Vom Winde verweht (1936)

I was extremely surprised by how much I loved this book. Far more detailed and nuanced than the movie, it gives a fascinating insight into the culture of the Old South.

Scarlett is more poignant in the novel than in the movie because here we can see and understand the roots of her lifelong drive not just for security, but to be recognized as "a lady." Alas, she never quite understands that it's not money that earns that status in the eyes of others but the kind of behavior demonstrated by her own mother and Melanie.

I've re-read this book several times and probably should do so again. ( )

What a fantastic novel. I can't believe I hadn't read this before now! I don't know how she did it, but Margaret Mitchell managed to write in a simple, easy-to-read manner (no thick, plodding prose), but at the same time really delve into the deep, complication of human relationships. And the civil war is like a character in itself - a finely-woven tapestry laid out behind the characters dancing in front of it. And to make us care what happens to, and look forward to finding out what happens to the so-very-spoiled Scarlett O'Hara, is quite an incredible feat. I can't believe how engaged I was in this book (I read A LOT) and sadly realize it may be years, even decades, before I read another book that sweeps me away like this one did.
(P.S. I watched the movie after I finished the book, and they did a decent job, but even in almost four hours of film, they cannot do it justice. Don't settle for the movie - read the book!) ( )

Holy crap, what a book. A great history lesson, a novel of love, hate, betrayal, and loss. Set before, during, and after the (not-so) Civil War, filled with memorable characters, this great novel, like any great story, draws you in and doesn't let go. I cared about these characters, even Scarlett O'Hara, whose selfish ass I was waiting for someone to kick. This is one of the great novels of 20th-century literature. Read it. Now. You'll thank me later. ( )

Reading this classic was never my intention, as I saw the movie, knew the story, and was a bit put off by so many pages. For some reason I decided to give it a try, though I hardly ever read books after I've seen the movie. This time, I'm glad I did.

What impressed me the most was all the knowledge I picked up about both the Civil War itself, and the Reconstruction period, things I hadn't known before (like certain battles and generals' names) and just never bothered to find out about. To me, this is where you separate the true historical romance novel from the false ones, that emphasize the romance and pay scant attention to the history. GWTW gives real life history prominence over the fictional stories of Scarlett, Rhett, Ashley Melanie and all the rest. It was also written so well that I finished the book a lot faster than I thought possible; I thought I'd be plodding along, letting anything else distract me, but that sure didn't happen.

Reading the descriptions of the soldiers going off to war made me feel like I time travelled, they were so vivid. Equally vivid were the scenes of them returning to their homes, some having to walk miles, others taken to makeshift hospitals that were all ready overcrowded, with overworked doctors far outnumbered, nearly overwhelmed by all the suffering and death. There was a stark contrast between the eager idealism at the start and the stark reality at the end. So many lives lost, or saved at too high a price, falling victim in the fight to preserve a way of life whose time had passed. Like Rhett Butler told Scarlett, the south was dying and that was long overdue.

No matter whose side you're on, war is definitely HELL.

If you didn't know from the start, it would soon become obvious that the book was written by a southerner, as the "Yankees" are the bad guys here, especially during reconstruction; they're seen as selfish and evil, taking terrible advantage of the downtrodden southerners who lost everything. While I've no doubt that was true in some cases, I don't believe it was nearly as extensive as she portrays.

Many people reading this will no doubt be offended by the racism (it got to me quite a bit) but I suggest you do as I did and accept it as an accurate portrayal of the times, where many a southerner talked of their "darkies" as children who needed to be cared for, and the plantation was the best place for them. (I've read a lot of biographies, and discovered that Martha Washington, for example, felt that way.) There were other examples of this type of thinking, but they have to be looked at with the right perspective.

It surprised me to learn that there was a sort of hierarchy among slaves; the ones who worked in the house considered themselves better than the field slaves. It also surprised me to hear them refer to themselves using the "N" word, but I guess everyone used it in those days.

Ms. Mitchell tries a few redeeming tactics, as well, like when she has a northern woman balk at the idea of getting a black woman to nurse her baby, preferring an Irish woman, instead. This was her way of stating that northerners had their prejudices, too, and weren't all that terrific toward African Americans, despite fighting a war for their freedom. She also had a former slave travel north, and then return to the south, because he found life there wasn't what he expected. (I think that's stretching it a bit. I doubt a black man with no family ties to the south would ever choose to return there.) This was her way of saying the south wasn't so bad , after all. To each his own opinion, however misguided.

Having seen a documentary on the first black congressmen, I have to take umbrage with Ms. Mitchell's depiction of them as uneducated buffoons, who voted the way white Democrats told them to, and spent their time in Congress eating lunch rather than paying attention to the proceedings. This was not a reflection of the times, this was her own opinion, which shows she did no research on the way this really was, despite writing what was an extensively researched book in other respects.

That takes care of the history, now for the romance. For most of the novel, Scarlett has a romantic obsession for Ashley Wilkes, who she believes is the only man for her, despite having more suitors than any young woman in Atlanta. Her feelings motivate many of her actions, like when she marries Charlie Hamilton a young man she cares nothing for, just to get back at Ashley for marrying Melanie, then ends up a young widow with a child she didn't want. She spends most of the novel despising Melanie (Charlie's sister) and not appreciating her kindness and friendship until it's too late. She doesn't realize (again, until too late) that Rhett Butler is the right man for her, instead she marries him for the security his money can give her and because she thinks it might be fun. For most of their marriage, she keeps longing for Ashley, or for the man she thinks he is. In reality, he's a man who's lost without his former way of life, and can't seem to make a new one for himself. He's a dreamer, whereas Scarlett, like Rhett, was a survivor, who takes things as they are, even though they're not what she wants them to be. She and Ashley would never have worked, they'd have ended up miserable, but she kept those blinders on way too long.

A lot of people no doubt object to the scene where Rhett carries Scarlett upstairs and apparently rapes her. I think they're getting this mixed up with those horrible bodice ripper tales from the 70's, where rape was a recreational activity, and women all too often passive participants. Since the days of exploiting every little detail had not yet arrived when GWTW was published, what actually happened in that bedroom is mostly left to the imagination, and Scarlett didn't appear to be a rape victim the next morning. I'm guessing this was more one of those "forced seductions", brought about by the hurt, anger and frustration Rhett had felt for way too long. It may be fashionable these days to blame men for everything, but I've always been a nonconformist, and in this case, I couldn't help feeling sorry for Rhett, who had loved Scarlett for so long, and got no love in return. She still couldn't let go of Ashley, wished he were in Rhett's place, and even thought of him when she was in bed with Rhett. If that wasn't bad enough, she tells him she wants separate bedrooms, ostensibly because she didn't want anymore children, but really because she felt by sleeping with him she was being disloyal to Ashley, whose marriage to Melanie was platonic, due to her fragile health. What a situation! And when people start gossiping about Scarlett and Ashley, it's no wonder Rhett let it all get the better of him. I don't think anyone would blame him for finding comfort in an affair with Belle Watling, either. Also, the scene where he pours out his heart to Melanie about his love for Scarlett, then cries in her arms, makes you want to run for the tissue box. This is one novel where the woman is the jerk.

But Scarlett was no jerk when it came to business, as, in a time when women - particularly southern women - were supposed to be confined to domesticity, Scarlett owned and operated a lumber mill and make a real success of it. She wasn't always scrupulous about it, but neither was anyone else in business, except her second husband, Frank Kennedy, and that got him nowhere. I liked reading about Scarlett's business acumen, as well as all the ways she managed to survive during the war, having no choice but to put her southern belle past behind her and become a different person.

One way I found the movie more effective is at the ending, where Clark Gable's "Frankly my dear, O don't give a damn" is short and to the point, whereas in the novel Rhett gets a bit more wordy before the last line, and there's no "frankly", which I found I missed, silly as that may sound. His too many words took away the impact.

There's one point toward the end, where Scarlett finally got everything in perspective (sadly, right after Melanie's death) and wants nothing more than to rush home to Rhett and declare her newly discovered love. If M.M. wanted the usual happy ending, she could have ended it right there, and let her reading audience picture the loving reunion in their minds. But, since she knew - as will anyone who reads this - that this was one book where a happy ending would be a mistake, she continues on to the well known conclusion.

All in all, I'm glad I read it. ( )

As usual, a better story than the movie.

I read when I first moved to Charleston because it seemed appropriate at the time. Part of what made it fun for me was knowing some of the geography.

I'm glad I read it but it isn't one I'll go back to. In spite of the topic ans setting, it wasn't quite a bodice ripper (or burning plantation novel, as my husband calls them), but close enough that one rad is enough for me.



( )