Magically lovely! Always was one of my favorite Oz books. Number 3 is probably my #1, though!

I really liked this second installment in the books of Oz. I enjoyed the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman again (my favorite characters from the first book) but also really enjoyed the added characters of the Saw Horse, Jack Pumpkin Head, and my newest favorite, The Highly Magnified Woggle-Bug, Thoroughly Educated. I hope he comes back :)

2.5 stars! These books are in crack in a way that only dated fairytales (fantasy?) can be. Upside down logic and magic and weird characters. Still interesting to read though as Oz is so well known
adventurous lighthearted slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven: Plot
Strong character development: No
Loveable characters: No
Diverse cast of characters: Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus: Yes

not as magical as the first book, but still fun.
adventurous lighthearted fast-paced
fast-paced

Had to remind myself several times that this book is from the turn of the century (1904) because the gender politics are weirdly progressive while also pretty regressive? Like the guys solve all their problems out of luck or sheer happenstance or wait around for the women to save them, the women move the plot forward, the girls revolt because they want a better future than being tied down as a housewife. BUT the story of Tipetarius being trapped as a boy and then magically returned to his true form as not only a girl but the princess Ozma of Oz beautiful beyond compare (as described by Dorothy to L. Frank Baum) is undeniably a Trans allegory, like its really really difficult to read that and not see what's going on there , lol.

The adventures of the Tin Woodman and the Scarecrow continue as they team up with a young boy Tip and his friend Jack the Pumpkinhead. What is going on with the group of girls charging the City of Oz with knitting needles?
adventurous funny lighthearted medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven: Plot
Strong character development: Yes
Loveable characters: Yes
Diverse cast of characters: Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus: No