Let’s Talk About “Wicked: For Good” (And The Pursuit of Goodness)

The celebrated musical “Wicked,” completed its ambitious transformation in the film industry with the second of the two-part series: “Wicked: For Good.” In this heartwarming finale, Glinda the Good Witch and Elphaba the Wicked Witch part ways after Elphaba loses the fight against the people of Oz, who deem her “evil” and “wicked.” The labels the community levies against her are brilliantly adapted to expose the prejudice underlying superficial appearance.

The movie opens with the public reviling Elphaba as they believe she has used her powers to torture animals. Their hatred morphs and projects into their own evil deeds. The public places their own mistakes, selfish actions, and self-inflicted pain onto Elphaba. They free themselves from accountability and external guilt by simply telling the world that Elphaba is the cause. Their hatred begins from Elphaba’s birth; her mother, unfaithful to her husband, drinks a green elixir to get rid of the baby. Instead, it makes Elphaba green. 

A living reminder of his wife’s infidelity, Elphaba’s father shuns and rejects her. The Wizard and Madam Morrible, one of the professors and sorcerers of Shiz (an academy in Oz), capitalize on Elphaba’s abilities and manipulate her into creating the infamous flying monkeys. Elphaba quickly realizes that the monkeys are in pain, and that she has caused irreparable harm. She decides to fight back, resisting against the morally inept authorities, assigning hate and pain for their benefit. Once Elphaba stands up for herself, Madam Morrible holds Elphaba’s self-agency against her, later levying blame and sole responsibility onto Elphaba. This is public, clear manipulation, a reminder of the unrelenting reality of the power and privilege of those with enough authority to exploit the media. And it is an undeniable assumption that this exploitation is so easily perpetrated because of the already existing prejudice against Elphaba. Simply put, people’s distrust toward Elphaba exists long before they know anything about her; their judgment stems from her greenness, from her difference.

Nessa, Elphaba’s sister, actively deflects and avoids responsibility. She makes Elphaba the sole scapegoat for her poor decisions. As she ruins the life of Boq, her emotionally distant ex-boyfriend, she shamefully lies to avoid his righteous wrath. Even Dorothy, from the original “Wizard of Oz,” celebrates the death of the Wicked Witch because it brings her closer to her homecoming. The song “No One Mourns The Wicked” is perhaps apt. Not at all, in fact, nobody celebrates their death and demise, because it allows the delusion of good. If Elphaba is wicked, then all that is different from her shines in the light of goodness. But these people are not good; they are hateful creatures, so lenient in their own desire for violence. “Wicked: For Good” invites us to investigate the authenticity of such labels and intentions.

The first installment, “Wicked: Part One,” excellently established the impersonal traits and identities of the characters. Following in its footsteps, this sequel and conclusion paint the tragic disruption in a once optimistic world, where good always wins. The cast echoes the word “good” throughout the first and, now, the second film. Glinda, the Good Witch, is the physical representation of the word in Oz. She has used the word as a brand, even suggesting that it should be trademarked. Elphaba resisted the fame and glamour through her bravery. It takes her death for Glinda to finally recognize the value of morality.