Framing Gone With the Wind-Max as a Form of Remix
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed fissures in American society, in particular the history of systemic racism, which, in the wake of the George Floyd protests, could no longer be ignored. Like many institutions at the time, streaming platforms reflected on their racist practices. Variety reported in June 2020 that HBO Max took down the classic and notoriously racist film Gone With the Wind (1939) from its platform in response to screenwriter John Ridley’s LA Times Op-Ed calling them out for keeping up its racist content (Moreau). Two weeks later, Variety wrote that HBO Max had re-issued the film with two additions: a mandatory viewing 4 minute 30-second long disclaimer video in which film scholar Jacqueline Stewart discusses the history of the film and its stereotypes and a roundtable discussion featured as an extra for optional viewing (Spangler). The clip transformed the film by causing audience members to think about their consumption of the movie upon viewing it. Gone With the Wind-Max—the re-published version of the film with the disclaimer video—is a conceptual remix because the original film was recontextualized, but it is also a critical remix because it reframes our understanding of the movie in a 2023 social and political context. Ultimately, as a form of remix, Gone With the Wind-Max unleashes a cultural discourse about a viable middle-ground alternative to cancel culture when it comes to problematic content.
Among other films and shows re-issued or altered because of the changing social and political climate, Gone With the Wind-Max, is a remix of the original version because of the mandatory viewing of the disclaimer video. We can think of the re-published version of the film as a form of remix because the film was recontextualized and added on to. In scholar Abby S. Waysdorf's 2021 article “Remix in the Age of Ubiquitous Remix,” she argues that there are different types of remix: aesthetic, communicative, and conceptual (Waysdorf 3-7). While aesthetic remixes may be the most familiar because they encapsulate the kind of remix used in works like songs, Waysdorf defines conceptual remix as “an act that draws on the sensibilities of remix, while not necessarily producing an identifiable transformative work” (7). The re-publishing of content in a manner different from its original form is becoming ubiquitous as streaming services become prevalent and old content appears across media platforms in the form of re-posts across Instagram, Tiktok, Facebook, and Twitter.
Not only is Gone With the Wind-Max a conceptual remix, but it is a critical remix video (CRV). In scholar Owen Gallagher’s 2021 piece “Remediation,” he writes that CRVs manipulate existing "material in their formal composition" (Gallagher 358). CRVs consist of "previously published media elements, which have been appropriated, repurposed and reconfigured in the creation of a new work that communicates different messages and meanings than the source material" (357). In the case of Gone With the Wind-Max, not only was it re-released on a different platform, but it was re-purposed to have new meaning. Gallagher further argues that as a form of political activism, CRVs "seek to right wrongs and injustices, correct misinformation, combat fake news and promote positive ideal traits such as equality and liberty" (356). In Gone With the Wind-Max, Jacqueline Stewart’s mandatory talk informs viewers about the film’s racist history and its racist contents, causing viewers to watch the film with new context. New social and political context, in effect, changes the meaning of the film for the audience; the audience can no longer take the film at face value.
A look at the Gone With the Wind’s history explains why a recontextualizing was in order. The film itself is racist for two major reasons: the first is that it erases the history of systemic racism in the United States by glorifying the antebellum south and ignoring the racist aspects of it; the second is that the film uses harmful stereotypes which perpetuate harmful ideas about Black people like the mammy trope. As John Ridley suggests in his June 8 2020 LA Times Op-Ed, the problem with Gone With the Wind goes beyond the representation issue in many films and TV shows we watch retroactively: “when it is not ignoring the horrors of slavery,” Ridley writes, it “pauses only to perpetuate some of the most painful stereotypes of people of color” (Ridley). Gone With the Wind perpetuates harmful stereotypes at the same time that it erases the evil parts of American history.
Within the film itself, the mammy trope is one of the most prominent. As Isabel Lewis of the Independent suggests, “the black characters in the film are portrayed as being content and happy to benefit from the kindness of their white benefactors, with something akin to friendship or family forming between Scarlett and Mammy, a domestic servant” (Lewis). Portraying a romanticized version of the relationship between Scarlett and Mammy creates the idea that relationships between black and white people in the antebellum south were friendly, obscuring the reality of the KKK and race based lynchings. Lewis references one scene in particular in which Hattie McDaniel’s Mammy fends off “a leering freeman—suggesting that emancipated slaves were immoral and a threat to women of all racial backgrounds” (Lewis). Lewis further argues that the film obscures the fact that slavery caused the Civil War and portrays the north as robbing the south of their idyllic way of life (Lewis). Riddled with historical inaccuracies and ridiculous portrayals of the relationship between Black and white people in the south, the film itself is undeniably racist.
Beyond the film’s narrative, the film has been controversial since its outset because of the way it was produced and celebrated. As Jennifer Schuessler of the New York Times suggests, Gone With the Wind has been controversial since the publication of Margaret Mitchell’s “mythic” novel in 1936 (Schuessler). Schuessler elaborates that at the same time that the “frenzy” after the release of the movie and the book “touched off a national craze for all things Dixie,” “African-Americans were registering objections,” and “there were complaints that a movie version would incite violence, spread bigotry and even derail a proposed federal anti-lynching bill” (Schuessler). Walter White, the head of the NAACP even wrote to David O. Selznick, the producer, urging him to hire an African American consultant to “fact check” the production of the film, but Selznick refused, and hired two white friends instead (Schuessler). Regardless, the film is one of the highest grossing films of all time. As Rebecca Keegan of the Hollywood Reporter explains, amid its accolades, Hattie McDaniel who plays Mammy was the first African American to be nominated for an oscar (Keegan). But, at the academy awards she could not even sit with her white counterparts and was marginalized during the award show (Keegan).
While Hollywood could get away with racism more easily decades ago, the industry is now facing backlash for its practices. As the systemic problems in American society have come to a head, it seems that in order for streaming platforms like HBO Max to hold onto their customer base, they can no longer be silent. Streaming services are the way most Americans consume their entertainment these days. As Anna Durrani of Forbes suggests, “as much of the world quarantined at home during the height of the pandemic, the popularity of streaming services skyrocketed;” “the number of subscriptions to online video streaming services worldwide reached 1.1 billion in 2020” (Durrani). Simultaneously, the events of 2020 forced the American public to confront its problematic history. This was epitomized by the George Floyd protests that erupted that June. Keegan writes:
The need for studios to reckon with their racist histories took on a new urgency…as Black Lives Matter protests were unfolding across the U.S. in response to the police killing of George Floyd, and brands of all varieties weighed in with charitable donations, public statements and corporate town halls about diversity and inclusion (Keegan).
In 2020, streaming services were tasked with reflecting the public’s outrage on the screen: how would Disney Plus, HBO Max, Hulu, and Youtube acknowledge the racist, sexist, and homophobic content on their platforms?
Approaches differ among different platforms: while Disney has issued warning videos, Warner Brothers has turned to erasure or censorship. As Keegan further elaborates, “studios are taking a range of approaches to grappling with that part of their legacies, from adding content warnings to removing shows or films entirely to creating new content that contextualizes older programming” (Keegan). Disney launched the Stories Matter initiative which encompasses Disney’s efforts to denounce problematic old story lines and push for inclusive and diverse ones in the future. The Stories Matter website explains that Disney is “in the process of reviewing our library and adding advisories to content that includes negative depictions or mistreatment of people or cultures” (Stories Matter). As D’Allesandro of Deadline announced, other approaches include the erasure of old characters in remakes: Warner Brothers’ Pepe Le Pew, a cartoon skunk criticized for portraying antiquated ideas about male courtship and perpetuating the notion that sexual harassment should be condoned, was removed from the Space Jam July 2021 remake (D’Allesandro). Disney’s warnings as well as the erasure of characters all together have been different strategies used to confront the new social climate.
On the other hand, Gone With the Wind-Max is not an example of erasure or censorship; the film is remixed. In Gone With the Wind-Max, Jacqueline Stewart briefly discusses the film’s accolades before divulging the film’s problematic history, confirming all of its problematic aspects since its outset like the tragic loss of the “romantic idyllic setting..to the past,” David O Selzneck’s “treatment of Black characters,” and Hattie McDaniel’s marginalization during the academy awards (“Jacqueline Stewart Disclaimer”). Stewart argues that although “watching Gone With the Wind can be uncomfortable, even painful,” it is “important that Hollywood classic films are available to us in their original form for viewing and discussion” because these films are an important part of American culture (“Jacqueline Stewart Disclaimer”). She argues that “these films indicate what images and stories Hollywood has deemed as acceptable and what mainstream audiences have found to be appealing and entertaining fare,” and “it is not only a major document of Hollywood’s racist practices of the past, but also an enduring work of popular culture that speaks directly to the racial inequalities that persist in media and society today” (“Jacqueline Stewart Disclaimer”). In Stewart’s view, the film should not be erased because it can be a learning point; the hard parts of American history, the history of slavery and the history of Gone With the Wind's production practices, should be reflected. The fact that it could be produced as it was is important to memorialize by keeping the film available.
For scholars who want to preserve problematic films, it seems conceptual remix is a productive way of framing the re-issued version of the film that gets around the overwrought debate of censorship. Film scholars like Stewart and screenwriter John Ridley warn against complete erasure and see the recontextualization of Gone With the Wind as a valuable learning asset. When John Ridley published his June 2020 Op-ed, which pushed Stewart to release the video, he corroborated Stewart’s argument:
Let me be clear: I don’t believe in censorship. I don’t think “Gone With the Wind” should be relegated to a vault in Burbank. I would just ask, after a respectful amount of time has passed, that the film be re-introduced to the HBO Max platform along with other films that give a more broad-based and complete picture of what slavery and the Confederacy truly were. Or, perhaps it could be paired with conversations about narratives and why it’s important to have many voices sharing stories from different perspectives rather than merely those reinforcing the views of the prevailing culture. Currently, there is not even a warning or disclaimer preceding the film (Ridley)
Ridley is in the recontextualization camp. Critically, he refers to “censorship” as problematic, and takes that to mean complete erasure. But, other scholars view censorship as distinct from erasure. The use of the term censorship as a version of adaptation or remix often becomes muddled in popular discourse because the notion of censorship devolves quickly into the polarizing debate about cancel culture.
While Ridley and Stewart see cancel culture as problematic because it prevents us from confronting hard parts of history and not reflecting on them, the right sees cancel culture as problematic because it is a first amendment infringement. Cancel culture is looked upon negatively by those from the left and right, albeit for different reasons. In scholar Thomas Leitch’s 2023 piece “Adaptation and Censorship,” he argues “the backlash against censorship, juiced by counter-accusations condemning the spread of cancel culture, became more passionate than ever during the Trump Presidency” (Leitch). Prominent cultural figures on the left like John Ridley and Jacqueline Stewart have also condemned cancel culture in response to the film. Leitch argues cancel culture is viewed by the right as an infringement on free speech; it is perceived by the right as a slippery slope in which those who have beliefs which are frowned upon are ostracized and forced into “submission” (Leitch). American history is riddled with cases in which individual rights protected by the 14th amendment come up against 1st amendment rights, particularly in Hollywood.
In Thomas Leitch’s case study of the film, he argues that adaptation is a less severe mode of censorship in which the existing artifact is altered, but, it seems conceptual remix is a preferable way to frame this considering the polarizing nature of the term censorship. Leitch argues that recontextualizing Gone With the Wind-Max is more acceptable to fans and placates the distress unleashed by negative associations with cancel culture. Nonetheless, in regards to Gone With the Wind-Max, Leitch posits that as much as scholars like Stewart and Ridley might “condemn the label” of cancellation or “disavow the practice,” “adaptation is a mode of censorship audiences and analysts find acceptable because it does not feel like censorship” (Leitch). Leitch continues to use the loaded language of censorship to characterize Gone With the Wind-Max. Censorship is a strategy of streaming platforms as evidenced by the removal of Pepe Le Pew’s character from Space Jam (2021). But, when we think about censoring as a practice of banning or erasing, Gone With the Wind-Max is not censorship. Rather, Gone With the Wind-Max is better framed as a conceptual remix because it is a happy medium which merges cancellation and doing nothing about existing content, solving a problem which Hollywood has faced for years.
While there are inherent risks to recontextualizing content like upsetting audiences who just want to enjoy the film, or on the other hand, placating audiences by not altering problematic content, Gone With the Wind-Max is a conceptual remix which is a valuable critical remix in that is causes audience members to reconsider their consumption of the film as they watch it for pleasure or even educational purposes. Gone With the Wind-Max has prompted popular discourse and debate on the differences between censorship, adaptation and remix. Gone With the Wind-Max elicited a new viewer experience; viewers enjoy watching the film at the same time that they are critical of it. As we bring new media into new contexts with better social and political awareness, framing Gone With the Wind-Max as a remix as opposed to censorship is valuable to discourse: Gone With the Wind-Max appeases audiences and subverts politically and socially polarizing cancel culture.
Works Cited
D’Alessandro, Anthony. “Pepe Le Pew Won’t Be Appearing in Warner Bros’ ‘space Jam’ Sequel.” Deadline, 8 Mar. 2021, deadline.com/2021/03/pepe-le-pew-space-jam-2-new-york-times-rape-culture-controversy-1234708688/.
Durrani, Ana. “The Average American Spends over 13 Hours a Day Using Digital Media-Here’s What They’re Streaming.” Forbes, 27 Mar. 2023, www.forbes.com/home-improvement/internet/streaming-stats/#:~:text=78%25%20of%20all%20U.S.%20households,service%2C%20with%20231%20million%20subscribers.
Gallagher, Owen. “Remediation.” The Routledge Encyclopedia of Citizen Media Ed. Mona Baker, Bolette B. Blaagaard, Henry Jones, and Luis Pérez-González pp 355-362.
“Jacqueline Stewart Disclaimer,” Gone With the Wind, 1939. Distributed by HBO Max, 2020. https://play.max.com/movie/6b43ae80-28c8-4257-988e-e0a9d591cf47
Keegan, Rebecca. “Racist, Sexist ... Classic? How Hollywood Is Dealing with Its Problematic Content.” The Hollywood Reporter, 29 Apr. 2023, www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/racist-sexist-classic-how-hollywood-is-dealing-with-its-problematic-content-4141665/.
Leitch, Thomas. “Adaptation and Censorship.” The Scandal of Adaptation, Palgrave Studies in Adaptation and Visual Culture. Palgrave Macmillian pp 195-212, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14153-9_11
Moreau, Jordan. “HBO Max Temporarily Removes ‘Gone With the Wind’ From Library” Jun 9, 2020, Variety
Ridley, John. “Op-Ed: Hey, HBO, ‘Gone With the Wind’ romanticizes the horrors of slavery. Take it off your platform now” June 8, 2020 LA Times
Schuessler, Jennifer. “The Long Battle over ‘Gone with the Wind.’” The New York Times, 14 June 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/06/14/movies/gone-with-the-wind-battle.html.
Spangler, Todd. “HBO Max Restores ‘Gone With the Wind’ With Disclaimer Saying Film ‘Denies the Horrors of Slavery’” Jun 24, 2020. Variety.
“Stories Matter - the Walt Disney Company.” Stories Matter - The Walt Disney Company, storiesmatter.thewaltdisneycompany.com/. Accessed 21 May 2023.
Waysdorf, Abby S. “Remix in the Age of Ubiquitous Remix.” Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, vol. 27, no. 4, 2021, pp. 1129–1144, doi: 10.1177/1354856521994454.
“Why Has Gone with the Wind Been Accused of Racism?” The Independent, 10 June 2020, www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/gone-with-the-wind-racist-hbo-max-trump-scarlett-o-hara-a9558531.html.
Comments