HENRY M. LITTLEFIELD
Mount Vernon High School, N. Y.
The Wizard of OZ:
Parable on Populism
ON THE DESERTS OF NORTH AFRICA IN 1941 TWO TOUGH AUSTRALIAN BRIGADES
went to battle singing,
Have you heard of the wonderful wizard,
The wonderful Wizard of Oz,
And he is a wonderful wizard,
If ever a wizard there was.
It was a song they had brought with them from Australia and would
soon spread to England. Forever afterward it reminded Winston Churchill
of those "buoyant days." 1 Churchill's nostalgia is only one symptom
of the world-wide delight found in an American fairy-tale about a little
girl and her odyssey in the strange land of Oz. The song he reflects upon
came from a classic 1939 Hollywood production of the story, which introduced millions of people not only to the land of Oz, but to a talented
young lady named Judy Garland as well.
Ever since its publication in 1900 Lyman Frank Baum's The Wonder-
ful Wizard of Oz has been immensely popular, providing the basis for a
profitable musical comedy, three movies and a number of plays. It is an
indigenous creation, curiously warm and touching, although no one really
knows why. For despite wholehearted acceptance by generations of readers, Baum's tale has been accorded neither critical acclaim, nor extended
critical examination. Interested scholars, such as Russel B. Nye and
Martin Gardiner, look upon The Wizard of Oz as the first in a long and
delightful series of Oz stories, and understandably base their appreciation
of Baum's talent on the totality of his works.2
The Wizard of Oz is an entity unto itself, however, and was not originally written with a sequel in mind. Baum informed his readers in 1904
I Winston S. Churchill, Their Finest Hour (Canmbridge, 1949), pp. 615-16.
2 Martin Gardiner and Russel B. Nye, The Wizard of Oz and Who He Was (East
Lansing, Mich., 1957), pp. 7 if, 14-16, 19. Professor Nye's "Appreciation" and Martin
Gardiner's "The Royal Historian of Oz," totaling some forty-five pages, present as
definitive an analysis of Baum and his works as is available today.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
48 American Quarterly
that he had produced The Marvelous Land of Oz reluctantly and only
in answer to well over a thousand letters demanding that he create
another Oz tale.8 His original effort remains unique and to some degree
separate from the books which follow. But its uniqueness does not rest
alone on its peculiar and transcendent popularity.
Professor Nye finds a "strain of moralism" in the Oz books, as well as
"a well-developed sense of satire," and Baum stories often include search-
ing parodies on the contradictions in human nature. The second book
in the series, The Marvelous Land of Oz, is a blatant satire on feminism
and the suffragette movement.4 In it Baum attempted to duplicate the
format used so successfully in The Wizard, yet no one has noted a similar
play on contemporary movements in the latter work. Nevertheless, one
does exist, and it reflects to an astonishing degree the world of political
reality which surrounded Baum in 1900. In order to understand the
relationship of The Wizard to turn-of-the-century America, it is necessary first to know something of Baum's background.
Born near Syracuse in 1856, Baum was brought up in a wealthy home
and early became interested in the theater. He wrote some plays which
enjoyed brief success and then, with his wife and two sons, journeyed to
Aberdeen, South Dakota, in 1887. Aberdeen was a little prairie town and
there Baum edited the local weekly until it failed in 1891.5
For many years Western farmers had been in a state of loud, though
unsuccessful, revolt. While Baum was living in South Dakota not only
was the frontier a thing of the past, but the Romantic view of benign
nature had disappeared as well. The stark reality of the dry, open plains
and the acceptance of man's Darwinian subservience to his environment
served to crush Romantic idealism.6
Hamlin Garland's visit to Iowa and South Dakota coincided with
Baum's arrival. Henry Nash Smith observes,
Garland's success as a portrayer of hardship and suffering on Northwestern farms was due in part to the fact that his personal experience
happened to parallel the shock which the entire West received in the
later 1880's from the combined effects of low prices, . . . grasshoppers,
drought, the terrible blizzards of the winter of 1886-1887, and the
juggling of freight rates....7
3 L. Frank Baum, The Marvelous Land of Oz (Chicago, 1904), p. 3 (Author's Note).
4 Gardiner and Nye, Wizard, pp. 5-7, 23.
5 Ibid., pp. 20-22.
6 See Calton F. Culmsee, Malign Nature and the Frontier (Logan, Utah, 1959), VII,
5, 11, 14. The classic work in the field of symbolism in Western literature is Henry
Nash Smith, Virgin Land (New York, 1961), pp. 225-26, 261, 284-90.
7 Ibid., p. 287.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism 49
As we shall see, Baum's prairie experience was no less deeply etched,
although he did not employ naturalism to express it.
Baum's stay in South Dakota also covered the period of the formation
of the Populist party, which Professor Nye likens to a fanatic "crusade."
Western farmers had for a long time sought governmental aid in the
form of economic panaceas, but to no avail. The Populist movement
symbolized a desperate attempt to use the power of the ballot.8 In 1891
Baum moved to Chicago where he was surrounded by those dynamic
elements of reform which made the city so notable during the 1890s.9
In Chicago Baum certainly saw the results of the frightful depression
which had closed down upon the nation in 1893. Moreover, he took part
in the pivotal election of 1896, marching in "torch-light parades for
William Jennings Bryan." Martin Gardiner notes besides, that he
"consistently voted as a democrat ... and his sympathies seem always to
have been on the side of the laboring classes." 10 No one who marched
in even a few such parades could have been unaffected by Bryan's cam-
paign. Putting all the farmers' hopes in a basket labeled "free coinage
of silver," Bryan's platform rested mainly on the issue of adding silver
to the nation's gold standard. Though he lost, he did at least bring the
plight of the little man into national focus."
Between 1896 and 1900, while Baum worked and wrote in Chicago, the
great depression faded away and the war with Spain thrust the United
States into world prominence. Bryan maintained Midwestern control
over the Democratic party, and often spoke out against American policies
toward Cuba and the Philippines. By 1900 it was evident that Bryan
would run again, although now imperialism and not silver seemed the
issue of primary concern. In order to promote greater enthusiasm, however, Bryan felt compelled once more to sound the silver leitmotif in his
campaign.12 Bryan's second futile attempt at the presidency culminated
in November 1900. The previous winter Baum had attempted unsuccessfully to sell a rather original volume of children's fantasy, but that April,
George M. Hill, a small Chicago publisher, finally agreed to print The
Wonderful Wizard of Oz.
8 Russel B. Nye, Midwestern Progressive Politics (East Lansing, Mich., 1959), pp.
63, 56-58, 75, 105. See also John D. Hicks, The Populist Revolt (Minneapolis, 1931),
pp. 82, 93-95, 264-68.
OSee Ray Ginger, Altgeld's America (New York, 1958).
10Gardiner and Nye, Wizard, p. 29.
11See William Jennings Bryan, The First Battle (Lincoln, Neb., 1897), pp. 612-29.
Two recent studies are notable: Harold U. Faulkner, Politics, Reform and Expansion
(New York, 1959), pp. 187-211 and Nye, Politics, pp. 105-20.
12See Richard Hofstadter's shattering essay on Bryan in The American Political
Tradition (New York, 1960), pp. 186-205. Nye, Politics, pp. 121-22; Faulkner, Reform,
pp. 272-75.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
50 American Quarterly
Baum's allegiance to the cause of Democratic Populism must be balanced against the fact that he was not a political activist. Martin Gardiner
finds through all of his writings "a theme of tolerance, with many episodes that poke fun at narrow nationalism and ethnocentrism." Nevertheless, Professor Nye quotes Baum as having a desire to write stories that
would "bear the stamp of our times and depict the progressive fairies of
today." 13
The Wizard of Oz has neither the mature religious appeal of a Pilgrim's Progress, nor the philosophic depth of a Candide. Baum's most
thoughtful devotees see in it only a warm, cleverly written fairy tale. Yet
the original Oz book conceals an unsuspected depth, and it is the pur-
pose of this study to demonstrate that Baum's immortal American fantasy
encompasses more than heretofore believed. For Baum created a children's story with a symbolic allegory implicit within its story line and
characterizations. The allegory always remains in a minor key, subordi-
nated to the major theme and readily abandoned whenever it threatens to
distort the appeal of the fantasy. But through it, in the form of a subtle
parable, Baum delineated a Midwesterner's vibrant and ironic portrait
of this country as it entered the twentieth century.
We are introduced to both Dorothy and Kansas at the same time:
Dorothy lived in the midst of the great Kansas prairies, with Uncle
Henry, who was a farmer, and Aunt Em, who was the farmer's wife.
Their house was small, for the lumber to build it had to be carried by
wagon many miles. There were four walls, a floor and a roof, which
made one room; and this room contained a rusty-looking cooking
stove, a cupboard for the dishes, a table, three or four chairs, and the
beds.
When Dorothy stood in the doorway and looked around, she could
see nothing but the great gray prairie on every side. Not a tree nor a
house broke the broad sweep of flat country that reached to the edge
of the sky in all directions. The sun had baked the plowed land into a
gray mass, with little cracks running through it. Even the grass was
not green, for the sun had burned the tops of the long blades until
they were the same gray color to be seen everywhere. Once the house
had been painted, but the sun blistered the paint and the rains washed
it away, and now the house was as dull and gray as everything else.
When Aunt Em came there to live she was a young, pretty wife. The
sun and wind had changed her, too. They had taken the sparkle from
her eyes and left them a sober gray; they had taken the red from her
cheeks and lips, and they were gray also. She was thin and gaunt, and
never smiled now. When Dorothy, who was an orphan, first came to
13 Gardiner and Nye, Wizard, pp. 1, 30.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism 51
her, Aunt Em had been so startled by the child's laughter that she would
scream and press her hand upon her heart whenever Dorothy's merry
voice reached her ears; and she still looked at the little girl with wonder that she could find anything to laugh at.
Uncle Henry never laughed. He worked hard from morning till
night and did not know what joy was. He was gray also, from his long
beard to his rough boots, and he looked stern and solemn, and rarely
spoke.
It was Toto that made Dorothy laugh, and saved her from growing
as gray as her other surroundings. Toto was not gray; he was a little
black dog, with long silky hair and small black eyes that twinkled
merrily on either side of his funny, wee nose. Toto played all day long,
and Dorothy played with him, and loved him dearly.'4
Hector St. John de Crevecoeur would not have recognized Uncle Henry's
farm; it is straight out of Hamlin Garland.'5 On it a deadly environ-
ment dominates everyone and everything except Dorothy and her pet.
The setting is Old Testament and nature seems grayly impersonal and
even angry. Yet it is a fearsome cyclone that lifts Dorothy and Toto in
their house and deposits them "very gently-for a cyclone-in the midst
of a country of marvelous beauty." We immediately sense the contrast
between Oz and Kansas. Here there are "stately trees bearing rich and
luscious fruits . . . gorgeous flowers . . . and birds with . . . brilliant
plumage" sing in the trees. In Oz "a small brook rushing and sparkling
along" murmers "in a voice very grateful to a little girl who had lived so
long on the dry, gray prairies" (p. 20).
Trouble intrudes. Dorothy's house has come down on the wicked
Witch of the East, killing her. Nature, by sheer accident, can provide
benefits, for indirectly the cyclone has disposed of one of the two truly
bad influences in the Land of Oz. Notice that evil ruled in both the East
and the West; after Dorothy's coming it rules only in the West.
The wicked Witch of the East had kept the little Munchkin people
"in bondage for many years, making them slave for her night and day"
(pp. 22-23). Just what this slavery entailed is not immediately clear, but
Baum later gives us a specific example. The Tin Woodman, whom
Dorothy meets on her way to the Emerald City, had been put under a
spell by the Witch of the East. Once an independent and hard working
14 L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, pp. 11-13. All quotations cited in
the text are from the inexpensive but accurate Dover paperback edition (New York,
1960).
15 Henry Nash Smith says of Garland's works in the 1890s, "It had at last become
possible to deal with the Western farmer in literature as a human being instead of
seeing him through a veil of literary convention, class prejudice or social theory."
Virgin Land, p. 290.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
52 American Quarterly
human being, the Woodman found that each time he swung his axe it
chopped off a different part of his body. Knowing no other trade he
"worked harder than ever," for luckily in Oz tinsmiths can repair such
things. Soon the Woodman was all tin (p. 59). In this way Eastern witchcraft dehumanized a simple laborer so that the faster and better he worked
the more quickly he became a kind of machine. Here is a Populist view of
evil Eastern influences on honest labor which could hardly be more
pointed.'s
There is one thing seriously wrong with being made of tin; when it
rains rust sets in. Tin Woodman had been standing in the same position
for a year without moving before Dorothy came along and oiled his
joints. The Tin Woodman's situation has an obvious parallel in the condition of many Eastern workers after the depression of 1893.17 While Tin
Woodman is standing still, rusted solid, he deludes himself into thinking
he is no longer capable of that most human of sentiments, love. Hate
does not fill the void, a constant lesson in the Oz books, and Tin Wood-
man feels that only a heart will make him sensitive again. So he accompanies Dorothy to see if the Wizard will give him one.
Oz itself is a magic oasis surrounded by impassable deserts, and the
country is divided in a very orderly fashion. In the North and South the
people are ruled by good witches, who are not quite as powerful as the
wicked ones of the East and West. In the center of the land rises the
magnificent Emerald City ruled by the Wizard of Oz, a successful humbug
whom even the witches mistakenly feel "is more powerful than all the
rest of us together" (p. 24). Despite these forces, the mark of goodness,
placed on Dorothy's forehead by the Witch of the North, serves as protection for Dorothy throughout her travels. Goodness and innocence
prevail even over the powers of evil and delusion in Oz. Perhaps it is
this basic and beautiful optimism that makes Baum's tale so characteristically American-and Midwestern.
Dorothy is Baum's Miss Everyman. She is one of us, levelheaded and
human, and she has a real problem. Young readers can understand her
quandary as readily as can adults. She is good, not precious, and she
thinks quite naturally about others. For all of the attractions of Oz
Dorothy desires only to return to the gray plains and Aunt Em and
Uncle Henry. She is directed toward the Emerald City by the good Witch
of the North, since the Wizard will surely be able to solve the problem
16 Hicks declares that from the start "The Alliance and Populist platforms championed boldly the cause of labor...." Revolt, p. 324. See also Bryan's Labor Day
speech, Battle, pp. 375-83.
17Faulkner, Reform, pp. 149-43.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism 53
of the impassable deserts. Dorothy sets out on the Yellow Brick Road
wearing the Witch of the East's magic Silver Shoes. Silver shoes walking
on a golden road; henceforth Dorothy becomes the innocent agent of
Baum's ironic view of the Silver issue. Remember, neither Dorothy, nor
the good Witch of the North, nor the Munchkins understand the power
of these shoes. The allegory is abundantly clear. On the next to last page
of the book Baum has Glinda, Witch of the South, tell Dorothy, "Your
Silver Shoes will carry you over the desert. . . If you had known their
power you could have gone back to your Aunt Em the very first day
you came to this country." Glinda explains, "All you have to do is to
knock the heels together three times and command the shoes to carry you
wherever you wish to go" (p. 257). William Jennings Bryan never outlined the advantages of the silver standard any more effectively.
Not understanding the magic of the Silver Shoes, Dorothy walks the
mundane-and dangerous-Yellow Brick Road. The first person she
meets is a Scarecrow. After escaping from his wooden perch, the Scarecrow displays a terrible sense of inferiority and self doubt, for he has
determined that he needs real brains to replace the common straw in
his head. William Allen White wrote an article in 1896 entitled "What's
the Matter With Kansas?" In it he accused Kansas farmers of ignorance,
irrationality and general muddle-headedness. What's wrong with Kansas
are the people, said Mr. White.'8 Baum's character seems to have read
White's angry characterization. But Baum never takes White seriously
and so the Scarecrow soon emerges as innately a very shrewd and very
capable individual.
The Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman accompany Dorothy along the
Yellow Brick Road, one seeking brains, the other a heart. They meet
next the Cowardly Lion. As King of Beasts he explains, "I learned that
if I roared very loudly every living thing was frightened and got out of
my way." Born a coward, he sobs, "Whenever there is danger my heart
begins to beat fast." "Perhaps you have heart disease," suggests Tin
Woodman, who always worries about hearts. But the Lion desires only
courage and so he joins the party to ask help from the Wizard (pp. 65-72).
The Lion represents Bryan himself. In the election of 1896 Bryan
lost the vote of Eastern labor, though he tried hard to gain their support.
In Baum's story the Lion, on meeting the little group, "struck at the Tin
Woodman with his sharp claws." But, to his surprise, "he could make no
impression on the tin, although the Woodman fell over in the road and
lay still." Baum here refers to the fact that in 1896 workers were often
18 Richard Hofstadter (ed.), Great Issues in American History (New York, 1960), II
147-53.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
54 American Quarterly
pressured into voting for McKinley and gold by their employers.19
Amazed, the Lion says, "he nearly blunted my claws," and he adds even
more appropriately, "When they scratched against the tin it made a
cold shiver run down my back" (pp. 67-68). The King of Beasts is not after
all very cowardly, and Bryan, although a pacifist and an anti-imperialist
in a time of national expansion, is not either.20 The magic Silver Shoes
belong to Dorothy, however. Silver's potent charm, which had come to
mean so much to so many in the Midwest, could not be entrusted to a
political symbol. Baum delivers Dorothy from the world of adventure
and fantasy to the real world of heartbreak and desolation through the
power of Silver. It represents a real force in a land of illusion, and neither
the Cowardly Lion nor Bryan truly needs or understands its use.
All together now the small party moves toward the Emerald City.
Coxey's Army of tramps and indigents, marching to ask President Cleveland for work in 1894, appears no more naively innocent than this group
of four characters going to see a humbug Wizard, to request favors that
only the little girl among them deserves.
Those who enter the Emerald City must wear green glasses. Dorothy
later discovers that the greenness of dresses and ribbons disappears on
leaving, and everything becomes a bland white. Perhaps the magic of any
city is thus self imposed. But the Wizard dwells here and so the Emerald
City represents the national Capitol. The Wizard, a little bumbling old
man, hiding behind a facade of papier mache and noise, might be any
President from Grant to McKinley. He comes straight from the fair
grounds in Omaha, Nebraska, and he symbolizes the American criterion
for leadership-he is able to be everything to everybody.
As each of our heroes enters the throne room to ask a favor the
Wizard assumes different shapes, representing different views toward
national leadership. To Dorothy, he appears as an enormous head,
"bigger than the head of the biggest giant." An apt image for a naive
and innocent little citizen. To the Scarecrow he appears to be a lovely,
gossamer fairy, a most appropriate form for an idealistic Kansas farmer.
The Woodman sees a horrible beast, as would any exploited Eastern
laborer after the trouble of the 1890s. But the Cowardly Lion, like W. J.
Bryan, sees a "Ball of Fire, so fierce and glowing he could scarcely bear
to gaze upon it." Baum then provides an additional analogy, for when
19 Bryan, Battle, pp. 617-18, "During the campaign I ran across various evidences of
coercion, direct and indirect." See Hicks, Revolt, p. 325, who notes that "For some
reason labor remained singularly unimpressed" by Bryan. Faulkner finds overt pressure as well, Reform, pp. 208-9.
20 Faulkner, Reform, pp. 257-58.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism 55
the Lion "tried to go nearer he singed his whiskers and he crept back
tremblingly to a spot nearer the door" (p. 134).
The Wizard has asked them all to kill the Witch of the West. The
golden road does not go in that direction and so they must follow the sun,
as have many pioneers in the past. The land they now pass through is
"rougher and hillier, for there were no farms nor houses in the country
of the West and the ground was untilled" (p. 140). The Witch of the
West uses natural forces to achieve her ends; she is Baum's version of
sentient and malign nature.
Finding Dorothy and her friends in the West, the Witch sends forty
wolves against them, then forty vicious crows and finally a great swarm
of black bees. But it is through the power of a magic golden cap that she
summons the flying monkeys. They capture the little girl and dispose
of her companions. Baum makes these Winged Monkeys into an Oz
substitute for the plains Indians. Their leader says, "Once . . . we were
a free people, living happily in the great forest, flying from tree to tree,
eating nuts and fruit, and doing just as we pleased without calling anybody master." "This," he explains, "was many years ago, long before Oz
came out of the clouds to rule over this land" (p. 172). But like many
Indian tribes Baum's monkeys are not inherently bad; their actions
depend wholly upon the bidding of others. Under the control of an
evil influence, they do evil. Under the control of goodness and innocence,
as personified by Dorothy, the monkeys are helpful and kind, although
unable to take her to Kansas. Says the Monkey King, "We belong to
this country alone, and cannot leave it" (p. 213). The same could be
said with equal truth of the first Americans.
Dorothy presents a special problem to the Witch. Seeing the mark
on Dorothy's forehead and the Silver Shoes on her feet, the Witch begins
"to tremble with fear, for she knew what a powerful charm belonged to
them." Then "she happened to look into the child's eyes and saw how
simple the soul behind them was, and that the little girl did not know
of the wonderful power the Silver Shoes gave her" (p. 150). Here Baum
again uses the Silver allegory to state the blunt homily that while goodness affords a people ultimate protection against evil, ignorance of their
capabilities allows evil to impose itself upon them. The Witch assumes
the proportions of a kind of western Mark Hanna or Banker Boss, who,
through natural malevolence, manipulates. the people and holds them
prisoner by cynically taking advantage of their innate innocence.
Enslaved in the West, "Dorothy went to work meekly, with her mind
made up to work as hard as she could; for she was glad the Wicked Witch
had decided not to kill her" (p. 150). Many Western farmers have held
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
56 American Quarterly
these same grim thoughts in less mystical terms. If the Witch of the
West is a diabolical force of Darwinian or Spencerian nature, then another contravening force may be counted upon to dispose of her. Dorothy
destroys the evil Witch by angrily dousing her with a bucket of water.
Water, that precious commodity which the drought-ridden farmers on
the great plains needed so badly, and which if correctly used could create
an agricultural paradise, or at least dissolve a wicked witch. Plain water
brings an end to malign nature in the West.
When Dorothy and her companions return to the Emerald City they
soon discover that the Wizard is really nothing more than "a little man,
with a bald head and a wrinkled face." Can this be the ruler of the land?
Our friends looked at him in surprise and dismay.
"I thought Oz was a great Head," said Dorothy. . . . "And I thought
Oz was a terrible Beast," said the Tin Woodman. "And I thought
Oz was a Ball of Fire," exclaimed the Lion. "No; you are all wrong,"
said the little man meekly. "I have been making believe."
Dorothy asks if he is truly a great Wizard. He confides, "Not a bit of
it, my dear; I'm just a common man." Scarecrow adds, "You're more
than that . . . you're a humbug" (p. 184).
The Wizard's deception is of long standing in Oz and even the Witches
were taken in. How was it accomplished? "It was a great mistake my
ever letting you into the Throne Room," the Wizard complains. "Usually
I will not see even my subjects, and so they believe I am something terrible" (p. 185). What a wonderful lesson for youngsters of the decade
when Benjamin Harrison, Grover Cleveland and William McKinley were
hiding in the White House. Formerly the Wizard was a mimic, a ven-
triloquist and a circus balloonist. The latter trade involved going "up
in a balloon on circus day, so as to draw a crowd of people together and
get them to pay to see the circus" (p. 186-87). Such skills are as admirably adapted to success in late-nineteenth-century politics as they are
to the humbug wizardry of Baum's story. A pointed comment on Midwestern political ideals is the fact that our little Wizard comes from
Omaha, Nebraska, a center of Populist agitation.2' "Why that isn't very
far from Kansas," cries Dorothy. Nor, indeed, are any of the characters
in the wonderful land of Oz.
The Wizard, of course, can provide the objects of self-delusion desired
by Tin Woodman, Scarecrow and Lion. But Dorothy's hope of going
21 Professor Nye observes that during 1890 (while Baum was editing his Aberdeen
weekly) the Nebraska Farmer's Alliance "launched the wildest campaign in Nebraska
history." Politics, p. 64-65. Bryan was a Senator from Nebraska and it was in Omaha
that the Populist party ratified its platform on July 4, 1892. See Henry Steele Com-
mager (ed.), Documents of American History (New York, 1958), II, 143-46.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism 57
home fades when the Wizard's balloon leaves too soon. Understand this:
Dorothy wishes to leave a green and fabulous land, from which all evil
has disappeared, to go back to the gray desolation of the Kansas prairies.
Dorothy is an orphan, Aunt Em and Uncle Henry are her only family.
Reality is never far from Dorothy's consciousness and in the most heartrending terms she explains her reasoning to the good Witch Glinda,
Aunt Em will surely think something dreadful has happened to me,
and that will make her put on mourning; and unless the crops are
better this year than they were last I am sure Uncle Henry cannot
afford it. (p. 254)
The Silver Shoes furnish Dorothy with a magic means of travel. But
when she arrives back in Kansas she finds, "The Silver Shoes had fallen
off in her flight through the air, and were lost forever in the desert"
(p. 259). Were the "her" to refer to America in 1900, Baum's statement
could hardly be contradicted.
Current historiography tends to criticize the Populist movement for
its "delusions, myths and foibles," Professor C. Vann Woodward observed
recently.22 Yet The Wonderful Wizard of Oz has provided unknowing
generations with a gentle and friendly Midwestern critique of the Populist rationale on these very same grounds. Led by naive innocence and
protected by good will, the farmer, the laborer and the politician approach the mystic holder of national power to ask for personal fulfillment. Their desires, as well as the Wizard's cleverness in answering them,
are all self-delusion. Each of these characters carries within him the
solution to his own problem, were he only to view himself objectively.
The fearsome Wizard turns out to be nothing more than a common man,
capable of shrewd but mundane answers to these self-induced needs.
Like any good politician he gives the people what they want. Throughout the story Baum poses a central thought; the American desire for
symbols of fulfillment is illusory. Real needs lie elsewhere.
Thus the Wizard cannot help Dorothy, for of all the characters only
she has a wish that is selfless, and only she has a direct connection to
honest, hopeless human beings. Dorothy supplies real fulfillment when
she returns to her aunt and uncle, using the Silver Shoes, and cures some
of their misery and heartache. In this way Baum tells us that the Silver
crusade at least brought back Dorothy's lovely spirit to the disconsolate
plains farmer. Her laughter, love and good will are no small addition
to that gray land, although the magic of Silver has been lost forever as
a result.
22 C. Vann Woodward, "Our Past Isn't What It Used To Be," The New York Times
Book Review (uly 28, 1963), p. 1; Hofstadter, Tradition, pp. 186-205.
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
58 American Quarterly
Noteworthy too is Baum's prophetic placement of leadership in Oz
after Dorothy's departure. The Scarecrow reigns over the Emerald City,
the Tin Woodman rules in the West and the Lion protects smaller beasts
in "a grand old forest." Thereby farm interests achieve national impor-
tance, industrialism moves West and Bryan commands only a forest full
of lesser politicians.
Baum's fantasy succeeds in bridging the gap between what children
want and what they should have. It is an admirable example of the way
in which an imaginative writer can teach goodness and morality without
producing the almost inevitable side effect of nausea. Today's children's
books are either saccharine and empty, or boring and pedantic. Baum's
first Oz tale-and those which succeed it-are immortal not so much
because the "heart-aches and nightmares are left out" as that "the wonderment and joy" are retained (p. 1).
Baum declares, "The story of 'the Wonderful Wizard of Oz' was written solely to pleasure children of today" (p. 1). In 1963 there are very
few children who have never heard of the Scarecrow, the Tin Woodman
or the Cowardly Lion, and whether they know W. W. Denslow's original
illustrations of Dorothy, or Judy Garland's whimsical characterization,
is immaterial. The Wizard has become a genuine piece of American folklore because, knowing his audience, Baum never allowed the consistency
of the allegory to take precedence over the theme of youthful entertainment. Yet once discovered, the author's allegorical intent seems clear,
and it gives depth and lasting interest even to children who only sense
something else beneath the surface of the story. Consider the fun in
picturing turn-of-the-century America, a difficult era at best, using these
ready-made symbols provided by Baum. The relationships and analogies
outlined above are admittedly theoretical, but they are far too consistent
to be coincidental, and they furnish a teaching mechanism which is guaranteed to reach any level of student.
The Wizard of Oz says so much about so many things that it is hard
not to imagine a satisfied and mischievous gleam in Lyman Frank Baum's
eye as he had Dorothy say, "And oh, Aunt Eml I'm so glad to be at
home again!"
A _ B~~~_
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:07:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Content Articles in Economics
In this section, the Journal of Economic Education publishes articles
concerned with substantive issues, new ideas, and research findings in
economics that may influence or can be incorporated into the teaching of
economics.
HIRSCHEL KASPER, Section Editor
The Fable of the Allegory:
The Wizard of Oz in Economics
Bradley A. Hansen
Abstract: L. Frank Baum's The Wonderful Wizard of Oz has become popular as a
teaching tool in economics. It has been argued that it was written as an allegory
of Populist demands for a bimetallic monetary system in the late 19th century.
The author argues that Baum was not sympathetic to Populist views and did not
write the story as a monetary allegory.
Key words: economic history, monetary economics, teaching economics, The
Wonderful Wizard of Oz
JEL codes: A2, Ni
One method of enhancing student learning in economics courses is to intro-
duce economic concepts through literature (Watts and Smith 1989; KishGoodling 1998; Scahill 1998). A well-known example in economics has been the
incorporation of L. Frank Baum's The Wonderful Wizard of Oz into the teaching
of monetary issues. The book is presented as an allegory about Populists'
demands for monetary expansion in the late 19th century. The allegory provides
an efficient means of introducing students to debates about monetary issues
because the elements of the story are so familiar. Students may also be intrigued
by the unfamiliar interpretation.
Although using The Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a means to discuss monetary
issues may have pedagogical merits, economists have gone too far by claiming
Bradley A. Hansen is a professor of economics at Mary Washington College (e-mail:
[email protected]). The author thanks Ben and Joanna Gregson for letting him read all the Oz
books to them. He also thanks Mary Eschelbach Hansen for carefully reading several drafts of this
article, and Hirschel Kasper and four anonymous referees for helpful comments. He also thanks
Hugh Rockoff and Ranjit Dighe. Neither gentleman entirely agrees with him, but both provided
numerous thoughtful comments and suggestions.
254 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
that the book was actually intended to be a monetary allegory. The primary evidence in support of the allegorical interpretation is what appears to be an extra-
ordinary number of similarities between characters and events in the book and
the people and events of the 1896 presidential campaign. The most popular version of the allegorical interpretation suggests not only that Baum described the
Populist movement but that he was sympathetic to it. Historical research on
Baum undermines both these propositions (Hearn 1992, 2000; Parker 1994; Tystad-Koupal 1996). Baum's writings, as well as his life history, provide considerable evidence that he did not have Populist sympathies and did not intend the
book to be anything more than a delightful story. Indeed, the true lesson of The
Wonderful Wizard of Oz may be that economists have been too willing to accept
as a truth an elegant story with little empirical support, much the way the char-
acters in Oz accepted the Wizard's impressive tricks as real magic.
THE WONDERFUL WIZARD OF OZ AS A MONETARY ALLEGORY
In 1964, Henry Littlefield, a high school history teacher, described what appeared to be numerous coincidences between The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and
the Populist movement of the late 19th century. Once viewed through a Populist
lens, the symbolism of the book appears incredibly obvious. The Scarecrow represents farmers, the Tin Woodman represents industrial workers, and the Cowardly Lion represents William Jennings Bryan.' Dorothy was told to follow a yel-
low brick road-the gold standard. People in the Emerald City were forced to
look at everything through green glasses-greenbacks. The silver shoescoinage of silver-really had the power to take Dorothy home. Oz itself refers to
the abbreviation for an ounce of gold.
Many economists have followed Littlefield's lead. In an article on the use of
literature in teaching economics, Watts and Smith (1989, 298) suggested the use
of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a tool for enlivening the study of bimetallism,
which they observed, "is often considered one of the dullest episodes in money
and banking or economic history courses." In the Journal of Political Economy,
Rockoff (1990, 739) also claimed that the book was "not only a child's tale but
also a sophisticated commentary on the political and economic debates of the
Populist Era." He extended the allegorical interpretation by examining the story
in light of both monetary theory and history and found additional symbols in the
book such as the seven passages and three flights of stairs that Dorothy passed
through in the palace of Oz (a symbol of the Crime of '73).2 Like Watts and
Smith, Rockoff (1990, 740) suggested that one of the primary benefits of the allegorical interpretation was pedagogical.
Although Rockoff was not the first author to write on the subject, he must be
credited with extending the interpretation and bringing it to a wide audience of
economists. Rockoff's article quickly became popular among economic historians. Friedman (1990, 1167) cited it approvingly in his 1990 article, "The Crime
of 1873." When Whaples and Betts (1995) put together a collection of the most
popular articles in American economic history, their survey showed that many
economic historians included Rockoff's article in their course reading lists.
Summer
2002
255
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
The interpretation suggested by Rockoff's article is the most common form of
the allegorical interpretation of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. He suggested that
Baum was a Populist, or at least a Populist sympathizer, and that he wrote the book
as an allegory. But advocates of the allegorical interpretation do not speak with a
single voice. They disagree about whether or not Baum was a Populist and whether
or not he intentionally wrote the story as an allegory. Clanton (1998, 183), for
example, argued that Baum was a conservative Republican who "apparently
amused himself by writing a subtle yet ingenious anti-Populist, gold standard tract
in the form of a highly suggestive and enormously successful children's story." Rit-
ter (1997b, 173) argued that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is "a cultural and political satire which was neither simply pro-Populist or pro-capitalist." She suggested
that Baum's intentions are not necessarily relevant. In her book Goldbugs and
Greenbacks, Ritter (1997a, 21) argued that "motive is not at issue. The argument
here is that Baum lived in the midst of a highly charged political environment and
that he borrowed from the cultural materials at hand as he wrote." Ranjit Dighe
(forthcoming) argued that Baum was probably a progressive Republican, and
although he may not have written The Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a monetary allegory, he was probably influenced by the political currents of the time. He also
emphasized that the merits of the allegorical interpretation are primarily pedagog-
ical. The common thread is a belief that L. Frank Baum, intentionally or unintentionally, portrayed political actors and events of the 1890s.
The Rockoff interpretation has now spread from money and banking and economic history courses to economic principles courses. In his Principles of Economics, Mankiw (2001, 648) claimed that when Baum "sat down to write a story
for children, he made the characters represent protagonists in the major political
battle of his time. Although modem commentators differ somewhat in the interpretation they assign to each character there is no doubt that the story highlights
the debate over monetary policy" (emphasis added).
There is doubt. Evidence in support of the allegorical interpretation turns out
to be rather meager. Rockoff (1990, 756) conceded that "Baum left no hard evidence that he intended his story to have an allegorical meaning: no diary entry,
no letter, not even an offhand remark to a friend." He claimed that the evidence
in favor of the allegorical interpretation is that "It has been recognized independently by a number of thoughtful readers," and that, "It is consistent with what
we know of Baum's politics" (Rockoff 1990, 756). Rockoff and others have
claimed that Baum consistently voted Democrat and marched in torchlight
parades for Bryan (Rockoff 1990; Baum and MacFall 1961; Gardner 1957). They
also observed that Baum was the editor of a small-town newspaper in South
Dakota before moving to Chicago in 1891 and suggested that this probably led
to his Populist sympathies (Mankiw 2001; Ziaukas 1998).
On closer examination, the evidence in favor of the allegorical interpretation
melts away like the Wicked Witch of the West. In contrast, the evidence against
the allegorical interpretation is abundant. It can be grouped into four categories.
First, there have not been multiple independent discoveries of the allegorical
interpretation. Second, Baum was not reluctant to express his political views, yet
he did not express Populist sympathies and did express anti-Populist sympathies.
256 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Third, much of what is written in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and Baum's other
children's books is inconsistent with the allegorical interpretation. Fourth, much
of what has been interpreted as political or economic symbolism in the book can
be traced to other sources.
THE CASE AGAINST THE ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION
Independent Discovery
Rockoff suggested the independent discovery by many individuals of the allegorical interpretation was evidence in its favor. Although it is true that many peo-
ple have come to the conclusion that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz was an allegory of the Populist movement, no one appears to have come to the conclusion
before Littlefield did, 64 years after the book was published. The New York Times
review of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, published September 8, 1900, when people should have been more aware of the supposed political symbolism in the text,
treats it only as a fairy tale. Those who have made the argument in favor of an
allegorical interpretation in recent years have almost all acknowledged Littlefield's lead (Rockoff 1990; Ritter 1997; Ziaukas 1998; Schweikart 2000; Watts
and Smith 1989). Those who did not cite Littlefield cited others who did;
Mankiw, for example, cited Rockoff. It is far from evident that many people have
come to the conclusion independently.
Political Sympathy
The evidence on Baum's politics is even more problematic than the evidence in
favor of multiple independent discoveries of the allegory. Supporters of the allegorical interpretation point out that Baum marched in torchlight parades for Bryan and
consistently voted for Democrats. This claim would appear to have great weight
because of its appearance in a biography coauthored by Baum's son, Frank Joslyn
Baum. There are, however, reasons to be skeptical. To Please a Child: A Biography
of L Frank Baum was published in 1961, 40 years after the death of L. Frank Baum
and 3 years after the death of Frank Joslyn Baum, at the age of 75. The claim that
Baum consistently voted Democrat and marched for Bryan appears to have come
from a biographical sketch of Baum by Gardner (1957, 29), published a few years
before To Please a Child. Gardner provided no references for the claim. In addition,
the story is at odds with the available evidence on Baum's politics.3
Baum's support of woman suffrage, opposition to monopolies, and apparent
sympathy for Asians and Native Americans have also been offered as evidence of
Baum's Populist-Democratic sympathies. Some of this evidence presents an
accurate view of Baum, but a misleading and somewhat anachronistic view of
late 19th century history. Baum's support of woman suffrage and antitrust does
not imply that he was a Democrat. His editing of a newspaper in South Dakota
does not imply that he was a Populist. Some of these suggestions are simply
incorrect: Baum consistently wrote editorials in support of Republican causes
and candidates and was not particularly sympathetic to Native Americans.4
It is true that Baum was an outspoken advocate of woman suffrage. His moth-
Summer
2002
257
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
er-in-law, Matilda Joslyn Gage, was a participant at the Seneca Conference and
co-author with Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony of History of
Woman Suffrage. Matilda Gage often stayed with the Baums, and she encouraged
L. Frank Baum to write down his children's stories and to seek a wider audience
for them. Baum clearly sided with his mother-in-law on the issue of suffrage. He
promoted woman suffrage in his newspaper and actively campaigned for it in
South Dakota (Tystad-Koupal 1996, 10-12). Baum also seems to have been interested in the problems associated with big business and monopoly. He worked
for a time in 1901 on a musical entitled The Octopus, or The Title Trust. The musical was never completed because Baum turned his attention to a musical version of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Baum also has an octopus in The Sea Fairies
take offense at being compared to the Standard Oil Co. (Gardner 1957, 29).
Many people now may associate women's rights and the regulation of business
more closely with the Democratic Party than the Republican Party. At the turn of
the century neither support for antitrust nor support for woman suffrage was
inconsistent with Republican party politics. For example, a Republican Congress
passed the Sherman Antitrust Act, and a Republican President signed it into law.
Theodore Roosevelt, the great trust buster, was also a Republican. Although Roosevelt did not take office until 1901, his views on big business were well known
from his days as governor of New York (Bittlingmayer 1994, 381). Woman suf-
frage also was not associated with just one political party. Initially, the woman
suffrage movement had strong connections to the Republican Party because of its
ties to the abolitionist movement. When Republicans supported voting rights for
African Americans but not women, some leaders of the woman suffrage movement began to seek support without regard to party affiliation (Foner 1988, 252
and 313). In the Midwest, one could find advocates of woman suffrage among
both Populists and Republicans (Goldberg 1994).
The Populist interpretation of Oz also associates Baum's position as the editor
of a midwestern paper with Populism. For example, Tim Ziaukas (1998, 8)
explained that in 1887 Baum "moved to an area that would become the state of
South Dakota, where he ran a variety store and worked in journalism and witnessed the desperation of the kinds of people who would be instrumental in the
Populist movement." However, the Plains States were far from being a solid block
in support of Democratic-Populism. Although Independents (the original name
used by the Populists in South Dakota) did well in the 1890 elections, their hold
in South Dakota was not particularly strong. South Dakota was a clean sweep for
the Republican Party in congressional elections in 1892 and 1894 (Hicks 1961,
262 and 333) and went for the Republican presidential candidate Benjamin Harrison in 1892. Bryan won South Dakota in the 1896 presidential contest, but
McKinley outpolled him in much of the eastern border of the state, where Baum
had lived. In 1900, South Dakota, like most of the other Plains States, returned to
the Republicans and voted for McKinley (Faulkner 1959, 134, 207, and 277).
Baum was one of the South Dakotans who never strayed from the Republican
Party. Baum's Aberdeen Saturday Pioneer was generally regarded as a Republi-
can paper, and he himself referred to it as a Republican paper (Tystad-Koupal
1996, 85). In his editorials, he consistently supported Republican candidates and
258 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Republican issues, such as the tariff.5 It is not necessary to decipher his views on
Populists from his children's books; he stated them quite clearly in his editorials.
Although he was not as hostile toward Independents as the other Republican
paper in Aberdeen, he could be very critical of particular Independents. After a
speech by the Independent candidate for governor, he suggested the man had
made "a fool of himself before all intelligent men" (Tystad-Koupal 1996, 90).
Baum continued to support Republican causes after his move to Chicago in
1891. In 1896 he published the following poem in the Chicago Herald Tribune:
When McKinley gets the chair, boys,
There'll be a jollification
Throughout our happy nation
And contentment everywhere!
Great will be our satisfaction
When the "honest money" faction
Seats McKinley in the chair!
No more the ample crops of grain
That in our granaries have lain
Will seek a purchaser in vain
Or be at mercy of the "bull" or "bear";
Our merchants won't be trembling
At the silverites' dissembling
When McKinley gets the chair!
When McKinley gets the chair, boys,
The magic word "protection"
Will banish all dejection
And free the workingman from every care;
We will gain the world's respect
When it knows our coin's "correct"
And McKinley's in the chair! (Hearn 1992)6
He could hardly have been clearer in his opposition to Populist monetary proposals. Baum clearly believed that the combination of sound money and tariff
protection, advocated by the Republican Party, would solve all the problems of
merchants, farmers, and workingmen.
Skeptical examination of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, as well as subsequent Oz
books (Baum wrote over a dozen more Oz books before his death in 1919), presents even more problems for the allegorical interpretation of The Wonderful Wiz-
ard of Oz. A particular problem is the issue of democracy. The Populist Party was
not a single-issue party devoted solely to bimetallism. Populists were almost as
concerned with democratic reform as with monetary reform. The Omaha Platform
adopted in 1892 stated that "Corruption dominates the ballot box, the legislatures,
the congress and touches even the ermine of the bench." The party's objective was
to "restore the government of the Republic to the plain people." Two of the 10 supplementary resolutions put forward by the platform committee directly addressed
democratic institutions. Consider resolutions 7 and 8.
7. RESOLVED, That we commend to the favorable consideration of the people and
the reform press the legislative system known as the initiative and referendum.
8. RESOLVED, That we favor a constitutional provision limiting the office of President and Vice-President to one term, and providing for the election of Senators of
the United States by a direct vote of the people (Hofstadter 1958, 152-53).7
Summer
2002
259
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Democratic reform was clearly central to Populist Party politics. The monetary
problem was regarded as just one symptom of a broader problem. It would seem
odd that someone writing a Populist allegory should completely disregard these
other issues, especially someone as concerned with suffrage as Baum.
Allegory: Alternate Interpretations
In contrast to the Populists, the inhabitants of Oz were not democrats. Quite the
contrary, they were avowed monarchists. All four of the main characters in The
Wonderful Wizard of Oz were elevated to royalty. The Scarecrow became ruler of
the Emerald City, the Tin Woodman became emperor of the Winkies, and of
course, the Cowardly Lion became king of the forest. Upon her return to Oz in
later books, Dorothy became a princess. Beginning with The Marvelous Land of
Oz, the second book in the series, Oz is ruled by Ozma. The powers of Ozma were
extensive. In The Emerald City of Oz, the sixth book in the series, Baum explained
"that, "All the property belonged to the Ruler. The people were her children and she
cared for them" (Baum 1991, 30). People in Oz lived where the ruler told them to
and worked at the jobs the ruler assigned them (Baum 1995, 185).
Baum's descriptions of the economy of Oz are also problematic for a Populist
interpretation. Consider, for example, the dialogue between the shaggy man and
the Tin Woodman about the Tin Woodman's castle, from The Road to Oz (1991,
the fifth book in the series):
"It must have cost a lot of money," remarked the shaggy man. "Money! Money in
Oz!" cried the Tin Woodman. "What a queer idea! Did you suppose we are so vulgar as to use money here?" "Why not?" asked the shaggy man. "If we used money
to buy things with, instead of love and kindness and the desire to please one
another, then we should be no better than the rest of the world," declared the Tin
Woodman. "Fortunately money is not known in the Land of Oz at all. We have no
rich, and no poor; for what one wishes the others all try to give him, in order to
make him happy, and no one in all Oz cares to have more than he can use." (Baum
1991, 164)
Hardly the views of a sophisticated monetary theorist. It seems easier to apply a
utopian interpretation to the Oz economy than a Populist one. It sounds more like
a household economy, in which the relationship between ruler and ruled is the
same as that between parent and child.8
If Baum was not a Populist how can all the seeming coincidences be explained? One might simply argue that a better understanding of Baum's politics
leads to a better understanding of the symbolism in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz.
Clanton (1998, 183), for example, has argued that Baum was a Republican and
that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz was written as a parody of Populists. Others
have suggested that even if Baum was not a Populist and the book was not intended as a full-scale allegory or parody, Baum's writing was shaped by the political
events of the time (Ritter 1997a, 21; Dighe forthcoming). Although one can try
to reconcile a non-Populist Baum with an allegorical interpretation of Oz, many
of the elements of the book that appear most laden with meaning actually have
alternative explanations.
Many of the elements of Baum's stories can be traced to his experiences.
260 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Baum was born in Chittenango, New York, in 1856. His father rose from the
ranks of the middle class to amass considerable wealth, then lost most of it. By
1898, Baum had written and performed in plays; managed a chain of theaters;
been a traveling salesman for axle grease, hardware, and china; edited a small
paper and reported for a large one; managed a general store; written a book on
raising chickens; and edited a magazine on window decorating. When he was living in Aberdeen, the area was experiencing a drought. Baum wrote a humorous
column about a farmer who put green goggles on his horses so that they would
think wood chips were grass, just like the Wizard made the inhabitants of Oz
wear green glasses to convince them the city was made of emeralds (Baum and
MacFall 1961, 74).9 One of Baum's sons described the Tin Woodman as a product of Baum's interest in window displays. According to Harry Baum, his father
"wanted to create something eye catching, so he made a torso out of a washboiler; bolted stovepipe arms and legs to it, and used the underside of a saucepan for
the face. He topped it with a funnel hat, and what would become the inspiration
for the tin woodman was born" (Carpenter and Shirley 1992, 43). Baum once
explained that he had been fascinated with scarecrows since he was a child
(Hearn 2000, 64). The story about pieces of china that come alive in chapter 20
of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz hardly seems surprising from a man who had
been a salesman for a china company.
Much of the allegorical argument is built on the significance of colors: a City
of Emeralds, a yellow brick road, silver shoes, and so forth. Although colors are
important in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, their significance arises from the col-
laboration of Baum with the illustrator W. W. Denslow. Many people now read
reprints of the Oz books that contain only black and white illustrations, but the
original books were unique at the time for their use of color and the integration
of text and illustrations (O'Reilly 1997, 42-47).10 Baum was the story teller, but
he worked throughout the creative process with Denslow. Each part of Oz had its
own dominant color. Blue was the color of the Munchkins, yellow was the color
of the Winkies, and red the color of the Quadlings. The colors in the book
changed as the characters moved through Oz. Such extensive use of color illustrations was unusual and expensive, but Baum and Denslow were so committed
to their vision that they agreed to pay for the printing plates themselves. Furthermore, whereas many of the colors appear significant in the allegorical interpretation, others are left unexplained. Why, for example, was the color of witches white? Why was Dorothy's bonnet pink?
Economist Rockoff adds a quantitative element to the case for the allegorical
interpretation: the seven passages and three flights of steps (the Crime of '73)
that Dorothy passes through in the Wizard's palace. Like the colors, however, this
example selects one out of many numeric combinations to present as significant.
What of the many other numerical combinations? The Emerald City had "nine
thousand, six hundred and fifty-four buildings, in which lived fifty-seven thou-
sand three hundred and eighteen people" (Baum 1991, 29). To go home, Dorothy
clicked her heels three times and took three steps. The possessor of the Golden
Cap was allowed to call the Flying Monkeys three times. What is the significance
of these numbers?
Summer
2002
261
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Other Sources of Symbolism
There is an alternative interpretation of Baum's use of colors and numbers.
The vivid colors and exact numbers, all expressed in simple language, are part of
what Hollister refers to as the "three dimensionality" that made The Wonderful
Wizard of Oz a success among children, if not among literary critics. He
describes this quality as "the three dimensional experience of going into another
universe where everything is brighter and more fragrant, more dangerous, and
more alive" (Hollister 1983, 195). The importance of color is not restricted to
Baum's Oz books either. In Sky Island (1912), one of Baum's attempts to escape
from the Oz series, the story takes place on an island in the sky where pink people live on one-half and blue people on the other. It is difficult, if not impossible,
to go more than a couple of pages in one of Baum's books without a reference to
a color or a number. These are descriptions that children understand and can
readily imagine.
Other historians have suggested additional sources for Oz. Leach (1993,
246-60) argued that the book is largely a product of Baum's interest in theosophy. Parker (1994) argued that Baum was strongly influenced by the Chicago
World's Fair of 1893. Baum was clearly a man with wide-ranging interests.
Hearn's The Annotated Wizard of Oz (2000) provides innumerable examples of
contemporary events that are likely to have influenced Baum's writing. He was
aware of developments in politics, religion, and popular culture. It seems reasonable that many of these developments influenced his writing, but the available
evidence strongly suggests that he did not write The Wonderful Wizard of Oz as
a monetary allegory.
CONCLUSION
Rockoff noted that the empirical evidence that Baum wrote The Wonderful
Wizard of Oz as an allegory was slim, but he compared an allegorical interpretation to a model and suggested that "economists should not have any difficulty
accepting, at least provisionally, an elegant but controversial model" (Rockoff
1990, 757). He was right-we did not have any difficulty accepting it. Despite
Rockoff's warning, we appear to have accepted the story wholeheartedly rather
than provisionally, simply because of its elegance."
It is as difficult to prove that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz was not a monetary
allegory as it is to prove that it was. In the end, we will never know for certain what
Baum was thinking when he wrote the book. I suggest that the vast majority of the
evidence weighs heavily against the allegorical interpretation. It should be remem-
bered that no record exists that Baum ever acknowledged any political meanings in
the story and that no one even suggested such an interpretation until the 1960s.
There certainly does not seem to be sufficient evidence to overwhelm Baum's
explicit statement in the introduction of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz that his sole
purpose was to entertain children and not to impress upon them some moral.
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is a great story. Telling students that the Populist
movement was like The Wonderful Wizard of Oz does seem to catch their atten-
262 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
tion. It may be a useful pedagogical tool to illuminate the debate on bimetallism,
but we should stop telling our students that it was written for that purpose.
NOTES
1. Bryan was the presidential candidate representing the fusion of the Democratic and Populist par-
ties in 1896. He lost to the Republican William McKinley.
2. The Crime of '73 was used by proponents of bimetallism to refer to the Coinage Act of 1873,
which omitted coinage of the silver dollar.
3. Gardner almost certainly misinterpreted one aspect of Baum's politics when he suggested that
his writings betrayed a distaste for feminism and woman suffrage (Gardner 1957, 21).
4. It has also been suggested that the Winged Monkeys represented Plains Indians and the Winkies
represented Asians (either Filipinos or Chinese immigrants) and that Baum was "clearly sympathetic to the plight of the Philippines (and to the Plains Indians)" (Rockoff 1990, 751). Baum's
editorials in the Aberdeen Saturday Pioneer indicate that his sympathy was limited. He declared
that whites had wronged the Native Americans but argued that the only solution to the Indian
problem was total extermination of these "untamed and untamable creatures" (Tystad-Koupal
1996, 147).
5. It might be suggested that Baum was merely pandering to a Republican audience, but he also
used his editorials to discuss issues that do not appear to have been popular in Aberdeen, such as
advocating woman suffrage and challenging the teachings of local churches (Hearn 2000, xxiii).
6. Chicago Sunday Times Herald, July 12, 1896. Reprinted in Hearn (1992).
7. Prior to the 17th Amendment, adopted in 1913, senators were selected by state legislatures rather
than by direct election.
8. Thanks to Mary Hansen for pointing this out to me.
9. Baum does not seem to have been very concerned with being consistent from one book to the
next. By the time of The Emerald City of Oz, the city is actually emerald encrusted.
10. The Books of Wonder reprints of the Oz series contain the original color illustrations by W. W.
Denslow and John Neill. Particularly spectacular are the illustrations in The Emerald City of Oz,
each of which incorporates a special metallic green ink. The annotated centennial edition edited
by Michael Patrick Hearn also reproduces the original appearance of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz.
11. I use the term "we" literally because I told the story to my classes for several years. I did not start
to doubt it until I read the Oz series to Ben and Joanna Gregson.
REFERENCES
Baum, F. J., and R. MacFall. 1961. To please a child: A biography of L. Frank Baum. Chicago:
Reilly and Lee.
Baum, L. F. 1900. The wonderful wizard of Oz. Chicago: Hill.
1904. The marvelous land of Oz. Chicago: Reilly and Britton.
1912. Sky island. Chicago: Reilly and Britton.
1991. [1909] The road to Oz. New York: William Morrow.
1993. [1910] The Emerald City of Oz. New York: William Morrow.
1995. [1913] The patchwork girl of Oz. New York: William Morrow.
Bittlingmayer, G. 1996. Antitrust and business activity: The first quarter century. Business History
Review 70 (3): 363-401.
Carpenter, A. J., and J. Shirley. 1992. L. Frank Baum: Royal historian of Oz. Minneapolis: Lerner.
Dighe, R. S. Forthcoming. The historian's wizard of Oz: Reading L. Frank Baum's classic as a political and monetary allegory. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.
Faulkner, H. U. 1959. Politics, reform and expansion. New York: Harper & Row.
Foner, E. 1988. Reconstruction: America's unfinished revolution, 1863-1877. New York: Harper
& Row.
Friedman, M. 1990. The crime of 1873. Journal of Political Economy 98 (6): 1159-94.
Gardner, M. 1957. The royal historian of Oz. In M. Gardner and R. Nye, eds., The wizard of Oz and
who he was. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
Goldberg, M. 1994. Non-partisan and all-partisan: Rethinking woman suffrage and party politics in
gilded age Kansas. Western Historical Quarterly, 25 (1): 2-44.
Hearn, M. P. 1992. Oz author never championed Populism. New York Times Jan. 10.
. 2000. The annotated wizard of Oz: A centennial edition. New York: W. W. Norton.
Hicks, J. 1961. The Populist revolt. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Summer
2002
263
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Hofstadter, R. 1958. Great issues in American history, vol. 2: 1864-1957. New York: Vintage.
Hollister, C. W. 1983. Oz and the fifth criterion. In M. P. Hearn, ed., The wizard of Oz. New York:
Schoken. Reprinted from 1971. The Baum Bugle (Christmas issue):5-8.
Kish-Goodling, D. M. 1998. Using The Merchant of Venice in teaching monetary economics. Journal of Economic Education 29 (Fall): 330-39.
Leach, W. 1993. Land of desire: Merchants, power and the rise of a new American culture. New York:
Pantheon.
Littlefield, H. M. 1964. The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism. American Quarterly 16 (1): 47-58.
Mankiw, N. G. 2001. Principles of economics. 2nd ed. Orlando: Dryden.
Nye, R. 1957. An appreciation. In M. Gardner and R. Nye, eds., The wizard of Oz and who he was.
East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
O'Reilly, M. 1997. Oz and beyond: The fantasy world of L. Frank Baum. Lawrence: University Press
of Kansas.
Parker, D. 1994. The rise and fall of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a "parable of populism." Journal
of the Georgia Association of Historians 15: 49-63.
Ritter, G. 1997a. Goldbugs and greenbacks: The antimonopoly tradition and the politics offinance in
America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. 1997b. Silver slippers and a golden cap: L. Frank Baum's The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and
historical meaning in American politics. Journal of American Studies 31 (2): 171-202.
Rockoff, H. 1990. The wizard of Oz as a monetary allegory. Journal of Political Economy 98 (4):
739-60. Reprinted in R. Whaples and D. C. Betts, eds., 1995. Historical perspectives on the American economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scahill, E. M. 1998. A Connecticut yankee in Estonia. Journal of Economic Education 29 (Fall):
340-46.
Schweikart, L. 2000. The entrepreneurial adventure: A history of business in the United States.
Orlando, Fla.: Harcourt Brace.
Tystad-Koupal, N., ed. 1996. Our landlady. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Watts, M., and R. E. Smith. 1989. Economics in literature and drama. Journal of Economic Education 20 (Summer): 291-307.
Whaples, R., and D. C. Betts, eds. 1995. Historical perspectives on the American economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ziaukas, T. 1998. Baum's wizard of Oz as gilded age public relations. Public Relations Quarterly 43
(3): 7-11.
Articles from this publicationrl I ~ r
are nw avilabl fro
"* Online, Over ProQuest Direct"--state-of-the-art online information system
featuring thousands of articles from hundreds of publications, in ASCII full-text,
full-image, or innovative Text+Graphics formats
"* In Microform-from our collection of more than 19,000 periodicals and 7,000
newspapers
"* Electronically, on CD-ROM, and/or magnetic tape--through our ProQuest?
databases in both full-image ASCII full text formats
Call toll-free 800-521-0600, ext. 3781
International customers please call: 734-761-4700
Attn.: Box 38, P.O. Box 1346, 300 North Zeeb Road., Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346
BELLOHOWELL For
comprehensive information on
Information and
Learning
Bell & Howell Information and Learning products,
visit our home page: http://www.umi.com
email: [email protected]
264 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION
This content downloaded from 129.119.67.237 on Sat, 21 May 2016 14:24:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
No Mysticism in Oz, Just the Populist Credo
nytimes.com/1991/12/20/opinion/l-no-mysticism-in-oz-just-the-populist-credo-245091.html
12/19/1991
To the Editor:
You report on "The Wizard of Oz as a Secular Myth of America," a paper delivered by Paul Nathanson at the
convention of the American Academy of Religion in Kansas City (news article, Nov. 28). Dr. Nathanson, a
researcher at McGill University's Center for Medicine, Ethics and Law in Montreal, apparently views "The Wizard of
Oz" as a mild blend of religion and mysticism. In fact, the book is a secular political tract firmly based in history and
ideology.
In 1896, L. Frank Baum was a supporter of the populist William Jennings Bryan in the Presidential campaign against
the eventual winner, the Republican William McKinley. The chief issue in that election was the gold standard (tight
money, high interest rates) with McKinley for and Bryan opposed since it kept farmers and workers in debt, and
made capital scarce for small business.
In his parable, Baum had the Scarecrow (farmer), the Woodsman (worker) and the Cowardly Lion (Bryan) join
Dorothy (Everyman) in the trip to Oz, the abbreviation for ounce, the standard measure for gold. Their travel to the
Emerald City to free the land of Oz involved passage along the yellow brick road (gold again) and battle with the
Wicked Witch (the Eastern banking establishment).
The Emerald City is unmasked as a facade of papier-mache, not a "modern technological metropolis," and the
Wizard confesses himself a common man making believe.
Unlike the 1896 election, Baum's tale has a happy ending from his point of view. Dorothy's companions gain
character, defeat the Wicked Witch and free Munchkin Village, which is not "an idyllic Midwestern town," but the
nation.
But then, Baum would have cheerfully left religious themes to those who seek them. SAUL ROSEN New York, Dec.
4, 1991
1/1
'Oz' Author Never Championed Populism
nytimes.com/1992/01/10/opinion/l-oz-author-never-championed-populism-370792.html
1/9/1992
To the Editor:
In "No Mysticism in Oz, Just the Populist Credo" (letter, Dec. 20), Saul Rosen states that "The Wizard of Oz" is no
more than "a secular political tract firmly based in history and ideology." In researching my biography of L. Frank
Baum, I found no evidence that Baum's story is in any way a Populist allegory.
Mr. Rosen has taken his conclusions from "The Wizard of Oz: A Parable on Populism" by Henry M. Littlefield
(American Quarterly, spring 1964), which has no basis in fact. Baum was not "a supporter of the populist William
Jennings Bryan in the Presidential campaign against the eventual winner, the Republican William McKinley." Baum
even wrote a poem backing McKinley and the gold standard, published in The Chicago Times-Herald, July 12,
1896: When McKinley gets the chair, boys, There'll be a jollification Throughout our happy nation And contentment
everywhere! Great will be our satisfaction When the "honest money" faction Seats McKinley in the chair! No more
the ample crops of grain That in our granaries have lain Will seek a purchaser in vain Or be at mercy of the "bull" or
"bear"; Our merchants won't be trembling At the silverites' dissembling When McKinley gets the chair! When
McKinley gets the chair, boys, The magic word "protection" Will banish all dejection And free the workingman from
every care; We will gain the world's respect When it knows our coin's "correct" And McKinley's in the chair!
No one knows how Baum voted in 1896. He did own and edit a Republican newspaper in Aberdeen, S.D., in 189091, in which he was aware of, but did not support the Populists.
During the 1896 campaign, Baum was on the road in Illinois, selling crockery when a friend asked him to speak
before a Republican Party rally. He agreed and that night delivered a tirade against the opposition. Then he was
asked by the Democrats to speak at their rally and delivered the same speech, this time directed against the
Republicans. As he finished, he saw in the front row the friend who had invited him to speak at the Republican rally.
Baum had little faith in politicians, considering most of them to be, like the Wizard of Oz, humbugs. He wrote "The
Wizard of Oz" to entertain children, not to lecture them about politics. MICHAEL PATRICK HEARN New York, Dec.
27, 1991
1/1
'Oz' Author Kept Intentions to Himself
nytimes.com/1992/02/07/opinion/l-oz-author-kept-intentions-to-himself-526392.html
2/6/1992
To the Editor:
" 'Oz' Author Never Championed Populism" by Michael Patrick Hearn (letter, Jan. 10) was a treat. As author of the
1964 article in question, "The Wizard of Oz: A Parable on Populism," I am honored to be identified by the authority
on most things Ozian as the one who might have alerted readers to L. Frank Baum's fascination with things political.
However, I absolutely agree with Mr. Hearn that there is no basis in fact to consider Baum a supporter of turn-of-thecentury Populist ideology. Read Baum's first book, then read my article. (Both may be found in "The Wonderful
Wizard of Oz," Mr. Hearn's 1983 anthology).
Baum's story may be taken as a parable on Populism, not a Populist parable. For me, his first Oz story remains a
gentle critique of those of us, whether farmer, worker or politician (Scarecrow, Tin Woodman or Lion?), who search
out humbug wizards to solve our own self-made problems -- hardly the stuff of "Cross of Gold" speeches!
We will never know if Baum had any conscious allegory in mind. I still think of the possibility of political allusions in
"The Wizard of Oz" as a kind of undercurrent, a context. My original point in the article was not to label Baum, or to
lessen any of his magic, but rather, as a history teacher at Mount Vernon High School, to invest turn-of-the-century
America with the imagery and wonder I have always found in his stories.
Thanks to M-G-M, Judy Garland, CBS and Ted Turner, who owns film rights, Baum's story lives on in our own age.
HENRY M. LITTLEFIELD Carmel, Calif., Jan. 22, 1992
Drawing
1/1