I was going to phone her, but couldn't get through, so I e-mailed earlier today my intentions. Got a reply back. She understand, and I have an open invitation for later visit. :D
The back-story is :
They chose a time when most of the Warehouse 13 agents were off recovering something, but Artie was surprised when he came back to retrieve his Farnsworth to find two strangers ransacking the warehouse!
The book is a dark excursion into what Oz would really be like if it existed, full of viciousness, poverty and cruelty (a bit like what life was like for many people in recent times if they weren't rich). It has a very "down" ending similar, but oh so different from the book. Apart from being an allegory for the politics of the first Gulf War (which is clear from the intro by Maguire in the Musical Programme) it also uses Animals (intelligent speaking animals) and describes a slow oppression of the same similar to that of Jews and other minorities under Nazi Germany and Tzarist Russia. Not bad for an adult version of a children's book!
How to reconcile the difference?
( Lots of spoilers underneath )
The original witch only appears only once in the original book (and looks like the top left illustration above). The MGM film made her a bigger character and really, the Maguire book seems to be based on that film and the Baum books (Ozma is mentioned, and I'm only 1/2 way through the 2nd book). In Maguire's book, Elphaba is intellectual but ultimately ineffective. She doesn't trust religion or magic, and (flasely) believes herself to be hopeless at casting spells. She has a freakish appearance not just because she's green, but also because of her face (which is angular and unflattering). In the musical she's green and a "nerd" (amongst the equivalent of jocks and cheerleaders) and that's about it! Her final appearance in the book is explained by the fact that she wears the uniform of a maunt - a sort of Ozian nun. In the musical it seems to come together by default by wearing things she finds or is given.
And therein lies the difference. If you only listened to the CD of the musical, you'd think everything was a big mistake, that Glinda was kindly and Elphaba mistakenly cold and unsocial. The moral would be that it's better not to care about issues and be socially acceptable. If you only listened to the CD. In the musical it's clear that Elphaba is placed in her position of "Wicked Witch" because of political corectness" from her opponents (the Wizard and Morrible). We love the fact that she rebels and finds her own way, though ultimately the success of that rebellion is problematic.
The book has no such lessons, and deals much more with the nature of good, evil, and the viewpoint of fairy tales. Characters "fall into" situations and events much less of their own choice, but by an inability to find alternatives. This Oz is definitely not a place you'd want to be dropped in, either by cyclone or other means.
So is there a (faanish) way of reconciling the book and the musical based on it? There is! In the book it the Clock of the Time Dragon is described as "...mounted on a wagon and stands as high as a giraffe. Its nothing more than a tottering, free-standing theatre, punched on all four sides with alcoves and proscenium arches.On the flat roof is a clockwork dragon, an invention of green painted leather,silvery claws... ...they dance and dwadle and dally with each other". In the book it is a travelling show that influences local populations with animated plays which seem to be about local characters (and which the audience assume represent truth).
The stage musical has aa dragon framework above the stage. Perhaps, then the musical is actually a "play" that occurs with the Clock, hence the rig, and the simplified story.
Just an idea.
|Kim Stanley Robinson||Shaun Tan||Robin Johnson|
The 68th World Science Fiction Convention will be held 2-6 September 2010 at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre. Our Guests of Honour are Hugo-winning author Kim Stanley Robinson, award-winning Melbourne artist Shaun Tan, and dedicated fan Robin Johnson. Melbourne has also hosted Worldcons in 1975, 1985, and 1999.
The annual Worldcon brings together science fiction and fantasy professionals and fans from around the world. All forms of SF&F are represented - film, television, comics, costuming, gaming, and especially literature. Programming includes panel discussions, lectures, science demonstrations, films, readings, and autographing.More details at http://www.aussiecon4.org.au/
And NO, I'm not going (given up going to SF cons since Swancon 21, with the exception of Aussiecon 3 back in 1999) ), but it occured to me that a number of my friends might be interested, and might want to.
Last night I kept on waking up and biting my tongue.Very very annoying. I also had odd dreams after watching a late night episode of Buffy.
In the dream I seemed to be en route from Perth Airport (that mysteriously was relocated over the interchange near Parliament house) and encountering problems - I lose the ticket and some of my luggage disappears. I'm also with a bunch of folk I know from Swancons and W.A. fandom, although I'm unable to identify any of them. At one point however we all travel through a warehouse cloakroom that seems to be full of gear owned by Stephen Gunnell (though he's not there) and everyone's laughing at me because I can't find the exit.
Not a dream I'd want to repeat.
I have been anticipating this film more than any other in the last year and a half. A film about Kirk, Spock and the rest during their academy days? This was mooted ages ago but instead we got Nemesis which while very well produced, was less than satisfactory. In fact it looked like that film almost "killed the franchise". That being the case, and the fact that J.J. Abrams was producer on Lost and Cloverfield made me a little uncertain as to what I'd see. I've been a fan of Trek ever since I watched it in the 60s, so I'm hard to please.
The short review of this film is: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes :) from which you might deduce that I liked it. The longer review's below.
( Minor Spoilers )
This is a "reboot" rather than a "reset" button, and this is quite clear in the credits with one character having "prime" appended to their name. There's already a sequel in the works, though I could even believe a new TV series could be launched by the film too - otherwise why use the original theme at the end (a very nice touch)? Wishful thinking perhaps. :)
So for me, a very long term fan, they got this film right, and I thoroughly enjoyed it, even if it does make my complete collection of "Star Trek fact files" obsolete.
Is Gillian Anderson planning a voyage on Doctor Who's TARDIS?
The British tabloid Daily Express reports that the former star of The X-Files is being lined up to star opposite Matt Smith, the 26-year-old actor who'll take over Doctor Who's lead role in 2010. Doctor Who's new head writer Steven Moffat reportedly wants Anderson to appear as "a deadly enemy of the Time Lord" in an episode of the sci-fi classic's fifth season: it's understood that the actress could play the renegade Time Lady Rani, a character not seen since the 1980s.
Originally played by Kate O'Mara, Rani was an evil scientific genius who would stop at nothing to complete her nefarious experiments. "Gillian obviously has a massive sci-fi following and it's felt it would be a major coup to have her appear in Doctor Who," a Doctor Who insider told the Express. "The team behind the show are keen for the next Doctor to have lots of new enemies and Gillian would be a glamorous and impressive addition to the list. Rani would be a perfect role for her as the character used to be regarded as one of the Doctor's most deadly opponents."
The next Doctor Who special Planet of the Dead, starring David Tennant in the title role, will premiere in Australia on ABC1 in May.
If it's true this'll be interesting. I was hoping they'd bring back the Rani, especially after the Master's death (when his ring was taken by a femme looking hand).