If you grew up in the 80s or 90s, you probably have a specific, vivid memory of a woman peeling off her face. It wasn't a horror movie—well, not technically. It was just a "children's book." But the witches of Roald Dahl weren't your typical hags on broomsticks. They didn't wear pointy hats. They didn't cackle over cauldrons in the woods. Honestly, that’s what made them so terrifying. They were everywhere. They were your neighbor. Your teacher. The lady buying apples at the grocery store.
Roald Dahl had this weird, dark knack for tapping into childhood paranoia. He knew kids weren't scared of monsters under the bed as much as they were scared of the adults they were supposed to trust. When The Witches hit shelves in 1983, it felt less like a fairy tale and more like a survival manual. It’s a book about genocide, really. Small-scale, child-focused genocide.
They Aren't Even Human
Let's get one thing straight: the witches of Roald Dahl are a different species. They are demons in human female shape. They don't have blood; they have "blueish" spit that they use as ink. They don't have fingernails; they have claws like cats, which is why they have to wear gloves all the time, even indoors.
Think about that.
Imagine being a kid in a stuffy classroom in July, looking at your teacher in her silk gloves, and wondering if she’s itching to scratch your eyes out. That’s the psychological trap Dahl sets. It’s brilliant. It’s also kinda messed up.
The lore is incredibly specific. Their heads are bald as boiled eggs, so they wear first-class wigs that give them "wig-rash." They have no toes, just square ends to their feet, forcing them into uncomfortable, pointy shoes. But the kicker? The nose. They have slightly larger, slightly curvy nostrils to smell out children. To a witch, a clean child smells like fresh dog droppings. The cleaner you are, the more you stink. My mom used to joke about this to get me into the bath, but looking back, it’s a pretty grim incentive.
The Grand High Witch: A Masterclass in Villainy
The leader of this global cabal is the Grand High Witch. In the book, she’s described as having a face that looks like it’s been "rotted away by fungus." She’s wealthy, powerful, and she has a plan. Her "Formula 86 Delayed Action Mouse-Maker" is basically a biological weapon.
Most people remember Anjelica Huston’s 1990 performance. It was iconic. The prosthetic work by Jim Henson’s Creature Shop was so grotesque it reportedly traumatized a generation. But the book version is even colder. She fries a witch on the spot with eye-beams just for speaking up. She's a tyrant. There’s no "misunderstood villain" arc here. She just hates kids.
Why People Think It’s Problematic (And Why They’re Sorta Right)
You can't talk about the witches of Roald Dahl without addressing the elephant in the room. Or the misogyny in the room.
💡 You might also like: Why Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy Actors Still Define the Modern Spy Thriller
Dahl has been dragged over the coals for decades because of how he framed these villains. "A witch is always a woman," he writes. He goes on to say that while a ghoul is always a male, witches are infinitely more dangerous because they look like "nice ladies."
Critically, scholars like Catherine Butler have pointed out that the book links physical "ugliness" with moral depravity. It's a classic trope, but Dahl leans into it with a mean-spiritedness that feels personal. In 2023, Puffin Books actually made headlines for editing new editions of Dahl's work to remove descriptions of characters being "fat" or "ugly." In The Witches, some of the descriptions of the women’s appearances were softened.
Does it change the story? Not really. The core fear isn't about how they look; it's about the fact that they are hiding.
The Controversy of the Ending
One of the most fascinating things about the witches of Roald Dahl is how the story ends. Or rather, how it doesn't end happily.
In the 1990 movie, the boy gets turned back into a human. It’s a Hollywood "feel-good" moment that Roald Dahl reportedly hated. He called the film "utterly appalling" because they changed his ending.
In the book? The boy stays a mouse.
He’s fine with it, too. He realizes that as a mouse, he’ll only live for about nine years, which is roughly how long his grandmother has left to live. They decide to spend those years traveling the world to hunt down and kill every last witch using the Mouse-Maker formula. It’s a suicide mission. It’s dark. It’s quintessentially Dahl. He didn't believe in easy outs.
The Cultural Legacy of the "Real" Witch
What Dahl did was redefine the "urban legend" for the 20th century. Before him, witches were something from the Brothers Grimm—relics of the past. Dahl brought them into the Ritz Hotel. He put them in middle-management.
📖 Related: The Entire History of You: What Most People Get Wrong About the Grain
This shift influenced everything from Hocus Pocus to the more modern "hidden horror" genre. The idea that "the monsters are among us" is a powerful narrative tool. It teaches children a certain kind of skepticism. Is that a good thing? Maybe. It definitely makes you look twice at the lady in the supermarket wearing purple tinted glasses (witches have weird eyes, remember?).
Fact vs. Fiction: What Dahl Actually Based Them On
Dahl wasn't just pulling this out of thin air. He had a complicated relationship with his own childhood and the various caregivers and authority figures in his life. Many biographers, like Donald Sturrock, suggest that Dahl’s depictions of cruel adults stemmed from his horrific experiences at British boarding schools.
The witches are basically the ultimate "bad teachers" or "cruel matrons." They are the authority figures who seem to despise the very children they are tasked with looking after. When you read it through that lens, the witches of Roald Dahl become a metaphor for the systemic cruelty children often face in institutional settings.
How to Spot One (According to the "Experts")
If you’re going to revisit the book or the movies, you have to keep the "signs" in mind. This is the stuff that gets stuck in your head.
- The Wig-Rash: They have to wear wigs because they're bald. Wigs are itchy. If a woman is constantly scratching under her hairline, watch out.
- The Gloves: They have claws. They never take the gloves off. Not even to eat.
- The Blue Spit: Look for a blueish tint on the teeth.
- The "Great Squish": Their feet are square and toeless. They hate wearing pretty, narrow shoes, but they do it to blend in.
- The Smell: To them, you smell like poop. If a woman makes a face like she’s just walked into a bathroom when you walk by, run.
It’s all nonsense, obviously. But to a seven-year-old? It’s gospel.
The 2020 Remake: A Different Take
Then there's the Robert Zemeckis version starring Anne Hathaway. This one took the witches of Roald Dahl and moved them to 1960s Alabama. It was an interesting choice, attempting to add a layer of social commentary to the mix.
However, it faced its own set of controversies. The design of the witches' hands—having only three fingers—drew heavy criticism from the disability community, specifically those with ectrodactyly. Warner Bros. had to issue an apology. It goes to show that the "deformity equals evil" trope is getting harder to pull off in a modern context.
Despite the CGI and the big budget, many fans still feel that the 1990 version captured the "grime" of Dahl’s world better. There’s something about practical effects that just feels more... visceral.
👉 See also: Shamea Morton and the Real Housewives of Atlanta: What Really Happened to Her Peach
Why We Keep Coming Back
Why do we still talk about this book? Why are we still obsessed with the witches of Roald Dahl?
Because it's honest.
Most children’s literature tries to shield kids from the idea that people can be naturally, inexplicably mean. Dahl didn't do that. He told kids: "Yes, some people are terrible. Yes, they might even want to hurt you. But you're smart, you're small, and you can fight back."
That’s an empowering message, even if it comes wrapped in a story about being turned into a rodent. It acknowledges the "otherness" that many children feel.
Modern Interpretations
In the era of "dark academia" and "cottagecore," the witch has been reclaimed as a feminist icon. But Dahl’s witches resist that reclamation. They aren't symbols of nature or feminine power. They are symbols of corruption.
If you're looking to dive back into this world, don't just watch the movies. Read the original text. Pay attention to the illustrations by Quentin Blake. His scratchy, frantic style perfectly captures the nervous energy of the story. The way he draws the Grand High Witch unmasked is arguably scarier than any movie version because it lets your imagination fill in the blanks.
Moving Forward with the Lore
If you're planning a Roald Dahl marathon or introducing the kids to the witches of Roald Dahl for the first time, keep a few things in mind to get the most out of the experience.
- Compare the endings: Read the book and then watch the 1990 film. Talk about why the filmmakers felt they had to change the ending and which one feels more "real."
- Look at the history: Research Roald Dahl’s life, specifically his time in Africa and his time in the RAF. You can see how his world-weary perspective bled into his villains.
- Analyze the "signs": Discuss how Dahl uses physical traits to signify internal character. It’s a great jumping-off point for talking about stereotypes and how authors use (and misuse) them.
- Check out the stage play: There have been several musical and stage adaptations that lean even harder into the "theatrical" nature of the witches.
The witches of Roald Dahl aren't going anywhere. They are baked into our cultural consciousness. As long as there are adults who seem a little too grumpy and kids who feel a little too observant, these stories will stay relevant. Just remember: if you see a lady in a fancy hat scratching her head a bit too much, maybe don't offer her a chocolate bar. You never know what’s inside.