The Scenery and Greenery of Gone with the Wind (2)

"Spring had come early that year, with warm quick rains and sudden frothing of pink peach blossoms and dogwood dappling with white stars the dark river swamp and far-off hills."

--Gone with the Wind, Chapter I

"Through the window Scarlett could see the bright riot of the twin lanes of daffodils bordering the graveled driveway and the golden masses of yellow jessamine spreading flowery sprangles modestly to the earth like crinolines.  The mockingbirds and the jays, engaged in their old feud for possession of the magnolia tree beneath her window, were bickering, the jays strident, acrimonious, the mockers sweet voiced and plaintive."

--Gone with the Wind, Chapter V

Well, dear readers, it's time for another edition of the Scenery and Greenery of Gone with the Wind, where we offer you a look at the flora and foliage mentioned in GWTW. As I'm sure you've all guessed, the two quotes above serve as the inspiration for this week's bouquet of Southern blooms.  Well, the inspiration with one small caveat--since we already featured dogwood in our first post, we thus won't re-list it here.

Like last time, our main source for plant info and description is the very long-titled Southern wild flowers and trees, together with shrubs, vines and various forms of growth found through the mountains, the middle district and the low country of the South (1901). Sadly, several plants this week (the peach tree and the daffodil) are sans description, as the book with the endless title doesn't include record of them. But as long as they are good enough for MM and GWTW, they are, of course, good enough for a photo spread here. Enjoy!

Peach Tree 

Family: Rose          Color: Pink          Blooms: March-April, with fruit starting in July

Daffodil

 Family: Amaryllis         Color: White, Yellow         Blooms: February-May           

Jessamine

 Family: Logania         Color: Yellow         Blooms: February-November       

"As interwoven, it seems, with the beauty and sentiment of southern lowlands is the “Jasamer,” as it is called by the natives, as is the velvety edelweiss with the history of snow-clad peaks. Early-laden indeed is the warm air of spring with its delicious perfume while, basking himself on its intensely yellow petals, the sly chameleon drowsily opens his rounded eyes. Through woods and thickets it wends its way vigorously and gleams as brightly as does later the Cherokee rose. It is one of the joys of the season, instilling impressions long remembered by those who know it well."

Southern Magnolia  (Laurel Magnolia)

Family: Magnolia         Color: Cream-White         Blooms: April-June

"Laurel magnolia or sweet bay, is a small member of the genus and perhaps the one most generally known; for while mainly found east of the Alleghanies to Florida and Texas, it is hardy, indeed indigenous, as far northward as eastern Massachusetts. As long ago as 1584 the tree was brought into prominence by some navigators who found it on Roanoke Island, N. C. ... In comparison with other flowers of the genus these are quite small, but there is still a charm about them. They are so waxy, so well modelled and exhale a strong fragrance very like that of Fraser's magnolia."
 

"A Comfort--and a Disillusionment"

Today we bring you another selection from Margaret Mitchell's letters, a selection that should be an inspiration to slow, self-critical and meticulous writers everywhere. Of course, we here at How We Do Run On plead total ignorance to the phenomenon of which MM speaks, being only the swiftest of swift writers in all matters. (Inside joke. Unless you're familiar with our other Gone with the Wind projects, or willing to dig deep enough through the links on the sidebar to find them. Then it's just the sad truth.)

All jokes aside, the excerpted paragraphs below come from Margaret Mitchell's letter of September 29, 1936 to Stark Young, a drama critic at The New Republic and the author of the Civil War epic So Red The Rose, published two years earlier in 1934. Mitchell was an admirer of her fellow Southern writer and his novel, and her esteem for Young's writing, along with her trademark self-deprecation, is on display in her charming letter. 

"My dear Mr. Young:

"Your letter was both a comfort—and a disillusionment. I am referring to the part of the letter where you disclaimed the 'ease in writing' which I attributed to you. You see, I had believed that established writers, writers who really knew how to write, had no difficulty at all in writing. I had thought that only luckless beginners like myself had to rewrite endlessly, tear up and throw away whole chapters, start afresh, rewrite and throw away again.

"I knew nothing about other writers and their working habits and I thought I was the only writer in the world who went through such goings-on. After I had rewritten a chapter ten or twelve times and had what I thought was a workable 'first draft,' I'd put it away for a month. When I dug it out again I'd beat on my breast and snatch out my hair, because it was so lousy. Then the chapter would be thrown away, because the content of it had not been reduced to the complete simplicity I wanted. Simplicity of ideas, of construction, of words. Then there would be another awful month of substituting Anglo-Saxon derivatives for Latin ones, simple sentence constructions for the more cumbersome Latin constructions.

"Then before I went to press I snatched out double hands full of copy, whole chapters. Snatched them out under such pressure that I didn't have time to tie up the severed arteries. In my eyes the book will bleed endlessly and reproachfully.

"But I had thought that people who knew how to write just breezed along. Now your letter arrives and disillusions me. Doesn't ease ever come?—However, there is comfort in the knowledge that the author of so many grand books as you didn't just sit down and bang them out. I know that's an Unchristian kind of comfort—the misery loves company kind of comfort—and I should feel guilty about feeling that way but I cannot prod my emotions into a sense of guilt."

--excerpted from Margaret Mitchell's 'Gone with the Wind Letters edited by R. Harwell. 

This post is part of our series A Week in August: The Margaret Mitchell Tribute. Be sure to check out the other posts (yesterday's can be found here) and leave your comments either here or on the Margaret Mitchell thread.

Fresh Off the Press

Check out this article from the Los Angeles Times. Ann Rutherford talks about how she got permission from MGM to star in Gone with the Wind and about how cool Clark Gable was.  Those are our highlights, of course, but there's interesting stuff in there about her other movies as well. Enjoy!

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-classic-hollywood-20100818,0,7360895.story

There will be more coming at some point today (the Margaret Mitchell daily stuff and probably the Quotable as well), so stay tuned!

"Catholic Nuns Like It..."

We all know the immense popularity Gone with the Wind enjoyed the very moment it was published. We are also aware of how unprepared that instant celebrity status caught its author. But in the excerpt we selected for today, you can see both of these aspects through Margaret Mitchell's eyes, in an account that speaks of her humor, modesty and talent at painting a picture, all at once.

Some quick background info before leaving you with our selection for today. The letter from which the respective paragraphs were detached is dated October 9, 1936 and addressed to Herschel Brickell. A journalist, reputed literary critic and supporter of the Southern Renaissance,  Brickell was among the first to review Gone with the Wind upon its publication in June 1936. His article, written for the New York Evening Post and called Margaret Mitchell’s First Novel, "Gone With the Wind," a Fine Panorama of the Civil War Period, praised the novel for "its definitiveness, its truthfulness and its completeness." He was also the first journalist to interview Margaret Mitchell in 1936 and the two became friends over the years. Their correspondence can be found in the Herschel Brickell collection at the University of Mississippi.

"Herschel, sometimes, when I have a minute I ponder soberly upon this book. And I can not make heads or tails of the whole matter. You know the way I felt toward it—and still feel toward it. I can not figure what makes the thing sell so enormously. I ponder soberly in the light of letters, newspaper articles and what people tell me. At first I thought the book might sell a few thousands to people who were interested in the history of that period. A few hundreds to college libraries for use in collateral readings in American History. But I've had to give up that idea because—well, my small nephew [Eugene Mitchell], aged nearly five, has had the book read to him several times and he has announced that it doesn't bore him with repetition as do other books. Here in Atlanta, the fifth and sixth grade students are reading it—obstetrical details and all—and with their parents' permission. I get scads of letters from school girls ages ranging from thirteen to sixteen who like it.

"As for the old people—God bless them! There are scores of grandchildren whose voices are rasping and hoarse from reading aloud to them and Heaven knows how many indignant grandchildren have told me that they had to sit up all night reading because the old folks wouldn't let them quit till after Scarlett was safe at Tara again.

"And in the ages between—this is what stumps me. The bench and bar like it, judges write me letters about it. The medical profession must like it—most of my letters from men and my phone calls from men are from doctors. The psychiatrists especially like it, but don't ask me why. And now, the most confusing thing of all. File clerks, elevator operators, sales girls in department stores, telephone operators, stenographers, garage mechanics, clerks in Helpsy-Selfy stores, school teachers—oh, Heavens, I could go on and on!—like it. What is more puzzling, they buy copies. The U.D.C.s have endorsed it, the Sons of Confederate Veterans crashed through with a grand endorsement, too. The debutantes and dowagers read it. Catholic nuns like it.

"Now, how to explain all of this. I sit down and pull the story apart in my mind and try to figure it all out. Despite its length and many details it is basically just a simple yarn of fairly simple people. There's no fine writing, there are no grandiose thoughts, there are no hidden meanings, no symbolism, nothing sensational—nothing, nothing at all that have made other best sellers best sellers. Then how to explain its appeal from the five year old to the ninety five year old? I can't figure it out. Every time I think I've hit on the answer something comes up to throw out my conclusion.

"Reviews and articles come out commending me on having written such a 'powerful document against war . . , for pacificism.' Lord! I think. I never intended that! Reviews speak of the symbolism of the characters, placing Melanie as the Old South and Scarlett the New. Lord! I never intended that either. Psychiatrists speak of the 'carefully done emotional patterns' and disregard all the history part. 'Emotional patterns?' Good Heavens! Can this be I? People talk and write of the 'high moral lesson.' I don't see anything very moral in it. I murmur feebly that 'it's just a story' and my words are swallowed up while the storm goes over my head about 'intangible values,' 'right and wrong' etc. Well, I still say feebly that it's just a simple story of some people who went up and some who went down, those who could take it and those who couldn't. And when people come along and say that I've done more for the South than anyone since Henry Grady I feel very proud and very humble and wish to God I could take cover like a rabbit....

"P.S. Small things do make me happy. The marked clipping, for instance. I sweated blood to try to make the voices sound differently and never dreamed anyone would catch it. The problem, for instance, of Archie and Will. Both Georgians, both practically illiterate, but one with a mountain voice and one with a wire grass voice. And Rhett and Ashley, both gentlemen, both educated, but with different intonations. It meant completely different sentence constructions, vocabularies not only in their words but in their thoughts and when I, as author, wrote about them."

--excerpted from Margaret Mitchell's 'Gone with the Wind Letters edited by R. Harwell.

This post is part of our series A Week in August: The Margaret Mitchell Tribute. Be sure to check out the other posts and leave your comments either here or on the Margaret Mitchell thread. 

A Week in August: The Margaret Mitchell Tribute

Non omnis moriar multaque pars mei vitabit Libitinam.

August 16 being the day Margaret Mitchell died, we thought a tribute was in order.  But then, between us being ourselves and a lovely lady reader giving us advice, that tribute quickly evolved into a series. So why not declare this week a Margaret Mitchell week and have a little snippet of her letters/writing outside Gone with the Wind each day, while inviting you to share your thoughts on MM and GWTW with us?

Sounds like a good enough plan, so let's proceed, shall we? Today being the first day of our tribute, and the date on which Margaret Mitchell passed away, we thought we'd simply invite you to share what Gone with the Wind means to you and the impact Margaret Mitchell's writing has had on your life so far. This thread will be open all week, so please join us and leave your comments below.

We'll go first:

iso:

Like many Windies, it's hard for me to fully express what Margaret Mitchell and  Gone with the Wind mean to me. But the most succinct answer I can give in this short space is that Margaret Mitchell was the first author to make me truly fall in love with literature. No book before or since has moved me like Gone with the Wind has. No other author has ever inspired me the way Margaret Mitchell first did, through the sheer power of her words and her characters, to want to be a writer myself one day. Everyone deserves to have a book like that in their lives--a book that inspires love for the written word--and Gone with the Wind is my book. And for that, thank you, Margaret Mitchell! 

Bugsie:

Dear Mrs. Mitchell, 

I've often wondered what it was about your book that made me always remember it, for I've known many books that were prettier than it and certainly more innovative and, I fear, historically much more objective and kind. But somehow, I always remembered Gone with the Wind. Even during the years when I thought I had grown out of it and was immersed into so many other wonderful books, I always remembered yours and wondered what Scarlett and Rhett were doing. And there I have my answer, for no other book, however wonderful, has ever given me characters like yours. Characters so strong that I see them not only as old friends, but almost as real people. Gone with the Wind and its figures are simply part of my life now and that's all there is to it.

Cheesily, 

Bugsie

Well, now it's your turn! Kicking off the week-long Margaret Mitchell thread.

Something Old, Something New: Everything Related to Scarlett Saying 'I Do' (to Rhett, of course!)

Imagine it's 1868 and you've been invited to a wedding held in one of Atlanta's finest parlors--that of Miss Sarah Jane Hamilton. The event is still a couple of days away, but the entire city is already sizzling with gossip and anticipation. One question is on everyone's mind: What will the bride, Miss Hamilton's scandalous niece, be wearing? She is a widow of only a year after all, how much bolder can she get?  (Though judging by her engagement ring, that perfectly vulgar piece that Captain Butler bought for her in Europe, one can never tell... )

If you're not one of the lucky few who've been privy to all the juicy details prior to the blessed event, worry not! How We Do Run On is here to provide you with a well-informed insight into the soon-to-be Mrs. Butler's toilette, as well as with a gallery of fashionable dresses she can choose from, hidden from prying eyes after the jump. We even have widow wedding dresses for you!

A Victorian Wedding Certificate

The Wedding Dress: White Silk, Lace and "Elegant Simplicity" 

We'll start, of course, with the element that surely has you most preoccupied, that central piece of any wedding and dream of any bride to be--the wedding dress. Regarding this year's bridal style, our trusted source, Harper's Bazar, spells it plainly out for us: "Bridal toilettes are remarkable for their elegant simplicity. The richest materials plainly made embody the correct idea of a dress for a bride." 

Dresses of white silk and lace are, of course, the de rigueur selection for brides (We're looking at you, Maybelle Merriwether!), but for those who cannot afford silk, dresses of grosgrain, poult de-soie, taffeta or faille are also acceptable. You'll find many examples of elegant wedding dresses after the jump at the end.

As one would expect, a wedding dress worn for a church ceremony would be a little more conservative, calling for a "high bodice and close sleeves." But for a home wedding (aka one in Miss Hamilton's parlor), a lower necklace and pannier skirt (a looped skirt draped over the hips) are acceptable, and in this particular case even highly-recommended. However, Harper's, in a moment of regrettable contradiction, declares that pannier skirts are not popular in wedding attire, only to say that they should be worn for home weddings, in the very next breath. So we guess Scarlett, our bride in question, is free to choose after her own taste (or lack thereof).

The Veil: Less is More

Next off is the veil. Now if Scarlett chooses to follow convention for her wedding to Captain Butler, you won't be seeing any veil. Veils are the property of new brides only; widows do not wear them. But if our rebellious bride decides to break the rules, here's the scoop: this year veils are made of plain tulle without trimming, in line with the edict of "elegant simplicity." This style is deemed both "prettiest" and "very much admired" by Harper's.  As custom, veils should also be long, with the front veil coming close to the waist, while the longer back portion reaches nearly to the train of the dress.  

The Flowers: Orange Blossoms, Clematis, Jasmine and Myrtle, Oh My!  

In the last couple of years, our long preferred wedding flower--the orange blossom--registered a certain and regrettable decline in popularity. Harper's certainly takes a dismissive tone about it: "Orange blossoms are losing prestige for bridal flowers. The buds are stiff, and the full-blown flowers large and coarse looking. They are prettiest and least unbecoming when mingled with other small flowers, such as clematis, jasmine, or the bridal spirae." 

White lilies and myrtle are still very much used as wedding flowers. Myrtle blossoms, in fact, are all the rage with young brides in Europe. Not so for European widows: they are the only ones on the Old Continent who still wear orange blossoms, so it's safe to assume Scarlett will wear them too, if only to be in line with the latest European fashion. 

The Hair: Of Curls and Finger Puffs

We've already established that Reconstruction-era ladies love curls and finger puffs in their hairstyles. So it's little wonder, then, that these elements are considered quite stylish for our 1868 bride: "The front hair is crped [sic]. Soft, light, airy curls float at the back over small finger puffs formed of the natural hair."  Below is an "evening dress" hairstyle from the March 7th, 1868 edition of Harper's Bazar that nicely resembles this description and that could just as well be Scarlett's choice: 

The Accessories: Lots of Fancy Finishing Touches 

Accessories make the (wedding) outfit, so we're certain Scarlett will have had some very fancy finishing touches to crown her bridal glory. Here is what Harper's recommends: "The bridal fan is of white silk or satin under lace, with pearl sticks. Handkerchief trimmed with lace of the kind used in the dress. Gloves of softest kid, and boots of the dress material buttoned with Roman pearls and trimmed with blonde lace."

The Jewelry: Pearls Trump Diamonds 

At least in this year's weddings they do, although, if one thinks of her engagement ring, Scarlett might disagree on this point. Still, Harper's clearly records that "prominence is given them [pearls] in wedding parures even when associated with diamond." 

Engagement rings should be "a solitaire diamond or pearl in crown setting without enamel," a far cry from the tasteless collection of stones Captain Butler presented his betrothed with. (And to think they say he's a man of taste...) Wedding bands are expected to be equally understated: "a plain hoop not very wide, made of twenty-four-karat gold," so we shall wait with bated breath to discover what his choice will be for that.

The Bridesmaids Dresses: Ridiculous This Year as Well  
 
Now that we've covered the bride's outfit, we can take a quick look at what her bridesmaids could be wearing. Poor dear sweet bridesmaids, the style of their dresses won't probably change for the next two centuries! Their dresses are puffed and tulle-d to the max: "Bridesmaid's dresses are of tulle and tarlatan in successive puffs, with a tulle overskirt looped with flowers. A different flower and a becoming color of trimming is assigned to each bridesmaid."  Bridesmaids sometimes wear short veils, in a style similar to the bride's own. 

You May...See the Bride!

So now, dear readers, you know what to expect from the blessed occasion of Scarlett and Captain Butler's union. We sincerely hope we've kept you one step ahead of this brazen combination, so their sartorial choices won't be a surprise--or even worse, a shock--to you.

If you want to see an assortment of wedding dresses, taken both from last year's magazines, and from some editions we miraculously managed to retrieve for you even before they were printed and available to the general public, take a look under the jump!

Which dress do you think Scarlett would choose? Let us know in the comments! 
 

Of Rich Bachelors and Debauchery

This little post today is the warm-up act for a very pretty and detailed insight into Rhett and Scarlett's wedding that the fashionista of our blog (iso, in case you're new around here) will have for you this weekend. (Abundance of period fashion plates! Run for your lives. You have been warned.)

So while my co-blogger is busy with that (and with trying to lock me out of my account once she reads this post), I will assume the voice of a Victorian moralist and see what really lurks beneath Rhett's "I am not a marrying man" statement:

"The main reason, therefore, why the number of marriages in this class of our population is declining is because the men choose to have it so, and not because the women are beyond their capacity to support. Three-fourths of the bachelors of our acquaintance are rich enough to bear the expense even of the most fashionable women; and, what is equally certain, they are bachelors just because they are rich. Wealth often indisposes men to marry, but it rarely has this effect on women. At the period of life when marriage begins to charm the fancy and awaken the sensibilities our fast young men are preoccupied. They have already, in most cases, surrendered their souls to other captors. Dissipation and licentiousness have utterly unfitted them for poetry and love, and they vastly prefer a midnight debauch, to the pleasures of the fireside and the companionship of a devoted wife."

--excerpted from the November 2, 1867 inaugural edition of Harper's Bazar

Ah, exactly like I suspected! It was bitchery and abomination* dissipation and licentiousness that kept Rhett from enjoying the tame pleasures of the hearth and "the companionship of a devoted wife." You will notice, though, how poetry and love are tied together and opposed to debauchery. If Scarlett had been of a more flowery language, that's what she would have told her husband instead of "You can't understand Ashley or me. You've lived in dirt too long to know anything else."

"Dissipation and licentiousness have made you utterly unfitted for poetry and love. Good night."

On a second thought, thank God she wasn't that eloquent. 

*TM: William Faulkner, don't you all faint at once.