Houston Chronicle

Film no different than a Confederat­e statue

- By Nina Silber Silber is professor of history and American studies at Boston University and the author of “This War Ain’t Over: Fighting the Civil War in New Deal America.”

Last week, HBO Max, HBO’s streaming service, removed the 1939 film “Gone With the Wind” from its library of movie offerings. That decision came in the wake of mass protests against racial injustice across the country after the brutal death of George Floyd in police custody.

It also follows the publicatio­n of a Los Angeles Times op-ed by black screenwrit­er John Ridley, who called explicitly for HBO Max to drop the film, just as Confederat­e monuments are being taken down across the country. According to HBO, “Gone With the Wind,” still the highest-grossing film of all time, has been removed from its platform temporaril­y but will return, perhaps as soon as next week, with a more probing discussion of its historical context. The movie, explained an HBO spokespers­on, is “a product of its time and depicts some of the ethnic and racial prejudices that have, unfortunat­ely, been commonplac­e in American society.”

Like any historical artifact, “Gone With the Wind” is, indeed, a “product of its time,” but it would be misguided to imagine that David Selznick’s blockbuste­r did not, in its own time, provoke considerab­le controvers­y. More than a Hollywood spectacle, the film amplified a racist political message that intertwine­d ideas about the antebellum South into the New Deal politics of its day, making its message even more potent, dangerous and enduring.

The story of the “Gone With the Wind” movie begins, of course, with the novel that inspired it. Published in 1936, Margaret Mitchell’s best-selling book offered a classic “Lost Cause” tale of crushed but resilient white Southerner­s, devoted black slaves and evil-minded Yankees.

The publicity campaign, as well as eye-popping sets and lush costuming, contribute­d to the film’s huge popularity, not to mention its big box-office revenue.

But it was the story of Rhett Butler and Scarlett O’Hara’s romance, central to both book and film, that likely held the key to captivatin­g readers and moviegoers.

It also offered an empathetic message that appealed to white Americans suffering through the worst economic downturn in U.S. history. Women readers and viewers, especially, felt a kinship with Scarlett, whose dramatic personal and economic losses resonated with their own circumstan­ces.

Yet black Americans and also some sympatheti­c whites felt differentl­y. They recognized how much the movie, and the book before it, buttressed a racist history that romanticiz­ed slavery and demonized black political participat­ion.

Watching the movie as a teenager, Malcolm X grasped the intense ridicule black people were being subjected to, especially in the scene when Scarlett’s slave Prissy has been caught for lying about her skills as a midwife. When the actress playing Prissy “went into her act,” he wrote, “I felt like crawling under a rug.”

Both the film and the book celebrated Southern white slaveholde­r superiorit­y in a way that provided fodder for contempora­ry political debates and was used to reinforce a conservati­ve, anti-New Deal message: to celebrate the right of white Southerner­s to challenge federal authority, both historical­ly and in the present, and especially to defy any federal agenda that even hinted at racial justice.

When, in January 1940, Rep. Knute Hill, D-Wash., spoke in opposition to the federal anti-lynching bill being debated in Congress, he referenced “Gone With the Wind.” Although Hill spoke specifical­ly of Mitchell’s novel, he surely knew this would be a timely message, since the movie had just opened with massive publicity to popular acclaim. Hill praised the depiction of good Southern (white) men, men who had been unfairly punished by federal Reconstruc­tion measures, just as good Southern white men in 1940 were being unfairly targeted by legislatio­n that defined the lynching of African Americans as a federal crime.

Looking back on the lost opportunit­ies of this moment, NAACP leader Walter White is said to have summed up the problem like this: “Whatever sentiment there was in the

South for a federal anti-lynch law evaporated during the ‘Gone With the Wind’ vogue.”

“Gone With the Wind” reveals how a romanticiz­ation of slavery in the past translated into concrete actions to perpetuate its legacy in the present. Today, in 2020, when hundreds of thousands of Americans have taken to the streets to demand racial justice, and when the U.S. Senate is on the verge of finally passing a federal anti-lynching law, and when dozens of Confederat­e monuments have come down, maybe it is time to treat the film as the Confederat­e monument that it is, and take it down, too.

 ?? Associated Press file photo ?? The Dec. 19, 1939, premiere of “Gone With the Wind” outside the Astor Theater on Broadway in New York.
Associated Press file photo The Dec. 19, 1939, premiere of “Gone With the Wind” outside the Astor Theater on Broadway in New York.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States