“WIZARD OF OZ” RETURNS AS VOTERS PLAY LIKE SCARECROWS
This 2010 to 2012 election period appears to be the best time for progressives to make a response to demagoguery and fascism. That is, if the people or electorate wake up.
In 1900, Frank Baum once wrote the Midwesterners perspective on the national cultural wars of the day. I would like to share the scenario to you (BELOW) here and ask you to identify the characters and monsters we are facing in both the 2010 and 2012 elections.
The following summary was used, by the way, in a Wall Street editorial some years ago. (Here is the scorecard to identify the players then. Who are they now in 2010?) –KAS
http://www.h-net.org/~rural/threads/discoz.html
For those interested in L. Frank Baum’s “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz” (1900) as a populist novel, the following translation table and discussion are helpful:
In the Wizard of Oz: Meaning: ----------------------- --------------------- Oz ounce (oz) of gold Dorothy "Everyman" Tin Woodsman industrial worker Scarecrow farmer Cowardly Lion William Jennings Bryan, populist leader Munchkins the "little people" Yellow Brick Road gold standard Toto a dog
“In the story, Dorothy is swept away from Kansas in a tornado and arrives in a mysterious land inhabited by `little people.’ Her landing kills the Wicked Witch of the East (bankers and capitalists), who `kept the munchkin people in bondage.’
“In the movie, Dorothy begins her journey through the Land of Oz wearing ruby slippers, but in the original story Dorothy’s magical slippers are silver [a reference to the bimetallic system advocated by W.J. Bryan]. Along the way on the yellow brick (gold) road, she meets a Tin Woodsman who is `rusted solid’ (a reference to the industrial factories shut down during the depression of 1893). The Tin Woodsman’s real problem, however, is that he doesn’t have a heart (the result of dehumanizing work in the factory that turned men into machines).
“Farther down the road Dorothy meets the Scarecrow, who is without a brain (the farmer, Baum suggests, doesn’t have enough brains to recognize what his political interests are). [Shades of Marx’s critique of peasants!] Next Dorothy meets the Cowardly Lion, an animal in need of courage (Bryan, with a load roar but little else). Together they go off to Emerald City (Washington) in search of what the wonderful Wizard of Oz (the President) might give them.
“When they finally get to Emerald City and meet the Wizard, he, like all good politicians, appears to be whatever people wish to see in him. He also plays on their fears…. But soon the Wizard is revealed to be a fraud–only a little old man `with a wrinkled face’ who admits that he’s been `making believe.’ `I am just a common man,’ he says. But he is a common man who can rule only by deceiving the people into thinking that he is more than he really is.
“`You’re a humbug,’ shouts the Scarecrow, and this is the core of Baum’s message. Those forces that keep the farmer and worker down are manipulated by frauds who rule by deception and trickery; the President is powerful only as long as he is able to manipulate images and fool the people. [Politics doesn’t change, does it?]
“Finally, to save her friends, Dorothy `melts’ the Wicked Witch of the West (just as evil as the East), and the Wizard flies off in a hot-air balloon to a new life. The Scarecrow (farmer) is left in charge of Oz, and the Tin Woodsman is left to rule the East. This populist dream of the farmer and worker gaining political power was never to come true, and Baum seems to recognize this by sending the Cowardly Lion back into the forest, a recognition of Bryan’s retreat from national politics.
“Dorothy is able to return to her home with the aid of her magical silver shoes, but on waking in Kansas, she realizes that they’ve fallen off, representing the demise of the silver coinage issue in American politics.”
Source: Michael A. Genovese, _Los Angeles Times_, 19 March 1988. (He teaches Political Science and is director of the Peace Studies program at Loyola Marymount University, where I teach.)
It’s amazing what I do to keep from writing my final exams.
Sincerely,
Jim Devine BITNET: jndf@lmuacad INTERNET: jdevine@lmumail.lmu.edu Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ., Los Angeles, CA 90045-2699 USA 310/338-2948 (off); 310/202-6546 (hm); FAX: 310/338-1950 if bitnet address fails, try jndf@lmuacad.bitnet
Eslkevin's Blog 
With the Teaparty and its recent gains, progressives need to bite and fight back as we did 100 years ago in national and presidential elections. We need real progressive people in office to fight off the fascists and luke-warm leaders we have now.
Why ‘The Wizard of Oz’ is the most popular film of all timeWhat ‘The Wizard of Oz’ reveals about ourselves
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-narcissus-in-all-us/201006/why-the-wizard-oz-is-the-most-popular-film-all-time
By Ilan Shrira on June 4, 2010
According to the Library of Congress, The Wizard of Oz (from 1939) is the most watched film ever. This is due in part to its regular broadcast on network TV beginning in the 1950s.
What’s made the film so timeless? What does it tell us that we find so appealing?
One interesting collection of insights comes from the writer Salman Rushdie, who shows that The Wizard of Oz has been successful because it embodies some of our most enduring values. At the same time, it also raises some provocative ideas.
Power and powerlessness
One prominent theme revolves around the inadequacy of adults—their inability to live up to expectations and to face down the larger forces in life. Adults, especially the good adults, are portrayed as powerless.
In the beginning, for example, Auntie Em and Uncle Henry are unable to prevent the wicked Miss Gulch from taking Toto away (after she gets bitten by him). They’re also helpless to protect their farm, or to protect Dorothy, from the oncoming tornado. Later, the film’s defining moment comes when we learn that the all-powerful Wizard is in fact powerless. These episodes will be disappointing to younger viewers, but they should hardly surprise older viewers, who are well-accustomed to the fallibility of adults. Is the film trying to convey this reality to children too?
Related Links
A Brief History of Wicked Green Drinks
Cinematherapy: Reel Therapy During the Holidays
Learning to be Self-ish
Looking Beyond Our Problems and Looking Toward Our Solutions, Pt. 1
Pursuit of the whole
Find a Therapist
Search for a mental health professional near you.
Find Local:
Acupuncturists
Chiropractors
Massage Therapists
Dentists
and more!
Another theme centers on the relationship between power and gender. The Wizard of Oz veers from the traditional Hollywood storyline in that there’s no male hero. In fact, quite the opposite: the only two figures with any real power are women—Glinda the Good Witch and Miss Gulch/Wicked Witch. The male leads—the Scarecrow, Tin Man, and Cowardly Lion—play the classic “common man” roles, with little power to control their own destiny. The only other powerful character to emerge is Dorothy.
In fact, after the struggle over Toto, the tornado can be understood as the clashing forces between Miss Gulch and the headstrong Dorothy. (It’s no coincidence that Dorothy’s last name is Gale). When we get to Oz, Glinda, Dorothy, and the Witch are the three powerful figures, while all the men are weak (including the Wizard). Thus, similar to the theme about the inadequacy of adults, we’re also getting the message that men’s power is illusory, whereas women’s power is real.
Were these themes a reaction to the turmoil of the Great Depression during the previous decade, and society’s (men’s) inability to protect people from it? Or did the (all male) writers and producers of the film have something else in mind? Whatever the reasons, it’s intriguing that the most popular movie ever features such a reversal of traditional power roles.
“There’s no place like home”
Dorothy’s immortal line is considered one of the central messages of the movie. If you ever go looking for your heart’s desire, you don’t have to look any further than your own back yard. In other words: your roots are important. Although this lesson is played up in the final scene of the film, the bulk of the story is instead about the dream of escaping, the desire to leave the here and now to find a better place.
This desire is stirred early when Auntie Em admonishes Dorothy to go “find yourself a place where you won’t get into any trouble.” Dorothy wonders whether such a place exists, and her rendition of somewhere “Over the Rainbow” provides the answer.
And is there any real contest between 1) the gray world of Kansas where there’s nothing to do and no one to play with, and 2) a place where you’re instantly loved by many (the Munchkins), you have a clear, meaningful goal (to see the wizard), and you have three new friends to help you reach that goal? There’s little doubt whether viewers would want to stay in Kansas or escape someplace else.
But Dorothy, who’s still a child back in Kansas, has little choice but to stay for now. Without any real alternatives, isn’t it better to just convince yourself that you’re exactly where you want to be?
These contrasting values (escaping vs. embracing your roots) broaden the movie’s appeal, allowing you to take away whichever message speaks to you more. Or better yet, the two messages can be taken together: Be happy with what you’ve got, but you can still dream of escaping to a better place.
We get a related message from Glinda, when she tells Dorothy that she’s had the power to return herself home all along, she just didn’t know it. Similarly, the Scarecrow, Tin Man, and Cowardly Lion discover that what they were seeking—a brain, a heart, and some courage—were actually inside of them all along. Overall, the film is affirming that you have the ability to get what you want, and this power comes from within. Other people may be able to offer some moral support, but ultimately it’s up to you.
Is there any more predominant message of American individualism than this one? We never get tired of hearing that we control our own outcomes—it empowers us and instills us with hope.
Human nature
One of the more subtle messages of the film is the way it characterizes human nature: people are depicted as generally good. This theme is best expressed when Dorothy accuses the Wizard of being a very bad man for deceiving them, to which he humbly replies, “Oh no, my dear…I’m a very good man. I’m just a very bad wizard.” (He’s powerless, but good.) Instead, all the evil emanates from the Wicked Witch, who can get others to behave badly while under her spell. Her foot soldiers, for example, turn out to be pretty nice guys once the witch is dead.
Thus, our goodness and our strengths come from within ourselves, while our wickedness originates from the outside—in this case by a truly evil person. This view of human nature fits with the current view held by many psychologists, who perceive people as well-intentioned but capable of behaving badly under harsh conditions or cruel authority figures.
Taken as a whole, you can see how The Wizard of Oz channels much of the optimistic worldview of modern Western culture. Moreover, the film’s popularity has made it an efficient means of socializing this worldview to the millions who watch it for the first time. Likewise, when you find that this worldview gets shaken, seeing the film again will help restore it.
(This post was co-authored by Josh Foster.)