Should I read Gone with the Wind?

[Skadi]

I'm considering reading Gone with the Wind as part of my attempt to be more well read in the classics. It's a fairly important book, having won a Pulitzer Prize and often hailed as "the American War and Peace."

 

At 980 page long, you could bludgeon someone to death with this book! With smaller titles, I can slog through it and move on to the next thing on my list fairly quickly, but not with something this long. We're talking a huge commitment in time, since I could be reading two or three other books in its place instead. So my question is, for those of you who have read it, is it worth it? Would you recommend it? Or was it tedious enough that you tell people to just watch the movie? :bigear:

[Rebecca VA]

I loved Gone With the Wind. I read it obsessively when I was a young teen. I never felt that I was slogging through it at all.

[Twigs]

We're talking a huge commitment in time, since I could be reading two or three other books in its place instead.

But you would still be reading the same amount of time / pages, right? What does it matter if it is 1 book or 3?

 

Do you already have the book? Maybe you could just sit down read a few pages, skip around and read a few pages later in the book - just to get a feel for it. If you don't already have the book, go to the library and read for awhile.

Also, you don't have to read it all at once. It's ok to have several books going at once. (I have Sophie's World and Les Miserable both going now - I just pick up one and start reading.)

 

Best wishes.

[Vida Winter]

Definitely worth it. I didn't want that book to end.

[pdalley]

It's my comfort book - the one I read when I need to shut my mind off.

 

To me the book is a billion times better than the movie.

[lmrich]

Yes! I just re read it this year. So good. Scarlet is such a real person in the book - not the selfish brat in the movie. It is worth the effort. There is a lot of back story on her parents as well.

[Lori D.]

Heretically, and preparing to duck tomatoes, no, I don't think it's worth it if you are looking to invest time in the Classics. Frankly, my dear, (IMO) Gone With The Wind should be classified as a whacking big romance novel set in a historical time period -- not as one of the Great Books. Is it tedious? Not at all. Is it well-written? For a romance/historical fiction novel, yes. Is it one of the Great Books? No.

 

If you're going to read it, don't expect the complexity, the beautiful language, and the depth of themes that you get out of, say, Shakespeare (or War and Peace). Think of it more as bedtime reading that will last you most of the next year. ;)

 

Just my opinion! And running for cover from the tomatoes! :tongue_smilie: BEST of luck, whatever you decide! Warmly, Lori D.

Edited July 2, 2011 by Lori D.

[Carol in Cal.]

Well, prize or not, I don't think of it as a great book. But it is engaging and a great summer read. I think you would enjoy it, and it does teach a lot about the historical Southern culture, good and bad.

[farmwife]

READ it! I don't care if it's a classic or not, it cultivates the mind and it has stuck with me for over 15 years and shaped how I view circumstances in life. Worth it IMHO! ;)

[Ellie]

Of course. :001_smile:

 

It may change your view of the War of Northern Agression. Just so you know. :D

[Penelope]

Yes, read it.

 

It is not a Great Book or a classic IMO, but nonetheless it is a Great book.

[Rosie Q]

The book and the film have many differences, and the transformation of Scarlett is much more interesting in the book. If you live in the south, you should probably read it - if for no other reason than to be familiar with a work that is still widely referenced. However, if you live elsewhere in the country, you can almost certainly skip it with no loss. To say that the author's perspective on the value of a multicultural society is outdated is a vast understatement.

[Carol in Cal.]

Of course. :001_smile:

 

It may change your view of the War of Northern Agression. Just so you know. :D

 

Heh...

[MaryCatherine]

I watched the movie lots of times growing up - loved it. Then as a young adult I read the book. Now, the movie is just almost awful. Read the book.

[regentrude]

one of my favorite books, read and re-read at least 20 times. DD loves it too.

I found it very easy and pleasant to read.

[Deniseibase]

Well, I'll stand up with Lori D. and say that honestly, if you want to read the Classics, this is really not so much. A fine book in its own right, but it's not likely to be read 100 years from now except perhaps as a specialized example in a romance novel class or a literature about the Civil War class. You'll enjoy it, almost certainly! Just not so much on the classic part :)

[Pepper Potts]

I agree with what everyone else has said, so I guess that means it all depends on your goal. If you want to make headway checking off your classic classics list then skip it. The movie doesn't measure anywhere near the book, so it's no substitute, although Clark Gable is fun to watch.

 

However, for me, this was the LEAST tedious book I ever read in my life! I loved the richness of characters and setting. I so easily got absorbed into the book that many meals and household duties were neglected :tongue_smilie:.

 

I asked several homeschool mom friends to read it at the same time and EVERYONE loved it and felt it was very worthwhile reading and fun to discuss (we all wanted to throttle Scarlett at times and yet loved her too!). I understand it might not have the weight of classics, but I loved the emotional journey (rollercoaster?) and exploration of it all. I've carried a deep emotional connection for this book with me since I first read it at 18. Can you tell?:lol:

 

IF you do decide to go for the ride, I suggest taking a friend along :001_smile:.

[Orthodox6]

Read it if you want to; skip it if you don't.

 

I'm in camp that considers the book a romance novel -- just one of the longest such you ever may encounter ! In fact, I might even term it "War and Peace" for the semi-historical romance genre !

 

Not everything that I read is "classic". I avoid what I personally consider junk or bad. GWTW is not junk.

Edited July 2, 2011 by Orthodox6

[Rosie_0801]

Oh no. Every time I read that book I would end it feeling depressed and have to read the sequel to cheer myself back up, even though it is the second worst sequel ever written.

 

Rosie

[Caroline]

Oh no. Every time I read that book I would end it feeling depressed and have to read the sequel to cheer myself back up, even though it is the second worst sequel ever written.

 

Rosie

 

Which begs the question, what is the worst sequel ever written?

[Rosie_0801]

Which begs the question, what is the worst sequel ever written?

 

Cosette, the so called sequel to Les Miserables.

 

Terrible, horrible, no good, very bad and if we had a cringe smilie here, I would use all 8 of them.

 

Rosie

[Penelope]

Oh no. Every time I read that book I would end it feeling depressed and have to read the sequel to cheer myself back up, even though it is the second worst sequel ever written.

 

Rosie

 

Yeah, it's not usually a good sign when the sequel is written 50+ years later by an awful, mostly unknown, writer.

[amtmcm]

Oh no. Every time I read that book I would end it feeling depressed and have to read the sequel to cheer myself back up, even though it is the second worst sequel ever written.

 

Rosie

 

:lol: Literally laughed out loud at that one! So what's the First Worst Sequel ever written? In defense of the sequel, I appreciated the author's careful research of Irish history.

 

As for the original post.... I'm a very slow reader - I rarely skim, I take in every word. Gone with Wind was a quick read. It won't take you that long. The language is smooth and easy and flows naturally on the page. If you like reading Jane Austen, you'll probably like Gone with the Wind.

[pdalley]

Oh no. Every time I read that book I would end it feeling depressed and have to read the sequel to cheer myself back up, even though it is the second worst sequel ever written.

 

Rosie

 

I actually liked both sequels - Scarlett and Rhett Butler's People. But it is probably because I loved Gone With the Wind so much in the first place.

[LibraryLover]

GWTW was my fav book when I was 11/12, and I have read it several times. I was, however, very confused to understand that the dear fictional character Ashley Wilkes, " Most of the miseries of the world were caused by wars. And, when the wars were over, no one ever knew what they were about", was a member of the KKK's early days. (That made me want to read more American history.)

 

It's quite interesting to read from a historical point of view, but I wouldn't consider it 'classic' in a literary sense. I would call it classic Americana/part of the American cultural canon, however. It's not a difficult book to read. It is not a slog, fwiw. It's very, very interesting.

Edited July 3, 2011 by LibraryLover
too many spoilers

[cathmom]

Which begs the question, what is the worst sequel ever written?

 

Especially since I could not make it through Scarlett! :tongue_smilie:

 

You should read it - it won't take long.

 

And it's not a romance novel. Romance novels have happy endings.

[LibraryLover]

Especially since I could not make it through Scarlett! :tongue_smilie:

 

You should read it - it won't take long.

 

And it's not a romance novel. Romance novels have happy endings.

 

 

lol and *I* edited for spoilers (and a husband miscount lol).

[pdalley]

GWTW was my fav book when I was 11/12, and I have read it several times. I was, however, very confused to understand that the dear fictional character Ashley Wilkes, " Most of the miseries of the world were caused by wars. And, when the wars were over, no one ever knew what they were about", was a member of the KKK's early days. (That made me want to read more American history.)

 

It's quite interesting to read from a historical point of view, but I wouldn't consider it 'classic' in a literary sense. I would call it classic Americana/part of the American cultural canon, however. It's not a difficult book to read. It is not a slog, fwiw. It's very, very interesting.

 

 

Can I confess I think Ashley Wilkes is the biggest drip in the history of literature and could never understand what Scarlett saw in him? Or Melanie saw in him either for that matter.

[JessicaLady]

Yes, read it.

 

It is not a Great Book or a classic IMO, but nonetheless it is a Great book.

 

:iagree:

I did love sharing with my mother all the ways Scarlett is different in the book from the movie. She was appalled and asked me to leave her 'vision' alone.

[Rosie_0801]

Can I confess I think Ashley Wilkes is the biggest drip in the history of literature and could never understand what Scarlett saw in him? Or Melanie saw in him either for that matter.

 

 

:D:lol::cheers2:

 

Rosie

[MeaganS]

Can I confess I think Ashley Wilkes is the biggest drip in the history of literature and could never understand what Scarlett saw in him? Or Melanie saw in him either for that matter.

 

Amen. Rhett is so much more awesome, Ashley never had a chance...

[MeaganS]

I totally agree that if you are looking to read a "Classic" with a capitol C you probably shouldn't read Gone With the Wind, but it is certainly a worthy read and you will hardly notice the length.

 

On another note, how did you guys like Rhett Butler's People? I agree about Scarlet, but I've always had a crush on Rhett and love the idea of reading a book about him. Is it worth a read?

[Jeanne in MN]

I'm considering reading Gone with the Wind as part of my attempt to be more well read in the classics. It's a fairly important book, having won a Pulitzer Prize and often hailed as "the American War and Peace."

 

At 980 page long, you could bludgeon someone to death with this book! With smaller titles, I can slog through it and move on to the next thing on my list fairly quickly, but not with something this long. We're talking a huge commitment in time, since I could be reading two or three other books in its place instead. So my question is, for those of you who have read it, is it worth it? Would you recommend it? Or was it tedious enough that you tell people to just watch the movie? :bigear:

 

I always thought GWTW would be a silly book about a selfish girl, until a librarian was telling me how much she enjoyed the book. I thought I should at least try it and I'm very glad I did. It's one of those rare books I would recommend to anyone. Another favorite of mine that I think is worth the read too, is Roots by Alex Haley. Couldn't put it down.

[pdalley]

I totally agree that if you are looking to read a "Classic" with a capitol C you probably shouldn't read Gone With the Wind, but it is certainly a worthy read and you will hardly notice the length.

 

On another note, how did you guys like Rhett Butler's People? I agree about Scarlet, but I've always had a crush on Rhett and love the idea of reading a book about him. Is it worth a read?

 

I loved it. I loved the way he told the story from Rhett's point of view and Rhett's background being fleshed out. GWTW and Rhett Butler's People are two books I've got on my Ipod and I re-read them a lot.

[Guest Squeakermom79]

Maybe you should ask yourself " what makes a classic?" Is it the romantic pros, or the research put into the book? Gone with the Wind does not have the beautiful eloquentness of Jane Eyer, but there is a certain beauty about it. The speech in the work comes from 10 years of research. Mitchell found over 100 " negro" dialects from her time researching for this book. She carefully displayed them in her work, which- to some- may look brutish when displayed against Bronte, Alcott, or Dickinson.

 

My personal belief is that Mitchell is best studied when coupled with studies on the Civil War or anthropology. She is the most famous of all Georgian authors and is such because the story of GWTW is woven from several true stories of the people around her.

 

So, in short- I think GWTW is definitely a classic- but what counts is YOUR definition. Good luck!

[cathmom]

lol and *I* edited for spoilers (and a husband miscount lol).

 

Are you saying that I posted a spoiler by saying it doesn't have a romance novel ending? LOL - doesn't everybody know the ending already???

[Carol in Cal.]

Can I confess I think Ashley Wilkes is the biggest drip in the history of literature and could never understand what Scarlett saw in him? Or Melanie saw in him either for that matter.

 

Are you serious? He is the romantic ideal. Everyone is supposed to love him, because he is good and the epitome of Southern virtue. Kind of like John Galt in Atlas Shrugged.

[Carol in Cal.]

I always thought GWTW would be a silly book about a selfish girl,

 

My big disappointment in the movie is that it portrayed her so much more that way than the book did. They were both good, though.

[Carol in Cal.]

GWTW was my fav book when I was 11/12, and I have read it several times. I was, however, very confused to understand that the dear fictional character Ashley Wilkes, " Most of the miseries of the world were caused by wars. And, when the wars were over, no one ever knew what they were about", was a member of the KKK's early days. (That made me want to read more American history.)

 

 

 

The book portrays the KKK as sort of an early volunteer police department, set up on an emergency, ad hoc basis to keep order in a desperate circumstance, rather than a terrorist group. I don't view this as accurate, but it's interesting to consider that 'justification' made early on.

[regentrude]

Can I confess I think Ashley Wilkes is the biggest drip in the history of literature and could never understand what Scarlett saw in him? Or Melanie saw in him either for that matter.

 

I can understand the attraction of a cultured, well-read, educated dreamer and thinker. I think for Melanie and Scarlett, the psychology worked very differently. For Melanie, he embodied the values with which she grew up (and, without the war, he would have been perfectly fine as a master at Tweve Oaks). For Scarlett, he was different from all the other guys and the fact that he was not part of the boys flirting for her attention held additional appeal.

[UmMusa]

Read the book!!!!! I read it in 8th grade and couldn't put it down. I'd sneak it on my lap during algebra class, read it during lunch, and be walking from class to class with the book open. I was sad when I finished it b/c I didn't know what I'd do with my life without it LOL The movie is pretty true to the book, but the book is waaay better. You'll love it!!!

[pdalley]

Are you serious? He is the romantic ideal. Everyone is supposed to love him, because he is good and the epitome of Southern virtue. Kind of like John Galt in Atlas Shrugged.

 

 

Dead serious. I dislike him for the reasons Rhett disliked him. He claimed to stand for lots of things but never was able to stand alone. I don't like my men to be polished on the outside and wobbly on the inside. He never made a decision - he allowed life to make all of his decisions for him.

[Carol in Cal.]

Read the book!!!!! I read it in 8th grade and couldn't put it down. I'd sneak it on my lap during algebra class, read it during lunch, and be walking from class to class with the book open. I was sad when I finished it b/c I didn't know what I'd do with my life without it LOL The movie is pretty true to the book, but the book is waaay better. You'll love it!!!

 

Ha, this reminds me, I had a similar experience in college. I remember sitting in the chemistry library reading it avidly. My friends were doing their homework for the next day, which I had not done yet, and I was helping them with it, but not actually doing my own. Could not put it down.

[Margaret in GA]

Maybe you should ask yourself " what makes a classic?" Is it the romantic pros, or the research put into the book? Gone with the Wind does not have the beautiful eloquentness of Jane Eyer, but there is a certain beauty about it. The speech in the work comes from 10 years of research. Mitchell found over 100 " negro" dialects from her time researching for this book. She carefully displayed them in her work, which- to some- may look brutish when displayed against Bronte, Alcott, or Dickinson.

 

My personal belief is that Mitchell is best studied when coupled with studies on the Civil War or anthropology. She is the most famous of all Georgian authors and is such because the story of GWTW is woven from several true stories of the people around her.

 

So, in short- I think GWTW is definitely a classic- but what counts is YOUR definition. Good luck!

 

:iagree: Goodness, y'all, a classic can be a classic because it reflects something of the time it was written. A perspective or historical frame. Even Twilight might be read 100 years from now, not because it is "great lit", but because it was a genuine phenomenon in its day and for that reason, it has historical significance. So, with GWTW. People LOVED that book. And therefore, the movie. To date, it has sold the most movie tickets of all time. That's significant!

 

Now, is it racist? No doubt. Several times in the book she refers to the slaves as being like children who need their masters the way a child needs a parent. But, that's the way the author truly felt. It provides a real glimpse into the ideology of slavery and Jim Crow.

 

That said, I loved the darned book. It's a superior love story with great characters. I disagree with the poster that said you are supposed to like Ashley. It's the idea of Ashley that Scarlet loves, just as it's the idea of the old south people are clinging to. It is flawed and its chance is gone. With the wind.

 

Margaret

[Ester Maria]

I hated it and considered it highly aesthetically unpleasing. :)

[cathmom]

I hated it and considered it highly aesthetically unpleasing. :)

 

EM, have you considered that you might not be American? LOL ;) Evidence seems to point in that direction.

[HelenNotOfTroy]

I loved Gone With the Wind. I read it obsessively when I was a young teen. I never felt that I was slogging through it at all.

 

I stayed up all night reading it when I was 13.

[Ester Maria]

EM, have you considered that you might not be American? LOL ;) Evidence seems to point in that direction.

But I like Melville! Should not that fact alone make me an honorary American, at least? :D

[cathmom]

But I like Melville! Should not that fact alone make me an honorary American, at least? :D

 

I suppose...

 

:lol:

[mazakaal]

I agree with Lori D. that it's not exactly a classic, but it is a wonderful book. I read it for the first time recently, and thoroughly enjoyed it. It's very long, but is a pretty easy read, so not nearly as time consuming as a classic of the same length.