The Republic of Heaven

*revives*

I just found an article critiquing Pullman's attack against the Narnia books here. It's rather old, so maybe it's been posted before, but I found it an interesting read.

The comments are also interesting and thought-provoking for the most part, though I did get rather annoyed when one poster accused Lyra of being a Mary Sue.

I have never liked em either my mum bought the whole saga about a year ago and I started it but then it just got dropped out. I even dont remember anything about it. Might try again as I have currently lots free-time.

Zodiac wrote:what bothers me now is that, in every book except the first three, Aslan kicks at least one of the kids out of the stories.

I noticed that too! I found the message to be that "we don't want you if you are old enough to notice the faults in our ways of doing things." It was rather unnerving. Michael Jackson, anyone? Plus, didn't Aslan kick Peter and Susan out after Prince Caspian, or number 2? And wasn't Edmund and Lucy kicked out after book 3, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader?

Don't they all come back at the end, except Susan, who is too grown up? All the Narnia books seem to glorify death, and childhood, as if there is nothing worthwhile in between.

I completely see everyone's point of view here and I still have mixed opinions. I have also noticed how a child gets kicked out throughout the series and now I've read all of this post I have actually realised how religious the books are. Also someone said they kick them out because it's like they're not agreeing with decisions (well, that wasn't explained very well but it's the best I can do as it was how I interpreted) but either way, I agree. Yet I love the books! I had the BBC adaptation of The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe and as much as it's old and cheesy, I preferred it over the film as the film just didn't appeal to me at all.
I can understand how C.S. Lewis talks down to people but I liked his ideas in his stories and I liked the fact that his description wasn't full which allowed you to imagine it how you wanted.

That's just my opinion though

I respect that CS Lewis deeply believes in what he is saying and writing; there is no sense that he's just writing stories for the money, it's just that everything in which he deeply believes, I reject. I've always respected people who write/talk from genuine belief, whether it is Christianity, atheism, socialism, whatever, and disliked people who are so cynical that they believe in nothing, not even their own beliefs (does that make sense?), but it doesn't mean you have to agree with them all. That said, you can enjoy Narnia without endorsing Lewis's strict and, ultimately destructive, views of Christianity.

Sorry for the incoherence, peoples. I've just finished my Honours thesis and all my literary ability has been absorbed by that.

PP doesn't like CSL - someone here doesn't like PP. Pemwish?

Melancholy Man wrote:PP doesn't like CSL - someone here doesn't like PP. Pemwish?

Some of the more eloquent Pullman bashing...

Pullman calls Narnia "racist" and "misogynistic".

I read the books when I was in fourth or fifth grade. I liked them then, but what bothers me now is that, in every book except the first three, Aslan kicks at least one of the kids out of the stories. Plus, the order is messed up, and then there's "The Horse and His Boy," which barely involves Narnia.

I agree I love the first two books (The magicians nephew and The lion the witch and the wardrobe. I like the voage of Dawn tredar (I think that's it)
But hen again I probally only like that one because it sounds like the name of my town.

What I'm trying to say is PP books are based around the characters journeys where as TCON are based on Narnia and not the specific characters.

I agree with Pullman on Narnia. I've read the seven Narnia books twice. The first time, in 1974, I was twenty-four and I was totally turned off by the preaching. It seemed dishonest for Lewis to preach Christianity in the guise of a children's book. Children simply don't know what they are reading.

I read Narnia the second time in 2005. I thought they were better stories than I remembered, but I was still turned off by the preaching. I was also highly offended by the treatment of Susan. In one train-wreck, she loses her two brothers, her sister, her parents, and several long-time friends. This would be a horrible thing to go through, but none of those people in the stable shows any compassion for what she would be feeling. All they object to is her interest in "lipstick, nylons, and invitations."

I really need to reread those... I remember reading them when I was young, and as a child, I didn't see the religious message (particularly as a non-religious child). To me, much like I think HDM is to children, it was just an adventure story.

I read the series again as an adult, but I don't know that I was so much annoyed with it as surprised (and somewhat impressed?) by the absolute blatancy of the Christian message. I don't remember having a particular view of Susan, or any character for that matter.

However, I guess what I'm getting at is that I feel in both cases, children aren't going to see a religious message unless they've already been filled with a strong religious message, and even then they might likely need an adult to walk them through the symbolism and message.

(But I could be wrong. Maybe I was just a totally oblivious child! Discuss.)

I read the first Narnia book when I was 15 and I thought it was a great fairy tale - exciting and nicely written. I was aware of the Christian overtones, but they didn't bother me at all. I'm not blaming an author for letting their religous beliefs influence their writing - and Pullman doesn't blame him, too. I also read "The Magician's Nephew" and "The Horse and His Boy", but I lost interest after the first few pages of "Prince Caspian". The "Narnia" series returned to my bookshelf and wasn't revisited for a while.

A year ago I read an interview with J.K. Rowling where she said that "Voyage of the Dawn Treader" was her favourite Narnia book. I thought that one of my favourite authors couldn't be wrong, so I gave the series another try.
I stopped reading after ten pages. I was absolutely puzzled by the way the character of Eustace Scrubb was introduced. So he's deserving the name "Eustace Clarence Scrubb" because he "liked books if they were books of information and had pictures of grain elevators or of fat foreign children doing exercises in model schools"? So his mother and father are bad parents because they are vegetarians and have "very few clothes on their beds"? I wanted to read a fantasy novel, not reactionary ramblings about Teetotalism and non-smokers.

You could argue that Lewis wrote the book in 1950 when he was 52 years old. He might have been conservative and sceptical about all those new trends and fads at that time. I just think that introducing those beliefs into a children's book in such a dishonest way lowers its value drasticly. That's what Pullman criticises: "The supernaturalism, the reactionary sneering, the misogyny, the racism, and the sheer dishonesty of his narrative method". I wouldn't go as far as that, but I see where he's coming from.

Balthamos wrote:You could argue that Lewis wrote the book in 1950 when he was 52 years old. He might have been conservative and sceptical about all those new trends and fads at that time. I just think that introducing those beliefs into a children's book in such a dishonest way lowers its value drasticly. That's what Pullman criticises: "The supernaturalism, the reactionary sneering, the misogyny, the racism, and the sheer dishonesty of his narrative method". I wouldn't go as far as that, but I see where he's coming from.

Yeah, Pullman sounds kinda grumpy sometimes but he's absolutely right about Narnia (although I partially disagree from him concerning The Lord of the Rings).
I read it kinda late, I was already a grown up with strong and firm opinions about religion, and I was already a fan of HDM.

I tried my best not to dislike it before I read it, but I also felt sick so many times, specially in "The Last Battle", that I don't think children should read it too young, not even christian kids, because even if you're christian doesn't mean you have to be so racist, ethnocentric, intolerant, sexist and also absolutist (yeah, Narnia has kings and kingdoms just like any other epic fantasy, but the difference is that in those other fantasies, that kingdom is not decided by God. It's plain anglicanism, which gives the terrible notion that political authority should always be obeyed and never questioned).

I try to judge the storytelling as something written in a time when children's book was not supposed to have adult fans. It's for kids only, so it's very soft and silly, totally unlike what we have today with HDM, Harry Potter, Percy Jackson, etc.

I don't criticise the books' religious subtext, because I defend the right of storytelling to be ideological. It's one of the greatest genius of His Dark Materials, and Pullman did it too, with the notorious difference that Pullman had an argument about sin and wisdom/innocence and experience. He gave us a reason for why the Republic of Heaven is the best option and why God had to die, while Lewis was just selling an idea and never gave us a reason why a world with Aslam is any better than a world without it.

So, Lewis was right to be ideological, but was wrong to just sell it, and to underestimate the rational thinking of his readers.

But the biggest problem is the christian messages per se, which is the worst from this religion. Some of those messages shouldn't be supported even by christian, but there's too much to be sick and angry about when you're a humanist like myself.

I have very mixed opinions of C.S. Lewis. I disagree with him on almost everything, but I enjoy reading his books as an intellectual exercise--they force me to think about why I disagree with him. Oddly, Lewis himself approved of such an exercise. He wrote of this matter in "The Screwtape Letters". In addition, he wrote extremely well.

I have been looking up on a few interviews with Pullman disliking Narnia and I have to say that although I love him as an author, I disagree greatly with his views on the ''Narnia'' subject. Ever since I was a child I have been a really very large fan of C.S.Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia. I fell in love with his way of writing and his ideas on a perfect world. I in myself am an agnostic but I cannot understand where Pullman is coming from in this subject!

Of course everyone is allowed to have an opinion but I think he is getting quite a few of the facts wrong. . For example he claims to have said that Lewis thought adulthood to be something horrible and wrong. This is incorrect; Lewis merely wanted to show that children are the purest at heart and by going to Narnia they became better people.

The subject with Susan is another that disturbs me. Many people see his decision to get rid of her as sexist and prejudiced. He didn't stop Susan from coming to Narnia because of the nylons and invitations, but because that was all she thought about and had forgotten Narnia completely.

When people read the Chronicles of Narnia, a few of them are distracted by what they think is sexist and prejudiced and do not look at the true deeper meaning. Aslan and Narnia are there to help us become better people on our journey to adulthood.

Queen_Emily wrote:I have been looking up on a few interviews with Pullman disliking Narnia and I have to say that although I love him as an author, I disagree greatly with his views on the ''Narnia'' subject. Ever since I was a child I have been a really very large fan of C.S.Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia. I fell in love with his way of writing and his ideas on a perfect world. I in myself am an agnostic but I cannot understand where Pullman is coming from in this subject!

Of course everyone is allowed to have an opinion but I think he is getting quite a few of the facts wrong. . For example he claims to have said that Lewis thought adulthood to be something horrible and wrong. This is incorrect; Lewis merely wanted to show that children are the purest at heart and by going to Narnia they became better people.

But: 1 Corinthians 13:11.

The subject with Susan is another that disturbs me. Many people see his decision to get rid of her as sexist and prejudiced. He didn't stop Susan from coming to Narnia because of the nylons and invitations, but because that was all she thought about and had forgotten Narnia completely.

So the Prim Pevensies say. But Susan's loss of interest in Narnia could easily just be a function of her age (although we've been alerted to her scepticism in earlier stories). A year earlier or two years later and she might have become a believer again (or still been one). She's an adolescent girl, after all.

Alternatively, CSL was merely consigning those utilitarians among his colleagues who laughed as his (and the other Inklings') love of fairy stories to a hell of his own devising. It wouldn't have been the first time - see That Hideous Strength.

When people read the Chronicles of Narnia, a few of them are distracted by what they think is sexist and prejudiced and do not look at the true deeper meaning. Aslan and Narnia are there to help us become better people on our journey to adulthood.

Actually, I'm not being fair with my flip responses. I have also enjoyed both PP and CSL's writings -

Ceres Wunderkind wrote:To finish on a personal note. I've read, and been enchanted by, the Chronicles of Narnia. More recently I've read, and been enchanted by, His Dark Materials. Do I hate the Chronicles now? No, of course I don't. Do I think that there are flaws in the Chronicles, such as the Susan Pevensie problem that Philip Pullman gets so worked up about? Yes I do; I think that CS Lewis is wrong to deny Susan the possibility of ultimate redemption. That's one of the reasons I wrote A Gift of Love. Are there flaws in His Dark Materials? You betcha. Don't get me started...

At the end of the day it all comes down to the power of imagination, conveyed by the magic of storytelling. Both HDM and the Chronicles have magic and imagination and storytelling in spades, regardless of the beliefs of their writers. Can't we leave it there?

And that's what I think matters most. Of course both series are full of flaws and inconsistencies. What writing isn't?

I can't help devouring every book i meet in front of me