Chapter 11, Squamates

[rthstewart]

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 lady_songsmith, clio, and 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.

Comments

[rthstewart.livejournal.com]

Your points about Aslan and Eustace's relationship to him and to a higher being here are very valid. To turn a well trod argument on its head, Spare Oom God is just a theory and to Eustace the scientist, the proofs aren't very convincing given how screwed up it all is. He believes in Aslan because he has seen Aslan and witnessed his power.

And just by the by, being at odds with the Church as Institution makes perfect sense, see, e.g., liturgical changes.

Someone just pointed out in teh comments to Chapter 12 that she's really not sure about my Lucy characterization -- she likes it, but I think it's reading OOC for her. The Lucy as written here is, first and foremost, valiant and fearless. I see her as very much a soldier for Aslan, saint and crusader, and just fierce and open and without guile. She's terrifying. But I really like your observation that she will see Eustace as having to experience Aslan for himself. This ties in a bit with Digory's own Franciscan views of a very personal relationship with God. When you have that personal relationship and when, in Digory's case, you see the creator in everything, it's really hard to think of the creator in any way limited or in need of being channeled through institutions.

OK tired now and bed. Thanks so much for the commentary. it's VERY helpful.

[metonomia.livejournal.com]

OKay, first a sort of pre-script: You know how we joked about this convo being studying for my final? Your io9 link about atheists exposing their children to religious traditions I actually did use :D

I find a lot of possibility for exploration in the fact that Aslan is such a directly-experienced God. Certainly within-Narnia there's room for characters to doubt Aslan, and especially to doubt his goodness or power, etc, but canonically, Aslan exists. That's part of why I love what you do with the application of Narnia to Earth, the 'it's all relevant' thing, because it's definitely a very different sort of application of faith. Faith in Aslan, in Narnia, is not necessarily a question of existence but one of dependence; transferring that back to England requires the Pevensies etc to do all you've been showing with finding Narnia in England, finding what Aslan wants them to do. And, as with Eustace, it's once back in England that the question can arise of, is Aslan there. Suddenly it has to be a faith without concrete experience, or at least only with the experience of the past, in Narnia. *shrug* I don't know how coherent that is, but I like pondering it.

As for Lucy, I guess I can see where someone might read your Lucy as OOC? She's certainly not quite the always merry, always-faith-in-Aslan child type of the books, but even as I typed that I was saying to myself- but she is. It's just that you write, you know, a more adult version of that, and to me that's an extension of character, not a new characterization or an out-of-character thing. Your Lucy has all the 'childish' aspects and also has that fierceness, the valiance, and she's got that connection to and firm faith in Aslan. Maybe it's just that I happen to love what you do with her, but I find your Lucy to make perfect sense.