Last evening, Francesca crossed off the last item on her to-do list, scrubbed the kitchen counters as she does every night, took a bubble bath, and got into bed with Rhett Butler.
Life just does not get any better than this.
May 7, 2008
10 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Oooh now you’ve made me crave re-reading (for the fourth or fifth time!) Gone With the Wind.
Comment by VerseFameBeauty — May 7, 2008 @ 7:08 pm
I’m actually reading this right now for the very first time. Well, I tried it when I was 12, but I got bored to fast and just managed to pick it back up. I’m enjoying it very much. Scarlett drives me crazy half the time, but Rhett, Rhett is divine. :)
Comment by Rachael — May 8, 2008 @ 1:03 am
I just finished reading Gone with the Wind about a month ago. It was simply superb.
Comment by Joelle — May 8, 2008 @ 7:06 am
I loooooooooove this book. The first time I tried to read it, I couldn’t get through it…but then again, I was only about ten. I picked it up again a few years ago and found it utterly devastating, in a good way. I’ve never actually seen the film, so was entirely surprised by the ending. Is that weird?
Comment by Never teh Bride — May 8, 2008 @ 11:37 am
NtB!!! Never saw the film? That’s like saying you never saw Casablanca, or tasted champagne, or bought the excellent Manolo shoes!!! Get thee to NetFlix now! I read the book for the first time when I was 11 or 12. That’s when I knew there was a difference between intelligent and smart. I reread it at least once a decade along with the Lord of the Rings, Pride and Prejudice, and a few other books I probably would be laughed at about (Runaway Robot and The Forgotten Door, my first entry to scifi) and the Terry Prachett Disc World Series when I need a taste of the absurd. Get a bottle of good Cab, turn off the phone and computer, dim the lights and watch.
Comment by Jennie — May 8, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
I know, Jennie, I know :-) I’ll do it, I promise.
And hey, I’m a re-reader, too! My must re-read list looks JUST like your must re-read list. How funny is that?
Comment by Never teh Bride — May 12, 2008 @ 8:50 am
Does it bother you at all that the book depicts the South as being better before the Civil War and is proslavery? Geez. I normally agree with you all, but this book is pure trash.
Comment by Andrea — May 12, 2008 @ 7:40 pm
I always wonder about this question: do you have to jettison or suppress books/arts/movies that were racist because we are now (supposedly) enlightened away from it or do you have an obligation to read/watch (cringing the whole time) what was considered acceptable and normal to come face-to-face with it as part of a shared cultural history? I don’t know. I usually suggest the latter.
I do know that while this isn’t art, it is not specifically pro-slavery. It is racist and sexist and a bunch of other ists. Scarlett is not a nice girl, nor a reflective one. For somebody like Scarlett, slavery worked out just fine–it provided the labor that provided her family’s wealth that in turn provided her with leisure, dresses and baubles. I’ve only read a couple of diaries from women on plantations, but they showed a remarkable ignorance of/disregard for the slaves and brutality around them (just as, I suppose, many of us slide right on by homeless people not acknowledging their humanity or assuming we can’t do anything about their situation.) I’m not excusing that; I’m just pointing out that the book is told from Scarlett’s perspective–that of a spoiled, privileged, petted girl, whose life and family were devastated by the war. Rather than recognizing the potential justice of her situation, it all feels very random and unjust to her, and as a result I think Mitchell actually did a good job there with the character, of not making her into a contemporary read on the Civil War. She’s a tough, rigorously selfish and self-interested person–and those are her main qualities. And strangely enough, you find a good deal to like about her despite that.
Comment by Chaser — May 13, 2008 @ 10:25 am
We can’t and should not attempt to sanitize the world of the isms. Their appearance in the arts is critical in opening the door for real dialogue.
Whew—The discussion on the evils of pink is so much easier;)
Comment by Peaches — May 14, 2008 @ 1:57 pm
You don’t have to be a anti-racist superhero to notice that the book (and the author herself was pretty outspoken about this) is overtly white supremacist. It is one thing to like the book despite its flaws. It is another thing to recommend the book as great without even mentioning the flaws (in this day and age).
Huck Finn was written even earlier and is an outspoken anti-racist masterpiece. Time of writing is no excuse.
I’m not trying to demonize anyone, but I think this was a bad call.
Comment by Andrea — May 15, 2008 @ 3:14 pm