Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"

Don · Post by **Don** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:37 pm

One of my favorite tales is “The Wizard of Oz”, largely because I find it rich with “Life’s Lessons”… For the benefit of those not familiar with the story, it’s about a collection of characters, each of which felt somehow incomplete. It’s about a scarecrow that didn’t have a brain, a Lion who felt himself a coward, an emotionless tin man, and Dorothy, a lost young girl. Together, they decide to ask the mighty and powerful Wizard of Oz to grant them what they are missing. Oz agrees, but only on the condition that they bring him the broomstick of a local Evil Witch! The brainless scarecrow lays out the strategy for the raid on the witches’ castle, the cowardly lion leads the charge, the heartless tin man reacts to the risks and casualties, and it turns out that Dorothy never left Kansas!

To me, though, the most fascinating character is the Wizard himself! The mighty and Powerful Oz turns out to be a funny little man with an echo chamber and a smoke machine, and surely that is one of life’s most relevant lessons! All too often, my boss was a funny little man with an echo chamber and a smoke machine! But if you dig a little deeper, Oz turns out to be a man of great wisdom! He doesn’t exactly grant the wishes, but he DOES point out that each of the characters had what they sought all along! All they had to do was use them!

What, you say, does this have to do with men wearing skirts? Well, it’s not hard to imagine a fifth member of this little troupe, i.e. “skirtsman”, who would petition Oz for permission to wear a skirt!

We keep clamoring for “fashion freedom”, as if it were something that could be granted by an edict from some lord high grand exalted PooBah with the bang of his gavel. Its good-news-bad-news on this one, guys; the bad news is that the PooBah doesn’t exist! The GOOD news is that fashion freedom DOES exist! In fact, like the scarecrows’ brain and the tin mans’ heart, IT HAS BEEN THERE ALL ALONG! All we really need do is USE IT! If you want to wear a skirt, wear one! No one will arrest you, no one will attack you, no one will sue you, and almost NO ONE will react negatively!

Make no mistake, though, “skirtsmanship” is a very subtle craft! Practice it skillfully, and the positive response will be overwhelming; Practice it poorly, and you’ll look like a jerk! But which is which? What does “skillfully“ mean? We’ve been struggling with that for quite a while, have we not?

The most meaningful quote I’ve heard goes something like “The clothes don’t make the man, the man makes the clothes”!

Website · Post by **crfriend** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 5:09 pm

Don wrote:We keep clamoring for “fashion freedom”, as if it were something that could be granted by an edict from some lord high grand exalted PooBah with the bang of his gavel. Its good-news-bad-news on this one, guys; the bad news is that the PooBah doesn’t exist! The GOOD news is that fashion freedom DOES exist! In fact, like the scarecrows’ brain and the tin mans’ heart, IT HAS BEEN THERE ALL ALONG! All we really need do is USE IT! If you want to wear a skirt, wear one! No one will arrest you, no one will attack you, no one will sue you, and almost NO ONE will react negatively!

Make no mistake, though, “skirtsmanship” is a very subtle craft! Practice it skillfully, and the positive response will be overwhelming; Practice it poorly, and you’ll look like a jerk! But which is which? What does “skillfully“ mean? We’ve been struggling with that for quite a while, have we not?

Thank you very much for that post, Don (and it's nice to read you again!), because you clobbered the nail precisely on the head with it. If we're going to "ask permission" to wear skirts we are going to be waiting a very long time for a response -- probably beyond our life-expectancies. However, by simply asserting our desire we sidestep that "permission", and in fact do it in the best possible manner by "granting it to ourselves".

As far as getting the look and "aura", you are also spot on and folks who wish to don skirts ought to beware of that notion.

ChrisM · Post by **ChrisM** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 1:39 pm

Very nicely put, Don!

Chris

Since1982 · Post by **Since1982** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 2:47 pm

I'm confused, Don..Are you remembering it from the 1939 original movie where Dorothy and her dog ToTo are swept away IN their house by a Tornado starring a young Judy Garland, and the original man with no joints, Ray Bolger as the scarecrow and land in the Fantasy world of Oz. OR are you remembering the story from "The Wiz" starring Michael Jackson as the Scarecrow, Nipsey Russell as the tin man and a full grown woman Diana Ross playing "Dorothy" who doesn't land in Oz, just wakes from a dream and she's there. I don't think either Dorothy was "lost" without being IN something, either a house or a dream.

It's also one of my all time favorite movies. My favorite actors in the original 1939 movie were Bert Lahr as the Cowardly Lion and Margaret Hamilton as the Wicked Witch of the West.

Website · Post by **crfriend** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 3:33 pm

Since1982 wrote:I'm confused, Don..Are you remembering it from the 1939 original movie where Dorothy and her dog ToTo are swept away IN their house by a Tornado starring a young Judy Garland, and the original man with no joints, Ray Bolger as the scarecrow and land in the Fantasy world of Oz. OR are you remembering the story from "The Wiz" [...]

Don might well be referring to the original text (remember those?) by L. Frank Baum rather than any of the assorted "productions" of the work.

It's also one of my all time favorite movies.

It's a good film, but even though I have not read the original text of the story, it's probable that some details were, of necessity, left out of the original film version. I wonder what a modern remake might look like.

Don · Post by **Don** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:41 pm

Since1982 wrote:I'm confused, Don..Are you remembering it from the 1939 original movie...

Yes, I was referring to the 1939 movie...

I agree, Dorothy was different in that she wasn't seeking something she didn't have but rather wanted to be someplace she wasn't... The whole yarn proved to be her dream, which presumably took place in Kansas.

Since1982 wrote:It's a good film, but even though I have not read the original text of the story, it's probable that some details were, of necessity, left out of the original film version

The best version I have seen was a production performed on ice a few years ago. The skating and special effects were breathtaking. This production was pretty faithful to the 1939 original, but did include a number called "The Jitterbug", performed while the troup was asleep in the poppy fields. It was filmed for the 1939 version but never included.

Remakes of classic films are usually big disappointments! One of the WORST movies I've ever seen was a recent remake of Neil Simon's "The Out of Towners". The 1970 version starred Jack Lemmon and Sandy Dennis, and was hilarious! The modern one starred Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn, and was awful!

Having said this, though, I've often wondered about a remake of "Slap Shot"...

Since1982 · Post by **Since1982** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 10:30 pm

I agree, Dorothy was different in that she wasn't seeking something she didn't have but rather wanted to be someplace she wasn't... The whole yarn proved to be her dream, which presumably took place in Kansas.

Since1982 wrote: It's a good film, but even though I have not read the original text of the story, it's probable that some details were, of necessity, left out of the original film version

The best version I have seen was a production performed on ice a few years ago.

I don't mind being quoted, but if you're going to quote me, please quote something I actually did say. This entire quote came from someone else's comments, not mine.

This is my entire post, please show me where this "quote" of mine you say I said, is at??? I said nothing about "ICE" or used the word "necessity" in any usage. >> I'm confused, Don..Are you remembering it from the 1939 original movie where Dorothy and her dog ToTo are swept away IN their house by a Tornado starring a young Judy Garland, and the original man with no joints, Ray Bolger as the scarecrow and land in the Fantasy world of Oz. OR are you remembering the story from "The Wiz" starring Michael Jackson as the Scarecrow, Nipsey Russell as the tin man and a full grown woman Diana Ross playing "Dorothy" who doesn't land in Oz, just wakes from a dream and she's there. I don't think either Dorothy was "lost" without being IN something, either a house or a dream.

It's also one of my all time favorite movies. My favorite actors in the original 1939 movie were Bert Lahr as the Cowardly Lion and Margaret Hamilton as the Wicked Witch of the West.
I don't see anything I said in the quote you are attributing to me. Now you really do have me confused.

Don · Post by **Don** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:25 am

It's been quite a while since I have posted anything using this particular mechanism. Apparently, my quote management skills are a little rusty!

Sorry about that!!!...

skirtcafe.org

Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"

Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"

Re: Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"

Re: Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"

Re: Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"

Re: Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"

Re: Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"

Re: Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"

Re: Lessons from "The Wizard of Oz"