Poppies in the field

[mongoosey]

Incidently, the book Wicked actually got me into overthinking. The book is actually just one huge overthought, is it not?

[stars in the sky]

That's what I've been told, because I kept thinking there was all this symbolism and stuff that was totally going over my head.

[imperfectly_green]

That happened to me, too. So I let everything settle, picked up the book a few months later, and reread. Things seemed to clear up a little, but remained mostly cloudy. So I tried again. Yes, an example of a huge overthought on my part. I have a friend who agrees with me, saying Wicked was "probably one of the more mature books we've read because of all of the symbolism and such that we didn't get." Quite a lovely little paradox, then, because it seems you can't read it without overthinking. But the book is a great read all the same.

[mongoosey]

Yes, and the fact that Maguire DID overthink the green witch from MGM's Wizard of Oz, therefore creating a book about her. He also overthought Boq from Baum's immortal books, and created a whole backstory to an otherwise "innocent" book.

And then Schwartz overthought Maguire's book. And proceeded to make a musical.

And THAT is the beauty of overthinking and why we must question "innocent" things more often. (I am having a BLAST with these yellow faces...was that racist?) ;D

[imperfectly_green]

Aaaah. So it does come in handy. And here I thought all us great overthinkers in the world would have nothing to do with ourselves.

Nice tie in with the beginning, by the way. I actually got my entire class to overthink when I shared the poppies-opium connection after the principal came in and handed out poppy pastries for the holiday. The teacher eyed her pastry warily and said: "Perhaps that's why I like poppy so much." ;D

[ElphieatShiz]

It's ok to overthink for creativity, but my mind feels dirty when people overthink and say that some things are sexual and they aren't, not with the author's original intent (I dislike the sexual stuff in McGuire's books).

[stars in the sky]

I thought most of the sexual content in Wicked (the book) was just odd. Actually, stuff like the Philosopher's Club, Elphaba's mysterious scar, and the fact that she won't let Fiyero touch her below the waist all contributed to the feeling that I was missing symbolistic-type stuff.

[galindafiedgirl215]

I have to agree. The "content" in some parts of the book made me a tad uncomfortable. My friend wouldn't even read it after she got to a certain point lol. But I mean I think (now that I have contemplated it some more) that there might be SOME symbolism, but I don't think there is as much as we think. Though politically there might be, because I read somewhere that Magurire said, "When George Bush became president, it was seeing my nightmare come true." Or something to that effect. I think that I read it on someone's quote off of Wicked on Broadway. But anyways that is y opinion lol

[stars in the sky]

I didn't find the sexual stuff uncomfortable so much as flat-out confusing. People have weird sexual tendencies, fine. But what was its purpose in the book? In the story that develops the Wicked Witch of the West into some semblance of what Baum originally wrote? Aside from Yackle's appearance and someone's complete breakdown (it's midnight-thirty, and I can't remember if it was Crope or Tibbett), the whole Philosopher's Club sequence doesn't seem to connect to the book at all. And Elphaba's sexual history, minus the Fiyero bits, is all murky, but it doesn't seem like there's a reason for it. Why mention the scar or her aversion to touching if it doesn't lead anywhere? Seems pointless, but maybe that is the point, in the end.

[mongoosey]

Yeah, the sexual situations were also fine for me too. I'm actually used to more explicit scenes (being an avid writer/reader). I like to think Maguire put all those things in to show us how much and how little we know about the life of Elphaba, the proclaimed "Wicked Witch of the West". He mentions details, then never explains them. I like to think this is what he meant by writing the book: that human nature is altogether too complicated to explain and/or label. For example, not really explaining her desire of the shoes, what she actually did before Fiyero found her at the chapel...
"The real disaster of this inquiry is that it is the nature of evil to be secret."
The sexual scenes actually made Elphaba much more tangible (at least to me), almost contradicting (in a terrificly realistic way) her objections to the Philosophy Club. To see a fanatical green girl with desires, well, that's just human.
Hee.
But I can understand how people (all right, all right, like me) can twist already enjoyable children's books into something, well, wicked. Sexual or not, I do agree that Wicked is an obvious adult read...in an attempt to undo the "damage", they made a "family-friendly" musical.
And I'm sure this is off-topic, but I wonder how Maguire thought out the transition regarding young musical lovers wanting to read the basis of the musical, the book.

[stars in the sky]

Point very well made. Just a note, though-- Maguire does explicate the shoes reasonably well.

[StageFiyero]

I think there's a difference between taking children's stories and twisting them and adding content like that of Wicked and taking something someone wrote a hundred years ago and saying that it all of a sudden has all these hidden meanings in it - drug references, the idea that The Wizard of Oz is a story of economy (gold Yellow Brick Road, silver shoes), etc. There is nothing wrong with twisting stories like The Wizard of Oz and making them fresh and new for adults to read, but making up deeper, darker, and just downright messed up meanings in innocent children's stories like Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz that never existed in the first place doesn't make any sense. I don't know if that made any sense but oh well.

[ElphieatShiz]

StageFiyero said:

I think there's a difference between taking children's stories and twisting them and adding content like that of Wicked and taking something someone wrote a hundred years ago and saying that it all of a sudden has all these hidden meanings in it - drug references, the idea that The Wizard of Oz is a story of economy (gold Yellow Brick Road, silver shoes), etc. There is nothing wrong with twisting stories like The Wizard of Oz and making them fresh and new for adults to read, but making up deeper, darker, and just downright messed up meanings in innocent children's stories like Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz that never existed in the first place doesn't make any sense. I don't know if that made any sense but oh well.

That makes sense. That's basically my point.

[stars in the sky]

I third that, although you have to admit it is kinda fun to find fake meanings in things. For instance, my sister and I watched Titanic awhile ago, and we started railing about how Rose's hairstyles represent her relationship to upper-crust society...and then Emily pointed out that if she'd jumped off the boat at the beginning, the movie would've been a lot shorter. Wait, that wasn't my point...

[mongoosey]

Which is why there's conveniently fanfiction for the rest of us.

As it takes someone to find hidden references (as absurd as they come) in innocent books and question them. Personally, my mind just starts thinking (what people call "corrupt" thoughts) involuntarily... Possibly not the thirst for defiling innocent things, but possibly the lack of satisfaction with reading and re-reading (or re-watching) material. Perfectly normal to come back to Disney movies and think, "My sweet George..." and be reminded of the even raunchier fairy tales that inspired those movies like the Grimms Tales and The Arabian Nights.

A matter of twisted perspective, I guess. And yes, good point. Titantic would have been incredibly short if she jumped in the first place.