"As posted on the Orpheum’s Facebook page event for the August screening, one user called the film “racist.” Another remarked over news of the canceled screening, “slowly but surely, we will rid this community of all tributes to white supremacy.”
I doubt it will get same treatment (copyright owner choosing not to publish new copies) in the near future (next decade). I absolutely agree that GOTW is a testament to Lost Causism and is racist and bad history (happy slaves, good owners, evil Yankees), but it was phenomenally popular and is still quite known in the public consciousness. The book has already entered the public domain several countries (not the US) so publishing there is a given, as long as it sells.
There was a blu-ray 75th anniversary edition of the movie in 2014. Not really sure how it sold, but probably well. As long as it continues to sell well, and make money, and doesn’t negatively effect the company, they’ll keep selling it. Unlike Disney, there’s not a big “values” market associated, and what’s probably even more important, it’s not aimed at children. That makes all the difference in the level of “outrage” stirred up.
In addition, it should be noted that the Civil War acts mostly as back-drop for the real story. If the focus of the story was the whitewashing of the Civil War and the rebellion of the South, it might be a different story.
I’m not sure I understand what the debate is supposed to be here. What does the OP mean by “get the Song of the South treatment”?
People have been criticizing the racism and glamorization of the Confederacy in Gone with the Wind for decades. As in, literally since the movie came out in 1940:
This is not a debate.
Either take a position and defend it or this thread will be closed.
[ /Moderating ]
My position is it is a ridiculous, laughable, pathetic, point-and-laugh kind of thing to take an acknowledged cinematographic work of art, label it as a “tribute to white supremacy” and stop showing it, as the place in Tennessee did. And so sorry I didn’t jump right on to responding to it, a few tornado warnings and a power interruption interfered.
And this is just the camel’s nose under the tent wall, IMO.
And I say that we, as individuals, weigh the messages in films v. the artistic merit (or entertainment value) and decide if we want to watch it and if we want to comment on those artistic merit or messages. We have every right to do so. Likewise, venues showing such works also have a choice - they can choose not to show it if they find the message inconsistent with the values they wanted associated with them or just if they think it won’t make them money.
Likewise, I note that you do not indicate whether or not you actually think the movie is a “tribute to white supremacy” or give arguments for that opinion. If it really was a tribute a white supremacy - if was The Birth of Nation - then would you think it reasonable for a venue to choose not to show it?
Let’s be very plain here - in the US, these are by far and wide, individual choices not to show these movies rather than any legal ban. Are you saying businesses should not respond to the desires of their potential customers when choosing what products to make available?
I think the loudest shouting “potential customers” in the current atmosphere of “everything is racist” are the ones that are scaring the businesses into these stupid decisions. And as I said, I think it is both stupid and ridiculous to claim the movie is a “tribute to white supremacy”.
And (I haven’t seen it, but from googling) even though The Birth of a Nation definitely is a “tribute to white supremacy” it is nevertheless a significant enough cinematographic work of art that it was selected for preservation in the National Film Registry. If a theater decided to show it in its “series of significant silent film milestones” for example, I wouldn’t object to it.
We remember and preserve all kinds of events/personages that were extremely flawed when considered in modern light. The bloodbath of French Revolution is celebrated in France every year. The imperial expansionistic warmonger - Napoleon is celebrated in the Arc de Triomphe. The bloodthirsty autocratic monster Peter the Great - in numerous works of art in Russia. Genghis Khan is a national hero in Mongolia. etc. etc.
Leave the historical works of art alone.
So you’re arguing that movie theaters must show these films? If not, then what are you arguing? Cinemas can choose which films to show, for whatever reason they want.
Can all businesses choose what message they want to display? For whatever reason they want?
As I already said, I am arguing that the current atmosphere of shouting down everything as racist is ridiculous and is contributing to the businesses’ stupid decisions. Unfortunately.
I think there are some legal limitations, but they’re not relevant to this conversation.
I would agree that shouting down EVERYTHING as racist is ridiculous. Calling racist things racist seems entirely appropriate to me, though.
Agreed. And sometimes there are things that we now say are racist (or sexist), but would have been perfectly normal or acceptable when they were produced (though, as mentioned upthread, sometimes these works were deemed such even when produced). As times changes, certain creative works become less (or more) entertaining or acceptable or popular with audiences. This might be because they promote messages they a contemporary audience dislikes, or it might be just because tastes change or mass audiences don’t want to watch that specific work or type or work anymore. Like silent films (no matter how fantastic or how much artistic merit they had_ - there wasn’t enough demand for a steady stream of new ones to be produced), and thus venues quit showing them. Same applies to specific works - if the demand isn’t there, the venues aren’t going to (keep) showing them.
I see a big difference between “people don’t come to see it, so we don’t show it” and “people who didn’t come to see it are agitating against our business for showing it, so we don’t show it”. Do you?
This is not a position in a debate. This is simply your opinion about a cause of some effect.
Get a DVD and play it 24/7 if you want. What’s the problem?
Movie theaters are in the business of making money. If they feel that showing a film will cost them financially, then they have every right to decide not to show it.
Free-market capitalism at its finest, really.
You’ll be called a racist and a Nazi and shamed out of your job and into homelessness by the vanguards of 1984 if you do.
Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a fuck.
- Obvious joke aside, you can still see Birth of a Nation if you want, it’s not like all copies were rounded up and bonfired, so I doubt Gone With the Wind (which I’ve personally never been able to sit through for reasons that have nothing to do with racism) will ever be, well, gone with… some kinda wind, I guess, especially once it enters public domain.