John Doe Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 I had to share this 'cause I found it at work, while I was browsing the net for a book. It's humorous yet if you think about it, very true. Shows how easily people's mind can be warped and we can lie to ourselves that we are good and have done a good thing or that a person is good and has done a good thing. Glinda, you are one foul <bleep!>. Read the article here. Well, you should read just because I found it funny and kept laughing.
hh5 Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 it kinda looks like ... the good witch is the lesbian witch ... the evil witch is a homeless witch ... what do the other witches look like?
comicfan Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 (edited) it kinda looks like ... the good witch is the lesbian witch ... the evil witch is a homeless witch ... what do the other witches look like? There are only the two witches in the story. If you read the original story by Baum the Good Witch of the North was beautiful and did all she could to help those who lived in her territory. There were the Wicked Witches of the East and West, who were sisters. The east witch had a house dropped on her which Dorothy lived in. The Wicked Witch of the West was a short evil woman, shorter than the little girl Dorothy herself. When they made the movie the Wicked Witch underwent a few looks. First as a glamorous witch, a la The Wicked Queen in the cartoon version of Snow White but later they decided to make her ugly. When they did the recast the witch making her sort of iconic. The Wicked Witch of the East wasn't shown in the book or the movie really. AS for being homeless, actually the Witch of the West has a castle she lives in. Guess you need to see this movie to sort of understand it hh. Edited March 22, 2012 by comicfan
hh5 Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 The story is left unbalance ... with no more evil witches ... and the witch of the north to rule all ahhh ... D. has yet to visit the south??? ... I'm sure baum would have loved to write many stories but he didn't have the power of media like we have today .. ... I haven't seen Tin Story ... dorithy a few yrs older ... oz ... quite diff than we thought ... there was one that cast a girl at the proper age ... perhaps its a year later the story takes place it showed that there are machines in oz .. and perhaps this is why Tin Story takes on that theme I don't think there is a true modern day version .. MJ is motown version ... lol the closest one to a modern day would be "the devil wears Prada" nice article ... innocence is a POV There are only the two witches in the story. If you read the original story by Baum the Good Witch of the North was beautiful and did all she could to help those who lived in her territory. There were the Wicked Witches of the East and West, who were sisters. The east witch had a house dropped on her which Dorothy lived in. The Wicked Witch of the West was a short evil woman, shorter than the little girl Dorothy herself. When they made the movie the Wicked Witch underwent a few looks. First as a glamorous witch, a la The Wicked Queen in the cartoon version of Snow White but later they decided to make her ugly. When they did the recast the witch making her sort of iconic. The Wicked Witch of the East wasn't shown in the book or the movie really. AS for being homeless, actually the Witch of the West has a castle she lives in. Guess you need to see this movie to sort of understand it hh.
Nephylim Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 Awesome. It happens over and over and over... beautiful = good, ugly = bad. What a load of rubbish
Palantir Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 Lol. The critique was fun but it played with logic to draw it's conclusion. The story stated that wicked witches were ugly. That's not the same as saying they were ugly because they were wicked - a bit like Lois Caroll and his 'I see what I eat' not meaning the same as 'I eat what I see'.
hh5 Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 its a children's story that draws in the adult crowd Shirley temple was the first runner up but the othr studio didn't want to lend her Its a good fate happen ... good for Judy career .. good for studio to take on a newbie being groom by mr mayer lol disney did change this ... ugly is now pretty too ugly was used only as a cover for Snow White to eat the apple Awesome. It happens over and over and over... beautiful = good, ugly = bad. What a load of rubbish lol, this is a NCIS moment!! Lol. The critique was fun but it played with logic to draw it's conclusion. The story stated that wicked witches were ugly. That's not the same as saying they were ugly because they were wicked - a bit like Lois Caroll and his 'I see what I eat' not meaning the same as 'I eat what I see'.
Benji Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 ...........That was very funny, I LMAO, kinda true though Glenda the 'god witch' pushed Dorthy thru some tough tests, she only rescued them from the opium fields by putting in a snowfall. other then than that she pretty much dissed Dorthy. LOL!!!
Guest Witwicky Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 "And remember only bad people are disabled, Dorothy" hahah
Bill W Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 That was great. It kind of reminds me of the westerns when I was a kid - the good guy always wore the white hat and clothes, while the bad guy the black hat.and garmets. I guess it was their tailors that decided if they were good or bad, where in Oz it was the beauticians (and possibly a plastic surgeon). .
Andy78 Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 Poor Dorothy really did get crapped on. But Judy Garland had an amazing singing voice.
comicfan Posted April 7, 2012 Posted April 7, 2012 Well the stories Baum wrote, which were 13 in total, had other villains as well. Nome who was the Gnome KIng, Mombi the Witch - she was used in both a cartoon version where Liza Minnelli took on her mother's role as Dorothy and Ethel Merman played Mombi, and again in Disney's Return to Oz where Mombi had many beautiful heads but was mainly played by Jean Marsh and Dorothy Gale is this time played by Fairuza Balk. Baum was constantly introducing new characters, good and bad. Just that when things came to the movies alterations would occur. Dorothy's silver slippers became ruby slippers, the short little witch with the silver crown who could call on the flying monkeys three times became tall, green and memorable. There are new Oz books still being written. A few years ago the whole series was re-imagined as Tin Man, and later this year this one hundred twelve year old story gets another going over as Dorothy and the Witches of Oz comes out as a mini series. Just another case of everything old is new again. Well that and a good story never fades from the public eye.
Celethiel Posted April 12, 2012 Posted April 12, 2012 actually as I recall there were 4 witchs in the original story (don't know for sure never actually read the serieds of books) and it was the Good witch of the south that sent her home... But I'd have to agree with the whole thing there in the movie it does look kind of fishy.... when you look at it with a more critical eye beyond that of the adventure.... Almost like a political powerplay where Glinda get's everything.... all rivals squished and would be rivals out of town... Considering the book was written as political satire over silver, gold, and greenbacks. Truth be said no one is good or evil, and if you're being sent on an adventure someone else is benifiting (who's in power...) while all his rivals are being squished....one reason I like Ebberon.
W_L Posted April 12, 2012 Posted April 12, 2012 Need to resist political baiting as I know what the wizard of oz was really about. (19th century American economic/politics with early 20th century stuff) Just for reference,The wicked witches represented two politicians of the same party and Dorothy wasn't wearing ruby slippers in the book. Alas, i promised not to get into politics until stories are done.
Celethiel Posted April 14, 2012 Posted April 14, 2012 Need to resist political baiting as I know what the wizard of oz was really about. (19th century American economic/politics with early 20th century stuff) Just for reference,The wicked witches represented two politicians of the same party and Dorothy wasn't wearing ruby slippers in the book. Alas, i promised not to get into politics until stories are done. correct I learned this in high school I kind of found it kind of funny actually... The original slippers were silver.... and the Yellow brick road represented gold. The Emerald city rempresented Green backs The wicked Witch of the East was one person in the politics of the time, the Wizard another, and Glinda possibly a third... Even the Black and white verses the vibrancy of the over the rainbow were political nonsense... I seem to remember there is actually a newer series of new books that redefine the original Wizard of Oz books (there is a series) from a different point of view...the Wicked Witch of the West... I've been wanting to read them but haven't...
comicfan Posted April 14, 2012 Posted April 14, 2012 Wow. The layers people put over a story. And the retelling is ehh. The musical Wicked barely stuck to the book and made it much better than it was, and this coming from an English major where the books are usually sacrosanct. It felt like it took forever to get through the first book but he has gone on to do Son of Witch and The Cowardly Lion.
NightOwl88 Posted April 18, 2012 Posted April 18, 2012 If you think about it, like REALLY think about it's actually kind of devious. The article was great though, funny yet thought provoking at the same time.
Rizan Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 Just another reason everyone should read Wicked. I believe in the original story (I know it happens in Wicked) Glinda does rule for a short time before she hands it over to the Scarecrow, so it fits. Wow. The layers people put over a story. And the retelling is ehh. The musical Wicked barely stuck to the book and made it much better than it was, and this coming from an English major where the books are usually sacrosanct. It felt like it took forever to get through the first book but he has gone on to do Son of Witch and The Cowardly Lion. As well as Out of Oz. To be honest though, I think the musical destroyed the book. I loved the musical, but it turned the story commercial. The book had a lot more depth, greater character development, and a better ending.
BlueSoxSWJ Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 The Wizard of Oz was written in 1900. The first known reference to it possibly being a political allegory about the gold standard screwing over workers was in 1964. A bit of a stretch to think the "real meaning" stayed hidden for 65 years until some random high school teacher noticed it.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now