Day 1 - Mustapha demands Cowardly Lion - Notta & Bob arrive in Mudge - night
  in forest
Day 2 - Lion begins journey at daybreak - Notta & Bob travel through Doorways
  - Lion meets woodcutters, leaves them "late in the afternoon," travels
  through night
Day 3 - Lion meets Notta & Bob at daybreak - travel to Un during early afternoon
  - attacks by Uns during night
Day 4 - Party meets Nickadoodle before dawn - escape in Flyaboutabus in morning -
  caught by Crunch in afternoon - party splits: Notta, Bob, & Snorer spend night
  in Fiddlestick Forest - Crunch & Lion travel through night
Day 5 - Notta, Bob & Snorer meet Ozma's court at breakfast - Crunch, Lion arrive
  in Mudge when "the sun was high" - Lion disenchanted in afternoon

Note: The above reflects the chronology as given in the text. Despite Mustapha's
giving Notta three days' rations to reach the EC, the trip actually takes four
whole days and possibly part of a fifth. Thompson states in Chapter 19 that
"Notta started to tell the history of his three amazing days in Oz,"
but this may mean that the day he spends in Un didn't count. Un, being a Skyle,
may not be considered part of Oz.

From: Ozmama at aol.com
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 00:27:26 EDT
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 06-28-99
 
BCF: (Sigh) O.K., I guess this means I should reread _...Cowardly
Lion.... 

For those of you who will be doing the same, or who are reading it
for the first time, would y'all kind of look for similarities between
it and Carroll's Alice work, please?  And I'd love to have a rational
answer for why Notta never uses all of his costumes, but it's never
mentioned that he doesn't.

And why, why, WHY is he so stubborn? I can answer these questions on
an "Oz as literature" basis, but not within the story itself.
--Robin

From: "Kenneth R. Shepherd" <kshepherd at email.msn.com>
Subject: Cowardly Lion of Oz
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 01:11:15 -0400
 
Robin:
 
<snip>I guess this means I should reread _...Cowardly Lion....
For those of you who will be doing the same, or who are reading it
for the first time, would y'all kind of look for similarities between it and Carroll's
Alice work, please?  And I'd love to have a rational answer for why
Notta never uses all of his costumes, but it's never mentioned that he doesn't.
And why, why, WHY is he so stubborn? I can answer these questions on
an "Oz as literature" basis, but not within the story itself.</snip>
 
Robin, this is kind of a stretch, but I've got some ideas I'll
share...
 
Similarities with Carroll's _Alice_: virtually none, other than the
(obvious) facts that the two stories were both written for children,
or with children in mind, and that they both happen in fantastic
lands. Did you notice any, or was this a generalized question?
 
Stubborn: I'm not sure what particular instances of stubbornness you mean.
Are you referring to his insistence on his rules of disguise,
politeness, joke, and run?
 
Disguises: Notta says (Chapter 3) that he has six: (1) Lion; (2)
Bear; (3) Huntsman; (4) Fish; (5) Witch. The sixth costume is never
mentioned, probably because Notta has arrived at the Emerald City
before the need for a sixth costume has come up, and realizes that
they are useless thanks to the words of Scraps, Tik-Tok, and the
Scarecrow: "`Well, after this,' said Notta, when the merriment had
subsided, `after this, I will be myself, for I guess it is better to
be yourself even if you _are_ a clown.'" (Chapter 19).
 
I think there's a general theme here--just as there was in _Royal
Book_--that it's not good to pretend to be something or someone
you're not just to impress or influence people. It's Notta and the
Cowardly Lion who best exemplify this theme. Notta Bit More seems to
have no identity other than as a clown. Even though it's revealed (in
Chapter 3) that his full name is Augustus Elmer More, no one
(including the author and Notta himself) ever refers to him by that
name. When he washes his face in Chapter 5, both he and Bob Up feel
that Notta has become somehow unnatural. We're also told that his
father was a clown, and Neill illustrates him in a costume that
reminds me of the _Commedia dell'Arte_ player (I can't remember his
name; Harlequin was the multi-colored trickster, I think .... was it
Scapin in the black-and-white suit with the pointed hat? It's the
character that sings _Vesti la giubba_ in _I Pagliacci).  Whenever
Notta deviates from his normal (clownish) personality by putting on
his disguises he loses control of the situation; in most cases, he
has to be rescued by Bob Up. Likewise, the Lion deviates from his
normal behavior by letting his desire to feel brave overcome his
moral sense.
 
Anyway, just some thoughts...
 
Best,
KRS

Date: Tue, 6 Jul 99 08:56:56 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: Alice in Oz
 
Robin Olderman: Carrollian similarities in "Cowardly Lion" --
re-reading it the past few days, it struck me that the Doorways
chapter seems a lot like "Wonderland."  Notta and Bob find themselves
in a hall lined with doorways where a doorman hops away from them
worrying about how furious the Queen will be, and the Queen accuses
them of stealing the door-jam.  Sounds a good deal like Alice in the
hall at the bottom of the rabbi hole, with the rabbi hopping away
worrying about how savage the Duchess will be (and perhaps a
recollection of how the Queen of Hearts is always in a fury), and
later the trial of the Knave of Hearts for stealing the tarts.  The
other chapters did not seem to have anything comparably close,
although occasionally the wordplay seems to run to nonsensical logic
that might reflect a bit of Carrollian influence. // Why Notta is so
stubborn about sticking to a program that fails him every time --
well, maybe the combination of his hopefulness (that a different
costume will be more successful than the preceding ones) and his
anxiety (he's in a dangerous country and responsible for a child as
well as himself, and no direct information about how to cope) make up
a plausible explanation for his rigidity in this matter?
 
Ruth Berman

Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 22:10:50 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: Oz or bust
 
About COWARDLY LION, Ken Shepherd wrote: <<Even though it's revealed
(in Chapter 3) that his full name is Augustus Elmer More, no one
(including the author and Notta himself) ever refers to him by that
name.>>
 
I had the impression that although Notta's mother wanted him to be
called Augustus Elmer, his father would have not a bit of it, and
thus his legal name is indeed Notta Bit More. Otherwise, I thought
your analysis about Notta being a clown and nothing but a clown is
right on the big red nose. 
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: Ozmama at aol.com
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 23:47:03 EDT
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-06-99
 
Ken on _C. Lion_:<<Similarities with Carroll's _Alice_: virtually
none, other than the (obvious) facts that the two stories were both
written for children, or with children in mind, and that they both
happen in fantastic lands. Did you notice any, or was this a
generalized question?>>
 
I did, and will be (more than) delighted to share my views after I
reread the book, which will be after Winkies and a trip down the Cal.
coast.
 
<<Stubborn: I'm not sure what particular instances of stubbornness
you mean. Are you referring to his insistence on his rules of
disguise, politeness, joke, and run?>>
 
Yes.  That really frustrated me as a kid.  How stooopid!  Blind
insistance on sticking to his rules, even when they made NO sense.  I
know people who act like that today, and am still frustrated by them.
 
Ruth:<< Carrollian similarities in "Cowardly Lion" -- re-reading it
the past few days, it struck me that the Doorways chapter seems a lot
like "Wonderland." >>
 
That's the episode that started me thinking about Alice.

From: "Mike Denio" <miked at ti.com>
Subject: For Ozzy Digest
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 08:11:38 -0500
 
On _Cowardly Lion_:
 
I was disappointed with _CL_ after reading a very enjoyable
_Kabumpo_.
 
This book always bugged me. What kind of role model is Notta? Here's
someone who is truely warped. He's uncomfortable when out of his
overt costumes, and alarmingly depressed when not in his clown face
(which is of course the greatest costume of all).
 
> ... and [Notta] realizes that [the costumes] are useless  thanks to the
> words of Scraps, Tik-Tok, and the Scarecrow: "`Well, after this,' said
> Notta, when the merriment had subsided, `after this, I will be myself, for I
> guess it is better to be yourself even if you _are_ a  clown.'" (Chapter 19).
 
How is going around dressed as a clown any different from going
around dressed as a bear? If he were a "real" clown (like Baum's
ceramic clown), I'd buy into the "be happy with who you are" theme,
but the theme of this book seems to be "adopt a protective (false)
persona and stick with it".
 
Also, some resurrected comments from "way back when":
 
Not that it should really affect her stories one way or the other,
but I still find it strange that RPT has put so much simple nastiness
inside the borders of Oz.  Baum usually restricted his cruelest
kingdoms to the surrounding lands, and most of his citizens were good
intentioned.  I get the impression from reading Grampa and Cowardly
Lion, that I would be more likely to meet a cruel person in RPT's Oz
that not. Other than the central "good" characters in both stories,
did we meet ANY friendly Oz residents in either _Cowardly Lion_ or
_Grampa_ (before the final chapter where Ozma invariably shows up and
consigns everyone she dislikes to oblivion)?
 
Mike

From: "Mike Denio" <miked at ti.com>
Subject: For Ozzy Digest
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 08:15:48 -0500
 
More on _Cowardly Lion_:
 
Here's another caustic comment I found while searching my Oz
archives. I hade the same opinion - if a little less restraint:
 
---
How about _Cowardly Lion_ where the Lion decides to go off and eat
somebody for no apparent reason? And how about that Clown, "Notta Bit
More", or whatever his name was? I can't believe Thompson would have
a hero who becomes nervous and depressed when he's not wearing a
costume (even though he's alread dressed as a clown), and then
manically depressed when he's not wearing face paint. He never gets
any better, and nobody seems to notice he has a problem!! Instead,
Ozma gives him his own circus tent. I wanted to write a sequel book
where Dorothy finds him hanging from the trapeze rigging after he
loses his rubber nose.
---

From: Nathan Mulac DeHoff <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-06-99
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 10:20:23 PDT
 
Kenneth Shepherd:
>Even though it's revealed (in Chapter 3) that his full name
>is Augustus Elmer More, no one (including the author and Notta himself) 
>ever refers to him by that name.
 
Was that actually his name, or was that just what his mother had
wanted to call him?
 
>When he washes his face in Chapter 5, both he
>and Bob Up feel that Notta has become somehow unnatural.
 
I'm reminded of the episode of "The Simpsons" ("Bart the Fink," to be
specific) in which Krusty puts on make-up to STOP looking like a
clown.
 
Ruth:
>Carrollian similarities in "Cowardly Lion" -- re-reading
>it the past few days, it struck me that the Doorways chapter seems a
>lot like "Wonderland."  Notta and Bob find themselves in a hall lined
>with doorways where a doorman hops away from them worrying about
>how furious the Queen will be, and the Queen accuses them of
>stealing the door-jam.
 
Not to mention that Theodore and Adora had a relationship quite
similar to that of the King and Queen of Hearts.
 
>Sounds a good deal like Alice in the hall at the
>bottom of the rabbi hole, with the rabbi hopping away worrying about
>how savage the Duchess will be
 
I think you mean "rabbit," although Alice following a rabbi down a
hole is an amusing image.
 
I'll have more thoughts on _Cowardly Lion_ (which I'm currently in
the process of re-reading) a bit later.
 
Nathan

Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 12:28:07 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com> 
Subject: Notes on a COWARDLY LION
 
About COWARDLY LION, Ruth Berman wrote: <<it struck me that the
Doorways chapter seems a lot like "Wonderland." Notta and Bob find
themselves in a hall lined with doorways where a doorman hops away
from them worrying about how furious the Queen will be, and the Queen
accuses them of stealing the door-jam.  Sounds a good deal like Alice
in the hall at the bottom of the rabbi hole, with the rabbi hopping
away worrying about how savage the Duchess will be (and perhaps a
recollection of how the Queen of Hearts is always in a fury), and
later the trial of the Knave of Hearts for stealing the tarts.>>
 
Also, in both the courtroom scene of ALICE and in Doorways, the king
gets tangled up in a pun. Theodore is a great deal dimmer than the
King of Hearts, though.

  I suspect, Ruth, your spell-check made your message far more kosher
  than you meant by removing "rabbit" (which chews the cud but does
  not part the hoof) in favor of <<rabbi>>.
 
Kenneth R. Shepherd wrote:
<<I think there's a general theme here--just as there was in _Royal
Book_--that it's not good to pretend to be something or someone
you're not just to impress or influence people. It's Notta and the
Cowardly Lion who best exemplify this theme.>>
 
In addition, it seems significant that worst of the Uns, the least
sympathetic character in a book full of villains (Mustafa, Crunch,
the cookywitch, et al.), is named I-Wish-I-Was. He's become the Uns'
ruler because "he could wish faster and shout louder than any of the
rest" [166].

Thompson seems to present wishing to be something one isn't as a road
to treachery and featherheadedness.

  As for the ROYAL BOOK parallel, Thompson's author note actually
  hearkens back to that volume: "I do not believe there has been so
  much excitement in Oz since the Scarecrow fell down his family
  tree." And a character from that book--the Comfortable Camel, of
  all folks--states the obvious lesson: "courage isn't the way you
  feel, but the way you act" [106].
  COWARDLY LION seems to throw several other morals at us as well as
  that one, however. We learn to other people's things alone
  (Mudgers), to not be greedy (Mustafa, sort of), to be true to your
  friends (Notta, Cowardly Lion, Crunch, Nick), to be unselfish
  (Unselfish and the Uns), and on and on. Any book whose resolution
  hinges on "tears are more magic than anything else" [282] clearly
  has a very high sap content. COWARDLY LION often seems to be trying
  too hard.
 
Ruth Berman wrote:
<<Why Notta is so stubborn about sticking to a program that fails him
every time -- well, maybe the combination of his hopefulness (that a
different costume will be more successful than the preceding ones)
and his anxiety (he's in a dangerous country and responsible for a
child as well as himself, and no direct information about how to
cope) make up a plausible explanation for his rigidity in this
matter?>>
 
I think Notta's behavior pattern defies rational explanation, however
he tries to rationalize it. He feels a need for disguises well after
even little Bob has grasped that they cause more trouble than they're
worth.

He's very concerned with how people will see him--most of all when
they might actually glimpse his real face. Notta seems to be a deeply
troubled man, as psychologically crippled in his way as the Scarecrow
and Tin Woodman were at the start of WIZARD. And like those
characters insisting that they needed brains or a heart even when
they were already thinking and loving, Notta's needs are insolubly
paradoxical. As the Cowardly Lion himself says to Notta, "you cannot
help your disguises any more than I can help my cowardice" [123].

  WIZARD hints that all the qualities we need are inside us, but
  unlike COWARDLY LION it doesn't hint that the effort of finding
  those things and growing is misguided. The Scarecrow and Tin
  Woodman don't make things *worse* for themselves by trying to
  change. In contrast, Notta's disguise complex does cause him
  trouble--part of the "don't try to be what you're not" theme that
  Ken Shepherd highlighted. (Similarly, the Lion decides the
  adventure is "a punishment...a punishment for my wickedness in
  planning to devour a brave man" [168].) So this Ozian adventure
  isn't a young person's attempts to survive fate and get back to
  home, nor a quest for personal fulfillment--it's the bad
  consequence of an obvious mistake.

  As if that doesn't make COWARDLY LION frustrating enough, Thompson
  keeps showing us her main moral but has to delay Notta's learning
  it until the final chapters. As I've already noted, the Comfortable
  Camel voices the lesson early. Bob tumbles to it. When the Lion
  resolves "to stay a coward forever," he immediately "felt
  light-hearted and happy again" [181]--but we still have over a
  hundred pages to go! Finally, practically everyone in Ozma's palace
  gangs up to force the notion into Notta's head [252-3].
 
 
My edition of COWARDLY LION is a later Reilly & Lee printing with no
color plates. (It was originally owned by Jean Clift of Waverly Road
in New York City, and she did some expert penciling inside the lines
on Adora's hair.) Do other people's copies show the following
pagination oddity? Even if I count the right-hand endpaper as a page,
I still come out with only twelve pages before the book starts on
page 15. That's:

  1 - endpaper
  3 - "This Book Belongs to"
  5 - half-title page, with picture of Lion
  7 - title page
  9 - author's note
 11- list of chapters
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Fri, 09 Jul 99 02:18:43 (PDT)
From: Dave Hardenbrook <DaveH47 at mindspring.com> 
Subject: Ozzy Things
 
COWARDLY LION:
Call me an un-American pinko, but I've always hated clowns, which
probably explains why I don't like _Cowardly Lion of Oz_...
 
One bit of _Cowardly Lion_-related strangeness: In this semester just
ended my Java teacher's first name was Mustafa.  (Anyone else here
ever known anyone with an unintentionally "Ozzy" name?)
 
                             -- Dave

From: "Bob Collinge" <BobofOz at prodigy.net> 
Subject: Cowardly Lion of Oz
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:36:21 -0400
 
Could it be that Notta Bit More was so used to being a clown that he
no longer felt comfortable as Augustus?  I don't think he thought of
his clown outfit as another disguise.
 
Bob C.

Date: Fri, 9 Jul 99 15:47:26 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu> 
Subject: Oz costumes/customs
 
Robin Olderman & Ken Shepherd: I'd make a guess that Notta's
reference to six costumes in a story that makes use of only five was
a mistake.  Either RPT miscounted how many there were, or she had one
in mind that didn't make it to the final draft.  Unless Notta was
thinking of his clown costume as one of the six? -- it isn't a
disguise in his terms, since he thinks of his identity as a clown as
his real self, but it's a costume?
 
Mike Denio: Some examples of friendly people in "Cowardly Lion" are
the Fairyman, the Trees of Fiddlebow Forest, Snorer, and the Sky
Terrier.  It occurs to me that the preponderance of antagonistic
characters for the protagonists to run into may itself be an example
of Lewis Carroll's influence.
 
Dave Hardenbrook: Mustafa is like some other Oz names (Ann, Dick,
Jack, Larry, Nick, Tommy) in being used also in the Outside World --
although unlike them in not being either part of a pun or something
that could perhaps be short for something less familiar (as Randy is
short for Randiwell, and perhaps Nick could be short for Nikadik).
The Mudgers imitate desert-dwelling Arabs (unfortunate stereotyping),
and so the king has the Arabian name of Mustafa.  I think the other
Mudger names, though, are invented.
 
Ruth Berman

Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 07:41:54 +1000
From: Gehan <calamity at eureka.lk>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-09-99
 
Thoughts on Cowardly Lion of Oz:
Overall, I think that this if one of RPT's best Oz books. The
plotline is really amusing and interesting and it teaches us a good
lesson on friendship. The secrets between Bob, Notta, CL and the
Stone Man are rather like a soap-opera. I really enjoyed the
adventures in the book,and I also enjoyed all the
characters......they each had their own, strong personality, and not
just some cheap-rip off of something. I guess RPT had a very vivid
imagination, which made her books really ozzy and amusing. There was
just one problem......when Dorothy saw Notta aproaching her,
disguised as a witch, she immeditaly took action to MELT the *WITCH*
away......to destroy her. This is not at all 'Dorothyish". She makes
it very clear in _WIZARD_ that she doesnt want to kill anything, not
even for the sake of returning home to Kansas to her Aunt Em and
Uncle Henry. I was also dissapointed that Ozma gave out an order to
destroy Mombi in _LOST KING_,when she makes it clear in _EMERALD
CITY_ that she doesnt want to harm wicked people, because they were
born wicked and they cant help it. RPT seems to got a bit carried
away sometimes.
 
Untill next time!
--Gehan

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> 
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-09-99
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 20:56:17 PDT
 
Mike Denio:
>Not that it should really affect her stories one way or the other, but I
>still find it strange that RPT has put so much simple nastiness inside the
>borders of Oz.  Baum usually restricted his cruelest kingdoms to the
>surrounding lands, and most of his citizens were good intentioned.  I get
>the impression from reading Grampa and Cowardly Lion, that I would be more
>likely to meet a cruel person in RPT's Oz that not. Other than the central
>"good" characters in both stories, did we meet ANY friendly Oz residents in
>either _Cowardly Lion_ or _Grampa_ (before the final chapter where Ozma
>invariably shows up and consigns everyone she dislikes to oblivion)?
 
Well, the main characters in _Grampa_ come from friendly lands within
the borders of Oz (Ragbad and Perhaps City).  Also, the Fire
Islanders are fairly friendly, although I suppose they're not
technically inhabitants of Oz.  In _Cowardly Lion_, the most friendly
Ozites were Nickadoodle and the half-lion, and the latter admits that
he might have been a threat if he had had his back side when Notta
and Bob met him.
 
_Cowardly Lion_ is also interesting in that there is some treachery
from main characters.  The normally friendly Cowardly Lion is
resolved to eat a brave man.  During his initial travels with the
Lion, Notta still plans to take him to Mustafa.  Crunch seems like a
friend at first, but turns out to be a dangerous adversary.
 
J. L. Bell:
>In addition, it seems significant that worst of the Uns, the least
>sympathetic character in a book full of villains (Mustafa, Crunch, the 
>cookywitch, et al.), is named I-Wish-I-Was.
 
While this doesn't really relate to your point, I found the Uns'
naming scheme somewhat odd.  The Un who became the King was
presumably named Unselfish, while none of the other named Uns used
their "unish" traits as their names.  In fact, aside from Unselfish
and I-Wish-I-Was, the only other two Uns whose names are given in the
text have fairly normal ones (Bill and Tom).  Incidentally, Thompson
seems to like the name Bill.  Within this book alone, she mentions a
lion tamer named Bill, an Un with the same name, and an elephant
named Billy.
 
>Call me an un-American pinko, but I've always hated clowns, which
>probably explains why I don't like _Cowardly Lion of Oz_...
 
Okay, you un-American pinko.  Seriously, though, although Thompson
was presumably fond of clowns, I've heard that many children are
afraid of them. 

  Personally, I'm fairly indifferent toward them.  I might not have
  laughed at Notta's antics any more than Theodore and Adora did.
 
Nathan

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> 
Subject: The Cowardly Lion of Oz
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 20:58:36 PDT
 
I have just finished re-reading this book, and I have several
comments to make:
 
This is Thompson's first book to use a Baum character in the title.
Not only is the Cowardly Lion the title character, but the adventure
was clearly written around him.  It was as if Thompson just wanted to
write a story about the Lion, and figured that having someone want to
capture him could lead to a plot.  Note that the same plot device is
used in _Hungry Tiger_, right down to having a bad-tempered monarch
of a quasi-Turkish kingdom as the big cat's would-be captor.  _Hungry
Tiger_ takes a different approach to the problem, though, as the
Tiger's capture is only the beginning of that story, while the entire
plot of _Cowardly Lion_ centers around the hunt for the famous beast.
 
Mustafa might have been named after Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the famous
President of Turkey.  Thompson puns on the name, however, by calling
attention to its similarity to "must have a."  As far as I can
recall, Mustafa's official title is never given, which is probably
why some sources (including _Who's Who_, I believe) refer to him as
"the Mustafa of Mudge." Thompson seems pretty clear in expressing the
fact that Mustafa is a name, not a title.  Mustafa is probably a
King.
 
Thompson must have had a fondness for Arabian tales and desert
kingdoms.  In addition to Mudge, her Oz books feature Rash, Samandra,
Skampavia, Hah Hoh Humbad, and the Red Jinn's country, all of which
contain some clear Arabian influence.
 
Thompson refers to "the sandy waste Mustafa was pleased to call his
garden." 

  In _Wishing Horse_, Skamperoo has a similar "garden."
 
This book seems to contain an almost Neillish amount of sentient
objects, most notably signs, doors, and trees.
 
Mustafa's grandfather was the ruler of Mudge when the country
received the book of laws.  Since the book credits Ozma, this
presumably means that Mustafa assumed the throne during Ozma's reign.
What happened to his grandfather?  Perhaps he accidentally stepped
out onto the Deadly Desert, which is shown as being near Mudge on
Haff and Martin's map.
 
This is the first book that mentions the deeds of the wizard Wam,
whose further exploits are described in _Wishing Horse_ and Melody
Grandy's non-canonical _Disenchanted Princess_.  It also gives a hint
as to how long ago Wam worked.  According to the text, Crunch had
"stood around for seven centuries."  If Wam planted the Travellers'
Tree (said by the sign to have been planted in the year 1120 O.Z.) at
around the same time, Oz might have been in the nineteenth century
O.Z. at the time of _Cowardly Lion_.  There is really no reason to
assume that Wam was only in action for a few years, however.  The
planting of the Travellers' Tree and the animation of Crunch could
have taken place centuries apart, for all we know.
 
Wam's animation of Crunch seems like a quite irresponsible thing for
the wizard to have done.  He brought a giant stone man to life, gave
him the power to think and turn living beings to stone, and ran away.
According to Crunch's testimony, he never came back to check on his
experiment.  Maybe this incident occurred when Wam was still a
mischievous apprentice, or something like that.
 
As he himself is proud to admit, Nickadoodle is an unusual character.
He's also not exactly central to the plot, and might have been added
as an afterthought by Thompson, who seems to like rather large
adventuring parties.  Although Nick settles in the Emerald City, he
is never even mentioned after _Cowardly Lion_, even in _Wishing
Horse_ (which does bring back Notta and Bob).
 
Thompson managed to give closure to the Un and half-lion incidents,
but never told us which was the right door through Doorways.  Any
ideas on which one it could be?
 
That's about all for now.  Perhaps I shall have some more comments
later.
 
Nathan

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> 
Subject: One more Ozzy comment
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 21:10:30 PDT
 
Sorry about the multiple posts, but I forgot to mention this in my
last message.
 
According to Glinda (in _Cowardly Lion_), the Great Book of Records
mentions the Cowardly Lion.  In _Magic_, however, Ruggedo tells Kiki
Aru that the Book only records the doings of people, and not those of
beasts or birds.  I really don't know how Ruggedo came to this
conclusion, though; he hadn't actually seen the Book at that point,
and a spy probably wouldn't have been able to get a good enough look
at the Book to determine whether or not it mentioned animals.  Maybe
Ruggedo's drink from the Forbidden Fountain muddled his mind on this
point.  Actually, come to think of it, I can't recall any occurrence
in Baum's books of an animal being mentioned in the Book.  Aside from
Rug's comment in _Magic_, however, there's no indication that the
Book wouldn't discuss the deeds of animals, either.
 
Nathan

Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 12:18:45 -0500
Subject: CLOz
From: "David Godwin" <d.godwin at minn.net>
 
Just a few observations about _The Cowardly Lion of Oz_:
 
Although Notta Bit More may be severely neurotic and dysfunctional,
at least he cares about little Bobbie Downs and is touched by the
boy's sadness.

Perhaps it is that which earns him a place in Oz despite his
hang-ups.

(Understand that I dislike the Notta character about as much as I do
any other entity in the FF, with the possible exception of Percy. For
some reason, Neill's depictions of the clown - almost always in some
acrobatic pose with his feet in the air - strike me as particularly
obnoxious. I want to say, "Oh, get a life and stand on your feet!")
 
Unless I am mistaken, Notta Bit More and Bobbie are the only two
characters from the Outside World in the entire FF whose place of
origin (Kansas, Oklahoma, Philadelphia, etc.) is never stated.
 
Bobbie continues the tradition of "orphans in Oz" that began with
Dorothy and which will continue with others all the way down to Robin
Brown.

However, I think that Bobbie is the only one (in the FF, anyway) who
actually lived in an orphanage.
 
- David G.

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> 
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-12-99
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 14:39:09 PDT
 
Ruth:
>The
>Mudgers imitate desert-dwelling Arabs (unfortunate stereotyping), and so 
>the king has the Arabian name of Mustafa.
 
I did find it interesting that, while peoples such as the Bedouins
are nomads out of necessity, the Mudgers are nomads because they
don't like their neighbors, and can't stay in one place very long.
 
David Godwin:
>Unless I am mistaken, Notta Bit More and Bobbie are the only two characters
>from the Outside World in the entire FF whose place of origin (Kansas, 
>Oklahoma, Philadelphia, etc.) is never stated.
 
I think it is mentioned that the orphanage is in Philadelphia.
Stumptown, where the circus is held, is presumably a suburb, although
I live in that area and don't know of any Stumptown.  It's probably
either a sort of disguise for a real place, or (if you subscribe to
Dave's alternate Earth theory) a suburb of an alternate universe's
Philadelphia.
 
Nathan

From: "Mike Denio" <miked at ti.com>
Subject: For Ozzy Digest
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 17:28:49 -0500
 
>
> Mike Denio: Some examples of friendly people in "Cowardly Lion" are
> the Fairyman, the Trees of Fiddlebow Forest, Snorer, and the Sky
> Terrier.  It occurs to me that the preponderance of antagonistic
> characters for the protagonists to run into may itself be an example of
> Lewis Carroll's influence.
>
 
Ruth, thanks for the information. I admit that I didn't go back and
read the book, but was speaking from past impressions.
 
I do find it odd that so many people claim a dislike for Baum's
_Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz_ and _Road to Oz_, when I've found
these two books to closely resemble Thompson's "quest" oriented
titles like _Cowardly Lion_ and _Grampa_. All are mostly episodic,
where characters work to get out of one bad situation just to get
into another.
 
Notta is definitely my main hang-up with _CL_. I guess I could accept
him as a clown (not a man in a clown suit) if Thompson hadn't made a
point of having him loose his face paint at some point in the story.
 
Another ridiculous comparison - a story where Dorothy decides she'd
rather be a fish than a little girl, so she puts on a fish costume
and flops around the palace floor. Then, after careful deliberation
of Dorothy's problem, Ozma and the Wizard decide that the most
helpful thing to do is to build her a large water tank to swim in.

From: "Kenneth R. Shepherd" <kshepherd at email.msn.com> 
Subject: More Cowardly Lion of Oz comments 
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 01:07:43 -0400
 
On Notta's name--
From: "J. L. Bell" : <snip>I had the impression that although Notta's
mother wanted him to be called Augustus Elmer, his father would have
not a bit of it, and thus his legal name is indeed Notta Bit More.
</snip> AND
From: Nathan Mulac DeHoff:  <snip>Was that actually his name, or was
that just what his mother had wanted to call him?</snip>
 
Oddly enough, it had never occurred to me that his legal name might
in fact _be_ Notta Bit More.  I had always assumed that it was part
of his (stage) persona.  If Notta is in fact his real name, however,
it might help explain the psychological problems he seems to have.
Does it strike anyone that having a name like Notta Bit More really
limits one's career choices? I mean, Notta Bit More, M.D.? the Right
Reverend Notta Bit More? the Honorable Notta Bit More? Captain Sir
Notta Bit More? Notta Bit More, MCSE? With a name like that, whatever
your job, I can't see that you'd be anything but ... a clown.
 
On Notta's personality--
From: "Mike Denio" : <snip>What kind of role model is Notta? Here's
someone who is truely warped.</snip>
<snip>How is going around dressed as a clown any different from going
around dressed as a bear? If he were a "real" clown (like Baum's
ceramic clown), I'd buy into the "be happy with who you are" theme,
but the theme of this book seems to be "adopt a protective (false)
persona and stick with it".</snip>
<snip>I can't believe Thompson would have a hero who becomes nervous
and depressed when he's not wearing a costume (even though he's
alread dressed as a clown), and then manically depressed when he's
not wearing face paint.
He never gets any better, and nobody seems to notice he has a
problem!!
</snip>
AND
From: J. L. Bell: <snip>[Notta] feels a need for disguises well after
even little Bob has grasped that they cause more trouble than they're
worth. He's very concerned with how people will see him--most of all
when they might actually glimpse his real face. Notta seems to be a
deeply troubled man, as psychologically crippled in his way as the
Scarecrow and Tin Woodman were at the start of WIZARD.</snip>
 
My impression of Notta (reforced now by the name debate above and
Notta's own reactions throughout the book) is that he _has_ no other
identity than that of a clown. He has never really had a life other
than that of a clown, and he is severely uncomfortable when he is
called on to be something other than a clown (viz his depression when
confronted with the thought of his old age). His rules--disguise,
politeness, joke & run--are an example: he uses the first two of them
in situations where clowning is inappropriate and when they fail he
reverts to clown tactics (joke & run). And even when clowning _is_
inappropriate, he resists assuming a "natural" persona. Of the five
costumes he uses in _Cowardly Lion_, only two are humans, and  they
are both people of power: a Huntsman (with gun) and a Witch.
 
I suspect that Notta was a very unhappy person outside of performing
in the ring; that may be part of the reason why he, almostly uniquely
among Thompson's American characters, chooses to remain in Oz rather
than return to the US.  In fact, that may be part of the reason Ozma
invites him to remain: she recognizes that Oz is in fact the only
place where he can be a clown permanently.  In our world, such an
attitude would make Notta a prime candidate for an institution, or at
least for some strong drug therapy and counseling; Oz, however, is a
happier land.*
 
I wonder if anyone has noticed what seems to be a Thompson theme that
appears strongly in this book: maturity. Notta and Bob Up are both
pretty much innocents and immature, Notta with less excuse than Bob.
For example, on their first night out, Notta (even though he
recognizes his responsibility to Bob--he got the boy into the
situation) falls asleep under a tree and leaves Bob vulnerable to
wild animals. They are only protected by the intervention of the
fairy. Later, in Un, Bob gets the dreams package labelled "For a
Little Boy" while Notta gets the one "For a Big Boy." Both of them
are rescued by the intervention of the Lion, who seems to be the
primary adult figure here; and it is Bob (not Notta) who discovers in
the end how to rescue the Lion from Crunch's spell.
 
So Notta (the nominal adult) ends up being the most immature and
irresponsible and only begins to change in the final chapters, while
Bob Up (the nominal child) begins to assume more and more
responsibility by the end of the book. And the Lion (the non-human)
is forced into the role of protector and ends up becoming the most
mature of all. Thompson scrambles traditional notions of age and
responsibility here.
 
Best,
KRS
 
*As long as you're not a Flutterbudget or Rigmarole.

Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 14:36:04 +1000
From: Gehan <calamity at eureka.lk>
Subject: Ozzy Things
 
Nathan:
Well, the GBR could have said something like this: "Notta Bit More
and Bob Up are in Oz. Mustafa gave them orders to capture the
Cowardly Lion." And later, it would have said:"Bob Up and Notta Bit
More are having adventures WITH the Cowardly Lion," and so Glinda
would have realised that the CL is at danger's door.
 
Untill next time!
~Gehan~

Date: Tue, 13 Jul 99 13:43:51 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu> 
Subject: latin in oz
 
J.L. Bell: I took a look at those paginations, and I see that
"Kabumpo" also starts the text on p. 15, although there, too, as in
"Cowardly Lion," a count of the pages suggests it ought to be 13, as
in most of the other Oz books.  I'd guess that someone inexperienced
did the paginations those two times and was counting either the front
cover or the color-plate frontispiece as a "page" to come up with 15,
but that their standard practice, followed by most of their staff,
was for a count that made p. 13 the start of the text in most of the
books.
 
Gehan Cooray: A couple of years ago there was a discussion of
Dorothy's haste in throwing water on Notta-disguised-as-a-witch.
I'll repeat the comment I made then: Notta, in his witch
impersonation, is running full-speed at Dorothy and gesturing wildly,
and those are factors that should be considered, too, in Dorothy's
reaction.  It really would look as if she's dealing with a wicked
witch who is about to do something wicked to her.  (And she has maybe
30 seconds to decide.)  After all, as various people have pointed
out, if she's wrong in thinking that the apparent witch is a witch,
she won't have done any more harm than dousing someone.  (Oz being
what it is, she doesn't need to worry about producing a fatal heart
attack if it's just an old woman with a weak heart.)  If RPT was
actually assuming that only wicked witches are meltable (and she may
have been -- as others have pointed out, Gloma does not mention
having any fear of water), then Dorothy doesn't even have to worry
that she might be melting a good witch.
 
David Godwin: Considering that Bobbie lived in an orphanage in
Stumptown Pennsylvania, he probably comes from somewhere in
Pennsylvania?
 
Ruth Berman

Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 08:58:27 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com> 
Subject: COWARDLY way out
 
Turning once more to COWARDLY LION, Notta Bit More seems to have
provoked unusually widespread agreement on the Digest. We've found
him "stooopid!" (Robin Olderman), "truely warped" and "manically
depressed" (Mike Denio), "severely neurotic and dysfunctional" (David
Godwin), and "psychologically crippled" (myself). Ruth Berman
charitably suggested he might be driven by a combination of
"hopefulness" and "anxiety," but she didn't seem convinced herself.
Anyone want to speak in favor of the personality of the Emerald
City's only clown*?

  Dave Godwin rightly pointed out that Notta carefully looks after
  Bob Up.

I believe he thus takes on more, and more permanent, parental
responsibility than any other non-relative in the series. In doing
so, and in reaching the Emerald City, Notta seems to find a niche
which turns his serious hang-ups into the most benefits and the least
difficulties. That's the best any of us can hope for, I guess. 

  Notta (and Thompson) also deserve credit for thinking of using the
  "Udge, Budge" rhyme from chapter 3 to send rescuers after the
  Cowardly Lion in chapter 19. Oz books don't always have so much
  dramatic unity. 
  (*Thompson tells us Notta is the only clown the Cowardly Lion had
  ever seen [119], forgetting Mr. Joker in WIZARD.)
 
Dave Hardenbrook wrote:
<<In this semester just ended my Java teacher's first name was Mustafa. 
(Anyone else here ever known anyone with an unintentionally "Ozzy"
name?)>>
 
I have a mother and a grandmother named "Dorothy." That answer may
seem facetious, but we have to remember that "Mustafa" (like "Akbad")
was a standard Mideastern name long before Thompson applied to one of
her villains. 

  Clearly Thompson enjoyed the pun inherent in Mustafa's name in an
  English story; she has him starting the book saying, "I *must have
  a*nother lion" [15--my emphasis]. Thus, the name "Mustafa" is
  presented not just as the name of a greedy villain, but as an
  emblem of that villain's greed. For most of her villains, Thompson
  seems to have made up names--Skamperoo, Glegg, Mooj--rather than
  use names that her reader might have, like "Peter" or "Angie." But
  she doesn't seem to have considered that some of her readers might
  be named Mustafa or Akbad.

  Nathan DeHoff wrote, <<Thompson must have had a fondness for
  Arabian tales and desert kingdoms.>> I think she had an *antipathy*
  for them--are any, with the possible exception of Seebania,
  presented as sympathetic and largely upstanding? Obviously,
  Thompson had little personal experience on which to base this
  presentation of Mideastern cultures; I suspect she inherited
  certain stereotypes from the Crusaders and the medieval romance
  writers who mythologized them. 
 
Gehan Cooray wrote:
<<when Dorothy saw Notta aproaching her, disguised as a witch, she
immeditaly took action to MELT the *WITCH* away......to destroy her.
This is not at all 'Dorothyish". She makes it very clear in _WIZARD_
that she doesnt want to kill anything, not even for the sake of
returning home to Kansas>>
 
Though Dorothy doesn't mean to kill the Wicked Witch of the West with
water in WIZARD, she's "very angry" when she does. We also mustn't
forget that Dorothy grows and changes, especially between WIZARD and
OZMA. She's a much more confident, even headstrong, person in Baum's
latter books. In SCARECROW he tells us that "there were times when
she was not as wise as she might have been." She has always been very
protective of her friends--slapping the Cowardly Lion when he chases
Toto is her first resort to violence, but not her last. 

  Therefore, it's conceivable that the Dorothy we know would without
  reflection try to liquidate a wicked witch whom she suddenly spots
  on the palace grounds. At the same time, this encounter isn't
  subtle nor clearly thought through. It's set up just to expose the
  folly of Notta's disguises and to put him in an uncomfortable
  situation--much like the rest of COWARDLY LION, in my eyes. 
  More interesting in this episode is how Thompson shows Dorothy, and
  by implication every sensible person in Oz, recognizing a wicked
  witch instantly by her appearance. Yet Mombi can get a job in LOST
  KING soon after.
 
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<I found the Uns' naming scheme somewhat odd.  The Un who became the
King was presumably named Unselfish, while none of the other named
Uns used their "unish" traits as their names.  In fact, aside from
Unselfish and I-Wish-I-Was, the only other two Uns whose names are
given in the text have fairly normal ones (Bill and Tom).>>
 
Good point. The names of I-Wish-I-Was and Unselfish among Bill and
Tom seem to be yet another sign that Thompson was trying too hard in
this book to create morals. 

  Speaking of names, Thompson never quite seems to settle between
  Snorer and Nick(adoodle). 
 
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Nickadoodle is...not exactly central to the plot, and might have
been added as an afterthought by Thompson, who seems to like rather
large adventuring parties.  Although Nick settles in the Emerald
City, he is never even mentioned after _Cowardly Lion_, even in
_Wishing Horse_ (which does bring back Notta and Bob).>>
 
Nick is crucial in the adventurers' escape from Un [190]; he's not
just an onlooker like the Comfortable Camel and Doubtful Dromedary.
He also fills a role that Thompson has used in both of the previous
books: the overly devoted animal companion, like the Camel with his
Karwan Bashi and Wag with Peg. 

  I find it interesting that Nick states clearly that he "was never
  any place else" but Oz [211], implying that Un is actually part of
  Oz, no matter how skybound. (Thompson echoes that conclusion when
  she writes, "very little news of the capital ever came to Un"
  [239].)  
 
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<This is Thompson's first book to use a Baum character in the title.
Not only is the Cowardly Lion the title character, but the adventure
was clearly written around him.  It was as if Thompson just wanted to
write a story about the Lion, and figured that having someone want to
capture him could lead to a plot.  Note that the same plot device is
used in _Hungry Tiger_, right down to having a bad-tempered monarch
of a quasi-Turkish kingdom as the big cat's would-be captor.>>
 
In both books, furthermore, the title cat sets out to eat somebody,
knowing he'll lose the respect of his Emerald City friends by doing
so, and then feels ashamed. He spends the rest of the book trying to
make up for that initial desire--even though it's rather natural for
a carnivore. [Compare that to Baum's ironic treatment of the same
hungers in LIL WIZARD STORIES.]

  Reilly & Lee seems to have pushed Baum to name books after
  children's favorite characters, and I wouldn't be surprised if the
  firm asked Thompson to write a COWARDLY LION. The Lion was the only
  adventurer from WIZARD (besides Toto) who hadn't shown up in a Baum
  title. And, like the mystery of the Scarecrow's animation that
  drove ROYAL BOOK, Baum had left a big unanswered question hovering
  over the Cowardly Lion: What happened to his courage? Thompson
  starts this book's third storyline with that problem, reporting
  that even the non-humbug Wizard couldn't make more [105]. 
  I wonder whether KABUMPO, with a completely new character in the
  title and mostly new ones on the cover, had sold less than hoped.
  Thompson's author note doesn't mention that book--she implies that
  the most exciting recent event in Oz was the Scarecrow's brief
  departure, not the theft of Ozma's palace by a giant Nome. Nor does
  Thompson mention the events of KABUMPO within the next book, as she
  usually would. It would be ironic if the elegant elephant, arguably
  Thompson's most popular creation, was at first poorly received. 
  KABUMPO and COWARDLY LION share a plot element, however: in both
  books, a pair of protagonists set out to grab one of the beloved
  characters in the Emerald City, an enterprise we readers know is
  doomed. Both also have an image of a familiar immortal looking
  after characters in sleep: the Sandman in KABUMPO, the fairyman
  with the lantern here [65]. 
 
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Mustafa's grandfather was the ruler of Mudge when the country
received the book of laws.  Since the book credits Ozma, this
presumably means that Mustafa assumed the throne during Ozma's reign.
What happened to his grandfather?  Perhaps he accidentally stepped
out onto the Deadly Desert>>
 
Note that Mustafa knows what a "tombstone" is [273]. Whether Mudge
contains one for his grandfather is uncertain. 

  Another hint about the dynasty's timing: Mustafa's FAMOUS LIONS OF
  OZ book was written after Dorothy became a princess of Oz [25],
  thus after OZMA. If Mustafa's grandfather cut off all trade after
  that point, it took Mustafa a surprisingly short time to capture
  9,999.5 intelligent lions.

(Those wonderfully awful lions yelling through the bars of their
enclosure like the cons in SCARED STRAIGHT is my favorite image in
this book.) 

  Incidentally, you wrote of where <<Mudge [stands] on Haff and
  Martin's map.>> This book must have been a challenge for our
  cartographers because Thompson states that it's in "the
  southwestern part of the Munchkin country" [19], yet also that
  Munchkinland in the eastern part of Oz [119].

I may have suggested before that in this case "southwestern" means
"go as far south as you can in Munchkinland, then go west." The
Cowardly Lion says, "According to the maps there are only scattered
farms between here [in the forest] and the Emerald City" [125],
implying Thompson at least glanced at the TIK-TOK map while writing.  
 
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<This is the first book that mentions the deeds of the wizard Wam,
whose further exploits are described in _Wishing Horse_ and Melody
Grandy's non-canonical _Disenchanted Princess_.  It also gives a hint
as to how long ago Wam worked.  According to the text, Crunch had
"stood around for seven centuries."  If Wam planted the Travellers'
Tree (said by the sign to have been planted in the year 1120 O.Z.) at
around the same time, Oz might have been in the nineteenth century
O.Z. at the time of _Cowardly Lion_.  There is really no reason to
assume that Wam was only in action for a few years, however.  The
planting of the Travellers' Tree and the animation of Crunch could
have taken place centuries apart, for all we know. . . . Maybe this
incident [Wam's animation of Crunch] occurred when Wam was still a
mischievous apprentice.>>
 
COWARDLY LION does several odd things with time, some clearly
intentional and others seemingly slapdash. For instance, Thompson
starts in Mudge and moves through to Notta's arrival as a lumpy lion,
then starts again at the circus and proceeds to the same point--only
then confirming how her first two plots relate in time and space.
That's clever. Also, the book's climax revolves around how Notta
thinks he has three days to rescue the Cowardly Lion from Mudge, but
Crunch's impatience speeds up the timetable and the suspense. 

  On the other hand, Thompson tosses in other statements about Ozian
  chronology that she seems to have made up on the spot rather fit
  with what else we know. Thus, we have the compressed period between
  Mustafa and his grandfather, and between Mustafa's loss of his
  lions and his growing "amazingly rich" [290]. We have glimpses of
  "a prehistoric Oz man" hacking out Crunch (though such monumental
  artworks are hardly the creations of primitive cultures) [224], and
  Wam active in "1120 O.Z." [177]. We even have a hint on the last
  page, which functions as a sort of epilogue, that Bob Up is
  approaching college age [291]. Time seems to expand and contract on
  a whim. 
 
David Godwin wrote:
<<Bobbie continues the tradition of "orphans in Oz" that began with
Dorothy and which will continue with others all the way down to Robin Brown.
However, I think that Bobbie is the only one (in the FF, anyway) who
actually lived in an orphanage.>>
 
In addition to naming this book after a Baum character, Thompson was
also for the first time tackling his "American child comes to Oz"
plot. And, to repeat myself, she tries too hard. Bob's not simply an
American child, but an orphan meant to suffer. The orphanage is a
Dickensian nightmare where boys are "grudgingly sheltered and
eternally shaken" [231]. He's never had a dog [151], he's never been
fishing [142], and "laughing was against the rules of the orphan
home" [60, 90]. (As a contrast, we can remember that Dorothy has a
pet or two, and is the only one on her farm who does laugh.) Thus,
COWARDLY LION isn't a story of a child striving to survive, get back
home, and maintain her integrity, but of one distracted until he
"forgot he had ever been an orphan" [179]. 

  Only barely does Bob seem to be a main character in COWARDLY LION.
  The first scene in which he appears is narrated through Notta's
  perspective: Bob's just a generic orphan, and not till the next
  chapter do we learn his name. Long sections of text don't mention
  what Bob's doing or thinking [47-9, e.g.]. He sleeps through the
  battle with the Uns [156]. Only on pages 234-5 is he on his own for
  even a few minutes. Bob also rarely has the ideas or takes the
  actions that save the day; instead, he usually arrives just in time
  to offer explanations. His motivation for brave acts is fatalism
  [42]. Again, that's quite a contrast with Dorothy and Trot.
  Bob states that he's been in the orphanage for seven years [40],
  and has no notion or memory of his parents [37]. That implies he's
  not much older than seven himself. Such an age would indeed be a
  good match for his behavior in this book. He's emotionally volatile
  [41]. When he comes to a stream, he immediately wants to paddle
  [67]. He speaks in "excited little shrieks" [177]. Lighting a fire
  leaves him "feeling very important" [194].

Thompson often refers to him as a "little boy," a label I suspect
Peter and Speedy wouldn't have stood for. Youth, and the proximity of
a caring, extroverted adult, seem to explain why Bob makes so little
impression in these pages. Thompson never went back to give him an
adventure in which he could grow up more--perhaps because she felt so
little interest in him once he'd stopped being a cliche orphan. 
 
David Godwin wrote:
<<Unless I am mistaken, Notta Bit More and Bobbie are the only two
characters from the Outside World in the entire FF whose place of
origin (Kansas, Oklahoma, Philadelphia, etc.) is never stated.>>
 
Bob and Notta disappear from a place called Stumptown [29], a name
that fits the overly dreary picture Thompson paints at the start of
their story.

She also has Notta call Bob "an orphan from Philadelphia" [254], but
I assume that's simply wishful thinking on her part. We know who the
real orphan from Philadelphia would be.

  (On the same page 254, Thompson has Nick explain that his nose has
  been invented by "Uncle Billy"--yet another Bill for Nathan
  DeHoff's list, and another detail Thompson would reuse with more
  success later.) 
 
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Thompson managed to give closure to the Un and half-lion incidents,
but never told us which was the right door through Doorways.  Any
ideas on which one it could be?>>
 
The door that's ajar. Unfortunately, it leads right to the
Preservatory. 
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> 
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-16-99
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 20:46:10 PDT
 
Mike Denio:
>I do find it odd that so many people claim a dislike for Baum's _Dorothy 
>and
>the Wizard in Oz_ and _Road to Oz_, when I've found these two books to
>closely resemble Thompson's "quest" oriented titles like _Cowardly Lion_ 
>and
>_Grampa_. All are mostly episodic, where characters work to get out of one 
>bad situation just to get into another.
 
Thompson's books usually have an end goal, though, while both
_Dorothy and the Wizard_ and _Road_ really don't have any goal, aside
from "Let's get out of this strange place."  Also, _Road_ isn't
really one bad situation after another; aside from the Scoodlers,
there isn't any real danger in this one.  

The fox and donkey heads are obnoxious to the people who receive
them, but the inhabitants of Foxville and Dunkiton are basically
friendly.  As for _DotWiz_, the situations in that volume tend to be
more threatening than anything in Thompson's books; an invisible bear
is probably much scarier to most readers than the threat of being
placed in a jar.  Besides, _Cowardly Lion_ and _Grampa_ are often
criticized, just as _DotWiz_ and _Road_ are.
 
J. L. Bell:
>   Notta (and Thompson) also deserve credit for thinking of using the 
>"Udge,
>Budge" rhyme from chapter 3 to send rescuers after the Cowardly Lion in 
>chapter 19. Oz books don't always have so much dramatic unity.
 
The rhyme was also used against the attacking Uns.  I agree that the
repeated usage of the chant provides some unity to the story.  I do
wonder why Mudge happens to have this formula, though.  Was it
created by a magic-worker who used to live there (the same person who
made Mustafa's ring, perhaps?), or do other Oz kingdoms have similar
transportation rhymes? 

  (Umperdink!  Humperdink!  Go to Pumperdink!")
 
>   Nathan DeHoff wrote, <<Thompson must have had a fondness for Arabian
>tales and desert kingdoms.>> I think she had an *antipathy* for them--are
>any, with the possible exception of Seebania, presented as sympathetic and 
>largely upstanding?
 
I suppose Rash could count in this category; the Rashers are
described as being hot-tempered, but Ippty and the Pasha are the only
real "baddies" there.  It might well have become a friendly place
under Evered's leadership.  I'm not sure Seebania would count as an
Arabian-esque kingdom; some of the names (Ree Alla Bad, Shamsbad)
sound a bit Middle Eastern, but the country is primarily forest, not
desert.
 
>We even
>have a hint on the last page, which functions as a sort of epilogue, that 
>Bob Up is approaching college age [291].
 
Since many Ozites choose not to grow up, college age might be a bit
younger for inhabitants of Oz than for people in the Outside World.
I do find it odd that Thompson mentions that Notta had saved up
enough for Bob's future (or something along those lines).  This is
one of the earliest indications that Thompson wasn't planning on
going along with Baum's "no money in Oz" rule.
 
Nathan

From: Ozmama at aol.com
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 22:54:57 EDT
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-12-99
 
In a message dated 7/12/99 3:30:02 PM Central Daylight Time,
OzDigest at mindspring.com writes:
 
Ruth<< It occurs to me that the preponderance of antagonistic
characters for the protagonists to run into may itself be an example
of  Lewis Carroll's influence. >>

Bingo! That and the rampant insanity of these characters. They live
in rarified, specialized situations where their lack of rationality
is actually encouraged. 
 
Mike D., I've long detested Notta as a main character.  He is most
definitely not a role model,  doesn't learn anything valuable from
his adventuring, gets the child involved into, not out of, trouble,
etc., etc.   The character is thoroughly distasteful to me.  
 
_C.Lion_'s tone is too dark, the writing too uneven, and the main
adult character far too flawed for me to rank it as more than, say,
#38 or so in my list of canonical Oz book faves.  The child is weak,
one of the best characters (sky terrier) is used all-too-briefly for
purely didactic reasons, and another of the main characters (Nick) is
an irritating zany who adds little, if anything at all, to the book.
The Fiddlestick Forest episode (a Fred Meyer favorite, btw)  is
lovely, but as an adult it frustrates me because it reminds me of how
well RPT could write but mostly didn't for this book.  It's original
(unlike the fairyman) and gentle.  I suppose I'm really going to have
to reread it, aren't I, if I want to rant....  --Robin

From: CruentiDei at cs.com
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 00:22:11 EDT
Subject: Oz
 
Gehan:
Ozma's ordered execution of Mombi in _Lost King_ is one of only two
times that I can recall in the FF that she had anybody killed.
Dorothy may have acted out of suprise the first time she threw a
bucket of water over Notta's head, but that also was unlike her.
 
Nathan:
Since Mustafa's grandfather apparantly disappeared during Ozma's
reign to clear the way for Mustafa, we must also ask ourselves about
the fate of his father. Maybe poltiics in Mudge are a little, err,
robust. If Mustafa Junior wants to be king, he needs to say "Hey,
dad, let's take a walk by the Deadly Desert..."
 
Tyler Jones

Date: Mon, 19 Jul 99 11:41:20 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu> 
Subject: costumes in oz
 
Ken Shepherd: I shouldn't think the name of Notta would have kept
Notta from less clownish professionals.  As Dave Hardenbrook
mentioned, people do succeed with odd names.  Lotus Delta Coffman was
a president of the University of Minnesota -- of course, he signed
everything L.D. Coffman (his parents must have been Egypt-buffs).  
And there are the options of using a daily name other than one's
legal name (Louis F. Baum, for instance), or going to court and
getting the legal name changed. // Your mention (and Mike Denio's) of
Notta's non-human costumes -- it occurs to me to wonder what good
(outside Oz) it could ever have done him to disguise himself as a
fish.  The bear and lion costumes might be useful in the circus, I
suppose, but more as costumes than as disguises, surely?
 
J.L. Bell: Besides Seebania, one Arabian-style (though not desert-
climate) Thompsonian kingdom presented favorably is the Red Jinn's.  
You're probably right that she had a dislike for Arabs growing out of
European-based/biased histories and romances, but the antipathy was
probably softened a bit by fondness for the stories in the "Arabian
Nights." // On the recognizability of Wicked Witches -- it seems to
be a matter of clothing, mostly, especially the steeple hat.  (I
think Neill shows Mombi wearing a sort of skull-cap while working as
cook, although I don't think the text specifies.)
 
Ruth Berman

Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 20:27:03 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com> 
Subject: LION down
 
Continuing the COWARDLY LION discussion, Nathan DeHoff wrote: <<I do
wonder why Mudge happens to have this formula, though.  Was it
created by a magic-worker who used to live there (the same person who
made Mustafa's ring, perhaps?), or do other Oz kingdoms have similar
transportation rhymes?>>
 
Another oddity is that it works in the Great Outside World. Magical
balloons, rhymes, and talking dogs were a steady part of Thompson's
depiction of America, but in WIZARD Baum set an implicit standard
that spells can't be cast here. The only exceptions I can recall in
his Oz books are Button-Bright's umbrella and the Love Magnet (and
not until SHAGGY MAN is that item's magical origin confirmed). 

  One theory about the rhyme's origin: it was created as a way to
  exile troublesome Munchkins to a desolate corner of the land. When
  enough bluebeards arrived, they formed a society, named it "Mudge"
  after the last thing they all heard, and started living off their
  neighbors. That would explain why these Ozians are so
  "short-tempered" and created a "barbarous country" [19]--they were
  angry barbarians to begin with. It would also imply that whoever
  came up with the "Udge, Budge" rhyme lived far away. 
 
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<I did find it interesting that, while peoples such as the Bedouins
are nomads out of necessity, the Mudgers are nomads because they
don't like their neighbors, and can't stay in one place very long.>>
 
City folk used to say the same thing about Bedouins--that they're
antisocial and restless. 
 
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Since many Ozites choose not to grow up, college age might be a bit
younger for inhabitants of Oz than for people in the Outside World.
I do find it odd that Thompson mentions that Notta had saved up
enough for Bob's future (or something along those lines).>>
 
Thompson indeed reports, "Notta has saved up for Bob's entire
education" [291], so my inference that the orphan was approaching
college age was wrong. Notta seems to have been looking far ahead. 

  I can imagine Notta picking up loose emeralds and other jewels
  around the capital and assuming they're as valuable in Oz as in
  America. (He's not the type to ask anyone for advice, after all.)
  After a few weeks he thinks he's "saved up" and heads to Prof.
  Wogglebug to discuss buying a place in the college a decade later,
  and perhaps how to prepare the boy. Whereupon the thoroughly
  educated insect would make Notta's painted head spin with the news
  that (a) jewels are too common in Oz to have much value; (b) he
  charges no fees, nor does anyone else in the Emerald City; and (c)
  Bob isn't necessarily going to grow up. Thus, COWARDLY LION's final
  passage may not really be a report that Notta and Bob have settled
  in to their new home, but rather a hint that they still have a lot
  of adjusting to do.
  Who was Thompson's informant about these adventures? One clue
  appears on page 207, when she reports one detail "as Bob Up
  explained later to Dorothy," implying that Dorothy was the source,
  and that she relied on Bob (and, most likely, the Cowardly Lion)
  for information. 
  As for the Royal Athletic College, in Neill's RUNAWAY, the
  students' age range is considerably younger than Baum seems to
  imply in EMERALD CITY. Or perhaps, because I first read it at a
  considerably older age, the students *seemed* younger. 
 
Ken Shepherd wrote:
<<it is Bob (not Notta) who discovers in the end how to rescue the
Lion from Crunch's spell.  So Notta (the nominal adult) ends up being
the most immature and irresponsible and only begins to change in the
final chapters, while Bob Up (the nominal child) begins to assume
more and more responsibility by the end of the book.>>
 
I'd give Bob only one "more" worth of responsibility, and even that
seems like a stretch. He does indeed spot the Cowardly Lion coming
back to life, but that doesn't require planning, insight, bravery,
perseverance, or other mature qualities. Whoever was watching Dorothy
at that angle would have seen the change. Notta is definitely a
man-child, but I don't see Bob growing up past him in this book.

  Incidentally, I don't think Dorothy is acting very much in
  character when she weeps over the Cowardly Lion. She hasn't cried
  since WIZARD, has she?

Granted, she hasn't seen one of her oldest Oz friends petrified
seemingly forever, but I imagine her (as Baum drew her) planning an
adventure to find someone who can restore the Lion, not just crying.

  And speaking of being in character, on page 280, Thompson shows
  Ozma "stamping her foot for the first time in her gentle little
  life." True?
 
I can't evaluate all the COWARDLY LION art because my edition doesn't
have the color plates. A look at the line art shows one interesting
detail: this is the first Oz book in quite a while with no full-page
line drawings at all. Perhaps the manuscript was deemed too long to
need them. 

  I see signs of Thompson having gotten her text in early. All of
  Neill's line art is connected to nearby passages, it usually fits
  the spaces at the chapter ends, and none is repeated. Other Oz
  books don't have those qualities. That implies this book was laid
  out in type with plenty of time for Neill to draw. [Speaking of
  layout, there's a clumsy glitch in the running head atop page 176.]
  Comments on individual drawings--

cover: It's appropriate for the Cowardly Lion to appear with his tail
between his legs--that's supposedly a heraldic symbol for a coward. 

9? 11? 13? In any event, the contents page: This picture of the Lion
in repose is my favorite in the book.

46: How many arms does Notta have?

71: Another magic doorknob from Neill, though Thompson's text
mentions only animated doors.

109: Presumably the clock in this art is *not* in the Emerald City,
since it shows 8:00 and the text tells us at that time the Lion was
"miles and miles away."

187: In this picture Bob looks like Judy Garland in her twenties to
me--an opinion enhanced by a previous owner of my copy coloring in
his lips with pencil. This Bob doesn't look much like the giraffish
child on the next page, however.

285: I've seen several circus acts using Hula Hoops, but always
assumed they were developed after the invention of that plastic toy.
But is Notta playing with some wooden or metal hoop here? Would Neill
have been illustrating a common clown act of the time?
 
Robin Olderman wrote this message's penultimate word on COWARDLY
LION: <<I suppose I'm really going to have to reread it, aren't I, if
I want to rant....>>
 
The only thing worse than rereading COWARDLY LION might be rereading
it too late for the discussion!
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Wed, 21 Jul 99 11:04:21 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu> 
Subject: tv in oz(not)
 
Nathan DeHoff: The idea that the Udge Budge rhyme might have been
invented by the same magician who made Mustafa's ring sounds
plausible.
 
Robin Olderman: Would you say, then, that being influenced by Carroll
is a bad thing for RPT's work, or maybe bad only in the context of
"Cowardly Lion" (use of Looking-Glass-style speech in Back Woods in
"Lost King" and "Lost King" as a whole, or use of descent underground
to insanely logical kingdom in "Hungry Tiger" and "Hungry Tiger" as a
whole maybe better)?  Or is this a question to answer in stages as
the other books come up for discussion?
 
Ruth Berman

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-20-99
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 09:30:11 PDT
 
Tyler:
>Since Mustafa's grandfather apparantly disappeared during Ozma's reign to
>clear the way for Mustafa, we must also ask ourselves about the fate of his 
>father.
 
If we assume that death did exist before Ozma's reign, but not during
it (which is an iffy assumption, but one that does seem to have some
support in the books), then Mustafa's father could have died before
Ozma took the throne (thereby allowing his father (Mustafa's
grandfather) to outlive him).
 
Nathan

From: Ozmama at aol.com
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 05:00:25 EDT
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-24-99
 
Ruth Berman:
Robin Olderman: Would you say, then, that being influenced by Carroll
is a bad thing for RPT's work, or maybe bad only in the context of
"Cowardly Lion" (use of Looking-Glass-style speech in Back Woods in
"Lost King" and "Lost King" as a whole, or use of descent underground
to insanely logical kingdom in "Hungry Tiger" and "Hungry Tiger" as a
whole maybe better)?  Or is this a question to answer in stages as
the other books come up for discussion?
 
Certainly it's not good in _C. Lion_, but I hadn't even thought of the backwards
speech pattern as being Carrollian. The underground descent concept
feels more like Thompson to me than Carroll, since she uses it several times.  All of
her oddball countries seem to have their own insane internal logic, don't they? 
I've never considered Carrollian influence in other Thompson work.  I'll try to look 
for it as we go, although I suspect you'll note it where I miss it.  I'm not really an 
Alice person. Its harshness turned me off as a young reader, and I still don't like 
the books much, although I'm able to appreciate the cleverness of the
writing much better now because of Martin Gardner.  I think I'd never
have reread any Alice material if I hadn't met and enjoyed him so.  His (annotated) explanations 
have gone a long way to help me understand now some of what I'd
missed earlier. 
 
John Bell: Y'know what?  I'm not going to reread the blasted book.  I'll just sit 
back and watch the rest of you tear it down for me.  :o)  
 
--Robin

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> 
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-24-99
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 12:54:40 PDT
 
J. L. Bell:
>Magical
>balloons, rhymes, and talking dogs were a steady part of Thompson's
>depiction of America, but in WIZARD Baum set an implicit standard that
>spells can't be cast here. The only exceptions I can recall in his Oz books
>are Button-Bright's umbrella and the Love Magnet (and not until SHAGGY MAN 
>is that item's magical origin confirmed).
 
Magic works in the Outside World in _John Dough_, which isn't part of
the Oz series, but was connected to it by _Road_.  As for magic not
working in the Outside World, the only real example we have of this
is in _Wizard_, in which the Silver Shoes don't make it to Kansas
with Dorothy.  In _Ozma_, Glinda states that the Belt wouldn't work
in the Outside World, but we never receive any actual proof.
 
Nathan

Date: Wed, 28 Jul 99 10:01:42 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu> 
Subject: education in oz
 
J.L. Bell: I wonder if "saving up" for a college education in Ozian
terms could perhaps mean finding out what equipment is needed to take
part in the games, and what books are recommended for those (probably
some in spite of pills?) students who want to read books for courses,
and getting hold of them to be ready when needed.  Then again,
considering that RPT seems to have some kind of money being used in
Oz in many of her books, perhaps he really is just doing something
(putting on circus-type shows for birthday parties, perhaps) to earn
money.  (She wouldn't necessarily have to be assuming that Baum's
everyone-contributes-and-everyone-gets system has switched over to
capitalism   the money might be serving as a sort of voucher system
to "budget" resources that are scarce.  Individual artworks,
individual performances, some crops if the farmers got tired of
growing creampuffs one year and all wanted to switch to caramels,
say, even places at the Wogglebug's College if Wogglebuggian
education had come to be more generally admired than it seemed to be
in "Emerald City," might be examples of resources that might not be
available for all the asking at any one time, even though they might
all be available over time.) // That does seem to be an arm too many
in that illo.  

Perhaps the lion's paw is stiff enough to stick up from the costume
without an arm inside it, or perhaps he took off his glove in putting
on the lion outfit, and the glove seeming to hold up the lion-head is
just caught on it? // I don't know what a clown would have done with
a hoop as part of the act at this time, but have dropped off a letter
to Sonia Brown (an Oz fan and circus buff), and will report if she
has comments.
 
Robin Olderman: RPT has several versions of descents underground, and
I'm not sure if I'd want to argue that all of them include some kind
of recollection of "Alice," but the "Hungry Tiger" one, with Betsy
coping with the unpleasant Queen Fi Nance does seem to me rather like
Alice's underground adventures.  (Baum's underground Mangaboos in
"Dorothy and the Wizard" also maybe show Carroll's influence?)
 
Nathan DeHoff & J.L. Bell: Another Baumian example of magic at work
in the real world is in the various displays of magic that the
Visitors from Oz put on in the "Queer Visitors" stories.
 
Ruth Berman

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 19:26:56 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com> 
Subject: acroz the great divide
 
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Magic works in the Outside World in _John Dough_, which isn't part
of the Oz series, but was connected to it by _Road_.  As for magic
not working in the Outside World, the only real example we have of
this is in _Wizard_, in which the Silver Shoes don't make it to
Kansas with Dorothy.  In _Ozma_, Glinda states that the Belt wouldn't
work in the Outside World, but we never receive any actual proof.>>
 
Nor would we want to try the experiment of taking the Magic Belt to
the Outside World if there's a good chance it would end up beside the
silver shoes! In addition to these passages about magic being limited
to Oz, there's also the implication of the Winged Monkeys' statement
that they can't fly to Kansas because they don't belong there.

  I mentioned Baum's "Oz books" because, as you say, he did depict
  magic working in America in other stories. In addition to JOHN
  DOUGH, mermaids swim under California soil in SEA FAIRIES and
  Button-Bright's fairy umbrella carries him across the continent and
  back in SKY ISLAND. Several AMERICAN FAIRY TALES show magic at work
  on our streets, and Oz's citizens not only remain animated but work
  a few spells in QUEER VISITORS.
  Nonetheless, in the Oz novels themselves, Baum depicts natural
  disasters and magic worked from within Oz as almost the only ways
  to fairyland.

(Button-Bright's trip in SCARECROW is an offstage afterthought.) In
COWARDLY LION Thompson starts a different approach, which she
continues in LOST KING, GNOME KING, JACK PUMPKINHEAD, GIANT HORSE,
and perhaps others.
 
Before COWARDLY LION runs away, there were a couple of phrases which
sounded odd to me, as if they were idioms that haven't survived--
 
193: "You don't need a disguise," wailed the Cowardly Lion remorsefully.
"You look like almost anyone."
"I feel the same way," coughed the clown.
 
209: Notta leaned out of the bus and, seizing a pencil and pad, wrote
back, "He broke himself, save the pieces."
 
Anyone recognize catch phrases here?
 
Also, does anyone want to conjecture a connection between the "shaker
of magic powder" that Wam used to animate Crunch [224], and the
powder of life from the crooked magician/Dr. Nikidik/Dr. Pipt? Wam is
also credited with wishing brains into Crunch's head [260, 263], but
I note Margolotte supplied brains for Scraps in a separate operation,
and Jack Pumpkinhead gets by with rather few.

  Lest I seem only to denigrate Thompson's storytelling in COWARDLY
  LION, I admire the details she inserts to show Crunch's physical
  power, especially his "rubbing his stone forehead noisily" and
  "bringing his fist upon a rock and splintering it" on page 227.
  Even before he becomes a clear villain, Crunch is a clear danger.
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 22:25:30 -0400
From: Lisa M Mastroberte <ozma.rules at cheerful.com>
Subject: Ozzy Matters
 
Ruth: <<(She wouldn't necessarily have to be assuming that Baum's
everyone-contributes-and-everyone-gets system has switched over to capitalism   the money might
be serving as a sort of voucher system to "budget" resources that are scarce.>>
 
True, more or less a barter system. Say, I want a bottle of Wogglebug Learning Pills and I have
a few, say, rare jewels. :-) He wants the jewels and I want the pills. Fair exchange, and still
can remain Ozzy. Better than resorting in stealing. ;)
 
Peace!! -Lisa

Date: Sat, 31 Jul 1999 09:28:00 -0500
From: David Hulan <davidhulan at ntsource.com>
Subject: Return to Oz (not the movie)
 
I did think I'd make a few comments of my own on _Cowardly Lion_, though
it's been long enough since I reread it that they're going to be more 
general than specific.
 
I have a hard time deciding whether this or _Ozoplaning_ is Thompson's worst book. It usually
boils down to which one I've read most recently; the fresher the memory the worse I find the
book. CL does seem to have a more integrated plot, with a real direction to it other than the
simple Omigod-we're-lost-so-how-do-we-get-home-again of _Ozoplaning_. On the other hand,
_Ozoplaning_ has several quite engaging characters: Jellia, in her best role in the series;
Azarine, a small part but a strong one; even the villains Strut and Bustabo (if I remember the
name right - the usurper who took Azarine's throne) are more interesting than most. Wantowin
Battles shows why he was never a major character in any other book, it's true - his main trait
is cowardice, and that stops being funny rather quickly. But overall, the characters in
_Ozoplaning_ are enjoyable. CL, on the other hand, as others have already said, lacks _any_
engaging characters. Notta has been justifiably dissed by just about everyone who's commented
on him. Bob is almost totally passive; not a fault in a quite young child, of course, but it
makes him of little interest. The Cowardly Lion isn't even in good form here; he starts off on
a quest that he knows quite well is wrong, and in the thunderstorm he panics and nearly gets
all of them seriously injured. And Snorer is pretty much of a bore. Crunch is at least
interesting, but he's only on stage for a short time.
 
There are other Thompson books I think are weak - _Royal Book_, _Grampa_, _Gnome King_, _Giant
Horse_ - but even they are much stronger than CL. I'm glad we're getting past it; when do we
start on _Grampa_?
 
David Hulan

Date: Sat, 31 Jul 1999 19:36:16 -0500
To: Ozzy Digest <OzDigest at mindspring.com>
From: "R. M. Atticus Gannaway" <atty242 at mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 07-30-99
 
RUTH BERMAN:
 
>Robin Olderman: RPT has several versions of descents underground,
>and I'm not sure if I'd want to argue that all of them include some kind
>of recollection of "Alice," but the "Hungry Tiger" one, with Betsy coping
>with the unpleasant Queen Fi Nance does seem to me rather like
>Alice's underground adventures.  (Baum's underground Mangaboos in
>"Dorothy and the Wizard" also maybe show Carroll's influence?)
 
Carrollian ditto on Neill's Chapter 16 heading for _Hungry Tiger_.
 
Atticus * * *

Date: Mon, 23 Aug 99 10:12:09 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu> 
Subject: welcome-backs to Oz
 
J. L. Bell: I don't think the "You look like almost anyone."/"I feel
the same way," exchange is a special idiom.  Notta just means he's so
shaken he doesn't know who he is and feels "like almost anyone." The
"He broke himself, save the pieces" line plays on the idiom of
"breaking the peace."
 
Ruth Berman

From: "Warren H. Baldwin" <wbaldwin at plvwtelco.net> 
To: "'Ozzy Digest'" <ozdigest at mindspring.com> 
Subject: Oz Digest 8/22
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 15:49:31 -0500
 
  In the spirit of the IE, I have coined a new acronym, one badly
  needed on the Digest: AV, meaning Alternate View or Alternative
  View.

  Here, then, is my parting AV of _Cowardly_ before the next BCF
  takes effect.

  I think y'all are being unnecessarily harsh and intolerant toward
  poor Notta. Sure, he's acquired himself a set of rules that don't
  seem to work very well, but apparently they did up to the time of
  the story, else why would he have kept them? They don't seem to
  work so well in Oz, but as we all know, Oz is a unique country
  different from America, thank (your own personal diety or absence
  of one). The whole book takes place in a few days. Who among you
  could shed a lifestyle of years, perhaps decades, practically
  overnight? You will note that by the end of the adventure he
  realizes the futility of all but one rule, and I call that pretty
  good. At least he's not a fanatic. As for continuing to dress and
  make up as a clown, that's not his fault. I suspect that Ms.
  Thompson created Notta to be a permanent "character" at Ozma's
  court, and in order to be a "character" the like of the Scarecrow
  or Woodman, who are "naturally" different all the time, Notta has
  to be in character all the time, else we'd have Ozma saying
  something like "I'd like you to meet Notta, the clown," and the
  respondent saying something like "I see a lot of clowns here. Which
  one is Notta?" You will also notice that Bob Up has his own
  reservations about Notta, but doesn't voice them. What you have
  here, folks, is the old wise child theme at work. Notta serves the
  dual roles of adult figure and straw man (humor intended); he's
  _supposed_ to be aberrant, and I think he fills both slots very
  well. The target audience (kids, remember?) is supposed to see this
  along with Bob Up and be drawn into the story, and Ms. Thompson
  plotted better than was dreamt of in your philosophy. Sorry, but I
  thought that the plot and the characters fitted very "cozily," and
  I enjoyed _Cowardly_ immensely.

  Incidentally, in Chapter 1, Mudge is described as being in the
  southwestern part of the Munchkin Country, which is the mirror of
  reality according to the Haff-Martin map. (Hanff?) Was this
  discrepancy covered in previous Digests?
 
  W. Baldwin

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 17:30:25 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com> 
Subject: Otto know better
 
Ruth Berman wrote:
<<RPT seems to have some kind of money being used in Oz in many of
her books. . . . She wouldn't necessarily have to be assuming that
Baum's everyone-contributes-and-everyone-gets system has switched
over to capitalism   the money might be serving as a sort of voucher
system to "budget" resources that are scarce.>>
 
Several indications of money in Thompson's books seem to come from
far outside the capital, as in Kimbaloo and its neighboring villages.
That situation implies it's actually a remnant of the earlier system,
rather than a new development in Ozma's economy.
 
Ruth Berman wondered:
<<if Wogglebuggian education had come to be more generally admired
than it seemed to be in "Emerald City">>
 
I got the sense from EMERALD CITY that it was rather popular among
the young people, as long as the professor didn't overdo it. "There
was great laughter and shouting" from the athletes when Dorothy first
visited, and the campus was obviously growing.

  Thompson in ROYAL BOOK and especially Neill/Shanower in RUNAWAY
  seem to have expanded the depiction of the Royal Athletic College.
  It's interesting that in doing so they made the Wogglebug from a
  harmless eccentric into an antagonist for kids (Zif, Alexample).
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: CruentiDei at cs.com
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 23:18:13 EDT
Subject: Oz
 
Warren:
I don't know if anybody has ever covered the corner-ness of Mudge
specifically, but the whole east-west thing has had quite a bit of
discussion. It does seem that Thompson mixed them up very often.
 
Tyler Jones

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> 
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 08-26-99
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 08:02:24 PDT
 
Warren Baldwin:
>   Incidentally, in Chapter 1, Mudge is described as being in the
>southwestern part of the Munchkin Country, which is the mirror of reality
>according to the Haff-Martin map. (Hanff?) Was this discrepancy covered in
>previous Digests?
 
I guess it was just hard to find a proper southwestern area in a
country shaped like the Munchkin.  Haff and Martin usually reverse
east and west in Thompson's books, due to the fact that she often
placed the Munchkin Country in the west and the Winkie in the east,
but she didn't do this in _Cowarldy Lion_.
 
Nathan

Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 11:53:54 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com> 
Subject: save the peace
 
Ruth Berman wrote:
<<The "He broke himself, save the pieces" line plays on the idiom of
"breaking the peace.">>
 
I hadn't considered this possibility. Unfortunately, I still don't see it.
Or hear it, or whatever you do with puns. Darn. 
 
Warren Baldwin wrote: 
<<I think y'all are being unnecessarily harsh and intolerant toward
poor Notta. Sure, he's acquired himself a set of rules that don't
seem to work very well, but apparently they did up to the time of the
story, else why would he have kept them?>>
 
Good point. On the other hand, they've worked only well enough to get
him to a two-ring tent show in Stumptown. 
 
Warren Baldwin wrote:
<<As for continuing to dress and make up as a clown, that's not his fault.

I suspect that Ms. Thompson created Notta to be a permanent
"character" at Ozma's court, and in order to be a "character" the
like of the Scarecrow or Woodman, who are "naturally" different all
the time, Notta has to be in character all the time>>
 
I think you're right about Thompson's hope to create another
permanent celebrity, like Sir Hokus. It's interesting that they're
both based on familiar types--a medieval knight and a circus
clown--rather than a truly novel, who-knows-what-to-expect personage
like a tin woodman. And in both cases Thompson gives the man another
level of depth below the stereotype.
In Notta's case, I think there's only one level, though, and it wears
thin.
 
  I don't begrudge Notta his choice to be a clown, though his anxiety
  at being caught without makeup is so acute that it comes across as
  troubling.

Rather, it's Notta's insistence at *not* greeting people as a clown
that's frustratingly obtuse. Bob keeps having to yell, "It's Notta!"
because he knows his painted friend is just fine as is. "'Why, it's a
clown!' cried Dorothy in delight" when she sees Notta in his real
persona [251]. Most people in Oz would be merely curious about this
new type of man, the story hints; it's Notta's overwhelming bad luck
that he meets almost nobody but crabs. [Apologies to real crabs.]

  Another result of Thompson's choice to focus COWARDLY LION on Notta
  learning to do without disguises means that he doesn't show a lot
  of personality beyond that. Unlike Sir Hokus, there's not really an
  interesting character to carry on with. And indeed, Thompson rarely
  brought him back. [One quality that might have made a more lasting
  character is to bring forward Notta's feelings of paternal
  responsibility, producing a paradox of the clown who's also an
  anxious, busy adoptive father.]
 
Warren Baldwin wrote:
<<You will also notice that Bob Up has his own reservations about
Notta, but doesn't voice them. What you have here, folks, is the old
wise child theme at work. Notta serves the dual roles of adult figure
and straw man (humor intended); he's _supposed_ to be aberrant, and I
think he fills both slots very well. The target audience (kids,
remember?) is supposed to see this along with Bob Up and be drawn
into the story>>
 
I agree about Bob and Notta's role-reversal. It would have been more
satisfying for me if Bob had ever spoken to Notta about the mistakes
he perceived, or took a leadership role in their little band. That he
doesn't (to my recollection, at least) seems due to how Thompson
portrayed him as so young. He may be wiser than his years, but he's
still such a little kid.
 
J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Fri, 27 Aug 99 15:01:36 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu> 
Subject: Notta in Oz
 
Warren H. Baldwin: Interesting defense of Notta's rules for survival.
I think what's oddest about them is that as badly as they work for
him in Oz, they seem even more unlikely as something that would have
been working for him in America.  The parts about being polite,
telling jokes, and running might have worked pretty well, but it's
mostly the part about disguises that gets him into trouble in Oz, and
it seems likely that they'd do the same in America.  Maybe the
huntsman and bear guises could be useful, but the fish and lion
disguises wouldn't be convincing, surely, and the witch might draw unwanted attention.  
Unless the idea is keep the rubes from knowing which circus employee
had annoyed them?  But then that would be getting the circus as a
whole in trouble?  I think RPT might have intended the implausibility
of some parts of Notta (his rules, his horror of being seen out of
clown-dress) to be comic, but in other ways the characterization is
more realistic.  It's not like, say, J.M. Barrie's play about
Harlequin, where the whole joke, consistently present in the action,
is that the characters' entire lives are lived in a world the same as
the world of the stage-pantomime.  In some moods, I think the comedy
of Notta's implausibility works as comedy, but in others I find
myself convinced by those who've been arguing that the shift between
Notta as someone who lives in a world that is the same as his on-
stage existence and Notta as someone who can be offstage as well as
on is too clumsy to work as comedy.

   The geographical discrepancy -- RPT was following the map of Oz as
   it was drawn, and she assumed that east was on the right-hand
   side.  She was not following the compass rose of the map, which
   was backwards, and showed that east was on the left.  Curiously,
   Denslow also got the directions reversed in his drawing of a
   weather vane in "Wizard."  And Baum was often inconsistent himself
   about east-west directions.  There really was no way that RPT
   could have treated the directions (short of avoiding mention of
   east/west entirely) that would have been consistent.
 
Ruth Berman

Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 14:19:55 -0500
From: David Hulan <davidhulan at ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: The Ozzy Digest -- Back from the dead! (08-22-99)
 
8/22:
J.L.:
I think the biggest reason there aren't any definite examples of
magic working in the outside world in Baum's Oz books is that there
is very little time spent in the outside world in Baum's Oz books.
About three pages in _Wizard_, a chapter in _Ozma_, a chapter in
_DotWiz_, a chapter in _Road_, a chapter in _EC_, a page or maybe two
in _Tik-Tok_, a chapter in _Scarecrow_, and that's it. And it's
arguable that magic did work in the outside world in _Scarecrow_;
what besides magic (counting mermaids as magic) rescued Trot and
Cap'n Bill from the whirlpool? Can you think of a possible natural
cause?
 
For that matter, if we accept your firm belief that Oz is physically
on our Earth, then there must be magic working in our world as well;
there's no other way in which a tornado can carry something from the
central US to a place that's somewhere well out into the Pacific
Ocean, so magic worked in our world in either _Wizard_ or _Ozma_.
 
8/26:
J.L.:
The earliest indication of the Woggle-bug as an antagonist to kids
was probably in _Magic_, when some of the students threw him into the
river.
 
David Hulan

Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 11:03:40 -0500
From: David Hulan <davidhulan at ntsource.com> 
Subject: Re: Ozzy Digest, 08-27-99 (Re-send 2) & 08-29-99
 
8/27:
J.L.:
> indeed, Thompson rarely brought [Notta] back.
 
Other than a mention in regard to the party in _Wishing Horse_, I
don't recall his appearing in any other book, and he isn't really
on-stage even in that book - certainly doesn't have any lines.
 
David Hulan

Date: Fri, 3 Sep 99 10:35:56 CST
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at maroon.tc.umn.edu> 
Subject: crooks in Oz
 
 
David Hulan: You're right that the only later appearance of Notta is
a mention in "Wishing Horse."  (Eric Shanower put him into an illo in
"Wicked Witch," though.)
 
Ruth Berman