Wicked, novel vs show

I've copies of both books and have yet to turn the first page. I've been told that they can be a tough read. Im interested also to hear how people compared book to show.
Whats the story to 'Son Of A Witch'- anyone?

---

Updated On: 2/22/08 at 12:25 PM

At the risk of having this deleted/getting myself banned (has happened before), here's a link to a great forum with a lot of discussion on the book and the musical: www.gregorymaguire.com/discussion

The search facility isn't great but most aspects of the book have been discussed at some point - it might be best to go back a few pages, because things have gone off a bit recently. There's a box somewhere that you can change from "last 45 days" to "all topics".

I can't really remember the story of SOAW having only read it once quite a while ago, and I don't want to say the things I do remember because it gives away some of Wicked! It involves the children of various people, mainly, as far as I remember. Gregory Maguire is currently writing a third book, I believe about the cowardly Lion.

I personally love the book and the musical but take them completely separately. I can see where the musical came from but it is very much simplified and changed.

The books are hard, and I know of some people who are put off by the first section in Wicked ("Munchkinlanders") but it does get better. There's a lot going on at times. I do recommend that you read it though, WB2, because it's fantastic.

There's so much to say, I don't really know where to start. The GM discussion board is great. If you're going to post, I recommend you lurk around for a couple of days and read a variety of topics to get the feel of things. It's not as bad as CB, but people can be a bit off if you ask questions that are very repetitive of ones asked before and easy to find the answers to!

I found the novel rather easy reading except for Maguire's attempts at writing high lit by halting the plot for pages at a time to preach about the nature of evil, etc. Part 4 is the worst for it, but there's quite a bit in Part 1 as well. Most of the musical takes place in parts 2-3, which are (if memory serves, it's been a while) the shortest.

It's worth taking out from the library and reading once. I haven't bothered with Son of a Witch yet, but I've heard that Ugly Stepsister and his other retellings are vastly inferior to Wicked.

Book adaptation, whether it is on sceen or on stage, has always been a (excuse me for the pun) BIG ISSUE !
An adaptation (sceen and/or stage) cannot be like the original book since those media do not use the same divices and "internal" language (there I'm talking about the theatrical or cinematic grammar)...
Being fully aware of what each involves is the only way to judge if the transfer is good or not.

---

While i do agree with this point re adaptation and not being able to compare different artforms on a totally equal basis, i think it can be taken too far. I know a novel and a stage show arent the same thing, and neither is a film the same as a radio play,etc, etc. However i see no problem whatsoever discussing different versions of the same property in comparison with each other. i'm not particularly asking for a vote on which is better, not least because thats too subjective anyway. I'm interested in whether people think the musical is a sucessful adaptation of the book, whether it would have been possible for the musical to have sucessfully stayed closer to the book, etc, etc.

the book is EXCELLENT.......and while it is a bit slow at first, I love how it evolves....I recently re-read it since I wanted to read Son, which I started last night, and am surprisingly amazed, as many said it stunk.

I would probably have enjoyed the musical better had I not read the book, as they are so different. But it's an amazing work.

---