(Untitled)

[vilajunkie]

Wow, it's been rather long since I last posted on here. I'm sorry about that. Well, I went on my trip to Disney World and I've been back for a couple weeks now. For the short time that I went there (3.5 days), I had a lot of fun and I went on practically every ride/show that I wanted to go on. The Enchanted Tiki Room is the only thing I really

Comments

Snow. Bleh.

[ozma914]

I've been thinking about this, and can't come up with a real favorite from among the Oz books. I liked the traveling exploration in "The Emerald City", although I always thought Ozma was wrong not to try harder to protect her country. I remember "The Road to Oz" scaring the heck out of me, and would count that along with "Dorothy and The Wizard" for being thrilling adventures -- both seem in retrospect to suffer from weak endings, but I didn't notice it as a kid. Perhaps my favorite is "Glinda of Oz", partially because Dorothy and Ozma are my two favorite characters, and it was great seeing them adventure together. Oh, what the heck -- I just can't decide.

Congrats on the great grades!

Re: Snow. Bleh.

[vilajunkie]

Thanks, Mark! And by the way, there's no reason to decide what book is best. They're all good in their own respects. I like it when the adventures have a purpose, when the adventures aren't just random wanderings. Which is probably why I enjoy the Baum and Snow books better than the Neill and Thompson books.

adventures with a purpose

[ozma914]

Agreed -- I like plot.

Re: Snow. Bleh.

[vovat]

I think Thompson's books were usually pretty strong on plot, but they meandered a lot before the characters reached their goals. None of her books were as plotless as Emerald City, but very few of them were as tightly plotted as Glinda, either. But there's usually an actual goal, and not just characters wandering around Oz. Neill, however, really had no idea how to come up with a plot. I like his books for their characters and some of the ideas, but he probably would have benefitted from a co-author (and I don't mean the editor who rewrote most of Wonder City).

the Oz franchise

[ozma914]

Let's face it, Neill was an illustrator -- and a very good one, usually -- not a writer. I can plot pretty well -- but I can't do my own illustrations!

Anyway, Oz is like any long-term franchise: some entries will be very good, some very bad, some in between. Anyone who's watched all the Star Trek movies knows exactly what I mean.

Re: the Oz franchise

[vovat]

Yeah, but I've never heard anyone argue that only the even-numbered Oz books are any good. {g}

Re: the Oz franchise

[ozma914]

I suppose if it comes down to it I'd pick the 14th book as my favorite, because I like the story and it features my two favorite characters, and also because my "favorite" number is 14. So at least there's one even numbered book that's good. But with Star Trek, that even numbered theory actually seems to be true. (Arguably, of course.) Isn't the one they're getting ready to make number ten? *fingers crossed*