0 reactions
Why do so many people think Roald Dahl’s Charlie and the chocolate factory, is a critique of shady business practices?
I mean, the book is a critique, but of bad parenting. Not underneath tactics used by industrialists.
The only thing I can think the would make someone reach the aforementioned conclusion. is the fact that Wonka laid off his workers and replaced them with the Oompa Loompas. But that’s explained by he fact that he shut down, in order to prevent being ruined by the espionage of his competitors. And hired the Oompa Loompas because he couldn’t trust the people in the town anymore.
There’s also the somewhat callous way he acts when Augustus gets sucked up the pipe. But I think that’s only because he, (Wonka), knows that he (Augustus). Is going to be ok.
By contrast when Violet is chewing the 3 course meal gum, he clearly acts concerned and agitated. And is openly stated to be upset when she’s turned into a blueberry. Which shows he does have concern when he genuinely feels the kid’s safety is at risk.
In the past few years, loads of people online have come out to say that it’s a critique of capitalism. What gives? It’s literally a children’s novel. Dahl never said it was a criticism of shady business. He said that he based the book off of what sort of work. That he thought a chocolatier would do. When he, (Dahl), was a kid.
If you do believe it’s a critique of certain business practices. Then Why?
TLDR: Roald Dahl based Charlie off his childhood pre-conceptions, of what a chocolate factory was like. And never mentioned shady business practices. Why do so many people now seem to think that it’s a critique of the latter?
#entertainment
I mean, the book is a critique, but of bad parenting. Not underneath tactics used by industrialists.
The only thing I can think the would make someone reach the aforementioned conclusion. is the fact that Wonka laid off his workers and replaced them with the Oompa Loompas. But that’s explained by he fact that he shut down, in order to prevent being ruined by the espionage of his competitors. And hired the Oompa Loompas because he couldn’t trust the people in the town anymore.
There’s also the somewhat callous way he acts when Augustus gets sucked up the pipe. But I think that’s only because he, (Wonka), knows that he (Augustus). Is going to be ok.
By contrast when Violet is chewing the 3 course meal gum, he clearly acts concerned and agitated. And is openly stated to be upset when she’s turned into a blueberry. Which shows he does have concern when he genuinely feels the kid’s safety is at risk.
In the past few years, loads of people online have come out to say that it’s a critique of capitalism. What gives? It’s literally a children’s novel. Dahl never said it was a criticism of shady business. He said that he based the book off of what sort of work. That he thought a chocolatier would do. When he, (Dahl), was a kid.
If you do believe it’s a critique of certain business practices. Then Why?
TLDR: Roald Dahl based Charlie off his childhood pre-conceptions, of what a chocolate factory was like. And never mentioned shady business practices. Why do so many people now seem to think that it’s a critique of the latter?
#entertainment
| 0 mlx | |
| 16 | |
| 0 |