In 1900, William McKinley was running for a second term against William Jennings Bryan, from my home state of Nebraska. One of the key issues was the debate of gold v. silver as the standard for our currency. McKinley was for the gold standard, Bryan for unlimited coinage of silver. A key argument was that gold benefited mainly businessmen, bankers and manufacturers, while silver benefited the common farmer and laborer.
That same year a book appeared which quickly became a big seller, but which some historians now say was political commentary on the election. The book:
The author, L. Frank Baum, had been a newspaper editor in South Dakota. He was a strong advocate of women's suffrage and wrote articles defending the American Indians. Other than that, his political views are rather vague.
Anyway, the literary interpretations go something like this. "Since the 1960s historians and economists have explored the bimetallism symbolism in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz/ The original 1900 book centers on a yellow brick road (gold), traversed by magical silver slippers (the 1939 movie changed them to ruby slippers), as Dorothy leads a political coalition of farmers (Scarecrow), workers (Tin Woodman) and politicians (Cowardly Lion) to petition the President (Wizard) in the capital city of Oz (the abbreviation for ounce, a common unit of measure for precious metal). The real enemy of the little people (Munchkins) is the giant corporation or Trust (Wicked Witch of the West), whom Dorothy dissolves, just as the progressives of the era tried to dissolve the corporate trusts."
Not noted, in this quote is the fact that the heroine of the book is a young woman, consistent with Baum's views on women's rights. She leads the group and destroys the Wicked Witch in the end.
When asked once if his books contained political symbolism, Baum replied, "I write books for the entertainment of children."
Good history, or just literary interpretation gone too far? I have no opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment