Day 1 (8/17) - Jenny Jump meets Siko Pompus, received fairy gifts, leaves NJ
Day 5 (8/21) - Ozma's birthday - Jenny arrives, meets Number Nine - night
  with Number Nine's family
Day 6 (8/22) - Jenny recovers the Turnstyle - arrives Emerald City at noon
  - opens shop - begins Ozlection
  
A week passes (Ozma says, "It has been a dull week for [Jack Pumpkinhead],
staying in his ozoplane to guard the votes.") 

Day 13 (8/29) - Jack Pumpkinhead's shoe concert - Heelers invade at night
  - Jenny arouses firefly fairies
Day 14 (8/30) - Number Nine meets the Wizard - Jenny undergoes youthening
  process, loses fairy gifts - old Ozoplane takes off - chocolate general
  holds Jenny, Scraps, Jack prisoner - Jenny escapes at night
Day 15 (8/31) - Number Nine's family comes to visit - he begins search for
  Jenny - they foil the invasion of chocolate soldiers - he visits the
  Wizard, rescues Scraps, Jack - meeting at PLOz at night
  
Time passes before day set for Ozlection:

Chooseday - Jenny loses, begins riot - Wizard removes Jenny's "bad traits" -
Ozma makes Jenny a Duchess - Siko Pompus returns her fairy gifts

Note: It is not stated in the text what length of time passes between the
meeting at the PLOz and the day set for the Ozlection, but on the basis of
Dorothy's statement, "I can't wait till next Choose Day.  This ozlection is
going to be a lot of fun," it isn't very long--perhaps no longer than a week.

Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 18:00:18 +0000
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at tmbg.org>
Subject: The Wizard and other WONDER CITY magic

To start off our discussion of WONDER CITY, I have a few observations on how
Neill portrays our old friend, the Wizard of Oz.  Neill makes him very
powerful, and also gives him the odd trait of dressing up in costumes and
spying on people.  There is some precedent for this behavior, since that's

essentially what he did back before the time of WIZARD.  He never seemed to
do this in any of the post-WIZARD Baum and Thompson books, though, so it's
odd that he does in WONDER CITY.  His attachment to disguises is almost of

Notta Bit More's level, with the Wizard acting as if his going to examine
the Magic Picture WITHOUT a disguise was unusual behavior, and transporting
Jinjur back home just because she identifies him in public.

One of the Wizard's most interesting disguises is that of the "broom man,"
in which guise he seems to be evaluating Number Nine's ability to act as his
assistant.  Oddly enough, Nine remains Jenny's office boy at the end of
WONDER CITY, although he's suddenly the Wizard's assistant at the beginning
of SCALAWAGONS, with no indication as to how this happened.  The picture of
the broom man on the endpapers makes it pretty obvious that this man is the
Wizard, but I seem to recall the drawings in the main part of the book show
him as taller and more sinister-looking than the Wizard generally is (at
least from what I remember; I don't have the book with me right now).

Many people criticize the Wizard for his lobotomy of Jenny Jump, which
actually wasn't in Neill's original manuscript.  As some people have pointed
out in the past, however, there is some precedent for it in his replacing
the Glass Cat's pink brains with clear ones (PATCHWORK GIRL), and Clocker's
bad works with good ones (PIRATES).  The former is obviously unsuccessful,
since she has the pink brains back in MAGIC.  We don't know how the latter
works out, since Clocker never reappears, but the Wizard's operation on
Jenny's brains might well have turned out just as poorly as his operation on
Bungle's.  In fact, one of Eric Shanower's additions to RUNAWAY indicates
that the Wizard eventually returned Jenny's lost personality traits.

In WONDER CITY, we are introduced to a new invention of the Wizard's: the
Teletable, which can find lost things.  The advantage of this device over
the Magic Picture seems to be that it will find things without specifically
being asked.

Speaking of the Magic Picture, it seems to have an additional power in this
book.  When Jenny is flying toward Oz, a speck appears in the Picture's
country scene, indicating that there is trouble in Oz.  Maybe this is a new
capability that Ozma or someone recently gave the Picture, so as to be
warned of impending danger.  Since Jenny really wasn't that much of a threat
to Oz, I have to wonder what the Picture would show if seriously hostile
forces were on their way.  Maybe more than a speck would appear in the
country scene.  If someone had thought to look in the Picture before the
Mimics' invasion in MAGICAL MIMICS, maybe they would have seen a serious
change in its usual appearance.

WONDER CITY has Ozma working some magic without the Magic Belt, something we
don't see much of in the Thompson books (about the only example I can think
of being her transportation of herself and others from Glinda's palace to
the Emerald City in OZOPLANING).  She allows Jellia to talk through her ear,
and makes it so she won't be hungry until the threads on her mouth are
broken.

I'm sure I'll have more to say about WONDER CITY later on, but this should
be enough to get things started, if other people haven't already done so.

Nathan

From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at ...>
Date: Fri May 2, 2003  12:22 pm
Subject: wonder city of oz

Having re-read this for discussion here --

I like Jenny Jump and Number Nine as characters, but dislike the
story as a whole. Noticed this time through that much of the story seems to
be told so much in simple declarative sentences as to make for an
unpleasant reading rhythm. Haven't checked to be sure, but I think Baum does that
kind of rhythm only for special effects (as with the opening description
of the grayness of Kansas in "Wizard"), and that both Baum
and RPT usually used much more varied structures.

The artwork, however, is splendid, especially the few older
illos, more detailed in line and more romantic in mood, scattered through
(especially Jenny among the firefly fairies; what is allegedly Number Nine's
mother, although it looks like Jenny, with alleged pair of nomes), but
also the newer stuff, especially the full-pagers and even more so the
douoble-page spreads. The Wizard's Rube Goldberg machinery, for instance.

We talked earlier about whether the Boxer is from the Box Wood
of Ix. He certainly looks as if he is, but does describe himself as a
Quadling. Very likely Neill forgot about the earlier Boxers -- but it would be possible
to suppose that he was originally from the Box Wood and had come to
live in the Quadling Country at some earlier time. (Alternatively, maybe
there is a group of Boxers in the QC, possibly the original territory of or
possibly an offshoot from the original territory of the Box Wood Boxers.)

It occurs to me to wonder if the pink kitten lost under the
Emerald City is meant to be Eureka. I suspect not, considering that the kitten
is still lost at the end of the story (with only the Wizard's promise to try
to get caught up at locating losts). Maybe it's a stray from the QC? (Belongs
to the Boxer, maybe?) On the other hand, maybe it could be considered
as being Eureka, and the story of Dorothy's quest to get her back needs
writing.

Ruth Berman

Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 13:52:43 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: The Wizard and other WONDER CITY magic

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<To start off our discussion of WONDER CITY, I have a few observations on
how Neill portrays our old friend, the Wizard of Oz.  Neill makes him very
powerful, and also gives him the odd trait of dressing up in costumes and
spying on people.  There is some precedent for this behavior, since that's
essentially what he did back before the time of WIZARD.  He never seemed to
do this in any of the post-WIZARD Baum and Thompson books, though, so it's
odd that he does in WONDER CITY.>>

I think that new habit shows the influence of the MGM movie issued the
previous year, in which Frank Morgan played several roles in the Emerald
City. The illustration of the Wizard with an absurdly false moustache seems
especially reminiscent of the facial hair in the MGM movie.

The "broom man" is an oddity, as you note. Neill draws him as gaunt while
continuing his pattern in the Thompson books of giving the Wizard a stately
paunch. That difference would require much more of a physical
transformation than gluing on a fake moustache. It makes me wonder what
Neill actually had in mind when he drew those images. The broom man and the
Wizard look alike only in the endpapers.

The chapter of Number Nine visiting the Wizard's lab and meeting the broom
man is the longest in the book, as I recall; I don't know whether that
means it was heavily rewritten or left just as in Neill's original, but it
stands out.

<<Speaking of the Magic Picture, it seems to have an additional power in
this book.  When Jenny is flying toward Oz, a speck appears in the
Picture's country scene, indicating that there is trouble in Oz.  Maybe
this is a new capability that Ozma or someone recently gave the Picture, so
as to be warned of impending danger.>>

That speck is Jenny herself, hurtling through the sky toward Oz, isn't it?
I don't see the text presenting her appearance as a warning like the
Soldier's red whiskers in WISHING HORSE. It seems to be just another case
of the Magic Picture coincidentally showing someone of interest, as in
RINKITINK.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at ...>
Date: Fri May 2, 2003  2:55 pm
Subject: wonder city of oz

"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at ...> wrote:
> [Neill gives the Wizard] the odd trait of dressing up in costumes and
spying on people.  There is some precedent for this behavior, since that's
essentially what he did back before the time of WIZARD. <
He appears in costumes in "Wizard," but there isn't any direct indication
that he goes out and about in his costumes and spies on people, is there? I
wonder if Neill was influenced by Frank Morgan's Wizard (in the 1939 movie),
who does go out and about incognito -- if we assume that Morgan's different
roles (Guardian of the Gates, Cabbie, Soldier with the Green Whiskers) are
really the Wizard in different guises, and not just Morgan in different
roles. It's an ingenious way to beef up the role, but as an element of
Neill's story it seems odd, as you say -- even pointless. (Number Nine
apparently doesn't know what the Wizard, so would be surprised to learn his
identity in any case, and most readers probably realize who the broom man is
early on. Shoving Jinjur offstage for recognizing him is disappointing to
those who find her character interesting and seems uncharacteristically rude
of the Wizard.)
Ruth Berman

From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at ...>
Date: Fri May 2, 2003  3:44 pm
Subject: wonder city of oz

This is something I've mentioned other times -- but the spring
1972 "Baum Bugle" had a nice article, "The Map of the Wonder City
of Oz," by Judy Pike (working from the late Robert R. Pattrick's city-plan), with a
map of the Emerald City and discussion of the information (and conflicts)
given in the Oz books. Much of the material comes from Neill. Perhaps because
he needed to have a layout clear in his head for the double-page spreads
of the castle seen across the city and of Ozma watching the parade, he was the
only Oz author who went into much detail in his texts on the city's
geography. The issue is out of print (and the "Best of the Bugle"
collections haven't come up that far). Anyone who would like a photocopy of it for
minimal cost, contact me offlist with your mailing address.

Ruth Berman

Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 03:50:29 +0000
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at tmbg.org>
Subject: Re: wonder city of oz

J. L. Bell:
>The "broom man" is an oddity, as you note. Neill draws him as gaunt while
>continuing his pattern in the Thompson books of giving the Wizard a stately
>paunch. That difference would require much more of a physical
>transformation than gluing on a fake moustache.

At the end of that chapter, Number Nine recognizes the Wizard, who is
apparently in his normal form at the time, as the same man who helped him in
the tower.  This almost certainly would not have been the case if the broom
man had looked as different from the Wizard as he seemed to in the
illustrations.  (He'd be more likely to recognize him as the street magician
who made his own whistlebreeches.)

>It makes me wonder what
>Neill actually had in mind when he drew those images. The broom man and the
>Wizard look alike only in the endpapers.

Does anyone know if the endpaper drawings were done before or after the text
was edited?  If before, then it's likely the chapter wasn't edited all that
heavily, and the Wizard, while helping Number Nine in the tower, was
disguised only minimally or not at all.  In that case, the tall man with the
broom might well have been intended to be someone else, as is the case with
the firefly fairies and the Nomes.  If after, then maybe the endpaper
drawing of the "broom man" was made to fit the edited text.

><<Speaking of the Magic Picture, it seems to have an additional power in
>this book.  When Jenny is flying toward Oz, a speck appears in the
>Picture's country scene, indicating that there is trouble in Oz.  Maybe
>this is a new capability that Ozma or someone recently gave the Picture, so
>as to be warned of impending danger.>>
>
>That speck is Jenny herself, hurtling through the sky toward Oz, isn't it?

I think so, but I believe she is flying into the Picture's usual country
scene, rather than toward an actual place.  I could be wrong, though; I'll
have to reread that part.

Ruth:
>"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at tmbg.org> wrote:
> > [Neill gives the Wizard] the odd trait of dressing up in costumes and
>spying on people.  There is some precedent for this behavior, since that's
>essentially what he did back before the time of WIZARD. <
>
>He appears in costumes in "Wizard," but there isn't any direct indication
>that he goes out and about in his costumes and spies on people, is there?  I
>wonder if Neill was influenced by Frank Morgan's Wizard (in the 1939
>movie),
>who does go out and about incognito -- if we assume that Morgan's different
>roles (Guardian of the Gates, Cabbie, Soldier with the Green Whiskers) are
>really the Wizard in different guises, and not just Morgan in different
>roles.

I think that's likely.  Speaking of the Wizard in disguise, though, there's
the case of Crinklink in the LITTLE WIZARD STORIES, who is the Wizard under
a magical transformation, rather than simply a false mustache or the like. 
A story in the first issue of OZIANA has the Wizard transforming himself
while at his retreat in the mountains, so as to command the respect of a
nearby giant.

>It's an ingenious way to beef up the role, but as an element of
>Neill's story it seems odd, as you say -- even pointless. (Number Nine
>apparently doesn't know what the Wizard, so would be surprised to learn his
>identity in any case, and most readers probably realize who the broom man
>is
>early on.

That's a good point.  His disguises are usually so transparent that he would
be recognized by people who know him anyway, while being totally unnecessary
for those who don't know him (like Number Nine).

As for why the Wizard sends Jinjur away, maybe he thinks that Jinjur, as a
woman with plenty of anger, envy, and ambition herself, would have objected
to the upcoming lobotomy.  I suppose that would make sense, although it
would make the Wizard even meaner than he would be for sending Jinjur home
just for recognizing him.

Nathan

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at ...>
Date: Sun May 4, 2003  10:39 am
Subject: WONDER CITY lost cat of Oz

Ruth Berman wrote:
<<It occurs to me to wonder if the pink kitten lost under the Emerald City
is meant to be Eureka. I suspect not, considering that the kitten is still
lost at the end of the story (with only the Wizard's promise to try to get
caught up at locating losts).>>
I think we're supposed to immediately think of Eureka at any mention of
pink kitten in Oz. And she's been nearly invisible in the books for so long
that a few more days of being lost won't matter (with the teletable, we're
reassured that she won't be permanently gone). Just one more little loose
end flopping off a very loosely wrapped narrative.

J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at ...

Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 19:52:23 +0000
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at tmbg.org>
Subject: Jenny Jump in WONDER CITY

Regarding whether Jenny's appearing in the Magic Picture is a warning or
just a coincidence, the book actually says: 

"This picture showed everything that was happening in the Land of Oz.  Ozma
smiled as she saw a peaceful country scene, for this meant that there was
peace and happiness everywhere in her kingdom." [p. 29]

This implies that, if something had been going wrong in the kingdom, the
peaceful country scene (the Picture's default state, according to both Baum
and Thompson) would be replaced with something else.  In the next paragraph,
Jenny comes into the Picture, apparently into the country scene itself,
although it is certainly possible that the Picture had changed scenes to
show Jenny's current location.

Jenny herself is an interesting character, and a bit of a mystery.  We first
find her in a house in the mountains of New Jersey, apparently living alone
at the age of fifteen.  On p. 23, it is revealed that a mountain "had stood
between her and the rest of the world all her life."  There is no indication
as to what happened to Jenny's parents, and whether she has ever been to
school.  She knows how an election works, and presumably knows how to read 
and write, although I don't recall any specific instance of her doing so. 

She seems to have fairly broad knowledge of fairy lore, knowing how to get a
leprechaun to grant wishes, and immediately asking to be turned into a
fairy.

From what I understand of Neill's original manuscript, Jenny's
transformation into a fairy happened earlier in her life, and Jenny herself
might well be older than fifteen at the beginning of the story proper.  She
had not gotten along with the fairies in the Jenny Jump Mountains, and had
sued them for ownership of the range.  The implication seems to be that
Neill's original Jenny Jump was the namesake for the Jenny Jump Mountains,
which wouldn't be true for the fifteen-year-old Jenny in the edited story. 
I don't know when the Jenny Jump Mountains were named, but I would imagine
it was before the 1920s.  I know there are several possible sources for
the name.

Nathan

From: Dave Hardenbrook <DaveH47 at ...>
Date: Thu May 8, 2003  2:45 pm
Subject: Voter Fraud in the Ozelection

Nathan wrote:

> As has been covered on this list before, the ozlection was an element added
> to Neill's original manuscript by a Reilly & Lee editor, presumably to unify 
> the plot.  While it worked in that respect, I don't know that Ozma, who was 
> pretty much forced against her will to be Queen in LAND, would be allowed to 
> give up her throne.

It seems as if Glinda, at least, would be against it,

> yet she does not seem to have any objection to the idea.

Let's face it, the whole thing is pretty odd... It goes against the 
whole historical line that Lurline always meant Ozma to eventually 
assume the throne -- and permanently.  This goes back to why I think 
it's absurd for a "Canon" to be defined in terms of a particular 
*publisher*, rather than the original author, because of potentially 
SO many and SO big contradictions, whether from the authors or the 
publishers.

Imagine if Bloomsbury/Scholastic decided to continue the Harry Potter 
series after J.K. Rowling's decease, and they decided to make Harry 
a drug-junkie rock star driving an SUV... Would Potterians be obliged 
to accept this as "Canon" simply because it was the same publisher???

> On p. 80, Ozma says, "I have been Queen a long time."  This "long time" is 
> apparently around forty years.  On p. 88, however, the Town Crier announces 
> that the winner of the ozlection will rule for 1000 years.  If Ozma 
> considers forty years to be a long reign, why would she have no problem with 
> letting a relative stranger rule for a millennium?  It seems awfully 
> inconsistent.

Maybe the story would actually have been more interesting and 
ultimately satisfying if Jenny *had* won, as that would probably have 
required that Lurline show up and invalidate the whole thing once and 
for all.

> The final form of the ozlection leaves the vote up to chance, which pretty 
> much defeats the purpose of having an election.  What's more, the voter 
> turnout seems to be incredibly low.  We are told that people came to the 
> Emerald City from all over Oz to vote, and Polychrome, who isn't even a 
> resident of Oz, is allowed to vote for some reason (although I doubt her 
> weight is enough to make much of a difference).

ILLEGAL OVERSEAS BALLOTS!!  :)

Jellia: Um -- Over-*skies* ballots, I thin you mean, Dave.

> Before Siko Pompus votes, 
> the total weight of everyone who voted comes out to 3,200,180 pounds.  
> According to EMERALD CITY, the capital itself has more than 50,000 
> residents, while there are about 500,000 in all of Oz (and even that might 
> be a low estimate, since it was from a time before a lot of small 
> communities were discovered).  Even if only the Emerald City-ites voted, 
> that would average out to each person weighing roughly sixty pounds, which I 
> would think is a bit low.  Even if it isn't, though, it certainly becomes if 
> we are to believe that a lot of people from outside the city also came to 
> vote.  Also, it seems that no animals, even those who behave themselves, are 
> allowed to vote.

The whole thing was pretty crazy -- That's why I have faith that if it 
had gone the wrong way, either Lurline or Ak would have stopped it...  

OZMAPOLITAN LATEST: SUPREME MASTER VOTES 5-4 TO HALT RECOUNTS...

     OZMA TO CONTINUE AS QUEEN OF OZ!

     :)

--

Dave

Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 17:36:19 +0000
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at tmbg.org>
Subject: The WONDER CITY ozlection

As has been covered on this list before, the ozlection was an element added
to Neill's original manuscript by a Reilly & Lee editor, presumably to
unify the plot.  While it worked in that respect, I don't know that Ozma, who
was pretty much forced against her will to be Queen in LAND, would be allowed to
give up her throne.  It seems as if Glinda, at least, would be against it, 
yet she does not seem to have any objection to the idea.

Most of the discussions about the ozlection are primarily excuses to make a
lot of bad puns, and the conclusions reached rarely make sense except as
jokes.  Professor Wogglebug objects to using umbrellas to vote, on the basis
that "some people have more than one umbrella" (p. 83), and then he suggests
right shoes.  What, no one in Oz has more than one pair of shoes?  Then the
Scarecrow and Tin Woodman remove their right shoes, despite the fact that
the Scarecrow's shoes are basically his feet, and he would have to limp
without one of them.  As for Nick Chopper, there has never been any previous
indication that he even WEARS shoes.

On p. 80, Ozma says, "I have been Queen a long time."  This "long time" is
apparently around forty years.  On p. 88, however, the Town Crier announces
that the winner of the ozlection will rule for 1000 years.  If Ozma
considers forty years to be a long reign, why would she have no problem with
letting a relative stranger rule for a millennium?  It seems awfully
inconsistent.

Why Neill decided to make the Scarecrow ruler of the Munchkins is a mystery,
and one that is often discussed on this list.  My personal belief is that
Cheeriobed was on vacation at the time, and the Scarecrow was serving as
regent.  Either Neill or his editor DID remember that Joe King ruled the
Gillikins, but, for some reason, he never appears in Neill's books.  Ozma
says that he cannot attend the ozlection meeting in WONDER CITY, and he is
conveniently on a leave of absence in SCALAWAGONS.  Maybe Neill just didn't
like the character, but couldn't think of a reasonable substitute.

The final form of the ozlection leaves the vote up to chance, which pretty
much defeats the purpose of having an election.  What's more, the voter
turnout seems to be incredibly low.  We are told that people came to the
Emerald City from all over Oz to vote, and Polychrome, who isn't even a
resident of Oz, is allowed to vote for some reason (although I doubt her
weight is enough to make much of a difference).  Before Siko Pompus votes, 
the total weight of everyone who voted comes out to 3,200,180 pounds. 
According to EMERALD CITY, the capital itself has more than 50,000
residents, while there are about 500,000 in all of Oz (and even that might
be a low estimate, since it was from a time before a lot of small
communities were discovered).  Even if only the Emerald City-ites voted,
that would average out to each person weighing roughly sixty pounds, which I
would think is a bit low.  Even if it isn't, though, it certainly becomes if
we are to believe that a lot of people from outside the city also came to
vote.  Also, it seems that no animals, even those who behave themselves,
are allowed to vote.

Nathan

From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at ...>
Date: Wed May 7, 2003  1:30 pm
Subject: wizard incog

"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at ...> wrote:
>  Speaking of the Wizard in disguise, though, there's the case of Crinklink
in the LITTLE WIZARD STORIES, who is the Wizard under a magical
transformation, rather than simply a false mustache or the like.  A story in
the first issue of OZIANA has the Wizard transforming himself while at his
retreat in the mountains, so as to command the respect of a nearby giant.<

Yes, there are some examples of the Wizard using disguises outside the
special circumstances of the Giant Head and the rest in "Wizard." Going
about in disguise isn't something that seems really out of character for
him,  but it wasn't (aside from Neill -- and Frank Morgan) presented as
something that was typical of him. Even Crinklink is something of a special
case, because correspondence between Baum and the publisher (printed in the
"Baum Bugle" in an article several years back) indicated that originally
Crinklink was the villain he seemed, and Dorothy was going to have to get
away from him by her own ingenuity. It was the publisher's suggestion to
have Criniklink turn out to be the Wizard in disguise. Baum liked the
suggestion, and took it, but it wasn't quite the way he saw the Wizard on
his own.
Ruth Berman

Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 20:38:08 +0000
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at tmbg.org>
Subject: Re: WONDER CITY cats, dragons, Nomes, and aging

J. L. Bell:
>Ruth Berman wrote:
><<It occurs to me to wonder if the pink kitten lost under the Emerald City
>is meant to be Eureka. I suspect not, considering that the kitten is still
>lost at the end of the story (with only the Wizard's promise to try to get
>caught up at locating losts).>>
>
>I think we're supposed to immediately think of Eureka at any mention of
>pink kitten in Oz.

Speaking of familiar characters sneaking their way into WONDER CITY, I've
had the idea that the dragon with the ozbestos box might be the same as the
blue dragon who accompanies Cheeriobed to the Emerald City in WISHING HORSE.

  There really isn't any evidence for this, though.  Dragons seem to be more
accepted in Neill's Oz than in Baum's or Thompson's.  Even Sir Hokus, who
would previously kill dragons upon sight (see ROYAL BOOK), is now friends
with a two-headed dragonette (presumably the same as Evangeline in Neill's
later books, although I think she's described as purple in WONDER CITY and
pink in either SCALAWAGONS or LUCKY BUCKY).

How did Umph and Grumph get into Oz, anyway?  Maybe they rediscovered the
Nome King's tunnel, which was apparently closed in EMERALD CITY, yet the
Shaggy Man and his friends are able to use it to get to Oz in SHAGGY MAN. 

From what I've heard, the tunnel is also used in a privately published Oz
manuscript called THE RED JINN OF OZ, which was written around the same
time, but I've never read this book.

>And she's been nearly invisible in the books for so long
>that a few more days of being lost won't matter (with the teletable, we're
>reassured that she won't be permanently gone). Just one more little loose
>end flopping off a very loosely wrapped narrative.

In one of the book's all-too-frequent puns, this lost cat is combing her
hair in the catacombs under the city.  The term "catacomb" can be used to
refer to any underground passageway, but since it's sometimes used to refer
to an underground cemetery, maybe this sheds more light on what happened to
dead people before immortality became the norm in Oz.

Speaking of immortality, Neill brings a good deal of confusion to matters of
death and aging in Oz (as he does for pretty much all aspects of Oz).  I
actually like his idea of a "stop-growing age," and, to bring it into line
with what Thompson wrote about aging, my belief is that everyone ages to the
stop-growing age, and then has a choice whether or not to age anymore.  The
stop-growing age seems to vary from family to family, but it's probably
often around ten, an age at which many Ozites (Philador and Ojo come to
mind) prefer to remain.

There are some very long-lived characters in WONDER CITY.  The Munchkin
baker's boy for 984 years.  I get the idea that Neill chose that age without
thinking much about how long Ozites have been immortal.  Regardless, the boy
has apparently aged, but hasn't died.  Perhaps this can be explained by
saying the spot where he was fishing had some kind of magical properties. 

Based on Neill's descriptions, Munchkin fashions seem not to have changed
much in the past millennium, so Jenny Jump's introduction of new styles into
Oz would be very revolutionary.

On p. 88, the Town Crier tells Number Nine, "For 811 years, no one in Oz has
made more noise than I."  This suggests that the Crier is very old, although
it's also possible that he actually means that, within 811 years, no one has
made more noise than the appointed Town Crier, an office held by multiple
people.

Nathan

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at ...>
Date: Thu May 8, 2003  5:05 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Voter Fraud in the Ozelection

Dave Hardenbrook:
>Let's face it, the whole thing is pretty odd... It goes against the 
>whole historical line that Lurline always meant Ozma to eventually 
>assume the throne -- and permanently.  This goes back to why I think 
>it's absurd for a "Canon" to be defined in terms of a particular 
>*publisher*, rather than the original author, because of potentially 
>SO many and SO big contradictions, whether from the authors or the 
>publishers.
> 
>Imagine if Bloomsbury/Scholastic decided to continue the Harry Potter 
>series after J.K. Rowling's decease, and they decided to make Harry 
>a drug-junkie rock star driving an SUV... Would Potterians be obliged 
>to accept this as "Canon" simply because it was the same publisher???

Well, no Oz fan is obliged to accept the entire FF as canon.  Nevertheless,
I would say that, at least in my opinion, no FF book strays as
far from Baum's vision of Oz as your hypothetical Harry Potter books
would (or, for that matter, as some more recent Oz-based works have).  Nevertheless, I 
think the post-Baum Oz books were accepted not only by Reilly & Lee, but 
also by Baum's heirs.  How much of a say they actually had in what went into 
the books isn't something on which I'm prepared to speculate, though.

Personally, I find quite a bit to like in the Neill books, and wouldn't want 
to totally remove them from the canon.  Nevertheless, I think Neill and his 
editors were prone to exaggeration, and I think the events in the Neill Oz 
books must be taken with a grain of salt.  I would accept the basic events 
of WONDER CITY, but I'm not totally sure whether the houses of the Emerald 
City actually had a battle.

Of course, I tend to be an Oz inclusionist anyway, accepting a lot of non-FF/R&L books and stories into
my personal canon, although I give more weight to some authors and accounts
than to others.

> > On p. 80, Ozma says, "I have been Queen a long time."  This "long time" 
>is 
> > apparently around forty years.  On p. 88, however, the Town Crier 
>announces 
> > that the winner of the ozlection will rule for 1000 years.  If Ozma 
> > considers forty years to be a long reign, why would she have no problem 
>with 
> > letting a relative stranger rule for a millennium?  It seems awfully 
> > inconsistent.  
> 
>Maybe the story would actually have been more interesting and 
>ultimately satisfying if Jenny *had* won, as that would probably have 
>required that Lurline show up and invalidate the whole thing once and 
>for all.

Since the term for the elected queen seems to be 1000 years, does that mean
there will be another ozlection in the thirtieth century?  Or will everyone 
know better by then?  I know some people here have written future Oz
stories, though, and someone (probably not Jenny again, both because of 
copyright restrictions and the fact that she'd probably have gotten resigned 
to being a Duchess within a millennium, especially since she seems quite 
content in SCALAWAGONS) citing the mention of the 1000-year term in order to 
run against Ozma for the rulership might be an interesting idea.

>The whole thing was pretty crazy -- That's why I have faith that if it 
>had gone the wrong way, either Lurline or Ak would have stopped it...

Lurline, maybe, but why would Ak have gotten involved?  SANTA CLAUS seems to 
suggest that he only has jurisdiction over the forests.  

Nathan

From: Tyler Jones <tyler.jones at ...>
Date: Thu May 8, 2003  6:51 pm
Subject: [Nonestica] Neill's Aging and Ozzy Hanging Chad

Nathan wrote
> I actually like his idea of a "stop-growing age," and, to bring it
> into line with what Thompson wrote about aging, my belief is that
> everyone ages to the stop-growing age, and then has a choice
> whether or not to age anymore.

I like this idea, too. It solves the "eternal pregnancy/baby" problem,
as well as allowing people to essentially remain children for as long
as they want.

Dave H. wrote
> > The whole thing was pretty crazy -- That's why I have faith that
> > if it had gone the wrong way, either Lurline or Ak would have
> > stopped it...

To which Nathan replied
> Lurline, maybe, but why would Ak have gotten involved?  SANTA
> CLAUS seems to suggest that he only has jurisdiction over
> the forests.

Ak does seem only to be in charge of the forests. While Lurline
respects Ak, she clearly does not report to him in any hierarchical
sense. I suspect that if Jenny had won, the Ozzy version of the
Supreme Court would have been composed of Lurline, Zurline, Lulea
(assuming that they're all different people, which I do) and possibly
even the Supreme Master himself.

Tyler Jones

From: "David" <chaosdsl at ...>
Date: Thu May 8, 2003  7:45 pm
Subject: Re: WONDER CITY cats, dragons, Nomes, and aging

Nathan wrote: 

"Even Sir Hokus, who would previously kill dragons upon sight (see 
ROYAL BOOK), is now friends with a two-headed dragonette..." 

This was one of my favorite scenes in "Wonder City."  It's very 
funny, and it returns Sir Hokus back to his normal self, after RPT 
changed him into the Yellow Knight in, appropiately, "Yellow 
Knight."  A mistake on Neill's part, yes, but I prefer Sir Hokus to 
the Knight.

David

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at ...>
Date: Fri May 9, 2003  2:05 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Re: WONDER CITY cats, dragons, Nomes, and aging

David: 
>Nathan wrote: 
> 
>"Even Sir Hokus, who would previously kill dragons upon sight (see
>ROYAL BOOK), is now friends with a two-headed dragonette..."
>
>This was one of my favorite scenes in "Wonder City."  It's very 
>funny, and it returns Sir Hokus back to his normal self, after RPT 
>changed him into the Yellow Knight in, appropiately, "Yellow 
>Knight."  A mistake on Neill's part, yes, but I prefer Sir Hokus to 
>the Knight.

A lot of people do, and even Thompson herself mentioned him as "Sir Hokus," 
rather than "the Yellow Knight," when she had him make a minor appearance in 
YANKEE.  It's possible that Corum allowed himself to age naturally after 
recovering his youth in YELLOW KNIGHT (I believe J. L. Bell once suggested 
something of the sort), which would explain why the WONDER CITY 
illustrations restore him to his old self.  

Nathan

From: "Joseph Bongiorno" <TheSithEmpire at ...>
Date: Fri May 9, 2003  12:16 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Wonder City frustration/ Rediscovering a lost love

It's a continual source of irritation to me that Neill's original Wonder 
City hasn't been published yet.  Judging from his "Scalawagons" and 'Lucky
Bucky" alone, I imagine the original must be far less of the hallucinatory, 
befuddled mess that this book was turned into.  I don't mind the talking 
houses (they could have been brought to life somehow), Number Nine, Jenny 
Jump, or her shop.  But continuity-wise and character-wise, there is very 
little in this version of "Wonder City" that even remotely resembles the 
rest of the Oz books (and even they aren't terribly cohesive).  Personally, 
I keep it in canon because of what elements of Neill are in there, but if 
ever his real manuscript becomes available, THAT is the version that I will 
consider the "real" one.  

Joe

Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 16:08:09 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY Jenny Jump

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<From what I understand of Neill's original manuscript, Jenny's
transformation into a fairy happened earlier in her life, and Jenny herself
might well be older than fifteen at the beginning of the story proper.>>

According to Eric Shanower's article in the winter 2001 BAUM BUGLE, Neill
originally drew Jenny Jump as "a not-particularly-attractive, middle-aged
woman dressed in a Pilgrim style." One of his previously unpublished
drawings appears in that magazine. (Perhaps I reveal my own middle-agedness
by saying I think she looks like a not-particularly-attractive young woman
in this image. But she's definitely adult.)

The Pilgrim clothing--for which we might read 17th-century or, as Rachel
Green would say, "the COLONIAL period"--might imply that Neill connected
her enchantment with the era of European settlement of America. In that
case, she and the Jenny Jump Mountains would indeed have gone way back
together. But Neill seems to have enjoyed drawing old-fashioned clothes.

Steve Teller's summary of the original WONDER CITY manuscript says Jenny
starts to "de-age" shortly after arriving in Oz, and does so over the
length of the manuscript, rather than artificially at the end. That implies
that while she received her fairy gifts around the time she entered
adolescence [Hmmm...], she's grown considerably older.

For folks who didn't get a chance to see it before, here is Steve's
summary, as posted to the Ozzy Digest on 2 Jan 1998:

+++++++++++++
Preliminary remarks:  -The MS of WONDER CITY has typewritten pages numbered
1-106 preceeded by a title page, a dedication page, a letter to "Dear Girls
and Boys" and a list of chapters.  In the text the chapters do not have
names but they are named on the LIST OF CHAPTERS page.  Two chapters are
missing in the MS:  Chapter 6 ("New Friends") pp 20-23, which corresponds
in pat to Chapter 14:  "An Unexpected Visitor" of the published book, and
Chapter 22 (the next-to-last Chapter "The shiftless god-father") pp 95-96.
The beginning of the book is different, we are told much more about Jenny's
childhood, and her receiving fairy gifts from Psychopompus (sic) occured
years before her jump to Oz.  There is no Ozma party, no rescue of a
Munchkin boy, no ozcalator ride.  Jenny lands in the Munchkin Country,
discovers the Turn style, gets a young Munchkin to help her wheel it to the
Emerald City and sets up shop.  She makes Whistlebreeches for the boy.
After the missing chapter 6 she starts growing younger.  There is no
Ozlection plot.  At one point Scraps dashes into the shop and accidentally
changes her patches for a boys swimming suit.  Jenny, for no good reason
goes on a rampage and releases many animals from the animal gardens.  She
gets to Jack Pumpkinhead's home a reconditioned Ozoplane, where he has a
glee club of shoes.  Jenny accidentally starts the Ozoplane with Jack,
Scraps and herself aboard.  They fly to a chocolate star where, after a
battle they are imprisoned.  Meanwhile Whistlebreeches' father helps stop
the animal attack, the family run the style shop, and Numbernine (as he is
sometimes called) searches for the Wizard to try to locate Jenny.
Eventually using on Ozmic ray, he recovers the Ozoplane and its three
inhabitants.  Jenny, by growing younger, has lost her fairy gifts/powers.
She has also become nicer and less spoiled.  Everything ends happily.
There is no removal of her bad temper, envy, and ambition.

Examing the illustrations of the printed text of WONDER CITY in terms of
the MS version, paying special attention to the style of Jenny's hair, I
discovered that some of the illustrations indicate that the originally
appeared elsewhere in the story.  On page 33, we have a picture of Ozma
meeting Jenny with the Wizard behind them, that supposedly takes place at
Jenny's first arrival in Oz.  However,  Jenny's hair in this picture
matches that in the pictures for the final Chapter in the book, especially
the 2 page spread on [314-315]. This is when Jenny has reached her youngest
age, about 11.  The pictures of Jenny on pages 156, 160, 168 etc, while she
is on the Ozoplane with Jack and Scraps and on the Chocolate Star sho her
with a hair style that matches her appearance in Chapter 26 "Jenny's Last
Flare-Up."  There would be no reason for her to revert to that hair style
after the Ozlection--but in MS her flare-up immediately preceeded the
unexpected adventure. For what its worth, the chapter illustration for
Chapter 4 shows a very similar hair style.

I had long been puzzled by the 2 page spread on pp [176-177] because there
is no textual equivalent for it.  However in the MS pp 54-55 we have the
following:  "[Scraps] threw herself bodily against the nearest chocolate
soldier.

"He toppled sidewise throwing his neighbor off balance, who in turn bumped
over the next and so on around the circle until every brave soldier was
lair flat. . . .  When she had them all flat she put  her foot on the
leader, and held him there."

What I suspect this means is not the Neill did not support the changes made
but that he had already drawn illustrations for the book and tried to
salvage as many as possible.  The pictures of Siko Pompus in chapter 1 and
p. 283 are probably later drawings.
+++++++++++++

J. L. Bell                 
JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at ...>
Date: Fri May 9, 2003  4:08 pm
Subject: WONDER CITY canonicity

Dave Hardenbrook wrote:
<<This goes back to why I think it's absurd for a "Canon" to be defined in
terms of a particular *publisher*, rather than the original author, because
of potentially SO many and SO big contradictions, whether from the authors
or the publishers. Imagine if Bloomsbury/Scholastic decided to continue the Harry Potter
series after J.K. Rowling's decease, and they decided to make Harry a
drug-junkie rock star driving an SUV.>>

One reason to connect canonicity for a multi-authored series to its
publisher is that that company has an economic incentive to keep its books
consistent in reader appeal--thus in tone and often in facts. Bloomsbury/
Scholastic has a huge cash cow in the HARRY POTTER books. Those
companies would be much more eager to maintain the series' fundamental
appeal than, say, the Chinese publisher that issued an ersatz POTTER book
just for a quick buck. Of course, WONDER CITY is far from consistent with its predecessors, and
Reilly & Lee's own editing bears some of the responsibility for that. (Not
all by any means, considering what folks have reported about how Neill's
manuscript also deviated from traditional Oz novels.) And for that we can
thank the later Reilly & Lee's quest for a quick buck. I suspect those
people who define their canon by WIZARD plus the Reilly &Lee books
aren't really thinking of Reilly, Britton, Lee, and their
successors as arbiters of Oz, but using the colophon on the spine as a
short-hand for "the novels I grew up viewing as the Oz books." The next
generation of Oz fans may have very different ideas.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at ...

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at ...>
Date: Fri May 9, 2003  4:08 pm
Subject: WONDER CITY canonical contradictions

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Why Neill decided to make the Scarecrow ruler of the Munchkins is a
mystery, and one that is often discussed on this list.>>

Is it? I think this is the first time I've offered my explanation: Neill
simply got it wrong. It's not that he decided to ignore Cheeriobed. Rather,
he wanted to make the Scarecrow an equivalent of the Tin Woodman, and thus
made them both emperors. Does he ever mention Cheeriobed in his books?

<<Speaking of familiar characters sneaking their way into WONDER CITY, I've
had the idea that the dragon with the ozbestos box might be the same as the
blue dragon who accompanies Cheeriobed to the Emerald City in WISHINGHORSE.>>

That once-spotted dragon is "familiar"? [I know what you're going to say. How do I know that dragon was ever
spotted when the text describes it as blue?]

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at ... 

Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 16:08:05 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY Magic Picture

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<"This picture showed everything that was happening in the Land of Oz.
Ozma smiled as she saw a peaceful country scene, for this meant that there
was peace and happiness everywhere in her kingdom." [p. 29] This implies
that, if something had been going wrong in the kingdom, the peaceful
country scene (the Picture's default state, according to both Baum and
Thompson) would be replaced with something else.  In the next paragraph,
Jenny comes into the Picture, apparently into the country scene itself,
although it is certainly possible that the Picture had changed scenes to
show Jenny's current location.>>

Baum indeed states in EMERALD CITY that the Magic Picture usually shows a
country scene. But in other books he describes its "default state" as
shifting scenes. (Note the insistent repetition of "constantly.")
        OZMA: "a picture which constantly changed in appearance, at one
          time showing a meadow and at another time a forest, a lake or a village."
        LIL WIZARD STORIES: "The scenes shift constantly"
        SCARECROW: "This picture was a magic one because it constantly changed its scenes"
        LOST PRINCESS: "various scenes constantly appeared and disappeared"

That's why I recalled Ozma or Dorothy occasionally stumbling across
interesting images in the Picture and sitting down to follow those events.
(They may do so in some books, but RINKITINK isn't one of them, as I
misstated before; Dorothy first learns about Inga in Glinda's Great Book of
Records, then moves to the Magic Picture.) The Picture thus seems to have
different settings: either the innocuous country scene or the constantly
shifting images.

It's certainly possible to interpret Ozma's pleasure at seeing that
familiar country scene to mean the Picture would indicate trouble by
altering that image. But that would present some logical problems for the
series. I don't think that power ever reappears when Oz is threatened, even
in WONDER CITY itself. Ozma never again consults the Magic Picture for such
a warning. Books after WONDER CITY, like books before, depend on Ozma NOT
being able to find trouble with the Picture unless she asks about a
specific person or place or lucks into the view. The power isn't mentioned
in MAGICAL MIMICS, in which the Picture is central to the plot (and in
which that "attractive view of a pleasant countryside with rolling fields
and a forest in the background" reappears as its usual subject).

The country scene definitely seems to include Jenny. The Wizard squints at
the Picture and appears able to figure out her distance from the Emerald
City just by looking at that image. Of course, he may have other powers,
such as that metaphorical "smelling trouble," but the simplest explanation
is that he sees an image of her in the skies above this country. So we're
either getting significantly incomplete information (in which case we must
be wary of inferences based on what we do get) or coincidence is at work
(not for the first time in the series), or both.

Why, if the overall pattern of evidence warns us that we can't rely on a
single glance at the Magic Picture to tell us that all of Oz is well, does
Ozma seem to do just that in this passage? I think there are two
explanations, both simpler and with more support in other Oz books than the
notion of the Magic Picture gaining a special new power.
        1) WONDER CITY is an illogical, internally and externally contradictory
          history. This inconsistent detail is only one of many, and a minor
          one at that.
        2) For all the good qualities Ozma has, logical thinking has never
          been her strength. The Picture's familar image of the countryside
          might have made her smile even though she should (probably even
          did) know better.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 22:43:57 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY endpapers

Nathan DeHoff asked when the endpapers to WONDER CITY were created in
relation to the book's two surviving texts. I haven't seen any information
about that, and suspect it's a matter of guesswork. But here are some
possible clues.

The picture of Siko Pompus in the endpapers is labeled "Sico." Steve Teller
reported that in the surviving Neill manuscript, that character was named
"Psychopompus." That means that Neill created the endpapers after the
character's name was respelled--but when was that? The surviving manuscript
may not have been Neill's last version.

Steve also reported how the original manuscript occasionally called the
book's young Munchkin "Numbernine," just as his name appears in the
endpapers.

The endpapers include a bear named "Sniffer," who might be Snufferbux from
OJO, but I don't recall him in the book. They also show some generic
Ozians: Quadling Girl, Munchkin (looking a lot like Nine). Every other face
in the endpapers reflects an illustration inside (except possibly
Polychrome, who is mentioned inside), meaning those characters appeared in
both the original manuscript and the final published version, if only
briefly.

The "cloud Pusher" in the endpapers has a quite different face from the
monster shown inside on the copyright page and 168. But perhaps cloud
pushers are as mutable as clouds.

All this arises from wondering if Neill originally meant the "broom man" to
be one of the Wizard's disguises. The endpapers show those two characters
having similar though not identical profiles and hairlines. They appear
much more alike there than in pictures inside the text (compare 239 and
255, for instance). But relying on this book to be consistent seems like a
lost cause.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: Tigerbooks at ...
Date: Fri May 9, 2003  11:24 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] WONDER CITY endpapers

In a message dated 5/9/03 7:51:17 PM Pacific Daylight
Time, JnoLBell at compuserve.com writes:

Nathan DeHoff asked when the endpapers to WONDER CITY were created in
relation to the book's two surviving texts.

All of the illustrations were completed before the published text was written.
We know this because Neill new nothing of the book being reqritten until after
the finished copies arrived on his doorstep. He was VERY surprised.

--David Maxine

Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 14:41:28 +0000
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at tmbg.org>
Subject: Re: WONDER CITY Jenny Jump

J. L. Bell, quoting Steve Teller:
>After the missing chapter 6 she starts growing younger.

Since Chapter 6 is missing, I guess we have no way of knowing whether or not
the Wizard was responsible for Jenny's de-aging in the original manuscript
(and, if he wasn't, what was).

>Jenny, for no good reason
>goes on a rampage and releases many animals from the animal gardens.

At least in the edited version she has a reason for this, albeit a rather
weak one.  I would say that releasing the animals is the worst thing Jenny
does in the book.  Interestingly enough, Jenny seems to be more heroic in
the edited book, since the original doesn't seem to include her saving the
Emerald City from an invasion.

>She gets to Jack Pumpkinhead's home a reconditioned Ozoplane, where he has
>a
>glee club of shoes.

Is there any explanation as to where he got these shoes?  I think I would
actually prefer Jack's singing shoes to be an explained Ozian phenomenon,
rather than going along with the editor's idea that ordinary Ozites' shoes
can suddenly sing when removed from people's feet.

Incidentally, it's interesting that Scraps seems to have become best friends
with Jack in the Neill books.  I don't recall them ever interacting much in
the Baum or Thompson books, except when they first meet in PATCHWORK GIRL.

Nathan

Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 11:58:11 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY urban renewal?

Joe Bongiorno wrote:
<<It's a continual source of irritation to me that Neill's original Wonder
City hasn't been published yet.  Judging from his "Scalawagons" and 'Lucky
Bucky" alone, I imagine the original must be far less of the hallucinatory,
befuddled mess that this book was turned into.>>

That judgment depends on SCALAWAGONS not being a "hallucinatory, befuddled
mess," which strikes me as charitable. Even LUCKY BUCKY, while benefiting
from the simple journey plot, has many episodes and characters that seem to
arise more from doodles and whims than logic. The only person I know to
have edited Neill's work successfully, Eric Shanower, has acknowledged
major failings in the man's verbal storytelling in general and his original
WONDER CITY tale in particular.

One of the reasons I reran Steve Teller's report on the original WONDER
CITY manuscript is to give us a taste of the book's original plot--or lack
of it. For example, Steve wrote at one point: "Jenny, for no good reason[,]
goes on a rampage and releases many animals from the animal gardens." In
the published manuscript, she at least has a bad reason for that action:
she just lost the Oz-lection.

We know Reilly & Lee was spending as little money and time as possible on
editing the Oz books at this point, being concerned mainly with getting
them out once a year. Yet the firm devoted resources to having Neill's
story greatly rewritten around his pictures. It first tried to recruit
Thompson, as I recall, and then assigned the task to an editor. The firm
wouldn't have done that on a whim, simply because someone thought there
should be an election in the Emerald City. The executives at Reilly & Lee
must have decided that publishing Neill's first effort at a novel would be
a disaster.

I'm not saying the published story is far better or more coherent than that
manuscript. I'm saying that it seems wishful to assume the original was
better, given that everyone who's actually read it says it was BAD.

Thanks, David Maxine, for the report on when Neill found out about the WONDER CITY editing:

<<All of the illustrations were completed before the published text was
written. We know this because Neill new nothing of the book being reqritten
until after the finished copies arrived on his doorstep. He was VERY
surprised.>>

In that case, the change of name from "Psychopompus" in the surviving Neill
manuscript to "Sico" in the endpapers means that there was an intervening
draft. Neill had to send something to Reilly & Lee, after all. The
surviving manuscript was therefore not his last word on the events of
WONDER CITY--providing an additional complication for the question of which
narrative is "authentic."

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: "John W. Kennedy" <jwkenned at ...>
Date: Sun May 11, 2003  8:24 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] WONDER CITY canonicity

You know, all this speculation about the publishers continuing Harry 
Potter is rather pointless, because the publishers do not own Harry 
Potter; J. K. Rowling does.  Similarly, Jill Paton Walsh's current 
continuations of Dorothy L. Sayers' Lord Peter Wimsey novels have not 
been under the aegis of Sayer's publishers (who, in the US, at least, 
are not even the publishers of the new books), but under that of the 
Sayers estate.

L. Frank Baum, and Maud Gage Baum after him, had contracts with Reilly 
and Lee that gave Reilly and Lee control of Oz (except for "Wizard" and 
the non-book materials).  This was not the usual arrangement then, nor 
is it now.

--

John W. Kennedy

"Never try to take over the international economy based on a radical 
feminist agenda if you're not sure your leader isn't a transvestite." 
    -- "She-Spies"

Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 20:08:29 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY animals

Ruth Berman wrote:
<<Query: do the animals not take part in the voting because the humans
consider them ineligible, or do the animals just think the whole game is
pointless?>>

The published text of WONDER CITY doesn't put animals on the same plane as
humans most of the time. The animals in the animal garden and zoo (which
may be the same thing) are kept "chained." Even Kabumpo lives in an
"enclosure," which Thompson's character wouldn't have stood for. The blue
horses wish to be "owned" by Nine's father; in contrast, Nine's position of
"humble servant" doesn't involve being "owned" by Jenny.

The text is also clear that all of Ozma's subjects MUST vote in the
ozlection. That implies the animals weren't exercising a choice in not
being involved. Rather, they weren't invited, even those whom we see
serving Ozma, such as the Cowardly Lion and Sawhorse.

We might say that doesn't fit with Baum's vision of Oz, but of course he
never had an election to compare with. I believe readers today are too
quick to assume that the Oz series consistently shows animals accorded the
same rights and privileges of people. EMERALD CITY, MAGIC, and other books
make clear that there are different rules for animals living in the wild
parts of Oz as against those who choose to live in human society. Ozian
humans are never cannibals, but they do eat meat with no assurances that it
comes from non-animal sources (and in the case of the Cowardly Lion strong
hints that some of his meals do).

During the time of the Reilly & Lee series (1900-1963), America wasn't
providing equality to all its human citizens, despite constitutional
guarantees. It may therefore have been easier for authors and readers to
imagine inequalities for animals in Oz, despite their ability to speak.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at ...>
Date: Sat May 10, 2003  10:57 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] WONDER CITY endpapers

J. L. Bell:
>The endpapers include a bear named "Sniffer," who might be Snufferbux from 
>OJO, but I don't recall him in the book.

While a lot of different animals appear in the finished manuscript of WONDER 
CITY, there are, as far as I can recall, no bears (probably because Neill 
couldn't think of any plant-related puns involving them).  Maybe either 
Snufferbux or another bear appeared in the original manuscript, or Neill 
just felt like drawing the character for no apparent reason.

Nathan

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at ...>
Date: Sat May 10, 2003  10:51 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] WONDER CITY canonical contradictions

J. L. Bell:
>Nathan DeHoff wrote:
><<Why Neill decided to make the Scarecrow ruler of the Munchkins is a 
>mystery, and one that is often discussed on this list.>> 
> 
>Is it?

Well, I've commented on it before, and I recall a few other people offering 
explanations.

>I think this is the first time I've offered my explanation: Neill 
>simply got it wrong. It's not that he decided to ignore Cheeriobed. Rather,
>he wanted to make the Scarecrow an equivalent of the Tin Woodman, and thus 
>made them both emperors. Does he ever mention Cheeriobed in his books?  

I'm pretty sure he doesn't.  He does, however, make a few passing references 
to Joe King, and I think every Thompson book that mentions one also mentions 
the other.

The other suggestions I've seen, in addition to yours and mine, are that 
"Emperor of the Munchkins" is an honorary title, the Scarecrow actually 
holds another public office in the Munchkin Country and Neill got confused,
and that the Scarecrow replaced a retired Cheeriobed.  

If we say Neill just made a mistake, it really wouldn't affect his stories 
that much.  As far as I recall, the only things he really does as a quadrant 
ruler are to attend the ozlection meetings and put on his crown to gain the 
respect of the uncles in LUCKY BUCKY.  As a high-ranking member of Ozma's 
court (Thompson's short story "The Enchanted Tree of Oz" identifies him as 
her Chief Counselor), he probably would have attended the meetings anyway.

Of course, this leaves open the question of why Cheeriobed wasn't there.  
Were he and Joe King off fishing together or something?

Nathan

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at ...>
Date: Sat May 17, 2003  10:09 pm
Subject: WONDER CITY I always think there's a band, kid

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Is there any explanation as to where he got these shoes?  I think I would
actually prefer Jack's singing shoes to be an explained Ozian phenomenon,
rather than going along with the editor's idea that ordinary Ozites' shoes
can suddenly sing when removed from people's feet.>>

Steve Teller's synopsis of the surviving WONDER CITY manuscript doesn't say
where Jack Pumpkinhead's shoe band came from. Obviously, the shoes weren't
votes in the ozlection, which Neill's editor added. Both the synopsis and
the double-page spread in the published book show that Neill had the idea
for the shoe orchestra, with shoe horns, shoe strings, and shoe singers
(waggling their tongues).

I conclude that the editor's idea of making right shoes the first votes in
the ozlection was inspired by that shoe-centered art, and developed to fit
the available puns. But the band itself may have been inspired by other
puns rather than logic or established facts about Oz.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at ...

Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 21:59:53 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY and OZOPLANING

I don't recall if Nathan DeHoff or someone else mentioned it, but one of
WONDER CITY's subplots [chapters 15-22] is almost exactly the same as the
main plot of OZOPLANING. Some Emerald City citizens accidentally launch
themselves in an ozoplane. They land in a hostile sky country. The denizens
of that land send hordes of soldiers to attack the Emerald City while our
heroes escape and race back to save Oz.

This conflict takes most of the book in OZOPLANING, but in WONDER CITY it's
over in a couple of chapters, stretched out by Number Nine's large family
and the two Nomes. WONDER CITY is, naturally, less logical as well, with
the Ozians arriving by coincidence just as the extraterrestrials are about
to attack Oz.

Visually, Neill's drawings of the surreal Stratovanian landscape were very
striking: the flora, the star-shaped chairs, and other details truly
created a world apart. The chocolate star, on the other hand, comes across
as just a drab mud pit. We know one image from that part of the book [on
page 208] was altered to make the art conform to the edited text. The
picture of Jack's smashed head [168] doesn't fit with any part of the text.
Perhaps there are other, more interesting images that didn't make the final
cut.

Some significant time must have passed between the two books because Ozma
has a new model of ozoplane [121], while Jack Pumpkinhead for some reason
has moved into an old one [84]. Even this old model doesn't work like those
we saw in OZOPLANING, however: it has a lever for a starter instead of
buttons [161], and Neill draws levers among the controls [214]. So Ozma's
must be at least the third-generation design.

Another change from OZOPLANING: The Wizard's lab has moved from behind the
throne room to the "top of the palace" [147], up in one of the towers.
WONDER CITY and Neill's other books were so firm on this point that it's
stuck with me more strongly than the old lab.

J. L. Bell                 
JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 22:00:36 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY Magic Picture (again)

Earlier we discussed the moment when Ozma checks the welfare of her country
by looking in the Magic Picture and spots Jenny for the first time. I'm
going to propose yet another reading of that passage which now strikes me
as fitting best with how Neill was depicting Oz and the Magic Picture at
this time.

Ozma pulls back the curtain over her Magic Picture on page 29: "This
picture showed everything that was happening in the Land of Oz. Ozma smiled
as she saw a peaceful country scene, for this meant that there was peace
and happiness everywhere in her kingdom."

I now propose that the writer's intent in this passage, and perhaps Neill's
original text, presented the Magic Picture as showing the entire land of Oz
from above, much like the bird's-eye view we see in the endpapers for
OZOPLANING. Neill drew a number of such views of Oz or the Emerald City in
the period from OZOPLANING to LUCKY BUCKY, sometimes as maps or schematic
drawings of journeys.

Thus, the Picture really did show "everything that was happening in the
Land of Oz" at the moment Ozma looked, but not in close-up. And with no
forest fires, advancing armies, or other calamities visible, the scene she
saw was a peaceful country--rendered in the text as "a peaceful country
scene." Then in the sky above that landscape the Picture picked up Jenny,
jumping her way into Oz.

Fitting all of Oz into the Magic Picture frame would imply that Neill
imagined the country as even smaller than his predecessors, which seems
consistent with WONDER CITY and SCALAWAGONS (less so LUCKY BUCKY, but it
does show the travelers' whole journey in one double-page spread). Even so,
Ozma wouldn't really be able to pick out small signs of trouble at such a
distance.

Another geographical oddity in WONDER CITY is how the published text states
that there's still a "barrier around Oz" for the Heelers to slip through
[119]. Since this race of "spineless sponges" live "in the Sandy Waste
outside Oz," that barrier can't be the desert itself [84]. It appears to be
the spell that Glinda erected in EMERALD CITY and not much evident in more
recent books.

J. L. Bell                 
JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <DinnerBell at ...>
Date: Tue May 27, 2003  12:22 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Location of the Wizard's lab

J. L. Bell:
>Another change from OZOPLANING: The Wizard's lab has moved from behind the 
>throne room to the "top of the palace" [147], up in one of the towers.  
>WONDER CITY and Neill's other books were so firm on this point that it's 
>stuck with me more strongly than the old lab.  

Maybe I'm wrong, but I seem to recall the Wizard having a tower room in at 
least one of Baum's books.  Thompson was consistent in placing it behind the 
throne room, where he lived before the time of WIZARD, and returned to in 
DOTWIZ.  Snow, like Neill, placed the Wizard's laboratory in a tower, and 
Dick Martin returned it to its Thompsonian location.  I think the most 
likely explanation for these discrepancies is that the Wizard actually has 
two laboratories, probably for different kinds of magical experiments.

Nathan

From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at ...>
Date: Tue May 27, 2003  1:53 pm
Subject: Wonder City

"J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at ...>

interesting point that the plot of "Wonder City" is lengthened a bit by
including a more-or-less-repeat of action of "Ozoplaning."

> Some significant time must have passed between the two books because Ozma
has a new model of ozoplane [121], while Jack Pumpkinhead for some reason
has moved into an old one [84]. Even this old model doesn't work like those
we saw in OZOPLANING, however: it has a lever for a starter instead of
buttons [161], and Neill draws levers among the controls [214]. So Ozma's
must be at least the third-generation design.

> I wonder if it might be minor tinkering with the controls, leading to
decision to construct a new second model, rather than three full stages of
design.

> Another change from OZOPLANING: The Wizard's lab has moved from behind the
throne room to the "top of the palace" [147], up in one of the towers.
WONDER CITY and Neill's other books were so firm on this point that it's
stuck with me more strongly than the old lab.

> The idea that a wizard needs a tower to live in is probably pretty old
--goes back to idea that a powerful source of magic is knowledge of the stars,
and idea that a wizard needs a tower to get a good view of them. I think the
last time this topic was mentioned, I came up with some older examples of
wizards in towers, but at the moment the only example coming to mind is the
modern one of Tolkien's Saruman in the tower of Isengard.

"J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at ...>
> Subject: WONDER CITY Magic Picture (again)> Ozma pulls back the
curtain over her Magic Picture on page 29: "This
picture showed everything that was happening in the Land of Oz. Ozma smiled
as she saw a peaceful country scene, for this meant that there was peace and
happiness everywhere in her kingdom.">

I now propose that the writer's intent in this passage, and perhaps
Neill's original text, presented the Magic Picture as showing the entire land of Oz
from above, much like the bird's-eye view we see in the endpapers for
OZOPLANING. Neill drew a number of such views of Oz or the Emerald City in
the period from OZOPLANING to LUCKY BUCKY, sometimes as maps or schematic
drawings of journeys. Thus, the Picture really did show "everything that was
happening in the Land of Oz" at the moment Ozma looked, but not in close-up.
And with no forest fires, advancing armies, or other calamities visible, the
scene she saw was a peaceful country--rendered in the text as "a peaceful
country scene." Then in the sky above that landscape the Picture picked up
Jenny, jumping her way into Oz.  >

Interesting idea. But visually it seems difficult, because a view from above
would (I think?) show Jenny's jump as indistinguishable from someone
traveling at ground-level. Even the "Ozoplaning" endpapers view of a map of
Oz with Jellia riding a Stratovanian flying-stick through a strip of sky at
the top doesn't leavel a lot of room for a sky-view. And there'd still be a
good deal of luck (or perhaps magic-based choice) in getting a view that was
angled enough off direct vertical to get a view of some sky and also
pointing in the right direction of sky to include Jenny. If there's going to
be that much luck (or choice) in the "peaceful country scene," perhaps,
after all, what Neill intended was simply not the entire country, but just
that the Magic Picture was showing a sample rural view, with its sample
(luckily or purposefully) including a view of Jenny? Also interesting point
that the Heeler's have a barrier that is Glilnda's
old "Emerald City" spell to get past, rather than being barred by the Deadly
Desert alone (which isn't a barrier to them, as they live in it). Baum had
showed the barrier as a rosy cloud in "Scarecrow," which would conceal Oz
from aerial survey and is somewhat disorienting to a traveller passing
through it, but not otherwise a bar to crossing. But maybe the
disorientation while travelling through it (similar to the difficulties
crossing the Great Fog Bank in Sky Island?). RPT's air-travellers (e.g.,
Tatters, Jinnicky, Kabumpo) don't seem to encounter any such cloud -- maybe
meaning that they went through it at greater speeds and didn't take notice
of it, or maybe meaning local variation in the strength of the spell?

Ruth Berman  

Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 16:27:42 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY turn-style

One mystery of WONDER CITY is how that turn-style works. I didn't think it
was a big mystery until I read an early draft of one of the stories in
OZIANA for 2003: "The Bashful Baker of Oz," by Kieran Miller. That tale
shows Jenny's employees feeding cloth into the turn-style. I recalled the
turn-style working by instantaneously transforming whatever clothes a
person had on, without needing a supply of cloth. So which was right?

In different ways, it turns out, the book's text supports both ideas. Jenny
stocks her store with "bolts of cloth" conjured up by her fairy fingers
[72]. She also uses that hand to cut and seam cloth [74-5], an image Neill
draws [73] so we know it was part of his original conception. And by
sending Number Nine through the turn-style she instantly clothes him "in
the breeches that Jenny had just made" [76], though the text doesn't
explain how this happens.

Yet we also see the turn-style change people's clothing without having had
any fabric fed into it or other preparation: Jenny's discovery of its power
[64-5], Scraps's misfortune [96-7], Number Nine's [103], the Munchkin
family [186-90], and so on.

It appears that Jenny uses actual cloth and her fairy powers mainly to make
"display styles" that draw customers [143; cf. 107]. Evidently the
turn-style can't make clothing out of midair. Jenny can do that with her
fairy powers, but the turn-style allows faster production.

There are still many mysteries about the turn-style. For instance, after
giving his siblings "each a pair of pajamas" by sending them through [188,
illustrated 187], Nine sends them through again for grown-up clothes. Does
this mean the pajamas have disappeared? (It seems like a sign of changing
times that in 1940 ten- and twelve-year-olds were expected to hanker after
adult dress-up clothes, rather than adults wishing to dress like
eleven-year-olds.)

The way the turn-style becomes "bright and shiny" in Jenny's shop [66, 72,
193, 216] may be a lingering effect of the fairy fingers she uses to pull
the magic machine apart and rebuild it. But the text makes no mention of
that, implying the phenomenon is part of how Jenny's house is glad to see
her. (I note that her house even makes breakfast, but there's no such
service from the house on Pudding Place where Number Nine and his uncle
live [182; cf. 141].)

Finally, if Jenny has 619 left shoes and wants right shoes, why doesn't she
just feed them through the turn-style and turn the votes her way? For that
matter, what sort of couturiere would let her customers limp out of her
shop in only one shoe?

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 21:59:11 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY familiar faces

One of my pet theories about the Emerald City is that the Guardian of the
Gates in PATCHWORK GIRL is not the same one as in WIZARD, LAND, and most
other books, but a less dedicated fellow brought into the service when Ozma
had more gates built in her city walls.

Well, he seems to be back in WONDER CITY. The gatekeeper Neill pictures on
page 68 is obviously not the little, round-faced bespectacled man in WIZARD
and LAND. We know from OZOPLANING that the Guardian Dorothy first met is so
conscientious that he refuses to leave his post even for her party. But
this one decides to "take a little snooze," "promptly fell asleep," and
naps through the attack of the Heelers [126, cf. 139].

Among other familiar characters, we've already discussed the Wizard's odd
habit of going around in disguises even though almost everyone in the
capital seems to know him [142].

Scraps moves beyond boisterous to combative in this book [156, 175]. She's
actually quite unappealing, and it seems surprising that Neill made her a
protagonist in RUNAWAY if he imagined her this way. And enough of the art
shows her in aggressive mode that I infer he did.

Prof. Wogglebug plays a bigger role in this book than in any since ROYAL
BOOK, as I recall, as well as a major role in RUNAWAY. His love of puns is
back after LAND, though now he takes them seriously. His school has become
the "College of Art and Athletic Perfection" [77]. Most notably, the
editor
seems to have been fixated on Prof. Wogglebug's antennae [77, 83, 119,
etc.]. I infer these mentions came from the editor rather than Neill
because they appear mostly in scenes involving the ozlection. But Neill's
picture of the Wogglebug eating grapes on page 315 is striking in its own
grotesque way. For one thing, he appears to have forgotten his clothing.

Jellia Jamb is a slapstick comic, a far cry from the heroine of OZOPLANING.
But at least she gets her full last name back.

Tik-Tok has a new speech pattern, with hyphens between his words instead of
in mul-ti-syl-lab-ic words [e.g., 119].

Umph and Grumph don't closely resemble the Nomes of previous Oz books very
carefully. They dress in red and green, not gray [191]. They "lived in a
kingdom underneath Oz," rather than under Ev [204-5]. They seem to be the
only creatures who change physically rather than simply change clothes when
they go through the turn-style [192] (unless we count Scraps, and in her
case the clothes make the woman). That change also reveals a fixation on
warts and ugliness that isn't evident in earlier Nomes, nor do Umph and
Grumph show most Nomes' congenital interest in digging and minerals.

On the other hand, Umph and Grumph are "short and earth colored," and
afraid of eggs [191], like regular Nomes. The text associates them with
"red-hot coals" and "Sulphur and brimstone!" like the old Nome King
[195-6]. I suspect that some details in the WONDER CITY text are in error.
Neill may have mistaken Umph and Grumph for Nomes even though they're from
another race who live in Oz and would want the turn-style. Or these Nomes
mau have come from under Ev for some unstated reason.

We've talked about how Sir Hokus returns to the Emerald City as he first
appeared in the Oz series, as a frustrated, old-fashioned old knight. Ojo
is back from Seebania as Kabumpo's elephant boy, while Kabumpo seems to be
living in an "enclosure where the animals were chained" [217] rather than
in his Pumperdink or Regalia apartments. Another Thompson return might
appear in the art on 36: Peg Amy as a wooden doll.

Finally, Ozma is generally a more assertive and inspired character than
she's been in many Thompson books. For instance, she has the idea to call
the firefly fairies to drive off the Heelers [133]. But not all her ideas
and choices are that wise or, despite her stated intentions, fair. Ozma
sets the main plot in motion by deciding to call an election [51], then
accepts the advantage of the first vote [272]. Even though Jenny is working
magic in the capital and trying to conceal it [110], Ozma makes one of her
exceptions for favored people after she receives a special dress [116].

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 21:59:17 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY ozlection

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Before Siko Pompus votes, the total weight of everyone who voted comes
out to 3,200,180 pounds. According to EMERALD CITY, the capital itself has
more than 50,000 residents, while there are about 500,000 in all of Oz (and
even that might be a low estimate, since it was from a time before a lot of
small communities were discovered). Even if only the Emerald City-ites
voted, that would average out to each person weighing roughly sixty pounds,
which I would think is a bit low.>>

We can approach this question from another direction as well. WONDER CITY
tells us some characters' weights:
        * Scraps is only nine pounds, at least in her boy's bathing-suit form [177].
        * Omby Amby is 125 pounds [274]. That seems too low for a woman of
          closely-packed cotton and a man over six feet tall, no matter how skinny.  Yet...
        * A Winkie girl is 67 pounds and a Gillikin boy 87, seemingly right
          for American measures [273].
        * An unidentified voter weighs 83 pounds [281].
        * A "weary old man" weighs 78 [281].
        * The singer who's lost his voice is 300 pounds [277].

These seven voters total 749 pounds, or 107 apiece. If we drop Scraps and
the singer as atypical extremes, the other Ozians average 88 pounds. That
might imply there are fewer than 37,000 voters, which in turns suggests
that Neill's editor viewed the land of Oz as considerably smaller than Baum
had described. Or she didn't have a good head for numbers.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at ...>
Date: Thu May 29, 2003  9:59 pm
Subject: Location of the Wizard's lab

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Maybe I'm wrong, but I seem to recall the Wizard having a tower room in
at least one of Baum's books.>>

It was there in MAGIC, according to Melody Grandy's gleanings on the layout
of the palace. In all other Baum books, it appears, his workshop is behind
the throne room. For some types of experiments, I suppose that location
might not have been safe or secret enough.

Ruth Berman wrote:
<<The idea that a wizard needs a tower to live in is probably pretty old
--goes back to idea that a powerful source of magic is knowledge of the
stars, and idea that a wizard needs a tower to get a good view of them. I
think the last time this topic was mentioned, I came up with some older
examples of wizards in towers, but at the moment the only example coming to
mind is the modern one of Tolkien's Saruman in the tower of Isengard.>>

Thompson puts wizards (or other magic-workers) in towers in YELLOW KNIGHT
and SPEEDY. Waddy's method for visitors to zip back down is not at all
dissimilar from the Wizard's Ambassa-door in WONDER CITY.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at ...

Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 12:33:17 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY place in the canon

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Personally, I find quite a bit to like in the Neill books, and wouldn't
want to totally remove them from the canon.  Nevertheless, I think Neill
and his editors were prone to exaggeration, and I think the events in the
Neill Oz books must be taken with a grain of salt.  I would accept the
basic events of WONDER CITY, but I'm not totally sure whether the houses of
the Emerald City actually had a battle.  Of course, I tend to be an Oz
inclusionist anyway, accepting a lot of non-FF/R&L books and stories into
my personal canon, although I give more weight to some authors and accounts
than to others.>>

The house battle is part of both the published WONDER CITY and Neill's
original manuscript, as indicated by the fact that he drew pictures of it.
So even though I find it neither consistent with the other Oz books nor an
appealing new idea, it's harder to rule that event "out of order" than the
ozlection or Jenny's personality surgery, neither of which came from Neill.

On the other hand, some elements of WONDER CITY that I like most, such as
Number Nine's relationship to Jenny, don't appear in the art. Indeed, that
relationship may not be easily illustrable without words.

I've described my approach to Neill's books within Oz history before, but
since I'm typing at home I can't hear any objections to my repeating it. I
posit that just as Ozma had allowed some sort of connection to Baum and
then Thompson for her inner court to tell those chroniclers about
adventures in and near Oz, she also created some way for Neill to see what
was going on in her country. Thus, he was usually able to draw accurate
portraits of people and places, though he probably never witnessed
unplanned events during the adventures.

When he took over as Royal Historian, however, Neill was at a disadvantage.
He could still see events in Oz, especially in the Emerald City, but he had
very little information about how those events fit together. The books'
texts therefore collect the images he found most arresting and his best
guesses about how they fit together.

I flatter myself that this theory explains why:
        * Neill challenges readers in the WONDER CITY author's note, "Were the
          pictures made to go with the story or was the story written to explain
          the pictures?"
        * Two distinct narratives exist for the same images in WONDER CITY.
          (After that book, I imagine Neill might have been granted a little more
          information from Ozma, though it still seems very choppy.)
        * Neill's books contain so many loose threads and contradictions with
          the previous and subsequent titles.
        * Neill's books are more tightly based on events in the Emerald City than most.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 12:33:26 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY art oddities

We know that Neill wrote a somewhat different text for WONDER CITY, and
then his Reilly & Lee editor composed a new text to fit his artwork. We
also know that the publisher altered his artwork sometimes to fit the new
text.

For instance, on page 54 Number Nine was originally looking through a
keyhole. The full image was printed in a recent BAUM BUGLE, I believe.

There are some other telltale signs of alterations in the art. The image
opening chapter 8 is a collage of details (some flopped) from later
drawings [81, 263], with smudgy lines drawn in to fill out the Scarecrow's
shoulders.

Something has been erased from Nine's right hand on page 245, and perhaps
also from his left. Neill himself may have left Number Nine's right leg off
of page 89, or it may simply be lost somewhere inside his M. C. Hammer
pants.

We also know that Neill wrote his original text around older illustrations
he had in his studio, most obviously those on page 206 and 134-5. So his
editor actually provided the THIRD explanation of what was happening in
that art. In the case of the image of Jenny and the firefly fairies on
134-5, it's notable that we never actually see this scene in the text. The
moment is narrated from Ozma's point of view, with Jenny zipping out of the
scene and then returning [136-7].

There are also moments when the text and art don't match up. For instance,
the text says, "The sky sweepers had feather brooms growing where their
hands should be," while a cloud pusher "looked like a windbag shaped like a
man. It was almost transparent" [165]. That implies the feathered creature
on page 163 is a sky sweeper. Yet a similarly feathered creature on the
endpapers is labeled by Neill as a "cloud Pusher."

The drawing of a rail fence about to wallop Jenny [289] is one of the
strangest bits of art. It appears to have been drawn for the same stretch
of adventures as the drawings on 43, 48, 285, 287, and the ozoplane
journey, judging by Jenny's hairstyle.

The bit of action shown on page 289 and described one page later involves
the book's heroine being laid out cold by a hostile element of the Oz
landscape. That strikes me as unusually violent for an Oz book. The
child-protagonist is rarely the object of such violence, protected by
either luck or magic like the Pink Pearl. I recall Randy being knocked out
in PURPLE PRINCE, but no such violence against a female protagonist. And,
as the ending of HARRY POTTER #1 showed, the culture still follows a
different standard when it comes to beating up girls.

J. L. Bell                  JnoLBell at compuserve.com

From: "David" <chaosdsl at ...>
Date: Sun Jun 8, 2003  6:31 pm
Subject: Re: WONDER CITY art oddities

J. L. Bell wrote:

"Something has been erased from Nine's right hand on page 245..."

It looks to me like it was a bucket (and the curved line left in 
Nine's hand is the handle.

"Neill himself may have left Number Nine's right leg off of page 89, 
or it may simply be lost somewhere inside his M. C. Hammer pants."

Or it could be stuck out behind him at an extreme angle.  He could be 
taking large strides to try to keep up with the Crier, who seems to 
be pushing him along.

David Larson

From: WCam60 at ...
Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003  10:50 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Re: WONDER CITY art oddities

In reference to the picture on page 89 of Number Nine and the Town Crier   " 

Apparently Neill wasn't quite sure what to do with Number Nine's right leg. On 
the original artwork, there are several traces of the leg drawn in pencil (and 
erased), but at a bit of an odd angle. Neill seems to have thought better of 
it and moved on. Unfortunately, it does leave Number Nine looking a bit odd!  

Bill Campbell

Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:23:31 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY Number Nine, Number Nine, Number...

Number Nine gets so abused in WONDER CITY! Jenny seems to trick him into
whistlebreeches, or at least takes advantage of his crush on her. She also
shoves him out into danger [103], pelts him with 621 left shoes [114], and
blames him for everything she can [97].

Because of his pants, the Town Cryer criticizes Nine [88], the
animal-plants tease him [93], and Scraps torments him [96]. On many days he
"had to fix breakfast for himself and his uncle" [191], even though the man
has nothing else to do. He gets "covered...with coal" [131] and spun
through the turn-style and into an "evening gown," among other outfits [103].

Rereading this book shows me why I feel so much more sympathy for Nine than
for most of Thompson's fortunate heroes. Many of those aspects of his
persona fade away in Neill's next two books, and by LUCKY BUCKY he's
ordering King Kaliko around. But I find this hapless, smitten boy more
interesting to imagine stories for.

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<line with what Thompson wrote about aging, my belief is that everyone ages
to the stop-growing age, and then has a choice whether or not to age
anymore. The stop-growing age seems to vary from family to family, but
it's probably often around ten, an age at which many Ozites (Philador and
Ojo come to mind) prefer to remain.>>

I assume the "stop-growing age" [55] is cultural rather than biological, so
Number Nine's family has chosen the ages at which its boys and girls cease
aging. (The boys get to be older, and there are a whole bunch of issues
involved in that which I won't go into.)

A cultural model would mean other families have other stop-growing ages, as
Neill implies, but also that many might reject the concept and let every
member age as he or she chooses. That would explain why the formal concept
hasn't appeared in the Oz books before. Like question time, it's a custom
of this traditional, blueblooded Munchkin family, but not necessarily
widespread.

A familial "stop-growing age" would mean that a rebellious child might
choose to stop aging before his or her parents wish, or to keep going. Of
course, that would be a rebellion only if the family has made a
"stop-growing age" rule, as Nine's parents have done. Less controlling
parents may not feel they should try to determine a child's age. And no
rule, no rebellion.

There are other sorts of potential complications in Ozian aging or
non-aging, of course. Sister Six seems to have been born before Nine, but
stopped growing at an earlier age. Is she now his older sister or his
younger sister? Does he feel differently about his older younger sisters
than about his younger younger sisters? 

J. L. Bell                 
JnoLBell at compuserve.com

Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:23:40 -0400
From: "J. L. Bell" <JnoLBell at compuserve.com>
Subject: WONDER CITY interesting qualities

I've written a variation on this comment before, but y'all have to suffer
through it again. In WONDER CITY, Neill and his editor together created a
new and potentially much more interesting type of Oz sequel. The main model
for Oz novels so far shows a young person from America or a corner of Oz
being forced by natural disaster or circumstance to leave home, having
adventures, and ending up in the Emerald City for a rescue, a party, and/or
a trip home. (Sometimes the young person is living in the Emerald City in
the first place, but is taken away by villains, magic, or villainous magic,
and then has to get back in time for the party.)

By contrast, in WONDER CITY Jenny Jump and Number Nine reach the Emerald
City EARLY. By chapter 7 out of 28 they both have homes and jobs in the
capital, with a royal welcome. (They may come earlier in the published text
than in Neill's surviving manuscript, but in both versions they settle in
the capital before most of the episodes.) Reaching the Emerald City is
where most Oz books end. But in this novel it's just the beginning. Jenny
and Nine have to learn how to live in that society, get along with other
people, and grow up or down as need be [258].

Symbolizing this reversal, Ozma's birthday party is at the end of ROAD and
MAGIC, but in this book occurs at the beginning, in chapter 3. It's not the
engine of the action, just a landmark along the way.

WONDER CITY thus tells readers that life in the Emerald City isn't perfect.
It can in fact be as full of difficulties and frustrations as living many
other places, especially since people bring their quirks with them wherever
they go. The book thus downplays geographic change in favor of character
change, a more mature theme. It also hints that lives in the Emerald City
need not be hunky-dory or monotonous.

Of course, the published text presents this theme in a ham-handed way.
Jenny's character changes not because of her own decisions but because a
knowing adult, the Wizard, secretly works changes on her [147-8, 307-10].
For all the editor's efforts to create a narrative through-line with the
ozlection, the plot grinds to a halt at the end of chapter 13 with the
defeat of the Heelers, needing new conflicts out of the blue (Jenny's age,
the chocolate war) to energize it again.

Neither young character is fully consistent. Jenny is entranced with her
fairy gifts at first, but barely notes their disappearance [155, 174]. She
realizes that she's youthing, but doesn't consider any consequence of that
but her clothing [151, 168]. After several chapters in which Jenny's temper
has disappeared, it returns just in time to be a character failing that
needs fixing [284].

As for Number Nine, we see him as a pleasant boy for a couple of chapters,
and then he suddenly turns lazy, gluttonous, and (most annoying of all)
unable to carry a tune [74]. He falls in love with a girl of a certain age
and personality, yet is supposed to retain his infatuation even after the
Wizard accurately tells him, "You will hardly recognize your Boss after
today" [307].

Despite those serious weaknesses, the innovative overall structure of
WONDER CITY makes it a useful addition to the series for me. I also think
there are occasional moments of interesting prose from the editor.

The moment in which Jenny Jump gains her fairy powers offers a mix of
hypersensations that eventually mirrors (echoes? tastes like?) the harmless
neurological phenomenon called "synesthesia."
        Her toes on one foot began to tingle and
        want to dance. First one finger felt that
        it was tinkling like a silver bell, then
        another finger, and then another. Both of
        her ears were full of wonderful music, and
        she could hear the chairs talking to each
        other. One eye changed and saw everything
        with new and more beautiful colors. Even
        the old kitchen wall became as bright as a
        rainbow. She felt like the song of an oriole,
        and the murmuring of leaves. [19]
Later, for anger the text says, "Red thunder filled Jenny's head" [224].

Two other rather well-written passages, one definitely from the editor and
the other probably so, are

  * Hokus's battle in the dark with a Heeler [128]
  * Jenny's suspenseful escape from the chocolate cell [210-1]

Baum wrote such action episodes so matter-of-factly that their tone doesn't
much vary from his less suspenseful moments (see, for instance, Inga's
struggles with the three caverns in RINKITINK). Thompson seemed in such a
hurry to get through each episode that at active moments she wasn't always
clear about what characters were doing.

On the other hand, whoever wrote the verse on page 60 of WONDER CITY
doesn't have metrical verse down pat; Thompson wouldn't have left that
second line as it is. And WONDER CITY is a very violent Oz book, with
houses smashing into each other, Scraps pummeling people for no reason, and
the heroine finally being knocked unconscious by a bu