Difference between revisions of "329-2010--Week 6 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Comments on the reading versus the movie) |
(→Things the movie got wrong) |
||
| Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
The thing that bothered me the most was Scarlett's character in general. I understand that not all women were passive and submissive to men, but her character seems a bit over the top. In my opinion it was probably a statement to women in the early 1900's about becoming stronger and more independent. However, it just didn't seem to fit in with the rest of the characters. Practically every other woman in the film is somewhat submissive to the male figures, even if not completely. I know we talked about women being put into new roles both during and after the war, but when Scarlett is running the lumberyard of the business, she is so overbearing to both her husband and even Ashley, that it leads me to doubt that this is the way a woman would have really acted. It may also have to do with the fact that I also really just dislike her character in general... - Victoria Y. | The thing that bothered me the most was Scarlett's character in general. I understand that not all women were passive and submissive to men, but her character seems a bit over the top. In my opinion it was probably a statement to women in the early 1900's about becoming stronger and more independent. However, it just didn't seem to fit in with the rest of the characters. Practically every other woman in the film is somewhat submissive to the male figures, even if not completely. I know we talked about women being put into new roles both during and after the war, but when Scarlett is running the lumberyard of the business, she is so overbearing to both her husband and even Ashley, that it leads me to doubt that this is the way a woman would have really acted. It may also have to do with the fact that I also really just dislike her character in general... - Victoria Y. | ||
| + | |||
| + | One thing I noticed that the movie did not necessarily get wrong, but did not portray was the true wealth of many in the south. As I discovered in class, many in the south did not actually have these huge, lavish plantations like Terra and Twelve Oaks in the movie. Many southerners only had five or so slaves and would actually rent slaves from wealthier plantation owners and in the movie, all we really see are these incredibly wealthy landowners with numerous slaves working. I believe the movie did this in order to romanticize the old south and give them a lavish and distinguished reputation in order to enhance our opinions of them. If the movie had presented the lower classes of the south more aggressively, the movie would not of accomplished one of its main goals: romanticizing the old south. -afrisk | ||
== The movie as a primary source about the time/people who made it == | == The movie as a primary source about the time/people who made it == | ||
