<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gone With The Wind?  It blew.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://majorlyenglish.wordpress.com/2008/01/28/gone-with-the-wind-it-blew/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://majorlyenglish.wordpress.com/2008/01/28/gone-with-the-wind-it-blew/</link>
	<description>About nothing and everything.  Mostly nothing.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:22:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Pete</title>
		<link>http://majorlyenglish.wordpress.com/2008/01/28/gone-with-the-wind-it-blew/#comment-1693</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:06:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://majorlyenglish.wordpress.com/?p=636#comment-1693</guid>
		<description>You certainly are correct in that Rhett and Scarlett are much more complex than many characters, but my reaction is much more related to the fact that 70 years after the fact, Gone With the Wind is portrayed popularly as a vastly different movie than had been expected.

Perhaps it&#039;s a bit strong to say that the movie &quot;blew,&quot; but it certainly was miles away from what I expected.  So, in a sense, it&#039;s not GWtW&#039;s fault that I reacted that way, but the popular culture that led me to believe that it was a sweeping romance, not a story of distinctly flawed people and the miserable lives they lead.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You certainly are correct in that Rhett and Scarlett are much more complex than many characters, but my reaction is much more related to the fact that 70 years after the fact, Gone With the Wind is portrayed popularly as a vastly different movie than had been expected.</p>
<p>Perhaps it&#8217;s a bit strong to say that the movie &#8220;blew,&#8221; but it certainly was miles away from what I expected.  So, in a sense, it&#8217;s not GWtW&#8217;s fault that I reacted that way, but the popular culture that led me to believe that it was a sweeping romance, not a story of distinctly flawed people and the miserable lives they lead.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Betsy</title>
		<link>http://majorlyenglish.wordpress.com/2008/01/28/gone-with-the-wind-it-blew/#comment-1692</link>
		<dc:creator>Betsy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:03:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://majorlyenglish.wordpress.com/?p=636#comment-1692</guid>
		<description>Your assessment isn&#039;t wrong.  What you neglect to mention is that Scarlett manages to earn every ounce of Rhett&#039;s dismissal.  Whether he genuinely loves her or just has a combination of lust/fascination is up for debate.  But really, she spends the entire movie (save the last 10 minutes) pining after Ashley, a man who marries his cousin but keeps giving Scarlett just enough hope that he might actually have feelings for her.  Given that women were only granted the right to vote about 20 years before the story was written, the sheer fact that a ballsy female character like Scarlett exists is an achievement.  Also impressive is the burning of Atlanta scene - that was a real fire.  It&#039;s a story about doing whatever it takes to survive.  It&#039;s not pretty.  It would have been easy to have Rhett and Scarlett fall into each others arms and declare their love for each other, but that wouldn&#039;t have made the preceding 4 hours worth it.  You can get that tripe from How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days.  It&#039;d be like having Rick and Ilsa do the same thing (granted, the characters couldn&#039;t be further apart, emotionally).  None of the characters are particularly likeable: Ashley&#039;s a wimp, Melanie&#039;s a doormat, Rhett&#039;s a bastard, and Scarlett&#039;s a bitch.  But they are interesting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your assessment isn&#8217;t wrong.  What you neglect to mention is that Scarlett manages to earn every ounce of Rhett&#8217;s dismissal.  Whether he genuinely loves her or just has a combination of lust/fascination is up for debate.  But really, she spends the entire movie (save the last 10 minutes) pining after Ashley, a man who marries his cousin but keeps giving Scarlett just enough hope that he might actually have feelings for her.  Given that women were only granted the right to vote about 20 years before the story was written, the sheer fact that a ballsy female character like Scarlett exists is an achievement.  Also impressive is the burning of Atlanta scene &#8211; that was a real fire.  It&#8217;s a story about doing whatever it takes to survive.  It&#8217;s not pretty.  It would have been easy to have Rhett and Scarlett fall into each others arms and declare their love for each other, but that wouldn&#8217;t have made the preceding 4 hours worth it.  You can get that tripe from How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days.  It&#8217;d be like having Rick and Ilsa do the same thing (granted, the characters couldn&#8217;t be further apart, emotionally).  None of the characters are particularly likeable: Ashley&#8217;s a wimp, Melanie&#8217;s a doormat, Rhett&#8217;s a bastard, and Scarlett&#8217;s a bitch.  But they are interesting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
