Customer Reviews

Scarlett - The Sequel To Margaret Mitchell's Gone With The Wind

5 star:		(125)
4 star:		(70)
3 star:		(60)
2 star:		(71)
1 star:		(118)

 

 

As a huge fan of GONE WITH THE WIND, I couldn't help but be excited when the sequel was first announced. The day it was released, I bought it eagerly - 24 hours later I finished the last page, closed the book and tried to distill all I was feeling - the anger and disappointment at seeing so fine a work as GWTW and its sparkling characters, distorted into something "mass market" and extremely unacceptable. When Margaret Mitchell was asked what became of Scarlett and Rhett, she replied that, like Rhett, she "didn't give a damn". She was tired of the whole book, which had consumed almost 10 years of her life. In her will, she had strict instructions that, upon her death, any remaining papers, notes, etc, relating to her writing of GWTW should be burned - which her husband faithfully carried out. Thus, we will never know if Mrs. Mitchell DID have ideas of what happened to the characters, of if the rumors WERE true... what were the rumors? That GWTW hadn't ended in the pre-publication version, with Rhett leaving Scarlett. Rumor says that it went on a bit longer, sort of just tapering off (the novel was not finished when the publisher bought it), but they had to choose some point to end the story, and Rhett leaving was the point decided upon. How true these rumors are, or if they are just wishful thinking by fans, will never be known. One thing that is certain is that there was a sequel commissioned by MGM around 1972 titled "TARA" (the author's name is not known). Unfortunately, MGM didn't really hold the rights to the story, only the film, and "Tara" never made it out of the galleys. It's said that "Tara" was superbly written, and not only stayed true to the original story and characters, but also to Mrs. Mitchell's incredible writing style. How sad that it was never published. We jump forward many years to the publication of Scarlett- The Sequel To Margaret Mitchell's 'Gone With The Wind'. The writer is Alexandra Ripley, a southern writer with quite a few historical romance novels under her belt. Like Margaret Mitchell, Ms. Ripley grew up in the South, and had a solid background from which to compose a sequel to GWTW. Sadly however, she is simply not the caliber of writer that Mitchell was, nor does Ripley seem to have even the barest of grasp of the subject matter or even to understand it. In GWTW, there isn't a single word written that doesn't, in some way, have meaning with some other part of the book; there is no action that doesn't further the story or deepen the characterizations. Even the most minor, throw away, lines have some meaning in the context of the story, such as Scarlett relating to the Tarleton Twins that Mammy Jincy had once told her fortune and declared that she would marry a gentleman with dark hair and a moustache, to which Scarlett replied that she didn't like "dark haired gentlemen." It's a seemingly innocent line near the beginning of the book, but in the overall context, is a foreshadowing of what's to come. Alexandra Ripley doesn't seem to have noticed this, and not only is most of the action in the book pointless, but it doesn't even relate to anything else, nor does it deepen our understanding of characters or their motivations. Page after stupefying page of tea parties, visits to the market, and knee slapping parities with Scarlett's white-trash Irish relatives are the bulk of the action. None of it leads anywhere, nor does any of it have any point. The scenes could be removed and wouldn't affect the story in the least. Dialogue is similarly inept. Characters make small talk, and none of it does anything but fill space. It's as if Ms. Ripley was told that she had to fill a certain number of pages, content be damned! Perhaps what's even worse, is the actions that DO propel the story forward are so out of step with the characters detailed in the original novel that it all becomes absurd. Scarlett selling Tara? No way. There was nothing in the world that could come between Scarlett and Tara, yet Ripley has Scarlett sell it off without even so much as a second thought. Essential characters from the original are similarly dispatched without delay. Mammy? Killed off. Ashley and Aunt Pitty? Gone ASAP. Then there are the situations that strongly suggest that Scarlett has suffered some form of brain damage from the hardships she's endured. At the ridiculous "masked ball" that Atlanta holds, Ripley's Scarlett is so stupid that she doesn't even recognize her own husband, Rhett! The suspicion of brain damage is confirmed when Scarlett is in Ireland and doesn't realize that a Civil War, similar to the one she lived through, is brewing. Plus, Scarlett, who in the original novel, only recognized "common sense" and didn't go in for the "twaddle" of religion and mysticism, is strangely taken by witchcraft when she's given a middle-of-the-night caesarian (with the kitchen butcher knife!) by an old witch... then she names the kid "Cat". I simply cannot image Scarlett naming a child of hers anything so awful as "Cat". Naming the child after her mother, whom Scarlett worshiped as something like a Madonna, would have been much more believable and in character. Possibly the biggest mistake was Ripley forgetting or ignoring the part of Gone With The Wind that read (paraphrasing): "When a Southerner took the time to pack a trunk and travel 20 miles, the visit was seldom for a duration of less than a month" It goes on to talk about how relatives would arrive for Sunday dinner and stay until they were buried some years later - newlyweds would visit and often remained in some pleasant place until their second child was born. Because houses were large, food plentiful, and staff's huge, visitors posed no problem. Sadly, Ripley has Scarlett traveling great distances at the drop of a hat, staying a few days, then going somewhere else. She travels as if it were modern times, and airlines existed, going from place to place in record time - even an across-the-ocean voyage to Ireland is quick of minimal importance to Scarlett! I could go on about all the defects, but what's the point? One thing that is clear is that as bad as the sequel is, it was, at one time, even worse. After Alexandra Ripley turned in her finished manuscript, it was felt to be so bad that a ghost-writer was brought in to re-work it considerably. This is not rumor or unsubstantiated fact. Before the book was published, it was common knowledge that it was being ghost-rewritten, so we can only imagine what a mess the story must have been originally. I've tried, on several occasions, to re-read the novel; to give it a second chance, and hopefully, see it on its own merits. I've not been able to accomplish that considerable feat. The book is just so poorly written, with such a lackluster story, situations and characters, that it cannot even stand on its own. This is quite sad. Hopefully, some day, we might get to read the sequel, "Tara", that was written in the early 70's. Until that time, just pretend that "Scarlett" was never written and imagine your own ending to Gone With The Wind... even in your worst nightmares, you are sure to come up with a better sequel than by Ms. Ripley and Ghost-Writer.

It has been a number of years since I rushed out and purchased my first edition copy of Scarlett and devoured it in a day. The bad taste left in my mouth then, remains with me today.

I found the entire idea of Scarlett abandoning her beloved South for Ireland to be the most insulting thing ever thrust upon a fan of any story. I am supposed to believe that this is what happens to the Great AMERICAN Novel's storyline?

I am also hard pressed to believe that Scarlett, a woman who tried so desperately to emulate her genteel mother, would somehow find herself evolving into an action hero. During the painful course of my journey through the pages I was constantly finding myself rolling my eyes and shaking my head. By the end, I was relatively certain that Ripley's primary influence was Bruce Willis in Die Hard and that she had never as much as had turned a single page of Mitchell's original work.

I am deeply offended that the Mitchell Trusts allowed this literary travesty to happen.

My only consolation is in knowing that this volume is rightly filling landfills the way no other book ever has, making remaining copies such as my own, an oddity whose collectible value increases with every year.

It is based on that premise alone that I would encourage anyone to consider its purchase.

I really, really tried to like this book, but all I can say is that it's an even bigger disappointment than I expected. Like many other Gone With the Wind fans who know the classic book and the movie frontwards and backwards, I was excited about the prospect of a continuation of Scarlett and Rhett's saga. However, instead of being entertained, I was insulted by nearly nine hundred pages of juvenile writing and a laughable, boring plot. None of the rich detail and vivid imagery that made Margaret Mitchell's book a masterpiece can be found here. Tara is a distant memory, and Georgia is just another spot on the map.

What's worse, all the marvelous characters who seemed so life-like in Mitchell's book are either killed off or ignored in Ripley's travesty. Except of course, Scarlet and Rhett, who are more irritating than interesting. Every facet of their personalities that made these two some of literature's most fascinating and unique human beings has been destroyed. Instead of drama, we get this bit of comedy: Scarlett loses all sensibilities and becomes a barefoot Irish peasant who cusses and has extra-marital sex. Good for her. Rhett loses his masculinity and is now a neutered mama's boy who dotes on his mother so much it began to make me uncomfortable.

One thing REALLY bothered me about this so-called sequel. Rhett and Scarlett's four-year-old daughter Bonnie died shortly before this book begins, and Scarlett never seems to mourn her, even though this beloved child died right before her eyes. In fact, Scarlet scarcely gives Bonnie a thought. Yet we're supposed to believe that when Cat is born that Scarlet suddenly becomes the world's most loving mother? Never mind the fact that after Cat was conceived (after Rhett and Scarlet had sex on the beach--how modern) Rhett spouts off some psychobabble to Scarlet about how he made love to her ONLY because he was relieved that they didn't drown. And then he deserts her. Examples like this left little to admire in either character.

After struggling through the first 600 pages of Scarlet's uninteresting non-adventures, I skipped to the end, read the highly unsatisfactory ending, and drop-kicked the book across the room. If you really feel you must read this book, do what I did and look for a used copy at a rummage sale. But I should warn you: Even if it only costs you a quarter, you'll still feel like you spent too much.

GONE WITH THE WIND ends with a question mark. Scarlett's ideal mate, Rhett Butler, has left her--and she is determined to get him back. But can she? Did she? And author Margaret Mitchell was beseiged with fans who wanted to know. To one and all Mitchell gave the same answer: the story ended where it ended. There was nothing more to tell. But where there is a will, there is a way--and especially so where there is a buck to be made. Some thirty-plus years after her untimely death, Mitchell's estate was persuaded to release the rights, and Alexandria Ripley was contracted to "finish" the story.

Although she is writing a sequel, Ripley goes to considerable pain to prevent readers from compairing her style and her novel to Mitchell's style and her novel--and so, wisely perhaps, Ripley wastes little time in killing off Mammy and moving the action out of Georgia entirely. But Ripley also revises the leading characters, and in the most bizarre ways imaginable. Scarlett gives Tarah to her sister Sue Ellen and runs off to Ireland, where she learns it is much easier to dance a jig if you take your corset off first. Give away Tara? To the sister she always hated? Ireland? Stranger still, when Rhett leaves Scarlett he goes to Charleston, where he tries to make amends with his family while also indulging his love of horticulture. HORTICULTURE? Well Hush My Mouth And Stuff Me With Chiltins!

Now, Ripley--who is best known for such mild-mannered but best-selling historical romances as CHARLESTON--isn't a bad writer. And frankly, if we changed the names Rhett and Scarlett to something else, this would be an okay book. But Ripley ain't no Margaret Mitchell. And Ripley's versions of Scarlett and Rhett have about as much to do with Mitchell's original creations as Santa Claus has to do with the Fourth of July. As Mitchell said, the story ended where it ended; there was nothing more to tell. And frankly, my dear, Alexandra Ripley should have left it at that.

When I heard about the sequel to Margaret Mitchell's "Gone With The Wind", my favorite book, I was a bit skeptical at first. It wasn't even written by the origional author, and futhermore, how could there possibly be a sequel to such an amazing book? It doesn't need one. Nevertheless, my curiosity overcame me and I read the book, I had to find out if Rhett and Scarlett ever got back together. In the beginning I was disappointed, Ripley killed off Mammy and made Scarlett so easily leave Tara when Tara was supposedly her heart and soul. As I kept on reading, I was greatly surprised at the quality of Ripley's writing and the way she made it so that I couldn't put the book down. Scarlett had grown up into a strong, respected woman, like her mother...who she always wanted to be, and Rhett came back, which made my time reading the book well spent. Although "Scarlett" is not as good as the origional, I'd have to say it's definately on my top ten list. Alexandra Ripley portrays each character in the same manner that Margaret Mitchell did, which was a pleasant surprise because I didn't think that any author was half as good as her until I read this book. Rhett is still the same dashing character, although quite older, and Ashley regains his old image when Scarlett returns for a visit. In the first novel, Gerald tells her that the love of the land is in her Irish blood, it really shows through in the second. Her passion for building Ballyhara to perfection in order to restore the O'Hara land, proves that Scarlett really does have Irish blood in her. Furthermore, I'd have to say that seeing Scarlett mature from a young, selfish little girl into an intelligent self-sufficient individual and a loving mother really makes this book worth reading. Her strong desire to get Rhett back in the end without acting desperate shows her great strength in character and is inspiring. As a whole, I'd say this novel is definately worth reading if you're a fan of "Gone With the Wind" and are craving to find out what happens with Scarlett and Rhett. You won't be disappointed.

I read all the other reviews about this book, and though I agree with the ones that are saying this book is horrible, they did not exactly furnish reasons for it.
The first aspect of Gone With the Wind that makes it a classic is the character analysis. Mitchell blatantly, in Scarlett's case, and more subtly in other cases, analyses the different characters in her novel: Rhett, the state of Georgia, the city of Atlanta, the Confederate cause, Melanie, Gerald O'Hara... This is completely and totally missing from Scarlett. Instead there is only a constant monologue in her head. Besides the fact that Ripley contradicts every single characterization in GWTW on Scarlett (she's a shrinking little idiot who alternates between obsequiousness and fright), she also removes every bit of analysis that made GWTW great. Scarlett and the other characters just simply are not interesting without the analysis.
Secondly, GWTW was wonderful because of Mitchell's portrayal of the historic attitude. This appeal never once appears in Scarlett because it is completely contradicted. Somehow, I do not think that it would be considered proper in the rigidly structured Southern society to have a casual conversation with a married woman about how you used to look up her skirts.
The overall impression I got from this book was that it was fake. The plot was fake, the characters were fake, and it sounded like a cheap scandal bestseller. It does not deserve to steal Gone With the Wind's wonderful story and characters and pervert them.

Though Alexandra Ripley's impressive sense of history and her flair for romantic fiction set against a broad canvas are clearly on display here, this novel nearly destroyed my love for the original. The classic characters of Rhett, Scarlett, Ashley, Mammy, etc. are subjected to a mish-mashy plot that, as it rambles along, increasingly diminishes their glow and vibrancy. The twists in the plot defy description. It is utterly repugnant, both in concept and in delivery of that concept. Unlike Margaret Mitchell's true original, which had its heaping helpings of soap-opera, and which sprang from the driven mind of an original voice, this book feels manufactured in every way. It robs ideas and characters created with affection and creativity and pushes them, unwillingly, into situations that feel at every step false, silly and even stupid. Steer clear of the television film which uses this epic disaster as its basis -- it is even worse. Commercial fiction at its most engineered, and least authentic.

I think I'm one of the few people who have read "Scarlett" BEFORE "Gone With The Wind" and I can tell that it is a good novel in itself. The problem is that everyone is comparing it to GWTW. After reading the two books in chronological order, my opinion of "Scarlett" being a good novel hasn't changed. The problem is that I can't feel it's a sequel. Except for the first 100 pages or so, I always felt that this is a book about a woman who happens to have the same name as the heroine of GWTW.

Alexandra Ripley tries to do her best in recreating the feeling of GWTW; copying scenes (the one about Scarlett getting lost at night at Tara reminds me very much of the scene behind the slave cabins where she swore she'll never be hungry again, and it's just one example) surprisingly do well, the hastily "resurrection" of Melanie's character in Anne Hampton is more far-fetched but she's only a minor character, so the problem lies not here.

The main problem is that Alexandra Ripley is not Margaret Mitchell. Scarlett's personality (and many of the events of her life) was coming from Margaret's personality and life. Ms Ripley is an excellent writer (and if I'll ever be happy about this whole fuss about "Scarlett", it will be because it made the author famous, so her other novels became available here) but she's a completely diferent personality. She said it herself: "Scarlett is not my kind of person" - although she has at least something in common with her, writing about strong and determined women wasn't difficult for her after creating the characters Elizabeth Tradd (heroine of "Charleston"), Mary MacAlistair (of "New Orleans Legacy") or Ginevra Pazzi (The Time Returns). (In fact, since GWTW every author writes about strong and determined women, so it's not a big deal any more.) The main difference is that GWTW had a sad, dark atmosphere and "Scarlett" doesn't have it (again, except for the first 100 pages or so), Alexandra's sunny personality and good sense of humor shines through the lines. Hey, Scarlett learned how to enjoy life. Yes, she changed too much. This is not Scarlett O'Hara of Gone With The Wind any more. But she has to change in order to have Rhett's love again, and the main purpose of the whole book as to reunite this couple. That's where the problem is. Scarlett of GWTW can never be happy. It is in her personality. It is her fate. She has never been happy in her whole life and simply doesn't know how to be happy, to learn this she had to be changed. The problem with "Scarlett" is that if they wanted it to have a happy end, it simply couldn't have been written differently.

Ms Ripley did her best. She continued the story the only way it could be continued. She found the minor threads like the hints about Rhett's family in GWTW and went on to explore them. Almost everything in "Scarlett" originates from GWTW. The book is also filled with the small details and tidbits I love so much in history novels (gosh, I've never known that new calling cards are interleaved with tissue...). Also, the main concept of the book, Scarlett's going back to her roots and finding herself before she can be happy again, and learning how to set Rhett free (you know the proverb... if you love someone, set him free, if he comes back he is yours, if he doesn't, he never was yours) is excellent. It is basically a story about growing up (she's 35, but it's never too late) and an excellent one. I think it would be more acknowledged and successful without GWTW (I mean, IF GWTW had never existed and Alexandra Ripley simply wrote a novel about a woman founding her lost love again, it would be a great success, and on its own right.) I gave this book a rate of 5 stars because it is good as a stand-alone story. For me, it's not a sequel. It's a different story about a different woman.

Gone With The Wind is not a novel that was meant to be continued. It is a whole and complete story by itself. The mere idea of writing a sequel was an insult to the memory of Margaret Mitchell who CLEARLY STATED that the novel is not meant to be continued. I don't know whose idea it was to write a sequel, I know it wasn't Ms Ripley's (who was specially selected to do the job as far as I know), but I guess it was mainly for money. At least they shouldn't have made a movie of this book, that was really awful and most of the story, with the murder case and all, doesn't have anything to do with this book so I don't know what were they thinking.

"Must have" books for you if you liked GWTW and/or Scarlett: "Charleston", "On Leaving Charleston" and "New Orleans Legacy" by Alexandra Ripley and "Lost Laysen" by Margaret Mitchell. Also, please, have in mind that these books paint a very idealized picture about the old South so don't forget to pick also an Alex Haley novel.

I bought this book hoping to read the continuation of not only Scarlett's life, but also all the other characters. Ashley-- how would he get along without his wife? How would Beau and Wade and Ella turn out? What about all the Clayton County folks and would she reconcile with the Atlanta Old Guard?
In this I was sadly disappointed. The "original" characters that helped shape GWTW make cameo appearances. Pitty is spoken of, but never appears, and India, the Tarletons, and the Merriwethers, to name a few, are given brief appearances at best. Tony Fontaine comes back from Texas, is devoted to for a couple of pages, and then departs, leaving me with a here-they-are-now-they're-gone feeling. Only the Charleston Aunts have a major role. By the first few pages, Ripley has severed any chance of Scarlett's reconciliation with the Old Guard, and by the first half of the book is over, has done away completely with the original GWTW supporting characters and come up with her own for the rest of the book. It was really hard for me to care about Scarlett's Irish family characters and what happened to them, they seemed too underdeveloped, and I felt a little lost when Rhett would materialize out of nowhere and then vanish. It's not a real meal like GWTW was, it's only a snack, and I think that since GWTW took 7 yrs to write, if a little more time had been spent on Scarlett I thought it could be a lot better. And did they really have the saying "when pigs fly" in the 1870's??
Not only did I want to find out what would happen to Scarlett and Rhett, but I also wanted to see if all the supporting characters that made GWTW the great book it was would recover and have a brighter future, as well. In that the book is sadly lacking. I wish I'd checked this out at the library, because for me this was a one-time read.

"Gone With the Wind" is my favorite novel of all time, and I am a voracious and well-read reader, most notably of the great classics. As many fans must feel, it is dissapointing to know that a major reason that Margaret Mitchell did not write a sequel was due to her distaste of the spotlight. However, reread the original "Gone With the Wind" and use your imagination as to how Rhett and Scarlett would have overcome their troubles and eventually find eachother again. It will be far more comforting than reading this "sequel".
No, Ms. Ripley is not a bad author in her own sense, but her style will remind you of those romance novels you read in junior high; not the intellectual, lush prose, extensive characterizations and authentic scenery provided by Ms. Mitchell. And Ripley's characterizations of Rhett and Scarlett do not ring true. Frequently Scarlett narrates the novel (something Mitchell never allowed), and she is initially introduced as a desperate, scared, selfish character who never reflects on her any of her old experiences- she is only an old overacted archetype of Scarlett. I would have expected Ripley to begin where the other book ended, but it is almost as if Scarlett had never known Melanie or Ashley, had a final insight into her mistakes and confrontational blow with Rhett. All is forgotten, much like taking two steps forward and five steps back. Both of her children are only mentioned in two scenes- that's forgotten too. Knock Tara and Mammy and Atlanta and Ashley off the list as well, and you see...well everything about the original is gone. No, this is in no way a sequel to what Margaret Mitchell wrote, but it would make an above average Harlequin romance. It could be called "Scarlett O' Hara's Irish Adventure!" or something of that sort.
I'd like to think that instead of this scenario, Scarlett would retreat a bit,examine her conscience(but not too much!), go home to Tara, teach Wade and Ella a bit of her business sense and love o' the land, keep her promise to Melanie and also watch over Beau. That's what Scarlett O'Hara was- willful, strong, and always a survivor. In the end, I feel that Rhett was probably testing her by leaving, but would still keep a watchful eye on her- as he frequently did throughout the novel- to see if her newgrown heart was truly real. Remember too, that he is an emotional wreck after the miscarraige, Bonnie and Melanie's death, and a blow to his ego upon learning that Scarlett has promised Melanie to look after Beau and Ashley, which furthers my theory that he would return to Scarlett...later. But if you want your Scarlett to act like a desperate coward, who abandons everything in life, read this "sequel".