- This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
The Wizard, the huge fraud who left Oz in shame, returns and becomes one of the few people allowed to do magic. Not only is he allowed to do magic,, he is given special training by Glinda.
Princess Ozma is the benevolent dictator. (She is a young fairy who was turned into a boy by a witch as a baby and then years later suddenly turned back into a girl.) She decrees that only she, Glinda and the Wizard can do magic without special permits.
Glinda the Good is a powerful sorceress who is a lot older than she looks but uses magic to keep herself young out of vanity. Despite being so powerful, it seems she did nothing to stop the wicked witches who were enslaving people and stuff. Wait, what happened to that good witch from the north? We haven’t heard much from her since the first book. Guess Glinda the Good doesn’t like competition.
Glinda has got everyone else in Oz wrapped around her little finger, even Ozma, the immortal fairy Princess who abolished money and made the Land into a communist fantasy.
It also seems like nobody can die a natural death in Oz. There is a spell to inconsistently stop people from aging, and it is implied that a person can be cut into pieces and survive that way. Forever.What about the Wicked Witch?
Who let this through?
I did. Feel free to delete if I missed a hidden intent. 🤣🤡😨👾🕵️🎩🍸⚠️🛂🚫🚯🔚🚷☢️✡️🕎🔯♒️🇬🇧🇮🇱🇺🇸
A lot of “innocent” children’s books are not so innocent. Many have subtle or not so subtle political or religious meanings- such as the Narnia series, Alice in Wonderland. Luckily this goes over the heads of the young kids.
There’s a well-known theory that the Wizard of Oz is a political parable about the conflict between those who supported the gold standard and those who supported the silver standard. In the book, Dorothy wore silver slippers, not ruby slippers, Oz is the abbreviation for ounce, the yellow brick road represents gold, the Emerald City represents paper money, etc.
FWIW, L. Frank Baum favored the annihilation of the remaining Native Americans.
YY – annihilation as in organizing their mass murderer?
Here’s a portion of an editorial Baum wrote in 1890:
The Whites, by law of conquest, by justice of civilization, are masters of the American continent, and the best safety of the frontier settlements will be secured by the total annihilation of the few remaining Indians. Why not annihilation? Their glory has fled, their spirit broken, their manhood effaced; better that they die than live the miserable wretches that they are. History would forget these latter despicable beings, and speak, in later ages of the glory of these grand Kings of forest and plain that Cooper loved to heroism.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.