Day 1 - Dorothy learns of impending war between Flatheads and Skeezers 
Day 2 - Ozma and Dorothy travel north in Red Wagon - they meet the Spiders
  & cross the Mist Valley - night on plain
Day 3 - Ozma & Dorothy meet the Su-Dic & escape - they enter the
  Skeezers' magic island and are made captive by Queen Coo-ee-oh - night
  in Lady Aurex's house
Day 4 - The Island is submerged - Coo-ee-oh is enchanted by Su-Dic - Flatheads
  return to Mountain & Dorothy begins search for fishes
Day 5 - Glinda's alarm bell rings in the morning & she summons Ozma's counselors
  at evening - at night, Ervic meets fishes & travels to Reera's house
Day 6 - Ervic enters Reera's house just after dawn - he outwits Reera & the
  3 Adepts are disenchanted - Glinda & party travel to Skeezer Lake - set up camp
Day 7 - Glinda joined by Adepts
Day 8 - The Island is raised and Aurex & Ervic are established in power
Day 9 - The Flatheads are defeated
 
During "the next few days" Glinda & Adepts change Flatheads
into normal people.
 
Note: the text of GLINDA says that the Skeezers in the boat with Ervic searched
for him for "three days." I assume that this is a mistake on Baum's
part (or perhaps his editor's). If we try to fit three days into the schedule
(rather than one, as above) then Ervic has to have an extra day of travel with
the Adepts. I refuse to speculate on why this might be the case. 
 
I've also had to insert an extra day (not accounted for in the text) between the
time of Coo-ee-oh's enchantment and Ervic's meeting with the 3 Adepts.  Baum
states that Ervic caught the fishes after Glinda last looked in the Book of
Records--in other words, after the alarm bell had sounded. The only way to work
this that I know of, given the days and nights listed in the text, is to move
Ervic's trip to the night after Glinda's alarm rings.
 
This is not one of Baum's tighter plots, chronologically speaking.

Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 22:14:00 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: shopping in Oz
 
Gehan Cooray wrote:
<<Someone wanted to know why Ozma doesnt use her magic and why Glinda
didn't help Dorothy when she was in trouble. Well,the answer is simple!They
both may have wanted people to think for themselves and not to depend on
others.>>
 
Another answer appears in the first chapter of GLINDA. On page 21 of the
Reilly & Lee edition and its reprints, Glinda counsels Ozma, "Had you not
learned of the existence of the Flatheads and the Skeezers, through my Book
of Records, you would never have worried about them or their quarrels. So,
if you pay no attention to these peoples, you may never hear of them
again." 

  That attitude seems to encapsulate a major difference between Ozma and
Glinda. The former can't leave trouble alone once she feels responsible for
fixing it. Glinda, though she looks at the Book of Records "several times a
day" [16] and must learn about all sorts of grief, can easily decide it's
not her problem. Glinda needs to know; Ozma needs to heal. 
 
Having just returned from a business trip, and being about to leave on a
holiday trip, I'm behind on reading GLINDA and will probably stay behind.
I'll therefore be late in posting any further analysis of this book. [Wild
applause.] 
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 98 11:24:54 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: ozzy digest
 
Some thoughts on "Glinda":

   The reference to "Dorothy's own uncle" and to "his wife Aunt Em" 
links up with Zeb's reference to "my uncle" and "your uncle" to suggest 
strongly that Henry is Dorothy's relation by birth-kinship, and Em her 
aunt by marriage.

   Besides the brief appearance of the Frogman as one of Ozma's 
council, the portrayal of war may give an indication that "Lost 
Princess," "Magic," and "Glinda" were written in the same sequence 
that they were published.  In the earlier books, war is either a conflict 
between good and evil (Oz vs Nomes) or a trivial pursuit easily 
stopped (Hoppers vs Horners -- or not so easily stopped, if the leader 
is stubborn enough, but still trivial: Ann Soforth vs the world).  Many of 
the books, including "Lost Princess," have plots without wars.  In 
"Magic," there are peripheral references to WWI (the transformation of 
the monkeys into soldiers and the book's dedication).  In "Glinda," the 
Flatheads and the Skeezers are both basically good peoples led by 
evil leaders into a long-time war (with fairly serious grieveances on 
both sides) which is stopped only with considerable difficulty.  This 
set-up sounds like Baum's reaction to WWI fairly late in the war, 
probably later than the peripheral references of "Magic" and the lack of 
references in "Lost Princess."

   I wonder who's minding the store once the entire council (including 
the Scarecrow, who was supposed to be in charge) sets off to rescue 
Ozma and Dorothy.  Maybe Jellia Jamb would be a good choice?  
Maybe the Soldier with the Green Whiskers would at least look good 
on the throne?  Maybe, as a special treat for several years of good 
behavior, Jinjur got to come over and queen it for those few days?

   Lady Aurex and Ervic among the Skeezers give a more fully 
characterized look at ordinary Ozites than the books usually give.  
(Aurex winds up as queen, but isn't a royalty until then.  Her title of 
"Lady" sounds like a suggestion of some kind of hereditary aristocracy 
in Oz, which sounds odd, but maybe Baum meant it as a job-title for 
someone who was among Coo-ee-oh's ladies-in-waiting.)

   Some particularly attractive Neill artwork -- the use of page-and-a-
half chapter headings gave him room for some lovely large-screen 
views (for instance, the landscape of strange flowers where Ozma 
pitches the Magic Tent, or the view of Glinda and the Wizard with the 
skeropythrope doing fireworks).
 
Ruth Berman

From: Ozmama at aol.com
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 13:04:23 EST
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-23-98
 
John Bell: <<... a major difference between Ozma and Glinda. The former can't
leave trouble alone once she feels responsible for
fixing it. Glinda, though she looks at the Book of Records "several times a
day" [16] and must learn about all sorts of grief, can easily decide it's
not her problem. Glinda needs to know; Ozma needs to heal. >>
 
Sounds good to me!  Also, I believe that Glinda's primary purpose 
in Oz is to take care of Ozma, and sending her into a potentially dangerous
situation would run counter to that function.  OTOH, 
she couldn't wrap Ozma in cotton wool, so to speak, either.  So 
she does the prudent thing by making sure the girls have an 
alarm ring.  If Baum had had Glinda monitoring their progress, 
that would have been a poor treatment of storyline.  I find it 
interesting that even in her own book, Glinda is not really the main
character.  Baum clearly wanted to leash all of her potential power.
 
Happy and Healthy Holidays to all of you.  --Robin

Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 22:31:15 GMT
From: David Hulan <davidhulan at ntsource.com>
Subject: Glinda of Oz
 
A Merry Christmas to all who celebrate it, and Happy Holiday to the rest!
 
Some thoughts on _Glinda_ first. For a change, I actually took some notes
as I was rereading for the discussion...
 
Who, I wonder, is the character illustrated on (unnumbered) page 4? Surely
not Glinda, and it doesn't look like Ozma either. Actually, it looks to me
more like Gloria from _Scarecrow_ than anyone else Neill had depicted, but
the crown is more like the ones worn by Ozma and Glinda. (Which look nearly
impossible to balance on the head, FWIW.)
 
As I've said before, I don't think Ozma's reasoning was very good in the
first chapter when she decided that there was nothing for it but to go
herself, with only Dorothy as a companion, to stop the war between the
Flatheads and Skeezers. She could have sent a scout ahead - the Wizard, or
maybe the Shaggy Man - to find out more about the Skeezers and Flatheads
before jumping in herself like Captain Kirk. (Maybe he was inspired by
Ozma, come to think of it...) Whoever she sends doesn't have to issue an
ultimatum, after all, and that's her reason for rejecting the idea.
 
Dorothy's statement that "all excitement is fun" is clearly that of a child
who's never had anything seriously bad happen to her. In fact, she doesn't
seem to have cared much for a lot of the excitement she met with in
_Wizard_, and she was scared enough to faint at the beginning of _DotWiz_.
It was only after she survived that fall that she seems to have become
convinced that after all nothing very bad could ever happen to her. ("Hey,
I'm the protagonist of this book!")
 
It's a new concept in Oz, as far as I can recall, that Dorothy (and
presumably others in Oz) can't suffer any great pain. Actually, this seems
inconsistent with a statement later in the same book that Coo-ee-oh
punishes Skeezers who get on her wrong side by lashing them with knotted
cords; if Ozites can't feel any great pain, why would this bother them?
Maybe Coo-ee-oh's Krumbic Witch powers let her suspend their immunity to
pain?
 
I think this is the only book in the series where Ozma is consistently
depicted without her trademark poppies. The only other case I know of for
sure is the final illustration in _Tik-Tok_.
 
On page 63 Dorothy refers to her purple kitten; on page 103 to her pink
kitten. Does she have two kittens - pink Eureka and a purple one that never
appears on stage in any book? Or did Baum (or someone at the publisher)
make a typo?
 
The title "Supreme Dictator" seems a bit on the prescient side for a book
finished in 1919. While the term dates back to Roman times, I don't think
there were many people who used that title - or who were even referred to
by that title by their enemies - until the '20s. Maybe in Latin America?
 
The lines, "...she slipped her hand into her bosom and grasped the silver
wand. With the other hand she grasped the hand of Dorothy, but these
motions were so natural that the Su-dic did not notice them." I don't think
if that were the case Ozma could possibly have been wearing the kind of
outfit Neill shows in the illustrations. To get a hand into the bosom of
that outfit her elbow would be up at least to near shoulder level, and
that's hardly a "natural" motion. I think Baum must have been envisioning
something with buttons so she could slip her hand in without raising her
elbow (sort of a classic Napoleon pose, maybe).
 
On page 97 the Skeezers are described as bearing firearms. One wonders,
then, why the four Skeezers who accompanied Coo-ee-oh in the submarine, and
who are described as being armed, didn't use those weapons on the Flatheads
when Coo-ee-oh was transformed?
 
We have remarked in previous discussions about Dorothy's reference to
whipping her pink kitten on page 104. But perhaps Eureka can also feel no
great pain, so it's more or less equivalent to a scolding.
 
Glinda seems to have a pretty good search algorithm for the GBR, since she
comes up with a good deal of information about the Flatheads and Skeezers
(p. 152) that has to be scattered through a huge volume.
 
Button-Bright takes shameful advantage of the wolf and tiger that Glinda
has immobilized. He deserves a scolding for that, but doesn't get it.
 
Somehow some time gets lost for Ervic. Maybe time passes differently in
Reera's cottage? He leaves his companions sometime after nightfall on the
day Coo-ee-oh was enchanted, and walks to Reera's home by dawn, so it's no
more than a 10-12 hour walk. He spends just a day at Reera's - the Adepts
are disenchanted in time for supper. Ervic and the Adepts then set out for
the Skeezer country after supper; even if they decide to spend a night
camping out (which isn't unreasonable, since Ervic had gotten no sleep for
at least 36 hours), they should arrive back at the lake no later than
sunset of the second day after Ervic left. Yet on page 201 the Skeezers say
that they had searched for Ervic for three days, and the rest of that day,
another night, and a good part of another day pass before the Adepts arrive
at the lake. I'm not sure how Ken Shepherd's chronology handled this one;
anybody remember (or have the chronology handy to check)?
 
That steel pillar that raises the Skeezer city has a rather Freudian
aspect, methinks...
 
It's established that Audah is the Adept who was a goldfish, but I don't
get any strong feeling as to which of the other two was the silverfish and
which was the bronzefish. From the order of description and the order in
which they identify themselves I suppose the probability is that Aurah was
the bronzefish and Aujah the silverfish, but unless I missed it somewhere
it's never definite. Dave, which way did you identify them in _Locasta..._?
 
And I think I'll do a separate post to respond to the last Digest; this is
getting long enough already.
 
David Hulan

Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 22:31:19 GMT
From: David Hulan <davidhulan at ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-23-98
 
Ruth:
>In
>"Magic," there are peripheral references to WWI (the transformation of
>the monkeys into soldiers and the book's dedication).
 
But the uniforms Baum described (as opposed to the ones Neill depicted)
sound more like 19th-century parade uniforms than the kinds of uniforms
worn in the Great War. The dedication, yes, but that would have been about
the last thing Baum would have written.
 
David Hulan

Date: Sat, 26 Dec 98 15:36:40 (PST)
From: Dave Hardenbrook <DaveH47 at mindspring.com>
Subject: Ozzy Things
 
ADEPTS AND NOMES:
David H. wrote:
>It's established that Audah is the Adept who was a goldfish, but I don't
>get any strong feeling as to which of the other two was the silverfish and
>which was the bronzefish. From the order of description and the order in
>which they identify themselves I suppose the probability is that Aurah was
>the bronzefish and Aujah the silverfish, but unless I missed it somewhere
>it's never definite. Dave, which way did you identify them in _Locasta..._?
 
I've always assumed that Aujah is silver and Aurah is bronze...
 
                             -- Dave

From: "Bob Spark" <bspark at pacbell.net>
Subject: RE: Ozzy Digest, 12-26-98
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 06:58:39 -0800
Importance: Normal
 
All,
 
 "On page 97 the Skeezers are described as bearing firearms. One wonders,
 then, why the four Skeezers who accompanied Coo-ee-oh in the submarine, and
 who are described as being armed, didn't use those weapons on the Flatheads
 when Coo-ee-oh was transformed?"

     The above reminds me of a conundrum that has always bothered me.  Why
do Flash Gordon and John Carter of Mars both go armed with ray gun and
sword?  Seems like the ray guns would have sufficed in practically every
encounter (I picture the Indiana Jones movie in which, rather than
physically fighting the enormous bad guy, he just shoots him).
 
Bob Spark

Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 10:12:23 -0500
From: Lisa Mastroberte <ozma.rules at cheerful.com>
Subject: Ozzy Digest
 
>I find it
>interesting that even in her own book, Glinda is not really the main
>character.  Baum clearly wanted to leash all of her potential power.
 
I don't remember _Glinda_ very well. I'll have to go to the library later
and check it out. That was the first Oz book I read after _Wizard_, _Land_,
and _Ozma._ All I remember were the Skeezer's or something along that line.
 
>Actually, it looks to me
>more like Gloria from _Scarecrow_ than anyone else Neill had depicted, but
>the crown is more like the ones worn by Ozma and Glinda. (Which look nearly
>impossible to balance on the head, FWIW.)
 
Maybe the crown is kept on by magic?
 
>On page 63 Dorothy refers to her purple kitten; on page 103 to her pink
>kitten. Does she have two kittens - pink Eureka and a purple one that never
>appears on stage in any book? Or did Baum (or someone at the publisher)
>make a typo?
 
I have no clue. The only thing that comes to mind is the purple kitten in
_Ozma_, but that was
 
*********Possible Spoiler for Ozma of Oz********
 
only a transformation of a prince of Ev, so the kitten is
no more!
 
************End Spoiler*********************
 
Happy New Year to All, and to all a good night!
 
Off2Oz,
Lisa
 
--------------------------
 
"Liberty is the only thing you cannot have unless
 you are willing to give it to others."
 
William Allen White, 1940

Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 17:38:29 -0600
From: d.godwin at minn.net (David Frank Godwin)
Subject: Oz
 
_Glinda_:
It's been a while since I read this book, so I am proceeding mainly from
memory along with a quick glance for review. This is not one of my favorite
LFB efforts. Maybe it has to do with the fact that my first wife was named
Glenda, but I doubt it. :) But as I recall, the book just seemed somehow
dissonant with the rest of the Baum canon. Sort of strange and unfamiliar,
as if the reader were confronted with a new set of rules and assumptions.
It seems as if LFB had to introduce too many arbitrary limitations on both
Ozma and Glinda in order to get Ozma and Dorothy in deep water (ha ha) and
require the intervention of the three adepts to clean up the mess. I may be
forgetting something, but I seem to recall being puzzled as to why Dorothy
and/or Ozma didn't use the magic belt to escape, at least.
 
- David G.

Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 22:47:10 -0500
From: Tyler Jones <tnj at compuserve.com>
Subject: Oz
 
David Hulan:
I've never thought of the Skeezer's steel pillar in QUITE that way :-).
However, an image like that would more properly belong in Thompson's Oz,
which was much more masculine that Baum's.
 
Tyler Jones

Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 16:37:30 GMT
From: David Hulan <davidhulan at ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 12-29-98
 
Bob Spark:
>     The above reminds me of a conundrum that has always bothered me.  Why
>do Flash Gordon and John Carter of Mars both go armed with ray gun and
>sword?
 
Strictly speaking, John Carter's firearm was a "radium pistol," which fired
explosive projectiles, rather than a ray gun. Burroughs attempts a
justification of the swordfighting by invoking an "honor system" where
weapons fall into a hierarchy (rifle, pistol, lance, long sword, short
sword, hatchet, dagger, bare hands, IIRC) and if one is attacked one can't
use a weapon any higher up the hierarchy than the attacker is using.
Failure to observe this practice will cause everybody in sight to attack
the one who violates it. However, this doesn't make a lot of sense; in
fact, Carter undoubtedly fights with a sword most of the time because it's
more fun to describe sword-fights than gun-fights. (I don't think we need
to get into a Barsoom-as-History POV here...)
 
Lisa:
>Maybe the crown is kept on by magic?
 
Maybe, but Rinkitink wears that style of crown as well and he doesn't seem
to have any magical powers.
 
David G.:
_Glinda_ isn't one of my favorite Baums, either, though I rate it higher
than a few others of his. (_DotWiz_, _Road_, _Emerald City_, and _Tin
Woodman_ for sure, and maybe _Tik-Tok_ as well.) And I agree with you that
it doesn't seem too consistent in feeling with the rest of his books. I've
often thought that this book has more right to be called _The Magic of Oz_
than its predecessor; it's the example _par excellence_ of matters of magic
driving the plot, and goes into much more detail about magic than any of
the other books. We have no fewer than ten magic-workers active at one
point or another in the book - eleven, if you count Lurline. (Glinda, Ozma,
the Wizard, Rora, the Su-dic, Coo-ee-oh, Reera, Audah, Aurah, Aujah, and
Lurline all work magic that is described in the book, though Rora and
Lurline don't work any on-stage.)
 
And it is puzzling, when Ozma has used the Magic Belt for transporting
Dorothy to Kansas, and assorted invaders back to their homeland, not to
mention filling the Nome King's tunnel, that she can't use it at least to
get herself, Dorothy, and the Skeezers out of the sunken city. Of course,
it may just be that there was no immediate need to do so, and that she knew
they'd all be more comfortable in the city, even under water, than they
would be camping out on the shores of the lake. If they'd started running
short of food or something like that she might have used the belt. But Baum
is pretty specific that Ozma's primary objective wasn't to get herself or
the Skeezers out of the dome, but to get the city back to the surface of
the lake.
 
Incidentally, this book is more than usually free of IEs; the very brief
encounters with the spiders, the crab, and the mist maidens during Ozma's
and Dorothy's journey are about it, and they take up a total of 14 pages,
about 4 of which are artwork.
 
David Hulan

Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 15:54:58 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: GLINDA OF OZ and much more
Sender: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
To: "Dave L. Hardenbrook" <DaveH47 at mindspring.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
 
Turning to GLINDA, Robin Olderman wrote:
<<I believe that Glinda's primary purpose in Oz is to take care of Ozma,
and sending her into a potentially dangerous situation would run counter to
that function.>>
 
Ozma sends herself into that situation, it seems clear. Glinda knows the
princess is "the only one in all the land that Glinda bowed to"
[14]--indeed, the sorceress placed Ozma in that high position. Therefore,
Glinda has only a few options:

  a) advise Ozma as best she can and create a contingency plan, as she does.

  b) address the problem at a distance, which she did with the Oogaboo army
(a "solution" Ozma eventually undid).

  c) go with Ozma to help--as if Glinda would leave her castle, her ladies,
and her Magic Book to spend time in the jungle when it wasn't absolutely
necessary!

  Turning to a broader question, what do you mean by "Glinda's primary
purpose"? Thinking of that either as Glinda's self-appointed mission in
life, as a job she's been given by some higher power [Lurline?], or as
Baum's view of her role in Oz, I can't help but think of such a formulation
as limiting. I see Glinda as a full-bodied personality with various
motivations, occasionally pointing in different directions if not opposite
ones. One of those motivations is indeed the preservation of order in Oz,
as embodied by Ozma on the throne. But another seems to be to know more
than anybody else. And having peace in Oz also gives Glinda more
uninterrupted time to continue absorbing knowledge, so who can tell which
motive is stronger?

  I find it interesting that Glinda has forgotten about the alarm bell when
she first hears it [151]. Ozma wouldn't have been so complacent had their
places been reversed, I suspect. But then Glinda would never have gone to
Flathead Mountain.
 
David Hulan wrote:
<<Who, I wonder, is the character illustrated on (unnumbered) page 4?>>
 
I think this lady is, as the words below the art say, "Glinda of Oz." But,
like the picture labeled "Princess Dorothy" on page 10, I bet Neill
recycled a drawing from an earlier project.

  I had trouble identifying the female figure on page 33 because of the
drawing's mismatched scales and because I had to recognize that, as you
point out, Ozma doesn't wear poppies in her hair through most of GLINDA.
She seems to do so at the start [13], and definitely does so at the end
[280], so perhaps she reserves poppies for the Emerald City, where she's
sure to have a supply. She may wear poppies in the drawing on page 116; its
framing is unlike other full-page art in this book, so it may have been
drawn at a different time.

  Baum seems to differentiate Ozma's "silver wand--tipped at one end with a
great sparkling emerald" [55] from the non-magical O-Z scepter he's
mentioned in earlier books. Neill seems to draw them alternately, however.
 
Ruth Berman wrote:
<<The reference to "Dorothy's own uncle" and to "his wife Aunt Em" links up
with Zeb's reference to "my uncle" and "your uncle" to suggest strongly
that Henry is Dorothy's relation by birth-kinship, and Em her aunt by
marriage.>>
 
Good eye.
 
Ruth Berman wrote:
<<the portrayal of war may give an indication that "Lost Princess,"
"Magic," and "Glinda" were written in the same sequence that they were
published. . . . This set-up sounds like Baum's reaction to WWI fairly late
in the war>>
 
I think the GLINDA portrayal of war is more in tune with the Wilsonian
attitude *before* 1917: that war was a foolish drain on nations instigated
by ambitious leaders, but that a third party stepping in (as Ozma does) can
be swept up into the conflict. If GLINDA had closely reflected American
attitudes during late 1917 and 1918, one side of the war would clearly be
wrong and Ozma would be justified in allying with the other.

  A number of phrases or images hint that Baum wrote MAGIC and GLINDA
around the same time. Flathead Mountain, with its saucer-shaped living area
on top, is much like Mount Munch as Baum describes it in MAGIC (though not
in TIN WOODMAN). Both MAGIC and GLINDA have a "Magic Isle" [85].

  In addition, there are some parallels with LOST PRINCESS: Ozma held
prisoner, a large search party going after her, a room that moves to
enclose people (Ugu's domed chamber and Coo-ee-oh's island), a magician
turned into a bird and loving it. However, in LOST PRINCESS Baum wrote
about (and Neill pictured) Glinda's swan chariot, while in GLINDA Baum
twice refers to her stork chariot [153]. (Near this reference Neill draws a
sort of stork [149].)

  On the other hand, both GLINDA and TIN WOODMAN show us an invisible wall,
a Yookoohoo, and a monkey wearing a lace apron [208]. One big shift between
those books is the value GLINDA places on Nick Chopper's heart, calling it
"not of much account" [158].

  If we accept that GLINDA wasn't the last manuscript Baum drafted, at some
point he made a choice about which would be the last Oz book he presented
to the world. It strikes me that MAGIC is a better culmination of his
series: Ruggedo brought to heal at last, everyone gathered at Ozma's palace
for a party. But the theme of GLINDA (discussed below) seems stronger. What
do others think?
 
Ruth Berman wrote of:
<<Some particularly attractive Neill artwork -- the use of page-and-a-
half chapter headings gave him room for some lovely large-screen
views>>
 
These fine double-page chapter openers were a benefit of Reilly & Lee
having the complete manuscript of GLINDA well before publication. The
printers had time to create galleys of text they knew was final, measure
how much space each chapter's text took up, and assign space for
illustrations so each chapter ended on a right-hand page. As a result, some
chapters have more art than others: chapter 8 has six illustrations on 14
pages, chapter 9 two on 12 pages.

  [I recall Neill and the book designers playing similar games with later
books like SPEEDY and JACK PUMPKINHEAD. I wonder if those manuscripts also
came in unusually early.]

  Some of Neill's drawings, especially on double-page spreads, strike me as
having graphite or crayon elements as well as ink lines. The picture of
Coo-ee-oh as a swan on pp. 128-9 is especially notable in this way.

  One book-mechanics element I can't figure out is why the top line on
certain pages [e.g., 91, 114, 178, 222, 267] is unnecessarily spread out.
 
David Hulan wrote:
<<Button-Bright takes shameful advantage of the wolf and tiger that Glinda
has immobilized. He deserves a scolding for that, but doesn't get it.>>
 
From Glinda's point of view, Button-Bright was largely unaffected by
criticism from her and the Glass Cat, so she might realize another lesson
would be a waste of words.

  More importantly, it appears that in Oz trying to eat a person
(especially a favorite of Princess Ozma) removes you from the benefits of
polite society, such as being protected from mischievous boys. It seems to
be acceptable for animals, even "civilized" beasts like the Cowardly Lion,
to eat other animals as long as they don't talk about it. Those who prey on
humans, however, can without regret suffer plunges into canyons, beheadings
[WIZARD], stakes through their chests [MAGIC], and so on.
 
David Hulan wrote:
<<That steel pillar that raises the Skeezer city has a rather Freudian
aspect, methinks...>>
 
Not to mention a telescoping bridge and torpedo boats!

  Notably, Baum has all these effects created by one powerful youthful
woman (Coo-ee-oh), using magic taught by three others (the Adepts)--no male
members of this group. Baum also says Coo-ee-oh had "a rare genius for
mechanics" [264], a trait stereotypically assigned to men.

  Which brings us to a mystery of the Skeezers' dome. Lady Aurex states,
"the three Adepts...built for us this wonderful dome of glass" [112], but
also, "The dome was built so that the island could disappear" [123]. Yet
Aujah and the other Adepts have only cursory knowledge of the mechanism
that raised and lowered the island [264]. Perhaps they built the dome to
let the Skeezers hide from the elements, and Coo-ee-oh added the
sub-sub-submerging part. Or perhaps Coo-ee-oh tricked the Adepts into
building the glass dome in a way that fit her secret plan.

  After my drive along the Erie Canal this summer, I noted how Baum may
have derived the idea for raising and lowering the lake from growing up
near the canal in Chittenango. The description of launching the submarine
boats on page 259 is even more similar to how canal locks work.
 
David Hulan wrote:
<<On page 97 the Skeezers are described as bearing firearms. One wonders,
then, why the four Skeezers who accompanied Coo-ee-oh in the submarine, and
who are described as being armed, didn't use those weapons on the Flatheads
when Coo-ee-oh was transformed?>>
 
Yet another sign of how Coo-ee-oh's despotic rule has made most Skeezers
unable to act for themselves--even when left alone in the boat, they don't
even try swimming or paddling the boat with their arms [183].

  Yet another portrayal of citizens--even soldiers--not wanting their
leaders' war.

  And yet more phallic symbols rendered impotent when their female creator
vanishes [leaving them in the hands of men].
 
Miscellaneous GLINDA comments:

  I've long disliked the conveniently dropped handkerchief on page 39.

  Baum gave both Glinda and the Flatheads alarm bells, and Neill depicts
them in three different chapter-openers [70, 85, 149]. If Baum had had more
time to revise the manuscript, he might have made one of those a different
sort of noise-maker, so as not to repeat himself.

  Twice Baum ends chapters with cliff-hangers, a technique he didn't always
employ: 83, 189. In the latter, Ervic literally poses the question, "What
next?"

  Useful key to personalities on page 114: "This story filled Ozma's heart
with sorrow and Dorothy's heart with indignation."

  On page 151 Baum has Glinda asking a question of some oracle he calls
"the Record"; it replies "No." This may be the Great Book of Records, but
he refers to that on this page spread as "the Great Book," not "the
Record," and I don't recall any other example of it responding to a
reader's question like the Magic Picture. We know Glinda prefers to keep
her magic room secret [19]. Therefore, I conclude that Baum the historian
never had a clear picture of how Glinda learned about the limit on Ozma's
power.

  Page-164-renders-Tik-Tok's-speech-in-an-unusual-style.

  The Tin Woodman's right hand has an odd grip on his ax in the drawing on
page 193. I believe Neill was right-handed. Artists often have trouble
drawing the hand they use to draw; it's easier to pose the other one.

  Looking at Coo-ee-oh as a swan, Trot says, "It doesn't seem like much of
a punishment. The Flathead Su-dic ought to have made her a toad." [194] Too
bad Neill didn't show us the Frogman's expression on hearing that.

  The Wizard is dubious that Glinda has brought enough rope for him to
climb down [255, with apologies to Dorothy], yet on the next page he
"discovered that the rope was long enough to reach from the top of the Dome
to the ground when doubled." Glinda, the Adepts, and/or Ervic must have
helped him improvise a pulley from the top of the Dome, though Baum says
nothing about that.

  The Adepts warn against extending the Skeezers' bridge before raising
their island, yet the party takes no precautions before they "experiment"
with Coo-ee-oh's name [268]. Their chance of making that mistake was 50%,
both before and after "Coo" sent out all boats. (Incidentally, now that
David Hulan has noted the seemingly prescient use of "dictator" on Flathead
Mountain, I'll point out how "Coo-ee-oh" echoes the title of that most
powerful modern ruler, the CEO.)
 
I was struck by how many different types of magic GLINDA portrays, and how
clearly it shows or states that each is limited. In chapter 1 the Great
Book of Records's shortcomings are as evident as its power. On the way
north Ozma tells Dorothy, "I am not as powerful as Glinda the Sorceress. .
. . Even the little Wizard can do some things I am unable to accomplish,
while I can accomplish things unknown to the Wizard" [58].

  Glinda can't raise an island [152], though with recipe 1163 she can "make
inanimate objects move at my command" [232]. The golden pig "couldn't do
any witchcraft [because] a witch has to use her fingers" [80]. Baum even
introduces three new types of magic-workers: a Krumbic Witch [103], Adepts
[112], and a Yookoohoo [206--if we assume he drafted this part of GLINDA
before TIN WOODMAN]. All of these magic-workers can overcome part of the
others' powers, but not all.

  Where do these limitations leave us, or lead us? Glinda explains: "Ozma's
magic is fairy magic, while you are a Wizard and I am a Sorceress. In this
way the three of us have a great variety of magic to work with" [239]. The
Adepts add yet more power--and, it seems, another type of power--as they
help to lower Skeezer Lake and figure out Coo-ee-oh's spells. (Their
arrival is possible only because of Reera's magic, of course.)

  But even a range of magic isn't a complete solution. As early as the
giant spiders, Baum shows us that Dorothy's inspiration and Ozma's magic
are both necessary for escape [43]. Ozma even jokes, "you have at least one
magical art, Dorothy: you know the trick of winning all hearts." (Like
fairy powers, Dorothy's charm is a natural quality, not acquired: "I am
sure I don't know *how* I do it," she replies [62-3].) Magicians'
occasional dependence on intelligent ordinary people is also a big theme in
Ervic's subplot.

  Understandably, Baum shows children as crucial participants in solving
the book's problems--Glinda can't do it all alone, even in her own book, as
Robin Olderman noted. Dorothy finds Coo-ee-oh's Gaulau and sees her name as
a likely key to using it. Her value is underscored when Baum shows the
Wizard as skeptical at first [265-7].

  The need to be open for contributions from all quarters is most clear in
Scraps's suggestion to lower the lake. Baum shows the Adepts convinced that
"If the Great Sorceress and the famous Wizard and the three talented Adepts
at Magic [note how he piles on adjectives] were unable as yet to solve the
important problem of the sunken isle, there was little chance for a patched
girl stuffed with cotton to succeed" [247]. It's up to Trot and Betsy--two
kids--to recognize the value of the Patchwork Girl's idea. Their enthusiasm
convinces Glinda to listen. (But we shouldn't forget that the first time
Scraps asked, "Why not pump the water out of the lake?"--back on page
163--Glinda snapped, "Do be sensible!")

  All that leads to a lesson that has floated through most of Baum's Oz
books since WIZARD, but never more prominently than in GLINDA: "None of us
is as smart as all of us."
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: Tyler Jones <Tyler at apprentice.com>
To: "Dave Hardenbrook (E-mail)" <daveh47 at mindspring.com>
Subject: Oz
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 15:39:39 -0700
 
Thoughts on _Glinda_: 
Ozma's encounter with Queen Coo-Ee-Oh gives an insight into Ozma's sovereignty.
Really, by what right does she rule the entire area contained in the Deadly
Desert? Her birth into an existing royal line may give her legitimate authority
over much of the central area, but what of the outlying areas? They never swore
allegiance to Ozma. In fact, many of them have never even heard of the Land of
Oz (although the Su-Dic apparantly knows all about it).
 
Ozma claims that her authority comes from Lurline. Of course, all Lurline did
was to fly over the land and declare that it was hers. I can see it now. A
gigantic spaceship lands outside of Washington, DC.
 
Alien: "Sorry, humans, but 10,000 years ago, my ancestor the great Nagorjarogo
flew by and declared this planet for himself and his descendants. He never told
anyone and never returned, but it's mine, so all of you are now my obedient
subjects".
 
However, I say join the crowd. I hereby declare myself Emperor of all Africa.
:-) 
 
Tyler Jones

From: Tyler Jones <Tyler at apprentice.com>
To: "Dave Hardenbrook (E-mail)" <daveh47 at mindspring.com>
Subject: Oz
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 11:15:16 -0700
 
More thoughts on _Glinda_:
Another interesting tidbit in this story is a discussion between Dorothy and
Ozma about the nature of magic. Ozma mentions that if everybody could do
everything, the quality of life would decline. I'm writing this from the
office, so I'm relying on memory. Perhaps somebody else could comment more
thoroughly. Also, Ozma says that no one person can perform all types of magic
at the highest ability.
 
In a way, Baum was foreshadowing RPTs Oz, where this became a realiy. Ozma had
so much power at the end of RPT's run, that she could indeed do just about
everything with little or no effort.
 
I always liked the idea of an underwater glass city (assuming the dome is
fairly strong). At night, when the lights went on, it must have sparkled in
great beauty.
 
Upon remembering that the Flatheads were allocated one can of brains each, some
questions came to mind (no pun intended).
 
1. If a child is born, where do it's brains come from?
 
2. Death and/or destruction could still happen. Would the deceased's can of
brains be rendered unto Ceaser? (in this case the Su-Dic). Perhaps the
population was relatively constant. With a population of 100 in an isolated
area with no danger, the death rate (and birth rate) would be exceedingly low,
so that there would always be about 100 people anyway.
 
3. What was life like for the Flatheads who had their cans of brains taken away
from them? Before, when nobpy had brains, they probably just milled around, but
now they would be living in a society where everybody else had a leg (or a
brain) up on them.
 
In a way, the cans of brains echo a Dilbert Comic Strip, wherein Dogbert's
consultants were so intelligent, they had to have their excess brains strapped
to their torsos. Okay, it was actually liver, but how many PHB's would know the
difference? :-)
 
Tyler Jones

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 22:49:54 -0500
From: Tyler Jones <tnj at compuserve.com>
Subject: Oz
 
John Bell again:
We've discussed the political implications of eating animals before,
especially during the BCF discussion of _DotWiz_. My example was that it
was OK for the Lion to go off into the forest and find his own supper, but
not OK for Eureka to eat a Piglet, a special pet of Ozma/Wizard.
 
Dorothy's heart of indignation:
IMHO, Dorothy seems more upset that the Skeezers and the Flatheads do not
acknowledge Ozma's rule than the trivial aspect of war. Of course, the
Su-Dic knew of Ozma, but ignored that knowledge.
 
Glinda's Oracle indicates that she has other methods of finding out
information that the Great Book. This may be used to get specific info
about events that are only hinted at in the Record Book.
 
 
Tyler Jones

Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 09:35:02 -0800
From: Barbara Johnson <barbarajohnson at midco.net>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 01-04-99
 
Tyler and John Bell
 
Re:
 
>>>John Bell again:
We've discussed the political implications of eating animals before,
especially during the BCF discussion of _DotWiz_. My example was that it
was OK for the Lion to go off into the forest and find his own supper, but
not OK for Eureka to eat a Piglet, a special pet of Ozma/Wizard.>>>>
 
There seems to be some pretty strong statements against cannibalism in Land of Oz...
when Jack Pumpkinhead feels threatened...Jinjur wants to make pies out of him...
and.. when the characters are marooned in the Jackdaws nest... the
subject of eating Jack comes up again...
 
It seems to be brushed aside fairly briskly...friends don't eat their
friends!
 
B

From: Tyler Jones <Tyler at apprentice.com>
Subject: Oz
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:47:09 -0700 
 
_Glinda_ and magic:
For me, the use and discussion of magic in _Glinda_ has always been a
benchmark for my view of magic in general in the Ozzy Universe, the idea
that nobody could do everything and that there are many different aspects of
magic. This was turned on it's head by RPT, of course, when their magical
power became all but limitless.
 
Ozma's rule on who can or cannot practice magic seems to be stretched a
little in this story. The Adepts apparantly are granted an exception to this
rule and Reera is not prevented from her own practice.
 
Tyler Jones

Date: Mon, 4 Jan 99 13:01:32 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: ozzy digest
 
 
[these are some comments from a bit earlier that don't seem to have 
got through.]
 
David Hulan:

   I think the references to a pink kitten and a purple kitten may 
represent an idea of a pinkish-purplish color and uncertainty as to 
what to call it, rather than multiple kittens in separate colors.  (Could 
well be a typo, though.)

   [A p.s. based on more recent comments -- on the Oz-as-fiction level, 
I suspect that Lisa Mastroberte is right in thinking that the purple kitten 
started out as a confusion of memory between Eureka and the Ev 
Prince so enchanted.  Gehan Cooray asks how Eureka came to be 
pink outside the lights of the Mangaboo suns anyway -- in connection 
with the "Magic" discussion, I suggested that Eureka might have 
enjoyed being pink and might have asked Ozma to make her pink 
permanently once she managed to get herself into Oz as a permanent 
resident.  David Hulan, by the way, has suggested in his Oz-writings 
that she got back into Oz by tagging along but staying out of sight in 
"Dorothy and the Wizard."]
 
[end of re-sent comments]
 
Tyler Jones:
   Ozma's right to rule the whole of Oz -- we don't really know enough 
about Oz history to know to what extent Pastoria-and-forebears 
claimed jurisdiction over all the territory inside the desert and to what 
extent other groups granted it.  She might have a good deal of 
precedent for the claim, or might have very little (apparently she has 
enough to satisfy her own conscience, and she has a generally 
scrupulous conscience, after all).

   Where canned brains come from and go to -- maybe we should 
assume that the spell includes delivery of a can (by stork? hanging on 
the umbilical cord?), and that destroying the owner produces spoilage 
of the brains?
 
J.L. Bell:
   "Glinda" warfare as reflecting stage of WWI while US is still neutral 
and not later than US entry into the war on Allies' side -- you're 
probably right.  But the "Magic" portrayal of war as an easily-quelled 
revolution sounds like something still earlier.  (David Hulan suggested 
the monkey soldiers may perhaps not even reflect WWI at all, as the 
description of them sounds more like operetta-soldiers -- Neill's illo, 
and the "Magic" dedication would have to be later than that, but, as he 
pointed out, the illos necessarily and the dedication quite possibly 
would come later than the text.)  Your suggestion that Baum might 
have been working on both concurrently (and on "Tin Woodman," 
assuming its lack of WWI references is a matter of theme and not of 
date) for most of the way sounds a reasonable possibility, though.

   Interesting point on Ozma's sorrow and Dorothy's indignation as a 
mark of character difference.

   I think the Frogman might feel serenely unconcerned in discussions 
of ugliness of toads.
 
Ruth Berman

Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 20:21:27 GMT
From: David Hulan <davidhulan at ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digests, 12-31-98 thru 01-04-99
 
1/3:
J.L.:
You have an illustration of Princess Dorothy on page 10 of your copy? In
mine, that's the second page of the introduction and there's no
illustration at all. What edition do you have? (Mine's an R&L from, I would
guess, the mid-'40s; no color plates, but with the old-style thick paper
that went out with the editions of the '50s.)
 
>  One book-mechanics element I can't figure out is why the top line on
>certain pages [e.g., 91, 114, 178, 222, 267] is unnecessarily spread out.
 
I checked several, though not all, of those, and in each case the line is a
"widow" (or possibly an "orphan"; I think the former is what it's called
when the last line of a paragraph is on a different page from the rest, and
the latter when the first line of a paragraph is on a different page, but I
might have those backwards). And for whatever reason the typesetter
justified the line rather than leaving it ragged right, as is normal for
the last line of a paragraph. I don't know enough about typesetting in 1920
to know why that sort of thing would happen, but the basic cause is clear.
Leaving widows is considered bad practice in books I've read on typography;
it's normal to either do something to squeeze the last line onto the
previous page, or to push a second line onto the following page. The
typesetter of _Glinda_ may have thought that justifying the widow so you
don't see a short line at the top of a page was an acceptable alternative,
even though it left wide spaces between words.
 
>  Which brings us to a mystery of the Skeezers' dome. Lady Aurex states,
>"the three Adepts...built for us this wonderful dome of glass" [112], but
>also, "The dome was built so that the island could disappear" [123]. Yet
>Aujah and the other Adepts have only cursory knowledge of the mechanism
>that raised and lowered the island [264].
 
I think it most likely that the Adepts built the dome very shortly before
Coo-ee-oh enchanted them. Coo-ee-oh probably had already invented the
raising and lowering mechanism for the city, but found that making a good
watertight dome wasn't the sort of thing a Krumbic Witch did well. So she
somehow tricked the Adepts into making it for her, and once she'd done that
she got rid of them because presumably they could have removed the dome as
easily as they'd created it.
 
I agree with you about the conveniently dropped handkerchief on page 39.
Baum handled it better in _Lost Princess_ when they circled Thi; they
started and ended at a natural feature of the landscape. Ozma and Dorothy
could have done the same with a distinctive tree, for instance. Or at least
Dorothy's dropping the handkerchief could have been described, rather than
being brought up only when it was found again.
 
>  The Adepts warn against extending the Skeezers' bridge before raising
>their island, yet the party takes no precautions before they "experiment"
>with Coo-ee-oh's name [268].
 
Well, what precautions could they have taken? I suppose they could have
temporarily evacuated the dome via the rope, etc., so that if something
happened there'd only be the few magic-workers to get out if the dome
sprang a leak.  But there wasn't any way to test what word did what except
to try one and see.
 
Tyler:
Ozma's assertion that people need to have to work hard for things in order
to be happy is certainly an idea that has been put forward many times
through history. Whether it's true or not is a separate thing, like the
idea that pain builds character. I'm skeptical, myself, but don't have any
concrete proof one way or the other. The picture of the child of wealthy
parents who is miserable even though he has everything he wants without
having to work for it is certainly a popular one in fiction, but from my
personal observations it's not all that common in real life. It happens,
yes - I could cite a few specific cases I know of - but it seems to me that
it's the exception rather than the rule. However, I don't know of any
serious study of the issue.
 
David Hulan

Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 16:09:55 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: Oz mysteries and histories
 
Tyler Jones wrote of Ozma:
<<by what right does she rule the entire area contained in the Deadly
Desert? Her birth into an existing royal line may give her legitimate
authority over much of the central area, but what of the outlying areas?
They never swore allegiance to Ozma. In fact, many of them have never even
heard of the Land of Oz (although the Su-Dic apparantly knows all about
it).>>
 
Many outlying Ozians accept Ozma's rule (Glinda, Bini Aru), or at least
know they should (Pipt, Su-dic, Ann Soforth). To me that's one of the
strongest pieces of evidence that Oz was in fact once unified, and that
most Ozians were brought up to hope for restoration of the legitimate line
of rulers. But your questions do cut to the paradox hanging over inherited
monarchs: their authority is based on a combination of divine right and raw
power.

  You're probably right that <<Dorothy seems more upset that the Skeezers
and the Flatheads do not acknowledge Ozma's rule than the trivial aspect of
war.>> She does tend to jump to emotionally-based conclusions, especially
when her friends are threatened.
 
Tyler Jones wrote:
<<Upon remembering that the Flatheads were allocated one can of brains
each, some questions came to mind (no pun intended).

  1. If a child is born, where do it's brains come from?

  2. Death and/or destruction could still happen. Would the deceased's can
of brains be rendered unto Ceaser? (in this case the Su-Dic). . . .

  3. What was life like for the Flatheads who had their cans of brains
taken away from them?>>
 
As with the Skeezers, the Flatheads have limited living space, so they may
well not reproduce. I recall no children in either society. With
destruction rare--especially during the Adepts' peaceful rule--there would
thus be no need to address the first two questions.

  The rise of Rora Flathead and the Su-dic changed that, of course. Based
on Baum's depictions of other characters with no or very little brains, I
expect the brainless Flatheads functioned at a low level, but not a
comatose one. Here's a related question: When Rora was turned into a pig,
where did her brains go? 
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 22:56:49 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: leaving "Oz" out of the subject line
 
Of GLINDA, David Hulan wrote:
<<You have an illustration of Princess Dorothy on page 10 of your copy? In
mine, that's the second page of the introduction and there's no
illustration at all. What edition do you have?>>
 
I have a "white cover" edition, and often the frontmatter of those reissues
was shuffled (usually the "This Book Belongs to" page became a page of text
called "The Famous Oz Books"). This illustration is opposite the contents
table. "Princess Dorothy" appears in profile looking right, with a ribbon
in her hair and a bonnet in her hand.

  The "white cover" edition of GLINDA contains no introduction at all--no
doubt because a discussion of Baum's death was unnecessary by the 1960s. 
 
About the odd spread-out lines in GLINDA [e.g., 91, 114, 178, 222, 267],
David Hulan wrote:
<<I checked several, though not all, of those, and in each case the line is
a "widow" (or possibly an "orphan"...). . . . The typesetter of _Glinda_
may have thought that justifying the widow so you don't see a short line at
the top of a page was an acceptable alternative, even though it left wide
spaces between words.>>
 
The mystery is that spreading the words to fill top lines isn't consistent:
pages 136, 164, and others have widows/orphans without the same extra
spacing. Pages 184 and 185 are normal, while page 182 in the same chapter
is right-justified. The spreading may have been a quirk of linotype
machines that was corrected only in some places, or a designer's choice
inconsistently applied, but either way it's an oddity. 
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999
Return-Path:
<d.godwin at minn.net>
From: d.godwin at minn.net (David G.)
Subject: Oz
 
Spread-out lines in _Glinda_:
IMHO, the typesetter accidentally justified these lines and no one ever caught
most of them before it went to press. I don't know what typesetting method was
used in this case, but ISTR vaguely that, on a Linotype, two keys had to be
punched at the end of each line: a justify and a return. If the line was to be
flushed left and not justified, you would punch quad left, return. A short line
at the end of a paragraph would justify if you hit justify, return, by mistake
- easy enough to do if you've got a rhythm going. Also hazardous. But that
doesn't explain why, in this particular instance, it only occurred with
widows.
 
- David G.
 
 

Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 23:22:12 -0500
From: Tyler Jones <tnj at compuserve.com>
Subject: Oz
 
More thoughts on _Glinda_:
When I noticed the difference in how Coo-Ee-Oh and the Su-Dic reacted to Ozma's
rule, I figured that Coo-Ee-Oh was not much form informational magic. Her magic
seems to be fairly mechanical in nature. Then I remembered her ability to hear
all words in her city, until Ozma put the kibosh on it.
Coo-Ee-Oh may not have had any long distance magic, and either the Su-Dic (or
his wife) did, or he employed spies.
 
I almost abbreviated Coo-Ee-Oh as CEO, but I decided not to. :-)
 
Tyler Jones

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 18:09:13 GMT
From: David Hulan <davidhulan at ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digests, 01-06-99 thru 01-08-99
 
1/6:
Tyler:
>Ozma's rule on who can or cannot practice magic seems to be stretched a
>little in this story. The Adepts apparantly are granted an exception to this
>rule and Reera is not prevented from her own practice.
 
Ozma's rule on who can or cannot practice magic seems to be highly flexible,
actually. We see characters other than Ozma, Glinda, and the Wizard practicing
magic in almost every book where much of the action takes place in Oz.
Sometimes Ozma stops them; more often she doesn't. Dr. Pipt in PG is stopped,
and Blinkie in _Scarecrow_, but Blinkie's associates aren't tracked down and
stopped. Ugu is stopped in LP, but there's no evidence the bear king is told
not to use his magic. Mrs. Yoop is stopped in TW, but Nimmie Amee is still
using magic and nothing is done about her. Bini Aru voluntarily stops using
magic in _Magic_, and Kiki Aru is stopped, but nothing is done about the
Lonesome Duck or the Kalidah King. And there are the examples you mention in
_Glinda_. And that's just Baum; there are even more magic-workers who get no
condemnation in the Thompson books.
 
1/8:
Tyler:
OK, I misremembered the distinction between "widows" and "orphans." As I said
at the time, I wasn't sure.
 
David Hulan

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 08:37:25 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com> 
Subject: Christopher Columboz
 
David Godwin wrote:
<<ISTR vaguely that, on a Linotype, two keys had to be punched at the end of
each line: a justify and a return. If the line was to be flushed left and not
justified, you would punch quad left, return. A short line at the end of a
paragraph would justify if you hit justify, return, by mistake>>
 
Thanks for this recollection. It definitely appears to be a mechanically-eased
mistake. A printer's devil setting by hand would have checked the manuscript
before going to the trouble of justifying the lines.  
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 16:28:11 GMT
From: David Hulan <davidhulan at ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest
 
Tyler:
It might be that the Su-dic found out about Ozma's rule by non-magical means;
e.g., a little bird told him. (I guess that's "magical" in a sense, but only in
the sense that everything in Oz is magical.) Possibly Coo-ee-oh didn't find out
in the same way because the Skeezer city is enclosed, and she wasn't outside
when the bird passed by. Even if the bird had told one or more of the other
Skeezers about Ozma, do you really think they'd have told their cruel queen
that she was supposed to defer to another ruler?
 
David Hulan

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 10:58:11 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: Eureka! I've found her.
 
About Glinda, Gehan Cooray wrote:
<<If she knows all this, why not help US for once? Why not help the thousands
who are dying in Sri-lanka thanks to this terrible war trhan preventing a silly
battle between the Skeezers and Flatheads? . . . Why not help those who cant
share all the comfortsthe Ozites do?>>
 
On page 21 of GLINDA, the sorceress counsels Ozma, "Had you not learned of the
existence of the Flatheads and the Skeezers, through my Book of Records, you
would never have worried about them or their quarrels. So, if you pay no
attention to these peoples, you may never hear of them again." That is, sad to
say, not an uncommon human attitude toward catastrophe on the other side of the
world. And Glinda is human--Glinda the Good, not Glinda the Perfect.
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com 

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:16:58 -0500
From: Tyler Jones <tnj at compuserve.com>
Subject: Oz
 
John Bell:
Glinda's attitude regarding ignoring the problem of the Flatheads and SKeezers
seems to indicate that her primary function is to keep Ozma's throne secure,
and not necessarily to help improve the general welfare of the Oz people.
 
Tyler Jones