Defying Gravity, Silence, and Societal Expectations: Social Movement Leadership And

Home , A Little Bit Wicked, Carmen Cusack, Coming Home Tour, Dee Roscioli, Eloise Jarvis McGraw, Geoffrey Holder

Defying Gravity, Silence, and Societal Expectations: Social Movement Leadership and

Hegemony in the Musical Wicked

A dissertation presented to

the faculty of

the Scripps College of Communication of Ohio University

In partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Valerie Lynn Schrader

June 2010

This dissertation titled

Defying Gravity, Silence, and Societal Expectations: Social Movement Leadership and

Hegemony in the Musical Wicked

VALERIE LYNN SCHRADER

has been approved for

the School of Communication Studies

and the Scripps College of Communication by

Jerry L. Miller

Associate Professor of Communication Studies

Gregory J. Shepherd

Dean, Scripps College of Communication

ii ABSTRACT

SCHRADER, VALERIE LYNN, Ph.D., June 2010, Communication Studies

Defying Gravity, Silence, and Societal Expectations: Social Movement Leadership and

Hegemony in the Musical Wicked (280 pp.)

Director of Dissertation: Jerry L. Miller

This dissertation examines the rhetoric of social movement leadership and

hegemony in the musical Wicked, suggesting that the musical offers “equipment for

living” to its audience members. Constructing a rhetorical text using the New York

performance script, sheet music, cast recording, and three performances of Wicked, I

analyzed the musical through an extended version of cluster criticism, clustering themes

rather than terms to form meanings.

Chapter 1 of this dissertation provides an introduction to the study, a rationale,

and a preview to the rest of the dissertation. Chapter 2 presents a literature review that

informs the rest of the study. This chapter includes literature on L. Frank Baum’s The

Wonderful Wizard of Oz and its many offspring, as well as a brief history of American musical theatre and its use as a method of societal critique. Chapter 2 also presents a discussion of the concepts of leadership, hegemony, and social movement characteristics and rhetoric. Chapter 3 discusses my extension of cluster criticism in detail, as well as explains how I am using cluster criticism, a method of rhetorical criticism, in conjunction

with performance studies.

Chapter 4 discusses strategies and tools used by the hegemonic regime in Wicked

and the role that apathy plays in the effectiveness of these strategies and tools. It also

offers two types of hegemonic leaders through the characters of Madame Morrible and

iii the Wizard of Oz. Chapter 5 defines the fictional Animal Rights Movement in Wicked as a social movement, with Elphaba as the movement’s militant leader. This chapter explores Elphaba’s journey as a social movement leader, ending with her downfall and the legacy she left behind. In Chapter 6, using the character of Glinda as an example, I argue that the line between social movement leadership and institutional leadership is not as strict as scholars have previously argued. This chapter explores Glinda’s transition from apolitical referent leader to the confident, social-conscious leader of Oz at the end of the musical. The final chapter of this dissertation offers various “equipments for living” for audience members and readers to consider, as well as suggestions for future research.

Approved: ______

Jerry L. Miller

Associate Professor of Communication Studies

iv DEDICATION

To my late grandfather, Lloyd Plunkett, who always supported me in all of my musical and theatrical endeavors.

To my grandmother, Ruth Plunkett, who showed me from an early age that women can do anything they put their minds to.

To my sister, Michelle Schrader, who was always willing to take a leading role in my childhood theatrical productions, no matter how silly.

To my parents, Andrew and Kathleen Schrader, who instilled in me a sense of social justice and taught me to fight for what I believe in.

And most of all, to my husband, Michael Ritter, who always saw the Elphaba in me when the rest of the world saw only Galinda.

v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my committee for all of their help and advice throughout this process. To Drs. Ben Bates, J.W. Smith, Bill Rawlins, and Jordan Schildcrout –

Thank you for embarking on this journey with me. Your suggestions have been immensely helpful. It has been such a joy to work with such wonderful, kind, and talented scholars.

I would especially like to thank my advisor, Dr. Jerry Miller, for reading my work, editing it, and offering numerous suggestions for how it could be improved. I can’t tell you how incredibly helpful your advice has been throughout this process. I could not have finished this project without you! Thank you for taking me under your wing three years ago and challenging me to become the teacher-scholar that you knew I could be.

To my “family” and friends in COMS, at the Athens First United Methodist

Church, in Athenian Berean Community Players, and outside of Athens – Thank you for your support and interest in my dissertation! I love you all!

To my parents, sister, and grandmother – It is because of you that I am who I am

today. Thank you for your love and support throughout this process…and for not teasing

me too much about studying “wicked witches and flying monkeys!” And a thank you to

Fiyero, my cat, for keeping me company during all of those late nights of writing!

And most of all, a very special thank you to my wonderful husband, Mike, who

has been there for me every step of the way. I could not have completed graduate school

without your support, much less write a dissertation. Thank you for your love and never-

ending patience! You mean everything to me.

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Abstract ...... iii

Dedication ...... v

Acknowledgments...... vi

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Dissertation ...... 1

Personal Rationale and Researcher Positionality ...... 7

Rationale ...... 11

Definition of Terms ...... 17

Preview of Dissertation ...... 19

Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework ...... 24

Previous Research on L. Frank Baum’s The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, the film The

Wizard of Oz, and Wicked ...... 24

American Musical Theatre and Social Critique ...... 35

Leadership as a Communication Concept ...... 47

Hegemony ...... 53

Characteristics and Strategies of Social Movements and Social Movement Rhetoric . 56

Chapter 3: Methodology ...... 64

Cluster Criticism and Rhetorical Criticism ...... 66

Performance Studies ...... 75

Three Performances ...... 78

Broadening Cluster Criticism ...... 79

Rationale ...... 80

vii A Step-By-Step Description of my Extension of Cluster Criticism ...... 83

Chapter 4: Silencing the Animals – Hegemony in Wicked ...... 89

Apathy in Ozian Society ...... 92

Strategies and Tools of Hegemonic Rule ...... 94

Naming ...... 96

Contextualization ...... 98

Legal Sanctions ...... 99

Bargaining ...... 105

Identification and the Use of Public Admiration ...... 106

Hiding Weaknesses ...... 110

Aligning Oneself with Those in Power ...... 111

Scapegoating ...... 115

Creating Fear and Spreading Rumors ...... 121

Threats ...... 124

Silencing and “Brainwashing” Dissenters ...... 125

Destroying those Closest to the Dissenter ...... 128

Conclusion ...... 130

Chapter 5: Reinventing the Witch: Elphaba as a Militant Social Movement Leader and

Activist ...... 135

Ozian Animal Rights as a Social Movement ...... 137

Elphaba Thropp: Baum’s Wicked Witch Becomes a Social Movement Leader ...... 140

Elphaba’s Leadership Traits ...... 143

Outgoingness ...... 144

viii Intelligence ...... 146

Ambition ...... 148

Sense of Duty and Caring for Others ...... 150

The Rise of a Militant Social Movement Leader ...... 153

Fiyero Becomes an Activist ...... 158

Militancy Reconsidered ...... 162

Militant Leadership’s Downward Spiral ...... 165

Passing the Torch of Social Movement Leadership to Glinda ...... 167

Legacy of a Militant Leader ...... 170

Conclusion ...... 172

Chapter 6: Obscuring the Line Between the Institution and the Social Movement: Glinda as a Conservative Social Movement Leader ...... 176

Galinda as a Popular, Apolitical, Referent Leader ...... 178

Two Roads Diverged in Yellow Brick: Glinda and Elphaba Commit to their

Leadership Styles ...... 186

Glinda as a Public Figure ...... 189

Glinda’s Awakening ...... 193

Glinda as the Leader of Oz ...... 196

Obscuring the Line: Conservative Social Movement Leadership ...... 200

Chapter 7: Discussion ...... 204

Expanding Cluster Criticism ...... 204

Hegemony, Wicked, and “Equipment for Living” ...... 206

The Militant Social Movement Leader and “Equipment for Living” ...... 209

ix The Conservative Social Movement Leader and “Equipment for Living” ...... 212

Future Research Possibilities ...... 216

Limitations ...... 218

Conclusion ...... 219

References ...... 221

Appendix A: List of Oz-Related Media ...... 248

Appendix B: Scene Summary of Wicked ...... 251

Appendix C: Character Descriptions in Wicked ...... 256

Appendix D: Sample of Cluster Analysis Scratch Notes ...... 259

Appendix E: Sample of Cluster Analysis Typed Notes ...... 260

Appendix F: Sample of Adjustments Made to Cluster Analysis Typed Notes ...... 262

Appendix G: Typed Notes for All Three Cluster Analyses ...... 263

Hegemony Cluster Analysis ...... 263

Elphaba as a Militant Social Movement Leader Analysis ...... 265

G(a)linda as a Leader Cluster Analysis ...... 268

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE DISSERTATION

When Stephen Schwartz and Winnie Holzman’s new musical Wicked, based on

Gregory Maguire’s 1995 novel, entitled Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West, emerged onto the Broadway stage in 2003, it quickly became successful1.

Although the show initially received mixed reviews2 (Isherwood, 2003; Ryan, 2003), by

June of 2004, it had received ten Tony nominations3 (Gardner, 2004), and won three

(Timeline, 2004). At the time of Wicked’s debut, Broadway was dominated by shows excelling in “parody and pastiche” such as The Producers and Urinetown, and shows considered “jukebox musicals” set to recycled scores, including ABBA’s Mamma Mia!

and Billy Joel’s Movin’ Out (Cote, 2005, p. 17). Many theatre-goers wished to see an

original uplifting musical, and Wicked provided exactly that, according to David Cote

(2005). With its original score, coupled with vibrant costumes and special effects, Wicked

1 Cote’s (2005) statement can be further justified by looking at the box office numbers for Wicked. Jenna Schnuer (2004) of Advertising Age notes that for the week of February 1, 2004 (only a few months after Wicked debuted), the show grosses $951,831, which, was more than any Broadway show except for The Producers starring Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick. Robert Hofler (2004) of Variety remembers that Wicked “quickly entered the exclusive club of $1-million-a-week grossers.” Jesse McKinley (2004) of The New York Times observes that Wicked had recouped its $14 million advance in just fourteen months. “By comparison,” McKinley notes, “another recently successful show, Avenue Q, took 10 months to recoup $3.5 million on Broadway; Wicked earned back four times that amount in just four extra months.” 2 For example, Isherwood (2003) praises Chenoweth’s and Menzel’s performances of the two witches, noting specifically that Chenoweth “beams her way into the hearts of folks in the back row of the balcony.” However, he criticizes Schwartz’s music and Holzman’s plotline, arguing that it is “cumbersome,” and “at times, threatens to turn the musical into a heavy-handed piece of propaganda for PETA.” Similarly, Ryan (2003) calls the musical “a long and overblown prequel to the Wizard of Oz,” but praises the performers, especially Chenoweth, Menzel, and Joel Grey (who plays the Wizard) for “elevating” the score and script “several notches.” 3 Wicked’s ten Tony nominations include Best Musical, Stephen Schwartz for Best Original Score, Winnie Holzman for Best Book of a Musical, Kristin Chenoweth for Best Performance by a Leading Actress in a Musical, Idina Menzel for Best Performance by a Leading Actress in a Musical, Susan Hilferty for Best Costume Design, Eugene Lee for Best Scenic Design, Kenneth Posner for Best Lighting Design, Wayne Cilento for Best Choreography, and William David Brohn for Best Orchestrations. Of these nominations, Wicked won three Tony awards: Idina Menzel won Best Performance by a Leading Actress in a Musical, Eugene Lee won Best Scenic Design, and Susan Hilferty won Best Costume Design.

attracted theatre-goers from across the country (Collins, 2005; Jones, 2005; Vincent,

2009). However, many musicals with excellent scores, special effects, and costumes

have not seen a fraction of Wicked’s popularity. Some suggest that the popularity of this

show is most likely due to its intriguing storyline (Fanger, 2003; Gardner, 2003; Handler,

2003; Hofler, 2004). As Robert Hofler (2004) of Variety observes, “Hairspray sells fun music. The Producers sells fun jokes. ‘We’re different,’ says [David] Stone [Wicked’s producer]. ‘We’re selling a story.’”

Wicked takes a different twist on L. Frank Baum’s classic 1900 novel, The

Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Rather than follow the story of Dorothy and Toto’s adventures in Oz, Wicked tells the story of two young girls: Pretty, popular Galinda and awkward, outcast Elphaba, who grow to become Glinda the Good Witch4 and The Wicked Witch of

the West, respectively. Wicked tells of their friendship, their loves, their losses, and of an

Animal Rights Movement5, a social uprising against anti-Animal bigotry, which, for the

purposes of this dissertation, I define as a social movement.6 It is the Animal Rights

Movement which plays a leading role in the lives of these two primary characters.

In Wicked’s version of the magical Land of Oz, Animals have the ability to think and talk. Animals (with a capital A) are distinguished from animals (with a lower-case a) by their ability to communicate, both orally and through writing. Despite their critical thinking and communication abilities, Animals are considered lower class in comparison

4 In Wicked, Galinda changes her name to Glinda to honor her history professor, Dr. Dillamond. Dillamond, who is a Goat, could not pronounce Galinda’s name in class and therefore called her “Glinda.” After Dr. Dillamond is no longer permitted to teach at Shiz University, Galinda changes her name to show her boyfriend, Fiyero, how much she supports Animal Rights and misses Dr. Dillamond. 5 Although the movement is not referred to by name in the musical, Maguire’s novel refers to the movement as the Animal Rights Movement. Throughout this study, I will refer to the movement by Maguire’s original name for it: the Animal Rights Movement. 6 A detailed discussion of the Animal Rights Movement as a social movement occurs in Chapter 5 2 to humans in Oz. Dr. Dillamond, a Goat, teaches Elphaba and Galinda in a college

history class until the Wizard passes a law forbidding Animals to speak. Elphaba

becomes enraged when Dr. Dillamond is taken away and is no longer permitted to teach

in Oz. Demonstrating her devotion to the movement, Elphaba, with the help of her

comrade (and Galinda’s love interest) Fiyero, steals a Lion-cub to free him from

oppression. She determines that if she tells the Wizard of Oz of the injustices that the

Animals must endure, he will put an end to this bigotry at once. However, when Elphaba

and “Glinda,” who has changed her name to honor her Goat-professor, confront the

Wizard, he ignores the atrocity, and encourages Elphaba and Glinda to do the same. To compensate for their hurt feelings, the Wizard offers both of them positions of power.

Whereas Glinda accepts, and becomes a public figure called “Glinda the Good” in the

Wizard’s regime, Elphaba refuses, and runs off to fight for Animal Rights against the

Wizard’s regime. Because of her non-conformist ways, Elphaba becomes known in the

Land of Oz as the Wicked Witch of the West, a label that the Wizard’s regime gives her.7

The first act of the musical situates the crisis in Oz, introduces the main characters, and

empowers the two lead characters so that they can grow and develop throughout the

second act. The second act of the musical describes Elphaba’s struggles as she fights

against Animal bigotry and begins to realize her own limitations as a leader. Elphaba’s

struggles are juxtaposed against Glinda’s transformation from frivolous party-girl to

good-natured leader.

7 At the end of Act 1, Madame Morrible, now the Wizard’s press secretary, announces to Oz through her loudspeaker, “Citizens of Oz! There is an enemy who must be found and captured. Believe nothing she says! She’s evil, responsible for the mutilation of these poor innocent monkeys! Her green skin is but an outward manifestorium of her twisted nature. This – distortion, this – repulsion, this – Wicked Witch!” 3 The musical’s storyline is based on Maguire’s novel, which is one of numerous texts adapted from L. Frank Baum’s book The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (Please see

Appendix A for a chronology of books, films, and plays based on Baum’s Land of Oz).

Maguire draws more from Baum’s original book than from the 1939 MGM film adaptation starring Judy Garland. He stays true to the names and colors in Baum’s book.

Maguire’s Wicked tells of the Quadlings in the southern region of Oz, of the Winkies in the western region, and kind Boq (pronounced “bok”) from Munchkinland. In Maguire’s novel, Dorothy’s shoes are silver, as they are in Baum’s book; they are not made of rubies as portrayed in the 1939 film. Maguire’s novel also reflects Baum’s plots and details. In the novel version of Wicked, Elphaba cannot become wet and frequently wears a rain cloak. This is a direct reflection of Baum’s (1900) book, which notes that the

Wicked Witch of the West keeps an umbrella with her at all times (p. 127). Furthermore,

Maguire’s plot concerning the Tin Woodman’s origins reflects Baum’s plot in which the

Tin Woodman becomes made of tin when the Wicked Witch of the East enchants his ax so that it amputates his limbs.

Maguire’s novel is not completely devoid of reflections of the 1939 film, however. The film, which adapted many aspects of Baum’s original novel in order to emphasize the movie’s message about the value of home, redefines the character of

Glinda as the Good Witch of the North (as opposed to the South, as stated in Baum’s novel). It also connects the Wicked Witch of the West and the Wicked Witch of the East as sisters, which was not something Baum had originally envisioned. Maguire’s novel holds true to both of these changes. Furthermore, the film emphasizes the importance of

4 the Wicked Witch of the West’s broomstick, an object which Maguire gives a prominent

place to in both Wicked (1995) and its first sequel, Son of a Witch (2005).

Maguire’s novel is much darker than the musical version that opened on

Broadway in 2003. Cote (2005) writes that Maguire’s Oz is a land where “the Wizard is

a sinister fascist figure and the Witch is a freedom fighter for the rights of talking

Animals” (p. 12). The novel includes multiple competing religions and a detailed love

affair, but offers no clear answers to the questions it raises about the definitions of good

and evil. Unlike the novel, the musical creates something of an Americanized, lighter

version of Maguire’s ominous Oz, while still entertaining the questions Maguire’s novel

raises about good and evil. The musical focuses on the friendship between Elphaba and

Glinda, their love-triangle relationship with Fiyero, a carefree and charismatic prince

from Oz’s westernmost province, and Elphaba’s rise to power. Kristin Chenoweth

(2009), who played G(a)linda in the original Broadway cast, notes that the focus between

the two female characters (which is not a prominent part of Maguire’s novel) emerged

through a three-year-long set of workshops where she, Stephanie J. Block (who played

Elphaba in the national touring company group, in a later Broadway company, and in the

Chicago production), Stephen Schwartz and Winnie Holzman adapted Maguire’s original

novel into a stage play (pp. 150-153). The musical even changes the book’s ending:

Instead of Elphaba being killed by water, Elphaba and Fiyero live to escape from Oz in

the musical version. Perhaps the largest difference between the book and the musical is

that the musical’s script is based on American politics, while Maguire’s novel portrays

the fascist society referenced earlier. Winnie Holzman, who wrote the script of the

musical, admits that “politics is very much embedded…in the story. The whole story is

5 about a political leader who is unmasked as a fraud” (Stasio, 2004, p. A10). Holzman

notes how the musical’s Wizard includes elements of American presidents Bill Clinton

and George W. Bush (Cote, 2005, p. 36), a departure from Maguire’s Wizard, who is

designed to be a fascist dictator who stops at nothing to maintain his power. However,

Stasio (2004) notes that Maguire approves of “the Wizard’s less hateful, more complex

stage persona” (p. A10) because “he’s not lying to everybody else so much as he is lying

to himself” (p. A10).

Wicked almost missed Broadway, as producers sought film rights instead of rights

to produce a musical. In an interview in Wicked: The Grimmerie, Maguire recounts that

Demi Moore’s production company at Universal Studios had optioned his book for a film

(Cote, 2005). Producer Marc Platt, as well as Schwartz and Holzman, noted that

something was missing from the screenplay. As Platt states in an interview in Wicked:

The Grimmerie, “the screenplay was actually not quite working. It lacked something; it

wasn’t quite magical” (Cote, 2005, p. 21). In their minds, Wicked’s storyline is best

portrayed through live performance. Theatre offers audiences a sense of immersion that

films cannot always offer (Cote, 2005). The lack of a screen between the action and the

audience creates a sense of togetherness than exists only in live performance. Theatre

performance can give the audience a sense of actually being in the production’s world.

Theatre performance also offers live music that can transform the audience’s state of

being.

Furthermore, as Platt points out in an interview in Wicked: The Grimmerie (Cote,

2005, p. 21), many people see Oz as a musical world, because they think of the 1939 film when they think of Oz. Platt also notes that theatre allows characters to sing to the

6 audience about what he or she is feeling; this is not something that happens often in contemporary film, at least not without an awkward transition. The performative aspects that theatre offers allow audience members to feel as though they are experiencing Oz along with the characters (Cote, 2005). It is this connection between performance and communicative messages concerning social movements’ strategies and characteristics, as well as the political meanings and storyline of Wicked that intrigue me and have led me to explore Wicked as a rhetorical text.

Personal Rationale and Researcher Positionality

When I saw Wicked: A New Musical for the first time in Chicago in 2005, I was fascinated by the portrayal of political messages in the text. I am still intrigued by how a seemingly silly musical with catchy songs, flashy special effects, and vibrant costumes can offer powerful messages. Those messages include not only the portrayal of characteristics and strategies of social movements mentioned previously, but as I argue in this dissertation, the role of hegemonic dominance, power and leadership. While I had no idea in December of 2005 that I would write a dissertation grounded in communication about Wicked, I did recognize that this musical was a rhetorical text laden with meaning worthy of exploration. In this section, I will discuss why I chose this topic for my dissertation, as well as how my background, meta-theoretical position, and ontological preferences drew me to this topic.

As a rhetorical critic and critical theorist, I am interested in texts that provide civic guidance. Having grown up in a union family, I am sensitive to challenges faced by the marginalized and how collective action can help alleviate some barriers to full civic participation. Because collective action requires communication in order to accomplish

7 goals, I became interested not only in the rhetoric of the American Labor Movement, but

also in the rhetoric of American social movements in general. Through my studies in

social movement rhetoric, I have found that change is often enacted through

communication. Murphy (2001) suggests that “a perspective based on hegemony creates

the possibility of meaningful critique leading to change” (p. 407). Like Murphy (2001), I

believe that through communication, American social movements and leaders can bring

about positive change.

One rhetorical tool of social movements used by those who wish to evoke social

change is theatre. During my first two years of graduate school, I became increasingly

aware of the unique connection between theatre and social commentary. As a trained

soprano who frequently participates in community theatre and performs in voice classes,

I became captivated by the social relevance of the messages shared with audiences. As I

studied the labor theatre of the 1930s,8 I found that union membership began to rise

during this decade (VanGiezen & Schwenk, 2003). In fact, VanGiezen and Schwenk of

the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2003) observe that national union membership rose from

13.8% in 1935 to 27.6% in 1940. This is startling when compared to the membership

numbers from the first half of the decade, when unemployment was higher. From the

years 1930-1935, union membership rose from 12.3% to 13.8%. One major difference

that occurred in the second half of the 1930s was that labor theatre became increasingly

popular. I began to realize that the Labor Movement’s use of performance was not

8 The significance of 1930s labor theatre was first brought to my attention in a history class (HIST 514F) about American social thought. I was particularly captivated by Clifford Odets’ Waiting for Lefty and Harold Rome’s Pins and Needles. Using the framework of Burkean identification, I analyzed the sheet music of Pins and Needles, arguing that the union members/performers used Burkean identification to connect to their audiences and then persuade them to support unions and other leftist causes. This piece was presented as part of the American Studies Division at the National Communication Association Convention in Chicago in 2009. 8 coincidental: Performance can have such an effect on audience members that they may

be moved to take action for a cause.

I believe that we, as humans, can co-create truths9 (Berger & Luckmann, 1967;

Bruner, 2002), which are subject to contextualization and often cannot be generalized to

other contexts. The truths that we construct are built by working together through communication. I believe that theatre, like any other communicative medium, can serve to communicate truths to an audience. These truths are co-created by the playwright, director, producer, performers, and ultimately, the audience. It is important to recognize that the audience plays a pivotal role in co-creating these messages by providing feedback to the initial creators of the message. When I watch a theatre performance, I am part of the audience, and, like other audience members, I participate in the construction of meaning. As Barthes (1977) states, “a text is not a line of words releasing a single

‘theological’ meaning (the ‘message’ of the Author-God10) but a multi-dimensional space

in which a variety of writings, none of them original, blend and clash” (p. 156). Because

each show can offer multiple truths, there is no one correct way of interpreting a play or

musical. Furthermore, as an interpretive researcher (a perspective which I will explain

later in this section), I understand that my background in social movement studies, vocal

performance, and musical theatre necessarily have an effect on my work. I cannot claim

to look at the concepts in this study, or any study, objectively. Instead, I have attempted

9 For instance, Berger & Luckmann (1967) note, “The reality of everyday life further presents itself to me as an intersubjective world, a world that I share with others” (p. 23). Furthermore, they argue that “I encounter knowledge in everyday life as socially distributed” (p. 45). For Berger and Luckmann, reality, knowledge, and truth are co-constructed by humans through communication. 10 The Author-God in Barthes’ writing refers to the person or persons whose intention it is to communicate a message to others. He notes that communication is not simply a matter of receiving a message sent by an Author-God; communication involves the receiver playing a role in authoring the text. The text can have multiple meanings for multiple receivers. 9 to recognize, embrace and document my biases. I believe that my background in these areas have strengthened this study, rather than weakened it.

Performances can change a message’s salience. The way an actor plays a character in a particular scene can determine which truths become most noticeable to the audience. For example, when I played Stupefyin’ Jones in my community theatre group’s production of L’il Abner, I played the role as a third-wave feminist who works hand-in-hand with her female cousin in order to use her sexuality to make money

(Schrader, 2009b). These third-wave feminist messages concerning the character were very different from the messages communicated through the more objectified, almost mechanical portrayal that Julie Newmar performed in the 1959 movie version of L’il

Abner. Newmar’s portrayal offered a message to the audience through satire: Women are objectified in society. My portrayal helped create a different message: Women have the choice to use their sexuality as they see fit. In my opinion, both performances reveal important insights; neither portrayal is more valid than the other is. Certainly, the meanings portrayed in performances and the saliences of these messages are influenced by the time periods and geographies of productions.

Similarly, Hamilton (2001) argues, performances can offer “alternative meanings” for a text (p. 309). He suggests that performance, rather than the text of a theatrical performance, in conjunction with audience interpretation, is what creates meaning.

Hamilton argues that performance scholars should be especially concerned about the meanings of theatrical texts, which are created through multiple elements including (but not limited to) audience interpretation, script, properties, settings, and direction. He notes

10 that difference performances of the same script may offer different meanings. Indeed, diverse performances create competing meanings for the audience to consider.

I embrace what is commonly called an interpretivist standpoint, which acknowledges and emphasizes multiple meanings which emerge from a text. As Cheney

(2000) points out, interpretivists “endeavor to understand the very processes by which meaning is constructed” (p. 19), focusing on the “multiplicity and dynamism of meanings” (p. 34). My intention is not to generalize my work, a conclusion which is in line with my interpretive perspective and my goal to offer insights about musical theatre

for consideration. Greenwood & Levin (2005) argue that context prevents most texts

from being generalized broadly. Through my research on Wicked, I show how this

musical transcends the boundaries set by the medium (the stage) and provides lessons for

living. I argue that Wicked offers multiple messages, and, in this dissertation, I identify

and examine the political messages concerning leadership, hegemony, and the strategies and characteristics of social movements. In the following section, I provide a rationale for this study.

Rationale

Theatrical performance is an act of communication. Similar to the model created by Shannon (1948) and then popularized by Weaver, theatrical performance can serve as

a channel for authors, directors, performers and audiences to co-construct messages.

Writers, actors and directors communicate a message to an audience, which, in turn,

provides feedback (often in the forms of applause, ticket sales, or reviews) for future

consideration. Therefore, it is important that we consider this communicative forum as a

rhetorical venue for the dissemination of ideas. In this section, I argue that it is important

11 to study works of musical theatre as rhetorical text laden with meaning. I specifically

note that it is important to study Wicked because of the salient political messages within the text and performance of the text.

Aristotle was perhaps the first to combine rhetoric with other disciplines. For example, in On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse, he connects rhetoric with politics

(Aristotle, 2007, pp. 52-75) and with prose (pp. 193-229). Kenneth Burke also sought to combine communication with other disciplines. As Andrew King (2006) aptly notes,

Kenneth Burke made connections between aesthetics and politics (p. 367). Burke’s work crossed disciplinary boundaries (King, 2006). For example, Burke (1941) explains that it is important to read and analyze literature because literature can serve as “equipment for living” (Burke, 1941, p. 61). He suggests that poetry (or any other literary text) “arm[s] us to confront perplexities and risks” (p. 61). Burke says, “Art forms like ‘tragedy’ or

‘comedy’ or ‘satire’ would be treated as equipments for living, that size up situations in various ways and in keeping with correspondingly various attitudes” (p. 304). Works of literature can “single out patterns of experience that are sufficiently representative of our social structure” (p. 300). Such philosophy applied to literature extends to performance of literature in theatre. Theatre can also serve as “equipment for living” by offering

“patterns of experience” that represent our social structure. For example, in Rodgers and

Hammerstein’s musical South Pacific, Nellie, a white American nurse stationed in the

South Pacific during World War II, falls in love with Emile, a Frenchman who now lives with his Polynesian children where Nellie is stationed. Although Nellie loves Emile and his children, her racist upbringing causes her to struggle with her feelings, especially her feelings towards Emile’s Polynesian children. Nellie ultimately overcomes her own

12 racism and finds happiness with Emile and his family (Aikin, 2005; Pao, 1992). As

audience members, when we watch Nellie in South Pacific, we may learn how to cope

with negative feelings, notions, and events from our own pasts. We may identify with

Nellie and her struggle in ways that are unique to our own lives. We might make a mental note to do what she does to overcome her own challenge, such as talk to friends who face similar situations. Theatre, like literature, provides us with equipment for coping with the perplexities of life.

While theatre is indeed a communicative process, few communication scholars have examined musical theatre from a rhetorical standpoint. Several communication scholars, including Elliot (1990), Gassner (1949), Hellman (1994), Miller (1991), Papa

(1999), and Schriver & Nudd (2002), have published works analyzing plays, but few communication scholars have published works concerning musical theatre. Nevertheless, there are a few important studies in a myriad of journals, both communication-oriented and theatre-oriented, which critically analyze musical theatre works. For example, the musical Oklahoma! has been critically analyzed by three scholars. Most (1998) studied how race is portrayed in the musical and how it creates meaning for audience members.

She focuses on two characters: Ali, the clever immigrant merchant, and Jud, the antagonist. She suggests that Ali “serves as a thinly veiled representation of the Jewish immigrant” (p. 82) because he is a peddler and most peddlers on the American frontier were Jewish immigrants and because he is at least somewhat accepted by the community at the end of the musical. Furthermore, Most argues that Jud is the “stereotypical black

13 man” (p. 82) because of his sexuality and the fact that he lives in a smokehouse11. She concludes that Ali and Jud play parallel roles; by portraying Jud as the accumulation of the negative characteristics of both the “black” and “Jewish” stereotypes, Rogers and

Hammerstein were able to let Ali take a more positive role, ultimately allowing him to

“represent Jews’ hopes of moving into white America” (p. 86). Additionally, Aikin

(2005) looked at the issue of race in Oklahoma! and came to a different conclusion. Like

Most (1998), Aikin examined the symbolic societal meanings represented by the characters of Ali and Jud. He specifically points out that Ali, the only Arab character in the show, is portrayed as cowardly and foolish, while Jud, who is violent and obsessive, can be interpreted as Jewish. Aikin argues that the portrayal of these characters suggests how deeply racist the American frontier was during the early twentieth century. Most recently, Susan Cook (2009) studied the musical through racial and gender lenses, suggesting that Laurey and Curly represent both “gender and racialized class ideals” and that Ado Annie represents “rural working class” (p. 38) because of her sexuality and her accent, which is stronger than Laurey’s and exists even when Annie sings. Cook examines not only the plot and acting in the musical, but also the music. She observes that music that offers a light, trilling sound and makes use of triplets signifies the female sphere in Oklahoma! She argues that the musical “provides a white middle-class man’s world” (p. 46) through its music, acting, and storyline.

Two popular musicals that emerged on the Broadway stage at the end of the twentieth century, Rent and Miss Saigon, have also been studied by communication and theatre scholars. Sebesta (2006) studied the musical Rent through the lens of Bahktin’s

11 Most (1998) notes that African-Americans were referred to as “smokies” during the nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries because of the “darkened color of smoked meat” (p. 83). 14 concepts of carnival and the carnivalesque. Bakhtin (1968) describes carnival as a

populist critique by lower classes of the higher classes’ use of hegemony and taste for

high culture (p. 109). Sebesta argues that carnival occurs throughout Rent. She specifically notes how the characters sing a mock eulogy to Bohemia in “La Vie

Boheme,” which is a “tribute to eccentricity, individuality, difference and the ‘Other” (p.

428). Moreover, she observes that the characters’ use of profanity and their utopian optimism are also elements of carnival.

Another late twentieth-century musical to gain the attention of scholars is Miss

Saigon. Pao (1992) looked at the roles of gender and race in the casting of Miss Saigon.

She notes that, when Miss Saigon began on Broadway, the Asian character of Kim was played by a Filipino actress, but the Eurasian character of the Engineer and the Asian character of Thuy were both played by white actors in “yellowface” (p. 21). She suggests that there were “cultural imperatives” (p. 32) that resulted in the selection of an Asian woman playing the role of Kim. Because Asian women have been stereotyped as beautiful, exotic, and self-sacrificing, only an Asian actress would be appropriate for the role of Kim, who gives her own life for the well-being of her child. Pao argues, “where representations of the Western woman have evolved to keep current with her ‘moment in history,’ the Asian woman has yet to escape from the cryogenic confines of Orientalism”

(pp. 31-32). Pao suggests that, while the male characters could be and were cross-casted, the female character of Kim could not be played by a white woman because of the different cultural stereotypes surrounding Asian and white women.

To date, only a handful of scholars have studied Wicked: A New Musical. Lane

(2009) has done so through the lens of Relational-Cultural Theory. She argues that

15 Elphaba and G(a)linda grow and develop their selves through their relationship, which, in

Lane’s interpretation, is similar to the client-counselor relationship, with each woman taking a turn in the counselor role. Kruse & Prettyman (2008) examined Wicked in terms of women’s leadership styles, arguing that Madame Morrible represents women who attempt to become leaders by adopting “masculine” leadership styles,12 that G(a)linda represents women who adopt “feminine” leadership styles, and that Elphaba represents women who reject both styles. Ultimately, Kruse & Prettyman extend their argument concerning Wicked’s characters to real-life school settings, suggesting that “the ways men and women in school leadership positions are encouraged to ‘make good’ differ” (p.

462). For her dissertation, Alissa Burger (2009) studied Wicked: A New Musical in conjunction with the book version of Wicked, the film version of The Wiz, the 1929 film

The Wizard of Oz, and L. Frank Baum’s original novel. Focusing on the key issues of gender, race, home, and magic, which appear in all five works and all relate to American identity, Burger argues that myth, like performance and text, is fluid, not fixed.

Perhaps the best known scholar to study Wicked is theatre scholar Stacy Wolf.

Wolf (2007, 2008) examined Wicked through the lens of Queer Theory and through the role of the Diva. In her 2007 article, Wolf argues that G(a)linda and Elphaba are an example of a queer couple. She compares the music, and in particular, the duets between

Elphaba and G(a)linda in Wicked to the duets between male and female romantic leads in classic musicals like Oklahoma!, Guys and Dolls, and Carousel. Wolf’s argument is further supported by her interpretation of Fiyero, who “fails to register as a significant

12 Kruse & Prettyman suggest that “masculine” leadership styles include being “aggressive, daring, rational, strong, objective, dominant, decisive and self-confident,” while “feminine” leadership styles include being “passive, shy, intuitive, dependent, subjective, indecisive, and nurturing” (p. 454). 16 force in Wicked” (p. 18), thus placing the two women in their lead roles (opposite each other). In her 2008 article, Wolf suggests that “Wicked revels in spilling outside of its frame to frankly acknowledge the passionate girl fans who sustain it” (p. 41). She argues

that the musical’s girl fans feel empowered by Wicked and their relationship to it. She notes that girl fans identify not only with the characters of Elphaba and G(a)linda, but also with the actresses who play these characters. While Wolf’s work on Wicked is especially insightful, offering important insights about the musical,13 it does not examine

any of the musical’s messages about social protest because Wolf looks at Wicked through different lenses. Through my rhetorical analysis of Wicked, I have sought to contribute to this understudied area of communication.

To date, few scholars (Bottoms, 2003; Denning, 1996; Papa, 1999; Thrift, 2003;

Wells, 2000) have studied the connection between social movement rhetoric and

theatrical performance. Although various social protest groups, like the 1930s labor

unions, have used theatre in the past as a means of communicating their messages to audience members, the connection between social movement rhetoric and theatrical performance is still largely unexplored. Through this dissertation, I have shed light on the connection between social movement rhetoric and theatrical performance.

Definition of Terms

Before I begin, I would like to define a number of terms related to my topic. First,

I define hegemony as how a dominant group coerces or convinces a subordinate group to accept their own oppression. Furthermore, I borrow my definition of the hegemon from

13 As described in this paragraph, some of the insights about Wicked that Wolf notes in her work include Elphaba and G(a)linda as an example of a queer couple and girl fans’ feelings of empowerment and identification after watching the musical. 17 Steve Chan’s (2008) essay in Davis B. Bobrow’s book, Hegemony Constrained. I define

a hegemon as “an institution, nation or collective entity that wantonly abuses its power”

(adapted from Chan, 2008, p. 63). These definitions will be discussed further in Chapters

2 and 4.

I would also like to define the term leadership. Although there are many good

definitions of leadership, I prefer Hollander’s (1978) definition: “a process of influence

between a leader and those who are followers” (p. 1). Leaders are “initiators of action”

(p. 2). I believe that leadership is not based on success and failure; it is based on being in

a position to lead others. A leader is one who attempts to lead others, but he or she need

not be successful in order to be a leader.

Next, I would like to define the term social movement. I support Simons’ (1970)

definition, with a slight caveat. Simons defines a social movement as “an

uninstitutionalized collectivity that mobilizes for action to implement a program for the reconstitution of social norms and values” (p. 3). While I agree with this definition and

do believe that the collectivity should be uninstitutionalized, I wish to note that I also

believe that individual leaders need not work outside the institution. As I argue in

Chapter 6, leaders can work both within and without the institution to bring about change.

In Chapter 4, I discuss strategies and tools used by the hegemonic regime in

Wicked and the role that apathy plays in the effectiveness of these strategies and tools.

Therefore, I would like to define the terms strategies and tools here as well. Tools are

tangible elements, such as props, costumes, and scenery, which have symbolic meaning.

For example, a guard may symbolically stand for the use of force by a hegemonic regime

against dissenters. Strategies of hegemonic rule differ from tools in that strategies are not

18 tangible; rather, strategies are methods and forms of communication used by the hegemon in order to maintain political power and to obtain their goals. It is important to

note, though, that strategies and tools are not mutually-exclusive. There is some

ambiguity between the two terms; for instance, a tool may be used along with a strategy to accomplish a goal. The terms strategy and tool will be discussed in detail in Chapter 4.

Preview of Dissertation

In this dissertation, I examine the connection between performance, social movement rhetoric, leadership, and Gramscian hegemony through the musical Wicked.

Using rhetorical criticism as my primary research method, I explored the messages about

social movement leadership and hegemony, as well as how performances adjust these

messages and connect to leadership and hegemony.

For this study, I constructed a rhetorical text using the New York performance

script, original cast recording, sheet music and my own fieldnotes from three

observations of the musical, as will be described in detail in Chapter 3 of this dissertation.

This rhetorical analysis intersects the fields of performance studies and musical theatre.

While some insights may be found by simply rhetorically analyzing the tangible texts of

the script, cast recording, and sheet music, insights concerning performance require the

observation and comparison of performances. As a qualitative scholar, I believe that each

performance offers a unique perspective and that generalizing to other performances

should be avoided. However, in order to compare how one performance changes or

upholds a leadership message differently than another performance, it was essential that I

observe multiple performances.

19 This dissertation consists of seven chapters. This chapter has introduced my study, provided a rationale for the dissertation, and defined key terms that I will use in this dissertation. I have discussed how the musical version of Wicked came into existence as well as its connections to L. Frank Baum’s novel The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, the

1939 MGM film The Wizard of Oz, and Gregory Maguire’s novel Wicked: The Life and

Times of the Wicked Witch of the West. The second chapter provides a literature review for the reader. This literature review includes research on social movement leadership and social movement rhetoric, the history of Wicked and The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, literature discussing hegemony and leadership, and literature connecting performance and social protest.

Chapter 3 explains how I am using a broadened version of cluster criticism, a method of rhetorical criticism, in conjunction with performance studies. After taking detailed fieldnotes at three different performances (specifically, The September 2, 2008,

Chicago performance starring Dee Roscioli as Elphaba and Annaleigh Ashford as

G(a)linda, the September 13, 2008, touring company performance in Pittsburgh starring

Carmen Cusack as Elphaba and Katie Rose Clarke as G(a)linda, and the July 11, 2009,

New York Broadway performance starring Nicole Parker as Elphaba and Alli Mauzey as

G(a)linda), I examined these notes in conjunction with the original cast recording, sheet music, and the New York performance script.

To begin my analysis, I started with a key word or phrase that emerged through the abductive reasoning process14. For Chapter 4 I chose “hegemony,” for Chapter 5 I chose “Elphaba as a militant social movement leader,” and for Chapter 6 I chose “Glinda

14 Please see Chapter 3 for a more detailed explanation of abduction. 20 as a leader.” These words and phrases were not signified by one specific performative element in the musical, but rather emerged through reflection on a number of performative elements in conjunction with each other. These terms and phrases were meant to be broad so that they would allow themes to emerge and form clusters to provide meanings. I began by examining the script, writing down any examples or themes that related to my key term or phrase. I quickly saw how these themes and examples clustered together, and I made note of this in my analysis. After I completed this process with the script, I repeated it with each set of fieldnotes (going in the order they were taken – Chicago, Pittsburgh, New York), and then the cast recording and the sheet music, which I analyzed at the same time because they complemented each other.

After my initial “messy” analysis was done and clusters had formed, I typed the analysis in order to make more sense of it. Occasionally, clusters adjusted as I typed – for example, sometimes I’d find new sub-clusters emerging that I hadn’t previously documented in my messy analysis. Finally, using the typed analysis, I was able to organize and write up my analysis in a way that I believe is most logical for the reader.

Chapter 4 was done topically because of the many strategies and tools used by hegemonic regime, while Chapters 5 and 6 were organized chronologically to provide the reader with a sense of trajectory experienced by each leader. This broadening of cluster criticism will be explained in further detail in Chapter 3.

The fourth chapter of my dissertation discusses social control and hegemony as exhibited in Wicked. Specifically, I pay careful attention to the characters of the Wizard of Oz and Madame Morrible, as well as to the various strategies and tools used by these hegemons. As previously described, strategies and tools differ in that tools are physical

21 objects that have symbolic meaning, and strategies are methods used by hegemonic

regimes. Strategies and tools work hand in hand; for example, a tool is likely to be used

as part of a strategy. Twelve strategies were used by hegemonic leaders in Wicked:

Naming, contextualizing, legal sanctions, bargaining with the opposition, identification and the use of public admiration, hiding weaknesses, aligning with those in power, scapegoating threatening potential dissenters, creating fear and spreading false rumors about the opposition, silencing and “brainwashing” dissenters, and destroying those closest to the dissenter. Five tools that work in conjunction with these strategies are also identified: The Time Dragon Clock, the giant golden head, a loudspeaker symbolizing media, guards symbolizing military factions, and labels. Chapter 4 also offers two types of hegemonic leaders through the characters of Madame Morrible and the Wizard of Oz.

Madame Morrible is a hegemonic leader in the more expected or conventional sense: She is a cold, heartless character concerned with only her own needs. The Wizard of Oz, on the other hand, is an unconventional hegemonic leader; while cowardly and ethically unsound, he is emotional person who wants desperately to be liked by his populace and works to benefit the majority at the expense of oppressing a minority. This chapter also examines how the performances of the actors playing these and other characters contribute to the hegemonic messages in Wicked.

Chapter 5 defines the fictional Animal Rights Movement in Wicked as a social movement, with Elphaba as the movement’s militant leader. This chapter explores

Elphaba’s journey as a social movement leader, ending with her downfall and the legacy she left behind. I discuss the multiple leadership traits Elphaba has, how she becomes a militant leader, and how she passes the torch of leadership to her friend Glinda. I also

22 argue that Elphaba is limited in her effectiveness as a leader because she fails to get the

Ozian public to support her cause.

In Chapter 6, using the character of Glinda as an example, I argue that the line between social movement leadership and institutional leadership is not as strict as scholars have previously argued. I compare Glinda to Samuel Gompers, the founder of

the American Federation of Labor and advisor to President Woodrow Wilson, and former

Vice President Al Gore, who is currently a leader in the fight against global warming.

Chapter 6 explores Glinda’s transition from apolitical referent leader to the confident,

social-conscious leader of Oz at the end of the musical. I note that Glinda’s story suggests

that conservative leaders may be more effective than militant leaders, but that militant

leaders must first lay the groundwork for conservative leaders to take over.

The final chapter of this dissertation offers various “equipments for living”

(Burke, 1941) for audience members and readers to consider, as well as suggestions for

future research. I suggest ways in which my version of cluster criticism might be used for

other performative or mediate texts. Among the “equipment for living” lessons are the

dangers of apathy, the warning that not all hegemons appear to be harsh and selfish to the public, that public perception and popularity play a role in a person’s successes and failures, that giving into societal expectations doesn’t always lead to happiness, and that institutional leaders and social movement leaders need not be separate entities. These messages concerning “equipment for living” will be discussed in further detail in Chapter

23 CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

In this chapter, I discuss the many ways in which The Wonderful Wizard of Oz has

been studied and interpreted. Additionally, I offer background information on how

musical theatre productions in the past have critiqued society. This chapter also provides

a theoretical framework for the concepts of leadership, hegemony, and social movement

rhetoric, which informs the rest of the dissertation. My dissertation contributes to

scholarship in these areas.

Previous Research on L. Frank Baum’s The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, the film The Wizard

of Oz, and Wicked

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, written by L. Frank Baum in 1900, has been

heralded as “one of the most beloved children’s books ever written” (Foreman, in Baum,

2002) and has been considered the first true American fairy tale (Maguire, 2006, p. xx).

Baum’s story tells of a young girl named Dorothy who is trying to rescue her dog, Toto, when a tornado strikes. The tornado whisks Dorothy into the magical Land of Oz, where she kills two wicked witches, meets new friends, finds her way to the Emerald City, and is eventually shown the way back home. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz became one of the most popular children’s books of its time and motivated Baum to write thirteen sequels.

The novel also inspired the MGM film starring Judy Garland, as well as various additional Oz novels by other authors, including Gregory Maguire’s Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West (1995) and his sequels, Son of a Witch (2005) and A Lion Among Men (2009). The Wonderful Wizard of Oz has also spawned various plays and two musicals: The Wiz and Wicked. A complete list of Oz books, plays and

24 films can be found in Appendix A to this dissertation. In this section, I will discuss previous research that has examined The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and its many offspring.

The Wizard of Oz, as both a novel and a film, has been studied by literary critics, historians, economists, rhetoricians and film critics alike. Classic works examining The

Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a rhetorical text include Greenberg’s interpretation (1975) that Dorothy’s journey is symbolic of the journey through adolescence, and Pearson and

Pope’s critical view (1981) of Dorothy as a “female hero.” Yet, even now, new perspectives on this text have emerged. Several scholars have examined The Wonderful

Wizard of Oz through feminist lenses. Paige (1996) centers her research on the “power of the female imagination” (p. 146), arguing that Dorothy’s visit to Oz is a metaphor for her own self-realization, and that the red shoes are an “exclusively woman’s symbol” (p.

147), connecting the shoes’ red color to menstruation. Harrison (2002) also notes the feminist interpretations of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, and observes that one might read a religious theme into the book, focusing on the moral aspects of the text and characterizing Oz as an Eden (p. 30). Payne (1989) notes that the Wizard of Oz (film version) is symbolic of the adolescent journey of young women, but he takes it a step further by portraying the film as a cultural artifact that is aired every spring to remind audience members of their own journeys of self-discovery.

Other scholars have offered a myriad of interpretations of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Billman (1981) compared the film and the book version of The Wizard of Oz, noting a number of similarities, such as that both are stories of optimism, and that both offer a “lesson in belief” (p. 242). Furthermore, Billman illustrates how the novel was adapted to film, bringing attention to the deletion of parts of the novel and the

25 “straightening out of the imperfect cues Baum gave readers in his frame” (p. 246), such as whether or not Dorothy wants to run away from home initially. Offering a much different view, Algeo (1990) compares the fictional Land of Oz to Australia, suggesting that it is possible that Australia got its nickname “Oz” from Baum’s Oz series of books and the 1939 film based on The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Carpenter (1985), offering yet another view, suggests that the film version of The Wizard of Oz was altered from the original book version to reflect the values of American isolationism after World War I.

In 2000, Hamelman examined the film version of the Wizard of Oz through Derrida’s deconstructivist lens, arguing that there are multiple ways of interpreting the film, and that there is no one correct allegory.

In addition to these views, Riley (1997) argues that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is a “celebration of the spirit and natural beauties of America” (p. 58). He notes that Oz is “America – an idealized and less overly civilized version maybe, but some form of

America all the same” (p. 56). Riley compares the Emerald City to the White City of the

World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893, held in Chicago. Furthermore, he argues that the novel “contains perceptive criticisms of certain traits in the national character (p. 58), such as Americans’ attraction to “humbugs,” which can be defined as “willfully false, deceptive or insincere persons” (Merriam-Webster, 2009). However, as Rogers (2002) points out, there is one major difference between Oz and America: America is

“civilized” (p. 76). Rogers, like Riley, believes that Oz is an idealized version of

America; Oz becomes a place where social conventions do not “limit imaginative possibilities by defining what is real, prescribing roles, and controlling nature” (p. 77).

26 Many scholars, including Littlefield (1964), Rockoff (1990), and Ziaukas (1998),

have suggested that Baum’s novel is an allegory about money and is connected to the

Populist Movement in America. Littlefield (1964) was perhaps the first to suggest a link

between The Wizard of Oz and the Populist Movement. Harrison (2002) has noted that

the Populist parable is the most promising interpretation of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz.

Littlefield (1964) argues that Baum’s novel is a parable of the Populist Movement, noting that Baum’s time in agrarian South Dakota likely led to Populist influences (p. 49). He suggests that while in Chicago, Baum consistently voted as a Democrat and supported

William Jennings Bryan, whose political platform was to add silver to the nation’s gold standard. Littlefield argues that the Tin Woodsman, who becomes mechanical due to a spell cast by the Wicked Witch of the East, is symbolic of the “Populist view of evil

Eastern influences on honest labor” (p. 52). He also suggests that Dorothy’s silver shoes and the yellow brick road are symbolic of the silver and gold standards, which were the focus of Bryan’s political platform. Furthermore, Littlefield proposes that the Cowardly

Lion represents Bryan as a political candidate, that the Wizard of Oz may be a parallel to the President of the United States (p. 54), that the Wicked Witch of the West represents a

“diabolical Darwinian or Spencerian nature” (p. 56), and that the winged monkeys

symbolize various Native American Indian tribes.

In addition to Littlefield’s (1964) critical study, Ziaukas (1998) argues that The

Wonderful Wizard of Oz has connections to the Populist Movement. He suggests that the story reflects concerns that the public had during the turn of the century as the United

States transitioned from a pastoral society which centered on farm life to an industrial society which centered on life at manufacturing plants. Like Littlefield, he specifically

27 makes reference to how the colors mentioned in the novel (silver shoes, a golden road, an

emerald-colored city) represent money.

Rockoff (1990), basing his ideas off of Littlefield’s original work, also advocates

that Baum’s book was written with a favorable opinion of the Populist Movement in mind. Rockoff takes an economic interpretation of the book, and offers a few differing

opinions on the symbolism of Baum’s characters. He agrees with Littlefield’s

interpretation that the Scarecrow represents the western farmer, that the Tin Woodsman

represents the industrial workingman, and that the Lion represents William Jennings

Bryan. However, unlike Littlefield, Rockoff believes that the Wizard is actually meant to

represent Marcus Alonzo Hanna, a close advisor of McKinley, and that the Wicked

Witch of the West is McKinley himself. He also suggests that Oz is symbolic of the

abbreviation for ounce, as in an ounce of gold, and that water is representative of

inflation.

Some cultural historians, economists, and literary critics have argued against the

suggestion that Baum’s novel, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, was written as a parable

about the Populist Movement. Hansen (2002), a professor of economics, argues that,

although The Wonderful Wizard of Oz may serve as an excellent pedagogical tool for

teaching monetary issues in economics courses, it is wrong to suggest that Baum intended

the book as a monetary allegory. He argues that Baum was not sympathetic towards the

Populist Movement, and notes, as Dighe (2002) does as well, that Baum was likely a

progressive Republican.

Specifically, Hansen’s argument is four-pronged. First, he suggests that there have not been various independent discoveries of the monetary allegory. He notes how

28 scholars seemed to follow Littlefield’s (1964) lead and adapted their interpretations from his initial suggestion, as illustrated by Rockoff’s (1990) article. Second, Hansen argues

that it is fallacious to assume that Baum was a Democrat. Although Baum was in favor

of women’s suffrage and antitrust, he wrote editorials in support of Republican causes.

Hansen makes reference to a poem Baum published in the Chicago Herald Tribune that clearly supports McKinley for president. Third, Hansen observes that much of what is written in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is inconsistent with the monetary allegory. He notes that Oz is not a democratic society; it is a monarchy ruled by a Wizard, later by a scarecrow, and finally by a benevolent ruler named Ozma. He observes that while some colors fit into the allegory, such as silver shoes and an emerald-colored city, other colors, such as the good witches’ wearing white and Dorothy’s pink bonnet, are left unaccounted for. Finally, Hansen suggests that Baum’s story emerged from aspects of his own life, such as his experiences as a traveling salesman and his childhood fascination with scarecrows.

Hansen is not the only scholar to critique the alleged monetary allegory in The

Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Clanton (1991) suggests that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is actually a parody of the Populist Movement, rather than an anecdote in support of it. He argues that the Wicked Witch of the West is not an American president or the forces of nature as others have suggested, but is instead representative of the Populists themselves.

Specifically, he suggests that Democratic Senator “Pitchfork Ben” Tillman from South

Carolina, who was a free-silver supporter, is the most likely model for the Wicked Witch of the West. Clanton argues that Baum’s book is “an apt metaphor or parable of

29 Progressivism, not Populism. It mirrored perfectly the middle-ground ideology that was fundamental among those who favored reform, yet opposed Populism” (p. 150).

Dighe (2002) attempts to reach middle ground in regards to the role of Populism in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Dighe explains the proposed Populist metaphors, and then argues that Baum was not necessarily a supporter of Populism. For example, he notes that in a script that Baum wrote for his 1915 musical, The Uplift of Lucifer, a character suggests that Lucifer turn his job over to William Jennings Bryan, to which

Lucifer replies, “Are not my people tortured enough?” (p. 7). This suggests that Baum was not a supporter of Bryan, thus making it unlikely that he wrote The Wonderful

Wizard of Oz as a Populist parable.

Nevertheless, Dighe acknowledges that “the book works as a Populist allegory”

(p. 8, emphasis Dighe’s). He suggests that Baum may have subconsciously, not

deliberately, incorporated political and monetary symbolism in the book. He notes that,

although it is unlikely that Baum wrote the book as political commentary on Populism,

“the parallels between characters, incidents, and settings in the book and in real-life

issues in late-nineteenth century America are striking” (p. 8). Ultimately, Dighe suggests that, though the book was likely not written as an allegory, it was influenced by the political issues of the time, and can serve as a teaching tool for exploring history and monetary economics at the turn of the twentieth century.

Leach (1993), however, offers a completely different view of Baum and his novel.

He argues that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz illustrates Baum’s belief in consumerism, mind cure, and theosophy. Mind cure was a type of alternative healing in the late nineteenth century, and theosophy was “a permissive form of mind cure, nonjudgmental

30 and tolerant” (Leach, 1993, p. 247). Theosophy, as defined by Merriam-Webster (2008), follows “Buddhist and Brahmanic theories, especially of pantheistic evolution and reincarnation.” Theosophy contained the belief that people are not sinful, and therefore

should not feel guilt. This belief led to a carpe-diem lifestyle, which Baum readily embraced. Baum had conducted séances in his home, decorated his home with mind-cure symbols, such as “no-worry” Billikens dolls, and was a member of the Theosophical

Society (Leach, 1993, p. 247). When he became wealthy, he went on shopping sprees, stayed at the best hotels, took long vacations and went into debt. Theosophy and mind cure appear to be two ideas that greatly influenced L. Frank Baum.

Leach argues first that Baum “Americanized” the fairy tale when he wrote The

Wonderful Wizard of Oz. He observes parallels in the novel that correspond with aspects of American life in the nineteenth century, such as farmland, tin, and axle grease, as well as with aspects of John Bunyan’s famous Protestant text, Pilgrim’s Progress. However, he is careful to note that Baum’s text does not offer a critique of American society.

Leach disagrees with the previously mentioned views that the novel is a Populist parable.

Instead, he argues that Baum endorsed the American industrial values of the time.

Leach suggests that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz includes abundant elements of mind cure philosophy. For example, he argues that the Wizard’s incarnations into a giant head, a beast, a lovely lady and a ball of fire are reminiscent of Hinduistic reincarnations.

Leach notes that Baum attempted to take the fear and worry out of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. This lack of fear and worry also expressed his mind cure philosophy, because mind cure rejects the “suffering side” of life (p. 252), emphasizing only the enjoyment

31 side of life. This removal of fear and worry was done by including colors throughout the book, and by making the humbug Wizard likeable despite his lying and fraudulent ways.

In fact, Leach argues that Baum himself was the model for the character of the

Wizard. “Baum was himself a ‘promoter,’ interested in carrying new ‘schemes’ to conclusion and pushing goods,” writes Leach (p. 254). The Wizard, in turn, became a trickster, “a man resembling Satan but with no sinister power, a character to admire and love, not to fear” (p. 254). For example, the Wizard offers Dorothy’s friends tokens of their desired trait (a brain, a heart, and courage). By doing so, he connects them with what they already are (intelligent, loving, and brave). According to Leach, this is another reference to mind cure: The Wizard is connecting them with their “latent powers” (p.

257).

Leach argues that Baum’s interest and belief in mind cure and theosophy resulted in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz’s modern character. This new philosophy eliminated the pain in life and focused only on what was enjoyable. In Leach’s view, Baum was able to pass these values onto children through The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and the other Oz stories.

In addition to these political messages that Baum may or may not have intended to place in his novel, political messages have also been interpreted in the film version of

The Wizard of Oz. Particularly, the film has received attention from the LBGT

Movement. Perhaps one reason that many members of the LGBT community identify with the film version of The Wizard of Oz is because the film stars Judy Garland as

Dorothy. Garland is known as a “gay icon” (Kuchwara, 1994), someone idolized by the

LGBT community. Garland was so popular among gay men in the 1960s that it has been

32 speculated that grief over her death may have sparked the Stonewall Riots (“Garland,

Judy,” 1995; Gross, 2000; Keating, 1998). She was and is particularly popular with older

gay men who, like Garland herself, had to overcome immense hardships in an attempt to

find their identity (Abernathy, 2006; “Garland, Judy,” 1995; Gross, 2000). In an article in

Atlantic Monthly, Michael Joseph Gross (2000) suggests several reasons for Garland becoming a popular gay icon: She was talented, she led a tragic life but did her best to persevere, she had a connection with gay men (her father, her MGM mentor, and two of her four husbands were homosexuals), and she struggled with sincerity and duplicity, just as many gay men struggle with the roles they play in their everyday lives. Horsley (2006) notes that what makes Judy Garland and other gay icons so appealing to the LGBT community is “an inner strength to override the all-too-apparent vulnerability” (p. 23).

Garland’s popularity with gay men may be one reason that the queer community has embraced The Wizard of Oz.

Another reason that The Wizard of Oz may be so popular with the LGBT community is because of the character of the Cowardly Lion. In his article arguing that the Cowardly Lion is an example of the archetype of the “sissy warrior,” Reid Davis

(2002) discusses his own experience as a five-year-old watching the film and questioning its creation of gender roles, as well as a later experience where he (as an adult) and other members of the LGBT community viewed the film at San Francisco’s Castro Theatre.

Davis notes at how the audience at the Castro Theatre roared with an approval each time

Bert Lahr’s Lion character wailed or trilled operatically. Davis suggests that many

members of the LGBT community identify with the Lion, who expresses both masculine

and feminine traits.

33 Before Wicked was created, another musical based on The Wizard of Oz offered a

social message for its intended audience. Just as The Wizard of Oz film was embraced by

the LGBT community, The Wiz was embraced by the African-American community in

the 1970s. The Wiz, a version of The Wizard of Oz featuring an all-African-American

cast, emerged on the Majestic Theatre’s stage on Broadway on January 5, 1975

(Dunning, 2001). Set in the Bronx rather than Kansas (Dunning, 2001), The Wiz featured

Motown music, as well as gospel-style music, an R&B ballad, and a Dixieland-style song

(Isherwood, 2009). In 1975, The Wiz took home seven Tony awards, including Best

Musical and Best Direction. Geoffrey Holder, who directed the show, became the first

African-American man to be nominated for and to win Best Director. In 1978, the

musical was turned into a film starring Diana Ross, Michael Jackson, and Richard Pryor

(Wood, 2008).

Just as many members of the LBGT community identified with The Wizard of Oz

film, many African-Americans identified with The Wiz. Director Geoffrey Holder has

been quoted saying that The Wiz was “a different kind of black show,” offering black

pride as an alternative to “black rage” (Dunning, 2001, p. 161). The Wiz offers a message

of empowerment. Andre de Shields, who played the title role on Broadway in the 1970s and then again in Chicago in the 1990s, notes that “After the avarice of the ‘80s, the

carnality of the ‘70s, the politics of the ‘60s, the complacency of the ‘50s, somebody has

to sound the alarm again. True success, true power, is within yourself” (Hart, 1992, p. 3).

It allows audiences to relate to Dorothy’s journey of growing up, finding herself, and

believing in herself (Hebert, 2006; Isherwood, 2009).

34 Furthermore, The Wiz created more opportunities for African-American actors at a time when non-traditional casting was uncommon, thus limiting African-American actors to smaller roles. In fact, the show became so connected with African-American rights that it was performed during the 1977 Martin Luther King Jr. Birthday Celebration in Washington, D.C. (Williams, 1977). In the past, when the show has not been cast with only African-American actors, controversy has ensued (‘Black Actors Assail White in

‘The Wiz,’ 1987; Herman, 1987). Just as the LGBT Movement has found connection with the original Wizard of Oz film, the African-American Rights Movement has found connection with The Wiz. Wicked also has a connection to social movements, as I discuss in this dissertation.

While many scholars from various fields have studied The Wonderful Wizard of

Oz and its many offshoots, Wicked, to date, has been only examined by a few scholars, as discussed in Chapter 1. By examining Wicked through a political lens, I intend for my study to contribute to the body of literature on The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and the many books, plays, films, and musicals that have sprung from it.

American Musical Theatre and Social Critique

Theatrical pieces often serve as texts for social commentary, as Wicked illustrates.

To use Carol A. Wells’ (2000) words, “there has never been a movement for social change without the arts – theatre, poetry, music, posters – being central to that movement” (p. 507). Bottoms (2003) observes that theatre is a “site for reflection” (p.

184) for the playwrights, performers, directors, and the audience. Thrift (2003) also notes that “the performative turn can help to plumb the meanings of democracy in which can be written into practice” (p. 407). Additionally, Rozik (2002; 2005) suggests, “theatre is a

35 specific iconic code and a theatrical performance is a text generated by this code” (2005,

p. 180). Indeed, theatrical works can be analyzed with regards to their implications for

societal change15.

From Ibsen’s plays (Elliot, 1990; Langas, 2005), Alice in Wonderland (Grimaldi,

1998; Reed, 2000; Weiner & Kurpius, 2005), Miller’s plays (Bonnet, 1982; Gassner,

1949; Hellman, 1994; Most, 2007; Pagan, 2008; Walker, 1956), and the work of Bertolt

Brecht (1964) to 1930s labor theatre (Denning, 1996; Duffy, 1996; Filewood, 2004;

Hyman, 1992; Papa, 1999), guerilla and street theatre (Bullins, 1968; Miller, 1991;

Schriver & Nudd, 2002), and contemporary theatre (Caster, 2004), many scholars have discussed how theatre has been used as a medium for social commentary. However, this section focuses primarily on how American musical theatre has served to critique society.

Because Wicked is an American musical, it is important to place it in the context of other

American musicals. While Wicked and other American musicals do not serve to mobilize people to join a particular cause, as 1930s labor theatre did and guerilla theatre does,

American musicals often contain political messages. The American musical has a long history of serving as social commentary, and, in order to more fully understand Wicked, it is important to first understand its predecessors.

Musical theatre has been used for political and social critique since the times of

Ancient Greece (Brockett, 1995). Brockett (1995) notes that the Ancient Greeks incorporated music and dance in their plays. They believed that music and dance had

15 Please refer to pages 13-17 in Chapter 1 for a description of studies that analyzed theatrical works’ implications for social change. 36 ethical qualities.16 In Ancient Greece, the purpose of theatre was not merely

entertainment; it was education (Green, 1994). Ancient Greek plays addressed ethical,

political and social issues of the time (Green, 1994). Similarly, early American minstrel

shows, variety shows, vaudeville shows, and operettas addressed social issues during the

nineteenth and early twentieth century. Racist minstrel shows blended music and

storytelling, but also stereotyped African-Americans. Variety shows featured music and

storytelling as well, but often featured excessive drinking and prostitution by audience

members and waitresses during the performances (Patinkin, 2008, pp. 38-39). American vaudeville shows were an attempt to “clean up” variety shows (pp. 38-39). Like modern musicals, vaudeville shows featured skits and songs. However, vaudeville began to disappear in the 1920s when talking and singing movies were invented, and they became extinct in the 1950s when television became popular.

Perhaps the closest ancestor to the American musical is the American operetta.

Operettas combined storytelling with classical music. During the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, operettas like The Threepenny Opera (redone in 1928 by political theatre artist Bertolt Brecht), Naughty Marietta and Pirates of Penzance became

exceptionally popular. American operettas were considered “more romantic and far less

satirical” and were “lighter musically” than their European counterparts (Patinkin, 2008,

p. 75). Most importantly for this dissertation, the American operetta, like the American

musical today, featured “a strong belief in democratic values at the heart of the show” (p.

76).

16 For instance, particular kinds of music conveyed particular emotions. Brockett discusses how the Ancient Greeks used various modes for music and dance; some of these modes were only suitable for one type of play, such as a comedy, while other modes could be used in a variety of plays. 37 The first true American musical, if American musicals are defined by their

combination of songs and non-musical scenes (Patinkin, 2008), was Show Boat. Show

Boat was structured like an operetta, but offered both scenes without music and three-

dimensional characters (Patinkin, 2008). Furthermore, it was the first musical to

showcase African American actors performing onstage with white actors. Despite this

attempt to break down racial barriers, the 1929 show contained many racial stereotypes.

In subsequent versions, directors have attempted to limit or remove these offensive

stereotypes. Although the show did not immediately spark a new trend in American

musical theatre, it did become a prototype for shows in Broadway’s Golden Age

(Patinkin, 2008).

Show Boat offered societal critiques for its audience’s consideration. Albert

Williams notes that Show Boat reflects on American history from the Gilded Age to the

Jazz Age (Patinkin, 2008). Sheldon Patinkin (2008) suggests that Show Boat is about

“people’s need for a sense of community and continuity in their lives and in the world to help them face the difficulties that life always brings” (p. 168). It also offers metaphors that serve to critique American society. The sternwheeler on which much of the musical takes place is a metaphor for America as a whole; both African Americans and whites work and live on the ship and everyone on the ship undergoes periods of celebration and

hardship. The river on which the sternwheeler sails is also a metaphor. The river

represents “the relentless, unchanging and uncaring passage of time” (Patinkin, 2008, p.

165) that existed for many African Americans who endured the persecution of the Jim

Crow South after the American Civil War.

38 However, as with any rhetorical text, these meanings are not fixed; they can

change with each performance and with each audience member. Todd Decker (2009)

used historiography to study Show Boat’s multiple meanings throughout the years. He documents perspectives from the show’s creators, Richard Rodgers and Oscar

Hammerstein, who attempted to use the musical as a statement against Jim Crowism, but failed in the eyes of many because of the African-American stereotypes in the show that patronized African Americans. He notes that some theatre experts, including Leonard

Bernstein and Miles Kreuger, did not acknowledge racial messages in Show Boat at all.

Others, like Robin Breon (1995), offer biting critiques of modern versions of the show, arguing that even the most recent revival by Harold Prince in the 1990s exudes racism.

Show Boat is indeed a musical the offers multiple political meanings for audience members to consider.

In the 1930s, American musical theatre reflected the values and politics of the

American Labor Movement, the New Deal and socialism. Three musicals are particularly noteworthy: Marc Blitzstein’s The Cradle Will Rock, Harold Rome’s Pins and Needles,

and Richard Rodgers, Lorenz Hart, George S. Kaufman and Moss Hart’s I’d Rather Be

Right. Denning (1996) found that these works contained not only New Deal and pro- union messages, but anti-fascist and socialist messages as well. One of these productions,

Pins and Needles, which was the first musical production of the International Ladies’

Garment Workers Union, starred union workers who rehearsed at night after they had finished work at the factories. The show is notable not only because it became the longest-running musical in Broadway history at the time (Denning, 1996), but also because it allowed for women’s representation at a time when such representation was

39 uncommon. Pins and Needles combined political satire and vaudeville song through sketches and singing numbers, all of which were accompanied by only two pianos and no orchestra. Songs from Pins and Needles including “Sing Me a Song of Social

Significance,” where a young woman rejects love songs because they’re impractical and cannot relate to her everyday life of “wars and breadlines,” and “It’s Better with a Union

Man,” which tells the story of a sewing machine operator named Bertha who has her heart broken by a sneaky, dishonest, non-union lover until her true love, a union man, rescues her. Pins and Needles used music and performance to establish identification with audience members and persuade them of pro-union and anti-fascist messages

(Schrader, 2009c).

Blitzstein’s The Cradle Will Rock also contained a political agenda. Patinkin

(2008) describes the show as “a deeply angry musical play with a complex semi-classical score, and a story that was a strong indictment of big business and the politics of poverty”

(p. 224). Hunter (1966) argues that the show “has intrinsic dynamism – an inner communicative power that marks really good propaganda” (p. 233). The story takes place in fictional Steeltown, USA. They city is run by Mr. Mister, a big business owner who tries to keep unions out of his city by buying off everyone and everything from organized religions to gangsters (Patinkin, 2008, pp. 224-225). The Cradle Will Rock’s “themes of unionism and of power and prostitution” (Hunter, 1966) made it so controversial that the

Works Progress Administration, the largest New Deal agency, refused to let the show go on. On opening night in 1937, Blitzstein played the piano himself to accompany a few actors who were willing to go against the WPA (Patinkin 2008, p. 225). The show

40 officially opened on Broadway a year later, but it wasn’t given a full production in New

York until 1960 (Patinkin, 2008, p. 225).

Not all 1930s musicals offered an outright left-wing message, however. Rodgers,

Hart, Kaufman and Hart’s I’d Rather Be Right is certainly political, but the meaning of

the show tends to change with the audience. Rodger’s and Hart’s only political satire, I’d

Rather Be Right had a large cast, a thin plot, and no opening chorus or singing for the

first twenty minutes of the show” (Patinkin, 2008, p. 148). Patinkin (2008) describes the show as a “satiric, semi-musical, semi-concept show” (p. 148) with a score that is “part pop, part pseudo-Gilbert and Sullivan, and part parody” (p. 207). I’d Rather Be Right tells the story of a young man named Phil, who asks his boss for a raise so that he can ask his

sweetheart Peggy to marry him. Phil’s boss tells him that he may have the raise when

President Franklin D. Roosevelt balances the budget. The entire show takes place in

Phil’s dream, where he meets Roosevelt and asks him to balance the budget. In the

dream, Roosevelt agrees and tries several “harebrained schemes” (Patinkin, 2008, p. 207)

to balance the budget. At the end of the show, Roosevelt fails in his task, but the couple

gets married anyway.

Eisler (2007) argues that I’d Rather Be Right was a “fundamentally right-wing

project” (p. 7). Noting the Roosevelt is portrayed as “a good man misled by bad ideas”

(p. 7), he suggests that the musical was written by four wealthy, successful Broadway

lyricists and playwrights for a wealthy audience. He notes that I’d Rather Be Right had a

rather high ticket price,17 suggesting that many wealthy patrons, who likely opposed the

17 Eisler (2007) compares opening night top tickets for three shows at the time: I’d Rather Be Right, Babes in Arms, and The Cradle Will Rock (p. 11). A top ticket for I’d Rather Be Right costs $5.50. In 41 taxes that Roosevelt’s New Deal policies implemented, came to see the show. Eisler

observes that audience members at the time had mixed emotions about the show:

Specifically, he claims that those in the balcony, where theatre seats cost less, applauded

the same moments that caused those in the orchestra section, where theatre seats are more

expensive, to hiss and boo (p. 11). Eisler argues that the casting choice of George M.

Cohan, who was well known for his personal and public stance against New Deal policies

and organized labor, as Franklin Roosevelt promoted a right-wing interpretation of the

show. Finally, Eisler supports his argument by suggesting that certain songs, such as

“Sweet Sixty-Five,” which echoed Republican criticism of Roosevelt’s Social Security

program, promoted the same right-wing arguments that were used against Roosevelt in

the 1936 election.

The 1950s brought with it a new wave of politically-conscious musicals. In 1954,

Richard Adler, Jerry Ross, George Abbott, and Richard Bissell offered theatre-goers a

lighthearted comedy about union activism called The Pajama Game. The Pajama

Game’s storyline concerns a strike in a pajama factory and centers around the romance

between Sid, the new superintendent of the factory, and Babe, the leader of the union’s

grievance committee. Based on Bissell’s novel, Seven and a Half Cents, and featuring

Bob Fosse in his first role as choreographer, The Pajama Game “takes the side of labor

against management and manages to keep it all lighthearted and fun” (Patinkin, 2008, p.

308). The musical offers pro-union messages to its audiences, but it does so in a way that

is entertaining and jocular.

comparison, top tickets for Babes in Arms cost $3.85 and top tickets for The Cradle Will Rock cost $1.65 on Broadway (55 cents off-Broadway). 42 In 1956, Li’l Abner, Al Capp’s famous comic strip, became a fun, fast-paced

comedic musical (Henderson & Lahr, 2005, p. 161). Rooted in vaudeville comedy

(Patinkin, 2008), the show, like the comic strip, is a satire (Berger, 1970) poking fun at

the government, corporate greed, and the scientific community. L’il Abner takes place in

the fictional town of Dogpatch, USA, which the U.S. Government has determined is the

most useless place in the country, and therefore has decided to test bombs on the site. The

citizens of Dogpatch do their best to stop the bombings from happening, and ultimately,

although haphazardly, they succeed. The show critiques the government, corporations,

and science, and it shows that ordinary people can triumph over large organizations.

Some 1950s musicals critiqued the racism and bigotry that was prevalent in

American society at that time. As previously discussed, South Pacific is one of these

musicals (see page 12). Another Rodgers and Hammerstein musical, Flower Drum Song,

concerns a cultural clash. In Flower Drum Song, which takes place in San Francisco’s

Chinatown, Chinese immigrants wish to maintain their cultural traditions, but their

American children dislike the traditions and refuse to abide by them. What makes

Flower Drum Song so significant is that it marked the first time Asians and Asian-

Americans were cast in the majority of the roles in a musical. Albert Williams notes that

in 1958, when the Broadway musical opened, “America was finally dealing with its antiquated attitudes toward Asia, which was becoming more important in the post-World

War II, cold war global order” (Patinkin, 2008, p. 336). Flower Drum Song was an

attempt to overcome the bigoted views against Asians that were widespread after the war.

In 1966, another musical that warned audiences about the dangers of bigotry

emerged onto the Broadway stage. Cabaret, by John Kander, Fred Ebb and Joe

43 Masteroff, examined the rise of Nazism in 1930s Germany. The musical takes place in a

cabaret in Germany called the Kit Kat Klub, which serves as “a symbol of German

decadence that, along with the country’s desperate economic situation, allowed and

encouraged the rise of Nazism” (Patinkin, 2008, p. 392). Albert Williams points out that

“this decay is reflected in the Emcee’s increasingly ugly songs: he starts out with the benignly escapist ‘Wilkommen,’ but soon begins to celebrate anti-Semitism, sexual decadence, etc.” (Patinkin, 2008, p. 392). Cabaret offers a political warning to its audience: The show warns that these tragic events could happen again if we, as a society, are not careful.

The year after Cabaret’s arrival on Broadway, Galt MacDermot, James Rado, and

Gerome Ragni finally succeeded in getting their own controversial musical on Broadway:

Hair. Hair is about the hippie counter-culture of the late 1960s and features a thin plot concerning Claude, a young hippie who received his draft notice and must decide whether to fight in Vietnam. Albert Williams notes that Hair examined “pressing issues that were dividing the United States in the late 1960s: race relations, alternative sexuality, women’s equality, new (i.e. non-Western) religious forms, the generation gap, and above

all the Vietnam War, which Hair depicts as just the latest in America’s long history of

genocidal violence dating back to the seizure of the land from the Indians and the

importation of African slaves” (Patinkin, 2008, p. 399). Hair was a controversial musical

because of its use of full frontal nudity, adult language, and “desecration” of the

American flag; however, it brought many new, young theatre-goers to Broadway shows

(Patinkin, 2008, p. 399).

44 In 1976, Chicago, a “cynical, racy, bitterly funny, pseudo-Brechtian satire set in the Roaring Twenties” (Patinkin, 2008, p. 435), began its run on Broadway. Chicago’s storyline features Roxie Hart, a young woman who longs to be a vaudeville show performer, who goes on trial for murder and is found not guilty because of her lawyer’s manipulation skills. Roxie and Velma Kelly, another murderer who was found not guilty due to the same lawyer’s tricks, become vaudeville headliners after they are free from jail. All of the musical numbers in Chicago are done in vaudeville style, and the world in the musical seems to lack morality (Patinkin, 2008). In addition to poking fun at a seemingly unethical American society after the Watergate scandal, the musical critiques

American society’s fascination with the lives of celebrities.

Recently, a new wave of musicals has critiqued various aspects of American society. Rent, a “rock opera based on Puccini’s opera La Boheme” (Patinkin, 2008, p.

506), follows the lives of eight friends who live in Manhattan’s East Village. Rent offers theatre-goers messages about HIV, AIDS, and sexual orientation, while promoting the values of love and common humanity. The musical has been examined by scholars through the lenses of Bahktin’s carnival and carnivalesque (Sebesta, 2006; see pp. 14-15 of this dissertation) and through the life perspectives of individuals living with

HIV/AIDS (Schrader, 2009d).

In 2001, a politically-oriented “pseudo-Brechtian” (Patinkin, 2008, p. 522) musical, Urinetown, came to Broadway. Urinetown’s plot concerns a police state with a severe water shortage, which causes citizens to have to pay to use a restroom. When the price of using the restroom rises, a revolution occurs, ultimately removing the town’s leader and abolishing the draconian laws. However, the revolutionary leaders’ new laws

45 result in worsening the water shortage, and many of the citizens die from thirst. Many of

Urinetown’s musical numbers poke fun at other popular musicals, such as West Side

Story and Les Miserables. Through its use of satire, Urinetown critiques society, government, and revolution.

The year following Urinetown’s Broadway debut produced a more light-hearted musical with a political message. Hairspray, based on John Waters’ 1988 film of the same name, has been described as “a comedy with a social conscience, set in Baltimore in 1962” (Patinkin, 2008, p. 524). Hairspray tells the story of Tracy Turnblad, a bubbly overweight white teenager who finds herself a star on a local television dance show called The Corny Collins Show, which was based on the real-life Buddy Deane Show.

Tracy, her friends, and parents battle segregation throughout the movie, ultimately succeeded in integrating The Corny Collins Show. Featuring racist villains like Velma

Von Tussle and Prudy Pingleton, Hairspray condemns racism and offers feel-good anti- segregation messages that suggest that we should look beyond a person’s physical appearance to appreciate his or her “uniqueness.”

Finally, in 2003, Broadway introduced audiences to two unique musicals with strong social and political critiques: Wicked and Avenue Q. While Wicked was the more popular of the two, it was Avenue Q that took home the Tony Award for Best Musical in

2003 (Patinkin, 2008). Sheldon Patinkin describes Avenue Q as “an adult Sesame Street”

(p. 524) complete with large hand puppets as characters. Most of the characters are 20- something-year-old residents of a run-down neighborhood who discuss their unsatisfying lives. The show discusses such issues as racism, pornography, and sexual orientation. It

46 encourages audience members to consider and perhaps reexamine their views on such issues.

In this section, I have examined how American musical theatre has been used for and has been interpreted as societal critique, pointing to significant musicals in American history and noteworthy studies that bridge the two disciplines of communication studies and theatre. This dissertation contributes to this growing body of literature by shedding light on how Wicked serves the function of communicating political messages to audiences. In the next three sections, I will discuss the three lenses with which I begin my study: Leadership, hegemony, and social movement rhetoric.

Leadership as a Communication Concept

Leadership has been examined by many scholars in various ways. In this section,

I will discuss some of the scholarship concerning leadership. Leadership, according to

Hollander (1978), can be defined as “a process of influence between a leader and those who are followers” (p. 1). Leaders are “initiators of action” (p. 2). I support Hollander’s definition because of its emphasis on the connection between leaders and followers and because of its emphasis on action. A leader cannot be a leader without followers, and, in my opinion, a leader is not a leader unless he or she seeks action or encourages other to seek action. While a leader may not be influential, he or she should attempt to influence others in some way. It is this attempt to influence others that defines a leader, rather than successes or failures.

Leadership entails motivation, direction, supervision, guidance and evaluation of others for the purposes of accomplishing a task (Fiedler & Chemers, 1984). Leadership involves both leaders and followers influencing each other and working together to

47 achieve mutual goals. Hollander (1978) contends that leaders should be legitimate

(meaning that they have been elected or appointed), competent, motivating,

knowledgeable about the situation facing the group or organization, and they should

exhibit certain personality characteristics, such as trustworthiness, courage, and

persuasiveness (p. 8). Hollander also argues that leaders can reduce uncertainty for

followers by providing information to them and clarifying situations to them.

Hackman & Johnson (1991), applying a communication perspective to leadership,

offer another definition of leadership. They suggest that leadership is “human

communication which modifies the attitudes and behaviors of others in order to meet

group goals and needs” (p. 11). According to Hackman and Johnson, leaders use symbols

to create reality, communicate about the past, present and future, and make intentional

use of symbols to reach group goals. They note that successful leaders must be able to

develop followers’ perceptions of the leader’s credibility, develop and use power bases

effectively, make effective use of verbal and nonverbal communication cues, develop

positive expectations for others, manage change, gain compliance from followers, and

negotiate productive solutions for the group (p. 14). Hackman & Johnson also argue that

leaders engage in impression management in front of supporters and others in order to

appear as good leaders to their supporters and to gain support from outsiders (p. 16).

Over the past century, scholars have examined leadership through a variety of

approaches. The most dominant approaches are the Trait Approach (Cartwright &

Zander, 1968), the Situational Approach (Hersey & Blanchard, 1993), the Transactional

Approach (Hollander, 1978), the Functional Approach (Benne & Sheats, 1948; Spotts,

1976), and the Transformational Approach (Hackman & Johnson, 1991). The Trait

48 Approach states that some people have certain personality characteristics, such as wisdom, courage, and character, which make them good leaders (Hollander, 1978, p. 21).

These traits are relative to the situation in which they are displayed; for example,

dominance is a trait that is found in many leaders, but in some situations, it may be

ineffective. Hollander (1978) is careful to point out that traits are dynamic, not static; meaning that they change with each different situation that the leader faces.

The Situational Approach states that different situations require different

leadership functions to be performed (Hollander, 1978). Stech (1983) suggests that there are task orientations (often referred to as task functions) and interpersonal orientations

(sometimes referred to as relationship maintenance functions). A task orientation focuses on the goals and objectives of a group; a leader with a task orientation seeks to keep the

group on track in order to achieve its goal. Task functions include initiating activity,

giving information, summarizing, and evaluating (Lassey, 1976). An interpersonal orientation privileges group members’ relationships with other group members. A leader with an interpersonal orientation seeks to resolve conflicts and maintain group unity.

Some common maintenance functions are setting standards for communicating with

others, expressing group feelings, and encouraging others (Lassey, 1976).

Hollander (1978) has noted that the Situational Approach to leadership is

somewhat simplistic and does not allow for followers’ perceptions of the leader’s actions

to take a prominent role. Instead, he advocates for the Transactional Approach, which

states that a dynamic relationship exists between leaders and followers. In this

relationship, followers perceive and evaluate the leader based on the demands of the

situation (p. 38). In the Transactional Approach, the followers’ perceptions of the leader

49 are just as important as the leader’s actions. Leadership is a mutual activity; followers

influence leaders and leaders influence followers.

Another extension of the Situational Approach is what Hackman & Johnson

(1991) refer to as the Functional Approach. This approach states that the ability to

communicate like a leader determines the leadership of a group or organization (p. 56).

In other words, a person with leader-like communication skills (eloquent speech, good projection, etc) is more likely to become a leader in his or her organization or group than someone who lack such communication skills. Benne & Sheats (1948) suggest that there are three types of roles that leaders play: Task-related roles, group-building and

maintenance roles, and individual roles. Task-oriented roles, like Stech’s task-orientation

in the Situational Approach, center on the goals of the group. Leaders can serve to keep

the group or organization focused on the common goal. Group-building or maintenance

roles allow leaders to handle conflicts among members and maintain a positive

environment. Both of these types of roles have a positive effect on a group or

organization. Individual roles, however, often have a negative effect on groups; a leader

who takes on an individual role may choose to prioritize his or her career or personal

needs and desires over the organization or group. An effective leader will emphasize

task-related and group-building roles over individual roles.

Hackman & Johnson (1991) advocate for another approach that places followers

in a prominent role in relation to leadership. The Transformational Approach states that

leaders should satisfy followers’ needs. This model is based on Maslow’s (1970)

hierarchy of needs, which suggests that basic physiological needs must be satisfied before

emotional needs. The Transformational Approach suggests that leaders must satisfy

50 basic needs, such as safety, before satisfying emotional needs, such as self-esteem.

Hackman & Johnson (1991) argue that transformational leaders exhibit five characteristics: They are creative, interactive, visionary, empowering and passionate (pp.

64-65).

In all five of these approaches, leaders have some degree of power. Cartwright &

Zander (1968) contend that leadership inherently involves the use of power. French &

Raven (1981) argue that a leader can gain power from five sources; a leader may have coercive, reward, legitimate, expert, or referent power (or any combination of these). A leader with coercive power forces his or her followers to do what he or she wants; a leader with coercive power may deny rewards or implement punishment if his or her wishes are not fulfilled. A leader with reward power gives followers something they want in return for outstanding work. A leader exhibits legitimate power when he or she is either appointed by another leader or elected by followers (Lee, 1980). Leaders who have exceptional knowledge on the group’s focus or goal may have expert power.

French & Raven also note that some leaders have referent power; that is, they are well liked by their followers and have gained respect and power through their popularity.

Leadership has also been studied in the specific context of social movements’ characteristics and strategies. In his discussion of the requirements, problems, and strategies that leaders of social movements often face, Simons (1970) categorizes social movement leaders and their strategies into three types: Moderate, intermediate, and militant (p. 7). Moderate leaders are viewed as the most conservative of the three types, as they tend to work peacefully within the system in an attempt to bring about change.

Moderate leaders are often seen as more reasonable in the eyes of their adversaries, but

51 their followers may consider them weak. Militant leaders, on the other hand, are the most radical of the three types, often bringing attention to the movement through radical tactics. Militant leaders often are able to unify the movement through their militant tactics, but they may be seen as unreasonable to the outside world. Intermediate leaders exhibit a combination of both militant and moderate characteristics, as they may appear to be more conservative in the minds of their adversaries and more radical in the eyes of their followers at the same time. However, this stance is not without its risks. A

movement’s members may see the intermediate leader as less dependable or less decisive

than a moderate or militant leader because of his or her ability to switch between tactics.

Jensen (1977), in his study of contemporary labor movement rhetoric, contributes one

more type of leader to Simons’ spectrum: A leader that can “adapt past policies to an

increasingly critical rank and file, and at the same time effect a renewal of traditional

militancy” (p. 33). Jensen’s fourth type of leader is similar to Simons’ intermediate

leader, but appears to lack many of the risks associated with being an intermediate leader.

Simons, Mechling, and Schreier (1984) later observe that social movement leadership

exists on what they refer to as the moderate-militant spectrum. Their work suggests that

social movement leaders and their tactics are not so easily classified. Simons, Mechling,

and Schreier do, however, maintain a distinction between social movement leaders and

institutional leaders. This view is also held by Jablonski (1980), who suggests that there

are “top-down” and “bottom-up” ways or running organizations. “Top-down” approaches

are associated with institutions; they include those who manage and advise institutions.

“Bottom-up” approaches are associated with social movements; they include those who

52 run grassroots social campaigns and protests. “Top-down” approaches are often

associated with the concept of hegemony, which I discuss in the next section.

Hegemony

In this dissertation, I consider how messages about hegemony and social control are conveyed through Wicked. Hegemony, initially coined by Antonio Gramsci (Gramsci,

1995), can be described as the maintenance of power by a group over a subordinated group. Hegemony describes how the dominant group coerces or convinces the subordinate group to accept their own oppression. Simply put, “hegemony is what binds society together without the use of force” (Sardar & Van Loon, 2004; p. 49). Hegemony

“describes the ways and methods by which consent is generated and organized, which, in turn, is directly related to the mechanisms and processes by which knowledge and beliefs are first, produced, and second, generated” (Fontana, 2005, p. 98). Hegemony creates a contradictory consciousness within people; on one hand, they experience life in an oppressed way, and on the other hand, they are subjected to the messages that praise upholding the status quo (McGovern, 1997). Gramsci suggests that the effect of this conflicting consciousness is “to immobilize subordinate groups from acting on the very real grievances that they feel” (McGovern, 1997, p. 423). To use Gramsci’s own words,

hegemony is “a complement to the theory of state-as-force” (Gramsci, 1995, pp. 357-

358). The hegemonic state becomes “the ‘common sense’ of the people” (Fontana, 2005)

in that they accept their own oppression as a part of everyday life. As Benedetto Fontana

explains, “hegemony is the institutionalization of consent and persuasion within both

civil society and the state” (p. 99). I personally define hegemony as the ability of the

dominant or institutional group to persuade or coerce a subordinate group to accept its

53 own oppression because there is significant benefit for the subordinate group by doing so.

I believe that hegemonic regimes use both persuasion and force to obtain their goals.

Gramsci argues that hegemony works at two distinct levels: Internally and externally (Gramsci, 1971; Gramsci, 1973; Fontana, 2005). Internal hegemony exists within the dominant group; external hegemony exists between the dominant group and the oppressed group. Internal hegemony is “the formation within the social group of self- discipline and self-government” while external hegemony is “the extension and dissemination of the group’s conception of the world throughout society” (Fontana, 2005, p. 99). Gramsci also observes that groups of people join in an “economic and cultural solidarity extending beyond a given class or corporate interest” (Fink, 1988). Gramsci refers to these groups as a “historical bloc” (Gramsci, 1973, p. 42; Sassoon, 1980, pp.

121-126). By forming “historic blocs,” social movements can present themselves as appealing to multiple groups, and thus offer themselves as an alternative to the existing institution (Fink, 1988, p. 119).

Other scholars have examined the role of the hegemon. Mearsheimer (2001) suggests that a hegemon is a state that dominates all others (pp. 40-42). The hegemon is the dominant group, institution, or leader that dominates an oppressed group. Keohane

(1984) notes that “the hegemon plays a distinctive role, providing its partners with leadership in return for deference” (p. 46). In Keohane’s view, and later in Lentner’s

(2005) view, a hegemon cannot act alone, because “it is impossible to separate the concept of hegemony from consent” (Lentner, 2005, p. 738). Lentner argues that autonomy plays a key role in hegemony. In short, a hegemon cannot exist without an oppressed group to dominate.

54 Murphy (2001) discusses four hegemonic functions that emerged from his

rhetorical analysis of the Freedom Rides: Naming, contextualization, legal sanctions, and

diversion. Naming allows the hegemonic group to re-name the oppressed group in an

unfavorable way (pp. 400-403). Contextualization occurs when the hegemonic force associates the dissenters or their values with something negative; for example, Murphy

observes that the Kennedy administration emphasized that the Freedom Riders took

America’s focus off of the fight against Communism (p. 403). Legal sanctions are often

used by the hegemonic group in order to benefit themselves; the same laws may be

applied differently to the hegemonic group than when they are applied to the dissenting

group (p. 404). Diversion is also used by the hegemonic group in order to focus the

public’s attention to another positive issue; In Murphy’s article, the Kennedy

administration centered on voter registration instead of the Freedom Rides (p. 405).

Parry-Giles (1996) also offers a hegemonic function for her readers to consider: The use

of propaganda. She argues that both the Truman administration and the Eisenhower

administration used ‘camouflaged’ propaganda by manipulating the content of the news

during the Cold War. In this case, the dominant group (the presidential administrations) pushed a dominant ideology onto less-dominant groups through television and radio media.

Another communication scholar, James Arnt Aune (1990) observes that “neo-

Gramscians” argue that the “task of the intellectual class at the present time is to construct a counter-hegemony” (p. 163) that can lead to positive change for oppressed groups. Aune argues that this counter-hegemony can be constructed through mass communication, which has the potential to bring people happiness, diversion and self-

55 assertion (p. 163). However, Aune points out that this counter-hegemony does not yet exist due to the fact that mass communication encourages people to buy things to make

them happy, thus promoting the capitalistic system which oppresses them.

James C. Scott (1985) also examined hegemony and suggests that there are two

primary strains of hegemony: “Thick theory” and “thin theory” (p. 72). Thick theory

states that the dominant group persuades the subordinate group “to believe actively in the

values that explain and justify their subordination” (p. 72). Thin theory, on the other hand, claims that the dominant group persuades the subordinate group that “the social order in which they live is natural and inevitable” (p. 72). Social movements often fight against both strains of hegemony. In the following section, I discuss literature concerning the strategies and characteristics of social movements and social movement rhetoric.

Characteristics and Strategies of Social Movements and Social Movement Rhetoric

The term “social movement” has been defined differently by different scholars.

Malcolm Sillars (1980), in an attempt to broaden the scope of social movement studies, defines social movements as “collective actions which are perceived by the critic” (p.

30). Camerson (1966) argues that a social movement “occurs when a fairly large number of people band together in order to alter or supplant some portion of the existing culture or social order” (p. 7). Wilson (1973) defines a social movement as a “conscious, collective, organized attempt to bring about or to resist large scale change in the social order by noninstitutionalized means” (p. 8). Simons (1970) argues that a social movement is “an uninstitutionalized collectivity that mobilizes for action to implement a program for the reconstitution of social norms and values” (p. 3). I support Simons’ definition because of its emphasis on mobilization for action. However, it is important to note that

56 while I do believe that the collectivity should be uninstitutionalized, I believe that individual leaders need not work outside the institution. In Chapter 6, I argue that leaders

can work both within and without the institution to bring about change.

Furthermore, Stewart, Smith & Denton (1984) discuss four characteristics that

they believe all social movements have: Social movements must have at least minimal

organization, be uninstitutionalized, propose or oppose a program of change in society,

and be countered by an established order (pp. 3-11). Della Porta & Diani (1999) also

offer four characteristics of social movements, although their characteristics differ

slightly from those proposed by Stewart, Smith & Denton. Della Porta & Diani suggest

that social movements consist of informal interaction networks, maintain shared beliefs

and solidarity, focus on collective action and conflicts, and use protests as a tactic (pp 14-

15). Cathcart (1972) maintains that there is a strong rhetorical component in social

movements; he notes that “movements are carried forward through language, both verbal

and nonverbal, in strategic [ways] that bring about identification of the individual with

the movement” (p. 86). In this study, I will define social movements in my own terms

while expanding on and challenging some of these existing definitions.

Some scholars have looked at the life cycles of social movements. Griffin (1952)

argues that social movements go through three distinct phases in their lifetimes:

Inception, rhetorical crisis, and consummation (p. 11). Inception involves generating

interest in a social cause or “striking an event” that initiates a movement (p. 11). The

period of rhetorical crisis is when the movement succeeds in getting people to question

the existing social structure. Finally, consummation occurs when the movement has

either succeeded in obtaining its goals, such as when the American Suffrage Movement

57 succeeded in obtaining women’s right to vote, or when the movement disbands due to the perception that perseverance is no longer fruitful (p. 11). Stewart, Smith & Denton

(1984) extend Griffin’s social movement life cycle argument to include five stages:

Genesis, social unrest, enthusiastic mobilization, maintenance and termination. They note that the genesis phase is similar to Griffin’s period of inception in that it generates interest in a particular social problem. Social unrest occurs when a young movement attempts to get the attention of the press and attempts to reveal their cause to the general public. Often, protests occur during this phase. The enthusiastic mobilization phase exists when the movement has gained a number of “true believers” in the movement who are certain that the movement’s tactics are the only way to substantial change (p. 41).

During this phase, social movements “expand, evolve, and confront serious opposition from institutional forces” (pp. 41-42). Stewart, Smith & Denton note that social movement leaders in this phase face difficult rhetorical challenges, because they must balance militant rhetoric that will energize members with more moderate language that will attract newcomers. The fourth stage, the maintenance phase, is a turning point for the social movement, which must either move towards victory or face disbandment. The last stage, termination, is similar to Griffin’s consummation period: The social movement ceases to exist either because it has completed its objectives, or because members no longer see the movement as a viable means of social change.

One of the most well known scholars in the area of social movement rhetoric is

Herbert W. Simons. Simons (1972; 1976) argues against how social movements were initially discussed. “By the older views,” notes Simons (1976), “movements were unnecessary, irrational, dysfunctional, and potentially dangerous” (p. 425). These older

58 views reflect a “system-oriented” approach to social conflict (Simons, 1972, p. 228), which assumes that conflicts are negative because they interfere with the institution’s goals. “System-oriented” views differ from what Simons (1982) calls “actor-oriented” views (p. 186). “Actor-oriented” views assume that “insurgent-initiated conflicts are necessary and inevitable consequences of systems that cannot possibly satisfy the needs of all persons equally or completely” (p. 186). Simons (1976) advocates for an “actor- oriented” view of social movements.

Prior to Simons’ and other social movement rhetoricians’ work, it was generally accepted that social protest groups, especially militant groups, used coercion instead of persuasion. Persuasion and coercion were considered two poles of a dichotomy. Simons

(1972) says that, in this dichotomous view, persuasion “involves appeals, advice,

arguments, and so on; coercion involves force or threats of force” (p. 231). In this view,

successful persuasion changes both behaviors and attitudes, while coercion changes behaviors but not attitudes (pp. 231-232). Simons argues against such a dichotomy, noting that both social protest groups and institutions use “coercive persuasion” (p. 232) which combines both persuasive and coercive elements. This concept of “coercive persuasion” opened the door for scholars examining social protest to view social movements in a more neutral light.

Later, Simons & Mechling (1981) found four variables that political movements

face: Relative resource control, how much bureaucratization exists within the movement,

constraints that impede practical decision-making, and public acceptance of the

movement. Simons further discusses these problems in his 1982 Communication

Quarterly article. He notes that, unlike institutional leaders, social movement leaders

59 “expect minimal external control and maximal external resistance” (p. 183). He argues

that social movement leaders have the expectations for several reasons. First, social

movements are seen as “illegitimate” (p. 183). The public is hesitant to follow a social movement because they see questioning authority as a societal taboo. Second, social movements have access to few resources, and often must employ creative tactics to overcome this disadvantage. Third, social movements generally are considered

“voluntary, nonbureaucratic collectivities” (p. 183). Social movement members can

come and go as they please and there are no constraints regarding who can join the

movement. This lack of organization, argues Simons (1982), can lead to impractical decision making.

Another rhetorician who studied social movements is Bruce. E. Gronbeck. In his analysis of the 1970 Black Action Movement at the University of Michigan, Gronbeck

(1973) argues that social movements use six rhetorical functions: Defining, legitimizing,

in-gathering, pressuring, compromising, and satisfying. Defining occurs when an agent of

change (either a group or an individual) defines a problem and proposes a solution.

Legitimizing is when authority figures who are respected by the public lend their voices

to the fledgling movement. In-gathering is when a movement builds a strong base of

consistent supporters, and pressuring occurs when the movement decides to begin an

organized campaign for reform. Compromising is a function that occurs when there is a

direct confrontation between the social movement and the institution, and a negotiation

must be worked out. Finally, the satisfying function happens when leaders return to the

movement’s members to report some sort of success, even if the victory is partial or

60 incomplete. This function keeps members happy and encourages them to keep fighting for the movement.

In addition, some social movement scholars have observed tactics used by social movement leaders and their followers. Tactics differ from strategies in that the former are used by the oppressed while the latter are used by the dominant group. De Certeau (1984) defines a tactic as “a calculated action determined by the absence of a proper locus.” (p.

39). He notes that “the space of the tactic is the space of the Other” (p. 39). Looking at these tactics, Stewart (1997) argues that conservative tactics are often abandoned for more militant tactics when younger activists join the movement and begin an evolution.

Windt (1972) examines how some movements use the diatribe as a last resort to bring attention to the movement. Additionally, in their article examining the rhetoric of the

Anti-Fur Movement, Olson & Goodnight (1994) briefly explore the differences between tactics used by radical activists and tactics used by moderate activists. They note that while radical anti-fur activists pushed a vegan platform, moderate anti-fur activists tolerated the use of animal products for human “necessities,” (p. 194) if the use involved the humane treatment of and minimized pain for animals. In his article examining the

Creationism Movement, Klope (1994) discusses how public debating can be used as a tactic for bringing positive attention to one’s cause. Stewart, Smith & Denton (1984) suggest that slogans and songs are effective means with which social movements can gain support or attention. They also note that some movements, such as the Pro-Life and

Pro-Choice Movements, use transcendence rhetoric as a tactic. Transcendence rhetoric suggests that “a person, group, goal, thing, right, action, or proposal surpasses, is superior to, or was prior to others of its kind” (emphasis Stewart, Smith & Denton’s).

61 Smith & Windes (1975), when studying the Sunday School Movement, observed that the

movement used multiple tactics, including denying that their values clashed with

institutional values, criticizing their opposition’s counterarguments, and creating and

pushing an effective rhetorical vision (pp. 88-90).

Furthermore, social movements have been classified into various categories by

various scholars. Stewart (1999) offers two such classifications. He notes that some movements, such as the Civil Rights Movement or the Labor Movement, are self-directed

because they are created by, participated in, and led by those who see themselves as

oppressed and who are fighting for their own equality and rights (p. 91). Stewart also observes that some social movements, such as the Animal Rights Movement and the Pro-

Life Movement, are other-directed, meaning that those who create, work for, and lead the movements are not those who are oppressed, and that they are fighting for the rights of those who cannot speak for themselves (pp. 91-92).

Jasper (1997) offers similar categories of social movements. Operating from a sociological and historical perspective, Jasper classifies social movements into three categories: Pre-industrial Movements, Industrial (or Citizenship Movements), and Post-

Citizenship Movements. Pre-industrial movements responded to immediate threats and were both local and short-lived (p. 6). Industrial movements, or citizenship movements, are similar to Stewart’s self-directed movements in that they are “organized by and on behalf of people excluded in some way from full human rights, political participation, or basic economic principles” (p. 7). Post-citizenship movements, like Stewart’s other- directed movements, are run by non-oppressed people on behalf of those who are oppressed.

62 These are the primary theoretical constructs with which I frame my study. Many of these constructs have been woven into the analyses in the fourth, fifth, and sixth chapters of this dissertation.

63 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

In this section, I discuss the methods I use in this dissertation. I am most

interested in the messages conveyed through theatre and how performance helps create

these messages. Because of my focus on message and performance, I believe that cluster

criticism, a form of rhetorical criticism, is an appropriate method for this study.

Rhetorical analysis allows one to find emerging themes (or clusters in cluster criticism) in the text, and these themes or clusters can be used to construct meaning. Rhetorical

analysis also focuses on the role of the audience. As Charland (1987) observes, the

audience embodies discourse. As an audience member, I participate in the meaning-

making process along with the performers, directors, and even the playwright. By

rhetorically analyzing my own fieldnotes which record my own experience, I am, in a

way, studying audience interpretation along with writer/director/performer intent and the

messages within Wicked. Therefore, I believe that qualitative observation of various

performances will serve a suitable method for this study when examining how these

messages are conveyed through performance. Observations of three performances have

generated data for this dissertation: The September 2, 2008, Chicago performance starring Dee Roscioli as Elphaba and Annaleigh Ashford as G(a)linda, the September 13,

2008, touring company performance in Pittsburgh starring Carmen Cusack as Elphaba and Katie Rose Clarke as G(a)linda, and the July 11, 2009, New York Broadway performance starring Nicole Parker as Elphaba and Alli Mauzey as G(a)linda. All three performances were directed by Joe Mantello. My fieldnotes from these observations provide descriptions of my experiences as an audience member and generate thoughtful reflection and analysis.

64 Furthermore, as an amateur actor, I understand that there are many people involved in how a message is conveyed through performance. Writers create scripts and characters. Directors have particular visions for how characters and events should be portrayed. Actors also have visions for how their characters are to be played. Lighting designers, sounds directors, set designers and costume designers all play a role in how messages are conveyed through performance. It is nearly impossible to determine who is responsible for a particular way a character is performed in a community theatre production, let alone a Broadway production. Therefore, I believe it is best to experience the living product of this collaboration: The performance of the character by a particular actor. As Gadamer (2004) observes, “it is in the performance…that we encounter the work itself” (p. 116).

For this study, I examine written texts associated with the musical and the three performances of Wicked identified previously. Written texts, such as the script and lyrics of a musical theatre performance, allow for ease of access at any point in the study.

These written texts are different from performances, which occur in a certain place and time and can only exist outside that context in the audience’s memory. I rely on the New

York performance script, original cast recording, and various sets of sheet music for my tangible textual fragments. McGee (1990) argues that rhetorical critics often form texts from “textual fragments,” which are “discourses from scraps and pieces of evidence” (p.

279). Using Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” Speech as an example, McGee explains that “as a fragment of the critic’s text, the speech is only a featured part of an arrangement that includes all facts, events, texts, and stylized expressions deemed useful in explaining its influence and exposing its meaning” (p. 279). My rhetorical text

65 consists of many textual fragments, including what I consider written or tangible texts

(sheet music, the script, the cast recording) and the observations of three performances.

My training in music and acting have guided my analysis of music and stage direction in addition to characters’ development (e.g. line delivery and nonverbal cues).

Using the research technique of qualitative observation (Angrosino, 2005; Lindlof &

Taylor, 2002), I attended three performances of Wicked, taking detailed fieldnotes by hand. These fieldnotes were transcribed within twenty-four hours of being written, achieving the recommendations of Lindlof & Taylor (2002), who suggest that it is beneficial to transcribe fieldnotes while they are fresh in the researcher’s mind.

Cluster Criticism and Rhetorical Criticism

When analyzing the fieldnotes and written texts previously described, I used an broadened version of cluster criticism as my primary research method. According to

Sonja Foss (1996), cluster criticism allows the rhetorical critic to examine relationships and meanings between concepts in the text. Clusters, originally defined by Kenneth

Burke (1941, 1959), can be described as “what goes with what” (Burke, 1941, p. 20).

Burke (1959) suggests that “significance [is] gained by noting what subjects cluster about other subjects” (p. 232). As Carol A. Berthold (1976) aptly notes, Burke’s method of cluster criticism is not clearly defined, and therefore, other scholars have sought to define the method in ways that are less abstract.

One of these scholars is Sonja Foss. Foss (1996) describes three steps the rhetorical critic should take when conducting cluster criticism. First, the rhetorical critic must identify the key terms or concepts in a text. Next, the critic must look for additional concepts and ideas that are associated with the key terms or concepts already identified.

66 These sub-ideas form collections, or clusters. Finally, the critic examines how each of

the sub-ideas represents the key term or concept. Foss (1996) observes that this step often

involves comparing clusters and incorporating other methods of rhetorical criticism, such

as metaphoric criticism or feminist criticism.

Cluster criticism has often been employed as a method in the area of public

address. Berthold (1976) applied cluster criticism to the rhetoric of John F. Kennedy.

She begins by noting key terms in Kennedy’s speeches, such as “peace” and “strength,”

and the agon-term18 “communism.” She proceeds to describe how other terms relate to

these key terms to form clusters, and then draws meaning from these clusters. Graves

(1983) employed cluster criticism in his examination of key metaphors in Quaker sermons in the late seventeenth century, finding that these metaphors were used to 1) construct a world that made sense to the listeners, 2) represent the implications of belief

in individual Quakers lives, and 3) allow speakers to preach without preparation (p. 375).

Also applying cluster criticism to a religious communication context, Foss (1984)

examined the debate regarding women wanting to become priests in the Episcopal

Church, focusing on four key terms: “Church,” “priest,” “male,” and “female.” Pullum

(1992), using cluster analysis, examined the rhetoric of Jewish televangelist Jan Bresky,

finding that Bresky used a problem-solution approach in his discourse and that he was

more concerned with leading followers ethically than converting individuals to Judaism.

Also using cluster criticism, Docan, Freitas & Holtzman (2003) analyzed George W.

Bush’s “National Day of Prayer and Remembrance” speech, and found that Bush

18 Agon-terms (or “devil terms”) are key words that seem to have the opposite message of the key terms. Agon-terms. when contrasted with the positive key terms (or “good terms”) can reveal a speaker’s intentions, according to Berthold (1976). 67 emphasized the importance of national unity, America’s responsibility to justice, and

God’s justification for specific political actions.

Cluster criticism can also be used as a method when examining other rhetorical texts. Using American weekly news magazines for his rhetorical texts, Corcorcan (1983) used cluster criticism to examine images of USSR political funerals and how the U.S. media portrayed these funerals. Lynch (2006) employed cluster analysis when analyzing focus group transcripts in order to see how perceptions change when race labels are changed. He found that both “white” and “European-American” resulted in the agon-term

“black,” suggesting that people tend to view race as a “white-black agon, or binary” (p.

7), despite attempt to change the wording of racial categories. Applying an organizational communication perspective, Hoffman and Cowan (2008) used cluster criticism to study

Fortune 500 2004’s list of the “100 best companies to work for” and constructed an ideology of work/life issues. They found four emergent themes related to this ideology:

1) work is the most important element of life, 2) life means family, 3) individuals are responsible for balance, and 4) organizations control work/life life programs (p. 227).

There have also been multiple scholars who have incorporated cluster criticism in their theses19 and dissertations.20

19 Using a combination of feminist criticism and cluster criticism in her master’s thesis, Alia Allougi (1998) studied the media coverage of American First Ladies, arguing that the media coverage reaffirms masculine hegemony in America. Denise Frye (2005) employed cluster criticism in her master’s thesis, which discussed the female genital mutilation social movement’s rhetorical strategies to raise awareness and outrage against the practice. In her master’s thesis examining representations of race in the television series American Dreams, Karen Nishie (2007) used cluster criticism to identify how meaning was constructed in the text of the show. 20 When studying the rhetoric of the White Ribbon Campaign for her dissertation, Amanda Goldrick-Jones (1996) employed cluster criticism to show how the campaign’s strategies were motivated by concerns about gender and power differences. In his dissertation, Dennis Mark Wilkins (1997) used cluster criticism to examine press narratives in order to determine if tensions existed between traditional press theories and modern ideological press theories concerning attempts to reform the General Mining Law of 1872. Terry Carter (2002), in his dissertation, used cluster criticism to analyze how texts represent African-Americans, 68 My dissertation extends the cluster criticism method to incorporate textual

fragmentation and my postmodern perspective. Brock, Scott & Chesebro (1990) offer

four tenets of postmodern rhetorical criticism. First, they argue that “rhetorical criticism

functions independently of the original work, ultimately displacing the original work” (p.

436). This piece of rhetorical criticism follows this tenet; it is an independent work that

serves to link the musical Wicked with the concepts of leadership, social movement

participation, and hegemony. Second, Brock, Scott & Chesebro suggests that rhetorical criticism affects the ethos of the original work because “the characteristics attributed to

the source of the rhetorical criticism are now linked with the original work” (p. 437). It is

my hope that this dissertation will encourage readers to see the musical through a new

lens. Third, the authors note that all pieces of rhetorical criticism are ideological

constructions. Finally, they suggest that every rhetorical criticism piece conveys multiple and sometimes contradictory meanings. Indeed, this is why two people can view the

same musical and yet come away with very different meanings. It is with these tenets in

mind that I attempt to expand the scope of cluster criticism.

Traditionally, cluster criticism has focused on specific terms or words in a text,

and emphasized the importance of the rhetor’s intent. While traditional cluster criticism is

useful in public address settings, it falls short when it is used to analyze non-public

address texts, such as films, television shows, music, and theatre. In 2006, Lynch

expanded cluster criticism in a new way. Lynch sought to extend cluster criticism so that

arguing that African-Americans are portrayed negatively in literary and rhetorical texts. In her dissertation research, Diana Lynn Tucker (2003) used cluster criticism to analyze football coaches’ autobiographies, their wives’ publications in cookbooks and newsletters, and their wives’ interviews. She found that, in the world of football, men and women are placed into separate spheres. Sharoni Denise Little (2005) also used cluster criticism in her dissertation. Little examined the debates surrounding the 1922 Dyer anti-lynching bill, and her cluster analysis revealed the use of savage and bestial imagery. 69 it may be used for qualitative interviews and focus groups. In his study, Lynch provide

key terms for focus groups to use, but his participants defined those terms by using other

terms, which then clustered together. For example, Lynch provided his participants with

the words “black” and “white” referring to race. The focus group participants clustered

thirteen terms around “white” and seventeen terms around “black” (p. 6). Lynch was then able to pull meanings from these clusters. Through Lynch’s discussion of cluster

criticism, one finds a way in which to work both inductively and deductively within the

same method.

Through this study, I attempt to extend Lynch’s extension of cluster criticism in a

way that will allow it to be a useful tool for rhetorical critics studying non-public address

texts. Like Lynch (2006), I begin with a few key terms and phrases, and then let the

cluster emerge from my analysis. Instead of looking for single terms that relate to one another, as various other scholars employing this method have done (Berthold, 1976;

Foss, 1984; Graves, 1983; Pullum, 1992), I looked at terms and phrases along with such

content as music, lyrics, performances, and visuals to explore relationships

between/among themes that emerge.

Furthermore, I was not looking for the playwright’s/director’s/performer’s intent.

Foss (1996), Berthold (1976) and Pullum (1992) note cluster analysis’s emphasis on the rhetor’s motive. However, I believe that cluster analysis can also be employed through a postmodern perspective to analyze co-constructed meanings. I am most concerned with messages and meanings in the text and performance of Wicked, which are co-constructed by the authors, directors, producers, performers and audiences. I am looking for messages and meanings within the text and for the ways in which performance affects

70 these messages and meanings. Therefore, I have extended the method of cluster criticism

to allow themes to emerge and be analyzed.

Michael Calvin McGee (1990) discusses the issues of intent and invention in his

essay, “Text, context, and the fragmentation of contemporary culture.” McGee notes that

the process of invention has changed throughout the years. He suggests that, instead of

looking solely at the intent of the orator or rhetor, rhetorical critics should now look at multiple voices through various textual fragments (p. 280). McGee uses an original text written by Henry Kissinger to illustrate his argument. He observes that Kissinger authored a text of about 8,000 words in Foreign Affairs, but that many journalists, debaters, and legislators wrote their own, shorter texts about Kissinger’s article in an

attempt to condense his article into a basic, shorter, brief “bottom line” argument (p.

280). McGee notes that meanings emerge when these texts are clustered together and

considered in relationship to one another. Clustering provides a way for meanings to emerge.

My intention was to use cluster criticism in the same way that McGee describes in his example concerning Kissinger’s article. I have used multiple textual fragments in

order to allow meanings to emerge. First, I recognize that there are multiple messages in

Wicked, and that it is only possible for my dissertation to examine some of these

messages. By reading through the script, listening to the music, and observing the three

performances, I have seen three key themes emerge: Leadership, hegemony, and the

characteristics and strategies of social movements. Using these themes, I decided on a

key term or phrase for each cluster analysis: Hegemony, Elphaba as a militant social

71 movement leader, and G(a)linda as a leader. I have chosen to focus on these terms and phrases in order to center my study on the political messages within Wicked.

Second, through the analysis my texts, fieldnotes and personal observations, I have allowed additional concepts and examples that relate to my key themes emerge from my analysis. These additional examples and concepts formed my clusters.

Finally, using my theoretical framework and other scholars’ previous research to guide me, I analyzed how each of the clusters relates to the key terms or phrases to form meanings about the text, performance, and communication. This step involved interweaving my analysis and theory. I believe that this method has allowed me to more clearly see the meanings that are salient in the messages and performances of Wicked.

Cluster criticism is a type of rhetorical criticism, which is one of many qualitative research methods employed by communication scholars. Rhetorical analysis is similar to literary analysis and narrative analysis in that it draws meaning from text. Like literary criticism and narrative analysis, rhetorical criticism involves interpretation and judgment, not measurement (Zarefsky, 2006, p. 384). However, rhetorical criticism differs from literary analysis and narrative analysis in the types of texts it examines. While literary criticism draws meaning from books and narrative analysis draws meaning from people’s stories, rhetorical analysis draws meaning from political speeches, television programs, songs, websites, theatrical productions, films, monuments, and various other cultural and popular texts (Hart & Daughton, 2004, p. 13). For this project, rhetorical criticism has allowed me to look beyond the script and storyline in order to analyze performance as a rhetorical text.

72 James R. Andrews (1983) explains the role of a rhetorical critic in detail. He

observes that “a critic is a specialist and must be able to communicate to others the results

of his or her critical observation and inquiry” (p. 5). He argues that a critic is, in a sense,

an educator who confronts a message. Andrews notes that “the critic seeks to understand what is going on in order to interpret more fully the rhetorical dynamics involved in the production and reception of the message” (p. 6). Raymie McKerrow (1989) also examines the role of the rhetorical critic. McKerrow suggests that “The focus [of rhetorical criticism] is upon the critic’s activity as a statement; the critic as inventor [of rhetorical texts] becomes arguer or advocate for the interpretation of collected fragments

[of discourse]” (p. 108). While Andrews’ view of the critic as educator may seem at odds with McKerrow’s view of the critic as advocate, I believe that the rhetorical critic may serve both of these roles at the same time. It is my hope that this dissertation will both educate readers about how political messages may be constructed through musical theatre and advocate for using theatrical performance as a medium for the construction of political messages in the future.

Stephen H. Browne (2007) points out that rhetorical criticism is “one means through which we expose our structure or reasoning, acknowledge the agency of our

interlocutors, and sustain our commitment to the ongoing practice of argument itself” (p.

109). Rhetorical criticism involves creating a logical argument about a specific text, and

providing evidence for the argument. As previously mentioned, there are many

arguments that can be made from Wicked as a rhetorical text. As Stacy Wolf (2007,

2008) has argued, the musical can be viewed through the lenses of Queer Theory and the

Diva. I have looked at the musical from various lenses as well, including women’s

73 humor stereotypes and friendship. In this dissertation, I argue that social protest and

social control messages are portrayed in the musical, and I provide evidence throughout

this dissertation to defend this claim.

One may ask: What exactly is rhetoric? Aristotle (1991) defined rhetoric as “the

faculty of observing, in any given case, the available means of persuasion.” In her chapter

in Bauer and Gaskill’s Qualitative Research with Text, Sound, and Image (2000), Joan

Leach offers some working definitions of rhetoric, including “the act of persuasion,” “the

analysis of the acts of persuasion,” or “a worldview about the persuasive power of

discourse” (p. 207). Andrews (1983) suggests that the “prime function of rhetoric is to

interpret and make meaningful what is the process of happening” (p. 9). McGee (1990)

also reminds us that rhetoric consists of multiple voices that emerge through textual

fragments. Personally, I believe that rhetoric is the process of co-creating meanings in a

persuasive text (completed or fragmented) that was intended for a specific audience at a

specific time. This is not to say that messages cannot transcend place and time; it is merely to say that context is an important component in any persuasive text. I believe that context includes time, place, historical background of the text, and societal or political events going on at the time the text was written, delivered or produced. As

Browne (2001) observes, both textual and contextual details must be taken into account in order to make sense of a text (p. 332). Enos (2006) suggests that “understanding discourse within its situational and cultural context may indeed be the single greatest contribution to rhetorical criticism” (p. 357). While the meanings formed through rhetorical criticism may transcend to other situations, those meanings can only be created by considering context in relationship to the text. For this dissertation, I look at context in

74 two ways. Primarily, I examine context as it is situated in the larger discourse of The

Wizard of Oz. I look at how the performance of Wicked changes meanings from the original text and how it expands issues in the original Baum novel. Furthermore, I also take context concerning the time and place into account. Specifically, I take into account the political happenings that were going on at the time Schwartz and Holzman wrote the musical and historical political events that happened prior to Schwartz & Holzman’s writing of the musical.

Performance Studies

This dissertation also intersects the area of performance studies. Performance studies is a broad, interdisciplinary field that encompasses history, anthropology,

German, English, political science, philosophy, comparative literature, theatre, women’s studies, African-American studies, cultural studies, and communication (Espinola, 1998;

Fenske, 2007; Schechner, 1988). In fact, because performance studies as a field is so interdisciplinary, it “defies easy classification” (Carlson, 2001, p. 141).

Performance studies bridges “art and study” (Mock & Way, 2005); it integrates professional theatrical performance with analysis done by scholars. Dwight Conquergood

(1992) describes performance studies as “the new frontier for staking joint claims to poetics and persuasion, pleasure and power, in the interests of community and critique, solidarity and resistance” (p. 80). He notes that performance is “the nexus between the playful and the political” (p. 80). Furthermore, David E. R. George (1996) argues that performance includes both “carrying out” and “presentation” elements (p. 16). The

“carrying-out” is described as “performing a task according to pre-determined criteria”

75 (Lavery, 2005), while the “presentation” element involves creating and performing an

aesthetic object of action for an audience.

Performance studies can include theatrical performances, performances of

identity, and cultural performances. Klope (1994) suggests that “performance studies

investigate how marginalized groups use performance in their own struggle to maintain

cultural identity” (p. 49). The field also includes performances that fall under the

theoretical perspectives of Kenneth Burke’s (1966) dramatism and Erving Goffman’s

(1959) dramaturgy. Burke’s (1966) dramatistic theory tells us that life is a play, complete

with action, conflict, and victimage (pp. 54-55). Goffman (1959) explains that we all put

on performances everyday in order to manage our appearance in front of others.

Performance studies are important to study because, as Eric Rosen (1998) observes, live

performance, which he describes as theatrical performance, can often “exceed in impact

the intentions of its creators” (p. 84). Thus, performance is an accumulation of the intent

of who created it, the message itself, and the reception and understanding of the audience

who experiences it. As Dwight Conquergood (1998) notes, “a performance paradigm struggles to recuperate the saying from the said, to put mobility, action, and agency back

into play” (p. 31, emphasis Conquergood’s). Arguing that performance blends both

artistic and analytical elements of scholarship, Conquergood (2002) suggests that

performance can be thought of in a number of ways, including “(1) as the work of

imagination, as an object of study, (2) as the pragmatics of inquiry…and (3) as the tactics

of intervention, an alternative space of struggle” (p. 152). He suggests that performance

involves creativity, critique, and citizenship. Indeed, performance is concerned with

aesthetics, action, agency and audience.

76 Conquergood (2002) further explains that “performance studies [as a field]

struggles to open the space between analysis and action, and to pull the pin on the binary opposition between theory and practice” (p. 145). He discusses that performance includes three main components: Accomplishment, analysis and articulation.

Accomplishment is the creative element of performance, and it involves embodiment, aesthetic form, and “the making of art and the remaking of culture” (p. 152). Analysis includes the interpretation and critical element of performance; it involves “thinking about, through, and with performance” (p. 152). Articulation is the activism component to performance, and it seeks communication and connection with a community. In this dissertation, I analyze the messages about leadership, hegemony, and social movement rhetoric, and then articulate that through my writing, and hopefully later, through publication.

Rhetorical studies and performance studies can work hand-in-hand. Performances are indeed rhetorical, and rhetoric is also performative (Cherwitz & Darwin, 1995). As

Bakhtin (1986) suggests, any rhetorical action is performative because it fulfills expectation and represents values. Even neo-classical rhetoricians note the connection between performance and rhetoric; for example, Wong (2008) points out that “rhetoric is actualized not just in the written speech, but in performance, in the way it is presented before an audience” (p. 186). In fact, rhetoric and performance studies share a common history: Carlson (2001) explains that “the study of theatre began in departments of

oratory” (p. 137). He notes that speech, theatre, and the study of dramatic texts (which

later became the field of performance studies) were all situated in the department of

English literature initially. Therefore, communication studies, and especially rhetorical

77 studies, which descended from oratory, is historically linked with performance and

theatre studies.

It is important to note that performance can work hand-in-hand with text to form a

more complete picture of the phenomenon being studied. Jill Dolan (1993) suggests that

“perhaps the most distinctive contribution of performance studies is to expand even further the scope of the textual object” (p. 430). Conquergood (1998) discusses the links

between text and performance in his article in the National Communication Association’s

book, The Future of Performance Studies: Visions and Revisions. Conquergood argues

that “performance as both an object and a method will be most useful if it interrogates

and de-centers, without discarding, the text” (p. 33). He suggests that we think of

performance as a “complement, supplement, alternative, and critique of inscribed texts”

(p. 33). In this dissertation, I have sought to study the performances of Wicked in this manner: As complements, supplements, and alternatives to the script, lyrics and other forms of inscribed text.

Three Performances

As an interpretivist with a postmodern perspective, I believe that each performance is worthy of its own study because each performance offers something unique that cannot be completely replicated. However, because the performance study

part of my dissertation requires me to compare and contrast performances in order to see

how performance can change, diminish or create political messages, I have chosen to

examine three performances. I would have liked to have examined more performances,

but because of time and monetary constraints, I chose to study three.

78 First, I chose American productions of the show for two reasons. The first is that

international productions, such as those in London or Tokyo, would bring with them a different set of cultural norms that might offer different meanings. While it would be interesting to study these, I needed to limit my dissertation to a specific context. Second, it was simply too costly to travel internationally without outside funding. Next, I chose to

see the Broadway production because Broadway is the quintessential place to see musical

theatre in the United States, and I chose Chicago because the show has been exceptionally popular in that city and had a very long run in Chicago. Both of these cities were also fairly accessible; it is only a short flight to New York and Chicago. Finally, the third production, in Pittsburgh, was of the national touring company. Unlike the New

York and Chicago productions, the touring company stays in a city for only a few weeks, and then travels to a different city; therefore, the sets aren’t “fixed.” I wanted to see the touring company to see if it differed significantly from the “fixed” shows. I chose

Pittsburgh because it is my hometown, it is easily accessible and it was relatively inexpensive.

Broadening Cluster Criticism

As mentioned previously, I have chosen to broaden the research method of cluster criticism in order to apply it to performative texts. In this section, I explain my rationale for doing so, as well as provide a step-by-step description of how I approached this method. This section will explain why I have taken on the responsibility of broadening this method of rhetorical criticism.

79 Rationale

I wish to broaden the scope of cluster criticism because I do not believe that

traditional cluster criticism can account for the performative aspects of a text. I believe

that vocabulary goes beyond words. The music, dance, costumes, scenery, and props in a

performance are all part of this vocabulary. Therefore, combining these vocabularies, and

not simply relying on a vocabulary of written or spoken words, requires me to extend

cluster criticism in a way that may not rely simply on the words in the script.

In Attitudes Toward History (1959), Burke tells us that “significance is gained by noting what subjects cluster about other subjects” (p. 232). He notes that clustering allow for the transcendence of a symbol, image, idea, or “vessel” (p. 233-234). This “vessel” can hold different meanings, and Burke tells us that it is not “complete” until it is put into a cluster. This clustering causes transcendence to occur, giving meaning to the

“vessel.” Previous research has suggested that the “vessel” be a word or term; however,

Burke does not define the “vessel” as such. In fact, he does not define “vessel” at all.

Therefore, I propose that the “vessel” be any idea, concept, symbol, image, or performative element that may provide meaning.

Burke also discusses cluster criticism in Philosophy of Literary Form (1941). He describes clusters as “what kinds of acts and images and personalities and situations go with [an author’s] notions of heroism, villainy, consolation, despair, etc” (p. 20). He further notes that cluster criticism causes one to be aware of “interrelationships among all

these equations” (p. 20). Cluster criticism allows one to form meanings by building

bridges. It is clear that Burke’s idea of cluster criticism provides meaning through the

80 interconnectedness of “vessels.” It is this interconnectedness that drew me to use an

extension of cluster criticism in this dissertation.

Burke also notes that acts are often “symbolic” or “representative” (p. 25). He

uses Clifford Odets’ play Golden Boy as an example to illustrate symbolic action. In

Golden Boy, the violin represents the protagonist while the prizefight represents the antagonist. While the examples of a violin and a prizefight suggest that symbolic action

must occur through a physical item, Burke explains that this is not the case. He notes that

a critic can look for symbolic action in kinaesthetic imagery such as eating and walking,

sensory imagery such as growth and stability, relationships such as those between family

members and friends, and abstract images such as upheavals and chasms (pp. 33-35).

Burke is primarily applying symbolic action to literature, but in his analysis of Golden

Boy, it is clear that symbolic action does occur in performances and should be analyzed in

order to understand meanings in performative texts.

Furthermore, Burke suggests that critics not limit themselves to studying only the

text at hand. In his discussion of Golden Boy, he suggests that critics look at other Odets

plays in order to create clusters to provide meaning. When discussing his analysis of

Coleridge’s poetry, he notes “there are so many points at which we, as readers, ‘cut in’ –

otherwise, the poem would not affect us, would not communicate.” He encourages critics

to search for “private elements,” or things that may have influenced the author. He states,

“If a critic prefers to restrict the rules of critical analysis that these private

elements are excluded, that is his right. I see no formal or categorical objection

to criticism so conceived. But if his interest happens to be in the structure of the

poetic act, he will use everything that is available – and would even consider it a

81 kind of vandalism to exclude certain material that Coleridge left, basing such

exclusion upon some conventions as to the ideal of criticism. The main ideal, as

I conceive it, is to use all there is to use. And merely because some ancient

author has left us scant biographical material, I do not see why we should

confine our study of the modern author, who has left us rich biographical

material, to the same coordinates as we should apply in studying the work of an

ancient author. If there is any slogan that should reign among critical precepts, it

is that ‘circumstances alter occasions’” (p. 23)

This statement offers two primary insights. The first is that we should use “all there is to use” when conducting cluster criticism. Burke appears to define this as biographical material and material from the same author’s additional works, but it likely includes performative elements of a text when taken in conjunction with the second insight. The second insight is that “circumstances alter occasions.” In the twenty-first century, many rhetorical texts are performative, whether live or mediated electronically.

The circumstances of these texts are different than the circumstances of a poetry book.

Therefore, we must alter the way we study texts in order to “use all there is to use” and gain a greater understanding of the meanings within texts.

Similarly, if we use Burke’s words in his Grammar of Motives (1969) as a metaphor, it is clear that we must adapt any research method to the text that we are studying. Burke states, “It is a principle of drama that the nature of acts and agents should be consistent with the nature of the scene” (p. 3). If the “nature of our scene” is performative, should we not broaden a method so that it would be consistent with that nature? I argue that if I had confined myself to only using terms that are explicitly stated

82 in the script, I would have limited my analysis unnecessarily to terms that are in the script, thus ignoring the vocabulary that emerges from performance elements. As Burke states, “terrain determines tactics” (p. 12), and in this case, the performative nature of the terrain led me to broaden the method of cluster criticism. One might observe that my extension of cluster criticism appears to be a combination of cluster criticism and thematic analysis. Indeed, it is. Like traditional cluster criticism, I began with a set word or phrase. Yet unlike traditional cluster criticism, I allowed clusters to emerge on their own, in the same way that themes emerge on their own in thematic analysis. However, my extension of cluster criticism differs from thematic analysis in two distinct ways.

First, I began with a pre-determined term or phrase for each analysis. Thematic analysis does not begin with pre-determined themes. Second, thematic analysis does not always allow for easy connections between themes. My extension of cluster criticism, on the other hand, forced me to make connections between concepts in order to form clusters and make meanings. As Foss (1996) observes, cluster criticism often involves other methods of rhetorical criticism, such as metaphoric criticism or feminist criticism. My extension of cluster criticism incorporates thematic criticism into the method. Because of the various layers of text with which I was working, and because of my previous experience with music and theatre, my extension of cluster criticism allowed me to find more nuances and make more connections than thematic analysis would have allowed me to do.

A Step-By-Step Description of my Extension of Cluster Criticism

In order to analyze each text for each chapter, I first gathered pens and paper and began by examining the New York performance script. In each chapter, I began my

83 analysis with a key term or phrase, and began to look for any emerging concepts or

examples that related to the key term or phrase. For chapter four, my key term was

“hegemony.” For chapter five, my key phrase was “militant social movement leadership.”

Finally, for chapter six, my key phrase was “Glinda as a leader.” The key terms/phrases

were chosen by my specific focus on hegemony, social movement characteristics and

tactics, and leadership.

One might ask how I arrived at these terms and phrases to begin my analysis.

This was done through the method of abduction. Abduction is “a reasoning process

invoked to explain a puzzling observation” (Aliseda, 2006, p. 28). Aliseda notes that

“abduction is thinking from evidence to explanation, a type of reasoning characteristic of many different situations with incomplete information” (p. 28). Abduction, originally coined by Charles S. Peirce in the early twentieth century (Aliseda, 2006; Krauss, 2003;

Thagard & Shelley, 1997; Wirth, 1998), has been described as “reasoning backwards”

(Wirth, 1998), has been compared to Aristotle’s enthymeme (Krauss,2003), and serves to

unify concepts (Thagard & Shelley, 1997).

Peirce (1935) notes that abduction works in this way:

The surprising fact, C, is observed.

But if A were true, C would be a matter of course.

Hence, there is reason to suspect that A is true.

Abduction as a method would then have the researcher return to theory to see if

there is additional reason to believe that A is true. An example in Wicked would be as

follows:

84 Dr. Dillamond, a renowned professor at Shiz University, is taken away and

forbidden to teach because he is a Goat.

If hegemony that oppresses Animals existed in Oz, it would make sense why an

Animal would be forbidden to teach at an Ozian university.

Therefore, there is reason to suspect that Oz is indeed a hegemonic society.

This logic then caused me to return to the literature on hegemony and check the

definitions and descriptions of the word. The literature allowed me to see that my logic

made sense and that hegemony is indeed a meaning that one can derive from Wicked.

This was my process in determining which terms and phrases with which to begin

my analyses. After seeing the performances of Wicked, certain terms and phrases

emerged as possible lenses with which to conduct the analysis. I then went back to the

literature to make sure that these terms and phrases did in fact align with what I

experienced in the text. In some cases, words were actually written and spoken in the

script, as in the case of “leadership.” In other cases, I had to rely on a vocabulary that

went beyond words, as in the case of “hegemony.” While there moments in which

hegemony manifested itself, such as the example described above or when the students

remain silent when they see “Animals should be seen and not heard,” these moments

were expressed through performative aspects, rather than through words.

For each analysis chapter, I read through the script and identified themes relating

to the key term/phrase. For example, when I began reading through the script with the

hegemony lens, the cluster of “Madame Morrible as sycophant” emerged very quickly.

Some clusters took much longer to emerge, such as “Elphaba as scapegoat.” I wrote down each cluster and drew a box around it to remind myself that it was a cluster, and not

85 simply an example. Examples that related to each theme were clustered around the

corresponding box with lines connecting the theme to the example. Sub-clusters

sometimes resulted from this part of the analysis. Sub-clusters were written as examples,

but had examples branching off from them to designate them as sub-clusters rather than

mere examples. Any examples resulting from the script were designated with the letter

“S” and the corresponding page number. Please see Appendix D for an example of this

part of the process.

After completing this process with the script, I then repeated it with each set of

fieldnotes. Because I looked at the script, performances, sheet music, and cast recording

as one fragmented rhetorical text, concepts and examples from each performance were

recorded on the same paper that the script analysis was recorded. I analyzed each set of

fieldnotes for each chapter in the order in which they were recorded: The Chicago performance, followed by the Pittsburgh performance, and then finally the New York

Broadway performance. This was to provide me with a sense of continuity as I

completed this analysis. For instance, in my Pittsburgh fieldnotes, I often came across the

phrase “same as Chicago performance.” Without analyzing the Chicago performance fieldnotes first, I would not know what this means. Any examples resulting from the

fieldnotes from a specific performance were documented with a specific abbreviation and

a page number. Examples from the Chicago fieldnotes were designated by the letters

“CHI,” examples from the Pittsburgh fieldnotes were designated by the letters “PGH,” and examples from the Broadway fieldnotes were designated by the letters “NY.” I then

repeated the same process by examining the sheet music at the same time I listened to the

cast recording. It was helpful to work with these two parts of the text at the same time

86 because I could listen to what I was reading in the sheet music. The two pieces complemented each other well. Concepts, examples and clusters drawn from the sheet music and cast recording were recorded on the same paper that the analyses of the script and performances were recorded. Examples resulting from the cast recording were designated by the letters “CR” and examples resulting from the sheet music were designated by the letters “SM.”

There are a number of characteristics that I looked for when examining my multiple textual fragments of Wicked. These characteristics included, but are not limited to:

• Voice intonation and inflection

• Voice volume

• Placement and use of props

• Song lyrics

• Spoken text

• Costuming

• Tempo, melody, harmony and repetition of music

• Keys and key changes in music

• Changes in character’s voice parts when singing

• Placement and use of scenery

• Physical body movement and gestures of actors

After all components of the text were analyzed, I transcribed the messy analysis notes into an orderly outline format. Sub-clusters were listed under each major cluster relating to the key word or phrase, and examples were listed under each sub-cluster or 87 major cluster, depending on to which it corresponded. The letters and page numbers

designating which part of the text the example was from were included in the outline

format of the analysis. Please see Appendix E for an example of this part of the process.

Using the outline format of the analysis and occasionally using the handwritten

analysis for reference, I wrote each of the analysis chapters by examining each cluster

and the sub-cluster and examples that clustered around it. Occasionally, but not often, I

found that through the process of writing, new sub-clusters emerged within a particular cluster. For example, when writing the hegemonic strategies section of Chapter 4, I found that the nine sub-themes could be clusters into two categories: Strategies for gaining consent and Strategies primarily using force. In the rare cases when this occurred,

I re-wrote the section in the typed outline as well as made the changes to the written analysis. Please see Appendix F for an example of such changes. A complete typed outline of the analyses is provided in Appendix G.

When writing this dissertation, I arranged the clusters in a manner that seemed easiest for the reader to follow. For Chapter 4, clusters were arranged topically to minimize the repetition of scenes and songs. For Chapter 5 and 6, clusters were arranged chronologically. This was done because Chapters 5 and 6 follow the journey of a main character in order to provide insights about militant or conservative social movement leadership.

It was through this process that I am able to draw insights about Wicked and its

messages about leadership, hegemony, and social movements. It is my hope that while

providing insights about the show and these messages, I can also offer a worthwhile

extension of cluster criticism to the rhetorical scholarly community.

88 CHAPTER 4: SILENCING THE ANIMALS – HEGEMONY IN WICKED

At the end of the first act during the Broadway performance of Wicked on July 11,

2009, the Wizard of Oz, played by P.J. Benjamin, urged Elphaba, played by Nicole

Parker, to cast what she believes is a levitation spell on the Wizard’s pet Monkey,

Chistery, who was played by understudy Brian Wanee (Act 1 Scene 13). However, the

Wizard and his new press secretary, Madame Morrible, played by Rondi Reed, tricked

Elphaba into casting a spell that caused Chistery and the other Monkeys to sprout wings and fly. When Elphaba cast the spell, the Monkeys shrieked in pain, running around the stage, as the Time Dragon at the top of the proscenium moved back and forth with its eyes blazing red. In fact, everything on stage became red, which appears to symbolize evil in the musical.

“Such wing span!” Reed as Madame Morrible declared grandiosely after admiring the flying Monkeys. “Oh, won’t they make perfect spies!”

Parker’s eyes widened, signifying that Elphaba is horrified. “Spies?”

“You’re right, that’s a harsh word,” Benjamin as Wizard replied. “What about scouts? That’s what they’ll be really. They’ll fly around Oz, and report any subversive

Animal activity…”

Parker stiffened her stance; Elphaba can’t believe what she’s just heard. “So it’s you?” she asked. “You’re behind it all?”

Benjamin used a calm, explanatory tone in his voice that made his character sound like a father explaining a difficult concept to a stubborn young child. “Elphaba, when I first got here, there was discord and discontent. And where I come from, everyone knows: The best way to bring folks together is to give them a really good enemy.”

89 Parker clenched her fists, showing that Elphaba’s anger increased as her eyes

begin to open to the reality of the situation. “You can’t read this book at all, can you?”

she accused. “That’s why you need an enemy! And spies. And cages. You have no real

power!”

“Exactly,” Benjamin admitted with a serious tone in his voice. “And that’s why I

need you!”

As an audience member, I found this performance to be quite effective.

Benjamin’s calm, fatherly demeanor seemed to contrast the Time Dragon’s blazing red

eyes and mechanical movements – and yet, the two are part of the same regime. Parker’s

reaction to her character’s discovery also contributed to the scene; her initial shock and

amazement were more believable than if, for example, she had chosen to immediately become enraged. The various aspects of the production – the acting, the scenery, and the

props – came together in this scene to provide the audience with an entertaining

performance that illustrates hegemony.

As this scene illustrates, Wicked recreates the Wizard of Oz as a cowardly, inept

hegemon who enlists the help of a power-hungry social-climber, Madame Morrible, to do

his dirty work of oppressing a particular social class in Oz. While Winnie Holzman, who

adjusted Gregory Maguire’s novel to appeal to theatrical audiences, had noted that her

version of the Wizard of Oz included elements of both former President George W. Bush

and former President Bill Clinton (Cote, 2005, p. 36), the Wizard is not a critique of

either one of these political figures entirely. Rather, it seems that the Wizard of Oz is a

character that serves to warn the theatrical audience of the dangers of power corruption in

general.

90 As explained in Chapter 3, the key term “hegemony,” with which I began this analysis, emerged through abductive logic from a number of performative elements of the musical. While it is almost impossible to name all these performative elements because they are so vast in number, there were several that emerged as very strong examples of hegemony. Among these elements were the situation of Dr. Dillamond’s dismissal from

Shiz University and the words “Animals should be seen and not heard” on the blackboard, as described in Chapter 3. Additional elements that led me to “hegemony” as a key term included the forbidding tone and repeated notes in the song “Something Bad,” the use of the term “scapegoat” in Dr. Dillamond’s lecture, the visual performance of several chorus members playing Animals who held hard labor positions and seemed unhappy doing so, and the Shiz students’ silence when Dr. Dillamond dismissed his class because of the anti-Animal message on the blackboard. Please note that this is not an exhaustive list, and that it was many of these performative elements in combination with each other that led me to choose “hegemony” as a key term for my analysis.

After completing a cluster analysis as described in the previous chapter, I found a number of themes clustering around the concept of hegemony. Specifically, these clusters primarily fell into two distinct categories concerning hegemony: Tools used by the hegemon and strategies used by the hegemon. A third overarching cluster that permits these other clusters and sub-clusters to emerge is the Ozian public’s lack of concern for anything that does not directly affect them. However, before I discuss these clusters, it is important to define hegemony as it will be discussed in this chapter.

Borrowing from Steve Chan’s (2008) essay in Davis B. Bobrow’s book,

Hegemony Constrained, I define a hegemon as “a institution, nation or collective entity

91 that wantonly abuses its power” (adapted from Chan, 2008, p. 63). While most political

theories and sociology readings discuss hegemons as countries, institutions, or other large

collective entities, I choose to focus on two hegemonic leaders that make up the hegemon

of the Ozian government: The Wizard of Oz and Madame Morrible. Although the Wizard

and Madame Morrible are part of the same regime, each character offers a different view

of hegemonic leaders, which will be discussed at the end of this chapter.

I also frame this analysis using Ernesto Laclau’s explanation of hegemony. Laclau

(2000) argues that “hegemony…defines the very terrain in which a political relation is

actually constituted” (p. 44). This is indeed the case for Wicked: All political relations in

the musical are intertwined with hegemony. In this chapter, I will discuss how public

apathy enables a hegemonic state to maintain its power and silence dissenters, as well as

how hegemonic leaders use many different strategies and tools to achieve their goals.

In order for a hegemon to exist, there must be a group that is being oppressed by

that hegemon. In Wicked, a lower social class consisting of thinking, communicating

Animals suffers at the hands of the Wizard’s regime. Furthermore, the oppression faced by Ozian Animals is only possible through the consent of the citizenry. The Ozian public

is apathetic towards anything that does not directly concern them. It is with this cluster

that I will begin my analysis.

Apathy in Ozian Society

The apathy of the Ozian public is revealed primarily through the character of

Fiyero in the first act. Fiyero, a trouble-making prince from Oz’s Vinku province who

has been kicked out of every school he has ever attended, arrives in a sawhorse carriage

reminiscent of Baum’s second Oz book, The Marvelous Land of Oz, and quickly

92 encourages the other students to stop studying and start “dancing through life.” Fiyero is a carefree party boy, and in the Chicago production, he is played very much like a stereotypical frat guy seen in popular American movies. Fiyero’s only solo21 in the show exemplifies apathy (Act 1 Scene 5). In an upbeat, major key, he sings:

“Dancing through life, skimming the surface, gliding where turf is smooth.

Life’s more painless for the brainless. Why think too hard when it’s so soothing,

dancing through life? No need to tough it when you can sluff it off as I do.

Nothing matters, but knowing nothing matters. It’s just life, so keep dancing

through. Dancing through life, swaying and sweeping, and always keeping cool.

Life is fraughtless when you’re thoughtless. Those who don’t try never look

foolish. Dancing through life, mindless and careless. Make sure you’re where

less trouble is rife. Woes are fleeting, blows are glancing, when you’re dancing

through life.”

At first, one may dismiss Fiyero’s lyrics as simply a carefree happy-go-lucky character encouraging his classmates to worry less and have more fun. However, when taken into context with other themes and examples in the musical, it’s clear that this upbeat don’t-worry-be-happy song actually has deeper implications. By encouraging his classmates not to think about things that upset them, he turns his back on the oppression of the Animals, thus contributing to the hegemony in the country. Hegemony cannot occur without the public consent. If the public chooses to ignore issues that trouble them, they are, in a way, giving their consent for such problems to exist.

21 Fiyero sings the first several verses of “Dancing through Life” solo before a chorus enters the song and continues to the end. Fiyero sings a love ballad with Elphaba in Act II (“As Long as You’re Mine”), but it is a duet, not a solo. 93 This apathy is further illustrated in the reactions of the class in the Pittsburgh and

New York performances when Dr. Dillamond turns the blackboard around and sees that someone has written “Animals should be seen and not heard” in large red letters (Act 1

Scene 4). In the Chicago production, the Ozian students were ashamed and hung their heads. In the other two performances, however, they were silent with blank expressions on their faces. Some of them may support the statement and simply do not want to own up to it in class. Some of them may feel sympathy for Dr. Dillamond, for whom the statement was clearly intended; he is, in fact, the only Animal on the faculty. However, the blank stares on their faces suggest apathy more than either of these previous two possibilities. It is this apathy that allows the hegemonic regime to oppress Animals without having to justify this oppression to a concerned public.

This sub-section has explained how the apathy of the Ozian public leads to the oppression of Animals. The next sub-section discusses specific strategies and tools that the Wizard’s hegemonic regime uses in Wicked to obtain its goals.

Strategies and Tools of Hegemonic Rule

This analysis revealed multiple strategies and tools used by hegemons and hegemonic leaders to gain or maintain control over their populace. Tools of hegemonic rule are tangible, physical objects used for hegemonic means. Like strategies (Browne,

2005), tools of hegemonic rule can only be used by a dominant group or a hegemon, not

by the oppressed group. Examples in theatre, and specifically in Wicked, may include

scenery, costumes, props, visual projections, and even specific characters. Tools can

work hand-in-hand with strategies; the two are not mutually exclusive. Often tools are

used as part of a hegemonic strategy; a tool may be used along with a strategy in order to

94 accomplish a goal. Strategies are methods and forms of communication used by the hegemon in order to maintain political power and to obtain their goals.

Twelve strategies were used by hegemonic leaders in Wicked: Naming,

contextualizing, legal sanctions, bargaining with the opposition, identification and the use

of public admiration, hiding weaknesses, aligning with those in power, scapegoating,

threatening potential dissenters, creating fear and spreading false rumors about the

opposition, silencing and “brainwashing” dissenters, and destroying those closest to the

dissenter. Five of these strategies use tools as a means of accomplishing hegemonic

goals: Labels are used as part of the naming strategy, the Time Dragon Clock is used as

part of the legal sanctions strategy, a loudspeaker is used as a part of the spreading

rumors strategy, the giant mechanical golden head is used as part of the public admiration

strategy, and the Wizard’s guards are used as part of the silencing dissenters strategy.

Three of these strategies, naming, contextualizing and legal sanctions, directly parallel

three of Murphy’s (2001) four hegemonic strategies; therefore, I will refer to them by

Murphy’s names for them.

John Murphy (2001) coined these three strategies (naming, contextualizing, and

legal sanctioning) in his article examining the Kennedy administration’s rhetoric

regarding the Freedom Rides. I will begin this section by discussing how these three

strategies are played out in Wicked. Of the remaining nine strategies, six are public

strategies used to gain consent, and three are strategies using force. I will discuss what I

refer to as the “consent strategies” before moving on to the “force strategies.”

95 Naming

The first strategy that the hegemonic regime uses to silence dissenters and

maintain its power is what Murphy calls “naming.” Naming allows the hegemonic group

to re-name the oppressed group in an unfavorable way (pp. 400-403). Murphy notes that

the labels given to events are “critical in shaping the meaning of those events” (p. 401).

Similarly, the labels given to people can shape the meaning those figures hold for the

public. For example, Sarachild (1978) discusses how radical second-wave feminists who

were participating in the process of consciousness-raising were re-named by their

opponents as “man-haters.” “When we merely brought up concrete examples in our lives

of discrimination, or exploitation of women, we were accused of ‘man-hating’ and ‘sour

grapes’” (p. 147), Sarachild describes. She also notes that the feminists’ meetings were

re-named “coffee klatches, hen parties, and bitch sessions” (p. 147). By using labels,

hegemonic leaders can name dissenters in a negative way.

In Wicked, Elphaba is re-named by the Wizard, Madame Morrible, and rumor- believing Ozians throughout the show. The Wizard, using the giant mechanical head he uses to impress his constituents, calls her a “fugitive at large” when she runs off with the

Grimmerie (Act 1 Scene 13); in reality, she is just a young woman who feels betrayed by someone she idolized, and she only wants to help the Animals. However, Madame

Morrible takes naming farther when she announces:

“Citizens of Oz! There is an enemy who must be found and captured. Believe

nothing she says! She’s evil, responsible for the mutilation of these poor

innocent Monkeys! Her green skin is but an outward manifestation of her

96 twisted nature. This distortion, this repulsion, this…Wicked Witch!” (Act 1

Scene 13)

In all three of the productions I observed, Morrible’s voice echoed to show that she was using a loudspeaker that all of Oz could hear. Her voice was also harsh- sounding and vehement; there is hatred in her tone. Most importantly, she re-names

Elphaba the Wicked Witch of the West. By re-naming Elphaba a Wicked Witch,

Morrible turns public opinion against Elphaba. A young woman with green skin may be likeable, but a “wicked witch” is to be hated and feared.

To further support her argument that Elphaba is a “wicked witch,” Madame

Morrible suggests that Elphaba’s green skin is a result of her wickedness. This argument reflects one of Laclau’s (2000) dimensions of hegemonic relations: The use of empty signifiers that makes particulars appear to represent the universal. The empty signifier here is Elphaba’s skin color; Elphaba’s skin color does not represent evil or good. It is simply due to her unusual birth origins: Elphaba is, as Madame Morrible later declares,

“a child of both worlds.” As Stacy Wolf (2008) points out, Elphaba’s skin does not even symbolize race or disability. However, Madame Morrible makes a generalization to provide an explanation for Elphaba’s unusual skin color. The Ozian public does not question this explanation, because 1) they have been led to believe that Elphaba is wicked by a regime that they support, and 2) they have never seen anyone else with green skin, so they have no previous meaning associated with that signifier.

In the second act, another example of naming occurs. The Wizard explains the hegemonic function of naming in his song, “Wonderful,” as well (Act 2 Scene 3). In this scene, the Wizard has offered a truce to Elphaba, and when she criticizes him for lying to

97 the citizens of Oz, he explains that, where he is from, people believe “all sorts of things

that aren’t true,” and call it “history.” He sings in a light-hearted soft-shoe tap style: “A

man’s called a traitor, or a liberator. A rich man’s a thief, or philanthropist. Is one a

crusader, or ruthless invader? It’s all in which label is able to persist.” Here, the Wizard

notes that those in power determine what is true and what is false. Therefore, one

hegemonic function that those in power use to quiet dissenters is by re-naming them with

an unfavorable label.

Contextualization

The second hegemonic strategy that Murphy (2001) identifies is

“contextualization.” Murphy explains that “a hegemonic response to a social movement

transforms the context from one that is favorable to the agitators to one that limits them”

(p. 403). Contextualization occurs when the hegemonic force associates the dissenters or their values with something negative; for example, Murphy observes that the Kennedy administration emphasized that the Freedom Riders took America’s focus off of the fight against Communism (p. 403). This strategy is prominent in the first scene of Act II,

when Madame Morrible has just announced Glinda’s surprise engagement to Fiyero, the

Captain of the Guard who is really in love with Elphaba (Act 2 Scene 1). Madame

Morrible re-tells the story of Glinda’s rise to power through song, and, as Fiyero aptly

notes, it’s nothing like the real story, which Glinda had told him previously. Morrible

declares,

“The day you were first summoned to an audience with Oz, and although he

would not tell you why initially, when you bowed before his throne, he decreed

you’d hence be known as Glinda the Good officially! Then with a jealous

98 squeal the Wicked Witch burst from concealment, where she had been lurking

surreptitiously!”

Morrible had to recontexualize the story in order to portray Elphaba in a negative

light and Glinda in a positive light. Instead of portraying Elphaba as a talented student

with promise who was the one initially asked to see the Wizard22, Morrible tells a story that frames Elphaba as a jealous, sneaky person. This allows her to silence her opposition (Elphaba) by discrediting her.

Legal Sanctions

The third hegemonic strategy found in Wicked that was initially described by

Murphy (2001) is legal sanctions. Legal sanctions are often used by the hegemonic group in order to benefit themselves; the same laws may be applied differently to the hegemonic group than when they are applied to the dissenting group (p. 404). Legal sanctions against

Animals, as well as against Elphaba, in the musical emerge in both acts. The first example of these legal sanctions occurs when Dr. Dillamond is no longer permitted to teach at the university, simply because he is a Goat. As he says goodbye to his class, government officials drag him offstage, screaming, “Come on, Goat!” (Act 1 Scene 8).

This demeaning statement to an esteemed professor is further evidence of the discrimination put in place by the legal sanctions. Another government official presents the students with a Lion cub in a cage immediately after Dillamond is removed from the classroom, and explains that “one of the benefits of a caging a Lion cub this young is that he will never, in fact, learn to speak.” In the musical, legal sanctions against the oppressed group go hand-in-hand with the silencing of them.

22 Glinda has no power at sorcery, and merely tagged along with her friend Elphaba in order to see the Emerald City. 99 The Time Dragon Clock, a tool of hegemony, also serves as a means for imposing

legal sanctions. This foreboding timepiece features a giant mechanical dragon that sits at

the top of the proscenium and flaps its wings (Act 1 Scene 1; Act 1 Scene 2; Act 1 Scene

13; Act 2 Prologue; Act 2 Scene 3; Act 2 Scene 6). Its eyes shine bright red, denoting evil

and its connection with the Wizard’s regime. While the clock plays a significant role in

Maguire’s book (indeed, it is the birthplace of Elphaba in the novel), it takes on a much

smaller role in the musical. In fact, it is only mentioned once in the show, albeit by a member of the regime. When Dr. Dillamond is taken away, a government official steps in

to teach his class. The official tells the students, “More and more, everyday, with each

tick of the Time Dragon Clock, in every corner of our Great Oz, one hears the Silence of

Progress” (Act 1 Scene 8). The Time Dragon Clock is projected against the back curtain,

and its runs to the thirteenth hour, not the twelfth. The clock serves as a timepiece to

keep order in Oz, but the ominous Time Dragon attached to it suggests that it may be

used to spy on subversives. The clock seems to represent a disciplinary mechanism – in

short, it is a panopticon. Foucault (1977) defines a panopticon as “a machine for

dissociating the see/being seen dyad; in the peripheral ring, one is totally seen, without

ever seeing; in the central tower, one sees everything without being seen” (p. 202). A

panopticon combines surveillance with discipline. Because Ozians never know if the

Time Dragon Clock is watching them, they may act in a disciplined manner for fear of

consequences of being caught not obeying the Wizard’s orders. The Time Dragon Clock,

representing a panopticon, serves to impose legal sanctions on the general populace – or

at least make Ozians fear the use of legal sanctions against them.

100 Interestingly, the Wizard and Madame Morrible are not the only two characters to

use legal sanctions as a means of obtaining their goals. Nessarose, who becomes the

Governor of Munchkinland in Act II, uses legal sanctions to keep Boq in Munchkinland with her (Act 2 Scene 2). As Boq tells Elphaba, “I’m not free to leave Munchkinland, none of us are! Ever since she took power, she’s been stripping the Munchkins of our rights! And we didn’t have that many to begin with! And do you know why?” “To keep

you here with me,” Nessarose confesses. While Nessarose does not intend to hurt a social

class in order to benefit the majority as the Wizard and Madame Morrible do, she does

use her position of power in selfish ways. She places her own desires before the good of

her constituency. She relies on her legitimate power as Governor to oppress the

Munchkins so that she can get what she wants: Boq to stay with her.

Perhaps the most interesting use of legal sanctions occurs at the end of the

musical, after Elphaba has presumably been “melted,” and Glinda takes control of the

Ozian government (Act 2 Scene 9). She demands that the Wizard leave Oz permanently,

and then imprisons Madame Morrible. After eliminating the oppressors, Glinda turns her

attention to removing legal sanctions that prevent Animals from having the same rights as

other Ozians. This is symbolized through the role of Chistery, Elphaba’s favorite flying

Monkey. Chistery hands Glinda the magic book of spells, which suggests that he will

serve as one of her consultants. During the Wizard and Madame Morrible’s reign, legal

sanctions were used to oppress Animals. One may assume that during Glinda’s reign,

which we do not see much of because the musical ends as she takes power, these

sanctions will be lifted and something like affirmative action will be implemented in an

attempt to right past wrongs.

101 Another example of this strategy is the demotion of those in the oppressed class to lower level positions. Throughout Wicked, especially in the first act, Animals have been demoted to manual labor positions. What is particularly interesting about this theme is that it emerged almost entirely from performance fieldnotes, while most of the other themes and sub-themes arose primarily from the script with the performance fieldnotes taking a supporting role. In fact, four out of the six examples regarding this sub-theme are observable only through performance.

The first instance occurs at the very beginning of all three of the performances

(Act 1 Prologue). Flying Monkeys push, pull, and spin mechanical-looking wheels that appear to cause the curtain to rise. The Monkeys make sounds, but they do not speak as they turn the wheels and cogs. In the New York performance, they entered the stage from every possible entrance: Some entered from stage left or stage right, some came from around the proscenium, and still others entered the stage through trap doors in the floorboards of the stage.

Other examples of Animals doing manual labor occur at various points in Act I.

Both the Pittsburgh and the New York performances included a bit part of an Animal pushing a cart containing Galinda’s massive suitcases when she arrives at Shiz University for the first time (Act 1 Scene 2). The New York performance also featured an Animal serving punch to Boq and Nessarose in the dance scene at the OzDust Ballroom (Act 1

Scene 5) and an Animal loading and unloading baggage at the train station when Elphaba leaves for the Emerald City (Act 1 Scene 10). In my fieldnotes from the New York performance, I note that the latter “looks exhausted and wipes the sweat from his brow.”

102 In fact, with the exception of Dr. Dillamond, Animals are never seen in a position of power or prestige during the musical. Dr. Dillamond explains the situation to Elphaba in the song “Something Bad” (Act 1 Scene 4). The song serves as a warning, as indicated by its minor key, repeated notes, and underlying formidable-sounding beat. Dillamond sings,

“I’ve heard of an Ox, a professor from Quox, no longer permitted to teach, who

has lost all powers of speech. And an Owl in Munchkin Rock, a vicar with a

thriving flock, forbidden to preach. Now he only can screech. Only rumors, but

still, enough to give pause to anyone with paws. Something bad is happening in

Oz, under the surface, behind the scenes.”

Dillamond’s story suggests that Animals in prestigious positions were ousted from their posts. Later, Dillamond becomes an example of his own story when he himself is forbidden to teach at Shiz University. With urgency, he enters his classroom for the last time, and quickly tells his students that he appreciates them, and assures

Elphaba that “They can take away my job, but I shall continue speaking out!” (Act 1

Scene 8). Several government officials pull him forcefully away, as he screams back to the students, “You’re not being told the whole story! Remember that, class!” One of the officials, showing no respect for the distinguished professor, snaps, “Come on, Goat!”

When taken in context with Dillamond’s story and experience, it seems unlikely that the Animals in low labor positions, such as the baggage loader and the punch server, chose to take these jobs because they enjoy them. In Oz, Animals are forced to take these positions because they are considered a lower social class, and Animals in prestigious positions, such as professors or pastors, are removed by the government from the very

103 positions they worked hard to obtain. This is similar to the initial measures the Third

Reich used in the 1930s to persecute Jews. According to the United States Holocaust

Memorial Museum website (2009), in 1933, the Nazi-dominated German government passed a law that forbade Jews from holding positions in government, in the tax profession, and as stage actors. The German government also restricted their rights when holding positions in the legal sphere and in the medical profession. The rights of the

Jewish people in Germany were further abolished throughout the 1930s until ultimately they were sent to concentration camps during the Holocaust. One might assume that a similar fate could await the Animals of Oz.

However, it does not, because Wicked’s story serves as a warning, rather than a real-life parallel. Wicked warns viewers against their own apathy and urges them to take action. Wicked’s story reminds theatre-goers that no nation is safe from committing these atrocities, unless its citizens remember history, keep aware, and take action.

In addition to Murphy’s three strategies discussed here, this analysis has revealed

nine other strategies used by hegemonic regimes to achieve their goals: Bargaining with

the opposition, identification and the use of public admiration, hiding weaknesses,

aligning with those in power, scapegoating, threatening potential dissenters, creating fear

and spreading false rumors about the opposition, silencing and “brainwashing” dissenters,

and destroying those closest to the dissenter. Of these nine, the first five require the

consent of the public, while the final three are done by the hegemonic regime primarily

by force.

104 Bargaining

First, hegemonic leaders may seek to bargain with dissenters, offering a “tit for tat” deal. Bargaining is similar to the steam-valve strategy, which happens when the

hegemon lets their opposition have something that they want in order for them to “blow

off steam” (Browne, 2005). This allows the opposition to “cool off,” thus not making

any further demands (Browne, 2005). Madame Morrible foreshadows this tit-for-tat

strategy when she first becomes the Wizard’s Press Secretary (Act 1 Scene 13). She tells

Glinda and Elphaba, “You’ll find that the Wizard is a very generous man. If you do

something for him, he’ll do much for you.” After Elphaba “proves herself” by casting a spell that made ordinary Monkeys fly, the Wizard offers both Elphaba and Glinda positions of power: “The world’s your oyster now! You have so many opportunities

ahead of you!” (Act 1 Scene 13). By offering Elphaba a reward if she agrees to work

with them, the Wizard and Madame Morrible attempt to quiet their potential dissenter

and maintain the oppression of Animals. Elphaba, however, is not interested in

compromising her ethics and beliefs in exchange for fame and fortune, and runs off with

the book of spells.

When she returns to the Wizard’s palace in Act II to set the flying Monkeys free,

the Wizard tries again to bargain with Elphaba (Act 2 Scene 3). He pleads with her, “Just

hear me out – I don’t want to harm you.” “Well, you have,” she snaps back. “You have

harmed me.” In a sincere manner, the Wizard replies, “I know that. And I regret it.”

Here, the Wizard recognizes that the hegemonic strategies used against Elphaba

have destroyed her reputation and made her life difficult. He believes that if he offers her

restoration of her public image, she will stop her militant tactics. He promises her

105 “rehabilitation” in terms of public image, and she agrees to accept this deal if he will set the Monkeys free. Although he attempts to bargain with her, he refuses to do anything that would jeopardize his power in order to help her. When she rejects his offer after finding a silenced Dr. Dillamond, the Wizard uses even more dastardly tactics to prevent

Elphaba’s success as a social movement leader. While he recognizes the hurt that he is doing to others, he refuses to change his actions. This scene suggests that hegemonic factions may try to give up small victories to the oppressed group in order to win the overall battle.

Identification and the Use of Public Admiration

Additionally, hegemonic leaders may seek to establish identification with either the audience or the dissenter in order to achieve consent. Burkean identification states that the more a person can identify with a rhetor, the more likely he or she is to believe what the rhetor says (Burke, 1969). Burke tells us that identification is when “A is not identical with his colleague, B. But insofar as their interests are joined, A is identified with B. Or he may identify himself with B even when their interests are not joined, if he assumes that they are, or is persuaded to believe so” (p. 20). Furthermore, Burke (1969) explains that identification is the way or ways which a speaker uses to “persuade an audience by the use of stylistic identifications; his act of persuasion may be for the purpose of causing the audience to identify itself with the speaker’s interests” (p. 46). As

Quigley (1998) has noted, identification involves being connected to the speaker while still being a completely separate entity. Burkean identification focuses on joined interests and appears to work in conjunction with persuasion.

106 In Wicked, the Wizard attempts to identify with Elphaba, in hopes of persuading her to stop her fight against his regime. When Elphaba returns to the palace to set the flying Monkeys free, the Wizard attempts to create a common bond between himself and his opposition (Act 2 Scene 3). “It gets pretty lonely for me around here,” he tells her. “I know you must be lonely, too.” Sensing a trap, Elphaba snaps, “You don’t know the first thing about me.” “Oh, but I do,” the Wizard insists. “I do know you. I can’t explain it, exactly, but…you know what I mean?”

This scene foreshadows the realization that the Wizard is Elphaba’s biological father, but it also shows how hegemonic leaders may attempt to identify with their opposition, in hopes that the opposition will stop its fight. In this case, the Wizard tries to identify with Elphaba through her loneliness. Elphaba has no human interactions, although presumably she spends time with the Animals she is trying to help. The Wizard recognizes this and attempts to prey on her weakness. The attempt fails, however, when

Elphaba sees no consubstantiality between herself and the Wizard.

Another hegemonic use of identification is illustrated through the public’s admiration for the Wizard. He uses the tool of the giant golden mechanical head in order to impress and distress those who come to meet him. The Wizard presents himself as a giant golden head with red eyes and a booming voice mediated through a loudspeaker

(Act 1 Scene 13; Act 1 Scene 14; Act 2 Scene 3). This is similar to the 1939 MGM film, but diverts from L. Frank Baum’s original book, which states that the Wizard changes form for each person he meets (for example, Dorothy meets the giant head as the Wizard, but the Scarecrow meets “a most lovely lady,” the Tin Woodman meets “a terrible beast,” and the Lion meets a Ball of Fire (Baum, 1999/1900, p. 84-87)). In the New York

107 performance script of Wicked, the giant head is described as “enormous” and it sits “on a jewel encrusted throne” (p. 59). When Elphaba cannot stop staring at it, the Wizard

explains, “I know, it’s a bit much, isn’t it? But people expect this sort of thing, and you

have to give people what they want. Truth is, I hardly ever let anyone meet the real me”

(Act 1 Scene 13).

The Wizard uses the giant golden head as a means of showing his grandeur as the

leader of Oz. He believes that people want to see a magnificent leader glorified by fine

things, and so he creates such things to promote this impression. This suggests that some

leaders will attempt to portray a particular image that they believe the public wishes to

see. In fact, this is a common strategy used in political campaigns; those running for

office typically attempt to convey a desired image to the public. Recent examples include

George W. Bush’s “good ole boy” image, John McCain’s and John Kerry’s “war hero” images, and Sarah Palin’s “hockey mom” image. Whether these images are true components of each leader’s character is irrelevant – indeed, we will never truly know

without becoming personal friends with them. It is important to note that leaders in real life, just as leaders in a musical based on a fictitious story, use image to obtain and maintain their positions of leadership.

In the Wizard’s case, this tool is successful, as illustrated by the Ozian public’s praise. For instance, when Glinda and Elphaba arrive at the Emerald City, they attend a show called “Wizomania” (Act 1 Scene 12). The script explains that “a pulchritudinous chorus sings as a cardboard balloon descends” (p. 57). In all three productions, a green curtain is used to present the Wizomania sequence, and two giant human-sized puppets that resemble Tweedledee and Tweedledum in Alice in Wonderland dance to the delight

108 of the fictional (and the actual) audience. The chorus sings in a vaudevillian style,

“Who’s the mage whose major itinerary is making all Oz merrier? Who’s the sage who sagely sailed in to save our posteriors? Whose enthuse for hot air ballooning has all of Oz honeymooning? Woo…wizn’t he wonderful? Our wonderful Wizard!” The citizens of

Oz love and admire their leader because of the good-natured and grandiose image he presents to them. Ozians want a grandiose leader who can save them from trouble, and the giant head allows the Wizard to project such an image to win over the public.

He later uses this admiration to create identification with the public in order to condemn his enemies. In the second act, when the citizens of Oz sing about their fear of

Elphaba (or, the Wicked Witch, as she has come to be known), they accuse her of

“defaming our poor Wizard with her calumnies and lies!” (Act 2 Prologue). First, the pronoun “our” suggests ownership or attachment; the Wizard of Oz is “their” Wizard, just as the American president is “our” president. The pronoun “our” suggests a connection between the leader and the people. Second, the accusation of slandering the

Wizard suggests that the Ozian public feels so connected to the Wizard that they will defend him against any enemy. The Wizard’s attempt to promote a positive image has succeeded in winning him public favor, which allows him to rally people against anyone he claims is his enemy.

The Wizard of Oz in Wicked is so concerned with maintaining this popularity, that he often takes credit for things that are not of his doing in order to make himself look more powerful and more admirable. However, this habit is unbeknown to the public. In her argument with Glinda after Nessarose’s death (Act 2 Scene 5), Elphaba makes the

Wizard’s habit clear. Glinda accuses Elphaba of flying around Oz on an old, dirty

109 broomstick, and Elphaba quips, “Well, we can’t all come and go by bubble.” She

continues, “Whose invention was that, the Wizard’s? Of course, even if it wasn’t, I’m sure he’d take credit for it.” This comment suggests that the inventions and sorcery that

Ozian citizens associate with the Wizard are really created by someone else. Indeed,

Elphaba made the Monkeys fly (Act 1 Scene 3), and Madame Morrible created the cyclone that killed Nessarose (Act 2 Scene 3). The Wizard has no real talent for sorcery or ability to invent things, but he portrays himself as having such an ability to make the

Ozian public like him.

Hiding Weaknesses

In fact, the Wizard actually admits these weaknesses, but only to those in his inner circle. His first confession occurs in the scene described at the beginning of this chapter, when the Wizard admits he has no real talent in sorcery, that he has created an enemy in the form of Animals in order to maintain his power and bring Ozians together against a common adversary, and that he needs Elphaba, with her sorcery skills, to help him (Act 1

Scene 13). He only reveals this information to three people: Elphaba, Glinda, and

Madame Morrible. In fact, he is so concerned with keeping the information secret, that

when Elphaba rushes off in anger, he screams, “We’ve got to get her back! She knows

too much!” His decision to share his weaknesses with only those within his inner circle

is reminiscent of many leaders. For example, a recent article by Daniel Levy and Susan

Brink (2005) suggests that President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s congestive heart failure was

kept secret from the public. Only those in his inner circle were aware of the President’s

heart condition. Similarly, in Wicked, only those closest to the Wizard are aware of his

lack of skill in sorcery.

110 He further recognizes his weaknesses through the lighthearted, soft-shoe tap song,

“Wonderful” (Act 2 Scene 3). He admits that in Nebraska, he was “one of your dime a

dozen mediocrities,” but acknowledges that in Oz is he is “respected – worshipped even,”

simply because “the folks in Oz needed someone to believe in.” He confesses that he got

“carried away” because of the praise he received. In the song, he claims to have lied

about the Animals in order to give the people in Oz everything they wanted. He justifies

this decision by insisting that the lies were what Ozians wanted to hear, and that, in

America, people believe “all sorts of things that aren’t true,” calling it “history.” In one of

the most poignant moments in the musical, he sings, “A man’s called a traitor, or

liberator. A rich man’s a thief, or philanthropist. Is one a crusader, or ruthless invader?

It’s all in which label is able to persist.” The Wizard acknowledges that his actions may

not be ethical, but justifies it by claiming it was what the public wanted.

It is important to note that the Wizard of Oz is not the only character in Wicked

who uses hegemonic strategies to get what he wants. Madame Morrible also uses

hegemonic strategies in order to gain power. One of these strategies is aligning herself

with those in power, and this strategy will be discussed in the next sub-section.

Aligning Oneself with Those in Power

As previously mentioned, the next strategy is illustrated primarily by the character

of Madame Morrible. Morrible seeks to connect herself with those in power in order to

increase her own power. Morrible’s interest in those with power is apparent when she

first meets Nessarose (Act 1 Scene 2). When she sees Nessarose in her wheelchair, she

immediately recognizes that she is the Munchkinland Governor’s daughter. “Oh, you

must be the Governor’s daughter! Miss Nessarose, isn’t it? What a tragically beautiful

111 face you have!” she swoons over the young woman. She soon insists on sharing her own

compartment with Nessarose, where she can “assist her as needed.” By fawning over

Nessarose and privileging her over other students, Morrible hopes to align herself with

Nessarose’s powerful father.

However, Madame Morrible soon realizes that it is the Governor’s other daughter

who holds the key to her ascent in Ozian society. When Morrible tries to wheel

Nessarose to her room, Elphaba becomes angry, and unknowingly casts a spell that

causes the chair to spin, rise in the air, and land safely in front of her (Act 1 Scene 2).

When Elphaba apologizes, Morrible declares, “Never apologize for talent! Talent is a gift! And that is my special talent, encouraging talent!” She insists on teaching Elphaba in a private sorcery seminar, in hopes that Elphaba will be able to develop her skill enough that Madame Morrible can present her to the Wizard and be rewarded for her efforts.

Later, when Madame Morrible arrives to tell Elphaba that the Wizard wants to meet her, Morrible is at least as overjoyed, if not more so, than Elphaba herself (Act 1

Scene 9). “Make me proud!” she tells Elphaba. While initially this appears to simply be the happiness of a mentor at seeing her student excel, it becomes clear that Morrible had selfish reasons for mentoring Elphaba and being happy for her. When Elphaba meets the

Wizard and casts a spell to make the Wizard’s pet Monkeys fly, Morrible, as the

Wizard’s new press secretary, tells the Wizard excitedly, “I knew it! I knew she had the power! I told you!” (Act 1 Scene 13). Elphaba, upset and backing away from Madame

Morrible, replies, “You…you planned all this?” Morrible quickly tries to cover her selfish motives by insisting, “For you too, dearie! You benefit, too!” However, Elphaba

112 is keenly aware that she has been duped and has been taken advantage of by her own instructor.

In this same scene (Act 1 Scene 13), Morrible clearly articulates her quid pro quo strategy for gaining power. “I’ve risen up in the world,” she tells Elphaba and Glinda.

“You’ll find that the Wizard is a very generous man. If you do something for him, he’ll do much for you.” It later becomes clear that Morrible offers two advantages for the

Wizard: 1) She has trained Elphaba, who the Wizard hopes will join his regime, and 2) she uses her own sorcery power to help the Wizard achieve his goals. In return, Madame

Morrible becomes an important figure in the regime. Madame Morrible’s actions suggest that the quid pro quo strategy is one strategy that hegemonic leaders may use to obtain their power.

Along with her desire to align herself with those who are powerful or potentially powerful comes Madame Morrible’s disdain for the ordinary (Act 1 Scene 2). This is revealed through her dismissal of Galinda, who so desperately wants to win Morrible’s favor. She brushes off Galinda’s questions about her entrance essay and does not initially include her in her sorcery seminar, even though Galinda wants to major in sorcery.

Morrible has no interest in teaching mediocre students like Galinda, because she does not have anything to gain from it. She doesn’t believe these students will ever be successful, and so she pays no attention to them.

This is perhaps best illustrated when Madame Morrible arrives at the OzDust

Ballroom to present Galinda with a training wand (Act 1 Scene 6). Galinda is thrilled, but

Morrible is less than impressed. “Miss Elphaba requested that I include you in sorcery class. She insisted I tell you this very night, or she would quit the seminar,” she tells

113 Galinda matter-of-factly. Galinda cannot believe that her roommate, with whom she’d been feuding since they had moved in, would do such a thing and asks why. “I have no idea!” Madame Morrible exclaims. “My personal opinion is that you do not have what it takes. I hope you prove me wrong. I doubt you will.”

While most instructors seek to encourage their students to excel in their chosen major, Madame Morrible is completely unconcerned with Galinda’s education. This is because Morrible is concerned only with her own welfare, and only encourages those who show promise because they potentially could help her obtain the power she so desperately seeks. Those, like Galinda, who do not show promise immediately, are simply brushed aside.

However, once Glinda becomes a figurehead in the Wizard’s regime, Madame

Morrible begins treating her with respect, and ultimately uses her sycophantic ways to try to escape incarceration. When Glinda becomes engaged to Fiyero, Madame Morrible announces cheerily, “Glinda, dear, we are happy for you! As Press Secretary, I’ve striven to ensure that all Oz knows the story of your braverism!” (Act 2 Scene 5). The story that she tells, however, is a lie that is used to make Glinda look good in front of her constituents while making Elphaba appear jealous, angry, and mean. The story accomplishes two goals for Morrible as hegemonic leader: 1) She is able to continue to align herself with those in power by painting Glinda in a positive light, and 2) she is able to re-contextualize what really happened to paint Elphaba in a negative light.

Morrible also attempts to survive a regime change through her sycophantic strategy when Glinda banishes the Wizard from Oz (Act 2 Scene 9). She anxiously tells

Glinda, “I know we’ve had our miniscule differences in the past, but…” Glinda, who is

114 angry and confident in taking the reins of leadership, is not interested in listening to her,

just as Morrible refused to listen to her when Glinda was a powerless young pupil. Glinda

sends Madame Morrible to prison; it is Morrible’s disdain for the powerless, which

initially caused her to rise to power, that ultimately is the key to her undoing. Morrible’s

undoing seems to go against Audre Lorde’s famous quote: “The master’s tools will never

dismantle the master’s house” (Lorde, 1984, p. 110). In her essay, Lorde suggests that

feminism as a movement cannot be successful because it works within a patriarchy that

will never let it advance. While this may be true of social movements, individuals are

often brought down by the same device that causes them to rise to power. Morrible’s case

suggests that a hegemonic leader’s own strength can also be her Achilles’ heel.

Scapegoating

Scapegoating is another strategy used by hegemonic regimes to maintain control

over their state. The term “scapegoat” dates back to the 16th century and initially

described a goat on which people placed their sins; the goat was then sent into the

wilderness in the Biblical ceremony of Yom Kippur (Merriam-Webster, 2009). Similarly,

a scapegoat is now “one that bears the blame for others” (Merriam-Webster, 2009). My

analysis revealed two scapegoats in Wicked: The Animals in Oz, and ultimately, Elphaba herself.

First, it is no surprise that Dr. Dillamond, the chief Animal character in the show, is a Goat. In fact, it is Dr. Dillamond, when lecturing the students on Ozian history, who introduces the term scapegoat (Act 1 Scene 4). He tells them, “Doubtless you’ve noticed I am the sole Animal on the faculty – the ‘token Goat,’ as it were. But it wasn’t always this way. Oh, dear students, how I wish you could have known this place as it once was.

115 When one could walk these halls and hear an Antelope explicating a sonnet, a Snow

Leopard solving an equation, a Wildebeest waxing philosophic. Can you see, students,

what’s being lost? How our dear Oz is becoming less and less, well, colorful. Now, what

set this into motion?” When Elphaba answers that it began with the Great Drought,

Dillamond continues, “Precisely. Food grew scarce, and people grew hungrier and angrier. And the question became – who can we blame? Can anyone tell me what is meant by the term ‘scapegoat?’”

Dillamond’s story is further enhanced by a visual aid in his classroom. In all three

of the productions documented for this study, a timeline on a blackboard further

illustrated this point. The timeline contained a history of Oz, including such events as the

Great Drought, the ending of the war, and the Wizard’s arrival. The timeline allows

Dillamond to show his students which events occurred in what order so that they may

make connections between history and the oppression currently facing the Animals.

Dillamond’s story, while a fictional story in a musical, has real-life parallels.

Most striking is perhaps the rise of anti-Semitism in post-World War I Germany. As

Burke discusses in “The Rhetoric of Hitler’s Battle” (1941), Germany was in a state of

economic ruin after the First World War and the German people were struggling. When

Hitler took power, he sought to unify the country and offered the German people a

“panacea, a ‘cure for what ails you,’ a ‘snakeoil,’ that made such sinister unifying

possible within his own nation” (p. 192). This “panacea” included the creation of a

common enemy: The Jewish people. Burke suggests that Hitler uses the Jewish people as

a “projection device” or “scapegoat;” one on which the German people can “hand over

[their] ills” in order to be purified (pp. 202-203). The Jewish people were thus blamed

116 for all of Germany’s problems, and this blame ultimately led to the Holocaust, where millions of Jews lost their lives.

As Dillamond’s story suggests, Animals are the scapegoat for Oz’s troubles. The same scene provides evidence that Ozians truly believe that Animals are the source of

Oz’s problems. When Dillamond flips the blackboard to write on the side of it that does not contain the timeline, he see the words “Animals should be seen and not heard” written in large red letters. The students’ reaction to this event varies by performance. In the Chicago performance, the students hang their heads in shame upon seeing the writing; they appear to be upset by what they see, although it is unclear if any of them are the perpetrators. However, in the Pittsburgh and New York performances, the students are silent, suggesting that they are likely apathetic about Animal rights. Dillamond’s reaction also varies by performance. In the Chicago and Pittsburgh performances, Dillamond is angry and perhaps frightened. He screams at the students to leave. In the New York performance, he appears to be more hurt than angry, and his voice shakes a bit when he tells the students to leave.

Each performance choice offers a slightly different message for the audience to consider. The Chicago performance suggests that those being oppressed are strong and willing to fight, and that the Ozian population merely needs to be educated, like the students who recognize the unfair treatment, in order to change society and end the oppression. In contrast, the Pittsburgh performance suggests that both the oppressed class of Animals, represented by Dr. Dillamond, is strong and willing to fight for their rights, but face the added challenge of winning the hearts and minds of an apathetic public.

Finally, the New York performance allows audience members to feel more sympathy for

117 the Animals, represented by poor Dr. Dillamond, and less sympathy for the students, or

Ozian society, whom they represent.

The words themselves serve as evidence of scapegoating. “Animals should be

seen and not heard” suggests that this lower class is not worthy of a voice. Since it was written by an Ozian citizen (likely a Shiz University student), it implies that this is a common feeling among the populace. Like the Jews in 1930s Germany, the Animals in

Oz are blamed for the nation’s problems. Moreover, the words are written in red, which symbolizes evil in Wicked and serves as a contrast to the only true moral character in the show, whose skin is green. Other examples of the color red in the musical include the

Time Dragon’s eyes (Act 1 Scene 1; Act 1 Scene 2; Act 1 Scene 8; Act 1 Scene 13; Act 2

Prologue; Act 2 Scene 3; Act 2 Scene 5), the lighting when the flying Monkeys are transformed (Act 1 Scene 13), and the background of the house that kills Nessarose (Act

2 Scene 5); all of which connect directly or indirectly to the hegemon, the Wizard’s regime.

Animals are not the only scapegoat in Wicked. Elphaba herself becomes a scapegoat in Act II. First, she becomes a scapegoat for her family. When Elphaba goes to the Governor’s Palace in Munchkinland to enlist her father’s help for her cause,

Nessarose informs her that he has died (Act 2 Scene 2). When Elphaba is stunned,

Nessarose replies, “Well, what did you expect? After he learned what you’d done, how you disgraced us…he died. Of shame. Of embarrassment.” Nessarose implies that

Elphaba is responsible for 1) her father’s death, and 2) any shame that has been brought to the family.

118 However, this is just the beginning of Nessarose using her sister as a scapegoat.

When Boq threatens to leave Nessarose because he is really in love with Glinda,

Nessarose angrily tries to cast a spell on him using Elphaba’s Grimmerie (Act 2 Scene 2).

While Nessarose wants to cast a spell to make Boq fall in love with her, she lacks

Elphaba’s talent and instead almost kills him. As Boq shrieks in pain, Elphaba grabs the book away from her sister, who screams, “This is all your fault! If you hadn’t shown me that horrendible book…”

Since spells are not reversible, Elphaba tries to cast another spell to contain the damage of the erroneous one cast by Nessarose. Since Nessarose caused Boq’s heart to shrink, Elphaba casts a spell to turn him into a tin woodsman so that he no longer needs his heart. When Boq awakens to discover his new form, he is horrified. As he runs off,

Nessarose screams after him, “It wasn’t me, it was her! I tried to stop her! It was Elphaba,

Boq, it was Elphaba!” Both of these examples suggest that Nessarose does not take responsibility for her own actions; instead, she blames Elphaba, the family scapegoat.

By the end of the musical, Elphaba becomes more than simply the family scapegoat. She becomes a scapegoat for the entire nation of Oz. This is especially prevalent during the mob scene at the end of the musical (Act 2 Scene 7). As the mob sets out to kill the “Wicked Witch,” two figures, one human and one Animal, blame her for their troubles.

The first figure is Boq, who announces, “This is more than just a service to the

Wizard. I have a personal score to settle with Elph – with the Witch. It’s due to her I’m made of tin. Her spell made this occur. So for once I’m glad I’m heartless; I’ll be heartless killing her!” Although Boq would have died if Elphaba hadn’t taken action, Boq

119 blames Elphaba, not Nessarose, for his current condition. Instead of learning how to best cope with his new form, he seeks to blame someone. Who better to blame than the one whom Ozian society has placed all their troubles on?

Perhaps more interesting is the second figure who speaks out, or rather, relays his message to Boq, who speaks for him. Boq urges a Lion to tell his story. “Come on, tell them what she did to you in class that day! How you were just a cub and she cub-napped you!” When the Lion screams, “No!” and pulls his tail offstage, Boq tells his story for him: “The Lion also has a grievance to repay. If she’d let him fight his own battles when he was young, he wouldn’t be a coward today!”

The Lion’s story suggests that Elphaba has become a scapegoat for her own cause. Animals whom she has tried to help have blamed her for their troubles. Some social movement leaders, as Elphaba will later be defined as, become the scapegoat for their own cause. A similar figure in U.S. history is abolitionist John Brown. Brown

became a leader of antislavery guerillas and fought against proslavery attacks. In

retribution for a proslavery attack, Brown brutally murdered five settlers in a proslavery

town (“John Brown,” 2009). While some abolitionists, like Ralph Waldo Emerson and

Henry David Thoreau, praised Brown (“John Brown,” 2009), others, like Abraham

Lincoln, disapproved of Brown’s actions and believed he was insane (Sandburg, 1993).

Brown became one of the most controversial figures of his time and has been partially

credited with starting the Civil War (Frye, 2009). Elphaba, as a scapegoat, faces a similar

fate. Some, like Fiyero and Glinda, support her cause, but most, like Boq and the Lion,

blame her for harming them. Elphaba is not only a scapegoat for her opposition, but for

120 those who support Animal rights. It is at this point that she realizes that she is no longer effective as a leader, as will be discussed in the next chapter.

Creating Fear and Spreading Rumors

Another cluster that emerged from this analysis is that hegemonic groups create fear among the populace in order to prevent dissent from arising. In Wicked, these fear appeals are created and dispersed through rumor. Madame Morrible attempts to do this when she announces to all of Oz that Elphaba is a Wicked Witch. She uses a specific tool to control public opinion: A loudspeaker, illustrated by the echoing sound of her

voice, which she uses to send messages to the Ozian public (Act 1 Scene 13). It is likely

that the loudspeaker represents all media since it is the only mediated device used in the

show. After Morrible announces that Elphaba is an enemy of the state and a “wicked witch,” within minutes, Ozians look at Elphaba and sing, “Look at her, she’s wicked!”

The loudspeaker is very effective in this situation, suggesting that hegemonic leaders may

use media as one means of convincing the public to accept their own oppression.

Judging from the response from the citizens of Oz, as sung in the song “No One

Mourns the Wicked” at the beginning of Act II (Act 2 Prologue), Madame Morrible is

successful in creating fear by spreading rumors through her use of media. “No One

Mourns the Wicked” is in a minor key, signifying the odiousness of those who are

“wicked.” The chorus sings a dissonant chord on the word “wicked” at the end of the song, further supporting this symbolization. The citizens of Oz sing, in a frantic, fast-

paced manner,

“Every day, more wicked! Every day, the terror grows! All of Oz is ever on

alert! That’s the way with the wicked – spreading fear wherever she goes,

121 seeking out new victims she can hurt! Like some terrible green blizzard

throughout the land she flies! Defaming our poor Wizard with her calumnies and

lies! She lies! Save us from the wicked! Shield us so we won’t be hexed! Give

us warning: Where will she strike next?”

Madame Morrible’s rumors about Elphaba have resulted in Ozian society fearing

Elphaba. They associate her with all things wicked; they assume she is flying around on her broomstick in order to hurt them, when she is really flying around to free oppressed

Animals. By turning public opinion against Elphaba, the Wizard and Madame Morrible are able to limit her effectiveness. Fear appeals have often been considered at least somewhat effective in advertising and persuasion (Perloff, 2002, pp. 185-187), and they are quite effective in political communication, as illustrated through George W. Bush’s war rhetoric and campaign rhetoric in 2003 and 2004. In Wicked, the hegemonic forces use fear appeals through rumors to prevent Elphaba from helping her cause.

The regime has told its citizens that Elphaba is an evil witch who will hurt them, and the citizens believe what they are told, even though there is not a single case where

Elphaba has truly harmed another being. Madame Morrible, as press secretary of the

Wizard’s regime, created an enticing story to feed the Ozian public at the end of Act I

(Act 1 Scene 13), and it is clear that even then, they believe her: They sing, “Look at her, she’s wicked” as Elphaba rises in the air with her broomstick. By the beginning of Act

II, the rumor that Elphaba is wicked has spread throughout the land and is thoroughly ingrained in Ozians’ psyches.

A crowd in Emerald City, which has gathered to celebrate the surprise engagement of Glinda and Fiyero, sings about additional rumors they have heard about

122 Elphaba (Act 2 Scene 1). Each rumor connects to the overall theme that Elphaba is a

“wicked witch.” One person sings, “I hear she has an extra eye that always remains awake!” Another announces, “I hear that she can shed her skin as easily as a snake!” A third person chimes in by saying, “I hear some rebel Animals are giving her food and shelter!” A fourth person offers the strangest rumor of all: “I hear her soul is so unclean, pure water can melt her!” The crowd reacts strongly to this rumor and begs, “Please, somebody go and melt her!”

As Fiyero aptly points out, “People are so empty-headed, they’ll believe anything.” Because of their apathy and their desire to blame their problems on someone else, the Ozian public is susceptible to believing such ridiculous rumors. Furthermore, their admiration for the Wizard and his regime makes them even more susceptible; they want to have a common enemy with the Wizard, because it creates further identification between the Wizard and themselves.

Also in this scene (Act 2 Scene 1), Madame Morrible re-tells the story of how

Glinda became a public figure in the Wizard’s regime. She reinvents the story so that

Glinda looks like the heroine while Elphaba looks jealous and mean. The people of the

Emerald City relish this story; in the New York production, they not only listen intently, but they act out the story as Madame Morrible tells it.

Even Glinda herself believes what the Wizard and Madame Morrible tell her.

Until Elphaba confronts her after Nessarose’s death (Act 2 Scene 5), Glinda assumed that the tragedy was merely an accident. Upset, Elphaba snaps, “You think cyclones just appear? Out of the blue?” Glinda is rattled, and stumbles over her words. “I don’t know,” she replies. “I never really…” “No, of course you never! You’re too busy telling

123 everyone how wonderful everything is!” Elphaba retorts. Elphaba’s words serve as a wake-up call for Glinda. This event will be discussed more thoroughly in Chapter 6.

The rumors and fear appeals ultimately result in the mob scenario at the end of

Act II. The Ozian public truly believes that Elphaba is evil and must be punished for her

deeds. They use her as a scapegoat, thinking that all bad things in Oz are somehow a

result of her. The hegemon has succeeded; the public, through its apathy and gullibility, has found a way to purge its sins on another while placing the regime on a pedestal.

Threats

While the strategies previously discussed have required the hegemon to obtain

public consent, the last three strategies identified through this analysis require primarily

the use of force. The first strategy using force is threatening potential dissenters.

Hegemonic leaders, in order to maintain their control and to keep the populace happy,

may threaten potential dissenters to prevent them from speaking out. As Dr. Dillamond

notes, it is difficult to speak out when “there’s so much pressure not to” (Act 1 Scene 4).

Glinda experiences these threats firsthand. When she confronts Madame Morrible

with her questions about the origin of the cyclone that killed Nessarose, Madame

Morrible “leans threateningly close” according to the New York performance script (p.

110) and snaps, “Now you listen to me, Missie. The rest of Oz may have fallen for that

‘aren’t I good’ routine, but I know better. You wanted this from the beginning! And now

you’re getting what you wanted. So just smile, and wave, and shut up!” (Act 2 Scene 7).

Morrible, as a hegemonic leader, threatens to spoil Glinda’s good name with the

Ozian public by announcing that she’s not as “good” as her name, Glinda the Good,

suggests. Indeed, Glinda has several skeletons in her closet: She has always been jealous

124 of Elphaba (Act 1 Scene 2), she ruined Boq’s life by setting him up with Nessarose (Act

1 Scene 5), and she played a significant role in Nessarose’s death by suggesting that the

Wizard’s regime spread a rumor that Nessarose was in trouble in order to capture

Elphaba (Act 2 Scene 3). Particularly, the latter is important to Madame Morrible.

Although the Wizard and Morrible made the decision to create a cyclone to kill

Nessarose, they could easily blame it on Glinda, should she choose to publicly defend

Elphaba. By threatening and blackmailing Glinda, Madame Morrible as a hegemonic

leader silences Glinda from speaking out.

Silencing and “Brainwashing” Dissenters

In Wicked’s Oz, Animals who speak out against the regime are silenced. This is first illustrated when Elphaba stays after class to speak to Dr. Dillamond about the

oppression facing the Animals (Act 1 Scene 4). She is shocked to hear that some

Animals have forgotten how to speak. Dillamond replies, “Well, with so much pressure

not to…if you make it discouraging enough, you can keep anyone silent.” Dillamond

recognizes that people can be intimidated into accepting their own oppression; indeed,

intimidation is often a strategy used by hegemonic regimes to silence their opposition.

It is important to note that the Wizard’s regime uses its guards to silence

opposition, maintain order and push its agenda through by force (Act 1 Scene 13; Act 1

Scene 14; Act 2 Scene 3; Act 2 Scene 5). The Wizard’s guards are similar to a military

force used by a powerful nation. Morton (2007) observes that a “normal state of

hegemony” exists when force is balanced with public consent (p. 188). While the

previously discussed tools of hegemonic rule primarily focused on obtaining public

consent, the use of the Wizard’s guards provides the balance of force. Guards are sent in

125 during multiple scenes in the musical, and they always enter when the hegemon is in a

state of crisis. For instance, the guards are called in when Elphaba runs off with the

Grimmerie (Act 1 Scene 13), when Fiyero runs off with Elphaba (Act 2 Scene 3), when

Nessarose is killed in an attempt to trap Elphaba (Act 2 Scene 5), and finally when

Glinda takes over (Act 2 Scene 9), ending the hegemonic regime. Whenever an attempt to gain consent fails, the Wizard’s guards are sent to achieve the hegemon’s goals by force. The guards serve to balance consent with force within the hegemonic regime.

When the guards take Dillamond away and he is forbidden to teach (Act 1 Scene

8), a government official steps in to speak to the students about the “Silence of Progress.”

“More and more, everyday, with each tick of the Time Dragon Clock, in every corner of our Great Oz, one hears the Silence of Progress,” the official says. He holds up a Lion cub in a cage. “For example, this is called a ‘cage.’ You’ll be seeing more and more of them in the future. This remarkable innovation is actually for the Animals’ own good.

One of the benefits of caging a Lion Cub this young is that he will never, in fact, learn how to speak!” Ozian officials believe that they are making progress by keeping a particular group from speaking out against their own oppression. The term “silence of progress” is interesting; in fact, it seems to almost be an oxymoron. Progress is something that requires the noise of deliberation, of machines and technology, and of voices speaking up to have their views heard. But for a hegemonic regime like the Wizard’s, progress is the sound of dissenting voices quieting, of a subordinate class accepting their oppression.

The last example of the silencing of dissenters is in Act II, when Elphaba discovers Dr. Dillamond under a sheet after she has freed the flying Monkeys (Act 2

126 Scene 3). After releasing the flying Monkeys, Elphaba finds Dr. Dillamond walking on

all four legs. In the Chicago and Pittsburgh productions that I documented, Dr. Dillamond

stares blankly at Elphaba and does not recognize her. When she tries to get him to

respond to her, he simply bleats. He has been brainwashed into being an unintelligent

goat, rather than a distinguished professor who happens to be a Goat.

How Dillamond is brainwashed is not clear. He may have been tortured or been

the subject of psychological experiments, or he may have been forced into an emotional

breakdown. The Wizard does, however, take responsibility for Dillamond’s state of

being, at least in the presence of Elphaba. He admits, “We couldn’t let him continue

speaking out!” This scenario implies that some hegemons will even destroy the minds of their opposition to maintain their power and influence over their citizens.

However, the New York performance offered a different interpretation.

Dillamond is silent and can only bleat, but his nonverbal communication suggests that he is not, in fact, “brainwashed.” He recognizes Elphaba, nods, and holds her hands. He has lost his ability to speak out, but he still understands and opposes the Ozian government’s oppression of Animals.

This last example offers two important insights: 1) Performance can change a meaning in a text for an audience and 2) Silencing is an effective strategy of hegemons.

First, as illustrated in the three performances I documented, Dillamond’s character in the second act can be interpreted many ways. The script offers little for directors and actors to lean on. It merely states that Dillamond “stares blankly at Elphaba” (p. 92). In the

New York performance, those involved in the decision chose to have Dillamond recognize Elphaba but be unable to communicate with her. As an audience member, I

127 felt more connection and sympathy for this Dillamond than the “brainwashed” one in the

Pittsburgh and Chicago performances. This is likely due to the fact that he still maintained his “humanness” (or should I say “Goatness?”) – he could show that he was pained by not having the ability to communicate. However, while this decision may lead

to an emotional connection between the audience and the character, it eliminates the

controversy of “brainwashing” as a hegemonic tactic from arising in audience members’

minds.

Second, it is no coincidence that silence was used to signify the oppression facing the Animals in Oz. Silence is often associated with oppression in modern day social movements. The American Labor Movement encourages workers to use unions to have a voice in their workplace. Women in the Feminist Movement (or feminist movements, perhaps) talk about finding their voices and using them to speak out against the oppression facing them. Both PETA and the Pro-Life Movement, though very different in their ideologies, both use the rhetoric of speaking for those who cannot speak. Silence is a metaphor for being oppressed, both in Oz, and in real life.

Destroying those Closest to the Dissenter

The final emergent cluster relating to hegemony and social control is the injuring or murdering those closest to the dissenter. This strategy occurs in the middle of Act II

(Act 2 Scene 4; Act 2 Scene 5), when Elphaba’s sister, Nessarose, is tragically killed

when a cyclone causes a house to fall on her. Glinda, in her anger at Elphaba for

“stealing” her fiancé, suggests that the Wizard and Madame Morrible spread a rumor that

Nessarose is in trouble, knowing that Elphaba will fly to Munchkinland to help her sister and that, there, she could potentially be captured (Act 2 Scene 3). When Glinda leaves,

128 Madame Morrible and the Wizard determine that Elphaba is too smart to believe such a

rumor; instead, they decide that they must actually endanger Nessarose if Elphaba is to

believe her sister is really in danger. Morrible, who has a talent for changing the weather,

creates a cyclone that eventually kills Nessarose. After Elphaba arrives at her sister’s

resting place, she is captured by the guards but then rescued by her lover, Fiyero, who

falls out of a tree, insists that Elphaba leave, and then takes her place as a captive (Act 2

Scene 5). He is taken away and beaten by the guards.

This strategy is by far the most destructive hegemonic function that emerges from

this analysis. Elphaba experiences multiple losses throughout the show: Her favorite

teacher is taken away from her and silenced, her father “dies of embarrassment” when

she runs away, her sister is killed by a cyclone, her lover is captured and presumably

killed by the Wizard’s guards, and her friendship with Glinda undergoes some very

difficult periods of betrayal. Of these losses, the loss of her teacher, sister and lover are

all directly related to the Wizard’s regime. More militant hegemonic groups, like the

Wizard of Oz’s regime in Wicked, may use torture, injury and even murder to quiet their

dissenters.

Ultimately, this dastardly tactic is effective, and Elphaba gives up after handing

the book of spells (and symbolically her cause) over to Glinda. Elphaba fakes her own death, as well as Fiyero’s, and together they escape from Oz. However, Glinda, who has

public opinion on her side, overthrows the hegemonic group. Elphaba’s goals ultimately

become realized through her friend Glinda.

129 Conclusion

The strategies and tools discussed in this chapter are primarily used in Wicked by

two characters: The Wizard of Oz and Madame Morrible. Although both characters

make up the hegemonic regime, they are very different: The Wizard of Oz is a fearful

leader who is driven by his or her desire to be liked, while Madame Morrible is a power-

hungry leader who is driven by his or her desire to obtain more and more power.

The Wizard of Oz is a cowardly leader who lacks sorcery skills and is driven by

his constant desire to be liked by all. The Wizard recognizes his weaknesses, but only

admits them to those in his inside circle. The Wizard presents himself grandiosely in

order to achieve Ozian society’s praise. He takes credit for things that he did not do, and

recognizing of his own weaknesses only in front of his inner circle. He uses various

tools, such as the giant golden mechanical head, and multiple strategies, including scapegoating and silencing his opposition, in order to maintain his power. He even mandates the use of force to continue his reign, such as when he approves Madame

Morrible’s decision to endanger Nessarose’s life in order to capture Elphaba.

However, what makes the Wizard particularly unconventional as a hegemonic leader is his own sincerity. This occurs in two noteworthy places in the musical: In Act I, when Elphaba and Glinda first meet the Wizard (Act 1 Scene 13), and near the end of Act

II, after Elphaba’s “melting” has occurred (Act 2 Scene 9). He sings the ballad “A

Sentimental Man,” which has a soft melody that adds to the sincerity of the lyrics. In the

song, the Wizard tells about how he always wanted to be a father, and so he does “the

best he can to treat each citizen of Oz as son or daughter.”

130 This same sincerity occurs again at the end of the musical, when the Wizard realizes he is actually Elphaba’s biological father (Act 2 Scene 9). He begins to cry and

sinks to his knees because he believes he has killed his own child. As the New York

performance script states, he is “a broken man” (p.119), which allows Glinda to exile him

without a fight. These two scenes allow audience members to see the Wizard as a person

with feelings, rather than simply a ruthless dictator. He is a cowardly figure; he

recognizes that he is harming others, but cannot stop himself because he loves the praise he receives from the public. The Wizard’s character suggests that not all hegemonic

leaders are looking to oppress others for their own benefit; some hegemonic leaders are

people of weak character who try to do good for the majority and for themselves, but

ultimately end up oppressing or destroying a minority group. The Wizard as hegemonic leader suggests that not all such leaders are power-hungry, ruthless fiends; some are simply misguided and cowardly.

Unlike the Wizard of Oz, Madame Morrible is a hegemonic leader (and a villain) in the conventional sense: She is power-hungry, two-faced, and will stop at nothing to get what she wants. Often, when we think of hegemonic leaders, we think of such leaders as

Adolf Hitler of Germany, Joseph Stalin or Russian, Augusto José Ramón Pinochet Ugarte of Chile, and Raphael Leonidas Trujillo Molina of the Dominican Republic. Madame

Morrible is a hegemonic leader in this sense. While initially, theatre-goers may simply dismiss her as the good-natured albeit flighty headmistress of Elphaba and Galinda’s university, it becomes clear by the end of the first act that Madame Morrible has ambitions of her own. To obtain as much power as possible, she aligns herself with those

131 in power positions; she is a sycophant and uses this strategy to put herself in positions of power.

Madame Morrible lacks true emotion. She is ruled completely by logic and lacks sympathy or empathy. When the Wizard sits slumped in a chair drinking alcohol after

Elphaba’s demise, Morrible says to him cheerfully, “Well, I don’t know why you’re so despondiary. I thought it went quite well. They seemed thrilled to shreds with their brains and their hearts and everything!” (Act 2 Scene 9). When the Wizard breaks down upon realizing he has just arranged for the murder of his own daughter, Morrible acts as if a puzzle was just solved. “So that’s it,” she says. “That’s why she had such power! She was a child of both worlds.”

Morrible is completely void of any emotion regarding Elphaba, Nessarose, and even the Wizard. She doesn’t try to console the Wizard; instead, she immediately attempts to align herself with the new leader, Glinda. She is a cold, heartless hegemonic leader who is concerned only with her own wellbeing. She serves as an important contrast to the Wizard, who is an unconventional hegemonic leader.

To summarize, Madame Morrible is a hegemonic leader in the more expected or conventional sense: She is a cold, heartless character concerned with only her own needs.

The Wizard of Oz, on the other hand, is an unconventional hegemonic leader; while cowardly and ethically unsound, he is emotional person who wants desperately to be liked by his populace and works to benefit the majority at the expense of oppressing a minority. If we return to the scene described in the beginning of this chapter, we can clearly see the differences between the Wizard of Oz’s hegemonic style and Madame

Morrible’s hegemonic style. While Madame Morrible seems content to merely praise the

132 innovation that will allow for spying to occur more easily in Oz, the Wizard of Oz expresses his reasons for engaging in such a tactic, in hopes that he will persuade Elphaba to abandon her principles and join his regime.

This chapter has focused on Wicked through the lens of hegemony. I have discussed the hegemonic situation in Wicked, the strategies and tools used by Wicked’s hegemonic regime, and the two different types of hegemonic leaders that emerged from my analysis: The conventional hegemonic leader represented by Madame Morrible and the unconventional hegemonic leader represented by the Wizard of Oz. I have found that hegemonic leaders use a number of strategies and tools in order to oppress a subordinate class, obtain their goals, and maintain their power. These strategies include naming, contextualizing, legal sanctions, bargaining with the opposition, identification and the use of public admiration, hiding weaknesses, aligning with those in power, scapegoating, threatening potential dissenters, creating fear and spreading false rumors about the opposition, silencing and “brainwashing” dissenters, and destroying those closest to the dissenter. Five of these strategies included the use of tools as a means of accomplishing hegemonic goals: Labels were found to be part of the naming strategy, the Time Dragon

Clock was found to be part of the legal sanctions strategy, a loudspeaker was found to be part of the spreading rumors strategy, the giant mechanical golden head was found to be part of the public admiration strategy, and the Wizard’s guards were found to be part of the silencing dissenters strategy. In Chapter 7 of this dissertation, I will discuss messages that emerged from this chapter that audience members can take away as “equipment for living,” including warnings concerning apathy, favoring leaders’ appearance and charisma over actions, and unawareness of political issues. In the next chapter, I will

133 discuss Elphaba’s journey as a social movement leader, from her rise to power to her downfall.

134 CHAPTER 5: REINVENTING THE WITCH: ELPHABA AS A MILITANT SOCIAL

MOVEMENT LEADER AND ACTIVIST

In the September 2, 2008, Chicago performance, Elphaba, played by Dee

Roscioli, freed the flying Monkeys and then noticed a sheet moving onstage (Act 2 Scene

3). Roscioli’s Elphaba, thinking one of the Monkeys is under the sheet, exclaimed, “You!

Under the blanket! Get up now!”

As Roscioli lifted the blanket to urge the Monkey to leave, the Wizard, played by

Gene Weygandt, pleaded, “Oh no! Wait!”

It was too late; Roscioli pulled the blanket away, revealing a trembling, frightened

Dr. Dillamond, played by K. Todd Freeman, who stood on four legs, not two. “No…it can’t be! Dr. Dillamond!” Roscioli shouted in shock.

Desperately, Weygandt pleaded, “Elphaba, we couldn’t let him continue speaking out!”

Roscioli appeared not to notice Weygandt’s plea, and immediately ran to

Freeman. “Dr. Dillamond, are you alright?” she asked, kneeling down next to him.

Freeman’s Dr. Dillamond let out a small bleat. His eyes scanned the stage, showing that he did not recognize Elphaba.

“Can’t you speak?” Roscioli asked. But Freeman just bleated again, this time running off stage.

Standing up, Roscioli turned to Weygandt furiously. Her voice deepened and her pronunciation became clearer. “You and I have nothing in common,” she snapped vehemently. “I’m nothing like you and I never will be. And I’ll fight you till the day I die!”

135 Roscioli’s compassion and anger in this scene contrast to allow audience

members to see the complexity of her character. Furthermore, Weygandt’s pleading gives the Wizard a more human dimension, as was described in the previous chapter. Perhaps what made this scene so compelling for me as an audience member was not so much

Roscioli’s strong performance as Elphaba or Weygandt’s excellent interpretation of the

Wizard, but rather Freeman’s character choice as Dr. Dillamond. Freeman’s performance

allowed me to envision Dr. Dillamond as an individual who can no longer think for

himself; in way, he has been “brainwashed.” While I preferred Timothy Britten Parker’s

performance as Dr. Dillamond in this scene in the New York production because of its

“humanness,23” Freeman’s performance was indeed quite powerful and heartbreaking. It

also works to provide justification for Elphaba’s actions throughout Act 2.

In this chapter, I explore how militant social movement leadership is portrayed in

Wicked. As described in Chapter 3, I used abductive logic in order to arrive at a key

phrase with which to begin this cluster analysis: “Elphaba as a militant social movement

leader.” There were many performative elements that led me to this phrase, although, as

in the last analysis, there are simply too many to name each one. However, some of these

elements include Elphaba’s outspokenness when Dr. Dillamond is taken away, her

indifference to public opinion throughout her time at Shiz University, her powerful and

confident singing in “The Wizard and I” and “Defying Gravity,” and her declaration to

fight the Wizard “until the day that [she] dies.”

In this chapter, I argue that Elphaba is a cunning, militant leader in the fictional

“Animal Rights Movement” (Maguire, 1995, p. 90), which is actually more comparable

23 Please see Chapter 4 for a full discussion of the various performances of Dr. Dillamond in this scene. 136 to the real-life Civil Rights Movement than the real-life Animal Rights Movement. I

discuss Elphaba’s leadership traits, her rise as a militant leader, her downfall, and her

legacy. First, I begin by defining Wicked’s Animal Rights Movement as a social movement.

Ozian Animal Rights as a Social Movement

Stewart, Smith and Denton (2001) define a social movement as “an organized, uninstitutionalized and large collectivity that emerges to promote or resist change in societal norms and values, operates primarily through persuasion, and encounters opposition in a moral struggle” (p. 22). Wicked’s fictional Animal Rights Movement exhibits each of the tenets in this definition.

First, the Animal Rights Movement is organized, uninstitutionalized, and presumably large, based on what Dr. Dillamond tells Elphaba at the beginning of the musical (Act 1 Scene 4). He explains to Elphaba that he has heard of various Animals in high positions, such as professors and ministers, who have lost their jobs and can no longer speak. His stories suggest that there is in fact an underground organized structure that allows these stories to permeate throughout Oz to warn other Animals. In order to reach Animals all over Oz, one can assume that this underground collectivity is fairly large. It is also clearly uninstitutionalized because it is underground and later fights against the state.

The Animal Rights Movement resists change in societal norms. Dr. Dillamond tells his students, “I wish you could have known this place [Shiz University] as it once was, when one would walk these halls and hear an Antelope explicating a sonnet, a Snow

137 Leopard solving an equation, a Wildebeest waxing philosophic” (Act 1 Scene 4).24

Societal norms and values in Oz have changed over recent years, and Animals must now

fight against their own oppression. The underground social movement attempts to resist these changes.

The movement also operates through persuasion, although Elphaba as a leader operates primarily through militant means, as will be discussed later in this chapter. In the second act, the movement appears to be more inward-focused; Animals are most concerned with persuading other Animals of the dangers they face. However, in the first act, Dr. Dillamond uses persuasion in his history class to show his students (none of

whom are Animals) that Animals are being oppressed in Oz (Act 1 Scene 4). He begins

to teach them about the term “scapegoat” before he is interrupted by Galinda.25 He

insinuates that Animals have been blamed for all the problems in Oz. In doing so, he attempts to persuade his students that the Animals’ plight is a problem they should recognize and be concerned with.

Finally, the Animal Rights Movement encounters opposition in its moral struggle against oppression. The Wizard’s regime places restrictions on the positions that Animals can hold, limiting them from obtaining and staying in higher level positions (Act 1

Prologue; Act 1 Scene 2; Act 1 Scene 5; Act 1 Scene 10). The regime also attempts to cage Animals in order to prevent them from speaking, as illustrated in the scene where a government official shows the Shiz University students a caged Lion cub (Act 1 Scene

8). The regime even attempts to use Flying Monkeys as spies to stop “subversive Animal

24 This is also discussed in Chapter 4, in regards to Animals not being allowed to hold prestigious positions in Oz. Please see pages 92-94. 25 Chapter 4 contains a thorough discussion of scapegoating in Oz. Please see pages 104-109. 138 behavior” (Act 1 Scene 13). The Animal Rights Movement faces clear opposition from the Ozian government.

Della Porta and Diani (1999) provide four characteristics of social movements:

Informal interaction networks, shared beliefs and solidarity, collective action focusing on conflicts, and use of protest (pp. 14-15). Again, Wicked’s Animal Rights Movement exhibits all four of these characteristics.

The Animal Rights Movement is, in fact, an informal interaction network. The movement is not well-structured, although it provides a means for communication between Animals across Oz, as evidenced by Dr. Dillamond’s statements about Animals who have lost their higher-level jobs (Act 1 Scene 4). The movement allows Dr.

Dillamond to learn of the plights of other Animals, but it is an underground movement without a formal structure. Furthermore, the movement is characterized by the shared beliefs of its members. While initially the movement likely consisted only of Animals (if one can judge from Dillamond’s statements in the first act), Elphaba’s rise to power changes the constitution of the movement to include non-Animals. In the second act, it appears that the only link between the Animals and the green-skinned Governor’s daughter is the shared belief that Animals should have the same rights as humans in Oz.

While collective action is not well described in Wicked because of Act Two’s focus on Elphaba’s downfall, I argue that it does indeed exist. In the opening number of

Act Two, Ozians sing about what they have heard about Elphaba, and one Ozian declares, “I hear some rebel Animals are giving her food and shelter” (Act 2 Prologue).

First, the statement as a whole suggests that Animals are working with Elphaba in a collective manner. They are part of a network that provides its leader with means of

139 survival. Second, the term “rebel Animals” suggests that Animals are taking collective action against the regime. This collective action is never described in detail because of

Act Two’s focus on Elphaba, but the statement does reveal that some sort of collective action in the movement exists.

Lastly, Wicked’s Animal Rights Movement makes use of protest. This is seen primarily through Elphaba’s actions at the end of Act One and throughout Act Two. She protests through law-breaking militant actions, such as stealing the Grimmerie (Act 1

Scene 13), rescuing caged Animals (Act 1 Scene 9), teaching silenced Animals to speak again (Act 2 Scene 8), and freeing Flying Monkeys (Act 2 Scene 3). Elphaba’s militant protest actions will be described later in this chapter.

Elphaba Thropp: Baum’s Wicked Witch Becomes a Social Movement Leader

In both the novel and the musical versions of Wicked, L. Frank Baum’s Wicked

Witch of the West receives an image makeover. First, by giving the character a name, the term “witch” is somewhat reclaimed in a positive light. Many oppressed groups have attempted to reclaim negative terms used against them. For example, the Feminist

Movement has attempted to reclaim the words “bitch” (Joreen, 1969), “lesbian”

(Radicalesbians, 1970), and even “radical” (Sarachild, 1978). The LGBT Movement has attempted to reclaim the words “queer” (Stryker, 2004) and “dyke” (Dykes on Bikes,

2009). Perhaps one of the most notable reclamations of a derogatory term is some factions of the African-American community who have reclaimed the infamous “n-word” as a term of endearment for another member of the African-American community.

140 “Witch” is another term that has been somewhat reclaimed. Dating back to the

12th century, the word “witch” finds its roots in Old English and Old High German26

(Merriam Webster, 2009). During the 13th century, St. Thomas Aquinas argued that the

world was full of dangerous demons, or “witches” (Linder, 2005). This preoccupation with witches continued throughout the 14th century and resulted in a frenzy of European

witch trials. Witch-hunting in Europe increased throughout the 15th and 16th centuries;

accused heretics were tortured, hanged, and burned (Linder, 2005). This same practice

occurred in 17th century North America as well. While some men were labeled witches

and executed because of it, most of the victims were women. By the beginning of the 18th

century, the witch hysteria had ended, although the term still contained a negative

connotation and was most often used to refer to women.

Throughout the 20th and 21st century, many people have attempted to reclaim the

word “witch.” Various Wiccan, Pagan or Witch spiritual groups have attempted to

reclaim the word “witch” to have a positive connotation (Coughlin, n.d.; Kaczmarczik,

2009; NightMare, 2000). Perhaps the most notable attempt at reclamation of the word

“witch” is by the Women’s International Terrorist Conspiracy from Hell (W.I.T.C.H.), a

radical feminist group which used guerilla theatre and protest (“Women’s International

Terrorist Conspiracy from Hell,” 2010) and proclaimed that “you are a witch by being

female, untamed, angry, joyous and immortal” (“The W.I.T.C.H. Manifesto of 1968,

2008). W.I.T.C.H sought to reinvent the term to describe a powerful woman. Even

Hollywood has attempted to redefine the term. Through the creation of films and television shows that feature young, beautiful, good-natured “witches” such as Glinda the

26 “Witch” is related to the Old English word “wigle,” meaning “divination,” and the Old High German word “wih,” meaning “holy.” 141 Good in The Wizard of Oz, Samantha Stephens in Bewitched, and Sabrina Spellman in

Sabrina the Teenage Witch, Hollywood has attempted to reinvent the term to take on a

positive connotation.

In Wicked, a different tactic is used to reclaim the term “witch.” The Wicked

Witch of the West is given a name, Elphaba, which makes her appear more friendly and human. The Wicked Witch of the West is also given a personality and a rationale for her

actions. By re-naming this character and giving her a personality and rationale for her

actions, Wicked reclaims the word “witch.” All of “the Wicked Witch’s” actions and

characteristics are explained in Wicked, from her pointed black hat (a gift from her friend

Galinda) to her entrapment of Dorothy (to get her sister’s shoes back as a cherished family memento). Most of this rationale is provided through the Animals Rights

Movement.

Elphaba becomes a leader in the Animal Rights Movement. Stewart, Smith &

Denton (2001) note that social movement leaders must be organizers, decision makers,

and symbols for the movement (pp. 107-112). Elphaba exhibits all three of these

qualities, although the third quality is skewed due to the Wizard’s regime’s strategies

against her. First, the previously mentioned comment from an Ozian declaring that

“rebel Animals” are helping Elphaba suggests that she has the ability to organize those

within her own movement (Act 2 Scene 1). She also successfully brings Fiyero and later

Glinda to support the movement, which will be discussed later in this chapter and in

Chapter 6. Elphaba has the ability to organize Animals and a few select humans to take a

stand for the movement.

142 Second, Elphaba is clearly a decision-maker. Even during her very first scene in the show, she is attempting to make decisions for her sister, Nessarose (Act 1 Scene 2).

Later, she makes decisions on behalf of the movement: She frees Animals from captivity

(Act 1 Scene 9), teaches them to speak (Act 2 Scene 8), and brings others to her

movement (Act 2 Scene 3; Act 2 Scene 8).

Perhaps most interestingly, Elphaba becomes a symbol, albeit a negative symbol

(at least the general populace in Oz). It is important to note that, while Elphaba becomes a symbol of wickedness in Oz, she does not become a symbol for her movement, at least not in the eyes of the general public. This is due to the Wizard’s regimes hegemonic strategies, which were discussed in the previous chapter. The Ozian government successfully persuades the populace that Elphaba is not trying to help Animals; she is trying to hurt humans (Act 1 Scene 13; Act 2 Scene 1; Act 2 Scene 3; Act 2 Scene 7).

These strategies limit Elphaba’s effectiveness by disassociating her from her movement.

One might assume that “rebel Animals” recognize Elphaba as a positive symbol of their movement, but human Ozians see her as merely a symbol of wickedness and fear.

This section has described how Wicked reinvents Baum’s “wicked witch” as a social movement leader, thus serving to also reclaim the word “witch” from its negative connotations. Elphaba also exhibits a number of traits that are commonly connected with leadership. In the following section, I discuss these specific traits that contribute to

Elphaba’s ability to lead.

Elphaba’s Leadership Traits

The Trait Approach to leadership, as discussed in Chapter 3, suggests that some people have particular characteristics that make them leaders (Hollander, 1978, p. 21).

143 However, these traits are not static; they change with each situation the leader faces. In

Wicked, Elphaba exhibits various traits that are associated with good leadership (Ciulla,

1998; Jablin & Sias, 2001; Solomon, 1998; Spotts, 1976; Tead, 1935). A cluster analysis centering on the phrase “Elphaba as a militant social movement leader” resulted in the emergence of six leadership characteristics exhibited by Elphaba. These traits that are

associated with leadership are outgoingness (Henry, 1948), intelligence (Barnard, 1948;

Tead, 1935), talent (Barnard, 1948; Tead, 1935), ambition (Tead, 1935), sense of duty

(Ciulla, 1998; Tead, 1935), and care for others (Jablin & Sias, 2001; Wald & Doty,

1954).

Outgoingness

First, Elphaba is outgoing from the very first moment she appears onstage (Act 1

Scene 2). When she realizes that her classmates at Shiz are staring at her because of her green skin, she put her suitcase down and announces, “What? What are you all looking at? Oh, do I have something in my teeth? Alright, fine…we might as well get this over

with. No, I’m not seasick. Yes, I’ve always been green. No, I didn’t eat grass as a child…”

In all three documented productions, the actresses playing Elphaba screamed these lines at the Shiz students. This character choice makes Elphaba look mean at the beginning of the show. Dee Roscioli, playing Elphaba in the September 2, 2008, Chicago performance, even went as far as running up into the faces of those staring at her as she shouted her lines. Roscioli’s choice made Elphaba appear at least socially awkward, if

not deeply troubled or insane. The benefit of these character choices is that all three actresses were able to prolong the false assumption that audiences have of Elphaba being

144 the villain. The disadvantage is that some of the comic nature of the lines is lost.

Whether Elphaba is interpreted as mean, awkward, angry, or troubled, one thing is made clear through these performances: Elphaba is not a shy character.

In the same scene (Act 1 Scene 2), Elphaba’s outgoingness is exhibited when she reveals her talent for sorcery. As Madame Morrible wheels Nessarose to her room,

Elphaba becomes angry because she promised her father that she would take care of her younger sister. “Let her go!” Elphaba screams angrily, making everything onstage spin and causing Nessarose’s wheelchair to spin directly in front of her and stop. While

Elphaba apologizes for her actions afterwards, her outburst suggests that she is a person who will speak out for what she believes in and to protect those she cares about.

Later, Elphaba exhibits her assertiveness at the OzDust Ballroom dance (Act 1

Scene 6). After being tricked by Galinda into wearing an ugly pointed black hat, Elphaba

becomes the object of laughter and criticism at the dance. She sees that she has embarrassed Nessarose, and goes to apologize to her sister, but Nessarose wheels herself

away in anger. Elphaba next stares daggers at Galinda, and in defiance, walks to the

center of the ballroom wearing the hat and dances by herself, even though no music is

playing. Her dance is awkward; she throws one arm out and then another before turning

around. While Elphaba’s feelings may have been hurt, she refuses to simply run away

crying. Her outgoing nature allows her to face her fears.

Elphaba’s outgoingness is also illustrated in the scene where Dr. Dillamond is

taken away and forbidden to teach (Act 1 Scene 8). When the government official brings

in a caged Lion cub, Elphaba is quick to ask pointed questions and voice her opinion.

When the official tells the students that the Lion cub is in a cage for its own good,

145 Elphaba snaps, “If it’s so good for him, why is he trembling?” When he explains that the

cub will never learn to speak because of being in the cage, Elphaba cries, “Oh, no!”

Then, because of her anger, she casts a spell that causes everyone in the room except for

Fiyero and herself to move uncontrollably. This allows Fiyero to grab the cage and the

two run off to free the Lion cub. This scene illustrates that Elphaba is not afraid to stand

up for what she believes in, and that she is assertive enough to break the rules when she

feels it is ethically necessary.

Perhaps the best illustration of Elphaba’s outgoingness is her willingness to

confront the Wizard of Oz after learning that he is the one behind the laws oppressing the

Animals (Act 1 Scene 13). Although the Wizard is the most powerful person in Oz, and

although Elphaba is star-struck when she first meets him, she is not afraid to speak her

mind after being tricked into casting a spell that caused pain to innocent Monkeys. “You

can’t read this book at all, can you?” she accuses the Wizard. “That’s why you need an

enemy. And spies. And cages. You have no real power!27” While many people, like

Galinda, would be afraid to speak out against their leader, Elphaba speaks her mind and fights for her cause.

Intelligence

Elphaba is a very intelligent and studious character. As early studies suggest

(Barnard, 1948; Tead, 1935), many people view intelligence as an important quality for good leaders to have. When Elphaba is in class, it is clear that she is very smart and dedicated to her education. She answers every one of Dr. Dillamond’s questions, causing

him to stop her in order to let other students have a chance to show what they’ve learned

27 Please see the beginning of Chapter 4 for a detailed description of the New York performance of this scene. 146 (Act 1 Scene 4). Elphaba is serious about her education because she believes it will

allow her to achieve her career goal: To be the Wizard’s expert on magic.

Elphaba’s intelligence is further illustrated by comments from other characters in

the musical. After Elphaba has begun her militant fight against the Wizard’s regime and

Fiyero runs away with her, Glinda, who is distraught, suggests that the Wizard and

Madame Morrible spread a rumor that Nessarose is in trouble (Act 2 Scene 3). Glinda

reasoned that Elphaba would fly to help her sister in Munchkinland, and the regime could

catch her there. However, when Glinda leaves, the Wizard and Madame Morrible create

other plans.

“A rumor won’t do,” Morrible says. “Elphaba’s too smart.” “Far too smart,” the

Wizard replies. They determine that the only way of trapping her is to actually hurt her

sister. Elphaba’s intelligence and cleverness as a leader and activist is identified by her

opposition, and then is used against her.

Talent

Elphaba is not only intelligent; she is also talented in sorcery. This character trait

makes her an ideal leader because it allows her to fight her opposition using an advantage

that they do not have: Her talent at reading the Grimmerie, the magic book of spells.

Elphaba’s talent in sorcery is illustrated at six specific points in the musical. Her talent is first revealed when, in her protectiveness of her sister, she causes Nessarose’s

wheelchair to spin and land in front of her (Act 1 Scene 2)28. Both Elphaba and Nessarose

admit that this was not the first time that Elphaba has caused something magical to

happen because she is overprotective of her younger sister. Madame Morrible is the first

28 Please see pages 130-131 for a more detailed description of this scene. 147 to recognize that Elphaba’s quirk is actually a talent, and encourages her to study sorcery.

Morrible insists on tutoring Elphaba privately so that she can train her to become the

“Wizard’s Magic Grand Vizier.”

Elphaba’s talent is further illustrated in many other scenes in the musical. When she becomes upset that a Lion cub is being caged and examined in her classroom, she accidentally casts a spell that causes everyone except Fiyero and herself to move uncontrollably or freeze (depending on the performance), giving Fiyero and herself time to free the cub (Act 1 Scenes 8 & 9). She also has a natural gift for reading the

Grimmerie, and this gift allows her to cast spells that produce wings on Monkeys (Act 1

Scene 13), make brooms fly (Act 1 Scene 13), make jeweled shoes allow their wearer to walk (Act 2 Scene 2), and turn a human into a tin woodsman (Act 2 Scene 2) or a scarecrow (Act 2 Scene 6). Elphaba attempts to use her power for the benefit of others.

While real-life social movement leaders obviously do not have magic sorcery talents like

Elphaba, many of them do have talents for organizing and public speaking. Talent is one trait that many leaders of both institutions and social movements exhibit.

Ambition

Ambition is a trait often associated with leaders as well (Tead, 1935). Elphaba has ambitions throughout most of the musical, with the exception of the very end when she has weakened as a leader and realizes that she is no longer effective. Her ambitions also change throughout the musical: At first, her ambition is to work alongside the

Wizard of Oz, and later her ambition is to help those who are oppressed by fighting against the Wizard’s regime.

148 Elphaba’s early ambitions are best illustrated in the song “The Wizard and I,”

which she sings solo (Act 1 Scene 2). In all three performances that I documented,

Elphaba stands alone on the stage bathed in a green spotlight. The music offers a quick, repeated constant underlying beat and the chords and melody are in a major key, symbolizing the hopefulness and excitement Elphaba feels when she thinks about her future. However, as in many other scenes, this scene changes slightly depending on the

performance. In the New York performance, Elphaba was giddy about her future from

the very beginning of the song; her excitement merely grew in intensity throughout the

song. In contrast, during the Chicago performance, Elphaba began the song timidly, and

then grew to be excited the more she sang about her future.

Elphaba also is very excited when she meets the Wizard, although it appears it is

less for her own purposes than it is for her purposes regarding Animal freedom (Act 1

Scene 13). For once, the typically-outgoing Elphaba is speechless, “too star-struck to

move or say anything” (New York Performance Script, p. 59). Once she relaxes and

finds her voice again, she excitedly urges the Wizard to help the Animals. “Oh, your

Ozness, I knew you’d help,” she says. “I’m here – we’re here (to include Glinda) – to

alert you to something bad happening in…” It is only after she realizes that the Wizard is

causing the Animals’ oppression that she changes her ambitions from wanting to become

the Wizard’s “Magic Grand Vizier” to wanting to use her sorcery powers to help the oppressed.

While Elphaba’s ambitions may have changed, she still desires to accomplish goals. She wants to use her powers to accomplish something positive: Primarily, she seeks to help the Animals with her powers, but she also seeks to help others. This is

149 revealed through a short section of song when Elphaba arrives at the Governor’s Mansion

to ask her family for help (Act 2 Scene 2). After casting a spell on Nessarose’s shoes that

allow her to walk, Elphaba sings, “Oh, Nessa, at last! I’ve done what long ago I should, and finally from these powers – something good! Finally, something good!” Her lyrics suggest that her ambition is now to help others using her talent for sorcery. Although her goals have changed, Elphaba’s ambitious nature continues throughout the musical.

Sense of Duty and Caring for Others

Throughout the show, Elphaba has a strong sense of responsibility. This is particularly revealed through her relationship with her younger sister, Nessarose. For example, when writing a letter to her father, she writes, “There’s been some confusion over rooming here at Shiz. But, of course, I’ll care for Nessa…” (Act 1 Scene 3). She feels a strong responsibility to care for her sister throughout the show. At first, this sense of duty seems to result directly from her father’s chiding her (Act 1 Scene 2), but during a conversation with Galinda, it become clear that Elphaba is overprotective of her sister because she blames herself for Nessarose’s disability (Act 1 Scene 7). She tells Galinda that her father hates her because it’s her fault that Nessarose was born with a physical disability. “You see,” she tells her friend. “When our mother was carrying Nessa, our father began to worry that the new baby might come out green. He was so worried; he made our mother chew milk flowers day and night. Only it made Nessa come too soon, with her little legs all tangled. And our mother never woke up. None of which would ever

have happened if not for me.”

Although Galinda tries to assure Elphaba that her mother’s death and Nessarose’s

disability were caused by the milk flowers and not Elphaba’s green skin, Elphaba remains

150 unconvinced and carries this self-inflicted guilt with her throughout the show. Her sense of guilt leads to a strong sense of duty, which is a characteristic associated with leaders

(Tead, 1935). Elphaba feels a strong sense of duty towards her sister and for the

Animals.

There are multiple examples of Elphaba’s sense of responsibility for her sister.

When Galinda finds someone to go to the school dance with Nessarose, Elphaba insists that Madame Morrible enroll Galinda in sorcery class as a way to repay her for her

“kindness” towards Nessarose (Act 1 Scenes 5 & 6). Later, Elphaba worries about leaving Nessarose at Shiz University when she leaves to meet the Wizard, asking Nessa,

“Will you be alright?” (Act 1 Scene 10). Even in the second act, Elphaba feels a sense of duty regarding caring for her sister, acknowledging that she should have found a spell to allow Nessarose to walk long before she actually did (Act 2 Scene 2; please see the previous subsection for a description and analysis of this scene), and flying off to help her when she learned Nessarose was in danger (Act 2 Scene 4).

This sense of duty concerning caring for her sister leads to a sense of commitment towards Animals. Elphaba is concerned about the plight of the Animals when Dr.

Dillamond first tells her about it (Act 1 Scene 4), but her sense of duty becomes especially strong when she and Fiyero free the caged Lion cub when Dr. Dillamond is taken away (Act 1 Scene 9). During an argument with Fiyero, Elphaba snaps, “You think

I want to be this way? You think I want to care this much? You think I don’t know how much easier my life would be if I didn’t?”

Elphaba’s lines here suggests that her feelings of caring are part of a sense of duty that she has. Her lines imply that she has no control over her emotions because her sense

151 of duty prevents her from choosing to ignore atrocities. While in real life people have the choice to turn their backs to oppression, many feel, like Elphaba, that they cannot because their sense of duty or sense of morality forbids it. While Elphaba’s inability not to care may not exist in real life, it parallels the feelings of some people, some of who may be in Wicked’s audience. Elphaba’s lines here parallel emotions in everyday life, if not actual situations.

Elphaba’s caring for others is also revealed in the friendship ballad “For Good,” which she sings as a duet with Glinda near the end of the show (Act 2 Scene 8).

Although Elphaba’s friendship with Glinda has undergone difficult times, they ultimately feel closer to each other than anyone else (except for maybe Fiyero). In her part of the duet, Elphaba sings:

“It well may be that we will never meet again in this lifetime, so let me say

before we part: So much of me is made of what I learned from you. You’ll be

with me, like a handprint on my heart. And now whatever way our stories end, I

know you have re-written mine by being my friend. Like a ship blown off its

mooring by a wind off the sea, like a seed dropped by a skybird in a distant

wood, who can say if I’ve been changed for the better? But, because I knew you,

I have been changed for good.”

Elphaba expresses her caring for her friend and the fact that Glinda has had an impact on Elphaba as a person. Likewise, Glinda tells Elphaba the same. Despite their sometimes rocky relationship, the women forgive one another, express their caring for one another, and say goodbye, as is suggested in Elphaba’s lines in the song.

152 The Pittsburgh production provided one additional example of Elphaba’s caring

nature: She kissed Chistery goodbye before her “melting” (Act 2 Scene 8). Chistery has

become like a son to Elphaba, and in the Pittsburgh production, Carmen Cusack kissed

Kyle Hill on the forehead to emphasize this relationship. This tender moment in the

musical further illustrates Elphaba’s caring for others.

In this section, I have described the various leadership traits exhibited by Elphaba.

In the next section, I will discuss her ascent as a militant social movement leader.

The Rise of a Militant Social Movement Leader

Elphaba’s ascent to militant social movement leader begins in the first act, when

she is awakened to the plight of the Ozian Animals. When Dr. Dillamond first tells

Elphaba about the oppression facing the Animals, she immediately wants to alert the

Wizard, thinking that he will put an end to it (Act 1 Scene 4). She exhibits concern for the Animals and their oppression when she and Fiyero free the caged Lion cub. Also, as previously described, she is upset when Dr. Dillamond is taken away (Act 1 Scene 8); in

the Pittsburgh production, she screams at the government officials in protest.

All of these instances reveal Elphaba’s connection to the Animals Rights

Movement at a fairly early age. In real life, this is frequently how social movement

leaders get their start; at an early age, they find a social issue that is close to their hearts

and become more involved with it. For example, Civil Rights leaders W.E.B. DuBois,

Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, and Rosa Parks all note memorable times in their

childhood when they experienced the awful effects of racism (King, 1998; Lucaites &

Condit, 1990; Parks, 1992; Wolters, 2002). These experiences greatly impacted their

lives and contributed to their decisions to join, and later lead, the Civil Rights Movement.

153 The same is true for Elphaba, although her awakening does not happen until college

because she is an “outsider” in the movement: She is not an Ozian Animal. Because she

did not experience this oppression herself at a young age, her awakening and decision to

take a stand is delayed in comparison to the real-life social movement leaders discussed

here.

Furthermore, Elphaba exhibits concern for Animals when she finally meets the

Wizard; she tells him of the Animals’ plight, and is worried about Chistery when she

inadvertently causes him pain while casting what she thinks is a levitation spell on him

(Act 1 Scene 13). It is this scene that causes her to choose a militant stance. When the

Wizard excitedly tells her that the flying Monkeys will be used to spy on animals in order

to “report any subversive Animal activity,” Elphaba is suddenly socially-awakened. She

realizes that the Wizard has no real power and is actually the one responsible for the

oppression. Her innocence is shattered, and she realizes that she has believed a myth her entire life: The myth that the Wizard is the epitome of goodness and will do anything to help his citizens. In an act of rebellion, she grabs the Grimmerie and runs off.

This act of rebellion is a turning point for Elphaba. Using Simons’ terminology,

she has become a militant social movement leader. She is willing to stand up for her

cause no matter the cost, and in this case, the cost is her reputation and life as she knows

it. Militant leaders engage in radical tactics and are willing to go to the extremes to bring

attention to their cause. Often, militant leaders are merely looking to raise awareness,

even if the attention they receive is negative (Simons, 1970; Windt, 1972).

Glinda runs off to find Elphaba before the Wizard’s guards do, and she locates

Elphaba in the palace’s attic loft (Act 1 Scene 14). Frustrated, Glinda chastises Elphaba:

154 “I hope you’re happy how you’ve hurt your cause forever!” Glinda’s comment reveals

her conservativeness; she prefers that Elphaba work within the rules set by the Wizard to

make change for the Animals. Militant leaders are commonly viewed as hurting the cause

more than they help it. Elphaba, however, is just as frustrated with her friend, and

responds with “I hope you’re happy, too! I hope you’re proud how you would grovel in submission to feed your own ambition!” Here, Elphaba feels that her friend’s lack of passion is flawed, and believes that Glinda’s suggestions to implement change by working within the system are not drastic enough. Frequently, this is a critique of

moderate leaders by their more militant counterparts; militant leaders may feel that

conservative tactics simply do not “get the job done” and pander to the opposition. As

Simons (1970) notes, moderate leaders win sympathizers, even within the power

structure, by reducing the distance between the movement and the power structure (p. 9).

However, those in power are reluctant to translate this sympathy into action, resulting in a

lack of action or success by moderate leaders. Here, Elphaba believes that Glinda’s

suggestion to work within the structure simply will not result in action.

When Elphaba discovers her true sorcery ability by making a broom fly, she

makes the decision to take a militant stand, leaving behind the only life and friend she has

ever known. As Elphaba declares her intentions to “defy gravity,” she becomes

empowered and announces that the Wizard should be afraid of her. Using a deeper,

richer voice quality than in previous songs, Elphaba sings about her feelings of empowerment:

“Something has changed within me. Something is not the same. I’m through

with playing by the rules of someone else’s game. Too late for second guessing.

155 Too late to go back to sleep. It’s time to trust my instincts, close my eyes, and

leap!”

Elphaba is bound and determined not to follow conventional means of protest.

She has tried to “play by the rules of someone else’s game” and was unsuccessful. She

went to the Wizard and asked for his help, only to find that he is the one who initially

began the oppression of the Animals. She continues declaring her empowerment in the

second verse of her song:

“I’m through accepting limits ‘cause someone says they’re so. Some things I

cannot change, but ‘till I try I’ll never know. Too long I’ve been afraid of losing

love I guess I’ve lost. Well, if that’s love, it comes at much too high a cost!”

Elphaba implies here that she hasn’t taken a more militant stand because of repercussions from those she cares about. She fears that her father, sister, Glinda, and

Fiyero will not love her anymore because of her decision to fight for what she believes in and to defy social norms. During her moment of awakening, however, she determines that silencing herself is not worth the cost of possibly losing the love of her friends and family. In an interesting twist, it is her passion and decision to reject societal norms in order to help the Animals that wins her the heart of Fiyero.

At the end of “Defying Gravity,” Elphaba rises to the top of the proscenium with broom in hand, wearing the black cape Glinda had draped her in and the pointed black hat Glinda had given her. The orchestral music offers a quick progression of repetitive major chords, further exemplifying Elphaba’s empowerment and excitement. In both the

Chicago and New York performances, lighting effects were used to make Elphaba’s dress and cloak look as if it flowed over the entire stage. This image added to the message of

156 Elphaba’s empowerment, suggesting that her passion and power are so all-encompassing that they fill the entire set. This effect was not used in the Pittsburgh performance, however. This is likely due to technological capabilities since the Pittsburgh

performance was done by the national touring company and the set was not permanently

fixed like the sets in the New York and Chicago productions. This unfortunately made

the ending slightly less powerful in the Pittsburgh production, but Cusack’s lowered voice and strong energy still resulted in conveying Elphaba’s empowerment.

Throughout the second act, Elphaba uses militant tactics to help Animals and

bring attention to her cause. Simons (1970) describes militant tactics as “direct action techniques and verbal polemics,” including threats, harassment, cajoling, disruption, intimidation and coercion (p. 8). He also argues that “hostility is expressed in dress, manners, dialect, gestures, in-group slogans and ceremonies” (p. 8). Militant leaders use confrontational strategies, such as strikes, sit-ins, and boycotts, to further the goals of their movements (p. 9). Militant leaders tend to defy social norms and occasionally violate the law.

It is important to note that militant tactics need not be violent (although they may). While some militant protest groups, such as the Labor Movement’s International

Workers of the World (Asimakopoulos, 2007), choose to use violent tactics, others choose what Wehr (1968) refers to as “social disruption,” which causes a disturbance in social or economic systems (p. 74). Wehr provides the example of the Civil Rights sit-ins

in the 1960s in order to illustrate social disruption. Many of Elphaba’s militant actions

are non-violent, but they certainly disrupt the Ozian social system. Elphaba is not radical in the violent manner described by Scott and Smith (1969) in their discussion of

157 confrontational rhetoric; instead, she is militant in the way that Lake (1983) discusses the

Red Power Movement. She is not violent, but she refuses to follow conventional norms.

Some of her tactics include breaking into the palace to free the flying Monkeys (Act 2

Scene 3), threatening the Wizard at “broompoint29” (Act 2 Scene 3), and unlawfully

teaching silenced Animals to speak (Act 2 Scene 8).

While militant leaders do not often seek to recruit new members and attract them

to the movement, Elphaba succeeds in attracting two people to her movement: Fiyero and

Glinda. Glinda’s transformation will be discussed in the following chapter. In the next

section, I will discuss Fiyero’s transformation from frivolous, apathetic party-goer to

movement activist.

Fiyero Becomes an Activist

Fiyero is first awakened to the plight of the Animals when a caged Lion cub is brought to class (Act 1 Scene 8). Elphaba is appalled, and casts a spell that causes

everyone to move uncontrollably or freeze (depending on the performance) except for

Fiyero and herself. The two students grab the cage, and run to the forest to set the cub

free (Act 1 Scene 9). This act of rebellion serves as a bond for the two characters, and becomes a turning point for the self-proclaimed self-absorbed Fiyero. This first act of protest later becomes a memory that causes Fiyero to take a stand for the movement, and also take a stand for Elphaba, later in the musical. Interestingly, although Elphaba initiates the act of rebellion by casting the spell, it is Fiyero who thinks of freeing the cub.

29 In all three productions documented in this study, the actresses playing Elphaba held their brooms as if it were a rifle pointed at the Wizard of Oz. In the Pittsburgh production, Carmen Cusack also pointed her broom as if it were a gun at the Wizard’s guards in the scene after Nessarose’s death. 158 This foreshadows Fiyero’s future role as an Animal Rights activist; he often completes work that Elphaba, as the leader, begins.

In a later scene (Act 1 Scene 10), Fiyero’s awakening is apparent as Elphaba,

Fiyero, and Galinda talk about the act of rebellion while waiting for Elphaba’s train:

Fiyero: Listen, I’ve been thinking…

Elphaba: Yes, I’ve heard.

Fiyero: About that lion cub and everything. I think about that day a lot…

Elphaba: Really? So do I.

Galinda: Me, too! Poor Dr. Dillamond. It makes me want to, uh, take a stand. So

I’ve been thinking of, uh, changing my name.

Fiyero: Your name?

Galinda: Well, yes! Since Dr. Dillamond had his own way of pronouncing my

name, in solidarity and to express my outrage, I will henceforth be known no

longer as Galinda, but as simply, Glinda.

Fiyero: Oh, well, that’s very admirable of you…Glinda. Elphaba, good luck!

This scene shows how two other characters, Galinda and Fiyero, become involved in the movement to a lesser extent. Fiyero is contemplating what he can do to become more involved in the movement. Galinda, who clearly is not ready to make the leap into social movement emergence, takes a small step by changing her name in honor of her professor

(but primarily to impress Fiyero). This scene serves to foreshadow Fiyero becoming a member of the movement, and to foreshadow, perhaps with irony, Galinda becoming a conservative leader of the movement and of Oz as a nation.

159 At the beginning of the second act, Fiyero’s consideration of the movement leads to action. He joins the Wizard’s guards in order to find Elphaba; he even works his way

up to becoming Captain of the Guards. When he hears the Ozian public spreading lies

about Elphaba, he is clearly upset (Act 2 Scene 1). He screams angrily at the crowd,

“People are so empty-headed they’ll believe anything!” Glinda pulls him aside to calm

him down, and through their conversation, he realizes that Elphaba does not wish to be

found. He is clearly distraught about her disappearance.

One may argue that Fiyero misses Elphaba and wants to find her simply because

he is in love with her. I do not believe this is the case for two reasons. First, Fiyero is in

love with Elphaba because of her passion for her cause and her desire to help others.

Elphaba lacks qualities that are often considered attractive qualities of lead females in

musicals30: She is not physically attractive, nor is she especially funny, and in the second

act, she is anything but accomplished in the eyes of the public. Fiyero loves her because

of her passion and her drive; he loves her because she is willing to sacrifice her own

personal ambitions to help others.

Second, not every production I documented placed Fiyero in a position of

melancholy at the beginning of the second act. During the Broadway performance,

Kevin Kern, playing Fiyero, had his arms wrapped around Alli Mauzey playing Glinda

during the first scene. My fieldnotes describe the interaction as “Fiyero is all over Glinda,

suggesting he does not yet know he is in love with Elphaba.” Indeed, if Fiyero

recognized he was in love with Elphaba, it is unlikely he would be cuddling with another

30 In most musicals, the lead female is typically beautiful (see Julie in Carousel, Fiona in Brigadoon, and Christine in Phantom of the Opera), funny (see Fanny in Funny Girl, Winifred in Once Upon a Mattress, and Annie in Annie Get Your Gun), or accomplished (see Nellie in South Pacific, Anna in The King and I, and Cassie in A Chorus Line). 160 woman. This suggests that Fiyero is searching for Elphaba for a different reason:

Because he cares about her cause, as evidenced by his “thinking” in the first act, and

wants to help her.

He has an opportunity to do just that when Elphaba sneaks into the Wizard’s

palace in an attempt to free the flying Monkeys (Act 2 Scene 3). It is here that Fiyero

finally takes a stand for Elphaba and for the movement. Believing in Elphaba’s cause

and finally realizing the he is in love with her, he points his gun at the Wizard, announcing that he is leaving with Elphaba, much to Glinda’s dismay. Fiyero, too, is willing to give up everything in order to help the woman he loves help the oppressed

Animals. Glinda is crushed, but Elphaba has converted her very first non-Animal member to the movement. This act suggests that even militant tactics can sometimes result in bringing outsiders to the movement, albeit this occurs less frequently than when moderate tactics are used.

Fiyero takes one last stand for Elphaba, and consequently for the movement, when she is captured by the guards after Nessarose’s death (Act 2 Scene 5). Dropping out of a tree, he points his rifle at the guards and then, realizing he is outnumbered, takes

Glinda hostage, threatening to kill her if the guards do not free Elphaba. It is likely that

Fiyero did this for two reasons: 1) He loves Elphaba and is willing to give his life for hers, and 2) As an activist and sympathizer, he believes she can do more good for the movement than he can. Fiyero’s actions suggest that social movement activists, like leaders, may prioritize the good of the movement over their own welfare and ambitions.

161 Militancy Reconsidered

While Elphaba does have some success as a leader, this success is short-lived

because of the Ozian government’s hegemonic tactics discussed in the previous chapter.

Elphaba is scorned by all of Oz, and her unpopularity leads to her downfall.

Elphaba is no stranger to scorn, however; she has been scorned by others throughout her life. She is first scorned by her family. Her father thinks so little of her that he doesn’t even mention her name to the headmistress at Shiz University (Act 1

Scene 2). He is embarrassed of her outgoing nature and sees her only as a caretaker for the daughter he does love, Nessarose. Similarly, by the end of the musical, Nessarose scorns Elphaba as well. She tells Elphaba that she shamed her family and is angry that

Elphaba has not used her powers to help her walk (Act 2 Scene 2). Ultimately, she blames Elphaba for Boq’s transformation, even though Nessarose herself is responsible

for almost killing him.

Elphaba has also been scorned by her peers, even from the first day she arrived at

Shiz University. The other students are frightened by her and stare at her (Act 1 Scene 2).

During the New York performance, one Shiz student fainted upon seeing Elphaba. All of the other Shiz students join Glinda’s side during the song “What is this Feeling?” because of their dislike for Elphaba. Her peers scorn her because of her green skin and her outspokenness.

Therefore, it is not surprising that this theme continues into Elphaba’s adulthood.

She is scorned by society, just as she had been scorned by her family and peers. Because of the successful hegemonic strategies employed by the Wizard’s regime against

Elphaba, Ozian citizens associate Elphaba with wickedness. They spread rumors about

162 her, such as “she has an extra eye that always remains awake” and “her soul is so unclean

that pure water can melt her” (Act 2 Scene 1)31. Her unpopularity leads her to reconsider

her militant position in Act Two.

When Elphaba arrives at the palace to free the Flying Monkeys, she encounters

the Wizard (Act 2 Scene 3)32. Rather than have her arrested by his guards, the Wizard attempts to bargain with Elphaba. In an attempt to identify with her, he explains that he is lonely and tells her the story of his ascent through song. A self-proclaimed “dime a dozen mediocrity” from Nebraska, he arrived by balloon at a time when Oz was in serious turmoil. The Ozian people idolized him, calling him “wonderful,” and he reveled in it. He explains that it made him feel parental to give them what they wanted. When

Elphaba points out that he lied to them, he defends himself by claiming “they were lies they wanted to hear” and that “we believe all sorts of things that aren’t true. We call it history.”

He then goes on to explain the concept of basic social constructionism: If people in society all agree that something is a certain way, it becomes a certain way. The

Wizard uses himself as an example: “They call me ‘wonderful,’ so I am wonderful.”

After explaining this concept, he offers to help Elphaba if she’ll stop her militant tactics.

“With my help, you can be the same,” he tells her. “A long, long last, receive your due – long overdue. Elphaba, the most celebrated are the rehabilitated. There’ll be such a whoop-de-doo! A celebration throughout Oz that’s all to do with you!

Wonderful…they’ll call you wonderful…”

31 Please see pages 109-111 of this dissertation for a detailed description of the rumors spread by the Ozian public concerning Elphaba. 32 Please refer to pages 96-98 of this dissertation for an explanation of identification in this scene. Also, please refer to page 98-99 for an explanation of the Wizard’s admission of lack of talent in this scene. 163 Elphaba considers this proposition, exhibiting her consideration through dance and song. She sings, “It would be wonderful…” before joining in the Wizard’s chorus.

She even takes his hand and dances with him, illustrating that she takes his proposition seriously. Suddenly, she thinks of a counter-offer, and agrees to accept his proposition if he sets the Monkeys free. He agrees, and pushes a lever that allows the Flying Monkeys to escape.

In this scene, it appears that Elphaba is reconsidering her militancy in favor of a more moderate approach. Simons (1970) refers to leaders who use both militant and moderate tactics as “intermediate social movement leaders.” Intermediate leaders tend to appear to be more conservative in the minds of their adversaries and more radical in the eyes of their followers, but this stance comes with its risks as well (Simons, 1970). For example, a movement’s members may see the intermediate leader as less dependable than a moderate or militant leader, and may consider him or her to be indecisive. In Elphaba’s case, taking a more intermediate approach might have made her seem weak in the eyes of some of her Animal followers, but it may also have allowed her to make greater strides for them by working within the already-established governmental system.

However, Elphaba quickly changes her mind, reneging on the deal for a good reason. As Elphaba begins to free the Monkeys, she comes across a white sheet which is covering her former professor, Dr. Dillamond. Dillamond is unable to speak now:

Whenever spoken to, he simply bleats33. The Wizard insists that they “just couldn’t keep letting him speak out,” implying the silence theme that is so familiar to real-life social movement members who are struggling for their voices to be heard. Elphaba replies,

33 Please see pages 113-115 for the various ways in which Dr. Dillamond is portrayed in this scene. 164 “We have nothing in common. I am nothing like you and I never will be and I will fight

you until the day I die!” She has clearly abandoned the thought of using any moderate or

intermediate tactics and returns to being a militant leader.

Militant Leadership’s Downward Spiral

Upon realizing that she is struggling as a militant leader, Elphaba travels to the

eastern part of Oz to entreat the help of her father, the governor of Munchkinland (Act 2

Scene 3). When she arrives, she finds her sister, Nessarose instead. In a much deeper- sounding voice signifying that she has been hardened by her difficult decision to become

a militant leader, she tells Nessarose that she needs their father’s help. Nessarose promptly replies that their father died of embarrassment because of what Elphaba has

done, and explains that she herself is the Governor of Munchkinland now. However,

when Elphaba asks for her help, Nessarose is uninterested and instead blames Elphaba for

not casting a spell allowing her to walk.

Through this conversation, we can see that Elphaba is weakening as a leader. The

hegemonic forces that are working against her have caused the entire country to despise

her, leaving her with little hope for success in her movement unless she can somehow

turn public opinion around. She is becoming desperate. She asks for help from her

family, thinking that a person with a good reputation, like Nessarose or her father, might

be able to help her cause more than she can. However, as Nessarose points out, Elphaba

paid a price when she joined the movement: She abandoned her family. Real-life social

movement leaders may face a similar fate. Their involvement in the movement may

damage their relationships with family and friends, especially their relationships with

those who do not believe in the movement. For example, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, a

165 leader of the Women’s Suffrage Movement, endured marital tension as a result of her long travel schedule and her husband’s differing views on Women’s Rights (Baker,

2005). In Wicked, Elphaba’s decision to join the social movement has hurt her relationship with her sister.

Later in the second act, when Fiyero has been captured by the guards, Elphaba reflects on her own situation in the song “No Good Deed” (Act 2 Scene 6). Red and purple lights surround her, suggesting her struggle between good and evil (and figuring out the difference). A lighting effect makes her long black dress appear to fill the entire stage as she searches desperately through the Grimmerie to find a spell that will save her lover’s life. After reflecting on how she tried to help others and failed, she reconsiders her own motives through song:

“One question haunts and hurts too much, too much to mention. Was I really

seeking good or just seeking attention? Is that all good deeds are when looked at

with an ice-cold eye? If that’s all good deeds are, then maybe that’s the reason

why no good deed goes unpunished. All helpful urges should be circumvented.

No good deed goes unpunished. Sure, I meant well, but look at what well-meant

did! All right, enough, so be it…so be it then. Let all Oz be agreed: I’m wicked

through and through. And since I can’t succeed, Fiyero, saving you, I promise

no good deed will I attempt to do again! Never again!”

This song, which is in minor key and features an ongoing beat that signifies urgency, illustrates Elphaba’s breakdown. Throughout the show, she has stood up for what she believed was right. She fought against a hegemonic regime in hopes of ending the oppression of the Animals, but her militant stance has come with a cost. As a result

166 of her fight against the regime, she has lost her sister and appears to have lost her lover.

She has completely lost hope and feels that she is ineffective as a leader. This breakdown

ultimately leads to her decision to give up and pass the torch of leadership to someone

else.

Passing the Torch of Social Movement Leadership to Glinda

After realizing her ineffectiveness as a social movement leader, Elphaba isolates

herself in a castle in Oz’s westernmost province that belongs to Fiyero’s family (Act 2

Scene 8). Glinda arrives at Elphaba’s castle to alert Elphaba that the witch hunters are

coming and to ask her to let Dorothy, the little girl whose house killed Nessarose, go.

Elphaba is in the process of convincing Dorothy to give her Nessarose’s shoes, which she wants as a sentimental reminder of her sister. When Glinda arrives, the two friends forgive each other, Glinda tells her friend that she is “out of control,” and Elphaba admits that she is no longer effective as a social movement leader:

Elphaba: (carrying a bucket of water) You’re right…it’s time I surrender.

Glinda: Elphie… Elphie, what is it?

Elphaba: (pointing to a corner) You can’t be found here. You must go!

Glinda: No.

Elphaba: You must leave.

Glinda: No! Elphie, I’ll tell them everything!

Elphaba: No! They’ll only turn against you.

Glinda: I don’t care!

Elphaba: I do! Promise me…promise me you won’t try to clear my

name…promise.

167 Glinda: Alright…I promise. But I don’t understand.

Elphaba: I’m limited. Just look at me. I’m limited. And just look at you; you can

do all I couldn’t do, Glinda. (Hands Glinda the Grimmerie) Here. Take this.

Glinda: Elphie, you know I can’t read that. Elphie…

Elphaba: Well then, you’ll have to learn. Now it’s up to you, for both of us. Now

it’s up to you.

Perhaps it is this scene that makes the strongest statement in the musical about social movement leadership. Here, Elphaba, realizing that she is no longer effective as a leader, passes the torch, symbolized by the Grimmerie, to Glinda, who has been transitioning from a self-absorbed young girl to a conservative leader who has learned from her experiences. Glinda is finally ready to take her role as a both an institutional leader and a social movement leader, and her transformation will be discussed in detail in

Chapter 6. By making Glinda promise not to try to clear her name, Elphaba ensures that

Glinda will be able to make a fresh start for the movement. While Glinda does not understand, Elphaba knows that Glinda cannot be effective as a leader if she is publically

connected with an unpopular former leader. This scene suggests that militant social

movement leaders must sometimes give way to moderate, or even intermediate social

movement leaders in order for the movement to be effective.

Lucaites and Condit’s (1990) work on the rhetoric of the Civil Rights Movement

further illustrates this concept. They argue that in order for Martin Luther King Jr.’s

“culturetypal” rhetoric to be effective, it had to be compared to Malcolm X’s “counter-

cultural” rhetoric. Malcolm X’s militant rhetoric made King’s equality argument more

palatable to White America, thus attracting more people to the Civil Rights Movement.

168 Similarly, Elphaba, as a militant leader, is able to pave the way for a more moderate

leader to advance the cause of Animal Rights and attract more Ozians to the movement.

This transition of leadership is also illustrated through the ballad “For Good” that

Glinda and Elphaba sing as a duet before Elphaba’s “melting.” Recognizing her inability

to lead her movement any longer due to her unpopularity, Elphaba sings to Glinda, “I’m

limited. Just look at me…I’m limited. And just look at you – you can do all I couldn’t do,

Glinda. Now it’s up to you, for both of us. Now it’s up to you.” Elphaba recognizes that

her militant tactics can only take her movement so far, but that Glinda’s popularity and

leadership could advance the cause of the movement further.

The two friends sing a touching ballad about their friendship, recognizing that this

is their final goodbye. As they sing, they switch voice parts. Glinda, who is a high

soprano, singing notes as high as two C’s above middle C throughout the show, takes the

lower part in “For Good.” Elphaba, a belting mezzo-soprano who always takes the lower

part when singing with Glinda34, takes a higher descant part in “For Good.” This voice part switch symbolizes the transition of power. Elphaba, who has always sung the lower, more powerful part, has always been the more powerful character. Here, however, she has broken down as a leader and is passing the reins to Glinda. Glinda has always sung the higher parts usually reserved for love-struck women in classic musicals35, and her

musical lines seems to parallel her frivolous, carefree personality. In “For Good,” she

sings the lower, stronger part, emphasizing her ability and readiness to take on a

34 “What is this Feeling?” is the other duet sung by Elphaba and G(a)linda. In this song, Glinda takes the soprano part while Elphaba takes the alto part. Similarly, this same split occurs at various points in One Short Day” and “Defying Gravity” when the two women sing together. 35 See Sarah’s songs in Guys and Dolls, Polly in The Boy Friend, Laurey’s songs in Oklahoma! and Hope’s songs in Anything Goes. Each of these soprano characters are more naïve and less powerful than their alto counterparts (Adelaide in Guys and Dolls, Maisie in The Boy Friend, Ado Annie in Oklahoma! and Reno and Bonnie/Erma in Anything Goes). 169 leadership role of the Animal Rights Movement in addition to her role as a leader in the

Ozian government. Glinda’s transformation and leadership position will be thoroughly

discussed in the next chapter.

Interestingly, the voice part switch occurred in only two of the three performances

I documented. It also occurs in the sheet music and cast recording, suggesting that the

creators of Wicked intended for it to take place. In the Broadway performance, however,

the voice part switch did not occur. Alli Mauzey, playing Glinda, continued to sing the

high descant part while Nicole Parker, playing Elphaba, continued to sing the lower,

more powerful-sounding melody. Unfortunately, this resulted in a less impressive leadership transition than the transitions that occurred in the other two performances. My initial speculation in my fieldnotes was that Mauzey may have been fighting a cold during the particular performance that I documented. As a soprano, I find it much easier to sing higher when I’m sick than to sing a belting, lower part. It is unlikely that either actor was unable to sing the full range of both parts since it was a Broadway production.

While local theatre may adjust ranges to accommodate less-experienced singers,

Broadway productions have their choice of thousands of the best singers across the nation and perhaps throughout the world. Whatever the reason for the continuation of their usual voice parts in “For Good,” the Broadway production’s leadership transition seemed lacking in comparison with the other performances because of this decision.

Legacy of a Militant Leader

After Elphaba’s supposed “melting,” her legacy continues to live on. This legacy is embodied by two characters: Chistery, Elphaba’s favorite Flying Monkey, and Glinda,

Elphaba’s best friend.

170 First, Chistery finally speaks after Elphaba’s “death” (Act 2 Scene 8). Elphaba had been trying to teach Chistery to speak just before her “melting.” She pleaded with him, “Chistery, please, if you don’t at least try to keep speaking, you’ll…” before being interrupted by Glinda’s arrival. However, Chistery did not speak, despite Elphaba’s best attempts at helping him. After Elphaba has “melted,” Chistery notices a small green bottle on the floor where Elphaba had disappeared. Perhaps recognizing the keepsake, he forces himself to speak in order to get Glinda’s attention. With difficulty, he says, “Miss?

Miss Glinda?” and hands her the bottle.

The act of Chistery speaking suggests that Elphaba did in fact have some success in her pursuit of Animal Rights. Chistery, who was initially silenced by the Wizard’s regime, has regained his voice due to Elphaba’s work with him. While she may not have succeeded in changing Oz for the Animals, she was successful in helping at least one

Animal, proving that she did, in fact, make a difference.

Elphaba’s legacy is also embodied through Glinda. Glinda’s awakening allows her to become a socially-conscious leader, and her charisma with the Ozian populace allows her to banish the Wizard, incarcerate Madame Morrible, and assume her new role as leader of Oz (Act 2 Scene 9). As Glinda notes in her duet with Elphaba just before the

“melting,” she has “been changed for good.” Elphaba’s passion for her cause and sense of ethics has had a profound impact on Glinda, and one can assume that Glinda, as the new leader of Oz, will repeal laws that oppress the Animals. This assumption can be made not only because of the impact Elphaba has had on Glinda, but also because of

Chistery’s presence at the very end of the musical. After Glinda speaks to the Ozian public, she retires to her chamber, where Chistery hands her the Grimmerie. Chistery’s

171 presence and his act of handing her the Grimmerie suggest that he, and other Animals,

will be instrumental in Glinda’s administration. Elphaba has succeeded in leaving a

legacy through Glinda and Chistery that will continue to promote Animal Rights.

Conclusion

In this chapter, I have argued that Elphaba is a militant social movement leader and that her story offers one possible trajectory of militant leadership. I have first explained how Wicked’s Animal Rights Movement is indeed a social movement with

Elphaba as its leader by standards established by previous scholarship. I then described traits that Elphaba embodies and explained how previous research has associated these traits with leadership. I have discussed how Fiyero becomes an activist in the movement.

Finally, I have followed Elphaba’s trajectory from her rise as a social movement leader to her demise and legacy.

But how successful was Elphaba as a militant social movement leader? One way of assessing the effectiveness of a leader is by examining the leader’s accomplishments through the lens of Simons’ (1970) three rhetorical requirements for social movement leaders. Elphaba successfully exhibits one of these requirements, but she is relatively ineffective regarding the second requirement, and fails to exhibit the last requirement at all. It is this last requirement that ultimately leads to her downfall as a leader.

First, Simons notes that social movement leaders “must react to resistance generated by the larger structure” (p. 4). Elphaba certainly exhibits this requirement. As was described in this chapter, Elphaba uses multiple militant tactics in order to fight against the Wizard’s regime. Some of these tactics include stealing the Grimmerie (Act 1

172 Scene 13), freeing caged Animals (Act 1 Scene 8), teaching silenced Animals to speak

(Act 2 Scene 8), and declaring war against the Ozian government (Act 2 Scene 3).

Second, Simons states that social movement leaders must “attract, maintain and

mold workers (i.e. followers) into an efficiently organized unit” (p. 3). While one might

assume that Elphaba may have organized “rebel Animals” to work for the movement, no

such events are discussed in the musical. This may mean that Elphaba failed to

“efficiently” organize followers. However, Elphaba attracted at least two members to the

Animal Rights Movement throughout Wicked: Fiyero and Glinda. It appears that she was only partially successful in regards to this requirement.

However, I challenge this requirement in regards to militant leaders. Militant leaders do not seek to attract members; they seek to attract attention. This is documented in Windt’s (1972) work on Yippie diatribes, in Olson and Goodnight’s (1994) work on the Anti-Fur Movement, and in Simons’ (1970) own work. While it is fair to criticize

Elphaba’s character for failing to maintain and mold workers into an effective group

(since it appears that she typically works alone), it seems unfair to judge her based on the

“attraction” standard because she is a militant leader. While she inadvertently attracts

Fiyero and Glinda to her movement, she, like other militant leaders, appears unconcerned with bringing outsiders to support her cause. She is more concerned with bringing attention to the movement and helping Animals through her militant tactics.

Lastly, Simons argues that social movement leaders “must secure adoption of their product by the larger structure” (p. 3). It is this rhetorical requirement where

Elphaba fails to be an adequate leader. While she tries to save Animals, teach them to speak, and make her cause known, the state successfully prevents Elphaba’s cause from

173 reaching public ears. The populace is apathetic and believes the lies told to them by the

Wizard’s regime. Furthermore, Elphaba is unable to persuade the Wizard to stop the

Animals’ oppression; it is ultimately Glinda who succeeds in changing the larger

structure. She is able to accomplish this requirement presumably only through her impact

on Glinda. In fact, when she is given the opportunity to work with the Wizard in Act 2 under the pretense that she stops her militant tactics, as described at the very beginning of

this chapter, she refuses, declaring war against the Wizard and his regime. She is more

concerned with standing by her ethics than compromising in order to get her “product”

adopted by “the larger structure.” It is this requirement where Elphaba fails as a social

movement leader, according to Simons’ (1970) requirements.

Elphaba’s story offers one possible course that militant social movement leaders

may take. While each militant leader will have his or her own experiences, and some

may not experience anything like Elphaba’s situations, Elphaba’s story does offer an

interesting conclusion: Militant leaders may bring some success to the movement, but

their greatest influence often occurs through the legacy they instill in others. It is no

secret that social movement leadership is in a constant state of flux. The same social

movement may have a militant leader for a period of time and then switch to a more

moderate leader, or vice-versa. Wicked’s storyline suggests that while militant leaders may be able to have some impact on some members of society, moderate leaders are the ones who must take the reins and bring the populace and the institution to the movement’s side. This idea will be further discussed in the next chapter, which analyzes

Glinda’s role as both an institutional leader and later a social movement leader.

174 Furthermore, lessons concerning Elphaba regarding “equipment for living” that audience members may take away from Wicked will be discussed in Chapter 7 of this dissertation.

175 CHAPTER 6: OBSCURING THE LINE BETWEEN THE INSTITUTION AND THE

SOCIAL MOVEMENT: GLINDA AS A CONSERVATIVE SOCIAL MOVEMENT

LEADER

On September 13, 2008, Katie Rose Clarke, while playing Glinda at the Benedum

Center in Pittsburgh, presented a brief, bold monologue in which her character takes on

the reins of leadership (Act 2 Scene 9). Dropping her nasal accent, which Clarke used

only when Glinda was young or speaking in public, Clarke as Glinda told her fallen

former role model, Madame Morrible, played by Myra Lucretia Taylor, “Have you ever

considered how you’d fare in captivity? Prison. Personally, I can’t imagine you’ll hold up

very well. You see, my personal opinion is that you do not have what it takes. I hope

you’ll prove me wrong. I doubt you will.” Clarke echoes Taylor’s lines from a previous

scene, but with even more disdain than Taylor originally delivered them. Clarke ends the

monologue by passionately and angrily ordering her guards to “Take her [Madame

Morrible] away!”

Clarke’s performance as Glinda in this scene was, in my opinion, the most

impressive of the three performances I examined for this study. Clarke allowed her

character to build in intensity throughout the show, initially portraying her as a nasal-

voiced flighty party-girl and allowing her to grow into the strong, independent leader that

she gives voice to in this scene. Her performance in this scene contrasted with Annaleigh

Ashford’s performance in the Chicago production, which played up the comedic aspect

of this scene but minimalized the transition to leadership, and with Alli Mauzey’s

performance in the New York production, which tried to balance comedy with serious political message by mimicking Madame Morrible until the very last line, which she

176 screamed angrily. As an audience member, I found Clarke’s performance the most

effective of the three because of her character’s display of growth and transition

throughout the show, finally cumulating in this scene. The contrast between these performances will be discussed in detail at the end of this chapter.

In the preceding chapter, I have argued that Elphaba is an example of a militant social movement leader, but Elphaba is not the only character in the musical with

leadership qualities. In this chapter, I argue that Glinda is also a leader, transformed from

frivolous party-girl to what I have defined as the conservative social movement leader,

which combines the roles of the institutional leader and the social movement leader.

Here, I explore Glinda’s leadership qualities and her transformation, as well as attempt to

contribute to the theory of social movement leadership rhetoric.

As in the previous two analyses, I used a key term or phrase that arose from

abductive logic when I viewed the performative elements in the three performances. The

key phrase emerged was “G(a)linda as a leader.” Again, there were more performative

elements that led me to this phrase than I could possibly list, but some of these elements

included Glinda’s popularity, her change in voice intonation, pitch and volume

throughout the musical, and her decision to banish the Wizard and incarcerate Madame

Morrible at the end of the musical.

In this chapter, I argue that the lines between social movement leaders and public

figures are not as clearly defined as previous social protest scholars have suggested.

Simons, Mechling, and Schreier (1984) observe that social movement leadership exists

on what they refer to as the moderate-militant spectrum. Their work suggests that social

movement leaders and their tactics are not as easily classified as previous work has

177 suggested (Jensen, 1977; Simons, 1970). Simons, Mechling, and Schreier do, however,

maintain a distinction between social movement leaders and institutional leaders. By

offering an additional type of social movement leader to this continuum, I contend that this distinction is obscured and that social movement leaders and institutional leaders can indeed be one and the same.

Galinda as a Popular, Apolitical, Referent Leader

Galinda, as she is referred to during her younger years, exhibits leadership qualities during her time at Shiz University, where she and Elphaba attend college (Act 1

Scene 2-9). Galinda, a pretty, blond-haired, flighty girl, is a popular leader to her peers.

Her peers laugh at her jokes and frequently praise her for being “so good.” One young man, a Munchkin named Boq, is particularly attracted to Galinda; he follows her around and tries to get as close to her as possible.

Though her peers admire her, Madame Morrible does not think very highly of her.

Instead, Morrible’s focus is on Galinda’s green-skinned classmate, the governor’s daughter, Elphaba, who is gifted in sorcery (See Chapter 4 for an explanation of Madame

Morrible’s motives). When Morrible announces her intentions to privately tutor Elphaba in sorcery, Galinda is disappointed because she herself wanted to learn sorcery from

Madame Morrible (Act 1 Scene 2). It appears that she deeply wants to be praised by

Madame Morrible and sees the headmistress as her role model. Often, role models have great influence on both political leaders and social movement leaders. For example, during the Women’s Suffrage Movement, movement leaders had great influence on each other. Lucretia Mott’s mentorship guided Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who later influenced

178 Susan B. Anthony (Wellman, 2004). At the beginning of the musical, it is clear that

Galinda wants to learn from Madame Morrible, who she considers her role model.

When Galinda and Elphaba are assigned to the same room, they find that they

harbor a strong dislike for each other (Act 2 Scene 3). The girls declare their hatred for each other as they write letters to their parents. Privately, the two girls reel against each other, declaring their “unadulterated loathing” for each other. However, once the other students enter the stage, Galinda reveals another side of herself. Dancing in sync with

Galinda (and opposite of Elphaba), they assure Galinda that they’re on her side, When they call her a martyr, she humbly replies, “Well, these things are sent to try us!”

This is the first time we see young Galinda show two different personas: Her private self in front of her roommate and her public persona in front of her friends. Later, as an Ozian leader, she uses the public persona to assure citizens that everything is fine, while her private self is emotionally torn apart. This is reminiscent of American politicians; the American people see a public persona of each politician, but this public persona is likely to be quite different than the person’s private personality. Furthermore, this scene pictures Galinda in her role as a leader with referent power; she is popular among her classmates, as exhibited by their alliance to her and their dancing that follows her, not Elphaba. Referent power occurs when a leader gains the respect or admiration of others; people are influenced because they like the leader (French & Raven, 1981).

Galinda, a young, apolitical leader, has considerable referent power over her peers.

Galinda’s role as a young leader with referent power (French & Raven, 1981) is perhaps the clearest at the dance at the Oz Dust Ballroom (Act 1 Scene 5 & 6). Initially,

Galinda acts only for herself, getting Fiyero, the most popular boy in school, to ask her to

179 the dance, pawning off her unwanted suitor on Elphaba’s beautiful and disabled sister,

Nessarose, and playing a practical joke on Elphaba by giving her a “hideoteous” black

pointed hat as a gift. Thinking that Galinda has done a nice thing for Nessarose, Elphaba

convinces Madame Morrible to let Galinda participate in the sorcery seminar. When

Galinda learns of this, she feels terrible; in the Pittsburgh production, Katie Rose Clarke

cries when she realizes that Elphaba is about to be humiliated because of the black hat.

Elphaba, realizing she has been duped, stubbornly and defiantly dances very poorly

alone, to no music. Galinda, feeling guilty, risks her own popularity by joining in with

her roommate. To both girls’ surprise, the rest of the students join in, with everyone

dancing Elphaba’s silly dance.

Because Galinda has so much referent power with her peers, they choose to

follow her lead, no matter how silly the dance is. This illustrates Galinda’s ability to be a

powerful leader. The students are willing to follow her, despite their dislike of Elphaba,

because they admire Galinda. Galinda relies on her popularity for her leadership, as she

describes in the musical number, “Popular” (Act 1 Scene 7). In the song, which features

quick, repetitive major chords that contribute to the upbeat nature and overall silliness of

“Popular,” Galinda declares, “When I see depressing creatures with unprepossessing features, I remind them on their own behalf to think of celebrated heads of state or especially great communicators. Did they have brains or knowledge? Don’t make me laugh! They were popular!” This reveals that Galinda believes in the importance of image and popularity to a leader. To Galinda, a great communicator, a term which may or may not be an interesting reference to President Ronald Reagan’s nickname, is someone who is popular among the public, someone who has charisma and is well-liked. Galinda revels

180 in popularity, declaring that she will make Elphaba popular…just not as popular as her.

For Galinda, leadership and power come from popularity, not talent, ability, or righteousness.

But what is it about Galinda that makes her so popular among her peers? This

analysis revealed five character traits: Three of these traits are positive clusters, and two

are negative clusters, or agon-clusters, to use one of Burke’s original terms. I use the term

“agon-cluster” here as Burke used “agon-terms” in his original description of cluster

analysis. Agon-clusters, like agon-terms, provide opposition to the main cluster. In this

case, the two agon-clusters regarding Galinda’s character traits are traits that are often

associated with unpopularity, not popularity. The three positive clusters related to

Galinda’s popularity are her energetic nature, her feelings of guilt when she recognizes

the negative consequences of her actions, and her preference for conformity over

difference. Interestingly, two additional clusters that are not often associated with

popularity, Galinda’s conniving nature and her ineptness, emerged from this analysis.

First, Galinda is energetic and has a positive attitude. She is optimistic, and

Davids & Parenti (1958) found optimism to be a trait commonly associated with popularity. While this personality trait reveals itself through Galinda’s actions and line emphasis throughout the show, it is most salient in the scene where she and Elphaba talk after the dance (Act 1 Scene 7). Galinda is energetic and offers to give Elphaba a makeover, teaching her new friend how to dress, act, and flip her hair. In the Pittsburgh production, Katie Rose Clarke as Galinda hugged Carmen Cusack as Elphaba so hard that

Cusack looked as if she were being choked. Clarke also performed awkward ballet leaps

and stretches during “Popular” to further indicate Galinda’s energy. Similarly, in the

181 Chicago production, Annaleigh Ashford as Galinda swayed back and forth on her bed as

if she were drunk and mimed using a microphone as she sang the phrase “great

communicators” in “Popular.” In the New York production, Alli Mauzey as Galinda

screamed into her pillow when she told “her secret” to Nicole Parker as Elphaba, and

pouted when Parker’s Elphaba wouldn’t tell her about the green bottle under her pillow.

Mauzey’s performance was more child-like than Clarke’s or Ashford’s, but all three actresses accomplish the same effect: They portrayed Galinda as happy and energetic to such an extent that each audience roared with laughter.

Galinda also favors conformity over difference. She values popularity, as is illustrated in her lyrics in “Popular” (Act 1 Scene 7). She is annoyed when Dr.

Dillamond can’t pronounce her name, complaining, “I really don’t see what the problem

is – every other professor seems to be able to pronounce my name.” In the Pittsburgh

production, Katie Rose Clarke’s Galinda curtsied incessantly, showing that she values

etiquette and formality. Later, Galinda tries to persuade Elphaba to apologize to the

Wizard so that Elphaba may achieve her ambitions. Each of these examples shows that

Galinda prefers conformity over difference. She sees no problem with the status quo and

appreciates when others follow it. This contributes to her popularity because popular

people are often people who embody the status quo (Bishop, 2004), rather than fight

against it.

Galinda also is an emotional person and feels guilt when she realizes that her

actions have negative consequences for others. In Act 1, Galinda convinces Boq to ask

Nessarose to the school dance in an attempt to rid herself of him (Act 1 Scene 5), and

Nessarose is so thrilled to have a date that Elphaba repays Galinda for her “kindness” by

182 insisting that Galinda be included in sorcery class (Act 1 Scene 6). Galinda, unaware of

Nessarose’s joy and Elphaba’s good deed, tricks Elphaba into wearing a pointed black hat

to the dance. When Elphaba enters and the entire school laughs at her, Galinda feels guilty. In the New York production, Mauzey’s Galinda became very quiet, reflecting on her bad deed. In the Pittsburgh production, Clarke’s Galinda cried softly in a corner. In all three productions, Galinda begs Fiyero not to stare at Elphaba and cries, “I feel

awful!”

Later, when Boq tries to break off his relationship with Nessarose, telling Galinda

that he can’t play her game anymore, Galinda tries to console Nessarose (Act 1 Scene

10). “Maybe he just isn’t the right one for you,” she tells her guiltily. Nessarose,

however, is completely in love with Boq and refuses to accept Galinda’s half-hearted

attempt to mend things. “No,” Nessarose replies. “It’s me that isn’t right.”

In both scenes, Galinda has made a transgression and feels guilty for doing so.

Her feelings of guilt make her a more relatable character than some of the others (for

example, the overtly-villainous Madame Morrible or the perfectly altruistic Elphaba).

These feelings also make Galinda more popular; when she makes a mistake or commits a

wrongdoing, she tries to make amends quietly and out of the public eye. This makes

those who are closest to her think that she is a good-natured person and trustworthy,

which is a trait associated with popularity (Davids & Parenti, 1958). It also makes

acquaintances believe that she never makes transgressions, making her appear “perfect.”

However, Galinda does indeed commit offenses against others in order to get

what she wants. This conniving nature is the first of two agon-clusters emerging from

this analysis. While generally those who do wrong to others are not popular in the eyes

183 of the public, Galinda’s wrongdoings have the opposite effect: They actually make her

more popular. When she decides to trick Elphaba into wearing the ugly hat, her two

friends, Phannee and Shenshen, urge her to do so (Act 1 Scene 6). They giggle and revel

in making fun of Elphaba. Similarly, when Galinda convinces Boq to ask Nessarose out,

Fiyero recognizes what she did, walks up to her, and admiringly says, “You’re good”

(Act 1 Scene 5). Later, she uses her conniving nature to help the Wizard’s regime. This will be discussed later in this chapter.

The second agon-cluster is Galinda’s ineptness, particularly at her chosen

profession, sorcery. During Elphaba’s makeover, Galinda is unable to transform her

friend’s frock into a ball gown (Act 1 Scene 7). Becoming frustrated, Galinda flings her

training wand off stage and announces, “Oh, just wear the frock! It’s pretty!” Madame

Morrible, whom Galinda wants so desperately to be her mentor, has little faith in Galinda

as a student, telling her that she doesn’t think she “has what it takes” (Act 1 Scene 6).

Later, when Morrible, Galinda, and Elphaba are in the Wizard’s chamber, Morrible

refuses to let Galinda touch the Grimmerie. Near the end of the musical, Galinda also

reveals another weakness: She directs Dorothy down the Yellow Brick Road and sighs, “I

am so bad with directions” (Act 2 Scene 5).

Generally, referent leaders are well-liked because of a particular talent. Perhaps

they are extraordinarily smart, great athletes, shrewd businesspeople, or talented

musicians. Galinda lacks these skills, but is popular nevertheless. As I have discussed in a

previous paper (Schrader, 2009a), this is likely because Galinda is stereotyped as the

“dumb blonde” character in American humor. This humor stereotype frames women as

being unintelligent, dependent, self-doubting, and mere sexual objects in the eyes of men.

184 As Walker (1988) observes in Dorothy Parker’s character of Hazel Morse, the “dumb blonde” often evokes sympathy in readers because she is unaware that she is giving into male expectations. In Galinda’s case, she does not give into male expectation, but she does give into societal expectations. Because “dumb blondes” give into others’ expectations, they are often popular but rarely respected. Because Glinda becomes the

“dumb blonde” stereotype, she becomes humorous, and humor leads to popularity, as noted by Omwake (1939).

One particular production offered another agon-term in opposition to Galinda’s popularity. In the Chicago production, Annaleigh Ashford performed Galinda as having a leg tick. Galinda would nervously and incessantly raise her leg when she wanted to get someone’s attention or appeared nervous. Dee Roscioli as Elphaba mimicked the tick when she makes fun of Galinda in “What is this Feeling?” (Act 1 Scene 3). Ashford’s

Galinda also continually raised her leg when she joined Elphaba in her silent dance at the

OzDust Ballroom (Act 2 Scene 6). In many circles, a leg tick like Galinda’s would diminish her popularity. Many real-life high school and college students make fun of others for having a tick. Knowing this, Ashford’s leg tick seemed out of place and out of character to me. However, in the Chicago production of Wicked, the other students seemed to accept Galinda and admired her without noticing her tick. In fact, the only character who teased Galinda about it was her roommate – the most unpopular girl at

Shiz University. Although I, as an audience member, felt that the tick was in opposition to Galinda’s character, the other actors’ actions made Ashford’s character choice fit with the rest of the show by simply ignoring Galinda’s tick.

185 Two Roads Diverged in Yellow Brick: Glinda and Elphaba Commit to their Leadership

Styles

When Dr. Dillamond is stripped of his rights as a professor, forbidden to teach and led away from the premises, a new professor attempts to teach the students about the importance of caging animals in order to silence them, showing a caged lion cub (Act 1

Scene 8). Elphaba casts a spell that allows Fiyero and her to set the cub free. The event ultimately has a profound impact on the two characters, as was described in Chapter 5.

Interestingly, Galinda does not appear in this scene, even though all the other students are there. While this may seem peculiar, it is imperative to the storyline that

Galinda not witness this event. While Elphaba quickly connects with the Animal Rights

Movement and slowly brings Fiyero to her side, Galinda’s transformation is the slowest of the three. Had she witnessed the cruelty in the classroom, she may have been more likely to support the movement and perhaps take a more militant stance like her friend.

This would not allow her to progress into the conservative leader that she will ultimately become.

Galinda’s slowness to transform into a serious political or social movement leader is also revealed when she, Nessarose, Boq, and Fiyero say goodbye to Elphaba, who is on her way to the Emerald City to meet the Wizard (Act 1 Scene 10). Galinda, in an attempt to make Fiyero like her, links arms with her beau and agrees with everything he says, including his concern about the Animals. She enthusiastically declares “Since Dr.

Dillamond had his own way of pronouncing my name, in solidarity, and to express my outrage, I will henceforth be known no longer as Galinda but as simply Glinda.” This pledge gives the appearance that Glinda genuinely cares about the Animals being denied

186 their rights, but, in reality, she is merely attempting to gain Fiyero’s admiration. Both

Fiyero and Elphaba seem to be aware of her true intentions, responding with an awkward silence. Fiyero reluctantly tells Glinda that her sacrifice is admirable, quickly wishes

Elphaba good luck, and rushes offstage.

Glinda, devastated and beginning to cry, admits to Elphaba that she truly didn’t mean to change her name:

Elphaba: Don’t cry, Galinda.

Glinda: It’s Glinda now. Stupid idea, I don’t even know what made me say it.

Elphaba: It doesn’t matter what your name is. Everyone loves you!

Galinda, now Glinda, makes a public commitment to the Animal Rights Movement, but not a private one. She still believes that leaders are created through popularity and image.

While she publicly changes her name in an attempt to get Fiyero to like her, she privately is not ready to take a stand for the movement.

When Elphaba asks Glinda to join her on her journey to the Emerald City, the girls go together to meet the Wizard. Upon entering the Wizard’s chamber, Glinda introduces herself as “Glinda. The ‘ga’ is silent,” showing that she is beginning to embrace her new identity (Act 1 Scene 13). At least in the public eye, Glinda is beginning to take on another leadership role; one that shows commitment in addition to popularity.

In the Wizard’s palace, Elphaba casts a spell on the Wizard’s Monkeys, and the

Wizard admits that he is responsible for the oppression of the Animals. He assures both

Elphaba and Glinda that he will give them “opportunities” for their cooperation, and

Glinda thanks him; indeed, she is hoping to have the same opportunity that Madame

Morrible, the Wizard’s new press secretary, has received. However, a distraught Elphaba

187 grabs the Grimmerie and runs off. Glinda assures the Wizard that she will “fetch her back.”

At this point, Glinda is not thinking very much about her own actions, what

Elphaba is standing up for, or what is right and what is wrong. Instead, she is simply obeying authority in hopes that she will receive the same tit-for-tat treatment that her role model has received36. She doesn’t question her leaders; she simply obeys them. She

follows Elphaba to the attic of the palace, where she chides Elphaba for “flying off the

handle” and accuses her of hurting her cause (Act 1 Scene 14). This statement reveals

two things about Glinda. The first is that she believes that radical tactics are not effective

or appropriate. She believes that change can be brought about by working with authority

and within existing governmental and social systems. This belief would place her near the

moderate end of Simons, Mechling, Schreier’s (1984) social movement leadership

continuum, should she choose to become a social movement leader. However, Glinda’s

statement provides a second insight: That she does not consider Animal Rights her own

cause at this point in the musical. She sees it as Elphaba’s cause; she says “I hope you’re

happy how you hurt your cause forever.” If she truly believed in Animal Rights, she

likely would have said “our cause,” not “your cause.” Glinda is not yet ready to become a

social movement leader.

Elphaba counters these attacks by accusing Glinda of “grovel[ing] in submission

to feed [her] own ambition.” This accusation reveals a truth about Glinda as well: She

will do whatever it takes to get what she wants. She believes that if she does what

authority figures tell her, she will be able to become a public leader. Glinda begs Elphaba

36 Please see page 100-103 in Chapter 4 of this dissertation for an explanation of Madame Morrible’s tit- for-tat strategy. 188 to apologize to the Wizard before Elphaba’s reputation is destroyed, but Elphaba has

made up her mind. She doesn’t agree with Glinda’s beliefs in the importance of authority.

She casts a spell that causes a broom to fly, which she uses to escape the Wizard’s

guards. She urges Glinda to come with her, and both acknowledge that together, they could do great things. However, Glinda is not ready for such a radical tactic, nor is she ready to give up her current life for a cause that she is not entirely committed to. She hesitates, and then makes the decision to stay. She wraps Elphaba in a black blanket to keep her warm, and wishes her the best. While she respects her friend and deeply cares for her, she must follow her own path to leadership. As the guards crash through the door and capture Glinda, Elphaba rises in the air and declares that Glinda had “nothing to do with it.” This act sets the girls in their roles for the second act: Glinda stays behind to

work within the current system and to become a public leader, while Elphaba takes a

militant approach, declaring war against the Wizard. The roads diverge, leaving each

young woman to choose her own type of leadership.

Glinda as a Public Figure

Glinda’s role as a public figure is recognizable from the moment she enters the

stage in Act 1 (Act 1 Scene 1). A few Ozians shout, “Look, it’s Glinda!” while others cheer. After her mechanical bubble lands, Glinda shakes hands with them. In the Chicago performance, she shook their hands and looked into their eyes like a politician; in the

New York performance, she put her hand in theirs and nodded like royalty. The Ozians look to her for answers to their questions, asking her “Why does wickedness happen?” and “Is it true you were her [the wicked witch’s] friend?” She speaks quickly to answer all of their questions.

189 Her role is further defined at the beginning of Act 2 (Act 2 Scene 1). On a

platform stands Glinda in a beautiful blue gown, Fiyero in a guard’s uniform, and

Madame Morrible looking rather dignified. A crowd gathers to listen to Glinda speak.

She smiles, waves at the Ozians, and begins her speech. She urges them to put aside their fear and celebrate her engagement to Fiyero, who is unaware that he is engaged. Glinda explains that she and the Wizard had planned the engagement as a surprise for Fiyero, who has become Captain of the Guard in order to search for Elphaba. It is clear that

Glinda has obeyed authority and is benefiting from her obedience. Here, Glinda and her oratory are serving what Cathcart (1978) would describe as a managerial function; both

Glinda and her oratory are “designed to keep the existing system viable; they do not question underlying epistemology and group ethic” (p. 97). Glinda’s role as a public political figure is to uphold the values of the Wizard’s regime and make these values appeal to the Ozian public.

Morrible tells the Ozian audience a story of how Glinda was summoned to be a public servant called Glinda the Good. As previously described, the story frames Elphaba in a negative light while making Glinda a heroine, and is an illustration of Murphy’s

(2001) hegemonic strategy of contextualization37. By re-contextualizing the story,

Morrible is able to continue the hegemonic lie that Elphaba is the enemy. This also shows

how corrupt systems reward those who follow the rules: Glinda, who obeyed the rules, is now a public figure. Though Glinda knows that the story is untrue, she does not argue

against it. She simply accepts the praise and smiles.

37 Please see Chapter 4 for an explanation of this strategy. 190 When Glinda and Fiyero speak privately about how Elphaba is being perceived, it

is clear that Glinda has discovered how to manage her image in front of the public while

hiding her true feelings. This is illustrated in the Pittsburgh performance through Katie

Rose Clarke’s use of a nasal valley-girl accent. When Glinda is in public, she speaks

nasally and uses Ozian slang, but when she speaks privately to others, she uses a less- nasal voice, symbolizing that she is serious. Similarly, Annaleigh Ashford in the Chicago performance and Alli Mauzey in the New York performance used dynamics to achieve the same result; Their Glindas sung and spoke more softly when they are reflecting on

Glinda’s own feelings and more loudly when conveying a public image. Wicked’s music further illustrates the difference between public and private for Glinda. Glinda’s “public” songs where she sings to the Ozian populace, such as “Thank Goodness” and “No One

Mourns the Wicked,” tend to utilize the upper part of her range, occasionally having her sing as high as two C’s above middle C (C6). In contrast, her “private” songs where she sings only in front of those closest to her, such as “For Good” and “Popular,” utilize her lower range, often having her belt.

Glinda admits to Fiyero that she hates when she hears Ozians saying terrible things about Elphaba but that she can’t resist being in the spotlight, noting that she feels she has a duty to raise people’s spirits. Fiyero agrees to marry Glinda because it will make her happy. She wants it to make him happy, too, but it’s clear that he is only doing it for her. Shaken, Glinda returns to her public while Fiyero leaves, smiling and informing them that he’s “gone to fetch [her] a refreshment.” She sings “Thank

Goodness,” where she fights between her public image and her true feelings. Her heart is breaking, but she tells the public that “she couldn’t be happier.”

191 In this song, Glinda realizes that, though she has followed all the rules and done what authority figures have told her, she is not truly happy. She has not won the heart of the man she loves. She has lost her best friend, whom she must pretend is her enemy. Her

decision to work within the system and her role as a popular political figure has not

brought her happiness. The mixed emotions are portrayed not only through her words and facial expressions, but also by the dynamics of the music. She crescendos when pretending that she’s happy; she decrescendos when she is thinking about what she is truly feeling.

Shortly afterwards, when Elphaba arrives at the palace in order to set the winged

Monkeys free, Glinda and Fiyero find her (Act 2 Scene 3). Fiyero dismisses the guards, holds a gun against the Wizard, and tells Elphaba to escape. Glinda enters and is thrilled to see her friend but urges Elphaba to leave for fear that the Wizard and his guards will kill her. When she turns to see her betrothed holding the Wizard hostage, she is shocked and apologizes to the Wizard for Fiyero’s actions, explaining that the three went to school together.

Glinda is trying to smooth things over, in hopes of protecting everyone through her connections with the Wizard. However, Fiyero does not wish to be protected, and he announces that he is leaving with Elphaba, much to everyone’s surprise. Glinda is shocked, angry and hurt. She feels that she has been betrayed by the people she loves the most. While normally she would not participate in the oppressive functions of the

Wizard’s regime (she is merely a figurehead), in her anger and dismay she offers the

Wizard and Madame Morrible advice on how to capture Elphaba. She suggests that they start a rumor to make her think that her sister is in trouble, knowing that Elphaba will go

192 to help Nessarose and the guards can capture her there. She thinks she is trading insult for

insult, but Morrible and the Wizard have other plans. Instead of starting a rumor, they

choose to actually endanger Nessarose, and she dies as a result of a cyclone created by

Madame Morrible.

Glinda’s Awakening

Nessarose’s death is a turning point for Glinda. She realizes that Elphaba was right: The Wizard and Madame Morrible do not have the Ozian people’s best interest at heart. At Nessarose’s gravesite, Glinda lays flowers and cries when she thinks no one from the Wizard’s regime is looking (Act 2 Scene 5). This act shows that Glinda realizes that working with the regime is not the best way to change things or bring happiness to anyone. She has to pretend to be someone she is not in order to succeed.

Elphaba arrives, and the two girls begin to fight. Glinda suggests that the cyclone

that killed Nessarose was an accident. Elphaba responds with “You call this an

accident?!” An angry conversation follows:

Glinda: Yes! Well, maybe not an accident, but…

Elphaba: Well then, what would you call it?

Glinda: Well…a regime change. Caused by a bizarre and

unexpected…twister of fate.

Elphaba: So you think cyclones just appear? Out of the blue?

Glinda: I don’t know, I never really…

Elphaba: No, of course you never…you’re too busy telling everyone how

wonderful everything is!

Glinda: Well, I’m a public figure now! People expect me to…

193 Elphaba: Lie?

Glinda: Be encouraging!

Here, Elphaba criticizes Glinda’s choice to remain with the Wizard’s regime. When cautiously placing the flowers on Nessarose’s grave, Glinda showed that she herself is questioning this decision, but Elphaba puts this in the forefront of her mind. Glinda realizes that she has never really questioned the Wizard’s regime and has simply gone along with all of the decisions the Wizard and Madame Morrible had made. While she snaps at Elphaba that it is her duty to encourage the public and make them feel good about themselves and their leaders, Glinda takes Elphaba’s criticism to heart, questioning what really happened with the cyclone. It is this event that ultimately leads her to take a stand.

Elphaba’s criticism assesses the role of public figures in general: She suggests that they have to twist the truth. Glinda, as a member of the government and a public figure, has had to lie to the citizens of Oz, spreading rumors that Elphaba is wicked, that

Animals should be silenced, and that the Wizard is wonderful. This blending of truth and falsehood often happens to public figures in the American government, as illustrated by campaign advertisements on television. Attack ads often feature quotations taken out of context, falsified images, and half-truths that make one candidate look good while painting his or her opponent in a negative light. Glinda is part of this same type of system; she spreads a mixture of truth and falsehood in order to promote the Wizard’s regime and make his enemies look bad.

The guards arrive and attempt to capture Elphaba, but they are stopped when

Fiyero drops out of a tree and pulls a gun on Glinda, threatening to kill her if Elphaba is

194 not freed. When Elphaba runs off, Fiyero releases Glinda, and the guards seize him, tying

him up with a rope. Glinda begs them to release him, but the guards refuse. She protests,

“Don’t you see, he was never going to harm me, he just…He loves her.” Fiyero

apologizes to Glinda and the two share a forgiving pause. The guards haul him away to

torture him until he tells them where Elphaba went. Glinda protests, but is ignored, and is

ultimately left screaming “Fiyero!” in agony. Glinda is discovering that her leadership

abilities within the Wizard’s regime are merely a farce. She has no real power to stop the

guards if they have been ordered to do something by the Wizard; she, too, has been used by Madame Morrible and the Wizard.

When Glinda returns to the Emerald City, an angry mob has gathered to hunt for

Elphaba (Act 2 Scene 7). As Madame Morrible and Glinda observe from a balcony,

Glinda increasingly becomes upset. While the Ozians tell lies about Elphaba, turning her good deeds into evil ones, Glinda shouts to the crowd, “No, that’s not how it happened!”

She is ignored.

Glinda is ready to take the reins of leadership. She has learned that appearances are often not true, and she understands that her power is merely an appearance. Wanting to spread the truth, she is no longer content smiling and lying to people; she is ready to make change. In desperation, she turns to Madame Morrible:

Glinda: Madame, we’ve got to stop this! It’s gone too far!

Morrible: Oh, I think Elphaba can take care of herself.

Glinda: But, Madame, something has been troubling me about Nessarose.

And that cyclone.

Morrible: Yes, well, I suppose it was just….her time.

195 Glinda: Was it, or did you….

Morrible: Now you listen to me, missy. The rest of Oz may have fallen for

that ‘aren’t I good’ routine, but I know better. You’ve wanted this from the

beginning! And now you’re getting what you wanted, so just smile, wave and

shut up!

Glinda’s eyes are open to the true nature of the Wizard’s regime, and she realizes

that her role model is no role model at all. Furthermore, Glinda realizes that she has been

party to the tragedy before her. Just as she had done as a student at Shiz University,

Glinda feels guilty for her role in the regime, and wants to mend things. She determines

that a more militant stand is necessary, and she takes off ahead of the mob in order to

warn Elphaba of the impending danger.

Glinda as the Leader of Oz

When Glinda arrives at Kiamo Ko castle, Elphaba is trying to teach her flying

Monkey Chistery to speak while keeping Dorothy, the same young farm girl from The

Wizard of Oz, captive in order to get Nessarose’s shoes back (Act 2 Scene 8)38. Elphaba

at first screams at Glinda to go away, but when a letter arrives with tragic news of Fiyero,

Elphaba decides that she must surrender. Glinda insists that she can help her friend:

Glinda: I’ll go and tell them. I’ll tell everyone the truth!

Elphaba: No! They’ll just turn against you!

Glinda: I don’t care!

Elphaba: Well, I do. Promise me you won’t try to clear my name.

Glinda: Elphie, no, I…

38 Please refer to pages 152-157 in Chapter 5 of this dissertation for further details on this transition of leadership. 196 Elphaba: Promise.

Glinda: All right, I promise. But I don’t understand.

Elphaba: (singing) I’m limited. Just look at me: I’m limited. And just look at

you: You can do all I couldn’t do, Glinda.

Glinda doesn’t understand; she simply wants to do what she thinks is right. She

thinks the best thing to do would be to follow Elphaba’s lead and take a more radical

approach by telling Ozians that Elphaba is the good one and that the Wizard is wicked.

However, Elphaba knows better: She knows that the regime will turn against Glinda as

well and that Glinda will not be able to make changes in society. She admits to Glinda

that she is now limited as a leader and must pass the torch, symbolized by the Grimmerie.

Elphaba recognizes that her militant tactics are no longer effective and that only working

within the governmental system will help Oz and the Animals now. Glinda, at first, refuses to take the book, insisting that she cannot read it, but Elphaba tells her that she must learn. The two girls sing a touching ballad about how they’ve each changed the other39, before Elphaba fakes her own death, leaving everyone, including Glinda, to believe she has been killed by a bucket of water.

After the “melting,” Chistery pulls back the curtain to reveal Elphaba’s hat and a

little green bottle. Glinda notices the hat, picks it up, and hugs it. Chistery, finally speaking, hands Glinda the bottle and says timidly, “Miss Glinda?” Elphaba, though

“dead,” has succeeded: At least one Animal has regained a voice.

Glinda returns to the Wizard’s palace, where she proceeds to take charge (Act 2

Scene 9). With a quiet authority, she looks at the Wizard defiantly and says “I want you

39 Please see Chapter 5 for an analysis of “For Good” and the leadership transition that takes place through the song. 197 to leave Oz. I’ll make the pronouncement myself: That the strains of Wizardship have been too much and you’re taking an indefinite leave of absence.” When no one responds, she raises her voice: “Did you hear what I said?!” The Wizard timidly responds, “Yes,

Your Goodness.” Glinda icily urges him to get his balloon ready.

This scene represents Glinda’s complete transformation. She is articulate, she is intelligent, and she is ready to lead. With a quiet confidence, she puts her own rules into effect, rather than obeying another’s authority. She also does this through her own means:

She chooses to do it through oratory, rather than exposing the Wizard for what he truly is:

A murderous, oppressive fraud.

Glinda gives Morrible, her former role model, an even more drastic sentence. She calls for the guards, as Morrible tries to smooth over their differences. Glinda cuts her off:

Glinda: Madame, have you ever considered how you’d fare in captivity?

Morrible: What? I don’t…

Glinda: Captivity. Prison. Personally, I can’t imagine you’ll hold up very

well. You see, my personal opinion is that you do not have what it takes. I

hope you prove me wrong. I doubt you will.

Here, Glinda is echoing the same words that Morrible once told her about her ability to do well in sorcery class. By imprisoning Morrible and banishing the Wizard,

Glinda is able to start with a clean slate where she will serve as the leader of the Ozians.

However, Glinda’s lines described above were delivered in three different ways in the three productions I observed, and each delivery method changed the meaning of the scene slightly.

198 In the Chicago performance, Annaleigh Ashford chose to mimic Madame

Morrible’s previous statement to Galinda when Morrible gave Galinda her training wand.

Using Morrible’s grandiose accent, Ashford made her lines appear more comic than powerful. This choice made Glinda’s transformation less apparent; she still seemed like the frivolous girl she was at the beginning of the show. Similarly, Alli Mauzey in the

Broadway performance chose a mimicking tone for all by one line: The very last one.

She screamed “Take her away!” angrily, showing Glinda’s power as a leader. While this was an improvement over Ashford’s completely mimicking tone, it made Glinda seem mean or vindictive rather than powerful. In contrast, in the Pittsburgh performance, Katie

Rose Clarke chose to drop her nasal voice and gradually increase the volume of her voice as she delivered the lines. By the end of the speech, she was screaming angrily. This decision was the most effective of the three choices in regards to Glinda’s transition.

While Mauzey’s and Ashford’s decisions may have elicited laughter from the audience, they didn’t portray Glinda as a strong leader who has learned from her mistakes and is ready to take charge. In this regard, Clarke’s portrayal of Glinda was most successful.

The guards obey Glinda this time, perhaps recognizing her authority for the first time. When Glinda enters her mechanical bubble to visit the citizens of Oz, Chistery hands her the Grimmerie, symbolically suggesting that Glinda’s government will give the

Animals their rights back, rather than oppress them. Glinda is becoming both a social movement leader and the head of state.

In her mechanical bubble, she addresses the public: “Fellow Ozians, friends….We’ve been through a frightening time. And there will be other times, and other things that frighten us. But if you’ll let me, I’d like to try to help. I’d like to be

199 Glinda the Good.” When she delivers this last line, she is serious and heartfelt, speaking without a nasal voice at all, symbolizing her full transition into leadership.

Obscuring the Line: Conservative Social Movement Leadership

The Animal Rights Movement in Wicked appears to be both self-directed and

other-directed, to use Stewart’s (1999) classifications. Some movements, such as the

Civil Rights Movement or the Labor Movement, are self-directed because they are created by, participated in, and led by those who see themselves as oppressed and who

are fighting for their own equality and rights (p. 91). Other social movements, such as the

real-life Animal Rights Movement and the Pro-Life Movement, are other-directed, meaning that those who create, work for, and lead the movements are not those who are

oppressed, and that they are fighting for the rights of those who cannot speak for

themselves (pp. 91-92). Jasper (1997) offers similar categories, describing self-directed

movements as “citizenship movements” and other-directed movements as “post-

citizenship movements” (pp. 6-7). The fictional Animal Rights Movement in Wicked is primarily self-directed or a citizenship movement because Animals, like Dillamond, have the ability, at least for some time, to speak for themselves. However, the movement’s leaders, Elphaba and later Glinda, are other-directed, working on behalf of the Animals.

One might question these seemingly rigid categorizations. Cannot a movement be both self-directed and other-directed? Must a movement be either a citizenship movement or a post-citizenship movement? Wicked’s fictional Animal Rights Movement appears to blur these lines.

One might question Glinda’s role as a social movement leader at all. After all, if we use Simons, Mechling and Schreier’s (1984) definition of a social movement –

200 “sustained efforts by non-institutionalized collectives to mobilize resources, resist counterpressures, and exert external influence in behalf of a cause” (p.794) – Glinda cannot be a social movement leader because of her affiliation with the Ozian government.

However, as I have attempted to show through this analysis of Wicked, the lines between social movement leadership and institutional leadership are often blurred. One can be a political leader while advocating for a cause. Indeed, this was done by Samuel Gompers, who led both the American Federation of Labor, one of the two most prominent organizations involved in the American Labor Movement at the time, and served on

Woodrow Wilson’s National Council of Defense during the First World War (Wright,

2003). As part of this council, Gompers became an advocate for the war effort and for labor’s role in it (Wright, 2003; Sinyai, 2006).

While Gompers is an excellent example of such a leader in historical times, a more contemporary leader who obscured the line between public figure and social movement leader is former Vice President Al Gore. Gore served as Senator of Tennessee before assuming the office of the Vice President. During his term as Vice President, he led the Clinton Administration’s efforts to protect the environment (“Al’s Bio,” 2010).

After he lost the 2000 presidential election, Gore decided to put his efforts towards educating the populace about the dangers of global warming. His best-selling book, An

Inconvenient Truth, was turned into a documentary film and won two Academy Awards

(“Al’s Bio,” 2010). He now is a leading activist for the fight against global warming, spearheading a number of projects for the movement (“Al’s Bio.” 2010).

Glinda can be compared to both of these leaders. Glinda takes a different road than Gompers did; she became a political figure before she seriously took up the

201 movement’s cause. Her trajectory is similar to Gore’s, becoming a public servant and

then a social movement leader. Like Gompers and Gore, Glinda, too, is both a social

movement leader and a political leader. She is a conservative social movement leader – a

leader who obscures the lines between social movement leadership and institutional

leadership. I use the term conservative with a specific definition in mind. The word

“conservative” is not meant to convey that the social movement must be seen as

conservative in the eyes of the public (for example, the Pro-Life Movement), nor is it

meant to convey that the leader must have what American society considers conservative

values (for example, belonging to the Republican Party). The traditional definition of

“conservativism” states that conservatives seek “continuity in politics [and] the

maintenance of existing institutions and practice” (Quinton, 1995, p. 245). Quinton

(1995) notes that while conservatives are generally suspicious of change, they are not

rigidly opposed to it; rather, they favor gradual, carefully-considered change (p. 245).

The word “conservative” in “conservative social movement leader” is meant to convey

the idea that the leader’s tactics are more moderate than the moderate leader because he

or she actually chooses to take a leadership role in the system that he or she is trying to

change. Glinda is a conservative social movement leader because she takes on the work

of the Animal Rights Movement while she serves as the leader of Oz.

Through this rhetorical analysis of Wicked, I have argued that classifications, such

as movement type and leadership type, cannot be as easily classified as we have

previously assumed. I have argued for the inclusion of a leader, which I have dubbed the

conservative social movement leader, who takes on leadership for the social movement

and the larger institution at the same time. I believe that by bridging the gap between

202 these two types of leadership, rhetorical critics and theorists can examine social movement leadership in a new way, perhaps offering new insights to the tactics of old movements or new explanations of how new movements affect change.

In this chapter, I have described and analyzed Glinda’s transformation from popular, apolitical, referent leader at Shiz University to public figure in the Wizard’s regime and ultimately to the leader of Oz. I have also explained how she represents the conservative social movement leader, which I defined as a leader who obscures the lines between social movement leadership and institutional leadership.

While Glinda may be fictional, the conservative social movement leadership type and the blurring of the lines between the social movement and the government are very real, as illustrated through Samuel Gompers’ involvement in the American Federation of

Labor and Woodrow Wilson’s National Council of Defense, as well as Al Gore’s work in the U.S. Government and with raising awareness about global warming. While militant social movement leaders, like Elphaba, can certainly enact change, and moderate leaders can appeal to people outside the movement, sometimes only those who are part of the institution can change the laws of a nation. In these cases, militant and moderate social movement leaders may choose to step aside in order to allow conservative social movement leaders a chance to fly. In the final chapter of this dissertation, I will offer a number of ways that the character of Glinda provides audience members with “equipment for living.” Some of these “equipments for living” include that every action has a consequence, that giving into societal expectations does not always lead to true happiness, and that conservative tactics may be more effective than militant ones when it comes to gaining support for a political movement.

203 CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSION

Throughout this study, I have sought to explain how social movement leadership and hegemony are portrayed in the musical Wicked, as well as how various performances can create different meanings for a seemingly fixed text. Furthermore, I have attempted to expand the range of use of cluster criticism by clustering themes rather than terms and applying it to theatrical performances, rather than to written texts, for which it was initially developed. In this chapter, I will review the main themes and concepts discussed previously in each analysis chapter, explain possible ways in which these concepts provide audience members with “equipment for living,” and offer possibilities for future research endeavors.

Expanding Cluster Criticism

As discussed in detail in Chapter 3, I have attempted to expand cluster criticism as a method of rhetorical criticism so that it may be used for a broader range of texts.

Cluster criticism has previously been used primarily for examining public address texts, newspaper articles, and other word-oriented texts. When employed in this way, cluster criticism has revealed clusters of “God-terms” and “agon-terms” that provide insight into the intention of the texts’ authors.

However, in this study, I have attempted to apply cluster criticism to various layers of a performative, fragmented text. Instead of searching for particular words that cluster together to form meanings, I searched for themes that clustered together to form meanings. These clusters emerged when I examined each fragment of my text (the New

York performance script, my fieldnotes from each performance, the original cast recording, and the sheet music). To maintain my focus on hegemony and leadership, I

204 began each cluster analysis by focusing on a specific term or phrase. For my analysis for

Chapter 4, I chose the term “hegemony,” while in Chapters 5 and 6, I chose a phrase that

would reflect my rhetorical lens more thoroughly (“militant social movement leadership”

and “Glinda as a leader,” respectively). This was done to limit my clusters and sub-

clusters to a manageable amount for this dissertation. It should be noted that different

clusters and sub-clusters certainly could emerge if a different term or phrase was used as

a lens with which to examine each layer of text.

By analyzing each layer of text, numerous clusters and sub-clusters emerged from

each chapter. After organizing these clusters and sub-clusters, as described in Chapter 3, I

was able to write each analysis chapter in a way that I believe will allow for easy reading

for my reading audience. Chapter 4 is arranged topically to allow each hegemonic strategy or tool to be explained in detail, while Chapters 5 and 6 are arranged

chronologically to best describe the trajectory taken by each leader.

It is my intention that this extension of cluster criticism will be useful to other

scholars who study performance as text. Specifically, I believe that this method can be

used by rhetorical critics and dramatic critics alike to study themes in particular theatrical

productions – both musical and non-musical. However, I also hope that scholars of film,

television, and other media will find my extension of cluster criticism useful. For

example, a film scholar may choose to study a particular film by using the film’s screenplay, the film itself, and its soundtrack as textual fragments.

In fact, I believe that is possible to use this extended method of cluster criticism for texts that lack the many layers that a theatrical performance has. Certainly, a scholar could begin with a key term or phrase and look for clusters related to that term or phrase

205 in a television show, website, videotaped speech, or song without the enrichment of

layers. He or she could cluster themes and sub-themes around each other in the way I

have described in Chapter 3 in order to find meanings in the chosen text. I hope that

rhetorical scholars will find this extension of cluster criticism useful when examining a

variety of rhetorical texts, whether those texts are performed live, videotaped, or broadcasted through new media.

Hegemony, Wicked, and “Equipment for Living”

Hegemony was defined in this dissertation as a dominant group’s action of coercing or convincing a subordinate group to accept its own oppression. This cluster analysis of hegemony in Wicked revealed a number of themes that clustered together to provide meaning. First, it suggested that public apathy allows for hegemons to exploit a particular group. Second, it revealed a number of strategies and tools used by hegemonic regimes. The specific tools used by the Wizard of Oz and Madame Morrible include the

Time Clock Dragon, the giant golden mechanical head, a loudspeaker, labels, and the palace guards. The strategies used by the hegemonic regime in Wicked include three of the four strategies that Murphy (2001) discusses in his article on the Freedom Rides:

Naming, contextualization, and legal sanctions. Nine additional strategies emerged through this analysis: Bargaining, identification and public admiration, hiding

weaknesses, aligning oneself with those in power, scapegoating, spreading rumors and

creating fear among the populace, silencing and “brainwashing” dissenters, threats, and

destroying those closest to the dissenter.

It is important to note that, while I have separated strategies and tools into two

separate categories for the ease of my readers, these two categories are not mutually

206 exclusive. For example, Madame Morrible uses the tool of labels in her strategy to name

Elphaba “a Wicked Witch.” Similarly, the Wizard uses the giant golden mechanical head in order to gain public admiration. Strategies and tools are often used hand-in-hand by hegemonic regimes.

There are many messages that audience members could take away from Wicked and use as “equipment for living.” First, audience members are awakened to or reminded of the dangers of apathy. Because the Ozian public was unconcerned about the oppression facing the Animals, The Wizard’s regime was able to scapegoat the Animals, blaming them for the problems in Oz. This resulted in not only initial apathy from the

Ozian public, but later, disdain and anger towards the Animals, ultimately resulting in many Ozians believing that the Animals deserved to be silenced and oppressed. This public anger ultimately allowed the hegemonic regime to harm a human Ozian, Elphaba, because of her ties with the Animal Rights Movement. Apathy can result in harm to many, as history has shown.40 We must not be so concerned with our own lives that we ignore the plights of others.

Second, each tool and strategy provides a warning for audience members. For example, the giant mechanical head and the strategy of identifying with the public warn audience members that we should not to be so concerned with the appearances of leaders

(including their charisma and speaking abilities) that we ignore their actions. The tool of labels and the strategy of naming remind audience members that things are not always as they appear to be. Madame Morrible’s strategy of aligning herself with those in power allows audience members to see both the benefit of such a strategy (for example, it might

40 Please refer to the discussion of pre-World War II Germany in Chapter 4. 207 be beneficial to make friends with one’s boss) and the downfall of such a strategy (when

others are hurt by this action, one might make enemies that will hold power over one

later).

These strategies also show audiences how hegemonic regimes can use both

persuasion and coercion to obtain their goals. While most of the strategies, such as

naming, contextualization, bargaining, and scapegoating, are used persuasively to

convince the public to agree to the oppression of the Animals, the strategies of

threatening dissenters, silencing and brainwashing dissenters, and destroying those closest to the dissenters are very coercive acts. Hegemonic regimes use these acts of

coercion to make an example of dissenters to discourage others from speaking out. This analysis has suggested that hegemonic regimes may use both persuasion and coercion in combination to silence dissenters.

Third, audience members are made aware that not all hegemonic leaders appear villainous to the public. While it is common to think of the likes of Adolf Hitler and

Joseph Stalin when thinking of hegemonic leaders, Wicked suggests that hegemonic leaders may appear kindhearted and well-intentioned. The Wizard of Oz is more cowardly than evil; he creates lies in order to benefit one social group in Oz at the expense of another in hopes that he will be liked by the social group he is helping.

Ozians sing his praises and believe he is good-natured and all-powerful. Indeed, in the eyes of the public, he has achieved an almost god-like status. Even Madame Morrible, who later reveals herself to be a villainous character with selfish motives, first appears to be the well-intentioned headmistress of Shiz University who wants promising students to succeed. Through the characters of Madame Morrible and the Wizard of Oz, audience

208 members are encouraged to evaluate at the actions of their leaders rather than the peripheral aspects of appearance and charisma.

Ultimately, Wicked offers a warning to its audience: We, as a society, must remain aware of what our leaders are doing. As history has shown, if we become apathetic to the struggle of others or to the deeds of our leaders, the results can be dangerous. Through the entertaining medium of musical theatre, Wicked alerts audience members to this lesson.

The Militant Social Movement Leader and “Equipment for Living”

In Chapter 5, I explained how the character of the Wicked Witch of the West is transformed into a social movement leader named Elphaba. Using Simons’ (1970) definition of a social movement, I argued that Wicked’s Animal Rights Movement is indeed a social movement41. I then suggested how Elphaba becomes a leader in the

Animal Rights Movement. Elphaba exhibits a number of traits that are commonly associated with leadership, including outgoingness, intelligence, ambition, sense of duty, and empathy for others. Furthermore, Chapter 5 chronicled Elphaba’s trajectory as a social movement leader, from her rise to power, her decision to briefly reconsider her militant tactics, her downward spiral, her decision to pass the torch of leadership to another, and the legacy she left behind. I also discussed Elphaba’s role in attracting a few key activists to her movement; specifically, Fiyero and Glinda.

Like Chapter 4, Chapter 5 offered a number of insights that provide audience members with “equipment for living.” First, it suggests that even the most capable of leaders cannot succeed alone. Wicked encourages audience members to think about the

41 Simons (1970) defines a social movement as “an uninstitutionalized collectivity that mobilizes for action to implement a program for the reconstitution of social norms and values” (p. 3). 209 value of teamwork. Elphaba is unable to accomplish her goals for the movement and

relies on Glinda’s popularity to help the Animals at the end of the musical. Fiyero saves

Elphaba’s life multiple times in Act 2, allowing her to continue her work. Though

Elphaba is a determined young woman with a strong social conscience, she cannot

succeed alone: She needs her friends to help her. Wicked promotes the concept of working together for common goals.

Second, this analysis suggests that public perception and popularity play a role in

a person’s successes or failures. Wicked implies that there is some truth to Glinda’s argument in “Popular” that states that one need not have intelligence or talent to be a

“celebrated head of state” or a “great communicator” – all one needs is to be popular.

This concept is further illustrated through both the Wizard, who, despite his lack of talent

and ingenuity, is such a popular leader that he is frequently praised and worshipped by

his constituency, and through Elphaba, who, despite her intelligence, talent, and strong

sense of ethics, is so unpopular that Ozians refuse to listen to her no matter how reasonable her ideas are. Elphaba’s downfall and legacy suggest that militant social movement leaders may make a difference in individual lives, but without popularity, they cannot succeed on a larger scale.

This tension between popularity and public perception of leadership qualities can be seen in recent U.S. politics. Popular newcomers to the political arena, such as

President Barack Obama and former Governor Sarah Palin, have been influential in

politics despite some critics’ suggestions that they lack the leadership trait of experience.

Just as the Ozian public idolizes the Wizard despite his flaws, the American public admires these leaders despite their lack of experience. Similarly, there are U.S. politicians

210 who have suffered downfalls like Elphaba’s because of their lack of popularity. Perhaps one of the most recent examples is former U.S. Senator Max Cleland of Georgia.

Cleland, an Army veteran who received a purple heart and lost both of his legs and an arm in the Vietnam War, lost his bid for a second term in the Senate in 2002. Despite

Cleland’s extensive record of public and military service, he was defeated by Republican challenger Saxby Chambliss, who ran political ads that criticized Cleland’s decisions while displaying images of Osama bin Laden (“Chambliss defeats Cleland in Georgia,”

2002). Ultimately, these ads contributed to Cleland’s diminishing popularity, causing

Cleland to lose his re-election bid. These examples, like the examples of the Wizard of

Oz and Elphaba in Wicked, suggest that popularity plays a strong role in a leader’s

success.

This analysis further suggests that militant social movement leaders cannot

accomplish their goals without the help of more moderate leaders. Elphaba was able to

teach Chistery to speak and was able to free Animals from captivity, but she was unable

to get the Ozian public to accept her movement as legitimate. Instead, she surrendered,

encouraged Glinda to take charge, and made her promise not to clear her name so that

Glinda could work for Animal rights without the tarnished image that Elphaba had

accumulated. Glinda did just that, and as a result, was able to banish and imprison the

hegemonic leaders that caused harm to Elphaba and the Animals. As suggested in

Chapter 4, it appears as though she also intends to incorporate Animal rights into her

agenda as the new Ozian leader, judging from her interactions with Chistery at the end of

the musical. Audience members are encouraged to see the value in both the militant and

conservative social movement leader, but it is ultimately the conservative social

211 movement leader who is given the chance to improve things, suggesting that militant leaders need more moderate leaders in order to accomplish their goals.

Furthermore, audience members may leave the theatre thinking about what really

is “good” and what really is “evil.” Wicked encourages audience members to question

labels placed on people and things in everyday life. After all, if a well-intentioned,

determined young woman like Elphaba is considered “wicked,” what other things that we consider negative are really positive, and vice-versa? When we judge and label people, are we simply creating another witch-hunt? Wicked invites theatre-goers to consider these questions and how they affect their own lives.

Finally, audience members may be inspired by Elphaba’s willingness to stand up for what she believes in despite the immense costs to her personal life. Through Elphaba,

Wicked encourages audience members to think about what they believe in and to take a stand for these beliefs. While the musical may not encourage the use of militant tactics because of their limited use in attracting others to the movement, it does encourage actions on behalf of beliefs. Audience members may feel inspired by Elphaba’s journey and choose to take action on behalf of a cause that they believe in as a result of seeing the musical.

The Conservative Social Movement Leader and “Equipment for Living”

Chapter 6 examined the character of Glinda as a leader and her evolution from referent leader in college to public figure to conservative social movement leader. Using

Hollander’s (1978) definition of leadership, “a process of influence between a leader and those who are followers” (p. 1), I suggested that G(a)linda is a referent leader, a public

212 figure, and ultimately a conservative social movement leader because of her influence on

others.

My analysis revealed a number of Glinda’s characteristics that worked to her advantage in making her a popular leader: She is energetic, she prefers conformity over change, and she feels guilt whenever she does something wrong. Interestingly, Glinda also is inept at her chosen profession and can be conniving, which are two traits that are

not often associated with popularity. Furthermore, Chapter 6 discussed how Glinda

separates her private feelings from her public life, often illustrated in performance by the

existence or lack of a nasal quality to her voice. Glinda is also reluctant to fight against

the status quo until the very end of the musical, when she transforms into a conservative

social movement leader.

In Chapter 6, I sought to expand Simon, Mechling & Schreier’s (1984) social

movement spectrum to include a leader that is both playing a role in the institution and

fighting on behalf of a social movement. Like Samuel Gompers and Al Gore in real life,

Glinda becomes a conservative social movement leader at the end of the musical42. She

bridges the gap between institutional leadership and social movement leadership.

The character of Glinda provides theatre-goers with a number of messages

regarding “equipment for living.” First, because Glinda struggles between what benefits

her and what benefits others, she is a character to which many people can relate – perhaps

more so than the always-altruistic Elphaba or the always-selfish Madame Morrible.

Glinda reminds us that there are always consequences for our actions – both positive and

negative. For example, when she tries to spare Elphaba from embarrassment at the school

42 Please see page 186 in Chapter 6 for a complete discussion of the conservative social movement leader. 213 dance, she gains a friend. In contrast, when she spitefully suggests that the Wizard of Oz and Madame Morrible spread a rumor that Nessarose is in danger in order to entrap

Elphaba, the Wizard and Madame Morrible deviously adjust her suggestion and actually kill Nessarose in order to capture Elphaba. Audience members are reminded through

Glinda that every act we commit – whether good or bad – has an effect on someone.

Perhaps one of the most important lessons audience members can learn from

Glinda is that giving into societal expectations does not always lead to happiness. While

Glinda’s conformity has led to her role as a popular public figure in the Wizard’s regime, she is not truly happy because what she really wants is to be loved by her fiancé, Fiyero.

Her contradictory feelings are best illustrated when she sings “Thank Goodness,” in which she reflects on both her public persona, which “couldn’t be happier,” and her private self, which is coping with the loss of her best friend and the fact that her fiancé doesn’t really love her. When Fiyero runs off with Elphaba, Glinda realizes that no matter how well she conforms to society’s expectations, she will never be loved by the man she wants to be with. She may be respected by the Ozian public, but it has not brought her inner happiness. Audience members can learn from Glinda’s experience and consider what they really want in life, and whether or not it conforms to what society expects of them.

This analysis also suggests that conservative leaders may be more effective than militant leaders when it comes to attracting support for the movement and implementing change. Audience members may learn that while standing by one’s beliefs is important, doing so in a way that it palatable to the public is what accomplishes change. While

Elphaba was able to make small changes in certain people’s and Animal’s lives, she was

214 unable to get the Ozian public to support her cause. Glinda, on the other hand, has won

the support of the public, which will make it easier for her to implement change and a

new policy of Animal acceptance in Oz. Through Glinda, audience members learn that

playing by the rules – but perhaps not giving into every societal expectation – results in

success.

However, it is also important to note that without Elphaba, Glinda could not

succeed as a conservative social movement leader. In Glinda’s case, it is Elphaba who

brings her to the movement. However, it is likely that Ozians are more likely to accept

Glinda’s more moderate Animals rights agenda after comparing it to Elphaba’s militant

tactics. Similarly, Lucaites & Condit (1990), in their analysis of the rhetoric of Civil

Rights leaders Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, argue that Malcolm X’s militant

rhetoric made Martin Luther King Jr.’s moderate social change rhetoric more palatable to

white America. In Wicked, Glinda is able to become a conservative social movement

leader because of Elphaba’s militancy. Audience members learn that although conservative social movement leaders are more effective in terms of gaining support for a cause, militant leaders often lay the groundwork for the conservative leaders’ success.

Finally, my analysis has suggested that institutional leaders and social movement leaders need not be separate entities. Often, political figures have ties to a particular social movement and seek to implement societal change. Perhaps less often, but occasionally, social movement leaders will seek to run for public office. In addition to the conservative social movement leaders I described in Chapter 6, I have personal experience with leaders who have ties to both social movements and local governments.

My father, a union Ironworker for 33 years who has been a part of the American Labor

215 Movement for longer than I have been alive, is one of two new township supervisors in

Cecil Township, Pennsylvania. Although he has only served for a few months at this

time, he has already helped to negotiate a local police contract where he sided with the

Fraternal Order of Police. In this short amount time as township supervisor, he has also

worked with local union road crews to clear residential areas in the township of large

amounts of snow that accumulated in February of this year. I imagine that, throughout the

rest of his term, he will face other situations where he must balance his ties between the local government and the American Labor Movement. Conservative social movement

leaders can be found in all levels of government.

Audience members’ eyes may be opened to this combination of institutional and

social movement leadership through the character of Glinda. In fact, the character may

even inspire some audience members to be this type of leader, just as the character of

Elphaba may inspire audience members to stand up for what they believe in no matter the cost.

Future Research Possibilities

It is my hope that this dissertation will encourage other scholars to use cluster

criticism as a research method and to study musical theatre as rhetorical texts that offer

audience members “equipment for living.” I also hope that this dissertation might inspire

others to look at the connection between performance and social movement rhetoric - a

long tradition of which Wicked is part.43

First, I believe that the extension of cluster criticism that has been outlined and

employed in this dissertation will be useful to rhetorical critics and dramatic critics alike.

43 Please see Chapter 2 for a thorough discussion of the connection between theatre and social protest rhetoric. 216 While the method that I have described in this study is best used for texts with multiple

layers, it could certainly be used for single-layered texts as well. In addition to live

performance, I believe this extension of cluster criticism will be useful when examining

films, songs, television shows, websites, and a variety of other texts. I also believe that

this is not the only way to extend cluster criticism. Other scholars may find other ways of

extending Burke’s framework to study other rhetorical, literary and dramatic texts.

I personally look forward to using this method again in my research. Specifically,

I would like to apply it to other theatrical productions. I currently have in mind a

particular project which will examine Dolly Parton’s musical 9 to 5 through the various

lenses of feminism using cluster criticism, but I imagine I will be using this extension of

cluster criticism in other projects as well.

There are a number of characteristics that I recommend researchers look for in

their chosen performative text when using this extension of cluster criticism to examine performances. These characteristics include vocal techniques, such as intonation,

inflection and volume, the placement and use of props, scenery, and costumes, spoken

and sung text, musical elements such as key changes and tempo changes, and physical

movement of the performers. A more detailed list is provided in Chapter 3 of this

dissertation.

Second, I hope that other rhetorical scholars will study musical theatre as

“equipment for living.” As the previous sections of this dissertation have discussed,

Wicked offers a number of messages that audience members can use as “equipment for

living.” Just as any piece of literature can offer “equipment for living,” any play or

musical can offer “equipment for living.” I hope that this dissertation will encourage

217 others to rhetorical analyze theatre in order to reveal themes that communicate life lessons to both the theatrical audience and the readership audience.

Limitations

It is important to note that this study, like any study, is not flawless. There were three prominent limitations to this study, which I wish to address here.

First, one limitation is that some scholars may not be comfortable with my broadening of cluster criticism in order to apply it to performative texts. Anytime a scholar attempts to extend a traditional method, questions will be raised. Some scholars may believe that cluster criticism should focus solely on words in a text, rather than the performative vocabulary I have used in this dissertation. Other scholars may disagree with my method of abduction or the way I reached the conclusion to use the key terms and phrases that I chose for each cluster analysis. I recognize these critiques as valid criticisms of my work and as limitations for this study.

Second, my work is limited because it focused solely on American productions of

Wicked. I chose to focus only on American productions in order prevent my focus from being too broad, but I can only imagine what other insights I might have gained by studying performances in London, Tokyo, or Sydney. Examining international productions of Wicked is a suggestion for future research.

Finally, because of the limitations of time and funding, I was only able to see, document, and analyze three productions of Wicked. As I mentioned previously, every performance is different and holds meaning, but in order to compare and contrast these meanings and the way they are conveyed through performance, it is necessary to examine

218 multiple performances. My analysis may have been richer and may have provided

additional meanings if I had documented more than three performances of Wicked.

Conclusion

Throughout this dissertation, I have examined the rhetoric of social movement leadership and hegemony in the musical Wicked, suggesting that the musical offers

“equipment for living” to its audience members. Constructing a rhetorical text using the

New York performance script, sheet music, cast recording, and three performances of

Wicked, I analyzed Wicked through an extended version of cluster criticism, clustering themes rather than terms to form meanings.

In my analysis chapters, I discussed how hegemony and leadership are portrayed in Wicked. Chapter 4 examined the strategies and tools used by the hegemonic regime in

Wicked and the role that apathy plays in the effectiveness of these strategies and tools. I have also offered two types of hegemonic leaders through the characters of Madame

Morrible and the Wizard of Oz. Chapter 5 defined the fictional Animal Rights Movement in Wicked as a social movement, with Elphaba as the movement’s militant leader. This chapter explored Elphaba’s journey as a social movement leader, ending with her downfall and the legacy she left behind. In Chapter 6, using the character of Glinda as an example, I argued that the line between social movement leadership and institutional leadership is not as strict as rhetorical scholars have previously argued. Chapter 6 explored Glinda’s transition from apolitical referent leader to the new, confident, social- conscious leader of Oz at the end of the musical. In this final chapter, I have attempted to offer various “equipments for living” for audience members and readers to consider, as well as suggestions for future research.

219 Wicked offers theatre-goers a number of messages concerning leadership and hegemony. In doing so, it joins a long line of American musicals which have critiqued society. However, as with any live production, the way Wicked is performed can add to or detract from the political messages in the script. Directors, actors, lighting designers, costume designers, set designers and many others can influence how a particular message is portrayed. Furthermore, audience members co-create these messages by interpreting these messages through their own perspectives. Audience members have the ability to select or reject certain messages. Therefore, they, too, have an important role to play in the communication process that exists in performance.

As an audience member, I found some scenes in some performances to be more effective than others, as I have outlined in throughout Chapters 4, 5, and 6 of this dissertation. However, other audience members may have been more influenced by different scenes. Indeed, we all have a different way of looking at things, which will ultimately result in some messages being highlighted while others are muted for certain audience members. As Fiyero and Elphaba say during various times of the musical, “It’s just looking at things another way.” It is my hope that this dissertation has resulted in leadership, hegemony, musical theatre, performance, and cluster criticism being looked at in another way.

220 REFERENCES

Abernathy, M. (2006, December 17). Decoding gay icons: The appeal of Judy, Babs, and

Madge is more than high camp and melodrama. It’s about who gay men are – in

the most fundamental way. Chicago Sun-Times, B1.

Allougi, A. G. (1998). Not so fast, Mrs. President: Hegemony, media, and the role of

First Lady. Masters Abstracts International, 36 (05). (UMI No. 199889)

Andrews, J. R. (1983). The practice of rhetorical criticism. New York, NY: Macmillan

Publishing Co.

Aikin, R. C. (2005). Was Jud Jewish? Property, ethnicity, and gender in Oklahoma!

Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 22. 277-283.

Algeo, J. (1990). Australia as the Land of Oz. American Speech, 65. 86-89.

Aliseda, A. (2006). Abductive reasoning: Logical investigations into discovery and

explanation. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.

Al’s Bio. (2010). Retrieved 11 February 2010 from http://www.algore.com/about.html

Angrosino, M. V. (2005). Recontextualizing observation: Ethnography, pedagogy, and

the prospects for a progressive political agenda. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln

(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (3nd ed., pp. 729-762). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Aristotle. (1991). On rhetoric. (G. Kennedy, Trans.) Oxford, UK: Oxford University

Press.

Aristotle. (2007). On rhetoric. (2nd Ed; G. Kennedy, Trans.) Oxford, UK: Oxford

University Press.

221 Asimakopoulos, J. (2007). Societal education, direct action, and working-class gains: An

anarchist perspective. Journal of Poverty, 11, 1-22.

Aune, J. A. (1990). Cultures of discourse: Marxism and rhetorical theory. In D. C.

Williams & M. D. Hazen (Eds.). Argumentation: Theory and the rhetoric of

assent. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press, 157-172.

Baker, J. H. (2005). Sisters: The lives of America’s suffragists. New York, NY: Hill and

Wang.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1968). Rabelais and his world. (H. Iswolsky, Trans.) Cambridge, MA:

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres, and other late essays. (C. Emerson & M.

Holquist, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Barnard, C. J. (1948). The function of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.

Barthes, R. (1977). The death of the author. In S. Heath. Image-Text-Music. (pp. 142-

148). London, UK: Fontana.

Baum, L. F. (1999/1900). The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. With M. Foreman [Illustrator].

London, UK: Pavilion Children’s Books.

Benne, K. D. & Sheats, P. (1948). Functional roles of group members. Journal of Social

Issues, 4, 41-49.

Berger, A. A. (1970). Li’l Abner: A study in American satire. New York, NY: Twayne

Publishers, Inc.

Berger, P. L. & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. Garden City,

NY: Anchor.

222 Berthold, C. A. (1976). Kenneth Burke’s cluster-agon method: Its development and an

application. Central States Speech Journal, 27, 302-309.

Billman, C. (1981). ‘I’ve seen the movie:’ Oz revisited. Literature Film Quarterly, 9.

241-250.

Bishop, M. (2004). Establishing and enforcing norms without government and religion:

The nasty, brutish life of middle school students. Presented at the annual meeting

of the Midwestern Political Science Association in Chicago, IL.

“Black actors assail whites in The Wiz.” (1987, January 7). San Jose Mercury News, 11A.

Bonnet, J-M. (1982). Society vs. the individual in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. English

Studies, 63, 32-36.

Bottoms, S. J. (2003). The efficacy/effeminacy braid: Unpicking the performance

studies/theatre studies dichotomy. Theatre Topics, 13, 173-187.

Brecht, B. (1964). Brecht on theatre: The development of an aesthetic. (J. Willett, Ed. &

Trans.) New York, NY: Hill & Wang.

Breon, R. (1995). Show Boat: The revival, the racism. The Drama Review, 39, 86-105.

Brock, B. L., Scott, R. L. & Chesebro, J. W. (1990). Methods of rhetorical criticism: A

twentieth century perspective. (3rd Ed.) Detroit, MI: Wayne State University

Press.

Brockett, O. G. (1995). History of the Theatre. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Browne, S. H. (2001). Response: Context in critical theory and practice. Western Journal

of Communication, 65, 330-335.

Browne, S. H. (2005, spring semester). Rhetoric of social movements, Communication

Arts and Sciences 411. Class lecture. The Pennsylvania State University.

223 Browne, S. H. (2007). Rhetorical criticism and the challenges of bilateral argument.

Philosophy and Rhetoric, 40, 108-118.

Bruner, J. (2002). Making stories: Law, literature, life. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and

Giroux.

Bullins, E. (1968). A short statement on street theatre. The Drama Review, 12, 93.

Burger, A. (2009). From ‘The Wizard of Oz’ to ‘Wicked:’ Trajectory of American myth.

Dissertation Abstracts International. (UMI No. 3350672)

Burke, K. (1941). The philosophy of literary form: Studies in symbolic action. Baton

Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press.

Burke, K. (1959). Attitudes toward history. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Burke, K. (1966). Language as symbolic action: Essays on life, literature, and method.

Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Burke, K. (1969). A grammar of motives. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Burke, K. (1969). A rhetoric of motives. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Camerson, W. B. (1966). Modern social movements: A sociological outline. New York,

NY: Random House.

Carlson, M. (2001). Theatre and performance at a time of shifting disciplines. Theater

Research International, 26, 137-144.

Carpenter, L. (1985). “There’s no place like home”: The Wizard of Oz and American

isolationism. Film and History, 15. 37-45.

Carter, T. (2002).Textual and personal representations of African Americans in

compositions and rhetoric. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63 (07). (UMI

No. 3059422)

224 Cartwright, D. & Zander, A. (1968). Group dynamics: Research and theory. New York,

NY: Harper and Row.

Caster, P. (2004). Staging prisons: Performance, activism, and social bodies. The Drama

Review, 48, 107-116.

Cathcart, R. S. (1972). New approaches to the study of movements: Defining movements

rhetorically. Western Speech, 36, 82-88.

Chambliss defeats Cleland in Georgia. (2002, November 5). Retrieved 1 April 2010 from

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/11/05/elec02.ga.s.hotrace/index.ht

Chan, S. (2008). Soft deterrence, passive resistance: American lenses, Chinese lessons. In

D. S. Bobrow (Ed.). Hegemony constrained. (pp. 62-80). Pittsburgh, PA:

University of Pittsburgh Press.

Charland, M. (1987). Constitutive rhetoric: The case of the peuple Quebecois. Quarterly

Journal of Speech, 73, 133-150.

Charland, M. (1991). Finding a horizon and telos: The challenge to critical rhetoric.

Quarterly Journal of Speech, 77, 71-74.

Cheney, G. (2000). Interpreting interpretive research: Toward perspectivism without

relativism. In S. R. Corman & M. S. Poole. Perspectives on organizational

communication: Finding common ground. (pp. 17-45). New York, NY: Guilford

Press.

Chenoweth, K. with Rodgers, J. (2009). A little bit wicked: Life, love, and faith in stages.

New York, NY: Simon and Schuster, Inc.

225 Cherwitz, R. A. & Darwin, T. J. (1995). Why the ‘epistemic’ in epistemic rhetoric? The

paradox of rhetoric as performance. Text and Performance Quarterly, 15, 189-

205.

Ciulla, J. B. (1998). Leadership and the problem of bogus empowerment. In J. B. Ciulla.

Ethics, the heart of leadership. (pp. 63-86). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Clanton, G. (1991). Populism: The human preference in America, 1890-1900. Boston,

MA: Twayne Publishers.

Collins, M. (2005, September 16). Season of the witch: Broadway’s ‘Wicked’ makes its

Denver debut. The Daily Camera, 20.

Conquergood, D. (1992). Ethnography, rhetoric, and performance. Quarterly Journal of

Speech, 78, 80-123.

Conquergood, D. (1998). Beyond the text: Toward a performance cultural politics. In S.

J. Dailey. The future of performance studies: Visions and revisions. National

Communication Association.

Conquergood, D. (2002). Performance studies: Interventions and radical research. The

Drama Review, 46, 145-156.

Cook, S. C. (2009). Pretty like the girl: Gender, race and Oklahoma! Contemporary

Theatre Review, 19, 35-47.

Corcorcan, F. (1983). The bear in the back yard: Myth, ideology, and victimage ritual in

Soviet funerals. Communication Monographs, 50, 305-320.

Cote, D. (2005). Wicked: The grimmerie. New York, NY: Hyperion.

Coughlin, J. J. (n.d.). Reclaiming darkness in Paganism: A call to balance. Retrieved 23

January 2010 from http://www.waningmoon.com/darkpagan/lib/lib0046.shtml

226 Davids, A. & Parenti, A. N. (1958). Personality, social choice, and adults’ perception of

these factors in groups of disturbed and normal children. Sociometry, 21, 212-224.

Davis, R. (2002). What WOZ: Lost objects, repeat viewings, and the Sissy Warrior. Film

Quarterly, 55, 2-13.

Decker, T. (2009). ‘Do you want to hear a Mammy song?’: A historiography of Show

Boat. Contemporary Theatre Review, 19, 8-21.

Della Porta, D. & Diani, M. (1999). Social movements: An introduction. Oxford, UK:

Blackwell Publishers.

De Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. (S. Randall, Trans.). Berkeley, CA:

University of California Press.

Denning, M. (1996). The Cultural Front: The laboring of American culture in the

twentieth century. London, UK: Verso.

Dighe, R. S. (2002). The historian’s Wizard of Oz: Reading L. Frank Baum’s classic as a

political and monetary allegory. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Docan, T., Freitas, L. & Holtzman, C. (2003). George W. Bush’s “National Day of

Prayer and Remembrance” speech: A cluster analysis of Bush’s rhetorical

argument for revenge. Presented at the annual meeting of the International

Communication Association in San Diego, CA.

Dolan, J. (1993). Geographies of learning: Theatre studies, performance, and the

‘performative.’ Theatre Journal, 45, 417-441.

Duffy, S. (1996). American Labor on Stage. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Dunning, J. (2001). Geoffrey Holder: A life in theatre, dance, and art. New York, NY:

Harry N. Abrams, Inc.

227 Dykes on Bikes. (2009). Dykes on Bikes: Women’s motorcycle contingent. Retrieved 8

January 2010 from www.dykesonbikes.org

Eisler, G. (2007). Kidding on the level: The reactionary project of I’d Rather Be Right.

Studies in Musical Theatre, 1, 7-24.

Elliot, B. F. (1990). Nora’s doors: Three American productions of Ibsen’s A Doll House.

Text and Performance Quarterly, 10. 194-203.

Enos, R. L. (2006). Interdisciplinary perspectives on rhetorical criticism. Rhetoric

Review, 25, 357-358.

Espinola, J. (1998). Some thoughts about performance studies across curricular divides.

In S. J. Dailey. The future of performance studies: Visions and revisions. National

Communication Association.

Fanger, I. (2003, October 30). A new twist on the Land of Oz. Christian Science Monitor,

11.

Fenske, M. (2007). Interdisciplinary terrains of performance studies. Text and

Performance Quarterly, 27, 351-368.

Fiedler, F. E. & Chemers, M. M. (1984). Improving leadership effectiveness: The leader

match concept. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Filewood, A. (2003). Performance and memory in the Party: Dismembering the Workers’

Theatre Movement. Essays on Canadian Writing, 80, 59-77.

Fink, L. (1988). The new labor history and the powers of historical pessimism:

Consensus, hegemony, and the case of the Knights of Labor. The Journal of

American History, 75, 115-136.

228 Fontana, B. (2005). The democratic philosopher: Rhetoric as hegemony in Gramsci.

Italian Culture, 23, 97-123.

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish. (A. Sheridan, Trans.) New York, NY:

Pantheon.

Foss, S. K. (1984). Women priests in the Episcopal Church: A cluster analysis of

establishment rhetoric. Religious Communication Today, 7, 1-11.

Foss, S. K. (1996). Cluster Criticism. Rhetorical Criticism: Exploration and Practice.

Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.

French, J. R. P. & Raven, B. (1981). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright & A.

Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory. (p. 317). New York, NY:

McGraw-Hill.

Frye, D. (2006).Save the women and children: An analysis of the rhetoric in the social

movement against Fgm. Masters Abstracts International, 43 (01). (UMI No.

1420791)

Frye, D. E. (2009). John Brown’s smoldering spark. Hallowed Ground Magazine.

Retrieved 19 December 2009 from http://www.civilwar.org/hallowed-ground-

magazine/Fall-09/john-browns-smoldering-spark.html

Gadamer, H-G. (2004). Truth and Method. New York, NY: The Continuum International

Publishing Group, Inc.

Gardner, E. (2003, October 31). Something ‘wicked’ comes to Broadway. USA Today,

9E.

229 Gardner, E. (2004, May 10). Actor race leads Tony drama. USA Today. Retrieved 22

June 2009 from http://www.usatoday.com/life/theater/news/2004-05-10-tony-

nominations_x.htm

“Garland, Judy.” (1995). Cassell’s Queer Companion, 95.

Gassner, J. (1949). Aspects of the Broadway theatre. The Quarterly Journal of Speech,

35, 289-296.

George, D. E. R. (1996). Performance epistemology. Performance Research, 1, 16-25.

Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York, NY: Anchor

Books.

Goldrick-Jones, A. (1996). Men in a feminist forum: A rhetorical analysis of the White

Ribbon Campaign against male violence. Dissertation Abstracts International, 57

(10). (UMI No. 9708912)

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. (Q. Hoare & G. N. Smith,

Trans.). New York, NY: International.

Gramsci, A. (1973). Letters from prison. (L. Lawner, Trans.). New York, NY: Harper

Colophon Books.

Gramsci, A. (1995). Further selections from the prison notebooks. In D. Boothman (Ed.

and Trans.) London, UK: Lawrence & Wishart.

Graves, M. P. (10983). Functions of key metaphors in early Quaker sermons, 1671-700.

Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69, 364-378.

Green, J. R. (1994). Theatre in Ancient Greek society. London, UK: Routledge.

Greenberg, H. R. (1975). The movies on your mind. New York, NY: E. P. Dutton. 13-32.

230 Greenwood, D. J. & Levin, M. (2005). Reform of the social sciences and of universities

through action research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of

qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 43-64). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Griffin, L. (1952). The rhetoric of historical movements. In C. E. Morris, III & S. H.

Browne. Readings on the Rhetoric of Social Protest. (pp. 9-14). State College,

PA: Strata Publishing, Inc.

Grimaldi. (1998). The Washington Monument syndrome. Public Manager, 98. 54-57.

Gronbeck, B. E. (1973). The rhetoric of social-institutional change: Black Action at

Michigan. In G. Mohrmann, C. Stewart & D. Ochs, Explorations in rhetorical

criticism. (pp. 96-113) University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.

Gross, M. J. (2000). The queen is dead. Atlantic Monthly, 286, 68-71.

Guba, E. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and

emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of

qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 191-216). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hackman, M. Z. & Johnson, C. E. (1991). Leadership: A communication perspective.

Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.

Hamelman, S. (2000). The deconstructive search for Oz. Literature Film Quarterly, 28.

312-320.

Hamilton, J. R. (2001). Theatrical performance and interpretation. Journal of Aesthetics

and Art Criticism, 59, 307-312.

Handler, D. (2003, June 29). Hey, watch who you’re calling wicked! The New York

Times, 5.

231 Hansen, B. A. (2002). The fable of the allegory: The Wizard of Oz in economics. Journal

of Economic Education, 33. 254-264.

Harrison, S. L. (2002). Twentieth-century journalists: America’s opinionmakers.

Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Hart, H. (1992, September 27). Return of ‘The Wiz:’ Andre de Shields brings maturity to

his recreated title role. Chicago Tribune, 3.

Hart, R. P. & Daughton, S. (2004). Modern rhetorical criticism. Boston, MA: Pearson

Education, Inc.

Hebert, J. (2008, September 24). Meanwhile, on this side of the rainbow: Playhouse

wizard Des McAnuff takes on ‘The Wiz.’ San Diego Union-Tribune, F-1.

Hellman, W. J. (1994). Elements of tragedy in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. North

Dakota Journal of Theatre and Speech, 7, 84-92.

Henderson, M. & Lahr, J. (2005). Stars on stage. New York, NY: Bulfinch Press.

Henry, W. E. (1948). Executive personality and job success. American Management

Association, personnel series, 120.

Herman, V. (1987, March 20). ‘The Wiz’ controversy roaring over mixed cast. Post-

Tribune, 7.

Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. H. (1993). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing

human resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hoffman, M. F. & Cowan, R. L. (2008). The meaning of work/life: A corporate ideology

of work/life balance. Communication Quarterly, 56, 227-246.

Hofler, R. (2004, May 6). Wicked is not Nietsche, but tells universal truths. Variety, A1.

232 Hollander, E. P. (1978). Leadership dynamics: A practical guide to effective

relationships. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Horsley, P. (2006, March 23). Isn’t she iconic? Why do gay men love Judy Garland? Her

music, her moxie, her melancholy. The Kansas City Star, 23.

Hunter, J. O. (1966). Marc Blitzstein’s “The Cradle Will Rock” as a document of

America, 1937. American Quarterly, 18, 227-233.

Hyman, C. (1992). Women, workers, and community: Working-class visions and

workers’ theatre in the 1930s. Canadian Review of American Studies, 23, 15-31.

Isherwood, C. (2003, October 31). Wicked. Daily Variety, 2.

Isherwood, C. (2009, June 19). Not in Kansas, or this century: Back of that road to the

‘70s. New York Times, 1.

Jablin, F. M. & Sias, P. M. (2001). Communication competence. In F. M. Jablin & L. L.

Putman. The New Handbook in Organizational Communication. (pp. 819-864).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Jablonski, C. J. (1980). Promoting radical change in the Roman Catholic Church:

Rhetorical requirements, problems, and strategies of the American bishops.

Central States Speech Journal, 31, 282-289.

Jasper, J. M. (1997). The art of moral protest. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago

Press.

Jensen, R. J. (1977). Leadership in contemporary American labor unions: Adaptation and

renewal. Communication Quarterly, 2, 29-33.

John Brown. (2009). Retrieved 19 December 2009 from

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p1550.html

233 Joreen. (1969). The BITCH manifesto. Retrieved 8 January 2010 from

http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/bitch.htm

Jones, C. (2005, July 15). Will ‘Wicked’ make for more Chicago shows? Chicago

Tribune, 8.

Kaczmarczik, S. H. (2009). Why do some of you use the word “witch?” “Wiccan?”

Retrieved 23 January 2010 from http://stason.org/TULARC/religion/paganism-

wicca-witchcraft/4b-Why-do-some-of-you-use-the-word-Witch-Wiccan.html

Keating, D. J. (1998, January 28). Judy Garland, pride and Stonewall Riots. The

Philadelphia Inquirer, D05.

Keohane, R. O. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political

economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

King, A. (2006). The state of rhetorical criticism. Rhetoric Review, 25, 365-368.

King, M. L., Jr. (1998). The autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. (Clayborne

Carson, Ed.) New York, NY: Warner Books.

Klope, D. C. (1994). Creationism and the tactic of debate: A performance study of

guerilla rhetoric. The Journal of Communication and Religion, 17, 39-51.

Krauss, M. (2003). Charles S. Peirce’s theory of abduction and the Aristotelian

enthymeme through signs. In F. H. Van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. A. Willard & A.

F. Snoeck Henkemans. Anyone who has a view: Theoretical contributions to the

study of argumentation. (pp. 237-254). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer

Academic Publishers.

Kruse, S. D. & Prettyman, S. S. (2008). Women, leadership, and power revisiting the

Wicked Witch of the West. Gender and Education, 20, 451-464.

234 Kuchwara, M. (1994, June 21). From drag to drama - A massive gay cultural festival gets

underway in New York, along with gay games and observance of 25th anniversary

of the Stonewall Riots. Sun-Sentinel, 3E.

Laclau, E. (2000). Identity and hegemony: The role of universality in the constitution of

political logics. In J. Butler, E. Laclau & S. Zizek. Contingency, hegemony,

universality. (pp. 44-89). New York, NY: Verso.

Lake, R. A. (1983). Enacting Red Power: The comsummatory function in Native

American protest rhetoric. In C. E. Morris III & S. H. Browne. Readings on the

Rhetoric of Social Protest. (pp. 288-304). State College, PA: Strata Publishing,

Inc.

Lane, I. (2009). A relational cultural approach to the Broadway musical Wicked. Journal

of Creativity in Mental Health, 4, 173-179.

Langas, U. (2005). What did Nora do? Thinking gender with A Doll’s House. Ibsen

Studies, 5. 148-171.

Lassey, W. R. (1976). Dimensions of leadership. In W. R. Lassey & R. R. Fernandez.

Leadership and social change. (pp. 10-15). La Jolla, CA: University Associates,

Inc.

Lavery, C. (2005). Teaching performance studies: 25 instructions for performance in

cities. Studies in Theatre and Performance, 25, 229-238.

Leach, J. (2000). Rhetorical Analysis. In M. W. Bauer & G. Gaskell. Qualitative

researching with test, image and sound. (pp. 207-226) London, UK: Sage

Publications.

Leach, W. (1993). Land of Desire. New York, NY: Vintage Books.

235 Lears, T. J. J. (1985). The concept of cultural identity: Problems and Possibilities.

American Historical Review, 90, 567-593.

Lee, J. A. (1980). Leader power. In P. Hersey & J. Stinson. Perspectives in leader

effectiveness. (pp. 33-46). Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.

Lentner, H. H. (2005). Hegemony and autonomy. Political Studies, 53, 735-752.

Levy, D. & Brink, S. (2005, February 6). A change of heart: FDR’s death shows how

much we’ve learned about the heart. Retrieved 11 December 2009 from

http://health.usnews.com/usnews/health/articles/050214/14heart.htm

Linder, D. (2005). A brief history of witchcraft persecutions before Salem. Retrieved

January 23, 2010 from

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/Ftrials/salem/witchhistory.html

Lindloft, T. R. & Taylor, B. C. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Little, S. D. (2006). “Death at the hands of persons known:” Victimage rhetoric and the

1922 Dyer anti-lynching bill. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67 (02). (UMI

No.3208241)

Littlefield, H. M. (1964). The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism. American Quarterly,

16. 47-58

Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider: Essays and speeches by Audre Lorde. Berkeley, CA:

The Crossing Press.

Lucaites, J. L. & Condit, C. M. (1990). Reconstructing : Culturetypal and

counter-cultural rhetorics in the martyred Black vision. Communication

Monographs, 57, 5-24.

236 Lynch, J. (2006). Race and radical renamings. Kenneth Burke Journal, 2, 1-19.

Maguire, G. (1995). Wicked: The life and times of the Wicked Witch of the West. New

York, NY: Regan Books.

Maguire, G. (2005). Son of a witch. New York, NY: Regan Books.

Maguire, G. (2006). Introduction: Welcome to Oz. In L. F. Baum. A wonderful welcome

to Oz: The marvelous land of Oz, Ozma of Oz, and the Emerald City of Oz. New

York, NY: Modern Library.

Maguire, G. (2009). A Lion among men. New York, NY: Regan Books.

Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

McGee, M. C. (1990). Text, context, and the fragmentation of contemporary culture.

Western Journal of Speech Communication, 54, 274-289.

McGovern, S. J. (1997). Cultural hegemony as an impediment to urban protest

movements: Grassroots activism and downtown development in Washington, DC.

Journal of Urban Affairs, 19, 419-443.

McKerrow, R. E. (1989). Critical rhetoric: Theory and praxis. Communication

Monographs, 56, 91-111.

McKinley, J. (2004, December 21). Wicked reaches financial nirvana. The New York

Times, 1.

Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. New York, NY: W. W.

Norton.

Merriam-Webster. (2008). Retrieved November 21, 2008 from www.merriam-

webster.com

Merriam-Webster. (2009). Retrieved July 1, 2009 from www.merriam-webster.com

237 Miller, G. T. (1991). Reality is only an option: Firesign Theatre and surrealism. Text and

Performance Quarterly, 11, 325-333.

Mock, R. & Way, R. (2005). Pedagogies of theatre (arts) and performance (studies).

Studies in Theatre and Performance, 25, 201-213.

Morton, A. D. (2007). Unravelling Gramsci: Hegemony and passive revolution in the

global political economy. Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto Press.

Most, A. (1998). “We know we belong to the land:” The theatricality of assimilation in

Rodgers and Hammerstein’s Oklahoma! Publications of the Modern Language

Association of America, 113, 77-89.

Most, A. (2007). Opening the windshield: Death of a Salesman and theatrical liberalism.

Modern Drama, 50, 545-564.

Murphy, J. M. (2001) Domesticating dissent: The Kennedys and the Freedom Rides. In

C. E.Morris III & S. H. Browne. Readings on the Rhetoric of Social Protest. (pp.

395-411). State College, PA: Strata Publishing, Inc.

NightMare, M. M. (2000). Reclaiming the “W” word, or why we call ourselves witches.

Retrieved 23 January 2010 from http://www.reclaiming.org/about/witchfaq/witch-

word.html

Nishie, K. E. (2007). The rhetorical representation of race in American Dreams. Masters

Abstracts International, 45 (02). (UMI No. 1439004)

Olson, K. M. & Goodnight, G. T. (1994). Entanglements of consumption, cruelty,

privacy, and fashion: The social controversy over fur. In C. E. Morris III & S. H.

Browne. Readings on the Rhetoric of Social Protest. (pp. 184-210). State College,

PA: Strata Publishing, Inc.

238 Omwake, L. (1939). Factors influencing the sense of humor. The Journal of Social

Psychology, 20, 95-104.

Pagan, N. O. (2008). Arthur Miller and the rhetoric of ethnic self-expression. Journal of

American Studies, 42, 89-106.

Paige, L. R. (1996). Wearing the red shoes: Dorothy and the power of the female

imagination in the Wizard of Oz. Journal of Popular Film and Television, 23,

146-154.

Pao, A. (1992). The eyes of the storm: Gender, genre, and cross-casting in Miss Saigon.

Text and Performance Quarterly, 12, 21-39.

Papa, L. (1999). “We gotta make up our minds”: Waiting for Lefty, workers’ theatre

performance and audience identification. Text and Performance Quarterly, 19,

57-73.

Parks, R. (1992). My story. New York, NY: Dial Books.

Parry-Giles, S. J. (1996). ‘Camouflaged’ propaganda: The Truman and Eisenhower

administrations’ covert manipulation of news. Western Journal of

Communication, 60, 146-167.

Patinkin, S. (2008). No legs, no jokes, no chance. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University

Press.

Payne, D. (1989). The Wizard of Oz: Therapeutic rhetoric in a contemporary media ritual.

Quarterly Journal of Speech, 75. 25-39.

Pearson, C. & Pope, K. (1981). The female hero in American and British literature. New

York, NY: R. R. Bowler Co.

239 Peirce, C. S. (1935). Collective Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Volume 5. In C.

Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds). Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard

University Press.

Perloff, R. M. (2002) The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the

1st century. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Pullum, S. J. (1992). Common sense religion for America: The rhetoric of the Jewish

televangelist Jan Bresky. Journal of Communication and Religion, 15, 43-54.

Quigley, B. L. (1998). Identification as a key term in Kenneth Burke’s rhetorical theory.

American Communication Journal, 1. 1-5.

Quinton, A. (1995). Conservativism. In R. E. Goodin & P. Pettit. A companion to

contemporary political philosophy. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Radicalesbians. (1970). The woman identified woman. Retrieved 7 January 2010 from

http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/wlm/womid/

Reed, M. A. (2000). Composing dialogues to express self-differentiation and Burke’s

rhetoric: A way to comprehend multilevel inner growth. Roeper Review, 23. 10-

18.

Riley, M. O. (1997). Oz and beyond: The fantasy world of L. Frank Baum. Lawrence,

KS: University Press of Kansas.

Rockoff, H. (1990). The “Wizard of Oz” as a monetary allegory. Journal of Political

Economy, 98. 739-760.

Rogers, K. M. (2002). Creator of Oz. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

240 Rosen, E. (1998). Professional theatre and performance studies: Reflections on a new

direction. In S. J. Dailey. The future of performance studies: Visions and

revisions. National Communication Association.

Rozik, E. (2002). Acting: The quintessence of theatricality. Substance, 31, 110-124.

Rozik, E. (2005). Back to ‘cinema as filmed theatre.’ Semiotica, 157, 169-185.

Ryan, D. (2003, November 4). It’s less wicked, alas, than woeful. The Philadelphia

Inquirer, E03.

Sandburg, C. (1993). Abraham Lincoln: The definitive one-volume biography. New York,

NY: Galahad Books.

Sarachild, K. (1978). Consciousness-raising: A radical weapon. In K. Sarachild. Feminist

Revolution. New York, NY: Random House.

Sardar, Z. & Van Loon, B. (2004, September 1). Hegemony. Introducing cultural studies,

49-50.

Sassoon, A. S. (1980). Gramsci’s politics. London, UK: Croom Helm.

Schechner, R. (1988). Performance studies: The broad spectrum approach. The Drama

Review, 32, 4-6.

Schnuer, J. (2004, March 1). Marc Platt & David Stone; Wicked: Slow to find its legs,

prequel to Dorothy’s adventure in Oz shows that witches are far from dead.

Advertising Age, S8.

Schrader, V. L. (2009a, October). Wicked witch or heroine?: Character transformations

through the use of humor in the musical Wicked. Presented at the annual meeting

the Ohio Communication Association in Columbus, OH. (Competitive

paper/poster. Poster session.)

241 Schrader, V. L. (2009b, October). The voiceless vixen speaks: Using performance to

reinterpret the role of Stupefyin’ Jones in the musical Li’l Abner. Presented at the

annual meeting of the Pennsylvania Communication Association in Latrobe, PA.

(Competitive paper, Performance Studies Division).

Schrader, V. L. (2009c, October). Connecting to and Persuading Audiences through

Musical Theatre: Burkean Identification in Pins and Needles. Presented at the

annual meeting of the National Communication Association in Chicago, IL.

(Competitive paper, American Studies Division).

Schrader, V. L. (2009d). “No Day But Today:” Life Perspectives of HIV-positive

Individuals in the Musical Rent. Communication and Theatre Association of

Minnesota Journal, 36, 23-36.

Schriver, K. & Nudd, D. M. (2002). Mickee Faust Club’s performative protest events.

Text and Performance Quarterly, 22, 196-216.

Scott, J. C. (1985). Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Scott, R. L. & Smith, D. K. (1969). The rhetoric of confrontation. In C. E. Morris III &

S. H. Browne (Eds). Readings on the Rhetoric of Social Protest. (pp. 28-35). State

College, PA: Strata Publishing, Inc.

Sebesta, J. (2006). Of fire, death, and desire: Transgression and carnival in Jonathan

Larson’s Rent. Contemporary Theatre Review, 16, 419-438.

Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System

Technical Journal, 27, 379-423.

242 Sillars, M. O. (1980). Defining movements rhetorically: Casting the widest net. Southern

Speech Communication Journal, 46, 17-32.

Sinyai, C. (2006). Schools of democracy: A political history of the American Labor

Movement. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.

Simons, H. (1970) Requirements, problems and strategies: A theory of persuasion for

social movements. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 56, 1-11.

Simons, H. W. (1972). Persuasion in social conflicts: A critique of prevailing conceptions

and a framework for future research. Speech Monographs, 39, 227-247.

Simons, H. W. (1976). Changing notions about social movements. Quarterly Journal of

Speech, 62, 425-432.

Simons, H. W. (1982). Genres, rules, and collective rhetorics: Applying the

requirements-problems-strategies approach. Communication Quarterly, 30, 181-

188.

Simons, H. W. & Mechling, E. W. (1981). The rhetoric of political movements. In D. D.

Nimmo & K. R. Sanders. Handbook of political communication. Beverly Hills,

CA: Sage.

Simons, H. W., Mechling, E.W. & Schreier, H. N. (1984). The functions of human

communication in mobilizing for action from the bottom up: The rhetoric of

social movements. In C. Arnold & J. Bowers. Handbook of rhetorical and

communication theory. (pp. 792-867). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Smith, R. R. & Windes, R. R. (1975). The innovational movement: A rhetorical theory.

In C. E. Morris III & S. H. Browne. Readings on the Rhetoric of Social Protest.

(pp. 82-95). State College, PA: Strata Publishing, Inc.

243 Solomon, R. C. (1998). Ethical leadership, emotions, and trust: Beyond ‘charisma.’ In J.

B. Ciulla. Ethics, the heart of leadership. (pp. 63-86). Westport, CT: Quorum

Books.

Spotts, J. B. (1976). The problem of leadership: A look at some recent findings of

behavioral science research. In W. R. Lassey & R. R. Fernandez. Leadership and

social change. (pp. 44-63). La Jolla, CA: University Associates, Inc.

Stasio, M. (2004, April 26-May 2). Every witch way but loose. Variety, A4, A10.

Stech, E. L. (1983). Leadership communication. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.

Stewart, C. J. (1997). The evolution of a revolution: Stokely Carmichael and the rhetoric

of Black Power. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 83, 429-447.

Stewart, C. J. (1999). Championing the rights of others and challenging evil: The ego

function in the rhetoric of other-directed social movements. The Southern

Communication Journal, 64, 91-105.

Stewart, C., Smith, C. & Denton, R. E., Jr. (1984). Persuasion and social movements.

Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.

Stryker, S. (2004). Queer Nation. Retrieved 8 January 2010 from

http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/queer_nation.html

Tead, O. (1935). The art of leadership. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Thagard, P. & Shelley, C. (1997). Abductive reasoning: Logic, visual thinking, and

coherence. Retrieved 1 May 2010 from

http://cogsci.uwaterloo.ca/Articles/Pages/%7FAbductive.html

244 Thrift, N. (2003). With child to see any strange thing: Everyday life in the city. In G.

Bridge & S. Watson. A companion to the city. (pp. 398-409). Oxford, UK:

Blackwell.

Timeline @ Wicked the Musical. (2004). Retrieved 22 June 2009 from

http://www.wickedthemusical.com/page.php#Timeline

Tucker, D. L. (2004). A rhetorical analysis of women’s role in American sport culture:

The case of the football coach’s wife. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64

(08). (UMI No. 3100781)

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. (2009, May 4). Anti-Jewish legislation in

pre-war Germany. Retrieved 17 December 2009 from

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005681

VanGiezen, R. & Schwenk, A. E. (2003, January 30). Compensation from before World

War I through the Great Depression. Retrieved 2 October 2009 from

http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/cm20030124ar03p1.htm

Vincent, M. (2009, June 5). ‘Wicked’ good profits. The Virginian-Pilot, E5.

Wald, R. M. & Doty, R. A. (1954). The top executive: A firsthand profile. Harvard

Business Review, 32, 45-54.

Walker, N. A. (1988). A very serious thing: Women’s humor and American culture.

Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Walker, P. (1956). Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible”: Tragedy or allegory? Western Speech,

20, 222-224.

Wehr, P. E. (1968). Nonviolence and differentiation in the Equal Rights Movement.

Sociological Inquiry, 38, 65-76.

245 Weiner, N. and Kurpius, C. E. R. (1995). Shattered innocence: A practical guide for

counseling women survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Washington, DC: Taylor

and Francis.

Wellman, J. (2004). The Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention: A study of social

networks. In L. K. Kerber & J. S. De Hart, Women’s America: Refocusing the

past. (pp. 200-213). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Wells, C. A. (2000). Solidarity forever! Graphics on the International Labor Movement.

Labor History, 41, 507-511.

Wilkins, D. M. (1997). Classical liberalism and press theory: An analysis of

metanarratival influence in the creation of press narratives about attempts to

reform the General Mining Law of 1872. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58

(01). (UMI No. 9717658)

Williams, J. (1977, January 13). Metro-area programs to mark Martin Luther King

birthday. The Washington Post, A-16.

Wilson, J. (1973). Introduction to social movements. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Windt, T. O., Jr. (1972). The Diatribe: Last Resort for Protest. In C. E. Morris III & S. H.

Browne. Readings on the Rhetoric of Social Protest. (pp. 58-70). State College,

PA: Strata Publishing, Inc.

Wirth, U. (1998). What is abductive inference? Retrieved 30 April 2010 from

http://user.uni-frankfurt.de/~wirth/inferenc.htm

The W.I.T.C.H. Manifesto of 1968. (2008). Retrieved 23 January 2010 from

http://jhstrega7.wordpress.com/2008/05/30/the-witch-manifesto-of-1968/

246 Wolf, S. (2007). Wicked divas, musical theater, and Internet girl fans. Camera Obscura,

22. 38-71.

Wolf, S. (2008). Defying Gravity: Queer Conventions in the musical Wicked. Theatre

Journal, 60, 1-21.

Wolters, R. (2002). DuBois and his rivals. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Women’s International Terrorist Conspiracy from Hell. (2010). Retrieved 23 January

2010 from

http://www.glossary.com/encyclopedia.php?q=Women%27s_International_Terror

ist_Conspiracy_from_Hell

Wong, L. P. (2008). Rhetorical performance: Performing the rhetoric. The International

Journal of the Humanities, 6, 185-193.

Wood, E. (2008, August 3). A soulful trip to Oz: Director glad to find right cast for the

Youth Theatre production of ‘The Wiz.’ Peoria Journal-Star, C3.

Wright, R.O. (2003). Chronology of labor in the United States. Jefferson, NC:

McFarland and Company Inc Publishers.

Zarefsky, D. (2006). Reflections on rhetorical criticism. Rhetoric Review, 25, 383-387.

Ziaukas, T. (1998). Baum’s Wizard of Oz as gilded age of public relations. Public

Relations Quarterly, 43. 7-11.

247 APPENDIX A: LIST OF OZ-RELATED MEDIA

Books:

1. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1900), also published as The New Wizard of Oz (1903) 2. The Marvelous Land of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1904) 3. Ozma of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1907) 4. Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1908) 5. The Road to Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1909) 6. The Emerald City of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1910) 7. The Patchwork Girl of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1913) 8. Tik-Tok of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1914) 9. The Scarecrow of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1915) 10. Rinkitink in Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1916) 11. The Lost Princess of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1917) 12. The Tin Woodman of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1918) 13. The Magic of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1919) 14. Glinda of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1920) 15. The Royal Book of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson [but originally attributed to L. Frank Baum], 1921) 16. Kabumpo in Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1922) 17. The Cowardly Lion of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1923) 18. Grampa in Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1924) 19. The Lost King of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1925) 20. The Hungry Tiger of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1926) 21. The Gnome King of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1927) 22. The Giant Horse of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1928) 23. Jack Pumpkinhead of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1929) 24. The Yellow Knight of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1930) 25. Pirates in Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1931) 26. The Purple Prince of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1932) 27. Ojo in Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1933) 28. Speedy in Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1934) 29. The Wishing Horse of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1935) 30. Captain Salt in Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1936) 31. Handy Mandy in Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1937) 32. The Silver Princess in Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1938) 33. Ozoplaning with the Wizard of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, 1939) 34. The Wonder City of Oz (John R. Neill, 1940) 35. The Scalawagons of Oz (John R. Neill, 1941) 36. Lucky Bucky in Oz (John R. Neill, 1942) 37. The Magical Mimics in Oz (Jack Snow, 1946) 38. The Shaggy Man of Oz (Jack Snow, 1949)

248 39. The Hidden Valley of Oz (Rachel R. Cosgrove, 1951) 40. Merry Go Round in Oz (Eloise Jarvis McGraw and Lauren McGraw Wagner, 1963)

* Note: These are the “official” Oz books. There are hundreds of other books that have been based on The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, but these are the only ones that were (1) published by Baum’s original publishing company, Reilly and Lee, (2) well-known and well-distributed, (3) kept in print for a significant amount of time, and (4) stay true to the plot of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Additional “unofficial” books regarding the Land of Oz may be accessed at http://members.cox.net/cruentidei/oz/hacc/hacc.html.

Plays and Musicals:

1. The Wizard of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1902) 2. The Woggle Bug (L. Frank Baum, 1905) 3. The Tik-Tok Man of Oz (L. Frank Baum, 1913) 4. The Magical Land of Oz (Ruth Plumly Thompson, marionette show, 1928) 5. The Wizard of Oz (Frank Gabrielson, opera, 1940s) 6. The Wiz (Ken Harper, 1975) 7. Wicked (Winnie Holzman and Stephen Schwartz, 2003)

* Note: This list does not include children’s theatre or community theatre versions of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. No such comprehensive list exists. There are so few plays in comparison to the books because most plays simply echoed the 1939 film after it was produced and distributed; with the exception of Gabrielson’s opera, no known original plays based on the Oz books were created between 1939 and 1975, when The Wiz was produced on Broadway.

Films:

1. The Fairylogue and Radio Plays (L. Frank Baum, 1908) 2. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (Selig Polyscope Company, 1910) 3. Dorothy and the Scarecrow of Oz (Selig Polyscope Company, 1910) 4. The Land of Oz (Selig Polyscope Company, 1910) 5. John Dough and the Cherub (Selig Polyscope Company, 1910) 6. The Patchwork Girl of Oz (Oz Film Company, 1914) 7. The Magic Cloak of Oz (Oz Film Company, 1914) 8. His Majesty, The Scarecrow of Oz (Oz Film Company, 1914) 9. The Wizard of Oz (L. Frank Baum & Frank Joslyn Baum, 1925) 10. The Wizard of Oz (Ted Eshbaugh, cartoon short, 1933) 11. The Wizard of Oz (MGM, 1939) 12. Journey Back to Oz (Author/Producer unknown, 1972 in Europe/1974 in North America) 13. Twentieth Century Oz (Author/Producer unknown, 1976 in Australia) 14. The Wiz (Sidney Lumet,1977)

249 15. Return to Oz (Walter Murch, Disney, 1985) 16. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (Cinar Films, 1987) 17. The Marvelous Land of Oz (Cinar Films, 1987) 18. Ozma of Oz (Cinar Films, 1987) 19. The Emerald City of Oz (Cinar Films, 1987)

List adapted from http://thewizardofoz.info

250 APPENDIX B: SCENE SUMMARY OF WICKED

Outline of Scenes in Wicked

Act 1

Act 1 Prologue – The overture plays. Flying Monkeys run around stage, bringing up the curtain.

Act 1 Scene 1 – The Ozian community sings “No One Mourns the Wicked” & rejoice at the Wicked Witch’s passing. Glinda arrives in her mechanical bubble to answer questions. She tells them Elphaba’s backstory – how she was born green and scorned by her parents. Glinda unwillingly admits she was Elphaba’s friend in college.

Act 1 Scene 2 – A new class of university students arrive at Shiz University, including Elphaba, Galinda, Nessarose, and Boq. Madame Morrible quickly takes a liking to Nessarose, and insists that she stay with her in her room. Elphaba, who has always taken care of her sister, casts spell to keep Nessa with her. This causes Nessa’s wheelchair to spin and return to Elphaba’s care. Madame Morrible is impressed with Elphaba’s natural sorcery talent, and insists on tutoring Elphaba privately, much to Galinda’s dismay. Elphaba and Galinda accidentally end up being roommates. Elphaba sings “The Wizard and I” in which she reveals her dreams of becoming the Wizard’s Magic Grand Vizier.

Act 1 Scene 3 – Galinda and Elphaba sing “What is this Feeling?” in which they profess how much they dislike each other. The rest of the Shiz students join Galinda’s side.

Act 1 Scene 4 – The students listen to their Goat Professor, Dr. Dillamond’s history lecture about the oppression of Animals. The other side of Dillamond’s blackboard reveals the phrase “Animals should be seen and not heard” in bright red letters. Upset, Dillamond dismisses the class. Afterwards, he has a discussion with Elphaba, where he further explains the situation facing the Animals in Oz. They sing the song “Something Bad” which illustrates this situation, before Madame Morrible arrives to take Elphaba to sorcery class.

Act 1 Scene 5 – Fiyero arrives at Shiz University, after being kicked out of several other schools. Galinda is immediately attracted to him, much to Boq’s dismay. Fiyero persuades his classmates to give up studying and become free spirits in the song “Dancing through Life.” Glinda convinces Boq to ask Nessarose to the dance as a favor to Glinda herself; meanwhile, she gets Fiyero to ask her to the dance.

Act 1 Scene 6 –Nessarose expresses her excitement about Galinda finding a date for her, and in return, Elphaba decides to insist that Madame Morrible enroll Galinda in sorcery class. Meanwhile, Galinda and her friends Phanee and ShenShen are laughing about an ugly pointed black hat that Galinda’s grandmother gave her; they decide to play a trick on Elphaba by giving her the hat and asking her to wear it to the dance. At the dance,

251 Madame Morrible arrives to give Galinda a training wand and asks her to be part of sorcery class, even though she doesn’t think Galinda “has what it takes.” Meanwhile, Elphaba arrives at the dance and everyone laughs at her. Stubbornly, Elphaba stands in the middle of the dance floor and begins to dance oddly by herself with no music playing. Galinda, feeling terrible about what she has done, joins Elphaba, and soon the rest of the students join in Elphaba’s dance. The two young women become friends as the students finish the song “Dancing through Life.”

Act 1 Scene 7 – Galinda and Elphaba, now friends, tell each other secrets back in their dorm room. Elphaba confesses that she feels responsible for Nessa’s disability and their mother’s death, because their father made their mother chew milk flowers to prevent Nessarose from being born green like Elphaba. Galinda decides to give her new friend a makeover, and sings the comical song “Popular” as she does it.

Act 1 Scene 8 – Elphaba, Fiyero, and a dozen other students are in Dr. Dillamond’s history class when Dr. Dillamond announces he has been forbidden to teach in Oz and is taken away. A government official steps in to teach the class, bringing a caged Liob cub with him to show the students how cages can prevent Animals from learning to speak. Upset, Elphaba casts a spell that makes everyone move uncontrollably except for Fiyero and herself. Together, Elphaba and Fiyero grab the caged Lion cub and run off to set him free.

Act 1 Scene 9 – Elphaba and Fiyero set the Lion cub free, bickering as they do it. Elphaba finds that she has feelings for Fiyero, and expresses those feelings in the song “Not that Girl.” While she sings the solo, Galinda and Fiyero walk across a bridge above her arm in arm. Madame Morrible brings news to Elphaba that the Wizard wants to meet her. Elphaba is excited that her dreams are coming true.

Act 1 Scene 10 – At the train station, Galinda, Nessarose, and Boq come to say goodbye to Elphaba and wish her good luck. Boq, frustrated that he still must pretend that he loves Nessarose to make Galinda happy, runs off, upset, and Nessa follows after him. Galinda confides to Elphaba that she is upset about Fiyero’s mood lately, which seems distant. Fiyero arrives late with flowers for Elphaba and explains that he’s been thinking about the day when they set the Lion cub free. Galinda, trying to impress Fiyero, insists that she too was upset that Dr. Dillamond was taken away, and decides to change name to Glinda in honor of Dr. Dillamond, who consistently pronounced her name Glinda. After Fiyero leaves, Glinda breaks down, upset that Fiyero is paying no attention to her. To console her friend, Elphaba invites Glinda to travel with her to the Emerald City.

NOTE: There is no Scene 11 listed in the New York Performance Script.

Act 1 Scene 12 – Elphaba and Glinda are impressed with the Emerald City, and they express this through the song “One Short Day.”

252 Act 1 Scene 13 – Elphaba and Glinda meet the Wizard, who initially uses a giant mechanical head to represent himself, until he realizes who his visitors are. He introduces them to his new press secretary, Madame Morrible, who has “risen up in the world” as a result of discovering Elphaba’s talent. They insist that Elphaba “prove herself,” and she is asks to read a spell from the Grimmerie, the magic book of spells. Thinking it is a levitation spell to allow the Wizard’s pet Monkey to see the birds out the window, Elphaba casts spell, only to realize it is a spell to make dozens of Monkeys sprout wings and fly. In the process, the Monkeys are in pain. When the Wizard and Madame Morrible announce that the Flying Monkeys will be used as spies to report “subversive Animal behavior,” Elphaba realizes that the Wizard himself is behind the oppression of the Animals. Upset, Elphaba steals the Grimmerie and runs off. The Wizard calls for his guards to capture her, and Glinda runs off to find her friend and persuade her to apologize and return.

Act 1 Scene 14 – Elphaba runs to the uppermost attic tower in the Wizard’s palace with Glinda at her heels. The two friends fight about each other’s actions, and Elphaba declares that she no longer wants to work with the Wizard. She casts a spell that allows a broom to fly. Madame Morrible uses a loudspeaker to announce to all of Oz that Elphaba is wicked and is an enemy of the state. Glinda is afraid for her friend, but Elphaba feels empowered. She sings “Defying Gravity,” revealing this empowerment, and asks Glinda to join her. Glinda considers it, but decides to stay. Glinda wraps Elphaba in a black blanket (which looks like a cape), and the two friends wish each other the best. As the guards break down the door and seize Glinda, Elphaba screams at them to let her go, rises on her broom, and sings the last verse of “Defying Gravity” triumphantly as the guards fall to their knees.

Act 2

Act 2 Prologue – Ozian citizens sing the reprise of “No One Mourns the Wicked” about their fear of Elphaba.

Act 2 Scene 1 – Glinda, who is now a public figure in the Wizard’s regime, announces her engagement to Fiyero, who has become Captain of the Guard in order to find Elphaba. Morrible remind the Ozians the story of Glinda’s rise to power, which has been falsified in order to make Glinda look valiant and Elphaba to look wicked. This causes the Ozians to sing about rumors they’ve heard about Elphaba. The rumors upset Fiyero, who runs off with Glinda behind him, and the two talk about how they miss Elphaba. Fiyero agrees to marry Glinda, but only to make her happy. Glinda sings “Thank Goodness,” where she tells Ozians about her “perfect” life, but also expresses her disappointment.

Act 2 Scene 2 – Elphaba arrives at the Munchkinland Governor’s Mansion to ask her father for help. Nessarose is there, and explains that their father “died of shame” because of Elphaba and that Nessa herself is now Governor. Nessa refuses to help her sister, accusing Elphaba of not using her powers to make Nessa walk. Elphaba casts a spell on

253 Nessa’s shoes that allow her to walk, and Nessa calls for Boq, thinking that now he will truly love her. Instead, Boq insists on leaving to explain to Glinda that he loves her, and tells Elphaba that Nessarose has been stripping the Munchkins of their rights in order to keep Boq with her. Nessa, in anger, tries to cast a spell on Boq to make him love her, but instead accidentally casts a spell that makes his heart shrink. In order to save Boq, Elphaba casts spell on him that turns him into a tin woodsman so that he no longer needs a heart. When Boq awakes, Elphaba is gone, and Nessarose blames her sister for Boq’s condition.

Act 2 Scene 3 – Elphaba returns to the Wizard frees Monkeys, where the Wizard confronts her and tries to identify with her. He sings “Wonderful,” where he explains how he came to be Wizard of Oz. The Wizard tries to make a bargain with Elphaba: He will restore her reputation if she stops her militant tactics. At first, she agrees, until she finds Dr. Dillamond helpless and voiceless hiding under a sheet. She declares war against the Wizard. Fiyero finds her, dismisses his guards, and holds his gun to the Wizard. Glinda arrives on the scene, and Fiyero announces that he is leaving with Elphaba, much to the shock of both Glinda and Elphaba. Fiyero and Elphaba escape, and Glinda is left with the Wizard and Madame Morrible (who arrives on the scene after Fiyero and Elphaba have left), brokenhearted. In her despair and anger, Glinda suggests that they spread a rumor to convince Elphaba that her sister is in danger, and when she flies to help Nessarose, they can capture her. However, when Glinda leaves, the Wizard and Madame Morrible decide to actually endanger Nessarose’s life because they believe Elphaba will see through a rumor.

Act 2 Scene 4 – Elphaba and Fiyero sing the duet “As Long as You’re Mine,” expressing their love for one another. After their song, Elphaba gets a vision of a house flying through the air and hears Nessarose screaming. She leaves to help her sister.

Act 2 Scene 5 – A house has landed on Nessarose, killing her. Glinda has apparently given Nessarose’s shoes to a farmgirl named Dorothy and gave her directions to the Emerald City. While Glinda mourns at Nessa’s gravesite, Elphaba arrives, and the two women argue and then get into a fistfight. During the argument, Elphaba points out that Glinda never questions authority. The guards arrive, tear the two women apart, and attempt to take Elphaba captive. Fiyero arrives to saves Elphaba, takes her place, and insists that she escape. Glinda begs the guards to release Fiyero, but they refuse to listen to her. She forgives Fiyero. Fiyero is taken away and beaten by the guards.

Act 2 Scene 6 – Elphaba sings “No Good Deed,” in which she attempts to cast a spell to save Fiyero’s life. She also reflects on how her attempts to do good deeds have resulted in misery and death for others. She vows not to attempt any more good deeds.

Act 2 Scene 7 – An angry mob has assembled to hunt down Elphaba. The witch hunters include Boq, who is now the Tin Woodsman, and the Lion cub Elphaba and Fiyero saved in Act 1, who has become the Cowardly Lion. Glinda confronts Madame Morrible about

254 the cyclone that killed Nessarose, but Madame Morrible tells her to shut up, smile, and quit questioning things.

Act 2 Scene 8 – At Kiamo Ko Castle in Oz’s westernmost province, Elphaba has been teaching the Flying Monkeys to speak. She has also captured Dorothy and has been trying to get her to give her Nessarose’s shoes; Elphaba wants them to remember her sister by. Glinda arrives at the castle warns Elphaba about the witch hunting mob, but Elphaba doesn’t want to speak to her. When a Flying Monkey arrives with news about Fiyero, Elphaba decides it is time to give up and that Glinda must take over. She gives the Grimmerie to Glinda and makes her promise not to try to clear her name. Although Glinda doesn’t understand, she reluctantly agrees, and the two women sing the ballad “For Good,” which describes how much they’ve meant to one another. After saying goodbye to Glinda and Chistery, Elphaba’s favorite Flying Monkey, Elphaba draws a curtain and is “melted.” When Glinda pulls the curtain back, all that remains of her friend is her cloak, hat, and little green bottle, which is a keepsake from her mother. Chistery finally speaks as he hands the bottle to Glinda.

Act 2 Scene 9 – Glinda arrives at the palace and shows the bottle to the Wizard, who realizes that Elphaba was, in fact, his own biological daughter. He breaks down and cries, realizing that he has just “killed” his own child. Glinda, taking power, banishes the Wizard and imprisons Madame Morrible. She returns to her bubble, with Chistery handing her the Grimmerie, and mourns the loss of her friend. Meanwhile, Elphaba emerges from a trap door (she has faked her own death) to find a Scarecrow waiting for her: It is Fiyero. Elphaba pauses a minute, regretting that she cannot tell Glinda that she is safe, and the two leave Oz together.

255 APPENDIX C: CHARACTER DESCRIPTIONS IN WICKED

List and Description of Characters

Elphaba – The green-skinned, awkward, outcast elder daughter of the Governor of Munchkinland who grows up to become “The Wicked Witch of the West.” Elphaba is an intelligent, kind-hearted, talent young woman who relates to the Animal Rights Movement and fights against the oppression of Animals. She is a talented sorceress. She is sister to Nessarose, best friend to Glinda, friend and lover to Fiyero, friend to Boq, student to Dr. Dillamond and Madame Morrible, and teacher to Chistery. At the end of the musical, it is clear that she is also the biological child of the Wizard of Oz. She fakes her own death at the end of the musical, and escapes Oz with Fiyero.

G(a)linda – The frivolous, silly, pretty, somewhat misguided, popular girl at Shiz University who grows up to become “Glinda the Good.” Though Glinda is often good- natured, she sometimes manipulates others to get what she wants. Glinda is inept at her chosen profession: Sorcery. Glinda changes her name from Galinda to Glinda in honor of Dr. Dillamong, who consistently mispronounced her name. Glinda transforms throughout the musical from perky party-girl to Ozian public figure with little power to a conservative social movement and institutional leader who runs Oz. She is best friend to Elphaba, friend and lover to Fiyero, and she works for The Wizard of Oz and Madame Morrible until the end of the musical.

The Wizard of Oz – The cowardly leader of Oz who desperately wants to be liked by his constituents. He is originally from Nebraska. The Wizard is a hegemonic force in Oz because he is oppressing Animals in order to give human Ozians everything they want. He puts on a show of grandeur and kindness for his constituents to make them like him, and hires Madame Morrible as his press secretary to ensure this image is put out to the Ozian public. The Wizard has no real sorcery powers of his own. He had an affair with “The Witch’s Mother,” and is actually the biological father of Elphaba.

Madame Morrible – The headmistress at Shiz University who becomes the Wizard’s ruthless press secretary. Morrible is a traditional villain/hegemon in that she is selfish and power-hungry and will stop at nothing to get what she wants. She seems to lack any true emotion towards anyone. She is a mediocre sorceress, and uses her powers to change the weather, ultimately causing a cyclone to kill Nessarose.

Fiyero – A carefree party-boy who has been kicked out of every school he has attended. He grows up to become Captain of the Wizard’s Guard and later an activist for the Animal Rights Movement. Fiyero intially falls in love with G(a)linda because of her beauty and later with Elphaba because of her passion and confidence. Although he becomes engaged to Glinda, he runs off with Elphaba and ultimately saves her life twice. Elphaba uses her powers to save him at the end of the musical, and he turns into a Scarecrow.

256 Nessarose – The “tragically beautiful” daughter of the Governor of Munchkinland and sister to Elphaba. Nessarose was born with a physical disability and uses a wheelchair. While she is at Shiz University, she falls in love with a Munchkin named Boq, who is really in love with Galinda. Nessarose becomes the Governor of Munchkinland after her father’s death and revoked the Munchkins’ rights in order to keep Boq with her. She becomes known as the “Wicked Witch of the East.” She is killed when a house lands on her as a result of a cyclone created by Madame Morrible.

Boq – A Munchkin who falls in love with G(a)linda, but spends much of his life as companion to Nessarose, with whom G(a)linda sets him up at the beginning of the musical. After he tries to leave Nessarose, she casts a spell on him that accidentally causes his heart to shrink. Elphaba saves him by casting another spell that turns him into a Tin Woodsman. He holds this against her and joins the Witch Hunting Mob to kill her.

Dr. Dillamond – The only Animal faculty at Shiz University during Elphaba and Galinda’s time there. He serves as a mentor for Elphaba. Dr. Dillamond enlightens his students to the plight of the Animals, and is ultimately fired from his job and silenced for it. Before being silenced by the Wizard’s regime, he was part of the Animal Rights Movement, speaking out and educating humans on the oppression of Animals.

Chistery – The Wizard’s Monkey servant, who becomes a Flying Monkey when Elphaba casts a spell on him that causes him to sprout wings. When Elphaba frees the Flying Monkeys, Chistery becomes a favorite of hers, and she tries to teach him how to speak. Ultimately, he does speak, and goes with Glinda, presumably, to be an advisor to her when she becomes the leader of Oz.

The Witch’s Father – The Governor of Munchkinland and father of Elphaba and Nessarose. He is proud of Nessarose but ashamed of Elphaba, whom he only sends to college to look after her sister. When his wife was pregnant with Nessarose, he insisted that she chew milk flowers to prevent the baby from being born with green skin like Elphaba. These milk flowers resulted in the death of the girls’ mother and Nessarose’s disability.

The Witch’s Mother – The wife of the Governor of Munchkinland who had an affair with the Wizard of Oz. This affair led to the birth of Elphaba, whose green skin is a result of her being “a child of both worlds.” The Witch’s Mother died after giving birth to her second child Nessarose.

Midwife – An Animal (perhaps a Ram) who delivers Elphaba at the beginning of the musical.

Phanee – A friend of Galinda’s at Shiz University who convinces her to give Elphaba an ugly pointed black hat as a gift.

257 ShenShen - A friend of Galinda’s at Shiz University who convinces her to give Elphaba an ugly pointed black hat as a gift.

258 APPENDIX D: SAMPLE OF CLUSTER ANALYSIS SCRATCH NOTES

259 APPENDIX E: SAMPLE OF CLUSTER ANALYSIS TYPED NOTES

Oppression of Animals 1. Silencing dissenters a) “If you make it discouraging enough…” S pg 25 b) Official’s lines about the “silence of progress” S pg 45-45a c) Dillamond’s silence in Act 2 NY 5 2. Animals demoted to low labor positions a) Monkeys wheel up curtain in the beginning Pgh 1/NY 1 b) Dillamond forbidden to teach & his exit S pg 44-45 i. Minor key, repeated notes, beat CR/SM c) Initial lyrics to “Something Bad” S pg 24 d) Animal pushing cart Pgh 3/NY 2 e) Animal serving punch to Nessa and Boq at dance NY 2 f) Animal baggage loader NY 4 3. Scapegoating a) Animals as scapegoats for Ozian’s problems i. Dillamond’s lecture S pg 21-22 ii. Timeline on blackboard Pgh 2/Chi 2 iii. “Animals should be seen and not heard” S pg 22 a) in red writing Pgh 2 b) Elphaba as scapegoat i. Father “dies of embarrassment” S pg 81 ii. Nessa blames Elphaba for showing her the Grimmerie S pg 86 iii. Nessa blames Elphaba for Boq’s transformation S pg 87 iv. Boq blames Elphaba for his current state S pg 109 v. The Lion cub blames Elphaba for his cowardice S pgs 109-110

260 vi. Spreading false rumors about opposition S pg 96/Pgh 4 vii. Brainwashing to silence Dillamond S pg 92/Chi 4/Pgh 4 a) In NY version, Dillamond is silenced but not brainwashed NY 5 viii. Recontextualizing (Morrible’s story) S pg 75-76 ix. Renaming Elphaba a wicked witch S pg 68

261 APPENDIX F: SAMPLE OF ADJUSTMENTS MADE TO CLUSTER ANALYSIS

TYPED NOTES

Means of Hegemonic Rule 1. Tools used by hegemons i. Time dragon Chi 1/Pgh 1 ii. Giant head S pg 59, 66, 92/Chi 3 iii. Color red Chi 3, 4/Pgh 3,4/NY 4 iv. Morrible’s loudspeaker via balcony S pg 68 a) Sound reverberates Chi 3/NY 4 v. Guards (see legal sanctions) vi. Labels S pg 90 2. Strategies used by hegemons i. Consent strategies a). Legal sanctions 1.Guards: S pg 69, 70, 71, 93, 104-106 2. Nessa keeping Boq in Munchkinland S pg 83 b) Identification with dissenter S pg 88-89 c) Bargaining with opposition S pg 91 d) Spreading false rumors about opposition S pg 96/Pgh 4 e) Recontextualizing (Morrible’s story) S pg 75-76 f) Renaming Elphaba a wicked witch S pg 68 ii. Force strategies a) Threatening potential dissenters S pg 110 b )Murdering those closest to dissenter S pg 97 c) Brainwashing to silence Dillamond S pg 92/Chi 4/Pgh 4 1.In NY version, Dillamond is silenced but not brainwashed NY 5

262 APPENDIX G: TYPED NOTES FOR ALL THREE CLUSTER ANALYSES

Key:

S=Script CR=Cast recording SM=Sheet music Pgh=Pittsburgh Chi-Chicago NY=New York

Hegemony Cluster Analysis

I. Morrible sucks up to those in power 1. Excitement upon meeting Nessarose a) “Oh, you must be the Governor’s daughter” S pg 10 b) Insists that Nessa share her compartment S pg 12 2. Emotion when Elphaba’s sorcery talent emerges S pg 14-15 3. Disdain for Galinda’s powerlessness S pg. 36-37 4. Excitement with Elphaba’s news to see Wizard S pg 50-51 5. Tit for Tat S pg 61 6. Planned for Elphaba to help Wizard with her powers S pg 64 7. Is “happy” for public figure Glinda’s engagement S pg 74-75 8. Ruled by logic, lacks heart S pg. 119 9. Sucks up to Glinda once Wizard is banished S pg. 119

II. Oppression of Animals 1. Silencing dissenters a) “If you make it discouraging enough…” S pg 25 b) Official’s lines about the “silence of progress” S pg 45-45a 2. Warning a) Lyrics of “Something Bad” S pg 24 i. minor key, repeated notes, underlying formidable beat CR 3. Animals demoted to low labor positions a) Monkeys wheel up curtain in the beginning Pgh 1/NY 1 b) Dillamond forbidden to teach & his exit S pg 44-45 c) Initial lyrics to “Something Bad” S pg 24 d) Animal pushing cart Pgh 3/NY 2 e) Animal serving punch to Nessa and Boq at dance NY 2 f) Animal baggage loader NY 4 4. Scapegoating a) Animals as scapegoats for Ozian’s problems i. Dillamond’s lecture S pg 21-22 ii. Timeline on blackboard Pgh 2/Chi 2 iii. “Animals should be seen and not heard” S pg 22 a) in red writing Pgh 2 b) Dillamond as scapegoat in Shiz

263 i. Hides board from Morrible and quiets Elphaba Chi 2/Pgh 2 c) Elphaba as scapegoat i. Father “dies of embarrassment” S pg 81 ii. Nessa blames Elphaba for showing her the Grimmerie S pg 86 iii. Nessa blames Elphaba for Boq’s transformation S pg 87 iv. Boq blames Elphaba for his current state S pg 109 v. The Lion cub blames Elphaba for his cowardice S pgs 109-110

III. Apathy of Ozian society, leading to oppression 1. Lyrics to “Dancing through life” S pg 28-30 2. Ozians dance in Glinda’s bubbles Pgh 1 3. Class is silent but does not look ashamed Pgh 2 (Different in NY & Chi) 4. Fiyero’s arrival at Shiz NY 3

IV. Referent Power/ Power comes from Popularity 1. Lyrics to “Popular” S pg 42 2. Glinda’s advice to Elphaba before leaving for Emerald City S pg 52 3. Glinda’s need to be liked S pg 77 4. Glinda’s “great communicator” line with microphone Chi 3

V. Ozian Society praises Wizard 1. S pg 57 2. “defaming our poor Wizard” S pg 73

VI. Wizard’s “cowardice” – Giving Ozians what he thinks they want 1. Grandeur i. Giant head S pg 59 ii. Discussion about Giant Head S pg 60 2. Recognition of weaknesses i. Admission of guilt S pg 64 ii. Admission of lack of power S pg 65 iii. Lyrics to “Wonderful” S pg 89 a) light-hearted, soft-shoe tap CR b) admission of misdeeds but justifies them c) soft-spoken, politician-like Pgh 4 iv. Recognizes and says he regrets harming Elphaba S pg 88 a) But does not change his ways 3. Takes credit for things that aren’t his i. Elphaba’s bubble comment S pg 103 4. Has a sincere side i. Lyrics to “A Sentimental Man” S pg 60 a) ballad, gives the impression of sincerity ii. Has something of a heart S pg 118-119/Pgh 5/Chi 4

VII. Gullibility of Ozian public

264 1. “No one mourns the wicked” in minor key, dissonance when talking about “the wicked” CR 2. “Look at her, she’s wicked!” S pg. 72 after Morrible’s comment 3. “No one mourns the wicked” reprise lyrics S pg 73 4. Anti-witch rumors S pg 76 5. Emerald City folks believe Morrible’s story NY 5 6. Boq’s belief that Elphaba is evil S pg 83 7. Boq and chorus’ lyrics S pg 109-110 8. Glinda’s initial belief that the cyclone was an accident S pg 103

VIII. Means of Hegemonic Rule 1. Tools used by hegemons i. Time dragon Chi 1/Pgh 1 ii. Giant head S pg 59, 66, 92/Chi 3 iii. Color red Chi 3, 4/Pgh 3,4/NY 4 iv. Morrible’s loudspeaker via balcony S pg 68 a) Sound reverberates Chi 3/NY 4 v. Guards (see legal sanctions) vi. Labels S pg 90 2. Strategies used by hegemons i. Legal sanctions a) Guards: S pg 69, 70, 71, 93, 104-106 b) Nessa keeping Boq in Munchkinland S pg 83 ii. Identification with dissenter S pg 88-89 iii. Bargaining with opposition S pg 91 iv. Threatening potential dissenters S pg 110 v. Murdering those closest to dissenter S pg 97 vi. Spreading false rumors about opposition S pg 96/Pgh 4 vii. Brainwashing to silence Dillamond S pg 92/Chi 4/Pgh 4 a) In NY version, Dillamond is silenced but not brainwashed NY 5 viii. Recontextualizing (Morrible’s story) S pg 75-76 ix. Renaming Elphaba a wicked witch S pg 68 x. Spying on opposition S pg 64

Elphaba as a Militant Social Movement Leader Analysis

I. Traits of a leader A. Outgoing 1. “Didn’t eat grass as a child” S p. 9 2. “Let her go!” S p. 14 3. Dance at OzDust Ballroom S p. 37 4. Speaks out against official S p. 45a-46 5. meltdown when Dillamond is taken away S p. 44-45 6. Confronts Wizard B. Smart

265 1. Answers all questions in class S pp. 21-22 2. Wizard & Morrible’s conversation S pp. 96-97 C. Talented 1. Spins Nessa’s chair S p. 14 a) All sets move CHI 2 2. Morrible’s praise S p. 15 3.Can read Grimmerie S p. 62 4. Freezes everyone except herself & Fiyero S p. 46 a) Everyone moves uncontrollably CHI 3 5. Makes broom fly S p. 70 6. Makes Nessa walk S p. 82 D. Ambitious 1. “The Wizard and I” lyrics S p. 16 a) green spotlight PGH 2 b) giddy NY 2 c) timid then becomes excited CHI 2 d) quick, repeated, underlying beat in major key – hopeful CR/SM 2. Excitement when meeting the Wizard S p. 51 3. Longs to do something good with her powers S p. 82 E. Sense of Duty 1. “Of course I’ll care for Nessa” S p. 18 2. Feels responsible for Nessa’s disability S p. 40/PGH 2 3. “Will you be alright?” to Nessa S p. 52 4. Wants to repay Galinda for helping Nessa CR 5. “Done what long ago I should” S p. 82 6. Gives up on Nessa S p. 87 F. Caring 1. “Care this much” S p. 47 2. Nessa S p. 87 3. Worried about Nessa S p. 100 4. “For Good” S pp. 115-116 5. Kisses Chistery goodbye PGH 4

II. Scorned by Others A. By family 1. By father S p. 10 a) “Never mentioned you” S p. 12 2. By Nessa S pp. 81, 86-87 B. By peers 1. Scares classmates when she arrives at Shiz PGH 1 2. “What is this feeling?” S pp. 18-20 3. Stared at by students S p. 9, 37 4. Caused girl to faint NY 2 5. Boq accuses her of lying S p. 83 C. By public

266 1. Rumors S p. 73, 76 2. Mob scene S p. 109-110

III. Concern for Plight of Animals A. Wants to tell Wizard S p. 25 B. Frees Lion Cub w/Fiyero S p. 46-47 C. Attempts to tell Wizard about Animals S p. 60 D. Upset when Dillamond is taken away S pp. 44-45 a) Screams PGH 3 E. Worried about Chistery in pain S p. 63

IV. Fiyero Becomes an Activist A. Grabs cage and runs S p. 48 1. Fiyero, not Elphaba thinks of freeing the Cub NY 3 B. Thinking about Cub S p. 54 1. Moody and thinking –Galinda’s lines S p. 53 C. Joined guards to find Elphaba S p. 74 D. Distraught over Elphaba’s disappearance S pp. 76-77 E. All over Glinda at ceremony; doesn’t know he loves Elphaba NY 4 F. Gets Elphaba out of trouble & runs off with her S p. 95 G. Rescues Elphaba in exchange for himself S p. 105

V. Elphaba becomes Militant A. Steals Grimmerie and runs off S p. 65 B. Criticizes Galinda’s moderate approach S p. 67 C. Finds her own voice in “Defying Gravity” S pp. 68-69, 72 1. “Defying Gravity” – repeated four notes than end in Elphaba’s last verse CR 2. Deeper voice in DG than in W&I NY 4 3. Cloak flowing/lighting effect CHI 3 NY 4 D. Sneaks in the palace to free Monkeys 1. Radiates light, points broom at guards PGH 3 E. Points broom like a gun at the Wizard PGH 4/NY 5 F. Unlawfully teaching Animals to speak S p. 112

VI. Reconsiders militancy A. Considers working within the system: “Wonderful” S p. 91

VII. Elphaba’s breakdown A. Lower voice in Act 2 PGH 4 1. Dark, cackling at the end PGH 4 B. Immediately desperate in Act 2 PGH 4 C. Seeks Father for help S p. 80 1. Broken, deeper voice NY 5 D. Self-reflection in “No Good Deed” Sp. 107-108

267 1. Red/purple lights CHI 4 2. Dress fills stage CHI 4 E. Glinda: “you’re out of control” S p. 112 F. Indignant and then gives up S p. 113 G. “limited” S p. 114 H. Melting S p. 117

VIII. Passes torch to Glinda A. Hands Glinda Grimmerie S pp. 114-115 B. Tells her not to clear her name S p. 114 C. “Now it’s up to you” S p. 115 D. Voice part switch CR/SM 1. Not in NY – Is Mauzey sick? NY 6

IX. Ultimately makes difference A. Chistery 1. Speaks S p. 117/CHI 5 B. Glinda 1. Takes over S p. 119-120 2. “Changed for good” S p. 122 3. Chistery gives Glinda the book NY 6

G(a)linda as a Leader Cluster Analysis

I. Popular Public Figure A. Ozians shout at her arrival S p. 2 B. Shakes hands 1. Like a politician CHI-1 2. Like royalty NY – 1 C. Ozians gather for her engagement party S p. 73-74 D. Look to her for answers/guidance 1. “Why does wickedness happen?” S p. 3 2. “You were her friend?” S p. 7 3. Speaks quickly to provide answers PGH-1

II. Popular Among Peers A. Laugh at her jokes S p. 11 B. Take her side in “What is this feeling?” S p. 19-20 C. “Popular” lyrics – “Not as popular as me!” S p. 43 D. “You’re so good!” S p. 11 E. Adored by Boq S p. 27 F. Gets the most popular guy in school S p. 31, 50 G. Others adopt Elphie dance style because Galinda makes it popular S p. 38 H. Agon theme: Galinda’s tick CHI-2

268 1. Elphaba makes fun of it in “What is this feeling?” CHI-2 2. Does it in the OzDust Ballroom dance CHI-2

III. Character Traits A. Energetic 1. Conversation with Elphaba S p. 39-40 2. Awkward hair flipping NY-3 3. Curtsies frequently PGH-1 4. “Popular” antics CHI-3, PGH-2 B. Conniving 1. Suck-up; raises hand incessantly PGH-1 2. Suggests a rumor be spread to capture Elphaba S p. 96 3. Tricks Elphaba into wearing ugly hat S p. 33 4. Gets Boq to ask Nessa out to get rid of him S p. 30-31 C. Guilty when consequences of her actions are realized 1. Conversation with Fiyero S p. 37-38 2. Conversation with Nessa S p. 52 3. Begins to cry when Elphaba enters ballroom with hat PGH-2 4. Quiet in ballroom NY-3 D. Inept 1. Madame Morrible doesn’t think “she has what it takes” S p. 37 a) Won’t let her touch Grimmerie 2. Can’t change Elphaba’s frock to a ballgown S p. 42 3. “So bad at giving directions” S p. 102 IV. Values appearance A. Separates private and public 1. Instantly thrilled when Fiyero arrives S p. 53 2. Reacts to friendship question a) Admits quickly, then backtracks CHI-1 b) Hedges questions NY-2 3. Name change is public commitment but not private S p. 54 a) Not really wanting to NY-4 4. Doesn’t fight against Morrible’s falsified story S p. 75 5. Appears happy when she’s not S p. 77-78 a) Dynamic in “Thank Goodness” CHI-4 6. Tries to cover for Fiyero in front of Wizard S p. 95 7. Private Glinda is softer than public Glinda NY-5 8. Generally sings higher in public than in private CR 9. Voice is more nasal in public PGH-4 10. Forces herself to smile and wave S p. 110 11. “He’s gone to fetch me a refreshment” CR B. Favors conformity 1. Values popularity – Lyrics of “Popular” S p. 41-42 2. Annoyed that Dillamond can’t pronounce her name S p. 21 3. “Still be with the Wizard” S p. 68

269

V. Believes in working within the system A. Doesn’t follow Elphaba’s lead, though wishes her luck S p. 71 B. “Be encouraging!” S p. 103 C. “I’ll fetch her back!” S p. 65 D. Becomes a public figure S p. 74, 77 E. Doesn’t question things S p. 103

VI. Awakening A. Begins to think about Nessa’s death S p. 103 B. Has no power over guards S p. 106 C. Speaks out against crowd S p. 110 D. Loses flighty voice in “For Good” CHI-4 E. Questions Morrible S p. 110 1. Coldly NY-5

VII. Taking a Stand A. Goes to warn Elphaba S p. 112 B. Tries to reasons with Elphaba S p. 112 C. Offers to tell everyone the truth S p. 114 1. Agrees to Elphaba’s condition S p. 114 D. Reluctantly takes Grimmeric S p. 114-115 E. Agon theme: No voice switch in “For Good” NY-6

VIII. Transition to Leadership A. Indicators of Animal Rights Support 1. Chistery speaks and hands Glinda bottle S p. 117, CHI-5, NY-6 2. Chistery hands Glinda Grimmerie in chamber B. Indicators of Rule 1. Baby blue and pink clothes and streamers worn by Ozians CHI-1 C. Acts as leader 1. Banishes Wizard S p. 119 a) Icily NY-6 2. Imprisons Morrible S p. 119-120 a) Mimicking Morrible’s lines is ineffective CHI-4 b) Mimics, then screams NY-6 c) Guards obey Glinda S p. 120 d) Anger/screaming PGH-5 3. Final speech S p. 121 a) Serious PGH-5 b) Heartfelt NY-6

270