|
|
Post by duckie on Apr 19, 2004 20:35:10 GMT -5
The Chronicles of Narnia. If you havn't read it already. Technically it is seven books, but since when has that stopped anyone? It's pretty interesting if you can ignore the heavy-handed allegory (especially in the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe...geez, we get it already). Does it count as "expanding my horizons" to go from JRR Tolkien to CS Lewis? In respect of Justin's wishes, thought I'd pull this from the Book Recommendations thread... I was killing some time in a bookstore last week, saw a special edition of the Narnia series. $118 (wow), but I betchya it was probably worth it. They had it all sealed up, so I don't know what the illustrations looked like. But, I might have to hint about getting it for a birthday or anniversary or XMas ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Lissa on Apr 19, 2004 21:06:56 GMT -5
Subtle....  |
|
|
|
Post by DocD83 on Apr 19, 2004 21:24:56 GMT -5
$118? Did CS Lewis sign it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Head Mutant on Apr 19, 2004 21:27:27 GMT -5
That's a chunk for the series... but a good investment.
I have fond memories of my dad reading this series to us when we were kids, at night before bedtime. I was talking with a friend the other day about which book we liked the best... Voyage of the Dawn Treader was mine, but The Silver Chair is up there as well.
It's a great series, because you can just enjoy it for the fantasy if you wish, but also dig into the "heavy" allegory as well. Lewis wrote the books to help explain some deeper Christian topics to his grandkids (kind of like parables), and even to this day, they help me understand topics more clearly that I would've otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by DocD83 on Apr 19, 2004 21:47:10 GMT -5
The Voyage of the Dawn Treader is my second favorite. It reminds me of Gullivers Travels, except I could finish VotDT. My favorite one is the Last Battle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lissa on Apr 20, 2004 8:10:54 GMT -5
Silver Chair was always my favorite, although the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is certainly up there for nostalgic reasons. (Not that it's not a good book. Phenomenal. But I did like some of the others better.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Magill on Apr 20, 2004 15:45:22 GMT -5
I'm partial to The Magician's Nephew. It was the first one I read (in addition to being first chronologically, though not first written). I loved the imagery of Aslan singing Narnia into being.
The later ones (after The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe just seemd to get weird. Especially Voyage of the Dawn Treader and The Last Battle (though I do like the ending chapters of that book).
|
|
|
|
Post by pfrsue on Apr 20, 2004 15:55:30 GMT -5
I always really liked "The Horse and His Boy", partially because I was (am) your typical horse-crazy girl and also because it made for an interesting departure from the other books. My favorite is probably "The Last Battle" though.
I'd be really interested in Justin's opinion on the part where Aslan says that to do good in the name of Tash was to serve Aslan, but to do evil in the name of Aslan was to serve Tash.... or words to that effect. I like that concept, although I'm not sure I've ever seen a Biblical parallel to it.
Sue
|
|
|
|
Post by Head Mutant on Apr 20, 2004 17:57:00 GMT -5
Girls like horses? Huh. Ya learn something new every day. Honestly, that one part about the Last Battle is a sticking point with many people studying the parallels. A popular interpretation is that Lewis is promoting universalism -- the belief that all ways to God are correct -- in attributing the pseudo-Muslim guy's faith as pure and his desire to worship the correct god as sincere, even though it was misguided and directed toward a cruel deity. However, not only does this go against most every Christian doctrine, but that interpretation is denounced by Lewis when you look at the other characters in the same story. The false prophets try to blend the two beliefs together -- Aslan and Tash -- into one, saying that there is "just Tashlan". Tash is clearly presented as an evil presence, most likely Satan (since this book parallels Revelation). Tash is described as the almost a polar opposite of Aslan. These characters are shown, by Lewis, to be incorrect and passing off a charade. Their worshipping of Tashlan and Tash are not honored by Aslan. So why is that one guy saved, even though he was a follower of Tash? My interpretation, which fits what I've known of Lewis and how this event happens in the story, is that he's talking about the salvation of someone who has dedicated their life to searching for and following the one true God without ever having specifically heard of that God. Emeth's efforts are rewarded because he hadn't heard the specifics of Aslan, but tried to live a righteous life according to the only god he'd ever known, Tash. He's also shown as a person who is seeking the truth and is not fooled by the deception of the ape. This is sort of a variation on the belief of how people (such as isolated tribes of indians, etc) can achieve salvation by searching and living for the one true God they know through everything they've seen and felt, even if they've never had the gospel related to them due to their (location) ignorance. This doctrine is called "inclusivism", which focuses on the requirements of salvation for those who have no access to or have never heard the true gospel. I think this line of thought has real merit to it -- it doesn't compromise the "one way to God" doctrine that Jesus preached, because even Jesus promised salvation to the thief on the cross who hadn't had time to hear the gospel, but could still acknowledge his need for a savior and ask for it. There's a whole article here, if you're interested: capo.org/premise/98/july/p980716.htmlIf you were asking more along the lines of Aslan acknowldging the good done in the name of others (such as Tash), I think that's a simpler point to address. The Bible talks about how God works through the "good of all things", and whether or not a specific good action is done in the name of God or not, it is still honored and loved by God. Whether done in the name of God or not, a good work glorifies God more, because it comes out of his creation. It's just better for the individual if they realize and attribute that good work to the glory of God instead of doing it out of some other reason. It's kind of why Jesus was telling his disciples that "anything you do to the least of these, you do to me," to get them to wake up and realize that they're not just being kind for the sake of kindness and altruism (which is nice, but temporary in the grand scheme of things), but to give glory and honor to God as well (which is eternally recognized and remembered). And any bad work, whether done in the name of God or not, is loathed by God. Sorry if that seemed more like a sermon, it's just my thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by DocD83 on Apr 20, 2004 19:07:13 GMT -5
Ah, I was wondering about that. Thanks J.
Personally, my favorite thing about "The Horse and His Boy" (which I think is the weakest story of the series, but it's still pretty good) is that you get to see King Edmund be a King. Every other time he's overshadowed by Peter or Caspian (who Edmund technically outranked, but he usually deferred to Caspian).
I don't think Lewis did enough with Susan, and I would have liked a follow-on with Cor (Corrin?) as king.
One thing I don't understand...did the four age in Narnia? I would assume they'd have to, since Lucy was entertaining a marriage proposal at one point but couldn't have been 10 when she entered. Did they un-age and get their old clothes back when they chased the stag back through the wardrobe? How did they have any legitimacy when they went back to Narnia?
|
|
|
|
Post by duckie on Apr 20, 2004 20:29:43 GMT -5
Ya know, it's been years since I read the series, am going to have to reread them soon. It'll be interesting looking at them again, this time through the eyes of an adult...
Oh, and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was my favorite, probably because it was the first one I read. I didn't go through the rest fo the series until a little while later, and because of that it really stood out as a separate story to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by duckie on Apr 20, 2004 20:37:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by duckie on Apr 20, 2004 20:43:29 GMT -5
Oh, and for those who hadn't heard yet (I don't remember if was mentioned here on the board a month ago, when the press release was made)... Disney will be bringing the series to the big screen, beginning with LW&W release on Christmas day, 2005....
|
|
|
|
Post by pfrsue on Apr 20, 2004 21:03:35 GMT -5
One thing I don't understand...did the four age in Narnia? I would assume they'd have to, since Lucy was entertaining a marriage proposal at one point but couldn't have been 10 when she entered. Did they un-age and get their old clothes back when they chased the stag back through the wardrobe? How did they have any legitimacy when they went back to Narnia? They did grow older in Narnia and revert back to their original ages as they returned to England, however you have to remember that as they grew older on Earth they were no longer allowed back into Narnia until the very end. And hundreds of Narnian years passed between their visits in some cases. So legitimacy rarely became an issue except I think for "Prince Caspian" when the dwarf didn't believe them. Sue |
|
|
|
Post by pfrsue on Apr 20, 2004 21:14:23 GMT -5
Thanks Justin. I hadn't really thought of it in relation to the redeemed sinner on the cross, but you have an excellent point. More to think about there.
Ever since I read those books many (oh very many) moons ago, that one section has always stuck in my mind and I thought it was in some ways an odd thing to come from C.S. Lewis, but in other ways something really very poignant about the value of simply living the righteous life. I've always wanted to get the opinion of someone from a background in the ministry. Thanks very much for your input!
Sue
|
|
oh, and you can even find it here...