Seditious Undertones in The Wizard of Oz

I watched Wizard long ago. Years ago. I never really saw much to it then. Just a fun, rather quaint story about a girl trying to get home. Funny situations, funny characters…sounds so benign, doesn’t it?

Never did I imagine that there was such an agenda behind the story. I’ll be commenting only on the film since I’ve never read the book, and I don’t know to what extent the book carries the same worldview.

I am not going to talk about good witches and bad witches, whether there ought to be wizards in childrens literature, or anything of the like. I don’t care so much about that, so it’s not really an issue. I’m a huge fan of the Harry Potter films, in any case. My primary gripe with Wizard is with the actual representation of the Wizard Himself.

The introduction of the Wizard is not His first appearance as the green disembodied apparition of the Emerald City. It is as Professor Marvel in “our world.” The film uses a sort of typology, which should be familiar to serious students of biblical literature. The characters in Oz are types of the characters in “this world.” the Lion is a type of Zeke, Tin Man is a type of Hickory, Scarecrow is the type of Hunk, and the Witch the type of Miss Gulch. As such, the types in Oz are intended to reveal certain truths about the antitypes in our world.

The one exception is Professor Marvel and the Wizard. They are not intended to reveal truth about each other. Rather, both are types of another antitype. Both Marvel and the Wizard are obviously frauds. Neither are particularly malicious, but they’re phoney all the same. Both promise Dorothy something they cannot deliver. And Dorothy puts her confidence in both.

In Oz, Glinda, the good witch, encourages Dorothy to seek out the Wizard, and the munchkins chorus their approval. And so they’re off to see the Wizard because of the wonderful things He does. Along the way she gathers her friends and points them all in the same direction. Seek the Wizard. He has the power to fix all your problems.

But when they meet the Wizard, he isn’t anything like they expected at all. In fact, it turns out he’s not even a wizard. Instead of solving their problems, he (now as a man) assures them that the solutions they seek, they already have in themselves. He cannot even solve Dorothy’s problem. Her solution is on her very feet.

So. Of what are Professor Marvel and the Wizard types? They are types of God, of course. The Wizard is more obvious, and serves to clarify Marvel’s charlatan role. The Wizard is presented as an all-powerful being in His world who holds all the solutions. He’s wonderful, powerful, does good things for those who seek Him, and inspires the beliefs of the whole world of Oz. Dorothy becomes His evangelist. In the end, he’s nothing but a fake. He has no answers, and even less power.

Am I reading into this? I don’t think so. The thing that really convinced me that the typology was intended is the diploma the Wizard gives to Scarecrow. “Th.D., doctor of Thinkology.”

Huh. For those who don’t know, the designation “Th.D.” is usually used to refer to a doctorate of Theology.

In other words, God is a great big phoney. All smoke and mirrors—no more real or powerful than the Wizard was. So let’s toss theology out the window. Use your head and be rational for a change.