Defender of the Child

[cyrano]

Not much in the mood to listen to Chieftains, but they're up on the ripping schedule. So there is much tweedling and hooting.
I made the mistake this evening of watching the Wizard of Oz with my jaundiced and less than innocent eye, and indicated that I thought that Glinda and the Wizard were less than altruistic folks. I also outlined how the Wizard used Dorothy to get rid of his political rival, the Witch of the West, and how Glinda used Dorothy to get rid of her political rival, the Wizard.
I'm too young to be this cynical, I'm told. Why can't they all be trying to help Dorothy become a better person? Why can't this just be a learning dream? Why does everything have to be a conspiracy?
Well, my friend, you're not a conspiracy. I think you're trying to help me become a better person. But my default assumption is that strangers I meet are looking out for their best interest rather than my own, and my best hope is that they intersect. I don't instinctively trust people, and I make them prove themselves to me.
I guess that makes me like the Wizard and Obi Wan, and maybe that's why it's so easy for me to see it in other people.
If I ever lose that fear, and give people the benefit of the doubt, maybe I'll become the Queen of Munchkinland. It looks like a nice place.

Comments

[technoboggan.livejournal.com]

Maybe the "altrustic" fan hadn't ever ready Frank Baum's original works... I think it's pretty clear that the Wizard isn't a benevalent old grandpa, but a schiester out to protect himeself. He sends Dorothy and her party to what he has to assume will be their death, so that they will not expose him for what he is, a country fair con man. And Glinda? That whole "you had the ability to go home the whole time", while sending her through that entire country filled with wicked witches and flying monkeys and accordian people and other things I can't remember since it's been way way too long, and right into the home of the person that I suspect she always knew was a fraud, but couldn't "sully" her image enough to expose...

I think you're right. And I tend to be an idealist... There's just a lot more to the story than the disney-fied skim-the-plot summary shows...

*hug*

*hug*

[cyranocyrano.livejournal.com]

Hi, hon--it's good to hear from you.
Even if the plot supports me, on this single case, it's just a single case that reflects my general lack of trust for humanity. Given the random schmo on the street, I would expect hir to be perfectly willing to screw me over to some extent if it made hir life more convenient or pleasant. That whole 'through a mirror darkly' thing, maybe--the idea that people may be more willing to screw me because I don't trust them, and that I attribute motives, perhaps spuriously, to people because I see them in myself.
I dunno. Maybe I'm just on insecurity crack. It's way hard to tell how big the forest is when you're standing inside it. Or maybe my friend was annoyed because I tainted her innocence and took her much nicer view of the story away.
Good man? Bad wizard? Bad witch?
(PS: Do let me know about the mp3 files--I'm working on holiday presents.)

Re: The darker lining to the rainbow

[tersa.livejournal.com]

Once upon a time, I was told the story that Baum wrote "Wizard of Oz" as an allegory of the then current political climate. Dorothy, and Kansas, represented the hard working salt of the earth Midwesterners. Oz was actually the contraction for 'ounce', and was the mini-cosmos of the raging debate between the gold and silver standard going on in the country at the time. Gold being the 'yellow brick road', and Dorothy's silver (not ruby) slippers.

The witches? The Wicked Witches of the East and West were actually physical locations, the evil East and West Coasts. The Emerald City, where everything was emerald because you wore emerald (rose-colored?) glasses. And, as you pointed out, the wizard was just a con man.

I'm sure the scarecrow, the tin man, and the lion were also allegorical figures, and not the dream-self manifestations of Uncle Owen's hired farmhands as the movie portrays.

Whether or not this interpretation is true, I no longer know, but I think it also lends credence to your theory that it isn't the bright shiny happiness portrayed in film.

I'm sure you've read the first...

[aelfsciene.livejournal.com]

But if you haven't, you should absolutely read Wicked, by Gregory Maguire. It's absolutely brilliant (though I didn't like his second book, on Cinderella, nearly as much). For another, very harsh take, read Was, by Geoff Ryman. It's almost hard to get through in places, but is very, very good, and is a fascinating take on Dorothy, the idea of Oz, and even Judy Garland.

Re: I'm sure you've read the first...

[cyranocyrano.livejournal.com]

Oo. In fact, I own the first and raved about it to you. (: Still interested in reading the Cinderella book someday. And very interested in the second, perhaps will steal it away from you stealthily some day.

Re: I'm sure you've read the first...

[aelfsciene.livejournal.com]

Oh! I'm a flake and completely forgot, it would seem--but I'll bring Confessions tomorrow night! Was, you'll have a hard time getting from me, because I borrowed it from the MV library, my favorite place of late. ^_^