Would Dorothy and Ozma be Made Canon Today?

[Winter]

I think you're applying modern standards to a time and place where they didn't exist.

When the idea of lesbianism was foreign to most people, that sort of speech and conduct wasn't interpreted in a sexual manner.

That's a BS talking point that has rarely if ever been true.

Chuck actually pointed out that historical research has shown that same sex relationships, transgender identity and bisexuality has been around for as long as there have been people. Ancient Greece has MANY heroes or historical figures who were LGBT and it was seen as normal back then.

Overly Sarcastic Productions made a video covering several lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders and aces in various cultures and lores. Not to mention that there are many animals that can engage in same sex relationships like Eagles, Horses and even wolves and big cats like lions & tigers and even some bears, (oh my ).

Again, we don't know if Baum INTENDED for Dorothy and Ozma to be seen as romantic and like I said things like kissing wasn't always seen as romantic at Baum's time but it's not impossible that he intended for them to be seen as romantic.

[ProfessorDetective]

I mean, it was pretty canon in Baum's books according to some.

Mind you, they're both perpetually children too.

So...yeah.

That ain't stoping The Owl House. As long as your kid couple doesn't go further then first base, I have no objections.

As to Dorothy and Ozma becoming an explicit couple in a modern rendition... I can see it and would love to see it... The adapters being brave enough to do it (or even just aggressively hinting at it without commiting), though...

Either way, I'd love to see a new take on Oz, especially if they properly started from scratch and didn't use the 1939 film as their foundation like the rest.

[Winter]

I mean, it was pretty canon in Baum's books according to some.

Mind you, they're both perpetually children too.

So...yeah.

That ain't stoping The Owl House. As long as your kid couple doesn't go further then first base, I have no objections.

As to Dorothy and Ozma becoming an explicit couple in a modern rendition... I can see it and would love to see it... The adapters being brave enough to do it (or even just aggressively hinting at it without commiting), though...

Either way, I'd love to see a new take on Oz, especially if they properly started from scratch and didn't use the 1939 film as their foundation like the rest.

There's a quote from makers for the the miniseries Tin Man that I always found funny, mainly because4 it is so true, "Every few decades there's a Wizard of Oz Adaptation".

But to your first point I found it interesting how western animation is the most inclusive on LGBT when it comes to main stream media. The Owl House has Lumity, Amphibia seems to be hinting at a Sashannarcy endgame, Avatar has Korrasami and Ranshi, She-Ra and the Princesses of Power... Is She-Ra and the Princesses of Power and Harley Quinn has Harley and Poison Ivy official hook up on the small screen for the first time in decades.

These have all been released within the last 7 years and all have been major hits with critics and audience alike so if Oz was made into a animated TV Series the chances of Dorothy and Ozma becoming a canon couple would likely be like 99% possible. I love the world sometimes.

[hammerofglass]

Right, because queer women is totally not anything a guy who hung out around suffragettes all the time would have understood. Just gals being pals. Roommates, even.

Seriously though, the main problem with this is that the Oz books effectively don't HAVE a canon. Baum did not give a single damn about consistency between books.

[Winter]

Right, because queer women is totally not anything a guy who hung out around suffragettes all the time would have understood. Just gals being pals. Roommates, even.

Seriously though, the main problem with this is that the Oz books effectively don't HAVE a canon. Baum did not give a single damn about consistency between books.

Truer words have never been spoken. I've only read a few of the books and I remember being REALLY confused! I think that's why The Wizard of Oz is usually the most adapted (there were about 3 films before the 1939 film and two of them were adaptions of the first book) it's a single isolated story that has a beginning, middle and end that wraps up most of the story points and gives everyone a complete character arc. After that... Well, let's just saying that ditching continuity to do whatever you want CAN be a good thing that leads to good stories but more often then not it just kinda leads to a tangled mess that no one can make sense of.

I mean, the continuity of Oz makes the Legend of Zelda's timeline look like a well thought out multistage plan that goes from one plot point to another smoothly and with no major draw backs.

[ProfessorDetective]

Right, because queer women is totally not anything a guy who hung out around suffragettes all the time would have understood. Just gals being pals. Roommates, even.

Seriously though, the main problem with this is that the Oz books effectively don't HAVE a canon. Baum did not give a single damn about consistency between books.

Truer words have never been spoken. I've only read a few of the books and I remember being REALLY confused! I think that's why The Wizard of Oz is usually the most adapted (there were about 3 films before the 1939 film and two of them were adaptions of the first book) it's a single isolated story that has a beginning, middle and end that wraps up most of the story points and gives everyone a complete character arc. After that... Well, let's just saying that ditching continuity to do whatever you want CAN be a good thing that leads to good stories but more often then not it just kinda leads to a tangled mess that no one can make sense of.

I mean, the continuity of Oz makes the Legend of Zelda's timeline look like a well thought out multistage plan that goes from one plot point to another smoothly and with no major draw backs.

Yeah, this franchise may be better served through a James Bond approach: some direct adaptations, but mostly pulling the source material apart to compile more original works with the pieces.

My new idea is an animated series that starts as a adaptation of Wonderful Wizard that eventually turns into a young girl turned princess/knight from Dust Bowl Kansas, her queen/girlfriend, and their growing legion of friends and allies fighting evil and protecting their Marvelous Land.

Also, according to TV Tropes, the first nineteen books are in the public domain and the rest will be hitting it one a year from now on. The only possible rights issues is if you crib too much from the 1939 film. If I had the disposable income and/or skills...

[hammerofglass]

Right, because queer women is totally not anything a guy who hung out around suffragettes all the time would have understood. Just gals being pals. Roommates, even.

Seriously though, the main problem with this is that the Oz books effectively don't HAVE a canon. Baum did not give a single damn about consistency between books.

Truer words have never been spoken. I've only read a few of the books and I remember being REALLY confused! I think that's why The Wizard of Oz is usually the most adapted (there were about 3 films before the 1939 film and two of them were adaptions of the first book) it's a single isolated story that has a beginning, middle and end that wraps up most of the story points and gives everyone a complete character arc. After that... Well, let's just saying that ditching continuity to do whatever you want CAN be a good thing that leads to good stories but more often then not it just kinda leads to a tangled mess that no one can make sense of.

I mean, the continuity of Oz makes the Legend of Zelda's timeline look like a well thought out multistage plan that goes from one plot point to another smoothly and with no major draw backs.

I think the main reason is that the play adaptation (that came out when it was the only book) had been super popular for decades.

[KitWargSpectacle]

I think you're applying modern standards to a time and place where they didn't exist.

When the idea of lesbianism was foreign to most people, that sort of speech and conduct wasn't interpreted in a sexual manner.

It would've been had they been 2 mails - which just demonstrates that all women are bi.

[KitWargSpectacle]

And today, the states HAVE gotten better when it comes to LGBT Representation to the point that many shows openly and PROUDLY feature LGBT characters in leading roles with many of the shows being huge hits with critics and audience.

So, with all that in mind, if there was a Oz TV Series (animated or otherwise) would Dorothy and Ozma be made into an official couple?

This treatment of lesbianism / depiction of such as some kind of cultural underdog comparable to mail homosex, is a source of ongoing perplexion to me.

And even that was quite "in" way back in 2000 or earlier, so wouldn't be some kinda cutting edge thing in the "late '10s"; so yeah, the talk about "the new daring *proud* L representation in 2022!!" just sounds highly bizarre and surreal to me idk

I mean yeah, conservatives and rightwingers may scoff at it, but what do those types NOT scoff at? Like they'll frown at secularism and atheism, but outside their circles those views are kind of a default and treating it as sth special or rebellious comes off as rather misguided.

[hammerofglass]

And today, the states HAVE gotten better when it comes to LGBT Representation to the point that many shows openly and PROUDLY feature LGBT characters in leading roles with many of the shows being huge hits with critics and audience.

So, with all that in mind, if there was a Oz TV Series (animated or otherwise) would Dorothy and Ozma be made into an official couple?

This treatment of lesbianism / depiction of such as some kind of cultural underdog comparable to mail homosex, is a source of ongoing perplexion to me.

And even that was quite "in" way back in 2000 or earlier, so wouldn't be some kinda cutting edge thing in the "late '10s"; so yeah, the talk about "the new daring *proud* L representation in 2022!!" just sounds highly bizarre and surreal to me idk

I mean yeah, conservatives and rightwingers may scoff at it, but what do those types NOT scoff at? Like they'll frown at secularism and atheism, but outside their circles those views are kind of a default and treating it as sth special or rebellious comes off as rather misguided.

It's always weird when talking about lesbian representation, just because for so long it pretty much only existed in media to titillate straight men but there WAS a lot more of it than other LGBT+ representation (that and the "all women are bi" thing). Being treated actually seriously or having lesbian characters written by lesbian creators in the mainstream is still rare enough to be notable.