Chronicles of Narnia - I really, really want to see this

[Dubversion]

I give up

promise?


i don't care one jot about this stepson. only an imbecile would claim that Christianity is not the abiding theme of the Narnia chronicles.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Aslan is the bollox in the new film.

That's good. He looked like utter piss in the old BBC version. Even as a 13 year old that didn't impress me one bit. Damn cheap BBC budgets!

 

[sleaterkinney]

i think you were a very smart child Dub because most of my friends kids (ranging from 3-9) wouldnt see it like you do/did, they just see a magical story. I didnt see it like you did either babes, i was more like foo, sat in a wardrobe with a flashlight trying to work out why my shity mfi wardrobe wasnt letting into Narnia But then again i was a simple child and stories were just that, they didnt have some greater deeper hidden meaning.

*preys she has a simple child*

Yeah, I just saw it as a good story when I was a kid, I was watching a few clips on the news this morning and I just burst out laughing though - a talking lion ffs. . The characters look to have been harry potterified, which isn't a good thing.

 

[Dubversion]

Slightly OT but what does passive aggressive mean? Someone said I was it once. Am I?

no. just aggressive

 

[WasGeri]

I must admit that the Christian allegory (is that the word?) passed me by completely as well! I'm not too familiar with the bible though, maybe that's why.

 

[Fruitloop]

Slightly OT but what does passive aggressive mean? Someone said I was it once. Am I?

Adopting a withdrawn or defensive attitude as an expression of internalised anger or aggression. And no, not obviously.

 

[onenameshelley]

but they DO, shells. they ALL do. Fairy tales, nursery rhymes, kids stories, they ALL have a greater deeper hidden meaning. which is fine, but it just means people should be free to expose and criticise those meanings.

Yes of course people can criticise what they like i just think its daft when its a kids story.

I hate bloody arguing so i am buggering off to eat me sarnies and flick bogies at Vivienne.

 

[foo]

but they DO, shells. they ALL do. Fairy tales, nursery rhymes, kids stories, they ALL have a greater deeper hidden meaning. which is fine, but it just means people should be free to expose and criticise those meanings.

yeh, but Dub - can't you also see that a lot of children (ok, not you when you were a kid), just enjoy the imagery and storylines without taking on board the deeper hidden meanings?

or do you think that these hidden meanings actually do damage to children in some way?

i'm trying to see your pov here.

 

[Fruitloop]

I can't speak for Dub, but it seems self-evident to me that people take on more meanings that the explicit storyline when they read a book or watch a movie. If this wasn't the case there would be hardly any point in criticising the ideological content of any work, since it would provide you with at best just biographical information about the author.

 

[tastebud]

care to expand?

Yes. I think they encouraged my already pretty active imagination as a child. I will point out that as a child I didn't object to the xtian theme running through them (which I fully realised: age 8) as I was a xtian (at the time). That doesn't mean that one cannot adore the fantasy, story lines, pure genius. Hidden meanings of course should be criticised and exposed but forgetting that for a minute; as a work of fantasy the books are superb.

 

[belboid]

yeh, but Dub - can't you also see that a lot of children (ok, not you when you were a kid), just enjoy the imagery and storylines without taking on board the deeper hidden meanings?

or do you think that these hidden meanings actually do damage to children in some way?

i'm trying to see your pov here.

how do you know that the deeper meanings aren't taken in subconsciously? that is, after all, what they are designed to do.

I mean, i never noticed all the hippy-shit subtext in Michael Moorcock books when I was a kid, but they still damaged me greatly and gave me an unconscious desire to listen to Hawkwind.

 

[pootle]

Adopting a withdrawn or defensive attitude as an expression of internalised anger or aggression. And no, not obviously.

Ohhhhh. Thanks Fruitloop.

Like going "shut up Dub! I am not fucking aggresive! Take it back or I'll kill you in the face....or at least add you to my list of people to kill in the face"

 

[Cid]

I must admit that the Christian allegory (is that the word?) passed me by completely as well! I'm not too familiar with the bible though, maybe that's why.

Yeah - same with me... Largely atheist household (although we did go to sunday school when I was very young... It was boring, I slept) so I guess I never picked up on it. Looking back on it now it is pretty clear though.

 

[belboid]

as a work of fantasy the books are superb.

not convinced by that either, there's much better stuff out there, they just have a 'history' of being great children's books, so they must be.

 

[jodal]

That's good. He looked like utter piss in the old BBC version. Even as a 13 year old that didn't impress me one bit. Damn cheap BBC budgets!

The acting from the kids is really bad and cheesy but the effects and the story and the laughs make up for it imho. Look out for Ray Winstone and Dawn French as cockney beavers, F***ing funny.

Oh and its 2hrs and 40mins, I couldn't feel my legs as I was walking out of the cinema.

 

[foo]

how do you know that the deeper meanings aren't taken in subconsciously? that is, after all, what they are [idesigned[/i] to do.

I mean, i never noticed all the hippy-shit subtext in Michael Moorcock books when I was a kid, but they still damaged me greatly and gave me an unconscious desire to listen to Hawkwind.

i don't know. i don't see how i could know something like that. i do know that i'm not, and never have been, a christian though.

oh and i too was brought up in a fiercy atheist household.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

I mean, i never noticed all the hippy-shit subtext in Michael Moorcock books when I was a kid, but they still damaged me greatly and gave me an unconscious desire to listen to Hawkwind.

I know, and I read Bottersnikes and Gumbles, and I still spend half my time trying to figure out quite how I'm going to fit into that jam jar

 

[ICB]

Yes of course people can criticise what they like i just think its daft when its a kids story.

I hate bloody arguing so i am buggering off to eat me sarnies and flick bogies at Vivienne.

Why is it daft cos it's a kids' story? Indoctrinating anyone isn't really on as far as I'm concerned. Even if we're fine with the Christian element there's still the immense tweeness, occidental bias and sexism. Basically the whole underlying value system in the Lewis' books is pretty reprehensible IMO.

If we don't like Moorcock's criticisms of Lewis (and I think MM is a twat who's inspired some truly dreadful art) then we could try Philip Pullman, amongst many others.

 

[Fruitloop]

I'm kind of interested in what Louloubelle's problem with Moorcock's views on porno are, although it is a hideous derail

Seems to me he was kind of Dworkin-lite, in that he dislikes photography that objectifies the participants, but not other kinds of nudity or depictions of sexual activity. What's the problem with that?

 

[Louloubelle]

promise?


i don't care one jot about this stepson. only an imbecile would claim that Christianity is not the abiding theme of the Narnia chronicles.

so, anyone who disagrees with you is an imbecile. nice

The point that the narnia stories have xtian and pagan elements to them seems to go over your head. Obviously xtians will see the xtian elements, if you compare the stories of mithras, osiris, and various other manifestations you'll see how aslan could be a representative of any of them, just like jesus could be.

I'll give it a few weeks from the release of the film, if it hasn't happened already, before certain funy groups start to slag off narnia as the occult and the work of the devil.

films and books are what you make of them, the myths inherent on the narnia stories are powerful ancient myths, much older than xtianity, but then so is the xtian myth. IMO

 

[sovietpop]

I used to *love* the Narnia books when I was a kid, but now I find the xtian theme a little creepy. Philip Pulman the author of the Dark Materials triology criticizes C.S.Lewis for killing off Susan - just because she was leaving childhood behind her and was starting to become interested in boys.

Q. You're not alone in attacking Lewis but you are really vehement in your criticism. You've called his books 'detestable'. Why do you feel so strongly about them?
A. Because the things he's being cruel to are things I value very highly. The crux of it all comes, as many people have found, with the point near the end of the Last Battle (in the Narnia books) when Susan is excluded from the stable. The stable obviously represents salvation. They're going to heaven, they're going to be saved. But Susan isn't allowed into the stable, and the reason given is that she's growing up. She's become far too interested in lipstick, nylons and invitations. One character says rather primly: 'She always was a jolly sight too keen on being grown up.'

This seems to me on the part of Lewis to reveal very weird unconscious feelings about sexuality. Here's a child whose body is changing and who's naturally responding as everyone has ever done since the history of the world to the changes that are taking place in one's body and one's feelings. She's doing what everyone has to do in order to grow up.

Maybe one day she'll grow past the invitations and the lipstick and the nylons. But my point is that it's an inevitable, important, valuable and cherishable stage that we go through. This what I'm getting at in my story. To welcome and celebrate this passage, rather than to turn from it in fear and loathing.

That's what I find particularly objectionable in Lewis – and also the fact that he kills the children at the end. Now here are these children who have gone through great adventures and learned wonderful things and would therefore be in a position to do great things to help other people. But they're taken away. He doesn't let them. For the sake of taking them off to a perpetual school holiday or something, he kills them all in a train crash. I think that's ghastly. It's a horrible message.

philip pullman

anyhow if you liked the Narnia books you should read the Dark Materials triology, they are much more subtle and philosophicaly interesting.

 

[Dubversion]

so, anyone who disagrees with you is an imbecile. nice

maybe not everyone. perhaps just you

The point that the narnia stories have xtian and pagan elements to them seems to go over your head.

if you say so.

 

[Louloubelle]

I'm kind of interested in what Louloubelle's problem with Moorcock's views on porno are, although it is a hideous derail

Seems to me he was kind of Dworkin-lite, in that he dislikes photography that objectifies the participants, but not other kinds of nudity or depictions of sexual activity. What's the problem with that?

that's a derail I don't have time for
I've met michael moorcock, albeit briefly, and used to know his daughters quite well
I just found his whole position untenable, as did one of his daughters.

I've just lost an hour posting here and it's too much

I'll leave the rest of you to discuss this further but I've got work to do

 

[ICB]

anyhow if you liked the Narnia books you should read the Dark Materials triology, they are much more subtle and philosophicaly interesting.

quite

 

[Cid]

Moorcock's views on porn...

Well, for a start, I don't think nudity is pornography. That sort of association has to do with American puritanism (well puritanism in general, but it always seems more prevalent over here, as do fixed gender roles). And I don't think sex is pornography. Nor is its depiction pornography. And I don't have problems with people selling comic books which have sex in them and so on and on. What I do have problems with is the objectification of people for sexual stimulus -- predatory sex, if you like. I do believe that photographic pornography is exploitation, however willing the exploited might be. I have no problems with nudity, as I said, and not much with most ordinary drawn pornography. Again where violence is concerned or where people are depicted as enjoying rape and so on, I have a lot of problems and I'd like to see that stuff disappear from society, though I don't know what it would take to make it happen, unless Dworkin's sueing by those who believe themselves exploited or otherwise harmed would work. You can check this out at the Dworkin site. I don't think anyone's ever considered me a prude or indeed straightlaced in any respect around sex. I am, as I reiterate many times, worried about exploitation and pornography which is evidence of crimes (child porn, of course, being the most obvious). The equation of anti-porn attitudes with conservatism is unfortunate but I know a lot of radicals (not all of them feminists) who hate porn as much as I do. I don't find the extreme satire of Lord Horror or Meng and Ecker disturbing (though many who like porn do!) for instance. Much that some would be shocked by I am not in the least shocked by. My attitudes have more to do with what I suppose are humane feelings towards other people. It's sad if people have to use porn, I will say. But then I don't know what it's like to have to use porn and am not entirely convinced it doesn't have to do with stimulating desire when no desire is around at that moment. I tend to have an idealistic fondness for spontanaity. And if it aint spontaneous I can't say I'm very interested. That probably is a simplification, but it's the way I am. I don't judge others, however. I just don't understand anything else. Best, M

Trying to work out what's so wrong with this?

 

[tastebud]

TBH I think it's pretty hard to be particularly critical of something you absolutely *adored* as a child and something that you associate with your childhood: especially something that relates to your imagination. I guess if we Tolkein/Lewis fans read the books as adults; especially non-xtian adults, our opinions might differ. But this isn't the case so I am greatly looking forward to the film.

 

[Dask]

I read all the the Chronicles of Narnia when I was a child.

Never thought once about becoming a "christian" or that I was being brainwashed to not think for myself.

Why does all that bullshit have to get in the way of a good story and potentially a good film? I'm sure there are religous undertones to everything if you look deep enough.

Call me an ignorant christian fool all you want but I'm quite looking forward to the film.

 

[sovietpop]

TBH I think it's pretty hard to be particularly critical of something you absolutely *adored* as a child and something that you associate with your childhood: especially something that relates to your imagination.

true enough, I loved the Far Away Tree by Enid Blyton, and I bet that doesn't stand up to critical scrutiny.

 

[Dubversion]

Call me an ignorant christian fool all you want but I'm quite looking forward to the film.

no harm in that. i don't like the books and have no desire to see the film, but that's just my subjective take on it - never claimed anything else.

all i'm saying is that a) these things DO have subtexts and b) to claim the predominant subtext in the Narnia books is Christianity is either dumb or wilfully revisionist. doesn't mean you can't still like them.

 

[WasGeri]

that's a derail I don't have time for
I've met michael moorcock, albeit briefly, and used to know his daughters quite well
I just found his whole position untenable, as did one of his daughters.

I've just lost an hour posting here and it's too much

I'll leave the rest of you to discuss this further but I've got work to do

Could you come back and tell us later?