Their Oz is yours, 'cause it's not mine
Not too long ago, I put in an order for four different Oz books, and I had wanted to wait and review them all together, but the last one still hasn't arrived. Waiting for mail (especially Oz-related stuff) has become somewhat of a summer tradition for me. I do it at other times of the year as well, but I always associate it with summer in particular. I've had this post stored in my drafts for a while now, though, so I might as well just post it now.
I suppose I'm somewhat of a purist when it comes to Oz, although that term is a little confusing. I mean, I liked March Laumer's Oz books, and I've seen people claim that they're not faithful to the spirit of L. Frank Baum's books. Regardless, I can say that this
bothers me. Here's an excerpt from the page:
"The Alpimar series uses all these works by Baum, and other Baum works for that matter, as potential source material for genuine Ozian adventures and Baum-style dialogue. But Oz fans must remember that the Alpimar series builds its plot only on the first book -- The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, written by L. Frank Baum and brilliantly illustrated by W. W. Denslow. Thus Oz enthusiasts will have to empty their minds not only of the various Oz films and stage plays but also of the plot lines and assertions of all Baum's works but his most famous tale -- that which tells the story of the tornado that carries Dorothy off to Oz."
Translation? "We're too lazy to try for consistency with what Baum wrote, but we're going to steal his ideas when we can't come up with our own." Or at least that's how it seems to me. And really, can any book that requests that people "empty their minds" before reading it be particularly good? In fairness, the excerpts that are up on the page aren't too bad, but why introduce creatures that are slightly different from Baum's Kalidahs, instead of just either using Kalidahs or making up some totally different sort of monster? It just irks me that these people want to borrow liberally from the original Oz books while putting them down at the same time. I mean, I have problems with Wicked
, but I've seen no indication that Gregory Maguire thought he was improving on Baum's work; he was just doing something different with it. (The opinions of some fans of Wicked
are a different matter entirely.)
And here are some reviews of Oz books that ARE faithful to the originals. I'm not sure why I keep writing these, when I don't think anyone actually reads them (I'll be lucky if anyone reads ANY of this post after seeing the word "Oz" near the top), but I guess I'm just stubborn in that respect.( Click here to read about Winged Monkeys, a queer quest (no, not THAT kind of queer), and a corn mansion.Collapse )
I guess that's all the Oz-related stuff I have to say for now. I might or might not make a non-Oz-related post today, and my review of The Magic Bowls of Oz
will be forthcoming after I've actually received and read the thing.