Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dcc1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!dcc1!unixcorn From: unixcorn@dcc1.UUCP (math.c) Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers Subject: Re: Oz books Message-ID: <143@dcc1.UUCP> Date: Sat, 29-Jun-85 10:59:12 EDT Article-I.D.: dcc1.143 Posted: Sat Jun 29 10:59:12 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 30-Jun-85 04:15:26 EDT References: <2352@topaz.ARPA> <132@dcc1.UUCP> <7334@watdaisy.UUCP> Reply-To: unixcorn@dcc1.UUCP (math.c) Organization: DeKalb Community College, Clarkston GA Lines: 34 Summary: In article <7334@watdaisy.UUCP> gjerawlins@watdaisy.UUCP (Gregory J.E. Rawlins) writes: >In article <132@dcc1.UUCP> unixcorn@dcc1.UUCP (math.c) writes: >>[....] >>year cycle that was so profitable for them. Ruth Plumly Thompson fit the >>bill perfectly, she had grown up on the OZ books, was already an author >>of childrens books and she needed the money to support her mother and >>invalid sister. The first book she wrote was published under Baum's and >>her name (to promote continuity) but was all her own work. Later they used >>[....] > > The "Reader's Guide to Fantasy" - Searls, Meacham & Franklin pg 27 >states that "The Royal Book of Oz" (her first) was a work up by her of >notes that Baum left his demise, so the accreditation would be proper >(that is if this is correct - i have no information to the contrary). >-- >Gregory J.E. Rawlins, Department of Computer Science, U. Waterloo Sorry, should have posted my sources in the first article.. From 'The OZ Scrapbook' by David L. Greene and Dick Martin--- "Actually it was entirely the work of Miss Thompson. Despite Baum's statement that he left material for the 1921 book, Miss Thompson used no Baum notes for 'The Royal Book'." Also, in reply to another poster, Ruth Plumly Thompson was NOT the daughter of L.Frank Baum. -- unixcorn (alias m. gould) "there's a unicorn in the garden and he's eating a lily" gatech!dcc1!unixcorn