rthstewart (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
rthstewart) wrote2011-02-12 11:02 am
rthstewart) wrote2011-02-12 11:02 am
Nieman's Review , Aslan, Making It Up As We Go, and Do You Know Where The Children Are?
Nemain, I'm not sure which if any of the Nemains you might be over on ff.net, so I'll put this over here and perhaps you will see it and perhaps others will chime in.
Nemain started Part 1 and got to the point where Lucy is writing to Peter in Chapter 4. In that letter, Aslan and God are mashed together in Lucy's mind. This actually isn't the first time this happens -- in Chapter 1 Digory specifically aligns Aslan with God. Nemain writes:
I have to admit that Lucy using 'Aslan' instead of God in her letter to Peter is very jarring to me, because as far as I can see, the children never react to him as such in the books; the allusion at the end of Voyage of the Dawn Treader is fairly blunt, but from what I can tell, this letter dates just prior to that story. Lucy and Edmund's characters in general come across as very post-Dawn Treader to me.
I'm not religious myself, but obviously this thread was present in the original novels and I don't find it too jarring that you've drawn it out into much greater prominence here. It is obvious that this is as important to you as it was to Lewis, and you've given it a lot of love and consideration. I really can't think of a more fitting tribute for his work and ideas.
I've gotten feedback of this variation before from readers. In this case, Nieman is noting that Lucy’s easy slide between the two seems a bit premature given that Part 1 occurs pre-DT. Nieman also is finding a Christian overtone in the story. Both are fair critiques at this point in the story and my lack of "meta" regarding the relationship between Aslan-Narnia and God-Spare Oom becomes apparent. I gave this very little thought when I wrote it in the fall of 2008 and it ended up being posted a few months later.
First off, as readers of the whole story know, and which Nieman doesn't as she's not gotten there yet (if she does, never assume, it’s impolite), is that religion in an conventional sense in this vision is ... hmmm.... mushy? fluid? benevolent? unorganized? Spiritual and theological rather than conventionally religious? All of the above? At the beginning especially, the story can read more overtly Christian than I think it actually turns out to be. Some of this is, I think due to who the main point of view characters are early in the story -- more on that below.
It is my hope and intent that the stories can be enjoyed by those who are not religious. I know I have readers who are not Christian or indeed religious at all. Many of the characters are not Christian although most observe some sort of spiritual discipline or, as in the case of Digory, are intellectually theological, but not religious. (Digory uses Bibles as door stops). One reader a while ago had thought that Mary Russell was atheist -- I had not thought she was but it is a possibility. Richard Russell, on the other hand, is specifically Christian -- but there I was doing something different, which was showing the co-existence of faith and science. Because Richard and Digory are significant point of view characters in the first part of TSG, a lot of it can read religious. Eustace and Jill are probably atheist. They certainly know nothing of Christianity and Eustace is pretty skeptical of the whole thing.
My treatment of Aslan/God is, in truth, formed more by fandom reaction than thought out meta. I did not want a big reveal where the characters suddenly find Aslan in the Christian Bible. I did not want Aslan to be cruel, neglectful, jealous, vengeful, or punishing. (He's not going to be blinding Susan so she no longer focuses on her beauty). Aslan does not set up tests or temptations – a point made several times.
So, Nemain, I'll be curious to see what you think after you've gotten deeper into the story if you stick with it. There is the Dawn Treader line much emphasized in the Christian Narnia fandom and in the film in which Aslan tells Lucy that she must come to know him in Spare Oom by his other name. Here, the characters from the very beginning ascribe divine power to Aslan. Narnia and Spare Oom are linked and Aslan travels freely between them, and offers comfort to anyone who asks. Aslan appears to characters and is active in characters' lives, including OCs, and regardless of whether they are Christian. Having walked with God (or god) in Narnia, the Friends of Narnia, are comfortable with their relationship with Aslan in Spare Oom, however he is called. As Peter will observe at one point, why isn't the proof of the existence of God sufficient with, "I've seen him, therefore I know he exists." In this, I really take Peter's approach, I'm afraid.
I’m not interested in pursuing Aslan in Narnia as allegorical construct for Jesus in Spare Oom nor in the "OMG he is GOD" revelation. Coming to know Aslan as God or Jesus or by some other specific name and boxing him into the "appropriate" religious tradition or whatever, is not important in the story. The characters all know this in some way already that is sufficient to move along to the real point of the story. So, NOW WHAT? What are we supposed to do? And, how very much there is to do in the post-War environment. What was the point of Narnia and what is the point of being a Friend of Narnia here with a charge by Aslan? The story presupposes the finding and is exploring instead what happens next.
And thanks so much to those who have been reviewing and commenting on Ch. 7. RL has been very unpleasant this week and I so appreciate it.
Also, a couple of reviewers have noted the asides in Chapter 7 about Peter's reaction to Edmund and Lucy being around small children. Yeah, I'm obviously going somewhere with that. I've not explained it, yet, though the hints are there and have been since the very beginning of TQSiT. Parenting, missing parental figures, unusual familial structures, and children have been cropping up for a few chapters now and it's intentional.
no subject
I must admit, it's been so long since I've read the first part that I shall need to refresh it - What.A.Shame. - but I like the idea of the children already being rather comfortable with Aslan/Jesus etc in this world, and therefore focusing on what they should be doing now :)
no subject
Oh, and another thought. I hadn't thought about it quite this way before, but I'm not sure that your arc isn't compatible with the 'knowing me there better' line, anyway. Why does it need to be a 'big reveal'? This was the 1930s and 1940s, so I'm starting from the point that some knowledge of Chritianity was commonplace among everyday British life. If that's the case, then no big reveal is necessarily needed. On that basis, you're starting from the point of 'by their deeds shall you know them'. And here we are at the common point of what a Friend is to do (if anyone's thinking needs them to specifically arrive there in the first place, that is...)
no subject
I agree with this. I would actually think it odd if they didn't connect Aslan with Jesus/God. These are people from a Christian background who had an in-person experience of the divine. Of course they know who Aslan is, and expect to find him back home. No, Lewis doesn't make that explicitly clear, but it would be kinda anvil-y if he did. I always took the moment at the end of Dawn Treader to be a reminder and a consolation, since they weren't coming back, rather than a revelation.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Well, we never see them make the connection in the book. But I see no reason why they shouldn't?
I like your unstructured spirituality for Narnia very well, since Narnia's religious trappings themselves are actually fairly unstructured (at least until TLB), and this was in fact one of the reasons why Tolkien disliked Narnia so much, because Aslan-as-Jesus just doesn't hold up very well if you start trying to pin down the correspondence. Frankly, Aslan is as much Mithras or Odin or Adonais as he is Jesus, and I suspect Lewis did that on purpose (not that it matters to me, as you know from my commentary on the Ascast *g*).
Anyway, if you haven't read it, I do recommend Laura Miller's The Magician's Book (I got it pretty cheap used through Amazon), because she talks at some length about the religious aspects of the CoN and the universal appeal notwithstanding. (And gives some much-needed insight into why the women in Narnia get such a bad shake from Lewis.)
no subject
I have heard some say that Lewis' vision was an evolving one and he certainly did not have some great meta in mind, as Tolkien did. It's a lot more slap dash and throwing things up against the wall and seeing what sticks.
no subject
Or, basically, what he likes to see. One of the things Miller does that I appreciated was explain how Lewis was basically just putting in things he liked, which connects very well to a fannish perspective, because it reminds me of what
no subject
Sounds like a very good description of Narnia. Unlike Tolkien's world, which was carefully considered and rewritten and rewritten and rewritten to the extent of never being published (he left to his son to finish The Silmarillion).
I like both approaches, but I guess that Lewis' approach works better for fairy-tales for children than for big epic novels for adults.
Then the fandom can change the fairy-tales into more fleshed-out novels ...
elegy_of_flames
(Anonymous) 2011-03-04 12:43 am (UTC)(link)I did wind up reading my way through all parts of the Stone Gryphon and all of the Narnia-side tie ins, and this particular post is prompted by my checking your FF.net profile to see if you've updated AW, then checking your LJ, so I guess you've made a believer out of me - in your writing, that is!
You're definitely correct about the specifically Christian aspect of it appearing much more heavy-handed in the earliest chapters of the first part, and I agree that I find an immense diversity of perspective appearing in OCs you introduce later (which I do think is concordant with the spirit of Lewis's work).
I was willing to read your writing from the perspective of an outsider (in the religious aspect, at least) and found it rewarding regardless of that fact, but by the time I made it to the end I no longer felt any kind of alienation from the spiritual context you've set up for your work. I didn't require it, but I do find it gratifying.
I also find the characters of the children very convincing and incredibly endearing. Your portrayal of Edmund and his misanthropy (of a sort) remain my favourite, but I didn't much like Susan in the novels, and I find I do now, or at least your portrayal of her.
I'm really quite confused that, from what you say on your profile and LJ, reactions to TQSiT have been mixed; I think its where your work really comes into its own, and has continued to shine for me therafter. It was well worth every hour of sleep I lost indulging in gleeful literary gluttony, and I deeply hope you will not let the criticisms you've received deter you from finishing. I'm generally an inconstant reviewer, but a faithful reader, and I WILL be following your writing avidly to see where you will be going next!
Now I am off to read the new chapter you've posted :)
no subject
no subject
I won't change Richard -- it's too much a part my response to the creationism element in the fandom. However, given how my thinking on Digory has evolved over the last 3 years, I may want to scale it back. Theologians often have pretty complex relationship with their God/god/gods and I am looking forward to exploring his own dissatisfaction with organized religion as Lucy undergoes something similar.
I appreciate that you stuck with it and that you eventually found it not spiritually alienating as that is certainly the opposite of one of the things I set out to do. Thank you and it is lovely to hear from you.
As for TQSiT, I still don't know what happened except that it happened at the same time with H&M and feedback dropped steadily from chapter 18 on. I kept sort of hoping to hear from readers who would go back or something, and nada. The most recent chapters of AW took a bit of a dive too as compared to previous chapters.
Thank you again
no subject
no subject
That is a very good guess!
no subject
no subject
Oh, are you a Susan/Tebbitt shipper? I have a few of those lurking about. And if you are interested in Susan After, there is this, if you've not discovered it: http://rthstewart.livejournal.com/35503.html It's AU because the ages are all wrong wrong wrong and I've horribly ripped off John Le Carre, but it's all in good fun.
And as for the others missing their lives, I'm really looking forward to seriously engaging them in things post war. There is so much for them to do, so much I want them to do, the sad/hard part is actually that I don't blow off canon completely and push the train crash until much later or even skip it altogether -- and they all lived happily ever after doing amazing things to make the world better!
no subject
I look forward to see what you do with the issue of brief lives - I imagine they'll have to be especially fulfilling to avoid the usual trap of nihlism that seems to arise from Aslan's Country being the only worthwhile "reward".
I hadn't read the AU blurb, but I have now, and it's delicious. I HAD read the preview you gave of the Apostolic Way, and I anticipate with great pleasure the scenes wherein Lucy trolls priests with more scripture than good sense!