] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, FEBRUARY 1, 1997 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:42:05 -0800 From: "Stephen J. Teller" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 01-31-97 Jane, just remember, don't be nervous. The whole world is watching you, and half of them have their VCRs on. Scott Hutchins wants to know how to get into digest discussions. Just jump in with both feet! BTW Scott, be careful, some of the Centennial Book Contest judges are on the digest. Dave L. Hardenbrook wrote: > > > BOOK OF THE MONTH: > My only problem with doing the books in order is the knowledge of the time > element if we have certain books in mind for discussion. If we were to start > tomorrow with _Wizard_, then we'd get to _Glinda_ in March of '98, and we'd > finish off the FF in May of 2000, and only then would we start on the non-FF > stuff. ( I suppose on the good side, by the time we'd get to _Locasta_, it > might actually be published! :) ) > Perhaps we do not need a whole month for ezch book. Couldn't we say everything significant about a book in two weeks? Just asking. As far as voting goes, I will keep my vote with DOT & WIZ. In case amyone was wondering. So far seven books have been submitted for the IWOC Centennial Book Contest. They range from 25 to 250+ typed pages. John Fricke writes that he sent out 200 responses for contest rules. That means that there are 193 MSS coming in in the next nine weeks. (Or maybe it doesn't). Steve T. ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:46:50 -0500 (EST) From: Nathan DeHoff Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 01-31-97 Scott: complicated about it. I don't think that Peter goes into public domain until 2003 or so. If you just hint at his deeds and don't use his name, the copyright issue might not arise. Also, Pastoria was a tailor in _Kaliko in Oz_, which was published by Buckethead Enterprises, so there is probably no legal problem with your using him in your manuscript. Of course, I'm no lawyer, or expert on copyright law. One problem that might arise regards the Club contest rules. I seem to recall them saying that only Baum characters, as well as your own characters, can be used in contest manuscripts. Jeremy: I don't live very close to the Library of Congress. When I read part of _Pirates_, I was living in Downingtown, Pennsylvania, which is halfway between Philadelphia and Lancaster. My mother and I happened to be passing through Washington on our way back from Virginia, so we stopped at the Library. Danny: I believe it has been suggested that the "courage" given to the Lion was some kind of alcoholic beverage or similar substance that made him feel brave for some time. In _Cowardly Lion_, the Lion tells the Patchwork Girl that his courage has worn off. Dave: I'm not really particular on what order in which we read the books, although I would like to discuss a few post-Baums soon. I guess it does not really matter to me, as long as we are still able to discuss books other than the Book of the Month. Nathan Mulac DeHoff lnvf@grove.iup.edu http://www.dragonfire.net/~VoVat/home.html Kinglet: "Is 'devoir' a kingly word?" Nebbie: "Absolutely kingly. It was used by King Arthur and Richard Coeur de Leon." Kinglet: "Very well! Why don't you answer me? Why are you so late in paying me your boudoirs?" ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:54:48 -0500 (EST) From: Jeremy Steadman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 01-31-97 Bill of Ozlo: I'm having trouble finding your website. Can you clarify how to go about it? Dave: Eeeks! You're right; doing the books in order will make the series stretch on (which is good in a way . . .). Well, regardless of the problems, I still think we should do it that way. If necessary, perhaps we should skip #1, since we've all heard quite a bit about WIZARD, although I'd still rather start there and head on forward. Or perhaps we should do TWO books per month (15 days each). Just a suggestion. At this point, I move to let you make an executive decision, since you'll probably end up doing that anyway. Okay, after weeks of putting up with my humor (or lack thereof) in other ways, here's my contribution to our virus parody collection (I hope nobody's done this one already, and I missed it): PRINCESS LANGUIDERE VIRUS: Makes the computer send data to a hundred monitors (only one of which is the real one); since the monitor can't find more than one, the data gets caught in a circuit, leaving the computer good for nothing at all. (The person who accidentally created this virus was trying to get a head of his classmates in Professor Wogglebug's computer programming class, with some interesting results.) DEADLY DESERT VIRUS: It's very unwise to touch the keyboard while this virus is in control of your computer, as you might find yourself suddenly a bit more flexible than you remember being last time you checked . . . FOUNTAIN OF OBLIVION VIRUS: This virus is a real problem for anyone who wants a usable computer. The drawback: your computer loses everything stored in memory. The advantage: at least your computer forgets it's forgotten anything. Trivia question: Although cancelled long ago, there was a TV sitcom based on the Oz series. Name this show. (It might be wise to remind me sometime that I asked the question, because I'll forget. Also, don't take the question too seriously.) That's all for now (as if that wasn't enough already), Jeremy Steadman ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 21:36:41 -0500 From: "Melody G. Keller" <104270.2374@compuserve.com> Subject: Ozzy Digest, 01-30-97 Dear Bear: In the letter to readers at the end of "Sir Harold, de Camp only calls the culprit "A one-time colleague, later notorious for his non-literary activities." Harold Shea's would-be assassin had him eaten by a giant serpent. In "Sir Harold" de Camp rescues him by having him disappear to Oz just as he goes down the serpent's throat. Here's a quote from de Camp's same letter in the back of "Sir Harold": "I found Ariosto much more entertaining. Perhaps his heroes' light-hearted way of trying to rape the heroines as soon as they have rescued them from the monsters lends a spice that Spenser's more austere presentation lacks." How many feminists must've written angry letters over *this* one? I remember feeling, "Grrrrrrrr! A hero who rapes is no hero at *all*!" >:-( . Kenneth Shepherd: Yes, I have the same audio clips--bought them at Radio Shack. When Windows 95 comes up, it shows a wallpaper of our four friends in the throne room, and then the computer booms: I--AM--OZ------! Tried the witch's laugh for a default sound, but she got irritating in a hurry. The Munchkins' "Follow the Yellow Brick Road" was the least irritating default. There were roughly 20 other clips, too. :-) Melody Grandy ====================================================================== Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:25:50 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Olderman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 01-31-97 Book of the Month: Dave wrote>>My only problem with doing the books in order is the knowledge of the time element if we have certain books in mind for discussion. If we were to starttomorrow with _Wizard_, then we'd get to _Glinda_ in March of '98.... We'd have the same problem with a time line no matter what sequence we use, wouldn't we? Like almost everyone who has stated a choice, I hope we just go with the logical "as published" sequence. On t'other hand, we don't have to devote an entire month to each of the relatively easy to find Baum books, do we? Is two weeks enough for each of these books? Feedback please. (It might make Dave feel better if we could move things along a bit faster!) Bibliographical points: I guess I could sum them up as we go. But I shudder at trying to sum up edition points on the WIZARD. It's a very complicated book, bibliographically. Perhaps I could just hit the high points here? If anyone needs more details, they *really* should get BIBOZ. *************************************************************** Here is a CRASH COURSE ON OZ EDITION POINTS *************************************************************** The first edition of WIZARD was published by George M. Hill. The first editions of all Oz books from LAND through TIN WOODMAN were published by Reilly & Britton. The company didn't change to Reilly & Lee until after the first edition of TIN WOODMAN was published. This means that any Oz book copyrighted between 1904 and 1918 must be published by Reilly & Britton if it's a first. N.B. Even if it's published by R&B, the book may not be a first edition. One other helpful piece of info is that if the Oz book bears a copyright date of 1935 or earlier, it must have some color work in it (not just on the paper cover label) if it's a first edition. The color work may be color plates, colored inking, or (as in ROAD) colored pages. There's lots more to know, but the above is a good place to start. *************************************************************** VirOzes: They're great! Keep 'em coming. PLEASE include a notice of permission if you want to see any of yours in OZIANA. Danny? Melody? Gili? Nathan? Jane: I know your first 15 minutes will be great. I also know that it's only your *first* 15 minutes! (of fame, y'all) Bill Wright: Congratulations on the award. You deserve it. Centennnial Book Contest:Using Peter Brown is Not a good idea. FWIW, I'm one of the contest judges. So is Steve. I'm sure he'll speak for himself on this, so I won't elaborate. Guess what?! I just got a heavy box full of manuscripts to judge! Quizzes: Anyone out there think that a compilation of BUGLE quizzes might be marketable? Something like what David's doing with OZIANA? I'd have very little trouble creating such a booklet, and it would be cheap, cheap, cheap to produce (I hope). --Robin Olderman ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 06:38:37 -0800 (PST) From: Eric Gjovaag Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 01-31-97 With all this discussion about the "Book of the Month" going on, I just want to say that I'm not terribly 100% interested in taking part (I'm spending too much time just reading the "Digest" as it is!), and so I'd like to cast my vote for the discussions being a separate posting, apart from the rest of the "Digest," so I can more easily skim it (or delete it or save it for later if necessary). And Jane, I believe you meant Secretary of State. Bill Clinton is Head of State. --Eric Gjovaag ### Visit my "Wizard of Oz" web site! http://www.eskimo.com/~tiktok/ ### ====================================================================== Date: Saturday, 01 Feb 1997 12:31:32 From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things RUGGEDO ZAPS AOL?: Hey, all you AOLers -- Did anybody receieve a Digest for the 30th? I just got a message from AOL bouncing the 1/30 Digest for *everyone*! I will resend it to you guys if necessary. (And did you get the 1/31 Digest?) BOOK OF THE MONTH: Okay, here's my ruling < fanfare :) >: We will do the books in order, but instead of a Book of the "Month" per se, we will have a "Book of Current Focus" (BCF) -- This will still allow people to comment on other books (I hope -- I really don't want to deter people from talking about what *they* want to), and we will just talk about the BCF as long as we feel we have anything to say, and then we will move on to the next...Also, I will announce the next book (obviously _Land_ in this case) well in advance, to give people a chance to get hold of it and read it, if necessary. I will *not*, however put the BCF discussions in a separate Digest...I have *enough* on my plate! :) So I will give everyone a week to get and read _Wizard_ (shouldn't be too hard -- it's by far the easiest to come by) and then we'll let the _Wizard_ discussion begin! -- Dave ====================================================================== ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, FEBRUARY 02, 1997 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 17:18:57 -0500 (EST) From: Jeremy Steadman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-01-97 Robin: I vote yes to the idea of compiling Oz quizzes. That would be a great addition to the world of Oz fiction (or whatever), and rather educational too. Also, I hereby give permission to use any of my "viruses" in OZANIA (as if they'd be wanted!), but if you use the PRINCESS LANGUIDERE virus, change my wording of "since the monitor can't find more than one [i.e. monitor!!] . . ." to "since the computer can't find more than one . . .". I don't know what I was thinking! Until next time, Jeremy Steadman ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 17:50:27 -0500 (EST) From: "James R. Whitcomb" Subject: For Ozzy Digest Dear Ozzy Digesters: I just want to give my aye! in that I am interested in participating in reading the Oz book of the "whatever" club. This is the perfect opportunity for me to expand my knowledge of Oz beyond the movie. I have read the 14 Baum books a long time ago, but would be willing to go on if I could participate in a weekly/monthly discussion. I think this idea should have been proposed a long time ago. I find many of the posts on this Digest interesting but can't relate often times because I'm not as "Oz literary sophisticated" as many people on this Digest. I just hope that people will be patient if some of the same questions come up that have already surfaced in previous posts re: the books. Dave Hardenbrook: I have to agree with Eric Gjoovag in that I think this should be maintained in a separate post. During the few days that you were sending poll results, I had to adjust my email file size in order to receive/read them. Luckily, I'm using Eudora Pro which allows me to do this very easily. I am only speculating, but I have a feeling some of the Oz books could produce rather lengthy discussions/comments. If this would be too much for you to handle, would you consider asking for volunteers to maintain the separate book postings? Lastly, I hope you will allow enough time for us to obtain the books prior to reading them. I assume they are all available rather easily. Just my 2 cents! Thanks! Jim Whitcomb. ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 17:59:49 -0500 (EST) From: Nathan DeHoff Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-01-97 Steve: I asked for a copy of the Centennial Contest rules, but I'm not turning in a manuscript. I haven't really had a chance to write one, and my writing style isn't as close to Baum's as the rules suggest, anyway. Jeremy: You may have noticed that I already did a Forbidden Fountain Virus. Our ideas on this one were quite similar. Robin: I would be glad to see my virus descriptions in Oziana. The collection of quizzes also sounds like a good idea. I'd probably get it. Nathan Mulac DeHoff lnvf@grove.iup.edu Kinglet: "By my halidom, churl, you shall either swallow my sceptre or die the death!" Blunderer: "What death?" Kinglet: "The one that makes people dead." (I've been quoting _John Dough_ quite a bit recently, haven't I?) ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 23:14:49 +0000 From: Scott Olsen Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-01-97 Re: Dave's "Book of Current Focus" (BCF) idea: Dave, an excellent idea!! (Have you ever thought of entering politics?) Sincerely, Scott Olsen ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 19:11:28 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Olderman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-01-97 We really can't expect poor Dave to separate book responses from the main DIGEST. He spends more than two hours each day on it as is. I'm heading out for the Austin book show Sunday morning. Wish me luck! ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 19:17:21 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Olderman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-01-97 VirOzes: I cannot publish any of the viruses if you do not give me specific permission to do so. Even then, there are too many to publish, but I plan to use some from everyone who submitted them and who gave me permission to use their work. So far, that's only John and Dave. --Robin Olderman ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 08:11:50 -0500 (EST) From: DIXNAM@aol.com Subject: Recent Ozzy Digests Dave: Okay! That explains it! Just received the 1/31 & 2/1 Digests this morning. Never received the 1/30 edition. Should have realized AOL was to blame! Craig Noble e-mailed me yesterday, also not receiving them. Dick ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 09:45:33 -0500 (EST) From: CrNoble@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-01-97 Dave: I have not received the 1/30/97 Digest. Until this morning, the last Digest I had received was dated 1/29. This morning I found the 1/31 and 2/1 Digests in my mailbox. And yes, I'm an AOLer. David: From a book collecting point of view, do the IWOC, BoW and Del Rey reprints make the R&L reprints essentially worthless then? Its seems to me they should still be more desireable because: 1) They're hardcover with the original cover art, whereas the Del Rey reprints are paperbound and have new cover art; and 2) They were printed by the original publisher. I do think it's more complicated with the BoW Baum books and any other hardcover reprints with color plates (and BoW's Neil-Snow hardcover reprints) b/c these books look substantially like the first editions (except they're thinner). That's why I have collected all the BoW Baum reprints as well as most of the others. Incidentally, I have not bought BoW's "Sky Island" and "Sea Fairies" -- I saw them at Borders once and was VERY DISAPPOINTED to see that they didn't have color plates. Why in the world they did this I don't know. I like "Sky Island" in particular about as much as any Oz book. -- Craig ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:35:24 -0500 (EST) From: "W. R. Wright" <71763.1616@CompuServe.COM> Subject: oz digest During December there were a lot of posts to the Digest on the subject making a CDROM with Oz books and stuff on it. Assuming there is still interest in this topic, I would like to add my 2 Kroner's worth, since I was not on-line at the time. First, Ken Cope had some very cogent comments regarding the cost and effort to produce a CDROM that people would want to have. I have worked at the Microsoft Interactive Media division, and from that experience plus investigations of my own, his figure of a million bucks is realistic. And that is just to produce the content. The costs of manufacturing, packaging and marketing could easily double that figure. So you have to plan on selling a whole heck of a lot of copies before you embark on such an endeavor. But most folks, I think, had in mind a cdrom that had a lot of Ozzy info on it and the books, but not all the fancy stuff (animation, video, sound, etc) that is needed in a commercially viable product. In that case, the cost would come down considerably. Let's assume that the content can be obtained free (ie, no money involved......still requires a lot of labor). Then the production cost will factor principally on the number copies made per production run. Small quantities are much more expensive per copy than you might think. To get to a reasonable price per copy, 500 is the absolute minimum to consider, in my experience. A thousand copies helps a whole lot to bring the cost per copy down. Someone, I forget just who, mentioned that a full text search engine would not only be desired but a key requirement for most of the people on the digest who have an interest. Just like everything else, the license price per copy is a factor of how many copies you pay for in one chunk. I've looked at Sonar, the lowest cost product with acceptable performance and functionality. Again, you have to get over 500 copies to get any kind of price break, and over a 1000 to get into a relatively reasonable range. Now there are not enough people on this digest to reach that number, even if everyone bought a copy, which is not likely. Of course, some people could buy a number of copies to give away as Christmas presents, etc. But even with this assumption, a thousand is not likely. So the bottom line is that to get to a reasonable price per copy the cdrom needs to be able to sell commercially, at least in some modest quantity. Two years ago I started development of an Oz CDROM. Completed a prototype using some inhouse tools from Microsoft. I never took it to market for several reasons. (1) The cdrom market developed so fast, the cost to have a competitive product was too prohibitive unless the market size was forecast as very large. (2) The market size for an Oz product was forecast just too small. (the ones that are out there now are no longer being made for just this reason) (3) Microsoft abandoned the tools I was using, so I would have had to redevelop the cdrom using a new set of tools. In the process of this development, I created a lot of artwork. To wit: I have some 150 original illustrations from the Wizard of Oz, Denslow's stuff in full color. I also have supplemented these with about 150 new illustrations in Denslow's style. I also have done a few of Neill's illustrations in full color. For my website graphics I used a few of these, but had to significantly reduce the size, resolution, and color ranges to get the images to a small enough size they can load over the internet in a reasonable time. This is not that big a problem on a CDROM; i.e, you can have much large and higher quality images on the CDROM. In content development, artwork is where a lot of the big costs are. Many hours are spent on each illustration to get it done right so it will display properly on the variety of PCs and Macs that are out there. I would have an interest in going ahead and producing a cdrom with all the PD Oz books on it plus Ozzy reference info, if I could be assured of enough sales to cover the production costs (i.e., make and package the disks) . If there is any interest in this topic, we can take it off line and just discuss it via email with those people who are interested in it, and not burden the remainder of the digest members who are not interested. Anyone who would like to talk some more on the subject, please send me an email to piglet@piglet.com. Bill in Ozlo Bill in Ozlo ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 13:42:55 -0500 (EST) From: Ozisus@aol.com Subject: Oz again Hanging Oz T=shirts I managed to fall off the ladder (on the steps, naturally) and smash my right knee. Shortly thereafter, my tingling lower lip erupted into a cold sore. Just wanted to let you all know that I'm not always fat lipped and limping... Sigh And sorry to not keep my political titles straight. I just had a handy USA tapped as first woman to head State." Jane ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 15:01:24 -0800 (PST) From: w_baldwin@juno.com (Warren H Baldwin) Subject: Return to Oz At last, _Return to Oz_ has been on home video long enough so that the price has fallen to within my reach ($12.95), and I saw the movie for the first time just the other night. FWIW, my thoughts on it: Right now, I'm kind of ambivalent about it; I can't decide whether or not I _like_ it -- I do, and then again I don't. Oh, well. I believe that I'd have to agree with the apparent consensus that RTO is darker and more somber than we'd like an Oz movie to be and perhaps not suitable for very young children (at least, very young children such as I used to be; as to modern very young children, I wouldn't venture to say). When I tried to analyze why I felt this way, I found there were two primary reasons. (1)At the beginning of the movie, Dorothy is abandoned to the care of strangers by her primary caregivers, Aunt Em and Uncle Henry. This has to be a terrifying prospect for a young child, or even a very old adult, either of whom is relatively helpless without assistance. I did not care for this at all. (2)Though none of the episodes was, in and of itself, any more scary than it would be if Oz and its characters were -- as it were -- real, the succession of fright from beginning to almost the end without respite is kind of overwhelming; not much chance to recover before the next terror. General comments: This is not a reprise of the MGM epic! Though Disney followed some of the conventions of the first movie, anyone going to see this one after having seen only TWOZ would find very little which might match their expectations. Item: characters not in the first movie appearing without introduction. Item: unrelieved menaces -- no songs, no light-heartedness. Item: Those familiar with the books, of course, will be appalled with the mangling, mixing and outright changing of the storyline. This circumstance, I think, is more the artifact of Disney's churning out movies en masse than any conscious desire to contaminate Oz. A lot of their productions seem to take a perfectly good book and distort it beyond all recognition; in this way they are quite egalitarian as far as themes are concerned. One example that I especially disliked was their rendition of _The Puppet Masters_. But RTO does have some redeeming qualities: (1)I think it conveys a sense of the vastness and isolation of the Kansas prairies at the turn of the century better than TWOZ, as well as the innocence and vulnerability of youngsters back then. The Balk Dorothy seems much closer to Baum's depiction than Garland, I thought, although the Balk Dorothy didn't seem to show much spirit or initiative until well into the story. (2)The representation of Tik-Tok I found charming and entirely likeable. About as close to the Neill characterization as you could get without turning to expensive computer animation. I could watch an entire movie about Tik-Tok. (3)General quality of transferring characters from the book to the screen is high. Item: Langwidere/Mombi is quite "realistic" and believable. Item: The Gump himself, perhaps the most contrived character Baum used, even has a bit of personality which could grow on you, more so than the Temple Black try way back when. Jack Pumpkinhead might have stepped out of the book pages just yesterday! The naughty Wheelers! Great -- and I wonder how long those actors had to practice in order to remain upright for more than one second! No wonder they didn't have a very large group in toto (no pun). The Scarecrow -- not a big part, and his face didn't have the mobility of Bolger's, but engaging nonetheless. Plus, (4)After the initial corny introductions I really liked the animations of the Nomes and the Nome King. Original. Effective. Much more "the way it ought to be," maybe, for people who seldom see the sun and quaff molten silver than the Baum/Thompson depictions. Turn of the century miners -- those who survived, at any rate -- really would be "rough" characters, I'd imagine. (5)The big wrap-up bash at the finale. What's an Oz book or movie without a party and everyone invited? Wishes: I wish we'd seen more of Ozma. One of those characters whose presence is not explained until the end, she's not at all like Baum's Ozma. She is physically larger than Dorothy and appears to be older, and looks, in fact, to be just on the threshold of giving Dan a very interesting time. I wish Disney would try another Oz film with story and continuity by someone outside the organization. The RTO effects were great, the organizing of the story not so hot. Well, after getting this down into bytes, I guess I'll have to stick my neck out and say that, in sum, I liked the movie. It's worth watching, but don't expect to see anything like the MGM product, and it will never get a listing in the Oz movie HACC. All IMHO, naturally. ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 16:18:09 -0500 (EST) From: DavidXOE@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 1/31 & 2/1/97 I got both the above two today, after not getting the 1/30 Digest at all - I'd appreciate a resend of that one if you'd be so kind, Dave. (Hasn't everyone noticed that the last two Digests are smaller? :-)) 1/31: Jane: I have cable, but my cable network apparently doesn't carry the fX channel. Pity; I'd love to see your segment. Nathan, Gili, Danny: Enjoyed your viruses. Jeremy: Cats can move fast, and 8 mph isn't all that fast. An ordinary cat can't keep up that speed for very long, but a cat can outrun me for a short distance, and I know I can run faster than 8 mph (if not for very long). 8 mph is the equivalent of 100 yards in about 25 sec, which is more of a fast jog than a sprint. (When I was in college a 10-second 100 was about what it took to finish well in an intercollegiate meet.) And Bungle, being made of glass, can keep up her maximum speed indefinitely, unlike an ordinary cat. Bob: >I will swear that I read the same story (cutting off >necks, inverting them and curing them in the sun to heal sore throats) >somewhere else in one of Baum's works, but can't recall where. I don't remember that incident from MMMO anywhere else in Baum, but that may be a faulty memory. Sometimes individual episodes from MO are reprinted elsewhere; you may have seen one of those. Danny: I know that when I first read MERRY-GO-ROUND my reaction was "Georgette Heyer writes an Oz book!" FORBIDDEN FOUNTAIN owes even more to Heyer, actually, (primarily the character of Toby), but McGraw acknowledged that she and her daughter were both avid Heyer fans, so I think my judgment was vindicated. As an avid Heyer fan myself, I don't find much difficulty in that aspect of MGR, but can see how it might be a negative for others. Bill: Congratulations on your Web site's high rating! I'll have to check out the Net Guide writeup when I log back on. Dave: Sounds as if Delphi has encountered AOL's problem... (And Compu$erve probably would, too, if they added half a million subscribers in a month.) 2/1: Steve: >BTW Scott, be careful, some of the Centennial Book Contest judges are on >the digest. Yeah, that's why I suddenly realized that I'd have to submit PROFESSOR WOGGLE-BUG OF OZ under a different title to preserve anonymity. At least I've never said anything about my plot, or even what other characters would be involved. (I suspect that you and Robin will probably recognize my book by my style anyhow, but at least you won't know Fer Sher.) Unless the 25-page MS is in teeny-tiny type and the 250+-pager is in Big Type, neither of those meets the guideline of 50-60,000 words. How strict -are- those guidelines? Would, say, a 45,000 word MS be ruled out without regard to quality? (Even though that's longer than some of the FF?) I ask because frankly, I think I'm going to have to pad to get to 50,000 words. I trust I can make it interesting padding (like, say, the adventure in the Valley of Voe in DOTWIZ), but I'd just as soon stick closer to the main plot. Nathan: Using Pastoria is clearly OK, since he's mentioned by Baum. Making him a tailo r is iffier, but probably OK as long as you don't refer to anything specific that's in LOST KING. (And for the Centennial book, even that would be OK legally, though how the judges would react is a separate issue.) Peter, as you say, is off limits for the Centennial book unless one can get Dorothy Maryott's permission. Robin: I'd certainly be interested in a compilation of BUGLE quizzes. Do you have any idea how many there have been, and how long such a publication would be? Dave: I'm reading WIZARD for my "bedtime story" now, and should finish it well within the week. Then I'll move on to LAND. I already have some comments that I need to note down (mostly, to be sure, with reference to what's going to happen in future books - I can't think of a thing to say about WIZARD as a stand-alone book that someone hasn't already said somewhere, but that's unique to this one Oz book and no others). David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 03:24:16 -0500 From: 76152.3120@compuserve.com Subject: Quote from book To: DaveH47@delphi.com Hi Dave, I hope that you can help me. I'm trying to find out which Oz book contains a few lines that I believe were said by Glinda to Dorothy. The gist of what she said was that Dorothy didn't need any helpers or magic anymore because she had always had the power inside herself. This very much applies to my daughter at the moment and I would like to send the exact quote to her. I reread the Wizard of Oz, thinking to find it there, but didn't have any luck. Hope this rings a bell with you. Thanks alot, Marjan ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 13:43:36 -0600 From: International Wizard of Oz Club Subject: RE: Help? To: "'John081@aol.com'" Cc: 'Dave Hardenbrook' Offhand I don't know of a source, but I'm forwarding your question to the Ozzy Digest in case someone there can help. Sincerely, Jim Vander Noot -----Original Message----- From: John081@aol.com [SMTP:John081@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 30, 1997 6:45 PM To: oztp@neosoft.com Subject: Help? Hello, Is there anywhere I can get some Clipart of "The Wizard Of Oz"? Can't find any, Would appreicate the help ...:) thanks! ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 14:05:20 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things BCF: How long would you like me to give you all to read _Wizard_ before we commence the discussion? As I said, I'm not willling to give it a separate Digest, but maybe I can figure out a plausible way to give the Digest a Table of Contents... BOOK CONTEST: I, too, would be interested in exactly how stringent the rules of the Contest are, including exactly what "Baum's concept of Oz" means...Does it mean that it must just be essentially Baum's Oz, with Ozma queen of a utopian fairyland, etc.; or does it mean that it must be a "Baum clone", down to mimiking Baum's writing style? AOL: Well, it looks as though the AOLers missed the 1/30 Digest, so I will resend it... -- Dave ====================================================================== ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, FEBRUARY 3 - 4, 1997 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 19:47:19 -0500 (EST) From: Nathan DeHoff Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-02-97 Warren: I saw "Return to Oz" several years ago. I agree that many of the characters were well-done. On the negative side, the Gump may have looked a little too much like a moose, and the Nomes were too big, and looked like they were made of stone. I agree that the film-makers tampered quite a bit with the story (Langwidere and Mombi are completely different characters), but this is usually done in transition from book to film. I liked the movie when I saw it, but this was before I had read any of the books, so I might have to see it again, and see how I feel about it now that I am a Oz fanatic. As for Ozma being older than Dorothy, she is described this way in the books. In _Tin Woodman_, I believe this was specifically mentioned. I don't exactly recall where I read it, but someone once thought that Ozma was about fifteen years old (in appearance). Marjan: That quote might have been from the MGM movie, rather than one of the Oz books. Nathan Mulac DeHoff lnvf@grove.iup.edu http://www.dragonfire.net/~VoVat/home.html "What's life without a few risks?" -Fanny ====================================================================== Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 20:01:28 -0500 (EST) From: JoelHarris@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest Craig: I am looking to put together a set of post-1935 b&w color cover "reading" copies for when my son is old enough to start the books (if anyone else can help, please let me know). I realize that modern reprints are available, but some of us still prefer the more "classic" copies. Please email me privately re: Speedy at JoelHarris@aol.com. Robin: I've always wondering how the club gets so much auction material. I, for one, would enjoy hearing any tips or good stories about acquisitions. Do we contact you about items for sale? Jane: Alla Ford's daughter ran an ad in the Trading Post about 1-1.5 years ago to sell her mother's collection. I spoke with her and was told that only newer and foreign material were still available, and she would send a listing once completed (which, I guess, has never been completed). I looked but could not find her address or phone number, but will continue to look. You might want to ask the IWOC for info. I did find something else interesting, which is noted in my comments below. Everyone: (1) Following in Craig's footsteps, I have a duplicate 3rd State of Master Key after upgrading at PBA. Any interest? (2) The 30th California International Antiquarian Book Fair will be in SF Feb. 21-23. I may be able to get free ticket(s) - a $10 value on Friday! Let me know if anyone is interested. If possible, I will post a report on Friday night, and will note any deals still to be had. (3) In searching for info about Alla T. Ford's daughter, I found my very first Herm Bieber book catalog. It is #25. I can only imagine the deals available in earlier catalogs. If you have not seen an old Herm catalog, perhaps Herm has some available, or would post some highlights of past listings (such as Wonderful Wizard 1st editions from $400-$500; Baum 1st's in DJ $300-$500; and many very reasonably priced 1st and later editions). I credit Herm for many of the books in my collection, and found there to be nobody more reasonable and honest in the profession. Joel Harris ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 08:17:47 -0500 (EST) From: CrNoble@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-02-97 Dave: I don't when this will get posted if you're still having problems getting the Digest out. But for what it's worth, I DID get today's Digest on time. Gordon: I was going through some old e-mail and realized that you're the "someone" who saw my post on the rec.arts.childrens.books newsgroup and referred me to the Ozzy Digest. Many thanks. I'm sorry I didn't give you credit earlier when I responded to the poll. I've enjoyed the Digest immensely. -- Craig ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 07:25:45 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Olderman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-02-97 Value of R&L reprints: I don't think the IWOC and BOW reprints have significantly affected the value of R&L reprints. Herm? Jane: Limping, fat-lipped and all, I'll bet you did a "bang up" job! BUGLE QUIZZES: Dunno how many there are. 20 something? I started being involved with them in the mid '70s when Jim Haff, The Quizzard of Oz, was doing them...and he'd been doing them for quite some time, I believe. I can find out. Centennial Book Rules: My suggestion is that you stick to them, length and all, as best you can. And no, it doesn't have to be a Baum clone...just a worthy successor to Baum and true to his vision. --Robin Olderman ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 10:26:40 -0800 From: "Stephen J. Teller" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-02-97 References: <01IEY7A0YS2Q9EF4TH@delphi.com> > David: > > >From a book collecting point of view, do the IWOC, BoW and Del Rey reprints > make the R&L reprints essentially worthless then? Its seems to me they > should still be more desireable because: 1) They're hardcover with the > original cover art, whereas the Del Rey reprints are paperbound and have new > cover art; and 2) They were printed by the original publisher. > The R & L reprints are ar from worthless. You should see the prices some book sellers (not those on the digest ask for them! > Incidentally, I have not bought BoW's "Sky Island" and "Sea Fairies" -- I saw > them at Borders once and was VERY DISAPPOINTED to see that they didn't have > color plates. Why in the world they did this I don't know. I like "Sky > Island" in particular about as much as any Oz book. > > -- Craig The reason BoW did not include color plates in these books is simple: cost. Their Oz Book reprints were made in collaboration with William Morrow books, and they had a more certain audience. SEA FAIRIES and SKY ISLAND were published by BoW alone, making available books that had been out of print since R&L's "Borderland of OZ" white cover editions, which were also in B&W. > From: w_baldwin@juno.com (Warren H Baldwin) > Subject: Return to Oz > Item: unrelieved menaces -- no songs, no light-heartedness. > But RTO does have some redeeming qualities: > (5)The big wrap-up bash at the finale. What's an Oz book or movie > without a party and everyone invited? > I wish we'd seen more of Ozma. I believe these points are related. RETURN TO OZ leads to the great party scene at the end, but the joyous section seems too short. It requires a VCR with clear stop action to perceive all the Ozzy characters who appear briefly in the crowd scene. These include Tommy Quikstep, the Frogman, the Patchwork Girl, Polychrome, the Bumpy Man, and the Braided Man, and others. None of these are introduced, they just appear in the crowd. Ozma's materialization comes very suddenly. The Jane Vinge novelization, which came out at the same time as the movie, extends this scene, with the crown being offered to the Scarecrow first, and then Dorothy, who wishes she could be ion two places at once. Then, Ozma comes through the mirror (shades of THE ENCHANTED ISLAND OF YEW, or MAGICAL MIMICS). I believe the party scene was originally intended to be much longer and was cut to shorten the movie. > Well, after getting this down into bytes, I guess I'll have to stick my > neck out and say that, in sum, I liked the movie. It's worth watching, > but don't expect to see anything like the MGM product, and it will never > get a listing in the Oz movie HACC. > All IMHO, naturally. > It is really more HACC than the MGM Film > 2/1: > Steve: > > Unless the 25-page MS is in teeny-tiny type and the 250+-pager is in Big > Type, neither of those meets the guideline of 50-60,000 words. The short one certainly doesn't. In the case of the other, it would depend on the quality. > How strict -are- those guidelines? Would, say, a 45,000 word MS be ruled out without > regard to quality? (Even though that's longer than some of the FF?) I ask > because frankly, I think I'm going to have to pad to get to 50,000 words. Speaking for myself: I will not rule out a MS that is slightly shorter than 50,000 words. (I don't count the words.) We don't want WAR AND PEACE or D?ICK AND JANE. > BOOK CONTEST: > I, too, would be interested in exactly how stringent the rules of the > Contest are, including exactly what "Baum's concept of Oz" means...Does > it mean that it must just be essentially Baum's Oz, with Ozma queen of a > utopian fairyland, etc.; or does it mean that it must be a "Baum clone", down > to mimiking Baum's writing style? > -- Dave This is to discourage writing that is either highly heretical (like WICKED or BARNSTORMER) or based on the MGM conception (like DOROTHY--RETURN TO OZ or THE LIZARD OF OZ). It should be faithful *in spirit* to the Baum Oz books. I hope AOL has straightened things out so the digest can return to normal. BCF: The 1st edition of WONDERFUL WIZARD was printed by George M. Hill, with Baum and Denslow underwriting the costs of production with proceeds from their previous best-seller, FATHER GOOSE: HIS BOOK. It comes in several states, all of which had 24 colored plates. There were monochrome color illustrations on the text pages of the book, and the colors of these pictures changed with the color of the country the story took place in. Gray in Kansas, blue in the Munchkin Country, green in the Emerald City etc. The BoW reprint reproduces these characteristics. The second edition, published by Bobbs-Merrill. originally called THE NEW WIZARD OF OZ had a new cover and dropped 9 of the colore plates. The third edition (1913) was from Donohue. Bobbs-Merrill was again the publisher for the fourth and later editions (except for the WADDLE BOOK) until 1956 when Reilly & Lee published it for the first time. There have been numerous adaptations, abridgements, etc. A long bibliographic entry can be found in BIBLIOGRAPHIA OZIANA revised edition (1988) 24-45. Steve T. ====================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 12:08:21 -0500 (EST) From: DavidXOE@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 1/30 & 2/2/97 Finally got the 1/30 Digest, either re-sent or after it kicked around on the Net for several days. 1/30: Gordon: Yes, my ratings of the books apply solely to the text. ROAD, for instance, which I rate near the bottom, has the best art of any of the FF imho. And MAGICAL MIMICS, which I rate fairly high, has some of the worst. Jeremy: You're at college in Rome? I lived there a couple of years when I was little, though I don't remember much about it except the houses we lived in. (Moved there in August '39 and away in May '41.) Ken S.: That Bungle would have doubled the straight-line distance from the Magic Isle to the EC is only a guess, but I'm reasonably sure that it would be substantially more. Landscapes are basically fractal in nature, which means that to a first approximation the distance traveled between two points by something that's bound to the ground is inversely proportional to the size of what's doing the traveling. 50 miles on an air line probably translates to 55-60 miles for a human on foot, but I'd guess at least twice that for a cat. As for frictional heating, I think we have to assume that the Powder of Life reduces the internal friction in Bungle's glass to a low enough level that there's no significant heating effect (without that, Bungle could hardly move at all, since glass won't bend very far without breaking). External heating from air friction would be negligible at speeds like 8 mph - in fact, moving at that speed would probably do more cooling from convection than heating from friction. I think you'll find that when your cat is motivated to move fast, she'll take a stride much more than 3 inches. When cats run, they bend their bodies in the middle to increase the reach of their limbs; typically the hind legs will be planted in front of the shoulders and then kicked out far to the rear as the body straightens. I suspect you'd find that the hind legs of a running cat the size of yours will land close to 2 feet apart. Let's be conservative and say 18 inches. And they're probably taking around 4 strides a second. So that's 6 feet per second, which is about 4 mph. Obviously I'm wrong in some of my assumptions - either they take longer strides or more strides per second or both - because 4 mph is a normal walking pace for a human, and I know perfectly well that a running cat can move a lot faster than I can walk. Faster than I can run, for that matter. Craig: If someone wants to set up and run an Oz chat on AOL, I'll participate if I can remember it's happening. I've never tried hosting a chat, so I don't want to do that, but I've participated in a few over in the Mystery group. 2/2: Jim R.: All the Baum Oz books are easily available in PB - you should find them in the SF section of any decent bookstore. After that it gets somewhat more difficult - the early Thompsons have to be ordered from the IWOC or found used from a dealer - but we won't reach that point for a while. Anyone who wants to participate in the discussions and doesn't have the books should probably set about acquiring them soon. And as we've said in the Digest recently, it's not too soon even now to start finding the four mid-period Thompsons (YELLOW KNIGHT, PIRATES, PURPLE PRINCE, and OJO) that can only be had used at this point. Craig: The value of a particular edition of a book is whatever someone is willing to pay for it. The Del Rey paperbacks clearly don't have much effect on the value of the R&L reprint editions, but in my opinion the IWOC hardcovers of SPEEDY and WISHING HORSE, with dust jackets and color plates, on considerably better paper and with better bindings than R&L ever used, should be worth more than R&L reprints without color plates. YMMV. As for the BoW reprints of SEA FAIRIES and SKY ISLAND, I too was disappointed that they didn't reprint the color plates. I've no idea why; if Peter Glassman reads this, maybe he can tell us. (Obviously it would be more expensive; it may be that BoW didn't think there'd be enough of a market for full-blown facsimile editions of those books, since they're not "Oz". Or it may be that the facsimile Baum books are only possible because of Morrow's backing, and Morrow wasn't interested in backing the non-Oz books.) Warren: Actually, if you read the description of the Nomes in the text of OZMA, the claymation figures from RTO fit it very well. Marjan: I don't remember any quote in the books from Glinda to Dorothy like the one you mention. The closest one I can think of is in GLINDA, where Dorothy says to Ozma, "...I can't do any magic at all, an' so I can't figure out e'zactly how you an' Glinda an' the Wizard do it." "Don't try," laughed Ozma. "But you have at least one magical art, Dorothy: you know the trick of winning all hearts." "No, I don't," said Dorothy earnestly. "If I really can do it, Ozma, I am sure I don't know _how_ I do it." Jim v N: I've E-mailed John081 directly, but for future reference there's a lot of Oz clip art from the books on a CD-ROM set called ART EXPLOSION 40,000, which is available from most of the mail-order software houses. Dave: I can't imagine that the IWOC is expecting anyone to try to imitate Baum's writing style; it's very difficult to mimic someone else's style for a whole book, and this is especially true of a writer like Baum who doesn't have a very pronounced style to start with. I wouldn't think one would need to get closer to his style than Thompson or Snow did. (Closer than Neill, Cosgrove, or McGraw would probably be good, though.) David Hulan ====================================================================== ===================================================================== ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, FEBRUARY 3 - 4, 1997 (Part 2) *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ===================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 15:21:42 -0500 (EST) From: DIXNAM@aol.com Subject: Ozzy Jane Dave; I received the 1/30 and 2/2 Digests today, along with your "May Day" message, so things appear to be ok now. I watched and taped the "Personal FX" show this afternoon, and Jane did a very fine job. (The injuries she mentioned were not visable) Her collection is fantastic, to put it mildly!! Due to time constrictions, we didn't get to see all she wanted us to, I'm sure, but the video did give an idea of the vastness of it. Most impressive, and I am most envious of her. If anyone who does not get the FX channel, or who does but was unable to= tape the show, would like a copy, they can e-mail me privately. Dick (dixnam@aol.com) ===================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 15:29:48 -0500 (EST) From: Jeremy Steadman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-02-97 Everybody: Sorry, got tied up in schoolwork yesterday, so am responding to two days' worth of Digests: Nathan: Sorry--I didn't mean to take your water away from you. Isn't John Dough (which you've been quoting quite a bit recently, by your own admission) the place where deer go to the bathroom? (Sorry--had to say that.) Robin: As I said yesterday (or sometime), use any of my virOzes you want to--they're catchy, in my opinion. Dave: I received your "May Day" message with distress (no pun intended). I personally have received every Digest you've sent since November 4th, and I hope you're not serious about suspending it. Msy the Digest really never end, Jeremy Steadman P.S. Please e-mail me explicating your reasons, if you don't mind; sorry. ===================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 16:30:10 -0500 (EST) From: Ozisus@aol.com Subject: Oz post Digesters interested in the Centennial contest. We did NOT mean to be designing stringent rules at all and were simply trying to eliminate the "Wicked" and "Silly Ozbul" type of manuscript from being submitted. If you understand what an Oz book is (and I'm sure all digesterd do), and have written one, you'll be fine. I wouldn't encourage you to pad for length -- just don't want a 100-word picture book to be submitted. And as to "Baum's Oz" we just don't want someone who's seen the movie dreaming up another "Wicked." We want a book designed to please a child. Keep in mind that we publicized the contest outside the Club with various writer's organizations and publications. Know telling how many Ruby Slipper and rainbow filled manuscripts we might have had to plow though if we didn't try to spell it out. And speaking of "Wicked," darned if the studio folks on Personal fX didn't= go and make me think on my feet with a question (that we had NOT discussed before going on air) that pushed me practically into talking about it. Bother. And to think I could have been saying something of interest with that time. Before going live they also had asked about my jointed paper Scarecrow, so I figured they knew something about him. Another precious handful of seconds melting right into the carpet as they droned on and on saying nothing. It could have been worse, however -- no one asked me about hanging Munchkins or Shriley-Temple-as-Dorothy (though I was prepared to mention Mary Pickford, Helen Hays, Marcia Mae Jones, Deana Durbin, etc. of they did.) So what did those of you who saw the spot think? Other than that I looked like a nervous wreck, I mean? I was shooting for making it as informative as I could vs. "I got this at such-and-such a flea market for $7" that is what seems to be on there most days. Oh and no, I don't usually cover= walls with T-Shirts and beach towels, set up displays in the hall or block the bathroom door with a giant poster. Tuesday's (not-Oz) show will include my friend Rhonda She's going to offer= on air that Banner Elk Oz theme park plate that sold for a fortune at the Ozmopolitan convention. Jane ===================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 16:33:37 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@cord.iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-01-97 Okay, how do I do this? The story needed a boy who had been to Oz but had not, to anyone's knowledge, returned. The book is nearly done, and I think it could well blow the competition away as a serious piece of literature. Since Peter often acts as a foil for Tip, and his part in the story cannot be excised, what do I do? I can't just scrap it. This issue has been pretty tough, since I didn't know what to do. Baum's only American boy was Button-Bright, and he was not very bright, but the manuscript calls for all of the characters to be vey bright in order to be accepted into a group of intellectuals at the point where I am now. Other than using his name and mentioning he likes baseball, the only reference to what he did before is when Tip says "So you're the one who dumbfounded the Nome King?" It says he tells them of his adventures in Oz, but does not say what they are. So please, Bill, if you have some advice, help! It is truly a fine manuscript, that I have worked on since 1994. I had to work very hard to keep out copyrighted characters, but Peter kind of slipped in. Also, if I call a minor character Daisy Bunsen, as in Tisha Campbell's character in the obscure Oz film, _The Magnificent Major_, would I be in trouble? How about the character Thelonius Spetnek, who is blantantly based on Nipsey Russell's _Wiz_ performance, but retooled to my liking (in personality and appearance), given a new name, no Teeny references, etc.? ===================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 17:14:33 -0500 (EST) From: Ozisus@aol.com Subject: another Oz post A great public serivce that would help educate people about the real Oz, would be to make Oz art -- Denslow, Neill, whatever is public domain -- available on a web site so people could download it. I've had everyone from the local paper to the Rotarians ask me where thay can get Oz art to illustrate feature stories. I don't belive the IWOC site has the capacity= to handle it -- though it could be linked. I know Jim gets e-mail asking for art regularly (in fact, he posted on such request in a Digest I just read). While Bill has gone to a heck a lot of work and wouldn't have much pay off in $$$, it would sure give graphic designers something to work with, and could show product designers what public domain material looks like. Along that line, isn't it weird how they'll make Dorothy with silver shoes, then still give the other characters the Frank Morgan tokens -- dipolma, ticking heart/clock, badge. Jane ===================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:41:39 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@cord.iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-02-97 My Oz book is not a Baum clone, but it's much closer in style to Baum's books than Thompson's, as many recent Oz writings tend to be. Here it's played totally straight-faced. I don't think I mentioned the title, which is really, really important, since it can be interepted multiple ways. The rough draft is mostly written and I hate to be written out over contest rules. The rule sheet does not say only Baum characters may be used, in addition to ones own, it says "any Baum characters from the Wizard of Oz books (plus the author's own characters, of course) as long as they follow the rules." Although that may be implied, it isn't there. By the way, when it comes to "standard English usage of grammar, spelling, and punctuation," that only applies to narration, right? I made the dialogue naturalistic, often with improper grammar or dialectical spellings. This is all stuff I wanted to say in advance, anyway. Now I don't have to include an anonymous note to the judges accompanying the manuscript explaining certain techniques I used. The plot, save for the one incident and a couple of characters mentioned before, is tightly wrapped up, but I will hint that I hope any conflict with Melody Grandy's _The Seven Blue Mountains of Oz_ will not make the manuscript lose, since another story could probably resolve it anyway. Scott ===================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:43:50 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@cord.iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-02-97 Does anyone know what this Oz/Glinda computer language is all about? ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 19:49:14 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@cord.iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-01-97 Has anyone seen the Shirley Temple Land of Oz? What does Norman Leavitt's Repairman character have to do with the plot? Also has anyone heard Tom Lehrer insulting _The Wizard of Oz_? He does this on two of his three albums, and he means the book. I want to see _The Wonderful Land of Oz_ so badly, hopefully before I have to finish my novel. Can anyone send me a copy? ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 20:56:13 -0500 (EST) From: DavidXOE@aol.com Subject: Ozzy Reviews Here are a couple of reviews that I meant to include in my last Digest posting, but forgot. One is my review of KALIKO IN OZ, which I just got from Buckethead and read. The other is a review of GLASS CAT that appeared in DRAGON MAGAZINE recently; it was so glowing that I had to share it. I have= no idea who wrote it; does anyone here know? (It's also a very good ad for Oz= in general in a place where Oz may not be very well known.) ************** KALIKO IN OZ, by K. Kline, illustrated by Michael Goldmann. This is a pretty good, if short, story, marred by illustrations and typography that should be a lot better to match the writing. Kaliko is well-characterized, and there's a lot of amusing tension as he travels with a rather engaging animated egg= (a relative of Humpty Dumpty's). There's a suitably nasty villainess (with the inexplicable name of Bel-Sor-t), not to mention a tiger who was a servant of the Wicked Witch of the West. Occasionally characters seem to speak out of character (I have a hard time imagining Kaliko saying, "It's a deal," for instance), and Scraps's verse isn't very good, but by and large the writing is smooth and the story flows well. Michael Goldmann, however, is not a professional-class illustrator. On the cover, for instance, Kaliko appears to have two right hands. There's an inexplicable frontispiece showing Kabumpo, Wag, and Peg Amy (still in doll form); none of them appear in the book. And in general the drawing is rather crude. Some of his ideas are interestingly different (Jellia Jamb in a low-cut, mini-skirted costume like that of a maid in a French bedroom farce, for instance), but his execution doesn't really do them justice. The main text font appears to be a demi-bold face that's really too heavy= for extensive text; there's more leading than it needs, and the margins are too narrow. If the whole book were set in the typeface and leading used in the "Attention All Scholars of Oz History" note at the end, with about 1/8"= extra margins on the sides, the whole book would look better and feel more comfortable to read. I give this one three stars for Kline's story, but only two for the illustrations and packaging. ********************** The Glass Cat of Oz David Hulan Emerald City Press $9.95 Before the Forgotten Realms setting, before Conan's Hyperborea, before Middle-earth itself, there was Oz. Though L. Frank Baum's famous stories aren't often mentioned in role-playing circles, the world of Dorothy, Toto, Princess Ozma and their compatriots is in many respects a direct ancestor of our modern adventuring milieus. And even less well known is the fact that a brand new series of Oz stories - David Hulan's _The Glass Cat of Oz_ among them - has appeared in recent years, carrying on Baum's legends in classic style. Hulan's story features a number of characters whom Oz fans will recallfondly from the original books. In addition to the Glass Cat, featured roles go to such well-remembered folk as Button-Bright, Trot and Cap'n Bill, and the Hungry Tiger. The plot also draws on well-established Oz lore, involving a scheme to overthrow the remote country of Oogaboo using weapons picked from its gun tree. Impressively, even the more obscure references and cast members are handled with accuracy and respect; there are no off-key bobbles to detract from the characterizations. But Hulan isn't merely rehashing old material. While all this is going on, he also introduces present-day youngsters Barry and Becky Klein, who find a genie's bottle on a California beach. Barry, it turns out, has read all the original Oz books (and enough other useful literature to sidestep the usual problems with genies and wishes). He and Becky are promptly transported to Oz and provided with a useful bit of magic, which they use to covertly attach themselves to the party dispatched to deal with affairs in Oogaboo. Hulan handles the combination of old friends and modern ideas in smooth and entertaining fashion; Trot relies on magical aid to save herself from one difficult situation, while Becky cheerfully demonstrates the uses of karate and threatens to start a fashion revolution when she realizes that girls in Oz haven't discovered blue jeans. The result is a lively and eminently likeable tale that brings the world of Oz firmly and agreeably into the 1990s. While _The Glass Cat of Oz_ is fairly short compared to Baum's original books, it's no less entertaining, and artist George O'Connor provides a lavish suite of illustrations in the style to which Oz fans have long been accustomed. Those who remember the original Oz books with pleasure should find David Hulan's tale a welcome addition to the canon, while those for whom Oz is a new discovery should find the volume a pleasant window into L. Frank Baum's world. The chief difficulty may lie in actually laying hands on this or other new volumes in the series; those who can't persuade a local bookseller to track down copies can contact the publisher at: Emerald City Press Books of Wonder 132 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10011 **************** ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 15:05:10 -0600 (CST) From: Ruth Berman Subject: ozzy digest - if deliverable again? David Hulan: I expect you're right that the myth that reading ruins the eyes comes partly from the number of near-sighted kids who turn to reading as a doable activity. I suspect also it comes from later in lives, from people liked to read in the first place and notice it when they can't do it anymore without reading glasses =FE the people who didn't like to read and were likely to have given up trying (or people who hadn't learned) did not notice the change when they lost the close-up vision they hadn't been using. (Or, if they'd been using it, then they would blame the "ruin" on "sewing too much," or whatever it had been.) Dave Hardenbrook: Did you know, by the way, that I met your father (we'd corresponded off and on, but hadn't actually met) year before last when he was here for a Sherlockian meeting? Melody Grandy: Yes, de Camp's joke about Ariosto's heroes and their "light-hearted way of trying to rape the heroines" is offensive. I suspect he may not have received much mail about it, though. He's kind of old-and-sot-in-his-ways for it to be a good investment of energy. (Besides, I'd rather argue with people whose work I like less =FE unless it was= someone I knew so well that my name would carry some force.) Craig Noble: The R&L reprints are better than Del Rey (because larger size) in reproducing the artwork. All of the later reprints are poorer than the early editions on art (fine shadings go to smudge) -- except, of course, the BoW "Wizard" compared to early-but-not-Hill editions. When Denslow's drawings in color were done over (not by Denslow himself, I would guess) to print in b&w, they lost much of their grace. I would assume that BoW left out the "Sky Island" and "Sea Fairies" color plates because they didn't think the books would sell as well as the Oz books and wouldn't sell enough to make back the expense if done with color. Warren Baldwin: I also bought a copy of the "Return to Oz" video recently. My reactions were similar to yours in thinking that there was a lot about it that was delightful (especially in the treatment of Tik-Tok, Jack, and the Gump), but thinking that it spent far too much time being horrific to work as something that overall was not a horror movie. Ruth Berman ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 21:15:18 -0500 From: Tyler Jones <104707.656@compuserve.com> Subject: Oz Marjan: The quote does ring a bell and it may have come from _Glinda_. --Tyler ======================================================================== Date: 00:36:00 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things E-MAIL PROBLEMS - CURIOUSER AND CURIOUSER: Well, I got so many messages saying "I got the Digests okay" that I'm going to keep sending it out, and send out the Digest secondarily to those who missed it...Funny thing is, my "May Day" message was bounced by Compuserve, MSN, and Netcom, for ALL Digest members on those servers!!! Go figure. Anyway, this promises to be anxiety-filled week for me... :( TO RUTH: Was that Don Hardenbrook? If so, he's my uncle. ( My dad likes Sherlock Holmes, but not enough to belong to the society... :) ) THE "SLINKY JELLIA"??? :) Jellia in a low-cut, mini-skirted costume? Well I'm in favor of course. :) :) :) I'm wondering, though, how much his Jellia in *characterization* matches an impish, mischeivous maid of French farce such as Toinette of Moliere's _Imaginary Invalid_; because I think in the early Baum years Jellia displayed the same sort of personality, which I've tried to enhance in my own writing... And speaking of _Glass Cat_ and depictions of the Oz gals, is it my imagination or does George O'Connor's Ozma bear an uncanny resemblence to Gene Tierney? Could it be deliberate?? BOOK CONTEST: Thanks for everyone's clarification messages on the Contest rules,= especially Jane's! (I'm so sorry about your injuries! I hope you're better soon!) Sorry to split today's Digest into two parts...Eudora's 32K limit... -- Dave ======================================================================== ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, FEBRUARY 5 - 6, 1997 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 08:37:44 -0500 (EST) From: Saroz@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 2) Ok, everyone, some questions: Does anyone know where to find classic Neill or Denslow art on the Internet? Does anyone know of any Oz computer programs (shareware or commercial), besides the rather disappointing Legends of Oz, available? Can anyone give me some information on the following Oz films/tv programs: The Magic Cloak of Oz, His Majesty the Scarecrow of Oz, Shirley Temple's Land of Oz, The Wonderful Land of Oz, The Wizard of the Emerald City. Does anyone have ideas on how to make a good Tin Woodman marionette that closely resembles the Denslow or Neill illustrations? Thanks. Sarah G Hadley ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 09:12:12 -0500 (EST) From: CrNoble@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 1) Joel: I e-mailed you privately about "Speedy." I'm glad you raised the point about reading Oz to your child. I don't have kids yet, but I know I'll want to read the Oz books to them when I do. This raises the possible problem of fragile, valuable books being handled by young children. I assume that's why you're building a second collection. What have other Digesters done? -- Craig ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 09:52:41 -0500 (EST) From: Jeremy Steadman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 1) Nathan: I just found your web page, and I must admit I'm somewhat impressed Interestingly enough, my favorite food is also spaghetti, we're just about the same age (I was born in February of 1977), I also enjoy Oz books (obviously), and I love cats too, although I'm an arts-and-languages type of person, my eye color is brown and my hair color blue (whoops--make that red), I also enjoy music, although I prefer classical and folk (I don't know who "Weird Al" is, for example). By the way, I tried to e-mail you through the web page (where it said I could), and I don't think I succeeded. Of course, if you got two identical e-mail messages from me (the bulk of which I included above), then I obviously succeeded. I was visitor 98, if that makes any difference. David XOE (Hulan?): You lived in Rome, GA? Quelle coincidence! Out of curiosity, where do you live now? Dave: I'm much relieved to see that the Digest has persevered through our problems. I think we're better off that way, AOL things considered. (My psychology teacher has given my fellow classmates permission to hit me when I do that kind of thing. Luckily, no one's tried it yet.) Until next time, Jeremy Steadman ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 15:57:44 +0100 From: Bill Wright Subject: Oz Digest Jane.........ref your question about making Oz artwork available for download from the net without financial consideration (free....:-). I have had a number of people who have asked by email if they may do just that. And my answer is yes, if it is not used for resale, ie, included in a product that is then sold. For those who would like to use any of the Oz graphics from my website in their website, or to illustrate some article, etc, they may do so if: (1) they ask first (2) acknowledge the source. Hope this helps. Bill in Ozlo ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 16:12:36 +0100 From: Bill Wright Subject: Oz Digest Jeremy: Ref your question >Bill of Ozlo: >I'm having trouble finding your website. Can you clarify how to go >about it? The url for the home page is http://www.halcyon.com/piglet/ From the menu on the home page you can access about a thousand pages of Ozzy information, plus the online books. Bill in Ozlo ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 12:01:12 -0500 (EST) From: DavidXOE@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 No problem with the Digest today. I got a second copy of the 1/30 Digest; did you re-send it twice, or was one of the ones I got the original? Nathan: I enjoyed RETURN TO OZ a lot when I saw it in a theater, and have watched a tape of it 3-4 times since. I didn't like the introductory part very much, but once Ozma turned up in Kansas, it took off and I was hooked. Fairuza Balk was much more like the books' Dorothy than Judy Garland ever was, and all the Oz characters (except Mombi/Langwidere - who didn't resemble either Baum character; she was more like Mrs. Yoop than anyone else in the books) seemed true to the book versions. It was darker than the Oz books, with little if any humor, but then aside from some silly puns by the Scarecrow there isn't much humor in OZMA, either, and that's the book it resembles most. In TIN WOODMAN Baum says that Ozma appears about 14 or 15, and Dorothy "much younger". OTOH, in the very next book, MAGIC, he says that when you saw Dorothy, Betsy, Trot, and Ozma together they all appeared "about of an age." So I think making Ozma appear anywhere between about 10 and 15 can be justified. (Or a bit older if the book is set later than Baum's time.) Robin: Maybe the IWOC and BoW reprints only affected the value -I- place on R&L reprints. I know I gave away my 1940s-vintage reprint copy of SPEEDY when I got my IWOC reprint. I keep the copies of books I had when I was a kid, but that SPEEDY was one I'd picked up used in the late '70s, so I didn't have any attachment to it. (I'd owned a copy of SPEEDY as a kid, but it got destroyed in a flood at my parents' house before I'd rescued the books of my youth from their not-very-careful stewardship. My copies of WIZARD and MAGICAL MIMICS also suffered some damage, along with many of my Burroughs and Howard titles, but SPEEDY was on the bottom and the only one that was unreadable.) When BoW brings out RINKITINK I have a pretty good copy with all but one of the color plates that I'll donate to an IWOC auction. Steve: I agree that RTO is more nearly HACC than the MGM movie. >I hope AOL has straightened things out so the digest can return to >normal. It doesn't look to me like the Digest's main problem was with AOL. At least, people on other services were also having problems getting the Digests over the last few days, and Dave's May Day! message made it to AOL people and not to those on several other services. Jane: I'm getting contradictory messages from you and from Robin on length. Who's in charge? Do I pad or not? (If necessary, of course. Since I haven't finished the MS yet, I'm not sure how long it will end up without padding.) Scott: >Okay, how do I do this? The story needed a boy who had been to Oz but >had not, to anyone's knowledge, returned. Why not Zeb Hugson? I think he's a much better character than Peter Brown, anyhow. (So why am I helping the competition? ;-)) Dave: Jellia has a very minor role in KALIKO; she isn't characterized to any significant extent in the text. You'd have to ask George O'Connor as to whether he had a model in mind for his Ozma. She definitely looks like some 1940ish actress; I think I remember someone mentioning Merle Oberon once, but it might have been Tierney (and it might have been you mentioning it, for that matter). I don't really remember what either of those ladies looked like. Speaking for myself, I prefer a 2-part Digest to having to download a file and read it with a word processor. David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 12:05:37 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@cord.iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 2) In regards to the Return to Oz characterizations of the Nomes, where did it say they were actually slinking around in the rocks, actually made of malleable rocks? I don't nemember this. The Nome King was described (by Dorothy!) as looking like Santa Claus, not gradually growing humanlike out of stone. At any rate, having been familiar with the books before I saw the MGM movie, (and I'm only 21!) I'm not sure which of these films I prefer, but that's just my opinion anyway. My favorite Oz film is The John Clark Donahue-John Driver TV stage play, _L. Frank Baum's The Marvelous Land of Oz_ (1981). I think it's funny all these reviews of the book where Oz girls haven't discovered blue jeans. In my novel they have, just not in places like the Emerald City and stuff, off the way places where they have undisclosed contact with the rest of the world. Also, about MGM references in the novel, Ruby Slippers can be mentioned in the context of the film, can't they? My Oz characters have seen many of the films, and sometimes talk about them, and Nikidik says he's known as Lord Nikidik to Shirley Temple, and Tip asks Polychrome if she started the rumor that "Over the Rainbow" was the Oz national anthem (that's from the disney record). She has no idea what he is talking about. I really hope I'm not saying too much for you judges, but I've worked so long and hard on this thing I don't want it to be automatically scrapped. Besides, I probably have the only manuscript that mentions the Lonesome Zoop! ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 11:07:31 -0800 From: "Stephen J. Teller" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 2) References: <01IF066TVEGY9D5XF7@delphi.com> > From: sahutchi@cord.iupui.edu > > Okay, how do I do this? The story needed a boy who had been to Oz but > had not, to anyone's knowledge, returned. The obvious choice is Dorothy's cousin Zeb, from DOROTHY AND THE WIZARD > From: sahutchi@cord.iupui.edu > Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-02-97 > > By the way, when it comes to "standard English usage of grammar, > spelling, and punctuation," that only applies to narration, right? I > made the dialogue naturalistic, often with improper grammar or > dialectical spellings. This is all stuff I wanted to say in advance, > anyway. Dialect for characters is acceptable; after all, Baum gave Dorothy a terrible childish dialect in OZMA and later. > I will hint that I hope any conflict > with Melody Grandy's _The Seven Blue Mountains of Oz_ will not make the > manuscript lose, since another story could probably resolve it anyway. > > Scott > Don't worry about *that.* The book must be faithful to Baum, not necessarily to all the non-cannocical writings, no matter how good they may be. Jack Snow completely ignored the books of Thompson and Neill when he came to write MAGICAL MIMICS. > Has anyone seen the Shirley Temple Land of Oz? What does Norman > Leavitt's Repairman character have to do with the plot? Also has anyone > heard Tom Lehrer insulting _The Wizard of Oz_? He does this on two of > his three albums, and he means the book. In the song "Smut" he says: "I can tell you things about "Peter Pan,/ And the Wizard of Oz was a dirty old man." But he really attacking cersorious people who see everything as dirty. >I want to see _The Wonderful > Land of Oz_ so badly, hopefully before I have to finish my novel. Can > anyone send me a copy? What WONDERFUL LAND are you asking about? If you mean the Shirley Temple version, it is completely unavailable at the present time. There is the Minneapolis Childrens Theatre version, the Barry Mahon film, the Cinar videotape version (both in its complete and its shortened versions). Actually most of these are MARVELOUS LAND. Jane: I saw your performance. You were fine, but it would have been nice if the person interviewing you knew something about the subject. BTW what happened with the Banner Elk plate? I did not tape the show today (of course I could tape it at 5 AM tomorrow morning if I really needed to know.) Dave: Thanks for keeping us going. Now, lets start talking about the WONDERFUL WIZARD!! Steve T. ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 12:11:35 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@cord.iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 2) Oh, and wasn't Jellia just a little girl in _Land_. She certainly seemed to be, but it seemed to change gradually, as apparently it did for Ozma. It was in Emerald City that Baum said Ozma looked about fifteen or sixteen, but he was inconsistent. In Tin Woodman, he says she is only a little older than Dorothy. If we are to believe that once Ozma was restored to the throne, that no one ages or dies, wouldn't that hold true for Ozma. Also, Polychrome is described as being Dorothy's age in Road, but illustrators and eventually authors seemed to be making her older as well, even though she is a fairy, and thus immortal. What happened with that Alfred Drake "Born in our present state; never were babies we..." I don't think it's entirely accurate (Ozma aged from a baby and as Tip), but things seem inconsistent. But with multiple authors, and the minimal proofreading we know R&B provided, who knows? ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 12:39:16 -0500 (EST) From: OzBucket@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 2) For what it may be worth, Michael Goldmann is a professional fashion designer. Why he designed clothes like that for Jellia, you'll have to ask him. Disney's Return to Oz: while it owes more to MGM than it does to Baum, it is indeed a very somber and depressing movie overall. It did, however, have two redeeming qualities that no one else has commented on. 1.) The claymation sequences are beautiful to look at, and 2.) Fairuza Balk is even more so. Okay, granted, my recent re-reading for the multi-billionth time of WW reveals that Dorothy is far less mature than my 2 year old niece (who I find annoyingly immature, by the way). Baum's Dorothy is a selfish little brat who isn't above saying things like, "I don't care a bit what happens to any of you, as long as I get what I want." Fairuza's Dorothy is much more kind and caring, and seems almost motherly in her relationship with Jack. Fairuza, a mature 9 (she turned 10 on the set) is a lot more likeable than Baum's immature little girl. Frankly, while reading WW this last time, I found myself wanting to take that little snot over my knee and beat her to a bloody pulp. (by the way, I am starting up a babysitting service...). As to my item #1, I direct your attention to Nightmare Before Christmas. Also visually stunning (just as long as the idiotic storyline doesn't distract you from the gorgeous visuals). I have been told that James & Giant Peach is also excellently done. It's going to be on the Disney channel in a couple of months, so I may actually get to see it. And my item #2... Sigh! Alas, as much as I respect Fairuza as an actor, she seems to be in movies which should be watched only by the dangerously optimistic who really really need something to make them feel miserable and depressed. Valmont, for example, is the result of some film maker's sick mind. I found Things to do in Denver When You're Dead absolutely stomach-turning. Gas, Food, Lodging... Well, you get the idea. A few rare exceptions in Fairuza's career: The Worst Witch. This is a charming film that I can see any time of year. Fairuza is perfect as Mildred! Okay, the special effects are rather flimsy, but who cares? This movie is well worth seeing. Another great one is The Outside Chance of Maximillian Glick. Someone will surely correct my spelling on that. This is an absolute delight! A must-see! Run, don't walk, to your video rental place and ask for it (don't read the box. That might scare you away. Sure, it deals with religious intolerance, but please, don't let that stop you from seeing this one!). Last night, we saw The Island of Dr. Moreau. Anyone who knows H.G.'s original will tell you it's a depressing story. Yes, it is! YUCK! But the make-up effects are a really remarkable achievement. Be prepared to be depressed and distressed by the story, but just look at that make-up! The only badly done scene I recall was with some computer-animated rat-people who looked horribly unreal. Oh, almost forgot, the Craft actually makes Fairuza look ugly. And it, as usual, is a downer. Will someone PLEASE cast this girl in a nice movie? Anything! Just so it's not a depressing piece of yuckiness... Speaking of movies, I wonder if they'll have a Bert Lahr sound-alike in the cartoon of Roger Baum's Lion of Oz and the Badge of Courage, which is currently in production... ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 13:00:12 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Olderman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 1) Nathan: Gee, I thought that the Nomes' looking like stone was cool! Check Baum's description of how they're kind of camouflaged in rock...shifting shapes.... Joel: I'm not sure what you mean about contacting me for info. I'm hoping that we'll be able to announce some of the auction material ahead of time this year, but I really don't know if that will/can happen. The only IWOC auction I know of that will probably have a catalog is the Centennial Auction. BTW, we're quite short of auction material this year and WE NEED DONATIONS AND CONSIGNMENTS. --Robin Olderman ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 13:15:12 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Olderman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 1) Joel: If you mean do you contact me if you want to sell something to IWOC or put it on consignment, yes, that's fine. Or Herm. Or, after he's back from his trip in a week or so, Patrick Maund. --Robin ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 14:40:06 -0600 (CST) From: ozbot@ix.netcom.com (ozbot) Subject: Ozzy stuff Wow! I walk away from my e-mail and don't return for a couple or four days and the Digest almost shuts down!!! FWIW, I have been getting all the Digests (except for maybe that first May Day thing. Was there more than one?) So is this Digest still on or not? (me in the background, crossing fingers and saying "Please oh please oh please!) Some points to remark on-- 1) Yes, if Ozianna wants to use my virOzes, its okay with me! 2) I will always remember Return to Oz with much nostalgia. (If anyone remembers from last time I mentioned it, this movie was the first I saw *by myself* with no parental involvement! A true passage into adulthood! Well, adolescence, anyway. I will always remember Tiktok this way. He is the best thing to come out of production design. 3) Thanks for all the replies about the Centennial Contest. Ooh, I just wish there were no Judges on this list, so we could share ideas and things. No offence or anything to any of the judges!! Maybe it's a good thing my book will be anonymous when they read it :) (There is no one in my household or my circle of friends who really know about Oz.) Nine weeks, Huh? So much to do, and so little time. . . Eric-- are we still trying to do Ozzy chats on Tuesdays? I had problems before, but I'll try again. Are you out there? Until next time, hopefully, Danny ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 15:22:22 -0600 (CST) From: Ruth Berman Subject: ozzy digest Marjan: As Nathan DeHoff mentioned, your Glinda quote is from the MGM movie, not from any of the books. "The Wizard of Oz, the Screenplay," ed. Michael Patrick Hearn, 1989 (Delta/Dell Books, NY) has Glinda telling Dorothy at the end, "You don't need to be helped any longer. You've always had the power to go back to Kansas," and, when Dorothy realizes that she's learned anything she wants is at home, and the Scarecrow and Tin Man think they should have realized it for her, "No, she had to find it out for herself. Now those magic slippers will take you home in two seconds!" Scott: Button Bright would probably do as a solution to your story needs. The narrative in "Road" characterizes him as "stupid," but in later Oz books he does not appear to be so. (You might want to look up an interesting "Baum Bugle" article, "The Enigma of Button Bright.") He appears as a main character in "Scarecrow" and "Lost Princess." He's been used as a important character in some of the small-press Oz books, but not often (David Hulan's "Glass Cat" and Harry Mongold's "Button Bright in Oz," I think are the main ones). David Hulan: Congratulations on the nice "Glass Cat" review. Nate Barlow: I sent a note to the Austrian student whose note you Digested, and suggested that she try to get hold of Hearn's "Critical Heritage Series" edition of "Wizard" (includes Bewley's "The Land of Oz: America's Great Good Place," Sackett's "The Utopia of Oz," and Littlefield's "Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism"), also articles by Erisman and St. John. I always warned her that Littlefield's allegorical reading is not really very plausible, in spite of being quoted as fact in articles all over the place, and suggested that she ask Hearn for advice. Dave Hardenbrook: Oh, so Don is your uncle? Yes, he was the one here for the Sherlockian conference in memory of John Bennett Shaw. // I was surprised to find that the two-parts of the Feb 3-4 Digest were different in format, with part 1 ordinary, but part 2 with a good deal of the hexadecimal intrusions. Ruth Berman ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 17:12:14 -0500 (EST) From: Ozisus@aol.com Subject: Oz FYI all, the Pacific Book Auction site has had the prices realized from the increase your insurance coverage. Jane ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 20:10:30 -0500 (EST) From: Nathan DeHoff Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 2) Steve: In terms of characterization and some of the events, Return To Oz was more Historically Accurate than the MGM movie. On the other hand, the MGM movie basically told the story of _Wizard_, while Return To Oz tried to combine two different books. David: The Nomes in RTO did look like they were carved from rock, as Baum stated in _Ozma_. I thought that they were too large, however. Jane: I would like to see some downloadable Oz art. Maybe I could use it to spruce up my pathetic web page. David: Bel-Sor-t did have an odd name. I noticed that "belt" is in it, as well as "sort." Dave: I received the May Day message, but I thought May Day was at the beginning of May. It's only February now! :) The second part of today's Digest had =3D and =20 all over it. Nathan Mulac DeHoff lnvf@grove.iup.edu Vaga: "Well! He may be a Prince to his mother, but he's a pain in the eye to me!" Grampa: "Then shut your eyes." ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 21:14:22 -0500 From: Tyler Jones <104707.656@compuserve.com> Subject: Oz Yoop vs Reera: It's possible that Reera is more powerful than Mrs. Yoop, or vice versa, or that they practice magic in totally different ways, despite the fact that they both claim to be Yookoohoos. I've theorized before that the title of a magic-worker may be nothing more than a self-imposed label. Scott: I suppose it depends on when your book gets published (or if it does) relative to the date that _Lost King_ goes PD. Rumor has it that Dorothy Curtiss Maryott (the person in charge of the RPT estate) is very unwilling to allow the use of RPT's characters. Book of Current Focus: It will probably be easier in the long run to comtinue to have one post that has EVERYTHING in it. People can skim or skip paragraphs if they want to, and concentrate on their areas of interest. Scott: The Oz/Glinda computer language stuff is just a couple of us computer geeks playfully trying to guess what kind of computer systems the Oz folk use. The curse of the =3D and =20 have returned in part 2 of the digest, but hopefully that was a hangover from the recent problems of the past few days. Dave: You may consider the Microsoft Network, or even good old CompuServe. --Tyler Jones ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 00:13:44 -0500 From: "Melody G. Keller" <104270.2374@compuserve.com> Subject: Ozzy Digest, 02-02-97 Robin: You can use my computer viruses, too. Here's more! Quilty Queen Virus: Patches all your program, system and data files together into one huge file, then suddenly flies apart into a million stray bytes. Wutz Virus: No matter how hard your programs try to please it, once it infects your machine Wutz will eventually archive (pot) all of them. Handy Mandy Virus: Can perform up to seven tasks simultaneously. Scamperoo Virus: Takes the place of your operating system, causing all programs and data to think it is the rightful operating system and forget the old one. Needs the Magic Emeralds and Chalk viruses to accomplish the dirty deed. Scott: How did *you" go about resurrecting Tip? I tried to base my method squarely on Baum. (Mombi used her "Switcheroo" spell on Ozma and a real Tip in infancy.) If you use Tip in your story with no explanation how he got there, there should be no conflict with SBM1. That's why I brought him back to begin with, so other Oz folks could use him in their stories again... Your story could take place sometime after the events of SBM, which was back in the early 1980's. The only thing I ask is please don't kill him off. :-) :-) Melody Grandy ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 22:35:10 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Olderman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 2) Scott: Button Bright is NOT stupid in _Scarecrow_ (or in _Sky Island_). As a judge, all I can say about the movie characters is that I'd have to be extraordinarily impressed with a manuscript before I'd even consider using something that might get us in trouble. And, of course, if after checking with a lawyer I determined that it could indeed create a potentially sticky situation for IWOC, I'd avoid it like the plague if the author couldn't excise any possible copyright infringements. Please avoid all potential copyright infringements. It would be a shame if we had to disallow a fine ms. because of them. Dialect and deliberate grammar goofs are fine. (If they weren't Baum's Oz would never have survived!) Writing discipline does count. Grammar rules are meant to clarify meaning: weak grammar (yes, mostly narrative) obscures discourse and is frustrating to a reader. --Robin Olderman ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 05 Feb 97 15:56:11 (PST) From: Dave Hardenbrook Subject: Ozzy Things THE DIGEST "HEXED" AGAIN???: I lot of you said to me that part one of yesterday's Digest was OK, but part two had hex codes...I'm stumped by that one... Ruggedo: Heh heh heh! CYBER-OZ?: Sarah G Hadley wrote: >Does anyone know of any Oz computer programs (shareware or commercial), >besides the rather disappointing Legends of Oz, available? This brings us back to our CD-ROM discussion... :) _RETURN TO OZ_: Scott wrote: >In regards to the Return to Oz characterizations of the Nomes, where did >it say they were actually slinking around in the rocks, actually made of >malleable rocks? I don't nemember this. The Nome King was described (by >Dorothy!) as looking like Santa Claus, not gradually growing humanlike >out of stone. IMHO, the Nomes were too scary in _Return_...As for blue jeans, Trot is wearing jeans in Cosgrove-Payes' _Wicked Witch_ (Dorothy and Betsey are in shorts)... MISCELLANIA: Jeremy wrote: >(My psychology teacher has given my fellow classmates permission to >hit me when I do that kind of thing...) Oh dear! Ozma: I'd better go over and have a talk with that psychology teacher... David H. wrote: >In TIN WOODMAN Baum says that Ozma appears about 14 or 15, and Dorothy "much >younger". OTOH, in the very next book, MAGIC, he says that when you saw >Dorothy, Betsy, Trot, and Ozma together they all appeared "about of an age." >So I think making Ozma appear anywhere between about 10 and 15 can be >justified. (Or a bit older if the book is set later than Baum's time.) *** MINOR SPOILER FOR "FAIRY PRINCESS OF OZ" *** "Fairy Princess of Oz" will provide an explaination for these descrepancies... In short, Ozma has long been in her teens, but she asked everyone, including the Oz Historians, to continue to say she was a "little girl fairy after all", to save her from the wrath of Zurline and other matriarchal fairies who weren't too keen on her abandoning her childishness, not even for the sake of her being a better and more mature ruler. But Zurline finds out what's going on from a disgruntled minor-kingdom-ruler whom Ozma dethrones, and then all Hippikaloric breaks loose... Zurline: At least I know some on the Digest will be rooting for *ME*! *** END SPOILER *** -- Dave ====================================================================== ] c/ \ /___\ *** THE OZZY DIGEST, FEBRUARY 7, 1997 *** |@ @| | V | \\\ |\_/| | ;;; \-/ \ ;/ >< ] ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 21:33:12 -0500 From: "Melody G. Keller" <104270.2374@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Ozzy Digest, Chris: My gorgeous villain is ready to be photocopied and mailed to you. Also got Pagemaker up & running again. Melody Grandy ====================================================================== Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 22:06:49 -0600 From: International Wizard of Oz Club Subject: RE: Another Take on the Film To: 'dimitri gontscharow' Cc: 'Dave Hardenbrook' Dimitri, I've not heard this interpretation. I'm forwarding your note to the Ozzy Digest discussion group, as I'm sure they'll find this interesting. Sincerely, Jim Vander Noot -----Original Message----- From: dimitri gontscharow [SMTP:dimgon@rgalex.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 1997 3:54 PM To: info@ozclub.org Subject: Another Take on the Film To: The International Wizard of Oz Club Congratulations on a great site about a great movie. My family and I have watched it many times and as you watch it again, different ideas and themes hit you. I think the reason the movie was made when it was, is that it was a gentle but telling allegory for staying out of WWII. The year in which it was released, 1939, was filled with strong calls for isolationism and I think this movie was meant to illustrate the danger of foreign entanglements. A poor, unsuspecting girl is transported to a far-away land full of castles, titles, regal pomp and circumstance, and is met with only fearful things. She has allies, but they are not completely dependable. One is lion (the symbol of France) who is a coward. (I haven't worked out the others) Finally, after all her ordeals and her conquering of the Bad Witch, she returns to the heartland of America, Kansas, and offers the defining theme, "there's no place like home." I am very curious if there is anyone else out there who might have been struck by this interpretation. Thank You, Dimitri Gontscharow dimgon@rgalex.com ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 21:58:04 -0600 From: International Wizard of Oz Club Subject: RE: Wizard of Oz Window95 Theme Pack To: "'Crewzun@aol.com'" , 'Dave Hardenbrook' I'm not familiar with this, but am forwarding to the Ozzy Digest in case anyone there can help. It would be good to have the information for our web site. Sincerely, Jim Vander Noot -----Original Message----- From: Crewzun@aol.com [SMTP:Crewzun@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 1997 11:04 PM To: info@ozclub.org Subject: Wizard of Oz Window95 Theme Pack I am trying to find a theme pack of the Wizard of Oz If you can help me, please e-mail me at crewzun@aol.com Thank You ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 02:33:26 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Olderman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-05-97 David: THANK YOU for the donation of a book for auction! I'm a judge for the Centennial Book Contest, but I'm not "in charge," as you put it. I didn't mean my answer to contradict Jane's. No one's gonna sit there and count words, but if the ms isn't close to the suggested count, we may notice its length as feeling too short or too long. A book that would be fine for Buckethead or Emerald City Press would probably be too short for us. On t'other hand, if a book feels "padded," that's not good either. Whatever you do, I'm sure it'll be fine. Joel: As an English teacher I, too, am glad you want to read to your child and have books available. Someone mentioned to me that you are an amateur book dealer. If so, got any surplus books for us? :-) Scott: "...in the gloom they could see strange forms flit across the face of the rock. Whatever the creations might be they seemed very like the rock itself, for they were the color of rocks and their shapes were as rough and rugged as if they had been broken away from the side of the mountain" (_Ozma of Oz_, 157). The "creations" are the Nomes. Tyler: If Dave saved all of our comments about _Wizard_ for one post, wouldn't we lose a lot of give and take in dialogue? I guess I'm not sure what you meant. Maybe one long initial post, then responses? I'm sure you didn't mean that we could only speak out in one post. (Who? US be concise?!) --Robin Olderman ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 04:46:40 -0800 (PST) From: Eric Gjovaag Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-05-97 Sorry I didn't get a chance to tell everyone, but there was no chat on Tuesday. Too many people seemed to not like that day, and it seems doing it during the week is bad for me as well. So in a while I'll announce a weekend time, which should be more convenient for more people. And I'll want to train someone else to take charge at those times when I'm not available. The "Digest" is getting SERIOUS overlong, and the prevailing attitude that the book-of-right-now discussions should be a part of the regular "Digest" will, I'm afraid, make it even longer (or force David to start doing them as two-parters regularly). If this keeps up, I may be forced to unsubscribe from the "Digest" just so I can keep up with all the REAT of my activities on the Internet, and in the rest of my life. --Eric "Oz is for everybody, even those whose time is stretched to the max" Gjovaag ### Visit my "Wizard of Oz" web site! http://www.eskimo.com/~tiktok/ ### ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 08:38:22 -0500 (EST) From: CrNoble@aol.com Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-05-97 David: I, too, prefer receiving a 2-part Digest to having to download the file and put it in a word processor. However, I think the most important issue is what's convenient for our kindly host, Mr. Hardenbrook. He's got enough work already! -- Craig ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 09:19:02 -0800 From: "Stephen J. Teller" Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-05-97 References: <01IF2VHEO8YQ9AOZMW@delphi.com> Dave L. Hardenbrook wrote: > > ====================================================================== > > ] > c/ \ > /___\ *** THE OZZY_*DIGEST, FEBRUARY 5 - 6, 1997 *** > |@ @| > | V | \\\ > |\_/| | ;;; > \-/ \ ;/ > >< ] > > ====================================================================== > Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 08:37:44 -0500 (EST) > From: Saroz@aol.com > Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-04-97 (Part 2) > > Ok, everyone, some questions: > > Does anyone know where to find classic Neill or Denslow art on the Internet? > > Does anyone know of any Oz computer programs (shareware or commercial), > besides the rather disappointing Legends of Oz, available? > There are the computer games YELLOW BRICK ROAD and YELLOW BRICK ROAD II. Has anyone played them to the end? I got bogged down in the first one and never completed it. > Can anyone give me some information on the following Oz films/tv programs: > The Magic Cloak of Oz, His Majesty the Scarecrow of Oz, Shirley Temple's Land > of Oz, The Wonderful Land of Oz, The Wizard of the Emerald City. > The first two of these were produced by the Oz Film Manufacturing Company in 1914 with L. Frank Baum serving on the productions. MAGIC CLOAK is based on QUEEN ZIXI OF IX, HIS MAJESTY THE SCARECROW served as the original of the Jinxland section of THE SCARECROW OF OZ. Both are currently available on videotape. A review of the newest release of them will appear in the Winter 1996 BAUM BUGLE. Shirley Temple's Land of Oz was a made for television program (an article about it was in the Fall 1996 BAUM BUGLE). It is not, and has never been, commercially available. Someone else will have to talk about "The Wonderful Land of Oz," I am not sure what it is. THE WIZARD OF THE CITY OF EMERALDS is Alexander Volkov's name for his translation/adaptation of WIZARD. There have ben at least two filmings based on it. One, an animated series made in 1974, which as far as I know has never been available in the US, and the other a live action version made in the 1990's which is (or was) available, but it is in Russian and not subtitled (the same would be true of the animated version). > Sarah G Hadley > > FYI all, the Pacific Book Auction site has had the prices realized from the > increase your insurance coverage. Jane > Huh? Steve T. ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 10:20:48 -0500 (EST) From: Ozisus@aol.com Subject: Oz post Sarah, I have some odd "Reading Adventures in Oz " software I can tell you about. But what are you looking for? Production information? Content description? Where-to-purchase info? Those same questions apply to your request for info on the Oz films you list. Narrow it a bit, if you can, so we won't load you with the wrong stuff. And see Bill Wright's home page to get Oz artwork (read his note in yesterday's Digest). I've noticed that in a couple recent posts of mine, words are dropped out right in the middle of sentences. A mystery to me. For example, I posted that the PBA prices realized were now on line and told you all to go check them out, then increase your insurance coverage. I promise it was an articulate sentence. Centennial contest writers: by all means follow Robin's lead when it comes to following the rules. All I can contribute is the spirit behind the rules as we drafted them, while as An Enforcer, she's a better lead to follow. IMHO, I would be dismayed to find out we disqualified a terrific manuscript over a few hundred words -- particulalry if it forces a manuscript to "win" that the judges didn't think was as good. Jane ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 10:30:19 -0500 (EST) From: DIXNAM@aol.com Subject: Ozzy Digest 2-5/6-97 Dave: I, for one, had no "hex" problems with part 2 of the Feb. 3/4 Digest. Is old Ruggedo being selective? Or just losing his touch (:-) Craig: My 2 kids showed only a passing interest to the Oz books when growing up, but did handle them with care. Now, however I'm letting my grandchildren read paperbacks or BOW copies, rather than my R&L color plate editions. ====================================================================== Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 23:54:27 -0500 (EST) From: "Donald A. Fennimore" Subject: Re: Back in the land of Oz On Mon, 3 Feb 1997, Simon Walmsley wrote: > Hi 'direct' folks, > I'm back after a year travelling the silk road (and picking up some > Vangelis bits and pieces along the way of course... > I'll be posting my list of "Vangelis sightings through Asia" which > surprisingly turned out to be quite a few places! Heck, there was even a > Persian version of 1492 that I picked up in Iran - have you got that one > Don (luckily I picked up a 2nd copy for you just in case you didn't have > it!)? Well, if it isn't Simon! Hard to believe it has been over a year since you left. Some changes have occurred, lots of new members on the list. And a good bit of collectible Vangelis has surfaced too. I am dying to hear about your Vangelis sightings through Asia, and a Persian issue of 1492? Tell me some more! This is one that I don't have! Welcome back. Cheers, Don ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 14:35:07 -0500 (EST) From: Nathan DeHoff Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-05-97 Jeremy: "Weird Al" Yankovic is a humor musician, famous for his parodies of popular songs. Mailing from the web page might not work. I have never been able to test it, since I usually can't send mail from Netscape on the computer that I use. You being visitor 98 does mean something. It means that not very many people come to my web page. David: In _Giant Horse_, Trot states that she has remained ten years old. In _Lost Princess_, it is stated that Betsy is a year older than Dorothy, and Trot is a year younger. This would seem to indicate that Betsy is twelve years old, Dorothy is eleven, and Trot is ten. Sahutchi (What is your real name?): No, the text of _Ozma_, at least as far as I can remember, never states that the Nomes were made of rock, just that they looked kinda like they were carved from rock. As for fashion in Oz, illustrations seem to indicate that Dorothy and some others keep up with fashion, and Jenny Jump introduces many new styles to the people of Oz. Chris: Dorothy is rather immature in _Wizard_, but I think that she is only about four years old in that story. When she moves to Oz permanently, she is about eleven, and is much nicer. Tyler: I wonder why DCM wouldn't want us to use Thompson's characters. I'd be glad to let someone use a character that I created, as long as they asked my permission and stayed close to my characterization. Dave: Are you sure you don't mean Lurline instead of Zurline? Zurline, in _Santa Claus_, is a Wood-Nymph. Nathan Mulac DeHoff lnvf@grove.iup.edu http://www.dragonfire.net/~VoVat/home.html "Having no head really saves one no end of trouble. No face to wash! No more headaches, no ear aches, no tooth aches! No lectures to listen to, no spectacles to hunt, no hair to lose, no more colds to catch in it. Why he is really better off without a head!" -Grampa ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 14:59:43 -0500 (EST) From: Jeremy Steadman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-05-97 Sarah: As to Oz computer programs, I had a program (commercial) called, appropriately, The Wizard of Oz, which was an interactive game, possibly by Infocom. The game was after the style of Zork, if that rings any bells. Sadly, when I sold my Commodore 64 (at a terribly cheap price), TWOZ went too. David H.: By the way, when I expressed surprise yesterday that you lived in Rome,. GA, the reason is because that's where Berry College, which I'm attending, is located, as you know. Bill Wright: I still can't find your website; I'm using Netscape,. and I typed the URL in several times. Okay, the last time, I said "I'm having a little trouble finding your website." Time for an upgrade: I'm having a LOT of trouble finding it. Chris (a.k.a. Ozbucket): I don't mind saying this in mixed company, but I disagree with your impression of Baum's Dorothy entirely (not that you're unaware of that). Re Button-Bright: Funny, in my Oz novels I ended up making Button-Bright quite smart, although I explained it by a widespread "contrary-personality" spell. However, I left open the option that he might remain so, and so other writers that make him smart might fit in fine . . . Re Digest hexes: I have encountered no such phenomenon. Am I lucky or what? Or am I the one behind it all? (You'll never know . . .) ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 15:57:29 -0500 (EST) From: DavidXOE@aol.com Subject: Ozzy Digest, 2/5 & 6/97 Sarah: What do you want to know about those Oz films? _The Magic Cloak of Oz_ is a silent film, made by Baum, of _Queen Zixi of Ix_ (thus not really about Oz at all), and _His Majesty the Scarecrow of Oz_ is also a silent film made by Baum, which is sort of _Wizard_ with the Jinxland plot of _Scarecrow_ mixed in. Both are available from Critic's Choice Video; I gave their toll-free number a few days ago in the Digest. You can get both of them, plus the Baum-made _Patchwork Girl_ (which is the best of the lot) and the silent _Wizard_ (best known as the one where Oliver Hardy plays the Tin Woodman), for $29.95 for the four. Craig: I didn't acquire any fragile, valuable Oz books until my daughter was old enough to know how to take care of books. When she was little she did damage my copy of YELLOW KNIGHT, but it was a fairly late reprint and I had no great difficulty in replacing it. Jeremy: I now live in Naperville, IL - a western suburb of Chicago. However, I've been in the Chicago area less than a year; before that I lived in Southern California for 33 years, the last 23 in Orange County not far from where Dave Hardenbrook lives - although we only met once, at the 1995 South Winkie conference. (And it's not that having met him, I immediately realized that I had to get outta town before sundown... :-)) Scott: If you have a copy of OZMA OF OZ, read the first description of the Nomes on the second page of Chapter XI, "The Nome King". I think the claymation came quite close to following that description - not perfectly, of course, but adequately. > I think it's funny all these reviews of the book where Oz >girls haven't discovered blue jeans. In my novel they have, just not in >places like the Emerald City and stuff, off the way places where they >have undisclosed contact with the rest of the world. It depends, of course, on when your book is set; _Glass Cat_ is set, according the Tyler's HACC (which I think is reasonably accurate), in 1983, though I'll admit that when I was writing it I was thinking 1988. If your book is set later than that, there'd be no conflict with girls wearing jeans in Oz. If it's set earlier, then there still is no necessary conflict; the absence of jeans in Oz is Barry's observation based on his reading of the FF, and girls never wear jeans (or pants of any kind) in the FF. But they might well wear jeans in places that aren't mentioned in the FF. Jellia was described as physically small in LAND, and as a "young girl", but you have to remember that in those days "girl" was used for women well into their 20s, and "young girl" (or "young woman", which Jack calls her once), probably meant a teen-ager. After all, she was an important maid in the palace (probably the same one who took care of Dorothy in WIZARD - definitely so if you believe OZOPLANING), and that's unlikely to be a post given to a sub-teen. Chris D.: >Baum's Dorothy is a selfish little brat who >isn't above saying things like, "I don't care a bit what happens to any of >you, as long as I get what I want." I don't remember Dorothy saying anything like that, and I just finished rereading WIZARD last night. Could you give a specific reference to the incident where it happened? It's certainly true that Dorothy is a much more passive character in WIZARD than she becomes in later books; she reminds me more of Betsy Bobbin (or vice versa) than her later persona. But I don't get the feeling at all that she's a "selfish little brat"; she's a young kid who's been ripped from the only home she's known into a very strange and unfamiliar country, and she's thoroughly overwhelmed by it. Despite that, she takes the best advice she gets and does what she can to get back home. If she were really that kind of selfish brat, wouldn't she have continued to chase the china princess? Ruth: Button-Bright doesn't meet Scott's criterion of " a boy who had been to Oz but had not, to anyone's knowledge, returned," unless his story is set between ROAD and SCARECROW. (And if his character was intended to be Peter Brown, then it isn't.) Button-Bright also plays a significant role in GLINDA, though not as prominent as in the two books you mention. His strongest role, though, is in SKY ISLAND. (In non-FF books, he has about as big a role in Robin Hess's CHRISTMAS IN OZ as he does in GLASS CAT.) Interesting. I didn't get any hexadecimal stuff in either part of the 2/4 Digest. See, AOL's not always the worst of the services! :-) Nathan: I know you were kidding about May Day, but a bit of trivia that not everyone knows is that this universal distress call is really French - "M'aidez!" - spelled phonetically in English. Tyler: If Scott's book is aimed at the Centennial Contest then it will, if it wins, presumably be published in 2000 - which would mean, let's see, ROYAL BOOK is PD this year, KABUMPO in '98, COWARDLY LION in '99, and GRAMPA in 2000. Nope, LOST KING won't be PD that year. Dave: True that Trot appears to be wearing jeans in WICKED WITCH, which is presumably set in the early Fifties. But remember that GLASS CAT was finished in 1992, before WICKED WITCH was published. Anyhow, as I said to Scott, we're going by what Barry knew, and as far as I know no Oz book published before 1983 - and certainly no FF book - ever showed girls in anything but skirts. Zurline is an immortal, but only if you're speaking loosely is she a fairy; she's a wood nymph, and they're not the same as fairies, though both have their primary homes in Burzee. David Hulan ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 16:45:27 -0500 (EST) From: sahutchi@cord.iupui.edu Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 02-05-97 Melody, Tip certainly does not get killed off. If I ever get to write the sequels I have planned, he'll be a major character in those, too. Tip's inclusion follows up on Jack Snow, if you know what I mean. (I know that's PD, if it weren't there would be know going forward; my narrative and character development would simply fall apart. The story is on that level, not Wicked or Dorothy, as far as when I said writing it not as a children's book. Actually, the character is more of a hinting at the Wiz Tinman, just enough so that you would know where I got it from. He is certainly different enough that I would consider him my own character, acknowledging "inspired by." The references to the Oz films are either discussions among the characters or subtle things like auteurist Hollywood films do (_Pulp Fiction_ and _Evil Dead II_ are good examples of the type I'm referring to; or the manner in which _Return to Oz_ reference _Suspiria_, _The Godfather_, and _Return to Oz_: subtle), though it is fairly obvious the American Film Investment Corporation Wizard of Oz is being shown at one point, when people wonder who the Garland soundalike is). I'll consider replacing Peter with Zeb, if that's what it takes to get published. (In the ms I have now, it actually says that he's dead.) Besides, didn't Button-Bright come to live in Oz? The reference to Lost King, other than an extremely vague reference to his ears, is just that he was enchanted by Mombi and she was executed for it, no specifics about any of that are given. Just that the punishment seemed harsh. ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 16:02:51 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Olderman Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 01-27-97 (fwd) Here's John Fricke's response to the Clara Blandick query. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 09:23:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 01-27-97 Re: Clara Blandick. She just wasn't a big enough movie name to warrant billing at the top of Oz. Charley Grapewin WAS...one of those all-purpose respected character actors who'd been around for ages. He was generally known to the movie-going public...so his name meant something. Hers wouldn't have, although she got listed at the end of the film as did Pat Walshe and "Toto" as that was the spot that all supporting players usually got at least acknowledged. (No, MGM did NOT remove her name after her suicide circa 1962!) (As if they'd go back and redo the credits under any circumstances at that point!) ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 20:47:20 -0500 (EST) From: Richard Bauman <72172.2631@CompuServe.COM> Subject: MANY DAYS OZ GROWLS Dave - Hobsen's Choice? What's this about a giant rat? Is it Sumatran? Melanie - Well, I got out my copy of Sir Harold and that quote is sure there. He didn't say seduce, he said rape. He was talking about Orlando Furioso which I have and have never got around to reading. That part you can't blame on de Camp but his attitude toward it as shown in the last half of the sentance you sure can. Sigh! I still find myself wanting to defend Sprague as I am sure he would not be in favor of violence toward women. I also noticed in the quote that he said "trying." I guess I will have to read Orlando. All this worrying about Ozma's age. I probably shouldn't let this out but Ozma actually has large jaws, tentacles, antennae, a carapace and leaves a slimy trail. She clouds everyone's mind so that you see her as a young girl of whatever age you think is right. This also explains why Munchkins occasionally disappear. Now Dave, is your lusty young man still interested? Craig - I read many of my Oz books to my kids. That way they didn't get their grubby little hands on them at an early age. And, most important, most kids or even adults, love to be read to. Hmmm. Is that still true in the age of the one-eyed monster? And, by the way, since someone asked. I for one would prefer to be addressed as an "Ozzy" rather than a "Digester." I get this visceral reaction to the latter. Has anyone ordered Oz maps lately. I just noticed that the ones I received are so poorly registered that some of the words on the right side are almost unreadable. Sigh. Hey! I was just kidding about Ozma. I just wanted to see who was awake. :) Trying to catch up..... Bear (:<) ====================================================================== Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 21:18:28 -0500 (EST) From: "John N. White" Subject: For Ozzy Digest Dave Hardenbrook writes: > THE DIGEST "HEXED" AGAIN???: > I lot of you said to me that part one of yesterday's Digest was OK, but > part two had hex codes...I'm stumped by that one... There were NO hex codes in part two for me. Perhaps you sent the hexed version to some people and the non-hexed version to others, or the problem is on the receiving end, with some mail readers somehow being switched to "hex" mode by something in the digest. > to save her from the wrath of Zurline and other matriarchal fairies who Poor Zurline! First, people keep referring to her as a fairy, (she's a wood nymph), and then they accuse her of doing all sorts of nasty things. In Baum's works Zurline is the queen of the wood nymphs that are in the forest of Burzee. The only recorded time one of Zurline's nymphs broke the law (leaving the forest and returning with a male mortal, no less) Zurline promptly took the side of her errant subject in discussing the matter with the Great Ak. (Contrary to a certain non-Baum work, Zurline never objected to any of her nymphs kissing a mortal. In f