town hung. (view spoiler) Divorced from its context, this is a brilliant scene. It's done entirely from Scarlett's point of view, so the actual gun fight is totally off page. What we see instead is the wives, with Northern soldiers in their living rooms waiting for the men to return - surrounded by enemies, their faces frozen into nonchalant expressions, desperately and silently scheming to save their husbands' lives. It's great stuff, as long as you can forget that you're being asked to root for the KKK to get away with lynching a man.

And here's a pretty long series of quotes. Again, they're all from the omniscient narrator - that is, from the book itself.

The South had been tilted as by a giant malicious hand, and those who had once ruled were now more helpless than their former slaves had ever been.

The former slaves were now the lords of creation and, with the aid of the Yankees, the lowest and most ignorant ones were on top. The better class of them, scorning freedom, were suffering as severely as their white masters...Many loyal field hands also refused to avail themselves of the new freedom, but the hordes of 'trashy free issue niggers,' who were causing most of the trouble, were drawn largely from the field-hand class.

In slave days, these lowly blacks had been despised by the house negroes and yard negroes as creatures of small worth...Plantation mistresses had put the pickaninnies through courses of training and elimination to select the best of them for the positions of greater responsibility. Those consigned to the fields were the ones least willing or able to learn, the least energetic, the least honest and trustworthy, the most vicious and brutish...[but now] 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.

To the credit of the negroes, including the least intelligent of them, few were actuated by malice and those few had usually been "mean niggers" even in slave days. But they were, as a class, childlike in mentality, easily led and from long habit accustomed to taking orders.
...
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.
...
Thanks to the negro vote, the Republicans and their allies were firmly entrenched and they were riding roughshod over the powerless but still protesting minority.

Man, just read that last sentence again. Wow.

Anyway, this is all very difficult for poor Scarlett: "The more I see of emancipation the more criminal I think it is. It's just ruined the darkies. Thousands of them aren't working at all and the ones we can get to work at the mill are so lazy and shiftless they aren't worth having. and if you so much as swear at them, much less hit them a few licks for the good of their souls, the Freedmen's Bureau is down on you like a duck on a June bug."

She complains that Northerners "Did not know that negroes had to be handled gently, as though they were children, directed, praised, petted, scolded...How could anyone get any work done with free niggers quitting all the time?...[It's] too dear a homeland to be turned over to ignorant negroes drunk with whiskey and freedom."

And with the final word, here's a former slave himself, Big Sam, who "galloped over to the buggy,his eyes rolling with joy and his white teeth flashing, and clutched her outsretched hand with two big hands as big as hams. His watermelon-pink tongue lapped out, his whole body wiggled and his joyful contortions were as ludicrous as the gambolings of a mastiff. ... 'Ah done had nuff freedom. Ah wants somebody ter eed me good vittles reg'lar, and tell me whut ter do an' whut not ter do.'"

Okay, is that enough? That was gross to type out. And don't think I'm cherry-picking the only racist passages; this book is soaked in racism. God's nightgown, it's fuckin' racist. Pat Conroy, in a despicably fawning introduction, sees fit to mention that "No black man or woman can read this book and be sorry that this particular wind is gone," and what the hell kind of thing is that to say? "White people, on the other hand...you gotta be a little bummed out, right?" Is that what you meant, Pat?

And look, yes, it's too bad that this book has destroyed itself with hatred, because it's got a lot going for it. It certainly has Scarlett O'Hara going for it. She's fuckin' terrific, a towering antiheroine, amoral, selfish and brave. Rhett Butler, her swarthy and cynical love interest, is pretty good too, although he can't stop mansplaining amorality and he might have some kind of social learning disability. (He's also a murderer, by the way: "I did kill the nigger. He was uppity to a lady, and what else could a Southern gentleman do?”) They have sortof a proto-50 Shades thing going on, including a fairly kinky love scene that's not explicitly described but Scarlett was definitely into it. Third love triangle corner Ashley sucks, no one cares about him.

It also taught me the phrase "God's nightgown!" which is certainly a great thing to yell.

But it is totally, irredeemably ruined by its racism. Look, I'm not trying to be "politically correct" here. That's not even a thing; it's a term made up by haters to excuse hate. Gone With The Wind angered me. I don't like hearing black people described as stupid monkeys over and over again. I didn't enjoy reading the book because I was constantly pissed off by how ignorant and hateful it is. It was racist at the time it was written; it's racist now; racism is the point and the message, and to ignore it is to disrespect its author's intentions, which were racist.

Books matter. We use stories to describe and define society. If we allow this book to become part of the foundation of our past - if we call it a classic, as some people have - we're basing our past on a terrible lie. And it is a terrible lie, in case we need to say that out loud: Slavery was bad, black people didn't like it, almost everyone else didn't either, and the South were the bad guys in the Civil War.

And books are also our companions. When we choose to read, we're spending significant amounts of time - hours and hours - deep in their worlds. This companion is full of hate. These hours and hours will be spent listening to her yell about insolent niggers. It's the most racist book I've ever read. I didn't like it.
1649 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Gone with the Wind.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

June 19, 2017 – Started Reading
June 19, 2017 – Shelved
June 21, 2017 –
15.0% "Among many, many other things, Mitchell sucks at poker: four of a kind against an ace-high full house is a fucking unlikely scenario."
July 6, 2017 – Shelved as: 2017
July 6, 2017 – Finished Reading

Comments Showing 1-50 of 654 (654 new)


Iris Yeah but you get that all the time in movies and books. It makes it more exciting, as opposed to ridiculous.


message 2: by Warwick (last edited Jul 06, 2017 05:42PM) (new)

Warwick I thoroughly enjoyed that comprehensive and convincing take-down. The "tragic necessity" of the KKK? Good lord (God's nightie), I had no idea. Reminds me somewhat of my experience reading The Confessions of Nat Turner.


Sasha Thanks, Warwick!

You mean Styron's Nat Turner? Is it super racist? I've read the actual Confessions, which were crazy disturbing, but not Styron yet.


message 4: by P. (new) - added it

P. Great review! I'd planned to read this book but not anymore.


message 5: by Warwick (new)

Warwick Yeah, the Styron novel. Not everyone thinks so, but I found it an incredibly creepy book to get through.


Sasha Interesting. I liked Sophie's Choice so I'd been planning to get to Nat Turner eventually. I guess I still will, just to see for myself.


Sasha Oh - and happy to help, Pechi, that was (clearly) what I was hoping some people would say.


Susanna - Censored by GoodReads I've read Styron (I also liked Sophie's Choice quite a lot), and do plan to get to his take on Nat Turner. (At least Styron can write.)


message 9: by Sasha (last edited Jul 06, 2017 09:09PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha Susanna, you mentioned the "Lost Cause" argument re. the Old South in connection with this book, and I meant to mention to you that they actually refer to it as a Lost Cause (with caps) repeatedly, so you are right about that.


Susanna - Censored by GoodReads Interesting - I didn't know that. (About the caps.)


message 11: by LdyGray (new) - added it

LdyGray This review is 1,000,000 times better than the book, and should be included in all "Top Books to Read" lists in its place.


❀⊱RoryReads⊰❀ Great review. This book has been recommended to me by several friends, and I refuse to read it. The film was revolting enough thanks.


message 13: by Wendy (new)

Wendy Thanks for giving me another reason to procrastinate on reading this book. It's on all the must-read classic book lists--but it seems it's growing more and more obsolete? I don't see myself ever picking up this book, and should probably just chuck my old copy at some point.


message 14: by Ajax (new) - rated it 1 star

Ajax Great job reviewing an abysmal book. You did the hard work that I could not bear to do. 1000+ pages of hatred and justification of atrocity. Thank you!


message 15: by Mindy (new)

Mindy This is a fantastic takedown. Wow! Making me glad that I never wanted to read this.


message 16: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha It's so gratifying to hear that I've helped to ruin a beloved classic for a few people! Thanks, y'all.


message 17: by Peggy (new) - rated it 1 star

Peggy Bravo. You said everything I wanted to say, much better than I could have said it. I see apologies for this book all over the place. It's a shame, because the book does have merits. But racism and Lost Cause-ism shouldn't be excused or propped up any more.


message 18: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha Thanks Peggy! I thought you said it quite well!

This is a particularly sad week to think about this book, isn't it?


message 19: by Peggy (new) - rated it 1 star

Peggy Alex wrote: "Thanks Peggy! I thought you said it quite well!

This is a particularly sad week to think about this book, isn't it?"


Yes, it is. Yes, it is.


message 20: by Mila (new) - rated it 5 stars

Mila Unfortunately, Gone with the Wind is still one of the most read and most loved books among Americans. The film is still the highest grossing of all time (adjusted for inflation). The film and the book are classics.

I find it vile, but there are things I like, or even love, about both the book and the movie. I don't think that's ever going to change.


message 21: by Roman (new)

Roman Cabay "Ah, can't you feel the breeze of a great society, once proud and great? Where everyone knew their place, and society was a haven for real Americans?"

No. No I can't.


message 22: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha High five!


Michelle Yes!! I couldn’t pinpoint exactly what I disliked about this book. Yes, it was racist. Yes, it was misogynistic, but I’ve loved books that have dealt with these issues. But after reading your review, I could pinpoint it. The clearly racist voice of the narrator bothered me too much. Racist characters and ideals I can deal with but for the author to be so racist and try to show/convince the reader why slavery/racism/misogyny is ok etc, was just too much for me. It was despicable. Also the glimpses of domestic abuse was ignored throughout.


message 24: by Teresa (new) - added it

Teresa The author is a very talented writer, but you’re right. This book is very racist. It’s quite horrifying. Some of the passages are downright shocking.


message 25: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha Thanks for dropping me a note, Michelle and Teresa! I'm glad I'm not the only person appalled by the racism in this book.


message 26: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha Thanks, Mimi! Believe it or not, I was surprised by this book. I'd seen the movie so I knew that was racist, but I...thought the book would be more nuanced? So many people call it a classic, it can't just be vitriolic racist trash, right?

Well. My bad.

I didn't really get into how problematic it was for its actual time, did I? There was so much to say, it's racist in so very many ways. I worked really hard on this review, because I deeply want to destroy this book forever. Picture me reading this bs for like two weeks, just underlining all the racist stuff. It was unpleasant. Also it didn't work, the book still exists, darn it.

Anyway, thanks for reminding me of this; I don't think the opening is as strong as it could be; I'm gonna try to tighten it up and then hope it gets a few more likes, because nothing would make me happier than if this was the top review for this hateful, shitty book.


message 27: by lucky little cat (last edited Nov 03, 2018 05:10PM) (new) - added it

lucky little cat God's nightgown, that's a great review! My favorite part: where you say books matter. Those quotes are repeatedly nauseatingly gobsmackingly astonishing, they're such a revelation. Thanks for including them.

And most damning is how popular this book was through most of the 20th century.


message 28: by Celina (new) - added it

Celina Wow. I read this book when I was 10 and I knew it wasn’t good but I didn’t realize just how vile it was. Thanks for the update.


message 29: by Laurie (new)

Laurie Holy shit, Alex. This review is a public service.


message 30: by Sasha (last edited Nov 04, 2018 01:25AM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha for pete's sake, of COURSE it's about feelings & personal reactions and what is wrong with their feelings and personal reactions, did they get broken?

gah

And thank you lucky little cat, Celina and Laurie! It is very nice to hear nice things considering how hard I worked on this and how incredibly unrewarding the work itself (of retyping racist stuff) was!


message 31: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha oh and no I don't...think I read that particular piece? But I have it bookmarked now!


message 32: by Kathleen (new)

Kathleen Fabulous review, Alex. Love your point about the time we spend in these book worlds--so important!


Joanne Fate I loved this book and yet totally agree with you on many levels. I think it's quite amazing that anyone would finish such a long book that they hated. I never even start anything that I think I might enjoy. I do a lot of books with lots of social and emotional angst, and this book has plenty of angst. It's important to understand its racist roots and her agenda. While I loved the book it's not the type of book I would search out again. Generally I'm more drawn to books that are anti-slavery.

I really appreciate your reviews, even when I have a different rating.


Patrick King Despite your very long review you didn’t understand this book. It was not slavery she missed. You should read it again preferably with an open mind.


message 35: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha Patrick wrote: "Despite your very long review you didn’t understand this book. It was not slavery she missed. You should read it again preferably with an open mind."

Yes it was, full stop.


message 36: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha Joanne, I appreciate your perspective! I'm glad we agree about what the book's about, anyway.

Mimi said it more elegantly, but to piggyback: I take books seriously, I take my identity as a reader seriously, and I want to have an informed opinion on books that some people consider "classics." And by the time I figured out how racist this book was, I wanted to murder it - so I kept reading in order to build my case, which I think I've done.


message 37: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha This dude's an idiot, I'm gonna block him. I can't be spending all day explaining reading to racists.


message 38: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha Mimi wrote: "not just a book about the past but an attempt to restate and reinforce a racialised past in the present."

Yes! Yeah, I totally agree on all points. It has a specific mission, and that mission is specifically racist.

I really tried to lay out a clear case for why this isn't a book where racist things happen but a racist book. That dude wasn't listening to what we're saying, and that's booooring.


message 39: by Savanah (new)

Savanah I have watched the movie, so I bet the book is good too.


message 40: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha not sure you totally followed my message here, Savanah


lucky little cat That's a kind answer, Alex. I know it's exhausting being the mature one. Hang in there.


Joanne Fate I don't know how to quote previous responses from my phone, but I think you and I both think about our books and choices. I notice that we have a venn diagram of books we respond to positively. I really appreciate your reviews, even when I have differing feelings about a book. Your in depth reviews are great and I love to read them to get another perspective. Of course with that venn diagram sometimes we closely agree!


message 43: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha lucky little cat wrote: "That's a kind answer, Alex. I know it's exhausting being the mature one. Hang in there."

You take that back, Cat. I have NEVER been the mature one and I resent that implication. *farting noises with armpits*


message 44: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha Joanne wrote: "I really appreciate your reviews, even when I have differing feelings about a book."

And I appreciate discussing different takes on books with rational people who are interested in discussions! High five, Joanne.


message 45: by Cecily (new)

Cecily I guess I'm unusual in that I've never seen the film or read the book, so I can't judge the fairness of your review, but it certainly reads as thoughtful and just.


Susanna - Censored by GoodReads I saw the movie for the first time on my 9th birthday (we had a good revival house in town) - I made my mommy take me home.


lucky little cat [snort ha snort] Fart jokes get me every single time. Sigh. Dignity, always dignity.

And at my house, we regularly quote Zombieland, where Woody Harrelson primly intones "Let me be the mature one." Which y'know, is really mature of us.


message 48: by Sasha (new) - rated it 1 star

Sasha Cecily, I read the books so you don't have to! ...and nine-year-old Susanna sees the movies, or at least the first parts.

Cat, oh man, Zombieland. That movie is great.


Susanna - Censored by GoodReads I have subsequently seen the entire movie, btw.


message 50: by lucky little cat (last edited Nov 16, 2018 12:55AM) (new) - added it

lucky little cat Well, there ya go. Old cultural touchstone, GWTW, new cultural touchstone Zombieland. Still not as diverse as we really need, so hey, something Zombieland II should aim for.


« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 13 14
back to top