The Wizard of Oz and the Crime of '73

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by kaparthy, Jun 28, 2009.

  1. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    By coincidence, Turner Classic Movies is showing the Wizard of Oz at 8/7c tonight. Starts in 20 minutes, I might watch it.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. green18

    green18 Sweet on Commemorative Coins Supporter

    Beat me to it....:)
  4. kaparthy

    kaparthy Well-Known Member

    Alexander the Great as Herakles

    CWTokenman, thanks for the longish summary. I could take issue with several points. The myth is variously interpreted. But all in all you identified the monetary elements. The racialist elements include the yellow Winkies, the Munchkins and the Flying Monkeys. (Don't forget them.) The field of poppies, too, has meaning. But, again, thanks for all that work. It helps to set the stage.

    Eric L, you miss the point. First of all, the argument is that regardless of what Baum said (and regardless of Littlefield's retraction later), the imagery is inherent in the story because it was inevitably drawn from the social currents of the day. Baum could not help but use those analogies unless he actively and consciously sought to avoid them.

    When someone says "last stand" do you assume they refer to the last taxi stand in the pickup lane at the airport? When someone says "Pearl Harbor" do you think of The Pearl by Ernest Hemingway? Monica Lewinsky's Dress. Haliburton. Enron. Meltdown. Bailout. How about a "cat" named "Britney."

    If it was arguable, it would have been argued. Instead four or five academic writers have jumped on the bandwagon (allusion there) and added their elements.

    That said, I agree that there are questions to be raised, but they go deeper than Baum's own disingenuous denials: "Aw, shucks, folks, garsh and heck, it's just a story."
  5. cwtokenman

    cwtokenman Coin Hoarder

    No doubt valid arguments could be made to challenge various aspects of the story, but the truth to it all will likely never be determined.

    My source was Bryan Money, by Fred Schornstein.
  6. cwtokenman

    cwtokenman Coin Hoarder

    If anyone has an interest in Bryan Money, I highly recommend Schornstein's book. It has good photos and descriptions, history and background, and political cartoons of the day sprinkled in.
  7. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    Actually that was part of the "crime of 1873", the right to bring silver to the mint and have it coined into money was removed by the act. After Feb 12th 1873 people could bring silver to the mint and have it assayed and cast into bars, but from that point on the only silver coins were produced on the governments account, not the peoples. (Exception: free coinage of silver into Trade dollars was still allowed.) Part of the gold/silver debates of 1896 was the restoration of the right for the free coinage of silver. The gold bugs won and the peoples privilege of having their silver coined into money never returned. Free coinage of gold remained untill the gold recall in 1933. (Although in the early years free coinage actually WAS free, that didn't last long an small charges were added for immediate delivery, for refining to bring it up to standard, for the cost of the alloy to bring it down to standard, or for dealing with very small amounts of bullon. Still the charges tended to run in the .5 to 1.5% range) Before 1837 ALL of the silver and gold coiage depended upon deposits by people and businesses. The Mint did not have a bullion purchase fund to allow them to buy gold and silver in the market for conversion into coins until 1837.

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Hmmmm, I can't tell you when it returned, but it most definitely did. All you have to do is read the US Code to see that.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page