Reaction to Reconstruction Documentary

 

The Fifteenth Amendment African American parade in honor of adoption of the Fifteenth Amendment.

The Hope and Terror of Reconstruction

In class today, we watched a documentary on the Reconstruction era, and it changed how I think about the years after the Civil War. Reconstruction was exciting and revolutionary for African Americans, but what stayed with me most was how quickly that excitement ran into violent resistance. The achievements of this period created immense backlash and struggle, and the film made sure we understood that.

The documentary opened with the Charleston massacre, which it used to show a long history of white terror directed at African Americans. That framing made it clear that the backlash during Reconstruction was not an isolated reaction. It was part of a pattern that stretches across American history, and seeing it laid out that way made the past feel much closer to the present.

The McLean family on their front porch.

From there, the film took us back to Palm Sunday, which signaled the end of the Civil War and the death of slavery. Abraham Lincoln then spoke about Reconstruction and about the right to vote for African Americans, a major moment in a country that had denied Black people so much. 

What I found most moving was the human side of those early days of freedom. They were filled with both apprehension and excitement. Formerly enslaved people needed to reconnect and reunite with family members and loved ones they had lost. I can’t imagine the mix of joy and uncertainty that came with searching for the people taken from you while also trying to build a new life from scratch. Freedom was not just a legal status; it was deeply personal.

But that freedom was far from secure. The 13th Amendment had not been ratified by the states yet, which meant the legal foundation of freedom was still unsettled. Then came the Black Codes, which complicated things even more. Instead of getting a clear path forward, newly freed people were met with confusion and new barriers.

"Two Members of the Ku-Klux Klan
 in Their Disguises," published in
Harper's Weekly on December 19, 1868.

The most upsetting part of the documentary was the creation of the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan terrorized African Americans who managed to acquire a decent amount of land, and it went after their children for attending school, all while others were still struggling to get by. Even small successes could turn a Black family into a target. Learning that was painful, because it showed that the violence was aimed at the very things that make freedom real: owning property, getting an education, and building a stable life. 

My biggest takeaway is that progress for African Americans during Reconstruction was met with violence almost immediately. The documentary didn’t let us treat this era as a simple victory story. It showed hope and terror existing side by side, and that tension is what I’ll remember. This is a part of history I want to keep learning more about, because understanding how quickly these gains were attacked helps me understand why the struggle continued.

Ai Disclosure: I used Claude. AI in a grammar correction and reformatting type of way for my blog post. I specifically asked Claude to not use any sources but my notes to reformat itself into a blog post around 500 words. The images and links embedded in them were done entirely by me, while Claude.AI is responsible for reformatting/grammar. 

GWTW Reaction Post

 

A Theatrical release poster of Gone With The Wind, depicting a passionate embrace between Scarlett and Rhett. 

Gone With The Wind 

My reaction after watching Gone with the Wind is wildly conflicted. While I can appreciate the film’s groundbreaking techniques in cinematography, given how it serves a lot of technological and cinematic advancements for its time. I am entirely put off by the blatant pro-confederacy propaganda and racist caricatures the film embraces. 

Historical Flaws and racism

The film’s depiction of the north is very cutthroat. The movie pushes the narrative that the union’s goal of seceding the south and abolishing slavery is unfair to the south and serves as a foil to our white protagonist. Northerners are called “Yankees” and are portrayed as barbaric un-american soldiers defiling the south’s main practice of its economy. 

It is awfully framed as a romantic and nostalgic southern fantasy of life in the mid-to-late 1800s; while whitewashing the horrors of slavery and historical mistreatment of African-American slaves. We do not see the faults of the confederacy, or Scarlett realizing how morally wrong slavery is. In a movie about the beginning and climax of the civil war. 

It is arguable that the film is intended to show off a flawed perspective of sheltered southerners and the disconnection of their view of slavery through the eyes of Scarlet. But, I strongly disagree with this interpretation as the story almost feels like an old white southern reminiscing about the “good” days of the south, glossing over why the confederacy had to fail. I severely doubt that a majority of filmmakers in 1930s Hollywood would have that much self-awareness regarding racism. 

The movie does not show us the cruelty of servitude.

Hattie McDaniel in a promotional image
as "Mammy" from Gone with the Wind

 It feeds into the “happy slave” trope that its narrative embraces: the racist lie that enslaved African-Americans gleefully consented to being forced into labor. White slave owners are portrayed as “caring” figures who treat their servants well, contributing to the erasure of systemic violence and power imbalance between a master and their slave. 

The film does not shy away with its outdated archetypes at all, given it has a supporting “Mammy” character that embodies all the stereotypical devoted, motherly caretaker

qualities that Black women were characterized as in media beforehand. 

Positive Aspects 

While I will jump to criticize a lot of dated aspects regarding the film’s historical flaws, I do appreciate the core film-making qualities of Gone With The Wind. Many scenes in this movie were shot gorgeously, with lighting being used as an excellent way of conveying the intensity of emotions in certain character moments. 

Intense climax scene between
Rhett and Scarlett displaying unique lighting

The sequence where Rhett kisses Scarlett is my favorite scene in the entire movie, highly because of its use of expressive, yet harsh lighting. Scarlett’s outburst towards Rhett’s unexpected departure from the journey is enhanced with the three-point lighting effect. The atmosphere's colors perfectly represent the conflict between our two romantic characters: red being used to display confrontation. It highlights the struggle of regulating the temper in our emotional state. While orange adds to the agitation and heat of the situation.

The colors put you into perspective to how Scarlett feels, and the betrayal and anger she holds against Rhett for leaving her. 

Conclusion

Gone With The Wind is a film’s glorified depiction of southern life during the brink of the Civil war that advocates pro-confederacy Ideology. It has a hand in producing in its time and overlooks a lot of blatant racism garnered in the movie. I can recognize the movie’s unique character acting and impressive lighting effects being positive attributions of its existence. 

But also heavily dislike the way the film refuses to address its idealization of slavery. 

Town Hall Reaction Post

Susan b. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton posed in a photograph

Elizabeth Cady Stanton on Abolition

I went into this town hall expecting a straightforward history lesson, but I left shocked by what I learned about Elizabeth Cady Stanton. 

Signers of the Declaration
of Sentiments at Seneca Falls in order

In 1848, she co-organized the first women's rights convention, where she spoke on women's suffrage as a major demand. She wanted women to have the right to vote, and she saw that fight as part of a larger fight for justice. 

In the speech, Stanton explained that she had been working with Susan B. Anthony and other abolitionists toward one clear goal: constitutional abolition. She did not want a gradual phase-out. She wanted abolition "written permanently into the law." What stood out to me was how firmly she chose permanence over compromise. For her, half measures were not enough.

Her choice of words struck me just as much. 

Stanton rejected calling slavery an "institution," arguing that the word is too soft. "Institution" sounds orderly, almost respectable. Instead, she called slavery tyranny, practiced generation after generation. By refusing the gentler language, she made her audience face the weight of what was being described.

She also spoke about the human cost, mentioning families being split up and sold. Hearing that detail alongside her demand for permanent change made her argument feel urgent and personal rather than abstract.

My biggest takeaway is how much language and legal permanence mattered to her. Stanton was not asking for slavery to be softened, managed, or slowly wound down. 

She was demanding that it be ended for good, and that the law say so plainly.

Ai Disclosure: I used Claude. AI in a grammar correction and reformatting type of way for my blog post. I specifically asked Claude to not use any sources but my notes to reformat itself into a blog post around ~300 words. The images and links embedded in them were done entirely by me, while Claude.AI is responsible for reformatting/grammar.