On the whole, I would say, yes

It is a tragic love story, but also a story of survival. The things that Scarlett must do to stay alive, and indeed, to keep Melanie and Ashley alive as well, change her in ways that doom her potential romance with Rhett. The book is a celebration of the triumph of an individual over the most horrific circumstances imaginable, but it is also sophisticated enough to note the ways in which that changes a person.

I think it is tragic due to Scarlett and Rhett really being the only ones who could have worked for each other, if only Scarlett had tried. She only realies that at the end when it's too late.

Scarlett is sort of an anti-hero. She's really not very likable, can be downright ruthless at times.

@CountJohn said:

I think it is tragic due to Scarlett and Rhett really being the only ones who could have worked for each other, if only Scarlett had tried. She only realise that at the end when it's too late.

Yes totally agree. I can imagine it was a shocking twist for the audience back then that it wasn't a happy ending. This film was truly EPIC!!

I know I'm in the minority here, but I'm glad there was a sequel. I don't know why it was rated so low as I thought it was a good mini series and well acted. Of course nothing can compare to the original or Vivienne Leigh and Clarke Gable, but Joanne Whalley and Timothy Dalton did a decent job. https://www.themoviedb.org/tv/15724-scarlett

Not that much of tragic love story between people. The supposed love story of Rhett and Scarlett is not so much drenched in tears. They are both alive in the end, none of them has betrayed the other for money and both knew why life brought them together. They are a love story but not tragic. The tragic love story in the movie is between Scarlett and her past, her memories , her childhood happiness, the only happiness she knew before discovering she loved Rhett in the end. Part by part she gives away everything connecting her with the past and her childhood dreams. First, she loses her home, her family, her friends die in the war, she loses her comfort and carelessness and also her reputation and respectability among her former fellow Southerners, in heart and mind, and only her wooden, idealistic infatuation remains. In the end, this is shattered too and she has nothing to keep her afloat while connecting her to the past. She maintains though her love for land, for Tara. The land is first uninteresting, then a beacon of her relentless survival and finally she learns it is also her only true resource and refuge...

@patrickios said:

Not that much of tragic love story between people. The supposed love story of Rhett and Scarlett is not so much drenched in tears. They are both alive in the end, none of them has betrayed the other for money and both knew why life brought them together. They are a love story but not tragic. The tragic love story in the movie is between Scarlett and her past, her memories , her childhood happiness, the only happiness she knew before discovering she loved Rhett in the end. Part by part she gives away everything connecting her with the past and her childhood dreams. First, she loses her home, her family, her friends die in the war, she loses her comfort and carelessness and also her reputation and respectability among her former fellow Southerners, in heart and mind, and only her wooden, idealistic infatuation remains. In the end, this is shattered too and she has nothing to keep her afloat while connecting her to the past. She maintains though her love for land, for Tara. The land is first uninteresting, then a beacon of her relentless survival and finally she learns it is also her only true resource and refuge...

Great write up @patrickios and welcome to the forum. For me the relationship was tragic in that she did start loving Rhett before he took Bonnie to Europe. She was so excited to see him when they arrive back, but both started with their stubbornness again, then she lost their baby when she fell down the stairs, then Bonnie died, drifting them more apart. Also when she fell down the stairs, she did call for him too, but Rhett didn't hear it so thinks she doesn't love him. That's what I thought was tragic and frustrating about their relationship, as they were both clouded by what was going on around them. I love both characters dearly. One of my all time favourite films.

@FlyingSaucersAreReal said:

Scarlett is sort of an anti-hero. She's really not very likable, can be downright ruthless at times.

Ugh, I couldn't stand Scarlett and I was almost happy when she suffered. She was a spoiled brat who deserved more misery than she experienced.

@Invidia said:

Yes she was a SPOILED BRAT and someone who was use to getting her way, but wasn't that trait also what enabled her to be able to feed herself, and others like Melanie and Ashley???

If it wasn't for Scarlett would anyone have been able to SURVIVE???

Melanie and Ashley seem too civilized to confront the YANKEE or do any of the other UNDERHANDED things that we see SCARLETT doing.

Not really. She survived in spite of her bratty upbringing not because of. Remember, before the war she had everything done for her. Everything! The story was more to the point that in the roughest of times, when pushed against a corner, survival instincts take over.

I mean, I guess. If you call batting your eyes at puppy-eyed boys profusely, flirting indiscriminately, and pouting to get your way determinism as in determined to get her way by whatever means she had at her disposal then I suppose your right. I wouldn't agree that it is something to be held in high regard. One could argue that a sociopathic person who did whatever was legally necessary to claw and backstab their way into becoming a CEO of a company determinism as well but I wouldn't consider them a good person. Scarlett was thrown into her position because of outside circumstances and she used what she had to survive. But at the end, we see she never learns her lesson about appreciating things. To the point that Rhett, who was madly in love with her, could no longer take it and leaves her. No, I dare say Scarlett was an ugly soul and is the type of woman I would stay clear and away from.

Sorry guys, but I'm unsubscribing from this conversation, because I'm getting too many emails about this- enjoy your debate though

Well, I won't argue that what was expected from a woman back then was not cruel and inhumane but that doesn't excuse bad behavior. Does a guy who chooses to sell drugs because he cannot get a job to support his family be excused of his crimes in court? But Scarlett not being allowed to eat is still taking the conversation in a different direction. My main point is after all of this suffering that Scarlett endures should have indeed humbled her. I know it would have humbled me but the film ends with her just as much as a brat as she was when she was a teenage girl flirting with all of the boys.

Also, I never meant to imply that Scarlett was a sociopath per se. I wouldn't put her in that category. I was simply stating that a sociopath's behavior could be excused as mere determinism or as a "Type A personality" both of which have positive or at the very least neutral connotations. If only at the end of the film Scarlett showed that she had indeed lived and learned I may have been a bit more sympathetic to her. To me, the best soul was Melanie who despite Scarlett's petty jealousies she never wavered in her love for her. Now THAT is a good woman.

@Invidia said:

@movie_nazi said:

Well, I won't argue that what was expected from a woman back then was not cruel and inhumane but that doesn't excuse bad behavior. Does a guy who chooses to sell drugs because he cannot get a job to support his family be excused of his crimes in court?

What about If someone were selling DRUGS during a time of WAR (at a time when one couldn't get a JOB or get money for what one needed in any other way)???

I don't think there is an excuse for it. On the other hand, I do not believe that drug dealing should be a capital offense like they do in some countries. The Taliban eliminated all of the poppy fields on pain of death when they had complete control of Afghanistan but then started growing it again to fund their war when the U.S. invaded. Seems to me hypocritical.

But Scarlett not being allowed to eat is still taking the conversation in a different direction.

How so???

Her INABILITY to EAT as much as she wants is an ONGOING THEME of the story right from the START when we see MAMMY dressing her and pulling the STRINGS of the CORSET as a way to get her WAISTLINE to look SLIMMER so she'd be able to better SEDUCE the MALES who found that kind of thing attractive.

Here's an INTERESTING ARTICLE about wearing CORSETS that also discusses SCARLETT:

Discussion about Scarlett O'hara's 18 inch waist:

http://www.victoriana.com/corsets/corseting.htm

I read somewhere that corsets actually was displacing women's internal organs causing all kinds of problems. It kinda reminded me of when they used to bind women's feet in China. Humans sure are some vain creatures as they will do all kinds of wierd shit to achieve "beauty" .

And here's another one that describes the scene where MAMMY helps her put one on and TIES it up after she gives birth to BONNIE:

What Was Scarlett O'Hara's Real Motivation? | Yahoo Answers

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100226082852AA29jg9

Feb 26, 2010 · In the movie, "Gone With The Wind," after Scarlett, after giving birth to Bonnie, is shown having her waist measured by Mammy. She has "grown as fat as Aunt Pitty," because her waist size is now 20 inches (gasp!). Mammy tells her that she will never be 18-1/2 inches again

So even AFTER the WAR is over and she's given BIRTH to a child, she's still dealing with the RIDICULOUS SOCIAL PRESSURE to have an 18 INCH WAIST.

First of all. No one put a gun to Scarlett's head and said she must starve herself and have an 18 inch waist. If she put her foot down and said, "fuggit, I'mma eat what I want. Mammy, bring me some biscuits!" Ain't no one gonna stop her! Trying to tell me there wasn't any heavy women in those days? Please! This is like crying a river for the poor Hollywood women who just have to get plastic surgery to stay relevant and working. No one forced you and you don't have to do it. Society may have it's peer pressures but no one says you must do it. This is not like in those Muslim theocracies where women are forced to cover themselves from head to toe on pain of punishment. Now THAT is real discrimination. Or worse yet, a women can be raped and unless she has witnesses then her testimony is not enough to convict. Now that is a REAL tragedy. BOO HOO , poor Scarlett can't have that extra biscuit because it makes it harder for her to squeeze into her gazillion dollar dress! Oh the humanity!

If you mean she's still an OPTIMIST who is DETERMINED to get what it is she wants, then YES the film ENDS with her being just as DETERMINED as she was at the START of it (due to the way she says she'll think about how she wants her husband back again another day).

Because instead of feeling sorry for herself or becoming DEPRESSED about her situation, she IMMEDIATELY sets about making plans for how to get him back again. Because she also knows if she MOPS about like her father did after he

LOL. Its her own fault she lost him! Its not the Yankees took her husband from her! Oh great, she's determined to connive and scheme to get Rhett back. Great. Totally commendable.

I know I screwed up because I was such a bitch that Rhett left me but I'm DETERMINED to get that poor sap back. After all, he is rich. Great, honey. Go for it. My hero.

One UNDERSTANDS the reason why you see MELANIE as a better example of WOMANHOOD.

But like one pointed out before, with MELANIE as the HEAD of HOUSEHOLD they'd probably all have STARVED to DEATH and NEVER SURVIVED.

It's not womanhood, it's HUMANITY. Melanie had a HEART. Scarlett had one but it was the size of a pigeon's. Melanie was of a physically weak constitution. Who knows? Perhaps she had some sort of disease that would have been modernly been diagnosed. Scarlett's strength is to be commended but it is possible to he hard and strong where need be and be kind and gentle at the same time. Remember when she smacked poor Prissy for lying to her about knowing how to midwive? Scarlett was a nasty bitch.

I concur that Prissy deserved the smack for lying about knowing how to midwife.

@Invidia said:

Technically she probably should have been ARRESTED and put in prison for impersonating a MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL when she was not one.

And if the person giving birth had DIED, then one could probably also have convicted her of 1ST DEGREE MURDER as well???

Ridiculous. Your issue is you try apply modern sensibilities to an antique time. Its not really possible to apply modern laws to what happened back then. Prissy told a silly fib is all. Women have been having natural childbirth all on their own since the beginning of time without any real medical knowledge. In fact, even in modern times, you do not need to have a medical degree to be a midwife so please stop being overdramatic with the "She should have been arrested!" Please.