The Wizard of Oz

The Wizard of Oz was never that big a deal to me when I was a kid. Not that I didn't watch the movie every year when it came on TV, but it was never my "thing." No, that was Star Wars. Still, I probably would have read it if I had known it was a book, but no one ever bothered to tell me that. I suppose that's what comes of having non-reading parents. By the time I found out it was a book (probably during high school, certainly not before), I just wasn't interested in it.

This was all sort of like my experience with Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory, which was a movie that I loved as a child and still do to this day. But I didn't know it was a book and had never really even heard of Roald Dahl until I was in college, and I had no interest in reading it at that point. That came later after the second movie was made, which I didn't like but the Dahl family did, so I decided that I should probably read the book. And I didn't like it. It just wasn't magical like the movie had been. And I didn't like Charlie and the Glass Elevator, either, despite the high hopes I'd had for it since there was no movie to hold it up against.

Despite all of that, I decided I should give L. Frank Baum a try. If nothing else, I wanted to see what it was like before passing it on to my daughter, especially since she loved the Charlie books despite my dislike for them (which is great; maybe, I would have liked them when I was a kid).

In a certain sense, both Baum and Dahl borrow their style of story-telling from Carroll. As in the Alice stories, crazy things happen to the main character, and that character just goes along with those things as if they are normal. There's no plot as such. For Carroll, this is certainly true. Both Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass just end. It's as if Carroll decided, "I'm though with this now," or, maybe, he just couldn't figure out how to end the story, so Alice wakes up and everything is over. I had that same sense from Glass Elevator. Dahl just got tired of writing or didn't know what to have happen next, so he just had it end. Chocolate Factory did have a bit more plot, but it was still kind of all over the place.

The stuff coming up about The Wizard of Oz will have spoilers. Now, you know. Also, it's kind of impossible to talk about the book and not talk about the movie. Okay, it's not, but I'm going to compare some things in the two mediums.

First:
The book starts out describing how gray Dorothy's life is. Everything is Kansas is gray. The land, the sky, her aunt and uncle. Everything but her little, black dog, and, by extension, Dorothy herself (because there is a heavy implication that Toto is the only reason Dorothy has not become a gray person herself). On the other hand, Oz is full of color and life that Dorothy has never experienced and is amazed by (I'll come back to this).

The movie starts off in black and white, mirroring the tone of the book, and bursts into full technicolor after Dorothy arrives in Oz. I think this is the most amazing thing about the movie and possibly the one thing that has made the movie so beloved for so long. I can't imagine the effect on an audience who had almost exclusively only seen black and white movies.

Second:
The Ruby Slippers. The issue of the shoes is one of  the things I've most heard complained about from people that love the book, wherein the shoes are silver. But, well, I get the desire to make them red for the movie since they were doing the big color shift in Oz, and I think going with the red was the better choice. Visually, it just stands out more. So, no, there was "no good reason" to change the color of the shoes... except that there was, and there is no significance to the shoes being silver in the book except that that was the arbitrary color that Baum chose. Or not really color, because I think he was just going with "silver shoes" to contrast against the "golden cap."

Third:
And speaking of the "golden cap," it's completely missing from the movie, so why not change the slippers to red since there is no golden cap to go with the silver shoes. I get dropping the whole "golden cap" thing from the movie, because that was a plot thread that the movie didn't need. That's just what frequently has to happen when you adapt a book to a movie: you have uncomplicate the book, so leaving the golden cap out of the story makes sense.

Beyond all of that, I liked the book. It has a more careful attention to plot than either Dahl or Carroll put into their stories while keeping the whimsical "you have no idea what might pop up next" quality. Bad things happen to the characters, and, if I hadn't seen the movie, I might have wondered what was going to become of the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman during Dorothy's captivity. I also like that Dorothy is actually gone from Kansas in the book rather than seemingly just waking up like in the movie.

The book does, however, have one great flaw which keeps me from liking it more: Dorothy has no real motivation to go home to Kansas other than that she ought to want to go home to Kansas. It's clear at the beginning of the book that she doesn't like Kansas. She has no joy there other than her dog, and the dog goes to Oz with her, so, really, there's nothing that ought to make her want to go back, especially since she loves Oz. But she does want to go back, and it is her unwavering desire to go "home," for going home's sake, that drives the story. I found that, along with the lack of growth on Dorothy's part that accompanied that, to be rather inexplicable. Other than to make the story happen, why did Dorothy want to go back to a place she didn't like to people that, as far as we can tell, she had no true emotion for.

And, speaking of the lack of growth on Dorothy's part: Dorothy doesn't grow as a character during the story. She's the same girl going back to Kansas as she was when she got to Oz. However, she does serve as the catalyst for all the other character growth in the novel, which was interesting to watch and not often done, so, whereas I would normally dislike a story where the protagonist is static (see my review of Brave), I found that I didn't mind that so much in Wizard. Well, except that I really did wish she would have realized, "Hey, I don't have to go back to Kansas."

Mostly, though, I found the book most interesting in how it and the movie deviate from one another. I'm not sure I would have enjoyed it so much just all on its own. At least not, now, as an adult. I wish I'd read it when I was a kid, though. However, I found it enjoyable enough (and Baum himself interesting enough) that I want to read more of the Oz books, so, I guess, you can't really ask more from it than that. Making me want to read the next one is its job, right? And it accomplished that. I'll have to wait and see how the rest of the books are.

Moving Like Glass (brought to you by IWSG)

This post is going to be a bit different from my normal kind of post in that I'm participating in Alex Cavanaugh's Insecure Writer's Support Group this month. People tend to believe that if you're a writer then you're insecure about it, that those two things go hand in hand. I'm actually not insecure about my writing, so I've been inclined to skip these posts in the past. Skip writing them, that is (I don't skip reading other people's posts), especially since many of my posts tend toward what I would consider support posts for other writers anyway.

However, although I'm not insecure about my actual writing, I am insecure about the whole writing career thing. One thing in particular constantly nags and pokes at me: everything seems to happen so slowly! I feel like a piece of glass.

Did you know that glass is a liquid? Okay, so, maybe not. Actually, the state of glass is still being squabbled over by Science, but, for my discussion, we're going to go with the "glass is a liquid" side of the argument. And, no, I'm not going to try and explain the argument, but I will say this: glass does not crystallize as other solids do when it's cooled. For this reason, it's generally called an amorphous solid or a supercooled liquid. Yeah, I know: if you go touch it, it feels plenty solid, and it can break, but if you want to go read up on all the science behind it, you go right ahead. [There's a good discussion here if you want to read up on it.]

Anyway...

Did you know glass is a liquid? The way it was explained to me (in Science) is that glass is a colloidal suspension. A simple example of this is Jello. Basically, you have a liquid into which is introduced a solid that is in suspension within the liquid causing it to hold it's shape. Or that's the case with Jello, at any rate. It doesn't actually have to be a liquid/solid suspension, but that's what works for my example. With glass, the actual glass is a liquid and has to have foreign particles introduced into it so that it will solidify and retain the shape it is cooled in. Most manufactured glass is soda-lime glass, known as such because of what is introduced into the system to help it retain its shape.

The theory is that glass then, only being a colloidal suspension, continues to flow very slowly over the years. Very slowly. Very, very slowly. So slowly in fact that this is also debated by Science, but, for my purposes, we're going to side with faction that believes in glass flow because it's a liquid.

And that's how I feel! Like a piece of glass moving so slowly that you can't tell I'm moving. I don't mean on the actual writing front. I'm not sitting here with writer's block or anything. But on the selling front, on the getting my name out there front, I feel like nothing's happening. See, I know that's not quite true, because I do have people reading my work and leaving reviews, but it's not spontaneous at this point. And that makes it feel like it's not happening at all.

And that makes me insecure. The feeling of no movement.

I suppose the good side of that is that it makes me want, even more, to finish my next project and get it out there.

Speaking of that next project, it's called Shadow Spinner (for those of you coming by for the first time today because of the IWSG thing. The rest of you should know this!). The first chapter, "Part One: The Tunnel" is available for free this week for the Kindle (only) over on Amazon. It would be so great if you'd go pick up a FREE copy of it, click the "like" button (something that seems to be difficult for most people stopping by), and, after you read it, leave a short review and rating. Yeah, okay, so I'm asking a lot, but it's a short read because it's just the 1st chapter, so there will be plenty of time left over for a short review! Make me feel like heated glass!

The cover has been done by the fantastic artist formerly known as Rusty Webb:

Did I mention it's FREE?!?


["Part Two: The Kitchen Table" will be available soon.]