The Magic Never Ends

Library of Congress

Eighty years ago today (can you believe it?), The Wizard of Oz premiered in theaters. The focal point of the movie is of course, a certain pair of ruby red slippers.

The number of slippers made for the film is unknown, and at least five pairs still exist. Discovered in one of MGM’s storehouses by costumer Kent Warner, they are the most recognizable pieces of film memorabilia in history. Even those who haven’t seen The Wizard of Oz are familiar with the ruby slippers.

Of course, as a little kid, I had no idea about Kent Warner, or how many pairs of slippers there are, or that there was all this intrigue surrounding them. None of that would have mattered much anyway.

rs on white
National Museum of American History

The ruby slippers might be costume pieces, but they are also magic. They really are. They turned me into a classic film lover.

I’ve always enjoyed The Wizard of Oz. Even before I saw the movie, I would act out an audio version I had on cassette. Embarassing, I know, but I was a kid. When my parents took me shopping for dress-up shoes, I picked out a shiny white patent leather pair with grosgrain bows because I thought they looked just like the silver shoes.

Of course, seeing the movie was a revelation. I was six. It was the eighties, so the first time I saw Oz was on TV. I was so excited, I taped the whole thing, including commercials, on blank cassette tapes so I could relive it later.


Naturally, I was captivated by the ruby slippers. What little girl wouldn’t be? They were bright, shiny, beautiful, and real. A girl named Judy wore them, and they still existed somewhere. Maybe I could even see them someday. They seemed unattainable, like the Holy Grail.

Or…maybe not. When I was almost eight, the news was all over the Bay Area that Dorothy’s ruby slippers were stolen from a store in San Francisco called Humpty-Dumpty and Sons. I remember feeling conflicted. How did I not know the ruby slippers were so close? Did this mean I would never see them? And yeah, I was a pretty dramatic eight-year old.

As it turned out, the stolen slippers–if they were stolen at all–were fakes, and the story died down as quickly as it broke. The real ruby slippers were safely ensconced at the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C. Humpty-Dumpty and Sons died soon after too, and as of October of 2017 the space stands empty.

The former Humpty-Dumpty and Sons, 1467 Pine Street, San Francisco. (Google Maps)

It wasn’t until I was seventeen, a little older than Judy was when she made Oz, that I had the chance to see the ruby slippers. My parents and I took a trip to New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C., which of course included the National Museum of American History.


I could barely contain myself. I knew what it was like to see the slippers from friends who had gone, but that was nothing to being there. Imagine my shock when I went up to a dark, somewhat shabby case in what amounted to a doorway to see a pair of…

Old, frayed, almost muddy brown shoes. Sequins missing. A bit of fuzzy stuff sticking out from under one of the bows.

The Ruby Slippers at the Smithsonian in 1994. Family photo.

Were these the ruby slippers? They had to be. Judy had worn them. The plate under them said so. But they couldn’t be. Maybe their magic was only temporary.

Welp, there went that dream.

Funny thing, though, a surprise was in store when we got home and developed our pictures: The ruby slippers looked perfect. Ruby red. Sparkly. Nothing missing. Their magic hadn’t gone away after all.

Now I was intrigued. I had to find out what made it possible for the shoes to look one way in person and another way in a photo.

Buy this book on Amazon.

Since it was the mid-nineties the answers weren’t as readily available, my questions had to germinate. I found little tiny bits of information in books such as Aljean Harmetz’s classic, The Making of the Wizard of Oz, but it wasn’t until I bought Rhys Thomas’s The Ruby Slippers of Oz that I was really able to satisfy my curiosity. It’s well worth a read, although the editing in my edition is a bit sloppy, with duplicate print and spelling errors, but the information it contains is gold, er, ruby.

First of all, the slippers were much darker than ruby red in order to photograph that way in the Technicolor of the time, which required intense, hot light that washed colors out. If the slippers had been ruby red in real life, they would have photographed orange. Even white, such as in Dorothy’s blouse, had to be overdyed pink in order to look the proper color.

One of Judy Garland’s screen-worn pinafores, housed at the Museum of Pop Culture, Seattle, Washington. Personal photo.

The shoes went through some design changes during pre-production. It was screenwriter Noel Langley’s idea to change the shoes to ruby in the first place, and no one argued with him, because red shoes are going to show up infinitely better in Technicolor than silver ones.

Initially, the ruby slippers resembled those in W.W. Denslow’s original illustrations, which had pointed toes and curled uppers, except that they were more elaborately jeweled. However, this design was jettisoned in favor of a simple pump with a French heel, as it was cheaper and faster to make over a lot of ready-made shoes instead of building them from scratch. The pumps were bought from the Innes Shoe Company of Los Angeles and were a mixture of sizes 5 and 6. At first, the newer shoes were covered in bugle beads and sequins, but a leather bow was soon added, and presto! The Ruby Slippers were born. All but one pair had orange felt on the bottoms to muffle the sound they made on the Yellow Brick Road.

Once the movie wrapped, the ruby slippers were put in what Rhys Thomas called “deep storage.” This was the fate of any costumes that were easily recognizable and therefore couldn’t be used in other films. That included the majority of the Oz costumes, as well as costumes from such films as Ziegfeld Follies. There they stayed until 1970, when Kirk Kerkorian bought MGM and liquidated the majority of its assets.

MGM Ladies’ Wardrobe in the 1930s. (Silver Screen Modes)

Kerkorian and his creditors saw the studio’s vast collections of costumes and props as junk to be sold or destroyed, and they unloaded them to the David Weisz Company for $1.5 million dollars. Weisz employee Richard Carroll hired costumer Kent Warner to search out the best pieces for their upcoming auction. The rest would be sold at a rummage sale.

Many of the studios were selling off their costumes, and Kent was heartsick at the cavalier way in which these movie factories were handling their history. RKO, for instance, stored costumes in the commissary, where patrons were wiping their hands on them. 20th Century Fox threw its entire history of special effects into a dumpster, and a rainstorm ruined all of it before it could be saved. Warner Bros. costumes were routinely sent to the incinerator. Paramount was one of the few studios that cared about its history and had everything catalogued, but they were the anomaly.

Costumes sold at the MGM auction, May 3-5, 1970. (Gorillas Don’t Blog)

Kent went to work. He devised ways of smuggling costumes out of studio lots, like hiding layers of costumes on dress forms, or maybe stuffing a duffel full of clothes. He didn’t get much resistance, as he was known around the industry, and many of his fellow costumers just looked the other way. His efforts spawned an underground market of Hollywood memorabilia.

When it came to MGM and the ruby slippers, the details are a little fuzzy. Some say Kent was told to save one pair of slippers, and others say Kent only told the auctioneer he found one pair, but either way, the thinking was that the slippers would seem more valuable if people thought only one pair existed. It’s agreed that Kent found the shoes in a bin under layers of dust, where they had reposed for decades.

Kent Warner with a pair of the Ruby Slippers at the MGM auction, May 5, 1970. (Vienna’s Classic Hollywood)

Five pairs may be in existence today, but again, no one knows exactly how many were made at the time Oz was in production. It was necessary to have multiples of costumes in case something broke or tore or otherwise couldn’t be used. Since the ruby slippers were such a focal point, not to mention Judy danced in them, there had to be lots of backups. Some have speculated there were as many as ten pairs, or possibly more.

We’ll never know for sure, though, because the records have been destroyed or lost, and pretty much anyone who could have given exact figures has passed on. We don’t even know how many pairs Kent Warner found when he discovered them in MGM’s costume vaults, because he never gave anyone a straight answer. When he died of AIDS in 1984, the secret died with him.

National Museum of American History

The pair that was sold at auction was what Rhys Thomas nicknamed, “The People’s Shoes.” They went to an anonymous buyer for $15,000 and were donated to the Smithsonian in 1979. These shoes are the most worn-out of any of the existing pairs, which probably means that both Judy and her stand-in may have worn them. Also, apparently, Judy was hard on shoes. Recently, a successful Kickstarter campaign was mounted to fund vital restoration work on the slippers, as they have slowly deteriorated over the years.

Dorothy’s Shoes, as they were pictured in the Christie’s catalogue for the 1988 auction. (The Ruby Slippers Project)

Another pair is “Dorothy’s Shoes.” These shoes are the most unusual of the five remaining pairs because they were sent out as a prize in a contest in 1940. Memphis teenager Roberta Bauman won them and kept them for forty-eight years. They were bought and cherished in 1988 by Anthony Landini for $165,000, who then sold them to David Elkouby in 2000 for $666,000.

The recovered pair of slippers, along with a sequin found at the crime scene. (National Museum of American History)

A third pair has been nicknamed “The Traveling Shoes.” Michael Shaw bought them directly from Kent Warner for $2,500 and occasionally exhibited them in shopping malls around the United States. This pair has a few lost years to its credit, as they were famously stolen from the Judy Garland Museum in Grand Rapids, Minnesota in 2005. Amazingly enough, the FBI was able to recover them thirteen years later, but the motive of the perpetrators has still not been revealed to the public. It’s unknown if Shaw took these shoes back, and as of this writing, their fate is up in the air (I vote for donating them to the Smithsonian, but that’s just me).


The fourth pair to surface is “The Witch’s Shoes.” This was Kent Warner’s personal pair, and he displayed them in a Lucite case in his living room. The condition of these shoes is pristine, except for a few circular scuff marks on the inside heel area, and the heels are higher than that of the other pairs. These shoes have no orange felt on the bottoms, which indicates that they were worn by the deceased Witch of the East in Munchkinland. It’s also likely Judy donned them for closeups. The pair was sold in 1981 to an anonymous collector for $12,000. Then in 1988 Phillip Samuels bought them for $165,000 at a private auction arranged by Christie’s East. In 2012, Samuels sold the slippers at an estimated two to three million dollars to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.


The fifth pair is ‘The Arabian Test Shoes.” They were never used in the movie, but according to Debbie Reynolds, Judy liked them best. Reynolds bought the shoes at the MGM auction and held on to them until she sold off her vast memorabilia collection in 2011. The pair went for over half a million dollars and it’s said they have been sold to a Middle Eastern collector.

Hank Azaria as Kahmunrah contemplates a Ruby Slipper.

Hollywood is also replete with apparent slipper sightings. It’s almost like seeing Elvis. Sammy Davis Jr., Liza Minnelli, and Mervyn LeRoy have all been rumored to have a pair. A costumer named Bill Thomas bragged to Rhys Thomas about having a pair in a safe deposit box. All of these rumors have been disproven or are unsubstantiated. There are also numerous convincing replicas around, such as the pair made for the second Night At the Museum film.

Judy Garland and Ray Bolger during the Richard Thorpe era. Judy is wearing the mysterious Bugle Bead Shoes. (Pinterest)

Another idea that gets slipper aficionados’ radars beeping is the possible existence of the “Bugle Bead Shoes,” the bow-less pair of Ruby Slippers which were briefly worn by Judy when Richard Thorpe was directing Oz. Again, however, no concrete information exists, and the shoes have yet to publically surface.

Why are these shoes so intriguing to people after so many years? Everyone seems to have their own answers. The slippers could symbolize a desire to be lifted out of the everyday. Or they might mean a longing to go home. Or they might see the slippers as the vehicle by which Judy Garland was cemented as a star and a legend. Or they could be relics of a Hollywood that will never exist again.

Or they could be part of a secret hope that somehow the magic of Oz is real.


A little girl once wrote to the Smithsonian and asked if the Ruby Slippers are still magic. She was told that no one wears the shoes anymore because they are very delicate and could fall apart, but as far as being magic, the magic was always in her.

For me, seeing the shoes opened up a world of reality turned into illusion, and inspired the wish to walk the bridge between the two. Over twenty-five years later, I’m still walking that bridge, and it gets more interesting the farther it goes.

More Oz can be found here. Thanks for reading, all…


Thomas, Rhys. The Ruby Slippers of Oz. Los Angeles: Tale Weaver Publishing. 1989

Treasure! The Search For the Ruby Slippers. Written and produced by Rhys Thomas. Narrated by Stuart Nelson. A&E, 1998.

13 thoughts on “The Magic Never Ends

  1. This was fascinating, thanks! I remember seeing the shoes in the Smithsonian in 1989. They appeared brown to me. They were right next to Captain Kirk’s chair from Star Trek. Which also looked chintzy. Amazing story about all the pairs of shoes.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. What an amazing article! I had no idea that the history of the Ruby Slippers was so intricate and fascinating. They are perhaps that most recognisable prop of the film which is quite a feat considering how much detail went into making this film.
    Several months back, I wrote a piece about MGM designer Adrian and I happened upon many designs that he had done for the film. They are all exquisite. Do you happen to know if he had anything to do with the styling of the shoes and/or other details, like adding the sequins or deciding the colour?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks, Erica! I only scratched the surface–there’s a lot more in Rhys Thomas’s book. And yeah, Adrian did have a hand in designing the slippers. The bows were definitely his idea. I think credit for the color goes to Noel Langley, though, because it was in his draft that the change was made. Who knew a pair of shoes could inspire so much intrigue?

      Liked by 1 person

  3. This is so interesting and makes me want to get my hands on that book by Rhy Thomas! I’ve heard that the Smithsonian replaces the carpet in front of the slippers very often because people stand there and stare, then they come back and stare some more. I wonder if any other piece of movie memorabilia holds that same magnetism and fascination for people. Thanks for sharing this!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks, and definitely! It’s really good. And yeah, it was like that when I saw the slippers in 1994–the carpet was worn all the way to the backing. It’s kind of amazing that these shoes grab people the way they do.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. I found it very interesting that the pair of slippers shown in your 1994 Smithsonian photo is actually the pair marked #7 (the Smithsonian’s pair is actually a mix of numbers #1 and #6), now owned by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. I knew that the #7 former owner Philip Samuels had loaned his pair to the Smithsonian on two occasions while the Smithsonian’s pair was unavailable, but I hadn’t seen any photographs of them there until yours. Thank you!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It is very interesting, and actually, the shoes in my photo were the People’s Shoes, which were sold at the MGM auction. The Shaw and Samuels pairs are in much better condition, whereas the shoes at the Smithsonian were pretty ratty when I saw them. The Philip Samuels pair also have higher heels. And you’re right about the shoes being mixed up, but it was the Shaw and Smithsonian pairs. I think Judy would have noticed if her heels were different heights, lol. And thank you–glad you enjoyed my article! 🙂


      1. Yes, the Shaw and Smithsonian pairs were mixed up. It happened during filming, not during the seasoning process as Rhys Thomas assumed. That was what I was referring to -sorry if it wasn’t clear.

        The pair in your 1994 photo looks much more like the Academy pair based on the flare of the heel and the slightly more collapsed side of the upper on the proper left shoe. The way the bows appear to be sitting mostly even with each other is also indicative of the Academy pair, as is the way the bow on the proper left shoe is sitting. It also appears that the pair in your 1994 photo has nearly all of their rhinestones on the bows. The bow nearest the camera should be missing several rhinestones on the bottom corner nearest the camera, if it is the Smithsonians pair.

        It could just be the angle of the photo, but I would bet money that that shot has the Academy pair visible instead of the Smithsonian’s. Their pair went on a national tour for at least two years sometime in the 1990s, and the Academy pair was loaned in their place, by Philip Samuels.

        As for condition of the different pairs, the Academy pair is supposed to be in the best overall condition. However, the conservator and curator who worked on the slippers at the museum also flew to LA to examine the Academy pair, and said that the sequins on the Academy pair are in worse condition than the Smithsonians. The overall condition is better if you factor in missing rhinestones, broken threads, and general wear, but the Academy pair has a lot of sequins going the wrong way, as well as a lot of sequins missing from the opening of the shoe.

        I’ve worked with the Smithsonian for quite some time in regards to their slippers, and have provided them with all of my research into the different pairs. I made the replicas for the Smithsonians 2016 #KeepThemRuby fundraiser, and was given two behind the scenes private viewings of the Smithsonian pair. I have some photos from then if you have any interest in seeing. Just shoot me an email and I’ll send some over.


      2. Well, that was kind of my point in the article–the shoes looked terrible in person but perfect on camera. There were a LOT of rhinestones, beads and sequins missing, plus the uppers were detaching from the soles. I remember the card saying that particular pair were sold at the MGM auction and there was no mention of Philip Samuels. Plus, the SI site says that the People’s Shoes have been on almost continuous display since the NMAH acquired them ( Oh, and by the way, that tour you mentioned didn’t happen until 1996 ( I’ll take the money when you have it, thanks, lol. 😉

        And that’s funny, because I’ve read Thomas’s book over a dozen times and he doesn’t mention “seasoning,” just that the pairs were probably mixed up while the shoes were being crafted. Based on what I’ve studied about Hollywood during the studio era, this assessment is likely true. They weren’t concerned about matching serial numbers, just getting the shoes done ASAP.

        As for the Philip Samuels pair, Profiles In History said they were in near-mint condition, and I believe they work with an appraiser ( I wasn’t able to find anything about Dawn Wallace looking at the shoes, though, but maybe she did.

        That’s cool about working with the Smithsonian–I saw your article on the SI website. If you want to send me the photos, that’s fine (I have a contact page). Thanks. 🙂


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.