What follows is some of the personal theories about Oz of members of the Ozzy Digest (Note: Much of the material in this file is also in Section 4 of the Ozzy Digest FAQ) ERIC GJOVAAG: * As enjoyable as I find the non-FF to be, there are a number of factors that keep them, IMHO, from being considered an official part of the series. They are not as well known, they are not readily available or kept in print, they are printed in MUCH smaller quantities than the FF, and there is no method (yet) of Oz authors getting together and coordinating things [the Ozzy Digest is a good start, but it must be remembered that only a very small proportion of Oz fans and potential authors are here]. And it is EXTREMELY difficult, even for a completist like me, to get and read all of them. So, for consistency's sake, and so as to avoid too much confusion, the ONLY sources I try to use when researching and coming up with theories are the FF, with lesser emphasis, because of their connections to the FF, to the non-Oz fantasies of L. Frank Baum, "The Little Wizard Stories of Oz," the books published by the International Wizard of Oz Club, and Neill's "The Runaway in Oz." Baum's plays and movies, the MGM movie, etc., are not a basis for any Ozzy research, since they are not part of the books at all. * Since this seems to be the one everyone disagrees with me the most on, I will just add that IMHO, "The Enchanted Island of Yew," unlike the rest of Baum's fantasies, is not part of the same world as Oz for a number of reasons: + No character from Yew ever appears in an Oz book, or vice versa. {The veiled reference to Baum's Santa Claus in "Yew," although it does weaken this point a bit, is nebulous, since Baum did not create Santa Claus in the first place, and Santa seems to be able to transcend the barriers between worlds. Or there's one on each world, since there's one in Oz and one in our world.) + Despite its inclusion on the Oz Club's map of countries surrounding Oz, there's no textual evidence that it belongs there, and there was some carelessness in arranging the Nonestic islands anyway. + At the end of "Yew," civilization comes to the island, and it becomes a very different place from Oz and all the surrounding countries. But the Good Witch of the North, in "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz", states that Oz is not a civilized country like Kansas, and so, by implication, Yew can not be part of the same world as Oz, as it appears that the entire Ozian world is uncivilized, at least by the Good Witch's definition ("In the civilized countries I believe there are no witches left; nor wizards, nor sorcerers, nor magicians. But, you see, the Land of Oz has never been civilized, for we are cut off from all the rest of the world. Therefore we still have witches and wizards amongst us.") While this may not preclude fairies and other magical beings from existing on Yew, civilization seems to have robbed the people of believing in them. (Much the same can be implied in our world, according to some of Baum's "American Fairy Tales".) MIKE BURNS: For a reference point, saw the 1939 movie first, hunted down the Baums, found the Thompsons at the same time, fell in love and have been there ever since. Opinions: Style and substance have priority over simply using Oz in the title. The FF in various degrees all have it, but only some of the non-FF do. Shanower, Karyl and Eric ;)... and that's it of what I've read. And I do confer Canon status on Former FF writers who return to Oz later in life. Mainly because they haven't lost "IT", whatever that might be. History: Lurline's enchantment of Oz, IMHO, was more to set aside a special, pre-existing place than the outright creation of same. I don't believe anyone or thing is 100% perfect and the results of the enchantment may have caused some unforeseen side effects. Like increasing magical abilities in and around the country. I'm not sure yet on the requirement for Ozma to be on the throne for the enchantment to have full power. Mostly because I disagree on what the enchantment does. I think, at most, that it limits the causes of death in that particular country. Maybe to the point where each sentient being only has one or two ways to die. And nothing else will work. It also, IMHO, (although people are rarely humble about their opinions, IMO) made aging optional in that country. I also think when you have carnivores and omnivores, there is going to be some eating of living animals. Of course this doesn't mean there aren't meat trees, etc. Wam was certainly a busy little wizard. Anyway, the human-looking population will certainly have a variety of opinions on the propriety of eating other sentient creatures. It may be that the Court of Ozma decided against it on the basis that you could never be sure your meal wasn't the leading philosopher of its race, given the fact that not every animal feels like talking. The Wizard, depending on the point in history, is a good but weak person. He can do things that someone else would consider bad. Lobotomies, sending a 5 year old against an army lead by a Witch. But generally means well. Has definitely landed in clover and knows it. Glinda keeps her own council. She knows more than she tells and not as much as she pretends. Uses spies, maintains by some accounts the best army in Oz even in peacetime. Takes matters into her own hands without consulting anyone, even the ruler of the country. Ozma is exactly what she seems to be. And doing a fine job considering the life she's lead. Although sometimes she tends to come across as Little Miss Invincible, Mistress of All She Surveys, she genuinely means well. Dorothy, Aunt Em and Uncle Henry in the later books (post-WOZ) act differently than they do in the first book and are therefore different characters entirely. WHAT HAVE YOU FIENDS DONE WITH THE REAL GALES??? I DEMAND YOU BRING THEM BACK!!! *giggle* followed by lots of little smileys, picture it, I'm not going to really type lots of the same characters over and over and over. It is so much easier to type this long drawn out couple of lines. Bastinda... WWW... hmmm. Which was easier? I know! Elphaba! Dave Hardenbrook: 1. Emerald City, Next 47 Exits: There have been many speculations about how big Oz is. I have heard estimates ranging from about 75 miles across (about the size of Vermont) up to 400 miles across (about the size of Colorado). For my stories and Ozzy musings, I assume a size of about 100 miles across. 2. Baumgea and Beyond the Infinite: In one of the "Famous Forty", the entire continent of magical lands that includes Oz is called "The Continent of Imagination". Prefering a name that is both exotic-sounding and pays homage to Oz's creator, I refer to the Continent as "Baumgea" ("Baum's land"). I also believe that elsewhere in the magical ocean other authors have their continents, like "Dodgsongea" for Lewis Carroll, etc. Some people speculate that Oz and other magical lands are on another planet. My personal theory is that Baumgea et. al. exist on Earth, but a "parallel Earth" in an alternate universe that got pulled into our universe. This "Ozzy Earth" is called Nerrum, has three moons (one of them Planetty's home), has in the 20th century sharply diverged from our history, thanks to Ozma and Oz's influence, and resides in the Large Magellanic Cloud. 3. Locasta -- Will the Real Good Witch of the North Please Stand Up: According to the "Famous Forty", The Good Witch of the North is a little old lady named Tattypoo (for all you who may be more familiar with the MGM movie, Glinda is actually the Good Witch of the *SOUTH*!). In Ruth P. Thompson's (canonical) _Giant Horse of Oz_, it is revealed that Tattypoo is in fact a beautiful princess who eventually is disenchanted. But in my soon-to-be-published _Locasta and the Three Adepts of Oz_, I reveal that there is much more to the story... In her non-canonical but excellent book, _The Disenchanted Princess of Oz_, Melody Grandy "resurrects" Tip by revealing Mombi's _modus operandi_ for transformations: A "Switcheroo Spell" that Mombi used in _Marvelous Land_ to disguise herself as Jellia Jamb and Jellia as her was also used on Ozma and one Prince Tippetarius of Lostland. So when Tip was changed back into Ozma, the *real* Tip in Lostland (who had occupied Ozma's physique) was also restored to his true, boyish form. Tip then was his "own man" once again, and he leaves Lostland to have adventures in Oz with his friend Zim the Flying Sorcerer. In my own MOPPeT, it turns out that Mombi used this "Switcheroo Spell" yet again -- with Princess Orin and the Good Witch of the North. In my soon-to-be-published Oz book, _Locasta and the Three Adepts of Oz_, I reveal that Tattypoo was NOT the same Good Witch of the North that Dorothy met in _The Wizard of Oz_. The Good Witch Dorothy met is Locasta, who is later banished from Fairyland by Mombi. Mombi then performed the "Switcheroo Spell" once more, turning Orin into the elderly Locasta (though she adopted the name "Tattypoo", since she didn't *become* Locasta, she just assumed her bodily form, and *maybe* a few of her most on-the-surface personality traits); and Locasta, faraway in her exile, suddenly found herself in Orin's lovely body. When in _Giant Horse_ Orin regained her natural form, Locasta did hers; and then in my book Locasta returns at last to Oz and resumes her influential role in Ozian society. This "Switcheroo Spell", then, has allowed for two "dead" Oz characters who were sorely missed to be "resurrected"! 4. The Adepts: In _Glinda of Oz_, Baum introduces the Three Adepts of Sorcery, three beautiful sorceresses whose magic is largely based on a harmonizing between Nature and Technology. The Adepts do not appear in any other canonical Oz book, and in _Glinda_, their characters are not well developed. In _Locasta and the Three Adepts of Oz_, I not only reveal that the Adepts are Locasta's granddauthers (and it is they who bring Locasta back to Oz), but I develop their personalities: Audah (the Golden-Haired Adept) is laughing and vivacious and specializes in magic garnered from nature; Aujah (the White-Haired Adept) is wisecracking and strong-minded and focuses on musical magic; and Aurah (the Brown-Haired Adept) is gentle, demure, and very intellegent and knowledgeable in mechanical magic. (My little inside joke is that I pattern Aurah, Aujah, and Audah after Judit, Zsuzsa, and Sofia Polgar -- The lovely and brilliant chess grandmasters from Hungary who happen to be sisters!) 5. Can an Ozite Sorceress Have It All???: This is the MOPPeT of mine that has created the greatest controversy. In _That Ozzy Feeling_, which I am co-authoring with Melody Grandy, both Ozma and Glinda (gasp!) *FALL IN LOVE*! And although Ozma and Glinda's beaus -- a young fellow named Dan and Zim the Flying Sorcerer, respectively -- are both sweet and kind and totally worthy their powerful brides, some people believe that the "evidence" in other Oz books logically precludes any possibility of Ozma (and in some cases even Glinda!) having a love interest. Here are the main arguments in favor of a forever unattached Ozma and my defenses of Ozma's love for Dan (This more or less applies to Glinda as well): a) Thompson asserts in (again canonical) _Kabumpo of Oz_, when the little Queen of Oz is proposed to, that Ozma is a "girl" ruler, and no more able to fall in love with anyone than Dorothy, Betsy, or Trot. But Baum himself said Ozma is in her teens. And I futher would suggest that perhaps Ozma has decided to let herself mature a little bit in recent years, and that now she is now of an age to be ready to love someone. Neill's later illustrations seem to bear this out, in which she looks definitely more mature than before. b) "Ozma is an immortal fairy, and therefore beyond all vulgar human longings like love and romance," many claim. I observe though, that no one in the canonical series has said that Ozian fairies definately *CANNOT* fall in love, and that there are plenty of examples in literature that fairies *CAN* fall in love (Gilbert and Sullivan's _Iolanthe_, for example). It has also been argued that magic uses the same "channel" of the universe as sex drive, so that any being that makes extensive use of magical arts must be celibate. I see no "evidence" of this in Ozian or non-Ozian literature, however. So there is no real objection that I can see based on her being a "magical" being to Ozma having a love interest. c) According to the (non-canonical) writings of March Laumer, Ozma, having once been a boy, is consequently a lesbian. But IMHO, Laumer's more "adult-oriented" Oz is enough of a departure from the Oz I know and love that I can assume the Laumerian Oz to be in an alternate "parallel universe" and need not concern me. d) "Ozma, as ruler of Oz, is devoted to her duties and has no time for love, Charlie Brown," says the opposition. But Ozma throws parties and plays with her friends -- If these leisure activites are permitted without interferring with Ozma's rule of Oz, why not romance? e) Some Oz fans feel that any permanent romantic relationship involving Ozma would too severely alter the status quo in Oz, i.e. destroy Oz's childlike innocence or severely alter Ozma's personality. This is based on the misconseption that my love story for Ozma will be some kind of steamy "Harold Robbins" number or else a _Grease_-like "teen flick". These are severe misrepresentations. Ozma remains the same sweet, loving person and devoted ruler of Oz she always was, and the story will be a 100% G-rated tale. There will be *NOTHING* explicit or "dirty" in it, but will instead be just a charming story about the special relationship between two people, as suitable for children as Disney's _Snow White_ or _Pocahantas_. TYLER: ********** THE BASIS FOR MY MOPPETS ********** While the extended HACC theory is too massive to post to the digest, (and it has never been fully written down), the least I can do is to post the "Mission Statement" for the HACC, or to state which Oz books I use, the level to which I use them, and why. When the Oz series began, it was the creation of L. Frank Baum, and he alone had the power to define Oz and to determine its history. As Oz grew, it became something greater than it was before and eventually superseded Baum and the publisher, Reilly and Lee. The uniqueness of Oz is such that it now belongs to no single person, family or publisher. It belongs to everybody who believes in its spirit. However, I hold that the FF is the basis for all that is Oz. It is in these books that the nature of Oz was created and first explored. For any other item to be called Historically Accurate, it must be true to the events recorded herein first. The whole of Oz is a living breathing saga, with each new episode adding a new thread to the ongoing tapestry that is the history of Oz. Some threads may appear to contradict others, but that is only an illusion. Diligent effort, which includes such things as resolving contradictions and sharing of information to ensure that major contradictions do not occur, can make all contributions to Oz vibrate together in a symphony of harmony without sacrificing that which made Oz what it is: telling fun stories that are a simple joy just to read, although they are also so much more. Of course, this assumes that the stories agree with the FF. Many of these goals are difficult, if not impossible. Many stories are very rare, so people cannot read them. Many people write stories and each has their own interpretations, beliefs and ways in which they love Oz. 100% total agreement and consistency will never be achieved, and every single niggling little detail will never be fully resolved, but we owe it to Oz and to ourselves to make the best attempt that we can. Why? Because. Just because. It is the search for truth that is its own reward and its own reason, even the imaginary truth that is the world of Oz. --Tyler Jones