Narnia

[Allegra]

The version I have is this: Amazon.com: The Chronicles of Narnia: Books: C. S. Lewis,Pauline Baynes. It starts with The Magician's Nephew. According to the publisher's note in the book, it is the author 'preferred order'.

And I don't complain about Lewis's allegories for christianity( he did it again in "out of the silent planet"; it's merely the way he saw the world. If I decided to only read books by authors who agreed with me, my reading list would be much shorter.

I agree. I'm not at all bothered by the religion element in the books. Sometime ago I read an article about Philip Pullman lashing C.S. Lewis with harsh accusation on his religious issue and I thought that was totally unnecessary and petty.

 

[Pyan]

The version I have is this: Amazon.com: The Chronicles of Narnia: Books: C. S. Lewis,Pauline Baynes. It starts with The Magician's Nephew. According to the publisher's note in the book, it is the author 'preferred order'.

Yes, but CSL actually says in Letters to Children:

"So perhaps it does not matter very much in which order anyone read them."

Sometime ago I read an article about Philip Pullman lashing C.S. Lewis with harsh accusation on his religious issue and I thought that was totally unnecessary and petty.

Yes I heard about that, too. And, of course, CSL being unable to refute arguments makes it worse. Pullman seems have made no attempt to research CSL's life or the reasons for his faith.

 

[Patrick Mahon]

I've really enjoyed reading the Narnia series to my son, but I must admit that the 1950s stilted dialogue does cause me some difficulties from time to time. Perhaps it's not such a problem if you're reading it to yourself, but when you read it out loud to someone else, it can sometimes sound like the worst kind of stereotype of how the British are (were) supposed to speak. I recognise that, to some extent at least, this is just a function of CS Lewis's style, but I've found myself having to slightly adapt some of the dialogue as I go along, so I don't sound like Dick van Dyke on a bad day.

Has anyone else found this a problem? Or is it just me?

 

[Pyan]

so I don't sound like Dick van Dyke on a bad day.

"Shudders*

Yes, I know what you mean, Patrick - but for me, it's just part of the charm of the books. I have the same problem with the "Swallows and Amazons" series by Arthur Ransome, and with a lot of classic detective novels, where everyone speaks with the same sort of slightly stilted speech, apart from the odd comic policeman.
(apologies for the alliteration!)

 

[bookaholic]

I'm glad I don't have to read the Narnia books aloud to anyone, it would take me all day to get the tone right!

 

[Cayal]

I just started reading these books. I bought the 7 books in one version from a bookstore and got through Magicians Nephew and only Lion, Witch, Wardrobe (which I have read before).

But, despite the somewhat childlike writing, I really have enjoyed both books and I really enjoyed the Lion, Witch, Wardrobe movie and can't wait for Prince Caspian.

 

[The Ace]

Looks like we won't have to wait that long, Jaire.
I suppose the dialogue is just part of it. I remember collecting a series of classic children's books (they were on special offer and with a limited income and three nephews it wasn't a bad idea) I found, 'Swallows and Amazons,' to be the only one which felt dated, with it's references to, 'Queen Elizabeth,' (the present Queen, was, of course only a child at the time and her parents were the Duke and Duchess of York, the thought of a second Queen Elizabeth just wasn't there).

 

[Grimward]

If memory serves, some of the critics who reviewed the film took the same exceptions to the religious overtones that book critics took (and still take) to Lewis' works. It is indeed unfortunate that Lewis isn't around to refute them, but I think one can get a taste of what those responses might have looked like by checking out the exchanges between Lewis and JRR Tolkien (lots of different places on the web to dig in here). I'm with you on the charm of the dialogue, Pyan, and would add that the dialogue helped me "get" the setting the first time I read the books (I was 12 or 13, growing up in suburban Washington. D.C., and people just didn't talk like that as far as I was concerned....then!).

I think the books do stand up enough as stories on their own, seemingly more so than many other series that came after them, with the obvious exception being The Last Battle, of course (to those who've not read them but are interested...it's title says enough!).

 

[Dee_hee]

It's strange, but years ago when I read these stories to my kids I was enthralled as well.

Recently, I returned to them. It was not the same.

Not sure why

PS- it was the books I returned to, not my kids

 

[Bentony]

What with the movies and all I have been rereading the Narnia Series. Other than the fact that in my view the tales should start with The magician's Nephew - a point that really annoys me about the films, the movies have been quite good. However the books still retain a charm for me although they can be a bit staid. But that I supppose is a sign of the time they were written. As for the religious aspect - well, form follows function and I do not find them nearly as in your face as Phillip Pullman. At least CSL did,nt try to push his ideas down your throat.

 

[tori_bingham]

I prefer the BBC TV dramatisations to the new films. The mood just felt less Hollywood. There have been quite a few liberties taken, and not all of them were for the best.

 

[Old Owl]

i loved these books, i still do love them, but reading them recently there not as impressive as i remember

 

[Scifi fan]

I just saw "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe", having read the entire series many years ago. The movie is true to the novel, and it was very well done.

As I now know, a story can be transformed into either fantasy (as it was) or science fiction. The witch can be the evil Emperor or Dictator, and her freezing spells can be hibernation or cryogenic chambers; The four children who entered through the wardrobe could have done so through a stargate or a spaceship; the battle of course, could be either fantasy creatures with swords or aliens with ray guns.

The movie was good, as was the story. I think the second novel is already out in movie form.

 

[kythe]

Scifi fan, if you are referring to the most recent movie, I disagree. I didn't find it very true to the story, but I do tend to be a "book purist" about these things. The BBC version done during the early 80's was almost word for word acting out the book, with the exact same dialogue and scenes. Even if there were no special effects to speak of and the acting is terrible, I still tend to prefer it because it *is* the book to me.

The new movie looked great, but they took too many liberties to the story for my taste. Prince Caspian came out a few months ago, but I haven't seen it because from what I have heard they took even greater liberties with the story. I know I shouldn't take it so seriously, but I have loved these stories for as long as I could read and I have my own vision of them ingrained in my head.

 

[Scifi fan]

What liberties are you referring to?

 

[kythe]

A few things added for dramatic effect, I think. It's been a few years since I saw it but if I remember right, they added a fox character who warned the beavers of their impending danger. The fox later ended up turned to stone in the Witch's castle. Edmund and Mr. Tumnus met each other in the Witch's castle, adding another scene which was supposed to provide character development. When Peter needed to kill the wolf Captain of the Guard, he didn't at first but instead escaped by using his sword to cut off a block of ice. I think it was supposed to emphasize that he wasn't ready to be king, but I found it jarring because he disobeyed Aslan's orders and delayed his fate.

Then there was the battle, which looked a lot like Return of the King. In the book, the main reason the Witch was winning was because she kept turning her enemies to stone. We see a little of this in the movie, but we see more of a traditional battle.

The Witch wasn't really very scary. She had quite the temper in the book, especially as we see her in The Magician's Nephew. She was too stoic here, and just appeared stiff and poised most of the time - not really up to the level of action we actually see of her in the two books she appears in.

Okay, I didn't expect this to be so long. I guess you've just heard my entire rant about the newer movie. I'm too much of a perfectionist, I think. It's why I would never do well working in the movie industry. Nothing would be to my taste.

To be fair, the book doesn't excell at character development. There is a point that they needed to add scenes to make the characters more 3-dimensional, people the viewer can relate to. I do like the background story given on Edmund in the opening scene, where they show his father off to war and how their family was hiding in a bomb shelter. He ran back inside just to grab a picture of his father. This scene wasn't in the book at all, but it worked for me because it explains why Edmund is so angry and brooding.

Maybe I do need to lighten up a bit about it. They did care about the characters and tried to make their motives realistic.

 

[The Ace]

To be fair, the religious overtones are there for a reason, Lewis recent conversion to Christianity.

I was raised an atheist and didn't even notice these at the time.

 

[Grimward]

Just to elaborate on that opening scene, The Chronicles of Narnia were published between 1950 and 1956. I will make a statement here which may be considered presumptive for a born-and-raised-tail-end-baby-boomer/first-generation-X-member, United States Citizen: Most adults (and many children!) living in England at that time would have very little difficulty painting the backdrop of WWII and the Luftwaffe's bombing raids over Lewis' setting and proceeding, I imagine. Contrast that to the release of the film in December of 2005, and the sad but true statement that a fair number of viewers (especially the younger children who make a fair part of Lewis' audience) wouldn't have the knowledge to make this association without the opening scene, and one has to give a thumbs up to Walden's screenplay writers and editor for the inclusion.

 

[mercs]

Anyone else read Michael Ward's Planet Narnia yet. I bought that to go on holiday and have started re-reading the books again to see if he's right. The idea being that rather than the chronicles being a random mish-mash, the seven books actually represent the seven medieval planetary bodies...

LW&W represents Jupiter, Silver Chair the Moon, Horse and His Boy Mercury, Voyage of the Dawn Treader The Sun, Prince Caspian Mars, Magicians Nephew Venus and Last Battle Saturn...

I can't go into all the details (it is a 200 page book!!) but some of the sentances and descriptions do support the idea. Adds another dimension to the books...

 

[Moggle]

I read book 1 and watched the film and found the film much better. The books don't appear to have much depth. It's a very basic type of storytelling. I suppose this was simply how children stories were written back then.