7/18/2023 0 Comments Lost in oz evil westThe head of the Wizard looks remarkably like Lenin. And lest you miss the point, the guard at the gate, the wizard in disguise, has the appearance of a Russian cossack as well as the Witch’s Winkie soldiers. This is a hyper organized, utopian, secular New Jerusalem ruled by a dictator. The Futurists admired speed, technology, youth and violence, the car, the airplane and the industrial city, all that represented the technological triumph of humanity over nature. When the Emerald city is finally in view, it is represented by a futuristic, fantastic edifice reminiscent of the Italian Futurist painters. Dorothy is tempted to venture off the path by intoxicating poppies, but Glinda controls the weather and produces a cold bracing snow which returns them to reason. Glinda is constantly behind the scenes, invisibly protecting the small band. The Munchkins (nature) reveal the path and Glinda (the divine) reveals the path. Glinda appears and reveals the path Dorothy must follow, a narrow gold road that she is not to depart from. Dorothy’s victory sets the Munchkin’s free from servitude (much like Romans 8). They are not human and at first appear as flowers. The munchkins seem to represent nature held captive by evil. ![]() While the wicked witch of the West is limited (her magic won’t work in Munchkin land) Glinda’s power is universal. The Wizard of Kansas has just returned from a tour of Europe.Īs Dorothy lands in OZ she crushes the head of the wicked witch of the East and is given a pair of magical ruby red slippers. The unease with new ideologies and European ideas is palpable. Europe and the far east was swirling with isms, ideologies and dictators including Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and Tojo. The film was released the same year that world war 2 started. She will face many obstacles and accomplish many great deeds. ![]() Much like Odysseus, Frodo or the Pilgrim, Dorothy is on a quest to get back to home. It is subtly anti-socialist, suspicious of government and sarcastic about higher education. Tradition, common sense and divine grace are Dorothy’s salvation. To advocate humanism would seem to be alien to the spirit of the times. Every main character in this film seems to have an alter ego rooted in real life except Glinda the good witch. However, I do not believe the film is lacking in divine grace. People were deep into the great depression and the question was, who was going to save them? The lesson of the 1930s was that there is no free lunch, one needed self-reliance, hard work and pulling oneself up by ones own boot straps. I believe it struck a nerve because for so many people, an economic tornado had come into their lives as well. I think, far from being a paean to humanism, it is a powerful depression era parable dealing with morality, ethics and politics. I have a little bit different take on it. I love the Wizard of OZ, perhaps because I didn’t see it till I was 25. Its a fun story, its entertaining, and the moral lessons, if any, aren't too bad. But in the life of the characters who populate Middle Earth, there is nothing but vague wizardry and the power of their own swords. If you get into the Silmarillion, there is a pathetically obvious parallel to the (non-Biblical) rebellion of a leading angel against a creator, creation of a world that had been only an idea, etc. But then, Tolkien's Lord of the Rings is likewise agnostic, since there is not the slightest trace of religion, or worship, at least among the good guys. It has nothing to do with "I can do it all without God." In that limited sense, I suppose it is mildly agnostic, since no god makes an appearance, nor does God. Accordingly, Dorothy's self-reliance is in contrast to expecting other fallible humans to fix things for her, none of whom remotely resemble God. The only act of idolatry here is comparing the Wizard, or the Tin Woodman, or the Lion, or Toto, of ANY of these characters, to God, or to gods. ![]() I would have to say that this analogy is way off base.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |