rthstewart: (Default)
rthstewart ([personal profile] rthstewart) wrote2011-11-19 12:29 pm

Chapter 11, Squamates


Chapter 11, Squamates, is up.

After much angst, I decided to split the chapter, putting off, yet again, conversations about camels and same sex bonded pairs of black swans, albatrosses, and giraffes. There will also be a flashback with Lucy, Aidan, Morgan and Edmund which answers the question Doctor Dolly raised after He loves not man the less, but nature more -- if Peter and Susan did the great bonding with Narnia, what did Lucy and Edmund do? The answer is that they performed Narnian bonding ceremonies with their spouses. Also, we (finally) get a normal, non-AU conversation with Mary and Peter -- the first since Part 1. But that is all for later.

For this chapter....

Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] lady_songsmith, clio, and [livejournal.com profile] snacky for the nudges and to many previous reviewers who asked some of the things I now wrestle with here.

I spent way too much time looking at historical agricultural production in Oxfordshire and locations of RAF bases and Aeorodromes. We finally get into the ballroom and return to the plaster blocks and Eustace finally hears about Chinese dragons. I found the story of the four dragons who became the four rivers of China in several places, including here. It is purportedly taken from Dragon Tales: A Collection of Chinese Stories. Beijing: Chinese Literature Press, 1988

I first found the discussion of the same sex giraffe pairs and rams who prefer other rams in the very comprehensive wiki entry, Homosexual behavior in animals and I'll be going back to that in a longer discussion in the next chapter. Other references, however, include the Merck Veterinary Manual which I understand recommends dealing with the rams that will not tup ewes as a matter of herd management and husbandry. N. Bailey and M. Zuk, Same-sex sexual behavior and evolution, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Volume 24, Issue 8, 439-446, 10 June 2009 was also useful, here

Some time ago, readers expressed an interest in seeing something of Mary and Richard happy, some explanation for why their relationship was what it was. So, I've done that here, writing what I hope is an older man and husband's point of view on his wife, love, lust, and bitter regret.

In an original text with Christian symbolism (I hesitate to call it allegory, as Lewis eschewed the term) and a fandom that so emphasizes it, I know that, nevertheless, there are plenty of readers (including some or many who come here) who do not adhere to Christianity and who do not and never have read the Chronicles for their Christian symbology. Some time ago, a reader asked me if Mary was an atheist. I said no, and of course, Richard is not an atheist as a point of his character was to show the co-existence of science and faith. The question though has stayed with me. As I moved into Part 3, I have begun to play with an idea with Digory -- that as a religious scholar he is, nevertheless, not religious. He is, however, a deist and shows how seeing God in everything means he sees God everywhere.  He does not subscribe to the view that God must be worshiped one particular way. He (and Lucy) are very iconoclastic, but still they are not atheists.

With Eustace, I go there, posing the questions a lot of fans have with this series. If we assume Aslan is a Jesus-stand-in, he is, at best, a pretty poor deity, so this argument goes. He imperils children, is inconsistent, arbitrary and even cruel, and, for instance, unlike Jesus who did tell his disciples that he would be resurrected (they just didn't understand the elliptical message), Lucy and Susan didn't have that information and so for a night, they weep over Aslan's dead body thinking he is really and truly gone forever. Nice.

Eustace, both in the canon character that we know, and as developed here, is in a position to express those viewpoints about where Aslan can be seen as falling short in the love your children, God is omnipotent, department. Eustace voices the criticism of Aslan the other Friends of Narnia don't voice. The counter is Jill who, as is developing here, has a very charismatic view of God and has been raised to see God as the deliverer, shepherd, and protector of oppressed people.  Jill is very comfortable with the age old question, why does God let bad things happen to good people?  She comes from slaves and still believes.

And if there was any doubt, Peter is no theologian or philosopher.

So, the next chapter is mostly finished and the one after that is the Christmas chapter, Just Like The Ones We Used To Know. I've been trying to get AW to the point that I can move seamlessly to my Big Bang, but they may not happen.

Anyway, thanks so much.  I would not have pushed Eustace in this direction were it not for the thoughtful commentary I've read over the last 2+ years so my thanks to those who have posed these questions.
ext_418583: (Default)

[identity profile] rthstewart.livejournal.com 2011-11-20 02:09 pm (UTC)(link)
Thank you! (and good luck with the mice!) The more I thought about this as true allegory, the more uncomfortable I became with it, for I really could not see the flawed deity of Aslan as Jesus, Son of God. It really just all fell apart. I wrote to Clio recently that I have no rear view mirror -- I am not a reflective person at all and am really very theologically and philosophically stunted. I don't THINK big questions in my life. So, trying to wrestle with this coherently and respectfully has been an interesting challenge. I really felt though that Jill nails it with a belief tested is a stronger belief. Eustace is angry, and I can easily see him taking this anger and looking at the war around him and deciding that a benevolent, omnipotent God simply cannot exist in a place where 6 million Jews are murdered.

Two things of import in the last day. Yesterday, I had to proclaim from Ezekiel at Mass -- and how God will gather his scattered flock and separate the rams from the goats. Oh yes, She's got a sense of humor alright and is laughing her head off at me. Then, this morning, an article that a local diocese (not mine) will no longer permit girls as altar servers. These are individual decisions, so YEAH for autonomy, I guess, but it horrified me and always leaves me with... well, you can imagine.

Bringing it back to the happy place of fic, I can imagine what poor Lucy would go through in a typical 1940s church environment. She's simply not going to be able to sit back and be philosophical about it, or ignore it, or shrug it off as, "well, they are just stupid." It is going to enrage her.