# Talk:Wicked (Maguire novel)

the shoes were silverish when frex gave them to nessa, but when glinda enchanted them, it turned them red (ruby)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.163.218.95 (talk) 22:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 
I belive the shoes were silver not Ruby in this book, the wicked musical as well as the orginal oz books.Lego3400 01:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

the shoes were made of glass through skills Frex learned from turtle heart. Zappernapper 22:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Maguire takes care never to call the shoes either "silver" or "ruby", instead using poetic descriptions of the way the shoes catch the light.  This way, the reader can envision them either as ruby (per the film) or silver (per Baum's original book). —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 22:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
In other areas where the movie and book differed he always sided with the movie. I thought Maguire made the shoes ambiguous to avoid paying a fee for use of the part of the story that MGM still holds under copyright: http://www.eskimo.com/~tiktok/faq19.html#11 172.162.255.176 13:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I know (smiles), but i think the fact that the shoes indeed were made of iridescent glass beads is something worth noted in the article itself. Zappernapper 23:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, sure.  There might even be room for a brief quoted description from the novel. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Dorothy wasn't eight or nine, she was more like twelve or thirteen, possibly fourteen or fifteen.

it's really hard to say how old Dorothy is supposed to be because the author borrows from both the orginal book and the movie (e.g. references to Boq, but nothing about the Witch of the South).  If we went by the book, then 10 is accurate, but the age Judy Garland portrays is significantly older (we have to remember that the part was orginally written for Shirly Temple who was indeed much younger looking. Zappernapper 22:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
you know.... never mind that bit about Shirley Temple, according to the 50th Anniversary Edition VHS booklet, that's a myth and MGM only briefly thought about hiring her, but Judy Garland was actually the orginal choice. Zappernapper 21:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I find myself at odds with the fact that the plot section suggests the Elixur made Elphie green, as a result of having been drunk by Melena while pregnant.  It was my understanding that the elixer made her very drunk or otherwise drugged and then had sex with the "salesman."  If ne1 wishes to dispute this please let me know but i'll be changing it soon if no one objects. Zappernapper 22:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to re-read both novels to make my eventual plot summaries accurate, but I believe that Elphaba's mother was already rather "heady" over the roots she would chew, and the elixir gave her hallucinations, as well as having a side effect on the pregnancy. Cybertooth85 04:26, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
How about we say, "may or may not" have been responsible for turning her green?  I just presumed it was because she was "born of both worlds."  Case in point - Liir's daughter at the end of the book is green and we have no reason to think that Candle drank the Elixur. -Zappernapper 04:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow.  I really didn't expect a spoiler for book two in the talk page of book one.  Crappy.  :(  216.114.249.102 03:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. However, with Liir's daughter, it could just be an instance of genetics, with the green skin being a recessive mutation...or some other convenient lie;) Cybertooth85 23:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Speaking of the children and their parentage, isn't it curious that the one child who seems from the plot details to have been most likely fathered by Frex, was named "Shell," with the obvious connection to the name of "Turtle Heart?" Davidb0229 (talk) 03:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

this is an old thread, but i figured i'd respond neways - the book plainly explains that Shell's name was connected to Turtle Heart b/c no one was sure who's child he was since at the time of conception Melena, Frex, and Turtle Heart were involved in a polyamorous relationship. -- ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 20:11, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
My understanding was that issue was present for Nessa's conception and that Turtle Heart had already died by the time Shell was born. I took it as Frex named Shell that to honor his dead friend. Tydoni (talk) 00:47, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

The Wizard of Oz book and movie pages each have some info about each other and about Wicked. How about a section here detailing the differences between Wicked and Wizards? 172.162.255.176 13:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

In the description it says "The story centers around Elphaba, the misunderstood green-skinned girl who grows up to become the infamous Wicked Witch of the West." Now, this may be original research and might be wrong, as I've only read a quarter of the book, but it doesn't center around Elphaba. It seems to concentrate on other people (Galinda, Fex and Melena, Boq). Only occassionally does it focus on Elphaba, spending more time following the other characters when Elphie isn't even around. This is either bad story telling for a book about the Wicked Witch of the West or she's not what the book is actually about. Maybe the description in this entry should reflect this structure in some way? Again, I have yet to read the last 300 pages and my opinion may change, but still feel like there was much too few pages about the supposed central character. 68.48.229.193 17:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The novel is about Elphaba.  Other characters are important, and get their share of the spotlight, but Elphaba is the central character; more of the book is from her point of view later on. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Wicked's central theme is the life of Elphaba, but it is not written from her point of view. It is written about her as seen by other characters (I believe this is commonly referred to as 'dynamic POV') to add depth and mystery to her character, as well as to give the reader a sense of how her thoughts and actions were influenced by those around her. --Marshmello 20:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marshmello (talk • contribs) 
The novel is usually told through dynamic POV as Marshmello said, but near the end it is told through Elphie's perspective, and at at least one point goes into first person with her reciting a dream sequence. :) --Me, a random person :P

There is no separate entry in the list of characters for princess Nastoya, the Elephant, who plays a key role.  It is she who actually tells Elphaba that she is to become a witch, and provides her the crows as "familiars."  Her importance is reinforced at the conclusion, when Elphaba summons her aid (although it is too late).  Davidb0229 (talk) 02:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

"She later gives birth to the child Elphaba, inside a device called The Clock of the Time Dragon"  The clock of the time dragon is a sort of theatrical device, this appears NOWHERE in the wicked book that elphaba was given birth inside the device, f anything the clock should be explained as well, it's a large part of Muchkinlanders and is alluded to several times throughout the rest of the book.Michael Cook 18:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

uh... yes it does... first chapter. is you remember, it was raining outside too, and given the timing of the birth, if the clock hadn't been where it was, Elphaba would have been been born in the rain and would have died. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 17:21, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
as the book goes on Elphaba is centred on more and more. im currently reading the book and i have about 100 pages left or so. It is soooooooooooo different to the musical (i prefer the musical version)

I was wondering if this wonderful novel and musical will ever be made into a movie. I'm sure it would be a hit. They need to turn all his novels from the wicked cycle into movies. I would defintely go see them. Yoda317 01:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I haven't personally read it, but apparently the Grimmerie (behind the scenes of the musical) explained why they did a musical and why they decided not to do a movie. I found these quotes on the Wicked forums:
"Marc Platt: The screenplay was kind of dense,and I kept wanting to go deeper into the story of the friendship between Galinda and Elphaba. What were these two women doing in the same frame? The screen play didn't quite get at that. It stuck more closely to Gregory's novel. In order to get at that kind of story, we needed inner dialogue, which is very hard to accomplish cinematically"The Grimmerie page 20
"Stephen Scwartz: After several months, I met with Marc[platt] in 1997 and basically tried to talk him out of doing Wicked as a movie. I believe they were awaiting the second draft of the screenplay. That's how far they'd gotten. I told him that i felt it had to be a musical and more specifically begin life onstage. I was lucky Marc had a background in musical theater. My plea wasn't falling on entirely deaf ears."The Grimmerie page 21
So I guess that's that. But I agree, a movie of the book would be awesome (I haven't seen the musical, but I think the fact that they made it 'family friendly' ruined the entire point of the book. I'm sure it's a great musical though), but perhaps just a one-shot and not the entire cycle. Too much can go wrong between movies, especially since the cycle isn't yet complete. They could create numerous plot-holes, or change directors or something stupid like that (I'm thinking of course of the Harry Potter movies *shudder*). But a movie's worth hoping for.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marshmello (talk • contribs) 19:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Would you have liked one with Demi Moore with Elphaba? Because that's what would have happenned. And the play version has tons of parental bonus (Two implied sex scenes, one implied torture. Of the right character too. And if done the right way, more attraction between Elphaba and Glinda than Elphaba and Fiyero. The song even plays with the duplicity of the signs that could mean hatred and love.) My main gripe with the play is that it's basically Wicked for the 1939 movie of Wizard of Oz. All the nods are to the movie, instead of the book. I wouldn't mind a movie of the musical, as long as it signs decent Broadway and West End actors as opposed to big name stars, especially of the Disney variety. If they sign movie celebs, as is the norm these days, I am expecting it to be book-based.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.30.188 (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
It would be difficult to turn Wicked into a satisfactory film. It is a novel of ideas, and such works do not translate well into a visual medium. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 00:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I always figured Melena's children were subtle examples of fidelity. It loudly hints that her two daughters were both fathered by men other than her husband (Elphaba by the Wizard, Nessa by Turtle-Heart), and coincidentally Elphaba turned out green and Nessa was born with no arms. Their brother Shell was born whole, and we can be fairly sure that his father was Frex.
Is this inference unencyclopedic or is it worth mentioning somewhere? The article doesn't have much meat to it; it's mostly just a play-by-play of the novel. It would be nice to add something else to it. --Marshmello 21:54, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The novel presents events, characters and situations from Anne's books and the film in new ways, with several differences between the Riley Anne series and the Wicked Cycle.
Who is Riley Anne, and what does this person have to do with Oz? Ronstew (talk) 05:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I see that Huntington has replaced the nonsensical references to Riley Ann wih correct ones to F.L Baum. Ronstew (talk) 01:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I propose merging the list: List of characters in Wicked to this article. Currently, the information exists on both pages but neither contains all of it. This merge would allow all the character information on Wikipedia to exist in one place in one article. I do not think an additional list is necessary as proposed here by User:JeanColumbia. Scottydude  talk 20:38, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Even though this is almost a year old, I say sure go for it.  The list itself has no references and I'm not sure it could survive an AfD since WP:STAND requires the same policies and guildlines for that list as to a regular article, such as WP:N, WP:V, etc.. ThemFromSpace 02:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
It may have taken two years to accomplish, but the merge is now complete. I hope no one has any objections now considering this has been up for discussion for such a long time. Neelix (talk) 20:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
(Discussion continued below; see Talk:Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West#Merge with Nor (Wicked), Frexspar, Liir, Doctor Dillamond, Madame Morrible, and Fiyero.)  Goustien (talk) 23:20, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Should the article really include spoilers? This woudln't be fair to people who are reading it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by GaryCalcagno (talk • contribs) 03:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC) 
I don't think you can really do a wikipedia article on a book and not have spoilers; so long as there is a warning, I don't see why they shouldn't be there.  To talk about the book without detailing what happens in it would make for a very short article.  "This is a book about the Wicked Witch of the West.  Read it."  You'd kind of be left with that.  However, those who are reading it can choose to heed the spoiler warning (as in other articles based on books, movies, and plays); if they read on, well, that's their choice.Jessixx (talk) 20:48, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

An encyclopedic article should be expected to have information concerning the topic in question.  If one were to read an article about the moon landing, he or she would expect it to have a description of the landing.  Spoiler warnings would be considered strange, as that reader would expect to see that description.
This article should be no different.  It is an encyclopedia, with descriptive information about the topics that are described.  It would be unusual to see spoiler warnings in Encyclopedia Britanica, so it should be unusual here, as well.
As per WP:Spoiler, it is not policy to use spoiler warnings.  They are unneccessary. ~QuasiAbstract {talk/contrib} 20:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Under the munchkinlander section, they say Nessa is pink and disabled and her father's favorite. She hasn't even been born yet. Melena is pregnant and unsure whether the father is Frex or Turtle Heart but we dont know about her pinkness and disabiltiy. Correct me if im wrong...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.233.77.30 (talk) 18:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC) 

The Clock of the Time Dragon reminded me of the Corpus Clock, maybe the designer of the clock was inspired by this book. The "grasshopper" on top really looks a bit like a "tik-tok dragon so lifelike as to strike awe in the hearts of all who see it". Mahjongg (talk) 23:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

There's a huge, run-on sentence that needs to be edited. I think I know what it is trying to say, but since I haven't read the book and am not familiar with the plot, I am not comfortable editing it:
"Boq's crush on Glinda eventually subsides, and they all become friends with a Vinkus Prince named Fiyero, a quiet boy who speaks little English but draws attention by his strange customs and pattern of blue diamond tattoos all across his body, who is new to Shiz, and Elphaba's sister, Nessarose, who is called up to Shiz, ostensibly to bring a new chaperone for Glinda and Elphaba."
--Yelocab (talk) 17:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

This is a novel of ideas that is more about the ideas than a storyline. The plot summary gives a good sense of the events, but doesn't tell us much about the ideas. I just finished rereading the novel, and I do not remember the Wizard ever being referred to as Oscar Zoroaster Diggs. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Why is this book classified as a children's novel? In the home page of the author's website this book is clearly listed as a book geared at adults. Even if it wasn't it should be clear its an adult book, whole plot points of the book involves adult themes: sex, murder, discrimination, adultery, the difference between boys and girls in regards to genitalia. These are topics that generally are not covered in children's literature and when they are not not covered in the kind of detail this book covers them in. The only reason I can see this book classified as children's literature is that it is based off of a childrens series. The Fairy Godmother by Mercedes Lackey is also based off of childern's literature and even has less adult themes however that book is for good reason placed under the novel category as this book should be. 
Tydoni (talk) 05:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, not good. I've removed the WikiProject Children's Literature box. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 06:53, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

There is a homosexual relationship between two characters in one scene and also there is an ongoing debate about whether Elphaba and Glinda have feelings for one another. Should this go in the "LGBT fiction" category?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.166.158.105 (talk) 19:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC) 
Were the two Characters you were talking about Frexpar and Turtle Heart? I agree that some of the characters are bisexual if not Gay. However the proof is mainly innuendo and speculation and I'm not sure how explicit the relationships have to be for the book to be included. However the book does very briefly talk about issues in the LGBT community so I'm leaning toward thinking it should. This book certainly belongs on a list of speculative fiction with LGBT themes if such a list exists. The possible same sex relationships should be mentioned in the article if they are not already.
Tydoni (talk) 22:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Why is it that if two people are close, they are considered bi or gay? Frexpar loved Turtle Heart, yes, but as a close friend, not a mate.  And Elphaba and Glinda became close friends as well, but Elphaba's heart belonged to Fiyero. And Frexpars' to his wife.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Butterscotch22 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 12 December 2010 (UTC) 

My understanding was that the Nanny was pretty sure that Frex and Turtle Heart were doing it. She made a comment about them sitting 'scandalously' close together. I forget which page it was on but it was before Elphaba started scrying. When someone talks about two people sitting 'scandalously close' I do tend to assume that it is a romantic relationship although you are right the evidence from my understanding of Frex could go either way. However I don't think that Frex's heart belonged to his wife, also just because the person your in love with isn't in love with you or the relationship doesn't go anywhere doesn't mean you don't love them or your not that sexuality. Like I said in a previous post most of the proof here is innuendo and speculation which makes it hard to peg down.
Tydoni (talk) 00:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
The novel explicitly states that Frex and Turtle Heart had a sexual encounter. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 18:03, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Many of the characters in this novel are not sufficiently independently notable to justify their own articles. As such, the following articles should be merged here: Nor (Wicked), Frexspar, Liir, Doctor Dillamond, Madame Morrible, and Fiyero. Neelix (talk) 18:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

It may make the article too long.  How about a separate article for the characters? Henrymrx (t·c) 20:29, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
That's an acceptable option. Unless there are objections to splitting off the character list or merging in the character articles mentioned above, I would be glad to create a List of Wicked characters. Neelix (talk) 14:29, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I disagree here, I feel that some of them (namely Morrible and Fiyero, and possibly Dillamond too) should have their own articles as they are main characters in both the novel and musical. I also think the list of characters is a bad idea (see my comment on the discussion on that page). Look at Elphaba, G(a)linda, Nessarose and Boq; they were all main characters in the book and the musical and they have their own articles. It annoys me when this sort of thing happens.

The Grimmerie is not sufficiently individually notable to justify its own article. As such, Grimmerie should be merged here. Neelix (talk) 02:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually, if you're going to merge it anywhere, I think you should merge it with The Wicked Years.  The Grimmerie is a significant presence in the other two books of the series as well. Henrymrx (t·c) 02:45, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
It actually is a book so it should have its own article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.31.120 (talk) 14:00, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Support merge. This plot element has not proven notability outside the Wicked/Oz universe. Since there is no improvement of the article by adding reliable secondary sources or impact in popular culture, I will perform the merger into The Wicked Years per comments of Henrymrx. --LoЯd ۞pεth 02:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm guessing the page linked to Melena (section Munchkinlanders) is false, it leads to "Melena" as in black feces.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.79.197.122 (talk) 21:41, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 

I am wondering about something: does the introduction of the concept of east/west witches being sisters contradict Baum's canon (did he explicitly say they were not related?) or does it merely supplement it? It's always nice when there is a way to puzzle out how media doesn't actually contradict and we can consider it all a wider universe if want. For example:

Perhaps in the original novels the West witch merely did not mention her familial relations because it was a personal issue for her? Especially since her family died, it may not be something she wanted to let on about.
Another possibility could be that familial claims in new media are simply lies, since witches are known to lie on occasion. Ranze (talk) 12:56, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Wicked (Maguire novel). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110103010011/http://www.filmshaft.com:80/finally-wicked-the-movie-this-way-comes/ to http://www.filmshaft.com/finally-wicked-the-movie-this-way-comes/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

The New York Times is particularly brutal in its apraisal of Wicked. https://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/24/books/books-of-the-times-let-s-get-this-straight-glinda-was-the-bad-one.html
Tor.com's review is less vitriolic and more balanced, but points out that Wicked very much flies in the face of the established canon. https://www.tor.com/2010/12/16/responding-to-fairyland-gregory-maguires-wicked/
I'm no editor, and certainly not skilled in presenting a balanced case for Wicked, since I am biased, but I do feel that this page is lacking a section on how the book was recieved.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:3940:92D0:788F:866A:F4C:5C78 (talk) 11:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC) 

Who or what is "Tor" in "Tor noted that terrorism, committed both by and against the state…"? - Jmabel | Talk 04:17, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

All references to the musical should be removed from this page since the musical is its own property and anyone wishing to find information on the musical can go to that page. 66.243.233.201 (talk) 05:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

The musical and film are adequately covered under the Adaptations section. I have placed an invisible comment there reminding future editors that both musical and film have their own articles now and any future additions should go on those pages. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 17:33, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
@ 94.154.152.115 (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I have not yet read the other books in the The Wicked Years series, but just based on this one, it seems that characters like Shell, who never enters the narrative, should be omitted from the list of major characters in favor of someone like Boq, who has a pov chapter ECGross (talk) 07:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The redirect Boq has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 3 § Boq until a consensus is reached.  InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)