Re: (long) Respectable artists my <ahem>

[mcolville@earthlink.net (Matthew M. Colville)]

In article <33FFB164.11F@earthlink.net>, peterf@howling.com wrote:

> Wfjcfjr wrote:
> > 
> > >My specific example is that of L. Frank Baum who wrote " The Wizard of
> > >Oz".
> > >A cute, children's story accepted by the masses.
> > 
> > "The Wizard of Oz" was definitely NOT a children's story. It was a satire.
> > A political one at that (The Cowardly Lion was William Jennings Bryan).
> > Not only is your position historically incorrect, it is pedantic and
> > self-serving. I am not condoning Baum's position, I am simply stating that
> > you have grossly misunderstood what his position and writings were about.
> > Try to show some historical accuracy as well as some knowledge of the
> > subject you are addressing before writing about it.
> 
> Yes, I know all about the political satire. I apologize for not going
> into depth about the fact that his story was turned into a film, which
> since then has been assimilated as a "mainstream family film". 
> 
> Sorry that most people (esp.your average 7 year old) don't know that
> fact about it. 
> Oz is of course the abbreviation for ounce, as in gold bullion (the
> yellow brick road), etc.
> I know about his feelings about the banking system, midwest farming,
> etc.
> 
> I have NOT grossly misunderstood anything, and have more "historical
> knowledge" of Baum, his writings and his treacherous deeds, than you
> will ever know.
> 
> It just has no relationship to my point of supporting the works and
> creations of genocidal humans, and it is of course self-serving.
> 
> peter

from "The Straight Dope" by Cecil Adams.

   "This interpretation was published in an allegedly scholarly journal
(Littlefield, American Quarterly, 1964) I will present it without comment
(more or less) in all it's ridiculous majesty.
   The Wizard of Oz, published in Chicago in 1900, was written by Frank L.
Baum, an endearing dreamer and general nutcake.  Baum had been a reporter
and an editor at newspapers in Chicago and South Dakota, where he had been
in a position to observe the Populist agitation for agrarian reform.  The
Populists felt they were getting screwed by eastern capatalists who
controlled the gold supply, among other things, and one of thier principle
demands was for the free coinage of silver, which would make for "easy
money."  Supposedly this was represented in The Wizard of Oz by Dorothy's
silver shoes (they only became ruby slippers in the move version), which
gave her a "wonderful power," could she but recognize it.  You'll recall
that Dorothy treks all over Oz via the Yellow Brick Road, which represents
the gold standard, the ultimate illusory route to salvation.
   The Tin Woodsman represents the ordinary workingman, reduced to a
dehumanized, heartless machine by  eastern capatalists.  The Scarecrow is
the midwestern farmer whose bumpkinesque fascade conceals his native
shrewdness.  The Cowardly Lion represents politicians in general and
specifically William Jennings Bryan, who was endorsed by the Populists for
president in 1896.  Bryan was a pacifist given to windy oratory, but deep
down he was a brave man.  Dorothy herself represents the Little Guy, naive
but feisty.
   The Emerald City represents Washington D.C. and the Wiz is El
Presidente, who appears awesome but is really an ordinary guy.  He sends
Dorothy out to do battle with the Wicked Witch of the West, namely the
malign forces of nature in the American West.  On the way, Dorothy and her
buddies were attacked by the winged monkeys, who represent (very subtle
metaphor here) the plains Indians.  Dorothy finally conquers the Wicked
Witch with water, representing the power of irrigation, believe it or not. 
Finally, Glinda, the Good Witch of the North (representing Cecil Adams,
symbol of universal righteousness), tells Dorothy she has had the power to
return home ever since page 16, thereby implying that she has frivoled away
an entire book's worth of adventures for nothing.  Our heros learn they
should look within themselves rather than to the government for the
solution to thier problems.  The End.
   The main problem with the preceeding interpretation is that taken in
aggregate it does not make a damned bit of sense.  I mean, why should the
forces of nature (the W.W. of the W.) be so hot for the free coinage of
silver (i.e. Dorothy's footwear)?  Baum was given to occational satirical
touches in his work, I admit, but he was primarily a storyteller rather
than a political commentator, and the bits of symbolism stuck into his
books for the most part don't add up to anything.  However, far be it from
me to discourage the English majors of the world."

   For my part, I agree with Cecil when he says that people who want to
believe this stuff will do so no matter what.  It's usually pointless to
try and argue with them.

-- 
Armed only with wisdom
The Shintao monks fight against the darkness. . .

Role-Playing & Fiction; http://home.earthlink.net/~mcolville