Frankly my dear... I DO give a damn
Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 9:37PM by Seán McGovern
With the recent news of Ed Skrein's departure from Hellboy, cinema goers as well as actors are becoming increasingly aware of the sensitivities of depicting race on screen. For 34 years the Orpheum theatre in Tennesse has shown Gone With the Wind in its summer programme. Screening the evening of August 11, just before the racist violence in Charlottesville, the theatre received numerous complaints of screening a work with highly romanticised visions of the Old South, and black characters who exist without any acknowledgement that they are slaves.
The Orpheum has decided to forego screening the film in 2018...
“The recent screening of Gone With the Wind at the Orpheum on Friday, Aug. 11, 2017, generated numerous comments,” Brett Batterson, of the Orpheum Theatre Group said in a statement to the New York Times. “The Orpheum carefully reviewed all of them. As an organization whose stated mission is to ‘entertain, educate and enlighten the communities it serves,’ the Orpheum cannot show a film that is insensitive to a large segment of its local population.”
Naturally the decision by the organisation generated different responses, with many applauding their decision and others claiming it as censorship. The legitimate debate surrounding GWTW is how its deeply problematic elements are handled when considering that it is still the highest grossing film in history (when adjusted for inflation) and boasts one of the greatest female performances of all time. One supporter of the Orpheum's choice to pull the film remarked that "those angered can find other ways to watch the film while remaining supporters of your important and unique business.”
While contemporary audiences are much better at revising our understanding of depictions of race in popular film (The Searchers, Breakfast at Tiffany's just two examples), there is already a historical precedent of films literally being revised and resissued. Take for instance the inclusion of "Sunflower" in Fantasia (1940). The character of the small black centaur, presented completely antithetically to the radiant white centaurs was completely erased for the 1960 re-release and has been completely excised today. The problem with GWTW is that it's not a matter of a few scenes, but a problematic romanticisation that cannot be managed by a quick re-edit.
There are many more examples even from the Disney vault that invite our attention - how many more films over the last 100 years need the same revaluation?
Reader Comments (36)
Censorship of any kind is dangerous. Films and all art forms are products of their time, and audiences are sophisticated enough to look back and appreciate that we live in a different time with different viewpoints. 'Look at how far we've come' is the natural response. Without comparison, how can we ever see how far we've come?
That Fantastic comparison sets a disturbing precedent.
*Fantasia
It almost reminds me of the #ThisIsNotUs hashtag that people were sharing after Charlottesville. Yes, I get that the main reason for it is to disavow ourselves from those despicable people, but it's also a lie. All of it IS us. The US is a damn racist place. It was racist then and it's racist now and people need to LEARN ABOUT THIS, OWN IT, and FIX IT. You can't do the latter without doing the first two.
So in this way, this censorship is a bit disturbing. Show it. Know about it. Find out why it's problematic. Learn from it.
@BillyBob Unfortunately I think you give way too much credit to people out there.
I think it was the right decision. The film is not being destroyed, altered, or hidden away. Something Disney *has* done and that I'd argue against. Show it, own up to it and be aware of the nasty depictions of race in their films over the years.
But learning, understanding and appreciating history through art all happens in different forms, moments and platforms. For a screening meant to be about the enjoyment of the community, in this current political climate it was the right call to pull the film.
And it doesn't constitute censorship.
The biggest unbeatable box office, a quality movie with a great cast of female performers and a female leader - too good for the world of today. This stupid world doesn't deserve a masterpiece like Gone With The Wind and artists like Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable. Anyway always will be the biggest box office and the biggest thing pop culture ever did - for lovers and haters.
I think one can show Gone with the wind while still being educated. I saw Die Große Liebe (1942) and before the film there was a little bit of talk about the propaganda machine of the Third Reich etc. So that people could contextualize it. With that said, probably not many uneducated in the issues of Nazi Germany were in attendance since it was a small screening at Cinemateket.
But still I think if a problematic film is gonna be shown one can turn it into an educatible moment for the audience so that we can be aware of the problematic effects of the film while still enjoying it for some parts.
I do think that film stands as a product and reflection of the time it was made. These depictions, while horrifying, give us a glimpse at race relations in 1939 and speaks volumes of how people then (and still now) glorify a time that was so frightening. "Gone with the Wind" remains a classic that still houses one of the great female performances of our time. It is also highly offensive and understandably has been removed from the Orpheum's lineup in 2018.
It's not censorship for a private organization to choose to not show a particular film. "Gone with the Wind" can easily be seen by anyone wishing to see it. Like most of our history, there are shameful elements that we should not forget, but move forward from. This is why we have museums, to give us a glimpse of what happened in history, both good and bad. "Gone with the Wind" is one such historic piece. It deserves to be seen and examined, but also should be talked about in reference to the detrimental ways it deals with its treatment of the South and slavery.
Gone With the Wind is such an absolute masterpiece that it emphasizes the unbelievable stupidity of the decision.
So every single classic Hollywood film where there is a slave shall never be screened or aired again? Or even films that were contemporary at the time with African Americans portraying maids will also be excluded? Poor Oscar-winner Hattie MacDaniel. Her WHOLE filmography will disappear, since in every single film or TV show she made she was a maid or a slight variation of a maid. Folks! It was another time! What’s more! These films are reminders of how horrible things were back then and a wake-up call so that such insensitivity and type-casting never happen again, and there’s no more cases of an Oscar so White!
I disagree with this. If you are offended by the film - just don't go see it. What next? book burning?
I find pulling the film itself from being seen in a specific movie theater is fine as long as it was of the theater's own volition, considering the current climate the business probably didn't want to worry about the press and the backlash or the risk.
What Disney did, however, makes me very uncomfortable. Film needs to be of a time-and-place. You can contextualize something like this, but art that is constantly revised takes away the original intent, and changing what film historians and audiences can look at and learn from a specific artwork crosses over into censorship. By all means, put a disclaimer in front of the film that's clearly separate from the work, but completely changing a movie like Fantasia (or never releasing it even for academic reasons like Song of the South) feels wrong.
I agree with Steve_Man.
And I'm sure all of you who are so mad about them not showing such an "educational" film will do just fine by watching the movie on the various formats in which it is widely available.
@Marcos - after more than half a century this film has remained a touchstone and has always been widely available and hasn't done anything to curve he advent of something like Oscars So White. Give me a break.
If you're offended by the film, don't watch it.
However characters are portrayed - that's a product of the times.
Next, somebody will be hurt by images shown in 'The Wizard Of Oz' or hidden 'symbolism' and that will be destroyed. Slippery slope indeed...
And to be clear, I do agree that what Disney does to their films is wrong. They're clearly trying to absolve themselves of any wrongdoing and I find that dangerous. Do I think GWTW should be locked away and never revisited? No, absolutely not. Am I ok with instances such as the one detailed in this post? Absolutely. It's a gesture of respect AND solidarity and since that seems to be the goal of the event, why not show something a little less divisive, especially in the climate we're living in today.
Let's consign all films that were made before 2004 to a museum where they belong. /Sarcasm
I just want to point out that there is an important distinction between say, GWTW and The Women, both of which are from 1939 and both star Butterfly McQueen.
1. In GWTW Prissy is a slave. She is the property of the O'Haras. No reference is made to them being more than loyal servants because the film is a heavily romanticised version of the Old South.
2. In The Women, McQueen is the poorly treated sales assistant to Joan Crawford.
3.Both are racial stereotypes, both mistreated. But in one she is a SLAVE and the other she is not, however she is presented the same in each role.
GWTW's problem is its huge romanticism of a racist society. It may be a brilliant piece of filmmaking but so was The Birth of a Nation - we need to look at both differently now.
Since Hollywood is completely bankrupt on original material and it's continuous rebooting, re-imaging, remaking projects - why not just remake this classic to 'right the wrongs' and satisfy the feelings of those offended by this film? Get Spike Lee or Ava Duvarney to tell it from their perspective and rewrite history to make everyone feel better? Prissy can now be Lupita N'yongo, a Harvard educated OB-GYN 'assistant' who does in fact know plenty about 'childbirth.' Octavia Spencer is back as the no-nonsense 'Ma'am' who has to straighten the O'Hara family around. Morgan Freeman as 'wise' Sam and a sprinkling of 'Glory' type soldiers winning the Civil War. All traces of the Democratic Party actually opposing the end of slavery will now be reversed. No Confederate flags, lots of sex, what a world.
GWTW has much to offer compared to the garbage that's offered today as 'classic' entertainment. Will people be passionate about Argo, Moonlight, 12 Years a Slave, Spotlight, Birdman, A Beautiful Mind or The King's Speech ten years from now, let alone 80 years from today?
GWTW is the standard for cinematography, adapted writing, costumes, editing, special effects, sound effects and acting on any level. What is was able to accomplish by putting it together in 1938-1939 should be want every movie lover appreciates. You care able every character in this film and what happens to them. I can't say the same thing for modern storytelling. If audiences want to stay aware from this piece of art - you don't know what you're missing.
i too think it's a slippery slope -- i think ignoring the past is a really terrible way to live in the present but for a private theater to opt out at this juncture doesn't seem like a bad call.
But the censorship so as not to offend is dangerous for society. SONG OF THE SOUTH should be available. It was given an honorary Oscar ferchrissakes. We need to understand what people valued, what people thought, at different junctures in history not just so that we can see progress but that we can remind ourselves of history. If you dont learn from the past you're doomed to repeat the same mistakes.
Interesting that there is so much controversy about GWTW and not one mention (as far as I can tell) of its romaniticized view of rape. I've never been able to see it as a great film because of it.
TOM, are you big mad or little mad? #askingforafriend
The call made was the right one. "Gone With the Wind" is offensive as fuck and should be reprimanded for it in light of its supposed "greatness." They should have done this sooner.
This is not censorship! This isn't censorship to "not offend some people." They're not hiding the movie. They're not destroying it. They're not jailing or punishing people for the movie. The movie is still wideeeeeeely, widely available in so many different formats. All they're doing is they are not giving it this specific platform, *that* is the right call. They're showing instead other movies that are more respectful and inclusive to the whole community, so that all members can participate and enjoy this.
We can still watch the movie, analyze it and understand what it means and its value as a historical document. Just not on this particular occasion and showing. With all due respect, the comments on this post, including the one from Nathaniel, are showing exactly why it was the right decision. Unlike what BillyBob said, audiences are not sophisticated enough to have a frank discussion about race. In general or in its influence on art.
Gone With The Wind is closer in time to the Civil War than it is to today. Of course things aren't the same as they were in 1939, let alone 1865.
I'd feel more comfortable if they had a discussion about the movie and why people are upset about it. That happened when I saw Birth of a Nation.
You can see Gone With The Wind on TV anytime you want and it is not presented with any discussion of the historical context.
I think this theater missed an opportunity to enlighten their audience.
@ Dg - "Gone With the Wind is such an absolute masterpiece that it emphasizes the unbelievable stupidity of the decision." Absolutely and I am giving full quote because it bears repeating.
If these intellectually bankrupt demagogues are going after something as undeniable as Gone with the Wind, there is no hope for anything else.
I think there's a scary and glaring strand of white privilege in these "supremacy of art" arguments being made. The moment someone decides to cease celebrating or recognizing problematic "art" - ESPECIALLY if it's racially problematic - white folks leap up and scream "censorship"!
Not recognizing or celebrating art is not the same as censoring it. Continuing to recognize something as "great art" without contextualizing or acknowledging its racially/sexually/etc. problematic components is maintaining systems of oppression. Period. We don't get the luxury of just enjoying great art in a vacuum.
I liked GWTW. It is a veritable classic. But it needs to be critiqued (just like a Birth of a Nation) if folks are going to have public screenings. There are TOO MANY folks out here (as witnessed over the last few weeks) who don't understand that the romanticized South was a figment of the imagination of white Southerners and their rewriting of their own history. Watching a movie like this without even that basic understanding just adds to the problem.
Why is GWTW considered one of the greatest films of all time? Not only because of the spectacle, and the brilliant performances of Vivien, Clark, Hattie, and Olivia, but because it celebrates white supremacy and patriarchy. So a public screening that doesn't address/explore what it represents and the impact those representations have had on filmmaking and the culture is a tacit endorsement of those oppressive/repressive systems. The Orpheum (finally) made the right call.
Some participants on here insist audiences are not sophisticated enough to judge a film as a product of its time, but that's a rather snobbish viewpoint if you ask me. Everyone takes something differently from art - that's the point! Nobody who wasn't an appalling racist would watch Gone with the Wind and think that the racial overtones are anything but a product of a bygone era.
By restricting or obstructing through censorship, you are taking away an individual's ability to come to their own conclusions. And that is important in a progressive society. You obscure the 'bad stuff' and people don't learn from past mistakes.
If someone has a different viewpoint, they have a different viewpoint. That is their perogative, but censoring/banning something that is objectively a historical artifact won't change their opinion, nor will it ever lead to progress. On the contrary, it hinders it.
What next? Banning Dickens because of his depiction of Jews, or taking Shakespeare off the syllabus because Macbeth fails the Bechdel test? Censorship stinks in whatever capacity or form it takes.
Censorship is wrong! If you don't agree with a work of art do not pay money to see it.
By the way, KBJr, I agree entirely with your points about the necessity of critique for a film like Gone with the Wind, especially in the current climate. It's a good point well made, and should apply to all films that have problematic elements.
But in my opinion you shit all over your perfectly valid argument by attempting to silence everybody with your holier than thou opening gambit.
"Those who forget the past..."
GWTW is my all-time favorite movie, and I've seen it dozens of times, but I'm okay with its not being shown here, especially now. Some previous commenters have said that audiences will be able to watch it and marvel at how far we've come, but I think GWTW goes to great pains to obscure that. It's worse than other movies featuring slavery precisely because it softens the issue so much. The white people here are all caring, gentle, and paternalistic, and the people they have enslaved all care for them like a family. It puts a filter and soft lighting over the brutality and the injustice, making it seem not so bad.
That's exactly the same thing that's happened with the Confederate imagery. People have tried to soften the realities with words like heritage and history. People don't look at a statue of Robert E Lee gleaming on a horse in a public square and think about how he led a rebellion against the US because he and his compatriots wanted to keep other people as slaves. That's trying to keep the good stuff and ignore the bad, but you can't separate them. As much as I love GWTW for all the reasons mentioned above, it also clearly does that.
Funnily enough, I think the themes of the story would really lend themselves to exploring slavery more fully. It's all about the clash between old and new: the old is beautiful and easy and gentle (if you're on top of the heap), and the new is scary and dangerous and course, but at the same time, it presents the new and the future as inevitable because the old is too fragile to survive. Just look at how nice, sweet, weak Mellie barely survives her first childbirth and [80-yr old spoiler alert] doesn't survive the second, but Scarlett is energetic, and pops out kids all the time (in the book she has four). Having that old system balance precariously on top of the system of slavery shows how fragile and doomed it is. I would be horrified if someone remade GWTW, but if someone did, there's a lot of fruitful ground there to till (if only you couldn't tell a lady by her hands...).
These are the same liberals that don't know the meaning of context and subtext, ignore history and hate "old movies". They tryed to combat Donald Trump - with the "help" of the press, media and Hollywood - and failed, actually, helping to elect him. The way things are going, frankly, I can see more four years. You have to "combat and resist" the hate and prejudice, but with intelligence. "Heart", "compassion" and "empathy" are not enough. The viewing of a movie like Gone With The Wind is more important now than ever because of the controversies it brings - according to the era. About history, context, minorities and the world of today. And also because of the masterpiece it is. Some are only interested in the movie for what it has of "frivolous": the protagonist's dresses, her fight to survive the war and her love life. There's nothing wrong with that. Or the artistic achievement: cinematography, script, edition, soundtrack, etc. And the incredible work of the cast. It's sad that Hollywood can't make a mix of entertainment, history and art like Gone With The Wind anymore. They don't even try.
Does anyone else felt something like this was inevitable? That is why I am worried about this, one theatre is nothing if it's their choice but I feel it can be a beginning of people not being able to publicly love Gone With the Wind anymore and that makes me sad since I love the film. But it's hard to comment as non American even if I don't think there is really an issue from a film pere stove since the story is told heavily form Scatlett's perspective. I think the fact it isn't addressed actually makes you able to see how many of this era could really ignore the issues if they were self centered enough and just spend time with house slaves even if they were not compeletely terrible people.
Hans, I would love a pleated version of the story maybe in a tv format that exampands on the slaves (the material from the novel that was left out and new things). Maybe a sequel would be fitting if someone could make main story work at the same time as making the slaves main characters. But it's never going to happen. I think there was one book form Prissy's perspective written but I heard it was terrible. Btw Hans, Scarlett has 3 kids not 4.
The "GWTW" sequel, "Scarlett," aired in 1994 as a TV miniseries starring Joanne Whalley and Timothy Dalton. I kinda liked it, FWIW.
The other book you mentioned, "The Wind Done Gone," isn't from Prissy's perspective, but another slave (Cynara) who is the child of Mammy and Scarlett's father. Yes, it's wretched.
I have been discussing this at length on Facebook and I Have Thoughts.
First, I looked into this theater. This is a "classic" series that showed 13 films, all popular crowd-pleasers. So there's (a) no educational context, (b) no pretensions about "art", and (c) plenty of great replacements. They're showing Rocky Horror, Dirty Harry, Willy Wonka, and the Maltese Falcon. They're not showing Birth of a Nation or other controversial but historically significant films. So removing it seems about on-brand.
Second, tt's not censorship. Fantasia is definitely self-censorship by Disney in that the original product is made unavailable. Government suppression is censorship. This is a commercial business making a commercial decision. The theater is in town with a huge black population and showing a classic that offends a large portion of its audience isn't good business.
Third, the offensiveness of the film is not because people owned slaves, but because GWTW is a product of the same Jim Crow sensibility as the monuments in Charlottesville and elsewhere. The monuments, as well as GWTW, were a romanticization of the antebellum South and the "Lost Cause" that is, in fact, ahistorical. It's racist revisionism.
Fourth, it's a mistake to think this is new, a product of recent "political correctness." Complaints about GWTW's happy slaves and benevolent masters, it's wonderful KKK riding to the rescue, have existed for decades.
Finally, the whole thing is complicated by the exceptional feminism of Scarlett O'Hara as a character. For white women, she represented a powerful rebellion against gender roles.
Gone With The Wind - book and movie - too big to be destroyed. As its protagonist, will survive and look at all this from the top.