CHANCE 9The Royal Historians of OzLyman Frank Baum (1856–1919),according to Martin Gardner, was“America’s greatest writer of children’sfantasy.” “His Wonderful Wizard of Ozhas long been the nation’s best known,best loved native fairy tale” (Gardnerand Nye 1957, p. 19). Although ini-tially rejected by publishers in Chicago,it became a children’s best seller byChristmas of 1900. Such an instantsuccess led biographer Russell Mac-Fall to write a chapter about 1900, call-ing it Baum’s annus mirabilis (Baumand MacFall 1961).After writing the first Oz book,Baum could not separate himself fromthe fantasy land he created. In less thantwo decades, he produced a series con-Does only “The Oz” himself know who wrote The Royal Book of Oz?Who Wrote the 15th Book of Oz?An Application of MultivariateAnalysis to Authorship AttributionJosé Nilo G. BinongoWho is the author of The Royal Book of Oz?sisting of 14 books. He consequentlyearned the title, “The Royal Historianof Oz.” Nye describes the scenario inthe early 1900s:The Wizard was apparently writ-ten with no intention of supply-ing a sequel; it is a complete unit,with nothing in it to anticipate asuccessor, much less thirteen ofthem. … [Baum did try] to endthe series in 1910 with TheEmerald City of Oz, but he wasdriven back to Oz by thedemands of his readers... Finally, promising that “as longas you care to read them I shalltry to write them,” he resignedhimself to at least one Oz storyeach year. (Gardner and Nye, p. 5) Even in frail health, Baum tried hardto keep that promise. Carpenter andShirley (1992, p. 117) write the details:In 1918, Frank agreed to have hisgallbladder removed. By this timehe had written two extra Ozbooks, The Magic of Oz andGlinda of Oz . . . . They were tobe published if he became too illto write a new book each year. .10 VOL. 16, NO. 2, 2003The Royal Book of OzThe 15th book in the series is nowbelieved by many to be Thompson’sfirst work. Moore (1974, p. 89) reports:Notes and a fragmentary draft of . . . The Royal Book of Oz werepresumably turned over by hispublisher to a successor, RuthPlumly Thompson, but no oneseems to know exactly howmuch of this book was reallyBaum’s work. . . . The complication started in 1921,the year the 15th book was published.Baum’s name was on the cover, andThompson was acknowledged only ashaving “enlarged and edited” the work.In her letter after the title page, Mrs.Baum explained that the book wasbased on “some unfinished notes” herhusband had left. Three decades later,Oz chronicler Jack Snow (1954) wrotethat the 15th book was, in reality,Thompson’s own work. The currentpredominant view sides with Snow.Hearn (2000, p. lxxxv), for example,asserts thatThompson did not base the storyon any notes Baum left behindas stated in the introduction. TheRoyal Book of Oz was entirely herown work. Thompson did notslavishly imitate what Baum haddone, but instead built on hiscreation. The story about Baum’s unfinishednotes seems to have been fabricated bythe publishers in an effort to ease thetransition and, presumably, to guaran-tee sales. With the Del Rey edition in1985, Thompson was identified as theauthor of the book. Following her nameon the title page was the qualification,“Founded on and continuing thefamous Oz stories by L. Frank Baum.”In 2001, a Dover edition of the bookwas released. As noted by the publisher,this is “an unabridged republication ofthe [1921] work.” As such, this editioncredits Baum as the author on the frontand back cover. However, the explana-tion on the back cover is not very clear:The Royal Book of OzL. Frank BaumBefore his death, L. Frank Baum,the “Royal Historian of Oz,” leftbehind notes for more delightfulstories about the adventures ofDorothy and her friends in Oz.This charming sequel, based onthose notes and written by RuthPlumly Thompson, fully capturesthe excitement, imaginativespirit, and playfulness of Baum’sown work. Although Baum’s name follows the titleof the book, Thompson is acknowl-edged as having written the work.Can statistics help shed light on theauthorship of the 15th book? That is,is it possible to show statistically thatthe writing style in the 15th book is,indeed, more like Thompson’s thanBaum’s? Critics like Riley (1997) claimthat “[Thompson’s] writing style wasquite different from Baum’s” (p. 233).Can we actually show using statisticaltools that each author used a consis-tently distinct style when narrating anOz story? A Non-TraditionalMethod of AttributingAuthorshipAlbeit described by humanities schol-ars as “non-traditional,” the use ofquantitative techniques to resolve theauthorship of a disputed text has beenaround for more than a century.Binongo and Smith (1996) traced one. . [After his surgery, he] tried toadjust to his new way of life bywriting a little each day. Proppedup on pillows, he finished The TinWoodman of Oz for a 1918 publi-cation date. Unfortunately, Baum’s conditiontook a turn for the worse. On May 5,1919, he suffered a stroke. “Baum’sgenerous heart, unlike the fine velvetheart of the Tin Woodman, was notreplaceable” (Gardner and Nye, p. 40).He passed away the next day. His lastwords were: “Now we can cross theShifting Sands” (Baum and MacFall,p. 275).Interpreting a conversation betweenOzma and Dorothy in Baum’s last book,Riley (1997) opines that “if Baum hadbeen able to write more stories, therewould have been more plots involvingOzma settling disputes and extendingher benevolent rule to all the undis-covered corners of Oz” (pp. 222–223).With Baum’s death, the publishersReilly & Lee (formerly Reilly & Britton)had to find someone to continue writ-ing tales about Ozma’s reign. Themotive appeared to be commercial:nineteen years after the publication ofthe first book, the series was still verypopular and profitable. Reilly & Leenegotiated a compromise with thewidow Maud Baum, promising “a fixedroyalty for her and Baum’s heirs onevery Oz book, no matter who was theauthor” (Baum and MacFall, p. 277).Ruth Plumly Thompson (1891–1976), an established children’s writer,took on the job as Baum’s successor.Although 35 years younger than Baum,Thompson started her career at 23,when she wrote a page for childrenevery week in the Philadelphia PublicLedger. Reilly & Lee were not disap-pointed: Thompson, like her predeces-sor, was a prolific writer. EveryChristmas season from 1921 to 1939,readers enjoyed a new Oz adventure
View Full Document
Unlocking...