Category: Classic Fantasy

Dark Maiden Number One is now on Amazon Kindle

 
 
Going to promote this like crazy this morning. This comic is the first issue of a three issue limited series. The proceeds from this book will go entirely to getting myself and my wife to Battle of the Nations to fight for Team USA in Italy. Here is a link so those who aren’t familiar know what Battle of the Nations is… https://www.youtube.com/user/battleofthenations
Interview: Dave Sindelar of Fantastic Film Musings and Ramblings

Interview: Dave Sindelar of Fantastic Film Musings and Ramblings

There are numerous film review sites on the Internet specializing in science fiction and fantasy cinema, but few are as ambitious or as comprehensive as that of Dave Sindelar. For more than a decade now, he has been watching one movie a day in the science fiction, horror or fantasy genre, accumulating more than four thousand reviews in the process, from the very first years of the cinema (date of release of the oldest film: 1895) to the early 1980s, from all around the world. The sheer breadth of films covered and the comprehensiveness in the coverage of the full range of fantastic cinema make his site, Fantastic Films Musings and Ramblings, a must for any film buff or science fiction fan. Dave kindly agreed to answer a few questions about his project for The Freehold.

1. Thanks for granting us this interview Dave! You explain to us how this project got started on the Musings and Ramblings website but explain to us a little about your own interest in film and how it led to the Movie of the Day project.

Two things led to my interest in film – monsters and lists. As a kid, I was always fascinated by monsters and I loved looking at pictures of them. This is what led me to start watching my local creature feature (called CREATURE FEATURE) which had the advantage of airing late enough of Saturday nights that no one else wanted the TV at those times. I’d have to say that as a kid, the only movies that really caught my attention were monster movies and comedies.

Yet, as I grew, my tastes started to widen somewhat. Here’s where my fascination of lists came into play. I loved books that consisted of long lists of movies, and ended up amassing several of them as I grew. One of my favorite things to do was make sub-lists of those lists, and try to see the movies; I remember attempts at trying to see all of the four-star movies in the Maltin guide, as well as to watch every movie in Danny Peary’s GUIDE FOR THE FILM FANATIC. As might be expected, these early attempts eventually ran out of steam.

It was twelve years ago that I began toying with the idea of the project in question. The big factor that had come into play was the Internet. Up to that time, there were big limitations as to undertaking the project, as I had a much more limited income and was at the mercy of what they were willing to show on TV or stock at my local video store. It was only after spending some time on the internet that it occurred to me that a whole new world had opened up, and that a project of this magnitude didn’t seem quite as impossible.

Still, this project might have fallen through if it hadn’t been for one other thing; about five months into it, I began posting my Movie of the Day listings on the board at Sinister Cinema. All of the sudden, it was no longer a private project, but a public one, and it was my awareness of that difference that made me commit to it on a level that I hadn’t done previously.

2. When you began the Movie of the Day project, DVD was in the process of overtaking VHS as the main means of watching movies at home, and there has since been another major revolution in the rise of streaming movies on the Internet. Tell us some more about how these have affected your project.

The impact of DVD over VHS was pretty important in a couple of major points. The first is storage. When I began the project, I already had a massive VHS collection, partially from purchase and partially from having recorded movies off of TV. Trying to maintain and update this collection was proving to be more and more difficult, mainly because of the bulk and the difficulty of storage. With DVD, I was able to reduce the bulk of the collection tremendously.

Another impact of DVD was the rise of bulk purchasing. Just for example, I have quite a few DVD megapacks from Mill Creek. These sets contain 50 movies that can fit in a space just a little bit larger than a single VHS cassette, and cost low enough that you’re only paying about fifty cents a movie. Since my project involves trying to watch as much as possible from certain genres, they prove a quick way to amass a good collection with minimum outlay and fitting into a smaller area.

The rise of streaming video is just beginning to make a real impact on the project; I can watch movies for a fraction of the price without concerns of personal storage at all. I still haven’t fully incorporated streaming into my project, but I’m very sure that as my project moves forward into the future, I’m going to end up watching more and more movies this way than any other. I also think it’s making a greater volume of movies available to the average viewer, and this makes it more likely that I’ll be able to find some otherwise inaccessible films.

3. How do you approach each movie as you review them, and what is your writing process like?

First of all, I called the site “Fantastic Movie Musings and Ramblings” for a reason; though much of what I write could be classified as reviews, I don’t see them being tied exclusively to that approach. If I see my write-ups as serving a purpose, it is as a snapshot of the viewing experience I had, and as opportunities to bounce my wit (such as it is) off of that experience.

What I basically try to do is give a certain minimum of information about the movie, and I try to give only the bare bones of a plot description. I don’t know about anyone else, but when I’m reading a write-up of a movie, the plot description is the part I’m most likely to skip. If I haven’t seen the movie, I don’t want to know. And if I have, I don’t need to know.

Then I do quick scan of my mind to see what feelings I have about the viewing, and I try to encapsulate that, with certain thoughts as to the reasons I feel the way I do (which, to be fair, may not be the fault of the movie itself). I don’t back away from the quirks of the experience; sometimes my reaction has a lot to do with factors that wouldn’t come into play if I watched it another time, and I’d rather acknowledge those factors if I can.

I try to be compact. Since I’m not keen on writing a novella about every movie I see (I don’t have the time or the inclination), I try to get to the heart of the matter quickly. If the movie is bad and I’m feeling playful, I may resort to one of my “ten thoughts on…” write-ups. If I feel like probing deeper, I will; for example, my viewing of THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT inspired a fairly lengthy (for me) analysis of the movie; it’s what the movie left me feeling I wanted to do.

One point I always try to cover is what it’s genre qualifications are. Sometimes, it’s obvious, and in that case, I may skip it. If not, I try to cover it, if for no other reason than to find out why someone classified it as genre, and as an exploration of just which elements play into genre classification.

Of course, some movies don’t inspire me much at all in the writing department, for some reason. This is especially true if I’m watching a two or three-minute silent short with no real story. So I trot off what I can and move on to the next one.

4. You regularly update your Movies of the Day on the Classic Horror Film Board and one of the highlights of that page is your Essentials List of recommended movies. How does your list differ from other similar “must-see” lists and what do you think it provides for the curious viewer?

As far as the Essentials list goes, it was an attempt to emulate what Danny Peary was doing in “Guide for the Film Fanatic”. That guide never pretended to list the best movies ever made; it was more interested in providing a wide of some of the most interesting movies ever made, and some bad movies are more interesting than some good ones. I wanted to give a strong sampling of the best, but I also wanted to represent sub-genres that are often neglected (like the Italian Sword and Sandal movies), highlight some bad films that make for interesting viewing, provide examples of the work of some of the famously bad directors (how can you really comment on the work of Jerry Warren or Larry Buchanan if you haven’t seen any of them?), add some movies that are historically significant, have strong cult followings, or are personal favorites that I feel are unjustly obscure.

I wanted to feel that if someone watched all of the movies on the list, they’d emerge with a solid grounding in the fairly wide world of fantastic cinema. There are movies on the list I don’t like (and some I loathe), but none I think make for worthless viewing experiences. It all depends on how you approach them. At the very least, I hope the list isn’t boring.


5. Out of all the movies you’ve seen, what have been the most pleasant surprises and alternately, what have been the most crushing disappointments?

Pleasant surprises abound. Anytime I encounter a movie that I’ve not heard anything about and discover that it’s excellent goes on this list. Before I saw them, I knew nothing about AN INSPECTOR CALLS, THE QUEEN OF SPADES (1948) or THE ROCKING HORSE WINNER, just to name three that pop into mind immediately.

As for crushing disappointments, these are more difficult. My most memorable crushing disappointments occurred before the project started; for example, ARNOLD was one of those movies I’d been excited about, since it sounded like something I’d love, but I was extremely disappointed on my first viewing of it.

However, some movies did indeed disappoint me. I was hoping I would like ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW more than I did. I was expecting a lot more from THE WORLD, THE FLESH AND THE DEVIL. SILENT RUNNING was one I harbored some hope for and was fairly appalled at the final result.

Yet, I do think I can point to one disappointment that sticks in my mind strongly, even though it was a movie I was already familiar with. When I viewed the 1956 INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (a movie that I do recognize as one of the classics of the genre), I sadly realized that the movie no longer held any appeal for me. Sitting through it proved a chore, and I’ve come to realize that the movie simply doesn’t resonate with me anymore. This was perhaps the saddest revelation I’ve encountered on the whole project.

6. Finally, although you’ve reviewed over four thousand movies in more than twelve years time, there’s still several classics or historically important films you have yet to watch for your project. Which ones are you most looking forward to finally catching?

I think I can say that I’ve covered almost all of the really important genre films up to the early seventies at this point, Probably the earliest significant film that I haven’t covered so far would be THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, and I know there are several others from the seventies (CARRIE, to pick one off of the top of my head) that I have yet to deal with. Of course, many of these I’ve already seen; I just haven’t done so for this project, so I already know in advance what I’m dealing with. If you’d asked me that question a year ago, I would have probably opted for DAWN OF THE DEAD as the one I was most curious about seeing, but that finally popped up last year. From the seventies, I’m probably most curious about PHANTASM at this point; it sounds intriguingly weird and rather original.

From the eighties, I’m probably most looking forward to checking out THE EVIL DEAD and RE-ANIMATOR, both of which I’ve heard quite a lot about. On another level, the movie I’m most looking forward to reviewing is FRANKENSTEIN ISLAND, which I’ve seen several times but haven’t covered yet. I can practically guarantee I’m going to have at least ten thoughts about that one. [Addendum: The Evil Dead and Frankenstein Island have both since been reviewed]

Thanks again Dave! Be sure to check out the Musings and Ramblings website, and if you’re ever in Omaha, be sure to check the schedule at the Brigit Saint Brigit Theatre; Dave may very well be performing in their next play!

What Does a Boy With Eternal Life Really Want? The Sexual Cravings of Peter Pan

What Does a Boy With Eternal Life Really Want? The Sexual Cravings of Peter Pan

 

Peter Pan is the boy who never grows up but what does a boy with eternal youth and absolute freedom really want?  Is it perhaps a Mother to love him? Does he confuse motherly love with sexual fulfillment? There is very little fertile ground left in the study of J.M. Barre’s classic novel of childhood and I doubt I will stumble over any great secret hidden in the text, however I would like to revisit the ideas of motherhood and sexuality in the story. I think much can be revealed when we delve into Peter’s fascination with both those subjects as well as J.M. Barrie’s childhood and his dysfunctional relationship with his own mother.

Lois Rauch Gibson in her article  “Beyond the Aprons: Archetypes, Stereotypes, and Alternative Portrayals of Mother in Children’s Literature.” looks into the idea that mother’s are not always who they appear to be in children’s literature. She focuses on the mother figures found in Mary Poppins, Alice in Wonderland, and most notably Peter and Wendy. Gibson states that,”books are also an important way for a culture to transmit its varied social values to its children” (Gibson 177). This simple statement would seem to be the very foundation of children’s literature. Gibson goes on to discuss the importance of children’s literature in forming a child’s view point about their peers, parents, and people in all walks of life. The female role model or mother figure is especially prevalent in children’s literature and her presence need not just be that of the traditional mother. Gibson uses Jungian ideas of archetype to deconstruct the mother figure and show how we can get “beyond the apron” as she put it in her title and look at the varied mother figures that populate and inform children in this type of literature. The mother is a complex archetype and while a Jungian idea could suffice in examining her, the competing ideas of Freud can help us understand Peter Pan as well. This is especially important in looking at Barrie’s work because of his seemingly incestuous fixation with his own mother.

J.M Barrie had an unusual relationship with his own mother in which he attempted to fill the void in her life left behind by his older brother when he died. Going to the extremes of wearing his brothers clothing and pretending to be his brother in an attempt to cheer his mother up. Barrie in Peter and Wendy is not shy in suggesting that Wendy is the mother figure and we might speculate that Peter is Barrie’s dead brother who can never grow up. Can we link Barrie and by extension Peter Pan into the Freudian idea of a Oedipal relationship with the mother figure of Wendy?

Peter Pan on learning that Wendy knows all the stories that her mother tells becomes excited. He has listened to these stories at the window and wants more. Wendy offering to tell him about mothers is in a way a seduction, an offering to tempt the boy into bringing her to Neverland.  Barrie says it himself ,“There can be no denying it was she who first tempted him.” (Barrie 30).  Wendy has the knowledge of a Mother and this is something Peter is desperate to have. Wendy is excited to go and have adventures and see exciting sights but is somewhat reluctant. Peter in turn entices her further with the promise of seeing mermaids and flying, but what really gets her attention is being the mother to the lost boys. Wendy is just as excited to play house and act as mother to the children of Neverland as she is to see a mermaid and Peter uses this to convince her to come with him. This attitude towards motherhood is somewhat foreign to the modern mind. Wendy is excited by the prospect of tucking children in at night and of darning their clothing but if we look at it from the perspective of the time Peter was offering her the adult world. He was elevating her from child to woman. Treating her as a grown up with all the authority that went with that. Barrie did not see his mother as a put upon house wife, and in these passages seeing Wendy’s excitement he elevates motherhood to a staggering height even greater than flying.

Gibson suggests that Wendy, her daughter, and daughter’s daughter become Persephone to Peter’s Hades. The mother who returns each spring to the underground house in a mirror image of the original myth. This “Reversal of the myth” (Gibson 179) says much for the emphasis Barrie places on the mother figure. She is not returning to hell to hearken in the winter she is returning to paradise to bring forth the spring.  Gibson further suggests that Wendy and her progeny are stand ins for the rites of Spring in which the maiden becomes the mother. Wendy is the mother but never the wife and this is the cause of distress in the Peter and Wendy household. Peter allows them to play act the roles of father and mother. He can never be the actual Father but he expects her to be the mother. Gibson states that Peter can never be a sexual creature that he is the perpetual child. I disagree with Gibson in this respect. I believe that Peter not only has sexual desires, he has surrounded himself with those desires. His world is full of sexually desirable females. Wendy, Tinkerbell, the mermaids, and Tiger Lily all try to seduce or entice him throughout the story.  He only lacks the adult understanding of sex to consummate his feelings. The real strife between Peter and Wendy is sexual in nature. It is not that Peter can not be the father figure it is that Peter lacks the ability to complete the sexual act itself. He never grows up and Wendy grows away from him. He offered her motherhood but she can only realize that gift without Peter. Peter’s immortality has rendered him impotent but far from lacking desire.

While Wendy is the Madonna and love interest Tinkerbell takes the role of sexual predator. As Peter Pan put it “She is quite a common fairy” (29). To the late Victorian reader this would have been the same as saying she was akin to a prostitute. Tinkerbell makes her claim to Peter clear. She is sexually attracted to Peter but again there is a problem. Here Barrie puts up another roadblock to sexual completion beyond Peter’s youth. Tinkerbell’s size certainly separates the two from ever being sexually complete. These impediments to sexuality occur with every female character that Peter meets even though he is surrounded by women some who wish to be his sexual partner.

Peter is a sexual being and has desires. These desires are just beyond his reach. He can never be a sexual being because of his eternal childhood but even in that state he can and does have needs and constantly interacts with those who could fulfill them if only he allowed himself to move from boy to man.

 

Works Cited

Gibson, Lois Rauch. “Beyond the Aprons: Archetypes, Stereotypes, and Alternative Portrayals of Mother in Children’s Literature.” Children’s Literature Association Quarterly 13.4 (Winter 1988): 177-181. Rpt. in Children’s Literature Review. Ed. Scot Peacock and Allison Marion. Vol. 93. Detroit: Gale, 2004. Literature Resource Center. Web. 13 Sep. 2011.

Barrie, J.M. Peter Pan. Penguin Classics, 2004. Print.

 

Further reading suggestion

Shipley, Heather E. “Fairies, Mermaids, Mother, and Princesses: Sexual Difference and Gender Roles in Peter Pan” Studies in Gender and Sexuality Vol. 13 Iss.2, 2012. Print.

The Beetle: A Forgotten Classic

The Beetle was first published in March of 1897 in the literary magazine “Answers” as a serial story under the name “The Peril of Paul Lessingham: The Story of a Haunted Man”. Written by the enigmatic Richard Marsh the Serial ran for fifteen weeks and was initially targeted at a lower class audience. Then in September of 1897 the serial was repackaged as a novel and refined for the middle and upper middle class. The name was changed to reflect the tastes of this new audience and the novel was published with mostly good reviews.

The novel was continually in print until the late 1920s and it went through 27 print runs in that time. During the late 19th and early 20th century it would be more popular than Dracula, with which it shared similar themes. The Beetle then fell into obscurity in the 1930s. It was not really rediscovered until the 1960s and had very little critical evaluation until the early 1970s. It’s rediscovery among literary critics is due to the themes of sexuality and gender confusion that pervade the novel. The novel’s intense focus on gender in Victorian society has been the crux of much of the modern literary interest and has spurred new editions to be published by several different printing companies. As the book is in the public domain it can also be found free online at sites such as Project Gutenberg and several free editions on Kindle.

Gender, feminism, and homosexuality are the main focus of the novel. The book explores these in depth and the attitudes of the Victorian to each of these in enlightening. These attitudes tell us much about the foundations of our own culture which owes so much to the Victorians in terms of cultural mores and our expectations of gender roles. The Beetle turns gender roles upside down. Portraying women in drag and showing us a very dominating woman who is often mistaken for a man. Not only does the novel delve into the ideas of gender it is also a cautionary tale of mixing the mysticism of the East with the culture and science of the West. The themes of otherness and of eastern influences which corrupt and even dominate white Victorian society are also very prevalent in the novel. Finally the novel is viewed in terms of the psychological oppressiveness of its environment. The villain/creature roams the streets of London hiding in dark places that allow her freedom to work her black magics on her victims.

Most of the literary criticism of this novel has revolved around the idea of gender. The novel is full of scenes of women dressing and acting as men. Much of this gender swapping is forced by the hypnotic suggestion of the priestess of Isis but the character of Marjorie Holt who is forced to dress and act as a man has already been introduced to the reader as one of the “New Women”. She is a feminist and her feminism is juxtaposed against her transgender domination by the priestess of Isis. This priestess when first viewed is almost universally mistaken for a man. These two women form a core of feminist ideology and gender confusion around which the novel becomes rich fodder for gender, feminist, and queer criticism. “Victorian fear of the den depravity, the hidden potency, of the female.” (Hurley 213) the idea of the female using her sexuality was frightening to the Victorian mind. This is a common theme in Victorian literature and it is fully on display in The Beetle. Not only is the priestess able to dominate her victims mentally she is able to walk in both the world of man and woman. She is the ultimate predator both sexually and physically.

Secondary to the modern reader but more important to those contemporary to the novel is the idea of post colonialism, or even reverse colonialism that is presented. “The Other” as represented by the priestess of Isis can be seen as an infection of Western culture by that of the far East. The creature could be seen as a “means of the appropriation and destruction of symbols of the moral, spiritual, and racial superiority of England’s ruling class- its women.”(Garnett 30). The Monster feeds through its domination of women and men, in this way the creature corrupts Victorian society and everything it touches. It is made plain in the book that the monster craves the white flesh of its victims. It wants both to have that flesh literally and to possess it sexually. This sexual corruption is certainly an allusion to the fear of the “Other” or people moving into London from the colonies. The creature in craving white flesh could be seen as a Victorian fear of miscegenation. The average Victorian must have felt that natives arriving in London were not much better than primitive savages and were there to corrupt and destroy their society.  The Beetle came along at just the perfect time to feed into these ideas of reverse colonization. This may go a long way towards explaining why this novel did so well originally even outselling Dracula in its day and it also may be a reason it declined in sales after the first World War as cultural fears began to change in the West. It would be interesting to look at how interest in the novel changed over time with cultural value changes.

The reader of the novel also can’t help but be struck by the environment in which the novel takes place. Some of the literary criticism has taken the environment and ecology into account when looking at the novel. Based in 19th century London The Beetle takes place in a crowded and dark urban environment. Much of the action of the novel takes place at night and in the shadows. This idea of the environment adding to the fears of the reader has not been lost on the critical reviewers of the piece. Speaking of  Marsh’s work Minna Vuohelainen states “his fiction provides us with phobic readings of monstrosity which are closely linked to the spatial experiences of fin-de-siècle London.”(Vuohelainen 32). Her supposition is that much of the horror in The Beetle is derived from a fear of claustrophobia. London at the turn of the century provided a perfect setting for this type of fear. It was crowded and a constant pallor of smoke lay oppressively over the city. The city was almost a living organism itself giving rise to a fear of being overwhelmed by it at any moment. Onto this backdrop Marsh sets his story of sexual perversion and horror and it created a true psychological mixture that put fear into the audience. I don’t think any of us not living in that city at that time could fully appreciate the gothic novels that revolve around the oppressive nature of London.

            The Beetle is a rich nuanced text full of both horror and what would seem like overt sexual situations to the Victorian mind. By today’s standards these seem a little dated and most of the action is hinted at rather than blatant. There is however something to be said for horror that occurs off screen. Our minds are free to create the most intense horror for ourselves, out of our own imagination, and from our own intimate fears. The Beetle creates a world in which the Victorian mind would have felt fear and anxiety. It is a novel dominated by women out of their natural element. Women corrupted by vile magic. This is true of both the female villain who transforms from Man, to beetle, to priestess or the female victim suffering the sexual appetites of the villain and being forced into a transgendered parody of herself. The Beetle is a masterpiece of horror that gives us many different visions of how the Victorian mind looked at sex, foreigners, and the horror of their own backyard.

 

 

Works Cited

 

Hurley, Kelly. “The Inner Chambers of all Nameless Sin: The Beetle, Gothic Female Sexuality, and Oriental Barbarism.” Virginal Sexuality and Textuality in Victorian Literature. ed. Lloyd Davis. New York: Suny Press 1993: 193-213. Print.

 

Garnett, Rhys. “Dracula and The Beetle: Imperial and Sexual Guilt and Fear in Late Victorian Fantasy”. Science Fiction Roots and Branches. ed.  Rhys Garnett and R.J. Ellis. New York: St. Martin’s, 1990: 30-54. Print.

 

 

Vuohelainen, Minna. “Cribbd, Cabined, and Confined: Fear, Claustrophobia and Modernity in Richard Marsh’s Urban Gothic Fiction.” Journal of Literature and Science 3.1 (2010): 23-36. JLS online. Web. 10 Apr. 2012.

Sometimes a Slipper is Just a Shoe: Why the Wizard of Oz is not a Marxist Fairy Tale

Sometimes a Slipper is Just a Shoe: Why the Wizard of Oz is not a Marxist Fairy Tale

David Parker in his article, “The Rise and Fall of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a ‘Parable on Populism” looks closer at the many interpretations of the Wizard of Oz and gives us his opinion that sometimes a book is just a book and that interpretations pulled out of thin air are often just as ephemeral.  I have always been very interested in what adults think about children’s literature. More often than not they read into the stories political, religious, and even topical themes of their own time or the time in which the story was written. Frank L. Baum’s Wizard of Oz is probably one of the most interpreted pieces of children’s literature. There are whole schools of thought dedicated to the ideas behind the characters and the symbolism throughout the entire book series. From ideas of female empowerment to the political/Marxist ideologies of turn of the century America, Oz has inspired many writers to look beyond the curtain to find out what Baum was really trying to say. Most people familiar with critical theory and the interpretation of the Oz stories have come to accept that Baum was writing from either a Populist or Marxist position. While this interpretation is almost ubiquitous it is a fatally flawed conceit constructed by closed minded and biased English professors and promoted by equally biased university English departments. Baum was not a Marxist neither was he a populist. He was merely a man seeking to tell a rousing story for children.

David Parker focuses his deconstruction of the flawed critical interpretations of  Oz  by taking a close look at the work of Henry M. Littlefield. In his seminal book on Oz, The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism.  Littlefield seeks and finds hidden metaphors throughout the Wizard of OZ . In fact, almost every character, object, and even action in the book is meticulously scrutinized and explained as part of a populist/Marxist agenda. Littlefield finds great meaning in assigning the Scarecrow the role of the beleaguered farm worker and the Tin Woodsman the role of industrial laborer.  Dorothy, the Lion, the Wizards, and Witches are assign fitting roles as either the oppressed or the oppressors. Littlefield even matches objects in the story to ideas held by populists and progressives. Littlefield believed that the slippers which were silver (not ruby) in the book represented the Silverite movement, an early American progressive movement which wished to devalue American currency. The argument that Oz is a work that is politically populist and Marxist became the major interpretation of the work in large part due to Littlefield. Marxist and populist interpretations of Oz popped up one after another on the heels of Littlefield’s work. Some agreed with his thesis some disagreed with how he interpreted each character, object, or plot point in the book, but almost all agreed on Littlefield’s primary message. This is not a surprising development for anyone familiar with late twentieth century university English departments.

The problem in the populist and Marxist interpretations of Baum’s work would not surface until years later. The Problem as David Parker lays out in his article is that Baum just did not conform to the idea of a populist. Parker looks at the political activity of Baum in depth before making his conclusion. Baum was a registered democrat and voted democrat, but he did not support populist ideology. In fact as Parker states, “Not only did Baum speak for the Republican party; he spoke against the movement that would soon evolve into the Populists.” (Parker 54) Baum even made pleas to support Republican candidates in a newspaper he owned. This was not the work of a populist. Parker in all fairness suggests that Baum may have taken the Republican stance in the newspaper to boost sales in the Republican majority city of Aberdeen South Dakota. However, Parker points out this was not Baum’s last pro-Republican piece of writing and these appear in publications that would be in much less Republican friendly areas. In fact Baum calls for the “silverites’ dissembling”  (Parker 60). These same silverites were part of the progressive movement and wanted to change the gold standard to a silver standard. They are also the foundation of much of the interpretation that Littlefield created to explain the The Wizard of Oz.

Parker concludes the article by examining what Baum said himself about the book and it’s purpose. Baum wanted to create a uniquely American Fairytale that had none of the European holdovers spoke to the American spirit.

I don’t think Baum meant for the book to be interpreted, analyzed, or approached from a feminist, Marxist, or any point of view other than as a story for children.  I think the best way to examine Dorothy and her journey through Oz is through Joseph Campbell’s Heroes Journey. I think we should put aside all the other interpretations and merely see this story for what it is. This is the story of a brave little girl who is confronted by obstacles and learns from her experiences. Looking at this story from the idea of the hero’s journey we can find a novel yet more satisfying way to approach the text.

I believe we should look at Dorothy as a Heroine. She conforms to all the aspects of Campbell’s Hero archetype. She begins the story by undertaking a quest to find the Wizard. Tragically flawed companions also accompany her on this quest. She encounters one physical obstacle after another that she overcomes by wit will and tenacity. In the end she overcomes an internal obstacle that changes her perception of the world and those around her. The final obstacle gives her new wisdom, which she now can take back, and use for the betterment of herself and those around her. Dorothy meets all the basic requirements for a hero according to Campbell. In the prologue to Campbell’s book Hero with a Thousand Faces he states that the hero, “is to return to us, transfigured, and teach the lesson he has learned of life renewed” (Campbell 4) This is Dorothy in a nutshell her entire journey led her to understand the importance of her life in our world. The great realization was that there was “no place like home”. While the character of Dorothy never says those famous Hollywood created words as she clicks the heels of the slippers together in the novel that sentiment is certainly in the book. Dorothy’s goal was always to return to Kansas, but her time in Oz taught her a lesson about the importance and joy of being home.

I think an approach to Baum’s work that doesn’t dwell on trying to find some underlying meaning to the text may be one of the best ways to understand what Baum himself sought. He was telling a modern fairy tale and he was creating a Heroine for children of his day. In fact in the introduction Baum says just that, “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz” was written solely to please children of today.” (Baum 1) There is no metaphorical story about progressive politics, and no hidden feminist, homosexual, or agrarian agenda on the part of Baum. He was simply writing a story for children and to place too much emphasis on analysis could take away from what the author saw as his job. Sometimes an author’s only job is to create a Hero or Heroine to entertain us with their struggles and their revelations.

 

Works cited

 

David B. Parker JOURNAL OF THE GEORGIA ASSOCIATION OF HISTORIANS, vol. 15, pp. 49-63.

Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1973. print.

Baum, Lyman Frank. Wonderful Wizard of Oz. New York: Dover Publications, 1960. Print.