While writing a story for JW Schnarr’s Shadows of the Emerald City horror anthology, I began to wonder why people assume the Witch of the West is the villain? I thought the same as a child, but looking back at that movie I don’t understand why she is seen as the villain at all. It can’t just be the maniacal laughter and green skin, can it? I’ve known several very nice people with laughs that could scrape the paint off a wall, but that doesn’t make them evil. And to discriminate based on green skin? I’d like to assume the makers of the movie weren’t selling a racist agenda in their children’s movie. I should note that the Witch in the original book did not have green skin, but she was described as being very very old, homely and having only one eye, so it could still be that she was assumed to be the villain just because she was unattractive or very old.
Let’s look at both sides, witch vs. wizard:
The Wizard is in a position of power where he has spent a lifetime misleading the public and frightening his citizens into submission. A little girl from a far-off land approaches him, asking for assistance, and his response is to send her on a mission to kill his most dangerous adversary. In return he makes promises that he’s incapable of keeping, giving snake oil presents to Dorothy’s helpers and then escaping before fulfilling his promise to Dorothy. His only explanation is: “I’m not a bad man, only a bad wizard.” That’s a terribly weak excuse considering the magnitude of his crimes. The Wizard escapes without providing his promised payment AND without paying for his crimes, and we think the story ends happily?
The Witch: The Witch’s eastern counterpart is dispatched without warning by a powerful child adversary who claims she didn’t mean to do it. But of course, that’s exactly what any child-assassin would say in that circumstance. And honestly, when was the last time an intact house fell out of the sky by coincidence? And if it were an accident, what are the odds that it would land on the Wicked Witch of the East? The Witch would be a fool to believe Dorothy at her word. Then, despite the child-assassin’s claims of innocence, the girl accepts a mission from the Witch’s greatest adversary to go kill the Witch. How can anyone fault the Witch for trying to kill Dorothy? It’s clearly self defense! Even in the moments of her death, the Witch has no reason to question her own judgment–somehow the girl knew her one weakness and used it with no hesitation. Dorothy claimed it was an accident, but again, what are the odds of that?
In a discussion with writer Jeanne Tomlin about this topic, she said the following:
“It’s hard to separate this subject from the very real persecution of women that witch hunts in Europe covered up. What you are looking at and questioning is some pretty basic sexism. Any time a female creature (especially in a Disney movie) wants power, then she is by definition evil since power by rights belongs to males. Blech. I prefer to concentrate on less depressing parts of fantasy.”
While there probably is some degree of sexism at play here, particularly since the source material was written over a hundred years ago, I don’t think that’s the whole picture.
If I had to pick who was the most powerful character in the story, I would say it was Glinda, yet she’s not portrayed as evil. She plays a positively depicted female in power, despite her ridiculous bubbly voice, and her unfortunate fashion sense (was that pink monstrosity of a dress EVER in style?). She’s the only one who is shown using magic of her own, even if she does show it by riding around in a bubble. The Wizard’s magic is smoke and mirrors, and the Wicked Witch of West seems to have no magic, save through magical mediums: the broom, the crystal ball, the monkeys. Glinda is the only one who shows any inherent magic, and she’s the only one who can determine the magical nature of the slippers. If sexism were the only agenda here, I think Glinda would be portrayed differently.
Glinda and Dorothy are both portrayed positively, but every single major male character has a major flaw that mars his character: the heartless, the brainless, the cowardly, and the impotent. Granted, it may be a stretch to call the Tin Man and the Scarecrow male, but they were referred to with male pronouns in the book, and were played by male actors for the movie.
The sexism of Witch vs. Wizard is perhaps not so much a fault with the filmmakers, but due to assumptions made by the viewers. Looking at it objectively, it seems clear that the Wizard is the villain because of his behavior.
What do you think? Do you think the Witch is the real villain, or the Wizard, and why?
David Steffen hails from the frozen north, the land of ten thousand lakes and ten billion mosquitoes, where he lives with his wife and two dogs. He is a writer, a gamer, and all-around media enthusiast. Watch for his writing in the upcoming weeks of Fantasy Magazine. In the meantime you can check out his blog, Diabolical Plots: www.steffenwolf.blogspot.com
Hi Dave,
This is a very interesting article. I never thought of looking at the story from the witch’s perspective. For the longest time, I’ve seen people associating the good guys with the ones who look good, and the bad guys looking ugly.
As in the case of the golden-haired princes and the black-haired villains. I don’t get that either.
After reading your article, I am beginning to believe the witch was truly innocent, or misunderstood, and wonder how many other stories feature the wronged person, who is in the end accused as the villain (jack and the beanstalk being the other that i could think of right now).
This is an excellent piece, I’ve never thought of it in these ways before. I will have to go back and watch the movie with these ideas in mind. Very Interesting David Steffen.
Surely this is what Wicked attempted to answer? Glinda is a sell out who gains her power by becoming part of the government apparatus. Elphaba is the rebel – the conscience destroyed by the state for daring to disagree.
Ika,
It’s strange what sort of morals are incorporated into children’s entertainment!
Another example (besides Jack and the Beanstalk) is Goldilocks and the Three Bears.
I’m glad you liked it, Lynn.
Joe,
This is indeed what Wicked attempted to answer, but Wicked is a new story, not an analysis of Baum’s original work. Neither the book nor the musical of Wicked was faithful to the original, each presenting new details that contradict details in the original. For this reason I consider Wicked to be more of an alternate history of Oz, rather than expecting it to interlock perfectly with Baum’s works.
For anyone who is interested in the subject of Wicked, I have another article coming up here in Fantasy Magazine that compares Wicked the novel (written by Gregory Maguire) to Wicked the musical.
There was an infamous summary of The Wizard of Oz somewhere (ages ago) that went, more or less: a young girl travelling to a distant country kills the first person she meets, then teams up with three strangers to kill again.
In Oz it’s Glinda who’s really suspicious. Think about it, Glinda knew about the power of the ruby slippers but she sent Dorothy off to the Wizard. Now even if Glinda believed the Wizard’s hype and thought he was stronger than her, she still sent a young girl off on a dangerous trip to see him. Then at the end she laughingly reveals that Dorothy had the means to get home the whole time. Ha ha ha, why didn’t you mention that before?
I reckon Glinda wanted to test Dorothy or perhaps get rid of her, reading the column it makes sense that Dorothy could be considered a threat to the witches of Oz.
I think you’ve struck on a very good point. In fact, what’s to say that the original tornado wasn’t created by the Wizard himself in the first place. It seems a bit convoluted, but whisk a house from Kansas to Oz as a missle to destroy one of the wicket witches, with Dorothy on board who is then sent to, basically, destroy the other one. One major spell, two kills.
Slightly more seriously, it is an interesting point that the Wicked Witch is that mostly because of how she looks. I’d like to point out that an interesting counterpoint to that is that within the story, describing someone as a “witch” has no moral connotations at all. “Are you a good witch, or a bad witch. Which?” Glinda asks Dorothy. The wizard turns out to be a sham at the end of the story, so the ONLY poeple with real power in the piece are female, the two wicked witches, Glinda the Good Witch, and Dorothy, who seems to have an inner power of her own which allows her to follow the path to inner renewal (which is the real point, I suspect). But the piece is very female-centric in its powerful characters.
Cathy,
Very good point. I’ve wondered about Glinda’s intentions in withholding the information about the shoes. In the Oz story that I’ve written I addressed this, and brought Glinda’s true intentions to the light of day.
You may not know this, but this apparent ulterior motive was introduced not in the book, but in the movie. In the book, there are actually 4 witches, the good witches of north and south, and the wicked witches of east and west. The witch who greets Dorothy at the beginning is not Glinda, but the good witch of the north, who manages to never be named within the text. Her sole purpose in the story is to send Dorothy on her journey, and Dorothy never runs into her again. Then at the end when Dorothy is trying to get home, someone sends her to Glinda, and Glinda immediately reveals the truth of the shoes.
In the movie, Glinda fills the role of the Good Witch of the North as well as her own role. I suspect the filmmakers did this to avoid expanding the cast wider than they had to, but as you pointed out, it casts Glinda’s behavior under suspicion to withhold the information about the shoes to herself until the ending.
I would like to say I have thought about this as well before. I do believe that the Witch of the West is misunderstood as well as misrepresented. I would like to point out that you did miss one thing, Glenda is the most evil of all the villains in the film. She is portayed as the Good Witch of the North, however when the house falls on the Witch of the East and Dorthy Steps out she is there and the Lollipop Guild is coming out of the wood works. Glenda gives the Ruby Slipers to Dorthy and when the Witch of the West comes to get what is rightfully hers, Glenda pins the crime of steeling the slipers on Dorthy thus turning the Witch of the West angry towards her. It was Glenda who gave said slippers to Dorthy and then points out that Dorthy’s house is what killed the Witch of the East causing more animosity between the two. Dorthy has no control where the house is going to land nor did she touch the Slippers until Glenda uses her magic to place them on her feet. Glenda realizing that the Witch of the West has no power in Munchkin land sends Dorthy up to the Wizard of Oz to get her back home. And as you already know he does send Dorthy to kill the Witch of the West. However on her march up to the Wizard, the Witch of the West tries to reclaim the slippers from Dorthy through the hatred of believing that she has killed her sister and taken her Ruby Slippers. Once the Witch of the West is killed off Dorthy goes back and yes the Wizard does not hold up his end of the bargin and send her home as he doesn’t have the power to do so. He then tells her Glenda could have told her how to get home this whole time, which is just click your heels three times and repeat there is no place like home. When Dorthy asks why did you just tell me that in the first place, her response is you wouldn’t have believed me. So now the Witch of the West, Witch of the East are dead, the Wizard has flown off to a distant land, all that is left is Glenda to rule over all the land. To me she is the most evil of them all due to the fact that all of this could have been avoided if she would have just told Dorthy to click your heels three times and repeat there is no place like home. However Glenda knew that the Wizard couldn’t take off with the Witch of the West still being alive and needed her gone, so in a way Glenda Cons everyone so she could rule the land as the Supreme Being in the movie. I agree the Wizard should have been held accountable for his crimes on the people of the land and got off easy. However they have Glenda to thank for that. So she is the master mind behind everything. The Wizard is still a bad dude none the less however we need to look at Glenda as being the most evil here!