The Shared Destiny of the Radically Other: A Reading of The Wizard of Oz

Film-Philosophy 14 (2):113-131 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper explores the classic MGM film  The Wizard of Oz  from a perspective influenced by Baudrillard’s writings. The paper begins by locating its argument within Baudrillard’s influential notion of the orders of simulacra, noting the neglected distinction between the imaginary and simulation (or hyperreality). It then moves into less familiar territory, exploring some of the least known aspects of Baudrillard’s thought: symbolic exchange, destiny and radical otherness. These notions, we argue, not only suggest an alternative reading of the film, they also suggest an alternative perspective on Baudrillard’s thought. Against standard views of Baudrillard’s work as relativist, postmodernist and anti-feminist (Kellner 1989), the paper draws out a very different Baudrillard, one concerned with illusion, imagination and, perhaps, a singular form of ethicality. Our reading of the film, through Baudrillard’s idiosyncratic writing on seduction, ritual and initiation, suggests an understanding of ‘ethicality’ as relational, radically contingent and subject to the play of destiny

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,642

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-24

Downloads
20 (#181,865)

6 months
95 (#177,219)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Meena Dhanda
University of Wolverhampton

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

America.Jean Baudrillard & Chris Turner - 1989 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 47 (2):199-199.
The Transparency of Evil: Essays on Extreme Phenomena.Jean Baudrillard - 1994 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 52 (4):487-488.
Beyond Theory in Crisis.Catherine Constable - 2000 - Women’s Philosophy Review 26:28-56.

Add more references