Littlefield, Henry M. The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism. American Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Spring, 1964), pp. 47-58 The Johns Hopkins University Press

In this journal article, Henry Littlefield reflects on why The Wizard of Oz is so popular. He mentions that nobody really knows why. The book never received any critical acclaim or examination. Littlefield argues that in order to understand the Wizard, you must understand the original author, L. Frank Baum. He was raised in Syracuse and later moved to South Dakota with his wife. He was in South Dakota during the formation of the Populist Party. Although to most it is just a warm fairytale Littlefield sees more. He sees Oz as a magic oasis with struggles of good vs. evil. He sees Dorothy as the “Miss Everyman”, one of us. He argues the Scarecrow is representative of a commonview thought of the people of Kansas, brainless. The Lion symbolizes, William Jennings Bryan, the populist presidential candidate of the time, who is not able to make an impression on the populist people he is running to represent. The Wizard, he claims, represents the presidency’s of Mckinley, Cleveland, and Harrison. They are a fraud and hide behind this big machine charade.

While Baum denies any sort of allegory and claims only to have written a fun book for children to enjoy, I think whether or not these characters are really symbolic of what Littlefield argues is immaterial. It is the idea, the sense, that the story is relatable and could potentially represent these things. Similarly, the when the film was produced in 1939 during the Great Depression, the allegory could essentially be the same, with a slightly different taste. Even fast forwarding to today, we could make the argument that the Wizard is “Wall Street” while Dorothy represents “Main Street”. In everyday human existence, there is some struggle of good vs. evil. Similarly there is always a “Wizard” out there who hides his true nature. For those who choose to read into it, the film could mean anything and everything. However, for those who don’t, the story can be a lighthearted entertaining fairytale with a happy ending. As Littlefield says, Baum “never allowed the consistency of the allegory to take precedence over the theme of youthful entertainment”.

Littlefield, Henry. "The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism." American Quarterly. Vol. 16, No. 1 (Spring, 1964), pp. 47-58. 28 November 2008 <http://proxy.library.upenn.edu:2097/stable/2710826?&Search=yes&term=%22parable+on+populism%22&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3D%2522parable%2Bon%2Bpopulism%2522;gw%3Djtx;prq%3Dbaum%2BAND%2Bthe%2Bprogressive%2Bdilemma;Search%3DSearch;hp%3D25;wc%3Don&item=1&ttl=18&returnArticleService=showArticle>.

Henry Littlefield's "The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism," is one of the most, if not the most, frequently referenced and significant pieces of literature written about The Wizard of Oz. Littlefield, in 1964, was one of the first scholars to write about symbolism in L. Frank Baum's story. Littlefield proposes that Baum's characters each represent a different political figure, or group of people, important to the political landscape of the United States in the late 1890s. For example, the Lion represents William Jennings Bryan, who won the support of the Populist movement in 1896, but lost the general election to McKinley, and the Tin Man reflects many Eastern workers who, according to the Populist movement, became dehumanized through excessive industrialization. Littlefield also suggests that the Wizard can represent any president from Grant to McKinley as 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" (Littlefield, 54). This article suggests that the Populist movement was, although not overwhelmingly successful, a gentle, innocent approach to politics, within which its supporters believed that the government could solve all of their personal problems (Littlefield, 57). Littlefield's innovation led to an explosion of theories relating to The Wizard of Oz and his work continues to be relevant to any discussion of the story.

Like Ziaukas' article, elements of Littlefield's analysis of Baum's work may also be applied to the film version of The Wizard of Oz. For example, in light of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal and the expansion of government-run programs, people in the United States may have once again begun to seek comfort in the president. The late 1980s, just as the 1930s, were a volatile time for the United States economy and it is generally true that during times of economic hardship, citizens turn to their governments for support. As a result, it is possible that in the film, the Wizard once again represents the president, this time FDR, to whom everyone turns. Furthermore, Littlefield's suggestion that the Tin Man represents mechanized workers in Baum's story may correlate to workers in the 1930s who became disenchanted as they watched their dreams of prosperity vanish before their eyes. Even though Littlefield's discussion is limited to Baum's The Wizard of Oz, it is evident that a significant amount of symbolism remains relevant to the political and economic situation of the 1930s.