rthstewart | Chapter 11, Squamates

Entry tags:

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

Late to the party once again due to being out of town all weekend... this chapter seemed so fast paced to me so it was hard to follow at times, but that is most likely due to a) it's late, reader is tired and b) group scenes of characters that I so need to go back and refresh my memory on!

The discussions here in this thread are fascinating with definitely lots to think about. As an uber self-reflective person, it's surprising to learn that you are not! You say someone pointed out that you are self-reflective through the fanfic medium, and I definitely agree with that! Know what's harder still? Self-reflection on self-reflection. (File that with the redundancy department of the redundancy department.) Just a note of observation, it's funny when you do start to reflect on your thought processes, scene developments, plot decisions, or whatever in your responses here and then you cut yourself off. I say: reflect!! reflect!! It's fascinating to hear and always leads to such great discussions!

Anyway, back to the chapter... love the intimate interaction with Mary and Richard. It's a great reminder of what essentially is such a grounding foundation of the Spare Oom side of your 'verse. And Peter! The Jill and Peter interaction was great, and I look forward to more of that. It's sad to know that he nor anyone else will not have the opportunity to "induct" any more Friends of Narnia into their circle.

And gay animals! I had no idea you were going down that route and thought you were joking about the Giraffes! But it's great you're covering that a bit and are discussing the issue... even as I write about homosexual Elephants and had decided a while back to not delve into it much at all. It's just going to be there, and if readers take issue, they're a mouse click away from not having to read any more.

I'm really, really, really looking forward to part two, and am also interested in reading some of the other reviews over at ff.net... But mostly part two and what you've hinted at.

it's funny when you do start to reflect on your thought processes, scene developments, plot decisions, or whatever in your responses here and then you cut yourself off. I say: reflect!! reflect!! It's fascinating to hear and always leads to such great discussions! Goodness, am I that transparent? I FREQUENTLY write something that is very tl;dr and very self-reflective and invariably end up deleting it. I do this A LOT. I figure it's pretty boring and who cares about me?

As for the gay animals -- I'll do more with this in the next chapter. I got whacked in a comment for not being a proper Catholic by implying too much by extension to humans. There are so many ways of responding and I'm still reeling a bit (OK, a lot, hence making me more likely to withdraw. I admit this one hurt). As I was stuck in traffic this morning, I talked to myself about the following:
1) the careful researchers are very clear, we can't (in this world) impute human to the animal or vis-versa. They are animals and it's different.
2) BUT in this cracky fic vision they are animals and fully sentient so that means what exactly? It means, as I thought has been clear over and over and over, that these things stand in for profound cultural differences and that as Susan says way back in Part 1, but which is repeated over and over, the charge is to love all, even those that are different and even those whose behaviors are not our own and to celebrate the differentness rather than try to eliminate it. Further, it explains that having grown up in this really wild, radically different place, the Pevensies are tolerant and understanding. And... I just did it again... wrote long thinky and just deleted it.

anyway, stopping now because I'm getting aggravated in that thrown my hands up, delete the accounts and run away mode, so time to get to RL.

Thank you for reading and I hope you had a great weekend!

I'm sorry you were upset by one of the reviews on this chapter. I'm certain that for every person who apparently takes offense at your writing, there are very many of us who appreciate your courage to tackle profound subjects and willingness to share it with others. And appreciate the honest, thoughtful, caring and often humourous way you do it!

I also think it is neither fair nor courteous to judge a person's private religious views by their writing, especially when that writing is fiction.

ClaireI

Thank you Clairel! It's fine. I go through this periodically. I just went back to one of my first discussions of it here, in October 2009, after I posted Queen Susan's withering criticism of Peridan in Chapter 7 of TQSiT. As Halpern will point out later to Mrs. Caspian, Hitler went after his kind, too, because sodomites don't propagate the Aryan race. That helped remind me of why I push. I am interested in the issue intellectually. I think the observer bias that persists even today is fascinating and I really feel for just how challenging this would be for Richard. Regardless of the cultural/sociological bias of the 1940s, as a scientist he can't square non-reproductive behavior with Darwinian principles. Both issues remain very relevant in today's scientific circles. But I pursue these issues for other reasons too. Sometimes I am preaching, sometimes I'm moving a thematic idea forward, sometimes I'm setting the stage for something to follow. That's all true here. Anyway, too much navel gazing. Back to it!

It seems to me that with the sentient animals, it becomes an issue of appreciating other cultures on their own terms (and applying the lessons to one's own culture, as the Pevensies certainly did as Narnian Monarchs completely immersed in new cultures). The fact that the behavior exists in the dumb animals of Spare Oom becomes another echo and reminder, with the talking animal experience a bridge to help explain and accept it.

I do find Richard's difficulty very interesting here (especially in view of his thoughts in the scene where he jokingly propositions Peter as an amusing way to drive off Asim and his questions). I'm looking forward to this being followed up in Chapter 12. I'll hazard a guess that it might involve a view of humanity as different from and above animals, no matter how thoroughly Richard appreciates the animal world. The idea that apparently counter-evolutionary behavior is not some sort of subversive invention of sentients might sting as much as the idea of apparently counter-evolutionary behavior in fact having some natural role.

Psst. I think we are alone now. Everyone else has moved on to discuss food. I am deeply indebted, again, to your insight. Neither Richard nor I have thought about the issue so deeply. I've had long, long responses and thoughts written, and I just deleted them. You're busy with your deadlines and I won't intrude anymore than I have on your time. Thank you so much. I hope I can measure up to expectation. I've been writing and re-writing 12 and just took another look at Peter and Richard's conversation, which will be their last while Richard is coherent.

Don't worry about imposing on me with replies! I enjoy reading them, and will answer any questions if and when I can- it's good for me to switch mental gears sometimes. Although don't feel obliged to go dig up those deleted responses either (I've written and deleted several replies to other posts and comments because they just jumped the shark somehow and couldn't be salvaged).

This particular scene prompted a fair amount of thought on my part which had as much to do with the delay as me being busy. Having read so many instances of your thoughts on and research into life and attitudes of the era, and your comments to Claire about how this would be challenging to Richard, it took me a while to work out what might make sense beyond some sort of religious gut reaction. Clearly Richard's an experienced and tolerant man (enough so at this point to view his original field notes critically), so what *else* is affecting his views? What would a man his age in the 1940s not even think to question? I don't know if I got it right (or if there is a right) but it was a fascinating line of thought.

I rather hope Richard gets at least one more semi-coherent moment with Jill, but that's just me enjoying their scene before rather than looking at the needs of the story :-)

And you're welcome! Thank you, again, for processing it all (from everyone here) into such wonderful and thoughtful stories!

Clearly Richard's an experienced and tolerant man (enough so at this point to view his original field notes critically), so what *else* is affecting his views? What would a man his age in the 1940s not even think to question? I don't know if I got it right (or if there is a right) but it was a fascinating line of thought.
From a New York Times article that led with the story of the albatrosses,
"Homosexual sex between ostriches was interpreted by one scientist as “a nuisance” that “goes on and on.” One man, studying Mazarine Blue butterflies in Morocco in 1987, regretted having to report “the lurid details of declining moral standards and of horrific sexual offenses” which are “all too often packed” into national newspapers. And a bighorn-sheep biologist confessed in his memoir, “I still cringe at the memory of seeing old D-ram mount S-ram repeatedly.” To think, he wrote, “of those magnificent beasts as ‘queers’ — Oh, God!”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/magazine/04animals-t.html?pagewanted=all

It is this very contemporary shock that I was trying to get at. In 1987, scientists are flipping out over "gay" butterflies. In 2009 researchers are finally realizing that these loving pairs of albatrosses, who have been anthropomorphized into symbols of heterosexual, marital fidelity, are in fact, female pairs. These findings are sending evolutionary biologists scrambling for explanations. Today. So, imagine what it would be like for a 50 year old man in 1942?

As liberal-minded as Richard is, and the man's got issues with the scientific establishment already, it is shocking today, so I thought it would be shocking to him.

I'd thought I had the chapter locked down and I keep fiddling with it, trying to address these things in a way that makes sense. I've got a long flashback with Lucy and Aidan and a bit of Morgan and Edmund, which I think is sweet, though I suspect people will think it dull and suburban. It's telling a bit about their relationship and the doubts Lucy has going forward here and Aidan embracing Narnia. It's setting up what happened after they left, and more of how the War impacted family life here and really what it means for Lucy and Edmund to have left their spouses behind. Peter and Richard close it out. Then FINALLY Peter and Mary have a normal (and gawd I hope non-subtextual) conversation, then we jump to Asim and a brief return of my boyfriend Col. Clark.

And... going to write now. just had an idea.... Anyway, really I don't mean to be distracting you. I really appreciate you taking the time to share your ideas. We can always take this to LJ messaging too -- just go to user info and click on Send Message.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Chapter 11, Squamates

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject