Wow, what child would have guessed that the magical story of "The Wizard of Oz" was actually disguised as a history lesson. The characters of the book do fit the roles of the country during the late nineteenth century, but why did the author never admit to such brilliant writing. This time in history happens to have been the turning point for our modern and industrialized society, but who would have expected to uncover the past in a childhood novel?
The characters do fit the roles that the author says that they do, but it doesn't make sense why Baum would not admit to it being an allegory to the politics of the late nineteenth century. He says that it he wrote it "solely to please children of today". If it was so obviously an allegory to the politics then why was it not found until a high school teacher used it to teach his history class in 60 years later?
I have never known that "The Wizard of Oz" could be looked at in a whole different perspective. It's very interesting how the numerous parts of the story almost perfectly match up to economic/social events at the beginning of the 1900's. Although L. Frank Baum wrote that the story's only purpose was enjoyment for children, it seems as though he was hinting at a larger picture, as he was involved in politics then. The story appeals to the common people as it could easily be a big comparison to events occurring around 1900. Just as Dorothy walked down the "yellow brick road", the United States was on it's own journey.
I think its intereseting how "The Wizard of Oz" is actaully interepreted as an allegory or metaphor for theevents in america in the 1890's. The characters do fit the roles that the author says, such as the scarecrow being western farmers and the tin woodsman being industrial workers.I wonder why L. Frank Baum never said that it was an allegory, but said that he wrote it just to "soley please children of today". I think teaching this in history classes is a good idea and would help students understand the political, social and economic events in american in the 1890's.
So.. which politicians were the flying monkeys??? I quess this could fit, but because it was never admited by Baum, I wonder if it was a stroke of luck? At the same time, that would have to be a hugh stroke of luck for that to fit the profile. I quess he could have done it, and then not admitted it in case people didn't agree with his opinion..but that kinda of doesn't make sense... I'm so confused, why didn't he just say yeah, I wrote it with that intention in mind......??
This interpretation of the story fits the events of the time period, so I find it hard to believe that it was just coincidence. In the article though it says that the cowardly lion symbolizes William Jennings Bryan which I don't understand because if you click on his name and read the article about him it doesn't really mention anything that I would consider cowardly, so...maybe I'm missing something? Anyway, I don't get why the author wouldn't admit to writing the book as an allegory because the book could have possibly sold more copies if people knew.
I agree with andrew. The characters fit their roles but the fact that it was not proclaimed an allegory. However, it is quite the anology. It seems silly that the monkeys are indians. I think that teaching this era of history using the story as a metaphor is a grand idea though.
It's no surprise really that Baum never claimed his story to be an allegory. Many, many authors have written stories that have meanings they don't share with the general public. J.R.R. Tolkien wrote the Lord of the rings series while in the trenches in World War I leading many to believe his books were a statement about the war in general. And the Gillian's Travels series had all similar metaphors to bigger, deeper things. Although the analysis of Wizard of Oz seems a little strained and contrived, seeing as how you could find metaphors in the Wizard of Oz to many things throughout history, or simply take it as this whimsical children's fairy tale that was written to be a whimsical children's fairy tale.
I find it to be very interesting that Baum used his book to tell the story of politics in that day, although he never actually said this. All of the connections are endearing in that they creatively connect to political life in the early 1900s. Everything fits, and once pointed out it seems to make perfect sense. For example the munchkins were the "little" people or those who had little political influence. Its interesting that Dorothy portrayed the character of a male, an important male figure in politics. And dubey, im kind of guessing it wasn’t by chance that Baum wrote this book that could coincidentally be traced back to political events that were occuring in that time....
When i was a child, i would have never thought that something so innocent would have such a great inner meaning. It is very interesting how all of the pieces of the puzzle fit. If in fact the author designed the whole story as an allegory then it is a brilliant literary work. I am curious however why he did not claim his work. Once that the idea that the Wizard of Oz might be an allegory was presented to me, the identification of some of the characters where pretty simple to figure out, such as the tin man and the scarecrow, but others had to be told to me. The people who analyzed the story made some pretty amazing discoveries. I wouldn't have thought that every action was planed according to history. I am also surprised that it took until the 1960's for a teacher to use it as a learning tool. O, and by the way Sarah, the monkeys represent the Indians. The monkeys live of the witch just like the Indians live of the land.
I agree with Andrew and Woody aobut how the characters fit their real life roles. I suppose if you were writing a parody about the government in time where talking about the govt wasn't really liked. I know the alien and sedition acts were years and years before this, but i can't imagine the govt completely givinv people their first ammendment rights to Petition the govt. So i don't know if the story was really an allegory or if this was just a myth. The article makes sense in what it is saying, but like Andrew said, why wouldn't he just admit to it?
The Characters and certain details in the "Wizard of Oz" do suprising tell a secret story of our history even thought he said it was "soley to please children of today." However This would make sense that he wrote a history lesson for the kids of his time and so on. Of course he also could of been afraid to admit its true meaning. He may of feared government banning of his book or punishment for his actions. There are many ideas to its similarites. In the end it could just be because of when it was made. Out movies or books of today always incorporate all kinds of our modern day problems, ideologies, and politics. so why wouldn't an author include it back then as well. None the less the similarities are there and it is obvious there are connections but why they are there are unknown. Wether it was puposeful or accidental is unknown like the Wizard of Oz's Connection to Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon."
I absolutely had no idea that the Wizard of Oz was ever anything more than just a children's book. Though Baum denied connections to the political connections in the story, writing it "soley to please the children of today," I think that the book had too many political connections to be ignored. These connections weren't just coincidence, they truly showed, in a simplistic way, the conflicts and problems during the time period. Yes, it is strange that Baum wouldn't take credit for this allegory, but the fact that it is still enjoyed as a childrens book and a political allegory means that he must have achieved his goal.
Wow, after reading all the descriptions of "The Wizard of Oz" characters, the comparison of life in the late 19th century is crazy! i think thats amazing that so many things connected, i would have never thought anything of it. the only thing i wonder is if they found any of the historical connections in the movie "The Wiz", which is basically the same story as "The Wizard of Oz". when it comes to why Baum did not admit it to being an allegory, maybe it wasnt and critics just over analyzed it and it is just conicidence that it has all the historical information that it does.
After reading this, I was not only amazed, I was also a little shocked. I was amazed of the political symbolism that fit so perfectly, such as the helpless scarecrow/farmer and the rusted and mistreated tinman/mill worker. But I couln't help but feel that some of the references were a bit of a stretch or just coincidencial: Dorothy symbolizes Theodore Roosevelt because the syllables in their name are mirrors of each other (Coincidence!). Oz is the abbr. of ounce, which is a 16 to 1 ratio to a pound, and 16 to 1 is the ratio that silver would be coined to gold, It all fits but it seems a bit of a reach. Either it was a common analogy at the time or the author was just awesome or the writer of the Wiki article was reading a bit too far into it.
I nwould have never guessed. after all this time i thought Dorothy was a cute 15 year old girl that gets sucked up in a fake tornado, dropped in a poorly constructed movie set and was told to start acting, i come to find out there was actually a meaning behind it? it blow my mind.
it is really weird to see how "The Wizard of Oz" was actually about events happening during that time period. I guess a lot of people were not too public with their opinions because if he were to have said something, he would have been noticed not only for the wizard of oz but for his views on politics.
Dorothy has always seemed very common to me. In fact, I always wondered why she was so plain and why she was so boringly midwestern, but now that all makes sense. Toto's role was apparently lost in the movie because there, he was pretty much just a dog. I love the William Jennings Bryan representation. It's so acurately amusing. This whole movie/story totally makes more sense now. I always wondered what kind of drugs the creator of this story did, but now I can see the metaphor and it makes sense.
18 comments:
Wow, what child would have guessed that the magical story of "The Wizard of Oz" was actually disguised as a history lesson. The characters of the book do fit the roles of the country during the late nineteenth century, but why did the author never admit to such brilliant writing. This time in history happens to have been the turning point for our modern and industrialized society, but who would have expected to uncover the past in a childhood novel?
The characters do fit the roles that the author says that they do, but it doesn't make sense why Baum would not admit to it being an allegory to the politics of the late nineteenth century. He says that it he wrote it "solely to please children of today". If it was so obviously an allegory to the politics then why was it not found until a high school teacher used it to teach his history class in 60 years later?
I have never known that "The Wizard of Oz" could be looked at in a whole different perspective. It's very interesting how the numerous parts of the story almost perfectly match up to economic/social events at the beginning of the 1900's. Although L. Frank Baum wrote that the story's only purpose was enjoyment for children, it seems as though he was hinting at a larger picture, as he was involved in politics then. The story appeals to the common people as it could easily be a big comparison to events occurring around 1900. Just as Dorothy walked down the "yellow brick road", the United States was on it's own journey.
I think its intereseting how "The Wizard of Oz" is actaully interepreted as an allegory or metaphor for theevents in america in the 1890's. The characters do fit the roles that the author says, such as the scarecrow being western farmers and the tin woodsman being industrial workers.I wonder why L. Frank Baum never said that it was an allegory, but said that he wrote it just to "soley please children of today". I think teaching this in history classes is a good idea and would help students understand the political, social and economic events in american in the 1890's.
So.. which politicians were the flying monkeys??? I quess this could fit, but because it was never admited by Baum, I wonder if it was a stroke of luck? At the same time, that would have to be a hugh stroke of luck for that to fit the profile. I quess he could have done it, and then not admitted it in case people didn't agree with his opinion..but that kinda of doesn't make sense... I'm so confused, why didn't he just say yeah, I wrote it with that intention in mind......??
This interpretation of the story fits the events of the time period, so I find it hard to believe that it was just coincidence. In the article though it says that the cowardly lion symbolizes William Jennings Bryan which I don't understand because if you click on his name and read the article about him it doesn't really mention anything that I would consider cowardly, so...maybe I'm missing something? Anyway, I don't get why the author wouldn't admit to writing the book as an allegory because the book could have possibly sold more copies if people knew.
I agree with andrew. The characters fit their roles but the fact that it was not proclaimed an allegory. However, it is quite the anology. It seems silly that the monkeys are indians. I think that teaching this era of history using the story as a metaphor is a grand idea though.
It's no surprise really that Baum never claimed his story to be an allegory. Many, many authors have written stories that have meanings they don't share with the general public. J.R.R. Tolkien wrote the Lord of the rings series while in the trenches in World War I leading many to believe his books were a statement about the war in general. And the Gillian's Travels series had all similar metaphors to bigger, deeper things. Although the analysis of Wizard of Oz seems a little strained and contrived, seeing as how you could find metaphors in the Wizard of Oz to many things throughout history, or simply take it as this whimsical children's fairy tale that was written to be a whimsical children's fairy tale.
I find it to be very interesting that Baum used his book to tell the story of politics in that day, although he never actually said this. All of the connections are endearing in that they creatively connect to political life in the early 1900s. Everything fits, and once pointed out it seems to make perfect sense. For example the munchkins were the "little" people or those who had little political influence. Its interesting that Dorothy portrayed the character of a male, an important male figure in politics. And dubey, im kind of guessing it wasn’t by chance that Baum wrote this book that could coincidentally be traced back to political events that were occuring in that time....
When i was a child, i would have never thought that something so innocent would have such a great inner meaning. It is very interesting how all of the pieces of the puzzle fit. If in fact the author designed the whole story as an allegory then it is a brilliant literary work. I am curious however why he did not claim his work. Once that the idea that the Wizard of Oz might be an allegory was presented to me, the identification of some of the characters where pretty simple to figure out, such as the tin man and the scarecrow, but others had to be told to me. The people who analyzed the story made some pretty amazing discoveries. I wouldn't have thought that every action was planed according to history. I am also surprised that it took until the 1960's for a teacher to use it as a learning tool. O, and by the way Sarah, the monkeys represent the Indians. The monkeys live of the witch just like the Indians live of the land.
I agree with Andrew and Woody aobut how the characters fit their real life roles. I suppose if you were writing a parody about the government in time where talking about the govt wasn't really liked. I know the alien and sedition acts were years and years before this, but i can't imagine the govt completely givinv people their first ammendment rights to Petition the govt. So i don't know if the story was really an allegory or if this was just a myth. The article makes sense in what it is saying, but like Andrew said, why wouldn't he just admit to it?
The Characters and certain details in the "Wizard of Oz" do suprising tell a secret story of our history even thought he said it was "soley to please children of today." However This would make sense that he wrote a history lesson for the kids of his time and so on. Of course he also could of been afraid to admit its true meaning. He may of feared government banning of his book or punishment for his actions. There are many ideas to its similarites. In the end it could just be because of when it was made. Out movies or books of today always incorporate all kinds of our modern day problems, ideologies, and politics. so why wouldn't an author include it back then as well. None the less the similarities are there and it is obvious there are connections but why they are there are unknown. Wether it was puposeful or accidental is unknown like the Wizard of Oz's Connection to Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon."
I absolutely had no idea that the Wizard of Oz was ever anything more than just a children's book. Though Baum denied connections to the political connections in the story, writing it "soley to please the children of today," I think that the book had too many political connections to be ignored. These connections weren't just coincidence, they truly showed, in a simplistic way, the conflicts and problems during the time period. Yes, it is strange that Baum wouldn't take credit for this allegory, but the fact that it is still enjoyed as a childrens book and a political allegory means that he must have achieved his goal.
Wow, after reading all the descriptions of "The Wizard of Oz" characters, the comparison of life in the late 19th century is crazy! i think thats amazing that so many things connected, i would have never thought anything of it. the only thing i wonder is if they found any of the historical connections in the movie "The Wiz", which is basically the same story as "The Wizard of Oz". when it comes to why Baum did not admit it to being an allegory, maybe it wasnt and critics just over analyzed it and it is just conicidence that it has all the historical information that it does.
After reading this, I was not only amazed, I was also a little shocked. I was amazed of the political symbolism that fit so perfectly, such as the helpless scarecrow/farmer and the rusted and mistreated tinman/mill worker. But I couln't help but feel that some of the references were a bit of a stretch or just coincidencial: Dorothy symbolizes Theodore Roosevelt because the syllables in their name are mirrors of each other (Coincidence!). Oz is the abbr. of ounce, which is a 16 to 1 ratio to a pound, and 16 to 1 is the ratio that silver would be coined to gold, It all fits but it seems a bit of a reach.
Either it was a common analogy at the time or the author was just awesome or the writer of the Wiki article was reading a bit too far into it.
I nwould have never guessed. after all this time i thought Dorothy was a cute 15 year old girl that gets sucked up in a fake tornado, dropped in a poorly constructed movie set and was told to start acting, i come to find out there was actually a meaning behind it? it blow my mind.
it is really weird to see how "The Wizard of Oz" was actually about events happening during that time period. I guess a lot of people were not too public with their opinions because if he were to have said something, he would have been noticed not only for the wizard of oz but for his views on politics.
Dorothy has always seemed very common to me. In fact, I always wondered why she was so plain and why she was so boringly midwestern, but now that all makes sense. Toto's role was apparently lost in the movie because there, he was pretty much just a dog. I love the William Jennings Bryan representation. It's so acurately amusing. This whole movie/story totally makes more sense now. I always wondered what kind of drugs the creator of this story did, but now I can see the metaphor and it makes sense.
Post a Comment