Now, I've been putting off reading this for about 4 or 5 years, not because it didn't look good, or because I didn't like the other Gregory Maguire novel that I read (Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister), because it did and I did. But because the M's are about halfway through the alphabet, you might notice, and I've been going through all my unread fiction in order of author name. Because I'm a sane and normal person who does not have an obsessive need for order.
Anyway, I was also putting off going to see the play until after I read the book, because I thought it would be like when you see the movie first and then the whole time you're imagining the main characters as Angie Harmon and Lane Smith. But then about a year ago, my mom came to visit me for her birthday, and all she wanted was to go see Wicked on Broadway in Chicago, and so I had to suck it up and go see it. Turns out, if you work for the city, you sit in the way up high back of the balcony and can't even see the actor's faces anyway, so there's not that much danger of them sitting in your unconscious waiting to act out the parts of whatever book you're reading.
Not to mention that now that I've gotten around to actually reading the book, it turns out it's pretty different from the play. I tried really hard to imagine Glinda (the good witch) as the bubbly spastic insane person I'd seen on stage, but it really didn't work out that well.
To double back, "Wicked" is what wickedpedia calls a "parallel novel": it retells the story of "The Wizard of Oz"* from the perspective of the Wicked Witch of the West. In this version, she's a genetic freak and a bit of a smartass, but not exactly born wicked. We follow her birth in Munchkinland, her education at Shiz, youthful political demonstrations in the Emerald City and eventual self-imposed exile at the castle of Kiamo Ko. All before Dorothy arrives. Dorothy's part in the story would be minor to the point of footnote if it weren't for her talent of being in the wrong place and doing the wrong thing at just the wrong time, namely at the end.
In a way, seeing the Chicago production of the play first did sort of affect my enjoyment of reading the novel: the play essentially re-imagines a well-known story such that the supposed Big Bad turns out to be the heroine, and conflicts that are disastrous turn out to be misunderstandings on a rather grand scale. This makes for entertaining song and dance numbers, very amusing little character quirks and, of course, a happy(ish) ending.
On the other hand, Gregory Maguire's style (in his adult works, anyway) is fairly serious and contemplates larger order issues, such as the nature of evil, the role of government and the existence of the soul. It gives us the question of where the Big Bad comes from and how she came to be who she is and make the decisions she makes. It doesn't tell us it was all a big farce; it deeply examines what it means to be wicked.
Once I settled into the difference, I definitely enjoyed the book, but I spent at least half of it waiting for the funny misunderstandings and was even a little surprised at the ending. That said, it's definitely worth the read, and the play is worth seeing. Just don't associate them too closely in your brain.
---------
* I'm guessing the original inspiration is the novel, rather than the movie, but for all you illiterates out there it's not important. You can pretty much follow along if you've ever seen a picture of Judy Garland.
