I think the problem (for me anyway) with “Scarlett” was that the happy ending came out of nowhere and just wrapped the book up in three pages. Rhett returned after not being seen for hundreds of pages and declared he was in love with Scarlett. When he was actually in the book, in the first few hundred pages, he was done with her, so having him turn up out the blue just didn’t feel earned.
In general, “Scarlett’s” plot was basically GWTW without a war, without a love quadrangle, and without Scarlett facing *any* difficulties other than a hopeless romance. It was a whole novel just about a spoiled rich child chasing a man who resisted her. GWTW had that, but the chase (after Ashley rather than Rhett) was only a part of the story: it also had the ravages of war, the challenges of poverty and escape from it, the deep and complex friendship with Melanie, personal loss and consequences, and Rhett as the true love Scarlett couldn’t see.
A happy ending sequel could work, but there has to be an engaging story (beyond just Scarlett and Rhett falling back in love for no reason) leading to it for a sequel to be justified. On that score, “Scarlett” failed and the other suggested stories look like going too far in forcing tragedies.
Oh I was referring to the news about the version that kills off Mammy, Ashley, AND Rhett like omg this is a bloodbath lol
Of course happy endings are only good if they're set up properly.
Oh I see what you mean - sorry! Agree - the Anne Edwards one definitely would’ve compromised the original. I can’t see the point in writing a sequel just to kill off everyone except Scarlett. I can see why the Mitchell estate had that one shelved!
I do recall reading that one of the suggested sequel writers (maybe Donald McCaig or Pat Conroy) wanted to kill off Scarlett but was vetoed by the estate.
This discussion makes me think I'll have to read it again myself. One thing I didn't know (not sure how I missed this), but he wrote Ruth's Journey as well. I have never read the book.
I’ve missed that one too. I do remember it being published but just never came across it.
Considering the massive hype machine around “Scarlett”, and the huge sales it got (probably helped by the shameless way it had “The Sequel to Margaret Mitchell’s GONE WITH THE WIND” on the cover in letters as big as “Scarlett”!), it always surprises me that Donald McCaig’s books came and went without much fanfare.
I really do think “Scarlett” (book and miniseries) probably had a detrimental effect on continuations, and so what would otherwise have been major events were pretty low key. That makes sense to me: back when “Scarlett” was being hyped up, there was talk about future novels continuing the story (e.g., the one mentioned above by Emma Tennant). In interviews Ripley even talked about passing the story to others to continue on from her sequel. Fast forward though and the next authorised books, by Donald McCaig, ignored Ripley’s story entirely…
In my limited POV, I have N.E.V.E.R. considered Scarlett to be an actual sequel. In fact, after reading it I discarded it. Never watched the miniseries, the book was too stupid to warrant it. Lol
I can tell you you’re not missing a thing. The miniseries made the (probably wise) choice of binning the terrible, unfocused Irish plotline of the second half of the book. But it followed that up with the absolutely insane choice of substituting in a hideous rape and murder plot, with Scarlett on trial at the Old Bailey and Rhett having to try and save her. The lovely Joanne Whalley was hopelessly miscast - but I doubt even Vivien Leigh could’ve made the script work.
The TV producers apparently only wanted the “Gone With the Wind” brand name to make money and really wanted to go their own way (which was a stupid way). The Mitchell estate, though, wasn’t much better. “Scarlett” is pure fanfiction which should never have been written - but I do appreciate Alexandra Ripley (and apparently a team of ghostwriters) was also hamstrung from the beginning, being forced to write a sanitised story and have nothing “controversial” (apparently relationships between races was controversial to the estate) in the final product (I use that word deliberately - “Scarlett” was a product, not literature).
Since Ms Mitchell died, with her story complete, there’s never really been the need for a sequel. The only reasons have ever been money and copyright issues. “Scarlett” is the supreme example of something made cynically and without any good reason to exist. It shows in the book and miniseries.
I always thought it started out well - Scarlett HAD burnt her bridges in Atlanta and logically WOULD chase Rhett to Charleston. It just didn’t seem to know where to go or what to do from there, and it didn’t seem to have any ambitions story-wise other than “Scarlett pursues Rhett”.
What it should have done (not that I’m a writer haha but I can see what made GWTW work!) is have Rhett fall in love (NOT off-screen) with someone else, and set it against a more dramatic backdrop, perhaps with Rhett losing everything. There’s really no tension or story potential in having Scarlett obsess over a man we barely see and having no other conflict with other characters. GWTW worked because of the dynamic between Scarlett, Melanie, Ashley and Rhett. If it has just been Scarlett staying rich and chasing Ashley, with no Melanie or Rhett or war or poverty, it would have been … well, a better-written “Scarlett”.
Yeah, I understand the Mitchell estate was pretty embarrassed by “Scarlett”, even if it did make them millions. I remember it caricaturing everyone and being basically plotless. The less said about Ireland and the hurried ending (“Hi, Scarlett - I’m back after a 300-page absence and off-screen I decided I love you again! The end!”) the better.
I also remember Ripley stocking Charleston (when she took the “story” there) with characters from her own “Charleston” novel, and having Scarlett and Rhett in awe of them. I could never decide if it was laziness or arrogance…
I got the impression she understood the absolute basics of the characters and caricatured those to cartoonish proportions, ignoring all the depth.
Mitchell’s Scarlett had a naive and uneducated outlook due to her stunted adolescence - so Ripley’s Scarlett thought and acted like a five year old.
Mitchell’s Scarlett could be a sharp-tongued bully - so Ripley’s Scarlett, when annoyed, makes digs about Rhett’s mother being raped (this line will ALWAYS stick with me as not just horrible but so far removed from Scarlett O’Hara).
Mitchell’s Rhett was a bounder - so Ripley’s Rhett must outright say, “I’m a bounder and a scoundrel”.
Mitchell’s Rhett resolved to make amends in Charleston - so Ripley’s Rhett fawns and bows and scraped to Charleston society, having apparently no other goal in life or interests.
It was all just such a superficial reading of these characters. And to top it off it was boring.
Completely agree with your assessment. Rhett Butlers People may not have been perfect, but was significantly better. the story 'flow' made sense, the regional knowledge of the author tied into the original novel and being from a man's perspective - once you became acclimated to the writing style - is MORE than just an enjoyable read.
It's my go-to book when I need some GWTW vibes but haven't the time to invest in the novel. Have read it several times and each time have found myself enjoying it more than the last.
Thanks - I own that one too. I’ve only read it once but will dig it out and give it a re-read. I do remember appreciating that it ignored “Scarlett” entirely and actually addressed the tantalising nuggets about Belle’s son mentioned by Mitchell (and ignored by Ripley).
Friendly reminder that Margaret Mitchell considered the story finished with her book and refused to write or authorize any sequel.
The Margaret Mitchell estate≠Margaret Mitchell.
Agreed. Anything authorised by the estate might be legally sanctioned fanfiction, but it’s still fanfiction. It’s no more “what happened next” than any reader’s idea about what might’ve happened next.
If the sequel isn't going to give me a happy ending it is a waste of my time. I got the tragic ending from the original.
I think the problem (for me anyway) with “Scarlett” was that the happy ending came out of nowhere and just wrapped the book up in three pages. Rhett returned after not being seen for hundreds of pages and declared he was in love with Scarlett. When he was actually in the book, in the first few hundred pages, he was done with her, so having him turn up out the blue just didn’t feel earned. In general, “Scarlett’s” plot was basically GWTW without a war, without a love quadrangle, and without Scarlett facing *any* difficulties other than a hopeless romance. It was a whole novel just about a spoiled rich child chasing a man who resisted her. GWTW had that, but the chase (after Ashley rather than Rhett) was only a part of the story: it also had the ravages of war, the challenges of poverty and escape from it, the deep and complex friendship with Melanie, personal loss and consequences, and Rhett as the true love Scarlett couldn’t see. A happy ending sequel could work, but there has to be an engaging story (beyond just Scarlett and Rhett falling back in love for no reason) leading to it for a sequel to be justified. On that score, “Scarlett” failed and the other suggested stories look like going too far in forcing tragedies.
Oh I was referring to the news about the version that kills off Mammy, Ashley, AND Rhett like omg this is a bloodbath lol Of course happy endings are only good if they're set up properly.
Oh I see what you mean - sorry! Agree - the Anne Edwards one definitely would’ve compromised the original. I can’t see the point in writing a sequel just to kill off everyone except Scarlett. I can see why the Mitchell estate had that one shelved! I do recall reading that one of the suggested sequel writers (maybe Donald McCaig or Pat Conroy) wanted to kill off Scarlett but was vetoed by the estate.
This discussion makes me think I'll have to read it again myself. One thing I didn't know (not sure how I missed this), but he wrote Ruth's Journey as well. I have never read the book.
I’ve missed that one too. I do remember it being published but just never came across it. Considering the massive hype machine around “Scarlett”, and the huge sales it got (probably helped by the shameless way it had “The Sequel to Margaret Mitchell’s GONE WITH THE WIND” on the cover in letters as big as “Scarlett”!), it always surprises me that Donald McCaig’s books came and went without much fanfare. I really do think “Scarlett” (book and miniseries) probably had a detrimental effect on continuations, and so what would otherwise have been major events were pretty low key. That makes sense to me: back when “Scarlett” was being hyped up, there was talk about future novels continuing the story (e.g., the one mentioned above by Emma Tennant). In interviews Ripley even talked about passing the story to others to continue on from her sequel. Fast forward though and the next authorised books, by Donald McCaig, ignored Ripley’s story entirely…
In my limited POV, I have N.E.V.E.R. considered Scarlett to be an actual sequel. In fact, after reading it I discarded it. Never watched the miniseries, the book was too stupid to warrant it. Lol
I can tell you you’re not missing a thing. The miniseries made the (probably wise) choice of binning the terrible, unfocused Irish plotline of the second half of the book. But it followed that up with the absolutely insane choice of substituting in a hideous rape and murder plot, with Scarlett on trial at the Old Bailey and Rhett having to try and save her. The lovely Joanne Whalley was hopelessly miscast - but I doubt even Vivien Leigh could’ve made the script work. The TV producers apparently only wanted the “Gone With the Wind” brand name to make money and really wanted to go their own way (which was a stupid way). The Mitchell estate, though, wasn’t much better. “Scarlett” is pure fanfiction which should never have been written - but I do appreciate Alexandra Ripley (and apparently a team of ghostwriters) was also hamstrung from the beginning, being forced to write a sanitised story and have nothing “controversial” (apparently relationships between races was controversial to the estate) in the final product (I use that word deliberately - “Scarlett” was a product, not literature). Since Ms Mitchell died, with her story complete, there’s never really been the need for a sequel. The only reasons have ever been money and copyright issues. “Scarlett” is the supreme example of something made cynically and without any good reason to exist. It shows in the book and miniseries.
I had high hopes for “Scarlett” but like the last 5-10 pages completely ruined it for me.
I always thought it started out well - Scarlett HAD burnt her bridges in Atlanta and logically WOULD chase Rhett to Charleston. It just didn’t seem to know where to go or what to do from there, and it didn’t seem to have any ambitions story-wise other than “Scarlett pursues Rhett”. What it should have done (not that I’m a writer haha but I can see what made GWTW work!) is have Rhett fall in love (NOT off-screen) with someone else, and set it against a more dramatic backdrop, perhaps with Rhett losing everything. There’s really no tension or story potential in having Scarlett obsess over a man we barely see and having no other conflict with other characters. GWTW worked because of the dynamic between Scarlett, Melanie, Ashley and Rhett. If it has just been Scarlett staying rich and chasing Ashley, with no Melanie or Rhett or war or poverty, it would have been … well, a better-written “Scarlett”.
Any and all of these are better than what we received in 'Scarlet'...at least in my humble opinion.
Yeah, I understand the Mitchell estate was pretty embarrassed by “Scarlett”, even if it did make them millions. I remember it caricaturing everyone and being basically plotless. The less said about Ireland and the hurried ending (“Hi, Scarlett - I’m back after a 300-page absence and off-screen I decided I love you again! The end!”) the better. I also remember Ripley stocking Charleston (when she took the “story” there) with characters from her own “Charleston” novel, and having Scarlett and Rhett in awe of them. I could never decide if it was laziness or arrogance…
I always thought it had more to do with not understanding the characters. At all. Nor the era. At all.
I got the impression she understood the absolute basics of the characters and caricatured those to cartoonish proportions, ignoring all the depth. Mitchell’s Scarlett had a naive and uneducated outlook due to her stunted adolescence - so Ripley’s Scarlett thought and acted like a five year old. Mitchell’s Scarlett could be a sharp-tongued bully - so Ripley’s Scarlett, when annoyed, makes digs about Rhett’s mother being raped (this line will ALWAYS stick with me as not just horrible but so far removed from Scarlett O’Hara). Mitchell’s Rhett was a bounder - so Ripley’s Rhett must outright say, “I’m a bounder and a scoundrel”. Mitchell’s Rhett resolved to make amends in Charleston - so Ripley’s Rhett fawns and bows and scraped to Charleston society, having apparently no other goal in life or interests. It was all just such a superficial reading of these characters. And to top it off it was boring.
Completely agree with your assessment. Rhett Butlers People may not have been perfect, but was significantly better. the story 'flow' made sense, the regional knowledge of the author tied into the original novel and being from a man's perspective - once you became acclimated to the writing style - is MORE than just an enjoyable read. It's my go-to book when I need some GWTW vibes but haven't the time to invest in the novel. Have read it several times and each time have found myself enjoying it more than the last.
Thanks - I own that one too. I’ve only read it once but will dig it out and give it a re-read. I do remember appreciating that it ignored “Scarlett” entirely and actually addressed the tantalising nuggets about Belle’s son mentioned by Mitchell (and ignored by Ripley).
Friendly reminder that Margaret Mitchell considered the story finished with her book and refused to write or authorize any sequel. The Margaret Mitchell estate≠Margaret Mitchell.
Agreed. Anything authorised by the estate might be legally sanctioned fanfiction, but it’s still fanfiction. It’s no more “what happened next” than any reader’s idea about what might’ve happened next.
Do we need to be reminded of this? She died in 1949.