] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 1 - 3, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 17:31:04 -0500 From: "Lisa M. Mastroberte" X-Accept-Language: en Subject: oz Dave H. wrote: >Maybe Ozma meant to fill the tunnel with coal (Carbon-12), but the >weakened Magic Belt failed her and filled it instead with Beryllium-8 with >a half-life of one quadrillionth of a second, after which it decays into >Helium-4...(Any evidence that the Shaggy Man's and his companions' voices >got high and Munchkin-like within the tunnel??) Or maybe, they filled it with some sort of material that disintagrates. >Coupla digests ago I threw out the question of how Books of Wonder should >have handled the villainous Arab in WISHING HORSE. I've been reminded that >BoW has never issued an edition of this book; the Int'l Wizard of Oz Club >did. >Come to think of it, why *doesn't* BoW do an edition of _Wishing Horse_? It's PD... I have no clue. (Peter, can you answer?) Btw, what is a Zoop??? Is it like a Woozy?? Which book does it appear in? (I have a pretty short memory with Oz books.) Also, I like the book _DotWiz_. Probably mostly because Eureka the Cat is in it. I have a copy from Watermill Press. It doesn't have any pictures inside, but it has a nice cover. _Road_ is probably my least fave, it has alot of IE's in it. Off2Oz, Lisa "Ozma" "Scully" Mastroberte ----------------- * "The last thing I remember is walking through a forest and hearing a loud noise. Now here I am, flying through the air. What am I, anyway?" -The Gump, Return to Oz, 1985 ====================================================================== From: Ozisus@aol.com Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 18:00:19 EST Subject: Oz 2000 presenters, topics? I'm speechless. Barbara Koelle tells me she's heard from anyone interested in presenting any "Life in the Land of Oz" topics at the centennial celebration. I thought you Digesters would be racing each other to get to her agenda first! Our other "track" chairmen are moving forward pretty steadily on coordinating a series of topical presentations. (Reminder fyi, the main tracks are: Baum's Life and Work, Literary Criticism/Comparative Literature, Oz Collecting, Oz on Stage and Screen and Life in the Land of Oz. Anything you'd like to present that doesn't fall neatly into one of those, tell me.) I can't believe that that those of you who so love to discuss the Oz material will let the characters, places and land of Oz itself be inadequately represented at this milestone event! OK, I'll agree that "what became of Miss Gulch" is little more than a fun dinner debate or late night exchange in the hospitality suite, and adult Oz books or "censorship" issues belong on Angelica Carpenters's agenda, but scan recent Digests and you'd see ... Oz Puns? Ozma's Castle? Education in Oz? Fashions in Oz? The Heads of Oz? Where is Oz? Technology in Oz? Romance in Oz? Feminism in Oz? Name That Witch? ANY favorite character? Seems to me like all someone has to do is poke half of you and out comes an Oz topic for which you have a clear passion. The centennial is your opportunity to share your love for Oz. And since the program will allow a multiple-choice format, it's a perfect venue for "smaller" topics unlikely to make the agenda at the usual conventions (where they'd be the ONLY thing on the agenda so broad appeal is necessary.) Grabbing others with similar or dissimilar ideas to form a panel discussion on a topic is a perfectly acceptable alternative. It's not too early to propose a topic. We'd rather confirm them now so we can describe them in promotional material. And you'll be disappointed if the entire weekend "fills up" before you get your shot at the podium. So go for it! Write Barbara Koelle at 244 Haverford Ave, Swarthmore, PA 19081. A past president of the Oz Club, Barbara has written extensively for the Bugle, presented at past conventions and is looking for people (you!) with interesting topics to make this convention a must-come event for people who love Oz books. This is the one to attend, folks, and as long as you're coming, why not get involved and present? Jane ====================================================================== From: "Jeremy Steadman" Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 20:21:38 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digests Digest of 11-25: Glad to hear some FF authors are still here . . . soon enough, though, it'll be NFF (non-FF) authors alone . . . much like the first three Doctors on Doctor Who are no more . . . and many of the scriptwriters too . . . Ding-a-derry: What bells do around cow pastures. How authors know: Instead of making hypotheses about how certain people let the authors know at certain times AFTER going to Oz BEFORE doing other things AND so on, isn't it more likely that Royal Historians are allowed to see the GBR so they can record the events as books? Or that Royal Historians are in fact the embodiments of the GBR in our physical world? No? Well, it makes sense to me . . . sort of. Digest of 11-30: PC Version of history: I'll spare you from all the clever puns I thought of here--for your sakes. Dave Hardenbrook: As an alternate title to the Digest, you could call it "Notes From Our Fearless Leader". >>The Ork is unfeathered?? Yes, nothing's holding it down. Until the next time you have to listen to (read) my superficial comments, Jeremy Steadman, Royal Historian of Oz kivel99@planetall.com http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dimension/9619 ICQ# 19222665, AOL Inst Mssgr name kiex or kiex2 "A good example of a parasite? Hmmm, let me think... How about the Eiffel tower?" ====================================================================== From: Ozmama@aol.com Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 21:08:23 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 11-30-98 David Hulan<> John Bell:<< Nice young adults get to marry, and often to marry royalty; nasty people may be born royal, but they go to bed alone.>> Here's my $ .02: Beautiful fairy princesses in Oz who know that physical beauty is not all that important may grow up to look like Rosa Merry or Posy Pink. Beautiful fairy princesses who think physical beauty is teddibly important, are flawed and, as they gain years, those flaws show up--physically. John Bell: <> A character that is easily accessible is more difficult to sustain. It makes sense for an author to "drop" a character rather than to have to continue developing it and possibly muddling up new stories in an attempt to retain the old characters. Kabumpo, Jinnicky, and Sam'l are extraordinary. They are plot movers. Majors. They are distinct individuals. Grumpy is a variant on Kabumpo. One curmudgeon per series is enough. David Hulan:<> Why _Silver Princess_? The tone is lighter, except for that awful moment towards the end, but why do you rate it higher than _Yellow Knight_? Btw, _Speedy_ is my fave RPT. ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 21:14:08 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: The Wizard of Oz Oscar and Adolf: Aside from the Scalawagon/Volkswagen thing (transportation for the people), there are other striking parallels between the Wizard and der Fuhrer: * The Wizard was born outside Oz but became its ruler. Hitler was born outside Germany but became its ruler. * Both men held on to power by the use of deception and lies. * Both were fond of grandiose architecture (the Wizard built the EC). * The Wizard had a hot air balloon. Hitler was also full of hot air. * Both men had difficulties associated with their names (Schicklgruber/Pinhead). However, as far as I know, the Wizard was not anti-Semitic and had no ambitions to conquer the countries around Oz to provide Lebensraum for an expanding Oz population. (On the latter point, I'm afraid I can't say the same for Captain Salt.) He caused no wars and attempted to exterminate no race of people. *However,* I will never be able to get used to the fact that he treated Dorothy and her friends so shabbily in WWiz. After all, what kind of a guy would send a little girl into almost certain death just to get her out of his hair - er, get her to quit bothering him? Then there's the shady business in _Land_, which LFB and then RPT ended up having to explain away and reinterpret. Now all of a sudden in DotWiz, here he is Mr. Nice Guy. There are depths to this man's personality that have never been fully explored, I tell you! That's not to mention the rather strange ease with which everyone accepts his transformation, to the point where he becomes a popular figure, Glinda trusts him with her magic, and so on. I don't think _I_ would have been as forgiving or as willing to trust as Dorothy. Even assuming that the alleged wrongdoing in _Land_ is a series of witchy fabrications, there's still the business with Dorothy and her friends in WWiz. The guy must have terrific charisma! Talk about a Teflon president! The only truly upsetting thing about the Scalawagon/Vokswagen parallel is the haunting notion that JNR got the idea from Adolf, perhaps subliminally. Was the VW in the news then, or did we only find out about it after the war? Aaron Solomon (ben Saul Joseph) Adelman wrote: >Pardon my puzzlement, but just what is a zoop? Good question. The Lonesome Zoop appears in at least two of the three LFB Oz silent movies. It is actually a man in a very weird costume that includes a long tail with a ball of fluff on the end, but it is intended to be some sort of creature, perhaps the only one of its kind. Its behavior seems to center around its loneliness, which it apparently seeks to relieve by drawing attention to itself, which annoys or frightens its victim, who runs away, thus providing fodder for some prolonged chase sequences. However, all instances of the zoop's appearance are strictly IEs. Michael Turniansky wrote: >As far as "spam-like" postings, whose decrying seemed to coincide with >Ruth's comment directly against my posting of the top 5 list, let me just >say (in >case the former comments were also directed towards me) in my defense, that >the >list was on-topic ("Top 5 Surprises in the re-released Wizard of Oz"), and the >credits following it were merely in keeping the etiquette of giving credit >where >it is due. Sorry if I filled up your mailboxes :( Mike, your Top 5 list was the farthest thing from _my_ mind when I complained of spam. I was thinking more of flashy ads (or as flashy as they can get in this format), which, even if sort of on-topic, are still annoying. :) J. L. Bell wrote: >About Elmira Gulch, David Godwin wrote: ><fellow undisposed to cooperate with Almira's anti-canine activism.>> > >But Miss Gulch owns half the county! Not all sheriffs were like Andy >Taylor, alas. Whereupon Dave Hardenbrook wrote: >We must remember that it was the Sheriff who authorized Gulch to take Toto in the first place... My whole idea was centered upon Miss Gulch's saying, "That'll be for the sheriff to decide!" Assuming that she, as "owner of the half the county," was willing to let the sheriff decide anything, why not in favor of some measure of clemency toward this poor, persecuted pooch? Maybe she could pressure the sheriff into issuing an order allowing her to pick up Toto, but putting him to death might be a different matter. Besides, if she dominated the sheriff to that extent, why didn't she just send him to pick up the dog himself rather than risk getting nipped again? Maybe it was the sheriff who owned the _other_ half of the county! I picked up that spelling of "Almira" from CD liner notes to the soundtrack. "Elmira" looks more likely, though. I don't know what it is in the filmscript. Nome King's Tunnel: Of the various theories suggested as to how Ruggedo's tunnel became un-filled, those mentioning some limitation in the power of the Magic Belt make the most sense to me. Ozma no doubt knew that the tunnel would not _stay_ filled, but neglected to publicize the fact for obvious reasons. - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 23:37:36 -0500 From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz Mount Munch: According to Baum, the Hyup country is shaped like a saucer, "wide and deep", implying that their land slopes downward toward the central part of the community. It's a god thing, too. If the land was higher at the center, and sloped downward toward the edge, there may not be as many Hyups as there are today. John Bell: I don't think that Baum ever states that Oz is a part of our physical reality. He implies it, but he may not have fully understood the mechanics of travel to Oz. Oz as a part of our Universe is not really necessary to his stories. Of course, Oz as part of another Universe is not either, but in the absence of necessity, I'll side with the preponderance of evidence, in and out of Baum. David Godwin: Luckily, we've never had a major problem with posts such that Dave would have to engage in major editing. That's a good thing, too, since I just got involved in a pryamid marketing venture, and I'm sure you'll all want to send..... ########################### Your idea about Oz is much like the "real" Narnia. Tyler Jones ====================================================================== From: christopher99@mail.geocities.com X-Note: Latest version at http://EmuMail.com Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 9:04:00 GMT Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest Hi all. I'm here on foreign exchange in Ankara, Turkey. Does anyone know if The Wizard of Oz will come to theaters here? We get most American movies here (I'm going to There's Something about Mary after school today.) On the Niell Books and Ozoplanes: MOPPeT is that the Wizard really screwed up some sort of magic after making the Ozoplanes because things go downhill after that. The living houses, fire injuns (another racial slur), etc. could be effects of the screw up. The Wiz himself seems changed in Ozoplaning and the Neill books, putting on disguises, pretending he's a crazy old man. By the time Snow took over the pen the Wizard seemed more cautious with his magic. Also, Ozma seems to accumulate quite a lot of magic throughout the series, does anyone have a theory as to why she never uses any of it? Best of Luck Chris Straughn christopher99@geocities.com Harika Oz Büyücüsü [The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (in Turkish)] EMUmail - Web based E-mail for YOUR mail server. http://EmuMail.com ====================================================================== From: shiromal@eureka.lk Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 09:13:29 +1100 Subject: The land of the north does anyone know more about princess Gayalette,than mentioned in the book?What happend to her afterwards?Did she rule the Gilikin country before Locasta? and if Ugu stole magic from the wizard and Glinda and Ozma,why didnt he think of the adepts and the good witch of the north? and speaking of the good witch of the north(this one's for you Dave),does Ruth mention about Locasta's banishment in -Giant horse-?.or does she admit that the good witch of the north was princess Orin all along?(even when Dorothy met her in WOO)?.Baum doesnt mention anything about her afterwards does he?why? ====================================================================== From: shiromal@eureka.lk Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 09:13:28 +1100 Subject: DR.NIKIDIK AND THE POWDER OF LIFE Dave, Is it true that Dr.Nikidik faked his death?and he moved from the gilikin country to the munchkin country,and settled down there as Dr.pipt?becuse it just makes no scense. Baum says that Nikidik fell down a gulf and died.and in-patchwork-here he is again!so is my theory correct,or did Baum just make a mistake?for Ozma herself knows that Dr.pipt is alive,and she even talks about him in the presence of tinman(who told shaggy about his death)....which bring's up the other question. The tinman told shaggy the story of Ozma and Mombi and Tip,but in-patchwork-shaggy claims necer tohave heard the story... and speaking about the -powder of life-.Dyna accidently spills some of it on her bear and says:"i wish you were alive",and her wish is granted.but how could this happen if she has to say the magic words:"weah!Teah!peah!"?. Thankyou, Gehan ====================================================================== From: sahutchi@iupui.edu Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 14:12:54 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 11-30-98 Aaron: The Zoop is a peculiar creature which is primarily simian, but with a strange forehead and four strange fluffy appendages by the shoulders. It does not, however, resemble a winged monkey. I don't think it was always Woodward playing him, but some other animal actor, particularly the scene in which Mewel (with four legs that Woodward had the skill of not going down on his knees to play, unlike Haruo Nakajima as Baragon or Baran; Koetsu Omiya or Hiroshi Sekita as Angirasu, but which Katsumi Tezuka did have, as Angirasu) is chased by the Zoop, as well as the scene in _The Magic Cloak_, in which Nikodemus rouns up all the forest animals to attack the robbers and then the Roly-Rogues. The animals included an elephant, a bull, the Woozy, the Cowardly Lion, the Hungry Tiger, a rabbit, an elephant, a kangaroo, and a crow. Queen Aubrey of the Quadling Elves particularly dislikes the Zoop, which once leaped onto her balcony. She threw it off. She also says that it (and a particular tree) are the reasons for the illusory wall around the Emerald City, and claims they are both so dumb that the could run into it even with their eyes closed. Sean: At the time I read "Much Ado About Kiki Aru," I liked it so much I wanted to consider iot official, but I haven't read it since middle school. I do notice that it is contradictory with _The Glass Cat of Oz_, which I still must admit I haven't read, and I'll reiterate this again, particularly if Melody (though she's not on the digest anymore) thought I was insulting her (never intentionally) that I don't buy you guys' books because I don't haver time to read anything not required for schoool at the present time. When I get to be Stephen's age, I'll have read everything Oz there is to read, and as much of everything else as I can. Mike: _The Wiz_ is similar to Volkov '56, and at least two of the Russian film versions (V. Popov and L. Smironov's stop motion miniseries and Pavel Arsenov's short (63 min) feature), only this time, it was the Wicked Witch, Gingemma, that brought the tornado. Minnesota Dave: Your idea with Peter sounds kind of like Rod Steiger's _Somewhere..._ project. Scott ============================================================================ ==== Scott Andrew Hutchins http://php.iupui.edu/~sahutchi Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Frances: I've led a pretty boring life compared to yours. Freddy [the neighbor]: Mine was pretty boring, too. I've just got a knack for picking out the interesting bits. --David Williamson _Travelling North_ Act Two Scene Three ====================================================================== From: SlvrSlprz@aol.com Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 14:46:45 EST Subject: I'm not on the Ozzy digest; please ship reply to me privately This is Rinny, Chris Dulabone's wife. Chris and I are curious about a story that was published in the 1997 issue of Oziana magazine. We do not know its title, but it was written by Frederick E. Otto. If anyone has access to a copy of it, we would very much appreciate if a synopsis were sent to us, including character names. ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 18:32:19 -0500 From: "J. L. Bell" Subject: MAGIC OF OZ and *pyrzqxgl* Not shying from big questions, David Godwin wrote: <> I think they surely do, even though their creators were constrained by their upbringing from fully showing those qualities. I view the situation as I view America's founding. Jefferson and his colleagues started us off with a "self-evident" truth that "all men are created equal"; yet it's evident most of those men didn't accept that truth in daily life. Lincoln's genius was to transform that claim into a "proposition," something the nation hadn't achieved but was dedicated to proving. (And activists like Matilda Gage made sure we read "men" as "people.") Similarly, I see Baum (and his successors to varying extents, Neill most of all) as setting out principles for Oz as a land where human and animal, metal and meat, young and old, immigrant Americans and blue-blood Munchkins--in short, the "queer" and the common--coexist with tolerance and respect. Self-segregated communities of Loons, cats, trapeze artists, books, and so on challenge that ideal, but often they're living warnings against self-absorption (and sometimes, in Baum's stories, lessons for our heroes about their own limited perspective). In the Emerald City and especially Ozma's palace everyone comes together--or should. When we look back at several Oz books--in fact, all of them, given their illustrations--the creators clearly haven't fulfilled that inclusive ideal. But the ideal can still inspire us, both in life and in creating new stories that move another inch toward proving Baum's proposition. Excellent point that <>. An African-American fan I met at work--she'd discovered Baum's books on her own in a public library--served as a reader for one of my manuscripts. In thanking me for including less melanin-deprived characters, she confirmed that aspect of the series had bothered her. Yet I know I can only go so far toward expanding Ozian society, not because of its limits but because of my own. David Godwin wrote: <> I don't think children yet have a strong enough sense of mortality to grasp what a boon immortality might be. More tempting for most kids reading the books, I suspect, is the autonomy and near invulnerability that children seem to enjoy in the Emerald City; imagining life on one's own is one of the prime impulses for most kids' stories, especially fantasy. As for returning to loved ones, some of Oz's visitors--Dorothy, Peter, perhaps Speedy--seem to feel special responsibility to return to the older, non-parental relatives with whom they live. That's another form of autonomy, being (at least partly) in charge. In contrast, the orphans with no one to look after--Bob, Robin, perhaps Betsy and Bucky--quickly choose to stay. Only after WW2 do children from nuclear families--Twink, Tom, Jam--reach Oz, and they all choose to return to that normalcy. The odd ones are folks like Trot and Button-Bright, who seem to forget their blood relatives entirely. About changes in sports-team names David Hulan wrote: <> I hope so, but I still see news stories about: a) fans resisting such changes (especially at the school level), and b) the Redskins, Braves, Celtics, and other ethnically-named teams, reported with no compunction about terminology. Lots of interesting semantic and societal issues surround such stories. Until we resolve those issues, I can't say our society has made the change. Those issues also surround David Godwin's original examples: should we treat the bare word "redskins" in SHAGGY MAN as we treat the racial caricatures drawn and described in, say, ROYAL BOOK? The former is a word with a history of pejorative use, but by itself isn't necessarily judgmental. The latter is a stereotype of both physiognomy and personality, yet it's not applied to any Americans or their ancestors, only to Silver Islanders. Peter Glassman seems to have focused on offensive illustrations. There's logic in his choice: a child can't escape seeing the drawings, and each is reportedly worth 1,000 "redskin"s. David Hulan wrote: <> You've no doubt read that the Shakespeare character quoted most often in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD is that nattering old counselor Polonius. Modern pols can quote whole sentences from his speech to Laertes and miss their context. Shakespeare's audience would have recognized most of those lines (e.g., "Neither a borrower nor a lender be") as trite chestnuts. Of Mr. Tinker's trip to the Moon, David Hulan wrote: <> Another possible reading is that Mr. Tinker simply *told* folks that he was heading to the Moon. The King of Ev was already mad, bad, and dangerous to know--beating his servants, about to sell his family into slavery. Tinker's partner had just drowned under mysterious circumstances. Seems like a wise time to declare you're going to the Moon--to gather stars for the king's crown, natch--and then skip out to Ix and open a VCR repair shop. Tik-Tok would repeat whatever story Tinker input into his memory--GIGO. I had noted, David, that you don't hold with the Oz reality being "accessible only by magic." It seems possible that no two fans have precisely the same idea about where/how Oz might be found. Sean Duffley wrote of his 1986 OZIANA story "Much Ado About Kiki Aru": <> Thanks for the reference, Sean, self-promoting or not. I neglected this OZIANA twelve years ago, so you gave me a reason to catch up a step. Like you, I suspect the Oblivious Kiki would retain his "somewhat sulky manner." Rather than send him back to Mount Munch, though, I've imagined him still living in the Emerald City, where he finally finds excitement enough to keep him only a little grumbly. He starts living as an ordinary Ozian, letting himself grow to manhood, starting a family. Eventually, I imagine, Ruggedo might achieve his goal of seizing control of the capital. He calls the young man to the palace and demands he become chamberlain. Kiki, under whatever name he's assumed, scowls and insists he's never met Ruggedo before. The Nome fumes: "Of course we've met! Don't try to fool me--the Water of Oblivion lasts only a few years! If you don't become my chamberlain, I'll--" And Kiki whispers *pyrzqxgl* and is off on the wings of a dove. I'm sure many other folks have wondered why, if *pyrzqxgl* is so powerful, the Wizard doesn't use it in later Oz books. Sean has one imaginative explanation. Another is that it's limited in important ways that MAGIC doesn't reveal to us. We see *pyrzqxgl* working only on nearby people. Does it transform people only into other living or once-living things, like nuts (Kiki threatens to turn Ruggedo into a stone [39], but never does so)? And how long do *pyrzqxgl* transformations last (at least a week or so, in the case of that nutty Ruggedo)? Speaking of *pyrzqxgl*, the attitude toward transformation shown in MAGIC seems to differ from that in TIN WOODMAN. After Mrs. Yoop's enchantments, we read seemingly endless complaints about how awful it is being a straw bear, a tin owl, and so on. In this book unexpected transformations are bewildering [142], but we read fewer complaints. Dorothy prefers being herself, not a lamb, but doesn't bleat about it [148]. Bru would prefer to stay a bear, but Loo enjoys being a man [94-7]. Though the forest wolf says, "I'm thankful I escaped with my own shape," he equates the Li-Mon-Eag's changing others with "making them all his slaves" [152]. Other animals actually "wanted to be transformed" [132]. One special case is Ruggedo, who's "dreadfully ashamed" of being turned into a goose who "might lay an egg!" [158] That implies he's a gender other than gander--quite a change. (As supporting evidence for that deduction, the Nome wasn't so upset about being another bird--an eagle [50].) Furthermore, in TIN WOODMAN the canary and the tin owl discovered their shapes naturally brought them knowledge of some bird language. As a monkey Woot instinctively flees through the forest from the jaguar. In contrast, Kiki deems his cry as a hawk to be "the funny sound this sort of bird makes" [25]. He doesn't know what hawks eat, and can't grasp sleeping the way hawks do [28]. Later we read of "the voice of Kiki, coming from the eagle" [50]. In sum, the *pyrzqxgl* spell doesn't seem to go as deep as Mrs. Yoop's yookoohoo magic; it changes the physical form of a person, but doesn't change that person's mind at all. Nor does Baum emphasize *pyrzqxgl* as a terrifying force that saps people of their identity. From the time Bini Aru discovers the word [19], it's presented as a tool, like the Magic Belt, no better or worse than the use to which it's put. David Hulan described one of the starting-points for his GLASS CAT OF OZ as <>. It thus seems fair to read his book as one learned interpretation of how that magic word works. [I'll avoid SPOILERS about plot points beyond the first chapters, for folks who haven't read this 1995 title yet.] Typical of David's smart approach to the series--smarter often than the characters within it--he starts by deducing that *pyrzqxgl* is actually disguised: "There is such a word, but it doesn't resemble *Pyrzqxgl*. If the author knew it at all, he deliberately misled his readers" [GC, 13]. In contrast, Baum solemnly warns us, " It might be well,...in reading this story aloud, to be careful not to pronounce *Pyrzqxgl* the proper way, and thus avoid all danger of the secret being able to work mischief" [20]. Early in GLASS CAT David's protagonists use *pyrzqxgl* to instantly change their clothes [GC, 16]. On rereading MAGIC, I see it indeed establishes the word can provide clothing: Kiki creates a giant soldier "dressed in a uniform and with a sharp sword" [164]. Nevertheless, David's scene originally got my knickers in a twist. That's because Kiki's spell was part of changing a monkey into a giant, while the children in GLASS CAT remain as they are *except* for their clothing. Furthermore, Baum implicitly tells us clothing is integral to a human: when Kiki is restored to "his natural form," he appears fully dressed as a Munchkin [259]. To Baum, born and raised a Victorian, natural and naked are incompatible. To Hulan, modern thinker that he is, a child can forget to put on underwear. On comparing the Wizard to Hitler, Dave Hardenbrook wrote: <> I began to suspect that after I started reading WICKED three days ago. Recommendations from you and others finally cued me to take this book off my shelf. Dave Hardenbrook wrote: <> Wait until January, Dave, when the new ZOOM debuts on PBS. [For us '70s kids, WGBH has issued a 30-minute video with clips from the original ZOOM and a small where-are-they-now paperback. I bought mine by searching the wgbh.org site for an 800 order number and asking the operator about this ~$35 set.] J. L. Bell JnoLBell@compuserve.com ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 02:06:35 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 11-30-98 J.L.: >David Hulan wrote: ><the extraordinary claim would be that a land like Oz could exist as part of >our physical universe.>> > >An extraordinary claim that certainly is, but it's the central claim made >by Baum. And, to get back to what I said a few Digests back, that's begging the question. Baum never said explicitly, "Oz is part of our physical universe." And a great many things happen in Baum's Oz books that are completely inconsistent with Oz being a part of our physical universe; I've cited some of them already, but could undoubtedly come up with more if I took more time on it. In the absence of an explicit statement from Baum that Oz is in our physical universe, I believe that we must consider the evidence of the books from both possible points of view, without prejudice. Yes, Oz is in some circumstances accessible from our physical universe without magical intervention; the Wizard on his first trips in and out, Dorothy on her first two trips in, Betsy on her trip in, Button-Bright on his first trip in, and maybe Trot and Cap'n Bill on their trip in, all did it. Going to the other Baum books tied in with Oz, John Dough and Dot and Tot made it in and the latter two back out (though their exit was probably facilitated by magic, since real rivers don't flow in circles.) No one else ever seems to have. These occurrences are therefore very rare, which is also inconsistent with Oz lying somewhere within our physical universe. >If we look outside his books for additional proof that Oz exists, >we indeed won't find it, But we're not talking about whether or not it exists, but whether or not it's accessible by some normal means - as are, say, New Zealand or Ceylon, or even Ellesmere Island. If Oz is not accessible by such means, and never has been, then saying it's nevertheless part of our physical universe is a distinction without a difference, and I'm willing to accept that. It's fully consistent with my opinion that when the Wizard rose to a certain altitude over Oz he suddenly found himself over the USA instead, for instance. I find this easier to understand when I call it a dimensional shift or something of the sort than an instantaneous spatial transition halfway around the globe from a place you can't get to intentionally except by magic, but if you prefer the latter then be my guest. >Other new characters Thompson brought to the >palace seem to stick around for only a title or two. She was more >successful at creating characters who lived elsewhere: Kabumpo, Jinnicky, >Captain Salt. True enough. Aside from the parade of characters in _Wishing Horse_, we never see most of Thompson's additions to the EC again, though her "external" characters - Peter, Speedy, Randy, Ato, and Roger in addition to the ones you mention - do appear in more than one book. The only exceptions I can think of are Sir Hokus, in most of the books that _Royal Book_ and _Yellow Knight_ bookend, and Camy in the first and last (though he's a relatively minor character in both). >Nifty suggestion, Ruth Berman, about the Glass Cat's personality >restoration (and how Eureka got <> as well). I like the part about the Glass Cat's personality restoration, but the Shaggy Man refers to Eureka as a Pink Kitten in PG when he first tells Bungle about her, so I don't think Eureka's pinkness can be placed after the restoration of Bungle's brain color. >["Mommy, >the Nome King's wandering around up here, and now he's really mad!" "Calm >down, dear. Let me tell you about vibrational planes."] I remember reading an SF story - I think by Bradbury, maybe in _The Illustrated Man_ - where some kids were dealing with an interdimensional invader and called him "Ruggedo" for very much that sort of reason. It was indeed odd that Baum transitioned from "it" to "she" as the pronoun for the Glass Cat in the middle of _Magic_; I've noticed that as well. In PG the cat was always "she"; I forget what the pronoun was in _Glinda_, which is the only other book where she had a speaking part. David G.: >I don't for a minute suggest bowdlerizing or >censoring the books, but it shouldn't be a mystery as to why the >demographics of Oz fans is (evidently) predominantly Caucasian, as I assume >it is. I've seen a fair number of Asian-Americans at Winkies, and there was one African-American family at Munchkins last year, but at least as regards Oz fans who are enthusiastic enough to come to the conventions, you're pretty much right. Speaking of which, I hope you'll consider coming to the Ozmopolitan next June. It's not too far for you (southern Wisconsin) and I'm sure you'd enjoy it. >Another thing about some of the Oz books that bothers me somewhat is that >all these numerous kids who end up there in one way or another have no >difficulty at all in choosing to be with their loved ones back in the >Outside World as opposed to staying in Oz and living forever. It always bothered me, too. I had a reasonably happy home life as a child - not idyllic, but pretty good - and I certainly loved my mother and brother and some of my other relatives, but if I'd been given the choice of staying in Oz (had I ever gotten there in the first place) I don't think I'd have had to think too hard about it. I'd certainly want to get the word back to my relatives if I could, and bringing them to Oz as well would have been even better, but even when I was a kid I could easily rate living forever higher than any family ties. Now it would be more painful - I love my wife more than I ever loved anyone back then - but at this point I know that I'll be fortunate to have another 20 years with her, and extremly fortunate to have much more; that's a modest amount of time to give up for living forever. Ruth: >David Hulan: You're right that it would be odd to accept destruction as >preferable to the pain of getting pulled up by the roots, but probably >it's meant to be assumed that Trot and Cap'n Bill are thinking in terms >of "Surely you can find a less painful treatment?" That would be my interpretation of their initial reactions, certainly, but it wouldn't explain their farewells on the last page of chapter 18, where Cap'n Bill says, "I guess, friends, it's all up with us this time," and Trot, after a somewhat lachrymose speech, ends it with, "...I hope, Dorothy, that none of you in the Emerald City will forget me - or dear ol' Cap'n Bill." To me, this clearly says that they've decided that it's better to be destroyed than to have the roots cut off; otherwise they'd be saying, "Are you _sure_ that cutting off the roots is the only way you could save us?" Dave: >Come to think of it, why *doesn't* BoW do an edition of _Wishing Horse_? >It's PD... I'm speculating, and I'm sure Peter will correct me if I'm wrong, but...all the other late PD books (or ones where BoW is publishing editions authorized by the copyright holders, as in the case of the Neill books and MGR) were originally published in black and white only. This is considerably less expensive than publishing editions with color plates. Since _Wishing Horse_ was originally published with color plates, it would have been more costly, and that would have been considerably more of a financial gamble for BoW than publishing the other late books was. The first book with color plates that BoW published on its own (as opposed to co-publishing with Morrow) was, I believe, _Royal Book_. I know that was about the time that Morrow started participating in the distribution of ECP and BoW books, even if they didn't co-publish them, which improved the prospects of sales considerably. I wouldn't be surprised to see a BoW edition of _Wishing Horse_ appear in the near future, actually, especially since the remaining Thompson books aren't going to go PD for another 20 years now. But in any case, I'm reasonably sure it was an economic decision and will continue to be. >My theory has Oz's parallel-Earth having *three* moons -- Luna (same as >our Earth), Planetty's world, and the moon Mr. Tinker visited. Doesn't sound unreasonable, although I don't know of any evidence for it in the FF. David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 3 Dec 98 09:36:42 CST From: "Ruth Berman" Subject: ozzy digest J.L. Bell: Documenting that racism was both pervasive and severe in the US c. 1938 seems an unozzy sort of activity, but since the context is to show that the kinds of racism in Thompson's (and Baum's) Oz books were no worse than average (if anything, less bad than average), I'll throw in as a nation-wide example the color bar in professional baseball, firmly in place until 1947 (Jackie Robinson). David Godwin: It may not be especially odd to suppose that children could easily decide to leave Oz and immortality in favor of home and family. Even being grownup (and dying all the more so) seems so far away, that it's all but eternity anyway. Giving up loved ones, in contrast, would be painful right away. As to whether a grown-up Peter or Zeb would be regretting the choice at the approach of death well, they might, but if they had found friends and got married and had children in the mortal world, they might well not have much in the way of regrets over coming home. Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 03 Dec 98 10:27:42 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things CONVENTION 2000: Believe me, Jane, no one would like to present something at the centennial more than I, whether it's "Is Romance Ozzy?" or "A Salute to Jellia Jamb"; but for me it's a matter of "How the hippikaloric am I going to scrape up the $$$ to get up there???" SCANDALS IN OZ: David G. wrote: >After all, what kind of a guy >would send a little girl into almost certain death just to get her out of >his hair - er, get her to quit bothering him? I stand by my theory that the Wizard thought that on hearing his request to kill the witch, Dorothy &c. would just give up. He never believed they'd actually attempt it and risk their lives. His big crime here is severely underestimating human will. >Then there's the shady >business in _Land_, which LFB and then RPT ended up having to explain away >and reinterpret. Now all of a sudden in DotWiz, here he is Mr. Nice Guy. >There are depths to this man's personality that have never been fully >explored, I tell you! Have you ever read _Oz and the Three Witches_? In spite of the title, it's really about the Wizard and his motivations regarding "Ozmagate". >Ozma no doubt knew that the tunnel would not >_stay_ filled, but neglected to publicize the fact for obvious reasons. The question is, is this impeachable or should the Fairy-Congress merely censure her? :) TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING: Chris wrote: >Also, Ozma seems to accumulate quite a lot of magic throughout the series, >does anyone have a theory as to why she never uses any of it? I asked Ozma, and she says that if she solved every problem in Oz with "a whispered command to the Magic Belt", everyone would then be dependant on her and would not learn to think for themselves...Also, she recognizes that if she solved every problem in Oz in two seconds, then the Oz authors would be out of business. LOCASTA: Gehan wrote: >and if Ugu stole magic from the wizard and Glinda and Ozma,why didnt he >think of the adepts and the good witch of the north? He probably never heard of the Adepts, and if he did he may have known they were fish at that time and so had no power to resist him. And as for the GWN, perhaps he regarded Tattypoo as harmless (I speculate that her powers were far less than Locasta's). >and speaking of the good witch of the north(this one's for you Dave),does >Ruth mention about Locasta's banishment in -Giant horse-?.or does she admit >that the good witch of the north was princess Orin all along? The banishment was unknown until I became an Oz Historian...As far as the Oz Canon is concerned, Tattypoo is the one and only Good Witch of the North. Only in my Oz sub-universe does she make a comeback as Locasta. -- Dave ====================================================================== -- Dave **************************************************************************** Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://people.delphi.com/DaveH47/ "What is Reality anyway...? Nothin' but a collective *hunch*!" -- Lily Tomlin ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 4 - 8, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== From: sahutchi@iupui.edu Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 21:26:46 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-03-98 Chris: Have you seen _Aysecik ve Sihirli Cuceler Ruyalar Ulkesinde_ [please excuse--this program can only type in standard ASCII]--one of the most accurate film versions, despite the lack of credit for Baum. Unfortunately, my tape is missing about 12 minutes. J.L.: In _Oz Squad_, Smith and Tinker faked their deaths and are discovered playing a chess game. They are confronted about a new plot device: the internal clockwork morality spring. Scott ============================================== Scott Andrew Hutchins http://php.iupui.edu/~sahutchi Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More! ------------------------------------------------------------ Frances: I've led a pretty boring life compared to yours. Freddy [the neighbor]: Mine was pretty boring, too. I've just got a knack for picking out the interesting bits. --David Williamson _Travelling North_ Act Two Scene Three ====================================================================== From: "Jeremy Steadman" Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 10:55:50 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-03-98 Reform of a Wizard: Ah, the wonders of Oz cure all ills! Why Ozma doesn't use much magic: Commonsense. Self-restraint. Tact. (I know, I know: who exercises those any more? Well, Ozma would! Dr. N/Dr, P: When he fell down the gulf, he didn't really die, perhaps, and some of his old creations found him and told him he was their creator? Just an idea. New arrival: Hi, Rinny! Are you and Chris getting back on the Digest? (this is in reference to her posting asking for the Ozania story) Kids don't understand immortality: Ah, but the adutls who read Oz books do . . . Until another day, Jeremy Steadman, Royal Historian of Oz kivel99@planetall.com http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dimension/9619 ICQ# 19222665, AOL Inst Mssgr name kiex or kiex2 "A good example of a parasite? Hmmm, let me think... How about the Eiffel tower?" ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 4 Dec 98 11:23:01 CST From: "Ruth Berman" Subject: ozzy digest Lisa M. Mastroberte: You might want to consider replacing your artless Windmill edition of "Dorothy/Wizard" sometime with the Books of Wonder reprint. It includes the color plates as well as all the b&w art. Gehan Shiromal: Gayelette doesn't get mentioned again after "Wizard." It's possible that Baum meant readers to assume that she was the same person as the Good Witch of the North (the name Locasta never appears in an Oz book, but comes from the 1902 stageplay of the "Wizard"). Or perhaps he expected readers to assume that flying monkeys live much longer than humans (Baum didn't decide on deathlessness in Oz until later), and Gayelette had died. It's also possible that Gayelette's "north" country is the northern part of the Winkie country, rather than a Gillikin territory, and perhaps the Wicked Witch destroyed her or took away her powers -- or perhaps Gayelette went into hiding and is still around somewhere. Baum mentions the Good Witch in "Land" and "Dorothy/Wizard," and mentions her as marching in the birthday parade in "Road." After that, there's no mention until Thompson's "Giant Horse." There is no consensus on whether Dr. Nikidik/Dr. Pipt is one magician with two names (sequentially, changing one for the other, or maybe both together as a full name of Nikidik Pipt) or two one-named magicians, and whether the Powder of Life mentioned in various contexts is the work of one magician (possibly with variations in the recipe over time producing variations in how it worked) or the work of different magicians using somewhat different recipes. It's been pointed out that any magician using a recipe that demanded a production method like Dr. Pipt's would presumably wind up being a Crooked Magician. Tyler Jones: Clever censorship bit -- enjoyed. J.L. Bell: Ruggedo's shame at being turned into a goose who might lay eggs may have more to do with Nomes' fear of eggs than with fear of losing his own sex. // Amusing adaptation of phrase in calling the King of Ev "mad, bad, and dangerous to know." David Hulan: You're right, it does sound as if Trot and Cap'n Bill are resigned to death rather than going through the pain of being pulled up by the roots. Maybe they forget about the radical alternative at that point in the subconscious hope that more emotional pressure on the Wizard will stimulate him to a less painful solution. Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 12:50:55 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Oz Return to the Outside World: At least two of RPT's protagonists, Peter (twice) and David Perry in _Enchanted Island_, wish to go back home from Oz perhaps not so much because of loved ones left behind as because they are prominent figures on amateur sports teams and "can't let the guys down." It's almost like they're saying, "What's immortality and living in Ozma's palace compared to next Thursday's game?" On the surface, this seems pretty silly. But I think the message here is that they really don't have a choice. If they were the sort of people who would betray the trust of fellowship (e.g., by not showing up for the Big Game), then they would not be qualified to live in Oz. Brother/sisterhood and the bonds of fellowship used to be a lot more important to people than they are now (which may explain why the Freemasons are becoming extinct), and they certainly seem important in the EC. The Wizard: In reply to my comment that the Wizard was morally culpable to send Dorothy to her probable death in confronting the WWW, Dave Hardenbrook wrote: >I stand by my theory that the Wizard thought that on hearing his >request to kill the witch, Dorothy &c. would just give up. He never >believed they'd actually attempt it and risk their lives. OTOH, giving him the benefit of the doubt as to his intentions, wasn't it a bit callous? Here's this six-year-old (?) kid wanting to get home and missing her beloved aunt and uncle, she's invested all her hopes in the Wizard, and now he crushes her entirely by telling her, in effect, "Ah, go play on the freeway, whippersnapper." Doesn't he consider what it will do to his reputation to have this little kid wandering around whining and crying because "Oz wouldn't send me home"? Except that Dorothy, being Dorothy, doesn't crush so easily. But he could have referred her to Glinda in the first place, thus passing the buck and getting rid of Dorothy & friends at least for a while, if not permanently (assuming that Glinda succeeded). Was he really that chary about admitting that his power had limitations? As for Glinda, assuming that she had the GBR at this period (and _Land_ seems to imply that she did), she must have known all along that Oscar was a humbug, yet she kept quiet about it (perhaps to help keep the wicked witches in line). She likewise must have known all along that Dorothy could get home anytime she wanted - yet she let the kid risk her life against the WWW, the fighting trees, the Hammerheads, etc. What was she thinking of? Was she trying to _mold character_ or something? And now these two, Glinda and the Wizard, are two of the only three people in Oz allowed to practice magic! Perhaps this has all already been dealt with by somebody (as in _Oz and the Three Witches_, which I haven't read). Otherwise, perhaps somebody could write _Ken Starr in Oz_. Startling Revelations: Until I read RPT's _Enchanted Island_ recently, I had assumed that the Startling Revelation was a phenomenon pecular to the books written by JRN. An SR, or "Neillism," can be defined as something introduced rather late in the series but which in the normal course of events we would have known about all along. An example would be that Jack Pumpkinhead was enslaved by Mombi for seven years (or thought he had been). Another would be that all the rivers in Oz had been rolled up. Imagine my surprise when reading the RPT book to find thatŠ *****SPOILER**** Nick Chopper's castle is adjacent to the "Tin Canyon," and apparently the canyon must be crossed to get from his castle to the EC, that citizens of Oz normally carry a "jumping stick," and that Nick has pockets! *****END SPOILER**** Since all the other RPT Oz books are more or less free of this sort of thing, I can only explain it by saying that _Enchanted Island_ was not originally written as an Oz book. - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 14:42:04 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Ozzy Feeling Dave H: I have only now discovered the controvery about _That Ozzy Feeling_ and have read your defense of the book on your web page. Of course, I have to offer my two cents worth. I don't know if this particular wrinkle has been explored, but I don't see any reference to it in your defense. Personally, my first reaction to the concept of Ozma getting married was to think of the folklore that a fairy who marries a mortal becomes mortal also - but it ain't necessarily so. As you say, this lore is not confirmed anywhere in the FF, although it is a tradition of long standing as opposed to a modern invention. Your defense seems more or less to say that Gilbert and Sullivan felt free to ignore this tradition, so you do too. However, upon reflection, I would like to offer a more substantial defense that does not rely on this "is too" "is not" "is too" argument. In the literature, the fairy becomes mortal only if she (it's always a she in these tales) marries the man in a Christian church and becomes at least a nominal Christian herself. The unstated theory seems to be that, if she accepts Christ and the sacrifice of Christ, then she has to accept mortality as part of the deal; otherwise the Crucifixion was for nothing. However, if the mortal man enters fairyland and the wedding takes place there (presumably according to pagan rites), then, so far from the fairy becoming mortal, the man becomes immortal - as is indeed the case in Oz, with or without marriage. Don't you feel that, regardless of the reasoning put forward, many of the objections to a love interest for Ozma arise from simple jealousy, the same unreasonable and crazy phenonenon as when young fans suffer heartache (and hatred of the Other person) when a popular movie star or rock star gets married? - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 17:39:10 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Anthony Donajkowski Subject: oz news Munchkin recreates role in 'Wizard of Oz' LANCASTER, N.Y. (AP) - Margaret Pelligrini, one of the original munchkins in "The Wizard of Oz," is on the yellow brick road again, recreating her role for a stage production of the 60-year-old classic film. "I'm going back to Munchkinland. That's going to be real exciting to play the part I played 60 years ago. Oh, it's going to be wonderful," the 75-year-old said Thursday before a rehearsal at the Lancaster Opera House. She will perform in more than a week of shows beginning Firday. Though she has revived the role countless times over the years, the energetic actress took nothing for granted for this production, double checking her cues with director Thomas Kazmierczak and admitting to a few jitters. ### ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 00:17:59 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Anthony Donajkowski Subject: oz on the bbc welll bbc1 is showing the oz cartoon now 7:40am The Wizard of Oz The Lion that Squeaked Animated magic from the land of Oz. The tricky Hyena, aided by the Wicked Witch, captures the Lion's roar ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 14:25:41 -0500 From: "J. L. Bell" Subject: MAGIC OF OZ and reality MAGIC comments first this time. Thinking back to Ruth Berman's and David Hulan's comments about the Lonesome Duck, I was struck by how little Baum anthropomorphizes it [and I believe Baum does refer to the Duck consistently as "it"]. That increases its isolation from the book's heroines and readers. Baum's usual magic-working animals--King Dox, the fairy beavers, the Lavender Bear, and so on--wear at least some clothing, walk upright, and carry tools. Often their magic involves wands and human speech. The Lonesome Duck, in contrast, grows toadstools by "waddling" and "quacky muttering" [180-1]. It carried the diamonds for its palace "in my bill" [204]. It walks like a duck, it talks like a duck--it's a duck. A few weeks ago we were discussing what sort of creatures the island of the Magic Flower captured. Because the Lonesome Duck wasn't rooted there, and because Trot and Cap'n Bill quickly flew away as bees, David Hulan theorized that the Isle caught mammals but not birds and insects. During this reading I therefore kept an eye out for clues on that one way or the other. Unfortunately, MAGIC's statements about the Isle are shifty. To start with, the Glass Cat first describes it "in the north of the Munchkin Country" [62], but she leads Trot and Cap'n into Gillikin land [102]. The Cowardly Lion knows stories "about the Isle and how the Magic Flower was placed there to entrap strangers--men or beasts. . . . if any living thing ventures upon the Magic Isle,...that man or beast takes root in the soil" [198-9]. Cap'n Bill decides, "it's only flesh that gets caught" on the island [118]; "It's only a thing made of meat--like man an' beasts--that the magic can hold an' root to the ground" [222]. Thus, on the one hand we have "any living thing" and all "flesh," but on the other the repeated phrase "man and beasts." Does that term "beasts" exclude birds and insects? The Lonesome Duck complains, "Beasts and men are terribly clumsy" [202], but it feels just as sour about fellow birds as about mammals. Ruggedo says, "Let us mix the shapes of several beasts," and includes eagles among those [84-5]. Yet there are no birds among the "beasts" assembled in the Forest of Gugu [122]. Just as Baum uses "people" elastically in this book, the definition of "beasts" seems fuzzy. On top of that ambiguity, the Lion is passing on a legend and Cap'n Bill is working with limited evidence--neither authoritative statements. We do see the Lonesome Duck walk around the Isle with no problem. But we also know that bird uses magical powers "for my own needs" [180]. Therefore, I don't think its freedom on the island necessarily extends to other birds. In the end, however, I came away thinking that the birds/mammals issue isn't the key to Trot and Cap'n Bill's escape. Nor does their release involve a theory I put forward before--that *pyrzqxgl* changes people around their center of mass or their brains, so the bees started a coupla feet off the island. Rather, the crucial variable is how long one touches the Isle. At first Trot "ran up the bank"; only when the Flower's beauty makes her stand still does she take root [113]. The Wizard, wise in the ways of magic, quickly assumes that time matters: he suggests his axe "will chop those roots from your feet and you can run to the raft before they grow again" [214]. Thus, when the Wizard uses *pyrzqxgl* to transform Trot and Cap'n Bill (whose bodies now include their roots), "up from the place where they had been flew two bumble-bees" [219]. Given shapes with no roots and the ability to fly, they quickly stopped touching the Isle, and were thus free. Jane wrote: <> The "Life in the Land of Oz" panel struck me as the toughest to assemble. All the other areas have more solid moorings for discussion: they're rooted in either facts or, in the case of literary criticism, generally accepted methods. "Life in the Land of Oz" has to run a gauntlet between old news (statements from the books, which most folks have read) and pet theories (which defy conclusive study). Making that discussion interesting and authoritative might demand the sort of exhaustive analysis of canonical details that Melody Grandy did in her study of Ozma's palace and grounds. Gehan wrote: <> Locasta, as Dave Hardenbrook has said, is largely his creation; in the Baum/Thompson canon, the Good Witch of the North is Tattypoo, and she never really ruled the Gillikin Country the way the three other witches in WIZARD controlled their territories. Gayelette never reappears after WIZARD in the series, though she's a character in some non-canonical Oz books--most prominently, Roger S. Baum's stiff DOROTHY IN OZ. We know little about her: WIZARD doesn't tell us the extent of her realm, and we don't know if she and Quelala are still alive when Dorothy arrives in Oz. I imagine, based on her headstrong personality and her choice of a ruby castle in the Gillikin Country, that Gayelette's still living there with her chosen husband and still a sorceress, quietly defying Gillikin customs and Ozma's laws. Tyler Jones wrote: <> And David Hulan wrote: <> As I recall, Baum never said explicitly that Dorothy has two ears. But in the absence of a statement otherwise, readers should assume she does. Similarly, Baum would have said that Oz isn't part of our physical universe if he'd wanted his young audience to make a leap beyond the world where he starts his stories. As I've pointed out before, a crucial part of Baum's inspiration was that his Oz stories don't take place "once upon a time" in the Old World or in a dream, as most earlier fairy tales did; they tell readers that Oz is part of the same world as electric lights and mortgages and radios and Philadelphia. That quality *is* "necessary to his stories"--not to their events, but to their literary originality and appeal. The crucial yardstick of what Baum meant to convey is verisimilitude for his original audience: turn-of-the-century children. They knew--indeed, we still know--that big storms do move small houses. That people go up in balloons and come down elsewhere. That shipwrecks leave people on foreign shores. And though we now know it's impossible for large objects to be swallowed by earthquake fissures and funnel-like whirlpools, those were considered natural phenomena in the early 1900s. By choosing such events as the route to his fairyland, in place of dreams and fairy visitations, Baum let his readers believe such journeys could happen within the world they knew. Some of Baum's representations are indeed "inconsistent with...our physical universe" as we now understand it. But only if we believe our understanding is complete does an extra-physical shift become necessary. Baum never said storms or earthquakes of the types that bring his heroines to Oz are common phenomena--they're indeed "very rare." But over and over he tells us there are things in our world we don't know about and can't see, that we have much more to discover. To conclude that because we haven't located Oz on the globe, even with satellite mapping, it must therefore not be on this Earth is to disregard that part of Baum's message. Stories earn their readers' suspension of disbelief through verisimilitude and entertainment. To break off that suspension, study the details, and demand more scientific consistency not only distorts the relationship through which authors and readers create a reality; it also creates demands that no fiction can withstand. Not Conan Doyle (there was no 21B Baker Street in London), not Fitzgerald (the army has no record of a Jay Gatsby), not the most autobiographical novelist on the planet. What happens when we apply to other books the same standards that would force Oz into another dimension? Six years before WIZARD appeared, Mark Twain wrote a story about a round-the-world balloon voyage: TOM SAWYER ABROAD. In that novel Tom, Huck, and Jim never enter a fairyland, but they do fly across the eastern U.S., the Atlantic, Africa, and beyond. If the Wizard's unprecedented balloon flights mean readers should infer he left our dimension, then by the same logic Twain was saying TOM SAWYER ABROAD didn't take place on our globe. And, since that book's a sequel to HUCK FINN, we'd have to further conclude that a top contender for the Great American Novel was never meant to be read as taking place in America. Robin Olderman wrote: <> I think Thompson's most successful characters are those who embody some irreconcilable contradiction that outlasts the conclusion of their books. Kabumpo isn't merely a curmudgeon, like Grumpy; he's curmudgeonly because his sense of righteousness keeps propelling him into situations that injure his equally elephantine sense of dignity. Jinnicky's a powerful wizard with the moods of a four-year-old. Samuel Salt is a naturalist who comes across as a buccaneer. And Sir Hokus was a knight who'd outlived his time; once he returned to Corumbia and youthful fitness, alas, he no longer faced that dilemma and faded from interest. Sometimes Thompson's happy endings wash out interesting contradictions in characters: Peg Amy, Notta Bit More, the Humpy/Pastoria pairing. Once these folks' needs are satisfied, they're no longer compelling; as Tolstoy argued, "All happy families are alike." (Of course, Thompson created plenty of other folks who were never rounded enough to hold our interest beyond the immediate crisis: Ozwald, Belfaygor, Percy Vere.) One character Thompson left in Ozma's palace whom I think has unexplored potential for fun is Benny, the Public Benefactor. On the one hand we see his granite gravitas, his sense that he should be doing something important and helpful; on the other, he's as ignorant as a newborn. And in thinking of her successful recurring characters, I realized, we've left out Pigasus. David Godwin wrote: <> The VW Beetle was conceived in 1933 at a meeting between Hitler and auto designer Ferdinand Porsche. By 1938 the dictator laid the cornerstone for an assembly plant designed as the world's largest. Versions of the civilian VW were used in North Africa and on the Russian front. So, yes, the original VW (called the "KdF" for the Nazi slogan "Strength through joy") was known when Neill wrote SCALAWAGONS. Neill wouldn't have needed overseas inspiration for his vehicles, however. Henry Ford had proclaimed the same goal of cars for the common man decades earlier; indeed, Ford was one of Porsche's heroes. A U of Chicago professor once coined the satirical term "ad Hitlerem" for the form of argument that says, "Hitler did it, so it must be bad." "It" could be gun control or gun training for kids, cheap cars or internment camps. Painting mediocre pictures didn't make Churchill into Hitler; erecting grandiose buildings doesn't do the same for the Wizard. But what about Ozma expelling gypsies from her country (in OJO)? Ruth Berman wrote: <> Yes, it's an un-Ozzy task and, I'd have thought, an unnecessary one. But we can never count out the selective failings of Richard Bauman's memory. He's desperate to believe he lived through a 1938 when there was no racial discrimination in, as you point out, professional sports. Or the US armed services. Or Hollywood movies. Or immigration law. Or laws governing marriage. Because discrimination in 1938 is undeniable, I didn't bother listing those examples and others. Alas, when general statements trouble Mr. Bauman, he yells that they contain no evidence. When evidence arrives to gnaw at him, he yells that it doesn't apply. And when folks prove he's wrong, he just yells, or goes underground for a couple of digests. [He never admits--have you noticed?--the tiniest mistake, no matter how obvious or inconsequential.] In an earlier digest I invited Mr. Bauman to offer any facts at all to refute my statement about 1938. He sent me an e-mail which said, in toto: <> So again he's ducked out of backing up his beliefs, with his usual lack of evidence, accuracy, and courtesy. J. L. Bell JnoLBell@compuserve.com ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 18:04:34 -0800 From: Steve Teller Subject: Oz The current issue of MAD Magazine (December 1998, Number 376) contains a four page article "THE WIZARD OF OZ in a Chat Room." MAD issues with OZ articles have a tendency to become collectors' pieces, so I recommend anyone interested go to the store and get a copy (or two, one to read and one to keep in Mint condition to sell in fifty years). Steve T. ====================================================================== From: Ozisus@aol.com Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 22:15:36 EST "W. R. Wright" Subject: Fwd: EMERGENCY - New OZ Webcast Site -------------------------- Date: Sat, 05 Dec 98 17:45:52 PST From: Scott Essman Subject: EMERGENCY - New OZ Webcast Site wizardoz@westol.com, dgomes2478@aol.com EMERGENCY - Update! I have been having trouble getting onto STEINONLINE (my AOL browser is telling me that the address has been moved), SO... Please direct your readers and OZ enthusiasts to www.broadcast.com instead. Again, this is for Sat, Dec 12 at 10AM Pacific Time. Sorry about the confusion! See (hear) you at the TRIBUTE TO THE WIZARD OF OZ with Eliot Stein as host! Call in your questions as you'd like! --- Scott Essman (sessman@ibm.mtsac.edu) ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 22:23:01 -0500 From: Jill Moore Subject: Oz Shopping Hi and Merry Christmas! If you're looking for that perfect Oz gift for someone, visit my favorite Oz place, www.anniems.com where you can find anything Ozzy that you're looking for, and maybe even something you're not looking for! I'm looking forward to receiving a shipment of the Ozware Character Mugs, and they are so beautiful and well made! And the price couldn't be beat! Ann is a very nice lady to work with, and she accepts charge cards, so check it out and have fun!!! Also, she has a lot of items that are not on her website so if you don't see something you want be sure and ask! Happy Oz Shopping and Happy Holidays to all!!! Your friend in Oz always ~~~ Jill ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 23:18:24 -0500 From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz Chris Straughn: This topic has been discussed before on the Digest, and here it is again. :-) Yes, The Ozzites have ammased quit a bit of magical firepower over the years. Why does most of it sit unused? Looking at Oz-as-Literature and Oz-as-history, I can think of three reasons. 1. If all of Ozma's magical power was used to it's full extent, most of the stories would be over with before they begin. This is a catch-22 for critics like me. I moan about how much magic they have, yet when they don't use it, I get upset that they're not being rational. Nevertheless, the story needs to be fun and (somewhat) suspenseful, since we all know they'll win out in the end, but we want to read an exciting story about it, not have Ozma fly in with her magic belt and solve all problems in an instant (although this happens quite often). 2. By the time that Ozma's powers are almost infinite, there are quite a few characters in the Ozzy sacred circle, and there are a number of locales that they are always travelling back and forth from. If Dorothy were to have an adventure and get stuck, it may be nearly a week before Ozma notices that she's not there. Hence, lots of time for Dorothy to solve her own problem. 3. We have also speculated that Ozma wants her subjects to have fun on their own and take care of themselves. Therefore, she may watch them in their adventures, but not step in until it becomes absolutely necessary. Another chance for people to get out of their own situations. Gehan: A Buckethead book about Gaylette was written once, but I can't remember what it was about. Actually, Mombi ruled the Gilikins before the Good Witch of the North, after Pastoria was deposed. As to who ruled the north country before that, there is no real evidence that anybody did. In modern times, each quadrant has their own ruler, but this was not necessarily the case in the old days. Evidence shows that the Winkie country was split up two ways back then and the Munchkin Country was split up THREE ways. It's also been theorized that Gil of Gilkenny was the ruler of the north, but I don't believe that the Gilikins had an overall ruler prior to Mombi. MOPPeT is that up to the time that Pastoria took the throne, each small community ruled themselves and that there was no layer of government between them and the Big Guy. I'll leave the rest of your question for Dave, except to say that the Good Witch of the North made a brief appearance in _Road_. Your comment that the Tin Woodman told Shaggy the story of Ozma and Tip before _Patchwork Girl_ is interesting. I poked around, but could not find it. Could you be a little more specific and tell me in what book (and what chapter) this discussion takes place? You may have missed the DIgest a few weeks ago, because the powder of life was discussed pretty throughly at that time. I'll sum up. At this time, most of us believe that Pipt and Nikidik were separate people, who may have traded with each other. The most likely scenario is that Mombi got some powder from Pipt, and put it in the box that contained Nikidik's wishing pills. The differences in application of the powder could be due to progressive refinements in the process or different magic-workers making the stuff. In _Land_, the incantation is needed. Dyna needs only a wish. In _Patchwork Girl_, nothing extra is needed. Scott: I remember the feeling well. Oz will still be here when you graduate (although it may be hard to find some titles by then). In the meantime, read "Plato's Republic" and "War and Peace" over the weekend and write a 20-page report on each. :-) Rinny: The story is called _The Forbidden Cave of Grapelandia_. Let me know in a couple of days if nobody sends you a plot summary, and I'll give you one. Dave: If you could get to Phoenix on your own, we could carpool over there and back for Oz 2000. Be warned: I intend to take an extrememly "scenic" route there and back, since I want to add several states to my list of ones that I have alread visited. Tyler Jones ====================================================================== From: shiromal@eureka.lk Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 18:49:23 +1100 Subject: Oz books Here are a fewpoints i find rather un-fit in the Oz books: 1.The shimmering emeralds only dazed Dorothy and her friends in the Wizard of Oz and never anyone else.(Dorothy's friends were dazzled even after wearing glasses,but other folk (such as Jinjur,Ojo and Ozma's party guests)were not.And they didnt wear glasses.) 2.Tinman says Nimie Amee lived with an old woman who promised the witch of the east two sheep and one cow if she stopped the marriage,since she was lazy and didnt want the girl to marry.But he tells Woot,that she lived with the witch herself,and that he even told her to stop interfiering in their affair. 3.Polychrome has existed for thousands of years and she has only got lost thrice.(Once in 1908,1914 and in 1918).Notice how close all these years are.It was between those years that she ever got lost. And she admits in-road-that that was the first time she got lost. 4.Someone must have seen the Tin soldire standing in the forest.Specailly Dorothy since she was walking that way.He's been standing still in the forest for over two decades.Surely!Someone must have seen him! 5.From where did princess Langwidere get her heads? 6.The cowardly lion seems to be more scared than he has ever been in any of the books in-lost princess-.Even more than in the Wizard of oz. 7.I think Nimee-Amee is terribly wicked.She says she'll have a happy time if she marries tinman because tinman isnt like other husbands.(No loosing temper,no need to cook,she says)She's happy to see tinman and tinsoldire leave,which shows that she doesnt love them in the least.she's been wicked to chopfyt.I'd give her a good telling off if I were tinman.Really,I think she's worse than all the wicked witches put together. --Gehan ====================================================================== From: shiromal@eureka.lk Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 18:49:25 +1100 Subject: Toto You know,if it hadnt been for Toto,none of the ozzy adventures would have taken place.Dorothy went in search of Toto,which was why she couldnt get into the storm-cellar.I mean,if Toto didnt get lost,she wouldnt have looked for him, and she would have gone into the cellar, and been safe,and not been blown away to Oz.And if not,the Wizard would still not have been exposed as a humbug.Tip would have runaway all right,but he wouldnt have met scarecrow or tinman ,who helped him to discover his true identity.In that case,Ozma may still not be discovered. But just suppose Dorothy was ship-wrecked and taken to the Land of Ev later.She would be still locked up in princess Langwidere's dungeon. Betsy would have been put to death in the rose kingdom. And King Krewl may have put Trot and Cap'n Bill to death too. Tinman may still be rusted in the forest.And Tinsoldire too. The nome king may still hold the Royal family of Ev prisoners. So I beleive,it was Toto,who was the real hero of the story. --Gehan ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 08 Dec 98 12:29:03 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things POWDER OF LIFE: Gehan wrote: >and speaking about the -powder of life-.Dyna accidently spills some of it on >her bear and says:"i wish you were alive",and her wish is granted.but how >could this happen if she has to say the magic words:"weah!Teah!peah!"?. As I've said in the past, I speculate that the "Weah! Teah! Peah!" was only required for Powder of Life 3.1 -- Powder of Life 95 works instantly. Audah: Powder of Life 98 has a major bug that causes it to make things only "undead" (Time to call Buffy!)... Aurah: BTW, if only Glinda, Ozma, and Wizard can practice magic, then does that mean we're wanted by the police??? CHRIS AND RINNY: Jeremy wrote: >Hi, Rinny! Are you and Chris getting back on the Digest? No. CHARLIE BROWN IN OZ: Ozma: Now that your adventures are at an end, would you like me to send you home now? I heard you say you had a "Big Game" coming up? Charlie Brown: No, I want to stay in Oz forever! As Lucy always says to me, I can't let my team down by showing up! MY PAGE: I just wanted to let everyone know that my web page has now officially moved to: http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/home.html I also now have a new version of the Ozzy Digest FAQ up. Here are the major revisions: -- My E-mail links now correctly point to my new Mindspring address -- Section 2.11 now gives the correct E-mails for Books of Wonder and Tails of the Cowardly Lion and Friends -- The links to Tyler's and Chris Dulabone's pages are now correct. -- There is now a link (In section 4.2) to Aaron's "Historically Inaccurate/Rejected Chronology Chain". -- Section 4.3, which discussed "Bastinda" and "Gingemma" has now been generalized to "Do the Witches of Oz have names?" -- Dave ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ "What is Reality anyway...? Nothin' but a collective *hunch*!" -- Lily Tomlin ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 9 - 10, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 17:01:22 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Anthony Donajkowski Subject: oz news update CAST: Munchkin Margaret Pelligrini, 75, one of the original small people in "The Wizard of Oz," to recreate her role for a stage production of the classic film at the Lancaster (PA) Opera House. Pelligrini is being joined by two of her movie co-stars, Karl Slover, a munchkin trumpeter, and Jerry Maren, a Lollipop Kid. ====================================================================== From: Ozmama@aol.com Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 19:57:42 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-08-98 John Bell wrote: <> MopPet on that is that these characters survive one or two books because they satisfy a kind of wish fulfillment for the reader who identifies with them. Kabumpo gets away with being cranky. He does precisely what he wants to do most of the time and gets away with that, too. He's big and strong and darned near fearless. He is beloved. Jinnicky has lots of power and can afford to exercise his sense of whimsy and capriciousness. He is also beloved. Sam'l gets to wander in and out of the world (I presume he can sail our seas, since Polacky could) and has the adventures of a pirate with all the derring-do and none of the nastiness, although he does successfully face deliciously exciting danger...as do all of these characters. Sir Hokus was a knight with all the Arthurian romance attached to that image, albeit he is not young and handsome. He comes across, as do the others, as a father type who helps and protects but who also needs help from the child figure(s) he shelters. That's irresistible to a kid. Kabumpo qualifies here in a similar way, since the child reader often knows his/her own judgment is better than Kabumpo's. It's no trick at all for a juvenile reader to both identify with and feel superior to a character, and I think that's what we find here with these particularly attractive Ozzies. Oh, Pigasus has the freedom of flight and many Kabumpan (Oy, what an adjective!) attributes. --Robin ====================================================================== From: Ozmama@aol.com Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:18:24 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-08-98:"SPAM" I know there's been some discussion about Spamming on the _Digest_. In general, I see nothing wrong with a fast notice about the availability of an Ozzy item, etc., but I'm having a bit of trouble with this kind of post: "Hi and Merry Christmas! If you're looking for that perfect Oz gift for someone, visit my favorite Oz place...." While I'm sure that the url provided will lead to a legitimately Ozzy site, and I'm dead-on certain that the poster is a terrific person, I can't help but feel that this post is an ad, pure and simple. Thus, it's spam. I'd like to see even more discussion on what is and what is not spam, please. Where do you feel the _Digest_ should draw the line? I have lots more to say about this, but I'd rather listen to y'all first.--R. ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 22:11:59 -0500 From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz David Godwin: It has also been theorized that the Wizard recognized the Silver Shoes on Dorothy's feet and figured that the Wicked Witch could not hurt her. At best they would have a standoff. As for the Scarecrow, Tin Woodman and the Cowardly Lion, the Wizard may not have cared about their fates. At that time in Oz history, the idea of odd celebrities and animals as equals may not have been as important as it is now. Glinda may not have known about Dorothy's mission to kill the Witch. The Record book has shown itself to be remarkably random and inconsistent about the information it gives. Concerning Dorothy's mission, it could have said "Dorothy went to the Emerald City. Is interested in magic". This is a slight spoiler, but _Oz and the Three Witches_ dealt primarily with the Wizard and his dealings with the Wicked Witches and Ozma, and didn't have anything to do with Dorothy. John Bell: I'll concede that in Oz-as-literature, Oz probably was meant to be in our world. From an Oz-as-History perspective, though, you're assuming that Baum fully understood the nature of Oz. He may not have understood the mechanics of space-time, nor would Dorothy. As far as they may have known, Dorothy never left this world. Tyler Jones ====================================================================== From: shiromal@eureka.lk Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 12:49:13 +1100 Subject: Re:Ozzy facts and questions Tyler:Look in chapter 17 in-Road-(The Royal Chariot Arrives).Tinman tells Shaggy man all about Tip's adventures and the magic powder of life,and it was certainly a better explanation than what Ozma gave in-Patchwork girl-.But the question is,Tinman told Shaggy the story,and he claims never to have heard of it in-patchwork girl-. Dave Godwin-Well,the Wizard may have been dead scared of being exposed as a humbug,and so he hoped that Dorothy would just give up.Besides,he may have thought ,she'd have a very happy life in Oz,even though she told him:"I dont like your country,even though it's beautiful."And as for Glinda,it's very unlikely that she had the GBR before.For she admits that she had spies ,in-Land-.Still,even if she had the GBR ,she may have waited untill the correct time.(I mean,the wizard was proclaimed king of Oz,and it's one's custom to obey and serve the king.She may have waited untill the correct time came,so that the wizard may be exposed,but without upseting any of his subjects.After all,he crowned Scarecrow king and then left,without dissapointing his subjects,or creating comotion).And Glinda may have known that Dorothy was a brave,clever girl,and was intellegent.She may have known that she had the kiss of the GWN as well,and that nothing could harm her.Also,as in the movie,she may have wanted Dorothy to realise that there is no place like home. And besides,I think the WWW had the least power out of the witches.She is afraid of the dark,alergic to water,scared of the cowardly lion,and doesnt seem to have any super-natural powers,or magical creations.The WWE had more power,it seems to me,and so did Mombi.(I think she is much weaker than Singra or Blinkie or Coo-ee-eh). --Gehan R.C.A ====================================================================== From: "Jeremy Steadman" Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 18:15:04 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-08-98 Use of magic: To me it's far easier, rather than explain why magic isn't used (and rather than not explaining at all), to explain how magic stops working altogether. I've used that in both of my completed Oz books, both the one that is published and the one that's unpublished. Cheating, perhaps? Well, it works! Melody's page: I realize that she is no longer keeping up her page, and I must have seen it in the past, but when I looked at it just then, I remarked how similar it is to a Zork story, or any of Infocom's computer games. Does anyone know what I mean? Jeremy Steadman, kivel99@planetall.com http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dimension/9619 ICQ# 19222665, AOL Inst Mssgr name kiex or kiex2 "A good example of a parasite? Hmmm, let me think... How about the Eiffel tower?" ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 09:45:33 -0500 From: Lisa Mastroberte X-Accept-Language: en Subject: Ozzy Digest What happens to a person who dies in Oz? I know the Wicked Witch of the East was so old she turned to dust, but Baum said in TIN WOODMAN, IIRC, that *nobody* can die. Leo in Oz??? Is it true that Leoardo DiCaprio is going to play Prince Pompa in a new version of KABUMPO? Ack! Off2Oz, Lisa ----------------------- "No-one is born with any kind of 'talent', and therefore, every skill must be acquired." -Ayn Rand ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 9 Dec 98 11:11:25 CST From: "Ruth Berman" Subject: ozzy digest David Godwin: Interesting comment on loyalty to (even small) obligations to friends as both a way to show characters are worthy to stay in Oz and to stop them from choosing to. // You're right in thinking that RPT's "Enchanted Island" started out as a non-Oz story. Mark Anthony Donajkowski: Must be an odd feeling to go back to Munchkinland after so many years. It seems odd that no one has tracked down any of the extras who played residents of the Emerald City -- seems likely enough that some are still around. But perhaps the Munchkins have been easier to locate because there's a network of communication among little people that isn't there for film-extras in general. J.L. Bell: Interesting comment on the Lonesome Duck's duckishness. Jill Moore: Your comment on the general availability of Oz doodads reminds me of John Lahr's comment in his recent "New Yorker" article about his father that in some moods he objects to the commercialization, but in other moods he finds it comforting to be able to see his father around all the time. Gehan Shiromal: Interesting set of questions-for-comment. On why the dazzling emeralds dazzled Dorothy & co. in "Wizard" and not others (and sunglassless) later -- could be several variables at work, including suggestibility in observer, brightness/cloudiness of weather, janitorial schedule for emerald-polishing. The discrepancies between the Tin Woodman's accounts of Nimmee Aimee's employer -- I commented on that when "Tin Woodman" was topic of discussion in October, and suggested that Nick might originally not have known that the employer was the same person as the Witch (the detailed report about their deal might have been guessworking gossip, or the Witch might even have been maintaining a Secret Identity (possibly to spy on her subjects), and Nick might have found out later about it. Polychrome's quick succession of times to get lost seems fairly plausible as is, because she discovered the first time it happened that it's kind of fun. (It's possible also that she hadn't been rainbow- dancing all that long before the first time she got stranded -- there may be other stages of life to being a Rainbow's Daughter.) The Tin Soldier -- you meant Tin Woodman, I think. As to why other travelers before Dorothy didn't notice him in his rusted state -- perhaps the angles from which he was visible were so small that the chance of being spotted were small, too. Or perhaps the other travelers were all Munchkins who knew or guessed that the Witch was responsible and were afraid of getting in trouble themselves if they did anything. Langwidere's source of heads came up for discussion when "Ozma" was the focus book. I suggested that she might have started with artificial heads (such as those used in for the "Magical Monarch" in Mo or for Fumbo in RPT's "Grampa") and pressured people to accept trades. Wickedness of Nimmie Aimee to Chopfyte -- she bosses him around a lot, but before deciding that that's more wicked than the Wicked Witches or even wicked at all, you'd probably need to ask Chopfyte for an opinion. He doesn't seem to mind it. Dave Hardenbrook: Enjoyed the version of Charlie Brown's choice re: loyalty to the team compared to staying in Oz. Isn't it about time to set a day to start "Glinda" discussion? "Magic" comments seem to be winding down. Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 11:45:58 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Anthony Donajkowski Cc: Tracy Dusenbury Subject: OZ TREATS VITAFORT subsidiary HOLLYWOOD PARTNERS has begun shipping its THE WIZARD OF OZ brand marshmallows to South East retail chain HARRIS TEETER. Gradually spreading across the country, these OZ marshmallows are the first of four WB-related products in HOLLYWOOD's AVENUE OF THE STARS brand, with packaging featuring the likenesses of Dorothy, The Scarecrow, The Cowardly Lion, The Tin Man, and Toto, and flavored marshmallows in the shapes of twisters and rainbows and such. ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 16:29:43 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Toto & fish in Oz Gehan wrote: >You know,if it hadnt been for Toto,none of the ozzy adventures would have >taken place.Dorothy went in search of Toto,which was why she couldnt get >into the storm-cellar In my post of 10/7, I mentioned this along with the fact that Toto caused Dorothy to miss her balloon flight (thus forcing her to rely on her own resources, which turned out to be the silver shoes) and exposed the wizard by tipping over a screen (or pulling back a curtain, in the movie). He is also responsible for Dorothy and friends coming to an understanding with the Cowardly Lion, because his cowardice was revealed only when Dorothy smacked him for attacking Toto. Bearing in mind that Toto could talk during all this yet chose not to, there's a lot more to this dog than meets the eye. If Neill's illustrations are to be trusted, he also did a certain amount of shapeshifting from breed to breed between one book and another. I've always thought of him as a cairn terrier, but in _Road_ he looks more like a boxer or something. Dave H: Loved your bit about Charlie Brown in Oz. Having more or less supported you in re _That Ozzy Feeling_, now I will traitorously whirl on you and make the point that there are strong and perhaps even legitimate feminist objections to Ozma having a love interest. As several people have pointed out, LFB envisioned Oz as a matriarchy ruled by Ozma and Glinda (and Princess Dorothy), with the Wizard having a minor assistant's role. Getting the girls involved with suitors dilutes the purity of their feminine power. You seem to be saying that no woman is complete without a man. This is incredibly chauvinist and flies in the face of the feminist doctrine that "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle." (However, if a fish ever did need a bicycle, it would be in Oz or the nearby Nonestic Ocean.) - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 21:09:48 -0500 From: "J. L. Bell" Subject: MAGIC OF OZ and timing Of Thompson's heroes, David Godwin wrote: <> I've wondered, given the high jock quotient of Peter, Speedy, and David, what Ruth Plumly Thompson's own experience with competitive sports was. Was she a fervid athlete or sports fan herself, or was she trying to reflect what a "real boy" should be? About a previously unreported yet hard to miss detail about Oz, David Godwin wrote: <> The stitching does show where Thompson added David's visit to Nick Chopper to make ENCHANTED ISLAND an Oz book. Another seam is that as soon as David arrives at Rupert's castle he feels "more than embarrassed to be barefoot in the presence of royalty," yet he showed no such discomfort meeting the Emperor of the Winkies. David Godwin wrote: <> I also suspect Glinda had the Great Book of Records since the beginning of the series (other folks disagree). But I think the books show us three good reasons why Glinda didn't, and doesn't, intervene as much as some expect. 1) There are hints the Book's not as helpful as its hype would have us believe. The few entries we read are quite spare. Several times we see Glinda have to puzzle out meaning. The Wizard's command over technology and success in building his city and holding the witch(es) at bay may have cast doubt on whatever hints of humbuggery she'd read. I think Glinda's show of knowing everything (especially in LAND and EMERALD CITY) is largely true, but partly how she wants to present herself. 2) We know from SCARECROW that Glinda and Ozma are selective about when they intervene in injustices. They know about Krewl's reign of terror and the witches in Jinxland. Neither does anything about those problems, nor do they tell close associates like the Scarecrow and Dorothy, until Trot and her friends are in danger. 3) Oz is set up with most of the information-gathering and decision-making at the very top of society. There's probably too much data for even Ozma and Glinda to keep ahead of. The Book of Records' entries must pour over Glinda each day; there's no indication she has, or allows, any help in monitoring it. Seeing a useful fact and acting on it quickly, as in her intervention against the Oogaboo army, is probably an exceptional event, not the norm. Similarly, if Ozma were to ask the Magic Picture to show her every friend who might be lost and every potential trouble spot, she might never have a chance to do anything else. Gehan Shiromal pointed out seven contradictions or unanswered questions raised by the Oz books. My replies: 1. WIZARD, chap. 15, reveals the real reason for green glasses. I think the dazzlement in chap. 11 is psychological, not physical. 2. Yes. 3. Polychrome seems to grow up a lot between ROAD and her next appearance in SKY ISLAND. After TIN WOODMAN she probably grows out of getting lost. Polychrome is immortal, but does that mean she's always existed? In ROAD she describes herself as "the Rainbow's daughter." Not until SKY ISLAND and TIK-TOK does Baum tell us she has sisters (though Neill did picture them in the earlier book), so perhaps they were created after her, in which case she needn't be very old in ROAD. 4. Why wouldn't a quiet tin statue in a thick, Kalidah-infested forest be missed for many years? (Less than twenty, given that Nick says he stood rusted for one year.) 5. Don't ask. 6. In OZMA the Cowardly Lion assures Dorothy he's "as cowardly as ever." Without his cowardice, Baum must have realized, the Lion wouldn't be a very interesting character. 7. Nimmie Amee wicked? Not on a Wicked-Witch scale, surely. But just the sort of person we're happy to leave in a remote corner of Oz, yes. Turning to MAGIC, Ruth Berman wrote: <> I'm sure it does, and that fear of eggs makes Ruggedo's reaction to being transformed different from others'. It also means, unless he's amazingly ignorant of where eggs come from, that he's *also* become a female. Baum, old poultry expert that he was, well knew the difference between a goose and a gander. Still more MAGIC remarks: Bru the bear's name clearly derives from the word bruin. Rango comes from orang, a point underscored on page 188 when Baum has a character call, "O Rango!" [Like the multiple appearances of "O Ak!" in SANTA CLAUS.] Do folks see similar puns in the names of the other denizens of the Forest of Gugu: Loo [82], Chipo, Arx, Tirrip [87], Ebu, Peeker [184-5], and Gugu himself? I recall being intrigued by the gifts different folks were making for Ozma early in MAGIC, but on this reading I realized I'd missed a lot about those. The Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman continue their habit of thinking each is made of the best of all possible material [68-9]. The Scarecrow has ordered some "straw foot-decorations" (a long reach for a pun on "strawfoot"). The tin man has made "a lovely girdle set with beautiful tin nuggets." When I first read MAGIC in the early 1970s, I knew girdles only as undergarments, not belts, and I remember thinking, "Wouldn't Ozma hurt herself wearing that?" With a few more years under my girdle, I can also appreciate the mythic resonance of Glinda overseeing fifty young maidens weaving a gown made of emeralds [74]. In myths weaving and other fabric work are often associated with female power: Penelope in the ODYSSEY, the Fates, the princess in "Rumpelstiltsken." Finally, one comment about Trot's gift makes me suspect Button-Bright was away from the palace until shortly before Ozma's party. "Trot...allowed no one in her room to see the beautiful blossoms except her friends, Betsy Bobbin and Dorothy" [238]. I can't imagine Trot excluding Button-Bright from her room when she lets in Betsy. Neill's illustrations for MAGIC follow the same pattern as in TIN WOODMAN, including half-page illustrations within the chapters. I checked the color plates in the Dover edition of MAGIC, and was underwhelmed. Many of them have empty colored backgrounds, and seem to show hasty draftsmanship. They don't set the book's mood as well as those two-page drawings of the Forest of Gugu. page 13, the drawing atop the Table of Contents: Any truth to the rumor that in the first edition you can see the opening of CORIOLANUS on the typewriter paper? 17: The vertical lines in the chapter-opening frame are obviously hand-drawn, in contrast to what I think are machine-made lines Neill used for shading from TIK-TOK to LOST PRINCESS. 155, 203: Twice Neill uses sunflowers with facial expressions commenting on the action. 209: The Wizard's tripod and bowl here also appears on the cover, though why Neill drew a crowned monkey there escapes me. Finally, this seems a fine time to discuss the timing of MAGIC. David Hulan wrote: <> I noticed how Baum was careful to add the Frogman and Tin Soldier on opposite sides of the dinner table, preserving its symmetry. I continue to be puzzled about (a) why, if Baum had MAGIC and GLINDA nearly ready to publish, he instead worked on RINKITINK, LOST PRINCESS, and/or TIN WOODMAN; and (b) when he would have found the time to write those two held-back manuscripts. At the end of SCARECROW Baum promised a story about Dorothy, Trot, and Betsy together--the story that became LOST PRINCESS. He was almost apologetic about giving readers RINKITINK instead. Eviscerating the end of KING RINKITINK to make it an Oz book implies that Baum hadn't completed the book he wanted, was up against a deadline, and saw no better solution. But if he'd written MAGIC (with plots for Dorothy and Trot) or GLINDA (in which Betsy, Trot, and Button-Bright all leave the capital to rescue Dorothy) before LOST PRINCESS, either of those would have fulfilled his promise better than Inga's story. One possible scenario: Baum got bogged down in LOST PRINCESS, noodled around with MAGIC and GLINDA as alternatives, and finally realized he had to adapt RINKITINK to make his deadline. All that work gave him a head start for the next year, and the failure of the Oz Film Company gave him more time. He finished MAGIC, GLINDA, and LOST PRINCESS by his next deadline, and chose to polish and publish LOST PRINCESS first since it was what he'd promised readers. That composition would make the three stories oddly contemporaneous, not sequential; i.e., any one of them could have "taken place first." Peter Hanff reported how the handwriting on the TIN WOODMAN manuscript looks much shakier than on MAGIC and GLINDA. Baum was clearly feeling the effects of ill health [which I think is reflected in the book itself]. With MAGIC and GLINDA complete, or nearly so, he could have slowed the writing of TIN WOODMAN. That he didn't implies he felt a powerful need to finish that book--maybe because it addressed a loose end about one of his oldest and most popular Oz characters, maybe because the book had crucial things to say about Oz's origins, maybe because its themes spoke to him, or maybe because he needed to accomplish one more big project in his lifetime. J. L. Bell JnoLBell@compuserve.com ====================================================================== From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-08-98 Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 08:14:43 PST David Godwin: >As for Glinda, assuming that she had the GBR at this period (and >_Land_ >seems to imply that she did), she must have known all along that >Oscar was >a humbug, yet she kept quiet about it (perhaps to help keep the >wicked >witches in line). She likewise must have known all along that Dorothy >could >get home anytime she wanted - yet she let the kid risk her life >against the >WWW, the fighting trees, the Hammerheads, etc. What was she thinking >of? >Was she trying to _mold character_ or something? Well, for one thing, the Great Book of Records doesn't always give details. Therefore, Glinda did not necessarily know that Dorothy was on her way to the Quadling Country. Also, Glinda's power seems to have been more limited back in the time of _Wizard_. To give one example, in _Tik-Tok_, Glinda transports Tik-Tok to Ev, presumably without much trouble. In _Wizard_, on the other hand, Glinda needs the Golden Cap just to send the Scarecrow, Tin Woodman, and Lion to other parts of Oz. In addition, the Sorceress lives in isolation at the time of _Wizard_, only interfering when absolutely necessary. Glinda's character, as well as her amount of power, changes quite a bit after Ozma takes the throne. >Imagine my surprise when reading the >RPT book to find that=8A >*****SPOILER**** >Nick Chopper's castle is adjacent to the "Tin Canyon," and apparently >the >canyon must be crossed to get from his castle to the EC, that >citizens of >Oz normally carry a "jumping stick," and that Nick has pockets! Well, these might have been recent developments. A tinsmith could easily have given Nick pockets, and the jumping sticks might have been invented by the Wizard (or someone like that) shortly before the start of the story. I don't know about the canyon, though. >*****END SPOILER**** >Since all the other RPT Oz books are more or less free of this sort >of >thing, I can only explain it by saying that _Enchanted Island_ was >not >originally written as an Oz book. True, although its original incarnation probably did not contain Nick Chopper or his castle at all. J. L. Bell: > What happens when we apply to other books the same standards that >would >force Oz into another dimension? Six years before WIZARD appeared, >Mark >Twain wrote a story about a round-the-world balloon voyage: TOM >SAWYER >ABROAD. In that novel Tom, Huck, and Jim never enter a fairyland, but >they >do fly across the eastern U.S., the Atlantic, Africa, and beyond. If >the >Wizard's unprecedented balloon flights mean readers should infer he >left >our dimension, then by the same logic Twain was saying TOM SAWYER >ABROAD >didn't take place on our globe. And, since that book's a sequel to >HUCK >FINN, we'd have to further conclude that a top contender for the >Great >American Novel was never meant to be read as taking place in America. I think that a large part of this is the fact that people want there to be a way for Oz to exist. Thinking that Oz is an actual place is a comforting thought for Oz fans. I doubt that the same holds true fro _Huckleberry Finn_. >And in thinking >of [Thomspon's] successful recurring characters, I realized, we've >left out Pigasus. True, although Pigasus changes quite a bit between _Pirates_ and _Wishing Horse_. In the latter, he employs a good deal of Kabumpo-esque sarcasm. > A U of Chicago professor once coined the satirical term "ad >Hitlerem" for >the form of argument that says, "Hitler did it, so it must be bad." >"It" >could be gun control or gun training for kids, cheap cars or >internment >camps. Painting mediocre pictures didn't make Churchill into Hitler; >erecting grandiose buildings doesn't do the same for the Wizard. But >what >about Ozma expelling gypsies from her country (in OJO)? Well, it wasn't stated that Ozma expelled ALL gypsies from her country, just one particular band that was known to contain kidnappers and thieves. -- May you live in interesting times, Nathan DinnerBell@tmbg.org http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/5447/ ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 17:06:19 +1100 From: shiromal@eureka.lk Subject: Dr.pipt According to Bill Wright(Author of the piglet press site),Dr.Nikidik faked his death ,and moved from the gilikin country to the munchkin country.He did this to prevent punishment,for he illegally practised magic.I accept this satement,for as Bill wright says,no-one can really die in Oz,espesailly a magicain.I also think that he may have pretended to die,because everyone will then think him dead,and he can yet,secretly indulge in sorcery and continue his magical inventions. I doubt the fact that Nikidik and Pipt are two different people ,and yet,there is proof........... In -Patchwork girl-... *.Margollotte says:"My husband foolishly gave away,all our magic powder to Old mombi the witch." *.And Ozma says:"It was Dr.Pipt's powder of life which enabled me to become queen." So perhaps Ozma later found out that Dr.NIkidik was still living,and forgave him,yet he continued practising magic.It could be that he settled down in the Munchkin country,and became popular as Dr.Pipt,and was later found out by Glinda and Ozma.SO it's quite possible that Dr.Nikidik and Pipt are the same person.(Only Nikidik faked his death) --Gehan C.A ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 10 Dec 98 16:56:39 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things GLINDA: Ruth wrote: >Isn't it about time to set a day to start "Glinda" discussion? >"Magic" comments seem to be winding down. How about a week from Monday? "A REAL, TRULY LIVE PLACE"?: Nathan wrote: >I think that a large part of this is the fact that people want there to >be a way for Oz to exist. Thinking that Oz is an actual place is a >comforting thought for Oz fans. I doubt that the same holds true fro >_Huckleberry Finn_. We can't blame ourselves for wanting Oz to be real...The danger I think comes from deciding Oz is real and then trying to censure certain Oz authors by pointing to their work and saying, "That's not the *real* Oz!" God bless the _Red Dwarf_ universe, which is designed to accommodate discrete "parallel realities". But Stephen Hawking at least is convinced that all possible realities -- including ones that include Oz -- play out their existance in other universes... >Well, it wasn't stated that Ozma expelled ALL gypsies from her country, >just one particular band that was known to contain kidnappers and >thieves. More evidence that Ozma is all too human... (See below) "YOU ARE IN AN OPEN FIELD WEST OF A WHITE HOUSE WITH A BOARDED FRONT DOOR": Jeremy wrote: >I realize that she is no longer keeping up her page, and I must have >seen it in the past, but when I looked at it just then, I remarked >how similar it is to a Zork story, or any of Infocom's computer >games. Does anyone know what I mean? Yes, I do, and I'm sure that I regard those old text adventures with the same nostalgia and these modern 3D wide-screen 16-track dolby stereo computer games with the same revulsion that our grandparents must have felt about their great works of literature versus that modern "wasteland" known as television. "HAVING IT ALL" IN OZ: David Godwin wrote: >Getting the girls involved with suitors dilutes the >purity of their feminine power. You seem to be saying that no woman is >complete without a man. This is incredibly chauvinist and flies in the face >of the feminist doctrine that "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a >bicycle." I consider myself generally sympathetic to women's fight for their rights, but this is the same "either-or" doctrine that cause so many to regard "feminist" as a dirty word... This idea that either a woman has a fullfilling career (and recognizes that "*ALL* men are bums!") or is a subservient housewife and baby-maker has plagued us and threatened to undermine the women's movement at least since Louisa May Alcott (who for all her feminism made all her heroines end up either fairly conventional housewives or spinster career girls). Of *course* a woman can be complete without a man...But I believe that a woman can have a man and *still* be complete! Indeed I see *that* as the *ultimate* feminist statement that even many so-called "feminists" don't have the guts to make. There's nothing inherently evil about us men! Some of us are decent chaps... There are even a few of us who don't even *like* football! :) As Tyler has said much better than I can, "Relationships and marriage are about two people who love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together. It is a union of equals, a true partnership forged in love, not in need or desparation. The man needs the woman as much as she needs him. If this isn't the case, then there is a problem with the people involved, not in the concept of marriage itself." So how does this relate to Oz? David Godwin first claims that I assert that Ozma et al. "need" men. No, they can get on just fine without them; 40+ Oz books have proven that. I'm just suggesting that the Oz ladies are capable of having their lives further enhanced by a loving, sharing relationship. Second, David asserts that I'm trying to undermine Ozma et. al.'s "feminine power". I'm trying to do no such thing... I am merely exhibting the (heterodox) view that the powerful females of Oz are people too with the same desire for human comapanionship most of us feel, even if our lives are happy and complete otherwise; for as Lou Grant says in one episode of _The Mary Tyler Moore Show_, "I guess it's our blessing -- and our affliction -- that people need people." I know some in the Oz community are going to say, as they have in the past, that Ozma "ain't 'people'", that Ozma is "a shimmering, glowing star in the fairyland fermeemint!" (apologies to Jean Hagen and the writers of _Singin' In the Rain_), but who says that Ozma, Glinda, etc. "ain't people"? They seem to exhibit other human emotions -- happiness, sorrow, fear, compassion, and yes, sometimes even foolishness and arrogance. Why has the desire for companionship have to be excluded. Why is it assumed that companionship can only come at the expense of everything else that makes someone good and great? I just don't see how having a love interest "weakens" a person or fairy. Indeed, I will go out on a limb and challenge anyone on this digest to find any passage in the Oz Canon that positively indicates that romantic love would indeed undermine the Oz girls' power. If someone can find that, I will throw _That Ozzy Feeling_ in the fire and that will be the end of it... But I don't think they'll find such an entry, because I don't think the Canonical authors really considered romance either way regarding Baum's powerful ladies, except RPT with Ozma, and her objection was based on her conviction that "Ozma is a little girl" (I still say she can mature and be "just the same Ozma"), and not on any belief that love in itself would somehow be harmful to the Oz ladies. -- Dave P.S. If topics are still needed for "Life in Oz" for Convention 2000, I'd like to take this opportunity to come out in favor of this volatile issue of romance in Oz treated as an Oxford-style debate. P.P.S. Jellia reports that the Fish Footman of Wonderland visited the Emerald City recently. He came by bike. :) ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ "What is Reality anyway...? Nothin' but a collective *hunch*!" -- Lily Tomlin ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 11 - 13, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 23:51:58 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-03-98 I've been lazy and busy and so have two Digests to respond to again. 12/3: Lisa: I like Eureka in _DotWiz_, but not much else about the book. It's one I didn't even like much when I was a kid, which was unusual for me - I liked several of them then (including _Road_) that I now think are weak. Some I read then I have little memory of my reaction to - _Glinda_, _Grampa_, _Gnome King_, _Jack Pumpkinhead_, _Purple Prince_ - but I remember relatively negative reactions to _DotWiz_, _Kabumpo_, and _Ozoplaning_. _Road_, _Tik-Tok_, _Cowardly Lion_, _Giant Horse_, and _Lucky Bucky_ pleased me more as a child than they do now. For the record, I didn't read _Captain Salt_, _Handy Mandy_, _Wonder City_, _Scalawagons_, _Shaggy Man_, _Hidden Valley_, or _Merry-Go-Round_ as a child, the latter three because I was at least a teen when they were published. Jane: >I'm speechless. Barbara Koelle tells me she's heard from anyone interested in >presenting any "Life in the Land of Oz" topics at the centennial celebration. I assume you mean "hasn't heard." _Au contraire_, she's heard from me, with an offer of a paper on Aging and Death in Oz and a suggestion that there be some panel discussions on "Life in Oz" topics - something that's easier to arrange than formal papers, which take a good deal of time to put together. I may have been the only one she's heard from, though, and it was several months ago I wrote her. Jeremy: >How authors know: >Instead of making hypotheses about how certain people let the authors >know at certain times AFTER going to Oz BEFORE doing other things AND >so on, isn't it more likely that Royal Historians are allowed to see >the GBR so they can record the events as books? Or that Royal >Historians are in fact the embodiments of the GBR in our physical >world? Not a bad idea. Considering how cryptic most of the references in the GBR are (based on the few that we see in their entirety), it's no wonder that in fleshing out those references the authors occasionally put something in that contradicts something he/she/another author said in similarly fleshing out a bare outline. Robin: >Why _Silver Princess_? The tone is lighter, except for that awful >moment towards the end, but why do you rate it higher than >_Yellow Knight_? Btw, _Speedy_ is my fave RPT. Nothing I can put my finger on; it's just my overall reaction to the two books. It may well be no more than that I've owned a copy of SP since I was nine years old, but didn't acquire one of YK until I was in my 40s (though I read it when I was 8 or 9 - but only once, whereas I reread SP many times as a kid). Owning a book as a kid doesn't guarantee a high rating - I got a copy of _Ozoplaning_ at the same time I got SP, and I rate it RPT's worst - but between closely matched books that I like it probably helps. _Speedy_ is my second favorite RPT, but _Wishing Horse_ is not only my favorite of hers, but my favorite Oz book period. (It was also the second one I ever read.) Chris Straughn: >Also, Ozma seems to accumulate quite a lot of magic throughout the series, >does anyone have a theory as to why she never uses any of it? This probably has a similar but not identical explanation whether we use the Oz-as-Literature or Oz-as-History mode for looking at it - something like the difference between the Strong and Weak Anthropic Principles in cosmology. >From the History standpoint, the probability is that Ozma does use her magic quite often - but when she does, the problem is solved as soon as she becomes aware of it, and if she becomes aware of it early on then there's no story worth recording. The problem is indeed resolved as shoon as she becomes aware of it in quite a few of the books: _Kabumpo_ (the Glegg/Peg problem, not the Ruggedo/palace one), _Cowardly Lion_, _Grampa_, _Giant Horse_, _Yellow Knight_, _Purple Prince_, _Ojo_, and _Speedy_ at least. It's true that Ozma doesn't actually intervene (personally or through the Wizard) in PP and _Speedy_, but if Jinnicky and Waddy hadn't beaten her to the punch she would have; once she knew about the problem it was in effect solved. >From the Literature standpoint, there wouldn't be a saleable story if Ozma used her magic to eliminate the problem early, so one of the tasks for the writer is to think of a reason why Ozma doesn't find out about the problem until there's been a satisfactory adventure for someone. Sometimes this is explicit, as in Ozma having to leave to stop a war in _Royal Book_, or Sir Hokus hiding the Magic Picture in _Yellow Knight_; sometimes, especially when the protagonist isn't anyone close to her, it's just implicit that she'd have no reason to check on that person. And sometimes she's taken by surprise and doesn't have a chance to use her magic; apparently she needs some kind of equipment, at least her wand, to do anything, and she doesn't always have it on her person. Gehan: >and if Ugu stole magic from the wizard and Glinda and Ozma,why didnt he >think of the adepts and the good witch of the north? Ugu learned about various magical items in Oz through books that had belonged to an ancestor (though how books more than 10 years old or so would know about the Wizard's black bag isn't clear); probably that ancestor didn't know about the Adepts (Glinda and Ozma didn't seem to before meeting them in _Glinda_). The GWN might not have had anything worth stealing; what little we know about her magic in pre-Dorothean times doesn't indicate that it was based strongly on equipment. J.L.: > The odd ones >are folks like Trot and Button-Bright, who seem to forget their blood >relatives entirely. I think Button-Bright's case is easily explained; his parents don't seem to have much concern for him, or vice versa, in any of the three books where he appears before settling permanently in Oz. Trot is more difficult; she seems concerned for her mother in _Sea Fairies_, much less so in _Sky Island_, and not at all in _Scarecrow_. I don't think Celtics is the sort of ethnically-named team that would offend anyone, any more than Trojans or Spartans or Canadiens do. (There was, I think, some controversy when the Vancouver NHL team decided to call itself "Canucks," which is a pejorative in the eyes of some.) That said, I agree that there's still resistance to changing the names of teams whose names are associated with Native Americans (those are the only ones I can think of that are considered offensive by members of the named group - ever hear an Irishman object to Notre Dame's team name?), but I think the process is well under way and will continue. Then there are teams like the Black Hawks and Red Wings that are actually named for Native Americans, but not obviously so; do they need to change, or just ensure that they don't emphasize the connection? > One special case is Ruggedo, who's "dreadfully ashamed" of being turned >into a goose who "might lay an egg!" [158] That implies he's a gender other >than gander--quite a change. No more so than transforming Gugu into a Gillikin woman. 12/8: David G.: I don't think _Land_ implies that Glinda had the GBR at that time - rather the reverse, since she refers to information she got about the Wizard from "spies." If she had the GBR, why would she need spies? The first reference to the GBR (as her "Magic Book") is in _Emerald City_. You're correct that _Enchanted Island_ was not originally written as an Oz book. RPT adapted it from a non-Oz fantasy that apparently didn't sell. J.L.: >The "Life in the Land of Oz" panel struck me as the toughest to assemble. >All the other areas have more solid moorings for discussion: they're rooted >in either facts or, in the case of literary criticism, generally accepted >methods. "Life in the Land of Oz" has to run a gauntlet between old news >(statements from the books, which most folks have read) and pet theories >(which defy conclusive study). Making that discussion interesting and >authoritative might demand the sort of exhaustive analysis of canonical >details that Melody Grandy did in her study of Ozma's palace and grounds. Well, yes, but that's what makes it fun. For some people, anyhow. It's also why I suggested panels to Barbara as well as formal papers; the latter take a long time to prepare if you do it right, but a panel of knowledgeable Oz fans could have a very interesting discussion of topics like "Where is Oz?" or "How Big Is Oz?" or "What Happened to the Nome King's Tunnel?" or "What Are Ozma's Origins?" Maybe some of these would resolve too quickly, but I just pulled them off the top of my head because they're subjects that have created some extensive discussion on the Digest. ************************************************** Long argument follows; skip if you're not interested in the location of Oz ************************************************** >As I recall, Baum never said explicitly that Dorothy has two ears. But in >the absence of a statement otherwise, readers should assume she does. But if Baum had consistently had Dorothy do things like saying, "Excuse me, I didn't catch that because you were on my left; could you repeat it?" then an inference that her left ear didn't work would be warranted even if he never explicitly said she was deaf in one ear. To my mind, that's the level of evidence we have that Oz isn't part of this physical universe. I think part of the problem may be that we're mixing modes of discussion here. From the Oz as Literature point of view, I think that Baum imagined Oz as somewhere on the North American continent in the first two books, probably down in the "Four Corners" area or maybe central Nevada. This is consistent with the length of time Dorothy was in the air in _Wizard_, with a realistic distance for a balloon flight, and perhaps most explicitly with finding large numbers of bills in dollar denominations in the jackdaws' nest just outside the desert. I don't think the dollar was a currency denomination outside the US and Canada in the early part of this century, though it's more recently been adopted by Australia and I think New Zealand as well. (Incidentally, does anyone know why the symbol for "dollar" is $?) In _Ozma_, _Tik-Tok_, and _Scarecrow_ he seems to have changed his mind and put it in the Pacific somewhere, on a continent (or at least a large island) of its own. Thompson seems to have had entirely different ideas about the location of Oz, and again moved it around to various different places for the convenience of each particular story. Sometimes it seems to connect with our world in a realistic way, and to be not very far from the US if not within it; sometimes it connects very improbably indeed. But if we approach it from the Oz as History point of view, then we can't talk about author's intentions, or compare what Baum did with what Twain or Doyle did. In that case we're treating Oz as a Secondary Creation, like Middle Earth or Pellucidar, and we have to look at what all of the books say and come up with a theory that's consistent with them all. (Of course, if you regard only Baum as canonical you don't have to reconcile books by later authors, but that doesn't remove the problem.) So let's do that. We have the following cases of travel to Oz that aren't obviously done by magic: _Wizard_: The Wizard drifts in a balloon from somewhere in the US to Oz, in a short enough time that he doesn't starve and the balloon doesn't lose its lift. Dorothy is carried by a cyclone, in less than 24 hours, from Kansas (which is the geographical center of the US) to Oz. The Wizard drifts in a hot-air balloon, with no on-board means of heating more air, from the center of Oz to somewhere accessible to the US. _Land_: The Gump flies from the Emerald City in no more than 12-14 hours to a place where they use dollars as currency. _Ozma_: Dorothy is washed overboard somewhere between California and Australia and drifts to the coast of Ev - a point less than a day's walk from the Deadly Desert surrounding Oz - in less than 12 hours. _Tik-Tok_: Betsy's ship goes down somewhere at sea and she drifts to the Rose Kingdom overnight. _Scarecrow: Trot and Cap'n Bill are sucked down into a whirlpool off the California coast and basically walk to Oz - with some shortish intervals of flying - in what appears to be no more than 3-4 days time. There might have been magical transportation by the mermaids - though why that would be, I couldn't say. _Grampa_: Bill the weathercock flies from somewhere near Chicago to Oz overnight. We don't know how fast weathercocks fly, but from other evidence in the book it's comparable to the flying speed of crows - maybe 15-20 mph at best. _Gnome King_: Peter is holding the string of a balloon in Philadelphia and a balloon bird carries him to an island in the Nonestic that's not far from the coast of Ev. This may be magical; we don't know that much about balloon birds and their powers. _Giant Horse_: Benny falls into a pit in Boston and breaks through the *sky* of Oz and lands near the Emerald City. _Yellow Knight_: Nothing very conclusive, since Speedy is underground in a highly improbable rocket much of the time. _Pirates_: Peter is swept overboard off Cape Hatteras (North Carolina) and swims to Octagon Island. _Speedy_: He's picked up by Umbrella Island, which is over our world at the time. UI has the ability to cross at will between Oz and the US, in fairly short order; whether this is natural or magic isn't clear. (Obviously the flying is magical, but could another flying object - a 747, say - do the same thing?) _Wonder City_: Jenny jumps, but she's using her fairy foot and there's probably a magical element involved. _Lucky Bucky_: Bucky is blown into the air by a boiler explosion. If there isn't magical involvement, then he went from New York harbor to Oz on a ballistic path that didn't get high enough that the air was unbreatheable. I calculate that that wouldn't get him more than 10-12 miles. _Hidden Valley_: Jam is carried by his kite from a point in Ohio and isn't up as much as 24 hours, apparently. To simplify matters, let's omit _Scarecrow_, _Gnome King_, _Yellow Knight_, _Speedy_, _Wonder City_, and _Lucky Bucky_, which for various reasons are easy to explain regardless of the location of Oz. We then have as plausible locations for Oz, if it's physically on this Earth: 1. Somewhere in the US, probably the Southwest: _Wizard_, _Land_, probably _Hidden Valley_. 2. Somewhere in the US, probably the Midwest: _Grampa_, possibly _Hidden Valley_. (Don't ask where in the Midwest you find a large desert. I'm not the one proposing that Oz is physically on this Earth.) 3. Somewhere in the Pacific: _Ozma_, probably _Tik-Tok_. 4. Somewhere in the Atlantic: _Pirates_, possibly _Tik-Tok_, possibly _Hidden Valley_. 5. In a gigantic subsurface cave with a simulated "sky": _Giant Horse_. Somehow all these conflicting statements have to be reconciled. I can only see two ways. One is that Oz is not physically on this Earth, but on another plane of some sort, with occasional weak spots that let sentient beings pass through (with the way in easier than the way out; we only know of one instance where someone left Oz by non-magical means and found his way back to the US). The two universes aren't congruent enough that the distance between weak spots in one is the same as in the other. The other is that in fact magic was involved except for at most one of the above sets of cases, but we don't know how or why. When you look at it that way, there seems no reason not to accept that magic was involved in all five sets, in which case the question of whether Oz is on our physical Earth, but only accessible by magic, or on another plane but occasionally accessible by non-magical means, doesn't really matter. If you have another logically consistent way of explaining these apparently contradictory journeys to Oz, I'd like to hear about it. So far I haven't heard anything from you that purports to do so; your cogent arguments have all been from the Literature POV. ********End of Long Argument******************* Bear's comment to you ("You really know the Liberal approach. Make some vast sweeping denunciation and then offer some anecdote as proof.") really sounds more like his own argumentative style than that of anyone else I know of. He's always making vast sweeping denunciations and then when taxed with backing them up with a fact or two either dropping the subject or saying something like what he said to you. I've tried taking arguments off-Digest with him quite a few times and never got further than that. He's a nice guy in a lot of ways, but you can't really argue with him. Tyler: I think it's questionable whether Pastoria ever actually ruled all of what we know as Oz. Certainly in _Land_, Glinda consistently refers to his having ruled the Emerald City, as the Wizard had, and we know that the Wizard had no power outside the immediate environs of the city. In _DotWiz_ Ozma indicates that Pastoria never actually ruled at all; he was imprisoned while her grandfather was still ruler. MOPPeT is that "Oz" only included the green country up until the time of Ozma, and that that's all Pastoria or his predecessors ruled. It was only when Ozma was crowned in the EC and revealed her wonderful qualities that the people of the more settled parts of the other four divisions of Oz mostly decided to swear allegiance to her. Certainly I think this was the progression of Baum's ideas about Oz from the Literature POV; from the History POV there are some contradictions. Gehan: It may be that after the Wizard left the Scarecrow didn't have the strength of personality to make the people of the EC spend much time polishing the emeralds, so that they became dusty and didn't dazzle Tip or Jinjur or others in _Land_. And when Ozma took the throne she might have deliberately had them somewhat dulled so there would be no more need for the glasses. Or it may be that the EC wasn't really as dazzling as all that, but that because they'd been told that without the glasses they'd be blinded, Dorothy and her friends were expecting to be dazzled and so thought they were. Expectations can cause a lot of misperceptions. I don't think the Cowardly Lion seems that scared in _Lost Princess_. However, he seems panicked by thunderstorms in both _Royal Book_ and _Cowardly Lion_. No question that without Toto, Oz-as-we-know-it wouldn't have happened (or would have happened via a very different set of circumstances). But I don't think "hero" is the right word for him. It's rather like an argument I once made that Charles I was the most influential monarch in English history: if he hadn't been so stupid and stubborn, Parliament wouldn't have become essentially all-powerful and the monarchs largely reduced to figurehead status. But he didn't intend it to be that way. Toto didn't intend to do any of the things he did that had profound results, either. David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 22:12:53 -0500 (EST) From: Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-10-98 > According to Bill Wright(Author of the piglet press site),Dr.Nikidik faked > his death ,and moved from the gilikin country to the munchkin country.He did > this to prevent punishment,for he illegally practised magic.I accept this > satement,for as Bill wright says,no-one can really die in Oz,espesailly a > magicain.I also think that he may have pretended to die,because everyone > will then think him dead,and he can yet,secretly indulge in sorcery and > continue his magical inventions. > I doubt the fact that Nikidik and Pipt are two different people ,and > yet,there is proof........... > In -Patchwork girl-... > *.Margollotte says:"My husband foolishly gave away,all our magic powder to > Old mombi the witch." > *.And Ozma says:"It was Dr.Pipt's powder of life which enabled me to become > queen." > > So perhaps Ozma later found out that Dr.NIkidik was still living,and forgave > him,yet he continued practising magic.It could be that he settled down in > the Munchkin country,and became popular as Dr.Pipt,and was later found out > by Glinda and Ozma.SO it's quite possible that Dr.Nikidik and Pipt are the > same person.(Only Nikidik faked his death) > > --Gehan C.A Nikidik is the inventor of the famous wishing pills. Most likely, Mombi went to visit Dr. Pipt, who had happened to have Nikidik's wishing pills stashed away and forgot about them, or picked them up as a bonus in some trade and never looked at them, or knew they were in the container he gave to Mombi. He never mentions having made any such wishing pills. I seriously doubt Tip could have remembered a name Mombi mentioned in passing, and would most likely make a subconscious connection between the two, where none had existed. I do that all the time, and so do most people. My theory regarding magic, which I use in both my Oz books and _Monster in My Pocket_, is that it is good at specific tasks, but very bad at complex tasks, like construction or reconstruction of a building, creative tasks like writing (Private Files's books are most likely time-wasters, but only the one person who reads it knows for sure, unless he hires scribes now), or multitask projects. One scene in MIMP has Warlock end a church fire, but he does not reconstruct the church, because magic cannot be trusted with such a task. The same was stated in _Tip of Oz_ in regards to the damage inflicted on the Emerald City in _Giraffic Park_. Scott ====================================================================== From: "Bob Spark" Subject: RE: Ozzy Digest, 12-10-98 Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 19:38:57 -0800 Importance: Normal Ozmama, "Where do you feel the _Digest_ should draw the line?" I have an abhorrence of censorship and I don't find the few messages that might have been plugs to be that offensive. Certainly this forum could be abused, but we shouldn't overreact to "might have been's". Let's not holler 'till we're hit. Bob Spark ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 23:43:47 -0500 From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz Gehan: It is true that the Wizard declared himself King of all Oz, but then he holed up in the Emerald City and never left. I doubt very much that he had any actual authority beyond the green territory. It was probably part of his plan to appear mysterious and powerful. At that time, his main goal was to avoid the Wicked Witches, and he needed as much PR and spin as he could get. According to the non-FF _Oz and the Three Witches_, anyway. Lisa M: Yes, Baum did say that nobody could ever die in Oz, but he also said that people could be destroyed by accidents, and he does mention at least one death in passing. There is also at least one death in the RPT books. It seems that death, after the ascension of Ozma, is at best an extremely rare event, but it can happen. As for what happens after that, well, that's one that has plauged people since the beginning of time. Dave: Thanks for appreciating my words regarding marriage, etc. However, I must state for the record that Dave's statements about some of us not liking football do NOT apply to me :-) The NBA strike can go on until the Nome King conquers Oz, but give me my NFL! :-) That statement in _Kabumpo_ is about the closest thing to anti-marriage you'll find in the FF, but it seems to me that Ozma was against marriage at that time because she felt herself too young. I do not believe that Ozma felt personally threatened by the idea of marriage. If she did, she would not have helped Pompa to find his one true love. If a man can have a job and a family, and feel fulfilled and self-worthy, then why can't a woman as well? To put what Dave said another way, saying that a woman must choose marriage or career, and that one is good and one is bad, is in itself extremely sexist. Also, a person can choose one over the other and neither path of life is better than the other if the person makes the choice of their own free will. For the record, I know several "house husbands" who stay at home while their wives work. They don't consider themselves less masculine for doing so, and do not define themselves in terms of their "need" for a woman. I don't see why reversing the sexes should change anything. All paths in life (career, homemaker, both, etc.) are noble and worthy if the person makes the choice of their own free will and leads such a life honorably. Nobody is made lesser for falling in love. In fact, we are made greater for doing so. Tyler Jones ====================================================================== From: "Jeremy Steadman" Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 23:55:37 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-10-98 Spam: Pam is 'spam does, I guess . . . Wizard recognizing the Silver Shoes: Um, it's a nice theory, but personally I don't think the Wizard, being only a former mortal, is likely to be aware of the Shoes AND clever enough . . . well, maybe he'd recognize them from former encounters with the WWE, I guess, but I still think that's attributing an awful lot of guile to him. Baum didn't really characterize him as too bright, I don't think. No Extrication: I just say Glinda and Ozma want people to work out their own problems. (Yes, I say that, even though I always want someone ELSE to make decisions for me. Inconsistent? You bet!) Wanting Oz to be Real: What do you mean, people want it to be real?! It is real, isn't it? No, you say? Well, prove it!!! Nothing evil about men: That's news to me . . . ;-) Anyway, until next time, Jeremy Steadman, Royal Historian of Oz kivel99@planetall.com http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dimension/9619 ICQ# 19222665, AOL Inst Mssgr name kiex or kiex2 "A good example of a parasite? Hmmm, let me think... How about the Eiffel tower?" ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:58:07 +1100 From: shiromal@eureka.lk Subject: Polychrome in Oz Does anyone have a synopsis of-Polychrome in Oz-by Nate Barlow? Thanks, Gehan ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:28:38 -0600 From: "R. M. Atticus Gannaway" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-10-98 ROBIN: What is Spam(TM)? I think I'm afraid to know what Spam is... Seriously, though, I think at one time I used this forum to plug a book, but I did so very briefly, according to my recollection, and merely pointed the way to a URL. I don't think a short statement such as, "Such and such is now available at , feel free to check it out" would be offensive to anyone. Less brevity would probably begin to stir some ire. RE: DAVE HARDENBROOK'S JUSTIFICATIONS OF OZMA'S ROMANCE Ken Cope may have written along these same lines before, but since he doesn't seem to be around lately, I shall write in what I consider to be his spirit, at least to a certain extent. Is Ozma's romance obscene? No. Is it Ozzy? No, or at least inconsistent with what Oz was intended to be. It is a place for children. Robin discusses this in the last Digest when she talks about children's being able to identify with the characters. What child identifies with romance and marriage? Those elements DO exist with Pon and Gloria, Files and Ozga, Corum and Marygolden, etc., but those couples are clearly meant to be older than Ozma and her little friends. The fairy princess looks on as her older subjects get hitched and offers a little approving nod, not a wistful sigh. Oz is for children, first and foremost, and the whole point is that the land is ruled by a perpetually youthful girl fairy who embodies youthful celibacy. The adults and their romantic notions are not SUPPOSED to invade this space reserved for kids. At heart, Oz is childlike. Its ruler embodies that. That is the reason every Royal Historian has placed Ozma outside of romantic entanglements. She is supposed to symbolize innocence. This is not travesty or injustice, but simple ideological structure. To change Baum's Ozma paradigm so drastically is to do a disservice to his creation. I think Ken put it best when he said that if Ozma married anyone, it would be Dorothy. The kind of love she gives is simple and childlike, not romantic. This is what children understand. This is what Ozma understands. That said, you have the right to write whatever you wish, and I'm the first to defend that. Atticus * * * "...[T]here is something else: the faith of those despised and endangered that they are not merely the sum of damages done to them." Visit my webpage at http://members.aol.com/atty993 ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:55:46 +1100 From: shiromal@eureka.lk Subject: Betsy and Dorothy Here is something I find rather strange: In-Lost princess-Betsy says that she has never been to the Munchkin country.And she has lived in Oz for.....9 years(1908-1917 as in the HACC).Surely,she wont stay cooped up in the Emerald city for 9 years.Which brings up the other question.Wont Dorothy,Trot,Betsy and Button-bright and the rest be bored in Oz?I mean,they stay cooped up in the Emerald city all day,and dont do much travelling. Plus,speaking of Dorothy's age,I think she may have been 5,at the time of-wizard-and 11 at the time of-Emerald city-.(I think a 5 year old can be independent,depend on herself and have adventures.For I remember walking home from school when I was five.And in this country,the roads are not at all like those in America.)Little five year old Dorothy knew what a venroloquist was in-wizard-(Remeber the Wizard tells her,that he was a ventroloquist.She didnt say :"What's a ventroloquist?" and neither did the Cowardly lion or the Scarecrow.)But Fourteen year old Ozma doesnt know what a ventroloquist is,as in-Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz-.How strange. BTW,does anyone know what became of MRS.YOOP after Tinwoodman of Oz? --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:55:45 +1100 From: shiromal@eureka.lk Subject: The Tinwoodman Ruth Berman: >>Tinsoldire-you mean the tinwoodman I think>> No,I meant Cap.Fyter the tinsoldire.He says he and nimee-Amee planned to elope while the witch was away,but he rusted on his way to Nimee's cottage and could'nt make it.This means that he rusted before Dorothy's house landed on the witch.And that means,he was standing in the forest,while Dorothy and Scarecrow were passing that way,but she did'nt see him,she only saw Tinwoodman.Well,maybe the trees covered him,but surely,someone must have seen him later.I mean,someone must have walked that way .Otherwise ,he's been standing still for two decades(Between 1889-1918)During -wizard-and-Tinwoodman-.Tons of people may have walked that way,during two whole decades. Maybe Baum did'nt think of that when writing the story,for he was terribly ill.And considering the old woman to be the wicked witch herself,I think Baum just made a mistake in-Tinwoodman-for he was ill,and may have forgotten about what he wrote in-wizard-.Baum has made tons of mistakes in the books.This could be one of them. After all,this is all Baum's imagination,I mean,as far as many people are concerned,there really is no place called Oz. --Gehan Cooray. ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:52:10 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Oz Dave H: My presentation of the radical feminist viewpoint regarding _That Ozzy Feeling_ was mostly intended to be satirical of the very viewpoint it was supposedly espousing. I guess that didn't come across. Unfair of me to expect you to read my mind. I should have realized that you must be weary unto death of air-headed attacks against the concept of your book and just might fail to see the humor. And yes, all men _are_ evil - according to this particular weltanschauung. At the same time, there is a more moderate and legitimate form of feminism which deserves the support of all fair-minded people. This isn't it. Part of my intent was also to expose you to yet one more ridiculous argument as to why Ozma (and Glinda) should not have romantic interests. After all, the more absurd attacks you have to endure, the better able you will be to defend yourself against them. Now, as to the matter of age differential, Ozma being thousands of years old...robbing the cradle...yada yada...give me a break! Not _all_ arguments are worth refuting! Seriously, I can see no legitimate reason why it should be necessary for you to _have_ to defend yourself and the book against all these innumerable objections. If someone doesn't like it, there's no reason why they should have to buy it, read it, or consider it canonical. (And they won't, no matter how logical and reasonable your defense.) If they want to attack Ozish heresy, there's plenty of it in the comics that would, IMHO, provide a more fitting target. Aging in Oz: Speaking of age differences, Dorothy is over 100 by now. Presumably, Martin Gardner notwithstanding, she is still physically about 11. But how old is she mentally and emotionally? Has her development been somehow stunted by her physical age, or perhaps by the absence of the sword of Death hanging over her immortal head? The same goes for Trot, Betsy, and other immigrants. Do they exist eternally as the "same sweet little girl"s they were when they came to Oz, or have they gained a measure of (nonphysical) maturity and elder wisdom? I don't see any of them _acting_ any older in any of the FF. Speaking personally, I would hate to remain forever as stupid and naive as I was at age 11. (Or as I am now, for that matter). Other Planes: I see that the discussion of whether Oz is in this world or in some other dimension of reality is continuing to this very day in the Digest. Imagine my surprise to find that the same question was being considered (and the same arguments presented) in _The Baum Bugle_ back in Autumn 1968, more than thirty years ago. It's apparently not an easy question to settle. - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 19:45:16 -0500 From: David Levitan X-Accept-Language: en,ru Subject: Ozzy Digest Archive Hi, My archive has moved to http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9075/digest. I am planning to put all the digests that I have up. Also, if any of you have links on your web pages to the Oz e-books that I had, they have been moved. The following table shows how they were moved. The url with which the addresses start with is at the top of the column: Old (www.bendov.net) New (http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9075/books/) -------------------- ------------------------------------------------- 12woz10.txt /baum/12woz10.txt bs_magicalmimics.txt /snow/magicalmimics.txt bs_shaggyman.txt /snow/shaggyman.txt bt_captainsalt.txt /thompson/captainsalt.txt bt_handyman.txt /thompson/handyman.txt bt_ozoplaning.... /thompson/ozoplaningwithwizard.txt bt_royalbook.txt /thompson/royalbook.txt bt_silverprinc.... /thompson/silverprincess.txt bt_wishinghors.... /thompson/wishinghorse.txt The reason for these changes is that I am switching to a different ISP soon and wanted to warn everyone of the URL changes. Thank you, David Levitan wizardofoz@bigfoot.com ====================================================================== From: "International Wizard of Oz Club" Cc: "Dave L. Hardenbrook" Subject: RE: Beanie Babies Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 01:09:37 -0500 Importance: Normal Bonnie, I'm forwarding your question to the Ozzy Digest in hopes that one of the readers will be able to help. Sincerely, Jim Vander Noot The International Wizard of Oz Club http://www.ozclub.org -----Original Message----- From: NaBonMa@aol.com [mailto:NaBonMa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 1998 8:22 PM Subject: Beanie Babies Can someone tell me where I can get some information on the 10 Beanie Babies from the Wizard of Oz? Thank-You Bonnie ====================================================================== From: "Jim Vander Noot" Cc: "Dave L. Hardenbrook" Subject: RE: Please help Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 02:10:58 -0500 Importance: Normal I'm passing your inquiry on to the Ozzy Digest. You would probably want to provide more detail, such as manufacturer and description of the dolls and the case. Personally I would treat them as collectible. Sincerely, Jim Vander Noot The International Wizard of Oz Club http://www.ozclub.org -----Original Message----- From: OhioGordon@aol.com [mailto:OhioGordon@aol.com] Sent: Friday, November 27, 1998 7:13 AM Subject: Please help Can you tell me about the Wizard of Oz dolls I have. There is a case for them and they came out in about 1974. I have the hole set and wondered if they are a collectable. They were put up for me when I was a child and are in great condition. I wondered do I put them up, or let the kids have them. Thanks for the time to reply ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 14:44:37 -0600 From: Gordon Birrell Subject: Ozzy Digest A bibliographical question: I recently purchased a very late (DJ ads to _Hidden Valley_) printing of _Road to Oz_ and was surprised to see endpaper illustrations depicting Ozma, Tik-Tok, the Tin Woodman, Scraps, and others vigorously rolling hoops in the form of the Oz emblem. The original endpaper design for the book involved, of course, two large Oz emblems surrounded by scores of heads of Baum characters. The Bibliographia Oziana doesn't mention the new endpapers, which are unmistakeably the work of John Neill. My questions are: When were the altered endpapers introduced? Were they commissioned expressly for this book (which seems an improbable expense for a reprint), or were they perhaps drawn for some other past or future project? Many thanks to any of you who can shed some light on this! Some old business: Ruth Berman: As far as I can see, there is no German word that would fit with Nimmie to convey the same sense as the cross-language Nimmie Amee and still sound even remotely like a plausible name (Nimmee Geliebt??!). Baum could have taken the all-French route and come up with Jammie Amee, which is rather wonderful in its own right but probably too frivolous for Nick Chopper's erstwhile true love. (It sounds more like a RPT name, in fact.) It's true that authors don't generally mix languages like this (big exception: James Joyce), but on the other hand Button Bright's real name is a similar amalgamation of European allusions. If my explanation of the meaning of "Nimmie Amee" is correct, Baum might have thought that encoding it in two different languages would make the reference less obvious and intrusive--a sort of playful wink over the heads of the children to his adult readers. J.L. Bell: The "factoid" about the percentage of American students taking German prior to WWI appeared a couple of years ago in a scholarly article on German enrollments in American schools in the last century, in _Unterrichtspraxis_, the pedagogical journal of the American Association of Teachers of German. The percentage stated referred to students, not institutions, and I see no reason to question the validity of the figure. --Gordon Birrell ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 16:07:33 -0500 From: David Levitan Subject: Oz Web Ring Update To all members: The Member Area might be down in January. I am probably changing to a different Internet Service Provider and they do not support the programs that I use now. I will inform later as to what is happening with the member area, for now though, the member area is staying at its current address. Thank you, David Levitan Ringmaster ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 09:57:30 -0500 From: Chris Tower Subject: Oz questions Dave, I see you run an Oz mailing list. I am doing a research project and I am looking for interpretations of the Wizard of Oz as a literary text (either book or movie). Can you help? Thanks much peace chris tower [Can someone please forward the material this non-member wants to him? ( Do I have to do *everything*? :) ) -- Dave] ====================================================================== From: "Robert J Collinge" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-10-98 Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 22:05:11 -0500 Hi, All, To Spam or not to Spam...... IMHO, this is the Ozzy digest, and you can talk or post anything Ozzy, right? I don't mind people advertising their web pages or things for sales. If they get to be too much, I just scroll down past them. I always enjoy knowing where Ozzy things can be found. Again, that is only MHO. Ozzily, Bob C. ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 23:06:29 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Ozzy Feeling Dave H -- I wrote: >>If they want to attack Ozish heresy, there's plenty of it in the >>comics that would, IMHO, provide a more fitting target. Dave H replied: >I agree -- I find bringing graphic violence into Oz far more disturbing... Although I did roll on the floor laughing at the superhero version of the Wogglebug as reproduced in _The Baum Bugle_. I suppose some adolescent boys take this seriously, sad to say, but no one else could. I have been asked to comment, if I liked, on Atticus' comments. I'm afraid I really don't have too much to say; everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. The child version of Ozma that you present, Atticus, is one that many people cherish, (>the land is ruled by a perpetually youthful girl fairy who embodies youthful celibacy.< you wrote) but it is not the only version possible. I have been struggling for some time now with the problem of Oz as eternal paradise in which nothing ever changes and nobody ever grows or develops. Ozstory stops with the accession of Ozma. By what rule of law can Ozma not allow herself to grow up a few years and experience the beginnings of adult emotions? Would she not be able to understand some of her subjects better? Or must she always remain the same, unchanging, ungrowing, a plaster figurehead for us to worship? You say that the Oz books are primarily for children, and no doubt that has been the case for most of their history. Today, however, despite the deliberate efforts of IWOC and BoW to appeal to the kiddies and solicit their input, I would be willing to bet that the majority of Oz fans today are adult or late teens. (I could be wrong. I'm not privy to any demographic data.) As for _That Ozzy Feeling_, I say give the guy a chance. There have been a lot worse things published. And who knows? You _might_ even like it! - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 13 Dec 98 23:24:16 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things OZZIE ISN'T OZZY: Just so no one feels that the perodic mistaking of the Ozzy Digest for an Ozzie Osbourne fan club is a unique anomaly, today on another mailing list I'm on I mentioned that I am a fan of "The Importance of Being Earnest" (as in Ernest "Jack" Worthing). Shortly thereafter, someone E-mailed me introducing himself as "A fellow Jim Varney fan" (as in Ernest P. Worrell)... ROMANCE IN OZ: R. M. Atticus Gannaway wrote: > Oz is for children, first and foremost, and the whole point is that >the land is ruled by a perpetually youthful girl fairy who embodies >youthful celibacy. The whole point of Oz is that it is a utopian land of happiness, peace, kindness, and just a little bit of magic. My challenge still stands to find ANY passage in ANY book in the FF in which it is stated or implied beyond a reasonable doubt that "youthful celibacy" is an essential ingredient to the "Oz formula". Because otherwise, with due respect, I think you are espousing your own personal feelings about Oz as "sacred, final truth". You have a right to those feelinga, naturally, but I have a right to mine. >The adults and their romantic notions are not SUPPOSED to invade >this space reserved for kids. At heart, Oz is childlike. Its ruler >embodies that. That is the reason every Royal Historian has placed Ozma >outside of romantic entanglements. She is supposed to symbolize innocence. I think we're back to the "Kochanski 'Pinball-Smile' Syndrome"...To refresh everyone's memory, this is my term for a situation in which a character in a particular literary universe is singled out as an "angelic ideal goddess" who is "above" anything resembling normal humanity. The classic example is Kristine Kochanski in "classic" Red Dwarf lore, the "forbidden" object of Dave Lister's affections. Kochanski and her "pinball smile" remain perfect, angelic, and to be admired from afar. Another example is Bess (a.k.a. "Goldilocks"), Amy's daughter in Louisa May Alcott's _Jo's Boys_, who's considered a "princess" to be respectfully worshipped, but is too delecate and precious to experience true love, and so the guy who loves her -- and who not totally coincidentially is named Dan -- is turned away, told repeatedly that Bess the "Fairy Princess" is too far above him, and must remain a "childlike symbol of innocence" (And as a result, Bess is by far the weakest, most two-dimensional character Alcott ever came up with) ... And a third example is Ozma, as depicted by you and others. But just as Kris Kochanski has recently joined the Red Dwarf crew and become "humanized", I think it's time Ozma was allowed to expand and develop her character, become more than just an "icon" who sits around in a state of childlike bliss, and have real life experiences and emotions, including love...lest she suffer Bess's sad fate. >The kind of love she gives is simple and childlike, not romantic. >This is what children understand. And once again I have to ask, If children "don't understand" and "don't identify with" romantic love, then where did all those fairy tales and Disney movies with romance in them come from? And if Ozma is to be forever "childlike", then why do so many Oz illustrators depict Ozma looking so -- er, um -- *appealing* to grown males? And why do I keep meeting guys who tell me that when they were young and reading Oz they wanted to *marry* Ozma?! Do these people as well as myself all have a totally twisted perception of Ozma and Oz? Or is it *just possible* that there is more than one way to perceive Ozma and Oz? ( I was going to respond to David G.'s comments as well, but I find that I can't improve on them. :) ) -- Dave ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ "What is Reality anyway...? Nothin' but a collective *hunch*!" -- Lily Tomlin ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 14, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== From: "Bob Spark" Subject: For the Ozzie Digest Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 07:47:46 -0800 Importance: Normal " A bibliographical question: I recently purchased a very late (DJ ads to _Hidden Valley_) printing of _Road to Oz_ and was surprised to see endpaper illustrations depicting Ozma, Tik-Tok, the Tin Woodman, Scraps, and others vigorously rolling hoops in the form of the Oz emblem." I have no idea when my copy of "Road to Oz" was printed (How does one determine this? There is nothing in the front of the book to tell me which edition it is.) but I have had it since I was a small child and I was born in 1940. The end papers have the whole group rolling the Oz emblem hoops. Bob Spark ====================================================================== From: Ozmama@aol.com Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 11:01:52 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-13-98 David Hulan:<_Speedy_ is my second favorite RPT, but _Wishing Horse_ is not only my favorite of hers, but my favorite Oz book period. (It was also the second one I ever read.)>> LOL! Sometimes I vote for _Wishing Horse_ as my favorite R.P.T., and sometimes for _Speedy_. It's the reading that got me: Gureeda reads and Ruth treats that as if it's o.k. I guess I can't get over the childhood sense of identification. And I love Terrybubble, right down to the dreadful naming of him. _W. Horse_ has just the best equine character ever. Period. Chalk is toooo cool! But _Ozma_ is still my alltime fave of the series. Atticus: "Spam" is unsolicited advertising. I have no problem with brief mentions of available Ozzy items. Tone matters, too. Mentioning something is fine and dandy. Telling that you like it is great. Touting it is not, but that's just my opinion, and I have no particular plans to try to make this a humongous issue on the _Digest_. --Robin ====================================================================== From: Ozisus@aol.com Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 11:03:59 EST Subject: Oz 2000 Dave Hulan: When I talked to Barbara she did say you'd offered something but didn't tell me what it was. She's also asked Gina Wickwar to do a presentation, and can give one herself. I believe that was it. Since we have four days and as many as a dozen opportunities (of which I hope she'll fill about 8 "slots" then duplicate others) it just really seemed like a low response. In the "wild card" category of things that don't fit neatly into the five topical tracks, I've already had more than twice that many options presented. I also agree that panel discussions are less difficult to prepare than individual papers, and hope a couple people will propose some interesting topics, line up panelists and pull them together. Jane ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 12:54:52 -0600 From: "R. M. Atticus Gannaway" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-13-98 DAVID G.: I appreciate your role as freedom-fighter, I really do, but in this case you must understand there's no fire to fight. In fact, there's not even a glass cat to rescue from a tree, and I'm afraid you're wasting your energy. A cursory glance at my comments, particularly the LAST PARAGRAPH which is SET OFF from the rest, reveals the following CLEAR statement: >That said, you have the right to write whatever you wish, and I'm the first >to defend that. To this you reply: >As for _That >Ozzy Feeling_, I say give the guy a chance. There have been a lot worse >things published. >And who knows? You _might_ even like it! When did I say I didn't think the book was good? When did I say he didn't have every right to write it? (In fact, I ***explicitly*** stated the opposite.) Like I said, I'm the first one to defend that right. For you to take on that role against me is superfluous and mischaracterizes my statement through a selective reading of it. DAVE HARDENBROOK: >The whole point of Oz is that it is a utopian land of happiness, peace, >kindness, and just a little bit of magic. My challenge still stands to >find ANY passage in ANY book in the FF in which it is stated or implied >beyond a reasonable doubt that "youthful celibacy" is an essential ingredient >to the "Oz formula". Because otherwise, with due respect, I think you are >espousing your own personal feelings about Oz as "sacred, final truth". >You have a right to those feelinga, naturally, but I have a right to mine. With due respect, you also are espousing your own feelings about Oz. My statement was an interpretation of foregoing textual/"historical" evidence. I think it's unfortunate that you react as though I were trying to take away your right to your opinion simply by stating my own. Did you simply IGNORE the last sentence in what I wrote? (Here it is AGAIN, for absolute clarity...) >That said, you have the right to write whatever you wish, and I'm the first >to defend that. Take a chill-pill, man. We both have our interpretation, and it's as ridiculous for you to ask for explicit textual evidence that Ozma must be "youthfully celibate" as it is for me to ask, "Where does it say that Ozma should get married?" I think it's fine to interpret Oz variously; we all do it, and I honestly find it hilarious that you seem to think I'm close-minded. You might ask a couple of people on here who know me personally about that. Does an opinion necessarily close a mind? Not hardly. I simply posit, "What isn't broken doesn't necessarily have to be fixed." It's kind of like the scalawagons. Some people just have to ask, "Why?" If you want to use Oz to express your support for committed relationships, all righty then. Just don't expect everyone to agree wholeheartedly with that modus operandi. Because I think that deep down, my friend, that sort of agreement is what you're looking for, and I'll save you a lot of grief by telling you that you won't find it. Never. So write what you will, and don't try so hard to convert. I'm not. I simply ask that from now on you try to give my comments a COMPLETE, fair-minded reading. I've never mischaracterized your statements ("What? Ozma gets DEFLOWERED?") or tried to convert you ("My way is the only way, and your having an opposing opinion means that you don't respect my opinion") and ask that I be extended similar courtesy. I refuse to be misread. Atticus P.S. Do adults or children write fairy tales and Disney movies? 'Nuff said. * * * "...[T]here is something else: the faith of those despised and endangered that they are not merely the sum of damages done to them." Visit my webpage at http://members.aol.com/atty993 ====================================================================== From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-13-98 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 12:26:15 PST David Hulan: >I don't think _Land_ implies that Glinda had the GBR at that time - >rather >the reverse, since she refers to information she got about the Wizard >from >"spies." If she had the GBR, why would she need spies? The first >reference >to the GBR (as her "Magic Book") is in _Emerald City_. It's possible that she had the book, but did not want to reveal this fact, so she invented the spies as an alternative reason for why she knew so much about the Wizard. Perhaps the spies filled in details on which the book was sketchy. Or perhaps Glinda didn't have the book until around _Emerald City_. >From the Oz as Literature point of view, I think that Baum imagined >Oz as somewhere on the North American continent in the first two >books, >probably down in the "Four Corners" area or maybe central Nevada. >This is >consistent with the length of time Dorothy was in the air in >_Wizard_, with >a realistic distance for a balloon flight, and perhaps most >explicitly with >finding large numbers of bills in dollar denominations in the >jackdaws' >nest just outside the desert. I don't think the dollar was a currency >denomination outside the US and Canada in the early part of this >century, >though it's more recently been adopted by Australia and I think New >Zealand >as well. I agree with this. As for dollars, though, "The Queen of Quok" makes it known that Quok (and possibly its neighboring countries) use dollars and cents, and Haff and Martin's map does indeed show the jackdaws' nest as being close to Quok. Tyler: >There is also at least one death in the RPT books. When does this happen? Gehan: >Wont Dorothy,Trot,Betsy and Button-bright and >the rest be bored in Oz?I mean,they stay cooped up in the Emerald >city all >day,and dont do much travelling. I don't know if I would really compare living in the Emerald City to being "cooped up." There's probably plenty to do within the city. It does seem a bit odd that Betsy would never have entered the Munchkin Country until after _Lost Princess_, though. Perhaps Baum intended the book to take place only a few months or so after _Scarecrow_. >Little five year old Dorothy knew what a >venroloquist was in-wizard-(Remeber the Wizard tells her,that he was >a >ventroloquist.She didnt say :"What's a ventroloquist?" and neither >did the >Cowardly lion or the Scarecrow.)But Fourteen year old Ozma doesnt >know what >a ventroloquist is,as in-Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz-.How strange. I would imagine that ventriloquism was not as popular in Oz as it was in the United States, so Ozites did not really know about it. That doesn't explain why the Scarecrow and the Lion would know what a ventriloquist was, though. (You generally don't encounter too many ventriloquists in cornfields or forests.) Perhaps they didn't know, but just didn't want to question the Wizard. Nathan Mulac DeHoff ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 00:16:05 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-10-98 12/10: Robin (and others): My own opinion is that if the ads that appear on the Digest are for Ozzy items, and aren't excessively long but mostly point us to URLs where we can get more information on the subject if we're interested, they're unobjectionable. Ads for non-Oz-related items should, I think, be eliminated before they appear on the Digest - but my philosophy would be, "When in doubt, include it." It's not as if it takes materially longer to download an extra 10K or so of Digest if it comes to that, and such posts are easily scrolled past with a couple of keystrokes if one isn't interested (and I'm generally not). Ads and spam aren't synonymous, after all, at least in my understanding of the latter term. It applies to the kind of unsolicited stuff that no recipient in his or her right mind would be interested in. (Unfortunately, since a lot of people on the Net aren't in their right minds, it draws enough response that people keep sending it.) Gehan: It's certainly true that we don't know of anything much the WWW could do of a magical nature. She was clearly a good strategist - with two uses of the Golden Cap she succeeded in enslaving the Winkies and driving out the Wizard - but that's really the only magical power she demonstrates. Otherwise she has a wolfpack, a beehive, and a cowardly lot of Winkies who will do her bidding, but they all seem to be natural rather than supernatural. She does have an eye that's extremely powerful, but that's about it. Mombi, Glinda, the WWE, and even the GWN seem to have more power - for that matter, so does Gloma, though she apparently didn't see fit to challenge the WWW on her own territory. Lisa: >What happens to a person who dies in Oz? I know the Wicked Witch of the >East was so old she turned to dust, but Baum said in TIN WOODMAN, IIRC, >that *nobody* can die. Baum says in several places that Ozites can be destroyed, though (at least, after Ozma's accession) they don't age or die naturally. In other places he implies that an Ozite who is chopped up or eaten by an animal remains alive in small pieces, though this isn't a very useful state in which to live. David G.: > If Neill's illustrations are to be trusted, he [Toto] also did a certain >amount of shapeshifting from breed to breed between one book and another. >I've always thought of him as a cairn terrier, but in _Road_ he looks more >like a boxer or something. It was kind of interesting when I used Toto as the narrator of the October _Emerald City Mirror_ serial installment. Pulling illustrations of him from several different books rather graphically brought home the extent to which Neill changed his thoughts as to which breed of dog he was. (In _Road_ and _Emerald City_ I believe the breed shown is the Boston Bull Terrier, or at least that's what they called in in my younger days.) J.L.: >The tin man has made "a lovely girdle set with beautiful tin >nuggets." When I first read MAGIC in the early 1970s, I knew girdles only >as undergarments, not belts, and I remember thinking, "Wouldn't Ozma hurt >herself wearing that?" Reminds me of a misconception I had back when I first read the Oz books, not that it connected with them uniquely - I knew the term "girdle" as a belt from my reading, but I'd never seen the undergarment's name written out, and thought it would be spelled "gertle." Had to be some way to distinguish such distinct concepts, right? Dave: A week from Monday sounds reasonable for me to start on _Glinda_. >But Stephen Hawking at least is convinced that all possible realities -- >including ones that include Oz -- play out their existance in other >universes... That's basically the concept behind _Glass Cat_. Wherever Oz may be, it's there somewhere. 12/13: A brief fill-in here: A few months ago I used the term "croggle" on the Digest, and a significant discussion ensued. Ruth traced its origin in SF fandom to Dean Grennell, and I undertook to query him about whether he'd made it up, and if so what its origins were. He replied that he had run across the term in the world of cartooning - that in the '40s, at least, "croggle" was the term used for the little bubbles that floated around the head of a person in a comic strip who was drunk or had been hit on the head or was otherwise operating at less than full mental capacity. So the search for the actual origin of the word has been moved yet farther back - anybody checked the OED? :-) Tyler: I'm with you, to a degree - I'm not the NFL fan that I once was (back when the Rams were a real team with a real owner and played in Southern California), but I still usually watch one or two games a weekend, and have a decided hierarchy of which teams I want to win (with the Bears at the top and the Cowboys at the bottom, FWIW). I don't follow other football, though, other than through the sports pages and then desultorily. These days I'm a "house husband," and have been since we moved to Illinois almost three years ago now. I like it and so does Marcia. Of course, I had a 35-year career in the workplace first, but I don't see why it should be any more couth for a woman to stay home and keep house than for a man to do the same. That's pretty much what my brother has done for most of his adult life; as long as his wife doesn't mind, why should anyone else? Atticus: I don't think there's anything wrong with Dave (or anyone else) writing an Oz book in which Ozma has a romance, and I can easily envision liking such a book quite a lot. My sole objection (if you can call it that) is that I don't think such a book should be considered binding on other Oz writers, because it makes such a major change in the infrastructure of Oz that it would create difficulties. Ditto wedding bells for Glinda or the Wizard, letting Dorothy or Betsy or Trot grow up, turning Scraps or the Scarecrow into Real People (a la Pinocchio), or the like. Such stories can be fun, but my feeling is that they should be considered one-offs, or at least part of a divergent series, rather than part of the HACC. Gehan: Betsy has always seemed rather shy and introverted to me, and it wouldn't surprise me particularly if she went several years without leaving the Emerald City. And if nothing in particular drew her to the Munchkin country (and what would, as of _Lost Princess_? The celebrities like the Scarecrow, Tin Woodman, and Jack Pumpkinhead all live in the Winkie country; Glinda lives in the Quadling. What would she know of in the Munchkin country that would attract her?) she might well go even nine years without heading in that direction. Dorothy is much more adventurous, and Trot somewhat more. Out of curiosity, what country do you live in? "lk" isn't an address that I recognize. And "Gehan Cooray" isn't a set of names that suggests a nationality very specifically, though it looks vaguely Celtic or possibly Dutch/Afrikaans or even Indian/Pakistani. David G.: MOPPeT is that the mortal children in Oz gain substantially in knowledge and somewhat in wisdom, but don't change much emotionally from the age they were when they got there. I think this is fairly consistent with the FF; Dorothy's actions in _Wishing Horse_, for instance, seem to be much more knowledgeable and mature than they were in _Wizard_ or even _Lost Princess_. (There was considerable regression in some ways in _Glinda_, but she was still a pretty darn sharp kid when it came down to the nitty-gritty.) Gordon: The hoop-rolling endpapers originally appeared in _Giant Horse_, I'm reasonably sure. I have an early edition of that one that has the "Oniberon" typo on the frontispiece, so I'm pretty sure that those are the original endpapers as well. Since they had nothing to do with that book, they were probably ones that R&L thought would be good to use on a late copy of _Road_ - possibly because the original _Road_ endpapers were 2-color, and they could save a few bucks by going to a monochrome one. David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 23:37:06 -0500 From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz David H. and John Bell: I think that the true distinction has finally been uncovered: the Oz as Literature versus Oz as history. John's main arguements are based on Baum's intent and his vision of what he wanted Oz to be. David (and myself) are arguing from Oz as history. David Hulan: Your idea about "Oz" only including the EC is fairly interesting, but it doesn't explain the family's association with Morrow. I also do not believe that Pastoria or his ancestors ruled the entire area, but their kingdom must have extended at least a little bit beyond the green area. Jeremy: I don't that washes at all. We're pretty sure that the Wizard had been in Oz for several years before Dorothy's arrival, and has had not a few encounters with the Wicked Witches (of course, I'm drawing from some non-FF sources). Also, remember that the Fab Four were in the Emerald City for a day before the Wizard spoke with them all, and I'm sure he had them watched. It wouldn't have taken much of a leap to recognize the Silver Shoes and perhaps even the kiss of the Good Witch of the North. If the Wizard was as simple as you make him out to be, he never would have risen to the top of the Emerald City. I found him pretty cunning. David GOdwin: The question of Dorothy's (etc.) emotional and intellectualy maturity was raised a while ago when someone else was trying to make an Oz scenario for a game called GURPS. Characters get point for various skills as they go through life. Children are generally assigned 75 Points, and I wondered if a modern Dorothy should have more, given her century of experience. Hmmm. Dave H: Are you also a fan of Frank and Ernest? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Sorry, I had to say it. Atticus wrote: > I think Ken put it best when he said that if Ozma married anyone, it would be Dorothy. Hmmm, read March Laumer much? :-) Tyler Jones ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 13:54:21 +1100 To: DaveH47@mindspring.com From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: The Magic of Oz Thhere are lots of un-fit facts in Magic of Oz.Here are a few: 1.In-Patchwork Girl-The Wizard replaces Bungle's pink brains with new,more humble ones.(Did he do the same to her heart)?But in-Magic-she's as vain and selfish as before and she has the pink brains. 2.Ozma only invites her close friends for her birthday.(She Doesn't even invite the Good witch of the North) 3.Baum does not identify the Glass cat as Bungle anywhere. 4.Dorothy didn't ask Betsy what her present was. 5.Ruggedo says that Dorothy and Ozma and the Oz folk drove him out of Nomeland.But it was actually The Great Jinjin. 6.In the previous books,the Oz folk are called Ozmies.But in-Magic-they are called Ozmies. ?????????????????????????????????????????????? Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 98 22:53:21 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things THE NOT-SO-GREAT DEBATE: I'm sure many on the Digest will be happy to learn that I've decided to pull the plug on the debate on _That Ozzy Feeling_, before it's too late... Every time the question of Romance in Oz surfaces on the Digest, instead of the usual, friendly debate we usually engage in, somehow it always escalates into a cyber-food-fight, with people interpreting rebuttals to their arguements as personal attacks. I don't know why this issue of Ozzy romance is such a grenade with the pin taken out, but there it is. And I know I can get as excessively passionate as anyone, though I am only trying to fight for the right for my book to be read and fairly judged, which can only happen if it's published and made generally available; and the current atmosphere among Oz publishers has, to my perception, shut the door on that possibility. And anyone who comes to my defense are likewise merely calling for that right for _That Ozzy Feeling_ to see the light of day, and we are speaking to the Oz community as a whole, *not* attempting to attack or degrade any individual who thinks differently than I. So while I will not censor anyone, I'm not going to respond any further on the Digest to statements about my book, and ask that if you have a statement to make on this issue, please do so in private. I can see that doing otherwise will only result in more inflamed tempers and hurt feelings, and I think we'd all agree that that *certainly* isn't Ozzy. This should be a *friendly* forum. I'm just so sorry people *do* insist on making this into a "personal" issue... It seems to me that with Clinton and Iraq and world hunger, there's so many more important things we could be getting angry and inflamed about... -- Dave ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ "What is Reality anyway...? Nothin' but a collective *hunch*!" -- Lily Tomlin ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 15 - 16, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== From: "Bob Spark" Subject: RE: Ozzy Digest, 12-13-98 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 07:19:07 -0800 Importance: Normal All, "In the previous books,the Oz folk are called Ozmies.But in-Magic-they are called Ozmies." Huh? "croggle", "anybody checked the OED? :-)" Just did. No such animal. Bob Spark ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:40:29 -0500 From: Lisa Mastroberte X-Accept-Language: en Subject: Ozzy Matters That Ozzy Feeling: Really, what is wrong with Ozma getting married? I myself think that would be sweet. Has anybody ever read "The Patchwork Bride of Oz"? *********Possible Spoiler*********************** Scraps and the Scarecrow get married because the Love Magnet, one Christmas Eve, shines on them and they fall in love. Personally, I think that book was adorable! Besides, in _Patchwork_, the Scarecrow thinks Scraps is very beautiful. (And vice versa) ***************End Spoiler********************* I mean, what would be wrong if Glinda, say, got married to the Wizard? :) R.P.T. Books: So far, I have read _Royal Book_, _Cowardly Lion_, _Lost King_, _Hungry Tiger_, _Gnome King_, and _Jack Pumkinhead_. So far, my fave RPT _Hungry Tiger_. But, my fave out of the whole series is Ozma of Oz. The intro to the Tiger is so cute. -Lisa --------------------- "There's not a word yet for old friends who just met." Gonzo in "The Muppet Movie" ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 11:08:45 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-13-98 David: There was some controversy some years ago over Notre Dame's Fighting Irish (I saw it on the news, and my left but cool history teacher, Bill Gulde, brought it up, too.) In _Tip of Oz_, I went into great detail about Ozma's silver wand, including a no-prize style explanation of why Neill's depiction of it is different from in the text. I tended to go into great detail in many places, greater than Oz books tend to have, usually into things which are very intricate, even if commonplace for Oz. Ruth: I tend to mix languages in my writing. Another acclaimed writer to do this was Shakespeare. David G.: At least in the _Oz_ comicbooks I've read, Wogglebug really wasn't played as much of a superhero. He looks like that because he is supposed to be taken seriously. Would you take Neill's Wogglebug seriously in high adventure? Dave: Those olf fairy tales were not written for children. They are folktales, which were later perceived as children's literature because children were part of the intended audience. They were also written in a time when it was not unusual for 12 year olds to get married. Scott ===================================== Scott Andrew Hutchins http://php.iupui.edu/~sahutchi Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Frances: I've led a pretty boring life compared to yours. Freddy [the neighbor]: Mine was pretty boring, too. I've just got a knack for picking out the interesting bits. --David Williamson _Travelling North_ Act Two Scene Three ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:22:11 -0600 From: "R. M. Atticus Gannaway" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-13-98 THE DEBATE'S END: >I'm just so sorry people *do* insist on making this into a "personal" >issue... It seems to me that with Clinton and Iraq and world hunger, there's >so many more important things we could be getting angry and inflamed about... I completely support the removal of discussion over something that isn't even published yet. Let me reiterate I never wanted to start a debate; I simply felt my statement of opinion was mischaracterized and overreacted to. That is what annoyed me; I could give two hoots and a holler if you publish the book, and more power to you if you do! (David Hulan summed up my own sentiments exactly in this issue of the Digest.) Doesn't keep *me* up at night... By the way, Clinton, Iraq, and world hunger would be impossibly off-topic. ;) (However, I might add that Hillary's new Socks and Buddy book is kinda cute.) TYLER: >Atticus wrote: >> I think Ken put it best when he said that if Ozma married anyone, it >would be Dorothy. > >Hmmm, read March Laumer much? :-) Not really, no, but I know to what you refer. I assume you know I meant a bond of purely platonic love. Actually, though, I think it's presumptuous to assume Ozma's (or anyone's) heterosexuality. Chew on that one a bit. And no, let's not discuss that one further. GENERAL QUESTION: This is slightly off-topic too, but only a brief foray: anyone have any great suggestions for things I can't miss in New York City? I'll be there the 23rd through the 27th. Atticus * * * "...[T]here is something else: the faith of those despised and endangered that they are not merely the sum of damages done to them." Visit my webpage at http://members.aol.com/atty993 ====================================================================== From: Ozisus@aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 11:36:23 EST Subject: Oz question Nathan poses an interesting question: "There's probably plenty to do within the [Emerald] city." What do you suppose the fair city's citizens do for entertainment when not employed, or off having undocumented adventures? Are concerts or stage productions ever mentioned in the FF? 'Spose someone's producing films in Oz by now? Just a book-reading, flower-picking, board-game playing community with an infrequent race between the Sawhorse and a contender thrown in from time to time? Posit away, digesters. It would be interesting to hear how you think these folks spend their time. Jane ====================================================================== From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-13-98 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:16:51 PST David: >It's certainly true that we don't know of anything much the WWW could >do of >a magical nature. She was clearly a good strategist - with two uses >of the >Golden Cap she succeeded in enslaving the Winkies and driving out the >Wizard - but that's really the only magical power she demonstrates. >Otherwise she has a wolfpack, a beehive, and a cowardly lot of >Winkies who >will do her bidding, but they all seem to be natural rather than >supernatural. She does have an eye that's extremely powerful, but >that's >about it. She also made a bar of iron invisible, and was able to recognize Dorothy's innocence by looking into her eyes. Gehan: >2.Ozma only invites her close friends for her birthday.(She Doesn't >even >invite the Good witch of the North) The relatively small size of this party, when compared to the enormous affair in _Road_, is interesting. I suppose Ozma sometimes likes her parties to be small, personal affairs. >3.Baum does not identify the Glass cat as Bungle anywhere. True, but many of Baum's characters were usually referred to by descriptions rather than names. These include the Tin Woodman, the Patchwork Girl, and the Soldier with Green Whiskers. All of these characters have names, but they were not used all that frequently. -- May you live in interesting times, Nathan DinnerBell@tmbg.org http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/5447/ ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:14:21 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Spam in Oz Spam: To clarify my own ideas on the subject, which seem to be shared by a lot of Digest posters: This is acceptable on the Diget: This is dubious: *This* is not acceptable: < ********** DEAL OF A LIFETIME! ********** - - AUTHENTIC MUNCHKIN TOENAIL CLIPPINGS - - Produced during the filming of the world-famous MGM spectacular, The Wizard of Oz, these toenail clippings are guaranteed to be authentic! Be the first on your block to own . . . - - AUTHENTIC MUNCHKIN TOENAIL CLIPPINGS - - Run, don't walk, to http://www.munchkintoenailclippings.com!!! ********** DEAL OF A LIFETIME! **********> Just in case anyone should take this seriously, this is all just meant to be illustrative of different ways of approaching a subject. There is no such website as http://www.munchkintoenailclippings.com, and no, I don't know where you can get authentic Munchkin toenail clippings. I also think the whole idea is disgusting, but so are some of the authentic offers I have seen. - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 05:05:36 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Anthony Donajkowski Subject: cowerdly lion sale fetches 250G 'Cowardly Lion' Sale Fetches $250G 'Cowardly Lion' Sale Fetches $250G LOS ANGELES (AP) _ A shirt Leonardo DiCaprio wore in ``Titanic'' and Michael Keaton's Batman suit fetched thousands of dollars apiece at a Hollywood memorabilia auction, but neither came close to the Cowardly Lion costume worn by Bert Lahr in ``The Wizard of Oz,'' which sold for $250,000. DiCaprio's shirt brought $10,000 at the auction Saturday. The Batman suit went for $60,000. The Cowardly Lion costume included the original body of lion pelts, and a remade headpiece, event publicist Dianne Bennett said. Another ``Oz'' item, the Wicked Witch's hat used in the scene where she exclaims ``I'm melting!,'' sold for $50,000. Other items sold at the ``Hollywood: A Collector's Ransom 5'' auction included a cane used by Charlie Chaplin in ``The Masquerader'' _ it went for $16,000 _ and greeting cards from Princess Diana. Two cards sold for $6,500 each. ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 13:51:04 -0500 From: Michael Turniansky Subject: ozzy currency.. David Hulan asks: > I don't think the dollar was a currency > denomination outside the US and Canada in the early part of this century, > though it's more recently been adopted by Australia and I think New Zealand > as well. (Incidentally, does anyone know why the symbol for "dollar" is $?) Most references that I have seen say that dollar sign was adopted from the abbreviation for pesos (a p with a superscripted s). Eventually, the line of the p extended upward, where it meged with the s. Another folk explanation, but one given little credence is that the double-lined $ sign came from the letter U superimposed on S (United States), with the bottom of the U removed. --Mike "Lucky Bucky :-)" Turniansky ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 13:58:51 -0500 From: "J. L. Bell" Subject: Oz-as-ambiguity On the spam issue, I see a difference between reporting Ozzy material available for sale and hawking it. I've bought books that digest members mentioned having for sale. I've posted order info on other books (in which I had no stake). But the message which prompted the spam complaint went beyond reporting goods: <<...And the price couldn't be beat! Ann is a very nice lady to work with, and she accepts charge cards, so check it out and have fun!!! Also, she has a lot of items that are not on her website so if you don't see something you want be sure and ask! Happy Oz Shopping and Happy Holidays to all!!!>>. It's tough to draw a line between reporting and hawking, but density of exclamation points may be one indicator of spam. David Hulan wrote: <> The panel-discussion format does seem like the best approach, as long as panelists can disagree energetically and wittily. Other issues might be the more general qualities of life like "Time in Oz" or "How Much Does American Culture Affect Oz?" Eventually, all our views probably boil down to "Here's what I believe, here are the four books why, and here are the three books why not." Each may need a warning sign like that you set on your "Where is Oz?" analysis: <>! Which brings me to David Hulan writing: <> I admitted *not* being able to reconcile what the books tell us about Oz with what science tells us about the universe. Where we differ is that I don't conclude, "Since Baum's journeys don't add up, I must disregard a crucial quality that distinguishes Oz from the fairylands that came before it." And while I entertain that Baum may have missed or fudged details, I don't allow that he misstated a fundamental characteristic of Oz, which Tyler Jones does in saying <> Instead, my position is that how exactly Oz is on Earth remains a mystery, but that Baum's books tell us Earth contains many such mysteries. For nearly every passage you see as forcing Oz into another dimension, the books hint at forces that can resolve what seems irreconcilable. The journeys seem awfully quick--but ROAD and SCARECROW tell us that there are powerful entities in the sky and sea we can't see. Oz should have been spotted by now--but EMERALD CITY tells us it was magically hidden. Tititi-Hoochoo's land would have to be on Earth, too--but TIK-TOK tells us its inhabitants are powerful fairies who easily make themselves invisible. However many anomalies there are to explain, Baum's cosmology never forces us into disbelieving his presentation of Oz as a fairyland on a fairy-filled Earth. I think my position squares with an Oz-as-history approach because the study of history requires the ability to deal with ambiguity. It involves evidence that's incomplete or contradictory. Historians have to admit, "We don't know what person A said to person B. We don't know what person C's motives were. We don't know where person D was." In their writings, they state the limits of their knowledge. Often they lay out varying explanations of the evidence, saying which they think is most likely but not ruling out the others that are still possible. In studying the past, historians aim to discern an objective reality: events did actually happen, people did actually say and think certain things, even if we can't recreate exactly what. That objective reality can give rise to new evidence: unstudied documents, archeological discoveries, DNA tests. That's why historical writing (the past-as-literature) gives way to new findings (the past-as-history). Contrary to politically motivated grousing, all historiography is "revisionist." The problem with applying that model too firmly to Oz is that no objective reality lies below the books; no new evidence will turn up to better inform us (unless the bulk of Oz fans agree to add a newly published work to the canon). The Royal Historians' books are not merely the previous generation of interpretations, they're the firmest ground we have to stand on. Therefore, when we look at competing explanations of contradictory evidence about Oz, I think we should defer to their explanations first, and be wary of overturning their fundamental statements along with their details. Trying too hard to make everything add up can leave us with zero. For instance, a basic quality of Oz and its neighbors is that magic works there. Yet without even trying hard we can all list anomalies about even the most often familiar tools: the Magic Picture, the Great Book of Records, the Magic Belt, the Powder of Life. If internal contradictions mean we should reject Baum's placement of Oz on Earth, they may also mean we should reject his statements about magic working at all. Of course, we don't want to do that. Instead, we work with details to explain the gaps: the Powder of Life changed, the Magic Belt has different operating systems, and so on. Similarly, trying so hard to locate Oz that we move it onto another planet or into another dimension strikes me as discarding one of Baum's loveliest ideas. I'm happier with the ambiguity of not knowing where Oz is on this Earth than the disappointment of deciding it must be on another. Dave Hardenbrook wrote: <> I don't think one need entertain the notion that Oz is real to judge some writing as not true to the model Baum and his successors created. We recognize that Noel Langley, Philip Jose Farmer, Gregory Maguire, and the OZ COMICS creators wrote stories that deviated from Baum's Oz. It's also important to distinguish between censuring Oz writings (or, as seems more common, saying that one doesn't see them fitting with the canon) and censoring them. I haven't seen anyone engage in the latter since LAUGHING DRAGON was put out of print over copyright infringement. Speaking of Gregory Maguire's WICKED, I finished reading it last weekend. Technically I thought the novel was quite well done, especially in depicting those oddly intense college/post-college relationships. Lots of good wordplay, too. But I came away thinking the book wasn't so much a dystopic take on Oz as a dyspeptic one. The characterizations seemed to be an unbroken parade of desperate lives. Liquidation came as a relief. I met Greg Maguire the day after I finished reading his book, and found him to be a cheery, funny fellow, about 2/3 the height I'd expected from his jacket photo. He spoke at a panel about children's publishing, and revealed that one reason he'd taken up writing adult books (such as WICKED) was that today's children's editors want so much quick action and so little scene-setting and character-building that he felt he couldn't write the quality of tale he wanted to. He's got a new book coming soon called CONFESSIONS OF AN UGLY STEPSISTER. David Hulan wrote: <> European history colors the way I look at the boundaries of Oz. During Baum's lifetime two peoples who had long been called "Germans" and "Italians" because of their languages united to create the political entities of Germany and Italy. Similarly, the people within the Deadly Desert may long have thought of themselves as Ozians living in Oz, but not until Ozma's restoration was there a strong political entity of that name. Or perhaps there had been a unified monarchy of Oz, decades before the Wizard. Like Europe after the collapse of the Roman and Carolingian Empires, it could have crumbled into fiefdoms. In addition, there are different levels of loyalty, from merely symbolic allegiance to complete subjugation. Pastoria may have been ruler of all Oz in title, but that doesn't mean anyone listened to what he said. Gehan Cooray wrote: <> You seem to be raising the HACC to canonical status. There are many different ideas about when the Oz stories took place. The most we can confidently say is that Betsy had been in the Emerald City for at least three years when LOST PRINCESS began, the span since the publication of TIK-TOK. [Actually, even that minimal span would be in doubt under my suggestion that publication of LOST PRINCESS was delayed a year.] Furthermore, if we think about the whole Oz series, Betsy usually stays very close to the capital. The only times she leaves are in large parties (as in LOST PRINCESS and GLINDA) and involuntarily (as in HUNGRY TIGER). No Dorothy-style adventuring for her. That's in fact nearly the only trait that makes her different from Dorothy. [Thanks for signing your full name to your last post, Gehan. You could also make it easier for us to read your fine observations by typing a space after the period and commas. Thanks!] Robin Olderman wrote: <> I see that appeal in Kabumpo and Jinnicky, who are in many ways childish, and in Captain Salt, because lots of kids would like to grow up to be him. But Sir Hokus tests the rule because he's not the knight in shining armor kids dream of; he's a blustery, cooped-up grandpa. Another character who tests the bounds of kid-appeal is Realbad. For most of OJO he's Errol Flynn, able to break every rule; then suddenly he's yer-ol' Dad, the guy who makes the rules. We should acknowledge there are (at least) two factors determining which characters Thompson brought back: those who appealed to readers enough that they asked for more, and those who held enough interest for her that she came up with new ideas for them. David Hulan wrote: <> The Canadien name does offend, or at least not square with the outlook of, Quebecois separatists. In Montreal, friends tell me, the team is often called "the Havs"--slang for "the guys," if memory serves. I threw "Celtics" onto my list not because anyone here in Boston dislikes the name, but because an objective rule against naming sports teams after ethnic groups would rule it out. Once we discard that objective rule, we enter a subjective realm: what names, or naming processes, offend people? As you say, <> Different trouble arises with the Cleveland Indians. The team's grinning logo is cartoonish, the team's current owner is a bigot, but the team's name is usually said to be a tribute to an impressive turn-of-the-century player, Louis Sockalexis, who was a Penobscot from Maine. Of course, neither he nor any other Native American chose that name, so Indians were still left out of the process which appropriated their identity for the team. A team mascot is a symbol, making this issue literally a symbolic one. The power relationship lurking in the symbols' histories is the real problem, and while changing team names is in all or nearly all cases the considerate thing to do, it won't change the deeper power relationship. J. L. Bell JnoLBell@compuserve.com ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:35:56 -0800 (PST) From: Peter Hanff Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-13-98 Reply for Bob Spark: The endpaper design you mention was originally used in Ruth Plumly Thompson's _The Giant Horse of Oz_ in 1928. Reilly & Lee (or at least its binders) sometimes provided decorative elements in reprints without regard for the book those elements were first intended for. They also sometimes switched the spine decorations from title to title. Peter Hanff ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 23:27:12 -0500 From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz ********** SPOILER FOR KABUMPO IN OZ ********** Nate: The closest thing to a death comes at the end of _Kabumpo_, when Glegg the magician explodes. It has never been conclusively proves that he DID die, but it's hard to doubt. ********** END OF SPOILER ********** David Hulan: Your one pseudo-objection to the HACC will soon vanish with the wind. As soon as I have the time, the HACC will be redone. All books accurate to the Baum 14 will be included. Following will be an intensive plot and historical analysis as it relates to the rest of the FF and beyond. All books will be welcome. This includes (much to the disappointment of many) the March Laumer books! :-) Gehan: The Nome King's shifting of the blame in _Magic_ is wasily explained. He's always had it in for the Oz folk, and he wouldn't hesitate to add to their list of "crimes" to make them look bad, even if it wasn't true. Tyler Jones ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 08:24:33 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Change in Oz Change in Oz: Despite various incidents that can be explained away as PL (pre-Lurline) or in some other way, such as destruction as opposed to natural death, the fact is that no one in Oz ever dies. Not of old age, anyway. It would also appear that, much like Peter Pan, no one ever grows up if they don't want to. According to John R. Neill, each family in Oz has a traditional "stop-growing" age. Furthermore, the population apparently remains constant (exactly the same population figure is quoted for the Emerald City both by LFB and, years later, by RPT). Yet during that time, a few immigrants have drifted in by various means and at least a few babies have been born. Perhaps the increase is so insignificant that it's not considered worth counting - or maybe, for each person born in Oz or entering it from the outside, someone is driven out into the Deadly Desert in order to achieve zero population growth! On the other hand, just watering a few witches here and there might take care of it. :> In one of his descriptions, perhaps in _Tin Woodman_, LFB goes on at length about how nobody every grows older in Oz. Even the babies in the cradles stay babies. Old people stay old. He didn't say that pregnant women stayed pregnant, or ceased being pregnant, or came to term, either because it didn't occur to him or because he didn't wish to deal with this subject in a children's book. Aside from that, most children do not age. Dorothy, Trot, Betsy, Button Bright, et al. stay the same as when they arrived. Its been close to a century since Ozma came to the throne, and she actually does _seem_ to have aged, judging by Neill's drawings, from around seven or eight in _Land_ to the point where where she has to be pushing sixteen in some of the later books. But I'm sure that would be voluntary, if it occurred, and aging eight years in a century is not exactly growing old in a hurry. Also, this change in the way she's drawn may be more reflective of the evolution of Neill's drawing style (and preference) than the way she actually looked at any given point. LFB says thirteen or fourteen. Ozma's probably always been there and always will be. Wouldn't stop Jerry Lee Lewis or Tiny Tim - but let's not start all that again. :) In all the FF, I do not recall any mention of its ever having snowed in Oz. In fact, it doesn't seem to rain a lot, either. The climate is always temperate and pleasant. The leaves never fall and the trees are never bare. Aside from the fact that the sun rises and sets, there is no indication that time passes in Oz at all. Of course, time has not stopped there. People and creatures still move around and do things, even though there may not be much variation for most of them. And so Oz exists as an Eternal Realm, in unchanging eternity, like Paradise, the Elysian Fields, the Garden of Eden, the Summerland. When Frodo sails west at the end of LOTR, no doubt he sails to Oz. The interesting thing about all this is that it flies in the face of the Victorian/Darwinian theories of change and progress that were very prevalent when LFB was writing. In this setting, for a child not to change, grow, and mature is some sort of malfunction. Most children want to be older than they are; they want to grow up. In Oz, they don't seem to have that desire, perhaps not even the ability. Surely this "never grow up" business represents an adult's desire to return to youth, or to keep their childen as children forever, rather than any desire on the part of children themselves? Anyway, if no one ever grows any older, do they likewise not mature mentally or emotionally? Is a ten-year-old brat in Oz going to be a brat forever? Is Button Bright always going to wander off and get lost? Do they never develop or become any wiser? Some philosophically minded folk might say that old age and death is the price we pay for development and growth, or even that the old have to die to make way for the young, to clear the decks for change and progress, to carry on the work of evolution. In Oz, no death, so no development? No progress? No evolution? Well, Oz is already almost perfect anyway, so what need is there for progress? Dorothy has a lot going for her from the get-go; her maturity in dealing with difficult situations in later books seems to exist to a large degree as early as _Ozma_. Later I suppose she gains confidence from experience with Ozzy situations, having become a veteran at dealing with IE threats (which usually consist of some isolated group trying to make all visitors just like themselves). But I don't see her becoming a forty-year-old (or older) woman in the body of an eleven-year-old. As for those countless communities in Oz where the inhabitants want to make everybody else just like themselves - that would be a natural consequence in a society where change is rare and uncomfortable. Differences cannot be tolerated in these communities because it implies change from the eternally traditional way of life. Thus the loons, for example, can't understand why someone doesn't deflate from a pin prick. That's different - it represents a _change_ from what they're used to. This eternal, changless quality also keeps out industrial development, so that refineries and steel mills will never be built in Oz (if they need oil or steel, magic is cleaner, faster, and better). Ozoplanes and scalawagons may be invented, but they do not revolutionize society. They are quickly cast aside and forgotten. If Oz had cable TV, no one would watch it, and only the Wizard would bother with a PC. With all due respect to Martin Gardner, why would Glinda need the Internet? She has the GBR. Thus we see that Oz is not in this world at all, nor even in some other science-fictiony space-time continuum or "dimension." It is, in a very real sense, a vision of Heaven. The Emerald City is the New Jerusalem. And, in such a situation, it is only natural that Dorothy, age 106 next year by the best reckoning, will always be the "same sweet little girl she was when she first came to Oz." Happy Hanukkah, Merry Christmas, and a Kool Kwanzaa to all, if I don't get around to it later. - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 15:51:41 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-13-98 Nathan: >As for dollars, though, "The Queen of Quok" makes it >known that Quok (and possibly its neighboring countries) use dollars and >cents, and Haff and Martin's map does indeed show the jackdaws' nest as >being close to Quok. But I think in that case Haff and Martin probably put Quok close to the jackdaws' nest just because of the common currency. While I respect their map, I don't consider it necessarily reflects Baum's thinking. From the Literature POV, I think Baum used dollars in both stories because it was the only currency American children would be familiar with. However, I also think that in _Land_ he really was envisioning Oz as being in the middle of a desert somewhere in the US, as opposed to on a "continent" in the middle of an ocean. From a History POV, it's highly improbable that the Gump flew to the US - it wasn't flying long enough, and there's no indication that it crossed water - so at least some country south of the Desert must use dollars. (I don't know if jackdaws are good distance flyers or not, but I'm sure that they wouldn't be carrying currency around with them while they flew hundreds or thousands of miles, even if the flight itself would be feasible.) >>There is also at least one death in the RPT books. >When does this happen? On stage, there's the explosion of Glegg; I don't know if that's what Tyler was talking about or not. Off stage there's the liquidation of Mombi, and the past destructions of Cheeriobed's and Ree Alla Bad's fathers. If you count non-humans there's Realbad's killing of some birds in OJO. Tyler: >Your idea about "Oz" only including the EC is fairly interesting, but it >doesn't explain the family's association with Morrow. I also do not believe >that Pastoria or his ancestors ruled the entire area, but their kingdom >must have extended at least a little bit beyond the green area. Are we really sure that Morrow was outside the green area in pre-Ozma days? We know from _Wizard_ that at that time the Quadling Country didn't start until you passed the Hammerhead Mountains; there was a sort of no-man's-land between the southern edge of the green area and the Quadling Country (denoted by brown as the color for the monochrome illustrations). Since we know that Morrow is no more than a few hours' walk south of the EC, it seems likely to me that in Pastoria's day (or possibly his father's, depending on which account we accept) the King of Oz ruled rather more than the current green area, but more because Glinda expanded the Quadling Country after the Wizard's departure than because Pastoria ruled some of the Quadlings. >We're pretty sure that the Wizard had been in >Oz for several years before Dorothy's arrival, We have his word that it had been a great many years; he says specifically that he was a young man when he arrived in Oz and that he's a very old man now (at the time of Dorothy's return from melting the WWW). Gehan: >1.In-Patchwork Girl-The Wizard replaces Bungle's pink brains with new,more >humble ones.(Did he do the same to her heart)?But in-Magic-she's as vain and >selfish as before and she has the pink brains. Literature POV: Baum probably forgot that he'd taken away her pink brains. History POV: She persuaded the Wizard to give her back the pink brains, since it's unnatural for a cat to be humble. >5.Ruggedo says that Dorothy and Ozma and the Oz folk drove him out of >Nomeland.But it was actually The Great Jinjin. True, as far as we know. Although...at the end of _Tik-Tok_ Ruggedo is still in the Nome Kingdom; might it be that Dorothy and Ozma paid another visit there, unrecorded by any Royal Historian, found that Ruggedo had become an _eminence grise_ and was persuading Kaliko to behave naughtily (as in _Rinkitink_), and made Kaliko kick him out permanently? Could have happened, and would resolve that misstatement. >6.In the previous books,the Oz folk are called Ozmies.But in-Magic-they are >called Ozmies. I think you meant "Ozites" in your first sentence. I think Baum's intention was that "Ozmies" were the inhabitants of the Emerald City, while "Ozites" applied to all inhabitants of Oz. (There's a Mysterious Asterisk when the term "Ozites" first appears in _DotWiz_, but no associated footnote.) "Emerald Cityites" doesn't have much of a ring to it. David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 09:40:44 -0600 From: Gordon Birrell Subject: Ozzy Digest David Hulan: >The hoop-rolling endpapers originally appeared in _Giant Horse_, I'm >reasonably sure. I have an early edition of that one that has the >"Oniberon" typo on the frontispiece, so I'm pretty sure that those are the >original endpapers as well. Since they had nothing to do with that book, >they were probably ones that R&L thought would be good to use on a late >copy of _Road_ - possibly because the original _Road_ endpapers were >2-color, and they could save a few bucks by going to a monochrome one. Thanks very much for the quick response! I had gone through the Thompson titles but somehow overlooked _Giant Horse_. What through me off was the fact that virtually all of the endpapers for the Thompson books, beginning with _Royal Book_, include characters or themes (e.g., jousting, in _Yellow Knight_) from the book that they were designed for. The curious thing about the hoop-rolling endpapers, on the other hand, is that they don't contain a *single* character from Thompson, and this is after all the eighth book into her series. I'm still wondering if the endpapers might have been a rejected design from much earlier. You're probably right in saying that R&L could "save a few bucks" by recyling the _Giant Horse_ endpapers, though they certainly could have printed the original _Road_ endpapers in monochrome (as, for instance, the Dover paperback edition does). My hunch is that the monochrome printing, with all those heads and the Oz emblem all in black/white, would look very cluttered and would also have been more costly to produce, since it would have required inordinately more ink to print than the much simpler hoop design. My question is why R&L went to the expense of illustrated endpapers at all, having dropped them from _Road_ as early as 1916. Does anyone know how many of the other late R&L reprints of Baum's Oz series have illustrated endpapers? --Gordon Birrell ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 16 Dec 98 12:39:12 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things THAT MGM MOVIE -- I CAN'T REMEMBER ITS NAME...: Has anyone seen the new edition of _The Making of the Wizard of Oz_? The author, Aljean Harmetz, was at the South Winkie convention, but I have only had a chance to skim through it breifly. A few odd things I noticed: She gives Yosemete as the site of the Winkie Convention, she says the Russians "claim Oz as their own" (is that really still true in this post-communist era of Gorbachev, Yeltsen, Oksana Baiul and Judit Polgar?), and she talks about the "psychologically traumatic" disenchantment of Tip. I've heard this talked about in depth elsewhere, about how Tip turning into Ozma causes severe withdrawal and neurosis in children. Somehow I muddled through remaining *fairly* mentally healthy. (Just so there's no doubt, the above paragraph was meant in jest.) THE GRIM REAPER IN OZ: Tyler wrote: >The closest thing to a death comes at the end of _Kabumpo_, when Glegg the >magician explodes. It has never been conclusively proves that he DID die, >but it's hard to doubt. Then there's also Mombi getting "washed out" in _Lost King_, but we don't see that one, so we're not sure *she* really snuffed it either... GLINDA@PALACE.QUADLING.OZ: David G. wrote: >With all due respect to Martin Gardner, why would Glinda need the >Internet? She has the GBR. You can't send mail with the GBR...You might as well try to talk back to your TV. Besides CNN.COM generally goes into more detail than some of the vague entries in the GBR. THE "OTHER SIDE": David G. wrote: >It is, in a very real sense, a vision of Heaven...it is only natural that >Dorothy, age 106 next year by the best reckoning, will always be the "same >sweet little girl she was when she first came to Oz." That makes me think of this exchange from _Blithe Spirit_: Ruth: How do you get in touch with people on the "other side", Madame Arcarti? Madame Arcarti: Through a "control" of course...In my case a little girl... Dr. Bradman: Yes, I see. How old is she? Madame Arcarti: Rising seven when she died. Dr. Bradman: When was that? Madame Arcarti: February 6, 1884. Dr. Bradman: She must be a bit long in the tooth now, I should think. Madame Arcarti: You *should* think, Dr. Bradman, but I fear you don't. At least not profoundly enough...Time values are very different on the "other side"... (Could it be that Dorothy was Baum's "control"??) :) MONOZPOLY: Anyone else see the _Wizard of Oz_ version of Monopoly? The bad news is it's strictly what I now call "Ozma Who?" Oz (i.e. MGM only). Actually, they are also now selling "Do-it-yourself" kits to design your own custom version of Monopoly. Anyone think an "Ozma's Oz" version is a good idea? SPAM: Well, I think I understand the group's collective opinion: There's a distinction between information and a commercial. I will screen future Digest posts concening products on the market with that in mind... -- Dave ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ "What is Reality anyway...? Nothin' but a collective *hunch*!" -- Lily Tomlin ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 17 - 19, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 18:43:49 -0500 From: Jill Moore Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-16-98 Re: The following letter quoted from the Ozzy Digest: "Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 13:58:51 -0500 From: "J. L. Bell" Subject: Oz-as-ambiguity "On the spam issue, I see a difference between reporting Ozzy material available for sale and hawking it. I've bought books that digest members mentioned having for sale. I've posted order info on other books (in which I had no stake). But the message which prompted the spam complaint went beyond reporting goods: ...And the price couldn't be beat! Ann is a very nice lady to work with, and she accepts charge cards, so check it out and have fun!!! Also, she has a lot of items that are not on her website so if you don't see something you want be sure and ask! Happy Oz Shopping and Happy Holidays to all!!!. It's tough to draw a line between reporting and hawking, but density of exclamation points may be one indicator of spam." I do not understand why this is even being discussed. I sent this letter, I have no affiliation with Annie M's Wizard of Oz Collectibles, but was sharing what I thought was exciting news with everyone. I went shopping at her site, had a wonderful time and bought many great items, and felt that by sharing this with others they too would be able to visit this site and have fun shopping for themselves. As to my exclamation points, the 'density' was after the phrase "Happy Holidays to All!!!" and I do not understand why anyone should object to my wanting to wish everybody on the digest a Happy Holiday. If anyone can explain to me what this hubbub is all about, I would appreciate it. And since I seem to have offended somebody by sharing this news, I can assure you that in the future if I find something exciting to share, that I will have to think twice before sharing it with members of the Digest. I am very insulted by this letter and by what it intimates. Are people really so critical, and so into analyzing every little thing in the books and in the e-mails apparently, that they've forgotten what Oz is truly about? It's about sharing, caring and loving, as shown by the Tinman's heart, the Lion's courage, and the Scarecrow's brains. Apparently this has been overlooked in the haste to analyze and criticize. Off2OzNOUT! Jill ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 19:45:23 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Oz & Ozma Ozma as Goddess: It's perfectly plain that Ozma is meant to represent a goddess, in fact a deity of very high rank indeed. When we first meet her, she is Tip the Father (as Jack calls him), then undergoes the magical sex change of disenchantment and becomes Oz-ma (Oz-mother). Thus she embodies both male and female principles - Father-Mother God, as some New Agers say - like a deity should. Thus she remains eternal and inviolate. :) I sincerely hope that no one takes this seriously enough to refute it. Ozma in the Movies: Has anyone here ever actually seen the Shirley Temple TV version of _The Land of Oz_ (1960)? Is there any way a normal (?) person like me could see it? As a general question, which in your opinion is the best film portrayal of Ozma: Jessie May Walsh of the LFB silents, Vivian Reed at the beginning of the Baum silents, Shirley Temple in her TV production of _Land_, or Emma Ridley of _Return to Oz_? Second part of this two-part question: who would you most like to see play the role of Ozma in a film production of ECOz or Tik-Tok (or whatever)? The answer to this may be surprising, or possibly upsetting to those of delicate sensibilities. Personally, I was shocked when a fan magazine in England polled its readers as to who they would most like to see as Doctor Who and his companion. The overwhelming winners were Tom Selleck and Madonna. Lisa Mastroberte: I don't see how anyone could object to a romance between the Scarecrow and Patches; after all, as you pointed out, they were attracted to each other at their first meeting. But would the Tin Woodman be jealous? (Friends often become jealous when a pal starts spending a lot of time with a love interest.) Scott wrote: >At least in the _Oz_ comicbooks I've read, Wogglebug really >wasn't played as much of a superhero. He looks like that because he is >supposed to be taken seriously. Would you take Neill's Wogglebug >seriously in high adventure? You mean the Oz books of the FF _aren't_ high adventure? But you're right, I would take the comic-book Wogglebug _very_ seriously if he walked in the room. But could he whip Jesse Ventura? Dave H. wrote: >(Could it be that Dorothy was Baum's "control"??) :) No question about it! LFB was a Theosophist, so there can be little doubt that he "channeled" all his information about Oz just as Ignatius Donnelly channeled his minute descriptions of Atlantis. Channeling Dorothy would be much more to the point than acting as a vehicle for some ancient Egyptian priest with only secondhand knowledge. :) - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 18:05:28 -0800 From: "Peter E. Hanff" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-16-98 Hi Dave, I think the references you cite in Aljean's latest edition of _The Making of the Wizard of Oz_ are indeed left over from earlier editions. At the time Aljean was writing the book, she regularly attended the Winkie Conventions, and they were indeed held at Yosemite National Park, at the Hotel Wawona. We held the conventions there from 1975 through 1983. Finally, the group outgrew the Wawona and we moved to the Asilomar Conference Center in 1984. The reference to the Russians considering Oz their own may be somewhat more obscure. In 1939 Aleksandr Volkov translated _The Wizard of Oz_ into Russian. The translation was so successful that he continued the series with five more original fantasies of his own, but basing them on characters from his original translation. His illustrator after a time was Leonid Vladimirsky, who added a sixth original title to the Russian "Oz" series. In any event, I believe Aljean was thinking of this "original" Russian Oz series when she mentioned that they claim Oz as their own. Interestingly, a few months ago Vladimirsky wrote to me and sent a copy of his newest illustrated version of Vokov's original translation of Wizard. This is an attractive book, illustrated in full color throughout. Vladimirsky's granddaughter is a student here at Berkeley, and his daughter lives in San Jose. We are exploring the possibility of inviting Vladimirsky to join us for the Centennial Convention of the Oz Club in 2000. As to whether the transformation of Tip into Ozma should be interpreted in post-Freudian terms I leave to others to consider. Best, Peter ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 21:12:12 -0800 From: plgnyc Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-16-98 <> Has anybody ever read "The Patchwork Bride of Oz"? Personally, I think that book was adorable! Thanks for the kind words on "The Patchwork Bride of Oz", Lisa. The author, Gil Sprague, was one of my oldest and dearest friends. Sadly, he passed away about 2 years ago. I know he would have been both touched and thrilled by your generous compliments. They certainly brought a smile to my face! -- Peter Glassman Books of Wonder ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 09:00:39 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Ozzy facts Here are a few Ozzy facts,I found in The Wizard of Oz tv series By Cinar. 1.The Wizard tells Dorothy during their first encounter: "Do you think I will grant you your wishes because you wear the magic shoes and bear the kiss of the GWN?".And the Guardian tells him:"Dorothy had the kiss of the GWN so I had to let her in".He may have told him about the shoes too.(Dorothy tells the Wizard about them during their first encounter in the book also,right?) 2.The Wicked Witch conquered the Winkies,so they could build her Fortress of Evil.She needs this Fortress to conquer Oz,and she even plans it out.She tells Dorothy:"You are lucky to work for a great and powerful witch.The Witch who very soon will conquer all of Oz!".And the Witch has the power to turn people to stone and has a magic mirror. 3.Dorothy meets the former mayor of the Winkies. 4.Dorothy encopunters some tiny elves in a cave during her journey to Glinda's palace. 5.Mombi doesnt say WEah Teah Peauh in order to bring Pumpkinhead to life.She says something like:Winkie Dinkie little piggy woah!Yummy Dummy Scrummy Bummy woah!"and goes on. 6.Jinjur's army only has four lazy girls. 7.Jinjur tickles the Gaurdian of the gates in order to deal with him and doesnt jab him with needles.Infact,she doesnt want to hurt anyone. 8.Mombi herself volunteers to help Jinjur,although Jinjur says:"I hate to share anything,especailly my power." 9.Jinjur makes a new law in the Emerald city:"No laughing and no smiling!" 10.Princess Langwidere is re-named Lulu and she collects hats instead of heads. 11.Tiktok works for Lulu 12.The Gnome king only kidnaps the prince of Ev(The only member of the royal family)and turns a great ocean into a desert by draining all the water to his underground tunnel 13.Billina worked for the Gnome King. 14.The Scarecrow says:"Dorothy,the citizens of the Emerald city are the heaviest people anywhere,and wont wake up till morning and by then,they will be in chains."For the Nome king tries to conquer the Emerald city with the help of Guph and the Growlywog.(Just one Growlywog and nobody else exept for the Nomes). 15.Nomes are afraid of eggs as well as sunlight. 16.Ozma is much smaller than Dorothy. 17.There is a place called the Emerlad chamber in the Emerlad city where the History of Oz is written and the Fobidden fountain is placed. 18.Ozma sends Dorothy home in Emerald city of Oz. Gehan ****************End of a very long list of Ozzy facts******************************* ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:25:12 -0500 From: Lisa Mastroberte Subject: Ozzy Matters >In all the FF, I do not recall any mention of its ever having snowed in Oz. >In fact, it doesn't seem to rain a lot, either. Except, of course, in Mo, it snows popcorn. I laughed when Button-Bright got caught in a pile of popcorn. Leave it Button Bright! :-) >Thus we see that Oz is not in this world at all, nor even in some other >science-fictiony space-time continuum or "dimension." It is, in a very real >sense, a vision of Heaven. The Emerald City is the New Jerusalem. You know, as I read the Oz books I get the same impression. Maybe, Oz is Baum's idea of Heaven. During the turn of the century, most people thought Heaven would be this cloudy place with angels singing all day, playing harps and doing nothing. Baum's vision might have been a little different, (Hey, we really *do* stuff in Oz!) so his way of changing the idea was through the Oz Books. MOPPeT is that the Nome King and the Kalidah's = Evil, (aka Satan) while Ozma, Betsy Bobbin, Glinda = Good. (aka angels) Christ is Born, Glorify Him! Merry Christmas, Happy Hanakah, and Happy Kwanza to all before I totally forget. :) Off2Oz, Lisa ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:29:32 -0500 From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz Atticus: Don't forget to stop by Books of Wonder, of course. I forgot exactly where it is, but it's at the lower end of Manhattan somewhere near the village. Jane: This has come up only briefly on the Digest. What do the average Ozites DO with all of their spare time? We mainly only read about the royalty and the celebrities of Oz. You could divide this up between city and country folk, if you don't want to count the extrememly unusual people of the odd countries. For example, the people of Preservia probably don't do much at all. The coutnry folk probably do a lot of work around the farm, although it's probably less than Uncle Henry and Aunt Em used to do. After all, we can assume that the soil is always rich and yielding, the climate is always good, there are no boll weevils, locusts or other parasites. I'd imagine that they play games, read a lot, study things and attend the Wogglebug's College at one time or another. Other festivities like dancing and camping come to mind. I can't imagine them hanging out at bars, though. David Godwin: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! :-) Gehan and John Bell: The HACC is definitely not at canonical status. It is simply the best guess of myself (and others) as to when the stories could have plausibly happened in relation to one another. Dates have shifted before and no doubt will do so again as we learn more. If this sounds a lot like John's discussion of history on the last Digest, that's because it is. As for this specific issue, I felt that I had to squeeze the first nine books of the FF in order to account for the relative non-aging of characters like Button-Bright and Trot, who have other adventures in out-of-Oz books. This leaves quite a gap where there was apparantly not a lot of activity. Either that, or we just haven't heard anything yet. David Godwin: In some non-FF books, there is some mention of snow in the mountains and at Christmas. Also, the people of the Emerald City discuss a good time to make some rain. Non-aging may not necessarily mean no growth in the intellectual or emotional sense. Staying a child (especialy in puberty) may slow the process, but should not entirely halt it. I'd get tired of being grumpy after about 100 years myself. :-) Being in a child's body may help presevere an attitude of joy and innocence. In the non-FF book _Glass Cat_, David Hulan commented on this a little bit by observing Button-Bright. David Hulan: Your point is well-made. Actually, I meant about the same thing, but I used a poor choice of words. By "The entire area", I meant that I doubted that Pastoria ruled all of the land contained within the Deadly Desert. This is a similar question to one that I ask every once in a while on the digest. I always cast doubt on the idea that each quadrant has had one and only one ruler at all periods back to the beginning of time. In the same manner, it is unlikely that each quadrant has always been poltiically or philosohpically one nation. In history, there have been several no-man's lands and boundaries are quite fluid. You know, that's true. We never actually witness Ruggedo being kicked out of the Kingdom of the Nomes, since Kaliko gave him permission to stay at the end of _Tik-Tok_, yet there he is wandering the earth in _Magic_. This could also be an interesting story, or a side-story, as the power behind the throne in _Rinkitink_. Tyler Jones ====================================================================== From: Kiex@aol.com Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:35:45 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-16-98 Scott Hutchins: Okay, okay, I give in--tell me how I can get a copy of TIP IN OZ. Atticus: But, but, . In case you're wondering, I just swallowed my words. (Taste great--less filling.) Pasttimes of Ozites: Higher things, things of the spirit--cultural things: music, books, theatre, and so on. In a Utopian place, what else is there? (Don't answer that.) Origin of the dollar sign: Perhaps going to the original documents by America's founders would be the only way to find out for sure, I suppose. I'm no historian, though. ;-) Oz on Earth: The only problem with the Oz on earth idea is that since earth is rapidly becoming populated, more populated, and overpopulated, Oz would have to be in another plane of existence to remain empty long (yes, even if it's in the middle of the ocean). What we really need is the Great Book of Records to look at, ourselves! J.L. Bell: You mention that not until Ozma's ascension to the throne did Oz really become unified--what about under Pastoria? Sport team names: I saw a movie recently (or else dreamed it) wherein a Native American teacher moved to a city whose HS football team was named the Chiefs and who did stereotypical "Indian" acts during halftime. As I recall, it had a tragic ending (okay, I'm pretty sure it wasn't a dream now). Does anyone know what I'm talking about? I have no memory of when it was made, of course, so it could be twenty years old for all I know. The discussion of team mascots just reminded me of that. Oz in the U.S.: David Hulan mentions that Baum seemed to think Oz was in the middle of a U.S. desert during LAND. Well, why not? Even after LAND, the only thing that goes against this idea is the ocean in OZMA . . . Okay, so you have a point. But since home (and by an extension, Oz) is where the heart is, I'd imagine one could get there from anywhere, anytime, if one only knows how . . . Wow--I just made a MOPPeT without noticing what I was doing. That would explain away any remaining concerns we have with the placement of Oz and how people get there. Well, with the how people get there part of that, at least . . . Until next time, Jeremy Steadman, kivel99@planetall.com http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dimension/9619 ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 10:25:00 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Re:Ozzy Digest David Hulan: You said that there may have been a no-man's land between the green terrotory and the hammerheads terrotory,which was not part of the Quadling country.Well,I think it was,but the only difference was: I beleive the no-man's land was also in the land of the south,but not in the Quadling country.I think all the lands in Oz(East,West,North and South)each have a seperate country where only people(such as Munchkins and Quadlings)live.That particular country is known as the Munchkin/Quadling/Gilikin/Winkie country,all though it isnt the entire land of the East/South/North/West.It's just a seperate little place where only people live,and no monsters or animals or strange beings(such as the Loons,Hammerheads and the Tottenhots). This shows that the Ruler of each country only has the power to rule his people.I mean,Tinman is known as Emperor of the Winkies not Empeoror of the west whichg means he only rules the winkie Country.Still,there are other little countries in each land apart from countries like The Winkie and Gilikin country,where they each have a seperate ruler.So the Quadling country may also just be a little country which exits in the Land of the South,and is ruled by Glinda.(I dont think she has power in countries like Utensia,Bunbury or Bunnybury)Remember in-Land-Baum begins:"In the country of the Gilikins,which is at the north of the Land of Oz......".This also shows that countries such as The Munchkin and the Quadling country are just a little part of the entire land(Such as the East and the South)and each Land is a mixture of several little countries.I hope you know what I mean. Dave: Speaking about the Ozzy Feeling,I also see no harm in Ozma getting married.Maybe Oz fans are upset because she married a nobleman.Maybe they would have been satisfied if she married a handsome fairy prince.Still,I see no harm in her marrying a Nobleman(Charles married an ordianary woman:Diana)for if previous rulers such as Pastoria and Ozroar got married,why can't Ozma?There is no law against getting married. I may be quite against Glinda getting married,but still I dont mind,for if great sorcerers and witches(Such as mrs.Yoop and Gayalette )get married ,why can't Glinda? --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 18:21:25 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Glinda and Ozma Someone wanted to know why Ozma doesnt use her magic and why Glinda didn't help Dorothy when she was in trouble. Well,the answer is simple!They both may have wanted people to think for themselves and not to depend on others.(yeah,even a little five year old should learn to depend on him/herself)Or else,everyone will depend on Ozma,Glinda and the Wizard went they are in trouble.I mean,take GOD for instance.GOD knows everything,in all the world(Glinda only knows the important things,but GOd knows everything)Yet,GOD is much,much more powerful than Glinda and Ozma,but that does not mean that he solves every single problem in two seconds.I guess the same goes for Glinda and Ozma. And besides,I doubt the fact that Glinda had the GBR before -emerald city-.I mean,she did not know that Dorothy was coming to meet her.(She asks her:"What can I do for you my child?" as she enters the throne room)And in -Land-O.k,she knew that The Scarecrow and Tip were on their way to meet her,but,she may have also had a crystal ball or a magic mirror.My own theory is this: Glinda didn't have so much power,as now in-Wizard-.She tells Dorothy to use the Magic slippers to return to Kansas,where as in -Ozma-she uses a magic carpet to help Ozma get passed the Deadly Desert.I think her spies recorded every thing they were able to see in a magic book.I think Glinda increased the powers of this book,and turned it into a Great Book of Records so that she wont need spies anylonger.Ofcourse,the GBR may also have been a seperate book,which Glinda created later,and not the same book her spies used.And besides,even if she had the GBR in-Wizard- it may have told her:"The GWN sent Dorothy to the Emerald city to meet the Wizard of Oz for help." "The Wizard sent Dorothy and her companions on a secret mission to the Winkie country" "Dorothy and her friends are on their way to see Glinda in the Quadling country." And so Glinda may not have known the reason,and may not have worried about the hammerheads,as Dorothy had the Golden cap,the Magic shoes and the kiss of Tattypoo(Or Loacasta).And in-Land-the book may have said:"The Scarecrow and his comrades escaped Jinjur and Mombi and are on their way to see you." This means that she may have got the GBR about two or three years before Dorothy came to Oz,and so she didn't know about the Wizard-beinga-Humbug as he came to Oz a long time ago.That's why she needed spies to check on him,but even her spies didn't know that he was aHumbug. And as for Ozma,she only uses magic after -Tinwoodman- which means she may not have known so much about Magic before.But even after-Tinwoodman- she doesn't often use it beacuse....(The Reason I gave in the ist paragraph) --Gehan Cooray ******************End of a Long Note******************************************* ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:51:32 -0500 From: "J. L. Bell" Subject: Oz whither and weather Thinking of Oz's capital, Nathan DeHoff wrote: <> Jack Pumpkinhead and the shoe band give concerts, if we credit Neill. Notta Bit More and Bob Up have a circus outside town. And the Magic Picture is said to be entertaining to watch. But most recreation in the Emerald City seems to be active rather than passive--contrary to the trend in America over the last coupla decades, though that might be changing. I recall a lot of handwork being done by Oz's young ladies, for instance. David Godwin wrote: <> Glinda has enchanted the air over Miss Cuttenclip's village so rain can't hurt its inhabitants, I believe. That and the storms and dew Nick Chopper worries about seem to be the only hints of inclement weather in the "normal" areas of Oz. In one of my Oz manuscripts Dorothy witnesses a rare big storm while in Quadlingland, and can't figure out if (a) it's part of a threat to Glinda, (b) Glinda has let her control of the weather slip while she fights that threat, or (c) the storm reflects Glinda's anger. Dorothy never finds out for sure. David Godwin wrote: <> Clearly the emphasis on eternal youth in TIN WOODMAN reflects Baum's health problems as he wrote that book. For kids, I think the wish fulfillment in Oz isn't never growing up, but being accepted as full members of society without having to. Since one can't know what it feels like to be twenty when one is ten, young readers would probably expect kids in Oz to maintain the maturity they've attained. I expect Button-Bright will indeed get lost throughout his life; to me, he seems remarkably impervious to the lessons of life, especially since he rarely suffers from them. David Hulan's GLASS CAT has a different take, saying he's achieved a certain amount of wisdom because of his peregrinations. PETER PAN has a different take on never growing up, a more fatalistic one that I think is aimed at the adults in Barrie's audience. About THE MAKING OF 'THE WIZARD OF OZ', Dave Hardenbrook wrote: <> The Winkies met at Yosemite for many years, and were doing so when Harmetz wrote her book. The notice I saw in ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY implied this is a reissue of the original edition, not an update. [Isn't Polgar Hungarian? You know the chess world better than I.] I suspect young kids reading LAND are generally less traumatized than post-adolescents (and post-Freudians) when Tip experiences...well--shall we say?--the *change*. For me gender confusion wasn't an issue so much as Tip being cajoled into the restoration by his adult pals. Even now I'm recalling Neill's very strong picture of Tip looking surly on the sofa. Gordon Birrell wrote: <> What made me skeptical about the statement <<75% of American schoolchildren learned German up until 1918>> was a hazy memory of the relatively low number of US students getting *any* sort of intermediate education then. I checked my source on that--the HISTORICAL STATISTICS OF THE UNITED STATES, published by the Census Bureau for the Bicentennial--and discovered that it helpfully gives figures for language study in American public high schools. [That's a different sample from all schoolchildren, of course, but I assume more students in high school than in elementary school studied foreign languages.] While the fraction of secondary-school students studying German was much smaller than UNTERRICHTSPRAXIS's figure, that article mapped the same trends. In 1915, 24.4% of high-school students studied German, more than any other modern language (though less than Latin); that percentage had more than doubled since 1890. In 1922, after the World War, the percentage of pupils studying German had dropped to .6%! David Hulan asked: <> I looked this one up, too, since I had a vague memory of reading that $ represented a snake wrapped around the Pillars of Hercules (the two vertical bars in some versions of the symbol), and an equally vague memory of reading that was a myth. I found the same explanation that Mike Turniansky posted. J. L. Bell JnoLBell@compuserve.com ====================================================================== From: "ltharris" Subject: Oz and ends Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:14:27 +0200 Dave- Mombi might get washed out in _Lost King_, but she makes some sort of a comeback in _Lucky Bucky_. Neill claims that it is not really her, rather just her image, but she sure acts like a real live witch. The other thing I noticed about her is that Neill rethought her hat style. I have managed to get my "eager little hands" (as Mr. Fearless Leader refers to it in his FAQ) on all of JRNs' books. I think that Neill improved with every one. The first seems to have no plot, Scalawagons is a little better, and _Lucky Bucky_ is much better, although not on par with RPT, and certainly not on par with Baum. I'm still in the middle of _Runaway_, but it also seems to be pretty well put together. Now I have to start working on those hard-to-get RPTs'. I've been watching for the WOZ film here in Israe, but so far no such luck. Tzvi Harris Talmon, Israel ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 18 Dec 98 09:17:58 CST From: "Ruth Berman" Subject: recent ozzy digests Robin Olderman: Interesting comment on RPT's use of father-like characters. J.L. Bell: I wonder if "Gugu" might be meant to suggest the leopard's growl. Your suggestion that Trot would surely have let Button Bright, as well as Dorothy and Betsy, get an advance look at her gift for Ozma and therefore he must have been away -- perhaps he likewise went looking for a present to give Ozma and didn't get back until just before the party, because he got lost as per usual? David Godwin & Nathan DeHoff: Nathan's comment that the use of jumping sticks to get over the Tin Canyon might be a recent development suggests the possibility that the Tin Canyon itself might be a recent development (well, of course, it is, but in terms of Oz-as-if- real as well as in the order of writing the books, I mean). It might have been a little magical landscaping that turned out more impressive than Nick quite wanted, and the jumping sticks might be a temporary measure while he decides if he wants to make the Canyon smaller or arrange for a tin bridge. (Or it might have started out as a sinkhole that opened up or the like, and the tin lining might be a way of keeping it from widening further until Nick decides what to do about it.) Gehan Cooray (Gehan Shiromal?): On the length of time the Tin Soldier was rusted -- it's probably much the same as with the Tin Woodman (even though for a longer length)? That's to say, he might have been only a short way off the path and still be invisible from the path except from an angle of view so narrow that it might well take a long time for someone to glimpse him. There's no further info on Mrs. Yoop in the R&L Oz books, although she gets a brief mention in "Hidden Valley." A good many commenters on when Glinda got her Great Book of Records: I wonder if it might be possible that Glinda was keeping a Great Book of Records (putting all her spies' reports into it, for example), before she succeeded in enchanting it so that it started recording things automatically? And even after she gets it going, she may be working out glitches in the working of the spell? Davids Godwin & Hulan: Once Neill decided to give up on the Boston and go back to the Scottie, he didn't do much shifting about on Toto, except for that one drawing of Toto as a flop-eared go (a spaniel? a mixture?). That one is so different that it looks as if he was being thrifty again and using up a drawing originally intended for something else. The appearance of these all together in David H's "Emerald City" makes the changes quite striking, as noted. (And it makes an interesting change to have an animal narrator -- Toto makes an interesting POV character.) Tyler Jones & David Hulan: The question of whether Morrow could at one time have been part of the Emerald area no doubt depends partly on whether "part of" means politically (easily possible) or chromatically (maybe more difficult). Changing the color would probably depend on whether the favorite color in an Oz area is entirely the work of the people living there, and could shift to follow political changes, or whether the favorite colors are so built into the geographical nature of the areas that it would always be obvious which country you were in. I'd make a guess that the people living in the area could change the color if desired to reflect a change in allegiance (maybe the process would take a little unconscious magic-working). Jay Delkin, several years back, had an article in the "Bugle," "The Meaning of 'Oz'," arguing (as David does) that "Oz" originally meant the Emerald area only. Bob Spark: For determining when copies of the Oz books were printed, you'd probably want to buy a copy of the IWOC's "Bibliographia Oziana." There are some general guidelines for figuring out approximately. Gordon Birrell had a copy with ads for other Oz books included, and seeing the latest book advertised is one way to tell approximately. (Hey, Robin, maybe sometime you'd like to reprint on the Digest your "Bugle" article on those ways to tell approximately the age of an edition.) Gordon Birrell: Interesting point, that the hoop-rolling endpapers don't have any characters specific to "Giant Horse." I wonder if it's possible that Neill might have worked out the design originally for "Lost King," referring to the Hoopers' Park, and decided it was worth using elsewhere. Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 18 Dec 98 15:04:36 CST From: "Ruth Berman" Subject: ozzy digest ps J.L. Bell commented a few days back on "the high jock quotient of Peter, Speedy, and David," and wondered if RPT herself was a competitive-sports enthusiast or if she was trying to reflect what a "real boy" should be. It's maybe putting it too narrowly to phrase it in those terms, in her writing overall. There aren't so many examples from her Oz books, but skimming through the collection of "The Wonder Book" I notice a lot of non-competitive sports activities (with both adults and children, and both males and females taking part) in the stories and poems -- roller skating, ice skating, skiing, tobogganing, kite flying, a "leaping match," etc. It sounds as if she liked all kinds of physical activity (to write about, anyway -- and probably some for doing, too, if not quite in such wide variety?). Considering that competitive sports at the time were open only to boys, I'd guess that she hadn't participated much herself (some schools had girls' softball teams?), but it does sound as if she was a fan of her local teams and maybe active in non-competitive sports? (Baum, in contrast, doesn't have much of either kind -- ice-skating in Mo is about all that comes to mind at the moment, and maybe Shaggy's abilities in pitching/catching.) Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 18 Dec 98 15:24:14 CST From: "Ruth Berman" daveh47@mindspring.com Subject: your Oz question You asked about looking for interpretations of the Wizard of Oz as a literary text. These may have been suggested to you already, but "The Wizard of Oz and Who He Was" by Martin Gardner and Russell Nye, the "Critical Heritage" edition of "The Wizard of Oz" edited by Michael Patrick Hearn's, Hearn's "Annotated Wizard of Oz," and Michael O. Riley's "Oz and Beyond, the fantasy world of L. Frank Baum," would be good books to begin with. They deal mainly with the book (also some with the movie), and following up their bibliographies would give you a lot of additional sources. If this is a long-term interest rather than something for a short-term project, you might probably like to join the International Wizard of Oz Club -- ask about costs at iwoc@sam.neosoft.com (and you could ask also if copies of back issues of the IWOC's journal "The Baum Bugle" concentrating on the movie are available). Ruth Berman ====================================================================== From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-16-98 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:01:50 PST David Godwin: >In all the FF, I do not recall any mention of its ever having snowed >in Oz. Well, in _Grampa_, it is stated that there is no snow in Oz. It snows when Prince Gules's party is approaching the Link in _Merry Go Round_, however, and there are living snowmen in Oz (_Hidden Valley), as well as Snow Mountain (_Ojo_). I would imagine that snow can only exist in certain parts of Oz, probably with magically controlled climates. >The leaves never fall and the trees are never bare. This might well be true. Also, in _Enchanted Island_, Humpty says that flowers have no season in Oz. Plants, unlike animals, might be able to die, however. Tommy Kwikstep states that he lives in an old tree that had "fallen to the ground with age." David Hulan: >I think Baum's intention >was that "Ozmies" were the inhabitants of the Emerald City, while >"Ozites" >applied to all inhabitants of Oz. (There's a Mysterious Asterisk when >the >term "Ozites" first appears in _DotWiz_, but no associated footnote.) >"Emerald Cityites" doesn't have much of a ring to it. Both Thompson and the McGraws use that term, however (the former in _Handy Mandy_, and the latter in _Forbidden Fountain_). Dave Hardenbrook wrote: >THE GRIM REAPER IN OZ: >Tyler wrote: >>The closest thing to a death comes at the end of _Kabumpo_, when >>Glegg the >>magician explodes. It has never been conclusively proves that he DID >>die, >>but it's hard to doubt. > >Then there's also Mombi getting "washed out" in _Lost King_, but we >don't >see that one, so we're not sure *she* really snuffed it either... Besides, these might well count as "total destruction," rather than death. >MONOZPOLY: >Anyone else see the _Wizard of Oz_ version of Monopoly? The bad news >is it's strictly what I now call "Ozma Who?" Oz (i.e. MGM only). > >Actually, they are also now selling "Do-it-yourself" kits to design >your own custom version of Monopoly. Anyone think an "Ozma's Oz" >version >is a good idea? I don't know. The "buy everything and bankrupt your opponents" philosophy of Monopoly strikes me as fairly un-Ozzy. It might still be fun, though. Nathan Mulac DeHoff ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 09:04:20 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Message board Just to tell you that I have a new "World of Oz" message board.You can visit on www.InsideTheWeb.com/mbs.cgi/mb242793 --Gehan ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 09:05:24 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Witches Here are a few facts based on the Witches in Baum's books: *.The Good Witch of the North could appear and dissapear as she liked.Yet,The Most Powerful sorceress on earth(Glinda)needed some kind of transport. *.Glinda's powers seemed to have devoloped alot in other books than in-Wizard-.I mean,she's able to see what someone else is doing through a magic glass(as in-Glinda)She can easily tell wheather one is lying or not(As in-Land-)She can transport people to various places and do many wonderful things,which she would'nt even heard of in-Wizard-.I mean,in-Wizard- she is identified as The Good Witch of the South but as Good Sorceress of Oz in later books.It's as if she were merely an ordinar witch in-Wizard- but an all-powerful sorceress in the later books.It seems quite strange to me,how she could have devoloped her powers in no time. *.If Glinda knows all the important things in the world,why doesn't she use her magic to help Earth-folk for once,when they are in real danger,(The 1st and 2nd World War e.t.c)?And besides,she never does anything herself.She just gives out the orders,and apperas out of nowhere at the last minute to help,when everyhting is O.K. I mean she didn't search for Ozma when Ugu kidnapped her. She didn't come to Scarecrow's rescue when Jinjur threatend to burn him and locked him up. And she didn't accompany Dorothy and Ozma on their journey to Skeezer Isle and Flathead Mountain.It's really un-fair.I now realise that she does not make use of her magical powers.And shouldn't a powerful sorceress be able to deal in transformations and appear and dissapear at any time she wanted? *.Mrs.Yoop is very much different compared to Reera.Her enchantments cant be broken but Reera's can.(By the way,what became of Mrs.Yoop)? *.Glinda broke the enchantment Mombi placed on Jellia.Why does she say she cant deal in transformations in later books? *.The GBR seemed to have recorded past events too. *.Baum totally forgets about the Good Witch of the North in later books.And why wont Ozma allowe her to perform magic?It's as if the Good Witch vanished after -Road- (Her final appearnce in Baum's books)and everyone forgot about her.And shouldnt Tattypoo know that she was really Orin?Mombi couldnt have switched their personalities too. *.I think Ozma is very silly.She rules all the land of Oz and doesnt even know all the parts of her own country and doesn't realise that no-one other than the Ozites abide by her rules..... --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 19 Dec 98 21:42:47 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things "TONIGHT THE PART OF OZMA WILL BE PLAYED BY..." David Godwin wrote: >Second part of this two-part question: who would you most like to see play >the role of Ozma in a film production of ECOz or Tik-Tok (or whatever)? The >answer to this may be surprising, or possibly upsetting to those of >delicate sensibilities. Chloe Annett, who plays Kristine Kochanski, the girl with the "pinball smile" on the British Sci-Fi series _Red Dwarf_ is my choice! Actors who IMHO should not be allowed within several time zones of any new dramatization of Oz: Tom Selleck, Madonna, Brad Pitt, Clint Eastwood, Charlton Heston, Sharon Stone, Michael Douglas, Bo Derek, Michele Pfeiffer. GIL SPRAUGUE: Sorry to hear of his passing... SNOW (THE COLD, ICY STUFF, NOT JACK) IN OZ: IIRC, in (non-Canonical) _Christmas in Oz_, it is revealed that Ozma allows it to snow just once a year, on Christmas. WITCHES: Gehan wrote: >*.The Good Witch of the North could appear and dissapear as she >liked.Yet,The Most Powerful sorceress on earth(Glinda)needed some kind of >transport. Glinda may be most powerful, but that doesn't mean that she can do *everything*... Most would agree that Einstein was one of the greatest minds this century, but he was terrible at math and Judit Polgar would have thrashed him at chess. >*.If Glinda knows all the important things in the world,why doesn't she use >her magic to help Earth-folk for once,when they are in real danger,(The 1st >and 2nd World War e.t.c)? According to my alternate timeline for the planet Nonestica (parallel-Earth where Oz resides), Glinda and Ozma *do* intervene to stop WWI and prevent WWII altogether!! (Also, thanks to Ozite influence, nukes are never invented, personal computers and WWW start appearing in the 60's, Kennedy survives Oswald's bullet and serves eight years, and the first women president is elected during the 80's.) >*.Glinda broke the enchantment Mombi placed on Jellia.Why does she say she >cant deal in transformations in later books? According to Melody Grandy, Glinda is morally opposed to transformations, unlike her friend/foil Zim the Flying Sorcerer (Melody's "control" in Oz). >*.Baum totally forgets about the Good Witch of the North in later books.And >why wont Ozma allowe her to perform magic?It's as if the Good Witch vanished >after -Road- (Her final appearnce in Baum's books)and everyone forgot about >her.And shouldnt Tattypoo know that she was really Orin?Mombi couldnt have >switched their personalities too. If you can, wait until _Locasta and the Three Adepts of Oz_ comes out...It will answer these questions (If you really want a "spoiler" to answer them now, E-mail me privately)... >*.I think Ozma is very silly.She rules all the land of Oz and doesnt even >know all the parts of her own country and doesn't realise that no-one other >than the Ozites abide by her rules..... I'll let David Hulan field this one... -- Dave ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ Castles, Castles in the air Take a paper plane through the rain and you'll be floating free through those Castles growing everywhere Won't you let your mind just unwind; Go upstream toward a dream You can ride on a laugh you can glide on; Behind every cloud is a star To light your way -- The Bugaloos, "Castles In the Air" ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 20 - 23, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 09:09:49 -0800 From: plgnyc Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-19-98 Tyler Jones Don't forget to stop by Books of Wonder, of course. I forgot exactly where it is, but it's at the lower end of Manhattan somewhere near the village. Books of Wonder is at 16 West 18th Street between 5th and 6th Avenues. The store is open every day. Hours are Monday - Saturday from 10am to 7pm and Sunday's from Noon to 6pm. The store's phone number is (212) 989-3270. -- Peter Glassman Books of Wonder ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 10:16:03 -0500 From: Lisa Mastroberte X-Accept-Language: en Subject: Ozzy Matters >Actually, they are also now selling "Do-it-yourself" kits to design >your own custom version of Monopoly. Anyone think an "Ozma's Oz" >version >is a good idea? Really, one time I was designing a "Return to Oz" monopoly game. But a few based on the books is a good idea...let's see, jail could be Langweirdre's tower, and then Boardwalk could be yellow brick walk........................ David Godwin wrote: >Second part of this two-part question: who would you most like to see play >the role of Ozma in a film production of ECOz or Tik-Tok (or whatever)? The >answer to this may be surprising, or possibly upsetting to those of >delicate sensibilities. Hmmm...let me think..does anybody remember the version of "A Little Princess" that came out a few years ago? The girl who played Sara Crewe, she's the *perfect* Ozma! On Gehans long list of facts: <<10.Princess Langwidere is re-named Lulu and she collects hats instead of heads.>> Less scary than somebody chagnging heads. Remember Mombi's hall of head's in RTOZ? Very realistic and scary. (But, then again, these were cartoons, right?) <<15.Nomes are afraid of eggs as well as sunlight>> Vampire syndrome. :) <<18.Ozma sends Dorothy home in Emerald city of Oz.>> Most kids remember the line, "There's no place like home!" from the MGMWiz. On the Wogglebug.... I'm currently writing two Oz books, Princess Polychrome of Oz and The Curious Wogglebug of Oz. Once I finish the endings, I'll let you in on the plot. Off2Oz, Lisa ====================================================================== From: Kiex@aol.com Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 15:18:54 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-19-98 Re Who Plays Whom: We discussed this awhile back, and came up with many different answers for Ozma. I don't think I remember any of them now except my own (which was out of date anyway, as she had grown up since the movie I saw her in). As for Doctor Who . . . this would be an awful muddle, but Patrick Stewart? With what companion I'm not sure . . . ------------------ Where's W'Oz-do? Yes, I like my idea better all the time--Oz can be reached from anywhere, anytime, for any reason, in any situation--that way we're all happy! Which means, sadly, that those who don't think it's in another dimension or somewhere like that would be wrong. It's just my opinion anyway, though. Aren't MOPPeTs fun! ------------ Let This Land Be Evermore Divided: Gehan's idea that not the entire country is actually under one of the four rulers makes sense in a way--the various dissenting would-be-rulers would then be justified as well. The only thing wrong with it is that the Wogglebug's map would have to undergo major renovation . . . Marriage in Oz: I guess, if one is prepared to spend eternity with someone, as one would have to in a land with no death, then one should go ahead and do so. But I disagree about Glinda, Ozma, and others like them--it just doesn't mesh for me. Oh well--we'll agree to disagree. ;-) Gllinda and the GBR: She may very well have known Dorothy was coming, but didn't want to frighten her unduly by admitting it. Wouldn't you be scared in a new land with danger galore, to be told someone knew it would all happen? I would! ------------ Never growing up: Toys 'R' Us has yet another take on not aging in their TV ads . . . Foreign Languages Before WWI: Perhaps this refers to the percentage of children who took any language at all. Self-Altering Toto: Oz produces all sorts of strange effects on those who go there. ;-) Gehan: I couldn't get the link you sent to work. Perhaps it's my fault, I'm not sure. Anyway, until tomorrow, Jeremy Steadman ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 16:34:38 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Oz Pumpkinhead Riddle Solved: In Neill's _Wonder City_, Jack Pumpkinhead is painting a likeness of Mombi. it says. This statement apparently conflicts with _Land_, wherein Jack runs away with Tip less than 24 hours after he is created. It has been suggested - partly, methinks, in jest - that Jack had a poor sense of time right after being created and judged the one night he spent in Mombi's stable to have been seven years. Where his recollection of washing dishes and peeling potatoes came from, the theory does not state. However, it is not necessary to stretch this far. MOPTAT (My Own Personal Throw-Away Theory) is that the events in the first two chapters of _Land_ took place well before Dorothy ever arrived in Oz. Although trying to stay awake, the fact is that Tip did drift off to sleep that night. In the morning, Mombi suddenly awakened him and turned him into a marble statue as she had threatened. Seven years pass. Jack works as Mombi's slave, washing and peeling. Dorothy comes to Oz, slays a couple of witches, and leaves. The Wizard leaves the Scarecrow in charge. Then for some reason Jack is being stored overnight in the stable (perhaps Mombi is out of dishes and unpeeled potatoes). That night, the spell on Tip is broken somehow - wears off? intervention by Glinda? Doesn't really matter - and he wakes up on the kitchen floor. (The statue was too heavy for Mombi to move to the garden, so it has been in the kitchen all this time - same scenario as in _Wicked Witch of Oz_.) He has no recollection of being turned to a marble statue and thinks it is still the same night that he sat dreading his fate in the morning, although it is seven years later. He rescues Jack, and the story resumes. Voila! The only slight wrinkle in this theory is that Tip explains all about Dorothy, the Wizard, the Tin Woodman et al. during their journey to the EC, which he would not have known if he was marbleized pre-Dorothy. The handiest explanation is that this conversation never really took place; it was just a device used by the Royal Historian to explain things to the reader. If that's not acceptable, let's just say that whoever rescued him from the spell implanted the current information in his memory. Gehan wrote: >*.If Glinda knows all the important things in the world,why doesn't she use >her magic to help Earth-folk for once,when they are in real danger,(The 1st >and 2nd World War e.t.c)? How do you know she didn't? Why do you think the Allies won? The English occultist Dion Fortune led a group that called archangels and/or King Arthur and his knights to fight the Luftwaffe; in fact, she claimed credit for the results of the Battle of Britain. If she could do it, why not Glinda? :) I seem to recall Superman helping out, too, in the Sunday funnies. Given his powers, why did the war last so long? The Axis must have had a lot of kryptonite stockpiled. - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 18:00:28 -0800 From: Steve Teller Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-19-98 > Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 19:45:23 -0600 > From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) > Subject: Oz & Ozma > > Ozma in the Movies: > Has anyone here ever actually seen the Shirley Temple TV version of _The > Land of Oz_ (1960)? I have, twice, once in 1960 and once at an Ozmapolitan Convention a few years ago. > Is there any way a normal (?) person like me could see it? Be lucky enough be be where it is shown. > As a general question, which in your opinion is the best film portrayal > of Ozma: Jessie May Walsh of the LFB silents, Vivian Reed at the beginning > of the Baum silents, Shirley Temple in her TV production of _Land_, or Emma > Ridley of _Return to Oz_? Vivian Reed, after all Baum chose her. > Oz on Earth: > The only problem with the Oz on earth idea is that since earth is rapidly > becoming populated, more populated, and overpopulated, Oz would have to be in > another plane of existence to remain empty long (yes, even if it's in the > middle of the ocean). > The problem of the earth population crisis encroaching on Oz is covered in THE TEN WOODMEN OF OZ by March Laumer. I want to thank Jane Albright. She told me about an eBay item I would have missed, and now I am the owner of a piece of sheet music signed: To Steve From Ray Bolger. Steve T. ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 07:53:45 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Ozzy things Ruth Berman: I was thinking of the same thing too.Glinda recorded all the important events her spies were able to find out in a magic book,and later,increased its powers so it would record things automatically.Maybe she DID know that the Wizard was a Humbug before after all,but didn't want to ruin him or dissapoint the Ozites.She may have wiated untill the correct time,as I said before. (BTW,I'm Gehan Cooray,not Shiromal) Coming to where Oz is located,here are a few guesses: 1.While flying to Australia as a kid,I happend to look out and saw the enormous Desert in Australia and thought to myself:"Maybe this is where Oz is located.After all,it is invisible.And it's such a big Desert." 2.Oz maybe in some magical planet,in another galaxy ,which can only be reached by a magic dimension gate.Maybe this Demension gate is formed in the sky,or may suddenly appear somehwerem,and Dorothy's house went through it. I'm not an expert on Oz,as I've not ready many of the FF books other than Baum's books,but ......... --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 07:53:49 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest Tyler Jones Wrote: You know, that's true. We never actually witness Ruggedo being kicked out >of the Kingdom of the Nomes, since Kaliko gave him permission to stay at >the end of _Tik-Tok_, yet there he is wandering the earth in _Magic_. This >could also be an interesting story, or a side-story, as the power behind >the throne in _Rinkitink_. Perhaps he decided that life in Nomeland was too boring ,now that he was just an ordinary nome,and perhaps he set out wandering,and somehow try to find a way to get back at Ozma and Dorothy.As one of the Digest Members said:Ozma and her friends may have had another adventure,unknown to the Historians.They may have told Kaliko to becareful of Ruggedo,and to make sure that he doesn't cause more mischeif,and maybe Kaliko banished him,as punishment for his cruel deeds. David Godwin wrote: ><return to youth, or to keep their childen as children forever, rather than >any desire on the part of children themselves? Anyway, if no one ever grows >any older, do they likewise not mature mentally or emotionally? Is a >ten-year-old brat in Oz going to be a brat forever? Is Button Bright always >going to wander off and get lost?>> Well,I think what Baum said about "Not Growing Up in Oz" and "Remaining the same age" is wrong.I mean,the Wizard came to Oz as a handsome young man,but soon grew old.I think one has the choice of growing or not.Maybe those who prefer to remain young do so,but those who dont DONT.The same goes for fairies and witches.I mean,Locasta was old when she came to Oz and defeated Mombi(Maybe lurline sent her)But Glinda ,having lived in Oz for centuries didn't grow old.I mean,Baum doesn't mention about Not Growing old in -Wizard-.He may have been really ill when writing TINWOODMAN and didnt know what he was doing.He may not have thought that far. I dont think Betsy or trot or dorothy or BB(ButtonBright)would grow emotionally.They will always remain little chidren.Button-Bright will always get lost,Dorothy will always be the "Same sweet girl" and Trot will always be "Tiny Trot". --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 07:53:54 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Ozzy things Ruth Berman: I was thinking of the same thing too.Glinda recorded all the important events her spies were able to find out in a magic book,and later,increased its powers so it would record things automatically.Maybe she DID know that the Wizard was a Humbug before after all,but didn't want to ruin him or dissapoint the Ozites.She may have wiated untill the correct time,as I said before. (BTW,I'm Gehan Cooray,not Shiromal) Coming to where Oz is located,here are a few guesses: 1.While flying to Australia as a kid,I happend to look out and saw the enormous Desert in Australia and thought to myself:"Maybe this is where Oz is located.After all,it is invisible.And it's such a big Desert." 2.Oz maybe in some magical planet,in another galaxy ,which can only be reached by a magic dimension gate.Maybe this Demension gate is formed in the sky,or may suddenly appear somehwerem,and Dorothy's house went through it. I'm not an expert on Oz,as I've not ready many of the FF books other than Baum's books,but ......... --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 07:53:51 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Ozma Here's my own MOPPET on Ozma: Ozma was always a member of Queen Lurline's Fairy-band ,even when she enchanted Oz.Then,Lurline left two of her fairies to rule the land,and appointed a Glinda as their "Royal Adviser".Lurline also told Glinda,that somday,she will send a fairy called Ozma through one of the Kings,and that everyone will love and respect her.(I dont think there was such a King as Ozroar,other than Pastoria's father)Some time afterward Pastoria was coronated ,and anoited "King of Morrow".He didn't really rule the whole country.Then,four wicked witches conquered Oz ,and bla bla bla,and kidnapped King Ozroar.At this time,Queen lurline had injected Ozma's fairy-spirit into Queen Ozette's womb,and she was born as "The daughter of King Pastoria".And after Mombi kidnapped Pastoria and Ozette,Lurline hid Ozma in a magic picture.Later after the Wizard came to Oz ,Lurline dis-enchanted Ozma and de-aged her back to a baby.But it wasn't long before Mombi found out,and she stole her.Lurline couldn't protect her from Mombi because witchcraft is different from fairy-magic.Then,Mombi went to the Wizard and told him to teach her all his tricks of magic,if not,she will expose him as a Humbug and make Ozma queen.That was why he tought her all his magic secrets and told Old Mombi to keep Ozma a secret too.Then,Mombi switched places with Ozma and Prince Tip.I think,Prince Tip was only a few months old at that time,whereas Ozma was thousands of years old,although she was de-aged.So Ozma had a very young nine year old body as Tip,but after she was dis-enchanted,she regained her mature form. That is my theory on Ozma.Anyone else agree with me? ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:08:50 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Ozzy things Ruth Berman: I was thinking of the same thing too.Glinda recorded all the important events her spies were able to find out in a magic book,and later,increased its powers so it would record things automatically.Maybe she DID know that the Wizard was a Humbug before after all,but didn't want to ruin him or dissapoint the Ozites.She may have wiated untill the correct time,as I said before. (BTW,I'm Gehan Cooray,not Shiromal) Coming to where Oz is located,here are a few guesses: 1.While flying to Australia as a kid,I happend to look out and saw the enormous Desert in Australia and thought to myself:"Maybe this is where Oz is located.After all,it is invisible.And it's such a big Desert." 2.Oz maybe in some magical planet,in another galaxy ,which can only be reached by a magic dimension gate.Maybe this Demension gate is formed in the sky,or may suddenly appear somehwerem,and Dorothy's house went through it. I'm not an expert on Oz,as I've not ready many of the FF books other than Baum's books,but ......... --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 07:53:47 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Glinda and the Kingdom of Morrow Here's my theory on the GBR: I think Glinda recorded all that her spies were able to find out in a magic book.Later,she increased its powers,in such a way,that the book will record important events automatically.I also think that Glinda was a mere Witch in -Wizard- but later,managed to increase her powers and learn more magic and became a sorceress.I mean,she has been in Oz for centuries(as -Emerald city-states),but all along,I think she was a mere good witch,and a Royal Adviser to the King.That's why she placed the magic fountain in the King's palace ,beacause one of them was wicked,and wouldn't listen to her.Then,when Mombi kidnapped Pastoria and her fellow-witches conquered Oz,she managed to overthrow Singra and become Queen of the South. Next,coming to the King's palace,I beleive the former kings and queens lived in a castle called Morrow (As-Blue Emperor -states).This Castle was located in Morrow. I think,Glinda placed her magic fountain in this castle.Then ,after the Wizard came,he destroyed the castle and the Kingdom of Morrow and built the Emerald city in it's place.This means that Morrow may have been in the Green country ,where the Emerald city was built. Does anyone agree with me? --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:11:03 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Message board Ooops,sorry.I gave the wrong adress for my message board.It's:www.InsideTheWeb.com/mbs.cgi/mb272493 Sorry, Gehan ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 22:14:59 -0500 From: Michael Turniansky Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-19-98 > Gehan asserts: > Here are a few Ozzy facts,I found in The Wizard of Oz tv series By Cinar. > > 13.Billina worked for the Gnome King. !!! Doing what? Making omelettes??? Tyler asks: > Jane: > This has come up only briefly on the Digest. What do the average Ozites DO > with all of their spare time? We mainly only read about the royalty and the > celebrities of Oz. Well, I don't rightly know, but I do know that (non-canonically) they "get up at noon and go to work at one, take an hour for lunch and then at two [they're] done. (jolly old fun!)" Gehan again (BTW, .lk is Sri Lanka, digesters) > *.Glinda broke the enchantment Mombi placed on Jellia.Why does she say she > cant deal in transformations in later books? Mombi placed an enchantment on Jellia? Must've been one of the books I haven't read. Which one, and what was it? (feel free to put spoiler warnings around it if you wish. I don't care. I read all spoilers anyway :-) --Mike "Shaggy Man" Turniansky ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 22:14:00 -0500 From: "J. L. Bell" Subject: shopping in Oz About the posting some of us saw as spam, Jill Moore wrote: <> I regret that you feel insulted, Jill. I was analyzing why your recent posting had prompted a complaint from an Ozzy Digest contributor that it was "an ad, pure and simple." You now write: <> The density was the appearance of eight exclamation points in the four sentences I'd quoted. The phrase you cite above was in its complete form not just a holiday greeting, but <> Warm wishes are indeed what L. Frank Baum's Oz is all about; shopping arguably isn't. Shopping for Oz items is clearly important to you, however. Your three previous postings to the digest in 1998 have all been about folks selling Oz material. Buying collectibles is a legitimate way of enjoying the Oz tradition, in which we all probably participate to some extent. So is analyzing the books, which accounts for the bulk of postings in this digest. Perhaps some of us are so jaded we misinterpret a long, genuinely enthusiastic, unsolicited recommendation of an Oz-goods dealer as hype. But anyone who opens an e-mailbox these days sees what purport to be enthusiastic, objective recommendations for Web sites, get-rich-quick schemes, and discount items. We're best able to evaluate and trust such information when we know the source. I invite you to join the conversation about other things Ozzy so we can get to know you better. David Godwin wrote: <> I haven't read PATCHWORK BRIDE OF OZ, but I've heard [twice now] one reader's fervent complaint that the search for suitable wedding attire that becomes one plot of the book (a) is out of character for the Patchwork ["I Hate Dignity"] Girl, and (b) would deprive the Scarecrow of what constitutes his body. Even this reader agrees, however, that Scraps and the Scarecrow are enamored of each other when they meet. They're no doubt Baum's Oz celebrities most likely to contemplate marrying each other. (The tin man and Scarecrow just live together.) David Godwin wrote: <> Then in LOST PRINCESS she disappears and is disembodied, completing a trinity by becoming wholly a spirit. Gehan Cooray wrote: <> Careful of those "facts"! One of the pleasant things about developing your own idea of what belongs in the Oz canon (i.e., what books or stories articles or movies give reliable "facts" about Oz) is that you can ignore the contradictory claims of the rest. Speaking on non-canonical items, Tyler Jones, I should note that I've been impressed by the thoroughness of the HACC and the thought that's gone into it. Though I don't agree with all of it--and can't recognize many titles it lists--it has made me think more about my own conceptions of Oz time. Jeremy Steadman wrote: <> David Hulan was the fellow who argued, <> My point was that "unified" can mean different things geographically, culturally, and politically; even if Ozians felt allegiance to a particular dynasty or person (such as Pastoria), their loyalty and obedience might be much weaker than what Ozma commands. In addition, even if Oz wasn't unified in Pastoria's time, it may have been unified before him. My impression of Pastoria's reign, based on his and Pajuka's personalities in LOST KING, the rise of the witches, and the royal household's enchantment, is that his hold on power was always tenuous. Whether he claimed to be in charge of the whole land within the Deadly Desert or only the green-leaning region in the center, or the green plus the nearby or relatively civilized parts of the rest, I'm not sure the books give a clear answer. Gehan Cooray theorized: <> In the Middle Ages, European rulers were indeed defined by the peoples they ruled, not the territories: thus, "King of the Franks" instead of "King of France." Latin terms for countries actually mean "what belongs to these people"--"Germania" means "belonging to the Germans." Countries couldn't be defined by borders until relatively recently. A similar system for Oz could indeed define "Quadlingland" as "land inhabited by people who consider themselves Quadlings." That said, there are many kingdoms and regions within Oz where people do accept Ozma's rule, and the authority of her chosen deputies. Among the areas of the South where Glinda exerts control are Miss Cuttenclip's village and Jinxland (when she chooses). Bini Aru obeys Ozma's laws as soon as he hears about them, and the Su-Dic at least knows he should. Ordinary human farmers seem most likely to accept the central authority. About Button-Bright in MAGIC, Ruth Berman wrote: <> I find I've written two Oz tales in which Button-Bright gives birthday gifts--in one he chooses something out of his pockets just before the party; in the other he selects a gift (forgetting he's given this person the same thing before), wraps it, puts it in a pocket, and forgets it until the party. I mention these details only so you can see how much respect I have for the lad's planning ability. But perhaps Ojo--who's sitting beside Button-Bright at Ozma's party in MAGIC, and who doesn't attend with Unc Nunkie--helped him find a joint present. [Having sniped at Button-Bright, I should acknowledge not being close to completing my New Year's gift choices myself.] Gehan Cooray wrote: <> Diana was Lady Diana Spencer, daughter and sister of earls. An earl is the third highest rank in the British nobility--below only duke and marquess, above viscount and baron. Before she married, Diana was formally addressed as "Lady Diana," not "Miss Spencer." [If she'd been born male, she'd have become the earl since she was older than her brother, and would have had the honorific title "Viscount" something-or-other from birth.] Furthermore, the Spencers are said to believe they have more royal English ancestors than the Windsors, who are mostly of German princely descent. So I don't think we can say Diana was born an "ordinary" Englishwoman. But your original comment was on whether the idea of Ozma's marriage would be more easily accepted if the groom were another fairy. I don't think so. Even we mortals who can't see Ozma falling in love would prefer to think she'd be willing to love one of us. I have a little less trouble with her marrying a mortal than with her marrying a software engineer! About Thompson's possible "jock quotient," Ruth Berman wrote: <> Thanks for the research and thoughts. Girls' basketball was a sport before WW2, I believe, though the rules restricted how far along the court players could run. Once I had a late 1800s photo of a women's baseball team. But I agree little Ruth's main exercise in school was probably calisthenics. I was wondering if anyone had written about her as a big fan of the Athletics, for instance, which would mirror her boys' eagerness to play ball. Baum does have the horse race in DOROTHY & WIZARD; it's significant, however, that animals exhibit all the competitiveness there. Perhaps his childhood soured him on team sports--but where did I read he played baseball in Aberdeen? Gehan Cooray wrote: <> Mrs. Yoop *says* her enchantments can never be broken, but she disenchanted herself after hiding from the shepherds who captured her husband, and Ozma breaks three of her enchantments (canary, tin owl, straw bear). Reera does prefer to change things back and forth, and never claims her transformations are permanent. After TIN WOODMAN Mrs. Yoop was presumably a small green monkey stuck in a big castle, listening to her stomach growl and learning bobbin lace. Gehan Cooray wrote: <> I expect the sorceress just knows how to make an entrance. See that illustration of her arrival in her stork chariot in LOST PRINCESS--more graceful, dignified, and awe-inspiring than a puff of smoke. [Do the books state Glinda's the "Most Powerful sorceress on earth," or simply in Oz?] Gehan Cooray wrote: <> This makes sense if, as I suspect, the Book existed well before Glinda revealed its existence in EMERALD CITY (and perhaps before Glinda owned it herself). Gehan Cooray wrote: <> What rulers or governors in the world have seen all parts of their territories and are obeyed by everyone within them? Gehan Cooray wrote: <> Another answer appears in the first chapter of GLINDA. On page 21 of the Reilly & Lee edition and its reprints, Glinda counsels Ozma, "Had you not learned of the existence of the Flatheads and the Skeezers, through my Book of Records, you would never have worried about them or their quarrels. So, if you pay no attention to these peoples, you may never hear of them again." That attitude seems to encapsulate a major difference between Ozma and Glinda. The former can't leave trouble alone once she feels responsible for fixing it. Glinda, though she looks at the Book of Records "several times a day" [16] and must learn about all sorts of grief, can easily decide it's not her problem. Glinda needs to know; Ozma needs to heal. Having just returned from a business trip, and being about to leave on a holiday trip, I'm behind on reading GLINDA and will probably stay behind. I'll therefore be late in posting any further analysis of this book. [Wild applause.] J. L. Bell JnoLBell@compuserve.com ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Dec 98 11:24:54 CST From: "Ruth Berman" Subject: ozzy digest David Godwin: I did see the Shirley Temple "Land of Oz" when it aired, and remember enjoying it, but don't remember much about the specific details of it. It hasn't aired since or been made available on videotape. If anyone knows of a reasonable address to write to (an address for Shirley Temple herself, possibly), perhaps a bunch of letters saying how nice it would be to have that episode (and maybe a selection of the Temple Storybook productions?) available on videotape might encourage her to try it. Jill Moore: It's sad that your well-meant recommendation got misinterpreted -- but it did *sound* like an ad (as in "price couldn't be beat!" or "check it out and have fun!!!"). Another time, you might want to include a specific mention of what the items were that you got that you hadn't seen available elsewhere or not at such low prices, rather than making the sweeping claim that this dealer's prices can't be beat, and it's probably a good idea to avoid both exclamation points and exclamatory phrases (because they sound like imperatives giving-an-order) such as "check it out" or "be sure and ask." Exclamation points and imperatives are kind of like ALL CAPS WRITING -- there's always a danger that the reader will get the feeling of being shouted at when all you intended was your feeling of enthusiasm. Peter Hanff: The possibility of getting Vladimirsky to the Centennial Convention sounds exciting. Do you know of any US dealers who would carry his newly-illustrated "Wizard" edition? I don't read Russian, but might be interested in it just for the illos. (By the by, if you know of someone but it's someone who has a web-site -- I don't have web access, so need an email or post-mail address.) J.L. Bell: I don't think Barrie's "I won't grow up!" is aimed just at the adults in the audience. Kids like the idea of growing up for the power and the freedom, but are also aware that adults complain of working long hours and don't seem to have much energy for fun (I suppose I vaguely realized that my parents thought it was fun to go to parties and stand around and talk, but I don't think I thought it compared with sitting home reading or climbing trees in the park). I remember that when I was a child Peter's cry of "I want always to be a little boy and have fun" meant something to me, although looking back I'm not sure I remember just what. Some thoughts on "Glinda": The reference to "Dorothy's own uncle" and to "his wife Aunt Em" links up with Zeb's reference to "my uncle" and "your uncle" to suggest strongly that Henry is Dorothy's relation by birth-kinship, and Em her aunt by marriage. Besides the brief appearance of the Frogman as one of Ozma's council, the portrayal of war may give an indication that "Lost Princess," "Magic," and "Glinda" were written in the same sequence that they were published. In the earlier books, war is either a conflict between good and evil (Oz vs Nomes) or a trivial pursuit easily stopped (Hoppers vs Horners -- or not so easily stopped, if the leader is stubborn enough, but still trivial: Ann Soforth vs the world). Many of the books, including "Lost Princess," have plots without wars. In "Magic," there are peripheral references to WWI (the transformation of the monkeys into soldiers and the book's dedication). In "Glinda," the Flatheads and the Skeezers are both basically good peoples led by evil leaders into a long-time war (with fairly serious grieveances on both sides) which is stopped only with considerable difficulty. This set-up sounds like Baum's reaction to WWI fairly late in the war, probably later than the peripheral references of "Magic" and the lack of references in "Lost Princess." I wonder who's minding the store once the entire council (including the Scarecrow, who was supposed to be in charge) sets off to rescue Ozma and Dorothy. Maybe Jellia Jamb would be a good choice? Maybe the Soldier with the Green Whiskers would at least look good on the throne? Maybe, as a special treat for several years of good behavior, Jinjur got to come over and queen it for those few days? Lady Aurex and Ervic among the Skeezers give a more fully characterized look at ordinary Ozites than the books usually give. (Aurex winds up as queen, but isn't a royalty until then. Her title of "Lady" sounds like a suggestion of some kind of hereditary aristocracy in Oz, which sounds odd, but maybe Baum meant it as a job-title for someone who was among Coo-ee-oh's ladies-in-waiting.) Some particularly attractive Neill artwork -- the use of page-and-a- half chapter headings gave him room for some lovely large-screen views (for instance, the landscape of strange flowers where Ozma pitches the Magic Tent, or the view of Glinda and the Wizard with the skeropythrope doing fireworks). Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:50:08 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-16-98 I'm delighted that the Digest has been coming out more frequently of late, but it's played hob with the habit I've developed over the past few months of letting things age for 3-4 days before replying. I'll have to get better about that. (As an excuse of sorts, last Friday was my 62d birthday and Marcia and I did various celebratory things that took up more of my time than a normal Friday.) 12/16: > "croggle", "anybody checked the OED? :-)" > Just did. No such animal. Wouldn't have expected it, hence the emoticon. If it's in any dictionary it would probably be in one of American slang. Scott H.: >David: There was some controversy some years ago over Notre Dame's >Fighting Irish Really? From Irish-Americans? >Ruth: I tend to mix languages in my writing. Another acclaimed writer to >do this was Shakespeare. I mix languages in my writing, too, but wouldn't presume to call myself an "acclaimed writer." >Dave: Those olf fairy tales were not written for children. They are >folktales, which were later perceived as children's literature because >children were part of the intended audience. Depends on which old fairy tales you're talking about. The ones from Grimm, yes. I think Andersen had a juvenile audience in mind for his, though, and in any case they aren't "folk tales." Neither are Perrault's, though I believe most of his are based on folk tales that he elaborated on. Atticus: I can tell you things I think are "don't miss" in NYC, but I don't know enough about your interests outside Oz to be sure you'd feel the same about anything except Books of Wonder, which someone has already suggested. (I don't remember the current address, but I don't think it's far from its old location at the corner of 7th Ave and 18th St. In fact, I'm not even positive that it's moved, though I think it did.) However, the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the American Museum of Natural History are two places that I'd hate to miss if I were in NYC. And Broadway theater is the best in the world (in English, anyhow), though it's pricey. Jane: The only concert I can remember in the FF was Jack Pumpkinhead's shoe choir in _Wonder City_, but I would imagine that there are fairly frequent concerts. We know from the parade in _Road_ that there are bands in Oz, and so presumably they'd give concerts from time to time - why else would they be organized? Maybe with guest appearances from the Tin Cornet Band or others that normally operate outside the capital, for extra treats. And then I'm sure there's shopping, which is of great interest to a lot of people; even if there's no money economy - which may have only been the case for a relatively short time, since there does seem to be one in _Grampa_, _Lost King_, and _Merry-Go-Round_ at least - presumably the people who make things need a means to transfer them to the people who want them, which implies some kind of shops. And attendance at Ozma's court probably takes up a good deal of the time of some of the citizens. We know there are "courtiers"; they're specifically mentioned in more than one of Baum's books. Since I don't believe that in Oz there would be a hereditary aristocracy, or any other kind of aristocracy for that matter, MOPPeT is that the citizens of the EC take turns at being "courtiers," enjoying the spectacle of court life for a month or two at a time before turning the duties over to another group. Possibly this rotation applies to all citizens of Oz, and not just the EC, though I'd guess that citizens from outside the capital would be fewer in number and probably serve a longer term, to compensate for the distance traveled. What else? Well, whatever else people of any medium-sized city in a benign climate might do. I don't recall ever having any difficulty filling my days when I lived in places a good deal smaller than the EC, even back in the days before there was television. (There was radio, but we know from _Magical Mimics_ that radio broadcasts from the US can be picked up in Oz. Of course, radio was a lot more interesting in the '40s than it is now. "Anybody wanna hear 'Front Page Farrell?'" A common cry I remember from my childhood.) Even when I was a kid during summer vacation, when I had essentially zip to do but recreate. Nathan: >True, but many of Baum's characters were usually referred to by >descriptions rather than names. These include the Tin Woodman, the >Patchwork Girl, and the Soldier with Green Whiskers. All of these >characters have names, but they were not used all that frequently. I think the Patchwork Girl was referred to as Scraps about as often as not, but the other cases are certainly true. It's interesting that while it appears to be the case that the Soldier with the Green Whiskers is the same as Omby Amby, he's never referred to by both appellations in the same book, and in the books where he's referred to as Omby Amby he doesn't have green whiskers, though he tells the Wizard in _DotWiz_ that he once did have them. This is ignoring Thompson's naming him "Wantowin Battles" in _Ozoplaning_. If we accept that as canonical then we have to conclude that there must have been multiple soldiers with green whiskers in the Wizard's army (not overly far-fetched) and that Omby Amby was not the Soldier with the Green Whiskers whom Dorothy dealt with and who also appears in _Land_ and the post-_Emerald City_ books. This leads me into a couple of side issues, one short and the other fairly lengthy. The short one is that I recently read, in _Dirty Little Secrets of World War II_, that some of the Polish units that were formed in Britain after the fall of Poland in fact consisted entirely of officers. I think there was even one such entire division. One wonders if they'd read _Ozma of Oz_? :-) (In fact, those units performed extremely well in combat, unlike Ozma's army.) *******A longish reflection on Ozish names follows. Skip if uninterested****** The naming of Ozites doesn't seem to follow a very consistent system. (I exclude immigrants from this discussion.) A relatively small number of characters have names that appear to be standard American-style names: Nick, Jack, Ann, Jo (though without a final "e" it's usually a female name for us), Angeline (Scraps's intended name), Gloria - or names that appear to be minor variants on American-style names: Dyna, Salye, Margalotte. A substantially larger number have names that appear to be puns, or descriptive: Jellia Jamb, Jinjur, Polychrome, Miss Cuttenclip, Grandmother Gnit, most if not all of the inhabitants of Utensia, Bunbury, and Bunnybury, Kings Kynd, Phearse, and Krewl of Jinxland, Cayke, and so on. Thompson did this even more than Baum, I think, without doing an exhaustive search of "Who's Who, etc." But the greatest number are named in ways that seem to be unique to Oz, without English equivalents or submerged (or overt) English meanings. The first Ozite we meet whose name is given is Boq, and later named characters tend to follow this pattern more often than not. Glinda is close enough to Glenda that they're frequently confused, but I don't think Baum had "Glenda" in mind when he named the Good Witch of the South. Mombi, Ozma, Omby Amby, Ojo, Pon, Googly-goo (could be considered punnish, I guess), Ugu, the Yoops, Ku-Klip, Nimmie Amee, Coo-ee-oh, Reera, Aurah, Audah, Aujah, and so on. When I named Ozites in _Glass Cat_ I mostly tried to follow this practice - the Munchkin couple Tosc and Dirna; the Bad Lads Torko, Moosko, Lando, Zango, and Faldo (Bad Lads' names are always two syllables ending in "o"). The Oogaboo women and children, because the Oogaboo names in _Tik-Tok_ seemed to follow a pattern of American-style or mild distortions of American-style names, I named in the same way - Mili and Jemi Cone, Totti Sundae, Joli Cheese. ************End of Ozish name discussion******************** J.L.: I see your argument of Oz-on-this-Earth as amounting to, "I want to believe Oz is on this Earth, so I'm going to and there's no contrary evidence that you can adduce that will make me believe otherwise." Fine. I have non-falsifiable beliefs myself. But please don't invoke Carl Sagan in defense of your position. >The most we can >confidently say is that Betsy had been in the Emerald City for at least >three years when LOST PRINCESS began, the span since the publication of >TIK-TOK. [Actually, even that minimal span would be in doubt under my >suggestion that publication of LOST PRINCESS was delayed a year.] And even that isn't certain. There's no reason that _Lost Princess_ couldn't have occurred years before Baum recorded its events, and possibly only a year or even less passed between the events of _Tik-Tok_ and those of _Lost Princess_. We've discussed the possibility (which I regard as a probability) that only 3-4 years, 5 at most, passed between the events of _Wizard_ and _Emerald City_. In addition, we have the factor that Button-Bright, who seems to be about four years old in _Road_, is no more than nine in _Scarecrow_. His aging might have been slowed somewhat by spending time in Mo or other non-aging territory before meeting Trot and Cap'n Bill, but since he was younger than Trot in _Sky Island_ and also in _Scarecrow_ it's necessary to take Trot's aging into account as well. Putting it all together, it figures that _Scarecrow_ took place no more than 5 years after _Road_, or about 1908 by my chronology. There's no particular reason I know of to place the events of _Lost Princess_ more than a year or so after _Scarecrow_. There just isn't much in the way of temporal correlation between the Oz books and the Outside World. We can be confident from internal evidence that _Emerald City_ takes place after Marconi invented wireless telegraphy and after dirigible airships were in production of sorts, but those are about the only time-binding I can find in the Baum books. (Well, there are other even more remote historical references, but none that would necessitate dating the events of even the last of the Baum books later than, say, 1910.) David G.: >Despite various incidents that can be explained away as PL (pre-Lurline) or >in some other way, such as destruction as opposed to natural death, the >fact is that no one in Oz ever dies. Not of old age, anyway. Not any more, but apparently Nick Chopper's parents did. I'm not sure that you were on the Digest when I last presented my theory about the development of Neill's drawings of Ozma. I was struck by the coincidence (?) that through _Jack Pumpkinhead_ Neill always draws Ozma in full, drapy clothing that completely conceals her figure, and gives her features and proportions consistent with her being a pre-teen. Starting with _Yellow Knight_ he usually draws her in close-fitting outfits, and changes her proportions as well, to make her appear to be at least a teenager. The Defining Event that led to this change may well have been that in _Jack Pumpkinhead_, for the first time, an adult male character wants to marry her. (Pompa doesn't really want to marry her in _Kabumpo_; he just thinks he needs to to save his country.) This may have persuaded Neill that he shouldn't draw Ozma in a way that would make suitors for her hand appear to be pedophiles. (That's a bit thick even for a villain in Oz.) >In all the FF, I do not recall any mention of its ever having snowed in Oz. >In fact, it doesn't seem to rain a lot, either. Someone (Nathan, I think) pointed out that there's snow - though it doesn't fall on-stage - in both _Ojo_ and _Hidden Valley_. Rain rarely falls on principal characters - the only exception I can think of on-stage is in _Cowardly Lion_, though it's what rusted Nick Chopper. But presumably it must rain with reasonable frequency in Oz; there doesn't seem to be any irrigation, and forests and green fields require a fair amount of rainfall to keep growing. It just doesn't often happen to the protagonists of the stories. > Is a ten-year-old brat in Oz going to be a >brat forever? Is Button Bright always going to wander off and get lost? Do >they never develop or become any wiser? Are there any brats in Oz? The closest we come to meeting one is Jenny Jump, and she gets debratified before she's been there for a whole book. As for Button-Bright, my take on him is that yes, he's always going to wander off and get lost because that's how he gets his kicks. He continues to acquire knowledge, and even a degree of wisdom, but his basic personality isn't going to change, and an ultimate degree of _sang froid_ is part of that. Dave: >I've heard this talked about in depth elsewhere, about how Tip turning >into Ozma causes severe withdrawal and neurosis in children. Somehow I >muddled through remaining *fairly* mentally healthy. I was somewhat disappointed when Tip turned into Ozma (I think I'd known it was going to happen from reading other books where the transition was mentioned - _Land_ was one of the later books I read in my first foray through the canon), because I liked Tip as a character and would much rather he'd stayed around and that Ozma had appeared in some other way. But I don't think it would bother many children in any way other than that. I suspect adults would be much more likely to find it disturbing. 12/19: David G.: I always thought of it as Lurline the Mother, Ozma the Daughter, and Glinda the Holy Spirit. :-) If you're talking about what contemporary actress I'd like to see play Ozma I'll have to pretty much pass; I'm not familiar enough with contemporary young actresses. Drew Barrymore is the only one I can think of that would be remotely suitable, and she's not very. If we can go back in time then Natalie Wood about the time of _Rebel Without a Cause_, or Liz Taylor a couple of years after _National Velvet_, would be good, I think. I average seeing maybe two or three movies a year these days, and the only TV I watch (except for sports and election returns) is an occasional episode of _Xena_. And while I think Lucy Lawless would make a dynamite Glinda (with her hair dyed red, of course), and Renee O'Connor would make an excellent grown-up Dorothy, I can't see either of them as Ozma. :-) Gehan: I never heard of that Wizard of Oz TV series. It sounds as if, despite its discrepancies, it comes closer to the Real Oz than most other dramatized versions. Do you know if it's available in the US on video? Anyone? Tyler: I think it's pretty clear in the FF - more from Thompson than Baum, admittedly - that the four quarters of Oz have seldom if ever been actual political units. Someone - a witch, an appointed ruler - may exercise a sort of mild supervision, but Oz seems to have always been divided into fairly small units that are essentially self-governing and may not even be aware of the existence of a central or regional government. Note that when the Flatheads and Skeezers have a dispute in _Glinda_, or the Hoppers and Horners in _Royal Book_, it's Ozma who goes to settle it, not the GWN or Glinda (or the Tin Woodman, depending on whether the Hoppers and Horners are placed in the Quadling or Winkie Country - I don't think it's clear from the text which is the case) respectively. So the regional rulers don't even have the responsibility for settling disputes among their subjects. I think you and I are pretty much in agreement on this one; I was elaborating my views for those who haven't seen them yet. Jeremy: >You mention that not until Ozma's ascension to the throne did Oz really become >unified--what about under Pastoria? Depending on what reference you use, Pastoria may never have ruled at all, though his father did (_DotWiz_), may have ruled only the Emerald City (_Land_), or may have ruled all "Oz" (_Lost King_). But, as I argued a Digest or two back, in his day "Oz" may not have meant much more than the current green area, with maybe a little extra so that Morrow is included. Oz is also placed in the ocean in _Tik-Tok_ and _Scarecrow_ - or, at least, you can get to it from an ocean without ever passing through a country known to us from traditional geography. Gehan: Interesting theory, that the Munchkin/Quadling/Winkie/Gillikin countries are only the parts of the East/South/West/North that are inhabited by humans, and that the regional rulers only have authority over the humans and not the beasts or weird creatures. Could be, though there are references to the Forest of Gugu being in the Gillikin Country, for instance. And quite a few other similar references to being in one or another of the countries while encountering weird creatures of one kind or another. Still, these might be cases of the authors speaking loosely, or even someone at R&B/L making editorial changes. I'll have to think about this a bit. It's apparent, though, that Glinda has power in Bunnybury - or at least, such great respect that the bunnies will do whatever she'd ask them to do. Utensia and Bunbury don't seem to have heard of her, though. Wasn't Diana of a noble house? She wasn't personally of the nobility, but then relatively few females have been historically. I thought she had a peer of the realm somewhere not too far up her family tree. Admittedly, I don't know this for a fact. Wanting people to solve their own problems is a valid thing, but can be carried too far. As any parent will tell you, although you want your child to develop survival skills, you don't let them go out and play in traffic and hope they figure it out before they're run over. Comparisons to God aren't really appropriate, either; except for a relatively small number of instances described in the Bible (if you accept those), God simply doesn't intervene in human affairs. Ozma and Glinda intervene frequently; the question is why they pick the occasions they do and not others. Glinda didn't search for Ozma when Ugu kidnapped her because she was trying to re-create some of her magic tools to help her find out what had happened to Ozma. She didn't just go back to her palace and wait for someone else to find Ozma. We discussed this back when LP was the BCF, actually; MOPPeT was that she'd sent out the search parties with very little expectation that they'd find Ozma, but just to keep them from popping in on her every few hours to ask her how she was getting along. Someone (I think it was John Bell) wrote a very amusing scene of what might have happened if she hadn't sent Dorothy and company out. Glinda is rather ambiguous about transformations. She certainly breaks several transformations in the course of the books (including Jellia and Bilbil), but at other times she either can't or won't. Is a puzzlement. Oz is a fairly sizable place (about the size of Belgium, I estimate), and there aren't many roads and not much in the way of transportation except shank's mare. I don't think Ozma is that silly for not knowing all about its various corners, especially when (as in most of the books) she's only been on the throne for a decade or two, and seldom has occasion or even opportunity to leave the capital. J.L.: Handwork by Oz's young ladies? Example? The only such thing I remember was Aunt Em (not exactly a young lady) sewing new eyes on Scraps. I had a couple of storms blow up in _Glass Cat_, too, though I didn't count those as being Evidence... Tzvi: Mombi in _Lucky Bucky_ is clearly not the same Mombi who was washed out in _Lost King_. Aside from anything else, she gets thoroughly soaked when Davy goes to the bottom of Lake Quad and is none the worse for it, other than being seriously [ticked] off (as newspapers put it when quoting athletes...). Ruth: Neill's later drawings of Toto (after the Boston period) still don't seem to go back to the original Scottie look; besides the one where he has hound-like ears in _Lost Princess_, the other illos of him in that book show him with a long plumed tail, which isn't characteristic of most terriers. More like some of the toy breeds, papillons and the like. Re Baum and competitive sports - don't forget the Woggle-bug's college! Baum doesn't make a lot of it - and I think to a considerable degree he was satirizing the emphasis that a lot of colleges, even in those days, put on athletics (I'm thinking of the Yale coach who, in the Teens or Twenties, announced to his team: "Gentlemen, you are about to face Harvard on the football field. Nothing you will ever do again in your life will be as important." Or words to that effect.). But he certainly mentioned it in more than one book. Dave: Einstein wasn't terrible at _math_; he was terrible at arithmetic. (Or what we call arithmetic; the Greeks, who invented the term, meant what we call Number Theory by "arithmetic"; addition, multiplication, subtraction, and division were called "logistic".) In some branches of mathematics he was highly innovative, especially in applying it to physics. (Tensor analysis, for instance.) Now if this can get to Dave before he puts out _another_ Digest... David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 17:51:17 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Ruth Plumly Thompson Shouldn't RPT know that the Winkies live in the west and the Munchkins live in the east and that both countries were given the wrong colours in her books(And the wrong rulers too).I mean,how can a silly old map confuse her,when she has read the books of LFB? Besides,I dont think RPT had a right to destroy a character invented by LFB himself.(The Good Witch of the North).I mean,Baum obvioulsy wanted her to be a Witch right along,and rule the Gilikin Kingdom.What right does Thompson have to destroy the character and say that she was actually a princess all along,under one of Mombi's spells.Ridiculous. And Besides,I think Baum's books should be considered as the "Officail Books" ,since he was the creator of Oz.He may not have aproved Thompsons stories IF he were alive.I mean ,if some other author was appointed "Royal Historian",he could have done whatever he wanted,used his imagination,written a story,and it would still be considered "An Officail Book".Does anyone know what I mean? But I guess its too late now.Still,the Baum books can be called "Famous Fourteen". --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:21:19 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: My ozzy books Just to tell you that I'm writing two Oz books.they are: *.The Lost Queen of Oz *.The Hidden Princess of Oz -Lost queen- explains the rescue of Polychrome's long-lost mother(Queen Peronel)from the wicked monster Queen:Hungar the Hartie,who kidnapped her over a century ago. -Hidden princess-,I must say,is quite a complicated story,about the search for Princess Gayellette and Quelala.In the meantime,Mrs.Yoop and Coo-ee-oh drink from the truth pond and are restored to their proper forms.They team up with Ruggedo to conquer Oz once again.And meanwhile,Launa the Wood Nymph steals the wishing Emeralds from the emerald city ,and accidently brings the Witch of the East back to life ,while looking for magic potions in the -cave of Marvels-..... The Good Witch of the North and Gloma have a part too. --Gehan Cooray( I'll let you know when they are published) **************************************************************************** *** ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 23 Dec 98 13:38:38 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things TO LISA AND GEHAN: Thanks for telling about your books! I can't wait to read them! ( 'Bout time Poly and Prof. W. got their own books! :) ) Not inclined to comment on anything else... -- Dave ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ Castles, Castles in the air Take a paper plane through the rain and you'll be floating free Through those castles growing everywhere Won't you let your mind just unwind; Go upstream toward a dream You can ride on a laugh you can glide on; Behind every cloud is a star To light your way -- The Bugaloos, "Castles In the Air" ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 24 - 27, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:17:02 -0500 (EST) From: Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-19-98 My mom has a friend who wants to sell me a 1939 Bobbs-Merrill movie edition of _The Wizard of Oz_, and I was wondering what would be a fair price. It has some spotting on the endpapers, no dust jacket, ans some crayoned in pictures. The corners of the cover are not bent, but the spine is quite faded. Scott ============================================================================ ==== Scott Andrew Hutchins http://php.iupui.edu/~sahutchi Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More! My next vocal performance shall be December 27 at Unity Church of Indianapolis, 907 N. Delaware, at the 9 and 11 AM services. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Frances: I've led a pretty boring life compared to yours. Freddy [the neighbor]: Mine was pretty boring, too. I've just got a knack for picking out the interesting bits. --David Williamson, _Travelling North_, Act Two Scene Three ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 17:44:32 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-19-98 David G. My understanding of the term "high adventure" connotes something a bit rougher than the Oz books, more like King Arthur or Classical Myth, not a place where nobody dies and the villains aren't killers. You must also not forget that Ozma was impressively played by Christopher Passi in drag in 1981's _L. Frank Baum's The Marvelous Land of Oz_, directed by John Clark Donahue and John Driver. Gehan: Cinar implies they created that series, when in fact they bought it from Panmedia of Japan, and only included post-production credits. those credited as "animators" are actually only the animators of the CGI title sequence. So much for their reliability. Jeremy: _Tip OF Oz_ is not available yet. I need to find another agent, since the first one rejected it. Anyone know where to get _Literary Marketplace_? You wouldn't be thinking of Alan Hale's 1920 _Braveheart_, would you? No, it sounds too '90s. J.L.: The dollar symbol is supposed to have two bars, and was derived by intertwining U and S for U.S. money, then the bottom caves in. I guess we know what the symbol for Oz money would look like if money were used in Oz (or at least the sancitoned use of money). My latest script, _The Hollow People_, to star Mandy Barrett (who can be seen on my page at LEAR.JPG and mbarrett.jpg) has dialogue references to _Return to Oz_ and _The Marvelous Land of Oz_. We'll be taping it this summer. She hasn't seen the script yet, but has already said she wants to do it. I also want her to play the Mad Gasser of Mattoon in my _Monster in My Pocket_ film, which she wants to do, too. The script has to be approved by Tino, before it can be made. Visit the Bunk Films site at www.marqueznet.com.bunk. Scott ============================================================================ ==== Scott Andrew Hutchins http://php.iupui.edu/~sahutchi Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More! My next vocal performance shall be December 27 at Unity Church of Indianapolis, 907 N. Delaware, at the 9 and 11 AM services. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Frances: I've led a pretty boring life compared to yours. Freddy [the neighbor]: Mine was pretty boring, too. I've just got a knack for picking out the interesting bits. --David Williamson, _Travelling North_, Act Two Scene Three ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 18:15:54 -0500 (EST) From: Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-23-98 > Hmmm...let me think..does anybody remember the version of "A Little > Princess" that came out a few years ago? The girl who played Sara Crewe, > she's the *perfect* Ozma! Liesl Matthews... I thout of her more as Dorothy, but I suppose she's getting older... > ------------ > Let This Land Be Evermore Divided: > How do you know she didn't? Why do you think the Allies won? The English > occultist Dion Fortune led a group that called archangels and/or King > Arthur and his knights to fight the Luftwaffe; in fact, she claimed credit > for the results of the Battle of Britain. If she could do it, why not > Glinda? :) I seem to recall Superman helping out, too, in the Sunday > funnies. Given his powers, why did the war last so long? The Axis must have > had a lot of kryptonite stockpiled. Ironically, the first Kryptonite story didn't come until after the war. Prior to the war, he had no known weakness. > David Godwin: I did see the Shirley Temple "Land of Oz" when it aired, > and remember enjoying it, but don't remember much about the > specific details of it. It hasn't aired since or been made available on > videotape. If anyone knows of a reasonable address to write to (an > address for Shirley Temple herself, possibly), perhaps a bunch of > letters saying how nice it would be to have that episode (and maybe a > selection of the Temple Storybook productions?) available on > videotape might encourage her to try it. Some of them are. I've seen her Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves. These were of the B/W "Storybook" show the previous season. Temple was only the host of the episode, which was quite good, and a very nice print at that. I don't remember what company released it (it was volume 4), but I could check, or someone could go to Suncoast or Blockbuster and check the Videolog book. > Scott H.: > >David: There was some controversy some years ago over Notre Dame's > >Fighting Irish > > Really? From Irish-Americans? Either that or PC freaks...I don't know the details. > Depends on which old fairy tales you're talking about. The ones from Grimm, > yes. I think Andersen had a juvenile audience in mind for his, though, and > in any case they aren't "folk tales." Neither are Perrault's, though I > believe most of his are based on folk tales that he elaborated on. According to my children's lit prof, Andersen and Perrault wrote for a dual audience. Parts of the stories were aimed at adults, and parts for kids. The prof was William Touponce, who has written a number of critical works on SF. > But the greatest number are named in ways that seem to be unique to Oz, > without English equivalents or submerged (or overt) English meanings. The > first Ozite we meet whose name is given is Boq, and later named characters > tend to follow this pattern more often than not. Glinda is close enough to > Glenda that they're frequently confused, but I don't think Baum had > "Glenda" in mind when he named the Good Witch of the South. Mombi, Ozma, > Omby Amby, Ojo, Pon, Googly-goo (could be considered punnish, I guess), > Ugu, the Yoops, Ku-Klip, Nimmie Amee, Coo-ee-oh, Reera, Aurah, Audah, > Aujah, and so on. When I named Ozites in _Glass Cat_ I mostly tried to > follow this practice - the Munchkin couple Tosc and Dirna; the Bad Lads > Torko, Moosko, Lando, Zango, and Faldo (Bad Lads' names are always two > syllables ending in "o"). The Oogaboo women and children, because the > Oogaboo names in _Tik-Tok_ seemed to follow a pattern of American-style or > mild distortions of American-style names, I named in the same way - Mili > and Jemi Cone, Totti Sundae, Joli Cheese. Names of characters in my book range from relatively orginary, if not in spelling, like "Will" and "Cate," and David Greene and his sister Daria (Ozzy in-joke) to Latinate names like Astarus, Kraktalus, and Tarkalus, to weirdness like Angelica Klqesile. > ************End of Ozish name discussion******************** > > Gehan: > I never heard of that Wizard of Oz TV series. It sounds as if, despite its > discrepancies, it comes closer to the Real Oz than most other dramatized > versions. Do you know if it's available in the US on video? Anyone? It is currently available from Lightyear Entertainment, severely abridged to four features. Sony released four episodes on tape, it was discontinued after the first run. Scott ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 19:26:11 -0500 From: Lisa Mastroberte X-Accept-Language: en Subject: Curious Wogglebug and Other Oz Stuff Dave: My book, _Curious Wogglebug_, starts out when the Wogglebug decides to take a vacation with some oz friends (Betsy Bobbin, The Hungry Tiger, Ozma and Eureka) to Merryland. There, they find out that the entire Land of Pussy-Cats has been cat-knapped by....well, they don't have a clue. The rest is history. :) David G. Your little MOPPET about Jack with Mombi for seven years isn't the worst. But think about, he didn't know alot so maybe he calls 'hours' 'years,' so seven hours would be 7 years in his pumpkin-seeds. Off2Oz, Lisa ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 18:54:05 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Re:Ozzy Digest Lisa: Yes,the Wizard of Oz TV Series was a cartoon.BTW,your iedias for a Monozpoly game are very creative. Mike Turniansky: <> Actually,in the Series,The Gnome King wasn't always afraid of Egg.As I said,he was a captain on ship before draining the water of an ocean to his caverns underfground.Billina laid him an egg one day,and when The king found no way to crack it for breakfast,he tried hitttinh it on his head,and got a very big bump and felt really dizzy.Then,he left Billina on his ship,stranded on a desert once he returned to his underground caverns.The Ocean he drained,later became the Deadly desert which surrounds Oz and borders the land of Ev.But of course,all this isn't real Oz.just a cartoon series. And BTW,Mombi exchanged forms with Jellia in -Land- ,when Glinda was looking for her.But Glinda knew that she wasn't really Mombi ,and gave her back her proper body.I think Glinda REALLY can deal in transformations,but only in restoring.I think Ozma just didn't know about it. David Hulan: The Wizard of Oz Tv series by Cinar. is a series based on four Baum Books:"Wizard,land,Ozma and Emerald City although the stories are quite different other than -Wizard -and -:Land-.It was done in Canada,written by Don Rali and narrated by Margot Kidder.It has 52 episodes,and is available on video.(Edited into four 90 minutes videos: Wizard,Land,Ozma and EC)The stories are a little different from the Books, for in the series:"The Wizard doesn't return to Oz.Dorothy meets him in a Kansas circus"."Pastoria built the Ec,and told the Wizard to protect Ozma from the Witches,when he died of a terrible illness.But the Wizard left her in the hands of Mombi"."Dorothy doesn't come to Oz for permanant".They showed the series in Sri-Lanka a few years ago,and yet again a few months ago,but only 26 episodes.I have two of the videos (Ozma and -EC)both which I got from Thailand and Singapore.Who knows,they might show it in the states as well,though it was done in Canada................... BTW,do any of you watch -Sunset Beach-?Dont you think the actress who played Annie Douglas would be perfect for Coo-ee-oh?Uma Thurman might suit General Jinjur,but not the reformed Jinjur in -Ozma- and -Tinwoodman-.haha! --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 18:55:11 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Re:Ozzy Digest Lisa: Yes,the Wizard of Oz TV Series was a cartoon.BTW,your iedias for a Monozpoly game are very creative. Mike Turniansky: <> Actually,in the Series,The Gnome King wasn't always afraid of Egg.As I said,he was a captain on ship before draining the water of an ocean to his caverns underfground.Billina laid him an egg one day,and when The king found no way to crack it for breakfast,he tried hitttinh it on his head,and got a very big bump and felt really dizzy.Then,he left Billina on his ship,stranded on a desert once he returned to his underground caverns.The Ocean he drained,later became the Deadly desert which surrounds Oz and borders the land of Ev.But of course,all this isn't real Oz.just a cartoon series. And BTW,Mombi exchanged forms with Jellia in -Land- ,when Glinda was looking for her.But Glinda knew that she wasn't really Mombi ,and gave her back her proper body.I think Glinda REALLY can deal in transformations,but only in restoring.I think Ozma just didn't know about it. David Hulan: The Wizard of Oz Tv series by Cinar. is a series based on four Baum Books:"Wizard,land,Ozma and Emerald City although the stories are quite different other than -Wizard -and -:Land-.It was done in Canada,written by Don Rali and narrated by Margot Kidder.It has 52 episodes,and is available on video.(Edited into four 90 minutes videos: Wizard,Land,Ozma and EC)The stories are a little different from the Books, for in the series:"The Wizard doesn't return to Oz.Dorothy meets him in a Kansas circus"."Pastoria built the Ec,and told the Wizard to protect Ozma from the Witches,when he died of a terrible illness.But the Wizard left her in the hands of Mombi"."Dorothy doesn't come to Oz for permanant".They showed the series in Sri-Lanka a few years ago,and yet again a few months ago,but only 26 episodes.I have two of the videos (Ozma and -EC)both which I got from Thailand and Singapore.Who knows,they might show it in the states as well,though it was done in Canada................... BTW,do any of you watch -Sunset Beach-?Dont you think the actress who played Annie Douglas would be perfect for Coo-ee-oh?Uma Thurman might suit General Jinjur,but not the reformed Jinjur in -Ozma- and -Tinwoodman-.haha! --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== From: Ozmama@aol.com Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 13:04:23 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-23-98 Lisa:<> Good. How 'bout writing a short story and submitting it to _Oziana_ and to the Oz Research Table? That goes for all you writers. The novel isn't the only good literary genre to work in, y'know. > Ozma in the Movies: > Has anyone here ever actually seen the Shirley Temple TV version of _The Land of Oz_ (1960)? Yeah, I did, when it originally aired and then again at an OzCon. I did not like it back in 1960. Upon seeing it again, however, I kinda liked the thing. I think the Minneapolis Children's Theater (I hope I've got that right) version is superior to it. John Bell: <<... a major difference between Ozma and Glinda. The former can't leave trouble alone once she feels responsible for fixing it. Glinda, though she looks at the Book of Records "several times a day" [16] and must learn about all sorts of grief, can easily decide it's not her problem. Glinda needs to know; Ozma needs to heal. >> Sounds good to me! Also, I believe that Glinda's primary purpose in Oz is to take care of Ozma, and sending her into a potentially dangerous situation would run counter to that function. OTOH, she couldn't wrap Ozma in cotton wool, so to speak, either. So she does the prudent thing by making sure the girls have an alarm ring. If Baum had had Glinda monitoring their progress, that would have been a poor treatment of storyline. I find it interesting that even in her own book, Glinda is not really the main character. Baum clearly wanted to leash all of her potential power. David Hulan:<<... last Friday was my 62d birthday and Marcia and I did various celebratory things that took up more of my time than a normal Friday.>> Happy Birthday, David! You're so much older than I. Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah-nyah! (FYI, Digesters, I'm 54, so David is not all that far ahead of me in age. ) David Hulan:<< I don't think Baum had "Glenda" in mind when he named the Good Witch of the South.>> Me neither. MOPPET: "Glinda" means good and beautiful, if the "G" is for "good," and the "linda" is the Spanish for "beautiful." Happy and Healthy Holidays to all of you. --Robin ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 22:31:15 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Glinda of Oz A Merry Christmas to all who celebrate it, and Happy Holiday to the rest! Some thoughts on _Glinda_ first. For a change, I actually took some notes as I was rereading for the discussion... Who, I wonder, is the character illustrated on (unnumbered) page 4? Surely not Glinda, and it doesn't look like Ozma either. Actually, it looks to me more like Gloria from _Scarecrow_ than anyone else Neill had depicted, but the crown is more like the ones worn by Ozma and Glinda. (Which look nearly impossible to balance on the head, FWIW.) As I've said before, I don't think Ozma's reasoning was very good in the first chapter when she decided that there was nothing for it but to go herself, with only Dorothy as a companion, to stop the war between the Flatheads and Skeezers. She could have sent a scout ahead - the Wizard, or maybe the Shaggy Man - to find out more about the Skeezers and Flatheads before jumping in herself like Captain Kirk. (Maybe he was inspired by Ozma, come to think of it...) Whoever she sends doesn't have to issue an ultimatum, after all, and that's her reason for rejecting the idea. Dorothy's statement that "all excitement is fun" is clearly that of a child who's never had anything seriously bad happen to her. In fact, she doesn't seem to have cared much for a lot of the excitement she met with in _Wizard_, and she was scared enough to faint at the beginning of _DotWiz_. It was only after she survived that fall that she seems to have become convinced that after all nothing very bad could ever happen to her. ("Hey, I'm the protagonist of this book!") It's a new concept in Oz, as far as I can recall, that Dorothy (and presumably others in Oz) can't suffer any great pain. Actually, this seems inconsistent with a statement later in the same book that Coo-ee-oh punishes Skeezers who get on her wrong side by lashing them with knotted cords; if Ozites can't feel any great pain, why would this bother them? Maybe Coo-ee-oh's Krumbic Witch powers let her suspend their immunity to pain? I think this is the only book in the series where Ozma is consistently depicted without her trademark poppies. The only other case I know of for sure is the final illustration in _Tik-Tok_. On page 63 Dorothy refers to her purple kitten; on page 103 to her pink kitten. Does she have two kittens - pink Eureka and a purple one that never appears on stage in any book? Or did Baum (or someone at the publisher) make a typo? The title "Supreme Dictator" seems a bit on the prescient side for a book finished in 1919. While the term dates back to Roman times, I don't think there were many people who used that title - or who were even referred to by that title by their enemies - until the '20s. Maybe in Latin America? The lines, "...she slipped her hand into her bosom and grasped the silver wand. With the other hand she grasped the hand of Dorothy, but these motions were so natural that the Su-dic did not notice them." I don't think if that were the case Ozma could possibly have been wearing the kind of outfit Neill shows in the illustrations. To get a hand into the bosom of that outfit her elbow would be up at least to near shoulder level, and that's hardly a "natural" motion. I think Baum must have been envisioning something with buttons so she could slip her hand in without raising her elbow (sort of a classic Napoleon pose, maybe). On page 97 the Skeezers are described as bearing firearms. One wonders, then, why the four Skeezers who accompanied Coo-ee-oh in the submarine, and who are described as being armed, didn't use those weapons on the Flatheads when Coo-ee-oh was transformed? We have remarked in previous discussions about Dorothy's reference to whipping her pink kitten on page 104. But perhaps Eureka can also feel no great pain, so it's more or less equivalent to a scolding. Glinda seems to have a pretty good search algorithm for the GBR, since she comes up with a good deal of information about the Flatheads and Skeezers (p. 152) that has to be scattered through a huge volume. Button-Bright takes shameful advantage of the wolf and tiger that Glinda has immobilized. He deserves a scolding for that, but doesn't get it. Somehow some time gets lost for Ervic. Maybe time passes differently in Reera's cottage? He leaves his companions sometime after nightfall on the day Coo-ee-oh was enchanted, and walks to Reera's home by dawn, so it's no more than a 10-12 hour walk. He spends just a day at Reera's - the Adepts are disenchanted in time for supper. Ervic and the Adepts then set out for the Skeezer country after supper; even if they decide to spend a night camping out (which isn't unreasonable, since Ervic had gotten no sleep for at least 36 hours), they should arrive back at the lake no later than sunset of the second day after Ervic left. Yet on page 201 the Skeezers say that they had searched for Ervic for three days, and the rest of that day, another night, and a good part of another day pass before the Adepts arrive at the lake. I'm not sure how Ken Shepherd's chronology handled this one; anybody remember (or have the chronology handy to check)? That steel pillar that raises the Skeezer city has a rather Freudian aspect, methinks... It's established that Audah is the Adept who was a goldfish, but I don't get any strong feeling as to which of the other two was the silverfish and which was the bronzefish. From the order of description and the order in which they identify themselves I suppose the probability is that Aurah was the bronzefish and Aujah the silverfish, but unless I missed it somewhere it's never definite. Dave, which way did you identify them in _Locasta..._? And I think I'll do a separate post to respond to the last Digest; this is getting long enough already. David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 22:31:19 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-23-98 Lisa: ><<15.Nomes are afraid of eggs as well as sunlight>> > >Vampire syndrome. :) I think in at least one place - probably _Kabumpo_ - it was stated that Nomes, or at least Ruggedo, didn't like sunlight, though it wasn't particularly harmful to him. >I'm currently writing two Oz books, Princess Polychrome of Oz and The >Curious Wogglebug of Oz. Once I finish the endings, I'll let you in on >the plot. Looking forward to it. Jeremy: >Gllinda and the GBR: >She may very well have known Dorothy was coming, but didn't want to frighten >her unduly by admitting it. Wouldn't you be scared in a new land with danger >galore, to be told someone knew it would all happen? I would! Well, the GBR doesn't tell what's going to happen - it's clairvoyant, not precognizant. Glinda would have known that Dorothy was traveling toward her, and maybe why, but not, for instance, whether Dot would actually complete her journey. (At least, not from the GBR. I don't know about her other magic.) David G.: I'm afraid that I'd rather believe Neill was mistaken (or that someone at R&L changed his MS) about Jack's servitude to Mombi than that the first two chapters of _Land_ happened before Dorothy's first visit. As evidence, I adduce Jack's constant worrying about his head spoiling. We know that a head doesn't last seven years plus; otherwise there'd have to have been at least 14 years between the end of _Land_ and _Road_, and Dorothy would be "quite a young lady" already in the latter book. But if Mombi had replaced his head between his first awakening and his escape with Tip, he'd know that replacement was possible and not be so obsessed by the problem. Besides, can you imagine hands like Jack's being useful at washing dishes or peeling potatoes? I think the quote from _Lucky Bucky_ just has to be rejected. I'd rather reject something from Neill than something from Baum, which you're forced to do if you assume that Tip's conversation with Jack about who was ruling in the EC never took place. Gehan: Your E-mailer seems to have stuttered; there are three copies of one of your posts in this Digest. I think the majority view among Oz fans who think about the subject - certainly my view, anyhow - is that most Ozites aged and died normally until after Ozma ascended to the throne. We don't know just when Lurline's original enchantment took place, but it didn't take full effect until after Ozma's coronation. In _Yellow Knight_ it's stated that the Samandrans stopped aging or dying 700 years earlier, but the Sultan of Samandra is a powerful wizard in his own right and might have developed such a spell independent of Lurline. There are too many references to aging and dying in the early books, especially _Wizard_. And it seems clear that Ozites who wish to can grow older (_pace_ Baum's statement in _Glinda_ that Dorothy "could not grow big"), from references to Ojo's growing up in PG to Pompa's statement, "I'll never be eighteen again!" in _Kabumpo_ and Pajonia's being old enough to talk in _Purple Prince_ though she couldn't have been born until after the events of _Kabumpo_. I agree in general with your MOPPeT on Ozma, though there are a few details I differ with. I think Ozma was a baby born after Pastoria and his queen (I don't particularly like the name "Ozette," and it has no FF justification, but whatever) were Mombi's prisoners, maybe some years after. And I don't think Lurline was involved during that time; Ozma was born, her mother was possibly destroyed, or even might have died in childbirth (it happened a good deal in those days, and I doubt if Mombi would have been giving her top-flight care), Pastoria was imprisoned in Blankenburg, and Mombi did the "switcheroo spell" to exchange Ozma's form with that of Prince Tippetarius, who was about the same age. Otherwise, I think your theory makes good sense. >Shouldn't RPT know that the Winkies live in the west and the Munchkins live >in the east and that both countries were given the wrong colours in her >books(And the wrong rulers too).I mean,how can a silly old map confuse >her,when she has read the books of LFB? Thompson didn't give the wrong colors and rulers to the Munchkins and Winkies, just the wrong quadrant of Oz. And she didn't always; in _Kabumpo_, for instance, she has the Winkies in the West. But it's true that she got them backwards more often than not, and Neill followed her usual scheme. I don't recall whether the later writers mentioned it one way or the other. >And Besides,I think Baum's books should be considered as the "Officail >Books" ,since he was the creator of Oz.He may not have aproved Thompsons >stories IF he were alive.I mean ,if some other author was appointed "Royal >Historian",he could have done whatever he wanted,used his >imagination,written a story,and it would still be considered "An Officail >Book".Does anyone know what I mean? Sure. I think most Oz fans agree that if a later writer contradicts something Baum said unequivocally (like which side of the country the Munchkins lived on) we have to ignore or at most rationalize the later writer's statement. Baum is the Ultimate Authority. On the other hand, Baum frequently contradicts himself (or at least it takes a massive wrench of things to reconcile disparate statements); if a later writer agrees with one of Baum's statements and contradicts another, it gives added weight to the one agreed with. All this is, of course, from the Oz-as-History POV; if you give the post-Baum books no credence then you don't really have much History to talk about. And I look forward to reading your books if I get the chance. Mike: > Mombi placed an enchantment on Jellia? Must've been one of the books I >haven't >read. Which one, and what was it? (feel free to put spoiler warnings >around it >if you wish. I don't care. I read all spoilers anyway :-) ************Spoiler for _The Marvelous Land of Oz_************* Mombi enchanted Jellia to look like Mombi, and herself to look like a rose. So when Glinda's army thought they'd captured Mombi they really had Jellia, but Glinda recognized this and broke the enchantment. You haven't read this book? ************End Spoiler************************** J.L.: >Careful of those "facts"! One of the pleasant things about developing your >own idea of what belongs in the Oz canon (i.e., what books or stories >articles or movies give reliable "facts" about Oz) is that you can ignore >the contradictory claims of the rest. I think Gehan had his tongue in his cheek when referring to "facts" from the Cinar series. >Furthermore, >the Spencers are said to believe they have more royal English ancestors >than the Windsors, who are mostly of German princely descent. And those of their ancestors who weren't German were mostly Scots and Welsh and French. The rulers of England usually married foreign royalty rather than local nobles. The current Queen Mum is English (though maybe not of royal descent), but George VI's mother Queen Mary was German, George V's mother was Danish, Edward VII's father was German, Victoria's mother was - hmmm, my reference doesn't say, since her father wasn't king, but I think German, the first three Georges all married Germans, and farther back than that my reference doesn't go. But George I was 3/4 German and 1/4 Scots, with just a whiff of English royal blood ten or eleven generations back. (He was the great-grandson of James I; I think his mother [if you believe Mary, Queen of Scots, was actually his mother and that he wasn't smuggled in in a warming pan] was a granddaughter of Henry VII, who himself had English royal blood only through his great-great-grandfather, being otherwise mostly Welsh and French.) (This is if you consider the Plantagenets English, which some diehard Anglo-Saxonists don't. They consider Harold Godwinson the last true English king...) >Thanks for the research and thoughts. Girls' basketball was a sport before >WW2, I believe, though the rules restricted how far along the court players >could run. Yes, it was. I can remember watching it during the war (though not before), and it was nothing new at the time. I don't know if it went back to when Thompson would have been in school, though. Basketball wasn't invented until about 1895, IIRC, and I imagine it would have taken at least a few years for it to spread from boys' to girls' athletics. (I can remember one high school that declined to have a girls' basketball team as late as the '50s because the Dean of Girls at the school didn't want some newspaper printing that any of her girls were "forward.") Ruth: >In >"Magic," there are peripheral references to WWI (the transformation of >the monkeys into soldiers and the book's dedication). But the uniforms Baum described (as opposed to the ones Neill depicted) sound more like 19th-century parade uniforms than the kinds of uniforms worn in the Great War. The dedication, yes, but that would have been about the last thing Baum would have written. David Hulan ====================================================================== From: TotoArf@aol.com Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 16:07:56 EST Subject: Fred What is this I hear about Fred Meyer giving up on Oz and selling off his collection? It can't be true, can it??? ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 17:47:18 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: My Ozzy Books Just to tell you that I WONT be writing the -Hidden princess of Oz- book (for several reasons).But still,I will mention certain things about Gayalette and Mrs.Yoop in my other book -Lost Queen -which I've begun writing. --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 26 Dec 98 15:36:40 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things ADEPTS AND NOMES: David H. wrote: >It's established that Audah is the Adept who was a goldfish, but I don't >get any strong feeling as to which of the other two was the silverfish and >which was the bronzefish. From the order of description and the order in >which they identify themselves I suppose the probability is that Aurah was >the bronzefish and Aujah the silverfish, but unless I missed it somewhere >it's never definite. Dave, which way did you identify them in _Locasta..._? I've always assumed that Aujah is silver and Aurah is bronze... >I think in at least one place - probably _Kabumpo_ - it was stated that >Nomes, or at least Ruggedo, didn't like sunlight, though it wasn't >particularly harmful to him. Nomes, Morlocks, and Sleestak all have an aversion to the light...Must have something to do with their all living in underground caves of some kind... -- Dave ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ Castles, Castles in the air Take a paper plane through the rain and you'll be floating free Through those castles growing everywhere Won't you let your mind just unwind; Go upstream toward a dream You can ride on a laugh you can glide on; Behind every cloud is a star To light your way -- The Bugaloos, "Castles In the Air" ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 28 - 29, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== From: Ozmama@aol.com Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 06:00:05 EST Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-26-98 Scott H.: <> Definitely no more than $50 in that condition. Are you sure you want it? ====================================================================== From: "Bob Spark" Subject: RE: Ozzy Digest, 12-26-98 Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 06:58:39 -0800 Importance: Normal All, "On page 97 the Skeezers are described as bearing firearms. One wonders, then, why the four Skeezers who accompanied Coo-ee-oh in the submarine, and who are described as being armed, didn't use those weapons on the Flatheads when Coo-ee-oh was transformed?" The above reminds me of a conundrum that has always bothered me. Why do Flash Gordon and John Carter of Mars both go armed with ray gun and sword? Seems like the ray guns would have sufficed in practically every encounter (I picture the Indiana Jones movie in which, rather than physically fighting the enormous bad guy, he just shoots him). "Thanks for the research and thoughts. Girls' basketball was a sport before WW2, I believe, though the rules restricted how far along the court players could run." As I can recall, in woman's basketball when I was attending high school, and I graduated in 1958 (much past WW2) the ball had to be passed after being dribbled 3 times. The sport was not very popular (at least on the west coast). I don't recall any intermural competition. I believe it just was played in gym class. Bob Spark ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 10:12:23 -0500 From: Lisa Mastroberte Subject: Ozzy Digest Hello Digesters! Hope you all had Happy Holiday's. Here is my response to the last digest. ---- >Liesl Matthews... I thout of her more as Dorothy, but I suppose she's >getting older... I can't remember the copyright date for that movie. Maybe 1994 or `95. I just remember seeing it and thinking, Wouldn't she be a great Ozma? >Yes,the Wizard of Oz TV Series was a cartoon.BTW,your iedias for a >Monozpoly game are very creative. What about calling it "Ozmanopoly" since it's based on "Ozma of Oz"? I have to work on this later, I could probably make a few copies to send around. >I find it >interesting that even in her own book, Glinda is not really the main >character. Baum clearly wanted to leash all of her potential power. I don't remember _Glinda_ very well. I'll have to go to the library later and check it out. That was the first Oz book I read after _Wizard_, _Land_, and _Ozma._ All I remember were the Skeezer's or something along that line. >Actually, it looks to me >more like Gloria from _Scarecrow_ than anyone else Neill had depicted, but >the crown is more like the ones worn by Ozma and Glinda. (Which look nearly >impossible to balance on the head, FWIW.) Maybe the crown is kept on by magic? >On page 63 Dorothy refers to her purple kitten; on page 103 to her pink >kitten. Does she have two kittens - pink Eureka and a purple one that never >appears on stage in any book? Or did Baum (or someone at the publisher) >make a typo? I have no clue. The only thing that comes to mind is the purple kitten in _Ozma_, but that was *********Possible Spoiler for Ozma of Oz******** only a transformation of a prince of Ev, so the kitten is no more! ************End Spoiler********************* One thought on "The Cowardly Lion of Oz." This only MOPPET, but when the lion is turned to stone, do you think that could be the basis of the turning the people to stone in Disney's RTOz? Happy New Year to All, and to all a good night! Off2Oz, Lisa -------------------------- "Liberty is the only thing you cannot have unless you are willing to give it to others." William Allen White, 1940 ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 16:20:40 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Jack snow and Lyman Baum Didn't jack Snow make a very big mistake in -Magical Mimics-?He says that pastoria ruled Oz during Lurline's visit and she gave him Ozma to look after.And after that,she enchanted the Mimics to prevent destruction.But in -Tinwoodman -Baum says that lurline left one of her fairies to rule Oz a long time ago (Probably centuries before Pastoria was born) and she forgot all about it.I think Baum's theory was correct,and maybe after Ozma was crowned ,or maybe even a little earlier,Lurline may have visited Mount.Illuso.For what jack snow tells us doesn't fit with any of the Baum books( -Tinwoodman-,-Scarecrow-,-DotWiz- or even -Emerlad City-)Shouldn't Jack Snow have been informed? --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 16:20:42 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: The famous Forty I mentioned earlier that baum's books should be considered "Officail".if anyones books ,other than Baums,are to be considered "Officail" it should be the books by Jack Snow(-Magical Mimics- only).He only used the charcters invented by Baum,and not by John R.Neill and RPT.The only mistake he made was the :"Lurline,Ozma and pastoria mistake",but other than that,he has done a good job. I STRONGLY disagree with RPT for many reasons.She has cahnged the World of Oz which Baum created.I havent read -Merry-go-round- and -Hidden valley- so I cant judge the work of Rachel pays and Eloise McGraw.I wouldn't have published ANY of the books she wrote if I were her publisher.I don't think anyone will agree with me here. BTW,considering the mistake Jack Snow made,I think this was what happend. -Magical Mimics- states that Lurline enchanted Oz about about two centuries ago from 1940,when pastoria ruled.But Baum says that Ozma was a member of a long line of Ozian Kings and Queen.In my own MOPPET :Lurline enchanted Oz and left one of her fairies to rule.This fairy was followed by a long line of Kings and Queens,among them Ozroar and his son Pastoria.I beleive Ozroar was King of Oz before Pastoria,but after Pastoria's coronation,Ozroar became ruler of the little Kingdom of Morrow,which may have been the capital of Oz before.And after Ozma beacme Queen,the Ozites were more happy and contented than they had ever been.Ozana claims to have guarded Oz for two centuries.Perhaps Queen Lurline just left Ozana to protect Oz during King Ozroar's time,but yet,she cast the spell on the Mimics after Ozma came to the throne.That is my theory.Anyone accept it? --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 10:57:11 -0800 (PST) From: "W. R. Wright" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-26-98 Can anyone explain why Baum used the "stage name" of Louis F. Baum? See page 14 of Hearn's Annotated Wizard of Oz. And a related question; from where did his first name, Lyman, come? And why did he not like it? Another question: has anyone done any research on The Uplifters group of which Baum was a member? Where might I be able to get some info on them? Bill in Ozlo ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 15:33:02 -0500 From: Michael Turniansky Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-26-98 David Hulan increduously asked if I hadn't read LAND: Well, I have, but it was some time ago (probably 25+ years since reading the full thing). I read the first several chapters with my son a couple of months ago, but he finished the rest on his own, so I didn't remember the enchanted Jellia. *shrug* --Mike "Shaggy Man" Turniansky ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 17:38:29 -0600 From: d.godwin@minn.net (David Frank Godwin) Subject: Oz David Hulan: >I'm afraid that I'd rather believe Neill was mistaken (or that someone at >R&L changed his MS) about Jack's servitude to Mombi than that the first two >chapters of _Land_ happened before Dorothy's first visit. Of course. This post (labeled as a throw-away theory, if you'll recall) was mainly intended to demonstrate the extremes we can be driven to if we accept every statement in every book - particularly Neill's - as authoritative. My own tendency is to ignore Neill's writing as much as possible, though it may not be entirely without merit. I notice you chose to ignore the existence of Number Nine when you... ******SPOILER****** ...made Barry the Wizard's assistant. *****END SPOILER****** The Ubiquity of Oz: I suppose this _could_ be considered relevant to the "Where is Oz?" discussion. Today's Sunday funnies included (as usual) the Sally Forth strip, which I quote here in full for the benefit of anyone who didn't see it: Husband: What are you reading? Sally: The travel section. Whenever I see these gorgeous photos,my head fills with incredible notions. Ever since I was Hilary's age, I would constantly dream about visiting far-off places. Paris. Cairo. Beijing. Oz. Husband: "Oz"? Sally: You can't believe how disappointed I was when I saw my first atlas. Happens to the best of us, Sally. _Glinda_: It's been a while since I read this book, so I am proceeding mainly from memory along with a quick glance for review. This is not one of my favorite LFB efforts. Maybe it has to do with the fact that my first wife was named Glenda, but I doubt it. :) But as I recall, the book just seemed somehow dissonant with the rest of the Baum canon. Sort of strange and unfamiliar, as if the reader were confronted with a new set of rules and assumptions. It seems as if LFB had to introduce too many arbitrary limitations on both Ozma and Glinda in order to get Ozma and Dorothy in deep water (ha ha) and require the intervention of the three adepts to clean up the mess. I may be forgetting something, but I seem to recall being puzzled as to why Dorothy and/or Ozma didn't use the magic belt to escape, at least. _Land_: My main puzzlement with the Oz books, which has never been satisfactorily settled by any explanation I've seen (all of which seem rather forced and improbable), is how Ozma can be a fairy who has existed for thousands of years, or since the creation of the world or whatever, and yet have been a neonate who could be handed over to Mombi to raise through childhood (as Tip). I'm not quite so disturbed by the problems concerning the Wizard's behavior in _Land_. After all, a Royal Historian is no better than his sources. If LFB did not get this story from Dorothy (who was not involved in any case), where did he get it? If he'd somehow gotten his information from Mombi, it would explain a lot. I also have a bit of a tough time explaining how Mombi-as-griffin and Glinda on the Sawhorse could venture into the Deadly Desert with impunity. (Of course, the problem disappears with the Oz as Literature viewpoint - the idea of the deadliness of the desert developed over time.) There's a Shanower graphic novel in which the Sawhorse and the Scarecrow finally figure out, after 90 some odd years of facing the problem, that the desert won't hurt them because they aren't flesh and blood and don't breathe. That would take care of Glinda on the Sawhorse, if she had some way to avoid breathing the deadly fumes, but I'm not sure I accept this premise. - David G. ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 08:42:03 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: The Wizard of Oz and the Magical Mimics in Oz The wizard of oz: I think the Wizard of Oz happend somewhere between 1895-1897 ,for Baum told the story in 1898.The only problem with that is :when the other stories take place,Dorothy would already be a young lady.I think Dorothy was 8 in 1896,when her first ozzy adventures took place.-Land- must have happend in 87(Dorothy is 9); -Ozma- and -DotWiz- in 88(Dorothy is 10); and -Road- and -ECOZ- in 89 when Dorothy is eleven.I think -Patchwork girl- and -Tiktok- and -Screcrow - e.t.c happend after 1904.this also menas that Betsy is years younger than Dorothy, for although Dorothy will remain an 11 year old, we have to consider the amount of yeras she has lived.So, just assume she grew after- ECOZ-(I'm not saying she did).then she will be 17 in 1905 (when I beleive -Tiktok- happend). This means that Dorothy is biologically older than Betsy, but chronologically younger..... And as for- Magical Mimics: I think -Magical Mimics- happend before -Royal Book- or any of the Thompson stories.Because Jack Snow doesn't use the Plumly characters ,and in -Magical Mimics- the GWN appears.And Giant Horse was written before -Magical mimics- ,and Tattypoo was already dis-enchanted when Jack Snow wrote -Mimics-.I think -Mimics- took place long before- Giant horse- or any of the Plumly Books.(I actually admire Jack Snow for ignoring Thompson's work).But if -mimics- happend after the thompson stories, maybe the GWN would have been Maggie or Belinda(Glinda's siter), who took the job after Tattypoo's dis-enchantment. (Oh and BTW, maybe The Wizard took the nine tiny piglets on his journey back to Omaha.But if he had them in Omaha between Wizard and -Dotwiz-, they must have grown, because Omaha isn't a fairy-town...............) --Gehan Cooray ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 12:45:36 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: The invisible spell what happend to the "Invisible" spell Glinda cast on Oz?Did Glinda remove the spell?What is the barrier of invisibility in -shaggy man-?It doesn't make the country invisible.I can't quite undestand that part.Can anyone explain? --Gehan ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 15:42:57 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-26-98 Scott H.: >According to my children's lit prof, Andersen and Perrault wrote for a >dual audience. Parts of the stories were aimed at adults, and parts for >kids. The prof was William Touponce, who has written a number of critical >works on SF. Well, sure, most good writers of children's fiction aim parts of their stories at adults. After all, it's usually adults who buy the books and (frequently) read the stories aloud to their children, and a story with something in it for adults is more likely to prove popular. But if they aim part of their stories at children, then they're consciously writing for children. Robin: >The >novel isn't the only good literary genre to work in, y'know. No, but it's usually easier to get ideas for, at least for me. (That's "novel" as in "book-length fiction"; by some more narrow definitions Oz books are closer to the "romance.") Though Ozzy short stories are easier than most fantasy short stories, since the background is already there and there's a good array of established characters to work with. The down-side is that there's no real commercial market for them. (_Oz-Story Magazine_ pays, but if you write a maximum-length story for it you get about $30-40. This isn't really enough to be considered "commercial.") People will probably be relieved to see that this Digest doesn't have a huge post from me; I think I was responsible for over half of the last one... David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 22:47:10 -0500 From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz All: I have returned after 12 days and three Digests. I won't respond to all of them, since I am simply not up to it today. Gehan: Our Ozma Theories are pretty close, alhtough I need more Ozroars than you since I accept and incorporate the events in _The Blue Emperor of Oz_ and _Lurline and the White Ravens of Oz_. Gehan: All of your messages seem to be coming in two or three times, both personal ones to me and posts to the Digest. John Bell: Thanks for your comments regarding the HACC. It is true that there are many obscure titles in there. As soon as I have time, I am planning a major revision to it, and there will be more information attached to it than just the titles of books. David: Yes, I believe we are in agreement about the strength (or lack thereof) regarding the poltiical unity of the four quadrants of Oz. I had just never probed the FF deeply enough for positive evidence to the effect that the four quardrants were not strongly unified. To extend your example, Glinda has no problem charging into the Gillikin Country to save Ozma and Dorothy. She did not bother to consult the Good Witch of the North, which she probably would have done, had the strength of quadrants been greater. IIRC, the only time anybody acts in their official capacity as quadrant ruler is when the Tin Woodman tries to assert his authority in _Hidden Valley_. It did not work very well. Gehan: Your arguements seem to be from an Oz-as-literature Point of View, so I'll concentrate on that. The only "right" that RPT had was, of course, the publishers. She took over Oz, and legally at least, the characters were hers to do with as she pleased. Morally, she could have respected Baum's writings and made no changes to his characters, but she did anyway. The decision as to which books are official is up to every person. General consensus is that the FF are official, but this does not require everyone to beleive so. David Hulan: I've never thought of the Skeezer's steel pillar in QUITE that way :-). However, an image like that would more properly belong in Thompson's Oz, which was much more masculine that Baum's. Tyler Jones ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 28 Dec 98 19:30:39 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things ATTENTION ALL LEGAL EXPERTS ON THE DIGEST: I am very distressed... I have just heard on another forum that under the new copyright laws, all fan-fiction is *ILLEGAL* and *not* considered to be "Fair Use"! Is this true?? Could I get clapped in irons for _Red Dwarf in Oz_ or any other of the Oz-crossovers I've contemplated like _Rumpole in Oz_??!! -- Dave ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ Castles, Castles in the air Take a paper plane through the rain and you'll be floating free Through those castles growing everywhere Won't you let your mind just unwind; Go upstream toward a dream You can ride on a laugh you can glide on; Behind every cloud is a star To light your way -- The Bugaloos, "Castles In the Air" ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, DECEMBER 29 - 31, 1998 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 19:04:06 +1100 From: calamity@eureka.lk Subject: Re:Ozzy Digest David Hulan: Baum probably made a mistake when he identified "Eureka" as a purple kitten.How did she become pink in the first place?Dorothy says in -DotWiz- that she was white, and looked pink simply beacuse of the Sun-gems in Mangaboo land.But, how could they effect Eureka permanantly? Tyler : Maybe Glinda didn't consult the GWN because it would take time. But what annoys nme is, why Ozma and Glinda never use their powers of transport to get to places. It saves alot of time and trouble. I can undestand Ozma looking forward for a few adventures on her journeys, but ,why Glinda?Couldn't she just snap her fingers, get to the emerald city, use her magic to transport all of Ozma's counsellers to Skeezer isle (She can transport other people as -Tiktok- states) and then figure out what to do. BTW, why doesn't the Good Witch of the North help solve any problems?(I dont beleive this Tattypoo-Orin thing for one minute) David Godwin: As I said, there is a different history with Ozma altogether.In my own MOPPET: She has existed for thousands of years, and was a member of Lurline's fairy-band.Centuries after Lutrline's Oz enchantment, Pastoria became king. He and his queen didn't have any children and were sad.So Lurline de-aged Ozma back to a baby and injected her into the Queen's womb.(That exoplains why Ozma doesn't have wings unlike other fairies).She was born as an ordianry princess and lived happily with her parents. Ozma may have been a few months the witches conquered Oz and kidnapped King Ozroar and King Pastoria. The Queen may haave hidden somewhere with Ozma,and she probably died during the Wizard's arrival and left Ozma in his care. He then left her in Mombi's care and the old witch hid her in a magic picture. As the decades went by, Mombi realised that she needed a servant being lazy, and so having dis-enchanted Ozma she turned her into Prince Tip of Lostland , about ten years before Dorothy's arrival. She switched their personalities too.Ozma says:"It's me the same old Tip" after her dis-enchanment, which I don't think was true.She just said that thinking her friends wont still be friends with her. Ozma was still Pastoria's daughter, so she didn't remember her fairy ways, and her magical powers, and looked like a little girl. I don't think she even was a fairy after her re-birth. Then, as the years went by, Lurline dis-enchanted the de-age spell she cast on Ozma when injecting her into Ozette's womb, and Ozma became her old fairy self once again. That explains why she didn't know Lurline during -Land- and -Ozma-, because she wasn't a fairy, only a human(Having been in Ozette's womb).Does anyone know what I mean? (BTW, I think all aging stopped in Oz after Ozma became her fairy self) --Gehan Cooray. ====================================================================== From: Ozisus@aol.com Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:06:39 EST Subject: An Oz post Lisa -- Why not develop your game(s) and "unveil" them for potential players at the centennial? Eric Gjovaag is lining up a fun-and-games kind of program and would probably be delighted if you offered something so neat. Bill -- Lyman was an uncles name. Don't know why he didn't like it, but I wouldn't either! Also, some of the buildings where the Uplifters met are still standing. A friend once realized he was in one at a party! Apparently they all gathered at a resort-type area that has since been turned into residential housing. Jane Albright ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 16:37:30 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-29-98 Bob Spark: > The above reminds me of a conundrum that has always bothered me. Why >do Flash Gordon and John Carter of Mars both go armed with ray gun and >sword? Strictly speaking, John Carter's firearm was a "radium pistol," which fired explosive projectiles, rather than a ray gun. Burroughs attempts a justification of the swordfighting by invoking an "honor system" where weapons fall into a hierarchy (rifle, pistol, lance, long sword, short sword, hatchet, dagger, bare hands, IIRC) and if one is attacked one can't use a weapon any higher up the hierarchy than the attacker is using. Failure to observe this practice will cause everybody in sight to attack the one who violates it. However, this doesn't make a lot of sense; in fact, Carter undoubtedly fights with a sword most of the time because it's more fun to describe sword-fights than gun-fights. (I don't think we need to get into a Barsoom-as-History POV here...) The way girls' basketball worked when and where I was in high school - a few years earlier than you - was that a team consisted of three guards and three forwards, and was a strictly half-court game. One team's guards and the other team's forwards stayed in one half of the court, and vice versa. If the ball was in team A's zone (its guards and team B's forwards) one team B forward could occupy the center jump circle, and if team B got the ball they could pass it to that forward, who could then pass it on to her other forward teammates. It was a very slow game, and in Kentucky at least was only played intramurally. In Tennessee at the same time girls' basketball was played by more or less the same rules as boys', and was quite popular and played interscholastically. (Whether this is a reason why the University of Tennessee is to women's basketball what the University of Kentucky is to men's is something that might be worth considering...) Lisa: >Maybe the crown is kept on by magic? Maybe, but Rinkitink wears that style of crown as well and he doesn't seem to have any magical powers. Gehan: Yes, Snow's description of Ozma's origins is inconsistent with Baum's. Of course, Baum is inconsistent with himself in the various descriptions he gives of it, but Snow isn't consistent with any of them. I disagree with you that Snow should be considered any more canonical than Thompson. It's true that he ignored all the Thompson and Neill characters in his books, but I don't see that as any particular virtue. He invented plenty of characters of his own, which I don't see as any different from Thompson's doing the same, and the overall spirit of his books seems the farthest from Baum's of any of the later writers. Both _Magical Mimics_ and _Shaggy Man_ are very dark books, more so than any of Baum's and probably any of the others', though a case could be made that _Ojo_ is as dark. Also, it's highly improbable that _Magical Mimics_ takes place before any of the Thompson books; the reference to Charlie McCarthy puts it in the late '30s at the earliest. I have no problem with your dating of the early Oz books (except that you sometimes typed 87 or 88 when you meant 97 or 98). It's a little earlier than mine, but not much. I do, however, think you got it backwards; Dorothy is chronologically older but biologically younger than Betsy. We've gone around about the invisibility spell several times here - it seems to have worn off or something between _Emerald City_ and _Rinkitink_, because in the latter book Dorothy and others cross the desert freely on the Magic Carpet without any mention of any invisibility spell. In _Scarecrow_ there's a pink mist that Trot and company fly through; it seems to be what's left of the spell at that point. Later, when Kiki Aru crosses the desert, there's no mention of invisibility when he flies in either direction. Another possibility is that Glinda decided to extend the barrier of invisibility to encompass all of Nonestica (or whatever you want to call the continent/island Oz is on, plus its surrounding sea and smaller islands). In Baum, at least, we don't have any characters passing between the known world and Nonestica after _Scarecrow_. The invisible zone in the Nome King's tunnel in _Shaggy Man_ is an anomaly. David G.: >I notice you chose >to ignore the existence of Number Nine when you... >******SPOILER****** >...made Barry the Wizard's assistant. >*****END SPOILER****** In the original MS of _Glass Cat_, which was written for my own amusement and that of a few friends, Number Nine, Jenny Jump, and Davy Jones all played significant roles at the end of the book; Barry joined Number Nine as an assistant to the Wizard. However, when it actually came to the point of getting it published, I had to clean up references to characters still under copyright (not to mention dropping some quotes from Broadway musicals and the like). I didn't so much "choose to ignore the existence of Number Nine" as I was forced to by legal considerations. Neill wasn't much of a writer, and his plots were weak (though they improved as he went along), but he created several memorable characters. _Glinda_ isn't one of my favorite Baums, either, though I rate it higher than a few others of his. (_DotWiz_, _Road_, _Emerald City_, and _Tin Woodman_ for sure, and maybe _Tik-Tok_ as well.) And I agree with you that it doesn't seem too consistent in feeling with the rest of his books. I've often thought that this book has more right to be called _The Magic of Oz_ than its predecessor; it's the example _par excellence_ of matters of magic driving the plot, and goes into much more detail about magic than any of the other books. We have no fewer than ten magic-workers active at one point or another in the book - eleven, if you count Lurline. (Glinda, Ozma, the Wizard, Rora, the Su-dic, Coo-ee-oh, Reera, Audah, Aurah, Aujah, and Lurline all work magic that is described in the book, though Rora and Lurline don't work any on-stage.) And it is puzzling, when Ozma has used the Magic Belt for transporting Dorothy to Kansas, and assorted invaders back to their homeland, not to mention filling the Nome King's tunnel, that she can't use it at least to get herself, Dorothy, and the Skeezers out of the sunken city. Of course, it may just be that there was no immediate need to do so, and that she knew they'd all be more comfortable in the city, even under water, than they would be camping out on the shores of the lake. If they'd started running short of food or something like that she might have used the belt. But Baum is pretty specific that Ozma's primary objective wasn't to get herself or the Skeezers out of the dome, but to get the city back to the surface of the lake. Incidentally, this book is more than usually free of IEs; the very brief encounters with the spiders, the crab, and the mist maidens during Ozma's and Dorothy's journey are about it, and they take up a total of 14 pages, about 4 of which are artwork. >_Land_: >My main puzzlement with the Oz books, which has never been satisfactorily >settled by any explanation I've seen (all of which seem rather forced and >improbable), is how Ozma can be a fairy who has existed for thousands of >years, or since the creation of the world or whatever, and yet have been a >neonate who could be handed over to Mombi to raise through childhood (as >Tip). I don't see that as being any more difficult than how the Son of God, who existed before the creation of the world, could become a neonate who was raised by a Galilean carpenter. Not saying that I believe the latter, either, but billions of people have; Ozma could have had a very similar transition in her life. It's possible that the Deadly Desert isn't quite so deadly as the signs say. After all, we never actually see anyone step on it and turn into dust. Another possibility is that its deadliness varies depending on where you are around its perimeter; it may be deadlier in the east and west (where it's normally crossed in the other books) than in the south where Glinda and Mombi entered it. Yet another possibility is that it's very deadly on its outer rim (where Dorothy & Co. saw the sign) but is much less so on the Ozzy rim. I don't think any of these possibilities is inconsistent with anything shown in the FF, and as you said yourself the information you get from a Royal Historian is only as good as the information the RH got from his sources. If an informant believed the desert was deadly then the RH would say so, even if it wasn't. Tyler: >IIRC, the only time anybody acts in their official >capacity as quadrant ruler is when the Tin Woodman tries to assert his >authority in _Hidden Valley_. It did not work very well. Well, there's the Tin Woodman's refusal to let Ojo take a wing from a yellow butterfly, and his taking the ability to understand animals from the cruel Winkie in _Lost Princess_. But those are the only examples I can think of where a regional ruler does anything _qua_ ruler, other than in a ceremonial capacity. (Glinda takes various actions in the Quadling country, but it seems more in her capacity as a powerful sorceress than as ruler of the Quadlings. She takes similar actions with inhabitants of other quadrants - e.g., her sending the Scarecrow to Jinxland is comparable to her diverting Queen Ann's army out of Oz.) Dave: I too will be interested in the answers of the legal experts on the Digest about the current status of fan fiction. My guess is that you can write it, and maybe show it to a few friends, and have it considered "fair use," but that any widespread publication of it (including posting it on the Web) is probably a no-no. But that's a guess based on my own sense of what's fair, and may have nothing to do with reality. David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 11:38:02 -0500 From: Mastroberte X-Accept-Language: en Subject: Oz ====================================================================== ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 29 Dec 98 12:02:52 CST From: "Ruth Berman" Subject: ozzy digest Gehan Cooray: I don't think Jack Snow made a mistake in saying that Lurline gave the baby Ozma to Pastoria to adopt during her visit to Oz. He was trying to conflate the different statements in Baum's "Dorothy and the Wizard," "Tin Woodman," and "Glinda," plus RPT's "Lost King." The question is whether the fairy Lurline left to rule Oz was the ancestor of the rulers of Oz (including Ozma and her father and her grandfather), or whether that fairy was Ozma herself (as claimed in "Glinda"). Snow was apparently combining these two versions by assuming more than one visit from Lurline, one very early, when, presumably, one fairy was left to rule who became the mother of the line of rulers-of-Oz -- no indication of who the father might be, and whether the descendants inherit that first Ozma's fairy powers, and no indication of whether that first Ozma somehow died or returned to Lurline's band -- and when Ozana set up shop to keep an eye on the country, and Lurline put some kind of enchantment on Oz, but maybe not including agelessness; and one later, when Lurline enchanted Oz to be without aging and gave the baby Ozma to the childless Pastoria to adopt. Various writers since have suggested that Ozma (the current one) was an adult-sized fairy who agreed to be turned into a baby and to have her adult-memories taken away, so that she could be raised as an Ozite. Choosing just one of the more-or-less-contradictory statements to follow makes things neater, but as it would be hard to come up with reasons to make one authoritative and the rest all mistakes, it's maybe more satisfactory to try to combine them as different aspects of a more complicated situation. It would be difficult to try to date "Magical Mimics" as earlier than RPT's and Neill's Oz books, as it includes references to radio programs and Edgar Bergen's Charlie McCarthy puppet. RPT no doubt changed Baum's Oz in many ways, but, then, so did Baum, over the years. The barrier of invisibility in "Shaggy Man: is the same as the spell of invisibility in "Emerald City" (see the flight from Mo into Oz in "Scarecrow" for Baum's version of what it looks like). David Godwin: That "Sally Forth" comment on Oz was fun, wasn't it -- it reminded me a little of the angrier comment in Shel Silverstein's "Uncle Shelby's ABZ Book," where the narrator does a riff on how magical the Emerald City is, ending up, "Well, you can't go to the Emerald City, because there is no Emerald City, and there is no Oz, and there is no Santa Claus. Maybe someday you can go to Detroit." Dave Hardenbrook: I don't think there's been any change in the legal status of fan-fiction. Publishing fiction set in someone else's world (if the works involved are still under copyright) was and is illegal. Practically speaking, however, it doesn't matter. Fan-fiction publications, for the most part, are on such a small scale that they make little or no money for the publishers, and the copyright owners are probably never going to hear about them -- or, if they do hear about them, will shrug and pay no attention, since they're not losing money by ignoring them and are gaining publicity. Some, however, do pay attention and do squash as many of them as they know about, out of fear that the fan-market may interfere with the professional fiction sales and so may lose them money that way, or out of fear that the fan-materials may be so poor artistically as to make the originals look bad, or for various other reasons. But going to court is an expensive and burdensome pastime, and copyright holders try lesser tactics first -- they send a letter first to ask the fan publisher to stop publishing/distributing the work. So do whatever you like, and if you get a stern letter someday telling you to stop distributing copies of a Red Dwarf or Rumpole story or whatever, apologize politely and agree to stop. (A helpful technique may be to photocopy just a couple of copies and send them to the copyright holders. This may get ignored entirely, or may get you a nice thank-you note, and in those cases you can feel safe in getting a bunch more copies printed for wider distribution. If you get a cease-and-desist note, you can obey without being out on the costs of a lot of additional copies.) Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 13:10:44 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-29-98 Bill: Lyman was after his uncle, and I don't blame him for not liking it, and I know several people who have said this as well. Fan fiction is illegal? That souns unconstitutional. We need to fight this. There is a huge difference between selling something commercially using other peoples writing and simple writing it and distributing it. It seems a violation of both the constitutional idea of copyright being for a limited time, since ideas belong to the people, and a curb to first amendment rights as well. Scott ============================================================================ ==== Scott Andrew Hutchins http://php.iupui.edu/~sahutchi Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More! My next vocal performance shall be December 27 at Unity Church of Indianapolis, 907 N. Delaware, at the 9 and 11 AM services. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Frances: I've led a pretty boring life compared to yours. Freddy [the neighbor]: Mine was pretty boring, too. I've just got a knack for picking out the interesting bits. --David Williamson, _Travelling North_, Act Two Scene Three ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 21:14:18 GMT From: David Hulan Subject: Re: RPT's Oz Cc: tnj@compuserve.com, d.godwin@minn.net >*I* certainly have no reason to love RPT...She killed off the GWN >and asserted Ozma's "little girlness"... Odd innit, in the Baum >years Ozma was a teenager and no one seemed interested in her the >way Dan is interested in her; then RPT comes along and says, "Ozma >is a little girl!" more persistantly than orthodox herpetologists say >"Dinosaurs are cold-blooded reptilians and _Jurassic Park_ is full >of hippikaloric!", and suddenly everyone and his brother seeks Ozma's >hand in marriage! ("Dyna-Irony, Electra Woman!") So one can't really >blame me (though people do anyway) for my ideas that Ozma is grown-up >now, but RPT had to say otherwise to protect Ozma from the other fairy >queens who say she must remain girlishly innocent. When did RPT say that Ozma was "a little girl," with the implication that she wasn't marriageable, other than in _Kabumpo_? And when, other than in _Jack Pumpkinhead_, did RPT say anyone wanted to marry Ozma? (As I said in an earlier post, Pompa didn't want to marry Ozma; he thought he needed to to save his country.) Am I forgetting something? Bear in mind that "little girl" was commonly used a generation or so before my time - meaning a couple or three before yours, of course, since you're younger than my daughter - for women up into their thirties in some contexts. My mother, for instance, frequently referred to people as "little girls" who were married and had kids. And my mother was about 20 years younger than RPT. Baum himself refers to Ozma as a "little girl" in _Glinda_, and when Dorothy first sees Ozma in _Ozma_ she thinks that Ozma is no bigger or older than herself. I feel as if I have to come to RPT's defense; I read her books interspersed with Baum's when I first encountered Oz, and my Visualization of the Ozmic All was more or less equally influenced by both authors. If I'd read the books in order I might feel differently, but a rough order of my early Oz reading was _Wizard_, _Wishing Horse_, _Lost Princess_, _Lucky Bucky_, _Magic_, _Kabumpo_, _Speedy_, _Tin Woodman_, _Silver Princess_, _Ozoplaning_...I know those were the first few; after that I was mostly reading borrowed books, and can't remember the order. I never had a distinctive feeling for a "Baumian" Oz that Thompson made changes to, though as an adult I can certainly perceive differences. While the average quality of Baum's books is higher than Thompson's, I think Thompson's best books are right up there with Baum's best. Despite which, I would certainly agree that in any case of irreconcilable conflict, Baum takes precedence over Thompson. I just don't see that many conflicts. >Chris Dulabone is what I call a "Famous Forty Fundamentalist" -- >He says every last word in the FF is literally true... If RPT said >Ozma is a "little girl", then she's a half-pint forever. Chris Dulabone isn't a "Famous Forty Fundamentalist"; he has made up his mind as to what Oz is and pointedly ignores anything in the FF that disagrees with it. The one place in the FF where Ozma's apparent age is given specifically is in _Tin Woodman_, and there it's given as fourteen or fifteen. He, however, has decided that she's physically about eight, despite the absence of any evidence for that (she's never described as younger than Dorothy, who is clearly older than eight), and you won't budge him on it. Rather like Bear on politics, when asked for evidence he gets huffy and refuses to continue the argument. Of course, Chris and I aren't exactly Buddies, so you can take what I say for what it's worth. >I don't care much for _Forbidden Fountain_, >which is for me just another "Ozma is as helpless as Snow White" story. I thought Ozma coped quite well for someone who'd lost her memory. I like _Forbidden Fountain_ better than a good many of the FF, though not than _Merry-Go-Round_. >I've never read _Hidden Valley_ but I thought _Wicked Witch_ was >fairly good. I like Percy the rat, though some "purists" think >his Bugs Bunny-esque slang has no place in Oz. I thought _Wicked Witch_ was better than _Hidden Valley_, but neither is very high on my list of Oz books. _Hidden Valley_ is, imho, the worst of the FF other than the first two Neills. David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 22:47:56 -0500 From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz Bob Spark: I can't speak for Flash Gordon, but for John Carter, I can give some insight. HIs firearm was not really a "raygun" inthe classic space-opera mode. It was a pistol much like the ones we use today. He also had a rifle. I gather that the reason the Barsoomians did not use these weapons exclusively was that for them, the love combat itself was more important that winning the war or conquering your enemies. The sword made battle more personal and up-close, and this the Barsoomians loved. Also, I gathered from the series that the bullets were hard to make, so they did not have too many of them. A sword, however, lasts nearly forever and does not need to be reloaded. Robin and Lisa: For the most part, the title character of Baum's book was rarely the main character. Here's the breakdown. _Wizard_ - Dorothy _Ozma_ - Dorothy _Dorothy and the Wizard_ - Dorothy and the Wizard _Patchwork Girl_ - Ojo _Tik-Tok_ - Betsy Bobbin and/or Shaggy Man _Sacrecrow_ - Trot _Rinkitink_ - Rinkitink _Lost Princess_ - Wizard and Dorothy _TIn Woodman_ - Tin Woodman _Glinda_ - Ozma Three out of ten. Gehan: There are many pre-Wizard stories sprinkled throughout the FF, and for the most part, they can be reconciled. Jack Snow's account is the one exception. It just doesn't fit with any of the other stories. The most likely scenario, IMHO (and based on supporting comments from others) is that around the year 1200, Lurline enchanted the land and caused one of her fairies to be born to the wife of Ozroar, ruler of Morrow. Throughout the next 700 years, other fairies entered the royal line, ultimately coming to a head with the birth of Ozma, whereupon the enchantment became complete. One problem with your theory that Snow only should be considered official besides Baum is the unspoken assumption that Baum had fully explored Oz and knew all about it, and also that Ozma knew the same. Oz is a large and diverse and it is very doubtful that Baum knew absolutely every person, place and thing in there. By the same token, you could argue that all "real" Oz books should only mention characters and places mentioned in the very first book. _The Land of Oz_ could be considered heretical, since Baum never mentioned Mombi, Tip, Jinjur or Ozma in the first book. Two centuries seems a fairly short time to generate a "long line of fairy queens". The 700 year figure comes from _Yellow Knight_, although that could have been a spot spell cast by the Sultan. Other people have put the date of enchantment at 1000 years or so. ********** SPOILER FOR _BLUE EMPEROR_ ********** Of course, much of it depends on how many non-FF books you accept. According to _The Blue Emperor of Oz_, Mombi kidnapped Ozroar and then Pastoria became King. ********** EN OF SPOILER FOR _BLUE EMPEROR_ ********** David Godwin: The best explanation I've ever heard about Ozma is that she was born as a mortal child to Pastoria's wife and forgot her fairy existence until recently. It is possible that the Deadly Desert came under the same enchantment as Oz generally. Maybe it couldn't kill until after Ozma ascended the throne. In _Wizard_, a Munchkin, describing the Desert to Dorothy, says that "no one could live to cross it". This implies a harsh enviornment, but not a magically deadly one. My best guess about Dorothy's ages is that she is six in _Wizard_. Following a six year gap, she is 11 physically and 12 chronologically in _Emerald City_. I've had to juggle things somewhat, since I account for several non-FF books that you don't accept. In _Lost Princess_, Baums says that Dorothy is a year older than Trot and a year younger than Betsy. If you accept the evidence in _Tin Woodman_, then the Piglets must have been around at the time of _Wizard_. March Laumer (whom most would like to see burn at the stake) has written an incredible account explaining how the Piglets really were picked up on the island of Teenty-Weent, yet are still the children of the Swynes. The spell of invisibility was in force in _Scarecrow_, although it was not physical. It seems to have evaporated, possibly because Glinda decided to remove it. Dave: Uh-Oh. Could you explain a little more clearly just what fan-fiction is? Tyler Jones ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 00:14:31 -0500 From: Lisa Mastroberte X-Accept-Language: en Subject: Oz if anybody would like to read the first chapter of my Oz book, _Curious Wogglebug_, please e-mail me and I will send you a TXT file of it. Please tell me what you think! (btw, a few months ago I went to a young adult writers workshop, so I'm always happy to receive criticism!) ~Lisa ====================================================================== From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-29-98 Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 13:42:00 PST Lisa: >One thought on "The Cowardly Lion of Oz." This only MOPPET, but when >the >lion is turned to stone, do you think that could be the basis of the >turning >the people to stone in Disney's RTOz? I would doubt it. Turning someone to stone is probably one of the most common deeds done by evil magicians. Gehan: >I mentioned earlier that baum's books should be considered >"Officail".if >anyones books ,other than Baums,are to be considered "Officail" it >should be >the books by Jack Snow(-Magical Mimics- only).He only used the >charcters >invented by Baum,and not by John R.Neill and RPT. Well, to be fair, Thompson only used characters invented by Baum and herself. >I STRONGLY disagree with RPT for many reasons.She has cahnged the >World of >Oz which Baum created.I havent read -Merry-go-round- and -Hidden >valley- so >I cant judge the work of Rachel pays and Eloise McGraw.I wouldn't >have >published ANY of the books she wrote if I were her publisher. While your objection to the books as a reader is quite valid, you might have had a different opinion if you had been a publisher. After all, Thompson's books did bring revenue to Reilly and Lee. In fact, it was the publishers who asked Thompson to continue the series. Bill: >Can anyone explain why Baum used the "stage name" of Louis F. Baum? I would imagine that he just didn't like the name "Lyman" (or at least felt that it was not a suitable stage name). >And a related question; > from >where did his first name, Lyman, come? I think it was the name of one of his uncles. > And why did he not like it? I don't know, but I don't blame him for not liking it. It doesn't really have a very pleasant sound to it. Gehan wrote: >what happend to the "Invisible" spell Glinda cast on Oz? From an Oz-as-literature point of view, Baum probably decided that it conflicted with what he wanted to do in later Oz books, and simply ignored it. From Oz-as-history, though, I don't know. Maybe it weakened over time. >What is the barrier of invisibility in -shaggy man-?It doesn't >make the country invisible. I think that this is Snow's attempt to reconcile the invisibility spell in _Emerald City_ with the fact that characters entered and left Oz with little trouble (aside from the desert) in later Baum books. Snow seemed to think that the barrier was only effective right on the borders of the country (and not all that effective even then, since the Mimics flew over the desert with no visibility problems.) Nathan Mulac DeHoff ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ====================================================================== -- Dave Dave Hardenbrook, DaveH47@mindspring.com, http://www.mindspring.net/~daveh47/ Castles, Castles in the air Take a paper plane through the rain and you'll be floating free Through those castles growing everywhere Won't you let your mind just unwind; Go upstream toward a dream You can ride on a laugh you can glide on; Behind every cloud is a star To light your way -- The Bugaloos, "Castles In the Air"