The Wonderful Wizard of Oz

I'd never read L. Frank Baum's The Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a child. Why did I need to, there was the movie? But after seeing Oz the Great and Powerful, even though it wasn't a good film, I was interested in exploring the origins of the story. I was in for quite a surprise.

The book, written in 1900, is one of the great landmarks of children's literature, appropriate for seven-to-ten year olds, or smaller children who could have it read to them. But what stunned me is that it is very little like the famous movie.

The book begins with the cyclone, which means there is no Elmira Gulch, Professor Marvel, etc. The movie script, by a variety of writers, came up with that, as well as the "there's no place like home" theme. Baum's story is much more like Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, in that the heroine, Dorothy, is thrust into a fantastic world where she must get from point A to point B. But the theme of the book, which remains in the film, subsumed by Dorothy's attempt to get home, is that all we need is a little self-confidence.

I assume everyone reading this knows the story of the movie. In the book, Dorothy does indeed kill the Wicked Witch of the East by house-dropping, and takes her silver (ruby looked better in Technicolor) slippers. She is told by the Munchkins that Oz in the City of Emeralds can help her. Along the way, she meets the Scarecrow, Tin Woodman, and Lion, each of whom need something from the Wizard.

Of course, the Scarecrow, though with no brains, comes out with great ideas, the Tin Woodman, though without a heart, cries at the death of an ant, and the Lion, though cowardly, holds off a group of monsters. The little things that happen are different than the film, such as the Scarecrow getting stuck on a pole in the middle of a river, or the travelers saving the Queen of the Field Mice, who then save the Lion from the poppyfield.

Also different from the movie, is the long coda after the Wizard floats off in his balloon. They are off to see Glinda, the Witch of the South, who may be able to help Dorothy get home. Also, the winged monkeys are okay primates, and do almost all of the work.

The book is charming, once I realized it was completely different than the movie. There are moments of puckish humor, such as the Scarecrow saying, "'When I remember that a short time ago I was up on a pole in a farmer's cornfield, and that now I am the ruler of the beautiful City, I am quite satisfied with my lot.'" There are also simple but profound sayings, such as the Tin Woodman's observation, "'But once I had brains, and a heart also; so, having tried them both, I should much rather have a heart.'"

The encounter with the Wizard is pretty close to what the film did. The Wizard, a humbug, can't give brains, heart, or courage, but he gives them each a placebo, that effectively convinces the threesome that they have what they had all along. One of the few lines in the film that comes from the book is one of the most touching: "'Oh, no, my dear; I'm really a very good man, but I'm a very bad Wizard."

For a while academics thought that the book was a political allegory of the time period, when the country debated whether to be on the gold or silver standard. We've got silver shoes and yellow (or gold) bricks, and supposedly the Lion was the stand-in for William Jennings Bryan. That is not considered legitimate anymore.