Day 1 (Thursday) - Chinda discovers Comfortable Camel in Ozma's
  stables - expedition prepared
Day 2 (Friday) - Tuzzle begins trip to Emerald City "at dawn" - in
  evening, Sir Hokus resolves to go on a quest ("Three days before
  Monday, the day set by Dorothy for the quest") - he and Camy leave at night
Day 3 (Saturday) - Sir Hokus awakens "about six," arrives in Marshland "about noon";
  rescued by Ploppa (they proceed into the marsh "for nearly an hour") - meets
  Camy in evening ("it was almost dark") - night on flying field - Tuzzle arrives
  at EC "a little before sundown on the second evening" (and "the day after Sir
  Hokus had started upon his quest") - departs the same night - Wizard announces
  completion of searchlight at dinner that night - Speedy takes off in the Skyrocket
Day 4 (Sunday) - Sir Hokus & Camy awake about an hour before dawn & are
  thrown off the flying field "as the sun came up" - they enter the castle of
  Corumbia & "after an hour's tramp" through the woods they disenchant Peter Pun
  - Speedy arrives in Subterranea, disenchants Marygolden, visits Quick City - Camy
  camel-napped by Tuzzle in AM (shortly after Peter Pun's disenchantment) - Speedy
  disenchants Stampedro - Speedy's party meets Hokus's party (in late morning or early
  afternoon) - enter Samandra "before the last of the sun's rays had faded from the
  sky" & encounter Sultan - return to Stampedro's horse chestnut after moonrise
  ("Dusk had deepened into night, and long afterward Speedy remembered that thrilling
  gallop through the shadowy forest with only the faint moonlight and an occasional
  star to show them a path between the trees") - disenchantment of court of Corumbia
Day 5 (Monday) - Marygolden & Confido join Sir Hokus & Speedy at breakfast at
  9:00 AM ("just one hour to ten") - Disenchantment of Corum, Prince of Corumbia at
  10:00 AM - arrive in Corabia around noon ("after a sharp two-hour gallop") - Corabians
  released from enchantment - Ozma & Dorothy arrive, disarm Sultan
Day 6 (Tuesday) - Marriage of Marygolden - Speedy returns home

Note: The timing of Speedy's trip in the Skyrocket is vague.  I assume that Speedy was
unconscious all night ("How long or how far he traveled in this helpless condition he
never did discover") and awoke early the next morning (there is a sun shower while he
is in Subterranea).  This lets him disenchant Marygolden early in the day and allows
time for traveling in the Parachuter and the adventures in Quick City before the
rendezvous with Hokus and Peter Pun around noon or a little after.

The marriage of Sir Hokus and Marygolden is solemnized "at high noon," according to
the text.  If this is true, then the marriage must take place on the day after the
disenchantment of the Corabians (Tuesday, the sixth day of the chronology), even
though there is no mention of an intervening night in the text.  The disenchantment
of Corum (a major plot point) is at 10:00 AM and if the Yellow Knight takes two hours
to travel to Corabia on Stampedro, then there is no way he could have disenchanted
all the Corabians and Princess Marygolden in time to marry her by "high noon."  An
alternative interpretation is that Thompson's interpolation of the "two-hour gallop" is
incorrect; a one-hour gallop might have left enough time for the disenchantments,
the disarming of the Sultan, and the marriage of Marygolden.

From: ruth berman <berma005 at m...>
Date: Mon Apr 9, 2001 2:15 pm
Subject: yellow knight of oz

I enjoyed re-reading "Yellow Knight" over the weekend. In some ways it's not
a particularly Ozzy story -- the plot is much more a traditional
fairy-tale/Arthurian romance than RPT used before.Of the previous
quest-romance-and-disenchantment plots, "Kabumpo" upends the material by not
letting Pompa win the princess he was expecting, "Jack Pumpkinhead" makes a
minor subplot out of Belfaygor-and-Shirley (and Belfaygor wouldn't have
needed disenchanting if he hadn't been acting on vanity), and even "Grampa,"
which comes closest, doesn't have Tatters setting out as consciously as
Hokus does to do all the traditional deeds that a knight/prince might expect
to do. The stories share the strategy of upending the ways that the
traditional deeds get done. Tatters, when he slays the dragon and wins half
the kingdom and the princess's hand, has nothing. He has to keep going to
find a princess when he wasn't actually looking. Hokus never does get to
slay a dragon in this one (cheers from all the dragon fans among us) -- it's
Speedy who gets to encounter dragons in the story, and he handles them just
by being careful and getting out of their way. The final big tourney tuns
out to be a sham, just a test to see which of the knights are as brave as
they claim. (It might have been awkward if any of the other knights had been
as brave as Hokus, but at that point in the story he's probably earned a bit
of a free pass.) The one big monstrosity he encounters is Ploppa, the giant
turtle, who turns out to be a friend. The story is also unlike most Oz books
in relying almost entirely on new or fairly new characters (Hokus and the
Comfortable Camel go back to RPT's first Oz book), leaving the old
characters out entirely or giving them no more than cameo roles. Hokus is a
strong character, though, with his mixture of flexibility and stubbornness
over his adherence to his (literally) quixotic ideals, and likeable enough
to carry the story. RPT has been criticized for over-using
romance-and-disenchantment plots, but this is one of my favorites in that
group of her stories.


Ruth Berman

From: Nathan Mulac DeHoff <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Mon Apr 9, 2001 8:56 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] yellow knight of oz

Ruth:
>The final big tourney tuns
>out to be a sham, just a test to see which of the knights are as brave as
>they claim. (It might have been awkward if any of the other knights had
>been
>as brave as Hokus, but at that point in the story he's probably earned a
>bit
>of a free pass.)

The Sultan apparently realized that Corum was a shoe-in for the tournament.
Otherwise, he might have waited until AFTER the tournament to take such a
drastic move as enchanting two kingdoms. (Actually, I sort of wonder why
the Sultan didn't try to win the tournament and marry the Princess himself.
Was his magic not powerful enough to ensure him a victory?)

>The story is also unlike most Oz books
>in relying almost entirely on new or fairly new characters (Hokus and the
>Comfortable Camel go back to RPT's first Oz book), leaving the old
>characters out entirely or giving them no more than cameo roles.

Most of the major roles in KABUMPO are taken by entirely new characters, but
the Baum characters (especially Ruggedo) still have fairly major roles.
After YELLOW KNIGHT, Oz books featuring Thompson characters only become more
common, until we get to books like CAPTAIN SALT and SILVER PRINCESS, which
mention Baum characters only in passing.

Nathan

From: ruth berman <berma005 at m...>
Date: Wed Apr 11, 2001 10:17 am
Subject: Merryland & Yellow Knight of oz

Nathan DoHoff: Yes, you're probably right that the Sultan must have felt
sure that Corum would win the tourney, and also that the Sultan didn't feel
his magic was so powerful (meaning maybe, in this context, so quick-acting)
as to make him entirely sure of winning. // Good point that in several of
the following books RPT featured her own characters, with little use of
Baum's. Geographically, there's maybe more Baumian reference in the others
than in "Yellow Knight," as "Captain Salt" explores Baum's Nonestic Ocean,
and "Silver Princess" explores Baum's Ix and Ev. (I suppose in those terms,
it could just as well be said that "Yellow Knight" explores Baum's Winkie
Country, but Corumbia and Corabia and Samandra seem to me less "Baumian"
than, say, the Nonestican shellbacks, or the Ixian Boxwood. But this is
perhaps a topic to raise again as we come to those books.) (And I should
maybe add that I'm not using "Baumian" and "not Baumian" here to imply
"better


Ruth Berman

From: ruth berman <berma005 at m...>
Date: Thu Apr 12, 2001 10:16 am
Subject: yellow knight of oz

J.L. Bell: I don't have a scanner, but if no one else can put in a copy of
the intro letter, it's probably short enough for me to type out to send you
a copy privately (but probably not for a few days, as this weekend is going
to be taken up with Minicon, a local sf convention). I don't think I've seen
the Del Rey edition of the book, so don't know how the layout of the chapter
headings was affected. Your description of the vertical element as "framed
in a corner" sounds as if it may be different from the original, at least a
little. The vertical drawing should run the length of the text. (With the
horizontal drawing above the chapter title running the length of the top of
the page, the horizontal and vertical pair make a sort of capital-gamma
design around the text.) It's quite handsome -- another example of Neill's
ingenuity in finding a different way for each book to make the chapter
headings striking.

I wonder to what extent RPT had this story in mind when she introduced Sir
Hokus in "Royal Book." My guess would be not much, or she wouldn't have
included the misleading comment in the earlier book implying that he was one
of King Arthur's knights. But she probably had at least some idea that she
might like to go on later to come up with his back story, although perhaps
no definite idea then of what the back story would be.

Ruth Berman

From: Nathan Mulac DeHoff <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Thu Apr 12, 2001 3:20 pm
Subject: BCF: The life of Sir Hokus, and a few other YELLOW KNIGHT notes (SPOILERS)

This post contains spoilers for YELLOW KNIGHT, and a few minor ones for
ROYAL BOOK.

In ROYAL BOOK (chapter 5), Sir Hokus reports that the phrase that sent him
to Pokes was "Live Wretch, for centuries in the stupidest country out of the
world!" YELLOW KNIGHT (p. 31) reports the phrase as "Live, wretch, for
centuries in the stupidest kingdom in Oz." Since, in ROYAL BOOK, Hokus
claims never to have heard of Oz, the beginning YELLOW KNIGHT shows him
either slowly regaining his memory (i.e., starting to remember that he had
always lived in Oz), or becoming more confused.

Upon first meeting the Cowardly Lion, Hokus is surprised that he "talks
quite manfully." In YELLOW KNIGHT, however, we learn that he had a talking
horse. Perhaps his forgetting that animals could talk was a side effect of
living in Pokes for so long. The only animals mentioned as living there are
snails, and they are probably too slow to communicate effectively with
humans.

In ROYAL BOOK, Sir Hokus recalls, "Long centuries ago, mounted on my goodly
steed, I fared from my father's castle to offer my sword to a mighty king."
Dorothy suggests that this king could have been Arthur, and Hokus neither
confirms nor denies this. It seems like Thompson is avoiding saying
specifically that Hokus was an Arthurian knight. A later book (perhaps
KABUMPO?), however, states directly that Hokus "dates back to the time of
King Arthur," or something along those lines. Being a contemporary of
Arthur's doesn't mean that Hokus was acquainted with him, though.
Considering that, if there was an historical King Arthur, he most likely
lived around the fourth century, and Hokus/Corum was probably born in the
thirteenth (various passages say that he is seven centuries old), they
really COULDN'T have been contemporaries, but Corum might well have lived at
the time when some of the more famous Arthurian legends were developing.
The King mentioned by Hokus is presumably actually the King of Corabia
(whose name, for that matter, might have BEEN "Arthur"; it isn't given in
the text of YELLOW KNIGHT).

Speaking of the Yellow Knight's past, if Corum was born 700 years ago, and
he spent 500 years in Pokes, that means he was 200 years old before setting
out to prove himself as a knight. That seems like a long time, even in a
country where people live forever. (Immortality must have come to Corumbia,
Corabia, and Samandra long before it had permeated throughout all of Oz.)

A few other notes:

I would say that Marshland is technically a swamp, not a marsh. Marshes
generally do not have trees, but Marshland clearly does. (Marcia's subjects
live in them.)

From pp. 64-65: "Though Samandra is in the wonderful Kingdom of Oz, the
animals there do not have the gift of speech like animals in most other Oz
countries, and unfortunately cannot converse at all." Later (p. 186),
Stampedro identifies Samandra as "the only country in Oz where animals can't
talk." Stampedro presumably has not been everywhere in Oz, though, so
perhaps there are other countries in Oz where animals cannot talk.

Speaking of animal dumbness in Samandra, the country seems not only to
produce non-talking animals, but also to stop normally talking animals from
speaking. This is somewhat of an oddity, since most Ozian animals are
apparently able to speak wherever they are, even if the native animals there
cannot. Kabumpo, for instance, is able to speak in Ix, when he visits there
in SILVER PRINCESS.

From p. 155: "But the Camel Driver, slipping a stout noose over [Camy's]
head, forced him unwillingly up the bank and toward the Royal Camel Quarters
behind the castle." The Sultan has apparently appointed a new camel driver
since Camy's original disappearance; the Camel speaks quite fondly of his
old camel driver (Karwan Bashi) in ROYAL BOOK.

The current Shah of Subterranea is "in the tenth year of his splendid subter
reign" (p. 96). The Sultan of Samandra gave Marygolden into the Shah's
keeping 500 years ago. My conclusion is that the Sultan gave the Princess
into the keeping of a different Shah. Either that or Subterranean years are
different than ours. (Actually, it is highly doubtful that an underground
people such as the Subterraneans WOULD use a solar calendar, so there years
almost certainly ARE different lengths. Thompson might not have thought of
that, though, and the other solution is much simpler.)

Nathan

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Fri Apr 13, 2001 10:21 pm
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT and Speedy

I have some general comments about YELLOW KNIGHT, but I decided to start
with one particular issue. In this rereading, I was looking for differences
between Speedy and Peter. Both are athletic, with a particular emphasis on
sprinting. Both are interested in airplanes, emulating Lindbergh in
particular. Both live with a single male relative in the northeastern US.
Both are looking ahead to college [ch 13]. So what distinguishes one
character from the other?

In fact, I find their characters to be quite similar, but I see a big
difference in how Thompson uses them. She repeatedly pushes Speedy into
dealing with the "feminine" side of life. In contrast, Peter has three
adventures, and in all that travel I believe he has only one significant
female companion: Scraps. She's female, but not terribly feminine.

Speedy starts out in an equally masculine environment: his uncle's lab. The
furniture is covered in leather [ch 20], as is Speedy himself. He and his
uncle are engaged in those most macho activities, building something and
setting off explosives under it. A few wrong turns, and Speedy is knocked
over by running into Marygolden [ch 8]. She turns from a statue into a
statuesque teenager, in her long dress seemingly the essence of femininity.

Speedy has definite ideas about how to deal with Marygolden, mostly tied to
her gender. "It was all very well for a boy to go exploring through a lot
of dungeony caverns, but for a Princess [that] was not the thing" [ch 8].
Yet he keeps being surprised by her capacities: "Afraid that she might cry,
he patted her reassuringly on the shoulder. But Marygolden straightened up
like a soldier." Finally, Speedy tells Marygolden, "Why, you couldn't have
done any better if you'd been a boy" [ch 13]. Nevertheless, he still
addresses her as "Girl" [ch 13, 14].

Gradually, Marygolden's repeated insistence that she's going to follow him
makes Speedy give up his prejudices--or at least expressing them. "Speedy
was about to explain that she, being a girl, could not possibly do all the
exciting and adventurous things that he, as a boy, could do, but she seemed
so pleased and happy that he decided to let the matter rest for a while"
[ch 13]. The next time Marygolden says, "I can do anything Speedy can do,"
he keeps quiet [ch 14].

Only when giving her Confido do Speedy's biases resurface: "'He's a girl's
dog anyway,' he announced condescendingly, 'and you can have him if you
wish'" [ch 16]. (Speedy has his own dog at home, which he wants to show
Marygolden [ch 19].) As Thompson slips in the word "condescendingly," she
signals us that these attitudes are Speedy's, not her own and not
necessarily correct. I don't think she ever undermines Peter the same way.

But breaking gender stereotypes isn't the only way Marygolden disrupts
Speedy's psyche. He also falls in love with her, or at least develops a
crush on this girl "half a head taller." At first he's just protective:
"She's older than I am, but knows nothing. . . . I'll just have to take
care of her" [ch 8]. Early on he feels "rather frightened by the
responsibility" [ch 13]. But when a rival--Sir Hokus--shows up, he insists
that Marygolden sticks with him: "'I'm taking care of Marygolden,' said
Speedy stiffly, 'I found her and brought her to life, and she's going back
to America with me.' . . . 'Oh, don't call her Princess,' begged Speedy, as
Sir Hokus placed Marygolden carefully in the saddle. 'She's through with
all that stuff, and she's going to be plain Mary when we get back to the
United States'" [ch 15].

But Speedy and Marygolden aren't destined to be together. Prince Corum
appears, and the young woman is in raptures: "Is he not of marvelous
handsomeness?" Speedy replies insistently, "What do you care about this
fellow? You're coming to America with me" [ch 18]. Then Marygolden is
restored, and Speedy roars, "How can Marygolden be the Princess of Corabia?
I found her my own self. She's my Princess and is coming back to America
with me!" But Marygolden is now taller and more mature than ever. The
Yellow Knight acknowledges Speedy's dashed hopes when he tells the boy,
"You wouldn't want to marry for years" [ch 19].

And it's marriage in all aspects that Speedy's actions have pointed toward.
He and Marygolden start to talk about going to America immediately after he
cuts off her skirts with his pocket knife [ch 14]. In any Hollywood movie
made under the Hays Office code (imagine Clark Gable cutting Claudette
Colbert's skirt), that act would have a clear symbolic meaning: sex.

Of course, sometimes a knife is just a knife. And sometimes it's what a boy
uses to plant his seed in the ground [ch 17]. What's the next thing we see
after Speedy does that? A tree trunk rises out of the ground like a "great
greasy pole," produces more seeds out its top, and then subsides back. On a
symbolic level, Speedy's form of masculinity, and his response to
Marygolden's femininity, clearly includes a sexual dimension.

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<I sort of wonder why the Sultan didn't try to win the tournament and
marry the Princess himself. Was his magic not powerful enough to ensure
him a victory?>>

In contrast to Speedy, the Sultan doesn't show any interest in Marygolden
as a mate. J. Glegg, Gorba, Mogodore, and other princess-kidnapping
villains were motivated by infatuation, but the Sultan seems simply to want
to riches of Corumbia and Corabia [ch 5]. Confido is the only creature he
seems to love, but the dog betrays him for a "pretty girl" [ch 16].

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: RMorris306 at a...
Date: Sat Apr 14, 2001 7:42 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] YELLOW KNIGHT and Speedy

In a message dated 4/14/01 3:07:03 PM, JnoLBell at c...  writes:

<<
But Speedy and Marygolden aren't destined to be together. Prince Corum
appears, and the young woman is in raptures: "Is he not of marvelous
handsomeness?" Speedy replies insistently, "What do you care about this
fellow? You're coming to America with me" [ch 18]. Then Marygolden is
restored, and Speedy roars, "How can Marygolden be the Princess of Corabia?
I found her my own self. She's my Princess and is coming back to America
with me!" But Marygolden is now taller and more mature than ever. The
Yellow Knight acknowledges Speedy's dashed hopes when he tells the boy,
"You wouldn't want to marry for years" [ch 19].
>>

Very interesting, and probably accurate (although I would guess the
Freudian symbolism of the tree and its seeds was strictly subconscious on
Thompson's part). Indeed

s
p
o
i
l
e
r

s
p
a
c
e

either Thompson or her correspondents might have felt that Speedy got
the short end of the deal in losing Marygolden to Corum/Hokus, and written
SPEEDY IN OZ to sweeten things by giving Speedy his own princess whom (at
least by implication) he WOULD marry in a few years...

Rich

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sun Apr 15, 2001 3:21 pm
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT strengths

Commenting more generally about YELLOW KNIGHT, I enjoyed this reading more
than I had before, and came to admire the book more.

It's still built around what I find to be one of the series's greatest
letdowns: the conversion of the interesting and sympathetic Sir Hokus into
the all-too-classically-heroic Yellow Knight. Like the Cowardly Lion in the
last part of WIZARD when he's no longer cowardly, there's no longer paradox
to this young prince, no evident dilemma in his life. The change is
underscored by Michael Herring's cover art for the Del Rey edition, showing
a air-brushed, blow-dried, and sun-tanned young man who seems to be
modeling the latest armor. (This cover has no familiar Oz characters or
sign of magic. It could just as easily go on a very odd romance paperback.)

Nevertheless, there are many strong elements of the story. Thompson weaves
several storylines together. At one point, she has us thinking about
separate quests by Sir Hokus, the Sultan, the Comfortable Camel, Speedy,
AND the missing Magic Picture. The resolution of those plots involves more
than just racing to safety and discovering people's real selves. It also
involves sorting out relationships, with some sacrifices and compromises
(Does Marygolden belong with Speedy or Corum? Is the Comfortable Camel home
in the Emerald City, Samandra, or Corumbia? Does Confido deserve his
rewards?).

Though Ozma and Dorothy arrive at the end to reassure us this is an Oz
story, Sir Hokus's actions in the early chapters have actually excluded
them from fixing things. Instead, the action pivots on the decisions of the
characters most involved in the Corumbia-Samandra dispute (as well as a
hefty number of coincidences, of course). And, as Ruth Berman and Nathan
DeHoff have noted, all the important characters were created by Thompson
herself. That may have had a freeing effect.

Sometimes, in fact, YELLOW KNIGHT feels like a tale from another place
that's been squeezed into Oz. The plot hinges on Samandra being an
exceptional (for Oz) place where animals can't talk. The story's timing is
unusual, resolving a conflict 500 years old (though that makes a starker
contrast with Speedy's modern rocket trip). The Magic Belt works
differently from ever before: it transports Ozma and Dorothy by "flying
[them] over the heads of the crowd" [ch 19], then sends Speedy home not
instantaneously but in a slow fadeout to what almost seems like waking up
from a dream, "curled up on the old leather sofa" [ch 20].  Thompson seems
to have been thinking partly of Oz, partly of the quasi-medieval romances
she'd previously drawn on.

The images of Sir Hokus in armor, especially when reproduced at the size
Del Rey chose, remind me of E. H. Shepard's drawings to illustrate some
poems of A. A. Milne. Thompson's verbal image of the Corumbians coming out
of their enchantment is excellent [ch 17]--although I think the restoration
of the two kingdoms from their natural, not magic, disintegration is too
easy. Thompson's monsters are also more genuinely fearsome than usual, not
in the least comic: the fire fish with their "flaming teeth," the blind
dragons groping through caves [ch 8], the tree of snakes [ch 9]. Even the
flying field, which echoes runaway surfaces in other books (KABUMPO,
GRAMPA, GNOME KING), becomes more frightening in how Thompson and Neill
depict it.

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Mon Apr 16, 2001 10:47 am
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT and Speedy

Rich Morrisey wrote:
<<[SOME STUFF ABOUT SPEEDY THAT I WON'T REPEAT SO PEOPLE CAN READ THAT BOOK
TOTALLY FRESH]>>

Yes, I see Speedy still having to deal with issues of masculinity and
feminity and even, at a symbolic level, sex in SPEEDY. The Oz Club edition
remarks on the characters' costuming in an early draft, which makes that
theme even more clear. But those details can wait for another time.

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: Darth-Bane at J...
Date: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:24 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Yellow Knight

J.L.  Bell wrote:
<<It's still built around what I find to be one of the series's greatest
letdowns: the conversion of the interesting and sympathetic Sir Hokus into
the all-too-classically-heroic Yellow Knight.>>

I suppose. For myself, however, not one of Hokus' biggest fan (also not
a Don Quixote fan for whom Hokus seems based), his transformation into
the intelligent and noble Yellow Knight was a great improvement. For me,
this book was the first time that Hokus, as himself, didn't annoy me. He
seemed more amusing and endearing than in prior adventures. IMO, this
period (starting with Jack Pumpkinhead) marks the height of Thompson's
creative efforts. The characters (old and new) sustain interest and are
more fleshed out. The adventures have a magically inspired fell to them,
and the plots are more memorable, fast paced and unpredictable than in
some of her earlier works. Speedy, though reminiscent of Peter, seems
more likeable somehow. I dunno. A little less arrogant maybe? (although
Peter loses that quality a little in later books). I would like to see a
bio of Ruth and her Oz books along the lines of "Oz and Beyond" written
one day.

<<Thompson's monsters are also more genuinely fearsome than usual, not
in the least comic>>

Another improvement. On the whole, I think that monsters should be
monstrous (unless we're dealing with a case where what looks like a
monster is really a hero and vice/versa) and not fodder for kiddie-style
comic relief.

-joe bongiorno

From: Nathan Mulac DeHoff <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Mon Apr 16, 2001 5:48 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] YELLOW KNIGHT and Speedy

J.  L. Bell:
>I have some general comments about YELLOW KNIGHT, but I decided to start
>with one particular issue. In this rereading, I was looking for differences
>between Speedy and Peter. Both are athletic, with a particular emphasis on
>sprinting. Both are interested in airplanes, emulating Lindbergh in
>particular. Both live with a single male relative in the northeastern US.
>Both are looking ahead to college [ch 13]. So what distinguishes one
>character from the other?

Living with an inventor and all, I suppose that Speedy might be intellectual
as well as athletic. This isn't really covered in the books, but I'm not
sure Peter would have liked the job as Waddy's assistant (in SPEEDY) as much
as Speedy does. Speedy also comes up with some clever ideas in his books,
such as bringing Confido out of Samandra, and using Waddy's metal-melting
ray to destroy Radj's water gun. I can't really think of any occasion when
Peter thought of something like this so quickly, but he was never in the
same situations, so I suppose we don't really know what he would have done
in them.

>Nathan DeHoff wrote:
><<I sort of wonder why the Sultan didn't try to win the tournament and
>marry the Princess himself. Was his magic not powerful enough to ensure
>him a victory?>>
>
>In contrast to Speedy, the Sultan doesn't show any interest in Marygolden
>as a mate. J. Glegg, Gorba, Mogodore, and other princess-kidnapping
>villains were motivated by infatuation, but the Sultan seems simply to want
>to riches of Corumbia and Corabia [ch 5].

True, but wouldn't marrying the Princess help him in his goal of obtaining
these riches? I suppose he wanted a more foolproof method of obtaining
them, and one that didn't give him a wife he didn't want.

Nathan

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 3:26 pm
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT Sir Hokus

At the end of YELLOW KNIGHT, having transformed Sir Hokus into his "true
self" from a knight his mother didn't know, Thompson takes pains to tell us
that nevertheless he's in fact the same personality as before. But the
change is more than a matter of golden armor for silver. He's become a
great deal younger, and I believe that age has been central to Sir Hokus's persona.

As Nathan DeHoff pointed out, Thompson first introduced Sir Hokus
to us in ROYAL BOOK as a possible relic of King Arthur's court. That might
have been Dorothy's misconception, but we know that he's spent "long
centuries" in Pokes--five, according to YELLOW KNIGHT. Although Baum and
Thompson have told us there's no death in Oz, I don't recall them ever
emphasizing how long individuals there have lived (except the Wizard's
off-hand remark about a non-Ozian, Queen Zixi, in ROAD). So from the
beginning, Hokus was a sort of living archeological remnant of another age.
The first chapter of YELLOW KNIGHT portrays Sir Hokus as a man out
of his time. "In my day," he grumbles, "maidens remained quietly at home,
doing household tasks." The American girls call this "old-fashioned." Time
seems to hover over these opening scenes in other ways. Dorothy asks Hokus
to "Wait till Monday, and I'll go with you." The knight has "a large
calendar on his wall," the first one I recall being mentioned in the Oz
books.

Why is time so important to Hokus's character? His age, and the
physical limits it brings, frustrate his knightly desires. That frustration
in turn provides the tension or paradox to make him an interesting comic
character rather than a boring paragon (i.e., Corum). YELLOW KNIGHT's first
chapter is all about how Hokus is frustrated in his quest: "'Twill be a
parade and no quest at all." That frustration echoes his laments in earlier
books, and reappears later in this one [ch 20, for instance].

As Ruth Berman has noted, the adventures Hokus does manage in the
first part of the book keep upsetting his standard expectations. A monster
rescues him from a queen instead of the usual arrangement. (Indeed, the
breakup of Hokus and Ploppa actually presents more affection than anything
between Corum and Marygolden. "'Oh, why,' wailed Ploppa, with a smothered
sob, 'cannot people who like each other like the same things? I long to go
with you, but I cannot live without mud'" [ch 4].)

Hokus, in sum, never quite measures up to his lofty goals and
ideals, though he was brave, warm-hearted, and fun to be around. Corum, on
the other hand, seems to quickly achieve everything he wants. And why would
anyone need to read anything more about him?

Ruth Berman wrote:
<< I wonder to what extent RPT had this story in mind when she introduced
Sir Hokus in "Royal Book." My guess would be not much, or she wouldn't have
included the misleading comment in the earlier book implying that he was
one of King Arthur's knights. But she probably had at least some idea that
she might like to go on later to come up with his back story, although
perhaps no definite idea then of what the back story would be. >>

In LOST KING, Thompson has Dorothy try the old king's cloak on Hokus
because she thinks he might be the enchantment of Pastoria. As early as
that book, therefore, Thompson knew that the mystery of Hokus's past had
potential for more story.

It's also clear that in YELLOW KNIGHT she didn't set him out on his
quest just to see what would happen. In chapter 2, she says, "he hoped to
learn something of his former history. . . . he began to think of the long
ago days of his youth, to wonder whence he had come, who he really was and
what great purpose had sent him riding upon that first quest on a faraway
and dimly remembered morning. Of his father or his father's castle he
remembered nothing."

Thompson also seems to have had marriage in mind from early in this
plot. "Sir Hokus,...like most of the rest of us, had often dreamed of his
own wedding," she says in chapter 4. By chapter 9, his dreams are pointing
in a specific direction: "He dreamed he was in a splendid ship, sailing
into the harbor of a crystal city. A golden-haired Princess waved to him
from a crystal tower." YELLOW KNIGHT doesn't make this dream come true, but
each element of the dream--a luxurious boat [ch 5], a crystal tower [ch
12], and of course a golden-haired princess--does appear in the adventure.

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: Nathan Mulac DeHoff <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 10:49 am
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] YELLOW KNIGHT Sir Hokus

J.  L. Bell:
> The first chapter of YELLOW KNIGHT portrays Sir Hokus as a man out
>of his time. "In my day," he grumbles, "maidens remained quietly at home,
>doing household tasks." The American girls call this "old-fashioned." Time
>seems to hover over these opening scenes in other ways. Dorothy asks Hokus
>to "Wait till Monday, and I'll go with you." The knight has "a large
>calendar on his wall," the first one I recall being mentioned in the Oz
>books.

One of the book's irrelevant episodes also seems to relate to the issue of
time. Quick City has people who grow old and then young again very quickly.
It might have been interesting for the Lively Hood to have restored Hokus'
youth, but it's Speedy who visits Quick City, and the episode remains
totally irrelevant to the plot (hence the name "irrelevant episode").
Another interesting aspect of Quick City is that it is pretty much the
opposite of Pokes, where Sir Hokus is first discovered.

Nathan

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Wed May 2, 2001 6:11 pm
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT timing

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<One of the book's irrelevant episodes also seems to relate to the issue
of time. Quick City has people who grow old and then young again very quickly.
It might have been interesting for the Lively Hood to have restored
Hokus' youth, but it's Speedy who visits Quick City, and the episode
remains totally irrelevant to the plot (hence the name "irrelevant
episode").>>

That episode is when Marygolden wins Speedy's admiration as well as his
feeling of responsibility toward her. In terms of the infatuation and
latent sexual urges I discussed earlier, it's notable that he goes through
every stage of development while he's wearing the Lively Hood. His hormones
must have been in a whirl!

<<Another interesting aspect of Quick City is that it is pretty much the
opposite of Pokes, where Sir Hokus is first discovered.>>

I was struck by one point of similarity: furniture or buildings that are
ordinarily inanimate move around in both places. In Pokes, that's to spare
the inhabitants from having to move. In Quick City, it's because everything
is doubletime.

<<
The current Shah of Subterranea is "in the tenth year of his splendid
subter reign" (p. 96). The Sultan of Samandra gave Marygolden into the
Shah's keeping 500 years ago. My conclusion is that the Sultan gave the
Princess into the keeping of a different Shah. Either that or Subterranean
years are different than ours. (Actually, it is highly doubtful that an
underground people such as the Subterraneans WOULD use a solar calendar, so
there years almost certainly ARE different lengths. Thompson might not
have thought of that, though, and the other solution is much simpler.)
>>

The Subterranea "sky" is the last rock layer that Speedy crashed through,
with "radium stars" for light [ch 7]. I'd find it very difficult to
calculate ten years in that environment.

Ten years before the events in YELLOW KNIGHT seems to have been a
significant time otherwise. It's been ten years since the Sultan lost his
camel [ch 5]. It's been ten years since Speedy was born [ch 7].
However, only nine years passed between the publication of ROYAL
BOOK, in which the Comfortable Camel came to the Emerald City with Sir
Hokus, and that of YELLOW KNIGHT. When mentioning events in other books,
Thompson often seems to portray approximately the same amount of time
passing in Oz as has passed in America, but only approximately.
So did the Comfortable Camel and Doubtful Dromedary wander for a
year before they bumped into Sir Hokus, Dorothy, and the Cowardly Lion in
ROYAL BOOK?

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: Nathan Mulac DeHoff <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Thu May 3, 2001 7:52 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] YELLOW KNIGHT timing

J.  L. Bell:
><<Another interesting aspect of Quick City is that it is pretty much the
>opposite of Pokes, where Sir Hokus is first discovered.>>
>
>I was struck by one point of similarity: furniture or buildings that are
>ordinarily inanimate move around in both places. In Pokes, that's to spare
>the inhabitants from having to move. In Quick City, it's because everything
>is doubletime.

You're thinking of Fix City with the moving furniture. People do move in
Pokes, just VERY slowly.

Nathan

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sun May 6, 2001 4:06 pm
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT timing

Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<You're thinking of Fix City with the moving furniture. People do
move in
Pokes, just VERY slowly.>>

You are correct, sir. I'd amalgamated two ROYAL CITY communities in my
memory. It's Fix City that resembles Quick City in having moving furniture
or buildings.

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Sun May 6, 2001 5:28 pm
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT Ozma

I believe David Hulan noted that Neill's picture of Ozma riding the
Sawhorse in chapter 1 of YELLOW KNIGHT (in tight slacks, yet) looks like
the picture of her on her wooden mount that Reilly & Lee placed on the
cover of EMERALD CITY around the same time. Though that chapter mentions
both Ozma and the Sawhorse, it never says anything about one riding the
other, and therefore the inspiration for this drawing had to come from
somewhere else.

Even by Thompson's standards, Ozma seems ignorant and complacent about her
realm in YELLOW KNIGHT. Though Samandra is big enough to separate its
neighbors by "a sharp two-hour gallop" [ch 18], appears in "the huge
encyclopedia of Oz," and receives enough news of Ozma's court for Tuzzle to
recognize Dorothy on sight [ch 6], before this book Ozma "had never heard"
of it.

The first thing Ozma learns of Samandra involves the possible suffering of
some of her subjects. Twenty "slaves" bring Tuzzle into her throne room,
four actually carrying him on their shoulders in a sedan chair. But from
Ozma those enslaved people merit only "a curious glance." Later "the Oz
folk burst into loud cheers of admiration and approval" at how fast those
slaves run with their heavy burden. As in other Thompson books, slavery for
some people (here undescribed) is accepted even though it's clear the
protagonists would dislike it: Stampedro bucks at the thought of going to
America where horses are "ordered about like slaves" [ch 14]. (There are
also slaves in Subterranea [ch 7], but they're outside Ozma's realm and
knowledge.)

During Tuzzle's conversation with Ozma, he reveals that his ruler's
favorite camel has been spotted by a "Chief Prophet and Seer" using a
"magic telescope." Surely that's enough of a hint that someone in Samandra
may be practicing forbidden magic to be worth following up. But Ozma seems
to let it pass.

Ozma does say that the Comfortable Camel can go to Samandra if he actually
wants to. As an Emerald City favorite, he's earned the right to choose. But
then the camel turns out to have disappeared. Rather than look in her Magic
Picture, Ozma has servants dash all around asking people. It appears that
Betsy is the first to think of the Picture, and only after Tuzzle has left.

It would be nice to think that Ozma secretly chose not to mention the Magic
Picture in front of Tuzzle because she didn't trust him and didn't want to
show him the camel's whereabouts. But when the Picture turns out to be
missing--along with Camy and Sir Hokus--Ozma shows no signs of being on
edge. Instead, she has such utter confidence in the Wizard's unfinished,
untried searchlight that she "went off to bed."

At the end of YELLOW KNIGHT, Ozma soars back into the action using the
power of the Magic Belt [ch 19]. She acts very quickly once the Wizard
locates Sir Hokus and the Comfortable Camel, and she's also quick about
bringing the Sultan in "to answer for his crimes" [ch 20]. But the
punishment Ozma imposes on that ruler is minor compared to what other
lawbreakers have suffered, especially when compared to the magnitude of his
deeds (completely despoiling two kingdoms for 500 years). Ozma takes away
the Sultan's magic, but she does nothing to help his suffering subjects or
the animals deprived of speech in his kingdom. Perhaps there's much more to
Samandra than we know, and Ozma doesn't think she has the authority to make
major changes there.

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: RMorris306 at a...
Date: Mon May 7, 2001 8:50 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] YELLOW KNIGHT Ozma

In a message dated 5/6/01 9:26:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
JnoLBell at c...  writes:

<< I believe David Hulan noted that Neill's picture of Ozma riding the
Sawhorse in chapter 1 of YELLOW KNIGHT (in tight slacks, yet) looks like
the picture of her on her wooden mount that Reilly & Lee placed on the
cover of EMERALD CITY around the same time. Though that chapter mentions
both Ozma and the Sawhorse, it never says anything about one riding the
other, and therefore the inspiration for this drawing had to come from
somewhere else.>>

Which would seem to make Ozma (rather than, as I'd always thought,
Gureeda in SPEEDY) the first girl or woman depicted as wearing slacks or
pants in an Oz book. Strangely enough, though, she's riding sidesaddle in
that picture...even though sidesaddle riding was invented expressly so women
could wear dresses and still preserve a certain amount of modesty while on
horseback. I could certainly see (especially given Ozma's past life as Tip,
and the Sawhorse's immense speed) that Ozma might want to ride astride the
Sawhorse in order to lessen the risk of falling off; I think riding breeches
for women were already coming into use. But in that case, why DIDN'T she ride
astride him?

<<Even by Thompson's standards, Ozma seems ignorant and complacent about her
realm in YELLOW KNIGHT. Though Samandra is big enough to separate its
neighbors by "a sharp two-hour gallop" [ch 18], appears in "the huge
encyclopedia of Oz," and receives enough news of Ozma's court for Tuzzle to
recognize Dorothy on sight [ch 6], before this book Ozma "had never heard
of it." >>

Well, that would seem only natural. More people in a small, relatively
unimportant part of Oz would certainly know of its ruler and her capital and
court than vice versa. Most people in Framingham, Massachusetts know about
the President and the White House in Washington, DC, but I doubt many people
in Washington have even heard of Framingham.

<<
The first thing Ozma learns of Samandra involves the possible suffering of
some of her subjects. Twenty "slaves" bring Tuzzle into her throne room,
four actually carrying him on their shoulders in a sedan chair. But from
Ozma those enslaved people merit only "a curious glance." Later "the Oz
folk burst into loud cheers of admiration and approval" at how fast those
slaves run with their heavy burden. As in other Thompson books, slavery for
some people (here undescribed) is accepted even though it's clear the
protagonists would dislike it: Stampedro bucks at the thought of going to
America where horses are "ordered about like slaves" [ch 14]. (There are
also slaves in Subterranea [ch 7], but they're outside Ozma's realm and
knowledge.)
>>

Which is, again, atypical not only of Baum's Ozma (who insisted the SuDic
of the Flatheads restore the brains he and his wife had taken from his
subjects, and eventually forced him to abdicate), but also of Thompson's
(who, only in the previous book, had seen to it that the Fraid Cats in Scare
City were disenchanted and freed).

<<
During Tuzzle's conversation with Ozma, he reveals that his ruler's
favorite camel has been spotted by a "Chief Prophet and Seer" using a
"magic telescope." Surely that's enough of a hint that someone in Samandra
may be practicing forbidden magic to be worth following up. But Ozma seems
to let it pass.

Ozma does say that the Comfortable Camel can go to Samandra if he actually
wants to. As an Emerald City favorite, he's earned the right to choose. But
then the camel turns out to have disappeared. Rather than look in her Magic
Picture, Ozma has servants dash all around asking people. It appears that
Betsy is the first to think of the Picture, and only after Tuzzle has left.

It would be nice to think that Ozma secretly chose not to mention the Magic
Picture in front of Tuzzle because she didn't trust him and didn't want to
show him the camel's whereabouts.>>

I like that idea!

Rich

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date:  Wed May 9, 2001 11:03 am
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT's Ozma

Rich Morrissey wrote:
<< >As in other Thompson books, slavery for some people (here
>undescribed) is accepted even though it's clear the protagonists
>would dislike it: Stampedro bucks at the thought of going to
>America where horses are "ordered about like slaves" [ch 14].

Which is, again, atypical not only of Baum's Ozma (who insisted the
SuDic of the Flatheads restore the brains he and his wife had taken from
his subjects, and eventually forced him to abdicate), but also of
Thompson's (who, only in the previous book, had seen to it that the Fraid
Cats in Scare City were disenchanted and freed).>>

Disenchantment and emancipation seem to be two separate issues in
Thompson's books. She clearly presents being transformed into something
else against one's will as a wrong to be righted. Many of her plots end
with people being restored to their original forms.

But it's quite typical for Thompson to leave people whom she introduces as
"slaves" in that same state at the end of her books: not simply in YELLOW
KNIGHT, but in GNOME KING, JACK PUMPKINHEAD, PURPLE PRINCE, and SILVER
PRINCESS. That pattern, combined with the contrasting treatment of
disenchantments, may carry the implication that for these people slavery is
their natural state, and shouldn't be changed.

Before YELLOW KNIGHT, we've encountered enslaved people within Ozma's
realm: in LOST PRINCESS and GNOME KING, for instance. But this seems to be
the first time she sees slaves laboring right in front of her. And her only
recorded response is mild curiosity.

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: David Hulan <davidhulan at n...>
Date: Wed May 9, 2001 7:38 pm
Subject: Comments on Yellow Knight

This was, I think, Thompson's best book up to the time it was
written, though most of her later ones were even better. The one
major flaw I saw in it was the overuse of improbable and unjustified
coincidences, which may be more prevalent in this book than in any
other Oz book in the whole series.

1. The Flying Field dumps Sir Hokus off within sight (IIRC) of the
castle where he was born, although it's apparently just another one
of those random nuisances (like the winding road in _Hungry Tiger_ or
the footpath in _Gnome King_) that post-Baum Oz seems to abound with
and that basically just move a character from one point in Oz to
another without volition. (And for Hokus and Camy to be camping on it
when it decides to move probably ranks as another coincidence...)

2. Speedy's improbable trip in the rocket ship (leave aside the
impossibility of what it did...) ends up in the near vicinity of the
enchanted Princess Marygolden.

3. The Parashoot takes Speedy and Marygolden to the surface within a
dozen miles or so of the castle where she was born.

4. Sir Hokus flips a date stone into a random bush and it just
happens to hit the one his father's jester had been turned into. (Not
very important for the plot - Peter Pun is pretty much an Irrelevant
Character - but still...)

5. Speedy does something similar (I didn't get around to rereading
the book for this discussion, so I'm going from memory and don't
recall the exact circumstance) and just happens to disenchant Sir
Corum's favorite horse.

I think there are more, but those should be enough. To
paraphrase...James Bond, I think...once is happenstance, twice is
coincidence, three times is bad plotting.

Still and all, I like the book.

Speedy, as several people have commented, has a great deal in common
with Peter (in fact, I doubt if anyone not fairly familiar with the
books could recognize a difference between Neill's depictions of the
two boys), but there are enough differences that I have to say that
I've always liked Speedy and never cared much for Peter (especially
in the first two books where he appeared). Peter strikes me as
selfish and irresponsible, and he shows little forethought or
ingenuity. Speedy is generous, responsible, and quite clever and
ingenious.

Sir Hokus also never appealed to me that much - he always seemed
extremely hokey (intended), and his knightly yearnings that seem a
good part of his character any time he appears in a book seem totally
out of place in the modern world. (They seem stupid to me even in the
medieval world, but I realize that people really did have attitudes
like that back then. Which makes me very happy I didn't live then...)
So his transformation into Prince Corum didn't come a book too soon
to suit me, even though it meant that he disappeared from the series
except for a bit part in _Wishing Horse_ and another bit part (as Sir
Hokus Pokus) in one or maybe two of the Neill books.

And Marygolden is the most fully realized female character Thompson
invented to date. Peg Amy is nice, but one-dimensional; Urtha is even
more one-dimensional; and while Shirley Sunshine had some potential
she wasn't on stage enough to really come through satisfactorily as a
person. Thompson later did even better with Gureeda, Mandy, and
Planetty (and in a way Jellia, since Baum really never developed her
character to the extent Thompson did in _Ozoplaning_, though Thompson
didn't invent her). I don't, to be honest, remember my reaction to
her when I first read YK as a kid - probably negative, since I didn't
like Girls much at age 8 or 9. (They were my main competition for
Teacher's Pet...) But when I acquired my own copy when I was 30 or so
I found that I liked her very much - she was as strong and
three-dimensional as Dorothy or Trot, even though she was (*gasp*) a
teen-ager!

The Sultan is a good villain, too - not as much of a buffoon as
Ruggedo or Mustafa or Irashi; not as thoroughgoingly nasty as Glegg
or Mombi or Mooj. It's true that he's a little hard to figure out;
his subjects - even his slaves - seem to like him well enough, but
the way he treated the Corumbians and Corabians is more villainous
than most other Oz villains. Although at least he didn't do away with
them completely, and left a provision that allowed them to be
disenchanted. (Maybe, of course, this is part of the rules in Oz, as
a contract with the Devil is supposed - in some versions, at least -
to include a loophole that a sufficiently clever bargainer can use to
evade its consequences.)

Not to mention good old Ploppa, who is one of the best animal
creations in the whole series for my money. The giant turtle doesn't
appear for very long, but is entirely memorable for all that.

So, since my interest in stories has, at least in my adult life,
centered a lot more around character than plot, I rate this book as a
solid B+ among the series even though its plot is undoubtedly flawed.

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Thu May 10, 2001 11:22 pm
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT magic

Among the important coincidences in YELLOW KNIGHT, David Hulan noted:
<<4. Sir Hokus flips a date stone into a random bush and it just happens to
hit the one his father's jester had been turned into. (Not very important
for the plot - Peter Pun is pretty much an Irrelevant Character - but
still...)

5. Speedy does something similar (I didn't get around to rereading the book
for this discussion, so I'm going from memory and don't recall the exact
circumstance) and just happens to disenchant Sir Corum's favorite
horse.>>

Before rescuing Peter Pun in chapter 10, Sir Hokus leans against a lyre
tree (a transformed musician) and hears music, is wept on by a willow (a
lady), and is pelted by horse chestnuts (horses like Stampedro). He throws
the date stone not into a random bush, but at a flock of jays who had
landed on a funnysuckle vine and started laughing--laughing because the
vine is the enchanted jester. Even after that moment, we hear of "the
strange murmuring of the forest."

All this prepares us for the beautiful scene in chapter 17 when the forest
turns back into the population of Corumbia. Thompson then says the
enchanted trees "were hardly missed," implying that they were a small
portion of the trees that had existed before. Nevertheless, before the
first disenchantment she's shown that the Corumbians constituted a
significant portion of the flora Hokus comes across. Furthermore, unlike
ordinary trees (even ordinary Oz trees) they can communicate faintly with
passing animals to draw more attention to themselves. It's possible that
they can communicate even more to Sir Hokus because of their ancient links.

(Hokus also has a run-in with a snake tree in chapter 9; animate plants
seem to be an ongoing motif of his plotline.)

Speedy's disenchantment of Stampedro is harder to accept since it depends
on him finding the single magical "colored stone" in the forest before
throwing it at an enchanted tree--in his case, not one that's drawn his
attention in any way. And, as you say, it's mighty convenient how all
routes--through the air (Hokus and Camy), through the ground (Speedy and
Marygolden), and on water (Tuzzle) lead to the same corner of the Winkie
Country.

Nathan DeHoff wrote a while back:
<<Living with an inventor and all, I suppose that Speedy might be
intellectual as well as athletic. This isn't really covered in the books,
but I'm not sure Peter would have liked the job as Waddy's assistant (in
SPEEDY) as much as Speedy does.>>

Rereading YELLOW KNIGHT with the hindsight of having read SPEEDY, I thought
it significant that Speedy pauses to look around Chinda the prophet's
center of operations in chapter 16. He does seem drawn to magical
technology. Peter doesn't show the same interests although, as you say, he
never really has the chance.

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: Nathan Mulac DeHoff <DinnerBell at t...>
Date: Thu May 10, 2001 4:46 pm
Subject: Re: [Nonestica] Comments on Yellow Knight

David Hulan:
>4. Sir Hokus flips a date stone into a random bush and it just
>happens to hit the one his father's jester had been turned into. (Not
>very important for the plot - Peter Pun is pretty much an Irrelevant
>Character - but still...)
>
>5. Speedy does something similar (I didn't get around to rereading
>the book for this discussion, so I'm going from memory and don't
>recall the exact circumstance) and just happens to disenchant Sir
>Corum's favorite horse.

There is certainly a good deal of coincidence involved here, but Thompson
wanted to establish the enchanted nature of the forest and the power of the
date seed, so it seems like at least one character would have to be
disenchanted in this manner.

Nathan

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Thu May 10, 2001 11:22 pm
Subject: YELLOW KNIGHT's Ozma

Ruth Berman wrote:
<<On Ozma's tolerance of Samandran slavery -- when Tuzzle makes his
entrance in the Emerald City, Ozma & co. don't really have any way to know
that the escort are slaves rather than paid employees. For the narrative
voice to report that they're slaves, presumably someone at the Emerald City
must have found out the fact, but it's possible that no one found out until
after the action of the story>>

That's an Oz-as-history analysis, and from that perspective Ozma's "curious
glance at the Samandran slaves" may indeed have concealed her resolve to
look into their plight. If so, it seems to have been concealed not simply
from Tuzzle but from Thompson.

From an Oz-as-literature approach, I find it significant that in JACK
PUMPKINHEAD and GNOME KING Thompson introduces characters as "slaves" as if
that state were apparent at first glance. In introducing most people, she
shows us what her main characters see and hear, letting us learn about
those newcomers through the details of their appearance, their statements,
or their actions. In this book, that's how she proceeds with the mud
guards, the Subterraneans, the Quix, and other people. (When she introduces
the Sultan's slaves, all the characters in the scene are Samandrans, and it
therefore makes more sense to allude to their society's class structure
matter-of-factly.)

I wrote earlier:
<<Disenchantment and emancipation seem to be two separate issues in
Thompson's books. She clearly presents being transformed into something
else against one's will as a wrong to be righted. Many of her plots end
with people being restored to their original forms.>>

After seeing this come back, I realized that several of Thompson's plots
end with villains being transformed into other things against their
will--enchantment as punishment, and therefore another sign that in her
approach it's a BAD THING.

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: Ruth Berman <berma005 at m...>
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 11:19 am
Subject: samandra in oz

Joe Bongiorno: Baum and Thompson can't really have considered slavery a
practice of their own day and necessary for the proper functioning of
society. They lived in a society that had abolished slavery a couple of
generations earlier. As J.L. Bell pointed out, other references, such as
Stampedro's comment about how he would hate to go to America, where he would
be speechless and enslaved, show that they disapprove of slavery in the
abstract. But both seem to have been open to the feeling (which probably was
common in their own time and is probably less common -- although still to be
found, unfortunately) that slavery for groups of people they don't care
about (such as giants under Herku or the populace of Samandra) is more or
less all right, or at least not something to slow the story down with
objecting to onstage. In most of the examples, slavery is a practice of Bad
Rulers, and maybe they both assumed and expected their readers to assume
that Ozma (inside Oz, that is, where she has the authority) was likely to do
something about this Bad Practice at some point. (And, as you commented in a
following message, the possibility makes nice openings for future stories.)
Even so, though, the assumption that on-stage slavery can be presented
without comment (even as a practice of Bad Rulers) seems to tie into a
feeling that slavery for groups of people you don't much care about is not
really an important matter. I suspect that if they'd received objections at
the time, they might have chosen to do some rewriting (as P.L. Travers did,
for instance, when she received complaints about "Mary Poppins").
Jinnicky is, I think, the only case of a Good Ruler who has slaves. This
is a rather different kind of insenstivity to the issue. But I'd rather hold
off discussing what slavery means there until we get to "Silver
Princess."

Ruth Berman

From: RMorris306 at a...
Date: Tue May 15, 2001 10:48 pm
Subject: RPT and YELLOW KNIGHT

I forget if I've already told the story of how I first came to read YELLOW
KNIGHT, but since the book is under discussion now I think it provides an
interesting counterpoint to my early reading of JACK PUMPKINHEAD. The
previous Oz book was the first post-Baum Oz book I ever read, at the age of
about 7; it was another twelve years before I had a chance to read my second.
And, almost at the same time, my third.

In the fall of 1973, I was an exchange student in London, England, and I
underwent all manner of novel experiences during that time...including
falling in love for the first time...but I also had occasion to visit (due to
our mutual interest in comic books) a British book collector named George
Beal. Mr. Beal had an immense and varied collection that included some Oz
books...mostly Baum's (all of which I'd read), but also two by Thompson that
I'd never read. One was THE ROYAL BOOK OF OZ, and the other was, needless to
say, THE YELLOW KNIGHT OF OZ. Suffice it to say that I persuaded him to let
me borrow them (promising to return them to his daughter, who worked near my
college dorm...as, after a week or so, I did), and, that night and the next
night, I read for the first time what appropriately proved to be almost the
entire story of Sir Hokus of Pokes.

As others have noted, Thompson clearly didn't intend all of it from the
beginning (she seemed at first to have thought of Sir Hokus as an actual
knight of King Arthur's Round Table), but some of it seemed to have been
brewing in her mind ever since she first introduced the new character. I know
he was almost completely unfamiliar to me...I suppose he'd made a cameo in
JACK PUMPKINHEAD, but not enought to register in my mind the way Peter and
the main characters did. I did remember a Martin Gardner article comparing Oz
to Wonderland and referring to Sir Hokus as "[Lewis Carroll's] White Knight
in yellow armor..." which proved to be largely inaccurate. He wasn't all that
similar to the White Knight (except inasmuch as both owed something to Don
Quixote), and his armor wasn't even yellow until he was disenchanted, though
that article did telegraph the resolution of the latter book to me. But that
didn't really spoil it so much as it enhanced the aura of inevitability.

Yes, as many have already noted, the coincidences in this book seem
incredible...but, just as I argued was the case in HUNGRY TIGER, I attribute
this to the Sultan's spell containing (figuratively and literally) the
seeds of its dissolution. The magic was already at work to bring enough
individuals and talismans together at the place where the disenchantment
could take place, and was probably at work as early as the events of ROYAL
BOOK, when Sir Hokus and the Comfortable Camel (the latter bearing the
enchanted dates all along, as it turned out) met and bonded with each other
before moving into Ozma's palace. The Black Knight's curse was unfortunately
ambiguous in the former book, "Live, wretch, for centuries in the stupidest
country out of the world!" Which would seem to indicate that Thompson was
already considering Oz "out of the world" (something she wouldn't be quite as
explicit about until later), but I also recalled hoping he didn't mean Oz by
that but only the individual sub-kingdom of Pokes. And I may not have been
the only one, the revised phrasing (perhaps yet another instance of the
disenchantment spell at work: Sir Hokus remembering past events more
accurately than he did in Pokes?) made it clear that it WAS only Pokes he
meant ("the stupidest country in Oz!")...Sir Hokus/Corum had been in Oz all
along.

There's a certain melancholy overtone to the early comedy of Sir Hokus's
nearly forced marriage to Marcia of Marshland, as Thompson observes that "so
many of us" have had thoughts about our prospective wedding day. Thompson, as
we all know, was never to have one, and (even then) may well have been
increasingly resigned to it. But what is Oz but a land where almost
everything ends happily, and (if you'll forgive my quoting "Somewhere Over
the Rainbow") dreams really do come true? Thompson could at least grant her
character the happiness she might not find for herself; not only a successful
and happy marriage but also renewed youth and a second chance to enjoy the
bliss of a young newlywed. Only Speedy was left out, and, as has been noted
before, not forever.

The Oz books have always muddled traditional gender roles from the moment
Tip/Ozma (literally) came on stage (along with other less famous Baum
hero/ines like Prince Marvel in YEW and Chick in JOHN DOUGH), so it's not
surprising that Sir Hokus...who literally makes his first appearance in Oz at
the same time Thompson does, and is the first recurring character she adds to
the books...may in many ways be Thompson's own alter ego. Like Sir Hokus,
Thompson was uncertain at first as she found herself in a magical land not
her own, and not sure how to interact with these famous celebrities...but
very quickly she and Sir Hokus both blended their own unique styles into
those of the Land of Oz. Even the change in the Black Knight's curse is symb
olic, for, along with her creation, she has gone from being a stranger on Oz
to accepting Oz as her home. And, for both Thompson and the disenchanted
Prince Corum, it always would be.

Rich Morrissey

From: J. L. Bell <JnoLBell at c...>
Date: Wed May 16, 2001 1:57 pm
Subject: RPT and YELLOW KNIGHT

Rich Morrissey wrote:
<< The Black Knights curse was unfortunately ambiguous in the former book,
Live, wretch, for centuries in the stupidest country out of the world!
Which would seem to indicate that Thompson was already considering Oz out
of the world (something she wouldnt be quite as explicit about until
later)>>

I don't think the knight's curse indicates that about Oz. It could be read
as "Live...in the stupidest country that is not in this world," or, "Live
in the country that is, out of all those in the world, the stupidest." But
the knight (sultan) was in Oz at the time of this curse, and the curse
transported Corum to another part of Oz, so only one world is involved--a
world that contained Oz. Whether the same world contains Speedy's America,
or our America, doesn't seem to come up.

On your deeper point about Thompson identifying with Sir Hokus in his
half-buried romantic aspirations, that possibility occurred to me, too. I
was intrigued by your take on it.

J. L. Bell JnoLBell at c...

From: Ruth Berman <berma005 at m...>
Date: Wed May 16, 2001 4:35 pm
Subject: Vig and Hokus and Mary Poppins in Oz

Nathan DeHoff: Moral status of Oz rulers with slaves -- As you say, Vig is a
Good Ruler in terms of being friendly to strangers in "Lost Princess," but
the narrative seems to condemn his treatment of his slaves is Bad and, by
implication, to suggest that it is Bad of Vig to have slaves at all.

Rich Morrissey: Interesting comments on Hokus. I think Martin Gardner's
description of Hokus as a Carrollian White Knight is probably fair, even
though Hokus is more like a Quixote in his pedantic determination to live up
to the ideals of knighthood. But there's probably some Carroll influence in
there, too -- the WK/Alice and Hokus/Dorothy relationships are more like
each other than they are like the Quixote/Dulcinea relationship, for
instance.


Ruth Berman

From: David Hulan <davidhulan at n...>
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 11:47 pm
Subject: Rich Morrissey

It is with sadness that I pass on the news that Rich Morrissey, who
was an interesting if sporadic contributor to our discussions here,
died yesterday of a brain aneurysm. I'm not sure of his exact age,
but he was relatively young - somewhat short of 50.