Day 1 - An "evening in April" - Robin rides the merry-go-round - Roundelay steals the last circlet
Day 2 - National Emergency in Halidom - Robin arrives in View Halloo - Giles, Fess, Fred, Flitter
  leave Halidom secretly at night, followed by Unicorn
Day 3 - Fess & Co. visit Sign Here & Oracle - Dorothy & Cowardly Lion visit Easter Bunny,
  meet Fess & Co. - combined companies visit Home, escape, discover 1st circlet - night in Blue
  Forest - Robin & Merry escape from View Halloo at night - remainder of night in cave
Day 4 - Robin & Merry cross river at ferry, come to Roundabout - joined by Fess, Dorothy &
  Co. In late afternoon/early evening - night in Round Room - Flitter rescues circlet #2
Day 5 - At dawn Merry discovers map to Halidom/Troth - escape from Roundabout - arrive Halidom at
  tea-time - interview with Sir Greaves - Ozma arrives - Giles & Fred promoted - Robin &
  Merry welcomed to Oz

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 10:34:51 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] merrygoround land of oz

Not quite finished re-reading "Merry Go Round in Oz," but far enough along
to have some impressions to share.

The opening scene, the evocation of the state fair, is probably one of the
most effective Ozbookopenings done, with the description done entirely in
terms of sounds (blared, snapped, banged, sizzled, shrieked, chimed -- and
the rubbing hands like sandpaper on wood). Robin is a bit similar to RPT's
Bob Up, but is thrown into more of a lead role, since his only companion is
not a parental figure like Notta, but the newly-conscious and timid wooden
horse. (I forget who commented that the portrayal of the wooden horse in the
"Return to Oz" cartoon based on "Land," but including Dorothy, voiced by
Liza Minelli, seems to have been influenced by Merry. Mostly, the cartoon's
Wooden Horse is the Sawhorse, but he comes off a merrygoround and has some
Merryish traits.)

I felt and still feel doubtful about the effectiveness of having so much
Anglophile material in an Oz book -- the huntin' crowd, the monacle-wearing
Easter Rabbit (and I wonder about delivery problems for an Easter Rabbit
based in Oz, although I suppose the basic idea of having the Rabbit
somewhere in the area is no odder than Baum's decision to have Santa Claus
just across the desert), the heraldic kingdoms of Pz and Troth, and the Good
Children and their Nannies in this book. (Not quite so strong a
concentration in the McGraws' other books -- the highwayman in "Forbidden
Fountain" and the Gilliken nobility of "Rundelstone," but still an important
element.) RPT's medievalish little kingdoms, by contrast, have a more
democratic flavor, without the use of characters who worry about their
bloodlines. But the humor in all the Anglophile material is so strong that
it did and does wind up giving enough amusement to make me feel in the end
that it works in the McGraws' books. Robin's combination of shyness and
timidity (he and Merry are something of a pair -- and it's their desire each
to help the other that results in a lot of their growth toward more
confidence in the story) and yet bravery and friendliness make him an
interestingly complicated character, also an attractive one.  Fess has a
somewhat similar role in coping with the foibles of his impetuous (Gules and
Fred) or clinging (Unicorn and Flittermouse) friends, but has to be slyer
and also firmer about it, as his friends are not disposed as Merry is to
grant him authority, so that he does not simply double Robin's activities
but is interesting in his own right.

More later, probably.

Ruth Berman

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:03:06 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] merrygoround land of oz

Ruth:
>The opening scene, the evocation of the state fair, is probably one of the
>most effective Ozbookopenings done, with the description done entirely in
>terms of sounds (blared, snapped, banged, sizzled, shrieked, chimed -- and
>the rubbing hands like sandpaper on wood).

I remember Eloise saying that she had originally planned an origin story for
the little man who sends Robin to Oz, but she had since forgotten it.  Any

idea where he might have come from?

>(I forget who  commented that the portrayal of the wooden horse in the 
>"Return to Oz" cartoon based on "Land," but including Dorothy, voiced by
>Liza Minelli, seems to have been influenced by Merry. Mostly, the cartoon's 
>Wooden Horse is the Sawhorse, but he comes off a merrygoround and has some
>Merryish traits.)

Woodenhead Stallion doesn't really act that much like either wooden horse,
but he definitely has some traits in common with Merry, like his desire to
run around in circles instead of in a straight line.

>I felt and still feel doubtful about the effectiveness of having so much
>Anglophile material in an Oz book -- the huntin' crowd, the monacle-wearing 
>Easter Rabbit (and I wonder about delivery problems for an Easter Rabbit
>based in Oz, although I suppose the basic idea of having the Rabbit
>somewhere in the area is no odder than Baum's decision to have Santa Claus
>just across the desert), the heraldic kingdoms of Pz and Troth, and the
>Good Children and their Nannies in this book.

I think you mean Halidom, rather than Pz.  I didn't really mind the English
flavor (or should that be "flavour"?), but it's definitely a change from the
rest of the Oz series.
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 16:50:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] merrygoround land of oz

--- Nathan Mulac DeHoff <xornom at hotmail.com> wrote:
I didn't
> really mind the English
> flavor (or should that be "flavour"?), but it's
> definitely a change from the
> rest of the Oz series.

The Anglicisms of MERRY GO ROUND have been pointed out
many times, but I've never found them particularly
out-of-place or even that intrusive.  I grew up not
far west of Philadelphia, and just over a few fields
from my back yard was (and is) a hunt club, and many
Saturday mornings I'd see the red-jacket riders
galloping across the meadows.  Daniel Mannix once
pointed out, Oz, to him, often felt a bit like
southeastern Pennsylvania: the rolling hills and
woods, the old and well-kept farms.  I have often felt
similarly, and anything I'd see around growing up,
seemed likely to turn up in Oz. 

Alan Wise

Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:50:49 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND opening

Ruth Berman wrote:
<<The opening scene, the evocation of the state fair, is probably one of
the most effective Ozbookopenings done, with the description done
entirely in terms of sounds (blared, snapped, banged, sizzled, shrieked,
chimed -- and the rubbing hands like sandpaper on wood).>>

I noticed that noisy opening, too, and that sensitized me to all the
other descriptions of overwhelming noise through the book:

* The merry-go-round makes a "glorious, if deafening, noise" [4].
* Robin has to make "as much noise as he possibly could" to cue Merry to
  run [21; also 168].
* Robin's response to fox hunt is that "he had never heard quite so much
  noise" [28]. At View-Halloo, "When Yoicks was not booming something,
  Tantivy was" [35].
* At the emergency council in Halidom, "Queen Farthingale was holding
  her ears as she always did, because she didn't like the noise" [64].
* Howzatagin has been nearly deafened by the waterfall [110].
* The parties from the Emerald City and Halidom meet in a noisy
  argument: "piercing neigh...loud, insulting yelling...tremendous
  roar...screamed...shrieked" [153].
* At Roundabout, Robin complains, "they're making too much noise to hear
  a single word we say" [184].
* The Good Children are "Chattering in their piercing trebles...[with]
  loud, shocked noises of concern and sympathy" [194].
* The Machine fends off intruders with a "Tremendous clamor of alarm
  bells...the noise shrilled and screamed and banged and clanged" [236].
  (The McGraws also used the verb "shrilled" in describing the Good
  Children [193].) The Machine's "racket" alone is enough to turn someone
  as determined as Dorothy away [239].

Usually in MERRY GO ROUND loud noise means people aren't listening,
particularly to Robin. It often signals confusion and arguments. But
sometimes loud noise is pleasing (the merry-go-round) and sometimes
simply natural (the waterfall). The Cowardly Lion's "deafening" roar is
one of the heroes' best weapons [197, 257]. So how are the McGraws using
this motif? Do the mentions fall into a pattern, or are they just a
common element in how these authors describe scenes?

Unfortunately, just as I've finished the book, I have to go out of town
on sudden family business. So I must save my answers to those questions
and other comments until the middle of next week. I look forward to
seeing other people's thoughts on MERRY GO ROUND. (David Maxine at
Hungry Tiger Press might be able to offer insight into Eloise McGraw's
work, including that mysterious calliope attendant in chapter 1.) I also
appreciate all the remarks on Oz illustrators, and hope to learn more
about Dick Martin.

J. L. Bell                 
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 21:22:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Gardner <hermiemunster at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Regalia] merrygoround land of oz

--- Ruth Berman <berma005 at umn.edu> wrote:

> Not quite finished re-reading "Merry Go Round in
> Oz," but far enough along
> to have some impressions to share.
>
> The opening scene, the evocation of the state fair,
> is probably one of the
> most effective Ozbookopenings done, with the
> description done entirely in
> terms of sounds (blared, snapped, banged, sizzled,
> shrieked, chimed -- and
> the rubbing hands like sandpaper on wood).

The first time (and only time so far) I read MERRY GO
ROUND, the opening caught me by surprise because of
the fact of its location, where I lived! I would have
never imagined that any of the Oz visitors came from
within miles of me. It was later exciting to discover
that the McGraws came from Portland (or lived there, I
think?). It was/is sad to think that I theoretically
could have met Eloise McGraw.

Unfortunately, I don't have the book with me at school
(in Orange, California) so I won't be able to reread
it. I did bring HIDDEN VALLEY but never had time to
get past chapter one. Some day I'll get on the ball
with these book discussions...

Joe G.

Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 11:23:56 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND and American visitors to Oz

Joe Gardner:
>The first time (and only time so far) I read MERRY GO
>ROUND, the opening caught me by surprise because of
>the fact of its location, where I lived! I would have
>never imagined that any of the Oz visitors came from
>within miles of me.

A quick search reveals that there really is a Clackamas County in Oregon,
but there isn't actually a town called Cherryburg.

As for visitors to Oz coming from your area, well, I live near Philadelphia,
so I never had trouble finding them, especially in the Thompson books.

Within the FF and Quasi-Famous books, we find people and other beings
visiting and/or moving to Oz from homes in the following states:

Kansas (Dorothy, Toto, Aunt Em, Uncle Henry)
Nebraska (Wizard)
California (Zeb, Jim, Trot, Cap'n Bill, Humpy)
Pennsylvania (Button-Bright, Bob Up, Peter Brown, Tompy Terry, David Perry)
Colorado (Shaggy Man and his brother)
Oklahoma (Betsy Bobbin)
Illinois (Bill the Weathercock)
Massachusetts (Benny)
New York (Speedy, Bucky Jones, Twink and Tom)
New Jersey (Jenny Jump)
Ohio (Jam, Percy, Pinny, Gig)
Oregon (Robin and Merry)

In addition, DOTWIZ states that Jim had also lived in Kentucky and Illinois,
and it's quite possible that Eureka was originally from Australia.  We never
find out the original home states of Billina, Hank, or Notta Bit More, but I
think they're all Americans.

Am I forgetting anyone here?
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 09:44:34 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] mcgrawings, glinda's books

"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I think you mean Halidom, rather than Pz. <

I think I was trying to type Pax-on-Argent, but ought to have said Halidom,
since I meant the kingdom name -- not to mention that maybe I would have
succeeded in getting all the letters in.

Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com> wrote:
> The Anglicisms of MERRY GO ROUND have been pointed out many times, but
> I've never found them particularly out-of-place or even that intrusive.  I
> grew up not far west of Philadelphia, and just over a few fields from my
> back yard was (and is) a hunt club, and many Saturday mornings I'd see the 
> red-jacket riders galloping across the meadows.  Daniel Mannix once
> pointed out, Oz, to him, often felt a bit like southeastern Pennsylvania:
> the rolling hills and woods, the old and well-kept farms.  I have often
> felt similarly, and anything I'd see around growing up, seemed likely to
> turn up in Oz.   >

Interesting point.

Joe Gardner <hermiemunster at yahoo.com> wrote:
> It was/is sad to think that I theoretically could have met Eloise McGraw.
> <

Sad to have missed that opportunity -- but maybe you'll meet Lauren McG.
Incidentally, have you looked up E McG's non-Oz books? My favorite of the
ones I've read is "The Moor Child," which is a fantasy-story set in an
imagined realm with a medieval-England-flavor, but she also has some
non-fantasy ones set in the Portland area.

Ruth Berman

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:04:22 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] merry-go-round, mostly

"J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net> wrote:
> I noticed that noisy opening, too, and that sensitized me to all the other

> descriptions of overwhelming noise through the book <

Not but what there are also a lot of vivid evocations of other senses. For
an early instance (in the opening paragraph of chapter 2), the vision and
bodily imbalance of "Seeing nothing more alarming than a patch of blue sky 
and a couple of clouds, he opened the other eye and tried to sit up. This
proved difficult, both because he was dizzy and because whatever it was he
had fallen into didn't seem to want to be sat upon. Peering down at it, he
perceived that it was a mass of leaves and twigs and thorns; as his head
cleared, he realized he was sprawled in the middle of a hawthorn hedge." Or,
for a late instance (in chapter 19), the description of tea-time as "the
loveliest of all hours in Halidom, when the first blue shadows were
lengthening over the fields of azure, gathering among the sloping mulberry
orchards, and reaching out to stain a turret here and a crumbling tower
there."

"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I remember Eloise saying that she had originally planned an origin story
> for the little man who sends Robin to Oz, but she had since forgotten it.
> Any idea where he might have come from? <

His rhyming speech patterns don't sound like it, but the description of him
as round and short sounds like Sir Greves. Could Sir Greves have found a
time-traveling charm to take him back after the story's end to its
beginning, to the carnival, to start the whole adventure? But that doesn't
sound like something the McGraws would have had in mind. I wonder if at some
point in the development of the story, the idea was to have Roundelay be
round and short like most of the other Roundheads, insteady of lean-and-sly,
and to have him learn from the Oracle that the popinjay had dropped the
third ring in a carnival ride and that if he went to the carnival and
pointed a suitable boy at it the boy would set in motion the fulfillment of
the prophecy that would bring prosperity to the Roundheads. If that was the
plan at some point, I suppose it would have been possible (but maybe
inartistic to bring in an additional Roundhead as an important character) to
explain that it was one of the other Roundheads while out peddling -- 
Spirals or Polkadots, maybe -- who got this advice from the Oracle and went
after Robin with the ring accordingly. Or I suppose they might have been
thinking of the Roundheads' prophecy as coming from some other source
entirely, but with the Oracle around earlier in the story, it seems at least
possible that the McGraws were thinking of it as being the source of the
Roundheads' prophecy as well as of the prophecy given to Prince Gules.

I forget who (a long time back) commented that Ozma and the Unicorn couldn't
very well have known each other as Ozma puts it "a long time ago ... We were
both with the Fairy Lurline then" unless Ozma had had a grown self at the
time and transformed into a baby shape when Lurline left her with Pastoria
(Snow's version -- RPT's version is that Ozma was Pastoria's daughter and
descended from the first fairy left by Lurline to rule Oz, and Baum strongly
hinted in "Glinda," that Ozma was herself the fairy Lurline left to be the
first ruler of Oz, although in "Dorothy/Wizard" he also had Ozma describe
herself as Pastoria's daughter and the descendent etc.). It occurs to me
that a somewhat simpler method of reconciling Ozma's Ozian infancy and her
acquaintance with the Unicorn might be to assume that the "long time ago"
isn't all *that* long a time ago, and that the Unicorn, although "given to 
the first Herald of Halidom by the fairy Lurline in ancient days," might
have visited Lurline now and again in more recent times. She might not have
the magical power to cross the Desert on her own, but if Lurline provided
transportation for visits, and if "a long time ago" meant some 10-15 years
earlier, Ozma might have met the Unicorn while visiting Lurline in Snow's
"Mimics."
 
Ruth Berman

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:26:40 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] merry-go-round, mostly

Ruth:
>"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>I remember Eloise saying that she had originally planned an origin story
>>for the little man who sends Robin to Oz, but she had since forgotten it.
>>Any idea where he might have come from? <
>
>His rhyming speech patterns don't sound like it, but the description of him 
>as round and short sounds like Sir Greves. Could Sir Greves have found a
>time-traveling charm to take him back after the story's end to its
>beginning, to the carnival, to start the whole adventure? But that doesn't
>sound like something the McGraws would have had in mind. I wonder if at
>some point in the development of the story, the idea was to have Roundelay
>be round and short like most of the other Roundheads, insteady of
>lean-and-sly, and to have him learn from the Oracle that the popinjay had
>dropped the third ring in a carnival ride and that if he went to the
>carnival and pointed a suitable boy at it the boy would set in motion the
>fulfillment of the prophecy that would bring prosperity to the Roundheads.
>If that was the plan at some point, I suppose it would have been possible
>(but maybe inartistic to bring in an additional Roundhead as an important
>character) to explain that it was one of the other Roundheads while out
>peddling --  Spirals or Polkadots, maybe -- who got this advice from the
>Oracle and went after Robin with the ring accordingly.

I do recall Eloise saying that she probably intended the man to be from
Roundabout, and his repetitive speech patterns seem pretty similar to the
circular manner in which the Roundheads talk.  I doubt it was intended to be
Roundelay, though.  Not only does Roundelay not look or talk like the other
Roundheads, but Robin doesn't recognize him upon meeting him in Roundabout.

Speaking of Roundabout, it's similar to the community of the Round-Abouties
that Trot, Benny, and the Scarecrow visit in GIANT HORSE.  Despite its
idiosyncracies, however, Roundabout is a relatively realistic city with a
fairly successful economy, while the Round-Abouties apparently don't do
anything but dance around in circles (i.e., the McGraws' take on the "round"
theme is more developed and realistic than Thompson's).  I actually asked
Eloise about the similarity at a Munchkin Convention, and she said she
hadn't read GIANT HORSE before writing MERRY GO ROUND.

Weren't the followers of Oliver Cromwell known as Roundheads?

--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 14:14:55 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] roundelay and h's

"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I do recall Eloise saying that she probably intended the man to be from
> Roundabout, and his repetitive speech patterns seem pretty similar to the
> circular manner in which the Roundheads talk.  I doubt it was intended to
> be Roundelay, though.  Not only does Roundelay not look or talk like the
> other Roundheads, but Robin doesn't recognize him upon meeting him in
> Roundabout. <

Well, there might have been a stage when it was intended to be Roundelay,
and at that stage the narrative presumably would have had Robin recognize
him. Or, of course, she might have intended the mystery-man and Roundelay to
be separate characters at the start -- so it's a question of whether the
change-of-mind involved a change in Roundelay's character, making him
unsuitable to be the mystery-man, or a a change in how many Roundabouts
would be presented as important characters. (Or maybe some other change
entirely? -- but one of those two looks likely enough.)

> Speaking of Roundabout, it's similar to the community of the
> Round-Abouties that Trot, Benny, and the Scarecrow visit in GIANT HORSE.
> Despite its idiosyncracies, however, Roundabout is a relatively realistic
> city with a fairly successful economy, while the Round-Abouties apparently 
> don't do anything but dance around in circles (i.e., the McGraws' take on
> the "round" theme is more developed and realistic than Thompson's).  I
> actually asked Eloise about the similarity at a Munchkin Convention, and
> she said she hadn't read GIANT HORSE before writing MERRY GO ROUND. >

The similarities come about mostly as a development from the basic pun of
roundabout, but, as you say, the development is quite different. It's not
really surprising that Eloise didn't have the earlier version in mind.

> Weren't the followers of Oliver Cromwell known as Roundheads? <

Yes, they cut their hair short, unlike the Cavaliers, who wore their hair in
long flowing lovelocks.
 
Ruth Berman

Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:50:57 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] unicorns

The combination of footnote and text on p. 73 suggests that an editor at R&L
made a good catch. The text, I imagine, is what the McGraws wrote by itself,
at first, saying that the Unicorn was "the only known creature of her kind."
The footnote qualifies: "At least, the only one known in Halidom and Troth.
There are other unicorns in Oz, as all scholars of Ozology know. But I'm not
a bit sure they were _fairy_ unicorns, are you?"

Specifically, of course, the other Oz unicorns are Loo in "Magic" and 
Roganda and her subjects in "Ojo." the unicorn comes rather late to stories.
Dragons, by contrast, show up in all kinds of legends -- Merlin's prophecy,
battles-with by St. George (in legend, and in Spenser's "Faerie Queene"),
Perseus (translating "ketos" as a sea-dragon, as most translations do,
although that isn't how modern zoology uses the term), Angel Michael,
guardian dragons on the Golden Fleece and Golden Apples, Daniel's poisoned
dragon, and so on. Unicorns, by contrast, show up in books meant to be
zoologically factual (well, more or less) such as Pliny's, and as a heraldic
animal. They get mentions in the Bible (supposedly -- modern translations
usually give r'em as meaning wild-ox), and the identification of the unicorn
as a symbol of Christ made it a popular figure in art, but they don't
actually get used as characters much until modern times. The nursery rhyme
of "The lion and the unicorn were fighting for the crown" is a
literalization of the heraldic image of the supporters of the British
coat-of-arms following the unification of England and Scotland (lions had
been on a lot of English royal arms, and unicorn on Scottish), and is that
perhaps the first use of a unicorn as a character in an actual story (very
brief, as narratives go, but still characters who carry out an action), and
from the nursery rhyme they got into Carroll's "Looking Glass."

Baum's Loo is quite a minor character. RPT's Roganda is presented as a more
important character, but still not a central character. I wonder if Odell
Shepard's nonfiction book in 1930, "The Lore of the Unicorn," may be
responsible for the importance of unicorns as characters in modern fantasy.
Can anyone think of pre-1930 examples of unicorns as important characters?

Shepard points out that medieval artists clearly thought of unicorns as
being rather more like deer or even goats than like horses and as having
cloven hooves. Modern fantasy writers, like RPT, usually seem to think of
unicorns as much more horse-like. RPT specifies that Roganda looks like a
horse with a horn, and Neill drew her that way. (Loo is such a minor
character that there's no illo of him and no description.) The McGraws don't
specify. Dick Martin's drawings do make the Unicorn look a little more
deer-like, the more so as he needs to contrast her with Merry the wooden
horse, but in the glimpse of the hoof-bottom as they fall from the fire
escape, p. 134, it looks as if the Unicorn does not have cloven hooves.
Still, it does look in the illos as if Roganda and the Halidom Unicorn
belong to different species, even though called by the same label.

Ruth Berman

Eloise Jarvis McGraw & Lauren McGraw Wagner, Dick Martin

Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:07:20 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] more on unicorns

I said that I thought there wasn't much about unicorns prior to Odell
Shepard's 1930 "The Lore of the Unicorn." I checked Malcolm South's article
on unicorns in his anthology of "Mythical and Fabulous Creatures," and the
examples he gave (mostly of novels) seemed rather late to imply that the
unicorn greew in popularity as a result of knowing more about them from
Shepard. (And I note in his list an example of unicorns earlier in narrative
than the lion&unicorn nursery rhyme -- but the unicorn episode of Rabelais' 
_Gargantua and Pantagruel_ isn't really all that well known, is it, in spite
of the fame of the work as a whole?)

South lists some early 20th century works, such as Yeats' play "The Unicorn from the
Stars" (1908), but unicorns were still mostly minor figures when used in the
early part of the 20th century. But most of the books later than Shepard's
non-fiction book that he lists are really quite a good deal later -- e.g.,
T.H. White's _The Witch in the Wood_ (1940 -- reprinted in abridged form in
_The Once and Future King_), Sturgeon's short story "The Silken Swift" (F&SF
Nov. 1953), Peter Beagle's _The Last Unicorn_ (1968). (One that South
doesn't list, Ella Young's 1932 "The Unicorn with Silver Shoes" might in
terms of date be drawing on Shepard. Again, though, the unicorn, although
used to give the book its title, is still a minor figure in the book as a
whole.)

The change in importance-in-story that can be seen in Baum's Loo compared to
Thompson's Roganda compared to the McGraws' Unicorn parallels the growing
popularity of unicorns in the 20th century, but I wonder if people have any
thoughts on the reason for the growth. It's not like dragons, which started
showing up in fiction (after a long hiatus when little fantasy of any kind
was being written) at the end of the 19th century, but showed up in rather a
large mass at the very end of the century, including three major stories,
Grahame's "Reluctant Dragon," Nesbit's "Book of Dragons," and Baum's Purple
Dragon (in "A New Wonderland"/"Mo"). Carroll's unicorn showed up earlier,
but didn't have much in the way of followers until a bit later, and even
then unicorns didn't start to have the almost-dragon-rivaling popularity
they do now until later still. I wonder what factors gave them this
slower-but-in-the-end-comparably-large growth.

Ruth Berman

Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:09:53 EDT
From: AGannaway7 at aol.com
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND hoofnotes

On 9/29/04, Ruth Berman wrote:

<<The combination of footnote and
text on p. 73 suggests that an editor at R&L
made a good catch. The text, I imagine, is what the McGraws wrote by itself,
at first, saying that the Unicorn was "the only known creature of her kind."
The footnote qualifies: "At least, the only one known in Halidom and Troth.
There are other unicorns in Oz, as all scholars of Ozology know. But I'm not
a bit sure they were _fairy_ unicorns, are you?">>

I remember reading in an old BUGLE
(probably the issue coinciding with the 20th anniversary of MERRY GO ROUND)
that Dick Martin went through the manuscript thoroughly and made some very
polite suggestions to Eloise McGraw about factual accuracy. The unicorn example
may even have been singled out as something Dick caught. This makes much more
sense than attributing a "good catch" to any R&L editor. Judging
by the degree of continuity in the first 39 Oz books, I feel confident in
saying that being detail-oriented was not a primary characteristic of the editorial
staff at that company.

Incidentally, it occurred to me
yesterday that MERRY GO ROUND stands out as being the only one of the Famous
Forty that lacks an author's note at the beginning. (GLINDA and ROYAL BOOK
don't have author's notes in the strictest sense, but there are introductory
remarks, nonetheless.)

Atticus Gannaway

Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:27:31 -0500
From: David Hulan <dhulan at wideopenwest.com>
Subject: [Regalia] Re: Unicorns

Ruth:
> South lists some early 20th century works, such as Yeats' play "The
> Unicorn
> from the
> Stars" (1908), but unicorns were still mostly minor figures when used

> in the
> early part of the 20th century. But most of the books later than
> Shepard's
> non-fiction book that he lists are really quite a good deal later --
> e.g.,
> T.H. White's _The Witch in the Wood_ (1940 -- reprinted in abridged
> form in
> _The Once and Future King_), Sturgeon's short story "The Silken Swift"
> (F&SF
> Nov. 1953), Peter Beagle's _The Last Unicorn_ (1968). (One that South
> doesn't list, Ella Young's 1932 "The Unicorn with Silver Shoes" might
> in
> terms of date be drawing on Shepard. Again, though, the unicorn,
> although
> used to give the book its title, is still a minor figure in the book
> as a
> whole.)

There's also a children's book, I think from the '40s but maybe later,
called The Little White Horse, by Elizabeth Goudge. The "horse" of the
title is actually a unicorn. And there's a "unicorn" in the Harold Shea
adventure The Mathematics of Magic (part 2 of The Incomplete
Enchanter), but it turns out to be a rhinoceros...

David Hulan

Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 15:11:23 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] footnotes and =20s

AGannaway7 at aol.com wrote:
> I remember reading in an old BUGLE (probably the issue coinciding with the 
> 20th anniversary of MERRY GO ROUND) that Dick Martin went through the
> manuscript  thoroughly and made some very polite suggestions to Eloise
> McGraw about factual  accuracy. The unicorn example may even have been
> singled out as something Dick  caught. This makes much more sense than
> attributing a "good catch" to any  R&L editor. Judging by the degree of
> continuity in the first 39 Oz books, I  feel confident in saying that 
> being detail-oriented was not a primary characteristic of the editorial
> staff at that company. >

Well, *someone* at R&L. Dick Martin acting in an editorial role sounds more 
likely than whoever was formally in the text-editor's job, though, you're
right.

Ruth Berman

Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 23:20:53 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND noisy noise annoys

When last heard from on MERRY GO ROUND, I replied to Ruth Berman's
comments on the book's raucously noisy opening with nine more citations
about overwhelming noise. And I wondered whether that pattern added up
to a meaningful theme.

Here's my reading of that motif. Noise seems especially significant to
Robin's story because over and over he's stuck in situations where no
one listens to him. Robin speaks "in a calm voice, as usual," so in the
McGudgey family he's ignored. There's that marvelous moment on page 2,
told entirely in the big brother's drill-sergeant dialogue, when Robin
has to tug on Tim's sleeve to even be noticed. Robin talks to himself
[8], probably because no one else listens until Merry.

When Robin needs to get people's attention, he has to yell, as in
View-Halloo on page 35: "'I'm NOT a kennel-boy!' Robin yelled at last. .
. . For an instant there was a perfectly astonished silence." That's the
same tactic the Cowardly Lion uses when he roars loud enough to stun
everyone [197]. But it doesn't work as well for Robin; soon everyone in
the kingdom is "talking jovially at once" again, and "Nobody heard him."
Robin concludes, "They're as bad as the McGudgeys...Worse!" [38]

Though Howzatagin is much more friendly than the Huntsmen, Robin has to
yell to get his attention, too. "Make as much noise as you can, Merry!"
he yells [106]. "'I said /we'd like to cross the river/,' Robin
shrieked, wishing he could turn off the waterfall. . . . 'WHAT'S THE
FARE?' Robin bellowed." [110]

Robin grows frustrated and desperate enough to shout again on page 180,
in Roundabout: "'oh, jeepers, if they'd only.../Be quiet!/' Robin yelled
suddenly at the top of his voice. To his surprise, everybody obeyed
instantly, but before he could draw another breath Roundelay was already
talking again." And we all know how well that conversation works out for
Robin and Merry.

In the Halidom plot, having to raise one's voice above others is also a
sign of a problem: that everyone from Halidom is stupid. Fess "had to
speak more loudly than ever now" when explaining the National Disaster
to Gules as well as his parents [57]. In contrast, in the Sign-Here
orchard of signs, there's "not one sound to be heard" [118]. Its
inhabitant, Bill Bored, communicates purely through visuals (like Thun
in SILVER PRINCESS). He points the party to the Oracle, another silent
communicator which turns out to be the main source of truth for this
novel. Symbolically, thus, silence is as golden as the Circlets.

The culmination of this theme, as I see it, comes back to Robin, after
Gules has finished his quest and is struggling with what to do about Sir
Greves. On page 281, the McGraws tell us:
++++++
    "I even feel sorry for the Roundheads," Robin said.
    He had spoken in his usual quiet voice, and had more or less assumed
he was talking to himself, since people seldom heard him unless he
shouted. Therefore he turned a little pink when everybody stared at him.
++++++

Robin has finally found a place where people listen to him even when
he's not yelling. Gules and his comrades can heed him during a difficult
but calm discussion on justice because they've become smart once more.
The noise theme thus helps us trace Robin's successful search for a good
home and substitute family, and Halidom's recovery.

[I have to admit that, although I didn't consciously remember that big
moment in Robin's story, I basically replicated it in my short story
"Ozma Fights the Sniffles," published in OZIANA. So even if other folks
don't find it that meaningful, it sure stuck with me.]

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:15:27 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND Unicorn

Thanks to the gents at Hungry Tiger Press, I can quote Eloise McGraw
herself about the Unicorn's uniqueness. The following comes from a
speech the McGraws gave at the 1983 Winkie Convention, with audio and
text available at:

++++++
Among my first Ozzy correspondents were--first of all, of course, Fred
Meyer, though I had already received a couple of messages from Dick
Martin via our Reilly and Lee editor, Maxine Rieckhoff, one of which
gently but firmly informed me that there were, too, other unicorns in
Oz, in fact a whole country full of them, and I could not have my
unicorn claiming to be Unique.
    So in my first letter to Fred I was apologizing for that goof (as I
already had to Dick) and promising to be more careful...
++++++
So it looks like Martin noted the discrepancy, the editor passed on the
news and worked with McGraw on the footnote, and McGraw was still
apologizing to Fred around MERRY GO ROUND's publication, as word of a
new book spread among Oz fans.

I find McGraw's footnote on page 73 to be an adequate explanation for
why the Unicorn thinks she's Unique--no apologies from the author
necessary. After all, several celebrity animals in Oz think they're
unique, and this Unicorn has some sort of fairy background to make her so.

Is there any other footnote in the Reilly & Lee Oz books besides that
one and the one Baum added to TIK-TOK when he realized [how?] that he'd
given the Nome King a new name in print? The McGraws planned several for
FORBIDDEN FOUNTAIN, but (according to that speech, once again) cut them
back before publication.

Ruth Berman wrote:
<< RPT specifies that Roganda looks like a horse with a horn, and Neill
drew her that way. (Loo is such a minor character that there's no illo
of him and no description.) >>

It behooves me to say that there are black and white pictures of Loo in
MAGIC, but none shows the detail you're seeking: his hoofs. Three show
his head and shoulders, the fourth him as the clownish man Kiki
transforms him into. Baum does write that "Loo the Unicorn reclined,
much as a horse does," which implies he was imagining a horned horse.

Even as a unicorn, Loo doesn't look as noble as Roganda or as dainty as
the fairy Unicorn. He's got big, mule-like ears and somewhat scraggly
hair at the base of his horn. That's interesting to consider alongside
your analysis of how unicorns didn't really flourish in fantasy
literature until after 1930. Their image as physically gorgeous and
appropriate for middle-school notebooks may not have been cemented yet.
[Tenniel's Unicorn seems to be primarily a caricature of Disraeli, and
thus not a model for later artists.]

MERRY GO ROUND offers some support for the idea that Loo and Roganda are
different sorts of unicorns from this fairy Unicorn (and perhaps from
each other). Dorothy has met Loo once, Roganda at least twice, yet when
the parties have bumped into each other on page 156, she asks, "/Is/
that a Unicorn?" That implies Halidom's Unicorn looks somehow different.

Before we leave Loo, I'll say that I find him an odd figure. Among
Gugu's counselors in MAGIC, he seems to be comic relief. The king, Bru,
and Rango seem to be stolid, thoughtful, and strong. Loo is excitable
and has "a high, squeaky voice." Unlike the others, he's happy to be
transformed into a man. Baum wrote, "All these are fierce and ferocious
beasts, and hold their high offices because they are more intelligent
and more feared then their fellows." But that just makes me wonder about
the foolishness of the rest of the unicorns or whatever contingent of
the forest population Loo represents.

<couldn't very well have known each
other as Ozma puts it "a long time
ago ... We were both with the Fairy Lurline then" unless Ozma had had a
grown self at the time and transformed into a baby shape when Lurline
left her with Pastoria. . . . It occurs to me that a somewhat simpler
method of reconciling Ozma's Ozian infancy and her acquaintance with the
Unicorn might be to assume that the "long time ago" isn't all *that*
long a time ago, and that the Unicorn, although "given to the first
Herald of Halidom by the fairy Lurline in ancient days," might have
visited Lurline now and again in more recent times.>>

I think "a long time ago" or "ever so long" for an immortal like Ozma
(once she knows she's a fairy) would be even *longer* than it would be
for us humans. Especially when the Unicorn tells Ozma, "You don't look a
day older" [290]. Since they've both been living in Oz, that would be an
odd statement indeed if they'd met within human memory.

But then I *do* imagine Ozma being transformed from a fairy into a human
baby and in the process losing most of her immortal memories before
WIZARD, gradually regaining her immortal memories as well as her magical
knowledge in OZMA through TIN WOODMAN. I also read the phrase "with the
Fairy Lurline then" as meaning both Ozma and the Unicorn were serving
for an immortally long time in Lurline's fairy band.

J. L. Bell                 
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:28:59 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND design

Atticus Gannaway wrote:
<<it occurred to me yesterday that MERRY GO ROUND stands out as being
the only one of the Famous Forty that lacks an author's note at the
beginning. (GLINDA and ROYAL BOOK don't have author's notes in the
strictest sense, but there are introductory remarks, nonetheless.)>>

Interesting observation. I have the Books of Wonder edition, and it also
lacks the beloved "This Book Belongs to" page. Can anyone confirm that's
absent from the original Reilly & Lee edition as well?

Those omissions lead me to a credit on the title page that appears to
have come from the original edition: "Designed & Illustrated by DICK
MARTIN." Martin, a big Oz fan, seems to have created the whole "look" of
the book. You'd think that he'd be especially careful about including
all the elements of a "real" Oz novel. Then again, maybe he doesn't list
a "This Book..." page among those. Or maybe the publisher decided
librarians didn't like that page, and were hoping for better library
sales for this book.

Martin nicely mirrors the way Denslow counts down Dorothy's three wishes
in WIZARD with three similar drawings of the Circlets, starting on page
207 [pagination forces the third of those drawings, on 285, a page
early]. He also followed the lead of a couple of earlier books by
including a map, labeled as drawn by Robin, Dorothy, and Fess (/not/
Prof. Wogglebug). I think the kiddos could have been a little clearer on
where the journeys start and end; the most prominent arrow in the map is
actually pointing /opposite/ the direction of movement.

On the other hand, Martin made some significant changes from earlier Oz
books' designs. There's a new typeface, and an even fancier display type
for the running heads. Another novel feature of this novel is
mid-chapter illustrations that spread across two opposing pages [36-7,
f'rinstance], but don't take up the whole spread as Neill sometimes did
(e.g., JACK PUMPKINHEAD). These lead up to the big confrontations
between the two parties on 226-7, with the Ozians on one page and Robin
and Merry on the other.

I like Martin's endpapers, which show a nice play-jousting match between
Fess on the Unicorn and Robin on Merry, with Emerald City favorites and
the Flittermouse looking on. Note how the round pillows on the lances
reflect the style of Fess's bedroom in Halidom [44].

Another mystery for me is the new Books of Wonder dust jacket. I liked
the Reilly & Lee cover, showing characters on a merry-go-round. It had a
white background that matched the firm's "white cover" editions, also
designed by Martin. Why didn't BoW reprint the R&L cover, as it did with
its Neill and Thompson reissues? Perhaps the original art was lost.
Perhaps it wouldn't fit the new edition's trim size. Perhaps so much
white makes books more vulnerable to looking scuffed and dirty. Or
perhaps Peter Glassman wanted to give/get more work for Martin.

In any event, Martin's style had changed over the years, becoming more
simplified and "cartoony" than the interior art. But what seems oddest
is that the newer jacket features the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman, two
characters who don't appear in the adventure.

J. L. Bell                 
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 22:22:42 -0600
From: Ivan Van Laningham <ivanlan at pauahtun.org>
Subject: Re: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND design

HI All--

"J. L. Bell" wrote:
>
> Interesting observation. I have the Books of Wonder edition, and it also
> lacks the beloved "This Book Belongs to" page. Can anyone confirm that's
> absent from the original Reilly & Lee edition as well?
>

I can confirm.  I have both editions, the R&L and the BoW, and neither
has the "This Book Belongs to" page.  There's a drawing on the copyright
page, and a dedication, but no "Bookplate" page.

> Another mystery for me is the new Books of Wonder dust jacket. I liked
> the Reilly & Lee cover, showing characters on a merry-go-round. It had a
> white background that matched the firm's "white cover" editions, also
> designed by Martin. Why didn't BoW reprint the R&L cover, as it did with
> its Neill and Thompson reissues? Perhaps the original art was lost.
> Perhaps it wouldn't fit the new edition's trim size. Perhaps so much
> white makes books more vulnerable to looking scuffed and dirty. Or
> perhaps Peter Glassman wanted to give/get more work for Martin.
>
> In any event, Martin's style had changed over the years, becoming more
> simplified and "cartoony" than the interior art. But what seems oddest
> is that the newer jacket features the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman, two
> characters who don't appear in the adventure.
>

Right.  I have both the BoW edition of the book and the signed/numbered
dustjacket artwork sold separately.  Personally, I like it better than
the original R&L artwork, but that may only be because I bought the
artwork;-)

I still don't care that much for Dick Martin's work, but it's worlds
better than the previous two illustrators.  And I'm not a fan of
Denslow, either, so to me, OZ illustrators comprise Neill and Shanower.

By the way, having spent time in the military, I was especially pleased
by Tim's drill-sergeant dialogue.  It was a lovely bit of business.

Metta,
Ivan

Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 10:54:40 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] unicorns, home-bases, merry go round

David Hulan <dhulan at wideopenwest.com> wrote:
> There's also a children's book, I think from the '40s but maybe later,
> called The Little White Horse, by Elizabeth Goudge. The "horse" of the
> title is actually a unicorn. And there's a "unicorn" in the Harold Shea
> adventure The Mathematics of Magic (part 2 of The Incomplete Enchanter),
> but it turns out to be a rhinoceros...  >

Yes, the Goudge book is from 1947. I don't know when "The Mathematics of
Magic" came out in magazine publication, but the book publication is also
from late 40s, isn't it? Seems oddly late for suggesting an influence from
Shepard's 1930 "The Lore of the Unicorn," but if that's not an influence,
then I wonder what influences were involved in finally building up
popularity of unicorns between, say, Roganda and the McGraws. (The main
increase in popularity is maybe a bit later still, and maybe Peter Beagle's
1968 novel, "The Last Unicorn" would be important here.)

> I think "a long time ago" [since Ozma had last seen the McGraw's Unicorn]
> or "ever so long" for an immortal like Ozma (once she knows she's a fairy)
> would be even *longer* than it would be for us humans. Especially when the

> Unicorn tells Ozma, "You don't look a day older" [290]. Since they've both
> been living in Oz, that would be an odd statement indeed if they'd met
> within human memory. >

Yes, probably so. Considering that point, my suggestion of a possible
more-recent-meeting as one they'd count as "long ago" is unlikely.

> I have the Books of Wonder edition [of "Merry Go Round"], and it also
> lacks the beloved "This Book Belongs to" page. Can anyone confirm that's
> absent from the original Reilly & Lee edition as well? >

Ivan confirmed. I'd add that the absence of the Ex Libris page wasn't forced
on R&L by the layout -- there are two blank pages (backs of the dedication
and table-of-contents pages) that could have been used.

Ruth Berman

Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 17:29:09 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND and Lurline

MERRY GO ROUND is one of the few books in the FF that actually mentions
Queen Lurline.  (I believe the only others are TIN WOODMAN, GLINDA, LOST
KING, and MAGICAL MIMICS, but I'm sure someone will let me know if I've
forgotten any.)  According to p. 42, she gave the Circlets to Halidom "in
ancient times."  She also gave the Unicorn to "the first Herald of Halidom"
in "ancient days" (p. 73).  We don't know for sure that these two gifts were
bestowed at the same time, but it seems likely.

How long ago did Lurline's visit to Halidom take place?  Well, apparently
sixty-three kings ago.  We don't know how long any of the Heralds reigned,

but we're probably looking at a period of at least several centuries between
the visit and MERRY GO ROUND.  There has been some speculation, based
largely on YELLOW KNIGHT, that Lurline's enchantment of Oz occurred around
the thirteenth century.  700 years still seems a little short for the reigns
of sixty-three kings, though.  On the other hand, maybe Lurline's visit to

Halidom wasn't connected with the enchantment of the entire land.  It does,
however, seem to much up fairly well with her giving canned brains to the
Flatheads, which presumably DID occur during the enchantment.

I tend to think that they were of average skill, intelligence, and strength
when Lurline gave them the Circlets, but, over the generations, they became
dependent on them, to the extent that they were clumsy, stupid, and tired
without them.

On a totally unrelated note, but still on the subject of MERRY GO ROUND, I
find it interesting that both this book and HIDDEN VALLEY have animal
characters named Spots.  They're different kinds of animals with very
different personalities, though.

Does anyone have any indication as to what Thompson and Cosgrove thought of
MERRY GO ROUND?  The essay in the IWOC addition of OZOPLANING says that
Thompson wasn't too fond of the Snow or Cosgrove books, but I don't recall
seeing anything about her reaction to the McGraws' book (which was actually
the first post-Neill book to mention one of her characters, namely Sir
Hokus).
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 21:38:21 EDT
From: AGannaway7 at aol.com
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND writing

On 9/27/04, Ruth Berman wrote:

<<Not but what there are also a lot of vivid evocations of other senses. For
an early instance (in the opening paragraph of chapter 2), the  vision and 
bodily imbalance of "Seeing nothing more alarming than a patch of blue sky
and a couple of clouds, he opened the other eye and tried to sit  up. This 
proved difficult, both because he was dizzy and because whatever it  was he
had fallen into didn't seem to want to be sat upon. Peering down at  it, he
perceived that it was a mass of leaves and twigs and thorns; as his  head
cleared, he realized he was sprawled in the middle of a hawthorn hedge." Or,
for a late instance (in chapter 19), the description of tea-time  as "the
loveliest of all hours in Halidom, when the first blue shadows were 
lengthening over the fields of azure, gathering among the sloping mulberry 
orchards, and reaching out to stain a turret here and a crumbling tower 
there.">>

Perhaps what strikes me most about MERRY GO ROUND is its high level of 
writing craft and emotional verisimilitude. For the Autumn 2001 issue of THE  BAUM
BUGLE memorializing Eloise McGraw, I wrote the following in my "Letter from 
the Editor":

*************(begin excerpt)
"Readers often feel closer to a writer than they do to their own 
families--feel a congeniality, almost an identification with him that the writer  knows
nothing about, and that perhaps doesn't really exist except in the reader's
mind. Then again, maybe it really does exist. Why not? As a reader I've felt
this closeness for certain writers--felt absolutely certain that if I knew  this
writer as a person, we would understand each other absolutely."
--Eloise Jarvis McGraw
...
Flipping through MERRY GO ROUND today, I can see and articulate the 
indications therein of a writer who knows what she is doing. The dialogue and 
characterizations exude personality and life. I come to the passage about the 
travelers' escape from Roundabout, when the animals in the party must bound on  the
whirling road like carousel creatures, and I smile as I read that "the 
Unicorn wore the affronted expression of a duchess being forced to dance a  jig." I
watch Robin grow from a timid, lonely boy afraid to expect anything but 
disappointment to a boy who dares to ask for what he most wants--a home in  Oz--and
is rewarded for his brave vulnerability. We all root for him, because we all
ARE him. Indeed, it is satisfying to note that the official Oz canon ends 
with the Cowardly Lion's welcoming Robin to Ozma's palace, where the boy will 
finally belong. The final paragraph is just two words: "Welcome home!" But what
a great deal is contained in that sentence. Any true writer understands the 
emotions and desires of a human being, and Eloise McGraw ends the book with
the  acknowledgment of that most basic need of all, the one which lends a
common  humanity to everyone: feeling a sense of belonging--feeling loved.

Reading some of Eloise McGraw's observations on writing, I was struck by the
astuteness of her remarks.... Her observation that I like best appears as 
the epigraph above. It penetrates to the deepest aspiration of a writer--to 
write so well that one's words will leave the indelible impression of oneself on 
others, a resonance that is never stilled.
*********(end excerpt)

There are numerous other examples of all these characteristics of the book's
prose, but I haven't the time to go into them just now.

Atticus Gannaway

Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:05:23 EDT
From: WndrfulWiz at aol.com
Subject: [Regalia] Cosgrove on Merry-Go-Round

In a message dated 10/8/04 3:36:36 PM, xornom at hotmail.com writes:

<< Does anyone have any indication as to what Thompson and Cosgrove thought of
MERRY GO ROUND? >>

Rachel once told me that she was put off by MERRY-GO-ROUND because "it can't
be read aloud." I'm not saying that I agree. She did say that she had expected
the story that finally became WICKED WITCH to be the next Oz book. She was
quite surprised when, years after it was turned down, the publisher came out
with a new one by someone else. Considering the fact that she told me that so
bluntly, I get the impression that she might have felt just the teeniest bit
bitter.

As for Thompson, I have no first-hand info. I have been told by at least
three sources that she was upset with FORBIDDEN FOUNTAIN because it featured
Kabumpo. Never mind the fact that Thompson was no longer even living at the time it
was written, nor that the book was dedicated to her memory. It is possible
that her heir voiced an objection, but I tend to doubt even that.

--Chris Dulabone

"To be individual, my friends, to be different from others, is the only way
to become distinguished from the common herd. Let us be glad, therefore, that
we differ from one another in form and in disposition. Variety is the spice of
life and we are various enough to enjoy one another's society; so let us be
content." -- The Cowardly Lion of Oz

Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:05:49 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] merry, uncles, mcgraw

"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> wrote:
> MERRY GO ROUND is one of the few books in the FF that actually mentions
> Queen Lurline.  (I believe the only others are TIN WOODMAN, GLINDA, LOST
> KING, and MAGICAL MIMICS, but I'm sure someone will let me know if I've
> forgotten any.)  <

That's the lot. There's a mention in Snow's short story, "A Murder in
Oz."

> How long ago did Lurline's visit to Halidom take place?  Well, apparently
> sixty-three kings ago.  We don't know how long any of the Heralds reigned,
> but we're probably looking at a period of at least several centuries
> between the visit and MERRY GO ROUND.  There has been some speculation, 
> based largely on YELLOW KNIGHT, that Lurline's enchantment of Oz occurred
> around the thirteenth century.  700 years still seems a little short for
> the reigns of sixty-three kings, though.  On the other hand, maybe
> Lurline's visit to Halidom wasn't connected with the enchantment of the
> entire land.  It does, however, seem to much up fairly well with her
> giving canned brains to the Flatheads, which presumably DID occur during
> the enchantment. >

700 years does seem too short for 63 reigns. Maybe there was a lot more
going on in the way of revolutions and dethronements than it sounds like, or
maybe there were only a couple of chaotic periods, but the numbering of the
monarchs got miscounted during them.

AGannaway7 at aol.com reprinted part of his comments on EJM -- A nice tribute!

Ruth Berman

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 13:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com>
Subject: [Regalia] How Ozzy is Merry?

--- Ivan Van Laningham <ivanlan at pauahtun.org> wrote:
I'm not sure I can
> be more specific,
> but do others think that MGR *feels* like an OZ
> book?  To me, HV doesn't
> at all, MGR a little bitty bit. ...

I think MERRY GO ROUND  does feel like an Oz book,
albeit a Thompson one which may not be so surprising
since the McGraws have said many times how much they
enjoyed RPT's additions to the series.  I think the
elder McGraw even once claimed that GRAMPA was her
favorite Oz book, and it seems to me that MERRY
follows a certain trajectory of early Thompson.
There's a central quest involving the well-being of a
smaller principality from the hinterlands of Oz, plus
the addition of a member or two of the central cast of
Oz celebrities who are out for a holiday only to find
themselves party to the quest.  This happens over and
over again in Thompson (KAPUMPO, GRAMPA, HUNGRY
TIGER,etc), and it seems to me that the McGraws
perfected this structure by deepening the resonances
for their protagonists.  Pompa's quest for the proper
princess never interested me much -- the adventure was
what counted -- but Gules' search for the circlets
made me want to root for him, to care about his
accomplishment.  Similarly Robin's growing into
himself through his adventures in Oz mirrored Bob Up's
journey in COWARDLY LION, but it was deeper and more
heartfelt.  And this is where I think the McGraw's tap
into what Baum had intended.  His Oz seems to be about
the growing of the self: Dorothy's first journey to Oz
requires that she find her way back to Kansas, but
that same journey makes it impossible for her to stay
there.  In addition to the pressures put upon Aunt Em
and Uncle Henry and the failing farm, it is impossible
for Dorothy to remain in the "stupid, humdrum world"
because her adventures, her growing maturity can only
find completion in the possibilities of Oz. 

Alan Wise

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:15:52 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND ring

I know the MERRY GO ROUND discussion has wound down of late, but I have
some more thoughts to share, and will try to pull my head out of
18th-century probate records long enough to think about the real world.

Folks talked a bit about the merry-go-round attendant at the beginning
of the book. He's weird enough, even for a carny, that the McGraws must
have meant something by him. I'm pretty sure I've read some comment from
the authors about hinting or originally planning to state that he was
from fairyland--perhaps even from Roundabout, as Nathan DeHoff
remembers--but I can't recall where. He certainly steers Robin toward
Merry, the little scarlet horse, and encourages him to grab the ring
that turns out to be magical. There's even an implication that Robin
couldn't have gone to Oz without his intervention.

It's unusual for an Oz book to start out with someone *trying* to get a
child to Oz for the first time. There are some possible precedents,
naturally: the balloon bird that flies off with Peter in GNOME KING,
Twiffle (or is it Twoffle?) enticing the twins into their TV in SHAGGY
MAN, the mermaids inviting Trot to visit in SEA FAIRIES. But in two of
those three cases, the kids actually have to escape from their initial
destination, where they'd be held captive. The third isn't really an Oz
book, and the rules strike me as slightly different (even though I
conceive of it in the Oz universe).

Usually kids' first visits to Oz or its region occur because of natural
disasters (shipwreck, cyclone, earthquake, explosion) or accidental
magic (whatever put Button-Bright on the side of Ozma's road, the Mudge
rhyme, Peter's piece of change). Dorothy also gets called back, but only
after three accidental trips. Those first visits carry the implication
that you, reader, should be ready for a sudden trip to Oz, too, since
such events happen at random. Your way is *not* gonna be smoothed by a
weird calliope attendant. So MERRY GO ROUND might be showing us a
fundamentally different picture of the door into Oz.

Related to that opening, MERRY GO ROUND's plot depends on a prophecy.
While Gules and his search party use the Oracle's words to guide their
journey to Roundabout, making its prophecy in part self-fulfilling, they
don't truly understand its details. Yet the prophecy comes true anyway.
Roundabout also has a prediction that works out, though it's vaguer to
begin with. The book therefore implies that there's an inescapable order
to this universe. Again, we can find occasional precedents (GRAMPA's
randy Prophet, PURPLE PRINCE's "Sooth!" for Randy), but generally Oz
books aren't plotted that tightly. They thus cast no doubt on
characters' free will. But in MERRY GO ROUND, could Gules have chosen
*not* to find the Circlets if he'd wanted to?

The interlocking underlying undeniable order of MERRY GO ROUND may be
something that both gives the book a tight yet elaborate plot and makes
it feel unlike other Oz books, as Ivan Van Laningham expressed.

Going back to the beginning, as a merry-go-round should, how many folks
have actually been on a merry-go-round with rings to grab? On the
example I remember, there was a sort of ring dispenser on the end of a
metal arm. It was fairly easy to grab a ring from the end of the arm,
but usually the one that was available was steel, not brass. Grabbing
the single brass ring won you a free ride. I assume that was the
standard mechanism for this sort of calliope, but MERRY GO ROUND says
nothing about other types of rings, just that Robin is determined to
grab a brass one.

I haven't seen another merry-go-round like that for decades. Perhaps
kids' wish for more thrills and insurers' worries about kids leaning off
their wooden steeds have combined to eliminate that amusement. "To grab
the brass ring" may become an inexplicable cliche in another generation,
to be followed by "an E-ticket ride."

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:47:29 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] upcoming discussions, merry discussions

Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com> wrote on the Ozziness of MGR --

Enjoyed the analysis.

"J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net> wrote on brass rings and
free will --

Enjoyed this discussion, too. Now that you mention it, I don't think I've
ever seen a merry-go-round with rings, although I've ridden on ones that
must have been old enough to have had them at one time or another.
Speculation that insurance concerns did away with them sounds plausible. The
phrase is likely enough to go on staying in use, though. After all, we still
talk about getting down to brass tacks, although there probably aren't any
stores around with brass tacks stuck into the counter to provide
measurements in the absence of commercially produced, easily available
yardsticks. (I think the US stores still all sell length goods by yards, not
meters? But I'm not sure -- it's a long time since I had occasion to buy
some yards of fabric, and that's about the only item I was ever likely to
buy that came in prices of length.)

Ruth Berman

Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:40:03 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] brass rings and E-tickets

I agree that the "brass ring" figure of speech is surviving the
disappearance of merry-go-rounds with brass rings to grab. But not
necessarily in an accurate way. Late this week the NY TIMES Business
section had a front-page article quoting an airline pilot as saying he
thought he'd "won the brass ring." Kids like Robin didn't *win* such a
ring; they *grabbed* the brass ring in order to win a free ride. The
pilot and/or reporter obviously knew that the brass ring was something
desirable, but it was unclear why.

As for "E-ticket," that term is a relic from before the Disney parks
charged visitors a single admission for a day, and then let them decide
whether they want to spend their time waiting in line for the most
popular rides or going on less popular attractions. Back in the early
1970s, when I first visited Disneyland, visitors bought a sheaf of
tickets at several prices, A through E, and then had to figure out what
rides to try. As Ruth Berman wrote, the biggest rides cost an E-ticket.
Here's more:

As people forget the original meaning of an "E-ticket ride," I bet the
phrase will get mixed up with our connotations with an "e-ticket," or 
electronic ticket for planes and the like.

The Oz books, most of them being pre-WW2, contain a lot of phrases that
might seem mysterious to us these days. Peter Brown in GNOME KING
described his school and athletic league in Philadelphia in phrases I
couldn't understand. I recall discussions of Baum's pre-WW1 phrases like
"blouse waist" and "sticking plaster" and
"wireless." Anyone else recall
such mysteries?

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 23:37:28 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND scene-setting

Alan Wise wrote:
<<Daniel Mannix once pointed out, Oz, to him, often felt a bit like
southeastern Pennsylvania: the rolling hills and woods, the old and
well-kept farms.  I have often felt similarly, and anything I'd see
around growing up, seemed likely to turn up in Oz.>>

That seems apt given Thompson's and Neill's homes in that region; they
contributed to more Oz books than anyone else.

While I was in southeastern Pennsylvania this summer, I photographed
Glinda's castle from the far side of a cornfield. (Actually, the
building's a Mennonite tourist attraction, but its bulk and pinkish
facade sure look right for Glinda's castle. I'd be happy to share a
digital image if anyone wants to check it out.)

Ruth Berman wrote of MERRY GO ROUND:
<<there are also a lot of vivid evocations of other senses. For an early
instance (in the opening paragraph of chapter 2), the vision and bodily
imbalance of "Seeing nothing more alarming than a patch of blue sky and
a couple of clouds, he opened the other eye and tried to sit up. This
proved difficult, both because he was dizzy and because whatever it was
he had fallen into didn't seem to want to be sat upon. Peering down at
it, he perceived that it was a mass of leaves and twigs and thorns; as
his head cleared, he realized he was sprawled in the middle of a
hawthorn hedge.">>

I agree that McGraw does better than any other author in the Oz series
at describing landscapes and tying them to characters' sensory
experiences. My analysis of the noise motif running through the book
takes nothing away from Eloise McGraw's overall descriptive powers.

Here are some more excerpts from that speech by her available at the
Hungry Tiger Press website. She starts by quoting a letter from Doug
Greene in 1980, commenting on the Ozzish landscape:
       "It was while reading FORBIDDEN FOUNTAIN that I suddenly realized
what makes MERRY GO ROUND (and its successor) different from the
Baum/Thompson et al Oz books--a greater sense of setting. Baum used
setting often to be whimsical; RPT to make puns. For both of them, place
was not very important for itself--with a few exceptions . . . but in
MERRY you carefully set up the history and language and attitudes of
Halidom and the Fox Hunters' country. . . . The result is a greater
feeling that what is described actually exists--not merely to provide an
excuse for a joke or an adventure."

And here's McGraw's response in 1983:
    "I hadn't realized I was making the setting more specific and real than
is usual for an Oz book--but a clear visualization of the scenery
through which my characters move is a necessary part of writing for me,
in any of my books. As I told Doug in my answer to that letter, for me,
the process of writing fiction is a lot like watching a movie (a talking
movie) inside my head. If I find the landscape going foggy, it's usually
a sign that it's a lousy movie, and I get busy doing something about it."

The opening descriptions in MERRY GO ROUND make an interesting contrast
with those in WIZARD. The first Oz book starts with a visual description
of overwhelming sameness. Not only is almost all of Dorothy's home one
color, but that color is gray. MERRY GO ROUND, in contrast, starts out
with an aural description of a nearly overwhelming mix of noises.

Both books, however, end up in the same place. WIZARD: "And oh, Aunt Em!
  I'm so glad to be at home again!" MERRY GO ROUND: "Welcome home!" [303]

J. L. Bell                 
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:49:23 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] landscapes of oz

"J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net> wrote:
> The opening descriptions in MERRY GO ROUND make an interesting contrast
> with those in WIZARD. The first Oz book starts with a visual description
> of overwhelming sameness. Not only is almost all of Dorothy's home one
> color, but that color is gray. MERRY GO ROUND, in contrast, starts out
> with an aural description of a nearly overwhelming mix of noises.Both
> books, however, end up in the same place. WIZARD: "And oh, Aunt Em!  I'm
> so glad to be at home again!" MERRY GO ROUND: "Welcome home!" [303] >

Interesting point. It's interesting to note that these similar endings are
quite opposite in terms of where Dorothy is to be at home and where Robin
is.

I'm not so sure about Doug Greene's point in the quotation from his letter
to her that McGraw's place-settings are more vividly described than Baum's
or Thompson's. There are cetainly differences in the ways they go about
describing them, but I think in their different ways they all wind up with
vivid evocations of place. (Usually -- I remember someone complaining that
Baum was likely to fall into cliches for describing prettiness, "green
sward" for landscape and "dainty" for human females.) Your
comment that
McGraw ties descriptions of place to an observer's emotions may be a key to
one of the differences, I suspect. And maybe she does more with drawing in
senses beyond the visual.

The example quoted of Baum's description of all the grays of Kansas appeals
much less to the senses, but its evocation of a sad sameness is what it's
about -- and very striking as such. In RPT's landscapes, I have a feeling
that seascapes and forests are places where she is especially effective.
(What that adds up to in terms of defining differences among the three, I'm
not sure.) I don't think I have as strong a sense of the landscapes in
Neill, Snow, or Cosgrove, although Neill's chocolate planet and Snow's Mount
Illuso occur to me as places where the descriptions do come across strongly.

Ruth Berman

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:24:10 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND heroes

A lot of my evenings in the last fortnight have been occupied with
watching highly unexpected events [I'm from Boston], so I've neglected
to reread YANKEE or gather remaining thoughts on MERRY GO ROUND. I'll
try to race through some observations, and I apologize that this posting
may seem at cross-purposes with other threads.

This posting is about the three boys or young men who provide three
distinct new heroes for MERRY GO ROUND. It might be interesting to
compare how that book and YANKEE approach the challenge of creating an
appealing young hero.

ROBIN

The McGraws apparently mean to tell us Robin's age when they mention
"the ten years of his orphan's life" [3]--but perhaps he was orphaned at
the age of one or so and is actually eleven. Robin knows his middle name
is Satchiverus [16], so unusual that I think it's more likely a family
name rather than one chosen for a foundling.

Whatever his earliest history, Robin has lived most of his years in
foster homes [3]. Yet he also remembers having lived in an orphanage
[299]. Presumably he's bounced in and out of such institutions.

Robin's been with the McGudgeys long enough to have experienced their
semi-annual dental schedule and to have been to the fair before [3]. He
doesn't seem to have been deprived of normal American childhood
activities there. "I once belonged to Cub Scout Pack 23," he says [30].
(He tried to sell can openers for this pack and "found it tough going"
[174].) He's also been to a Christmas carol concert at the Cherryburg
Community Center [299]. Robin knows touch-football [92]--he and the ten
McGudgey brothers are just enough for a full team.

But one tradition the many McGudgeys apparently don't follow is parties.
Robin remembers having been to only one, and that was while he was at
the orphanage [299]. Or perhaps he means parties outside the family
home. Another element of growing up in America that Robin hasn't
experienced is reading the Oz books; he hasn't heard of Oz [104].

For personal interests, we learn that Robin admires horses (like our own
David Hulan at the same age)--though he has yet to meet a horse
personally [4]. Robin therefore gets excited about the medieval-knights
aspect of life in the Argentine region [253-4]. He "always liked dogs,"
too [94]. And as for individual quirks, his "nose...always itched when
he first woke up" [253].

Early on, Robin suspects the McGudgeys won't miss him, but this may be
projection because he knows he won't much miss them [17]. Later he tells
Ozma, "I don't think I was the sort of boy they liked" [302]. That
justifies staying in Oz in his mind. Meanwhile, back in Clackamas
County, the Department of Social Services might be investigating the
McGudgeys and bringing them up on charges for having lost their foster
child.

FESS

For a few first chapters we see Fess rushing around getting breakfast
for seemingly half the people in the castle of Halidom, even before they
fully wake up. He orders around the presumably older grooms and
servants. People address him as "Master Fess" [71]. This seems to
reflect his social status as son of a nobleman, expected to rise above
Page status, and his intelligence in a country of simpletons--but also
his personality.

Fess is a born organizer and right-hand man. Before this rereading, I'd
remembered him as a rising young Knight, but he's more like a natural
chief of staff. I hadn't remembered how fussy he is, and devoted to
making Prince Gules's plans work out. Fess is "more dubious than ever"
about Gules's idea of a quest [69], at first expects to walk the whole
way [78], and then has "doubts to how the two animals were going to get
along" [83]. Nevertheless, he throws all his capacities into the mission.

"Everything was going to be up to Fess--he knew it very well," the
McGraws tell us [77]. Quite late in the game, he and Dorothy are still
stepping aside to secretly work out realistic plans for their party [243].

Fess is a good chief of staff because he cares about the details. When
Gules invites the Emerald City party to a non-existent lunch, Fess gets
"in a panic" [158]. He and Dorothy grill fish for the travelers who need
cooked food [221]. Fess's concern about his Halidomian companions leads
to a crucial plot twist when he jumps into Fred's path to stop the
runaway steed and causes Gules to drop the Easter egg, thus loosing (and
finding) the biggest Golden Circlet [204].

At that point, the Halidomians regain their intelligence. And it quickly
becomes clear that Fess doesn't look after them just because he's the
only smart one. Rather, he looks after them because it's his
personality. While they talk about how smart they are, he's busy
building the campfire [211]. He tends to Fred's tackle and grooming
[263]. Even as late as the end of the quest, Fess fetches a stool for
Sir Greves (though he makes sure it's a hard one) [271].

Fess is just a typical "good kid," and that makes him very popular back
home. Just as all the Halidom palace animals want to go on the quest
because they like Fess [71], when the party returns, and the city is
excited to see Gules, the palace inhabitants give a warmer welcome to
Fess [268].

There's even a hint that Fess bends gender roles. The Unicorn complains
to him, "Males are usually so rough and boisterous! Except you" [73].

Fess in turn promises to weave her a daisy chain [74]. I don't see this
as a sign of femininity by Halidom standards. Rather, Fess is so willing
to serve people that he can fulfill the Unicorn's wish for dainty care
as well.

GULES

Prince Gules is a particular challenge for the McGraws. On the one hand,
he's the stereotypical royal hero on a quest, and the fellow both Fess
and Robin wish to be [254]. On the other hand, because those boys are
along, readers are more likely to identify with them, rather than the
older, less approachable hereditary prince.

In fact, when he starts out, Gules is just the sort of person a lot of
Americans naturally resent: born to power without having done anything
to earn his high place in society, ambitious with no sense of the cost
of his ambitions, demanding of the people under him [68] while refusing
to ask for help from others [like Ozma--160], and exasperatingly stupid.

Nevertheless, the McGraws keep Gules from being unsympathetic. They say
his "aloof" eyes are appropriate for a prince. "Though he was a bit
condescending in manner,...he was never unpleasant and not really
spoiled" [66]. Gules uses his polite royal hauteur to quell the signs
and Bill Bored on behalf of his party [122]. He has the natural
authority to calm the argument between his party and the Emerald City
pair when they first meet [155].

Given that personality, it makes sense for Gules to become the
expedition's true leader once he regains his intelligence and energy.
And he's learned at least one valuable lesson about life along the way:
"wicked people don't always look wicked" [265]. We can feel confident 
that Gules will make a good king of a revitalized Halidom [295].

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:43:09 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] reader/character intersections

"J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
> This posting is about the three boys or young men who provide three
> distinct new heroes for MERRY GO ROUND. It might be interesting to compare 
> how that book and YANKEE approach the challenge of creating an appealing
> young hero.>

Interesting discussion of how they're made appealing and also kept distinct.

> Another element of growing up in America that Robin hasn't experienced is
> reading the Oz books; he hasn't heard of Oz [104]. >

The McGutcheys don't seem like a family who'd have a lot of books around the
house, do they.

> Early on, Robin suspects the McGudgeys won't miss him, but this may be
> projection because he knows he won't much miss them [17]. Later he tells
> Ozma, "I don't think I was the sort of boy they liked" [302].  That
> justifies staying in Oz in his mind. Meanwhile, back in Clackamas County,
> the Department of Social Services might be investigating the McGudgeys and 
> bringing them up on charges for having lost their foster child. >

Even without charges, there'd probably be a lot of hooha in the
search-for-the-missing-child (presumably they'd notice his absence at some
point and ask the authorities to help look for him). But that's the sort of
messy detail (like "what about Trot's parents?") that tends to get glossed
over. In this case, the family seems probably conscientious enough to suffer
a good deal of grief over the loss, even if Robin is right in thinking that
they won't miss him. On the other hand, it does seem as if it would be
unreasonably hard on Robin to be sent back "home" to a family that doesn't
much like him, even though it would spare them a lot of anxiety.

Ruth Berman

Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 22:53:23 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] MERRY GO ROUND Halidom and Roundabout (long)

The McGraws provide a heckuva lotta backstory about Halidom. On the one
hand, that historical grounding makes the kingdom seem more real, and
its plight more affecting. On the other hand, it takes a considerable
number of pages for this plotline to start moving.

We get less information about Roundabout, but enough to see the big
contrasts between the two societies, which turn out to be the most
important in MERRY GO ROUND. The McGraws' emphasis on National Things
with a capital N--National Magic Possession, National Emblem, National
Dish, National Prophecy--may hint that we're supposed to consider each
nation's peculiar culture.

ECONOMY

Halidom is "a heraldry" with University of Genealogy and luxury textile
trade [41]. So it has an export economy based on stuff that people don't
really need, marketed exclusively to the top crust of society: "royal
families anxious to feel truly royal" [42]. Troth's armor has practical
value, but it too is for society's elite (especially if demand has
dropped since Ozma began her peaceful reign). Dorothy knows of Halidom
and Troth through Sir Hokus's armor orders--which really means Troth
[157]. Both countries have a rudimentary money economy: Gules produces
"two small and rather battered coins" [127], and Fess "an old one from
Troth" [128].

In contrast, Roundabout produces a wide range of useful goods, all of
which happen to be round. [This is the second Oz book in a row to
feature factories.] Dorothy seems unfamiliar with that city, so its
peddlers must not service the Emerald City, and indeed the capital
doesn't appear on Roundelay's maps [254]. Presumably that's because
Roundabout's distribution system is still rudimentary, depending on
walking peddlers who want to stay home [175-6].

CLASS SYSTEM

As a capable boy in the Argentine kingdoms, Fess plans to rise from Page
to Squire to Knight [46]. Fred counts the corresponding ranks for
horses: Palfrey, Steed, Charger, Destrier [81]. And of course below them
all is the status of plowhorse, which embarrasses Fred [217]. (This
system has a sort of mirror in View Halloo, where both Merry and Robin
are expected to pass a series of examinations [92, 97].) At first glance
the Argentines' freedom to move up in these rankings makes the kingdoms
look like meritocracies.

But it becomes clear that Halidom has even more class lines, and they
seem to be defined by inheritance. Fess, a nobleman's son, has much
higher prospects than his fellow page Barry, son of a chef. The McGraws
even tell us how ingrained these expectations are when they say that
Barry aspires to nothing higher than being a kitchen page [46]. Thus,
even though the two boys share a title and a bedroom, and in Martin's
artwork Fess's clothing is poor and patched, there's a class divide
between them. Halidom thus seems to have a servant class and a noble class.

We see some of the common touches that Baum applied to royal families,
as when he showed Princess Langwidere darning socks or Queen Ann Soforth
sweeping floors. Herald 63d lost the Third Circlet to a thieving
popinjay while washing dishes [43--the McGraws nicely established the
threat of popinjays three pages before]. The queen has a chef, but she
also has her own housekeeping secrets [274]. Nevertheless, the overall
impression is of a society with strictly defined classes.

Furthermore, people seem to inherit their titles, and thus their class.
Herald 64th passes on his crown to Gules as Herald 65th [295]. Every
king of Halidom is apparently expected to take the name Herald (though
perhaps there are other names breaking up those all those Heralds). We
see the same pattern in Sir Greves and Sir Gauntlet, who have inherited
those names/titles in addition to their family feud [45].

When we consider the last few Heralds' behavior, the idea that they've
earned their ruling position through merit seems untenable. Herald 62d
lost the golden headband that conveys wisdom by using it to play quoits
[42]; if that's the sort of silly thing he did while wise, how stupid
must this king have been after he lost the Circlet? The McGraws tell us
that Herald 64th is "possibly the slowest-witted of all his slow-witted
countrymen" [57, 270], and the smartest thing he ever does is
recognizing that he "Never was quite smart enough" [295].

(The abdication of Herald 64th also shows that kings of Halidom don't
need to die to leave office. But we hear about no ex-kings hanging
around, even during an emergency council meeting, so perhaps Heralds
1-63rd are dead and/or gone. Yet more mysteries around immortality in Oz.)

I think someone on this list expressed the smart idea that the Circlets
have interfered with natural selection in Halidom, letting genetic
traits that should die out be passed on to subsequent generations. With
the Circlets suddenly removed, the Halidomians suddenly suffer the
consequences of inferior genes. And that's most apparent at the
top--which wouldn't be such a problem if the crown weren't inherited as
well.

Yet more wrinkles to Halidom's class system. Gules owns Fred's bridle,
not Fred himself [220], which implies that humans outrank animals. But
at the very top is the Unicorn, who looks down on all of Halidom: "I
feel I've lost caste. . . . Why, it's In Trade!" [73] Even Fred finds
her "/very/ stuck-up" [82].

In contrast, Roundabout seems to be an egalitarian society, at least as
far as we can see. Except for Roundelay, no Roundhead seems to be above
or below any other. The Roundheads are free to choose their own ruler,
though they decide to follow misinterpreted scripture rather than elect
wisely. (Their hailing Robin as a king [171] echoes experiences of
Dorothy, Speedy, and Jam, all children welcomed as magicians or kings by
small people soon after they arrive in Oz. But in Robin's case this
assumption becomes a serious plot point, not just a passing exchange or
incident.)

In one respect, Halidom is democratic: /everyone/ suffers from the
National Disasters that set Gules's quest in motion. In some of
Thompson's plots, something terrible happens to the royal family, but
it's not always clear why this is bad for the people they rule. In
GRAMPA, do the people of Ragbad really suffer from their king losing his
head? In OJO, Thompson states that Mooj has secured the loyalty of
ordinary Seebanians--yet we're still supposed to root for the
restoration of Ree Alla Bad and family.

But here the McGraws tell us that the third National Disaster in Halidom
is truly national: "Every native-born inhabitant of the country
awoke...with a mysterious malady" [40].

LAW

Halidom and Troth must have laws, in that the Sandbar Sinister is where
"both kingdoms exiled their lawbreakers" [40]. But all we hear about is:
"No armies, no wars allowed. Only jousting tourneys" [66]. Halidom
doesn't seem to have a formal judicial system, however, since Gules sits
down to discuss Sir Greves's penalty with a motley collection of
insiders and visitors from other lands [280-1]. At least this is a
serious discussion of justice, one of the most thoughtful in the Oz
series. And Sir Greves does end up exiled.

Roundabout's laws seem more flexible, or perhaps we come upon the
kingdom just when they're trying to make a change, and not caring about
what traditions or fairness they violate.

GENDER ROLES

Another aspect of life in Halidom is fairly strict gender divisions. We
see this first when Lady Annelet, the youngest courtier, wants to follow
her beloved Gules on his quest. She even shows above-average sense for a
Halidomian [66]. But her grandmother won't allow it; "You will stay
safely at home, and knit comforters and things" [68]. We hear more of
this sort of thing from the Unicorn: "It's lovely to see a maiden again,
after all these males. . . . No one expects /maidens/ to be brave. . . .
we females are much more sensitive than these crude males" [156].

Such comments lay the groundwork for the lesson the McGraws derive from
Sir Greves's misbehavior. He's been breaking expectations for a nobleman
in Halidom, avoiding jousts and instead collecting more recipes than
"any woman" [273]. (This implies that the queen's chef is female, and

Barry's father, mentioned on page 47, has another palace job--but more
likely the McGraws were so intent on the lesson for Sir Greves that they
didn't remember that a male chef collects recipes, too.) The reluctant
knight says, "I swapped household hints with all the good housewives of
the kingdom--and the ladies never knew. . . . Fighting is not in my
nature, any more than it is in any housewife's" [274].

Dorothy voices the book's lesson on tolerance: "If people had just let
him do it openly, without making him think it was something disgraceful,
he'd never have begun all that sneaking around" [280]. If only Sir
Greves hadn't felt that he had to behave like Sir Gauntlet, but felt
free to express his more "womanly" interest in recipes, Halidom would
never have suffered its third National Disaster.

(Dorothy's remark about gender expectations is ironic given how she's
lost some of her Baumian and Thompsonian boldness in MERRY GO ROUND. She
seems uncharacteristically concerned with her clothing, even in
emergencies [159, 195, 200]. When locked up by the Nannies, she "only
wrung her hands" while others think of a way for her to escape [196].
When the party is lost in the wild, the McGraws tell us, "Dorothy was
trying not to" cry [222]. She hasn't cried since WISHING HORSE in 1935,
and before that DOROTHY & WIZARD in 1908, and she's been lost an awful
lot of times in between.)

BACK TO ECONOMY

For some reason I'm sure economists could explain but I can't, people
often earn less for producing what we really need, such as milk and
shoes and ball bearings, than for producing luxury goods we can live
without, like escutcheons and jewelry and pick-up trucks with leather
seats. It's no wonder, therefore, that the Roundheads aspire to a
society like Halidom's. They want to stay home as "ladies and gentlemen"
[175-6], instead of making useful goods.

Roundabout's economic problem is that its goods are *too good*. Its
products don't wear out [174-5]. Its manufacturers haven't discovered
planned obsolescence. Thus, the Roundheads have almost fully supplied
their customers within walking distance.

Fortunately, the Roundheads can make a product with no limit on its
demand: Pi. Not only do people consume this dessert entirely,
eliminating the obsolescence issue, but it's potentially addictive. Sir
Greves's description of how Roundelay enticed him with Pi is a classic
of a drug pusher: starting out with a few free samples, then raising the
price for more [276].

MERRY GO ROUND is one of the Oz books in which Ozma zooms in at the end
to help makes things right. But, interestingly, she does very little
magic in this book. Instead, she offers political solutions for the
countries' social and economic problems [292]. She also plans to "scold
[Roundelay] severely" and expects him to reform [293].

Looking back over the McGraws' total depiction of Halidom and Roundabout
leads to a curious feeling. The people of Halidom are naturally stupid,
rule themselves by strict and inherited class lines, and produce nothing
of real value. The Roundheads, in contrast, are democratic and
productive. Yet the Halidomians are the book's heroes. And who would
want to live in Roundabout?

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Hutchins <scottandrewhutchins at yahoo.com>
Subject: [Regalia] beginning Merry Go Round

I left off last night the chapter before McGraw gets to the preexisting Oz
characters.  So far, this is probably the best FF book since Baum and
Eloise a wordsmith of his calibre and Lauren's ideas strong enough to make an
interesting book even if this weren't about Oz (since up to the point I've
read, it didn't have to be), despite its oddly anglophilic tendency that makes
me think of a number of the characters as members of Monty Python (my
director's game has me attaching Terry Jones to this--for Hidden Valley it was
Ken Russell).

A bit confusing is McGraw's reintroduction of money to Oz in such an expansive
way as to Halidom and Troth being major contributors to Oz's economy, and
Halidom in particular filling its treasury with earnings (from where--Samandra
and the like?--what kingdoms in Oz do we know use money in spite of the law in
the FF?)

How fun that I read about Howzatagin while on a ferry!

Robin Brown is one of the most developed protagonists as well, and nice to have
a kingdom like View Halloo that is bossy but definitely has a sense of
hospitality.  Under Thompson and Neill it was looking like 90% of Oz's
non-EC urbanites were insane!

Scott


Scott Andrew Hutchins

"I think one of the main faults in cinematography comes from the fact that
people never consider a variety of ways of launching a film, and force young
people to do old people's work and take on old habits, or otherwise their films
will stay in a trunk and never come out."--Jean Cocteau, trans. Robin Buss

Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 14:35:26 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] beginning Merry Go Round

Scott Hutchins:
>A bit confusing is McGraw's reintroduction of money to Oz in such an
>expansive way as to Halidom and Troth being major contributors to Oz's
>economy, and Halidom in particular filling its treasury with earnings (from 
>where--Samandra and the like?--what kingdoms in Oz do we know use money in
>spite of the law in the FF?)

In Thompson's books, both Pumperdink and Kimbaloo still use money, and there
are several other mentions that imply it's widely used in Oz.  Even in Baum,
Jinxland still uses money at the time of SCARECROW, although Baum might well
have meant his readers to assume that they would stop doing so upon coming
more closely under Ozma's rule.  My Oz-as-history theory on why money starts
reappearing in the Thompson books is that, as more minor Ozian communities
started establishing relations with Ozma and the Emerald City, the
storehouse system and non-use of money became less practical.  Perhaps there
are other explanations as well.
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org