====================================================================== ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, MAY 29 - JUNE 20, 2000 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 05-28-2000 Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 01:19:22 GMT J. L. Bell: >The way Snow depicted his choice in WHO'S WHO implies he was >motivated by loyalty to Baum's vision. I recall, however, seeing quotations >from a Thompson letter to Reilly & Lee asserting control over the >characters she created, "of course." So perhaps Snow's hands were legally >tied. Well, Snow could have avoided using Thompson's characters without directly contradicting her work (which she did when she placed the Good Witch of the North in one of her books, and probably did at other times I cannot remember just now). From most of what I've read, Snow seems to have been a "Baum purist." >In this book Thompson invents "exspectacles" [135], though >Kaliko's wizard doesn't seem to make a new pair after Carter breaks this >one [152]. We don't see the wizard creating a new pair, but this must happen at some point, since Kaliko uses the magical glasses again in _Wishing Horse_. There's no sign of them in _Gnome King_, but there really wasn't a point at which it would have been appropriate for them to appear (unless Potaroo had mentioned them as one of his recent inventions, rather than the flying dishes). > Another curious slip from TIK-TOK is Thompson's statement that >Ruggedo had been deposed by "a powerful Jinn" [134]. That must be how she >remembered Tititi-Hoochoo, the Great Jinjin. In JACK PUMPKINHEAD Thompson >would introduce her own Red Djinn, later rendered simply as the Red Jinn, >but this seems to be the first appearance of the term "Jinn" in the Oz >series. Did she call Tititi-Hoochoo the Great Jinjin or the Great Jinn in _Kabumpo_? (He was mentioned in Ruggedo's rock history.) Nathan ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ====================================================================== From: Ozmama@aol.com Date: Sun, 28 May 2000 21:41:15 EDT Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 05-28-2000 In a message dated 5/28/00 7:47:21 PM Central Daylight Time, OzDigest@mindspring.com writes: << Jack Snow seems to have tried especially hard to be consistent--with Baum. But he had to fudge in some ways because Baum's books weren't consistent with each other, and he made a couple of flubs of his own. The way Snow depicted his choice in WHO'S WHO implies he was motivated by loyalty to Baum's vision. I recall, however, seeing quotations from a Thompson letter to Reilly & Lee asserting control over the characters she created, "of course." So perhaps Snow's hands were legally tied. >> My understanding is that Snow didn't feel RPT's interpretation of Oz was valid and that he ignored her whenever possible. I think it was more of a personal thing than a legal one. Convention: Have y'all checked out some of the auction highlights for this summer's Centennial Convention? If not, the list is worth looking at. Here's a link for the main Centennial site; just click on the Auction link: Wizar d of Oz Centenniel Page If the main link doesn't work, here's the URL: http://www.geocities.com/%7Eozfan/ozcenten.htm I'm assuming that most of you have seen this site, but if you haven't, for cake's sake, please look at it! IWOC is going to have a truly phenomenal bash in July. How many of us Digesters are planning to attend? David Hulan, Dave Hardenbrook, David Maxine, John Bell, Jane, Me, Patrick Maund, Peter Hanff, Atty, Lynn Beltz and Kathy Gire (they lurk and don't post much), Ruth Berman, Steve Teller, and who else? --Robin ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 28 May 2000 22:32:10 -0400 (EDT) From: "Mark Donajkowski" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 05-28-2000 if anyones loking for copies of hte oz kids email me off list as i know where there are some cheep cpies of them ====================================================================== From: DJWMS3@aol.com Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 02:20:31 EDT Subject: OTHER PLACES Hi: Has there been any discussions in the past on how Little Nemo's Dream world fits into the location of OZ? AMC has been showing Shirley Temple monies in the early morning hours. Tis weekend they shwn the BLUE BIRD, and so I taped it to see if I agreed with some of the Ozzy comments. I thought it was really sickening sweet & bad, so I erased the tape without seeing the whole movie. If Little Miss ST had the role of Dorothy I doubt that we would even mention the MGM movie. It would rot in the film vaults, lie the Disney flick. Dave Williams ====================================================================== From: "Mike Denio" Subject: RE: Ozzy Digest, 05-28-2000 Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 07:49:14 -0500 charset="iso-8859-1" Importance: Normal > > Titanic's sister ships seems to also have had a similar fate. > > Dave Williams > The sulfur/brittle steel theory was best explained in a National Geographic article about 5 years ago. Sorry, I don't recall the date. The Britannic was being used as a hospital ship in WWII and was sunk following by a large explosion - most likely a torpedo or mine. The Olympic stayed afloat for around 25 years being scrapped in 1935. Mike ====================================================================== From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 09:45:24 -0700 charset="iso-8859-1" Dave Williams: I asked BOW if they had a web page a long time ago, and the answer was no. They may have one now, or may be planning one. It would be pretty cool. Tyler Jones ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 17:19:04 -0400 From: "John W. Kennedy" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 05-28-2000 ruth berman wrote: > There's an interesting article, "Foreign Goods," by Michael Patrick Hearn, > in the Spring "Riverbank Review," which is a magazine on children's books > published by the University of St. Thomas, 1000 LaSalle Ave #MOH-217, Mpls > MN 55403-2009 ($5/issue). The article is a complaint about toning down or > trying to hide complaintly the foreign setting of children's books of other > countries. His chief examples are the American editions of the Harry Potter > books (which translate British turns-of-phrase into American ones or > substitute British ones common enough to be better known) and Alexander > Volkov's translation/*very*-free-adaptation of "The Wizard of Oz" into > Russian. I'm afraid I don't get this. A quick examination of the first "Harry Potter" turns up any number of difficult Briticisms in the first few pages, including "Director [of a company]" -- never used in America unless specialized ("Director of Manufacturing") or in the plural -- "garden" (American "yard") and "sweet" (American "candy"). The setting is plainly British, and so is the entire plot, not only in its accidents, but in its substance, for the boarding-school story never amounted to much in the USA, and died out completely with WWII. (This is why "Daisy Pulls It Off", a West-End smash hit in 1984, didn't have an American production until the 90's, when it was done by the students of Kent Place School in Summit, NJ. Eleanor and I are probably the only people in the world to have seen the play on both sides of the Atlantic.) The only Americanization in "Harry Potter" that I caught was a rejiggering involving the expression "public school", which is pretty nearly mandatory to avoid utter confusion, since a British "public school" is an American "private school". (No, they're not insane. It's "public" because it isn't limited to, e.g., the chorus boys of such-and-such cathedral.) I'd have to compare the texts, but it reads to me like a minimal translation for understanding, in the absence of outright footnotes. Similarly, "The Wizard of the Emerald City" is plainly set in America. In fact, Magic Land is expressly said to be located in America, which is more than can be said for Oz. One may quarrel with Volkov's choices, and his rather disingenuous acknowledgement/nonacknowledgement of Baum, but the only strikingly non-American touch I ever noticed lies in the fact that "Urfin Djus" is clearly a book written in a country that has suffered an invasion within living memory. (The contempt for royalty shown in "Seven Underground Kings" is not the current American fashion, but it was ordinary enough in Baum's day.) DJWMS3@aol.com wrote: > Titanic's sister ships seems to also have had a similar fate. They were ill fated, but under wholly different circumstances. One was a war casualty. J. L. Bell wrote: > Jack Snow seems to have tried especially hard to be > consistent--with Baum. But he had to fudge in some ways because Baum's > books weren't consistent with each other, and he made a couple of flubs of > his own. The way Snow depicted his choice in WHO'S WHO implies he was > motivated by loyalty to Baum's vision. I recall, however, seeing quotations > from a Thompson letter to Reilly & Lee asserting control over the > characters she created, "of course." So perhaps Snow's hands were legally > tied. Not by the law as it stood then, as far as I know. The books were always copyright in the name of Reilly and Lee. And I don't recall that she "asserted control", she merely remarked that she assumed that her successors would leave her characters alone. > Queen Ann seems to be significantly older than Reddy or Randy, and older > than the intended Oz book readers, so I don't think her parents' > disappearance would be as worrisome to kids as theirs. On the other hand, > getting parents out of the way is a constant challenge for children's book > writers. Or even for non-children's-book writers. As a member of the company of the New Jersey Renaissance Kingdom (http://www.NJKingdom.com -- now performing weekends through June, hint! hint!) I have been working on novelizing the past years of our continuing storyline. For sufficient reasons, I invented two children to serve as surrogates for the original live audiences. But now I'm up to the second volume, and I could not, without unreasonable use of coincidence, keep their parents imprisoned in pro/epilogue-land. I'm finding it deucedly difficult to keep things in balance with the parents on-stage, and am looking forward to future volumes when the kids will be old enough to go to Somerset Faire on their own without invoking broken legs and sick neighbors. (It was easier for me, in fact, when I brought a perfectly ordinary grown-up into Oz.) -- -John W. Kennedy -jwkenne@attglobal.net Compact is becoming contract Man only earns and pays. -- Charles Williams ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 08:48:31 -0400 From: "J. L. Bell" Subject: HUNGRY? not HUNGRY? charset=ISO-8859-1 The International Wizard of Oz Club web site [ozclub.org] now includes a link to the cover of THE HIDDEN PRINCE OF OZ, with ordering information. Also, the new edition of ANNOTATED WIZARD OF OZ has made its preview appearance at online bookstores. It includes an introduction by Martin Gardner. If you look for the book at Amazon, however, you won't find it listed under Michael Patrick Hearn's name yet; as the tin man said when he saw 40 bees heading his way, there are some bugs. Ruth Berman wrote: <> I've heard these HARRY POTTER translation complaints, mostly from people who are already avid readers of children's books from many cultures (including the past). But one extraordinary effect of those books is how they've coaxed reluctant readers into enjoying them. Would that have happened if they'd been harder to understand? Scholastic also paid a lot of money for the US rights, and even more to market the first book. I can understand how the firm would choose not to risk that investment by keeping obstacles in their customers' way. Most conspicuously, Scholastic replaced the term PHILOSOPHER'S STONE in the first book's title. Neither that alchemical tool nor its root in the use of "philosopher" for "Renaissance scientist" remains in our daily speech. I suspect many Americans would guess a philosopher's stone is what Rodin's THINKER sits on. The replacement term, SORCEROR'S STONE, doesn't fit into a historical tradition, but it does evoke thoughts of magic rather than metaphysics. Discussing whether books benefit from being transmuted as well as translated seems to require looking at books that don't become enormously popular, as well as those that do. Dave Williams wrote: <> Sounds like somebody might have had issues! Which is to say, perhaps the only idea of Freud's that still enjoys widespread acceptance is that people have emotions and desires which they don't know or don't want to know, but which surface in different ways. A facility at telling stories is a wonderful gift, but that doesn't necessarily mean the stories themselves are facile and without meaning, especially in their creator's life. I've been struck in rereading the Oz books in sequence at how much deeper Baum's themes seem to run compared to Thompson's. It's not that those themes are very sophisticated, but in a book like TIN WOODMAN they show up much more consistently than in Thompson's madcap stories. By that measure, Baum's shallowest books seem to be the ones he adapted from scripts meant for whole families to enjoy. When writing directly for children, he seemed to bring up more of what he wanted to say, rather than what he thought his audiences expected to hear. In HUNGRY TIGER, food's a constant theme, appropriate to the title character. Irashi's opening temper tantrum is about burnt pudding [15], and the main plot ends with a "splendid repast" [253]. Along the way we get to see the Nomes chow down in a memorable way [146-7 and, according to Ruth Berman, a notable color plate]. That food motif also speaks to children's interests. The book seems to show a conflicted attitude toward the topic, however. The Hungry Tiger's struggle between appetite and conscience is the prime example, of course. He ate "real tiger food" in the wild [38], but since meeting Ozma seems capable of consuming only vegetables and cooked meat. The Rash singer laments people's carnivorous habits: "Should little lambs grow into chops / And hang around in butcher shops? / No! No! I weep, it is too sad" [52]. Yet other scenes show eating cooked animals to be acceptable: Thompson even praises Betsy for how she helps herself to a chicken roasted on a spit [112]. On the other hand, there's Carter Green and his vegetables. He turned into a real vegetable man by eating his wares, but only out of love: "I could not let them die, so I ate them" [59]. So not eating vegetables, he hints, is as murderous as eating animals. Of course, now that Carter's vegetable himself, he no longer can eat. But he's still picky about who else he'll let eat his wares. He presses food on Betsy [59-61], but asks Irashi to "spare my potatoes, my cabbages and fresh young beets" from being eaten by the dreaded tiger [76]. It seems to have become a control issue. Carter Green is a difficult character in some other ways as well. He's clearly this book's "non-meat" Ozian, his gradual transition from ordinary person to non-sleeping humanoid reminiscent of Nick Chopper's [103] and his ability to replace his ears like Jack Pumpkinhead's [36, 161]. Carter doesn't seem as pleasant a companion as those other gentlemen, however. He's cheerful and loyal, of course, but he's as obsessed with his role as a vegetable man as the Daddies of Down Town are with their vocations. Being eaten, he laments, "would ruin my business" [76]. Falling through the underground tunnel has "ruined my business" [100]. In Down Town, he "busied himself with counting the oranges and apples in the window and wondered wistfully whether he could not find a cart somewhere and stir up some trade" [114]. If Carter didn't feel responsible for Betsy being away from home, I could easily imagine him staying behind with the Rash Singer and Barber. Visually, Thompson seems to have sensed that Carter might be off-putting: "Can you stand me at all?" he asks Betsy [58]. Thompson assigned Carter a "turnip nose and two tall corn ears" simply for the puns, letting Neill try to work that into something vaguely facial. Neill managed pretty well, though the endpapers of Carter hoeing little Carter heads just puts us back into a conflicted, potentially gruesome "Garden of Meats" territory. Neill also seems to have trouble with Carter's cart, which appears [56, 70] smaller than Thompson implies it should be [e.g., 86]. Incidentally, Jack Snow or the layout artists at Reilly & Lee seem to have decided that the Rash Barber didn't actually stay in Rash after Reddy's restoration [129]. WHO'S WHO shows him as the barber who cuts Jinnicky's hair or, more often, Alibabble's in PURPLE PRINCE. Rounding out this discussion of HUNGRY TIGER ambivalent messages, Ippty seems to start out as a sympathetic character, hiding from Irashi's wrath and defining the opening chapter's point of view [16]. As a writer, Thompson may have naturally identified with this pencil-fingered scribe. But starting on page 21, Ippty becomes the novel's chief villain, the one who actually comes up with the schemes. By page 85, he's said to share responsibility with Irashi (and the unseen national military) for all the bad things that have happened in Rash. Thompson calls Ippty "still fatter" than his "fat" master [23], another food reference. Neill gives them both a lean and hungry look, however. He also occasionally leaves off Ippty's hard-to-draw drawing fingers [39]. Will Atmos Fere's fellow sky scientists decide those are typical of earth humans? J. L. Bell JnoLBell@compuserve.com ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 14:33:24 -0500 From: David Hulan Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 05-28-2000 Ruth: I saw that PBS production of "The Scarecrow," or at least that's how I recall the name of the play based on "Feathertop." ISTR the author of the play was Percy something, not anybody I'd heard of in any other context, though that's not terribly surprising. We also did a reading of it in one of the Mythie groups I was in back in - oh, I think '72 or '73. Lots of fun. Dave W.: >This was in the days before typewriters were common. How long ago was this? Typewriters were certainly common when I started college, and that was back in '54. And I'd thought they were common for a good decade or more before that. (I don't know if they're very common any more, though, except as curiosities...)(In colleges, I mean.) > Could LFB BEEN A NATURAL BORN STORY >TELLER? I think indubitably. Interesting info on the Titanic. >Does Books of Wonder have a web page? I'm pretty sure they do, but I don't know the URL. Maybe somebody will, or you could do a search. J.L.: > Jack Snow seems to have tried especially hard to be >consistent--with Baum. But he had to fudge in some ways because Baum's >books weren't consistent with each other, and he made a couple of flubs of >his own. The way Snow depicted his choice in WHO'S WHO implies he was >motivated by loyalty to Baum's vision. He didn't seem to succeed very well at his efforts, imho. I like _Magical Mimics_ very much, and think _Shaggy Man_ is OK though fairly weak, but I don't think they're at all Baum-ish - less so than Thompson's books. Thompson is certainly distinct from Baum, but I think her books are more like Baum's than those of any subsequent Oz writer's. >I recall, however, seeing quotations >from a Thompson letter to Reilly & Lee asserting control over the >characters she created, "of course." So perhaps Snow's hands were legally >tied. Snow didn't use any Thompson characters, but Neill did, so apparently using them wasn't forbidden in R&L books. Granted, Neill's versions of Kabumpo and Captain Salt and Sir Hokus weren't anything like Thompson's, but he did use them - possibly others, though those are the only three I remember. >Because Baum's stories ARE <> it seems important >to give special weight to the explanations in them. Unlike Herodotus, we >don't have other chroniclers of the same events, or an archeological or >scientific record about them. The only "better evidence" about Oz that we >can come up with is other statements from Baum. > If we discount what Baum's books tell his readers about Oz's >location, we start to cast doubt on what they say about its existence. >That, in turn, may start to diminish their credibility, already fleeting, >and their appeal. If we can find answers within his books (and I think we >can find answers as scientifically valid as the notion of alternative >dimensions), my preference is to stick to those. My point is, and has always been, that while within any one Baum book one might say he had provided some information on the physical location of Oz, there are no two Baum books that connect Oz with our world that give even vaguely similar information. One has to postulate a magical transition in every case but one, and at the point where you've done that then why single out that one as the real physical location of Oz and make the others magical? There just isn't anything consistent that "Baum's books tell his readers about Oz's location," so some degree of speculation is necessary. >In the early chapters of that book--the part Thompson was most likely to >have been mapping out or writing as she drafted the foreword to HUNGRY >TIGER--Ruggedo speaks to his "general" Peter about using his "army of >gnomes" to conquer Oz. Sounds like an impending invasion to me! Ruggedo may have schemed an invasion of Oz in _Gnome King_, but it never happened. Tyler: I think "Ozma who?" while primarily referring to people who have only seen the movie, might also apply to those who've read the book _Wizard_ but never heard of its sequels. There are quite a few people in that category as well, since _Wizard_ has been continuously in print in many editions with many illustrators whereas most of the others have been hard to get at one time or another, and have never been anywhere near as popular. David Hulan ====================================================================== From: Ralex56@aol.com Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 03:36:07 EDT Subject: Need info Do you know the name of the tavern in Chicago on 63rd Street that was owned by two cast members who played Munchkins. I believe they were husband and wife. I had visited there about 20 years ago and the name eludes me. ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 12:19:23 -0500 (EST) From: Subject: UK Oz DVD http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00004D2XN/qid=960743579/sr=1-3/026 -3719536-3984438 I just ordered this. I *think* it's the Jim Simon USA/South Korea production. _Return to Oz_ does not appear to be out on DVD in the UK, where the coronation scen is longer. (My player can bypass region encoding, or be set to a different region). Scott ============================== Scott Andrew Hutchins http://php.iupui.edu/~sahutchi Cracks in the Fourth Wall Filmworks/Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More! (with special musical guest Leila Josefowicz) "Who's John Adams?" --Vice President Albert Gore, Jr., at Monticello, after failing to recognize busts of other founding fathers. ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 12:20:59 -0500 (EST) From: Subject: Semon Oz on DVD UK again. It erroneously has this as part of a pair of Laurel and Hardy films: http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00004S32R/qid=960743579/sr=1-4/026 -3719536-3984438 ============================================================================ ==== Scott Andrew Hutchins http://php.iupui.edu/~sahutchi Cracks in the Fourth Wall Filmworks/Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More! (with special musical guest Leila Josefowicz) "Who's John Adams?" --Vice President Albert Gore, Jr., at Monticello, after failing to recognize busts of other founding fathers. ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 00:46:03 -0400 (EDT) From: "Mark Donajkowski" Subject: OZ TIME LINE The Wizard of Oz is undoubtedly one of the best-loved movies of all time. We all know that it was adapted for the screen in 1939 from L. Frank Baum's classic American fairy tale The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, which he wrote in 1900. But have you ever given any thought as to how the MGM movie version came to be -- who decided to make this film, and when? This page was created in order to compile some chronological data in answer to those questions. There are also two additional sections, one of which include parts of the film which ended up on the cutting-room floor and the other listing the awards given to The Wizard of Oz. (The sources consulted appear at the bottom of the page.) Special Thanks to Jim Whitcomb for creating and supplying the timeline. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- This timeline starts in the year 1924 when only the idea existed for making a film version of The Wizard of Oz and continues through the year 1939 when the film was completed and released in theaters. The Year is 1924: 1924: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) considered making a movie of The Wizard of Oz as early as 1924 when Frank J. Baum was peddling the silent film rights. They couldn't agree on terms so Frank J. Baum sold the rights to Chadwick Pictures. The Year is 1933: 1933: While Frank J. Baum was negotiating with Samuel Goldwyn for a musical comedy feature, MGM wanted to option the Oz books for a series of animated cartoons, but like before they couldn't agree on terms. The Year is 1934: January 26, 1934: Samuel Goldwyn bought the film rights to The Wizard of Oz from Frank J. Baum for $40,000.00. The Year is 1935: 1935: Judy Garland signed a contract with MGM. The Year is 1937: 1937: MGM once again looked into the idea of purchasing the rights to all of the Oz stories, but the first for animated shorts. 1937: Louis B. Mayer asked Mervyn LeRoy and Arthur Freed which book each would like to make into a movie, they both expressed an interest in The Wizard of Oz. 1937: Producer Arthur Freed wanted to find a good film property for Judy Garland. Agent Frank Orsatti told him that Samuel Goldwyn had The Wizard of Oz. The Year is 1938: January 1938: While concentrating on other numerous pre-production details, Mervyn LeRoy turned the book over to his assistant, William Cannon, in early January, to get his thoughts on how best to dramatize the story. January 1938: MGM announced that Judy Garland would be cast in the role of Dorothy. January 31, 1938: Ray Bolger is assigned to be the Tinman while Buddy Ebsen is assigned to the role of the Scarecrow. Bolger insists the roles be switched and they were shortly thereafter. February 3, 1938: Mervyn LeRoy signed a contract to produce The Wizard of Oz. February 18, 1938: Samuel Goldwyn agreed to sell the rights to The Wizard of Oz to MGM. February 24, 1938: Variety announced MGM's purchase of the rights to The Wizard of Oz and the casting of Judy Garland in the role of Dorothy. 1938: Irving Brecher served as the first screenwriter for the film, but was immediately taken off to begin work on At the Circus. February 28, 1938: Herman Mankiewicz is assigned as screenwriter for the film. He worked on the script until March 23, 1938. March 7, 1938: Ogden Nash joined Herman Mankiewicz to write the script for The Wizard of Oz, but he made no important contributions. He was released on April 16, 1938. March 11, 1938: Writer Noel Langley joined Ogden Nash to work on the script for the film. April 5, 1938: Noel Langley completed the first script for MGM's The Wizard of Oz. April 19, 1938: Writer, Herbert Fields was assigned to work on the script for The Wizard of Oz between April 19 and 22, 1938, but made no important contributions. May 7, 1938: Lyricist Edgar Yipsel "Yip" Harburg and composer, Harold Arlen, began work on the musical score for MGM's film. May 31, 1938: Writer Samuel Hoffenstein worked on the screenplay for The Wizard of Oz, but made no important contributions. He was released on June 1, 1938. June 3, 1938: Samuel Goldwyn officially sold The Wizard of Oz to Loew's Incorporated, MGM's parent company, for $75,000.00. June 4, 1938: Noel Langley's script is marked with what he considered to be his last revisions. 1938: Florence Ryerson and Edgar Allan Woolf immediately replaced Noel Langley as screenwriters to MGM's The Wizard of Oz. June 13, 1938: Florence Ryerson and Edgar Allan Woolf submitted first scripts for the film. July 25, 1938: MGM announced that Bert Lahr would be cast in the role of the Cowardly Lion. July 27, 1938: Arthur Freed took Florence Ryerson and Edgar Allan Woolf off The Wizard of Oz to work on his new picture, Babes in Arms. July 30, 1938: Noel Langley returned as screenwriter. He worked on the script through March 3, 1939. August 3, 1938: Writer Jack Mintz is assigned to work on the script for The Wizard of Oz. He stayed on through September 2, 1938. August 12, 1938: MGM announced that Charley Grapewin would be cast in the role of Uncle Henry. August 20, 1938: MGM announced that Gale Sondergaard would be cast in the role of the Wicked Witch of the West. September 17, 1938: Richard Thorpe is assigned to direct MGM's The Wizard of Oz September 22, 1938: MGM announced that Frank Morgan would be cast in the role of the Wizard. September, 1938: MGM announced the final member to star in The Wizard of Oz and that was Terry, the cairn terrier who played Toto. October 1, 1938: Leo Singer signed a contract to supply MGM with his troupe of "The Singer Midgets" to play Munchkins in MGM's The Wizard of Oz. October 4, 1938: MGM announced that Pat Walsh would be cast in the role of Nikko, Head Winged Monkey. October 8, 1938: The final shooting script for MGM's The Wizard of Oz was completed. October 10, 1938: MGM announced that Margaret Hamilton would be cast in the role of the Wicked Witch of the West to replace Gale Sondergaard who decided she didn't want to play an ugly witch. October 12, 1938: Richard Thorpe began directing MGM's classic film, The Wizard of Oz. October 21, 1938: Buddy Ebsen suffered from a near fatal allergic reaction to the aluminum dust used in his Tinman make-up. He never returned to the film and is replaced by Jack Haley. October 22, 1938: George Cukor replaced Richard Thorpe, but for only seven days, as interim director for The Wizard of Oz. November 3, 1938: Victor Fleming started directing The Wizard of Oz. He brought John Mahin in to help with the script. November 11, 1938: Leo Singer's "Singer Midgets" arrived on the set to begin shooting the Munchkinland scene. December 18, 1938: The Munchkinland scene is completed. December 23, 1938: Margaret Hamilton is severely burned during a mishap while filming her departure in the Munchkinland scene. She left the film for six weeks. The Year is 1939: February 1939: King Vidor directed The Wizard of Oz during the last three weeks of filming. February 11, 1939: Margaret Hamilton returned to the set of The Wizard of Oz to resume filming. February 28, 1939: The last revisions on a dated script of MGM's The Wizard of Oz are marked. March 16, 1939: Principal filming of MGM's The Wizard of Oz is completed. June 1939: The first sneak preview of The Wizard of Oz is held in San Bernadino, California. June, 29 1939: NBC Radio Premiere broadcast of The Wizard of Oz takes place. August 7, 1939: MGM's The Wizard of Oz was granted its first copyright. The 101 minute film cost $2,777,000.00 to produce. August 12, 1939: The world premiere of MGM's The Wizard of Oz is held at the Strand Theatre in Oconomowoc, Wisconsin. It is shown through September 16, 1939. It should be noted that this is considered the "official" anniversary date for The Wizard of Oz. August 15, 1939: The Hollywood premiere of MGM's The Wizard of Oz is held at Grauman's Chinese Theater in Hollywood, California. August 17, 1939: The Wizard of Oz opened at the Loew's Capitol Theatre in New York City where Judy Garland, along with her frequent film partner, Mickey Rooney, performed each night on stage. Is it possible to even imagine The Wizard of Oz being a better film that it already is? I personally doubt it. During the many versions of the script that were written and some scenes that were filmed, several items were cut from the final version. Below is a list of some of the scenes that didn't make the final cut. You can decide for yourself if these would have added anything to the film. * means this scene was actually filmed, but cut from the final version of the movie. ** means this scene was written by one of the scriptwriters, but was never filmed. **Kansas sequence scenes with additional characters: In the book, The Wizard of Oz : The Official 50th Anniversary Pictorial History, the authors mention several scenes written into earlier versions of the script that called for additional characters in the Kansas sequence. One such scene was to have the character of Miss Gulch having a son named Walter in the Kansas sequence while this same actor would play the Wicked Witch of the West's son, Bulbo, in the Oz sequence. Another was to have a Kansas farm helper named Lizzie Smithers being a love interest for Jack Haley's character Hunk while having her be an assistant to the Wizard in Oz. None of these additional characters evolved for this reason according to the authors, "Above all, the scripts were padded by the activities of nonessential characters." *The Scarecrow's Dance: One scene that was filmed, but was cut from the final version was a more elaborate dance number for Ray Bolger's role as the Scarecrow. This included Toto jumping onto a large pumpkin that started it rolling toward the Scarecrow. It hit him from behind causing him to fly high into the air. The Scarecrow landed back onto the Yellow Brick Road and ran off bouncing back and forth along the fence until he broke through it. Then, the same shot was done in reverse action. *The Tinman and the Beehive Scene: One scene that was cut that proved the Wicked Witch's powers involved the Tinman after the Wicked Witch of the West said she would turn him into a beehive. In the movie we hear the Tinman say, "I'll see you reach the Wizard, whether I get a heart or not. Beehive--bah! Let her try and make a beehive out of me!". The scene that was cut would have allowed audiences to hear a buzzing sound coming from inside the Tinman. He bangs on his chest only to have the buzzing increase. He coughs and a couple bees fly out of his mouth. Then, a whole swarm of bees fly out of his ears, mouth, and funnel on top of his head. **The Cowardly Lion Fighting with a Dragon: Some of the screenwriters thought it necessary for the Cowardly Lion to engage in some sort of battle to prove his courage. In earlier versions of the script, some of the writers had the Cowardly Lion fighting with a dragon. *The Jitterbug: Unfortunately, this elaborate dance number was cut from the film after its first sneak preview in June 1939 in San Bernadino, California. All that is left is some rare footage on home movies. When Dorothy and her friends approach the Haunted Forest they are greeted by human Jitter Trees. This resulted in them engaging in a five minute song and dance number. Even though this scene was cut, it is still hinted at when the Wicked Witch says to her Winged Monkeys before they fly off to capture Dorothy and Toto, "I've sent a little insect on ahead to take the fight out of them." *Reprise of "Over the Rainbow" in the Witch's Castle and The Rainbow Bridge: While Dorothy was locked up in the Witch's Castle she did a reprise of "Over the Rainbow". The reprise contained a portion of the song that wasn't heard when Dorothy sang this song in the Kansas sequence. In addition, a Rainbow Bridge forms between the two towers of the Witch's Castle. Dorothy, desperate to escape from the Wicked Witch, sets out on the bridge despite its thinness. The Ruby Slippers start to glow and carry her safely to the arms of her friends down below. *The Triumphant Procession: Another elaborate scene that was filmed, but cut was when Dorothy and her friends returned to the Emerald City after having killed the Wicked Witch of the West. As they are returning a large procession comes forward to greet them. Dorothy and her friends are surrounded by flower girls while the Scarecrow proudly carries the Witch's broomstick high above his head for all to see. They all reprise the song, "Ding Dong, The Witch is Dead!" as was done in Munchkinland to celebrate the death of the Wicked Witch of the East. Can you believe "Over the Rainbow" was almost deleted from the film?: It's true! This scene was cut because Louis B. Mayer didn't like the fact that Judy Garland would be singing this song in a barnyard. It was producer Arthur Freed's pleading with Mayer that got the song put back into the film. Thank goodness! The Wizard of Oz had some stiff competition at the Academy Awards in 1939. One of its toughest contenders was Victor Fleming's, Gone With the Wind, which won best film. However, The Wizard of Oz did get recognized. And, most importantly, perhaps, it went on to become one of the most prolific films of all time, touching many folks and having influences in many aspects of our culture. At the 1939 Academy Awards, The Wizard of Oz received the following awards: Best Song for "Over the Rainbow" Best Original Score A Special Award for Outstanding Juvenile Performance which went to Judy Garland The Wizard of Oz made history by being the first movie to be shown on commercial television annually. It first appeared on CBS on Saturday, November 3, 1956 and last aired on Friday, May 8, 1998. The film will still be telecast on television, but on the Turner cable channels of either Turner Classic Movies (TCM) or Turner Broadcasting System (TBS). Several years ago, a National Registry was established that inducted The Wizard of Oz into its registry. This means that the film cannot be edited or otherwise altered without full disclosure and only within certain limits. On the CBS television airing, Tuesday, June 16, 1998, the AFI (American Film Institute) revealed its choices for the 100 greatest films from the past 100 years. The Wizard of Oz was chosen as the no.6 best film of all time!!! In the August 8-14 issue of TV Guide, The Wizard of Oz came in as no.4 in TV Guide's "Nifty Fifty", The 50 Greatest Movies on TV and Video. In anticipation of the 60th anniversary of The Wizard of Oz, the film will be re-released in over 2000 movie theatres nationwide on November 6, 1998. This will be its first theatrical re-release in over forty years. ====================================================================== From: Tigerbooks@aol.com Message-ID: <6c.469276.267d194d@aol.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 14:11:25 EDT Subject: Ozzy Digest To: OzDigest@mindspring.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 106 What happened to the Ozzy Digest? It's halfway through June, and I haven't seen a digest since May 28th. Hungry Tiger Press's latest publication, Oz-story 6, is at the printer. The scheduled shipping date looks like we'll have copies at both the Ozmapolitan 2000 convention in Indiana and at the San Diego Comic Con 2000. Any of you who has already ordered a copy should receive it by the end of July. We're really excited about this oversize final volume. Featured are previously unpublished works by SIX of the seven original Royal Historians, including: The Rundelstone of Oz a brand new Oz book by Eloise Jarvis McGraw illustrated by Eric Shanower Meet the Troopadours, a vivacious group of living Marionettes! They travel across Oz, presenting their popular entertainments to the joy of Ozites everywhere, but Slyddwyn the Whitherd has other plans for them. Poco, the Third Comedian of the Troopadours, is plunged into a desperate search for the mysterious Rundelstone in order to rescue his fellow players. But that's not the whole story--where in Oz is the country of Fyordi-Zik? Why does Fyordi-Zik's continued happiness depend on the Rundelstone? And what does Ozma's lady-in-waiting Pernilda have to do with all of this? Mystery, magic, and more combine in three-time Newbery Honor winner Eloise Jarvis McGraw's third Oz book. When You Love, Love, Love a lyric by L. Frank Baum with a verse unique to Oz-story 6 Princess Chrystal and Prince Eolus a short story by Jack Snow excerpted from his unpublished book Tinkle and Tod illustrated by Eric Shanower Rocket Trip to Oz by Rachel Cosgrove Payes the first chapter of what would eventually become The Hidden Valley of Oz illustrated by Eric Shanower A glorious full-color study by John R. Neill of a dozen or so of your favorite Oz characters--featured on the front cover of Oz-story 6 Sketchbook pages by Lauren Lynn McGraw, displaying her original character designs for The Forbidden Fountain of Oz and The Rundelstone of Oz Only Ruth Plumly Thompson has no previously unpublished work in this volume of Oz-story, but we've included several rare pieces by her, including the previously unreprinted poem "The King of Pumperdink" and the short story "The Ogre of Oh-Go-Wan" in which appears the ogre from Thompson's Pirates in Oz. Of course, that's not everything in Oz-story 6--far from it. We really tried to pull out all the stops for this final issue, so you also get: L. Frank Baum's up-to-this-point RAREST novel: Annabel The 1906 edition and the 1912 edition had different illustrations--by H. Putnam Hall and Joseph Pierre Nuyttens, respectively--so we've gathered them all into one convenient package for you. The conclusion to Walt Spouse's Wonderland of Oz comics adaptation of Baum's The Emerald City of Oz. The Wonderland of Oz has proved to be one of Oz-story's most popular features, and this last installment won't disappoint you. Ozzy Digesters may be interested to learn that Hugh Pendexter III's short book, Oz and the Three Witches, will be printed in full in Oz-story 6. Now all of you who have been wanting to read it will have a chance. We've included many of the original illustrations by Patricia Ambrose. Ozzy Digester Atticus Gannaway offers the short story "Toto and the Truth," illustrated by Oz-story regular Anna-Maria Cool, who just recently illustrated the Oz Club's brand new book The Hidden Prince of Oz. The three final and rarest of Denslow's Scarecrow and Tinman stories. These were only printed in one newspaper in 1905, and to the best of our knowledge, have never been reprinted. Get 'em here! Philip Jose Farmer, the author of the controversial Barnstormer in Oz, is represented by his short essay "The Tin Woodman Slams the Door." We've got plenty of more Oz comics this time: -- Andy Hartzell (Bread and Circuses, Gay Comics) brings us "The Cusp of Success," about Fred Stone's triumph as the Scarecrow in the 1902 stage show of The Wizard of Oz -- Tommy Kovac (Stitch) draws the delightful "Stitch and Scraps" in which the Patchwork Girl is up to her usual tricks -- Steve Lieber (Whiteout, Hawkman, Medal of Honor, Conan) draws "The Mermaid's Necklace" from the story by Ruth Plumly Thompson, adapted for comics by Eric Shanower -- Steven "Ribs" Weissman (Yikes!, Champs, Measles) adapts for comics the second chapter of Baum's The Road to Oz in "Dorothy Meets Button-Bright," and if you know Steven's work, you know Button-Bright's never been cuter! -- At last, a full-color reprinting of one of John R. Neill's "Little Journeys of Nip and Tuck" comic strips! In this one, Nip, Tuck, and their dog Dingleberry visit the Man in the Moon Well, that's not everything that you'll get in Oz-story 6, but that's plenty to whet your appetite, isn't it? Just let me mention one last thing: A brand new Trot and Cap'n Bill Oz book--Trot of Oz--by Glenn Ingersoll and Eric Shanower with illustrations by Eric Shanower Trot and Cap'n Bill travel beneath Lake Quad in the company of their new friend Quaddle, a lake monster who's been buried for a zillion years in lake mud. What Trot finds in the underground lands will surprise and delight you. Don't miss her thrilling new adventures! For ordering information, e-mail Hungry Tiger Press at: tigerbooks@aol.com or go to the Hungry Tiger Press website: www. hungrytigerpress.com ====================================================================== From: "ruth berman" To: "ozdigest" Subject: oznotes Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 14:24:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 There's a pleasant article in the current (June/July) issue of "The Smithsonian Magazine," "The Amazing Author of Oz," by Bruce Watson. A standard sort of account, but nicely done. What publisher is the current owner of Reilly & Lee, and does anyone on the list know if that publisher would have the rights to re-issue the Thompson Oz books still under copyright, or would even R&L (in the corporate person of whichever publisher bought them last) still have to clear permission to reprint with the estate? It occurs to me that if there's an existing publisher who already has the right to reprint those still-under-copyright-few, perhaps it might be possible to encourage that publisher to go ahead and do the reprints, if a lot of Oz fans wrote in supporting the idea. The recent extension of the copyright period means that it might be worth the publisher's while to do such reprints. (Who knows, maybe said publisher could even be talked into including the color plates.) Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 19 Jun 00 15:57:56 (PDT) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things CONVENTION: First off, I apologize for three weeks since the last Digest... Various hardships and catastrophes have occupied most of my time these last few weeks. I'm sorry to have to report that increasing obligations elsewhere have precluded my attending the Centennial Convention. :( But I still intend to videotape a short piece on Oz on the Internet to be shown there. Is there anyone who will have a sales table at the convention who would be willing to display fliers for my book? MOVIES: Dave Williams wrote: >I thought [_The Blue Bird_] was really sickening sweet & bad... I think that's largely the fault of the original story. >If Little Miss ST had the role of Dorothy I doubt that we would even >mention the MGM movie. I won't go into such hypotheticals, but I agree ST would have been a miscasting. >It would rot in the film vaults, lie the Disney flick. Which Disney flick? _Return to Oz_? THE BOOKS: David Hulan wrote: >There are quite a few people in that category >as well, since _Wizard_ has been continuously in print in many editions >with many illustrators whereas most of the others have been hard to get at >one time or another, and have never been anywhere near as popular. Which is a pity since I think at least half of the Baum 14 is superior to _Wizard_... I know some people who have read _Wizard_, been disappointed, and have not read the any other Oz books because they have assumed that the of the series is no better. HARRY POTTER IN OZ: John K. wrote: >I'd have to compare the texts, but it reads >to me like a minimal translation for understanding, in the absence of >outright footnotes. Speaking as someone who was weaned on Monty Python and Fawlty Towers, I have no problem with the Britishisms... But there are American translations in the books... For example, Dean Thomas talks about his fondness for "soccer", which of course is "football" in the U.K.; when Harry is at the Dursleys, he does homework in the dead of night under the bedcovers with a "flashlight" (instead of a "torch"); and Mrs. Weasley tells her kids to remember their "rubbers" (galoshes) whereas in the US a "rubber" is a -- ahem! -- well, you can't say on a family Digest like this... Speaking of Harry Potter, I found a recent interview with J.K Rowling in which she states that the books will be growing darker here on in. I certainly hope she's exaggerating! One of the things I like about the Oz books (the Baum 14 anyway) is the alternation between dark, somber plots and "comic relief" stories. MARK: Thanks for the MGM _Wizard_ timeline. With year permission, I'll add it to the Digest file archive. ALFRED HITCHCOCK IN OZ(!): Did anyone else catch the Oz referenece in the documentary about Alfred Hitchcock on American Movie Classics yesterday? Hitch appears as a scarecrow and says something like, "I've made my living scaring people, so why not crows? This job does have its disadvantages -- This girl and tin man keep wanting me to dance down the road with them..." -- Dave ====================================================================== ====================================================================== ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, JUNE 20 - 27, 2000 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== From: "ruth berman" Subject: oznotes Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 14:24:56 -0500 charset="iso-8859-1" There's a pleasant article in the current (June/July) issue of "The Smithsonian Magazine," "The Amazing Author of Oz," by Bruce Watson. A standard sort of account, but nicely done. What publisher is the current owner of Reilly & Lee, and does anyone on the list know if that publisher would have the rights to re-issue the Thompson Oz books still under copyright, or would even R&L (in the corporate person of whichever publisher bought them last) still have to clear permission to reprint with the estate? It occurs to me that if there's an existing publisher who already has the right to reprint those still-under-copyright-few, perhaps it might be possible to encourage that publisher to go ahead and do the reprints, if a lot of Oz fans wrote in supporting the idea. The recent extension of the copyright period means that it might be worth the publisher's while to do such reprints. (Who knows, maybe said publisher could even be talked into including the color plates.) Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:53:25 -0400 From: "John W. Kennedy" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 06-20-2000 Ozmama@aol.com wrote: > How many of us Digesters are planning to attend? Eleanor and I, of course. J. L. Bell wrote: > Sounds like somebody might have had issues! Which is to say, perhaps the > only idea of Freud's that still enjoys widespread acceptance is that people > have emotions and desires which they don't know or don't want to know, but > which surface in different ways. Hardly original with Freud -- you'll find it in Plato and Dante, among others. Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > Speaking as someone who was weaned on Monty Python and Fawlty Towers, > I have no problem with the Britishisms... But there are American > translations in the books... For example, Dean Thomas talks about > his fondness for "soccer", which of course is "football" in the U.K.; > when Harry is at the Dursleys, he does homework in the dead of night > under the bedcovers with a "flashlight" (instead of a "torch"); and > Mrs. Weasley tells her kids to remember their "rubbers" (galoshes) > whereas in the US a "rubber" is a -- ahem! -- well, you can't say on > a family Digest like this... I don't have any problem with British English either, but I would have had trouble with most of those references as a child. (And "rubbers", of course, mean plain rubber overshoes in the US, rather than boots.) Now, if you want to argue purity of text, that's one thing, but I honestly cannot see any evidence here of an attempt to "hide" the books' British setting or essential Britishness, and that is the theory that was proposed. I see nothing here but changes for comprehension. ("Philosopher's Stone" should, perhaps, have been left alone, but, on the other hand, I was just commiserating on-line with an adult German who could find no translation into contemporary English of "wissenschaftlich".) -- -John W. Kennedy -jwkenne@attglobal.net Compact is becoming contract Man only earns and pays. -- Charles Williams ====================================================================== From: "ruth berman" Subject: scarecrows in oz Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 10:23:50 -0500 charset="iso-8859-1" David Hulan: Yes, the dramatization of "Feathertop" was called "The Scarecrow." Author was Percy MacKaye, son of another dramatist, Steele MacKaye. Both interesting in terms of turn-of-the-century theater (Steele mostly in the couple of decades before and Percy mostly in the couple of decades after), and mentioned in theater histories, but both pretty much entirely forgotten. "The Scarecrow" is the only one I've seen (or even heard of as being done nowadays), but the U of MN library has a bunch of their works -- maybe I should try reading some, sometime. John W. Kennedy, J.L. Bell, & Dave Hardenbrook: The changes in "americanizing" the Harry Potter books seem to be numerous, but so minor that I'm not entirely sure they make any real difference one way or the other. I suspect that the books are not harmed artistically by the changes, but suspect also that it would not have harmed them financially to have left the Anglicisms in (young readers would have been puzzled, but I think very likely would have been too caught up in the story as a whole to mind?). I haven't seen copies of the English editions, though. I hope that at some point someone will get copies of both sets and do a more thorough analysis than the ones I've seen so far of what kinds of changes are involved and what (little?) difference they make. (I had the impression from Michael Patrick Hearn's comments in his article that he hadn't seen the English editions, either, but was going by the list of changes provided in a "New Yorker" "Talk of the Town" item some time back.) I read some of Volkov's Oz books, but don't have a clear enough memory of them to comment on ways in which they "russianize" the material and whether they amount to major change or only minor. If there's some general interest, I could quote the relevant comments from Hearn's article. (Don't have it to hand at work, where my email access is, but could bring it in.) Mark Donajkowski: Thanks for supplying Jim Whitcomb's timeline on the 1939 movie. On the question of whether the movie could have been improved by keeping in some of the material that was filmed or scripted -- I'd agree that most of the omissions were probably better off omitted. (I'm especially glad to do without "the Jitterbug," which was boring as a song, and looked tedious in the bit of "home movie" footage that has survived and was shown on tv a few years back.) The Scarecrow's dance solo, though, included as an appendix now on some versions of the movie, is impressive. The producers might have been right in feeling that it stopped the story too long and needed to be cut, but my feeling from seeing it (even though not seeing it in the context of the scene as a whole) is that it might have been a better idea to keep it in, and trust to the interesting choreography to hold attention. Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 12:46:31 -0400 (EDT) From: "Mark Donajkowski" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 06-20-2000 heh um dave can we say repreted wihtout permission i got it off a web site which may or not be kinda offical hang on ill try to dig up the addy um heh its from hte offical warner brothers site lol http://thewizardofoz.warnerbros.com/movie/index.html heh thers a wealth of info there and on the linking pages like the acme build your own oz page thing the main ain site http://thewizardofoz.warnerbros.com/ they all god someting differnt the one guy has a acme page that has like 21 of the books online to read ====================================================================== From: "Bea & Herschel Premack" Subject: Convention Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 12:22:51 -0500 Robin: I am not a regular contributor to the Digest, but I will be coming to the Centennial Convention. I look forward to meeting those of you who carry on this fascinating dialogue. The Oz Festival in Aberdeen will be just the week following..July 29 and 30. We are delighted to have lined up some great activities. Margaret Pellegrini will be here. Our stage play will, of course, be the Wizard of Oz with a 100th birthday celebration. We will have Puppeteers, Oz magician, storytellers, clowns, and this year 15 Oz characters roaming the park and signing autographs. We will have tethered balloon rides (and pony rides as a hedge to the weather). We have Steven Teller and Nancy Koupal speaking and Rod Evans doing 'Baum and His Music'. In our Dakota Heritage area there will be living history reenactments with infantry and muzzle loaders. Native American dancers, drum group, history and storytelling, victorian fashion show, hands on heritage crafts and games and a medicine man show. There will be Barbershop Chorus and City Band concerts. And of course lots of food. Our Land of Oz which is a part of our Storybook Land Park keeps adding displays and the Baum sculpture has been put on a permanent pedistal. We certainly welcome one and all to join the festivities. Perhaps conventioners could return home via Aberdeen!! Bea Premack ====================================================================== From: Tigerbooks@aol.com Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:53:43 EDT Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 06-20-2000 Ruth Berman wrote: What publisher is the current owner of Reilly & Lee, and does anyone on the list know if that publisher would have the rights to re-issue the Thompson Oz books still under copyright, or would even R&L (in the corporate person of whichever publisher bought them last) still have to clear permission to reprint with the estate? Last I heard, Contemporary Books owns the Reilly & Lee imprint, but as far as I understand, they have no rights in the Oz books. I believe that the Baum Trust holds all current rights to the Thompson Oz books that are still under copyright. It's my understanding that Thompson's heir signed over within the past two years the rights to the Thompson Oz books ( Cowardly Lion thru Pirates and Speedy) not already held by the Baum Trust. (The Baum Trust reportedly owns Purple Prince and Ojo outright). I have not seen the contract between the Baum Trust and Thompson's heir, so I don't know the details or how long the contract runs. This info is what I understand to be the case. Please verify with the parties involved. Eric Shanower ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:41:08 -0400 (EDT) From: "Mark Donajkowski" Subject: turner to show oz with dark side of th emoon sound track 'Dark Side' trips down yellow brick road NEW YORK (Billboard) - While no one involved with Pink Floyd has ever admitted to any link between the band's seminal 1973 album "Dark Side of the Moon" and the 1939 film "The Wizard of Oz," urban legend purports that the album was conceived as an alternate soundtrack to the film. DirecTV subscribers will be able to judge for themselves at 11 p.m. ET, July 3, as Turner Classic Movies and Capitol Records present the film, with "Dark Side of the Moon" broadcast in sync on the alternate Second Audio Program. TCM host Robert Osborne will give viewers instructions on accessing the SAP channel and note some of the more interesting coincidental occurrences between the album and the film, particularly the cash register sound at the beginning of the song "Money," which coincides with the precise moment the film switches from black and white to color. Additionally, the TCM Web site will feature information on the film and the album, as well as Web sites devoted to the legend. ====================================================================== From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 06-20-2000 Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 01:51:51 GMT Robin: >IWOC is going to have a truly phenomenal >bash in July. How many of us Digesters are planning to attend? David >Hulan, Dave Hardenbrook, David Maxine, John Bell, Jane, Me, Patrick Maund, >Peter Hanff, Atty, Lynn Beltz and Kathy >Gire (they lurk and don't post much), Ruth Berman, Steve Teller, and >who else? I'm planning on coming. It should be fun. I forgot to take note of who wrote these other quoted portions of text. >The International Wizard of Oz Club web site [ozclub.org] now includes a >link to the cover of THE HIDDEN PRINCE OF OZ, with ordering information. It sounds like it should be a good read. From the description, there seem to be quite a few links to Aztec culture. >Another was to have a Kansas >farm helper named Lizzie Smithers being a love interest for Jack Haley's >character Hunk while having her be an assistant to the Wizard in Oz. Wasn't Jack Haley's character Hickory? Or am I confused? I admit that I haven't actually seen the movie in some time. Anyway, I suppose a love interest for the Tin Woodman should technically be Nimmie Amee. I'm not sure why a love interest for the Tin Man would be the Wizard's assistant, though. >*The Tinman and the Beehive Scene: One scene that was cut that proved the >Wicked Witch's powers involved the Tinman after the Wicked Witch of the >West said she would turn him into a beehive. In the movie we hear the >Tinman say, "I'll see you reach the Wizard, whether I get a heart or not. >Beehive--bah! Let her try and make a beehive out of me!". The scene that >was cut would have allowed audiences to hear a buzzing sound coming from >inside the Tinman. He bangs on his chest only to have the buzzing >increase. He coughs and a couple bees fly out of his mouth. Then, a whole >swarm of bees fly out of his ears, mouth, and funnel on top of his head. I wonder if this scene might have worked if they had just cut it short, only allowing the audience to hear the ominous buzzing, and not to see the final result. Nathan ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 21:00:56 -0400 Subject: Fred Buechner & Oz From: Ben A Lindsey Page 5 of the Baum Bugle references an essay abour Rinkitink of Oz by Fred Buechner. Where can I see or get a copy of that essay? THANKS! ben.lindsey@juno.com ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:41:51 -0400 From: "J. L. Bell" Subject: Library of Congress and copyrights charset=ISO-8859-1 Earlier this week I was at the Library of Congress, and got the chance to visit its centenary exhibit on THE WIZARD OF OZ and its impact. For me, the highlights of the show were the manuscript of GLINDA, on loan from the Baum family, and several of Denslow's ink drawings for the color plates in WIZARD. The latter aren't colored--those inks would come during printing--but one can see the pencils below his pen marks. I envy Denslow's fluidity with his ink lines. His penciling shows some choices he rejected. For instance, in the picture of Dorothy eating oatmeal in the home outside the Emerald City, Denslow originally sketched her legs hanging in front of her chair; the final art leaves them out. In the plate of the China Country, Denslow tried Toto in different positions--seated in the corner of the page on the same plane as Dorothy; standing on his hind legs with his forepaws on the frame, peeking over--before seating him on the frame. MGM movie fans can see a well-preserved pair of the ruby slippers and costumes of the Scarecrow, Lion, Lollipop Guild (Jerry Maren's, in fact), and an Emerald City inhabitant. There are artifacts from other dramatic adaptations of Oz (one exception being the films Baum himself was involved in, though HIS MAJESTY, THE SCARECROW is excerpted on the continuous video). There are also collectibles and ephemera from many years, among them pieces from the personal collection of Frank J. Evina, the Library of Congress employee who put this exhibit together. The gift shop in the Jefferson Building sold a variety of Oz souvenirs, including tall mugs made for this exhibit ($9.00) and rather elaborately sewn dolls based on the MGM principals ($6.00--showing how little the people who sewed these were paid). The exhibit T-shirts show Denslow's title page for WIZARD on the front, Dorothy lecturing the Lion on the back. At the main shop I could find only extreme sizes (i.e., for younger children and XXL, nothing in the middle). When I went back to my manuscripts, however, I stopped in the gift shop in the Madison Building and found a wider selection of T-shirts. So folks who don't find what they want in the main shop may wish to go across the street. The Web site associated with this display is at: http://www.lcweb.gov/exhibits/oz Scott Hutchins, someone's already asked you to remove the political quotation from your signature line when you write to this forum, on grounds of both relevancy and accuracy. Please do so. Dave Williams wrote: <> I don't recall any, though some of us have wondered about how Winsor McKay would have illustrated Baum's worlds. Since NEMO's adventures are explicitly dreams and Oz isn't (except in the MGM movie), would there even be a place for them to overlap? Perhaps that odd "Kingdom of Dreams" on the TIK-TOK map. Nemo himself tends to be reactive and to complain a lot, in his little-voiced way. Though he, like Dorothy, grows in confidence as he navigates his adventures, his character is a stark contrast to hers. David Hulan wrote: <> This fact doesn't seem relevant to my initial observation, but that was so many weeks ago that it may be time to review. I noted that Thompson's preface in HUNGRY TIGER spoke of "Another war" in Oz, yet she hadn't written a book about a war. That note was also dated rather late, possibly after she'd started her next Oz book, GNOME KING. And the first half of GNOME KING is when Ruggedo "schemed an invasion of Oz." That prospect might have been on Thompson's mind and prompted this otherwise hard-to-explain remark. On the issue of Thompson's claims to her Oz writings, here's the quotation I recalled as her "asserting control over the characters she created." It appears on page 280 of the Oz Club edition of OZOPLANING, in the afterword by Michael Patrick Hearn. Thompson was writing to the head of Reilly & Lee on 20 June 1938: If you prefer to have another author do the book [for 1939] or continue the series after that, it is perfectly o.k. with me. I don't care a *darn* either way. Naturally I would not expect him to use *my* characters. He could work with Mr. Baum's and his own new ones. As David Hulan noted, Neill used versions of Thompson's characters two years later. I don't think we can necessarily conclude, however, that this shows using Thompson's characters <> Thompson had a friendly relationship with Neill in 1939; she dedicated OZOPLANING to Johnny with "Bows, cheers, and heartfelt appreciation!" She offered to check the manuscript, praised it as "good," and in 1943 declined to continue the series without him. Thompson might therefore have signaled that she wouldn't object to Neill using her characters. But if Reilly & Lee had tapped anyone but him to write the 1940 Oz book, it seems unlikely that Thompson would have been so cooperative. She wasn't feeling at all warm toward the firm. That's not to say that Thompson had an enforceable legal claim over her Oz characters in 1940. As John W. Kennedy noted, <> Sir Hokus is briefly mentioned in MERRY-GO-ROUND, which Thompson had no link to, and Reilly & Lee granted the Oz Club the right to publish stories about her characters in OZIANA. But Thompson could have raised a stink if someone else wrote a Jinnicky, Kabumpo, or Captain Salt book for Reilly & Lee. Only five years before, Frank J. Baum had forced the firm into court by trademarking the term "Oz" in contradiction to the contract his mother had signed; he lost the case, but caused a lot of trouble. That's why I wonder whether Jack Snow's choice to ignore Thompson's creations was purely artistic. At the very least, the head of Reilly & Lee would have been very pleased to receive an Oz manuscript that worked only with Mr. Baum's characters and the author's new ones. Also on Thompson copyright issues, Ruth Berman wrote: <> From all indications I've seen, the rights to the Thompson books have reverted to her estate--specifically, I believe, to the children of her sister. The copyright renewal in the Del Rey editions is in her name. Under a modern book contract, all publishing rights would have reverted to the copyright owner when the firm put those books out of print. Being able to sell copies of those books fairly steadily for 20 more years would attract a publisher if it weren't for the tax code. But that press would have to pay tax each year on all its unsold inventory, wiping out the savings from printing a long-lasting supply. I therefore think the most likely option for seeing new editions of Thompson's Oz books is print-on-demand. That would require digitizing the books' text and black-and-white art--perhaps the whole original pages. Current technology probably doesn't allow the color plates to be printed and bound in the books at a reasonable price, unfortunately. Contacting Thompson's heirs and proposing a print-on-demand effort might be more successful than lobbying a publishing firm to contact them and negotiate the rights. Maybe the Oz Club itself could undertake that when it has a Special Publications Manager again. Finally, I have a question about when Thompson wrote YANKEE. In her afterword for the Oz Club edition of HIDDEN VALLEY, Rachel Cosgrove Payes wrote that Reilly & Lee asked her to change the first chapter, which involved a rocket ship, because the firm had recently turned down another manuscript with a similar trip to Oz. (Payes's chapter is finally seeing print in the new OZ-STORY magazine.) I'd assumed that other book was YANKEE, which Thompson offered to Reilly & Lee unsuccessfully. But Hearn's afterword to OZOPLANING implies that Thompson wrote YANKEE when Regnery bought the imprint in 1959, years after HIDDEN VALLEY. I can see various possible ways to put these statements together: * Payes misremembered Reilly & Lee's request, which was to come up with a different route to Oz than YELLOW KNIGHT had already used. * Thompson proposed a trip to Oz by rocket in the early 1950s, but didn't follow through on her idea until a decade later. * Some other, unknown Oz author submitted a rocket-based Oz story to Reilly & Lee in the early 1950s. J. L. Bell JnoLBell@compuserve.com ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:03:27 -0600 From: pat james [Non-member] X-Juno-Att: 0 hey dave - do you have any idea where I could order a copy of the MGM Wizard of Oz screenplay? I'm interested in performing it as a speech piece but haven't a clue as to where to look for it. Thanks much - Ashley James ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 12:19:01 -0500 (EST) From: cc: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-28-2000 I haven't had a chance to look at the digests in quite some time. But now that I have e-mail access at home (I'd prefer you'd send to scottandrewh@home.com, as this will be shut down soon if you wish to contact me outside the digest). BTW, I was at a bookstoer in Bloomington called Caveat Emptor (!) and they had a book called _Tin Woodman_ by David Bischoff and Dennis Bailey. Does anyone know anyhting about this? The only thing I've read by Bischoff is his Gremlins 2 novelization, which was actually clever, for a novelization that is. Bt then, Dante's films would allow room for cleverness in a novelization (the Hulk Hogan/John Wayne alternate scene for the theatrical and video versions is here replaced by a scene in which the Brain Gremlin--who mocks Bischoff for referring to him as "Mr. Glasses" throught the text, ties the author up in a closet and starts typing his strange philosophy into the narrative). Scott ===================================== Scott Andrew Hutchins http://php.iupui.edu/~sahutchi Cracks in the Fourth Wall Filmworks/Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More! (with special musical guest Leila Josefowicz) "Who's John Adams?" --Vice President Albert Gore, Jr., at Monticello, after failing to recognize busts of other founding fathers. ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 13:43:24 -0500 From: Scott Hutchins Subject: Ozzy Digest Rich: Apparently Spencer Bell was already in under his own name, as the filmography was much longer than it had been when he was credited as G. Howe Black. Now they are identified as different billings for the same person. They generally go by how the person was credited most frequently, so Luigi Montefori is in as George Eastman, sometimes credited as Luigi Montefori, with that also given as his real name. George Eastman is the name he uses in badly-dubbed Italian productions masquerading as American films. Scott ====================================================================== From: "Gili Bar-Hillel" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 06-20-2000 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 02:46:14 PDT Robin - if it's not too late for me to register, then I'll be attending the convention with my soon-to-be husband. We've had a big year, the two of us, and I wasn't sure either of us could leave our new jobs to attend the convention. But as I write I am awaiting responses to some inquiries about space availability and travel plans. There was a short piece in the New Yorker in September about some of the changes made to Americanize Harry Potter. Apparantly there were indeed some phrases that were exchanged for "more British" sounding terms. But as one who is intimately familiar with both Harry Potter and Oz (translating a book is an excellent way to get to know it...), the changes made to adapt Harry Potter for American readers are negligible compared to what Volkov did to THE WIZARD OF OZ. Almost any translation to a foreign language necessitates a certain amount of adaptation - the sawhorse was almost a sawdonkey in my unpublished translation, and was a sawgoat in a Scandinavian edition - but Volkov went as far as to add episodes. I'd like to read what MPH had to say about that... A new translation of "The Wizard of Oz" has been published in Israel. This is the 4th unabridged Hebrew translation, not counting the shortened versions from 1947 that were translated by Zvi Rin and Yemima Chernowitz. The new translation is by Yuval Willis, published by "Prague" publishing house, a small firm that up to now has published mostly new-age guides and advice books, but seems to be branching into classic children's lit. (they recently published a new translation of "Just so Stories", and Christopher Milne's autobiography "The Enchanted Places". The new edition is a small paperback book, no illustrations, with a distinctly odd cover design that shows a figure composed of a collage of photographed china plates, with red shoes, a pointy blue hat and a disturbing white masklike face. This is the only Hebrew edition of the book with a postscript expanding upon the Oz phenomenon - unfortunately, the postscript is rife with typos and editing oversights (such a reference to a map that is not in fact printed in the book). ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ====================================================================== From: Tyler Jones Subject: Oz Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:54:20 -0700 All: My web site is back on-line. Some non-Oz stuff is not fully up to date, but all Oz stuff is. http://members.home.net/cruenti/ For those who need to know, the main page is now called index.html. Tyler Jones ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 27 Jun 00 17:49:36 (PDT) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things MY PAGE: I have at long last updated my Oz Web page and the Ozzy Digest FAQ (mainly fixed broken links). I'd appreciate it if everyone read it: http://www.mindspring.com/~daveh47/Oz.HTML http://www.mindspring.com/~daveh47/Ozzy_FAQ.html Please feel free to E-mail me feedback. THE MOVIE: Ruth wrote: >The producers >might have been right in feeling that it stopped the story too long and >needed to be cut, but my feeling from seeing it (even though not seeing it >in the context of the scene as a whole) is that it might have been a better >idea to keep it in, and trust to the interesting choreography to hold >attention. For my part, I just always thought it was unfair in the final cut to preserve Jack Haley's extended dance number but not Ray Bolger's. I must admit I'm looking forward to seeing the Movie without commercials; I will also be using Dorothy et al. to combat The Attack of the "Guy" Movies that will undoubtably hit on the patriotic Fourth-of-July weekend. On one of the promos Turner is running on the Movie, there's this guy they interview who says he's always wondered who the woman with the cat is... Someone on Eric's list suggested it was Jellia, but I can't see her in a hood like that. Any ideas? -- Dave ======================================================================