rthstewart | 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

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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Hello krystyna! Nice to hear from you again. Narnian fandom can be divided long one axis -- those who are interested in language and those who are not. Some writers I adore have been VERY interested in precisely the issue that you raise -- the lack of a Tower of Babel and the lack of linguistic shift -- there's also the apparent lack of any technological developments. this isn't one that I focus energy on, but writers like

anastigmatfic are very interested in linguistic issues and... oh gosh. there's someone else who is predictably also a Tolkien scholar.

As for the titles, I don't really know. I would guess Lucy is either a Dame or maybe just Lucy, Knight of the Order of the Lion?

If she would be a Knight, she would also be a King of Narnia, if we want to uphold basic coherence.
Krystyna

The Queen of England is also a Knight of the Order of the Garter. I've never heard anyone refer to her as "Sir" or "Lady", though - under most circumstances, where one person holds several titles, the highest ranking title is used. See http://www.royal.gov.uk/monarchUK/honours/Orderofthegarter/orderofthegarter.aspx for more, including (something I didn't know) they included women in the middle ages, albeit only as associate members. And apparently for this order at least it's Lady, not Dame.

where one person holds several titles, the highest ranking title is used. Thank you!!

Hi - this is

wellinghall -

adaese's husband.

where one person holds several titles, the highest ranking title is used

This is, as

adaese says, generally true. One exception is that the highest relevant rank is true. So the fact that Prince Charles is Duke of Rothesay is generally ignored in favour of his higher rank of Duke of Cornwall - except when he's in Scotland, when he becomes Duke of Rothesay.

Exactly. In this particular case - there is sometimes a reason for which you want to refer to Peter as a Knight of the Order of the Lion rather than as High King. And just as well there may be a reason to refer to Lucy as a member of the same order.
>adaese
That's one of the reasons for which I wrote "despite British being slightly inconsistent in the matter of titles associated with certain awards nowadays". Female members of same of the orders are called Dame, some others - Lady. Queen's case, as the Sovereign of the Order, is also different. It's all the result of several historical processes which were happening in different times, during several centuries. But Lucy was made a Queen of Narnia and member of the Order in (from the historian's point of view) the same time, so in both cases the same rule should be applied.
I don't recall a woman from the High Middle Ages which would be made a full member of an order equal to a Knight. Hence I use an analogy with royal titles. In both cases certain "profession" is supposed to be hold only by men and titles which goes with this professions practicly by deffinition refer to men. As a result when by exception a woman gets certain position there is a problem how to call her. You can observe two ways of solving that problem: by giving that woman a title which is normally given to a wife of a person holding such a position (like in England and Great Britain, where you have reigning queens and dames or - because of processes mentioned above - ladies of orders), or by giving a woman title which usually indicates that a person who bears it is a man. Narnia clearly follows the first pattern.
Krystyna

Thanks, Krytyna! The breadth of your knowledge and that you do this so well in a foreign language always awes me. Bringing it back to Lucy and fic, I can imagine Queen Lucy the Valiant saying, "I am a Knight of the Order of the Lion and you may call me [Sir, Lady, Dame, Queen]" and everyone else saying, "Yes, your majesty."

Hello

wellinghall and thank you for stopping by! It is thus I blather all over about places I have never been and subjects I have never studied and manage to (so far) get some or a lot of it mostly right with assistance along the way from those who are wise and generous.

Chapter 11, Squamates

Re: All your Narnia fiction

Re: All your Narnia fiction

Re: All your Narnia fiction

Re: All your Narnia fiction

Re: All your Narnia fiction

Re: All your Narnia fiction

Re: All your Narnia fiction

Re: All your Narnia fiction