Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Adragis]

I, quite simply, does not see how it is quite that clear cut and how it turns the author into an arsehole. Further, arsehole is a pretty damned strong term, and seem to imply that old Mr. C.S. Lewis co-wrote Der Ewige Jude or something, rather than a series of allegorical novels with a vaguely Christian theme that carries some very unfortunate and overly conservative implications towards the end.

'cause they don't agree with it and it makes them sad that not everyone believes what they do to the letter.

[NJW2000]

Fair enough, people are always going to have different readings of the text. I found Susan's treatment and it's implications a little upsetting, but can understand that other people might see it entirely differently.

I can't help but feel stressed that even today, people still morally condemn writers throughout the ages for not sharing their narrow band of political beliefs :/

This seems like cheap rhetoric. Condemning someone for their "political" beliefs and attitudes? Like, say the National Front? Or Mike Pence? Or extreme hasidic Jews (re: women)? Yeah, these guys think things I don't agree with. I condemn them for it.

[Adragis]

Equally cheap rhetoric, equating a writer of primarily Christian books during the mid-nineties or so to even further-right individuals or groups in the modern day, where his views are far less common.

[Loud Whispers]

This seems like cheap rhetoric.

It is

Condemning someone for their "political" beliefs and attitudes? Like, say the National Front? Or Mike Pence? Or extreme hasidic Jews (re: women)? Yeah, these guys think things I don't agree with. I condemn them for it.

I like my cheap rhetoric better, my cheap rhetoric is asking you to not haste to judge on such petty things as diversity and yours is asking me to condemn C.S. Lewis because he's a hasidic jewish conservative nazi

I bring up my cheap rhetoric because it's so cheap for its truth is so basic bitch

Morally condemning writers because their texts do not share the viewer's narrow band of political beliefs is very painful to watch, it stems from narrow mindedness that posits that the viewer's beliefs are universally good, exclusively good and will eternally be good. Why act like this?

[ChairmanPoo]

I have to agree with NJW, your point is pretty bullshitty Adragis. There are plenty of reasons to dislike the preachy prose of CS Lewis. Or am I supposed to like every author that motivates you?

I don't particularily like Terry Pratchett either, specially in the late period.

[Silverthrone]

Fair enough, people are always going to have different readings of the text. I found Susan's treatment and it's implications a little upsetting, but can understand that other people might see it entirely differently.

True. If I had been one of C.S. Lewis's friends (and that would've been quite the place and time, oh, how I do wish), I think I'd have said "Oi, Louis, old mate, that brings a lot more along than it ought to. Makes Susan's not goin' to Narnia suand more on h'account-a bein' a slag than makin' hesself ferget about Narnia because it seems childish and past her. Could do whit a bitta change, knowwhad I mean?". It's quite fair to have a problem with it. But I think it is also easy to add a lot more luggage to it than there was. Not unreasonably, mind. There is an awful lot of room for it in that little sentence, and all that it implies. I do wish he'd gotten a few more years to write a loop to that loose thread.

[Loud Whispers]

I have to agree with NJW, your point is pretty bullshitty Adragis. There are plenty of reasons to dislike the preachy prose of CS Lewis. Or am I supposed to like every author that motivates you?
I don't particularily like Terry Pratchett either, specially in the late period.

I can't speak for Adragis but I think that's the point, to slag them off on the merits of their work
Thus preachy prose is completely valid slagging

[Adragis]

I have to agree with NJW, your point is pretty bullshitty Adragis. There are plenty of reasons to dislike the preachy prose of CS Lewis. Or am I supposed to like every author that motivates you?

I don't particularily like Terry Pratchett either, specially in the late period.

I don't particularly like CS Lewis's writing myself, or at least not his children's books. I'm not saying one can't disagree with the man's beliefs, or his inserting of them into his children's writing (which annoyed me as well), but I do think making aspersions on his character is somewhat out of line.
My point was that equating him to modern far-right groups is something of a cheap shot seeing as at the time the entire political spectrum was different, albeit not in the same way as it would have been in, say, the 1800s. As well as that, it'd be an unfair comparison anyway given his fairly liberal views.

[Silverthrone]

It is. I quite like (and liked) the Narnias, but good Lord, there were passages that were quite difficult to get past, even for an eight-year-old on the same page. That said, the preaching, teaching business did usually take a comfortable back seat for the benefit of the story. I remember an awful lot of children's material that did not bother with that. Not that it lets C.S. Lewis off the hook, but I've got some uglier fish further up the line, on the whole.

I have to agree with NJW, your point is pretty bullshitty Adragis. There are plenty of reasons to dislike the preachy prose of CS Lewis. Or am I supposed to like every author that motivates you?

I don't particularily like Terry Pratchett either, specially in the late period.

I don't particularly like CS Lewis's writing myself, or at least not his children's books. I'm not saying one can't disagree with the man's beliefs, or his inserting of them into his children's writing (which annoyed me as well), but I do think making aspersions on his character is somewhat out of line.
My point was that equating him to modern far-right groups is something of a cheap shot seeing as at the time the entire political spectrum was different, albeit not in the same way as it would have been in, say, the 1800s. As well as that, it'd be an unfair comparison anyway given his fairly liberal views.

I do rather disagree that it would be particularly wrong of him to insert his beliefs into children's writing. On the whole, they seem rather agreeable, with the odd unpleasant implications. It's not exactly unsuitable material for children. Of course, that is a whole knotty discussion in itself; what beliefs are suitable for insertion into children's media, and what would be the metric?

[smjjames]

This is someone elses wtf, not mine, but still funny:

president (my phone autocorrected to "king" wtf)

[NJW2000]

LW, Yeah, I used extreme examples of groups that didn't agree with me and could be condemned for the way they disagreed. This proves that there is nothing inherently wrong with condemning someone for beliefs dissimilar to yours. You have a different reading of Lewis? You think his beliefs don't present him as a jerk? Fine. But don't twist my words. I only condemn some beliefs and attitudes I don't agree with. And a couple I do.

I'm not particularly annoyed, but I'd hate to cause someone unnecessary stress.

[Silverthrone]

Good old Edmund... I liked him. He had to work on being good, and had practical experience on the matter. He was never really unreasonable, he was the sort of made-up person who is selfish for a reason. Lying and cheating to get a better share, or just his own share, sometimes. After all, he was Peter's brother, and I always though Peter must have been perfectly insufferable to live with. Same with that other irritating little shit Eustace, who learned a thing or two and became someone better, where other stories would have chucked him into whatever equivolent of a firey lake there would have been and moved on with the righteous, "relatable" characters.

Not to mention, I remember Edmund muttering something like 'when I am king of Narnia, I will build some proper roads!', which is something that one of those kings really ought to have done at some point. Living in a fairy-tale kingdom must be an awful inconvenience, you will never get anywhere in a hurry.

[Dunamisdeos]

So hey, just want to jump in again and remind he was not being secretive about what he was writing. It is Christian allegory through and through. Just because he did not name it the Jesus, The Witch, and the Wardrobe does not mean he's trying to trick you into reading it.

He's like the most famously Christian writer of Christian books that are all about Christianity since the Bible. It's totes cool to not like his work for any reason that we fancy, but seems kind of wrong to dislike him just for writing religious fiction that otherwise interests us.

If you don't want your kids reading Christian fiction, do not buy them the most famous Christian fiction ever written for their perusal.

:::EDIT:::
Also, it's not all allegory. Having read the series, I can say that The Voyage of the Dawn Treader is fantastic and contains very little in terms of religious parallel. The Silver Chair is the same way. The Horse and his Boy, unless I'm forgetting something, has exactly nothing.

It's mostly The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe combined with The Last Battle that are extremely direct about it.

[ChairmanPoo]

I think The Magicians is a better (and less anvilicious) take on Narnia than His Dark Materials

[Enemy post]

I've been reading Caspian recently, found myself liking Nikabrik more than I used to. I like his more ruthless attitude juxtaposed to the more optimistic characters.