Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's definitely about an offensive topic, but it does such a remarkable job illustrating the fact that the world isn't as neatly split into "good guys" and "bad guys" as we'd like to believe.
Who are the “good guys”?
The "good guys" are supposedly the yankees, while the "bad guys" are supposedly the confederates, but it's really not as simple as that. Humans are complex.
No, in this case, slavery is bad, anyone fighting to maintain is bad, glorifying slavery is bad. Not to mention all the other things it glorifies (violence against women, sexual assault etc). Might these things have been acceptable back then? Maybe, but that doesn't make less problematic.
So don’t read it because our delicate sensibilities can’t handle the “problematic” truth of history?
What else should we cut out? The Crusades, ww2, the French Revolution, the entire Roman Empire? Do you think it was all sunshine and roses?
I get your point, but the issue with GWTW is that many Americans still believe that its portrayal of the South is real and true. They believe that the enslaved were "better off" as slaves than as free. They believe that the enslaved loved their "masters" and were part of the family. They believed the enslaved were loyal and loving towards their enslavers and too simple to be anything but treated as children well into adulthood. They believe that black men are going to rape their white women and the women need to be protected. They believe the southern aristocracy was the height of success of our country and idealize that time period to the point they want it back.
That's why it's a problem. Nobody is actively wishing for a return to the time period of the crusades or Roman Empire or using those time periods to justify racism.
Look, I grew up LOVING both the movie and the book of GWTW. I reread it about five years ago and was embarrassed at how much I still loved the book. It has great characters, a great flow of plot, and an exciting setting. It really works as a book. But the actual content, overt glorifying of the confederacy, the idealized portrait of slavery, etc. all make it a book that is unfortunately still used by racist Americans to justify their incorrect and dangerous beliefs. So I just can't endorse it anymore.
No one, and I mean no one, believes this in 2024. Take your antiquated talking points back with you to the '90s.
Why is GWTW offensive? Because it is not aggressively moralizing and woke, plain and simple. From the culture warrior's point of view, every story touching on the antebellum South in any way must return to, again and again, the inhumanity of slavery. That must be the primary undercurrent of every story that features slaves. Because GWTW doesn't center slavery enough, it is not woke, and therefore is bad.
Would you say the same thing about a novel that romanticizes communism in the USSR and overlooks the gulags and the authoritarian nature of that society and the lack of individual freedom? Would you be okay with such a novel being read in schools without any discussion of its propagandist nature, with no woke analysis of how it centers a utopian view of what in reality was a cruel and horrific system? Be honest now if you would be fine with such a novel being ready purely as a work of art with no historical context allowed to be mentioned.
DP.
In history class? No. In English/literature? Absolutely.
Not every novel about the USSR needs to be about gulags. Not every novel about the American South needs to be about slavery.
Hope this helps clear it up for you.
Interpreting literature by forbidding discussion of context??? Wow. Would hate to be in your class.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's definitely about an offensive topic, but it does such a remarkable job illustrating the fact that the world isn't as neatly split into "good guys" and "bad guys" as we'd like to believe.
Who are the “good guys”?
The "good guys" are supposedly the yankees, while the "bad guys" are supposedly the confederates, but it's really not as simple as that. Humans are complex.
No, in this case, slavery is bad, anyone fighting to maintain is bad, glorifying slavery is bad. Not to mention all the other things it glorifies (violence against women, sexual assault etc). Might these things have been acceptable back then? Maybe, but that doesn't make less problematic.
So don’t read it because our delicate sensibilities can’t handle the “problematic” truth of history?
What else should we cut out? The Crusades, ww2, the French Revolution, the entire Roman Empire? Do you think it was all sunshine and roses?
I get your point, but the issue with GWTW is that many Americans still believe that its portrayal of the South is real and true. They believe that the enslaved were "better off" as slaves than as free. They believe that the enslaved loved their "masters" and were part of the family. They believed the enslaved were loyal and loving towards their enslavers and too simple to be anything but treated as children well into adulthood. They believe that black men are going to rape their white women and the women need to be protected. They believe the southern aristocracy was the height of success of our country and idealize that time period to the point they want it back.
That's why it's a problem. Nobody is actively wishing for a return to the time period of the crusades or Roman Empire or using those time periods to justify racism.
Look, I grew up LOVING both the movie and the book of GWTW. I reread it about five years ago and was embarrassed at how much I still loved the book. It has great characters, a great flow of plot, and an exciting setting. It really works as a book. But the actual content, overt glorifying of the confederacy, the idealized portrait of slavery, etc. all make it a book that is unfortunately still used by racist Americans to justify their incorrect and dangerous beliefs. So I just can't endorse it anymore.
No one, and I mean no one, believes this in 2024. Take your antiquated talking points back with you to the '90s.
Why is GWTW offensive? Because it is not aggressively moralizing and woke, plain and simple. From the culture warrior's point of view, every story touching on the antebellum South in any way must return to, again and again, the inhumanity of slavery. That must be the primary undercurrent of every story that features slaves. Because GWTW doesn't center slavery enough, it is not woke, and therefore is bad.
Would you say the same thing about a novel that romanticizes communism in the USSR and overlooks the gulags and the authoritarian nature of that society and the lack of individual freedom? Would you be okay with such a novel being read in schools without any discussion of its propagandist nature, with no woke analysis of how it centers a utopian view of what in reality was a cruel and horrific system? Be honest now if you would be fine with such a novel being ready purely as a work of art with no historical context allowed to be mentioned.
DP.
In history class? No. In English/literature? Absolutely.
Not every novel about the USSR needs to be about gulags. Not every novel about the American South needs to be about slavery.
Hope this helps clear it up for you.
Interpreting literature by forbidding discussion of context??? Wow. Would hate to be in your class.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's definitely about an offensive topic, but it does such a remarkable job illustrating the fact that the world isn't as neatly split into "good guys" and "bad guys" as we'd like to believe.
Who are the “good guys”?
The "good guys" are supposedly the yankees, while the "bad guys" are supposedly the confederates, but it's really not as simple as that. Humans are complex.
No, in this case, slavery is bad, anyone fighting to maintain is bad, glorifying slavery is bad. Not to mention all the other things it glorifies (violence against women, sexual assault etc). Might these things have been acceptable back then? Maybe, but that doesn't make less problematic.
So don’t read it because our delicate sensibilities can’t handle the “problematic” truth of history?
What else should we cut out? The Crusades, ww2, the French Revolution, the entire Roman Empire? Do you think it was all sunshine and roses?
I get your point, but the issue with GWTW is that many Americans still believe that its portrayal of the South is real and true. They believe that the enslaved were "better off" as slaves than as free. They believe that the enslaved loved their "masters" and were part of the family. They believed the enslaved were loyal and loving towards their enslavers and too simple to be anything but treated as children well into adulthood. They believe that black men are going to rape their white women and the women need to be protected. They believe the southern aristocracy was the height of success of our country and idealize that time period to the point they want it back.
That's why it's a problem. Nobody is actively wishing for a return to the time period of the crusades or Roman Empire or using those time periods to justify racism.
Look, I grew up LOVING both the movie and the book of GWTW. I reread it about five years ago and was embarrassed at how much I still loved the book. It has great characters, a great flow of plot, and an exciting setting. It really works as a book. But the actual content, overt glorifying of the confederacy, the idealized portrait of slavery, etc. all make it a book that is unfortunately still used by racist Americans to justify their incorrect and dangerous beliefs. So I just can't endorse it anymore.
No one, and I mean no one, believes this in 2024. Take your antiquated talking points back with you to the '90s.
Why is GWTW offensive? Because it is not aggressively moralizing and woke, plain and simple. From the culture warrior's point of view, every story touching on the antebellum South in any way must return to, again and again, the inhumanity of slavery. That must be the primary undercurrent of every story that features slaves. Because GWTW doesn't center slavery enough, it is not woke, and therefore is bad.
Would you say the same thing about a novel that romanticizes communism in the USSR and overlooks the gulags and the authoritarian nature of that society and the lack of individual freedom? Would you be okay with such a novel being read in schools without any discussion of its propagandist nature, with no woke analysis of how it centers a utopian view of what in reality was a cruel and horrific system? Be honest now if you would be fine with such a novel being ready purely as a work of art with no historical context allowed to be mentioned.
DP.
In history class? No. In English/literature? Absolutely.
Not every novel about the USSR needs to be about gulags. Not every novel about the American South needs to be about slavery.
Hope this helps clear it up for you.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's definitely about an offensive topic, but it does such a remarkable job illustrating the fact that the world isn't as neatly split into "good guys" and "bad guys" as we'd like to believe.
Who are the “good guys”?
The "good guys" are supposedly the yankees, while the "bad guys" are supposedly the confederates, but it's really not as simple as that. Humans are complex.
No, in this case, slavery is bad, anyone fighting to maintain is bad, glorifying slavery is bad. Not to mention all the other things it glorifies (violence against women, sexual assault etc). Might these things have been acceptable back then? Maybe, but that doesn't make less problematic.
So don’t read it because our delicate sensibilities can’t handle the “problematic” truth of history?
What else should we cut out? The Crusades, ww2, the French Revolution, the entire Roman Empire? Do you think it was all sunshine and roses?
I get your point, but the issue with GWTW is that many Americans still believe that its portrayal of the South is real and true. They believe that the enslaved were "better off" as slaves than as free. They believe that the enslaved loved their "masters" and were part of the family. They believed the enslaved were loyal and loving towards their enslavers and too simple to be anything but treated as children well into adulthood. They believe that black men are going to rape their white women and the women need to be protected. They believe the southern aristocracy was the height of success of our country and idealize that time period to the point they want it back.
That's why it's a problem. Nobody is actively wishing for a return to the time period of the crusades or Roman Empire or using those time periods to justify racism.
Look, I grew up LOVING both the movie and the book of GWTW. I reread it about five years ago and was embarrassed at how much I still loved the book. It has great characters, a great flow of plot, and an exciting setting. It really works as a book. But the actual content, overt glorifying of the confederacy, the idealized portrait of slavery, etc. all make it a book that is unfortunately still used by racist Americans to justify their incorrect and dangerous beliefs. So I just can't endorse it anymore.
No one, and I mean no one, believes this in 2024. Take your antiquated talking points back with you to the '90s.
Why is GWTW offensive? Because it is not aggressively moralizing and woke, plain and simple. From the culture warrior's point of view, every story touching on the antebellum South in any way must return to, again and again, the inhumanity of slavery. That must be the primary undercurrent of every story that features slaves. Because GWTW doesn't center slavery enough, it is not woke, and therefore is bad.
Would you say the same thing about a novel that romanticizes communism in the USSR and overlooks the gulags and the authoritarian nature of that society and the lack of individual freedom? Would you be okay with such a novel being read in schools without any discussion of its propagandist nature, with no woke analysis of how it centers a utopian view of what in reality was a cruel and horrific system? Be honest now if you would be fine with such a novel being ready purely as a work of art with no historical context allowed to be mentioned.
DP.
In history class? No. In English/literature? Absolutely.
Not every novel about the USSR needs to be about gulags. Not every novel about the American South needs to be about slavery.
Hope this helps clear it up for you.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's definitely about an offensive topic, but it does such a remarkable job illustrating the fact that the world isn't as neatly split into "good guys" and "bad guys" as we'd like to believe.
Who are the “good guys”?
The "good guys" are supposedly the yankees, while the "bad guys" are supposedly the confederates, but it's really not as simple as that. Humans are complex.
No, in this case, slavery is bad, anyone fighting to maintain is bad, glorifying slavery is bad. Not to mention all the other things it glorifies (violence against women, sexual assault etc). Might these things have been acceptable back then? Maybe, but that doesn't make less problematic.
So don’t read it because our delicate sensibilities can’t handle the “problematic” truth of history?
What else should we cut out? The Crusades, ww2, the French Revolution, the entire Roman Empire? Do you think it was all sunshine and roses?
I get your point, but the issue with GWTW is that many Americans still believe that its portrayal of the South is real and true. They believe that the enslaved were "better off" as slaves than as free. They believe that the enslaved loved their "masters" and were part of the family. They believed the enslaved were loyal and loving towards their enslavers and too simple to be anything but treated as children well into adulthood. They believe that black men are going to rape their white women and the women need to be protected. They believe the southern aristocracy was the height of success of our country and idealize that time period to the point they want it back.
That's why it's a problem. Nobody is actively wishing for a return to the time period of the crusades or Roman Empire or using those time periods to justify racism.
Look, I grew up LOVING both the movie and the book of GWTW. I reread it about five years ago and was embarrassed at how much I still loved the book. It has great characters, a great flow of plot, and an exciting setting. It really works as a book. But the actual content, overt glorifying of the confederacy, the idealized portrait of slavery, etc. all make it a book that is unfortunately still used by racist Americans to justify their incorrect and dangerous beliefs. So I just can't endorse it anymore.
No one, and I mean no one, believes this in 2024. Take your antiquated talking points back with you to the '90s.
Why is GWTW offensive? Because it is not aggressively moralizing and woke, plain and simple. From the culture warrior's point of view, every story touching on the antebellum South in any way must return to, again and again, the inhumanity of slavery. That must be the primary undercurrent of every story that features slaves. Because GWTW doesn't center slavery enough, it is not woke, and therefore is bad.
Would you say the same thing about a novel that romanticizes communism in the USSR and overlooks the gulags and the authoritarian nature of that society and the lack of individual freedom? Would you be okay with such a novel being read in schools without any discussion of its propagandist nature, with no woke analysis of how it centers a utopian view of what in reality was a cruel and horrific system? Be honest now if you would be fine with such a novel being ready purely as a work of art with no historical context allowed to be mentioned.
Anonymous wrote:Seriously? You know, in the South, there are still huge groups of white people who do debutante plantation parties when their daughters turn 16 or graduate high school? In big "Scarlett-style" hoop skirts and all. There are large swaths of people who still idolize this Southern Aristocracy era.
Search "antebellum party" to learn more.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's definitely about an offensive topic, but it does such a remarkable job illustrating the fact that the world isn't as neatly split into "good guys" and "bad guys" as we'd like to believe.
Who are the “good guys”?
The "good guys" are supposedly the yankees, while the "bad guys" are supposedly the confederates, but it's really not as simple as that. Humans are complex.
No, in this case, slavery is bad, anyone fighting to maintain is bad, glorifying slavery is bad. Not to mention all the other things it glorifies (violence against women, sexual assault etc). Might these things have been acceptable back then? Maybe, but that doesn't make less problematic.
So don’t read it because our delicate sensibilities can’t handle the “problematic” truth of history?
What else should we cut out? The Crusades, ww2, the French Revolution, the entire Roman Empire? Do you think it was all sunshine and roses?
I get your point, but the issue with GWTW is that many Americans still believe that its portrayal of the South is real and true. They believe that the enslaved were "better off" as slaves than as free. They believe that the enslaved loved their "masters" and were part of the family. They believed the enslaved were loyal and loving towards their enslavers and too simple to be anything but treated as children well into adulthood. They believe that black men are going to rape their white women and the women need to be protected. They believe the southern aristocracy was the height of success of our country and idealize that time period to the point they want it back.
That's why it's a problem. Nobody is actively wishing for a return to the time period of the crusades or Roman Empire or using those time periods to justify racism.
Look, I grew up LOVING both the movie and the book of GWTW. I reread it about five years ago and was embarrassed at how much I still loved the book. It has great characters, a great flow of plot, and an exciting setting. It really works as a book. But the actual content, overt glorifying of the confederacy, the idealized portrait of slavery, etc. all make it a book that is unfortunately still used by racist Americans to justify their incorrect and dangerous beliefs. So I just can't endorse it anymore.
No one, and I mean no one, believes this in 2024. Take your antiquated talking points back with you to the '90s.
Why is GWTW offensive? Because it is not aggressively moralizing and woke, plain and simple. From the culture warrior's point of view, every story touching on the antebellum South in any way must return to, again and again, the inhumanity of slavery. That must be the primary undercurrent of every story that features slaves. Because GWTW doesn't center slavery enough, it is not woke, and therefore is bad.
Anonymous wrote:Seriously? You know, in the South, there are still huge groups of white people who do debutante plantation parties when their daughters turn 16 or graduate high school? In big "Scarlett-style" hoop skirts and all. There are large swaths of people who still idolize this Southern Aristocracy era.
Search "antebellum party" to learn more.
Anonymous wrote:I think it can be a good book/movie to show your child/children what the unfortunate predominant thought process was at the time. But you need an educated adult to guide and frame it properly and to know whether your child is ready for this type of nuance. BUT: white children need to grow up learning about this. It is real and it was real. Maga folks will like to say, “We do not have racial anymore!@ but kids need to learn how to identify it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's definitely about an offensive topic, but it does such a remarkable job illustrating the fact that the world isn't as neatly split into "good guys" and "bad guys" as we'd like to believe.
Who are the “good guys”?
The "good guys" are supposedly the yankees, while the "bad guys" are supposedly the confederates, but it's really not as simple as that. Humans are complex.
No, in this case, slavery is bad, anyone fighting to maintain is bad, glorifying slavery is bad. Not to mention all the other things it glorifies (violence against women, sexual assault etc). Might these things have been acceptable back then? Maybe, but that doesn't make less problematic.
So don’t read it because our delicate sensibilities can’t handle the “problematic” truth of history?
What else should we cut out? The Crusades, ww2, the French Revolution, the entire Roman Empire? Do you think it was all sunshine and roses?
I get your point, but the issue with GWTW is that many Americans still believe that its portrayal of the South is real and true. They believe that the enslaved were "better off" as slaves than as free. They believe that the enslaved loved their "masters" and were part of the family. They believed the enslaved were loyal and loving towards their enslavers and too simple to be anything but treated as children well into adulthood. They believe that black men are going to rape their white women and the women need to be protected. They believe the southern aristocracy was the height of success of our country and idealize that time period to the point they want it back.
That's why it's a problem. Nobody is actively wishing for a return to the time period of the crusades or Roman Empire or using those time periods to justify racism.
Look, I grew up LOVING both the movie and the book of GWTW. I reread it about five years ago and was embarrassed at how much I still loved the book. It has great characters, a great flow of plot, and an exciting setting. It really works as a book. But the actual content, overt glorifying of the confederacy, the idealized portrait of slavery, etc. all make it a book that is unfortunately still used by racist Americans to justify their incorrect and dangerous beliefs. So I just can't endorse it anymore.
No one, and I mean no one, believes this in 2024. Take your antiquated talking points back with you to the '90s.
Why is GWTW offensive? Because it is not aggressively moralizing and woke, plain and simple. From the culture warrior's point of view, every story touching on the antebellum South in any way must return to, again and again, the inhumanity of slavery. That must be the primary undercurrent of every story that features slaves. Because GWTW doesn't center slavery enough, it is not woke, and therefore is bad.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's definitely about an offensive topic, but it does such a remarkable job illustrating the fact that the world isn't as neatly split into "good guys" and "bad guys" as we'd like to believe.
Who are the “good guys”?
The "good guys" are supposedly the yankees, while the "bad guys" are supposedly the confederates, but it's really not as simple as that. Humans are complex.
No, in this case, slavery is bad, anyone fighting to maintain is bad, glorifying slavery is bad. Not to mention all the other things it glorifies (violence against women, sexual assault etc). Might these things have been acceptable back then? Maybe, but that doesn't make less problematic.
So don’t read it because our delicate sensibilities can’t handle the “problematic” truth of history?
What else should we cut out? The Crusades, ww2, the French Revolution, the entire Roman Empire? Do you think it was all sunshine and roses?
I get your point, but the issue with GWTW is that many Americans still believe that its portrayal of the South is real and true. They believe that the enslaved were "better off" as slaves than as free. They believe that the enslaved loved their "masters" and were part of the family. They believed the enslaved were loyal and loving towards their enslavers and too simple to be anything but treated as children well into adulthood. They believe that black men are going to rape their white women and the women need to be protected. They believe the southern aristocracy was the height of success of our country and idealize that time period to the point they want it back.
That's why it's a problem. Nobody is actively wishing for a return to the time period of the crusades or Roman Empire or using those time periods to justify racism.
Look, I grew up LOVING both the movie and the book of GWTW. I reread it about five years ago and was embarrassed at how much I still loved the book. It has great characters, a great flow of plot, and an exciting setting. It really works as a book. But the actual content, overt glorifying of the confederacy, the idealized portrait of slavery, etc. all make it a book that is unfortunately still used by racist Americans to justify their incorrect and dangerous beliefs. So I just can't endorse it anymore.
Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it needs to be censored, but I do think it needs critical context, both before reading the book or watching the film.
I believe that AMC still airs the movie (over Thanksgiving?) but with an informative introduction. I hope that newer printings of the book come with a critical foreword.
It would be one thing if GWTW was told from a first-person narrative; it is not. It is told from an omniscient narrator. So it’s not Scarlett saying that watermelon and barbecue are “so dear to Negro hearts,” it is an omniscient narrator. When you consider that the omniscient narrator is racist, that says a lot about the author and about majority culture.
It would be an entirely different critical reading if it were literally just Scarlett’s perspective. But it’s not; the omniscient narrator is racist AF.