Talk:Our Gang Unsolved Mysteries

Can this be added to? What came to mind was how did Wally go from being poor in Hi'-Neighbor! and For Pete's Sake to rich in Honky Donkey and Washee Ironee? Rjh 06:10, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

• I didn't think it was a monumental blooper considering how he slummed it at times, but I added it anyway. Thor2000 16:46, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
• I wouldn't call it a blooper; just another instance of a lack of continuity when there was little effort to maintain any. As you know, there were also lots of inconsistencies with gang members' parents changing, and the gang occasionally being orphans, that could be added to this page. Another possible mystery is why did Farina undergo so many sex-change operations? And to a lesser extent, Buckwheat.

Having to deal with the gang's antics is what probably led to the high turnover rate in the police force. Rjh 04:21, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

• In my opinion, the gang thought Farina was a girl, that's how I figure that. As far as Buckwheat, William Thomas was a male actor continuing the female Buckwheat character originated by the female actresses, but once he wore pants, he was a new male character who became the new Buckwheat. I'd call the female character the original Buckwheat and the "real" Buckwheat once he stopped wearing the girl's clothes. Thor2000 17:35, February 14, 2011 (UTC)
• The gang clearly thought Farina was a boy in Lodge Night because they didn't let girls into the Cluck Cluck Klams. If you think Farina winds up as a resident of Mother Malone's Boarding School, he has to be a boy to be in that. Title cards keep flipping from "he" to "she" among many of the early shorts.
• I'd call that short the moment the gang realized Farina wasn't a girl. As far as the title cards, it sounds as if H.M. Walker couldn't keep his own notes straight. Thor2000 17:14, February 15, 2011 (UTC)
• I hope you realize the ambiguity about Farina's gender was deliberate. It probably didn't end until he was one of the boxers (and referee) in Every Man For Himself.

• I wasn't aware it was deliberate. By today's standards and practices, Hal Roach and his studio might have been held accountable. Wikia-wise, I just try to figure out a logical way to explain it. Thor2000 15:24, February 16, 2011 (UTC)
• A source for this is the Maltin-Bann book, page 31, describing Seein' Things. Roach milked the ambiguity for more publicity. Rjh 05:56, February 18, 2011 (UTC)